®MIT Mixed Projects 2013 - 2014

-Maarten van Dam 1352458- -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 2013 Table of contents Urban analysis 5 Historical development The project area Conclusion

Architectural analysis 13 The history of the Haarlemmerpoort The architect The context of the Haarlemmerpoort The architecture of the Haarlemmerpoort Conclusion

Building technology analysis 23 The foundation of the Haarlemmerpoort The structure of the Haarlemmerpoort How is it build? The current state of the Haarlemmerpoort

Value assessment 32 Context value Object value

Bibliography 34 Literature Figures

2014 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- Urban analysis

Research question How is the transition between the 'Algemeen UitbreidingsPlan' and the development based on the urban plan by J. Kalff in Asmterdam-West? Is there a fracture or connection between the two build-era's. This question is focused on the build situation of the 1930's. Historical development In the 19th century Amsterdam was recovering from a malaise. Due to expansive warfare with neighbouring countries and de- ferred maintenance on the water trade routes Amsterdam lost his fortune from the 'gouden eeuw'.

In 1876 the Noordzeekanaal was finished which revived the mar- itime trade. Amsterdam's harbour became once again an eco- nomical centre. The port of Amsterdam needed a large work- force which led to overpopulation in the city centre.1

The migration towards Amsterdam resulted in an accelerated urban development late 19th century. Due to annexation with the surrounding village's it became possible for Amsterdam to extend beyond the border that was marked by the Singel- gracht.2

In 1877 J. Kalff presented a plan to extend Amsterdam annular (fig 1.1). His plan followed the existing polder landscape, saving fi g. 1.1 (van Dam) the government money not having to re-sculpture the land.

The housing blocks would be build by the private sector. Mean- ing that everything was built to make profit.1 The most im- portant difference between the houses in the city centre and those build in Plan Kalff can be found in the building line. While the houses in the centre all have an different appearance in hight, size and window alignment, those in Plan Kalff are show- ing systemically build row houses. You can see they are built as a project due to its similar window, door and building size.

From 1928 onwards the city calculated it would grow exces- sively over the next 70 years to over 1 million inhabitants. Plan Kalff was completed and a new plan for further extension was needed. The Algemeen Uitbreidings Plan (AUP) was designed and officially accepted by the state in 1935. At that time some new neighbourhoods were already constructed.3 The founders of the AUP are C. van Eesteren and T van Lohuizen, both mod- ernist architects and urban planners. They were true 'believ- ers' of the 'nieuwe bouwen' that was developed in CIAM.4 While the houses of Plan Kalff show a similarity in de- sign and detailing with the city centre, the AUP was a whole new type of house design in Amsterdam. fi g. 1.2 (Dienst der Publieke Werken Amsterdam, 1934) 1 Gemeente Amsterdam Sector Stadsontwikkeling Dienst der Pub- lieke Werken, 1975 2 Velde, 1968 3 Dienst der Publieke Werken, 1934 4 The 'nieuwe bouwen' follows the principles 'light, air and space'. Qualities everyone should have for there living space. Beside the upgrade for the habitat of the economical weaker section the separation of func- tion working, living and recreation was essential. -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 6 2013 2

1

fi g 1.3 (Gemeente Amsterdam Sector Stadsontwikkeling Dienst der Publieke Werken, 1975) (van Dam)

The different urban approach of Plan Kalff and the AUP is fur- ther illustrated by figure 1.3. The black striped area's repre- sent the planned or existing district centres. The centre (1) ob- viously existed already. The Sloterdijk area (2) is a new centre planned with the AUP. This was the first plan for Amsterdam that develops new centres that could indicate that the AUP was seen as a sort of satellite city.

The project area fi g. 1.4 (van Dam) Figure 1.4 shows the growth of Amsterdam through its histo- ry. The pointy figure drawn in this map is Amsterdam-West, the project area for the graduation program of RMIT. The area contains a mixture of different building types and different building times.

Before Amsterdam took over the land, the landscape consisted mainly out of polder. When you compare the polder landscape with the build city you can find several resemblances. The way the farmers parcelled the land is still visible on some places. For example: the parcels on the southwest where the water streams take a little turn to the west, one of these streams now became a vital traffic road for the district

fi g. 1.5 (tussen haarlemmerweg en.....) 2014 7 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- The mapped time-line (fig 1.6) shows the development of the

Amsterdam West: 60 years of planning and 95 building. city over time. Plan Kalff was drawn in 1877 and construct- ed shortly after. Between Plan Kalff and the AUP is a time difference of only 60 years. This era can be found in the map as the blue building blocks. The AUP is coloured green. Am- 1877 sterdam-West was mostly built before the plan was officially applied.

