‘Developing in the spirit of North’: a qualitative research on residents’ place attachment and experiences with participating in the SASA area development Student: Tom Bijlholt (10431462) Supervisor / second reader: dr. Adeola Enigbokan / dr. Linda van de Kamp Program: Sociology (MSc) - University of Amsterdam Track: Social Problems and Social Policy Place of submission: Amsterdam Roeterseiland Campus Date: July 9th, 2018 Word count: 23,982 2 Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my second reader dr. Linda van de Kamp and my thesis supervisor dr, Adeola Enigbokan. Adeola, you’ve inspired me a lot this year. You let me think about the why and how of sociology and of all the courses I’ve followed, your classes made me laugh the most. That’s really an achievement! I would like to thank my fellow students as well, you were/are all so nice and willing to help. I would also want to express my sincere gratitude to the residents of North who made time for me, who conveyed their love for North, who took me on hours-long biking tours through North, who kept sending me interesting articles, who always approached me with a warm smile when I saw them again on the streets or at information meetings. I would also like to thank the beautiful humans surrounding me: Cleo, Lea/Henk, Cécile, Joris, Siebert, Yoren, Tania and Chiem and Bart. Wheely and Lea, thanks a lot for the extensive feedback. Jasper, the walks and conversations were very relaxing. Joris, Joe, David, Nicolas, the hours of chess were very much needed. Finally, I want to thank my dearest Lisa, Antoon and Yvon for their unconditional support and their even more unconditional love. I want to dedicate this thesis to my brother Stef. Although he’s not here anymore and I miss him intensely, I haven’t lost him. He will always inspire me. 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 3 Table of contents ...................................................................................................................... 4 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 6 Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 8 Theoretical framework .......................................................................................................... 12 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 17 Chapter I: A historical perspective on spatially engineering the SASA ........................... 19 1.1 The Sixhaven and surrounding areas ......................................................................... 19 1.2 Amsterdam North: a place ‘one wouldn’t want to be caught dead’ ........................ 21 1.3 Shifting from the current residents to the future place ............................................ 23 1.4 The Sixhaven and surrounding areas: the policies .................................................... 24 1.4.1 Koers 2025: densifying the city ............................................................................. 25 1.4.2 Densifying the SASA, where, what and why? ..................................................... 27 1.4.3 Infrastructural policies: the bridge across the North Holland canal ............... 29 1.5 Participation in the exploratory phase of area development ................................... 30 1.6 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 32 Chapter II: Place attachment in the densified city ............................................................. 34 2.1 Introduction: the taboos ‘in which people are living’ ............................................... 34 2.2 How densification policy conflicts with residents’ place attachment ..................... 35 2.3 Residents’ perceptions on how North is changing ..................................................... 41 2.3.1 Place attachment does not, by definition, equate resistance .............................. 41 2.3.2 The greater good versus the financial good ........................................................ 42 2.3.3 Residents’ perceptions on high-rise construction ............................................... 43 2.4 Combining methods to unveil place attachment: the PPGIS methodology ............ 46 2.5 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 47 Chapter III: Experiences of participating in the SASA area development: a damaged trust relationship between residents and municipality ..................................................... 49 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 49 3.2 Misrepresentation leading to distrust ......................................................................... 50 3.2.1 Misrepresenting the bridge across the NHC ....................................................... 50 3.2.2 Misrepresenting the IJplein: who is presenting? ................................................ 52 3.2.3 Misrepresenting the SASA.................................................................................... 53 3.2.4 The importance of ‘internal connectors’ ............................................................ 55 4 3. 3 Non-transparent communication and unclear frames and expectations ............... 56 3.3.1 Non-transparency .................................................................................................. 57 3.3.2 Ideas of plans? The importance of clear frames ................................................. 58 3.3.3 Non-corresponding perceptions and expectations of participation .................. 59 3.4 Accumulation of negative experiences leading to powerlessness and distrust ....... 61 3.5 Thinking from the perspective of the citizen ............................................................. 63 3.6 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 66 Conclusion/discussion ............................................................................................................ 67 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 70 Appendix ................................................................................................................................. 79 5 Summary In this study, I focus on two related themes: firstly, residents’ place attachment to their living environment – the Sixhaven and surrounding areas (SASA) in Amsterdam North –, which is being considered for redevelopment by the municipality of Amsterdam. Secondly, I focus on how residents experience the participation process regarding this redevelopment. Historically, Amsterdam North accommodates ‘the things Amsterdam did not want to have’: the gallows field, the polluting industries and the re-education villages (Asterdorp is the most famous example) (Oudenampsen, 2010). This played an important role in the stigma that North carried; a ‘anti-social’ place where ‘one would not want to be caught dead’ (Kok, 2016). At the end of the 20th century, however, a shift occurs in municipal policy. By reframing North from anti-social and industrial to creative and metropolitan, the focus shifted from emancipating the current population to attracting middle class families with higher incomes (Oudenampsen, 2010). In addition: the municipality of Amsterdam employs a densification policy, which encompasses designing residential complexes that can accommodate more residents per m2 compared to the current situation. Many of the potentially to be densified areas in the SASA are areas that are currently still green areas. Chapter II shows that this policy damages the ways in which residents are attached to the SASA. There is a generally shared worry that, as a result of the proposed developments, the SASA might lose its unique green, wide and quiet character. These environmental features, as well as the village-like housing stock, are exactly the aspects residents are attached to. These places let them ‘unwind’ and function in a stress-reducing manner, and create a certain calmness which they appreciate and which is mentioned as one of the key reasons why residents have moved to the SASA and why they are not considering relocation. Hence, it is important to take residents’ attachments to the SASA into account in the development of the SASA. In order for this to happen, the development process needs an adequate participation process. Chapter III proves a deeper insight into this participation process. Residents of the SASA have experienced the participation process as a process in which they were not taken seriously. Although they were allowed to say something, they felt to have little influence on the actual plans. This feeling of non-involvement contradicts the key aim of participation and damaged the trust relationship between the municipality and the residents of the SASA. I illustrate this by addressing five points. Firstly, feelings