UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM

GSSS

MASTER URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING

Overtoomse Veld: Conquered by Cranes & Creativity?

A spatial exploration emphasizing the lived space in an Amsterdam neighbourhood on the verge of gentrification

Master Thesis Urban & Regional Planning 2015/2016 Leonoor Hogerheijde | 10004641 Supervisor: Dr. David Evers June 20th 2016 A B S T R A C T

Arts-led urban regeneration and ‘place-making’ initiatives are becoming more widespread in European cities. In Amsterdam, these initiatives which favour transformations of the city (image) appear to go hand in hand with a policy orthodoxy of positive gentrification. Academic studies generally focus on both gentrification-induced displacement as well as a reinterpretation of gentrification as a positive process. However, there appears to be a lack of qualitative academic research that aims to understand which disadvantages for low-income communities occur when they are not physically displaced. This thesis project aims to enrich that ‘black box’ in academic urban planning literature. The ‘trialectics of space’, and in particular the concept of ‘lived space’ by Lefebvre or ‘thirdspace’ by Soja, which emphasizes the social experience of space, provide a useful theoretical foundation for this aim. Through an ethnographic method, combined with policy documents and interviews, the process of beginning gentrification is explored around the case of Lola Luid, which is located in a potentially gentrifying district of Amsterdam. It shows the contradictions between the perceived space of municipal urban regeneration policy, the conceived space of a creative city discourse and the lived space of neighbourhoods residents.

2 CONTENT

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 5 1.1 Phenomenal debate on gentrification ...... 6 1.2 Necessity for qualitative research ...... 7 1.3 Conceptual framework founded on three spatial dimensions ...... 8 1.4 Discrepancy with the fundaments of planning (political, social, spatial) ...... 8 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 9 2.1 ESSENCE OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN ...... 9 2.1.1 Planning in the face of power ...... 9 2.1.2 Jane Jacobs’ influence on urban planning and design ...... 11 2.1.3 Cultural critique on Jacobs’ urban perspective ...... 12 2.1.4 Public culture in place-making? ...... 14 2.2 PARADIGM ON SPATIALITY ...... 15 2.2.1 Paradigm on spatiality ...... 15 2.2.2 Spatiality in the gentrification debate ...... 16 2.3 DEBATE ON GENTRIFICATION ...... 18 2.3.1 Gentrification: From sociological phenomenon to neo-liberal urban policy concept ...... 18 2.3.2 Initial stage of gentrification: artists as pioneers ...... 20 2.3.3 Creative city as policy rhetoric ...... 21 2.4 SUMMARY ...... 23 3. METHODOLOGY ...... 24 3.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT ...... 24 3.2 Research design ...... 24 3.3 Example of ethnographic contributions to planning ...... 25 3.4 Ethnographic ontological and epistemological considerations ...... 25 3.5 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ...... 26 3.5.1 Gentrification without physical displacement ...... 26 3.5.2 Framework and hypothesis ...... 27 3.5.3 Concepts and operationalization ...... 28 3.6 DATA COLLECTION ...... 30 3.6.1 Study area ...... 30 3.6.2 Respondents ...... 31 3.6.3 Participant observation and interviews ...... 32 3.6.4 Semi-structured interviews ...... 32 3.6.5 Documents ...... 32 3.6.6 Data analysis ...... 33 3.6.7 Limitations ...... 33 4. PERCEIVED SPACE IN MUNICIPAL URBAN REGENERATION POLICY ...... 34 4.1 CASE DESCRIPTION OVERTOOMSE VELD NEIGHBOURHOOD ...... 34 4.1.1 Recent developments in Overtoomse Veld ...... 34 4.1.2 Contextual factors of Overtoomse Veld as disadvantaged neighbourhood ...... 35 4.2.1 Focus on space: ‘Koers 2025’, space for the city ...... 37 5. CONCEIVED SPACE OF ARTS-LED URBAN REGENERATION ...... 39 5.1 CREATIVE CITY DISCOURSE ...... 39 5.1.2 Social mix by Lola Luid ...... 40 5.1.3 Diversity in policy ...... 41 5.1.4 Diversity in, and according to Lola Luid ...... 42 6. LIVED SPACE OF NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTS ...... 43

3 6.1 EXPERIENCE OF PLACE: OVERTOOMSE VELD ...... 43 6.1.1 Shops and meeting places ...... 43 6.1.2 Social structures ...... 45 6.1.3 Local governance ...... 46 6.1.4 Fear of rent increase ...... 48 6.2 CREATIVE CITY DISCOURSE IN PRACTICE: LOLA LUID ...... 49 6.2.2 Diversity: no balance ...... 55 7. CONCLUSION ...... 57 7.1 CONTRADICTIONS IN PERCEIVED, CONCEIVED AND LIVED SPACE ...... 57 7.2 CONTRIBUTION TO GENTRIFICATION DEBATE ...... 58 7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REINSTATING THE SOCIAL IN SPATIAL PLANNING ...... 59 LIST OF REFERENCES ...... 61 APPENDIX I ...... 64 FIELD NOTES BUURTZAAK ...... 64 APPENDIX II ...... 68 FIELD NOTES LOLA LUID ...... 68 APPENDIX III ...... 75 FIELD NOTES FROM THE STREET ...... 75 APPENDIX IV ...... 77 TRANSCRIPTION INTERVIEW NO. 1 ...... 77 APPENDIX V ...... 87 TRANSCRIPTION INTERVIEW NO. 2 ...... 87

4 1. INTRODUCTION

“In keeping with the discursive strategy of the neoliberal project, which deploys carefully selected language to fend off criticism and resistance, organized around a narrative of competitive progress (…), we have apparently arrived in the age of regeneration, revitalization and renaissance in the hearts of Richard Florida’s cities of technology, talent and tolerance. Lost in the alliterative maze are the critical perspectives on gentrification upon which our understandings of the process and its effects were built” (Slater, 2006:738).

Fairly recently, the district of Nieuw-West in Amsterdam is being promoted as ‘the new Kreuzberg’, a neighbourhood in Berlin known for its hip and happening gentrification. In an article in Het Parool (2015), a key Amsterdam-based newspaper, attention is given to the major regeneration plans that are currently underway in this municipal district. Located at the western side of Amsterdam, Nieuw-West can be distinguished as a suburban city area, separated from the inner city by the main ring-road. After recent years of crisis, construction has begun to transform the area in quite a significant manner. The renovation of older dwellings, the construction of new ones, and the re-zoning of plans are all part of this fundamental transformation envisioned by the municipality. With the argument of releasing the increasing pressure on the inner city, Ronald Mauer, as representative responsible for daily governance within the district, finds it only logical that now the move is being made to the outer city area of Nieuw- West (Het Parool, 2015). Especially the area between the ring-road and the metro line that runs from the north-west to the south-west of the city, where the neighbourhood of Overtoomse Veld is situated in-between, faces extensive developments. An important aim of these developments is to build for students and youngsters, with the hope that they will stay in the neighbourhood when they complete their education. Mauer hereby refers to a future vision of Amsterdam of becoming similar to Berlin, with its emphasis on the spreading of the city beyond its centre. Similarities are seen between Nieuw-West and gentrified neighbourhoods such as Kreuzberg and Brooklyn, New York, due to the mix of original residents and newcomers (Het Parool, 2015). Besides these renovations and new constructions, a vacant school building in the neighbourhood has been transformed into a temporary pop-up mall by a group of artists, called Lola Luid. By emphasizing the public character of the building, the initiators aim to provide a connection between the old residents and the newcomers. In light of these developments, social geographer Wouter van Gent cautions for disregarding the consequences of gentrification for the initial inhabitants of the neighbourhood. If the district of Nieuw-West has the ambition to follow the example of Kreuzberg, a former immigrant neighbourhood roughly similar to the current composition of Nieuw-West, such a

5 debate on gentrification and its effects for the less privileged initial residents needs to be held (Het Parool, 2015). It is precisely this latter comment that spurs the interest of this thesis, which is a critical study that revolves predominantly around answering the following research question:

How can temporary place-making of Lola Luid, in a policy context of urban regeneration, be observed as spurring a process of beginning gentrification in Overtoomse Veld, through the lived experience of space?

1.1 Phenomenal debate on gentrification The major regeneration plans that the purportedly deprived neighbourhood of Overtoomse Veld is facing, display preliminary signs that the phenomenon of gentrification is now spreading beyond the ring-border into this area. In Amsterdam, it can be said that the inner city is now largely gentrified, which makes the quest for new places reach beyond the ring-road border. In the field of urban planning, the debate on this phenomenon is astounding. Gentrification is often understood as the middle-class taking over former working-class neighbourhoods. In its original understanding, coined by urban sociologist Ruth Glass in 1964, it refers to class inequality and injustice which can be observed through the displacement of less privileged initial residents, unable to remain in the area due to property price increases. Though, recent accounts on gentrification appear to lead attention away from its unequal essence. By means of rebalancing the concentration of poverty through an influx of middle-class residents, merits that are ascribed to this middle-class, such as having a work ethic and paying taxes, are assumed to stimulate low-income residents to do the same. This process would result in a higher quality of the urban living environment, benefiting all residents (Duany, 2001; Byrne, 2003). Tom Slater (2006), a pronounced author on urban injustice, finds this development in the debate worrying, as he thinks that the choice for low-income communities between either unliveable degeneration, or renewal and displacement, is a fairly false one. Especially the presumption that the social mix resulting from gentrification is a remedy for urban decay is questionable. In a contemporary context of neoliberal urban policy, policy rhetoric that combines urban regeneration proposals with social mix objectives needs to be critically examined, in order to perceive the injustices that lie beneath them. A particular form of current policy rhetoric on urban regeneration, is inclined by an appreciation of cultural representations and creativity, often in the form of temporary initiatives. Such strategies conceive creative industries to be a catalyst for widespread investment. The development of such strategies is seen as being greatly influenced by Florida’s (2002) theory of a creative class, stating it to be a driver for economic development. Critical notions however, question the practical consequences of such rhetoric. Critical perspectives point at the opportune utilisation of creative city discourse in neoliberal urban policies, thereby normalizing socio-spatial inequality and gentrification (Peck, 2005).

6 1.2 Necessity for qualitative research Concerning critical literature on gentrification, a void is recognized concerning qualitative research (Slater, 2006; Davidson, 2009). Especially with regard to the aspect of displacement, merely quantitative accounts on actual, physical displacement direct the attention away from the wide-ranging implications of its fine-grained process. Resulting from this methodological gap, the understanding of gentrification as a socio-spatial process that is unequal by nature gets lost. As Davidson (2008: 2401) states:

“Gentrification must therefore proceed with an understanding of displacement as a process and remain critical of the potential for injustice bound up in it”.

This thesis aims to address this methodological gap, by providing a qualitative account on an initial process of gentrification, by means of an ethnographic method. As such, I take on a perspective that emphasizes the multi-faceted processual nature of gentrification as a phenomenon of urban inequality. In particular, I will look at the case of Overtoomse Veld, where I place a special focus on the creative, cultural initiative of Lola Luid and its role in this process.

Figure 1: Image of the front entrance of Lola Luid. Source: Photography Rosa Boon.

7

1.3 Conceptual framework founded on three spatial dimensions The conceptual framework is structured in three-fold and finds its basis from theoretical thinking on different dimensions of space by Edward Soja (1996) and Henri Lefebvre (1991). Three metaphysical perspectives on space are offered, that are helpful in distinguishing the contradictions between regeneration policies, culturally inclined initiatives and the actual lived space of everyday life. These are defined as: perceived space, conceived space and lived space. This thesis argues that in the neighbourhood of Overtoomse Veld, the focus lies too much on the perceived space of renovating and constructing buildings, and the conceived space consisting of art-led urban regeneration theories, while the lived space of ‘non-creative’ residents remains marginalized. By including the dimension of ‘lived space’ in this study, it provides insights to place the sociality of planning back into the gentrification debate. The highly qualitative method of ethnography is most useful for grasping this important dimension in an initial process of gentrification.

1.4 Discrepancy with the fundaments of planning (political, social, spatial) By taking on a conceptual framework and method that comprehends the dimension of lived space, the significance of socio-cultural aspects can be distinguished. Given the developments in the debate on gentrification, where the inherent facet of inequality seems to fade, together with the augmented utilisation of creative city discourses in urban policies, I believe it is highly relevant to reach back to these essential aspects in urban planning. This is done by means of theoretical insights derived from Forester (1989), Jacobs (1961), Zukin (1995; 2010) and Friedman (2010), regarding the political, social and cultural elements in planning. These are utilised to argue how the socio-spatial foundation of urban planning needs to be revalued in the debate on gentrification. Furthermore, it places this process in a wider course of actions of municipal policy that is focused on neighbourhood regeneration and cultural temporary use. It thereby uses insights from principal works on the essential socio-spatial underpinnings of urban planning.

This is in line with the argument from Davidson (2008: 2402), stating that:

“Critics of gentrification therefore have to continue to illustrate the injustices of the process and engage a policy and political debate that offers an alternative for low-income communities”.

The study does not purport to be a systemic evaluation of all relevant indicators, but is an exploratory investigation into ‘real’, ‘perceived’ and ‘lived’ circumstances of the locality of Overtoomse Veld.

8 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

“I understand planning to be a governance practice that has evolved to address the difficulties created by the complex colocations of activities and their relations and the impacts these colocations generate across space-time. It is a practice that is not merely concerned with managing existing relations but with imagining and opening up future potentialities for improving the conditions of daily life existence and enrichment for humans in their coexistence with each other and the rest of the animate and inanimate world” (Healey, 2007; cited in Healey, 2009: 277).

This quote by Patsy Healey concerning the core of planning concisely sums up the fundamental aspects that are recognized throughout the following theoretical framework. I understand it as regarding planning as an authoritative practice to address societal issues across space and time, for improving or enriching the daily living conditions of human beings, the relations with each other as well as with the world around us. This is by no means a simple practice, as the world, animate and inanimate, exists and transforms by the grace of complexity. The intertwined relationship of sociality and spatiality as hinted at by Healey (2007), are discussed in the first part of this framework on the essence of urban planning and design. The aspect of politics and power is addressed by Forester (1989), sociological insights on urban planning are discussed through Jane Jacobs (1961) and Zukin (1995) provides a critique on these insights by including cultural influences. Friedman (2010) is attentive to the sociality that is involved in spatial place-making initiatives. The second part continues on a more abstract level, through discussing Soja’s (1996) metaphysical understanding of space, as well as Davidson’s (2009) application thereof in conceptualising gentrification. This forms the bridge to the last part, concerning the significant debate on this complex phenomenon.

2.1 ESSENCE OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN

2.1.1 Planning in the face of power

A classic urban planning text was written by John Forester in 1989, about the challenges of planning practice in a perilously democratic but strongly capitalistic society. His work, titled ‘Planning in the Face of Power’, emphasizes that planning guides future action, in a world that is inherently consisting of conflicting interests and grave inequalities of status and resources. This acknowledgement regarding the unequal nature of societies, hints at the significant aspect of politics, that planners have to deal with continuously. In spite of this fact, the bottom line for planners, and the essence of planning, is to plan

9 for people. As such, Forrester (1989:3) explores the vocation of planning for people and their well- being, or in more traditional terms, for social welfare and social justice. Throughout this exploration, the essentially political and practical character of planning is stressed.

“Only if the practical context of power relations, conflicting wants and interests, and political- economic structures are assessed clearly can planners respond to real needs and problems in anything approaching an actually rational, if not textbook-like, way” (Forester, 1989:7).

While remembering this quote as probably the main message of his work, and keeping in mind the organizational and institutional context in which planning exists, Forester highlights the significance of perceiving planning as practical communicative action. Language and listening are fundamental aspects for a planner, due to the politically inherent meaning to them. Yet, the work of listening can be poorly understood, as listening carefully is commonly mistaken for the practice of hearing (Forester, 1989:107). As Forester (1989:107) formulates it: “in planning practice, fact and feeling, reason and emotion are often tightly intertwined”. For all the different stakeholders and actors that are involved in planning, even (or especially) on neighbourhood level, careful listening is necessary, which requires sensitivity, self-possession and judgement. Listening in this regard is not a passive task, it asks for participation on behalf of the listener. The choice for ignoring or responding to the questions that are raised, may it be by neighbourhood residents or project developers, makes the listener a political actor. In this sense, Forester (1989:118) emphasizes that we can only have a meaningful world of which we are intelligible, moral members when we have a shared language, work and interaction:

“In listening we may still better understand, explain and cut through the pervasive “can’t”, the subtle ideological distortions we so often face, including of course or own misunderstandings of who we are and may yet be” (Forester, 1989:118).

In addition to this highly important aspect of listening carefully and critically, Forester (1989:132) makes a case for observing the design feature of planning as a deeply social process. Wherever a creative design impulse originates, it depends on social relations for its development refinement and ultimately its realization. In his observations of a community planning meeting, the author highlights the rhetorical, organizational cultural and political dimensions when dealing with rather simple design problems. In this light, Forester (1989:132) argues for (re-) instating a vision on urban design that respects it as being a social practice. Thus, an alternative conception of designing urban landscapes is proposed, namely as an interactive effort of making sense together in practical conversation. Following from these insights, Forester (1989:162) appeals to a recognition of planning practice as inherently communicative and argumentative. This paves the way for considerations of the

10 manner in which planning practice may distort or clarify the prospected plans that affected communities face. Consequently, his argumentation is intended for developing a ‘renewal of structurally sensitive, practically engaged, ethically and politically critical planning theory and practice’ (Forester, 1989:162). As he concludes his own communicative action:

“In the face of power, justice and equality are hopes, solidarity is a source of strength, and, however daunting the odds, there is freedom in the struggle” (Forester, 1989:162).

2.1.2 Jane Jacobs’ influence on urban planning and design

An author who has dealt with this practical struggle over power, justice and equality in urban planning in her personal life is Jane Jacobs. Her work ‘The Death and Life of Great American Cities’, dating from 1961, is seen by many as an essential framework for assessing the vitality of cities. Jacobs (1961:3) addresses, or in her own words, attacks the prevailing principles and aims of modern, orthodox city planning and rebuilding. Her observations on urban renewal in New York City during that time, paint a picture of planners and architects, who were not consciously ignoring the actual functioning of cities, but nonetheless were clinging on too tightly to imaginations of how cities ought to work and what ought to be good for people. Her idea on this matter was that:

“They take this with such devotion that when contradictory reality intrudes, threatening to shatter their dearly won learning, they must shrug reality aside” (Jacobs, 1961:8).

Hence, Jacobs’ (1961:6) most pressing argument revolves around the discrepancy between theories and teachings on city building and city design on the one hand, and the actual study of success and failure thereof in real life on the other. In her perspective, cities should be seen as immense laboratories of trial and error, where city planning should be learning and testing its theories. In this perspective, she introduces sociological insights for better understanding developments in urban planning and urban renewal projects. A principal insight in this respect, forms that of the necessity for a highly complex mixture of uses that are constantly mutually connected (Jacobs, 1961:14). The presumed civilizing function of such mixture of uses, is greatly dependent on its level of diversity. As Jacobs (1961:144) argues, enough mixture of uses – enough diversity – creates sufficient complexity to sustain city safety, public contact and cross-use. The vitality or successful functioning of a city is seen to be reliant on this. Accordingly, Jacobs (1961:150) proposes the necessity of four fundamental conditions for generating exuberant diversity in a city’s streets and districts. The first condition refers to the competence of a district to serve more than one primary function, and existing of a population that goes out on different schedules, but are able to have a common use of many facilities. A second is that

11 most blocks must be short, meaning a frequency of opportunities to turn corners. The third condition proclaimed by Jacobs, forms the presence of diverse buildings that differ in age and condition, and mingle in a fairly close-grained manner. The last condition is a presence of a sufficiently dense concentration of people, where their purpose of being there is of lesser significance. This includes a density existing of people who are there for residential purposes (Jacobs, 1961:151). In her explanation and illustration of these four conditions, Jacobs’ (1961:433) all- encompassing approach to understand cities is that of understanding organized complexity. As she puts it: “They [cities] present ‘situations in which a half-dozen or even several dozen quantities are all varying simultaneously and in subtly interconnected ways” (Jacobs, 1961:433).

It is here that Jacobs aims to grasp the nature of the kind of problem that a city is, where she compares it as being the same kind of problem of organized complexity as occurring in the life sciences. Viewing cities in this light, Jacobs (1961:439) is able to argue that the tactics to understand cities depend on the microscopic or detailed view, as is done in life science research. This insight leads back to her attack on the then prevailing principles and aims of city planning and renewal, which lacked a correct understanding of the nature of the problems at hand. She believes that a stagnation of planning occurs when the first requisite for a body of practical and progressing thought is lacking, namely recognizing the kind of problem at hand (Jacobs, 1961:439). An important warning that Jacobs (1961:242) makes in this regard, concerns the danger of a city to self-destruct, due to its diversity being so successful. When a diversified mixture of uses becomes outstandingly popular at a certain place in a city, a competition for space in this locality follows. Consequently, as the winners of this competition will present only a narrow segment of its mixture of uses (that is the most profitable one), the locality becomes more monotonous and diversity fades.

2.1.3 Cultural critique on Jacobs’ urban perspective

As Jacobs’ practical inquiry into the most ordinary scenes and events in city neighbourhoods leads to an appraisal for creating a most intricate and close-grained diversity of uses in cities, this insight is prone to critiques that encompass a cultural perspective. A fairly recent critique stems from the account of Sharon Zukin (1995; 2010). Zukin argues against the practical, sociological design necessities as mentioned by Jacobs as prerequisites for a healthy and diverse city, and stresses the power of greater political-economical-cultural forces that construct the attractiveness of a neighbourhood. Set in New York, Zukin (1995) discusses not only the growing importance of culture for boosting a cities’ symbolic economy (formed by the intertwining of cultural symbols and entrepreneurial capital), but furthermore deliberates on what that means for social differences and urban fears. She

12 argues that cultural symbols have material consequences, such as in the built environment of cities, which increases as cities become less dependent of traditional resources and technologies of material production (Zukin, 1995:268). Zukin’s main point in viewing these material consequences of cultural symbols, is to raise questions as to whose culture and whose city is actually represented. In a recent work, Zukin (2010) critiques how Jane Jacobs’ insights are currently being used in the social construction of ‘authentic’ places. As such, she points at how authenticity is not developing because of the design aspects as mentioned by Jacobs, but how the notion of authentic areas is being manufactured and so increases the attractiveness of a neighbourhood. Zukin (1995:111) mentions the use of culture as an interim development strategy, which can be useful in times of uncertainty and risky development projects. She specifically points out how we, who live in cities, like to view culture as a solution for the often heard critique that cities represent the basest instincts of human society (Zukin, 1995:1). Trendy art galleries, cafes, restaurants or museums are supposed to lift us up from the swamp that is our daily life. Opposite this viewpoint that culture makes us thrive beyond the basest instincts, is the perspective that culture can be used to control cities. Zukin (1995:1) puts it as follows: “As a source of images and memories, it symbolizes “who belongs” in specific places”. There is an interesting tension present in this, with regard to artists or other independent cultural producers. Public officials and developers are seen to welcome the image of a city as cultural capital, while concurrently breaking down this value that is given to the arts when demands for low-cost artists’ housing start to compete with pressures for gentrification. It is noteworthy how Zukin (1995:111) mentions how artists are welcomed at first as “bridge” gentrifiers, but cannot rely on any protection when property values rise. Zukin (1995:261) furthermore touches upon current conceptualizations of the city, where the struggle of both ethnic and social diversity is reflected in our public spaces. Questions concerning how these diverse people form a public, how to adjust to unavoidable contact with strangers or whose face we trust, come down to questions of culture. Answers are not unequivocal, as both the common use of the term culture as well as cultural styles have changed (Zukin, 1995:262). Zukin (1995:263) observes this as a modern revolution that is ideological and behavioural, stemming from feelings amongst citizens that their centre has fallen apart, whether that was the city, family or face-to-face communications. As a consequence, the norms of civility are broken where no one knows how to talk to anyone else. Especially with regard to the appreciation of cultural diversity, which is mainly limited to ethnic ‘color’, Zukin (1995: 283) recognizes a gap with an inability to understand the social problems that are disproportionately concentrated in low-income areas. Multiculturalism alone stops short of understanding the interrelated problems of people with another culture to integrate into the legal, mainstream economy. It is the negotiation herein that needs to be grasped (Zukin, 1995:290).

13 2.1.4 Public culture in place-making?

A particular strand in contemporary planning literature related to the global context that Zukin refers to, is that of place-making. In general, place-making is regarded through its social dimension, as a process of transforming spaces into qualitative places and by doing so linking meaning and function to spaces (Cilliers & Timmermans, 2014:415). In this regard, an intriguing shift of the focus of urban planning is identified. Traditionally, the focus was to plan for buildings and infrastructure with the overall aim to attract life. Whereas in current place-making approaches, the focus lies on adapting spaces to people, which places an emphasis on social realities and needs (Cilliers and Timmermans, 2014:414). In light of such place-making, Cilliers and Timmermans (2014:414) mention an interesting paradox between the traditionally slow-changing nature of the built urban environment, and a society that has an increasingly dynamic character with fast-changing needs. This paradox creates tensions between the urban environment and preferences of society. Related to this paradox, is the contribution by Feldman and Stall’s (2004: 184) on the appropriation of spaces. The authors refer to the intentional use of a space by individuals or groups to make it their own. In doing so, successful and lively places, “can be characterized by this social orientation as addressing the needs of the communities who are the actual users of the space” (Cilliers and Timmermans, 2014: 415). Space then becomes a place linking meaning and function. Such a social orientation is furthermore recognized by Friedman (2010), who argues for the importance for planners to recognize the small places of the city, such as neighbourhoods, in a rapidly urbanizing world. According to the author, the needs of ordinary people and the small places at neighbourhood level which they inhabit have been forgotten in those urbanization processes (Friedman, 2010:150). He discusses how contemporary strands of literature on the city are filled with references to a scenario of ‘placelessness’. A significant share of literature refers to sprawling suburbs and desolate public housing projects such as the banlieues in Paris, as illustrations of how people growingly lose a sense of place in the city and lose the connection with the lives of others. Friedman (2010:151) especially mentions how, throughout the globe, ever larger numbers of young people are declared redundant and are pushed to the margins of society by a system that excludes them. His argument runs counter to this, as he appeals for reclaiming the places of the ‘human habitat’ as urban residents and for reconnecting our lives with the lives of others in ‘ways that are inherently meaningful’ (Friedman, 2010:152). The way to achieve such re-humanizing of the urban is by focusing on and reviving urban neighbourhoods, according to the author. This needs to be done from a perspective on place that runs from the inside out, thereby assigning a key role to the ways in which place is experienced and sometimes transformed by those that are living in it. This is contrary to other perspectives on place that observe the concept from the outside in, where place is defined by the perspective from an outside observer (Friedman, 2010:152).

14 2.2 PARADIGM ON SPATIALITY

Forrester’s conception of planning practice as argumentative and communicative action, Jacobs perspective of understanding cities as organized complexities through diversity and Zukin’s discussion of the use of culture as development strategy for physical interventions, all hint at the element of social construction via physical intervention that is fundamental in planning practice. In order to critically examine concrete and contemporary urban renewal plans with the supposed aim of certain social outcomes, I believe it is necessary to highlight the metaphysical understanding of space as proposed by Edward Soja (1996) in his book ‘Thirdspace’. That is, for adequately grasping the beginning process of policy-led gentrification and its meaning for residents, examining the abstract considerations on space underlying those practical plans can amount to useful insights.

2.2.1 Paradigm on spatiality

At a highly abstract level, the spatial turn in critical studies that Soja announced during the mid-nineties, is concerned with the question of how to perceive space, as well as the role that space plays in our everyday lives and the world we live in. Human geographer Soja (1996) proposed an important perspective on this matter in the form of a ‘trialectics of spatiality’. The central argument of Soja’s work forms the importance of the ontological, epistemological, and theoretical rebalancing of spatiality, historicality and sociality as all-embracing dimensions of human life. Soja’s (1996:1) extensive work is based on the belief that “the spatial dimension of our lives has never been of greater practical and political relevance than it is today” (Soja, 1996:1). As such, space got to be scrutinized with a same critical emphasis as was predominantly given to time and history on the one hand, and social relations and society on the other. The main purpose of Thirdspace is an encouragement for creatively redefining and expanding our contemporary consciousness of spatiality. Soja (1996:2) argues for not narrowing or confining the scope of our critical geographical imagination, but to keep our ways of thinking about space open. Only fairly recently, the spatial aspect of human life is being regarded by a growing community of scholars and citizens in a similar vein as sociality and historicality. The author mentions how “there is a growing awareness of the simultaneity and interwoven complexity of the social, the historical and the spatial, their inseparability and interdependence” (Soja, 1996:3). As such, Soja presents a vital third mode to theoretical and practical understandings of the world around us, which was heretofore essentially two- sided, namely social and historical. The author calls this a three-sided sensibility of spatiality- historicality-sociality, which “is not only bringing about a profound change in the ways we think about space, it is also beginning to lead to major revisions in how we study history and society” (Soja, 1996:3).