In the timespan of just 60 years the city grew rapidly, Amster- dam-West had the most explosive growth. As the city grew so did the different styles in architecture. Meaning that the col- ours of building blocks in the maps of figure 1.6 not only show there age but also there building style. You can imagine that there are several fracture lines in district West.

Not only the built environment left there markings in the area. The (old) railway, the Haarlemmertrekvaart and weg, the high-

1900 way A10, the wholesale area and other canals are creating dis- tance between the different neighbourhoods. While the High- way A10 is cuts through the city in a south - north direction, the Haarlemmertrekvaart together with the Haarlemmerweg are dividing Amsterdam-West in east - west direction. Since the northern part consist mainly out of harbors and working area, ill be focusing on the southern part.

road train canal 951970 / Present 1935 industrial area, not accessible the IJ

fi g. 1.6 (van Dam) fi g. 1.7 (van Dam) -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 8 2013 As seen on figure 1.4, the southern part of Amsterdam-West contains out of different building dates and architectural styles. Beside the differentiation by style there are more bar- riers between the neighbourhoods. Some of these barriers are shown with figure 1.8 by photo's. The picture are to indicate 1 1.1 how that specific fracture line is shaped.

Photo 1 and 1.1 are showing the ring-highway A10, a wide road that cuts through the 'Bos en Lommer' neighbourhood bringing noise and pollution. The A10 is raised from the surface creating tunnels as transition between 'Bos en Lommer oost' en Bos en Lommer west'.

Photo 2 represents the barrier made by the 'Bos en Lommer- weg'. This wide road is the biggest border that can be found between Plan Kalff and the AUP. The wideness of the road counteracts a possible connection between the volumes of each side of the road. Beside the Bos en Lommerweg there are several other heavily used roads cutting through neighbour- hoods, the other roads indicated here are the Haarlemmerweg on the north and the Admiraal de Ruyterweg that goes from north to south.

Photo 3 is the gate to the former foodmarket of West. The area was a wholesale area which brings a lot of trucks and other logistics. Although the biggest volume, the Markethall, lost his function the food industry is still very active. The fi g. 1.8 (van Dam) southern entrance seen on the photo shows the physical and mental border of this industrial area, in form of an actual gate including barriers and control booths. 2 4

Photo 4 represents the last type of barrier, the waterways. There is more water in Amsterdam-West then is indicated in figure 1.8. The canals indicated here are those that cut through roads that are not directly supported by a bridge. The blue water creates a distance between neighbourhoods which can only be overcome by bridges. A detail is that Plan Kalff has 3 substantial more bridges then the AUP, the waterways are in such direction however that it cuts more through roads then at the west part of Amsterdam-West.

Its important to realise that these precedents, except the foodcenter, create barriers in their direct surroundings but simultaneously make connections between other area's. This means they are not only dividing area's, they also connect ar- ea's but on a different scale.

2014 9 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- 1 2 3 Conclusion Looking back at the previous paragraphs you can conclude that Amsterdam-West is an district that contains neighbourhoods 7 which were build in different times by different architecture. The city grew following the landscape that was parcelled by the farmers. This landscape resulted in a linear urbanism that 5 can be seen through out the whole of Amsterdam-West.

If you take out the knowledge about the different architecture 4 and only see the map as on figure 1.9 you can still point out the different neighbourhoods. At first sight everything is the same except maybe the direction of the volumes, a closer look tells us however there are special volumes introducing the different 6 neighbourhoods. Buildings that introduce or mark a transition point and introduce a new area. The coloured numbers in the map correspondent with the pho- fi g. 1.9 (van Dam) to's below showing most of the markers of Amsterdam-West. 1 2

fi g. 1.10 (Google maps) fi g. 1.11 (Google maps) 3 4

fi g. 1.12 (van Dam) fi g. 1.13 (van Dam) 5 6

fi g. 1.15 (Google maps) 7

fi g. 1.14 (Google maps)

fi g. 1.16 (Google maps) -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 10 2013 Amsterdam-West is an area with barriers which are all men made. These barriers, highways, wide roads, industrial area or waterways create such distance between neighbourhood that it is save to say that they create fractures within the district.

