National Report the Netherlands

Final National report from The Netherlands Crime Prevention Carousel Nicole Smits Tobias Woldendorp Final National report from The Netherlands Crime Prevention Carousel Amsterdam, 21 december 2006 Nicole Smits Tobias Woldendorp Met medewerking van: Eric Lugtmeijer DSP – groep BV Van Diemenstraat 374 1013 CR Amsterdam T: +31 (0)20 625 75 37 F: +31 (0)20 627 47 59 E: [email protected] W: www.dsp-groep.nl KvK: 33176766 A'dam Inhoudsopgave 1 Introduction - Description of the site 4 1.1 The Bijlmermeer 4 1.2 Description of the research area 7 1.3 Social fysical context of The Bijlmermeer 8 1.4 Method of research in The Netherlands 9 2 Answering the questionnaire 11 Introduction 11 2.1 Aims 11 2.2 Structure and Process 11 2.3 Changes in perception 12 2.4 Security and crime reduction 13 2.5 Design and Crime 16 2.6 Individual Participation 16 2.7 Participation of Police 16 2.8 Participation of residents 17 2.9 Acceptance 17 2.10 Success and Costs 17 2.11 Lessons learned during the renewal 18 2.12 Displacement 19 2.13 Costs 19 2.14 Outlook 19 3 Site visit reports 20 3.1 Introduction 20 3.2 What stroke you most in the area? 20 3.3 What lessons can your country learn from the visited project? 21 3.4 What advise would you give to the visited project? 22 3.5 Can you give references (good or bad examples) of projects in your own country? 23 4 Concluding observations 24 Appendix Appendix 1 Site visit reports 26 1.1 Site visit report from Germany 26 1.2 Site visit report from Hungary 32 1.3 Site visit report from Poland 33 1.4 Site visit report from the UK 39 1.5 Site visit report from the Netherlands 41 Appendix 2 Literature 45 Pagina 3 Final National report from The Netherlands DSP - groep 1 Introduction - Description of the site 1.1 The Bijlmermeer Perhaps internationally the most famous neighbourhood of The Netherlands. Famous for its spatial concept of 'functional town'. Famous, or better notori- ous, for its safety problems. And famous for the comprehensive renewal now carried out. The total area covers 2,210 hectares and with that it's the largest city district of Amsterdam. Source: Paul van Soomeren, Dream, nightmare and awakening, September 1995. Pagina 4 Final National report from The Netherlands DSP - groep The original Bijlmermeer For this project for the Crime Prevention Carousel we selected two small parts of it, in which we can study the physical renewal from start to the end: some buildings were renovated 10 years ago, in some the work is in progress and some still wait for the final plan. Pagina 5 Final National report from The Netherlands DSP - groep The two parts of the site in the north area D and F, south area H But physical renewal is just one part of the entire story. The example of the Bijlmermeer shows, that a comprehensive approach, in which physical renewal is combined with socio-economic renewal and management renewal, can be the only way to save a neighbourhood from downfall. Pagina 6 Final National report from The Netherlands DSP - groep 1.2 Description of the research area The research area consists of the characteristic high-rise in the D, F and H neighbourhood. Honeycomb shaped apartment blocks in a green setting: D-area D-area: the concierge room for the time being (left) and work in progress (right) F-area - Florijn: the new entrance (left) and (on the other side of the building) high rise combined with low rise H-area: after renewal Pagina 7 Final National report from The Netherlands DSP - groep The research area contains the following blocks of apartments: • Hakfort • Huigenbos • Hogevecht • Haag en Veld • Hofgeest • Hoogoord • Florijn (old high rise with new low rise) • Daalwijk • Dennenrode • Develstein The public space surrounding these buildings belongs to the research area as well. The area is mostly residential area, but here and there you find offices (commercial and non-commercial) and facilities such as a day care centre. 1.3 Social fysical context of The Bijlmermeer In December 1966 the foundation stone was laid for the Bijlmermeer. It was meant to be the 'functional town' for the future. Living, working, traffic and recreation were seperated. This was according to the concept of Le Cor- busier, developed during the Congrès Internationaux d´Architecture Mod- erne (CIAM) in 1928. In this theory, which was widely spread under modern- ist planners, the solution of the housing problem for large industrial cities had to be sought in the fields of space, light and green. After the second world war the theory of the modernists was widely set in to make a fresh start in the fifties and sixties of the last century. This new part of the city of Amsterdam consisted mostly of high-rise blocks