15 With regard to conceptualising the matter of space, Soja introduces a ‘trialectics of spatiality’. This concept proposes three realms of understanding and experiencing space, which Soja (1996:10) views as being connected to Lefebvre’s (1991) meta-philosophical invocation of three different kinds of spaces; perceived space, conceived space and lived space. Soja (1996) refers to these perspectives as firstspace, secondspace and thirdspace. Firstly, perceived space or firstspace is mainly fixed on the concrete materiality of spatial forms. Cilliers and Timmermans (2014:413) mention this as the dominant mode for understanding space and the primary mode of operation for planners. Secondly, conceived space or secondspace is defined as ideas about space, or representations of human spatiality in mental or cognitive forms (Soja, 1996:10). The first perspective of space is often considered as ‘real’, whereas the second is considered as ‘imagined’. The third perspective on space, that is conceptualised as the lived or thirdspace, draws on both the first material and the second cognitive perspective on space, but extends beyond this dualism. Such spaces of representation are directly produced and experienced as images and symbols, formed by the everyday life of users (Lefebvre, 1991; Soja, 1996 in Cilliers and Timmermans, 2014:413). As Soja (1996:23) states, the ultimate goal of this third perspective on space, which entails a radical openness and limitless scope, is ‘to contribute to the progressive resolution of at least some of the problems associated with this contemporary restructuring-generated crisis’. It is this thirdspace that needs to be recognized more in critical spatial studies, if the scope and practical relevance of our thinking about space and related concepts such as place, environment and city are to be expanded.

2.2.2 Spatiality in the gentrification debate

An author that pursues to reconceptualise the underlying notions on space in the debate on gentrification- related displacement, is Mark Davidson (2009). By means of Soja’s perceptions, this scholar emphasizes the lived experience of space in his conceptualisation of displacement as being an inherent part of gentrification. His argument revolves around rethinking the philosophy of space that underpins the gentrification debate, in order to highlight the intricate socio-spatial relations. Davidson (2009:220) identifies the ‘absence of phenomenology (the philosophical study of the structures of consciousness and experience) and associated critical understandings of place’ in the debate on displacement in gentrification literature. Contemporary debates on this topic are generally based on the actual physical removal of people from neighbourhoods, while disregarding the socio-spatial relations associated with displacement. As such, Davidson (2009) recognizes a continued presence of a theoretical and empirical void in understanding displacement from a thirdspace or lived space perspective. The definitions of space and place are of substantial importance in this regard. As current gentrification literature is mainly concerned with the extent of physical displacement occurring within gentrifying neighbourhoods, a significant consequence is the interpretation of displacement as a purely spatial process. In this sense, space is considered as an abstraction, reducing the understanding of displacement as a purely spatial re/dis-location of individuals (Davidson, 2009:223). The problem of

16 such an understanding, is that it ignores important space/place tensions which involve the social aspect of space. In order to grasp displacement in its phenomenological entirety, this narrow spatial understanding needs to be replaced by one that captures the full dimensions of the process (Davidson, 2009:226). As Davidson (2009:226) explains, the concept of place needs to be reasserted in displacement. The importance of such a reassertion lies in its capacity for asking questions as: ‘What does a loss of place constitute?’ or: ‘How is a loss of space differentiated from a loss of place?’. Davidson (2009:226) here refers to humanist geographer Tuan (1977:3), who claims that ‘place is security, space is freedom: we are attached to one and long for the other’. In this perspective, place is seen as securing identity and existence. Such an understanding of place distinguishes it from space, where the latter is regarded as being less attached to the self. Consequently, a subject’s alignment distinguishes a loss of place from a loss of space. When it is asserted that merely the spatial relocation of individuals constitutes displacement, place is understood as space. The personal attachment to place as securing identity and existence is then forgotten. For Davidson (2009:226), this lacking distinction in argumentation is what makes the abstracting metaphors underlying the current debate on displacement problematic. This identification paves the way for observing displacement not merely as actual physical displacement, but as an experience of a loss of place by people that are unable to (re)construct place (Davidson, 2009:228). In his reasoning, Davidson (2009:230) draws on Lefebvre’s conception of space, as previously discussed through Soja, to come to a principal implication for the study of gentrification-related displacement. Following from Lefebvre’s philosophy on space, the extent of displacement has to be understood through a more adequate, ‘placed’ conception of space within literature on gentrification (Davidson, 2009:231). This point stresses the loss of space/place as can be experienced by individuals, which needs to be regarded as displacement as much as the physical outward movement. The social utility of home and neighbourhood (Tuan, 1977 in Davidson, 2009:231) is thus recognized. The importance of such a perspective lies in the opportunity for analysing the spatial underpinning of social relations, seen as an essential part of the capitalist city. Within such a conception of displacement, merely preserving space as a political goal holds no guarantee of truly protecting place. This makes it possible to politically challenge contemporary urban renewal plans on the base of gentrification-induced displacement. Thus, the essential dimension of lived space for critical inquiries on gentrification is emphasized:

“(…), I want to make the point here that a general failure to understand lived space in its entire dimensions in recent gentrification scholarship represents a particularly significant problem for critical commentary” (Davidson, 2009:229).

17 2.3 DEBATE ON GENTRIFICATION

“It is argued that the ‘eviction’ of critical perspectives from a field in which they were once plentiful has serious implications for those at risk from gentrification, and that reclaiming the term from those who have sugarcoated what was not so long ago a ‘dirty word’ (Smith, 1996) is essential if political challenges to the process can be effective” (Slater, 2006:737).

Jane Jacobs’ contribution to urban planning, despite her attack on the rigidity of abstractions by planners, architects of urban design and the like, is taken up by some as a way of viewing gentrification as a form of positive urban regeneration. Ironically, within such an interpretation, Jacobs’ insights practically provide a blueprint for the phenomenon of gentrification. In a context of crisis and weak planning, temporary place-making initiatives occur and are growingly supported by local authorities in their quest to urban regeneration. A special form hereof is through arts-led regeneration, an urban development strategy, sturdily spurred by Richard Florida’s argumentation on a creative class which is presumed to stimulate economic development. However, there is a growing body of critical research that questions the assumptions underlying arts-led regeneration, arguing that it is often used as an economic development strategy resulting in an uneven distribution of the benefits. Those critical studies perceive certain economic strategies that interfere in the physical urban realm as catering to the needs and consumption of the middle-class, while circumventing the outcomes for wider communities (Munzner and Shaw, 2015:18). For this reason, it forms a part of the gentrification debate as is discussed here.

2.3.1 Gentrification: From sociological phenomenon to neo-liberal urban policy concept

Ever since urban sociologist Ruth Glass coined the term ‘gentrification’ in 1964, the term has generated a large body of international literature. This immense body of scholarship makes the debate on gentrification quite a substantial one for the field of urban planning. Glass’ initial definition originated from research on housing and class struggle in London, where she witnessed Victorian houses being rehabilitated, the transformation from renting to owning, property price increases and the displacement of working-class occupiers by middle-class newcomers (Slater, 2011: 571). The original understanding thus focused primarily on the class transformation as seen in residential rehabilitation and the physical displacement of people. According to Tom Slater (2011: 571), a human geographer with a profound interest in the urbanisation of injustice, this original understanding powerfully captures the class inequalities and injustices created by capitalist urban land markets and policies. Though, merely focusing on residential rehabilitation is not sufficient to understand the urban phenomenon of gentrification today, which is rather different in terms of sheer geographical scale

18 (Slater, 2011: 574). Institutional arrangements, such as private property rights and the free market, are seen to create urban environments that favour capital accumulation, instead of social needs such as home, community and family. The essential meaning and critical intent of the concept is emphasized by geographer Neil Smith (2002: 445). He mentions how gentrification has become somewhat of a dirty word for developers, politicians and financiers, because it so accurately points at the class shift that is involved in the regeneration of a city. Concerning this notion, Slater (2011: 572) mentions:

“Over the years there have been numerous deliberate attempts to avoid the language of gentrification completely, and more recently some attempts to gentrify the term itself, putting a positive gloss on a word that was coined to signify a worrying trend, one that raises vital, normative questions about the future of urban places” (Slater, 2011:572).

An example of this ‘positive gloss’ on the term gentrification, is given by American legal scholar Peter Byrne. Byrne (2003:406) argues that the process is ‘good on balance for the poor and ethnic minorities’. His argument is based on a contention that an increase in affluent and well-educated residents is good for cities, as it augments the number of tax payers and residents who purchase local goods and services. Furthermore, he explains how gentrification can benefit low income residents economically, politically and socially. Economically, by ‘expanding more employment opportunities in providing locally the goods and services that more affluent residents can afford’ (Byrne, 2003:419). Politically, by creating ‘urban political fora in which affluent and poor citizens must deal with each other’s priorities in a democratic process’ (Byrne, 2003:421). And lastly, the social benefits can be seen as ‘new, more affluent residents will rub shoulders with poorer existing residents on the streets, in shops, and within local institutions, such as public schools’ (Byrne, 2003:422). Another celebratory account on gentrification, with a similar viewpoint as Byrne, is provided by American architect and urban planner Andres Duany (2001). His work on the occurrence of gentrification in great American cities speaks of rebalancing the concentration of poverty through an influx of middle-class residents, by providing their tax base, rub-off work ethic and their political effectiveness. Furthermore, he states that the quality of life for all residents will follow in the process, since “it is the rising tide that lifts all boats” (Duany, 2001:36). Duany (2001:39) hereby dismisses critiques on the negative effects of gentrification, as existing merely of ‘old neighbourhood bosses’ who cannot accept the self-reliance of the incoming new middle-class. Slater responds to these ‘sugar-coating’ examples of what was formerly a dirty term, and puts his response in a broader commentary concerning the eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification research. Slater (2006: 746) identifies three key reasons why contributions to the gentrification debate have transformed from a focus on rent increases, class conflict and displacement to a language of cheering gentrification, middle class natural habitats and residentialization.

19 The first explains the persistent focus in theoretical and ideological ‘squabbles’ on the causes of gentrification, leading to an under examination of the effects. The acknowledgement that the multi- faceted process of gentrification is an expression of urban inequality, which leads to serious effects, gets lost in the process (Slater, 2006:747). The second reason shows similarities to Davidson’s (2009) contribution on reconceptualising gentrification-related displacement. Although displacement is a vital aspect of gentrification, in the 1990s it has been substantially ‘displaced’ from gentrification literature, due to methodological reasons. Slater (2006:748) hereby refers to the emphasis on quantitative studies for measuring the number of displacement in a neoliberal context of public policy. No numbers, meant no displacement. It is argued that qualitative research is greatly necessary to put displacement and critical perspectives on gentrification back on the agenda. Lastly, a third reason for the triumphant shift in the gentrification debate forms a misguided focus on social mix as a remedy for urban disinvestment and decay. In the current era of neoliberal urban policy, Slater (2006:751) argues that recent policy rhetoric on urban regeneration projects by means of social mix can be seen as gentrification in disguise. The empirical evidence on the intended effects of social mix paint a different picture, where the assumed interaction between home-owners and renters in neighbourhoods appears to be limited and how it can even lead to social segregation and isolation (Blomley, 2004:99). In this light, it is surprising that there are still not many critical accounts on policy-led gentrification in Europe. Following from these three clarifying details, Slater states that:

“Perhaps a key victory for opponents of gentrification would be to find ways to communicate more effectively that either unliveable disinvestment and decay or reinvestment and displacement is actually a false choice for low-income communities (…), and that progress begins when gentrification is accepted as a problem and not as a solution to urban poverty and blight” (Slater, 2006:753).

2.3.2 Initial stage of gentrification: artists as pioneers

Besides this delineation of an evolving gentrification debate, which is understandably more elaborate than can be described here, the process of gentrification itself can be categorized into evolving phases as well. This is done by Clay (1979) for instance, who has developed a four-stage model for the phenomenon of gentrification. The stages range from an initial pioneer gentrification phase, to a final phase of maturing gentrification. The final stages embody the conventional understanding of gentrification as an increasing influx of middle class residents, accompanied by real estate developers that perceive investment possibilities in the ‘upcoming’ neighbourhood. What is important to note here, is that the initial pioneers are often distinctive of the typical middle-class gentrifiers commonly associated with the maturing phase.

20 This particular distinction was also mentioned by Sharon Zukin (1995). She perceives the pioneer gentrifiers as existing of artists, who are welcomed as ‘bridge gentrifiers’ by public officials that appreciate the image of the city as cultural capital. However, the welcoming presence of such bridge gentrifiers becomes precarious when property values rise. Concerning pioneer gentrifiers, Rose (1984) uses the term marginal gentrifier, which is distinctive of the mainstream matured gentrifiers. She distinguishes marginal gentrifiers as the less privileged of the new middle classes, that hold a high level of educational capital and a low level of economic capital. These people, predominantly characterised as artists, students, and young couples/families, are presumably attracted to a tolerant, socially and ethnically mixed urban environment of city centre neighbourhoods. Mendes (2013) views a parallel between this concept of marginal gentrifiers and their preferences, with Richard Florida’s terminology on the creative class and its preference towards open, tolerant and diverse communities.

2.3.3 Creative city as policy rhetoric

Richard Florida has been widely influential in the academic and policy debates on city development. His work stems from economic research, more specifically a strand of research that is concerned with a shift from older industrial models of economic organization to newer, post-industrial and ‘flexible’ economic systems (Florida 2014:196). Influenced by Marxist and Schumpeterian thought, combined with the work of Jacobs, amongst others, Florida attempts to enlarge the focus of economic development by including attention to people and places. He has done so by researching ‘creativity’, which Florida views as a key human and economic resource, in particular our shared creativity that extends across all kinds of people and is embedded in every kind of occupation. Place holds an important position according to his perspective, as it is seen to be the locus of creativity and innovation. The influence of Jacobs can be distinguished in this sense, who Florida (2014:197) mentions as being one of the first to point out that the creation of new things and new kinds of work occurs in places, not in firms. The latter can enhance efficiency and innovation at best. Florida places his empirical focus therefore on occupations, as opposed to industry, for better understanding economic transformation and the role of place. This lead to a strand of economic research that investigates how place was supplanting firms as the primary social and economic organizing unit of the post-industrial age. The main line of reasoning is formed by three specific factors that Florida (2002) identified as critical for regional economic growth, namely technology, talent and tolerance, also referred to as the 3T’s of economic development. This line of reasoning has been subject to a fair amount of critique from other scholars.

2.3.4 Creative city strategies overly celebratory An important critique on Florida’s creative class thesis, concerns the lack of attention for economic inequality and gentrification. Peck (2005) critiques the unsubstantiated claims of causality concerning the creative class as driver for economic development. As such, Peck (2005) points at the convenient

21 utilisation of creative city discourse in neoliberal urban policies, that are based on gentrification and the normalization of socio-spatial inequality. In this regard, Mendes (2013) points at the rhetoric of social mixing and diversity that is inherent to the creative city discourse, hereby linking it to the process of gentrification that is similarly characterised. Specifically, the contradictions between the discourse of gentrification and its actual practice are emphasized. The promotion of social mixing, multiculturalism and difference in the discourse is short-sighted, as it neglects the practical implication of real social and housing conditions of minority groups (Mendes, 2013). An important practical inquiry that stands critical towards the ‘creative city’ arts-led urban regeneration strategies, is provided by Munzner and Shaw (2015). Arts-led urban regeneration is understood as the development of creative industries as a catalyst for widespread investment. The authors mention how Florida’s creative city strategy is the best-known manifestation of this (Munzner and Shaw, 2015:20). The analysis studies a regeneration strategy in Newcastle, Australia, concerning a temporary use and creative activation initiative that links local cultural producers with owners of vacant properties. The following quote can be observed as combining Zukin’s reasoning on culture in capitalistic cities with a critique on Florida’s influence in creative city policies:

“Creative city arts-led urban regeneration strategies are popularly employed to stimulate local economic competitiveness through developing cultural capital” (Munzner and Shaw, 2015:18).

The conclusions show that the central aims of local physical and social activation, economic development and support of the arts and creativity are contrasting. The benefits for local communities and the arts and creativity fall short compared to the objective of economic development. This study contributes to a greater body of critical research, which concludes that arts-led urban regeneration is often used as a rhetoric for economic development that is tailored to middle-class consumption, ultimately leading to an uneven distribution of benefits (Munzner and Shaw, 2015:18). It hereby shows the relation between temporal uses through creative city strategies, and the debate on gentrification, which is expressed more clearly in the following quote:

“Further research in Europe suggests that recognition of informal and temporary cultural uses can in and of itself constitute a gentrification strategy” (Munzner and Shaw (2015:21).

As such, attention is given to the phenomenon of temporary cultural use in Europe, which are becoming valued for sparking interest in formerly decaying places, and can be seen today as core ‘strategic components of urban planning, development and management’ (Lehtuvuori and Ruoppila, 2012: 31).

22 2.4 Summary

This extensive theoretical review revolves around a core understanding of urban planning as involving political, social, cultural and spatial dimensions. Forester (1989) observes planning practice as being inherently communicative and argumentative, where careful listening in practical conversation is deemed to be of great importance. Jane Jacobs (1961) provides sociological insights for designing healthy cities, existing of neighbourhoods with a diversity of both functions as people. Zukin (1995; 2010) critiques a mere focus on such design necessities, and addresses the issue of political-economic forces that decide on whose culture is represented in a city. Accounts on place-making highlight how lively places can be created by addressing the needs of the communities that are the actual users of the space. Concerning space, Soja (1996) and Lefebvre (1991) provide three metaphysical perspectives, namely perceived, conceived and lived, in order to widen the scope for critical studies on the urban environment. An example hereof is established by Davidson (2009), who identifies the necessity of including the perspective of lived space for a more adequate understanding of gentrification-related displacement. Lastly, the debate on gentrification is comprehensively discussed, while connecting it to theories on the creative city. Here, it is emphasized how critical perspectives that perceive gentrification as a process need to readdress the inherent inequalities of the phenomenon. As the literature on the creative city has shown, in theory, diverse, creative and open places in a city are thought to produce practices of creativity and innovation, resulting in a flourishing city life. This spurs the argument that by creating social mix in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, upward social mobility can occur. However, a substantial amount of literature contradicts these intended effects from theory, by pointing at the practical effects of social exclusion and gentrification on neighbourhood level.

23 3. METHODOLOGY

“[The primary historical mission of critical thought … [is] to perpetually question the obviousness and the very frames of civic debate so as to give ourselves a chance to think the world, rather than being thought by it, to take apart and understand its mechanisms, and thus to reappropriate it intellectually and materially” (Wacquant, 2004:101 in Slater, 2006:753).

This thesis seeks to investigate a planning topic by means of an ethnographic method. The theoretical ‘squabbling’ in the aforementioned gentrification debate shows the great importance of the chosen methodology for the resultant contributions to this debate. As Friedman (2010) touches upon the importance of focussing on the neighbourhood scale when assessing place-making, critical scholars such as Slater (2006) and Davidson (2009) are more explicit in stating the need for research on the lived- experience of space in order to adequately address the issue of gentrification. As the aim of this research project is to explore the lived experience in a neighbourhood that is on the verge of gentrification, choosing a qualitative method of ethnography is only logical. Even more so, considering Forrester’s (1989) argumentation on behalf of practical engagement in planning, and Friedman’s (2010) call for focusing on urban neighbourhoods from an inside out perspective. As ethnography is not a typical or traditional method for research in planning, I believe it is important to explicate why this interdisciplinary method can provide useful insights for both theory and practice of urban planning. To do so, two relevant examples are considered where this combination of ethnography and planning has already been employed. These two examples form the bridge to my conceptual framework, which leads to the main research question on the experience of lived space in a neighbourhood that is prone to an initial phase of gentrification.

3.1 Problem statement The problem statement is derived from theoretical contributions by Slater (2006) and Davidson (2009) in particular:

In the debate on gentrification and displacement, critical qualitative research is substantially lacking, including a general failure to understand the dimension of lived space, which is essential in the practice of urban planning.

3.2 Research design The case study design proved the best fit for providing answers to my main research question:

24 How can temporary place-making of Lola Luid, in a policy context of urban regeneration, be observed as spurring a process of beginning gentrification in Overtoomse Veld, through the lived experience of space?

In particular, it consists of a single case study, namely the neighbourhood of Overtoomse Veld, located in the municipal district of Amsterdam Nieuw-West. This design consists of an in-depth study of a particular research problem, as opposed to more comprehensive comparative inquiries. Since, the theoretical framework indicates the necessity for a detailed and descriptive exploration of the phenomenon of gentrification. More specifically, qualitative accounts of displacement were called upon to contribute to this debate. A case study design is excellent for such purposes of detailed contextual analysis of complex phenomena. The reason for focussing on a single case, forms the aim to conscientiously explore how a process of beginning gentrification can be observed in practice. The only comparison I will make, is between municipal urban regeneration policies, the visions behind Lola Luid and the experiences of neighbourhood residents, to discover existing discrepancies.

3.3 Example of ethnographic contributions to planning Since the main method in this qualitative research project is ethnography, I now turn to an example of how an ethnographic method is useful in planning research. This is done by Christmann (2014), who suggests an ‘ethnographic discourse analysis’ as possible complex research design. Such a research design, according to Christmann, can be of help for empirically exploring structures and dynamics of space-related communicative action in actor constellations. This research is relevant as it focuses on a research question involving ‘urban pioneers’ and by investigating bottom-up initiatives that aim to achieve more quality of life in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. In the reflective conclusion, Christmann (2014:249) discusses how this particular methodological proceeding proved adequate to investigate spatial transformation processes on a ‘microscopic level’. It is precisely this last point that is relevant for my research on Overtoomse Veld, as a neighbourhood that is on the eve of gentrification. The spatial transformation processes that are occurring are investigated on such a microscopic level, namely through observations on the streets of the neighbourhood and in particular at Lola Luid.

3.4 Ethnographic ontological and epistemological considerations As this research explores the phenomenon of gentrification, which is social-constructivist by nature, it is evident that I take on an ontological position linked to constructionism. This entails a presupposition that social phenomena and the meanings assigned to them are continually being established by social actors (Bryman, 2008:20). The epistemological stance is interpretivist. I adhere to Schutz’ (1962:59) phenomenological ideas on social sciences, which firstly point out that social reality has meaning for

25 human beings, which leads to meaningful actions on their part; and secondly refer to the role of the social scientist in grasping those meanings and actions from their point of view. Regarding methodological considerations for ethnographic research, LeCompte and Goetz (1982) provide a clear viewpoint. The formulation of problems in this type of research is distinguished as ‘emphasizing the interplay among variables in a natural context’ (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982:33). As ethnography is usually conducted in a real-life setting, it is particularly interested in contextual factors and on-the-spot analysis of causes and processes. In addition, concerning the nature of research goals, ethnographers: “attempt to describe systematically the characteristics of variables and phenomena, to generate and refine conceptual categories, to discover and validate associations among phenomena, or to compare constructs and postulates generated from phenomena in one setting with comparable phenomena in another setting” (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982:33). Following from this, the concepts in this research are developed to fit the data. This explanation points at the inductive stance on the relationship between theory and research as mentioned by Bryman (2008:366), as the formulation of hypothesis a priori is commonly avoided by ethnographers.

3.5 Conceptual framework 3.5.1 Gentrification without physical displacement As I focus on a process of initial gentrification, where actual physical displacement cannot be observed, the insights from Shaw and Hagemans (2015) concerning gentrification without displacement are of great significance. The relevance lies in the possibility offered by the authors for distinguishing how physical transformations in urban neighbourhoods cause a sense of loss of place without physical displacement (Shaw & Hagemans, 2015). Although the researchers have not used an ethnographic method, their deeply qualitative approach provides essential notions for my research on the process of beginning gentrification in the Overtoomse Veld district. The notions I am referring to, follow from the theoretical foundations on which Shaw and Hagemans (2015) build. These foundations share similarities with the theoretical framework of this thesis, with regard to the debate on critical perspectives on the process of gentrification. Based on Davidson’s (2008) work, the authors identify the loss of place according to two elements that are categorized as being most vulnerable to processes of class transition: shops and meeting places, and social structures and local governance (Shaw and Hagemans, 2015:326). In their research, the method that Shaw and Hagemans (2015:330) have used are in-depth interviews. The respondents were long-term low-income residents of secure community housing in the gentrifying neighbourhoods Fitzroy and St. Kilda in Melbourne, Australia. The respondents were invited to participate in the study through the community housing providers. With regard to the analysis of the data derived from the interviews, the authors took a deeply qualitative approach. The interest of the research was aimed at the residents’ experiences and how they

26 talked about them. As they mention: “We sought the interviewees’ experience of gentrification; if these are tinged with regret and nostalgia, that is their perception” (Shaw and Hagemans, 2015:330). The results of their research was thus a reproduction of the received comments, which were analysed and contextualised accordingly. Though, the intention was to let the voices speak for themselves as much as possible (Shaw and Hagemans, 2015:330. This particular intention mentioned by Shaw and Hagemans (2015) is contemplated throughout this thesis project.

3.5.2 Framework and hypothesis It is clear by now that the perceptions and experiences of residents in the ‘lived space’ in Overtoomse Veld are put central in this research. In order to perceive the implications of addressing this lived space contention for planning practice, it is distinguished from the conventional two contentions on space, namely perceived and conceived. Soja’s (1996) and Lefebvre (1991) perspectives on these three spaces are directly used here, resulting in the following conceptual framework (and hypothesis):

Figure 2: Conceptual framework scheme

The hypothesis underlying this framework followed from the inductive process and forms:

- Local urban regeneration policies are predominantly based on a contention of perceived space, which currently facilitates the conceived space of arts-led temporary use, possibly leading to gentrification (without physical displacement) in the lived space.

With the risk of not doing justice to the nuanced differences in the theoretical reasoning of Lefebvre and Soja, for reasons of theoretical clarity I choose to refer to the three dimensions of space as formulated by Lefebvre.

27 3.5.3 Concepts and operationalization

- Local urban regeneration policy - perceived space As proposed by Soja (1996), I understand perceived space to be the ‘real’ physical or material space in the neighbourhood. This includes the physical space such as the street-plan, dwellings, school buildings or parks and playgrounds. As Cilliers and Timmermans (2014:413) referred to this space as being the primary mode of operation for planners, I expect this to be the underlying conception of space in municipal regeneration policies for the Overtoomse Veld area. Essential here is the difference between space and place, explained by Tuan (1977), distinguishing the social-spatial character of place with a merely spatial character of space. The perceived space is explicitly understood as the merely spatial perception of ‘space’.

Category Concept Space Physical space detached from personal experience

- Arts-led regeneration / temporary place-making– conceived space Also directly following from Soja (1996), I view conceived space as cognitive ideas about space, or ‘imagined’ space. Resulting from the critical theoretical contributions on arts-led urban regeneration strategies by Peck (2005), Mendes (2013) and Munzner and Shaw (2015), presenting its practical contradictions, I identify such ‘creative-city-discourse’ strategies as cognitive ideas about space. The municipal policy of ‘Broedplaatsen’, facilitating artists with affordable workspaces, is seen as such. I aligned this with temporary place-making, also mentioned by Munzner and Shaw as a particular form of arts-led regeneration, that fits the temporary initiative Lola Luid quite accurately. Therefore, the ideas and expectations about Lola Luid as a place in the neighbourhood from the artists themselves are included in this part.

Category Concept Creative city Social mix (diversity of people: ethnicity, income, age) discourse Diversity (buildings, functions)

- Gentrification (without displacement) – lived space I follow Soja’s (1996) conception on lived space as encompassing both the first material and second cognitive perspective on space. I explicitly refer to it in this research as being the everyday experience of the ‘old’ residents in Overtoomse Veld, as being the actual users of the neighbourhood space. It thereby entails their opinions, perceptions, feelings of their neighbourhood and the regenerative changes that are currently being made and Lola Luid as a specific part of it.