fi g. 1.17 (van Dam) Before this analyses I didn't realize that Plan Kalff and the AUP are actually far away from each other. The (blue)dotted area are the parts that has been built in the years after Kalff was finished and the AUP wasn't started yet. When reviewing figure 1.9 you notice that the AUP has less buildings that mark a neighbourhood as it happens at Plan Kalff and the in between area.

fi g. 1.18 (van Dam)

fi g. 1.19 (van Dam)

2014 11 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- architectural analysis

Research question What contributes the architecture of the Haarlemmerpoort to the fracture lines of Amsterdam-West. The history of the Haarlemmerpoort The current gate is not the first gate to Haarlem. Amsterdam has had a city wall since 14821 containing gates to all the im- portant directions. Every city expansion required a replace- ment of the city wall and new gates making the current Haar- lemmerpoort the fifth gate to Haarlem.

The present building is in several historical ways exceptional:

- The start of the build around 1837, was parallel to the dis- mantling of the city wall2 - The building was not made for the defence of the city, it was only made for ceremonial reasons and to collect taxes for those entering the city.3 - The gate was built for King Willem II who had his inauguration in 1840 and entered the city for that reason through the Haar- lemmerpoort.4 fi g. 2.1 (Daalmeijer) - The current gate is built on the location of the old gate, mak- ing this gate the only gate that was built while the city was not being extended.

The Haarlemmerpoort, or officially: 'the Willemspoort' the name it received for the inauguration of king Willem II, didn't hold its original purpose for long. In 1866 the city stopped using the gate for collecting excises and it became a fire station. In 1877 the policeforce joined the firemen sharing the Haarlemmer- poort.3 In this year the 'Publieke Werken' decided to replace the bridge over the Singelgracht. They build a new wider bridge just south of the original bridge in order to cope with the ever growing traffic.5 The port was not loved by the 'Amsterdammers' resulting in plans to demolish the entire building in 1889, and again in 1896. Why it was not demolished wasn't clear in the literature but in 1900 the municipality decided for conservation, saving the estate for future plans of dismantling. The Haarlemmerpoort kept serving as a police post until 1961. After a few years of vacancy, 'Publieke Werken'6 took there residence in the port. They stayed there till 1983 when a 2 year renovation took place and the building became a residence with several apartments.3

1 Loos, 2013 2 Ros, 2010 3 Gemeente Amsterdam 4 Magnenat, 1840 5 Gosschalk, 1874 6 The Publieke Werken ceased to exist in 1985, there responsibility fi g. 2.2 (Beeldbank Amsterdam) was to maintain all the estate that served the public. From bridges to sew- er. -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 14 2013 The architect The Haarlemmerpoort is built under supervision of the city council in 1837-1840. The city architect in that time was Corne- lis Alewijn who therefore is the official architect of the gate. In spite of the official architect, most literature honours Bas- tiaan de Greef, Alewijns at the time 22 year old assistant, as the actual designer of the Haarlemmerpoort.1

Bastiaan de Greef is the son of Jan de Greef, an architect who fi g. 2.3 (www.regioamersfoort.nl) worked for Lodewijk Napoleon. J. de Greef studied architecture in Rome where he was taught in the art of classicism2. One of his works is the extension of the Paleis Soestdijk, a textbook example of classical architecture. While his father was working on the palace, B. de Greef was growing up.1 This makes it not surprising that one of his early works, the Haarlemmerpoort, is a neoclassical building. After working as an assistant for the city architect B. de Greef became the city architect of Amsterdam himself. He worked on many public buildings as the main architect for Publieke Werk- en. Some of them are still existing like 'de Munt' and several schools, other like the old city theatre (another example of ne- oclassicism) disappeared due to fire or replacement over time.3

fi g. 2.4 (Beeldbank Amsterdam)

fi g. 2.5 (NAI) fi g. 2.6 (Beeldbank Amsterdam)

1 Priester, 2010 2 Wikipedia, 2013 3 NAI, 2013 2014 15 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- The context of the Haarlemmerpoort The urban situation of the Haarlemmerpoort changed dramat- ical over time. Figure 2.7 is the urban situation of 1842, just 2 years after the opening. All traffic coming over land from the west had to go over the bridge and through the gate, giving the city the opportunity to raise taxes from whoever entered the city. The crossover north of the gate is only a sluice and not an actual bridge.

