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 Unpublished conference paper 5.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 Unpublished © Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat / Pi de Bruijn Highrise – Lowland Pi de Bruijn Ir, Master of Architecture Partner in de Architekten Cie,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.