28 Gentrification is understood here as the initial phase of the phenomenon, where physical displacement has not yet occurred. This makes it possible, mentioned by Slater (2006) and Davidson (2009), to perceive the social, personal and experienced aspect of displacement as gentrification. This makes a perspective possible that observes the essence of inequality in gentrification, without using quantitative numbers that merely state an understanding of matured gentrification. The experiences of myself as a participant observer, and the everyday experiences of the artists are included here. These are thus separated from the conceived ideas and expectations of the artists.

Category Concept Indicators Place Displacement: Sense of loss of Shops & meeting places place, through personal experience Social structures & local governance of place, worries about changes Fear of rent increase

Category Concept Creative city Social mix (diversity of people: ethnicity, income, age, gender) discourse Diversity (buildings, functions)

Within these two categories, the significance of certain cultural aspects can be observed, hence this forms a category. Though it is not explicitly analysed in a separate section, but can be witnessed in the observations of the abovementioned categories: Category Concept Culture Urban fears, social-cultural differences

The main questions that are asked to observe these categories and concepts, though dependent on the course of the conversation, where: - Are you a resident of this neighbourhood? If yes, for how long? - What do you think of the neighbourhood? - What are your experiences with the renovations and constructions? - Are you familiar with Lola Luid? If yes, how is your experience with Lola Luid?

29 3.6 Data collection

3.6.1 Study area As is described in the introduction, Overtoomse Veld, a purportedly deprived neighbourhood, is currently faced with major regeneration plans. It exhibits important signs that the phenomenon of gentrification, which appears to have reached saturation in the inner city, is now spreading across the ring-border into this area. As my research revolved around the placement of Lola Luid in specific, I choose the blocks that were closest to Lola Luid, as I assumed that people living and walking there were the most likely to be aware of the presence of the building. I furthermore choose the August Allebésquare as an important spot for this research, as it is a main square in the neighbourhood with small shops, a supermarket, a mosque and houses. It is furthermore a focus point in the municipal regeneration plans of the neighbourhood, where regenerative constructions are already clearly visible.

Figure 3: Map showing the location of Overtoomse Veld in Amsterdam (black rectangle). Source: Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016d.

30

Figure 4: Map of Overtoomse Veld and Lola Luid, located at the black circle. Source: Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016e.

3.6.2 Respondents With regard to finding respondents, I used purposive and snowball sampling. Purposive sampling was applied, as the units (people, places, events, documents) were selected relying on my judgement whether they were to suit the purpose of my research. This choice of sampling fits well within the qualitative, exploratory research design, as it provides an ability to focus on particular characteristics of the neighbourhood of interest in this case. The reason for just approaching people on the street, as opposed to sending out interview invitations through housing associations or another formal way, is the aim to really grasp the ‘lived’ experience on the street. My expectation was that I could meet the most diverse people through just being on the street or on squares and to contact people. Although a few were reluctant to talk in the initial contact, this usually changed during the course of the conversation. Of course, this choice has consequences for the replicability of the research. As most of the respondents did not provide their names or other specificities with regard to identity, another researcher during a different time might receive different results. However, I believe that the credibility of the findings is sufficient, given the amount of respondents, the diversity thereof, as well as the provision of the necessary characteristics of respondents (such as duration of residency in the neighbourhood, approximate age, gender, ethnicity). Furthermore, snowball sampling occurred as my contacts with various residents augmented. For instance, during the event of ‘Zwerfafval Prikken’ I met Ben, who has been a neighbourhood resident for several years. He recommended me to go and speak to Abi, the owner of a well-known snack bar in the neighbourhood. Abi, with all his social knowledge of the neighbourhood, could be quite helpful for my research.

31 3.6.3 Participant observation and interviews Field notes were collected from the participant observation I engaged in, as well as from participant interviews with neighbourhood residents. Particularly, I observed the lived experience of residents during specific events in both Lola Luid and community centre ‘De Buurtzaak’. In and around Lola Luid I participated and observed during events such as, the ‘Rommelmarkt’, ‘Zwerfafval Prikken’ and ‘Goede Gesprekken’. In ‘De Buurtzaak; I participated and observed during the events Meeting against Radicalisation, the daily lunch, and the weekly dinner called ‘Bonte Maaltijd’. I also collected field notes from walking through the neighbourhood, ‘hanging around’ Lola Luid and approaching people on the street during various times and days of the week. Some important comments are in place in terms of limitations of these field notes. I choose to not immediately write down the field notes when I was participating in conversations with residents. My expectation was that they would feel more comfortable to speak freely about their experiences when I would not have a pen and notebook in my hand and be busy writing. I wanted to engage in the conversation with my full attention and be listening carefully, in the spirit of John Forrester (1989). Then, directly after the conversation I would find a spot to write down the essence and details of the conversation, as accurate as I could recall. Of course, a consequence is that the field notes lack information that would otherwise have been recorded by a tape recorder for instance.

3.6.4 Semi-structured interviews Besides the participant interviews with neighbourhood residents, which were often concise, I held two more substantial interviews with one of the initiators of Lola Luid, namely Emilie Kröner. Both interviews were semi-structured, as there were specific elements I wanted to know, though learning about her own story and perspective was the main purpose. I chose to have a second interview over time, as this was a possibility to cross check findings, as well as to ask additional questions which relevance became apparent during the participant observations. A relevant note I need to make in this regard, is the fact that, due to schedule-related reasons, Emilie combined the first interview with a for me unknown second interviewer. This influenced the course of the first interview, which made it all the more essential for me to have a second one-on-one interview.

3.6.5 Documents Secondary data was employed in the form of municipal policy documents concerning contemporary urban regeneration plans of the city on the whole, and for the Overtoomse Veld area in particular. These municipal policies are used to obtain insights in the formal policy aims, and to distil a perspective of perceived space underlying those policies.

32 In addition, specific municipal policy regarding the temporary use of vacant buildings are utilised. As Lola Luid is facilitated through this policy called ‘Broedplaatsen Beleid’, which facilitates cheap spaces for artists and creative start-ups to work and/or live, I expect this policy to be of use in scrutinizing the underlying notions of conceived space concerning this initiative in Overtoomse Veld.

3.6.6 Data analysis I used qualitative data analysis that can best be described as grounded theory. The data collection, as explained before, has been connected to theory in a highly iterative manner. The categories of perceived, conceived and lived space follow directly from the theory by Soja (1996). I used these to place my concepts, which I derived from coding my empirical data and simultaneously reaching back to theoretical groundings. The respondents are distinguished as being residents (R), creatives (C), or others (O). The category of others did not fit either the category of respondents or creatives, as for instance employees involved at the community centre. The analysis of municipal policy documents and the interview data is done through a content analysis.

3.6.7 Limitations A major limitation of this study, is formed by the duration of the study. As for ethnographic studies, participant observation is usually done for a longer period of time to come to a comprehensive understanding of the case that is scrutinized. Due to a limited time frame of this study, the ethnographic findings could be strengthened when the research is extended for a longer period of time. However, the conclusion is not merely based on the ethnographic field notes, but furthermore addresses documents and interview transcriptions. As such, the analysis reaches beyond merely ethnography.

33 4. PERCEIVED SPACE in municipal urban regeneration policy

“Not only does ‘urban regeneration’ represent the next wave of gentrification, planned and financed on an unprecedented scale, but the victory of this language in anaesthetizing our critical understanding of gentrification in Europe represents a considerable ideological victory for neoliberal visions of the city (Smith, 2002:446).

For a better understanding of the space/place element of the case, a short overview of recent developments in the area is essential. The assertion by Cilliers and Timmermans (2014:413), which observes ‘perceived space’ as the dominant mode for understanding space and the primary mode of operation for planners, is leading to an analysis of municipal urban regeneration policies for Overtoomse Veld, including first a contextual description of the case.

4.1 Case description Overtoomse Veld neighbourhood 4.1.1 Recent developments in Overtoomse Veld Pop up mall and ‘broedplaats’ Lola Luid is located in a former school that has been vacant for over a year. The building is situated in the neighbourhood Overtoomse Veld, which is part of Slotervaart, an area in the western district of Amsterdam. It lies in-between the outer ring road of the city and the metro line that runs from the North-West to the South-West of Amsterdam. Currently, the neighbourhood is being transformed drastically. The municipality aims for changing the characteristics of Overtoomse Veld significantly, from being a predominantly mono-functional residential area, to a vibrant city region (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016e). On a daily base, co-operations of housing associations, real estate companies and the city district Amsterdam Nieuw-West are joining forces to make these physical changes in the built environment. The renewal plans for the neighbourhood have been going on since the end of the 1990s. The built environment existed largely of unilateral residential blocks, which are replaced for ‘attractive’ new constructions which offer a great variety of residential properties. The idea behind these renewal plans is to create more dwellings and to generate more space for work and for meeting one and other (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016e). According to the municipality, the Overtoomse Veld neighbourhood is being appreciated due to its spacious and green character. In addition, the fairly short distance to the city centre and a great accessibility to public transport form the qualities which make that people enjoy living there (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016e). The physical changes are already greatly visible, for instance at the building sites around the August Allebésquare, which is located approximately one block apart from Lola Luid. These building plans exist of renovating old buildings for retail, building a complex with around 500 new dwellings for young people, transforming an old office into 40 dwellings for -young professionals- and the

34 creation of a new housing block with mixed functions as retail and residential (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016e). The public space will also receive a make-over, as soon as the construction work is finished. A few blocks away from the August Allebésquare, and a bit further away from Lola Luid, a complete new ‘climate neutral’ residential area called ‘Stadstuin Overtoom’ is being built. Around 350 timeworn dwellings from housing association Eigen Haard have been demolished, to make space for 470 new climate neutral dwellings, of which 30% will be social housing. The houses are being built in a sustainable manner, where materials are recycled and energy is generated on a sustainable and local scale without the use of fossil fuels. The result will be affordable and energy-neutral houses, according to the municipality (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016e). As these developments of area renewal create an image of positivity and liveability, it is important to note that this has been quite different for approximately the last two decades. The neighbourhood was known for its urban issues regarding tenuous liveability and social cohesion.

4.1.2 Contextual factors of Overtoomse Veld as disadvantaged neighbourhood In 2009, Engbersen (2009:111) writes about Overtoomse Veld as being a disadvantaged neighbourhood, where serious urban issues can be observed. The author explains that there is (or given the recent developments, possibly has been) a permanent influx of low-income groups in this area, relatively high numbers of unemployment and social welfare, combined with severe issues of liveability and to a lesser extent of crime. Engbersen (2009:111) mentions that it is mainly such issues of liveability in daily life, together with a vulnerable position of many residents, which generates the insecurity and discontent that can threaten the social cohesion in a neighbourhood. He views these issues, which are of importance to provide a contextual framework for my case, in light of four structural factors on macro level that determine urban developments in Amsterdam. Firstly, a process of selective migration amounts to a changing population in the city. This process is two-sided, in that autochthonous inhabitants leave the city and non-Western migrants are coming to the city. This is not only a question of ethnic background, but also of social status, where middle income groups leave the city while lower income groups go to the city. This process of selective migration is spurred by the second structural factor, namely the one-sided housing stock in the city. Compared to the national average, Amsterdam holds a relatively great amount of social housing, cheap rental tenements, older dwellings and flats. Due to this particular supply of housing, Amsterdam shows to be an attractive place to live for people with a lower-income (Engbersen, 2009:110). A third structural factor according to Engbersen (2009:110), are the changes in urban labour markets. As can be observed in several western cities, Amsterdam has been facing a loss of industrial jobs and loss of jobs in general, as well as the simultaneous rise of a post-industrial service sector. The social consequences of this economic restructuring are unmistakeably visible in the city. The amount of adult citizens receiving social welfare in Amsterdam was 19% in 2002, one and a half times as much compared to the national average. The last factor Engbersen (2009:110) mentions, is

35 that of liveability and crime. In Amsterdam, the amount of criminal offences declined on the long term since 1994, though offences with a violent character have increased in the city, but it is still less than the national average. These four structural factors are partly transcending the city level or even the national level. However, the consequences thereof for the societal position of urban residents and their possibilities to develop are significant, especially for residents of deprived neighbourhoods (Engbersen, 2009:111).

Figure 5: Impression of the major regeneration plans in Overtoomse Veld

36 4.2 Distinction between space and place Engbersen (2009) has sketched a specific analysis regarding the state of Overtoomse Veld. This was published in 2009, in the middle of the crisis. Given these insights, it is interesting to scrutinize the neighbourhood specific policies, as well as city-wide municipal policies that are currently prevailing.

4.2.1 Focus on space: ‘Koers 2025’, space for the city Firstly, it is interesting to observe the general discourse in the municipal strategic policy for 2025, which is titled ‘Space for the City’. The fundament on which it is based is an understanding of Amsterdam as being highly popular and growing in terms of residents every year. With this stated as a fact, the policy aims for realizing a high amount of new dwellings, namely 50.000 within the city borders by 2025, appears as a logical solution (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016d:4). In addition, the strategy document emphasizes the global trend that is perceived in cities, which attracts people in both times of austerity as well as wealth. This is also manifest in Amsterdam, which is acclaimed to have been growing for years. Despite the crisis and the construction stop in 2010, the city welcomed many new residents. The document mentions how the city ‘soaked up newcomers, youngsters, fortune seeker, families and internationals like a sponge’ (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016d:6). Given these developments, together with a strengthening of the economy, in 2014 the municipality agreed to realize 5000 dwellings on a yearly base. For this agreement to happen, space is sought for constructing these dwellings with the ultimate goal of housing many more people. The aim is composed around the supposition that creating higher densities and creating places with mixed-uses does not only hold economic benefits, but also creates social value (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016d:6) When the analytic focus shifts to specific plans for the neighbourhood, it is striking how much attention is given to both the social as well as economic issues. The 2016 District Analysis (Gebiedsanalyse) of the Slotervaart area, of which Overtoomse Veld is a part, conveyed by the municipality speaks of: a low social quality, a strong disadvantaged position of youngsters, a lack of utilities at the August Allebeplein, one of the key squares in the neighbourhood (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016a:1). Also, it recognizes how the population exists of a high percentage of youth, high percentage of low-income and a high percentage of ‘immigrants’. It specifically states that the neighbourhood Overtoomse Veld stands out in a negative manner. It holds a low appreciation for its physical characteristics, as well as the presence of a layering of social issues. Overtoomse Veld holds significantly low ratings when it comes to the fields of how clean, whole and safe it is in the neighbourhood. Also, the existence of grave tensions between residents is mentioned as an important focus point (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016a:1). Besides these numbers on the issues that are apparent in the neighbourhood, the importance is stressed that the regeneration plans of the area are continued and completed in the coming years. This

37 is necessary, as this specific zone aligning the ring-road is becoming very attractive for the ‘new urbanites’ (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016a:2), which is literally stated as such. This notion leads to the policy of ‘more construction within the same space’, increasing the density and to a growth of the population. Due to the intensifying use of space, the municipality recognizes the necessity to strengthen the spatial quality in this area. Examples are mentioned, such as the passage underneath the ring-road and the rail tracks. The policy of constructing many new dwellings in the neighbourhood in the coming years is furthermore addressed in the 2016 District Plan for Slotervaart, which follows from the analysis of the district. Highly interesting, forms the expression of the explicit objective to strengthen the ‘creative’ and ‘regenerative’ image of the district of Nieuw-West (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016b:12). Given the aforementioned neighbourhood analysis, where the degenerative state of the physical and social sphere of the neighbourhood is emphasized, it can be questioned to what extent such a ‘creative’ and ‘regenerative’ image is already present in order for it to be strengthened. Furthermore, the document speaks of the urban regeneration as being a success, when there is a sufficient quantity of utilities, such as schools, community centres and childcare, present, as well as enough green- and playground facilities (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016b:13). If these are truly the criteria for a successful regeneration development, which only state the physical space of a presence of utilities, it appears as though perceived space forms the lens from which the policy stems. From these statements, it becomes clear that the hurry behind all of these developments is being enacted as self-evident. There is also a notion present that is connected to the next chapter on the conceived space of arts-led urban regeneration, namely that it is literally stated how ‘culture and art are the generators behind successful urban development’ (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016a:12).

38 5. CONCEIVED SPACE of arts-led urban regeneration

“Gibson’s (2004:4) summary of ‘just add culture and stir” points to the superficiality of the arts-led regeneration thesis, where notions of ‘creativity’ and ‘culture’ are raised as a quick fix to complex urban problems” (Munzner and Shaw, 2015:20).

5.1 Creative city discourse The previous chapter has shown the policy context of the district in which Lola Luid is located, as occupying a vacant school building in a rather disadvantaged city district of Amsterdam. As the theoretical framework has shown, the positive or regenerative effects of such creative temporary uses for a neighbourhood are presupposed in policies, despite the lack of evidence of these effects. The conceived space refers to ‘imagined’ space, or theoretical thinking about space. This chapter dissects this theoretical thinking regarding the arts-led urban regeneration and supposed assumptions through the example of Lola Luid and the municipal policy concerning Broedplaatsen.

5.1 Social-mix in policy An important source for analysing the conceived space, or representations of space in cognitive or mental forms on Overtoomse Veld and the expected role that Lola Luid can play therein, forms the municipal policy on creative hubs in the city of Amsterdam. This policy is titled ‘Broedplaatsen Beleid’, where a ‘broedplaats’ refers to the creative hubs or places that are intended to be created through this policy. The initiative of Lola Luid falls under this policy, though it is not a typical broedplaats, as is explained by one of the main initiators, Emilie Kröner (Appendix IV). Lola Luid is part of an organisation called Lola, which aims to create solutions for vacant buildings and offices throughout the city. These solutions have the ultimate purpose of stimulating societal value, by occupying vacant spaces that would otherwise be empty places without a function. The policy commences with an appreciation of Amsterdam as being one of the most attractive and creative cities in the world. It emphasizes the city’s extraordinary supply of art and culture, which is present on both global as local (neighbourhood) level. Short distances, both in a spatial as well as organizational sense, guarantee casual encounters in galleries, at events, restaurants, cafes and bars, or just ‘in the city’. New and cooperative ideas, founded via informal circuits, find their way effortlessly to practice, to the public or to clients (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016c:3). Besides this notion of Amsterdam being one of the most attractive and creative cities in the world, the discourse on the assumed positivity of a social mix in neighbourhoods can be distinguished in specific parts of the policy. For instance, in a specific section that also addresses the issue of

39 gentrification gently, it is mentioned how broedplaatsen can be a contribution to the attractiveness and regeneration of a neighbourhood. It specifically states that this policy is beneficial on two levels, namely: (1) creatives or artists with a low income arrive in the neighbourhood where they are able to rent affordable workspace, and (2) the variety in the program of a broedplaats, such as exhibitions, peculiar cafes and pop-up stores, create an attractiveness for both existing residents as well as for newcomers (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016c:4). This last point is quite significant, because it literally states the assumption that the provision of such variety in a broedplaats is appealing to the entire community around it, for both old and new residents. This notion is placed in a comment on gentrification, which is addressed as ‘the social, cultural and economic upgrade of neighbourhoods’ (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016c:4). It is explained that due to the popularity of the city, Amsterdam has to deal with price increases of commercial real- estate. Though, due to the exceptional amount of social housing in an area as Nieuw-West, this process of price increases following from gentrification evolves gradually. The significant presence of social housing thus slows the increase of housing prices in this part of the city, while ‘neighbourhoods experience an increasing mix due to the arrival of higher educated residents with a dual income’ (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016c:4). Curiously, the only reference that is made about displacement in this regard, concerns creatives. It is stated that they are forced to leave the city when land prices increase. The policy on broedplaatsen is made to prevent this from happening, and to keep attracting creative talent that is perceived to be essential for a vital functioning of ‘creative city’ Amsterdam. Thus, the city needs to be an inviting, accessible and attractive environment for these creative newcomers (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016c:4).

5.1.2 Social mix by Lola Luid It is interesting to note the difference between what is stated in the municipal Broedplaatsen policy and what creative Emilie from Lola Luid emphasizes. The municipal policy has a clause built in the document that explains how Broedplaatsen need to fulfil to certain criteria. One of the criteria is that concerning space, which entails (1) raising the attractiveness of the location for potential renters (2) increase the visibility of the Broedplaats for residents or employees or stakeholders in the area, and (3) to make people outside of the area known with it through the programs (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016c:19). However, as Emilie has emphasized during the interview, her intention of Lola Luid is precisely not directed at people from outside the area. More in particular, she mentions that she does not want the initiative to attract a lot of hipsters from the inner city area. As for gentrification, Emilie Kröner (Appendix V) emphasizes how it will be a lost opportunity if this will occur in Overtoomse Veld. Both as a resident and creative in Lola Luid, she perceives the developments in the neighbourhood as ‘the city that is marching on into the outskirts’. She emphasizes that she hopes that the initial residents will remain in Overtoomse Veld, despite all the new constructions. In her view, by which she refers to the perspective of the current mayor of

40 Amsterdam (Eberhard van der Laan), a city is only interesting if it is sufficiently mixed. Although she does not explain the reasons behind this, Emilie states that the intention of Lola Luid is to be a connection between the social mix of initial residents and newcomers. Furthermore, it is mentioned in the second interview that she would not like to see the city centre as a place merely for rich people. She refers to this as an ‘artificial ghost town’, which self- destructs due to its own success. The social aspect of injustice for the lower income residents who are pushed further into the margins outside of the city is mentioned in this regard. Also, stating an awareness of the phenomenon of gentrification, Emilie points at the initial discovery of the area by artists and students. In this light, she thinks that it is a bad thing if this is followed by a displacement of the old residents in the neighbourhood. Though, she talks about this development as being a rather factual and inevitable possibility for the future of Overtoomse Veld.

5.1.3 Diversity in policy As Jane Jacobs (1961) identified, the health of a city in terms of city safety, public contact and cross use, depends on the amount of diversity that is present. This does not only refer to a social mix of citizens, but also to a diversity in the built environment and its functions. Her suggestion was to generate a sufficient amount of density and design the presence of diverse buildings that differ in age and condition. These aspects can be distinguished in municipal policies, and to a lesser extent in the thoughts behind Lola Luid. Firstly, in the recent revision of the policy on Broedplaatsen, one of the key notes stresses the need for this specific policy to have a more integrated connection with city-wide strands of policy. It hereby designates attention to the aforementioned ‘Koers 2025’ policy that concerns the city as a whole. It states that the municipal council invests in seizing opportunities of area transformations in the zone around the ring-road. The ambition is to create broedplaatsen in those areas, which are currently seen as unknown for the bigger part of the inhabitants of Amsterdam. The ambition of spreading public functions concerning culture, as well as the function of nightlife is seen to be attained through the broedplaatsen in this particular zone around the ring-road, including Overtoomse Veld. In the municipal note called ‘Stad in Balans’ (translated as a balanced city), the café, restaurant and nightlife establishments in broedplaatsen contribute to this ambition for a de-concentration of nightlife in particular. The Overtoomse Veld area in which Lola Luid is located, is specifically distinguished as a centre zone on which the Broedplaatsen Beleid focuses. In the coming years, this zone is designated for increasing the development of broedplaatsen. The ultimate aim of this ambition, is to create a diversity in people as well activities, which is seen as being highly desired in this zone. In addition, the Overtoomse Veld neighbourhood is defined as being part of an important development location for initiatives of place-making. Especially relevant in terms of planning, forms a reference to the

41 municipal department of ‘Grond en Ontwikkeling’ (translated as land and development). In future land-lease plans, the amount of square meters designated to a societal function should preferably be used for the establishment of broedplaatsen. Moreover, the role of the municipal district is distinguished as possessing the financial support for strengthening the broedplaatsen. The cultural and societal capacity of a broedplaats is emphasized in this regard. It states that such creative hubs form the base for the creation of cultural programs that are targeted at the neighbourhood (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016c:15). Such district policies stimulate the arrival of new creative hubs, and after its realisation the value for the community. Analyses of the neighbourhood form the motivation for establishing such hubs in precisely these areas. It does not state however, which elements of these analyses are in need of being addressed by the arrival of broedplaatsen.

5.1.4 Diversity in, and according to Lola Luid With regard to diversity, Emilie has made some statements in the interview about the building of Lola Luid in particular, and the neighbourhood in general. Her vision of Lola Luid is that of a lively pop-up mall, a truly public space with shops on the ground floor, and offices and homes on the two floors above. She refers to it as a ‘lively core in the neighbourhood’. A functional use of the building such as Lola Luid is considered as a far better alternative in a neighbourhood than a dark and empty building. Emilie mentions that the entire building consists of different functions. There are quite a few spaces that can be used by neighbourhood residents. These are for instance, a large kitchen, a theatre hall, a gym and a workshop space. Through this variety of spaces, her aim with Lola Luid is to provide a neutral public place, with a variety of shops and services that will appeal to all residents, high and low income, young and old, Dutch or non-Dutch (Appendix IV). An interesting point that Emilie makes, refers back to the comment made in the introduction, stating the possibility of the district of Nieuw-West to become the new Kreuzberg. She finds this idea, along with the ambitions of the municipality to transform the district into a thriving economic ‘West- Axis’, rather bizar (Appendix V). In her view, these perspectives are ridiculous, and do not do justice to the neighbourhood.

42 6. LIVED SPACE of neighbourhood residents

“Put simply, displacement understood purely as spatial dislocation tells us very little about why it matters. We miss the very space/place tensions… that make space a social product” (Davidson, 2009:326)

As mentioned, this study aims to contribute to the gap in qualitative research in the debate on gentrification. The experience of lived space is seen as a valuable perspective to grasp the space/place tensions that Davidson (2009) refers to. This also helps to distinguish between a viewpoint that merely focuses on physical space, a viewpoint that consists of mere imaginations of space and the actual lived socio-spatial circumstances. This chapter analyses the sense of loss of place and the lived experience around Lola Luid as a conceived space initiative, by means of the collected field notes and observations.

6.1 Experience of place: Overtoomse Veld This part of the analysis is structured by the elements that are identified by Davidson (2008) as being most vulnerable to processes of class transition and constituting a sense of loss of place, namely; shops and meeting places, social structures and local governance. An additional element appeared important in the experience of a possible loss of place, which is associated with a matured phase of gentrification, that is: the expressed fear of rent increases.

6.1.1 Shops and meeting places As I have been present in the neighbourhood on various days and times over a course of several weeks, where I often walked through the neighbourhood, I noticed how the composition of the area is rather monotonous. Most buildings have a residential function, as well as there is a fairly high concentration of schools around the building of Lola Luid. With regard to shops, restaurants and meeting places, there are not many to discover. Though certain places, such as the Piet Mondriaansquare, the August Allebésquare, lunchroom ‘Abi Patat’, and the small grocery shops near the Allebésquare appeared as meaningful from my field notes. During one of my visits to the community centre not far from Lola Luid, I met an elderly Dutch woman (R6) who has been living in Overtoomse Veld for over 20 years. After I asked her about her experience with living in the neighbourhood, she mentioned the riots at the August Allebésquare at the end of the 1990s, which intensified a quite grim atmosphere in the area. These riots exposed the grave distrust between the police and a specific group of Moroccan boys, which was lingering for a longer period of time. The woman hereby addresses the fact that she witnessed a rapid increase of residents with a Moroccan or Turkish background over those years. ‘They’ took over quite a lot of

43 stores, establishing mostly Turkish/Moroccan grocery stores and bakeries. She states this more as a fact of developments than that she expresses whether she likes or dislikes it. The changes that have been made over the years to the Allebésquare are regarded by her as positive, since the open square has been made smaller (less space for riots) and the parking spaces have diminished. Another day I met a young Dutch-Moroccan male student (O6), who grew up in the neighbourhood. He appreciated having so many Turkish and Moroccan shops around. Also, the fact that there are about 5 mosques in the immediate surroundings of where he lived was a very pleasant thing for him.