fi g. 2.7 (van Dam) When the gate was build in 1840 it was lined out with the orig- inal city wall. The building was standing outside the border of the city as if it actually introduced the city for those who came from the west. Even while there is a square between the gate and the following building blocks the design is lined out with the rest of the volumes in the east. Even when figure 2.9 is a drawing and might not represent the reality it does show how the gate represented itself as a calling card for the city. fi g. 2.8 (van Dam) fi g. 2.9 (Beeldbank Amsterdam) The previous gates all had a bended road to prevent the ene- my from looking in to the city. The current Haarlemmerpoort is placed on top of a view axis that reveals the city all the way till the centre. The arrow drawn in figure 2.10 start at the train station Wil- lemspoort, the predecessor of the central station. In the 19th century the train was the most modern way to travel, you can imagine that Amsterdam wanted to offer the best view of the fi g. 2.10 (van Dam) fi g. 2.11 (Daalmeijer) city when passengers got out of the train station.

The Haarlemmerpoort and the Haarlemmerplein are inextricable connected to eachother. The square was meant for the bigger wagens and horses who were not allowed to go further into the city. For example the Omnibus had his stop here for the people coming from the west.1

fi g. 2.13 (Beeldbank Amsterdam)

fi g. 2.12 (van Dam)

1 Gosschalk, 1874 -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 16 2013 The context anno 2013 of the Haarlemmerpoort is drawn in figure 2.14. On a bigger scale there are already some chang- es visible compared to the map of 1842. Most important is to see that the city has expanded, while in 1842 some farms and small industry was located outside the city borders, complete neighbourhoods are built since. Another striking change is the amount of blue. Comparing the two maps shows that the Singelgracht has been straightened for traffic over water and narrowed to win land. Also the north west part of the map a lot of water is lost.

fi g. 2.14 (van Dam) One reason J. Kalffs design was accepted in 1877 was his sol- lution to place the central train station in the water north of the centre. This meant that the Willemspoort station was no longer necessary and got demolished.1 Due to intensified train traffic which is passing the Haarlemmerpoort just north, the track became a 6 way rails cutting through the city.

fi g. 2.15 (van Dam) fi g. 2.16 (van Dam) In 1877 it was decided to move the Willemsbrug slightly to the south. This was necessary to cope with the increasing amount of traffic, the port did not provide enough space and traffic delays did occur when people couldn't pass each other driving through the gate.2 The current direct context shows a gate that goes blind on a waterfront. A gate to a dead end place makes the gate pointless. ? fi g. 2.17 (van Dam) fi g. 2.18 (van Dam)

Replacing the bridge ment that all the traffic would go around the Haarlemmerpoort. The red arrow shows the present di- rection of the traffic that originally went over the Haarlem- merdijk.

fi g. 2.19 (van Dam)

fi g. 2.20 (van Dam)

1 Exel, 2011 2 Gosschalk, 1874 2014 17 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- The architecture of the Haarlemmerpoort The rules of neoclassical architecture are similar to those of the classicism itself, otherwise it wouldn't be a neo-style ob- viously. The choice to use the neoclassical style for the Haar- lemmerpoort can be traced back to the combination of romantic and rationalism. In the end of the 18th century the architec- ture tried to express simplicity and wanted to show the art of building without extra decoration.1

fi g. 2.21 (van Dam)

The Haarlemmerpoort follows many rules that the neo-clas- sical architecture subscribes. The building is constructed out of simple geometrical forms and is symmetrical in two ways (figure 2.21)

fi g. 2.22 (van Dam) Another neoclassical feature is the hierarchy that can be found in the routing of the gate. The main route follows the direc- tion of the gate. Smaller side routes are created by the doors in the middle of the gate, the rectangular pillars narrows the pass way, making this route less important then the first. As last, the least important four other doors can be found more to the side of the building, these entrances are less decorated making them the lowest in hierarchy.

fi g. 2.23 (van Dam) 1 Watkin, 2008 -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 18 2013 The front face of the Haarlemmer- poort is designed as a decor for those entering and leaving the city of Am- sterdam. Comparing this facade with the side facade shows how the design is fo- cused on people passing through the gate instead of passing by the gate.

The facade is completely symmetri- cal, the top is made extra notable by a clock.

