Highrise – Lowland

ctbuh.org/papers

Title: Highrise – Lowland

Author: Pi de Bruijn, Partner, de Architekten Cie

Subjects: Building Case Study Urban Design

Keywords: Urban Habitat Verticality

Publication Date: 2004

Original Publication: CTBUH 2004 Seoul Conference

Paper Type: 1. Book chapter/Part chapter 2. Journal paper 3. Conference proceeding 4. Unpublished conference paper 5. Magazine article 6. Unpublished

Pi de Bruijn

Ir, Master of Architecture Partner in de Architekten Cie, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Abstract High-rise in the Netherlands, lowland par excellence, could there be a greater contrast? In a country dominated by water and often by low roofs of cloud, high-rise construction is almost by definition a Statement. Perhaps this is the reason why it has been such a controversial topic for so long, with supporters and opponents assailing one another with contrasting ideas on urban development and urbanism. Particularly in historical settings, these ‘new icons’ were long regarded as an erosion of our historical legacy, as big- business megalomania. Such a style does not harmonize with this cosy, homely country, it was maintained, with its consultative structures and penchant for regulation. Moreover, high-rise construction hardly ever took place anyway because there were infinitely more opportunities for opponents to apply delaying tactics than there were for proponents to deploy means of acceleration, and postponement soon meant abandonment. Nevertheless, a turning point now seems to have been reached. Everyone is falling over one another to allow architectonic climaxes determine the new urban identity. Could it be more inconsistent? In order to discover the origins of the almost emotional resistance to high-rise construction and why attitudes have changed, we shall first examine the physical conditions and the socio-economic context of the Netherlands. We shall subsequently compare the framework of high-rise construction in two contrasting cities: the world port of Rotterdam, which lost its historical heart during a bombardment in the Second World War, and the capital Amsterdam, whose historical centre as a whole has the status of a monument.

Keywords: Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Zuidas, Highrise

1. Introduction consensus model that means important decisions can High-rise construction, with its dominant ego, is only be executed if they have adequately broad support difficult to combine with the vulnerability of a historic – gives opponents every opportunity to delay plans for environment. Even if one chooses to completely high-rises or to truncate them to the point that they disregard that context, the antagonism remains lose their essence. Given such complex, touchy tangibly present. Inversely, historic cities have an circumstances, it is a wonder any interesting high-rises enormous impact on high-rise construction, in terms of have been built in the Netherlands at all! Nevertheless, both the height and shape of buildings and how they some have been. are incorporated into urban planning. Besides the precarious relationship between buildings and their context, soil conditions play a key role in the Netherlands, as well. The most significant historic cities of the Netherlands are situated in a waterlogged area and consequently have their foundations in a layer of sand some 20 metres down. Advanced technologies make it possible to lay a stable foundation without causing damage to the adjacent older buildings, but that comes at a price. More of a concern is the resistance bordering on repugnance that tall buildings have been met with in the Netherlands until recently, particularly in historic areas. The Dutch love of meetings, regulations, Fig.G1.GM.C. Escher, Day & Night. procedures and red tape, and its “poldercultuur” – a

Contact Author: Pi de Bruijn, partner in de Architekten Cie., Amsterdam, Keizersgracht 126, P.O. Box 576, NL_1000 AN The Netherlands. Tel: +31 20 5309 300 Fax: +31 20 5309 399 e-mail: [email protected]

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 605 The Netherlands - Delta Land In the early seventeenth century, the economic A brief sketch of the physical conditions of this emphasis shifted seawards: maritime shipping brought country so utterly dominated by water will aid a better spices and raw materials from all corners of the world grasp of the circumstances. and transformed Amsterdam into a rich mercantile city. The Netherlands is a river delta shaped by The commoners had the money and ran the show, interminable expanses of water, the ocean, lakes and without the meddling of the nobles, who, failing land- rivers that flooded at regular times. Water made up the ownership, had not gained a foothold, or the church, better part of the provinces of Holland, Zeeland and which was splintered into all manner of sectarian Friesland. Would it actually be more accurate to call it factions. Schama (1987) accurately portrays the water with islands in it instead of land? abstemiousness of these Calvinistic merchants ashamed of their wealth. The other side of the story is that there was not much distance separating those in power and the common people. Those less well off profited from the economic boom as well. Even servants could buy shares in the VOC.

Fig.G2. Flood of 1953.