Figure 6: Grocery shops near the August Allebesquare, at the Jan Tooropstraat. Source, Photography Rosa Boon

Concerning the shops that are currently predominantly exploited by members of Turkish or Moroccan decent, I spoke with another elderly woman (R17) at ‘café Allebé’. This was during a Saturday afternoon, and as it is the only café on the square it was not difficult to get in contact. As a resident for about 38 years, this lady has experienced quite some developments in the neighbourhood already. Just as resident R6, she has seen the emergence of dominantly Turkish and Moroccan grocery shops and restaurants. Specifically, she misses the Dutch clothing shops and restaurants that were around the Allebésquare. As she has difficulty walking, the café and the supermarket Albert Heijn at the Allebésquare are the only places she goes to. Given the newer developments, she is pleased that this supermarket has remained, as it is one of the few, maybe the only Dutch shop where she can find all that she needs. Also, she is pleased that the pharmacist is still there. At the same terrace at café Allebé, sits a middle-aged man (R18) who has something to say about the supermarket as well. He has been living in the neighbourhood for a few years now, but as for the recent developments he only sees homes that are being built. Though, there are no more

44 supermarkets, only the Albert Heijn and the Lidl. As such, he finds that there are too many houses being built. Related to the high number of construction work in the neighbourhood, are the frustrations of an elderly lady (R8) concerning the disruptive influence the constructions have on both her cell-phone reception. Furthermore, this disruption due to the many building sites are experienced at the Albert Heijn supermarket as well. She explains how there have been occasional difficulties with reception of the ATM machines in the shop. Besides this annoyance, she expresses how she particularly misses all the Dutch clothing shops that used to be around the August Allebesquare. As she cannot get around as easily as she used to, it is quite an undertaking for her when she is forced to go into the city for clothing. Also, the mentions how she perceived many shops that have been taking over by different cultures over the years. She does not feel at home here anymore, hence she urgently wants to leave. As for meeting places, an important position appears to be held by the community centre called ‘De Buurtzaak’. This community centre is present in the neighbourhood for quite some time and is exploited by the foundation ‘Samenwonen-Samenleven’, which is co-supported by the municipality, and Nisa4Nisa, an organisation for women in the neighbourhood. As such, it shows to be an established place for activities and the provision of support for the neighbourhood community. Here I met a Dutch elderly lady, who revealed to me that she has reached the age of 89 and was born and raised in Amsterdam. She has been living in an elderly home in the neighbourhood for about 15 years. For her, the weekly meals on Tuesday evening are very important. She goes every week, because for her it is a place to stay in contact with people as she is afraid to become isolated otherwise. Two residents (R10, R13) mention they are pleased with Lola Luid as a welcome new meeting place in the neighbourhood. Both of them mention that there are no real alternatives in the neighbourhood to go for a coffee or have lunch. Hereby, they refer to lunchroom BOX that is located in Lola Luid. With regard to meeting places, the male filmmaker (R13) furthermore mentions how a lunchroom called Abi Patat is an important place in the neighbourhood. This cafeteria is run by Abi (not his real name), who is said to have an excellent understanding of the social structures in the neighbourhood.

6.1.2 Social structures Abi (R15), who is notoriously known in the neighbourhood for being the ‘frying-philosopher’, is the owner of a lunchroom located in the street sideways from Lola Luid. Abi is familiar with Lola Luid, as he was present during the event of ‘Goede Gesprekken’ (translated as meaningful conversations). He is well aware of the developments in the neighbourhood and points at how there is no balance in Overtoomse Veld. He mentions how he begins to perceive a change in residents. With regard to the balance in the neighbourhood, he mentions: “Formerly there were around 10% Dutch people, the rest Turkish and Moroccan. Now, in some buildings or parts of the neighbourhood, it is the other way

45 around, 80% Dutch and 20% other”. He emphasizes that there is no balance in the social structure of the neighbourhood due to these extremes. Also, he mentions that there is a large number of children that live in Overtoomse Veld. This can be quite difficult, as they sometimes misbehave, but he holds an eye out for them and he feels that they listen to him. Most importantly, he stresses that there is little contact between people. Two girls (O1, O2) that are responsible for ergotherapy at De Buurtzaak mention, talk about this lack of contact as well. In their work, they perceive a distinguishable separation between activities at the community centre where Dutch ‘autochthonous’ elderly residents go to, versus those where mostly Moroccan and Turkish residents are going. As for the non-Dutch elderly that they encounter, which are mostly women, they hear stories about not feeling at home in the neighbourhood anymore. About those stories: “They see a change in the population, where there are a lot more young people, who do not greet them, help an old lady out, make contact”. Though it cannot be said whether these ‘young people’ that are referred to are specifically newcomers due to the current regeneration plans, it is the overall perception which is important as a changing feeling of place. In particular, it is expressed by some of these elderly that the changing atmosphere has the effect that they do not feel at home anymore. With regard to young people, I encountered a young male student in his early 20s (O6), who has lived in the neighbourhood his entire life and has a Moroccan background. Only very recently he moved away. I met him at the bike shop of Achmed, in the basement of Lola Luid. As he knew Achmed from the time that he was living here, he is aware of Lola Luid. An interesting point that he tells me concerning social structures, is that it is a turbulent neighbourhood. However, he has never felt unsafe. Why? “Because he knew the guys that were causing trouble”. As such, he can imagine that someone else, who does not know them, might perceive it as unsafe. But for him, when someone got arrested, he did not find it shocking as he knew that this was a good guy. The perspective that pronounced the gap between cultures strongest, was by a woman (R1) who has been working at the organization Nisa4Nisa, located in the Overtoomse Veld neighbourhood, for several years. She has also been living in the neighbourhood for quite some time. She has experienced stories and daily life situations of neighbourhood residents first hand during these years. After I asked about her experience with the neighbourhood, the first thing she mentions is that it was, and still is in a way, a problematic ‘deprived’ neighbourhood. She sees how a lot of people in her direct surroundings, mostly through her work for Nisa4Nisa, are only busy with surviving. Money problems are a big issue here. This circumstance makes her anxious for increasing housing prices due to the new developments that are arising in the neighbourhood.

6.1.3 Local governance My visits to community centre called ‘De Buurtzaak’ proved to be rather insightful with regard to existing familiarities with local governance. It is here that I get in contact with Godfrey Lado (R4), an

46 active resident in Overtoomse Veld, as also a passionate storyteller and musician. He is involved in the assembly that is responsible for directing municipal subsidies to local community initiatives, called the ‘regiegroep’. It is on this topic that he mentions how certain cultural differences influence the functioning of connecting residents through local governance. An important barrier that he encounters, concerns the so-called ‘language gap’ between municipal clerks and residents. He refers to the former as intellectuals that lack the capacity to speak to the latter on a similar level. As he encounters various residents that wish to take on an active role in the neighbourhood, he perceives this as a missing connection. A specific aspect that is noticed regarding language, forms linguistic problems of residents that are not sufficient in speaking or reading Dutch. Besides these apparent language difficulties that are specific to the neighbourhood, Godfrey senses opportunities to create a better link between municipal policy and the current functioning of the ‘regiegroep’. Considering the aforementioned two-fold cultural language gap (level of intellect versus linguistic cultural background), he believes that a professionalization of the group can be made. Currently, the regiegroep exists merely of active residents, where most members miss the capacity to accurately approve or disapprove an application. An example hereof forms the municipal wish for focusing on health in the neighbourhood. He encounters many applications that have an element of health in it, though it is not approved as such. As the group, responsible for municipal funding, does not consist of even one municipal officer, this is a lost chance according to him. A different experience regarding local governance in Overtoomse Veld, stems from one of the women (R1) whom I met at a meeting for Moroccan-Dutch women at community centre De Buurtzaak. She has been working at an organisation that connects women in the neighbourhood with each other, offering language courses, sewing classes and various types of informative meetings on societal topics. This particular meeting revolved around the issue of radicalisation, mainly concerning the recent development of jihad-affiliated youngsters. She mentions how the contact with municipal officer, called the ‘district-director, is challenging at times. She refers to the fact that he hardly ever responds when they, as an organisation, reach out to him. Remarkable in this regard, is when I overhear her talking to a colleague, who has a similar experience regarding contact with the ‘district- director. The woman, who is Dutch, expresses concerns for the organisation, called Nisa4Nisa (translation women for women), as it has been associated with a group of orthodox Muslim women that used to go to the Nisa4Nisa centre frequently. She ponders whether this affects the way that the organisation is looked upon by the municipal authorities. Furthermore, a curious comment is expressed by her concerning both the experience with local governance, as well as the initiative of Lola Luid. As a resident in the neighbourhood, she mentions not being familiar with the temporary pop-up mall. She responds slightly aggrevated when I explain its location in the former school building at the Piet Mondriaanstraat. The curious thing is, that she tells me how Nisa4Nisa has shown interest in occupying that vacant school building approximately a year ago. However, according to her, after having contact with the municipality to propose their plans,

47 the reaction was that it was not possible for them to use. She did not elaborate on the reasons behind this reaction, but her interpretation was that their proposal did not fit with the ideas the municipality had for use of the vacant building. A contrasting experience regarding the district-director of Overtoomse Veld is expressed by Emilie Kröner (Appendix IV, V), one of the initiators behind Lola Luid. During the two interviews, she enthusiastically pointed at the excellent contact they experience with him. He visits Lola Luid on a frequent, weekly base, talking about all sorts of things. Besides this exceptional interaction, her experience with the ‘district-manager’ is incredibly positive as well. This district manager, responsible for the greater district of Nieuw-West, has had a great role in lobbying for Lola Luid. Based on the conception that Lola Luid could function as a connective force in the neighbourhood in an organic manner, this district manager has significantly supported the placement of Lola Luid in the vacant school building. This continued in the form of financial support, for example for the outside lighting construction. Emilie furthermore mentioned in this regard that she has the feeling that the local municipal officers that they are in contact with, are very cooperative and want to financially support certain activities if necessary. Interestingly though, Emilie expressed the notion in the first interview that their uniting role in the neighbourhood is all but commanded. Lola Luid is completely free in the manner in which they pursue to connect neighbourhood residents, where Emilie is very pleased with. In the second interview (Appendix V) I touched upon this aspect as a check, where Emilie emphasized again that there is no evaluation or municipal control on the societal objectives of Lola Luid. On the other side of the spectrum, Emilie does encounter certain struggles with the municipal department regarding permits. This is the paradoxical role of the municipality according to her. On the one hand there is a wish that Lola Luid plays a prominent role in the neighbourhood, but on the other hand the bureaucratic department enforces restrictions concerning the variety of permits that are relevant for the initiative. One of the artists (C10) that has a shop inside pop-up mall Lola Luid, also speaks of her experience with the local municipality. As Emilie did perceive substantial support from the municipality, this Dutch female creative emphasizes how she experiences the role of the municipality as distrusting and controlling. The municipal stance is very ‘hands-off’ according to her, where the aspect of temporality is a magic word. She expresses how by using the term ‘temporary project’, municipal permits and investors are not difficult to get on board.

6.1.4 Fear of rent increase As is already mentioned by the female resident that works for Nisa4Nisa (R1), she worries for rent increases in the neighbourhood due to the plans for regeneration. She is not the only one who expressed such concerns.

48 A younger woman with a Moroccan background (Arabic, not Berber to be precise) (R3), mentions how she perceives many houses of the new constructions being sold even before completed. Therefore, she worries about an increase in housing prices, as the demand is apparently high. Interesting to mention in this regard, is the awareness of Emilie (Appendix V) in the second interview on this topic and its relation to gentrification. Personally she is not scared that this will happen, but she does perceive it is a missed opportunity for the neighbourhood when the initial residents will be driven farther outside the city. As she mentions, she already observes that project developers are coming in the direction of Overtoomse Veld. She can only hope that it will stay as it is, because of the social mix in the neighbourhood.

6.2 Creative city discourse in practice: Lola Luid

As I sat down one day in front of Lola Luid, waiting for Achmed, owner of the bikeshop in the former school, I noticed two women. They were standing on the balcony of their home, in the building just opposite from where I was sitting. As they also noticed my presence, I thought it would be a good idea to approach them and hear about their experience in the neighbourhood. They told me that they are mother and daughter and have a Moroccan background. Quite a few relatives live close by in the same neighbourhood they mentioned. The interesting part, was when I asked them if they were familiar with Lola Luid. As their balcony has a perfect view on the grand school building, I could imagine that they, as being direct neighbours, must have some knowledge on what is happening there. Surprisingly, they had no idea. They were not aware of the fact that it is an open place for neighbourhood residents and that anyone can enter as they like. When I explain a bit more about what pop-up mall Lola Luid offers, including the shops and the provision of spaces for community activities, they are quite surprised. For me, this is a striking example of what I encountered on my various visits in the area. Considering that the intention, and underlying assumption, for Lola Luid is to provide a neutral meeting place for all residents, no matter the income or ethnicity, I encountered numerous residents as well as creatives that told a contrasting story based on their lived experience of the space.

6.2.1 Social mix: no contact The field notes (Appendix II) from the observations I made in Lola Luid on different times, different days and during different events, all paint a rather similar picture. The attendance of neighbourhood residents in the building was scarce, with the only exception of the flea market event. That afternoon was the first time I got to speak to a substantial number of creatives as well as residents. During this event, as well as in other visits to the place of Lola Luid, I received the impression that there was little interaction taking place between residents, that creatives are struggling to engage the community with

49 the initiative, and that the social mix in terms of actual public contact cannot rightly be perceived in and around Lola Luid. This quote by Abi, the social beacon, is salient:

“There is no balance in the neighbourhood, no balance. Before, there were 10% Dutch people, the rest Turkish or Moroccan. Now, there are buildings that have 90% Dutch people, and the rest is different. And people have little contact with one another. Throughout the city, and probably also in other cities, there is no balance” (translation of conversation with Abi, the ‘frying-philosopher and social beacon in Overtoomse Veld. Appendix III)

Figure 7: The snack bar of Abi, frying-philosopher, at the Jan Tooropstraat. Source: Photography Rosa Boon.

6.2.1.1 Narratives by neighbourhood residents On my visits to community centre De Buurtzaak, which is a place for the community and is an initiative of the municipality, I encountered various residents who provided valuable insights in the level of contact in the neighbourhood. The community centre is run by two community organizations, namely Nisa for Nisa and the foundation Samenwonen-Samenleven (translated as living together), and it is a place where neighbours can meet, interact and find several services for issues such as poverty, violence or individual difficulties. Most neighbourhood members that I met there, mentioned how they have not heard of Lola Luid. Some of them mention that they do know Lola Luid, however they are unaware of the public function that it aspires.

50 An example forms the Dutch elderly lady (R5) that was already mentioned, who states that she is vaguely familiar with the initiative. It could be that she read something about Lola Luid through one of their flyers, but she has never been there. For her, the community centre is a nice place to meet people every week. Also, she is still able to get her own groceries, but she mentions that she does not experience much contact with other people on the street. A more extreme account regarding public contact on the street was given by an elderly lady (R8), who confided in me that she urgently wants to leave the neighbourhood. She has been living there for 40 years, in a social housing unit from housing association ‘De Alliantie’. Due to two robberies she experienced on the street in the last decade or so, she does not feel particularly safe on the street. Therefore, she does not go out of her house so much. The moment I met her, was also her first time at the community centre. As for Lola Luid, she is not familiar with the initiative. Her concerns go out to the frequent disruptions she experiences due to all the construction work that is going on in the neighbourhood. She mentions that due to all these developments, as well as the lack of Dutch shops, she does not feel at home anymore. A different experience is expressed by the best friend of the former lady, also an elderly lady (R9) who has been a resident in Overtoomse Veld for 46 years. She speaks enthusiastically about those years and how she is particularly pleased with the private rental dwelling her and her husband live in. She has good contact with people in the area. She highlights how:

“Everyone is a human being, we are not that different from one and other so why shouldn’t I be friendly to them”.

She hereby hints at the vast amount of people with a Turkish or Moroccan background that live in the neighbourhood. Thus, she does not experience any difficulties in this regard. The abovementioned accounts were expressed by residents with a Dutch background. On a different event, namely a meeting against the radicalisation of youngsters, I mainly met Moroccan women. Here, a middle-aged woman (R2) told me that she has been living in Overtoomse Veld for 23 years now. She encounters no difficulties with the new residents. Furthermore, she thinks that it is a good thing that the neighbourhood will be more diverse and that more ‘white’ people will join. When I ask her about Lola Luid, she expresses that the name sounds vaguely familiar. Moreover, she is not aware of everything that is organised there. At the same table there is a younger woman with a Moroccan background (R3). Interestingly, she has no noteworthy experience with Dutch or ‘white’ residents in the neighbourhood, but she has experienced racism here. Though, this happened within the Moroccan community. As she is from an Arabic-Moroccan background, she experienced a lack of acceptance from the Berber-Moroccan community. The funny thing is, that this only happened when she came to the Netherlands to live in

51 Overtoomse Veld. Back in Morocco, this was never an issue. With regard to Lola Luid, she has never heard of it.

Figure 8: Jan Tooropstraat, where Abi Patat is located. Source: Photography Rosa Boon.

The most notable accounts on social mix and public contact on the street, were given when I visited lunchroom ‘Abi Patat’. This snack bar holds an important place in the neighbourhood, where owner Abi (R15) holds the title of ‘frying-philosopher’. He is very clear about his experience in the neighbourhood, stating that there is no social balance and there is little contact between people. As an actively engaged resident, he is familiar with Lola Luid and has been to the event of ‘Goede Gesprekken’ (translation meaningful conversations) to talk about when and where one feels at home. In my field notes from this event, it becomes clear that the desired turnout of neighbourhood residents was disappointing. Regarding the developments in the area, Abi worries about the extremes in diversity. When the neighbourhood previously consisted of a majority of Turkish and Moroccan residents, he is aware that currently there are buildings with mainly Dutch residents. He finds this troublesome, as there is little contact. This notion is agreed to by Abi’s Moroccan neighbour (R16). Though he has only been living here for a few months, he is very familiar with Overtoomse Veld, since his son has been living there for several years. He does not know Lola Luid, but after a short explanation on the societal and cultural objectives from my side, the man is interested to go sometime. He says that the problem in this neighbourhood is that people are scared and do not dare to speak to others. Especially on the street, he misses the occurrence of strangers meeting each other. Although he still perceives instances of criminality and thinks that the policy does not have any control over the neighbourhood, he does not feel unsafe. As for the social mix of people, he finds it a bad thing that “Only 1% of the residents in the

52 neighbourhood is Dutch”. He believes there is not necessarily a problem regarding cultural differences, but it is mainly because there is no contact between people. An interesting point was made by a resident (R13) that has been living next to the building of Lola Luid for three years. This 33-year-old Dutch man with Arabic and Jewish roots referred to the cultural differences in the neighbourhood. As the only resident, he joined in the event of cleaning up the trash on the streets in the area. He referred to the rat-plague that is occasionally occurring in his building, though rats are seen to be a problem throughout the neighbourhood. His comment was addressed to the flyers of the municipality with regard to the trash facilities, which should not only be in Dutch, but also in Arabic and Turkish because “otherwise some people won’t get it and just ignore it”. He also mentioned, and that was the part where I was intrigued by the most, that some neighbours should stop throwing left-overs from lunch or dinner over the balcony. In Islamic culture, as he was able to tell me, it is prohibited to throw away food in the bin. If there are left-over it should be given to other people, or to animals. This cultural directive seems difficult to match with living in an apartment block in Overtoomse Veld, where next-door neighbours can feel directly affected by it.

6.2.1.2 Narratives by creatives As previously stated, the flea market showed to be a good event for getting in contact with both residents as creatives. The impression that there is little contact in the neighbourhood and with Lola Luid in particular, is also discerned from the experiences from the creatives inhabiting the building of Lola Luid. An example is given by one of the creatives (C1) who has a shop on the ground floor. She mentioned being surprised by the diverse crowd of visitors to the flea market. On regular days, she is quite disappointed by the amount of people that enter the shop. A few other creatives (C5, C9, C10) mention a similar experience, where on some days there are no visitors at all. Regarding the engagement of the community, parallels can be drawn as well between experiences of several creatives. It is mentioned that it is perceived as a struggle to come up with successful ways of engaging a diversity of residents (C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C7, C8). An interesting illustration of this struggle is provided by a young female artist (C1). She specifically refers to the difference in language and culture between artists and residents. During one of the meetings with other creatives of Lola Luid, one of the male creatives with a Moroccan background mentioned that the informative flyers for events and the like needed to be downgraded in terms of aesthetics. He made the point here that nicely designed flyers would not necessarily appeal to certain low-come and/or ethnic residents. The woman told me that this particular notion regarding a difference in aesthetic preferences has never crossed her mind before. She also makes a notable remark on such differences, stating that:

“They don’t come here to drink coffee”.

53 Another female creative (C5) with a shop on the ground floor, speaks about engaging residents as it being a puzzle to find the right method or tool to lower the threshold for the women to participate. With her clothing shop called Le Jurk, she wants to provide a place for women in the neighbourhood where they can take sewing classes. In this regard, she mentioned having had contact with community centre De Buurtzaak to help with reaching the women in the neighbourhood that are interested in sewing. In her experience, it is very important to advertise through face-to-face contact and via other people. Up until now however, the idea behind the shop is not functioning as desired. The awareness of a lack of interaction between people is addressed by the young female initiator (C8) of the ‘Goede Gesprekken’ event, who also has a workspace in Lola Luid. Through this returning event, she wants to connect residents with a different background and create meaningful conversations. She perceived how certain groups of people were not represented during this evening and she wonders how they can be reached. She hereby makes a reflective comment concerning her own behaviour, pointing out that she is aware of being mainly around people and friends that are similar to her. For Lola Luid, she believes that there is still a lot of work to do. The struggle with engaging the community is furthermore addressed by a young male creative (C7) of Lola Luid, though he adds an interesting contrasting notion. He mentions that he has participated in handing out flyers advertising Lola Luid in front of the Islamic school El Kadisia, that is next door. When doing this, he experienced a feeling of exoticness as he was surrounded by predominantly Muslim parents and children. This made him very aware of the fact of him being a Dutch, white creative. Referring to Lola Luid, he denotes it as “being on an island in the community”. In addition, he expresses that he is mainly part of Lola Luid due to the affordable work space that is offered to him. With regard to the societal aspect of Lola Luid, he experiences little support from the municipality and this is mainly addressed by Emilie. A positive notion concerning the social mix in Overtoomse Veld is uttered by a middle-aged woman (C6) that organises the children’s club in Lola Luid. Though she lives in a different area, she has worked in a kindergarten in the neighbourhood for over 10 years. As such, she witnessed a decrease in white children and increase of children with a Moroccan background. Currently, she notices a substantial increase in white, autochthonous children due to all the new houses that are being constructed. She is happy to see that it is now mixing again. She is supportive of Lola Luid for bridging the gap between the old and new residents. Especially, since she experienced earlier in the neighbourhood how merely building in a certain style or design is insufficient for building a community.

54 6.2.2 Diversity: no balance Regarding the diversity in the built environment, the most striking observation in my field notes concern the significant number of cranes and building sites that are present in the area (Appendix III). Everywhere you turn and everywhere you look there is a building site with a massive crane. Around the August Allebésquare in particular, it appears as if the square is being surrounded by new constructions. My experience in Lola Luid was that the diversity is mainly present in the type of art that is being made. This ranges from textile, painting, furniture, poetry, writing and more. However, I would not refer to it as being a neutral place even though it is proposed as such (see chapter 5). Specifically, my field notes refer to the experience of feeling as the outsider, as most people that entered Lola Luid are the artists who work there. These both observations are shared by the experience of several residents, as will become clear in the following.

6.2.2.1 Narratives by residents Various residents I encountered mentioned how they perceive the neighbourhood as becoming busier (R2, R5, R8, R11, R12, R15). A Moroccan family (R11, R12) I met at the flea market event tell me how they experienced a change in the neighbourhood for the last five years. With all the constructions everywhere they think it has become busier. They are pleased to see that the building is now occupied again, it looks nice now as opposed to being in a degenerating state. This is their first visit to Lola Luid, as they did not think it was open for public and did not feel invited to enter. Through a flyer in the mailbox they knew about the flea market and thought that this would be a good opportunity to see the building from the inside. During their visit to the flea market they did not see any familiar faces. Concerning diversity in buildings, the woman (R11) furthermore mentions how the lay-out of the street plan and the buildings are not inviting and create an impersonal atmosphere. Regarding the diversity that is offered by Lola Luid, two residents (R10, R13) find it a welcome alternative in the otherwise uninteresting landscape of the neighbourhood. One of them is a young Italian woman (R10), who has lived there for two years with her partner. She forms an exception in my respondents, as she lives in one of the new building blocks. Precisely for this reason though, I found it relevant to mention her experience within the neighbourhood. We met at the flea market, where she had a stand. There she told me that she is very pleased with Lola Luid, as it is the only place in the neighbourhood to go for a coffee or lunch. She also regularly goes to the yoga classes that are organised in the building. For her, it is a nice place to meet people and see the same faces. The other positive account I heard was by a young male resident (R13), who joined for the event of picking up trash in the area around Lola Luid that is done once every two weeks. He tells me that he is a filmmaker and has lived in the area with his partner for three years, in one of the older buildings next to the building of Lola Luid. As with the former, I get the impression that he does not

55 fit into the target group for Lola Luid of ‘initial’ residents. He also mentions that this is one of the very few places to go for a coffee or have lunch. In a different manner, a currently experienced lack of diversity in functions within the neighbourhood can be observed by the references to the monotonous types of shops. For instance, references regarding shops predominantly concerned the Turkish and Moroccan grocery shops (R6, R8, R17, R18). However, these are also perceived as positive by others (R9, O6). ‘Frying-philosopher’ Abi (R15) made some comments regarding his experience with the extreme changes that are currently happening. He finds that there is no balance in these developments. An example he makes regards the transformation of an old funeral home, which is now a nightclub called Vlla. Another example concerns the police station at the August Allebésquare. Apparently, before there was a shop located for the community. He truly misses a balance in Overtoomse Veld and is critical whether the new developments will contribute to a better balance.

6.2.2.2 Narratives by creatives An interesting remark is made regarding the physical construction of the school building in which Lola Luid is established. A young woman (C9) who works at lunchroom BOX, placed in Lola Luid, tells me something about her experiences in Lola Luid. She expected a lot of neighbourhood residents to come in and have lunch or coffee, though she is disappointed that this is not the case. She considers the possibility that people perceive it as being a work space which is not open for the public. She makes the suggestion that the steps towards the entrance are quite far from the street. A different notion is expressed by one young female creative (C5) who runs a clothing shop called Le Jurk. She expresses her disappointment with regard to the amount of clientele that visits the shop. She suggests the possibility that it is due to the location of Lola Luid, being in a residential neighbourhood and it is not located at a shopping street. She also refers to a target group, which is apparently not present in the neighbourhood. During the flea market event, I spoke to a woman (C6) who is involved in Lola Luid by organizing activities for children. She made an interesting comment about her experience with city renewal, at a previous time a bit further in the neighbourhood (she did not explain as to where this precisely was). She mentioned that you cannot build a community by creating the built environment in a certain style or design. There needs to be some ground conditions and services that make it easier for people to connect. Therefore, she is very supportive of Lola Luid. She personally perceives this by an increasing influx of Dutch and ‘white’ children.

56 7. CONCLUSION

“The problem with re-hashing these old debates is not just epistemological, that it just precludes widespread agreement that gentrification is a multi-faceted process of class transformation that is best explained from a holistic point of departure; it is also political, in that critical perspectives get lost within, or are absent entirely from the squabbling about whether Smith or Ley has got it right in a certain gentrification context” (Slater, 2006:747).

In this quote, Slater (2006) addresses the importance of construing critical perspectives regarding the complex phenomenon of gentrification. The aim of this thesis was to contribute to this appeal, by focusing on the lived experience of space and thereby reinstating the social underpinning of spatial planning. It appears as though the planning practices where Jane Jacobs fought against in the 1960s – clinging on too tightly to imaginations of how the city ought to be – can be observed when the findings of perceived, conceived and lived space in the neighbourhood of Overtoomse Veld are compared. through the lens of lived space. Ironically, it is now being done according to her own insights for creating a vital city. To be clear, it has not been my aim to make a representative case for the situations of all working-class people in the Overtoomse Veld area. Nor has it been my intention to state a generic report on how gentrification without displacement takes place. Given the limited time aspect of my research, I have attempted to provide insights in the social and personal experiences of ‘typical’ old residents regarding the rejuvenating developments in the area, more particular towards the presence of Lola Luid. This has been done through a critical framework on a neo-liberal policy orthodoxy of imposing social mix and ‘positive gentrification’.