Underneath the clock there is some sort of rectangular pediment, this is were B. de Greef differs with the neo- classical architecture. Its a rectan- gular piece instead of triangular and contains decorations that do not tell fi g. 2.24 (van Dam) fi g. 2.25 (van Dam) a story or have any other contribution OOOOO O to the gate other then decoration. O OO O

27680 mm 13950 mm Another proof that this facade is the front facade are the window frames. These extra frames are made out of stone instead of wood. X | The facade has several measurements repeated. This can be found in height and in width of the facade. (figure 2.26) X

| X

fi g. 2.26 (van Dam)

The plan of the facade shows a suc- ceeding of rectangular and circular forms which is in line with the neo- classical architecture of geometrical forms.

fi g. 2.27 (van Dam) 2014 19 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- fi g. 2.30 (van Dam)

fi g. 2.28 (van Dam) fi g. 2.29 (van Dam) Figure 2.31 shows the simpler side facade. The photo's 2.32- 2.34 are showing some detailing of this facade. Comparing these with the front facade you see that there is a lot less decoration and the window frames and cornices are made out of the cheaper wood.

Figure 2,27 is the gate facade, these facades: walls and ceil- ing are made to be seen. The wall is symmetrical again and composed out of geometrical forms. The ceiling is highly dec- orated with Corinthian capitals on the columns carrying the 'roof' of the gate as can be seen on photo 2.28 and 2.29.

fi g. 2.31 (van Dam)

19220 mm 13950 mm

fi g. 2.33 (van Dam)

fi g. 2.34 (van Dam) fi g. 2.35 (van Dam) fi g. 2.32 (van Dam) -LidyLid Meijers,M ij WouterW t Willers,Will FFrankk KKoopman- 20 2013 Conclusion

fi g. 2.36 (van Dam)

fi g. 2.39 (van Dam) fi g. 2.40 (van Dam)

fi g. 2.41 (van Dam)

Due to urban changes in the direct surroundings of the Haarlemmer- poort, the gate became on island surrounded by travellers either by train, car, bike or by foot. Unfortunate this resulted in the fact that people only pass the gate and no longer go through the gate.

However the complete different type of architecture and its unique fi g. 2.37 (van Dam) position does add to the awareness that you enter a new district, ei- The order of the architecture of ther Amsterdam centre or Amsterdam-West. the walls and ceiling within the gate The dominant appearance created by to the neoclassical architecture was so important that the building embodies a borderline.. Maybe it is not directly readable for a quick structure was changed. The four passenger, but the sightline and position towards the square make inner columns are slightly of the ithe port an unique structure standing on a transition line between grid with load bearing walls (figure west and the centre. 2.35) in order to make an symetri- fi g. 2.38 (van Dam) cal appearance on the gate facades (figure 2.36 and 2.37).

2014 21 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- building technology analysis The foundation of the Haarlemmerpoort The soil underneath Amsterdam consist out of various layers. The first one to two meter contains organic material, mainly peat, and is continued by a mixture of sand and clay. Both lay- ers do not possess enough strength to prop up a building. The first layer that is strong enough for load bearing is a 3 meter thick layer of sand at a depth of 12 to 15 meter under NAP.1

To make use of this load bearing layer, logs were driven into the ground. Just like many materials wood rots by the combi- nation of oxygen and water. Since timber is preserved when its completely under water the heads of the logs are deep enough into the ground so the entire log are submerged into the groundwater.

fi g. 3.1 (Gemeente Amsterdam Sector Stadsontwikkeling Dienst der Publieke Werken, 1975)

fi g. 3.4 Restauratievademecum, this drawing of an ´Amsterdamse fundering´ is an example. Th e measurments are generic and are diff erent in each work. The picture 3.4 above shows how they continued with building on top of the piles. This detail shows the build up of the Am- sterdam foundation which contains a double pile. Figure 3.2 shows how the pile plan of the Haarlemmerpoort is layed out. The open black dots represent the new piles driv- fi g. 3.2 (van Dam) en for the fifth port. The green points are part of a recycled foundation of the previous gate, Haarlemmerpoort four. Reus- ing an older foundation had probably was probably an econom- ical decision. On top of the piles, brickwork in the form of arches was made. Figure 3.3 shows where these material saving arches were made. When you compare the archplan with the pileplan you can find singular piles (Rotterdamse style foundation) right in the middle of the arches. These, at first sight, useless piles were placed to uphold the 'schuifhout (wood)' (figure 3.4) that could bent or break by the sand used to fill the crawlspace.2 The dashed archlines are a guess of where extra arches could be.