This portion of the Netherlands was deemed impassable. The Romans came as far as the Rhine, the Church reached Utrecht. Even the German Kaiser could not manage to control that wet mess, a morass where any old vassal who came along could set up shop for himself. A land of bridge-builders Self-reliance and perseverance were rewarded with independence. As early as the thirteenth century, dykes were built to control the water; land was pumped dry Fig. 3. The Burgher of Delft and His Daughter, by Jan Steen with windmills to create polders. The sea was beaten back and where water and roads intersected, tolls were Translated into the implications for the landscape, charged, goods were transferred, people stopped and the age-old ‘waterscape’ continued to be dominated by did business. Small towns that differed little in terms church spires and windmills, symbols of decentralised of size and power sprung up there. Even in the early rule and the power of action. Until well into the days, structures had to be built on foundations because twentieth century, the last monument to the Power of of the swampy soil conditions in these regions. the Church, the 112-metre Dom Tower (1381) of The battle against the water laid the groundwork for Utrecht, remained the standard against which Dutch solidarity. The water was transformed from a threat to high-rises were judged. a mode of transport, the basis of a flourishing The horizontality that characterises the landscape exchange of goods. Produce auctions emerged very has its roots in the mentality of the citizenry. The early on, and there was even a futures market. This Netherlands was very early to have a Republic, an way, the natural conditions were capitalised upon as indirect form of democracy. Granted, there was no economic resources, via the rivers to the hinterland universal suffrage, but the people had considerable (Germany) and later via the sea. The parallel rapid political influence. The federated association of the development of advanced technologies such as United Provinces had little in the way of hierarchical windmills, water management, foundations and structure. Status was not important, but money was: a maritime technology created the conditions for the practical survival mentality. The constant threat of economy and culture to bloom.

606GGGCTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea water created an early form of collective responsibility Van Eesteren gave thought to densities and greenery. to keep the land dry, a bottom-up development. Room was made for greenery by stacking – medium- rise buildings – still horizontal. This systematic Horizontal high-rise analysis gave rise to the separation of functions and The horizontal mentality and swampy soil routing of traffic flows, resulting in fewer traffic conditions did not create a naturally fertile soil for accidents but also diminished social safety because of high-rise construction. Nor was there a need, the unclear arrangement of the area. economically speaking, to build tall buildings. The Underlying Van Eesteren’s analytical urban Netherlands may indeed have many historic centres, planning, which reacted against the arbitrary nature of but no real metropolis. Add to that the small scale, the aesthetic urban construction, was a socialistic ideology power of the little man and his rejection of everything that wanted the best for everybody: everyone was out of the ordinary, the wariness for status – these are equal and nobody was to have more than anyone else. all age-old cultural ingredients that have stood in the This led to egalitarian urban planning, culminating in way of a flourishing high-rise culture. Horizontalism the Bijlmermeer district, a utopian construction that seems rooted in Dutch genes. High-rises are the also rang the death knell for modernistic urban antithesis to that. They were taboo, a feeling later planning in the Netherlands. Not designed by him fuelled by negative experiences. personally but in his style, the Bijlmer succumbed to Grand master architect Berlage was still in a flat the egalitarian, over-idealised image of man, the overly phase circa 1920. The tallest building in his plan for schematised design, the extreme uniformity, the southern district of Amsterdam, with 12 storeys insufficient differentiation and artificially, exaggerated (36 m), was already dubbed ‘the skyscraper’. It was separation of functions. People are not all the same. not until the emergence of modernism that the first Society was not makeable. wave of high-rise construction swept over the The frantic construction that took over post-war Netherlands. It was a tidal wave, as the housing Netherlands in a heroic battle against the housing shortage made it necessary for construction to be shortage resulted in large-scale urban expansion carried out at a quick pace. All over the Netherlands, throughout the country. Building quickly and modernistic urban expansions with lots of greenery inexpensively was more important than quality. The shot up like mushrooms. One of the pioneers of enormous quantities of horizontally orientated modernism was Van Eesteren, city architect and medium-rise buildings gave high-rise construction a initiator of the Amsterdam Town Planning bad name that was difficult to shake off. High-rise had Commission. Together with Le Corbusier, he belonged connotations of monotony, without the exciting buzz to the founders of the CIAM (International Congresses of the city or the free space of the countryside. of Architecture). Van Eesteren developed urban The second clash between the horizontal mentality planning as a discipline. and high-rise plans occurred in the turbulent seventies. Historic city centres were becoming impoverished and threatened with demolition. Business speculators bought buildings in which to house offices. Heated debates escalated into fights whose repercussions could long be felt. There was great resistance on ideological grounds against high-rise housing as well. It was considered inhuman, against human nature. This was the period of extensive public participation procedures that greatly empowered opponents of any plan whatsoever. Just a few opponents, or even professional troublemakers, could delay a project to no end.