7.1 Contradictions in perceived, conceived and lived space

With regard to the perceived space, municipal documents concerning the urban regeneration plans in Overtoomse Veld appeared to have a clearly stated goal, namely the urgency of developing 5000 dwellings on a yearly base. What became clear from this, is that there is a clear necessity of finding space for this major increase. It is furthermore stated how the specific zone around the ring-road, where Overtoomse Veld is becoming very attractive for the ‘new urbanites’. Although attention is given to the level of crime, safety and quality of the built environment, there seem to be no notions concerning the personal aspect of place, or the qualities that are currently present in the neighbourhood. Predominantly the degenerative aspects are emphasized, while at the same time referring to strengthening the alleged creative and innovative character of Nieuw-West. The success of the plans is assessed by the presence of a sufficient amount of schools, community centres, childcare

57 and green- and playground facilities. As such, the rhetoric that was analysed can be understood as having a strong focus on increasing the amount of dwellings, for which Overtoomse Veld due to its favourable location close to the city centre is considered to be the perfect place. As for the conceived space, both the specific municipal policy regarding creative hubs, as well as utterances by Emilie, representative from Lola Luid, showed an ambition to create a social mix by means of the temporary creative initiative. Although the issue of gentrification is acknowledged in the policy of these creative hubs, it appears as though the issue is focused more on the disadvantages for the creatives. The possible negative or at best neutral effects for the neighbourhood in which these ‘Broedplaatsen’ are placed seem under-acknowledged. Also, as is literally mentioned, the presence of so-called ‘broedplaatsen’ would stimulate the attractiveness and revitalisation of neighbourhoods, and have a moderating effect on increasing housing prices. Emilie states as being aware of this possibility and expresses her unhappiness when this would result in a decrease of initial residents. Despite this awareness, Lola Luid is not seen as being of influence in such a development. Furthermore, the diversity of shops, spaces and events that are offered in Lola Luid, in addition to its ‘public’ character, are expected to connect both the initial residents as newcomers. The dimension of lived space seems to contradict these expectations of connection and social mix. Especially significant in this regard, forms the lack of contact in the neighbourhood. This appeared to be a returning topic in the field notes. Many residents that I encountered on the street and in community centre ‘De Buurtzaak’ were unfamiliar with Lola Luid, but did have something to say about the cultural differences in the neighbourhood. The lack of balance in terms of residents, as well as in the lack of diversity in shops were points of importance. As for the experience of various creatives of Lola Luid, many expressed a struggle with engaging the community. The feeling of being on an island in the neighbourhood was literally stated. Concerning safety, a few residents that recognized the level of crime in the neighbourhood, expressed that they did not feel unsafe because of their social relations in the neighbourhood. Regarding the aspect of local

7.2 Contribution to gentrification debate

For the debate on gentrification, this study has addressed an account of displacement by taking on the dimension of lived space. In doing so, it was able to be attentive to the socio-spatial relations that are present in the whole process of gentrification, as was proposed by Davidson (2009). This is contradictory to an account on gentrification that merely reflects on the matured phase of the process, by focusing on the actual physical displacement. It showed the distinction between the municipal policy that appeared to have high expectations of the urban regeneration plans being beneficial for attracting the new urbanites. The already present social structures, cultural customs and preferences cannot be observed here. Moreover, the social

58 benefits that was addressed by Byrne (2003:422) as ‘new more affluent residents will rub shoulders with poorer existing residents on the streets, in shops, and within local institutions, such as public schools’, could not be distinguished. The assumption that residents will interact with each other in and through the initiative of Lola Luid is difficult to perceive. The most striking example forms that of the two female neighbours that live ust across the street, who did not think that it was open for the public. As such, it can be questioned to what extent the place-making by Lola Luid is adhering to the needs of the community. More importantly, given experiences of both residents and creatives as it being an ‘island in the community’ and the struggle of creatives with engaging citizens, the actual practice of the discourse on social mix seems contradictory. Also, it is valuable to note how some residents expressed their concerns with an increase in rent prices, due to the major regenerative interferences in the built environment. This was also recognized as a possibility by Emilie from Lola Luid. Such rent increases are often regarded as the matured phase of gentrification. Via qualitative research and a conceptual framework that addresses the lived space, such notions could be observed and can form important contributions regarding injustices in the debate on gentrification.

7.3 Recommendations for reinstating the social in spatial planning

Given these findings, an interesting remark can be made concerning the shifting focus in planning mentioned by Cilliers and Timmermans (2014). Paradoxically, it could be said that the contradiction between the slow-changing character of the built environment and the fast-paced dynamics of society, can both be distinsuished in Overtoomse Veld. At least, the changing character of the built environment appears to be moving forward in a rapid pace. The major constructions that create a significant increase in density have the purpose to attract life, whereas initiatives such as Lola Luid propose to create a meaningful place in the neighbourhood. By taking on an ethnographic method, the lived dimension of space could be addressed. This made a connection possible to Zukin’s (1995, 2010) insights on the culture of cities. The questions concerning whose city, whose culture, and whose authenticity is represented in the urban environment are essential questions to ask in the socio-spatial field of planning. Specifically, if this is done through a conceived space of cultural place-making. An interesting notion in this regard, is related to Feldman and Stall’s (2004) description of successful and lively places, which can be characterized as addressing the needs of the communities who are the actual users of the space. If the creatives of Lola Luid are regarded as a community, it can be distinguished as successful as it appears to fulfil those needs. However, it can be questioned whether the presupposed intention of being a lively place for the wider community of Overtoomse Veld is being reached in this manner. It appears as if this intention is

59 lost, since the experiences of various residents through the lens of the lived space do not show that particularly their preferences are met. Furthermore, regarding Forester’s (1989) argument on listening carefully, it has become clear that language and conversations between residents and creatives play is marginally occurring. Differences in language or aesthetic preferences, such as the flyers, were observed. The involvement of the municipality and already existing networks and organisations, such as Nisa4Nisa appear to be underused in the place-making of Lola Luid. As with approximately all academic research, the inquiry is never finished and there are always recommendations that can be made for further research on the matter. This thesis is no different. The emphasis for the recommendations lies on the interdisciplinary perspective on spatiality as proposed with different features by Soja (1996), Lefebvre (1991). Recognizing the problems at hand is necessary, as stated by Jacobs (1961). Merely analysing the numbers of crime, youth and the amount of low-income residents is not sufficient for grasping the multi-faceted process that is gentrification. Especially within policy discourses that emphasize the necessity for regeneration, creating density and facilitating cultural and creative initiatives, qualitative accounts on what is actually happening in the lived experience of space of people that are the users of that space are necessary. A final note is formed by Jane Jacobs (1961) warning against the self-destructive force of cities. In a context of arts-led urban regeneration, and by overlooking the urban injustices that underlie processes of gentrification, this might still hold relevance today, as she warns for a narrowing of a mixture of uses due to the winners of the competition for space that will only present one segment.

60 LIST OF REFERENCES

Bryman, A. (2015) Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Byrne, J.P. (2003) Two cheers for gentrification. Howard Law Journal (46)3, 405–32. Christmann, G.B. (2014) Investigating Spatial Transformation Processes. An Ethnographic Discourse Analysis in Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, 235-256. Cilliers, E.J. and Timmermans, W. (2014) The importance of creative participatory planning in the public space-making process. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2014, 41, 413-429 Clay, P. (1979) Neighborhood Renewal: Middle-Class Resettlement and Incumbent Upgrading in American Neighborhoods. Lexington: D.C. Health. Davidson, M. (2008) Spoiled mixture: where does state-led ‘positive’ gentrification end? Urban Studies (45)12: 2385–405. Davidson, M. (2009) Displacement, Space and Dwelling: Placing Gentrification Debate. Ethics, Place & Environment (12)2: 219-234. Duany, A. (2001) Three cheers for gentrification. American Enterprise Magazine April/May, 36–39. Engbersen, G. (2009) Wat te doen in de Vogelaarwijken? In: Musterd, S., & Ostendorf, W. J. M. (2009) Problemen in wijken of probleemwijken?. Uitgeverij Van Gorcum. Feldman, R. M., & Stall, S. (2004) The dignity of resistance: women residents' activism in Chicago public housing. Cambridge University Press. Florida, R. (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books. Florida, R. (2014) The Rise of the Creative Class--Revisited: Revised and Expanded. New York:Basic books. Forester, J. (1989) Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press. Friedman, J. (2010) Place and Place-Making in Cities: A Global Perspective. Planning Theory & Practice (11)2: 149-165 Gemeente Amsterdam (2016a) Gebiedsanalyse 2016, Slotervaart. Stadsdeel Nieuw-West. Amsterdam: Gemeente Amsterdam. Gemeente Amsterdam (2016b) Gebiedsplan 2016. Slotervaart & Sloterplas en- park. Amsterdam: Gemeente Amsterdam. Gemeente Amsterdam (2016c) Herzien Amsterdams Atelier- en Broedplaatsenbeleid, 2015-2018. Amsterdam: Gemeente Amsterdam. Gemeente Amsterdam (2016d) Koers 2025. Ruimte voor de stad. Amsterdam: Gemeente Amsterdam.

61 Gemeente Amsterdam (2016e) Slotervaart Noord, Stedelijke Vernieuwing. (Retrieved online at: https://www.amsterdam.nl/wonen-leefomgeving/bouwprojecten/bouw/projecten- stadsdeel-1/slotervaart-noord/ ) Healey, P. (2007) Urban complexity and spatial strategies: Towards a relational planning for our times. London: Routledge. Healey, P. (2009) The Pragmatic Tradition in Planning Thought. Journal of Planning Education and Research (28): 277-292. Het Parool (2015) Is Nieuw-West het nieuwe Kreuzberg? (Retrieved online November 8th 2015: http://www.parool.nl/amsterdam/is-nieuw-west-het-nieuwe-kreuzberg~a4180994/) Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House. LeCompte, M. D. and Goetz, J. P. (1982) Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of educational research 52(1): 31-60. Lefebvre, H. (1991) The production of space. Oxford, UK and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Lehtovuori, P. and Ruoppila, S. (2012) Temporary uses as means of experimental urban planning. SAJ. Estonian Academy of Arts, University of Turku. Mendes, L. (2013) Marginal Gentrification as Emancipatory Practice: An Alternative to the Hegemonic Discourse of the Creative City. RCCS Annual review (5). Munzner, K. and Shaw, K.S. (2015) Renew Who? Benefits and Beneficiaries of Renew Newcastle, Urban Policy and Research (33)1: 17-36. Peck, J. (2005) Struggling with the Creative Class. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research (29): 740–770. Shaw, K.S. and Hagemans, I.W. (2015) ‘Gentrification without Displacement’ and the Consequent Loss of Place: The Effects of Class Transition on Low-Income Residents of Secure Housing in Gentrifying Areas. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 39(2): 323 – 341. Slater, T. (2006) The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification research, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research (30) 737–757. Slater, T. (2011) Gentrification of the City. In: Bridge, G. And Watson, S. (eds) The New Blackwell companion to the city, pp. 571-585. Smith, N. (1996) The new urban frontier: gentrification and the revanchist city. Routledge, London. Smith, N. (2002) New globalism, new urban- ism: gentrification as global urban strategy, Antipode (34): 434–457. Soja, E. W. (1996) Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Oxford: Blackwell. Wacquant, L. (2004) Critical thought as solvent of doxa. Constellations (11)1: 97–101. Zukin, S. (1995) The Culture of Cities. Cambridge and Oxford: Blackwell.

62 Zukin, S. (2010) Naked city: the death and life of authentic urban places. New York: Oxford University Press.

63 Appendix I

Field notes Buurtzaak

Tuesday May 17th 2016 – Meeting against radicalisation 9.00-12.30

Diary I came to the Buurtzaak for the weekly walk that was on the program, to get a notes perspective on the neighbourhood and have the possibility to talk to residents. Though, this was cancelled for the coming weeks. Instead, Naima, from the Buurtzaak, invited me to join the meeting she hosted about radicalisation of youth. This was organized for Moroccan women of the community, via ‘Stichting Marrokaanse Nederlanders’ (association for Dutch people with Moroccan roots). It was a meeting where a woman from the national government, working for the Expert Unit Social Stability, was giving a presentation, as well as a woman from the municipality, concerned with integration and social issues. What I notice is how often mobile phones are ringing and the women answer the call during the session. Also, there is a nice lunch prepared with Moroccan delights and lentil soup. The meeting is held bilingual, in both Arabic as Dutch. Before and after the meeting I speak to some women that have been present.

R1 Who Woman, approximately 40 years’ old, works at Nisa for Nisa. What She tells me about the neighbourhood, how it was and still is in a way, a ‘problem- area’. With regard to the neighbourhood director from the Municipality, Ralph Jansen- Dahle, she mentions that he hardly ever responds. She is afraid that the rents will increase due to the new developments, which is going to be highly problematic as moneyproblems are a big issue in the neighbourhood. She mentions how a lot of residents are mostly busy with surviving, and not that interested in art etcetera. She is not familiar with Lola Luid, though she knows the building. What is curious, is that she mentioned how Nisa for Nisa wanted to use the vacant building also, they have had contact with the municipality, but apparently that was not possible. A little later I overhear her talking to a colleague, saying that she wants to leave the organisation. She expresses her concerns regarding the association of the organization with a group of orthodox Muslim women, which is affecting their reputation as a neutral organization. She does not go into details about this.

R2 Who Woman, approximately 40-50 years’ old, Moroccan What She is sitting at a table with two other women. She tells me that she has been living in the neighbourhood for 23 years now. She encounters no difficulties with the new residents. She thinks it is good that the neighbourhood will be more diverse and that more Dutch, ‘white’ people will join. Though, she does notice how it is already a lot busier in the area, both in terms of people as well as building density. She vaguely knows Lola Luid, but is not aware of the activities that are offered.

R3 Who Woman, approximately 25 years’ old, Moroccan What She is sitting at the same table as R2. She mentions how this is the place where she experienced a form of racism, not by Dutch people, but by Berber Moroccan residents. As she is Arabic Moroccan, apparently that was an issue here, not back home. She says that she encounters no difficulties with new Dutch. ‘white’ residents. But she does express the fear that housing prices will increase, since many houses are built as private homes for sale. These are all being sold even before they are finished. As for Lola Luid, she is unaware of the initiative and has never heard of it.

64 Monday 30th May 2016 – Lunch 10:30 – 13:30

R4 Who Godfrey Lado, active resident in Overtoomse Veld, owner Forgotten Stones What We start talking after I ask whether he expects residents to join for lunch at the Buurtzaak. He tells me he is an active resident himself. After I explain to him what I am researching, the recent developments in the neighbourhood and how that is affecting the residents, he tells me that he is quite involved with interacting with residents and initiating activities to connect them. An important barrier that he notices is the ‘language’ gap between the intellectual municipal clerks and the residents. The city district department of Nieuw-West lack the capacities to speak to residents on the same level. There he perceives a missing connection between the municipality and the neighbourhood residents. At the same time, he meets residents who are enthusiastic and want to be active in and for the neighbourhood. Though, what is difficult here is the language. There are still quite a few residents with a non- Dutch background who are not able to speak or read Dutch. That is why communication through flyers and the like are often missing the purpose. The difference in culture is also present, and sometimes causes for a barrier. He mentions how the neighbourhood is turbulent. When I tell him that I have approached people on the street and square, he starts laughing and mentions: ‘Wow that’s brave’. Furthermore, he tells me that he is part of the ‘regiegroep’, a group that deals with resident applications to receive a small subsidy for neighbourhood initiatives. With regard to this, he mentions that the group exists of only neighbourhood residents, not someone from the municipality. He experiences that this group can be professionalized, because most members miss the capacity to accurately approve or disapprove an application. He refers to municipal wish to focus more on health in the area, a lot of initiatives have a health element in it, though it is not perceived/approved as such. The link with municipal policy are missing.

O1/ Who Two girls who are doing an internship at the Buurtzaak, approximately 18/20 years’ O2 old, Dutch with Arabic roots What Godfrey introduces me to the girls, and I explain that I am doing research into the area given all the new developments. They mention that they have a lot of contact with senior residents in the neighbourhood, due to their internship for arranging ergo therapy in the Buurtzaak. They frequently hear that older ‘allochtone’ residents, mostly women, do not feel at home in the neighbourhood anymore. They see a change in population, where there are a lot more young people, who do not greet them, help an old lady out, make contact. They have expressed that they perceive a change in the neighbourhood atmosphere, where they do not feel at home anymore. They are more uneased to go out of their homes because of it. For the two girls, they noticed how there are mostly ‘allochtone’ seniors coming to the meetings or to the Buurtzaak in general. The ‘autochtone’ senior residents are more scarce in their meetings. They think this is because of the high percentage of the neighbourhood that has a different cultural background than Dutch. These people meet each other, find like-minded people, people with a similar cultural background. The girls also mention that these cultural differences are noticeable with regard to the meetings they organize and the communication around it. If they do not frequently contact the senior residents with a mostly Moroccan/Turkish background, they just do not come. That has happened often, that they just do not show up, or show up late. They have learned a lot about the importance of understanding the cultural background of the residents, in order to create successful meetings. Furthermore, they mention how the spaces at the Buurtzaak have changed. There were more creative/sewing activities in the building, but these have been dissappeared because of municipal cut backs. Now

65 the spaces in the building are more and more being rented out for commercial use, higher prices.

Tuesday May 31st 2016 – “Bonte Maaltijd” (dinner) 18:00-20:00

Diary This evening I am joining for a community dinner in community centre de Buurtzaak. At notes an earlier moment, my visit on the day before, I was recommended to go here, because surprisingly this is one of the only events where the older ‘autochtone’ residents go to. I have not spoken to people from this specific group, so I went. It was indeed true, when I arrived there were only senior ‘autochtone’ residents, about 15 people in total. I joined a table with 5 women and 3 men. They were quite friendly, but also a little bit distanced at first. I predominantly spoke to the three women and man next to me.

R5 Who Mrs. Alders, 89-year-old woman, Dutch What Mrs. Alders tells me she has lived in this neighbourhood since 2001, in an elderly residency. She likes living here, but does think that it has become busier lately and that they’re building so much. She has not had any problems while living here, but also mentions how she has little contact with other people. She is vaguely familiar with Lola Luid, she might have read something about it on flyers, but has not been there. She likes going to this meal every weak, because for her it is a place where she can meet people and is afraid to be isolated otherwise. The only other times that she goes out is for groceries she says.

R6 Who Woman, approximately 60-70-years-old, Dutch What She tells me that she has been living in the neighbourhood since 1992. She has witnessed quite some changes during those years. She mentions how the increase in residents with a foreign background, mostly Turkish and Moroccan, went quickly. They took over quite a few shops, which are predominantly (Turkish) grocery stories and bakeries now. Also she speaks of the riots in 1998 at the August Allebesquare. This was quite a happening and created a kind off grim atmosphere in the area she mentions. She believes that the changes that have been made to the square since have been good, by making the open space smaller, by diminishing the amount of parking places. She knows of Lola Luid, has been to the former location at the Schipluidenlaan, but has not been to the new one. She liked it.

R7 Who Male, approximately 60-70-years-old, Dutch What When I tell about my study and investigation in the neighbourhood at the table, this man has something to say about the presence of the Turkish and Moroccan community in the neighbourhood. He is together with woman (…), but has not lived here since 1992. He mentions that he is not familiar with Lola Luid. He starts speaking about the racism debate that is currently widespread in the Dutch media. He mentions how he does not think this is the Netherlands anymore, in this particular neighbourhood. He also speaks about the cinema that was at the August Allebesquare, which was closed in 1999. Now there is a police station located on the spot. He does not understand how the owners have just left it to decay. It was a special cinema, with a special screen which was one of only two in the city. He finds it shameful that this place went away and there is a police station now. He also refers to the many mosques that have been placed in buildings that became empty. He is not particularly pleased with that. Why? Because of his opinion of the housing corporations. “They only fill their own pockets for expensive cars and the like. They leave the houses and flats to decay and then spent an awful lot of time renovating them, throughout the city. They are not building for people.”

66

R8 Who Female, 60-70-year-old, Dutch What She tells me that she has been living in the neighbourhood for 40 years. She urgently wants to leave. She experiences a lot of problems with the amount of constructions work that is currently underway. She lives in a social housing complex from the Alliantie, but precisely in her home the construction work causes a lack of reception for her phone. This is quite distressing, as now she can only call people or receive a call in the evening or weekend. During the weekdays she just cannot hear anyone or anything that is on the line. She also mentions that this is the case for her in the Albert Heijn at the Allebesquare. They also encounter difficulties there with the ATM’s or paying machines in the supermarket, these don’t have a good reception sometimes. She mentions that she particularly misses all the Dutch clothing shops that were at and around the square, that have been gone now for some time. She is not very mobile, so she wonders where she should go if she wants to by stockings. They stopped selling them at the supermarket, so now she is forced to go into town, which is quite an undertaking for her. The shops have been taking by shops with and for different cultures, as she perceives it. She does not feel at home here anymore, and she likes to leave. She also mentions how she has been robbed on the streets for two times. She does not feel particularly safe on the street, so she does not go out much. This was also the first time she was at the Bonte Maaltijd. She is unaware of Lola Luid and the activities there.

R9 Who Flora, 60-70-year-old female, Dutch What Flora tells me she has been living here for 46 years, she is a friend of woman (…). She lives in a nice private lease dwelling. She lives here with pleasure; she has good contact with people. She mentions how everyone is a human being, not that different from each other so why shouldn’t she be friendly to them, where she is referring to the Turkish and Moroccan community in particular. She likes all the small shops that are close, she doesn’t mind going there.

67 Appendix II

Field notes Lola Luid

Friday 08 April 2016

Diary Where: Lola Luid, we are sitting in a separate former classroom next to the entrance, notes which is Emilie’s office, next to her shop. It might have been a concierge office. I see some people entering during the hour, not a lot. People look diverse, mostly appear young and creative.

Interview is with a for me unknown second interviewer, which has been planned as such due to Emilie’s tight time schedule. Also, this is the first interview so I feel a bit nervous. I find it difficult to interview with a second person who is interviewing with a different focus. Inevitably this leads to occasional steering of the conversation in a direction which is not necessarily linked to my objectives. I find myself feeling irritated by my unknown co-interviewer at times. Emilie is very charismatic and talks elaborately about Lola Luid and its history. During the last 15 minutes I’m getting hungry. In general, I feel at ease at the place.

Saturday 16 April 2016 11:00-14:00

Diary Where: At the lunchroom BOX in the main hall of Lola Luid. notes What: Observing who enters, what is happening. French music is playing in background.

Who: Between 11-12 ‘o clock there are no other visitors. It seems that the 6 people that I see entering/walking around are working here and know each other. 1 Caucasian young man, estimate in his 20s, wearing glasses. Appears to me as student or young professional Decided that meeting a friend could be a good way to start observing, it lowered the threshold for me to be there. However, the moment she left it felt strange. I don’t feel at ease, because I feel like some sort of voyeur or intruder.This is strengthened by seeing that people know each other here and have a purpose to be there. I feel a bit lost with my purpose. I have the feeling that I should walk around, but I don’t. Something is holding me back. The space does not feel inviting to walk around in. I think because of the size and separation of the spaces (classrooms). Though, the people are not hostile but rather friendly.

Saturday 14-5-2016 – Rommelmarkt event 11:30-15:30

Who O3 Who: Female, early 20s, Dutch, at one of the stands What She responds to my question if she is from the area and tells me that she is not from the neighbourhood, but lives in Bos & Lommer. She is here via her friend who has an office here. Her own business is Trashformers, which buys and sells second-hand clothing. This is the first time that she is at Lola Luid.

C1 Who Artist Bloem, female, end 20s/beginning 30s, Dutch, at her workspace/shop, which she shares with Roos

68 What She does not live in the area, but in Bos & Lommer. She is working here since 3 months. She mentions being surprised by the turnout of the day, as to the diversity and amount of people. She finds the building a nice place, but mentions that she experiences barriers to engage the surrounding community residents. She mentions the difference of language between artists and residents. As example she mentions how, during a meeting with the other renters/artists, one male creative with a Moroccan background, mentioned that flyers for the events need to be downgraded in terms of aesthetics in order to appeal to the residents (as in allochtoon and low-income). This has never crossed her mind as being a potential issue, because of her ‘artist’ and ‘creative’ mind set Bloem tells me that before this she was at a ‘Broedplaats’ at the Columbusplein. There were also some difficulties with engaging the surrounding residents. “They don’t come here to drink a coffee”. Furthemore, she speaks about the money problem with regard to the municipality. When there is a better bid for the ground moneywise, she is concerned that there will not be room for extending the presence of Lola Luid. Though, the amount of people that visit the shop is quite disappointing. Perhaps people perceive a threshold for coming in and checking out the place, she mentions. She also tells me about the great success of the opening night, where a Maroccan band from the neighbourhood was invited to play. This really made a difference in her eyes, as their involvement was directly needed and invited. “Vluchtelingenworkshop” My impression: We had a very nice, long talk about new developments in the city and the role that creatives could take up.

O4 Who Female at one of the stands. Dutch, mid 20s What She lives in Rotterdam now, but grew up in Osdorp. She tells me that she moved to Rotterdam because of the more ‘raw’ culture with regard to ‘broedplaatsen’ and vacant spaces. This is less hipster there than compared to Amsterdam she thinks. She and her mom have a stand, with their own vintage and recycled products and designs. They do this mostly at festivals, where the “doelgroep” is more present. The people that are here are not really the people that buy there things, because they are really more looking for “koopjes”. But she mentions that she is surprised that the turnout is so diverse. She mentions that she does not perceive a yuppen/hipster/creative culture here (yet).

C2 Who Three females from the Dichtklup. All three Dutch/white, one girl mid 20s and two C3 women in 40s. They don’t live in the immediate surroundings, but in Osdorp and Bos C4 & Lommer. What They don’t live in the immediate surroundings, but in Osdorp and Bos & Lommer. What: They mention that they are still searching for the right ways to offer their services (editing/poetry/language) to the community. Today they have a table with word cards, where people can step in to create and associate their own poem. They mention that they mostly aim for children, and that in the building other artists are also focussing on children events. They mention that they perceive little engagement of the community so far and that they find it difficult to come up with ways to engage them. My impression: It is a quiet and big room, so it is a bit of a barrier to step in. though, the women are very friendly and inviting, encouraging people to step in and try it. You can see their effort and struggle with that.

O5 Who Male, around 20s, son of one of the kwartiermaker Bart van Heesch What At one of the stands. He tells me that he lives in the building. His experience is good, he likes that there are things happening all the time. Also, he experiences more contact with the neighbours across the street.

69

C5 Who Female, end 20s, one of the artists, Dutch, shop Le Jurk What She explains that Le Jurk is still in a starting phase when it comes to engaging the women of the area. Though, this is the main reason for their start-up. It is not about making money, because she and her colleague have another job that is more secure. But they are struggling with engaging the residents and to kick off their initiative of Le Jurk. She tells me that she is disappointed with the turnout for the shop, on some days there are no visitors at all. Furthermore, she mentions de Buurtzaak, which helps in this regard, to reach out to the women of the neighbourhood that are interested in sewing. Advertising through face to face contact, via via is of great importance according to her. She tells me it is a puzzle to find the right method/tool to lower the threshold for the women to come in and participate. Also, she says that she is scared that they will have to stop in July, when the contracts stops. She has not heard anything about extending the lease for the pop-up mall so far. But as a business, it is not going to well, due to location in a residential area and the target group. It is not a shopping street. My impression: She is very friendly and open about her work and about her thoughts on Lola Luid, both positive and negative.

R10 Who Female at one of the stands, lives in the neighbourhood for 2 years, one of the new blocks, Italian descent What I ask her about her experiences in the neighbourhood. She is very enthusiastic about Lola Luid, because there are no real alternatives for lunch or coffee or art in the neighbourhood. She is going to the yoga classes regularly. It is a nice place to meet people and see the same faces. Also, she likes the area. She can’t really say if it has changed a lot. She does not experience any separation/segregation in terms of community, but that is her experience she says.