1 (Gemeente Amsterdam Sector Stadsontwikkeling Dienst der Pub- lieke Werken, 1975) fi g. 3.3 (van Dam) 2 (Wattjes, 1931) -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 24 2013 The structure of the Haarlemmerpoort ? The exploded figure on the right (figure 3.5) shows how the ? ? ? ? foundation of the Haarlemmerpoort looks like, based on the ? ? analysis of the old pileplan. The gate is build on a sloped sur- ? ? ? face, this small angle is levelled by the foundation. The ques- ? ? tion marks indicate the spots we don't know. The drawn arcs are on guess based on the foundation drawings.

fi g. 3.5 (van Dam)

The groundfloor is made by wooden beams in 2 directions. The direction of the beams is determined by the smallest span, the smaller the span the less material is needed.

fi g. 3.6 (van Dam) The structure follows a rational systems of load bearing walls in combination with some columns. The columns in the volumes are to make orthogonal beam plan possible (leaving the aes- thetic value aside). The middle part is an exception on the load bearing system but will be discussed later in this analysis.

fi g. 3.7 (van Dam) The ground floor has an mezzanine to make extra floor space. These floors have been added during the renovation of the 1980's when this building was transformed into an apartment building.

fi g. 3.8 (van Dam) 2014 25 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- The system of load bearing walls and floor beams in the most economical direction as seen in the previous drawings contin- ues.

fi g. 3.9 (van Dam)

The only change is the place of the staircase where the beams are trimmed.

fi g. 3.10 (van Dam)

The second floor shows a variation in the beam plan. As said before the middle part of the building is an exception in the grid. The gate columns are placed slightly of the grid. The floor beams are imposed over two long beams whom span over the columns and two load bearing walls. The reason for the exception in the grid, can be found on the next page where the concept of the ceiling cassettes is ex- plained.

fi g. 3.11 (van Dam) -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 26 2013 The top floor shows an interesting combination of a load bear- ing wall construction and timber construction. The load bearing walls in the side volumes of the building shows an confined indoor space. The timber construction in the middle creates a much larger space due to the use of roof trusses. The drawings below the plan shows the truss-work in plan and in 3D.

At this moment the space is completely divided into small spac- es. This has been done during the renovation from the 1980's in order to create several housing units with shared bathroom and kitchen facilities.

In the centre of the middle space contains a remarkable circular construction with a roof light. However the construction seems over dimensioned and not carrying the roof. Photo's from the fi g. 3.12 (van Dam) archive do show an small tower on top of the gate. This attach- ment must have been a temporary decoration for celebration of the 25th jubilee of Willem III in 1874.1

fi g. 3.13 (Beeldbank Amsterdam) fi g. 3.14 (van Dam)

fi g. 3.15 (van Dam) fi g. 3.16 (van Dam) fi g. 3.17 (van Dam) 1 (Stadsarchief) 2014 27 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- ??? ? ? ?

? ?

fi g. 3.18 (van Dam) This section shows the entire construction of the Haarlem- merpoort. The only little uncertainty are the arches of the foundation below the columns. The question marks indicate the spots we don't know. The drawn arcs are on guess based on the foundation drawings

fi g. 3.19 (van Dam) -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 28 2013 How is it build? The building is erected out of different materials;

At first the beams who are made out of pinewood.

Secondly the walls, at first sight they are completely made out of stone. A closer look however, tells us that the walls are a combination of two materials: Bentheimer sandstone and brick. The sandstone is used as a rich cladding with brickwork as a supporting layer behind it. The reason must have been an eco- nomical one. Bentheimer sandstone was an expansive material from Germany while bricks were made close-by. Figure figure fi g. 3.20 (van Dam) 3.21 shows how it usually was done in the 19th century.

fi g. 3.22 (van Dam) fi g. 3.21 (Wattjes, 1929)

One thing must be said, it is still uncertain of the walls of fi g. 3.23 (van Dam) the rectangular volume is a combination of materials. So far only the circular building parts showed brickwork due to rais- ing moisture that revealed the bricks and joints through the plaster. For the rest of the building it is however a logical as- sumption that all walls are made in the same way.

The ceiling of the gate is an excessive decorated one figure 3.22 - 3.23. The drawing shows how the geometrical order de- termined the location of the columns, The cassettes are a mul- tiplication of each other. The vertical facade of the gate is also in line with the geometrical order of the columns and ceiling. The drawing shows how parts of the wall are of the same size and therewith related to each other.