in honeycomb pattern. In between the block were large green spaces with bicycle and pedestrian routes. A separate structure was made for the car routes: roads above ground level, leading to multi-storey car parks made finally a very functional new town where it would be pleasant to live. The blocks would have had the appearance of a vertical village. But sadly, the first signs of deterioration were apparent in the 1970s. Shortly after people moved in the first flats When the Bijlmermeer wasn't even finished yet, in Holland urbanisation started. This meant that low-rise houses were built in smaller towns around the big cities. The Bijlmermeer consisted mainly of high-rise dwellings, which were meant for middle-class families. They however chose to move to the low-rise areas and the demand for the higher blocks decreased rapidly. Most new residents in the Bijlmermeer were people living alone, families without children and single-parent families. Many came from the former Dutch colo- nies Surinam and the Antilles: in 1975 Surinam became independent and not everybody was trustfully with the new government of Desi Bouterse. At the same time the unemployment was high and there were many drugs problems and other social problems related to poverty. The levels of social and physical maintenance were too low for this high-rise area with a pretty problematic population. The number of vacant dwellings increased (15% in 1983 and 25% in 1985) and the residents turnover was very high (25%). Pagina 8 Final National report from The Netherlands DSP - groep Unsafety, pollution and financial problems for the housing associations were the result. The Bijlmermeer1 ended up in a negative spiral and got a very bad reputation. What went wrong? The original plan for the Bijlmermeer has been changed during the planning process, due to financial difficulties. This turned out to be the starting point for social problems, starting from physical conditions. For instance: • The number of dwellings on each elevator was increased from about 50 to about 100 (which turned into anonymous environments). • The inner streets didn't come on ground level, but on the first floor. In- stead on ground level storerooms were made, which caused an anonymous and closed facade. • The inner streets didn't gain the intended quality because dwellings were made on the sunny side (to gain more rent), which left the inner streets in the shade. • The shopping centres and other functions came many years later than the first residents and the number and quality level of the shops decreased because of less financial basis. The spaces under the levelled roads and parking decks degenerated without the functions. • It wasn't possible to give every building its own maintenance worker. 1.4 Method of research in The Netherlands When the Karuzela project was still in a quotation phase, DSP-groep made clear to the other participants that their role would be optimal when linking the social, criminal, spatial and physical aspects from all the sites and all the ideas for the sites. Because of the status of DSP-groep (a private commercial office instead of university or institution like the other partners in the AGIS-project) the contribution had to be filled in, from the beginning on, in a different way. So DSP-groep: • made the format for the site visit reports; • visited the five sites and wrote from the point of CPTED reports on all sites; • prepared a visit to the Netherlands for the other partners; • interviewed several people (see below) for the Dutch project and searched the literature; • prepared two workshops, in which the Karuzela partners exchanged experiences with all kinds of measures (Budapest, Berlin). Starting with a list of measures that were taken in all countries, every partner answered two questions: • Was that measure taken in your country? • If not: would that measure be a good or a bad idea for your country? The results of these workshops are presented in the main report. So DSP-groep focused on the exchange of knowledge and experiences between the partners. Foot-note 1 Not all flats were as bad: for instance the east part of Haag en Veld stayed pretty good, due to better maintenance by the owner. Pagina 9 Final National report from The Netherlands DSP - groep For the Dutch part of the project we chose a method that took less time. The data on the research area in Amsterdam were collected in several site visits (in 2005 and 2006) and by analysing many documents. Much has been writ- ten on the Bijlmermeer. To gain specific information during the summer of 2006 we interviewed a varied group of people: experts out of their profes- sion and experts out of experience as a resident.

Load more