R11 Who Family that lives in the neighbourhood, man, woman, young daughter. Arabic. R12 What I meet the man (R11) at a table in front of Lola Luid. Later his wife (R12) and daughter join. It is their first time here. They have been living in the neighbourhood for about 5 years. They tell me that they have walked passed the building, but don’t feel like going in, that is perceived as a barrier, because it is unknown. They are here at the rommelmarkt via a flyer in their mailbox and see this as a possibility to check out the building and what is going on there. They didn’t think it was open for the public on other days. Also, the woman asks me if there are things happening for children here, because she thought it wasn’t. They are positive about this occupation of the building and happy that they have been able to see it now. They are happy to see that the place is done up, it looks nice now, instead of degenerating. The woman mentions that in the area there are not a lot of other places where people can meet. Also, the lay out of the street plan and the buildings are not inviting and impersonal. They haven’t seen any familiar faces inside. Furthermore, in their network they don’t know anyone that is familiar or aware of Lola Luid. They also perceive a change in those 5 years in the neighbourhood, that it feels busier. According to them this is because people can’t afford to live inside of the ring road area/inner city anymore.

C6 Who Female, middle age 40-50, Dutch/white, works at the children’s club in the basement What She told me about the neighbourhood, that it has improved a lot in the last 10 years. It was very criminal and unsafe, though she never felt unsafe. She was at a former kindergarten in the area, but that closed. There she noticed how the children that were coming were increasingly from a Moroccan background and the amount of white children diminished. It was difficult to attract white children from that point. Here, she

70 notices how with the new buildings/developments there is a big increase in white/autochtoon children. She is very happy to see that it is mixing again here. She is very supportive of Lola Luid, for bridging the gap between old residents and the new. She experienced this in the area earlier, that you cannot build a community only by building in a certain style or design. There needs to be extra ground rules/randvoorzieningen which make it easier for people to connect. Also, the environment is not inviting to meet people. She lives in Bos & Lommer, previously near the Hallen but she had to leave there because of the developments. My impression: She was very friendly and open.

Thursday May 19 2016 – Event Zwerfafval Prikken 15:00-16:30

Diary Setting: Two women who are initiating it, Karlien and Marita; two men from the notes ‘wijkzorg’ who do this regularly in the neighbourhood, Ruben and...; Boyd, one of the creatives; Ben, resident of the neighbourhood for 3 years. It gives a great feeling to clean the street/square and to see that the school children on the square are curious and want to join.

R13 Who Ben, male, around 30s, resident for three years, filmmaker What We start speaking during the gathering of the trash. He tells me that he has been living in the neighbourhood, just one street behind Lola Luid for three years, with his wife. Then, when they moved there were predominantly Turkish and Moroccan people around, in both his building as the area. Now, he sees this changing. He is currently unemployed, for two years, as he suffered from a severe burn-out since he finished his documentary. As a filmmaker, he is interested and open-minded towards different cultures. When I tell him about my research project, he is very interested and wants to tell me what he knows about the neighbourhood. He mentions how there is a rat-plague in some buildings. How come? Well, in Islamic culture it is forbidden to throw left-overs from food away, it should be given away to people or animals. What do people do, they throw it over their balcony in the community back or front yard. Flyers from the municipality or Lola Luid will not help, as there are still some Moroccan or Turkish residents who cannot read Dutch. He thinks this difference in culture between the significant Turkish and Moroccan community and the Dutch society with other rules is an issue, as well as the language barrier. As for Lola Luid, he is quite enthusiastic. He mentions that this is one of very few places to go for coffee or lunch. He also thinks that the societal aspect of Lola could amount to positive effects in the neighbourhood, though the temporary aspect can have a negative effect in this regard. If it were to have more time, perhaps more sustainable outcomes can be achieved. He also refers to the death of the owner of a bike shop, that was fairly known in the neighbourhood. He was stabbed two months ago, probably because of money. He knew him and it was a friendly guy. He also mentions that I should talk to Abi, who is known as the ‘fry philospher’, who knows the neighbourhood well and is well known in the neighbourhood as well.

C7 Who Boyd, male, around 30s, artist at Lola Luid What After the walk around, cleaning the streets, we meet back at the steps of Lola Luid. I tell him about the reason for my presence here, my research project. When I ask him about his experiences, he tells me that he finds it rather difficult to initiate an event that contributes to the community. He has been participating in handing out flyers for one of the music events. I asked where they did this. He told me at one of the schools, and he felt like an exotic person, as he was surrounded by ‘moslim’ children and

71 parents. He felt very aware of his position as Dutch, ‘white’ artist. He also referred to the position of the municipality, which is a bit odd he says. They facilitate them as artists, “just put them there, they want to have a place that is cheap”, but they do not provide any other support, or he does not perceive it as such. The community aspect really is a thing that goes out from Bart and Emilie, the kwartiermakers. Furthermore, he mentions that the municipality has certain rules for the artists, such as: you cannot put any art on the windows or in sight, which could be provocative. As an artist this is a problem for him, as he wants to be free without limitations, so this slightly bothers him. He experiences Lola Luid, or his presence, as being on an island in the community, where the community does not, or rarely enters. Also, for him this is mostly a cheap work place.

Thursday May 26 2016 – Goede Gesprekken 19:00-21.30

Diary This evening there was an event in co-operation with Dialogue in Action (DIA), for notes having open conversations for all those interested concerning the topic ‘where do you feel at home?’. The evening was announced on the website and by handing out flyers in people’s post-box.

C8 There were around 15 people at the start. Around 5 were from DIA, 5 were from Lola Luid and the other 5 (including me) were residents of the neighbourhood or familiar with DIA. We started with vegetarian soup and bread. After a short introduction by Rosa Sijben (C8), we spread out in three smaller groups. I started with Arthur (conversation leader), Joke (involved with DIA), Igor (familiar with DIA), Rosa (creative at Lola Luid), Eva (creative + resident at Lola Luid). Five minutes after we started Abdel joined us. We had a conversation for about 1,5 hour. During the conversation, three other men with a non-western outlook walked in and joined one of the other groups. After the conversation, Rosa wrapped the evening up by explaining why she organised this event. That was because she noticed how in the area (she lives in the east of Amsterdam), everyone seems to walk past each other and all live their separate lives. Especially in Slotervaart area, with its diverse population, she thinks it is a shame that so many different groups of people do not interact with each other. She refers to this as probably happening in other parts of the city or other cities too. Then she asked help from everyone how to address all those other neighbourhood members that were not represented during this evening. She hints at the non-Western males and females in the area, as well as the ‘poor’ Dutch resident. She mentions how she had contact with the chief of the Mosque at the Allebesquare, and he invited her to host the next meeting at the Mosque. Also she mentioned that she came across one of the residents from across the street, a Moroccan woman, who had no idea what was happening in this building for the last couple of months. Rosa says in this regard, that there is still quite a lot of work to do. She notices this in her own behaviour as well, where she is also mainly surrounded by friends who are alike. But she wants to change this. One of the participants, a Dutch female, mentions how it might be interesting when the municipal officer that is responsible in the neighbourhood, would be contacted about these initiatives, perhaps to reach a broader audience.

Friday 27 May – regular visit 13.00-14.00

72 Diary Again it is rather quiet. During my presence at the building, I only see some of the artists notes going in and out.

C9 Lunchroom BOX – The girl at the counter tells me that it is rather quiet today for a Friday. Though, she usually works on the Tuesdays, which are always very quiet. Busy with making coffees, but then mostly for the artists within the building she mentions. Also, she says that she expected more residents or people from outside to enter. Possibly they have the impression that it is just a working space which is not open for the public. This could be because of the staircase and the entrance which is quite far distanced from the street.

C10 Who Katja van Heesch, female, 30-40 years old, occupies a shop in Lola Luid What Katja is one of the creatives in the building who has her workspace and shop on the ground floor. She mentions that there are not a lot of people visiting during the day, this has been the case for the time that she has been there. Furthermore, she mentions that the ‘new residents’ find their way to Lola, but the ‘old residents’ or the ‘allochtone bewoners’ are difficult to engage. Concerning my question about her knowledge of the neighbourhood, the first thing she mentions is the stabbing of a bicycle shop owner only two months ago, the theft of copper on the roof of Lola Luid fairly recently, when the police interfered and one of the guys jumped off the roof into a three where he broke his wrists, and breaking windows or stealing car tires. Also, with regard to my question about the role of the municipality, she emphasizes that she experiences it as distrusting, controlling and not hands on at all. She was amazed that in the former location, where she was not part of, but heard it via her brother Bart van Heesch (one of the kwartiermakers), the municipal officers from the Stadsdeel were only talking within their own circles, but did not engage in the location at all as to what was happening there. Here also, she saw the role of the municipality as very hands off. In this regard, the aspect of ‘temporality’, is a very convincing word for both licenses as investors. If a project is temporary, it is less difficult to get these parties on board. That is why she actually only thinks in terms of projects, which are temporary. For herself, she has done a lot of community art, but she is not doing it at Lola. This is very intensive and it is about daring, and for her it often results from the frustration about boring grey garage doors on street level, garbage wondering around at the street, children that are misbehaving. She has done this a lot at the Banne, where she lives. There is a project that is quite structural, about a Huiswerkbegeleiding office that was set up, but which is a lot more than only this. Here children can go with their issues, children who are often lacking education or opvoeding, where they learn what decent behaviour is and be engaged in projects.

Saturday 28 May 2016 – regular visit 14.00-17.00

Diary Walking around in the area, I notice how strikingly present the regeneration plans notes are. Everywhere I look there are cranes and building sites. As for the streets and buildings, it is quite monotonous. There are mostly big apartment blocks, which appear to differ in age.

73 R14/ Who Achmed, male, owner of bike-shop in Lola Luid, Moroccan roots, approximately 35 C11 years What I met Achmed at the ‘Goede Gesprekken’ avond, where I complimented him about the Moroccan tea he brought us. When I explained him about my research, he invited me to stop by his place if I would like to talk to him. I met him in his bike- shop in the basement of Lola Luid, which was the only thing open when I arrived around 15 ‘o clock. Achmed says he has been living in the area, behind the Allebesquare since 2005. During those years, he has gotten to know a lot of people in the neighbourhood. He has not encountered any troubles. He finds it difficult to say something about how he perceives new residents interacting with old residents. He mentions that the old residents all pretty much know each other. They now who is living in their block and that goes quite well. He mentions how the building opposite Lola Luid has been renovated in 2008, the old residents returned to their old homes when the renovation was finished. This caused no troubles he says. As for the newer blocks, he sees that those new residents are high educated, have a higher income than the old residents. The new block are more private sector and more homeowners, opposed to social housing. He still encounters people that don’t know Lola Luid at all. Also, he says that it is a rather quiet area, where people know each other.

O6 Who Student, male, approximately 23 years, Dutch with Arabic roots What He overhears me speaking to Achmed and is curious about what I’m studying. He grew up in this neighbourhood, has lived here for 21 years, now lives at Ijburg. He tells me that it is a turbulent neighbourhood. The residents mainly have a non-Dutch culture/descent. He emphasizes that he has never felt unsafe, because he knew the guys that were causing trouble. For that reason he was not scared. But he can imagine that other people, who don’t know them, might perceive it as unsafe. If someone gets arrested for instance, he doesn’t find it shocking, as he knows that it is a good guy. He liked having so many Turkish and Moroccan small shops around. Also, that there are about 5 mosques not far from each other was a good thing for him. Everything was close. Though, what he did hear from people he knew, that at a housing complex close to the metro-line, people did not know for a long time if it would be renovated or demolished. They were kept in the dark for quite some time, which caused some frustrations. It went back and forth between renovation and demolition.

74

Appendix III Field notes from the street

Friday 27 May – regular visit 14.00-17.00

Diary After my visit to Lola Luid, I did not feel particularly satisfied with the information I notes received up until then. I decided to go for a walk around the building, to see if I could encounter some residents on their daily business. When I walked past the snackbar Abi Patat, at the Jan Tooropstraat, I immediately rolled into a conversation with two friendly Moroccan/Turkish men, one the owner of the snackbar, whom I recognized from the evening before in Lola Luid.

R15 Who Abi, the ‘fry philosopher’, owner of snackbar Abi on the Jan Tooropstraat. Moroccan roots. What I walk up to Abi, who is standing outside with another man. I recognize Abi (not his real name) from the event before at Lola Luid, the ‘Goede Gesprekken Avond’. He immediately invites me in the conversation. I explain him that I am doing research in the neighbourhood, specifically on Lola Luid and concerning the way that he experiences change in the neighbourhood. He knows the neighbourhood well; he says he is a ‘social beacon’ for the neighbourhood. After my question he immediately starts about the missing balance in the neighbourhood. There is no balance whatsoever. Formerly there were around 10% Dutch people, the rest Turkish and Moroccan. Now, in some buildings or parts of the neighbourhood, it is the other way around, 80% Dutch, 20% other. He emphasizes that there is no balance throughout the city, probably also in other cities. Also he mentions that there is little contact between people. There were previously a shop was located for the area, now is a police station. He also mentions Vlla in this regard, of changes that have occurred, which was formerly a funeral home, now is a house/dance/night club. Hence, no balance. He mentions that there are a lot of children in the neighbourhood, which can be quite difficult, but they listen to Abi. This happens actually at the same time, when a group of schoolboys walk past and greet Abi friendly.

R16 Who Man, Moroccan roots, approximately 50 years old What He has been living here now for three months, so not very long. He does not know Lola Luid. He thinks that when you invite people face to face, they will be interested and willing to check it out. When I explain a bit about Lola Luid, the neighbourhood and artist aspect, he says that he thinks it is a good initiative. He still perceives quite a bit of crime, though he does not feel unsafe. Also, he notices how only 1% of the residents in the neighbourhood is Dutch. He does not think this is a good thing. It is not necessarily about the difference in culture he thinks, the children speak Dutch well, but there is no contact. People are scared and they do not dare to speak to others, that is the problem. And also, he experiences that the police do not have any control over the neighbourhood. Perhaps it is better now, but still there are few police eyes on the street. That is what is missing. He emphasizes that people do not have contact with each other, by which he refers to meeting strangers on the street. He has lived in Noordwijk for 37 years before he moved here, a completely different environment where there were only Dutch residents. His son has been living here for a longer time, so he knew something about the area before.

75

Saturday 28 May 2016 – regular visit 14.00-17.00

R17 Who Female, Dutch, 85 years old What She has been living in the neighbourhood for 38 years. She says immediately that she misses the Dutch shops that were around the square, as well as some restaurants. Now there is a school, which is only brick and windows, so it has a very different outlook she mentions. Also she finds that there are a lot of small Turkish and Moroccan shops and restaurants. She says that there are only houses being built. Also, during her 38 years in the neighbourhood she has seen the gradual increase of Turkish and Moroccan residents. As opposed to the amount of Dutch residents, those are fewer and fewer. As she has difficulty walking, she is dependent on the Connexxion taxi service. She does not go out a lot, only to this café every weekend. And she is happy with the Albert Heijn as one of the few, maybe the only, Dutch shop where she can find all that she needs. And she is happy that the pharmacist is still there. She has nice neighbours, there are no difficulties but they are not talking much either.

R18 Who Male, approximately end 30s. What I have a quick conversation with this man, who appears Eastern-European due to his accent. He mentions that he misses supermarkets. Especially given all the new houses that are being built, a lot more people but only 1 or 2 supermarkets. There are too many houses being built he says.

R19 Who Two females, mother and daughter (approximately 50-25 years old), Arabic, wearing R20 a hoofddoek. What I approach them when I am sitting in front of Lola Luid, waiting for Achmed. I see them cleaning a carpet at their balcony, just across the street. I approached them with the question if they know Lola Luid. They tell me they haven’t heard from it and did not know that they could go in there. Even though it is exactly opposite their house, they are looking out on it. They are unaware of the activities of Lola Luid. They seem enthusiastic when I tell something about it. A lot of family is living in the same area they mention.

76 Appendix IV Transcription interview no. 1

Interviewer: Leonoor Hogerheijde Interviewer: Dries van de Velde Interviewee: Emilie Kröner 8 februari 2016

Setting: In Lola Luid, with a second interviewer Dries van de Velde, who is mostly interested in the techniques that are used by the entrepreneurs and artists as a ‘broedplaats’ and how to connect creatives with each other.

Ik ben in de eerste plaats benieuwd wat jullie ervaringen op de Schipluidenlaan zijn? Heb je iets op de website bekeken over LOLA? LOLA zijn natuurlijk de leegstandsbeheerders en Bart, mijn man, en ik zijn door LOLA gevraagd als kwartiermakers. Dat komt omdat we al die mensen hebben leren kennen, dat hele grote netwerk van LOLA.

Jullie zijn daar gaan wonen? Nee, daar hebben we niet gewoond. We wonen nu hier, hiervoor woonden we in een oude school. (ik ga even de deur dicht doen, anders worden we afgeleid door iedereen). We woonden in het voormalig Islamitisch College Amsterdam, aan de Jacob Geelstraat. We huurden, of huurden, via een leegstandsbeheerder. We hebben daar vrij snel contact gemaakt met mensen in de buurt en we kwamen erachter dat er aan de ene kant een school was waar heel veel vierkante meters vrij waren en aan de andere kant, dat er vanuit de buurt heel veel behoefte was aan ruimte om allerlei activiteiten voor en met de buurt te ondernemen. Wij begrepen eigenlijk niet zo goed waarom dat niet kon, want zo’n gemeente geeft dan zo’n pand in beheer bij zo’n leegstandsbeheerder en dan gaan de deuren dicht en dan is het klaar. Terwijl het natuurlijk gemeenschapsgeld is en wij vonden dat iedereen daar eigenlijk gebruik van zou moeten kunnen maken. Dus wij hebben heel erg lopen trekken en heel veel naar Pakhuis de Zwijger, naar al die lezingen en met heel veel mensen gesproken om iets voor elkaar te krijgen, want we hadden heel erg een soort idee voor ogen wat je dus met zo’n pand zou kunnen doen, eigenlijk wat we dus nu hier doen. Echt een openbare plek voor de buurt met winkeltjes, boven op een etage meer kantoren en bewoning, als een soort kloppend hart van de buurt. Maar dat ging natuurlijk niet, want dan ben je twee particulieren dat kun je vergeten. Maar door dat twee jaar aan zo’n dood paard staan trekken hebben we heel veel mensen leren kennen. Deze mensen hebben zich op een gegeven moment verenigd in LOLA, omdat ook zij vonden, dat zijn allemaal organisaties die zich bezighouden met bottom-up initiatieven, wijkondernemingen, leegstand. Die vonden ook natuurlijk dat vooral de gemeentelijke leegstaande panden dat dat natuurlijk veel beter ingevuld kon worden. Dus die hebben zich verenigd. Toen hebben ze een pand toegewezen gekregen van de afdeling Broedplaatsen, dat was het voormalig West-burg College aan de Schipluidenlaan. En, zij hebben toen ons gevraagd als kwartiermakers, omdat wij dus actieve bewoners zijn en zij eigenlijk een beetje de spil zijn met de gemeente, waar ze door dat grote netwerken natuurlijk hele goede banden hebben met de gemeente, alle stadsdelen, en dus met alle actieve bewoners. Omdat we daar in een soort industriegebiedje zaten, niet industrie met allemaal kantoren, hadden we zoiets we willen wel dat het een openbare ruimte is maar het moet niet zo zijn dat de mensen die daar aan het werk zijn niet afhankelijk zijn van aanloop. We zijn op zoek gegaan naar startende ondernemers, die wel aan het produceren zijn en van maandag tot vrijdag hun deuren open hebben. Dat je gewoon binnen kan lopen alsof het een winkel is dat je dingen kunt kopen. We hadden daar ook horeca en we hebben daar ook van alles georganiseerd. En er was wel een soort woonwijkje iets meer in de buurt, die hebben ons wel gevonden, uiteindelijk. Het leuke van hier, van dit, daar hebben we uiteindelijk 15 maanden gezeten, dat is nu afgebroken en er komt nieuwbouw. Toen zijn we eigenlijk door de gemeente gevraagd om hier te komen zitten, dat is dus voor 8 maanden, dat is natuurlijk heel kort, maar iedereen wilde wel mee dus ik durfde dat er wel op te wagen, dan zijn we al met een groep. We hopen natuurlijk dat we langer mogen blijven. Wat hier heel erg leuk aan is, is dat we natuurlijk midden in een woonwijk

77 zitten en dat het ook vooral het stadsdeel er heel erg aan gelegen is dat we een verbindende rol spelen in de buurt, vooral tussen oude en nieuwe bewoners he. Je hebt daar de nieuwbouw en er zijn nogal wat spanningen onderling en door alleen al hier te zijn, door de deuren open te hebben, dat is al heel veel beter dan een donker gebouw waar geen leven in zit. Bart en ik, die hebben dus daar heel, als we het dan hebben over de cohesie tussen de huurders is dat heel erg met zorg geselecteerd, ik wilde een zo divers mogelijk gezelschap hebben, ik wil ook iedereen altijd even in de ogen kijken. Ik heb geen zin, zeker voor zo’n korte termijn, met rare mensen die moeilijk gaan doen, weet ik veel allemaal. Dat lukt ons aardig, dus we hebben een leuke groep, hardwerkende, lieve, aardige mensen uitgekozen, die met respect met elkaar omgaan. Daarom is de sfeer ook heel goed. Wij zijn een beetje de lijn tussen, wat je meer ziet bij broedplaatsen is dat je kunt inschrijven op een atelier of op een wachtlijst en dan is wie het eerst komt, wie het eerst maalt. Dan hoor je ook van heel veel kunstenaars, mensen die huren een broedplaats, van ja, joh ik ken niet eens mijn buren. Omdat, je neemt je intrek en dat is het dan. Dus dan moet er eigenlijk vanuit zo’n, wij zijn in dit geval echt de aanjagers. En nu merk je ook dat er vanzelf allerlei dingen ontstaan, dat is heel erg leuk. Nu is het in dit pand wel zo dat ik aan iedereen de voorwaarde heb gesteld dat ze echt een verbinding met de buurt aangaan, anders waren ze niet welkom. Ook voor nieuwe huurders was dat het geval.

Hoe merk je dat tot nu toe? Nou kijk, ik ga daar niet heel erg actief achteraan, heel soms, laatst heb ik even een facebook berichtje erop gezet en dan komen mensen vanzelf naar me toe, die hebben allerlei ideeën. Vooral gaat het heel erg om participatie he, er is bijvoorbeeld een fotograaf, videokunstenaar en die weet dan niet precies hoe ze dat moeten aanpakken. Die is heel erg dol op planten en die verzorgt bijvoorbeeld alle planten in het gebouw. Het gaat er mij dus heel erg om dat je participeert in het geheel en dat je meedoet, dat je niet je atelier of ruimte dichtdoet en in je eentje aan het werk bent.

Dries: En als er bijvoorbeeld een event is, heb je het idee dat iedereen mee wil doen? Want dat is natuurlijk het idee in alle broedplaatsen, vragen aan huurders vooral als er sociale doelen zijn. Emilie: Maar wie zijn ze dan? Je zegt, dan vragen ze aan alle huurder mee te doen. Dries: Dat hangt er vanaf welke situatie er is, zoals kwartiermakers of in de Broedstraat (..) Emilie: Ja maar in de Broedstraat is dat natuurlijk wel zo. Laten we zeggen de verhuurders in dit geval, overkoepelend. Dus de selectie wordt altijd ingezet op sociale doelen, soms is die visie zeer sterk soms wat minder. Maar meestal verwatert dat dan toch een beetje. Je hebt altijd mensen die meer doen of daar geen zin in hebben. Hoe kijk jij daar tegenaan? Emilie: Nou hier is het natuurlijk zo dat we hier dag en nacht zijn, we wonen hier nu ook. Hiervoor op de Schipluidenlaan, we woonden zeg maar precies in het midden van dat gebouw en dit gebouw. Nu wonen we hier en, dus we zijn heel erg nou ja echt dus ook fysiek aanwezig, maar ook zichtbaar. En niet iedereen doet altijd mee, absoluut niet. En de een doet ook meer dan de ander. Maar goed, men voelt altijd wel natuurlijk de ogen in de rug prikken (stil) en ik vind nu, de meeste mensen ondernemen wat, dus iemand neemt het zwerfafval prikken op zich. We organiseren dan de grand- spectacle, 1 van de huurders die dat organiseert, er worden dan allerlei acts gedaan en er zijn allemaal mensen die zich daarvoor aanmelden. En er moet natuurlijk geflyerd worden, 1 oproepje en daar komen al mensen op af. Muziek @Luid is de pianist hier in huis, die organiseert iedere maand een muziekavond. Er zijn twee dames die gaan een rommelmarkt organiseren. We hebben meegedaan met 4uur LolALuid, dat was onderdeel van 24uur West. Daar waren een aantal workshopjes, daar waren een aantal dames die vertalen en schrijven, die hebben nu de dichtclub opgericht, dat gaan ze nu ook weer doen.

Dat zijn actieve bewoners of huurders? Dat zijn allemaal de huurders waar ik het nu over heb.

D: Hoeveel mensen wonen er hier en hoeveel huren? Het zijn 11 bewoners. Dat zijn niet per se allemaal creatieven. Nee, we hebben bijvoorbeeld 1 student die studeert scheikunde, dat is trouwen gewoon mijn stiefzoon. Maar die is dus verder niet creatief bezig in het pand. De rest hebben allemaal wel een soort iets in het pand nog, of een atelier of een galerie hier. Metheo is de pianist dus die organiseert de muziekavonden.

78

D: Dat is ook wel een voordeel als mensen ook in de wijk wonen? Ja, kijk het is natuurlijk een hele uitdaging om de hele buurt binnen te krijgen. Want de nieuwe bewoners die krijg je wel binnen, die hebben het wel voor mekaar, tweeverdieners. Die denken opgeruimd op zaterdagochtend, joh zullen we een kop koffie gaan drinken en een stuk taart eten. Dar tegenover staan natuurlijk de oude bewoners, die sociale huurwoningen, armoede, huiselijk geweld, weet je het bordje is vol en zie die dan maar binnen te krijgen. Maar ik wil natuurlijk ook hele graag een plek voor die mensen bieden. En wat we doen, we hebben een aantal ruimtes die bieden we te huur aan, we hebben een grote praktijk keuken, een gymzaal, een theaterzaal, een workshopzaal, die stellen we ook ter beschikking aan bewoners uit de buurt als ze een activiteit willen ondernemen, voor en door de buurt. Dus er is nu bijvoorbeeld iemand bezig met het maken van een dansvoorstelling met bewoners. Zij is bewoonster in de buurt en zij gaat met bewoners uit de buurt een dansvoorstelling maken en dan mag zij de theaterzaal gebruiken.

D: Werken jullie dan met verschillende tarieven? Emilie: Nou dat is dan gewoon gratis. Het wordt dus heel veel verhuurd, ik heb al die ruimtes, het beheer ervan heb ik verdeeld onder huurders die daar zin in hadden. Eerst deed ik de gymzaal daar alleen, dat kost best wel veel tijd en als ik dat voor hier al die ruimtes zal moeten doen ben ik echt de hele dag bezig. Dat wilde ik dus niet. Dus het is zo dat een gedeelte gaat dan naar degene die het beheerd en een gedeelte gaat naar LolaLuid, dan kunnen wij er ook weer van alles mee organiseren. We hebben een soort pot van LolaLuid waar we flyers van bestellen, of allerlei evenementen organiseren.

D: Er zijn dus twee tarieven, gratis voor de wijk.. Emilie: Er zijn er zelfs drie hoor. Het is zo dat als er echt een commercieel bedrijf bijvoorbeeld komt, we hadden op een gegeven moment een aanvraag van Hunkemoller om de gymzaal te huren. Het tarief normaal, het wordt namelijk heel veel verhuurd voor kinderfeestjes, is 25 euro per uur en eenmalig 15 euro vor servicekosten, want je moet de deur openmaken, schoongemaakt, verwarming aan etc. Maar als Hunkemoller komt dan geldt er natuurlijk een ander tarief, want dat zou natuurlijk ook niet eerlijk zijn. Dan doen we het per dagdeel en dan is het geloof ik 150 euro per dagdeel.

D: Ik ben meer van de technische kant, als jij verhalen wilt, ik wil aanvullen, maar ik heb heel veel technische vragen over de organisatie. Vraag jij maar vooral, ik probeer wel aan te vullen, wanneer de tijd op is ben ik tevreden. Een van de eerste dingen is bijvoorbeeld, krijgen jullie daarvoor subsidies? Buiten de opstart en broedplaatssubsidies? Emilie: Nee, wij vallen officieel onder Bureau Broedplaatsen, maar het is geen Broedplaats. Het is leegstandsbeheer. Een broedplaats is met een huurovereenkomst, dat is 5 tot 10 jaar. Waarom we officieel daaronder vallen is vanuit de gemeente makkelijker werken. Maar wat je kunt doen bij bureau Broedplaatsen is dat je een visie document maakt, daar krijg je dan 6000 euro opstartkosten voor. En that’s it. Wat prima is.