One last remarkable aspect of the cassettes are the steel bars that goes through the interior to withhold them from sag- ging. Figure 3,19

fi g. 3.24 (van Dam) 2014 29 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- fi g. 3.29 (van Dam)

fi g. 3.26 (van Dam)

fi g. 3.25 (van Dam) fi g. 3.27 (van Dam) fi g. 3.28 (van Dam) fi g. 3.30 (van Dam) There are two types of door and window frames used in the gate. A stone casing can be found at the two representative fronts of the building, there were the gate opening is. The oth- er two sides, which were originally seen less due to its lo- cation, have wooden casings. Although the actual frames are similar the different casing material gives an very different impression. A little side note: The timber casings were probably cheaper when the building was build. The current state of the wood shows however, that more sustainable materials, the more ex- pansive stone in this case, are cheaper over time. N Analysing photo's from the 1960's and recent ones showed that the timber has always been there and was not placed in the 80's during a renovation.

The current state of the Haarlemmerpoort The photo's on the left are showing damage in the form of cracks around the window- and doorframes. Since there has been a renovation in the 1980's these cracks can be interpreted as recent. A typical form or direction seems absent. fi g. 3.31 (van Dam) -Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 30 2013 The Bentheimer Sandstone which is used as facade material is covered by plaster and paint. Several thin layers of paint and plaster came of the facade. Possible cause is nature that eroded the surface over time.

The building has been subjected to a major renovation in the 1980's. The effect of repairwork can be found around the fa- cade openings. The amount of detail is lagging plus the repair- work seems as an thicker layer then the original. fi g. 3.34 (Daalmeijer)

The plumbing in the foundation is fitted in the most economical way. This photo shows how this work damaged the foundation arch, locally weakening the foundation.

fi g. 3.32 (van Dam) fi g. 3.33 (van Dam)

The joints of the aesthetic pilasters in the gate are showing cracks, revealing the way they are constructed. The crack that is going downwards is more curious since it is not located in a joint.

A more detailed photo of the pilaster described above. The bro- ken surface could be caused by moisture penetrated through the open joint. This needs more investigation to make a proper fi g. 3.36 (van Dam) conclusion.

On places where erosion occurred the original Bentheimer Sandstone became visible. Unfortunate the joints around this part of facade are again completely open, making it vulnerable to moisture.

fi g. 3.35 (van Dam) fi g. 3.37 (van Dam) fi g. 3.38 (Daalmeijer) fi g. 3.39 (Daalmeijer) There are several locations in the building where rising damp from the crawlspace became a serious problem. This in combi- nation with leaking drainpipes creates such a high level of rel- ative humidity that mold and fungus are undoubtedly present.

The high level of humidity reveals the build structure under- neath.

Besides some humidity problems and some rotten wood the main structure of the gate seems to be in OK state. This provides possibilities for instance to extend and redevelop the building.

2014 31 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- Value assement Context value The context of the Haarlemmerpoort is very important. When the gate will lose more of its original context it will also lose in significance as a city gate.

The sightline has an importance for me because it shows how his gate opened the city compared to the previous gates.

The square has always had a direct connection with the port. When this square will be filled with volumes the Haarlemmerpoort will loose its marking point simply because the building can not outweight other buildings easily since it is rather small.

-Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 32 2013 Object value The originally facades for the public, the front face and the gate fa- cades are important. They show how the city of Amsterdam wanted to demonstrate itself to the people. The detailing and use of material is not commonly seen in the area around the Haarlemmerpoort which creates an extra object value for the Haarlemmerpoort. I value the walkpath through the gate and the people who are passing through the gate instead of passing by.

2014 33 -Maarten van Dam 1352458- Literature GEMEENTE AMSTERDAM, Haarlemmerpoort [Online]. Available: http://www.amsterdam.nl/kunst-cultuur-sport/monumenten/monumenten-0/ gebouwen-gebieden/beschrijvingen/haarlemmerpoort/ [Accessed 08-03 2013].

DIENST DER PUBLIEKE WERKEN AMSTERDAM 1934. Algemeen uitbreidingsplan van Amsterdam; nota van toelichting, Amsterdam, z. uitg.

EXEL, M. V. 2011. Geschiedenis van station Amsterdam Centreaal. Geschiedenis.

GEMEENTE AMSTERDAM SECTOR STADSONTWIKKELING DIENST DER PUBLIEKE WERKEN 1975. Amsterdam; stedebouwkundige ontwikkeling; ontstaan, ruimtelijke ontwikkeling, structuur en vormgeving, Amsterdam, Gemeente Amsterdam.