Fig. 4. Bijlmermeer, (1973) He postulated that the design was not all-important, as it continued to be for Berlage who created aesthetic urban designs in the tradition of the Viennese Camillo Sitte, but rather the research that goes into it beforehand. Functional analysis: What are you accommodating and where are you accommodating it? Process analysis, too. Who does what when? What is taking place in the city and where are the bottlenecks? Fig. 5. Demonstrations against demolition in the city centre

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 607 Until the late eighties, a wide-spread aversion to fundamentally new urban plan? The latter won out, in high-rise construction, fuelled by those two bad a sort of mixed CIAM tradition with a lot of slabs in experiences and a more general distrust of everything the centre. Unfortunately, Rotterdam could not that stands out, put a damper on the development of immediately benefit from the opportunities for renewal skyscrapers in the Netherlands. The political ideology offered by this tabula rasa. The first priority was to fill of social democracy, with its emphasis on the small that traumatic hole and solve the housing shortage – scale, was in line with public opinion. hard work, in other words. The political shift has had a noticeable effect on Rotterdam. A new élan emerged in urban planning, with room for creativity and architectonic aesthetics. The Beursplein Square with the Schielandtoren Towers was the nineties answer to the slabs of Lijnbaan. Moving the harbours to the coast freed up a lot of space around the river and the large scale demanded a fitting answer. The Kop van Zuid dockland regeneration project was developed, moving the River Meuse from the border of the centre to the centre itself, crowned by the Erasmus Bridge. The first complex on the Kop van Zuid, De Landtong (tongue of land), may not have been high-rises, but in one fell swoop defined the area as an urban environment, setting the standard for the area yet to be built. Now there is a sea of high-rises along the Meuse, on the Kop van Zuid and in the centre, as well as along the Weena. Rotterdam’s handicap became its asset. Fig. 6. Rotterdam after the bombardment ‘Manhattan on the Meuse’: autonomous, aesthetic architecture. Finally, Rotterdammers can be proud of their city again. Something is happening here that big Then suddenly, in the early nineties, everyone had rival Amsterdam cannot easily imitate. had enough of the labyrinth of rules that no one could make heads or tails of, the endless procedures that Amsterdam has it … neutered every gutsy idea and turned it into unimaginative mediocrity, the paternalism and good intentions. Perhaps we have globalisation and the Internet to thank. After all, the Internet generation literally has the world in the palm of its hand, via laptops and mobile phones. Everything is nearby and everything is fast. Differences of opinion are fought out on-line, not on the barricades. Politically, this has meant a shift to a left-liberal coalition that may contain more contradictions, but which, especially in its early stages, has made room for new approaches, brave ideas, moxie and vision. Deregulation, market forces and public-private partnership have become the new catchphrases. Municipal governments have let go of the reins of urban planning, and the door has opened to new initiatives, mixed functions, new urbanism and, indivisibly connected with it: high-rises. Fig. 7. Rotterdam: Manhattan on the Meuse

Manhattan on the Meuse It was a completely different story in Amsterdam. In Now that we have come to this point in the story, we this city plagued by swampy soil conditions, the would like to zoom in on two key Dutch cities: biggest obstacle to high-rise construction has been the Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Many similarities and just historic centre, declared a monument in its entirety. as many differences. The world port was a true Amsterdam is a water city. This relationship with working city. The mentality was slightly less anti- water is symbolised by the first major urban planning hierarchical than it was in Amsterdam, as the port step in the growth of the city, the damming of the barons always had power. The bombardment in WW II River Amstel in the 13th century. Around 1600, forced the city to make some choices: should the old Amsterdam became an international centre of trade, city plan be replicated or should we proceed from a science and culture, thanks to shipping, thanks to water,

608GGGCTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea and no thanks to the soil conditions, the existing peat canals, bog being unsuitable for intensive construction. for which

Fig. 9. Kalver Tower, Amsterdam

Fig. 9. Rembrandtower, Amsterdam

Amsterdam has its image and its nickname as the ‘Venice of the North’ to thank.