D: Dus niet voor verbouwen etc. Emilie: Nou nee, want Lola is een leegstandsbeheerder he. Maar dan nieuwe stijl eigenlijk. Leegstand oplossen met een sociaal maatschappelijke meerwaarde. Het blijft een tijdelijke oplossing, van tijdelijke leegstand. Dus het is geen broedplaats. We zeggen wel dat het een broedplaats is omdat we officieel daaronder vallen.

D: Ongelofelijk interessant, dat moet ik ook nog even zeggen ik vind het ongelofelijk tof wat jullie hier doen. Ik ga zeker ook nog terugkomen. Ik heb ondertussen 20-30 gezien, dit is echt wel een topper. Dus jullie zijn dan ook vrij in tarieven eigenlijk? Nou, het is zo natuurlijk in broedplaatsen, ik weet niet of we nu heel erg van jouw onderwerp af gaan?

Nee, het zijn goede achtergrond vragen. Emilie: Nou ja kijk, bij broedplaatsen werken ze dus met een huurovereenkomst en dan hebben ze het over per vierkante meter wordt het verhuurd. Hier werken we met een bruikleenovereenkomst en gaat

79 het om een gebruikersvergoeding. En dat betaal je per ruimte. Dus voor zo’n lokaal, zoals hiernaast betaal je 120 euro per maand en in dit geval nu excl. BTW, in principe is Lola natuurlijk een stichting, maar ze hebben het zo kunnen doen dat het excl. BTW is.

D: Dat is samen opgesteld met Bureau Broedplaatsen? Emilie: Nee, ja, kijk ik ben geen Lola he, ik ben de kwartiermaker. Het wordt wel besproken, omdat we natuurlijk wel een exploitatie hebben. Dus het wordt besproken met de directeur dat is Simon van Dommelen. De andere mensen van Lola is ook een bestuur, maar wij gaan gewoon kijken wat kunnen we vragen, wat is fair om voor zo’n ruimte te vragen. En alle klaslokalen zijn 100 euro. Zo’n kleine ruimte is 100 euro. Dat betekent ook meteen dat we alleen maar echte start-ups een kans bieden, die ook een sociaal hart hebben en zich willen inzetten om een verbinding met de buurt te maken. Het is natuurlijk verkapte subsidie. Dus daar probeer ik de huurders ook heel erg van te doordringen. We hebben ook sommige huurders, die zeggen, ik heb geen water meer in mijn lokaal, hoe moet ik nu afwassen want ik kan niet meer in de keuken. Dan denk ik, maar het is antikraak he, het blijft leegstand. Het is natuurlijk houtje-touwtje, dus daar staat gewoon wat tegenover.

Dries: Dus vanuit de gemeente, die vragen er niets voor. Zij stellen het open voor gebruik? Emilie: Ja, in principe kan de gemeente in zo’n geval, als ze weten dat panden een bepaalde tijd leeg komt te staan, dan kiezen ze vaak voor een leegstandsbeheerder. Dat is tot nu toe altijd de Zwerfkei, of AdHoc of Camelot geweest. Dat is natuurlijk een hele passieve leegstandsbeheer. Maar nu hebben ze dus een alternatief en dat is Lola, dat is voor iedereen win-win. Want het gebouw wordt natuurlijk goed ingevuld, of ten minste ook afgevuld, en het is vol en wat ik vooral heel belangrijk vind is dat het een openbare plek is. Dus dat het open is en dat de buurt binnen kan komen en dat iedereen daar eigenlijk gebruik van kan maken, omdat dat gemeenschapsgeld is. Dus ik vind dat zo’n gebouw, in plaats van dat er 3 bewoners zijn, 3 ateliers en deuren dicht. En wat ook wel leuk is, in het vorige pand zat eerst de zwerfkei met 8 gebruikers. Toen kwamen wij erin. Toen hebben we de energierekening bekeken en we hebben de gemeente, we hebben 14.000 euro minder verbruikt met 46 gebruikers, dan de Zwerfkei met 8. Want dat is het punt, de Zwerfkei is dus ook een leegstandsbeheerder, maar dat is dus heel erg old school. Het aardige is, Bart zit daar bovenop, die is zeg maar technisch, dat is mijn man, die loopt bij iedereen de verwarming uit te draaien en als je het raam open hebt krijg je op je lazer. Dat heeft dus wel zijn vruchten afgeworpen. Toen wij erin kwamen, in dat vorige pand, dat was in juli 2014, toen stonden dus de verwarmingen midden in de zomer loeihard, alles stond te draaien, alles stond aan. Daar let dus verder helemaal niemand op. Dat is niet mijn ogen hoe je verantwoordelijk omgaat met je panden, zeker niet als gemeente. Weet je, als het particulier is dan denk je nou ja. Maar dit is natuurlijk gewoon, de gemeente heeft de verantwoordelijkheid om netjes om te gaan met het gemeenschapsgeld. Dus dat is wel echt een heel wezenlijk verschil, dus wij zijn niet een broedplaats. Om terug te komen op de subsidie, wij krijgen dus 6000 euro van BB voor dat visiedocument en kijk daar is de directeur van Lola, maar die is een presentatie aan het geven. Maar wat heel leuk is is dat de gebiedsmanager van dit gebied, van nieuw-west, dat is Margot Lutters, die heeft ons ontmoet in het eerste pand en die was heel enthousiast en die zei, ik wil jullie behouden voor dit gebied, omdat ik zie dat jullie op een hele organische manier een soort verbindende rol in de buurt kunnen spelen. Ik zit hier met grote problemen tussen oude en nieuwe bewoners en ik krijg daar tonnen voor, misschien nog wel meer, dat kan ik wel inzetten op jongerenwerkers en weet ik wat allemaal, maar als ik zie, want wij hebben het met 6000 euro daar gedaan anderhalf jaar, wil ik jullie hiernaartoe halen. Dus die heeft heel erg voor ons gelobby’d, die heeft veel voor ons geregeld, Zwerfkei er weer uit gewipt, want die zat hier ook. Dus die heeft er wel een beetje de P in, maar wat ik alleen maar goed vind, die bedenken nu ook ineens, o we moeten nu ook wel echt die kant op. Anders krijgen we natuurlijk nooit meer een pand toegewezen.

Hoe merk je de steun van die gebiedsmanager? Emilie: Wat heel fijn is is dat zij natuurlijk hoopt dat wij een verbindende rol spelen, maar dat niet als eis stelt. Dus wij zijn helemaal vrij daarin. Ik vind dat zelf heel belangrijk, dus ik trek daar heel erg hard aan en ik vind het ook nog eens heel erg leuk. Zij heeft in het begin bijvoorbeeld wel gezegd, joh, kunnen we iets met verlichting doen om het gebouw een beetje uit te lichten. Daar hebben we echt een lap geld voor gekregen, dus we hebben hier de letters en de verlichting en we gaan nu achter ook nog

80 iets doen. Dus in die zin werden we ook wel even financieel gesteund. En zij lobby’d natuurlijk ook dat we iets langer mogen blijven.

Dries: En hoe is dan de samenwerking met die jeugdwerkers? Nou, we hebben heel goed contact met Ralph Jansen Dahle, dat is de gebiedsmaker zoals dat heet, van het Overtoomseveld hier. Die komt 3 keer per week binnen en komt kletsen over van alles en nog wat, die is natuurlijk heel erg op de hoogte van alles. Wat wel jammer is, Margot zou wel meer voor ons willen doen, maar helaas gaat ze weg omdat het haar dus heel erg tegenvalt in wat ze gedaan krijgt. Dat is dat logge apparaat van de gemeente. Dat is natuurlijk heel bureaucratisch en zij zegt het ligt aan mij, ik ben gewoon te ongeduldig maar ik trek het niet.

Dries: Wat ik ook interessant vind aan dit verhaal, hoe lang zitten jullie hier? Wij zitten hier vanaf 23 november en wij mogen officieel tot 23 juli blijven, dus echt 8 maanden.

D: Dikwijls is er schrik, zoals HW10 hier verderop, prachtige buurtwerking, en zoals jij waarschijnlijk beter weet duurt het even voordat je een relatie op bouwt met de buurt. Maar ik merk bij jou dat je, meestal stort zo’n buurtwerking in, je zat eerst in een andere buurt. De relatie met die buurt ben je kwijt, dat is toch een afstand. Maar je hebt wel een netwerk dat er toen was op die locatie, die heb je voor een groot deel kunnen meenemen? Emilie: We hebben de huurders mee kunnen nemen, twee of drie niet. Maar iedereen die voelt zich zo verbonden eigenlijk met LolaLuid, en er was geen alternatief. Iedereen wilde gewoon heel graag met z’n allen mee.

D: En de verbinder zijn jij en je man als kwartiermakers? De tweede kwartiermaker is je man, ja dat zie je niet op de site. Emilie: Nee, dat is verder niet tactisch, maar ik heet niet van Heesch.

D: Dus jullie zijn een beetje de creatief directeuren, jullie zorgen voor de inhoud? Emilie: Ja en voor het dagelijks beheer.

D: Als ik zo vrij mag zijn, jullie worden full-time uitbetaald? Emilie: Nou full-time, ik werk wel full-time maar ik heb niet het idee dat ik… Kijk, mijn motivatie is niet geld, dan had ik iets anders moeten gaan doen. En wij krijgen ieder 1000 euro per maand, dat is netto.

D: Misschien moet ik mijn vraag iets verduidelijken, want ik ben misschien iets te direct. Emilie: Nee nee, ik ben daar heel open in.

D: De reden waar ik benieuwd naar ben is de techniek. Zoals bij Urban Resort zijn er technieken, die voorziet in gemeenschappelijke ruimten in een pand, zo versterk je de bottom-up beweging. Zonder huurders te zeggen wat ze moeten gaan doen. Zo zijn er verschillende technieken. Een van de andere technieken is de bemiddelaarsrol, wie draagt het netwerk, wie gaat de expertise opbouwen, wie draagt dat en hoe wordt dat gedaan. Sommige panden, zoals 1 ruimte gratis aanbieden aan die kwartiermaker of bemiddelaar zoals we dat in Vlaanderen noemen. In de Ceuvel hebben ze een systeem, daar betaalt de bar dat. Daar hebben ze een goede bar, die beseffen we maken veel winst, dat komt omdat die plek zo populair is, en die plek is populair, omdat die onderhouden wordt. En ze betalen zo de bemiddelaar. Iedereen heeft zo zijn eigen manier om dat te realiseren. Als ik het goed begrijp, hoef je hier huur te betalen, belachelijk weinig, 150 euro, ik veronderstel dat de helft daarvan de kosten dekken voor verwarming enzo, en de andere helft in de werking steken en in kwartiermakers. Is dat ongeveer correct? Emilie: Kijk, in dit geval stelt dus de gemeente dit gebouw ter beschikking, ten minste, zij vragen aan Lola kun je het beheren. In het vorige pand was de afspraak dat de gemeente een groot deel van gas water licht zou betalen, en moesten wij wel gaswaterlicht afdragen elke maand en als we boven een bepaald punt zouden komen, moeten we dat inleveren. Het goede nieuws was dat we dus zo zuinig waren dat iedereen zijn geld heeft teruggekregen. In dit pand hebben we de mazzel dat we helemaal

81 geen GWL hoeven te betalen. Dat neemt niet weg dat we daar heel zuinig mee doen. Als we het hebben over een techniek ofzo, kijk Lola werkt, en dat vind ik heel slim, in alle buurten heb je de actieve bewoners, die dan dus een leegstaande school zien staan en denken ja mar waarom kan ik daar nou niet een knutsel club beginnen. Waarom kan ik daar niet maaltijden voor ouderen gaan verzorgen. En Lola is eigenlijk de verbinder. Dus wat Lola doet, die stelt inderdaad kwartiermakers aan en die betalen ze uit de exploitatie van dit hele pand. En ja, moet ik heel even nadenken hoe die begroting er ongeveer uitzag… Ja je hebt dus een aantal kwartiermakers, maar dus geen GWL en een aantal wordt bekostigd voor inrichting. We hebben de inrichting natuurlijk meegenomen van daar naar hier.

D: En dat is verlichting en technisch beheer? Emilie: Ja, en er zijn wel een aantal posten, ook voor advies of voor onvoorzien of… Nou ja, o ja, we hebben nu ook een van de huurders, die heeft zich ontpopt, want ik heb natuurlijk ook gevraagd kan iemand een website maken, dat is Annelies. Annelies is nu zeg maar onze communicatiemedewerker, die organiseert heel veel met mij samen eigenlijk. Zij wordt dus, zij krijgt ook betaald vanuit Lola en vanuit LolaLuid.

D: Maar alleen voor die communicatie? Emilie: Ja alleen daarvoor, de organisatie is vrijwilllig.

D: Is dat transparant? Weten de andere huurders hoe dat geregeld wordt? De enige plek waar dat echt zo is die ik ken is de Ceuvel. Emilie: Nou nee, niet iedereen weet hoe het in elkaar zit. Ja, nee dat kan wel hoor. Ik ben daar heel open in over wat we wel en niet betaald krijgen of wie wat wel betaald krijgt. En dat is ook in principe als iemand dat wil inzien, dan kan dat gewoon. Maar het is niet iets wat ik op FB zet…

D: Maar laten we weer terug naar de buurt gaan. Bereiken jullie ook allochtonen? Emilie: En daar gaat ie weer, haha.

Ik denk dat het aansluit, maar wat is je vraag precies?

Emilie: Nou kijk de allochtoon is dus grotendeels, zijn dat de oude bewoners he, die dus veel met armoede en met gescheiden gezinnen en huiselijk geweld te maken krijgen en… En dat is natuurlijk wel een uitdaging om die binnen te krijgen. Wat we nu wel, kijk we hebben een aantal dingen, we hebben dan een knutselculb voor kinderen en dan krijg je ook de moeders natuurlijk binnnen. Kijk die kinderen komen wel, die maken nergens onderscheid in. We hebben ook een meidenclub op woensdag een keer in de twee weken. We hebben een repaircafe, dat is een landelijk iets he, ik weet niet of jullie dat kennen?

D: Ja, in Vlaanderen werkt dat heel goed via kinderen. En werkt dat repair-cafe goed voor allochtonen? Emilie: Ja, ook wel want dan iedereen komt dan dus met zijn kapotte broodroostertje binnen. En dat is een ruimte die heb ik gratis ter beschikking gesteld aan een buurtbewoner, Herman, die deed dat al ergens anders maar had nooit een aparte ruimte. Toen zei ik kom nou gewoon bij ons.

Dus hij kent de buurt? Emilie; Ja met Herman heb ik ook in de regiegroep gezeten, hier van Huis van de Wijk, Slotervaart Noord, waarin je bewoners initiatieven subsidies toekent. Dus zo ken ik ook weer een gedeelte van de buurt goed, maar Herman die kent het goed die woont ook in de straat hier. We bieden ook onderdak aan fietsen en die worden elke dinsdag gebruikt door een initiatief, dat is Vrouwen Fietst, geloof ik. Dat zijn Hanneke en Hasna, en die leren allochtone vrouwen fietsen hier achterop het plein. Dat is natuurlijk doldwaas grappig, die zijn vreselijk bang om te vallen. Daar kunnen wij ons natuurlijk niets bij voorstellen. En dan hebben we natuurlijk onze Achmed de fietsenmaker en dat is onze oude overbuurman, die stond altijd op straat vanuit zijn kleine boxje fietsen te repareren. En toen zeiden wij natuurlijk twee jaar geleden kom nou bij ons, want je krijgt een ruimte. Dus die is bij ons echt een fietswinkel begonnen en die zit links beneden, dus daar moet je maar even binnenlopen. En Achmed

82 kent natuurlijk, die heeft natuurlijk vrienden over de vloer, die heeft eigenlijk een soort van klein mannen-cafe. Dus daar hebben we heel goed contact mee, ook met zijn vrienden, dus dat zijn echt een beetje de allochtone mannen. En dan werken we ook met, ja ik ga maar even door. We hebben dus een boven en een beneden gymzaal, twee gymzalen beheren vond ik te veel, tenminste voor iemand. Dus de beneden gymzaal verhuren we exclusief aan drie partijen, dat is Skiandri. Dat is een organisatie die doen allemaal sport activiteiten met de buurt. En die zitten hier dinsdagen en donderdagen. En die voetballen dan dus in de beneden gymzaal en die komen dan ook binnen vanaf het plein. Die hebben dus hierachter dit plein, dus in het weekend lopen daar wel honderden kinderen rond, dus het is een gigantisch kinderrijk gebied. Daar zitten ook een aantal vervelende jongetjes tussen, daar hebben we dan ook weleens problemen mee. Maar zij doen, wat fijn is, dat zijn jongens Nordin en Farouk, dat zijn jongens van allochtone afkomst en die hebben, dat is zo belangrijk om die in je, om daar dus heel goed contact mee te hebben. Want zijn hebben zulke goeie grip op die jongens, dus dat is een beetje hoe we proberen daarop in te zetten. En nu komen ook, heb ik weer contact met allochtone dames en die beginnen hier volgende week een beauty, kapperssalon. En die ruimte stel ik dan ter beschikking, he die kunnen dat niet betalen, dat zijn dan geen commerciële prijzen, voor alle vrouwen toegankelijk. Dus we proberen dus echt een beetje, nu probeer ik nog de autochtone, de arme autochtoon binnen te krijgen. Want die zijn er ook heel veel, die heb ik nog niet binnen.

Daar ben ik ook benieuwd naar. Ervaar je bepaalde barrieres, het is toch een creatieve plaats. Ik kan me voorstellen dat mensen een idee hebben van het is hip & happening, dat ze zich niet aangesproken voelen? Hoe probeer je dat te doen? Emilie: Ja, we of ik, probeer eigenlijk krampachtig niet een hotspot te worden of iets dergelijks. Iben helemaal niet geïnteresseerd in allerlei hipsters die hier over de vloer komen. Want mijn doel is om de buurt over de vloer te krijgen, niet de stad. En ik vind het leuk als mensen uit de stad komen, maar ik wil gewoon de buurt binnen krijgen. En dat vind ik ook leuk, want dat is echt een uitdaging. En dat loopt natuurlijk wel, dat mensen dit zien en dan denken, o ja dat is niet voor mij. Dat ze zich geïntimideerd voelen. En ik denk dat krijg je natuurlijk niet zo rechtsreeks te horen, maar ik denk wel dat dat natuurlijk zo is.

En hoor je dat dan via mensen die wel betrokken zijn en actief in de buurt. Emilie: Nee, ik zie gewoon mensen die ik heel veel op straat zie lopen en die ik niet binnen zie. Die nu echt wel weten wat het is en dat je binnen kkunt komen. Daarom zijn we nu dus ook bezig met het organiseren van een rommelmarkt, dus heel erg laagdrempelig. Dat je dingen voor 10 cent kunt kopen. Dat is natuurlijk altijd wel een soort van ding o mensen ook te vereniging.

En hoe is de ervaring tot nu toe? Zie je veel hipsters? Emilie: Nee gelukkig niet hoor, dat valt wel mee… Mar we hebben bijvoorbeeld op de opening meer dan 1000 mensen binnen. Dat was super fantastisch en heel erg leuk en bruisend. Dat was echt helemaal te gek. Alleen het is dan wel grappig, want jij kent natuurlijk Jaap Draaisma, van Urban, dat is natuurlijk een van de initiatiefnemers van Lola.

D: Ja ik moest nog de groeten doen van hem. Emilie: O de groeten, o ja dank je. En de opmerking van Jaap, dat was ook mijn kritiek, is waar zijn even kort door de bocht, waar zijn de hoofddoeken, zo zei hij dat niet hoor.

D: Ja, die zit daar nog steeds met zijn handen in het haar, als ik hem ga vertellen wat dat jij hier allemaal hebt gezegd. Emilie: Dan?

D: Dan gaat hij licht omvervallen? Emilie: Waarom?

D: Hij is er niet van op de hoogte denk ik dat je nu zo goed die mensen bereikt. Ik vind het zelf ook ongelofelijk, wat je in zo’n korte periode hebt gedaan. Emilie: Nou ja, we moeten natuurlijk knallen in 8 maanden.

83

D: Ga je er echt vanuit dat jullie moeten stoppen na die tijd? Emilie: Nee, ik ga er niet vanuit. Ik hoop natuurlijk dat we lange rkunnen blijven. Dus daar hopen we heel erg op. Maar kijk, ik ga verder niet piepen en huilen als het ophoudt in juli. Want dat is namelijk wat we hebben afgesproken. Dus dan had ik het niet moeten doen.

D: Het feit dat jullie samen als collectief functioneren maakt dat een heel sterk netwerk. Maar ik voel toch ook dat jij zelf al heel lang met dit soort zaken bezig bent, dus dat je wel een heel goed netwerk beschikt ook in de buurt enzo. Dat is ook belangrijk denk ik als je het over de buurt hebt, klopt dat? Emilie: Nou ja het klopt wel, ik ben hier in 2012 komen wonen, augustus 2012. En eigenlijk al eind 2012 zijn we echt begonnen, maar jeetje kunnen we dan niets met de school waar we wonen. Vanaf toen af aan zijn we heel erg met iedereen gaan praten. Toen hebben we natuurlijk al die mensen ontmoet, van Urban en van Lokale Lente, van Stipo en Culturele Stelling. Dan had je van die diners, dan zat je aan en dan had je het over vertrouwen in de stad en dan zat je met de gemeente. En mijn man, het liefste wat die de hele dag doet is praten. En die is heel handig, die praat altijd met iedereen, ook hier op straat. Dat is wel natuurlijk de kracht, dat je, en ik ben natuurlijk toen, ik heb twee jaar hier in de regie groep gezeten. Dan krijg je alle aanvragen van buurtbewoners binnen.

Wat doet die regiegroep precies? Emilie: Die kent subsidies toe aan bewonersinitiatieven. Dus dan mag je tot 5000 euro, mag je subsidie toekennen aan…

D: Maar zitten hier dan geen burgerinitiatieven in? Emilie: In dit pand? Jawel, tuurlijk, nou ja in zoverre, omdat ik natuurlijk zo goed op de hoogte ben van hoe je dat moet aanpakken en de regels enzo, heeft Matheo, dus die muziek@Luid aan het organiseren is en dat elke maand doet. Vraag dan bewoners initiatief aan.

D: Hoeveel krijgt hij ongeveer? Emilie: Hij krijgt nu voor 5 keer iets van 1500 euro.

D: En hoeveel volk bereiken jullie daarmee? Zijn dat eerder de jongeren? Emilie: Ja, het idee is… Hij stelt dus een avond samen, omdat hij professioneel pianist is, en contacten heeft, nodigt hij ook (semi-) professionele collega’s uit, maar hij nodigt ook mensen uit de buurt uit om te komen spelen. Daar hebben we vooralsnog niet heel veel reacties op, maar goed we hebben het pas 1 keer gehad nu. De volgende staat voor 19 april gepland. Maar dat is dus ook een beetje het idee, om eventueel mensen uit de buurt te organiseren. We hebben ook een flyer en een poster ook. Dat staat er ook in het Turks en Arabisch. Maar dat is dus dat bewonersinitatief, maar omdat ik natuurlijk twee jaar in die regiegroep heb gezeten, en dan zit je in een groep van ong 10 mensen, dat zijn allemaal bewoners van deze buurt. Dus ja, dan leer je natuurlijk ook wel weer wat speelt. Ik ben er natuurlijk dus vanaf 2012, nou ja begin 2013, dus dat is alweer drie jaar. En dan was het natuurlijk zomer 2014 zijn we naar de Schipluidenlaan gegaan. Ja… En wat heel fijn is, is dat Urban alle administratie doet. Die doet alle contracten.

En die hebben ook vooral Lola als beheerder, zij hebben echt contact met de gemeente? Emilie: Ja Lola is dus een heel netwerk, dat zijn al die verschillende organisaties door de hele stad heen. Die hebben hele goede contacrten met elk stadsdeel, met bestuurders etc en dat maakt het ook heel sterk. Omdat je dan makkelijker dingen gedaan krijgt, mensen denken dan oja dat is Lokale Lente, of o ja dat is Lola. En wat nu heel fijn is voor de gemeente, maar ook voor de bewoners, is dat er een partij is als Lola, een betrouwbare partij, dat ze denken dat beheer kunnen we gewoon uit handen geven want daar zit Lola achter, dus dat komt goed.

D: Hebben jullie zin om nog zo’n tweede pand erbij te nemen? Emilie: Ik had het daar toevallig met Bart over, maar nee. Ik vind het nu, dit is echt een fulltime, meer dan fulltime is het eigenlijk.

84 D: Dat is je leven momenteel toch? Emilie: Ja, ik kan het nog net, nu vind ik het nog heel erg leuk. Vooral alle samenwerkingen en ideeen, we hebben nu ook een kunstenaar die gaat gamenights organiseren voor de jeugd hier op het plein. En we hebben weer een ander die gaat een pingpong toernooi organiseren op de rommelmarkt enzo. Maar dat komt natuurlijk eerst via mij, dan moet ik ze weer naar allemaal andere dingen… En je moet natuurlijk een balans zien te vinden tussen helemaal om komen in je werk en het nog leuk vinden zeg maar. En het twee pand, kijk waarom het nu werkt is omdat wij hier dag en nacht zijn. En je moet er denk ik ook een beetje gek voor zijn, anders dan haha… We doen het natuurlijk met ons hele hart en 100%. Mensen zeggen weleens, maar je gaat zo weg, waarom doe je dat dan nog, waarom doe je dan zoveel. Dan denk ik ja, maar het is alles of niets. Als ik niet alles geef, waarom zou ik het dan überhaupt doen.

D: Werkt die co-working space? De Lunch-box? Emilie: Ja, het is gewoon een lunchroom. Dat is gewoon voor de buurt, dat is Box.

D: En mensen mogen gewoon binnen vallen? Emilie: Ja het is echt voor de buurt.

D: En werk dat een beetje? Wat moet ik me daarbij voorstellen, 10 man? Emilie: Ja, absoluut. Nou ja 10 man, het verschilt heel erg. Soms is het op een dag heel rustig en soms komen er dus op een dag 15 man en die hebben lekker een broodje besteld en lekkere koffie. Dus dat is heel afhankelijk.

D: Ik zag ook op jullie website, kunstgalerijen? Emilie: Ja het grafische werk, en helemaal heb je Lokaal 1B en dat is meer conceptueel. Maar dat is wel leuk, want die hebben dan weer echt connecties, heel erg binnen de museum wereld en het Stedelijk. Dat is wat mij betreft eigenlijk iets te high-end voor deze buurt, maar ik vind het ook wel weer grappig. Ik probeer dus een beetje low-end, high-end te verbinden.

Maar op dit moment is het dus zo, je probeert die mensen vooral te bereiken via via en door de website en door deze flyers? Emilie: Ja, nou ja en dus ook bijvoorbeeld… nou ja, Bart die spreekt ook nog wel mensen aan op straat, vooral dan hier voor de deur, of als ze de auto moeten aanduwen of weet ik wat. En ik ook hoor, maar we proberen dus inderdaad zoveel mogelijk wel… we merken dat het het beste werkt als je mensen dus direct aanspreekt, dus met zwerfafval prikken gaat dat heel goed. Dat is echt een soort van ding om contact te maken.

Is dat een terugkerend iets? Emilie: Ja, dat is gisteren gedaan en ik geloof dat het nu zo om de twee drie weken dat we dat doen.

D: Is dat met vrijwilligers uit de buurt? Emilie: Nee, in principe met mensen uit dit pand. We zitten ook in een besloten FB groep, dat is onze manier van communiceren, ja we zijn met 70 man, dat kan niet allemaal via de mail. Dat werkt eigenlijk heel goed, meer belangrijke dingen, zoals huisregels of eventueel verlenging van een contract ofzo dat gaat natuurlijk wel allemaal via de mail. Maar in principe trommelen we voor het zwerfafval mensen op hier in het pand. Vorige keer as het wel grappig, toen kreeg Rosa, die ongeveer het opperhoofd zwerfafval is, die kreeg een sliert met kinderen achter zich aan uit de buurt, ook allemaal met prikkertjes, dus dat is leuk.

D: En de radio, werkt dat een beetje? Emilie: Ja, dat is ook, Frank organiseert ook le Grand Spectacle, maar is ook van Radio, een kunstenaar hier in het pand. Ja die doet 1 keer per week, woensdag tussen 4 en 5, dat is leuk satire, dat gaat dan via het internet.

D: Is dat ook met de buurt?

85 Emilie: Nee, dat is eigenlijk meer gewoon radio.

D: Want, om even terug te komen op de huurders zelf, je spreekt van de FB groep. Alles staat hier open, er is een enorme gemeenschappelijke ruimte, vinden ze elkaar ook zo, komen ze elkaar goed tegen, ben je daar tevreden over? Emilie: Nou ja, dat ander pand was natuurlijk een heel compact pandje. De aula was daar echt het midden, daar kwam je elkaar veel makkelijker tegen. Nu kreeg ik ook van Sabine, die daar achterin de hoek zit, die zat naast mij eerst, ik zie je nooit meer. Ja, dit is gewoon veel groter, maar vooralsnog is het contact wel goed. Kijk, we, er is iemand die dan initieert om elke maandag te lunchen met elkaar.

[de post wordt gebracht]

Nee dus dan wordt er bijvoorbeeld elke maandag om half 1 is er hier lunch in de hal, dan is Box ook dicht, dus dan sluit iedereen aan die daar zin in heeft. Bij lunch verzamelt iedereen, iedereen die daar zin in hebben komen lunchen met elkaar gewoon hier in de hal.

Als een soort kantoorlunch, maar dan anders. Emilie: Ja, meer een soort van iedereen moet lunchen en het is gezellig om dat met elkaar te doen. We hebben ook een kerkgenootschap hier in het pand, dat is Villa Nova. Dat is dan weer via Herman. Herman zit dus bij de kerk, die hebben elke zondagochtend hier een bijeenkomst. Ik ben daar wel een soort van strikt op geweest, want ik wilde dus niet dat ze hier met borden en kruisen en in tapijten rondlopen. Omdat, wat jij al zei, ik wil eigenlijk dat het zo neutraal mogelijk is. Als het te uitgesproken is, dan kunnen mensen sneller het gevoel krijgen o dit is niet voor mij. Dus zij hebben dan bijvoorbeeld ook een bord elke zondagochtend, welkom bij de bijeenkomst, die hadden ze eerst buiten staan, toen zei ik naar binnen. Niet dat mensen niet mogen weten dat hier een kerk is, maar ik wil niet dat bepaalde mensen denken o hier zit een christelijke kerk, dit is niet voor mij. Maar goed, Villa Nova organiseert ook eens in de zoveel tijd lunches met een thema. We organiseren ook eens in de zoveel tijd filmavonden en met kerst hebben we vorig jaar een afscheidsfeestje gedaan en weer een nieuw feestje. Het leuke is dat mensen elkaar redelijk goed kennen, ook wel met de nieuwe huurders erbij. Er ontstaan dan allerlei kruisbestuivingen en dat is heel erg leuk om te zien.

Een afsluitende vraag, wanneer zou dit initiatief voor jou een succes zijn geweest? Emilie: Ja, die vraag werd me laatst ook al gesteld. Nou, daar heb ik wel over nagedacht, als bewoners uit deze buurt en bewoners die niet vanzelf met elkaar in contact komen elkaar op straat gedag zouden zeggen. Dus vooral de oude en de nieuwe bewoners, dat er dus iets meer… Dat zou wel, als dat naar aanleiding is van ons initiatief, dan zou ik dat wel heel erg leuk vinden. En natuurlijk ook als ik hier iedereen binnen krijg, dus de allochtoon, de autochtoon, de rijke allochtoon, de arme allochtoon, de rijke en arme autochtoon. Wit zwart, jong oud. Maar dat is natuurlijk heel moeilijk, maar dat zou ik leuk vinden.

86 Appendix V Transcription Interview no. 2

Interviewer: Leonoor Hogerheijde Interviewee: Emilie Kröner Friday 10 juni 2016

Setting: In the main hall in Lola Luid.

Ik ben heel benieuwd hoe jij over de stedelijke vernieuwing denkt in de wijk. Daar hebben we het de vorige keer niet over gehad. E: Ik moet je eerlijk zeggen dat ik me daar niet zo heel erg mee bezig houd. Ik zie het natuurlijk wel oprukken, er is bewoon een tekort aan woningen, dus de stad rukt op zeg maar. Dat klinkt heel raar, want hier is het natuurlijk ook al stad. En wat je wel ziet wat er natuurlijk in elke stad wel ziet, dat zon gebied eerst wordt ontgonnen door kunstenaars en studenten, nou ja de gentrificatie. En wat je hoopt, dat is hier nog niet aan de orde, wat ik hoop is dat de oude bewoners behouden kunnen worden voor zon buurt. Maar goed, het hele concept van gentrificatie is wel bekend, en iedereen was daar eerst natuurlijk heel lovend over, en er is ook heel veel kritiek. Hopelijk, mensen zijn zich er in ieder geval van bewust, dat dat niet altijd goed is. En dat zo’n buurt natuurlijk heel gemixt is. En dat het niet eerlijk is, zo’n buurt heeft natuurlijk ook veel oude bewoners, dus de arme bewoners die weer verder de stad uit geduwd worden. Dat is meer een sociaal aspect denk ik. Je ziet nu inderdaad dat de grote projectontwikkelaars deze kant op komen. Dus Lola is ook al benaderd voor een pand, om ergens de boel op te waarderen eigenlijk. Daar zijn we nog niet op in gegaan, maar dat krijg je dan dus nu ook

Ben je daar bang voor in deze buurt, dat de oude bewoners weggaan? E: Uiteindelijk, wat jammer is is dat het altijd heel veel over geld gaat natuurlijk, toch. En ik ben bang dat dat nog wel zo heel lang blijft. Dus de kans is natuurlijk best heel groot dat die bewoners verder de stad uit gedreven worden, ik weet niet of ik daar bang voor ben. Ik vind het heel jammer, ik vind het een gemiste kans. Gelukkig is onze burgemeester daar wel heel erg voor, die zegt een stad is pas interessant als het heel gemixt is. En wat je dus ook niet hoopt voor het centrum dat daar alleen maar de rijken kunnen wonen die daar niet zijn. Dat je dan een artificiële spookstad krijgt, dan ga je dus ten onder aan je eigen succes. Voor deze buurt, ik kan alleen maar hopen dat dat zo blijft.

Hoe merk je daar de rol van de gemeente in? Zij faciliteren dit met de hoop de mix op gang te brengen. E: Ja, nou hier in het gebied was het toch vooral de gebiedsmanager, Margot Luttens, die nu helaas dus weg is, die het herkende en die ook inzag dat dat dus met heel weinig geld gebeurde. Die dacht, ja dit gebouw staat dus al twee jaar leeg en die dus herkende dat wij op een organische manier een verbinding in de buurt zouden kunnen maken. Vooral tussen de oude en nieuwe bewoners. In die zin is dat natuurlijk heel waardevol. De gemeente speelt daar natuurlijk wel een degelijk rol in, maar je moet wel een visie hebben. Vorige week donderdag waren we ook in Pakhuis de Zwijger, en dat ging over of Nieuw-West het nieuwe Kreuzberg is, wat natuurlijk een belachelijke vergelijking is. Tenminste, ik ben nog nooit in Berlin geweest, laat staan Kreuzberg. Maar het is natuurlijke een soort geforceerd jezelf een soort imago toe-eigenen. En dat slaat natuurlijk helemaal nergens op. Om terug te komen op je vraag, de gemeente had een filmpje gemaakt over de visie voor nieuw-west. Dat heeft Achmed Badouch laten maken door een of ander bureau, en dat ging over de West-As. Dat dus Nieuw-West HET centrum van Europa zou worden. Als een soort van economisch meest interessant, want het was met de haven en Schiphol enzovoort. En iedereen in de zaal had zoiets van, wat is dit voor iets belachelijks. Er is dan een soort van punt op de horizon,

Waar de gemeente naartoe wil met Nieuw-West?

87 E: Ja, zoiets, Ik geloof dat veel mensen het wel met mij eens zijn, dat de visie van Nieuw-West er niet echt is. Er is niet iemand met een visie voor de langere termijn, nou ja dit idee, maar dat is veel meer op een economisch aspect gericht dan sociaal. En je moet daarvoor mensen hebben die ook durven.

Jullie worden hier heel vrijgelaten daarin heb ik de vorige keer begrepen, dat er weinig controle is? E: Nee dat klopt, het sociale aspect wordt niet op gecontroleerd. Dat is heel prettig, want daardoor hebben we heel veel vrijheid. En ondertussen zet ik iedereen wel heel erg onder druk hier in het pand. En we hebben wel bijvoorbeeld te maken met handhaving, daar zitten we volgende week, over allerlei vergunningen enz. Het is natuurlijk nu omdat wij als leegstandsbeheer best opvallen, hebben ze daar nu ineens een punt van gemaakt.

Wat voor punt? E: Nou met bijvoorbeeld een horeca vergunning en met bewoning dat dat niet kan. Terwijl met andere leegstandsbeheerders, de stad is natuurlijk vol van allemaal leegstandsbeheerders, waar beheerders allemaal mensen laten wonen. Maar goed, dus we hopen dat als we dit een beetje open kunnen breken, dat we dan ook een soort precedent scheppen voor andere panden.

Mis je een bepaalde steun vanuit de gemeente, voor de sociale doelen die jullie willen bereiken? E: Nee, we worden toch wel erg gesteund. We hebben toch wel goed contact met onze gebiedsmakelaar, dat is Ralph Jansen-Dalen, en daarnaast ook met een gebied coördinator, dat is Pedro Veldhuis en zo zijn er nog een aantal mensen. Tenminste, voornamelijk die twee. En Cecile de Boer. Dus we worden toch wel erg ondersteund. Dus als wij iets willen, Bart had bijvoorbeeld het idee om in de voortuin moestuintjes te beginnen. En daar worden we ook meteen financieel in gesteund, dus dat is wel te gek. Maar er wordt dus wel heel erg meegedacht.

Dus waar jullie dan mee komen, dat wordt gesteund? E: Ja, al is het wel zo dat de meeste dingen zoals de muziekavonden en goede gesprekken en zwerfafval, daar worden we heel erg in gesteund. Als ik bijvoorbeeld vraag of ze kunnen regelen dat we een soort paraplu vergunning kunnen krijgen, dat we niet elke keer een vergunning moeten aanvragen, dat wordt dan lastig. Want dat moet je natuurlijk gewoon via de reguliere kanalen af, maar dat begrijp ik ook wel. Alleen we zijn natuurlijk ook en pilot. Het enige wat wel een beetje is, is dat de gemeente aan de ene kant heel graag wil dat je hier bent, dat je wel een prominente rol speelt in de buurt. En dat je tegelijkertijd aanloopt tegen een muur van bureaucratie van vergunningen. En dat is dus een en hetzelfde orgaan. Dan zou je dus willen dat het dagelijks bestuur met de secretaris-generaal van dat gebied, de afdeling handhaving aanstuurt en zegt… maar daar hebben we dinsdag een gesprek over. Dat is het enige dat een beetje wringt. Maar daar ontkom je ook niet helemaal aan, dat heeft ook met veiligheid te maken waar ik ook helemaal achter sta, dat is natuurlijk heel belangrijk. Alleen hebben we nu net met iemand van de afdeling handhaving te maken die vrij rigide is. Maar goed, we zien het wel.

Je zat in de regiegroep, hebben jullie daar een samenwerking mee? E: Ja, nou ja ik ken ze natuurlijk al heel lang, dus Hans Krikke, en Fatiha, en Ineke etc. In zoverre samenwerking, wij organiseren elke maand de rommelmarkt en dan mogen we hun tafels lenen. Hans heeft een bus van vrijwilligers, die moet hij dan te werk stellen en hij vraagt dan aan ons of we vrijwilligers kunnen gebruiken, dan zeggen wij ja hoor, maar daar wordt dan niet meer op gereageerd. Dus we willen wel, maar het is niet altijd. We staan op hele goede voet hoor. Nu staat het even on hold, maar er is een benefietavond die wordt georganiseerd en de opbrengsten daarvan komen ten goede van de Sadaka stichting, die heel erg hier op de buurt gericht is, voor armoedebestrijding. Dat doen we dan in samenwerking met Huis van de Wijk. We zijn natuurlijk heel erg op de hoogte van elkaars dingen enz.

Ze hebben daar ook een divers aanbod, gericht op armoede en schulden etc. Ook heel erg het cultuuraspect. Zou je dat hier ook meer willen incorporeren, of is het meer een creatieve plek?

88 E: Ik denk toch het laatste, want zij doen het dus al. Dus ik denk dat we elkaar dus daarin heel erg mooi aanvullen. Je moet niet hetzelfde willen gaan doen. Ik denk dat wij daarin wat speelser en creatiever zijn in het aanbod dat we geven. En ik denk, dat past ook meer bij ons. En bij Huis van de Wijk zitten natuurlijk ook echte professionals, dat zijn wij natuurlijk niet. Het is veel beter om ieder zijn eigen ding te doen en een aanvulling zijn op elkaar in deze wijk.

Hoor je vanuit het Huis van de Wijk waar bewoners behoefte aan hebben? E: Nee, dat hoor ik niet. Behalve dan dat ze vrijwilligers willen plaatsen, maar verder niet.

We hadden het net over gentrificatie, dat daar wisselende gedachten over bestaan. Ik kijk ook naar het gemeentebeleid, zowel op stadsniveau als op de wijk. Daar lijkt het erop alsof de positieve aspecten worden benadrukt. E: Ja, want het gaat om geld natuurlijk.

En met de contacten die je hebt, merk je dat jullie daar anders in staan, dus wat sceptischer bijvoorbeeld? E: Nou nee, want ik ben er niet dagelijks mee bezig. Het is meer iets dat dus af en toe ter sprake komt, maar de gemeente is er natuurlijk wel mee bezig. Ik weet ook niet precies waarom, misschien worden ze daarop afgerekend of heeft het met image te maken, want in deze school willen ze dus heel graag Denise, dat is een internationale school. Die zit nu in een pand in Zuid. De gemeente is er heel erg aan geleden om dat hier te doen. Omdat ze dus hopen dat ze daarmee de buurt opwaarderen, terwijl, als je kijkt naar de buurt gaat het helemaal nergens over. Als je hier in de buurt kijkt denk je echt waarom zou je hier zo’n internationale school willen plaatsen? Kijk naar wat de buurt nodig heeft. Dat heeft wel met opwaarderen van de wijk te maken, en uiteindelijk ook met geld. En bij Lelylaan, waar wij eerst zaten op de Schipluidenlaan, dat is nu inmiddels afgebroken, maar in het Calvijn, ik weet niet precies wat daar de status van is, daar zit noodopvang en ik weet niet of dat nu verlengd is of niet. Maar daar vlak voor is een Duitse investeerder flats aan het bouwen. Het plan voor het Calvijn zou zijn dat daar een broedplaats zou komen in combinatie met vluchtelingen, een soort samenwerking. Een heel mooi concept, echt fantastisch. Maar dat wil die Duitser dus niet, want die wil geen vluchtelingen in zijn achtertuin. En dus wil de gemeente dat dus ook niet, want daar gaat dus ontzettend veel geld mee gemoeid. Je hebt dus iemand nodig die dus een visie heeft en die dat niet elke keer op een soort korte termijn zich heel erg laat leiden door geld of door imago. Ik weet niet precies hoe dat in elkaar zit, misschien wordt de gemeente wel op centraal niveau daarop afgerekend, ik weet niet precies hoe dat in elkaar steekt. Maar het is jammer dat de gemeente zich daar dus echt heel erg door laat leiden. En kijk, het idee dat hier dus een internationale school in komt, daar krijg ik echt de slappe lach van. Maar goed.

Dat is met het idee met de komst van alle nieuwe bewoners? E: Ja, nou ja, misschien is het ook wel kortzichtig van mij hoor. Misschien heeft het wel met lange termijnvisie te maken en verwachten ze dat hier heel veel expats komen wonen en buitenlanders komen die allemaal hun kinderen dan hier naar school sturen.

Dat dat hun lange termijnvisie is? E: Ja, dat zou dus de insteek kunnen zijn. Alleen als ik dus nu op dit moment kijk, en ook naar de jeugd hier en naar alle kleine kinderen, dat zijn er heel veel, ik geloof dat er nu dus ook vanuit Den Haag dat de afdeling Onderwijs er heel erg op hamert dat kinderen dicht bij school wonen, omdat dat uitval tegen gaat. Dan krijg je, het Meridiaan hier gaat weg, dus dan zou je denken dan is het in deze buurt, het Comenius gaat ook naar de andere kant, dan zou dit een prachtig gebouw zijn voor kinderen hier in de buurt.

Maar dat worden dan expats. E: Ja precies.

Heb je het idee dat de gebiedsmakelaar, die op de buurt zit en kennis van de buurt zou hebben, kan hij naar jullie toe goed aangeven waar behoefte aan is? Wie brengt dat in kaart?

89 E: Hmm... Ja ik denk dat hij dat zou moeten zijn in principe. Ja, dat weet ik niet. Ik neem aan dat hij dat is als gebied makelaar.

Merk je dat zelf in je contact met hem? E: Nee, niet direct. Nee het is niet zo van, ik weet dat daar behoefte aan is en kunnen jullie daar wat mee. Wij zijn zelf natuurlijk een beetje, bijvoorbeeld het zwerfafval, daar heb je alleen maar twee ogen in je hoofd nodig. En je ziet ook, daar houdt Bart zich een beetje mee bezig, met de kinderen op het plein, je ziet dat daar totaal geen toezicht op is van de ouders. Het zou goed zijn als er meer toezicht zou zijn, daar springt Bart dus in. Het is meer iets wat we zelf dus zien in de directe omgeving van het gebouw. Misschien mis ik iets hoor, ik moet even heel hard nadenken of Ralph daar weleens mee komt, van goh, kunnen jullie daar iets mee doen, dat kan kan best hoor. Maar het schiet me even niet zo snel te binnen.

Dus het is meer wat jullie opvalt en horen. Hoe gaat bijvoorbeeld het flyeren? E: Ja, dat gaat goed. Ja hoor.

Ik heb een paar keer gesproken met een paar bewoners, daar kwam naar voren dat wanneer ze face-to-face benaderd worden, dan komen ze wel. E: Maar dat doen we ook hoor. Dus de mensen die gaan flyeren, die spreken ook mensen aan op straat. Maar goed, niet iedereen is natuurlijk op straat. Ja dan krijgen ze het dus in de bus. En ik weet ook wel hoe je daar mee omgaat hoor, de meeste mensen gooien het ook vaak weg, maar je moet ergens beginnen natuurlijk. En het gaat me ook te ver om aan te bellen. Dus zoveel mensen aanspreken, en ook bij El Kadisia, daar staat altijd een grote groep ouders om twee drie uur.

Jullie mogen langer blijven in het pand? E: Ja in ieder geval tot december, dat is heel fijn. We weten nog even niet wat daarna is, maar dat horen we dan waarschijnlijk pas in november december zoiets.

En dan wordt het weer wat nieuws. E: Ja geen idee, daar ga ik me nu niet mee bezig houden dat vind ik zonde van mijn energie.

Ik ben benieuwd wat voor effecten de tijdelijkheid gaat hebben, met de verbindingsrol die jullie hier hebben. E: Ja je hoopt, dat is eigenlijk het kleine dingetje dat een beetje wringt, met zo’n concept zou je het liefst, idealiter twee/tweeëneenhalf jaar in zo’n pand blijven. Maar de hele visie van Lola is natuurlijk dat het een tijdelijke oplossing voor leegstand is, dat is 2,5 jaar natuurlijk ook. Ik hoop heel erg dat die tijd ons gegund is in dit gebouw. Omdat je dan net iets meer een positieve invloed op de buurt zou kunnen hebben. In mijn ogen is dat zoals mensen elkaar in ieder geval leren kennen. Het is natuurlijk al een hele winst als mensen elkaar op straat gedag zeggen. Een praatje maken etc. Als die die interactie al zou kunnen bevorderen, dan is dat al grote winst.

Vooral in zo’n roerige buurt. E: Veel rotzooi hoor, ‘never a dull moment’. We hebben dus koperdieven gehad, die hier op het dak zaten, onze stilstaande auto die was aangereden, gisteren waren er jongetje die trekken de spiegel van de motor van iemand die hier huurt, nou gelukkig wordt dat gezien. We hebben ook hier in de straat verderop eindeloos veel politie aanvallen en dan weer een stille overval, inbraken, dode fietsenmaker, het gaat maar door. Ik denk dat het gewoon belangrijk is dat mensen elkaar leren kennen. Dan heb je iets meer sociale controle. Dat is in zo’n buurt heel belangrijk.

Ja, dat je ogen op straat hebt? E: Ja, nou ja en dat mensen elkaar makkelijker durven aan te spreken.

Hoe is dat tot nu toe?

90 E: Nou ik heb het idee dat mensen, ik vind het moeilijk, ik kan dat nog niet zo inschatten. Dan zou ik de hele dag door de buurt moeten lopen of buiten op een bankje gaan zitten om te kijken of daar iets ontstaat, maar dat kan ik nu nog niet zo goed inschatten.

Hoor je zulke geluiden? E: Nee, weet ik nog niet, nee, nee.

Dat was het wel zo’n beetje. Dankjewel. Het is boeiend om te zien hoe dit initiatief in het geheel past in de buurt. E: Ja, en dat is dus wel grappig hoor, want de gemeente is dus aan de ene kant word je heel erg ondersteund, en aan de andere kant wordt er gekeken, ja het is ook nog hele erg pionieren. Er zijn heel veel mensen erg enthousiast, maar er wordt ook nog wel gekeken, kan dat allemaal wel ofzo.

Een beetje wantrouwend? E: Ja, maar dat hoort er misschien ook een beetje bij.

Het is natuurlijk ook een omslag van de gemeente, die een meer facilitaire rol aanneemt. E: Ja, dat is ook wel zo. Maar dat zou natuurlijk in de basis zo moeten zijn, dat was Margot altijd heel erg, die zei altijd ik wil faciliteren. Als ik goede dingen herken wil ik dat ondersteunen en mensen hun gang kunnen laten gaan. Dat is natuurlijk heel goed. Maar dan moet je de eigenschap hebben dat je mensen durft te vertrouwen. Want daar heeft het natuurlijk heel erg mee te maken.

Is er nu een nieuwe gebiedsmanager? E: Nou, ik geloof dat er nu iemand waarneemt voor haar. Dan zijn ze op zoek naar een nieuwe. Heb jij Margot ook gesproken?

Nee, die kreeg ik niet te pakken. E: Wat jammer. Want zij is dus inderdaad uit zichzelf weggegaan, ook dat ze zei dat ligt ook aan mezelf, ik ben te ongeduldig. Dit heeft ze dan toch wel voor elkaar gekregen, dat vind ik dan toch wel knap.

(Emilie vraagt hoe het nu verder gaat met mijn scriptie en mijn plannen daarna, waarbij ik aangeef dat ik veel interesse heb gekregen voor dit soort buurt onderzoeken. Daar haakt ze nog op aan)

E: Dat is grappig, want vorige week zaten we dus in Pakhuis de Zwijger, daar zaten Bart en ik aan tafel bij een norse oude man, die was heel lang bij de gemeente in dienst geweest. Die zei, wat belangrijk is, dat er gekeken moet worden naar een behoefte in de buurt. Vanuit een behoefte bouwen, dus niet in een wijk zomaar woningen neerknallen, koopwoningen, terwijl er in zo’n buurt juist behoefte aan sociale huurwoningen. Als je dat zo hoort denk je, natuurlijk! Nou heeft dat natuurlijk ook met een bepaalde visie te maken met de lange termijn, maar het heeft ook vooral te maken met zo’n visie de je voor de buurt hebt. Dat is natuurlijk wel interessant, of je zulke behoeftes in kaart kan brengen. Of je dan vanuit de gemeente kan kijken wat er nodig is. Ik weet natuurlijk ook niet wat de centrale stad voor ogen heeft met Nieuw-West. Er ligt alleen een opdracht er moeten zoveel woningen bij, nou ja de binnenstad is vol, dus dan komt het allemaal hier naartoe. En wat ga je dan hier eigenlijk creëren, en hoe zie je zo’n stadsdeel zich ontwikkelen.

Precies, en alle belangen die daarbij komen kijken. Voor wie wordt er gebouwd en voor wie niet, dat daar oog voor is. Het lijkt me ook lastig voor zo’n log apparaat als de gemeente, waarbij je eigenlijk iemand nodig hebt in de buurt die mensen aanspreekt. E: Nu is het misschien toch wel interessant om nog even met Ralph te praten. Binnenkort komen er acht of negen gastvrouwen en heren, die gaan dan door de buurt lopen hier en met mensen praten, informatie geven en mensen aanspreken. Toen zei ik o dat is ook een beetje handhaving. Ik vind het wel grappig, maar het is altijd zoeken naar balans, want wanneer komt dan de betutteling. En ik geloof dat ze ook met gele hesjes gaan rondlopen, en dan denk ik o dat moet je dan dus niet doen. Dat weet ik niet zeker hoor, dat zei iemand anders weer.

91

En dan is het de vraag, waar ligt het vertrouwen dan, wanneer je met zo’n hesje duidelijk onderscheidend bent als instantie? E: Nou exact. Je zou dat dus eigenlijk moeten willen met mensen uit de buurt. Iemand die hier de buurt kent, de straten kent, de kinderen een beetje kent en kinderen zelf heeft. Dat zou veel waardevoller zijn.

Ik las iets over buurtvaders die hier waren, iets soortgelijks? E: Ja, maar ik weet niet meer precies waar dat was. Dat is best heel waardevol, zo gaat dat in Marokko ook he. Maar ja, ik weet niet wat er met dat project gebeurd is eigenlijk. En ik denk dan ook als je daar mensen vanuit de buurt aan vraagt en die zou je dan betalen om dat te doen, dat andere mensen dan weer… ja dat gaat dan toch weer om vertrouwen. Ik moet dan mijn buurvrouw weer terecht gaan wijzen. Daar zit dan ook een dingetje. Het zou dan niet om handhaving moeten gaan, maar om informatie. En niet top-down, maar meer bottom-up.

Ja, dat komt wel terug in het beleid dat dat zo zou moeten zijn, maar dat zijn maar woorden. E: Klopt, want ze willen dan toch heel vaak controle houden. De enige manier waarom Bart en ik dit nu kunnen doen, is omdat wij gevraagd zijn door Lola. En Lola is dus dat betrouwbare netwerk wat wijd verspreid is in de stad, met credentials en weet ik veel wat. Want wij hebben zelf ook jaren aan zo’n pand staan trekken, dat begrijp ik dan ook wel weer. Maar dan moet die balans… ik vind ook niet dat je eindeloos moet gaan hebben over de participatiemaatschappij en burgerinitiatieven ondersteunen, meer bottom-up en dan vervolgens alles in de kiem smoren, omdat je toch controle wil hebben. Dus het gaat uiteindelijk heel erg om vertrouwen, en om de mogelijkheid dat iets ook mag falen. De gemeente maakt zelf natuurlijk ook de ene fout na de ander, dus waarom zouden wij dat als burgers niet mogen. Dan heeft de gemeente natuurlijk weer iets, die moeten zich verantwoorden naar diezelfde burger toe.

En het geldplaatje... E: Hier komt dus gewoon weer een school, dat is wel zeker. Ik ben ook helemaal niet tegen geld, maar ik denk dat het heel erg gaat om de balans. Als je enige motivatie geld is, dat is niet goed. Er moet gewoon een goede combinatie van zijn.

En het kan spanningen alleen maar verergeren. E: Ja, juist. Ze hebben hier natuurlijk met al die nieuwbouwwoningen waar ook koop en vrije huursector en ik geloof dat er ook sociale huurwoningen tussen zit, wat heel goed is. Maar je merkt natuurlijk, dat is een soort van cold turkey erin geramd. En als je als oude bewoner hier dus al 30 jaar woont, dan denk je pardon. Het is natuurlijk een beetje gek. Dan ontstaan er ook weer spanningen

92