GOSSCHALK, I. 1874. Plan tot Uitbreiding der stad in den omtrek der Zaag- en Willemspoorten, voornamelijk met het oog op een ontruiming der kelderwoningen; met een toelichting., Amsterdam, Gebroeders Binger.

LOOS, J. 2013. Mokums [Online]. Available: http://www.mokums.nl/stadsmuur.html [Accessed 12-03 2013].

MAGNENAT, W. C. 1840. Inkomst van Z.M. WIllem II te Amsterdam den 27 November 1840.

NAI. 2013. Bastiaan de Greef Janszoon [Online]. Available: http://zoeken.nai.nl/CIS/persoon/12386 [Accessed 12-03 2013].

PRIESTER, S. 2010. De eerste voorman van Publieke Werken. Ons Amsterdam.

ROS, R. 2010. Verdedigingswerken van Amsterdam door de eeuwen heen. Erfgoed van Industrie en Techniek.

STADSARCHIEF, G. A. Monumentale Versieringen opgerigt door de Amsterdamsche Feest-Commissie, op 12 Mei 1874 [Online]. Amsterdam. Available: http://beeldbank.amsterdam.nl/beeldbank/indeling/detail/start/20?q_searchfield=willemspoort [Accessed 28 03 2013].

VELDE, J. J. V. D. 1968. Stadsontwikkeling van Amsterdam 1939-1967, Amsterdam, Scheltema en Holkema.

WATKIN, D. 2008. De Westerse architectuur een geschiedenis, Nijmegen, SUN.

WATTJES, J. G. 1929. Constructie van gebouwen Dl. 1 Muren en aangebouwde schoorsteenen, Amsterdam, Kosmos.

WATTJES, J. G. 1931. Constructie van gebouwen Dl. 3 Fundeeringen en kelders; rioleeringen, Amsterdam, Kosmos.

WIKIPEDIA. 2013. Jan de Greef [Online]. Available: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_de_Greef [Accessed 15-03 2013].

-Lidy Meijers, Wouter Willers, Frank Koopman- 34 2013 Figures ABRAHAMSE, J. E., KOSIAN, M. & SCHMITZ, E. 2010. Tussen Haarlemmerpoort en Halfweg historische atlas van de Brettenzone in Amster- dam, Bussum, Thoth. fig 1.5

Beeldbank.Amsterdam.nl fig 2.2, 2.4, 2.6, 2.9, 2.13, fig 3.13,

Daalmeijer, Suzan fig 2.1, 2.11 fig 3.38, 3.39

Dam van, Maarten fig 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.12, 1.13, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, fig 2.7, 2.8, 2.10, 2.12, 2.14, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17, 2.18, 2.19, 2.20, 2.21, 2.22, 2.23, 2.24, 2.25, 2.26, 2.27, 2.28, 2.29, 2.30, 2.31, 2.32, 2.33, 2.34, 2.35, 2.36, 2.37, 2.38, 2.39, 2.40, 2.41, fig 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, 3.15, 3.16, 3.17, 3.18, 3.19, 3.20, 3.22, 3.23, 3.24, 3.25, 3.26, 3.27, 3.28, 3.29, 3.30, 3.31, 3.32, 3.33, 3.35, 3.36, 3.37

DENSLAGEN, W. F. & RIJKSDIENST VOOR DE MONUMENTENZORG 1985. Restauratievademecum, 's-Gravenhage, SDU Uitgeverij. fig 3.4

DIENST DER PUBLIEKE WERKEN AMSTERDAM 1934. Algemeen uitbreidingsplan van Amsterdam; nota van toelichting, Amsterdam, z. uitg. fig 1.2

GEMEENTE AMSTERDAM SECTOR STADSONTWIKKELING DIENST DER PUBLIEKE WERKEN 1975. Amsterdam; stedebouwkundige ontwikkeling; ontstaan, ruimtelijke ontwikkeling, structuur en vormgeving, Amsterdam, Gemeente Amsterdam. fig. 1.3 p. 21 fig. 3.1 p.7

WATTJES, J. G. 1929. Constructie van gebouwen Dl. 1 Muren en aangebouwde schoorsteenen, Amsterdam, Kosmos. v fig. 3.21 www.googlemaps.nl fig 1.10, 1.11, 1.14, 1.15, 1.16 www.regioamersfoort.nl fig 2.3 www.NAI.nl fig 2.5,

2014 35 -Maarten van Dam 1352458-