The 17th-century skyline is still the city’s logo. The project managers from that century pulled off a great feat Fig. 8. Amsterdam centre in 2004 of city marketing, in the most modern sense of the term. What was primary infrastructure in the Golden Age, the That Amsterdam did not become a high-rise city ring of canals, is now used for leisure boating, making it like Rotterdam, which advertises itself as ‘Manhattan one of the top tourist attractions. But even after the on the Meuse’, has its roots in the 17th century. Since construction of the canals, water has remained a key that time, the largest portion of the city has consisted instrument structuring urban plans. Berlage devoted of buildings with four storeys plus a roof, a total of great attention to it in 1913, with an impressive use of some 15 metres high. High structures were water in a central location in Zuid (the southern district occasionally built in the city, primarily for church bell of Amsterdam). He also used the tower motif to towers. In the period from 1606 to 1622, the accentuate Victorieplein Square, with his ‘Skyscraper’. Amsterdam skyline gained eight towers, with the But this is just incidental high-rise construction. Westertoren Tower being added in 1638. The Otherwise, his plan still followed the traditional height ‘pancake’ was given a crown of towers. The famous of the city centre. ring of canals was also built at this time: the western As outlined above, Van Eesteren rang in a new era part starting in 1612, the southern and eastern parts of socialistic orchestration. Van Eesteren dominated after 1658. Within a span of 80 years, the city had been the Town Planning Commission until his death. He given a completely new skyline and characteristic was the guru of Amsterdam. The urban expansion layout. plans of his General Extension Plan of 1934 were All designed by Hendrik de Keyser, the towers still executed at a rapid pace after the war because of the serve as a reference for new high-rise projects in the housing shortage. centre of Amsterdam. The Kalvertoren Tower, for The political shift of the early nineties has also example, had to be made of glass for the sake of affected Amsterdam. The demonstrations around high- transparency and was not to exceed the height of the rise plans in the city centre grew silent and suddenly, Munttoren Tower. Very recent plan development along before anyone noticed, Rembrandtoren Tower (135 m) the southern bank of the river IJ is being assessed on was there. This was part of three towers around Amstel the basis of the height of the seventeenth-century Station, lovingly called ‘Manhattan’. This well- towers. The protected cityscape of Amsterdam, an area intentioned exaggeration is a clear indication that the roughly the size that Amsterdam occupied in the late average Amsterdammer still compares everything to 17th century, may not be besmirched by external the 15-meter building height to which they have factors. The seventeenth-century city silhouette is become so accustomed, and also that the scepticism sacred. And of course the same applies to the ring of

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 609 towards high-rise construction has disappeared like the first time. It is a structural choice to create a high- snow in summer. rise city in density and building height, although the proximity of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol means its Whereas the city of the seventeenth century could height is not unlimited. be recognised by its towers in the centre, now Amsterdam is marked by high-rises around the periphery: Sloterdijk, Amsterdam Zuidoost (south- east) and the Zuidas. There are also high-rises on the banks of the IJ, but they are subject to strict rules regarding sight lines and building heights because of their proximity to the centre. Amsterdam is undergoing what might be called a relief inversion, from a pancake with some high-rise accents in the centre to a sort of

Fig. 12. Zuidas Area

Zuidas European Space The Zuidas is an area between the Zuid district (Berlage, 1917) and Buitenveldert district (Van Eesteren, 1935). This traffic hub for local, regional and international public transport, motorway and the future Fig. 10. The Whale, Amsterdam high-speed train near the centre of Amsterdam and bowl formed by a circle of high-rises around the A10 Amsterdam Airport Schiphol is to be a new hyper city bypass. urban hub. High-rise construction in Amsterdam? What are we The Zuidas is not just the latest of so many actually talking about? The banks of the IJ still follow expansions of Amsterdam, but is to become a new the frame of reference of the city centre, Java island is urban centre, parallel to the old city core. Amsterdam a new interpretation of the ring of canals. Yet is expanding its centre along the Zuidas. High-rise Amsterdam is also changing. While high-rises on the construction is being used here as the driver for a 21st- banks of the IJ and along Amstel Station used to be century centre environment. reserved to an incidental accent and at Sloterdijk and To make space for a new centre area seamlessly the south-eastern districts was allowed to roam freely, connected to the two adjacent city sections, the entire high-rise construction has actually been included in the infrastructure is being submerged, yielding about one structure plan since 2003 (Amsterdam DRO, 2003). million square metres. Mahler 4 is part of the centre zone of the Zuidas. Here is where the first In the new Zuidas development area, the latest scion concentrated high-rise complex is to be constructed. on the stem, high-rise construction is the guideline for The building height will taper down towards the edges.

610GGGCTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

Fig. 11. Acanthus, Amsterdam Zuidoost connected with work functions. The mixture of functions can thus be carried through to the level of the buildings. Another appealing point besides the metropolitan milieu is the green structure. The Zuidas connects two large green areas via green zones that are interwoven into the urban planning pattern. Despite the high density, the area has an abundance of parks and the public space is of a high quality. Green is even being incorporated into the high-rises: roof areas are green by definition, a type of vertical green structure. And water is also important, of course, a given that has also been incorporated into the architecture. In Amsterdam, the Zuidas is the most systematic Fig. 13. Mahler 4, Zuidas, Amsterdam regional development, an example of comprehensive planning. In that sense it harks back to the ambitious In terms of planning, the towers are to be divided in formula of wanting to analyse an area in a completely a checkerboard pattern to maintain optimum sight lines plan-based way – what Van Eesteren did in way, but and sunlight. The volume is divided into three layers, with new ingredients. The separation of functions has focusing on three different levels of scale: blocks with been replaced by an emphasis on combining those facilities in the plinth on the bottom, open blocks with functions whenever possible. visible courts on top of that, and towers on top of that. A second difference with Van Eesteren is that the To achieve the aim of an urban centre environment paternalism has been left behind. Public-private with a unique metropolitan character, equal parts of partnerships have taken the place of socialistic housing and working spaces are essential. The 50/50 orchestration. What have we found? This type of ratio between housing/working in the Amsterdam development turns out to be highly self-regulating. centre is being used as a reference. The station also plays a crucial role as a super transfer machine: it Conclusion generates continuous movement, diversity and The Netherlands is characterised by horizontality, in intensity, and ensures the circulation of different types both its physical conditions and in a social sense: the of people. On the other hand, the presence of many consensus model, broad consultation, a generalised types of permanent activities should ensure that the polder model. This is not always very conducive to Zuidas appeals to a broad range of people. That is why rapid decision-making. High-rise construction is a lot of room will be created for facilities besides diametrically opposed to this horizontality; it is a offices and homes: shops, galleries, small-scale statement. Perceived as an expression of status, high- commercial services, night life, museums and theatres. rises were not received enthusiastically at first in a That is necessary for a busy, sociable urban country where no one is supposed to stand out. The environment and also yields a sustainable urban whole: consensus model and procedure-loving culture made safer socially, transport systems more evenly used and high-rise construction difficult to achieve when facilities thriving better. The smell and noise, former opposed. We now have a departure from social reasons to separate living and working, are no longer orchestration in favour of market forces, and high-rise construction has matured. In the freedom offered by its context, Rotterdam has embraced high-rise construction as autonomous architecture, icons of a new urban heart: ‘Manhattan on the Meuse’. Amsterdam has crawled out from under the yoke of its historic heritage, is no longer fixated on it and is no longer allowing it to hold the city back. The historic city centre has taken its place as a monument and high-rises also have their place, at specifically selected locations, always with respect for the existing city core as the driver of history. Fully in line with Amsterdam’s urban planning development – and in contrast to Rotterdam’s – the most prestigious high-rises are not being plunked down as autonomous architecture, but carefully incorporated into a well-conceived urban plan with the intention of claiming a place for Amsterdam as a European Space.

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 611

Fig. 14. Amsterdam Symphony, Zuidas 7) Vollers, K. (2001) Twist & Build, Rotterdam, 2001 Acknowledgements 8) Wagenaar, C. (1992) Welvaartsstad in wording: de Thanks to Allard Jolles of the DRO Spatial Wederopbouw van Rotterdam 1940-1952, Rotterdam, Planning Department of Amsterdam for his 1992 [The Reconstruction of Rotterdam] contribution on the historic development of Amsterdam

Fig. 15. Twisted building; Max Tower; European Central Bank

References 1) Amsterdam, DRO [Spatial Planning Department] (2003) Structuurplan Amsterdam [Amsterdam Structure Plan] 2) Amsterdam, DRO [Spatial Planning Department] and De Bruijn, P. (2004) Visie Zuidas [Strategic vision on Zuidas] 3) Berlage, H.P. (1917) Uitbreidingsplan voor Amsterdam Zuid [Extension Plan for Amsterdam Zuid], Amsterdam, 1917 4) Deben, L. and W. Salet (eds) (2004) Cultural Heritage and the Future of the Historic Inner City of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 2004 5) Eesteren, C. van (1935) Het Algemeen Uitbreidingsplan van Amsterdam [General Extension Plan], Amsterdam, 1935 6) Schama, S. (1987) The Embarrassment of Riches, London, 1987.

612GGGCTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea