Muhammad Hegazy Ali, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Social Sciences, ISSN 2249-9482, Impact Factor: 6.301, Volume 06 Issue 12, December 2016, Page 19-34 Contemporary Iconic Architecture in Amsterdam: Bilbao Effect hunting the City? Muhammad Hegazy Ali (Assistant Lecturer, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt) Abstract: Image of the city is what makes it distinctive among other, as well as the perception of people towards that place and how it remarks in their memories. Iconic architecture is among the major shapers of this image, where a remarkable, eye-catching design gives sharper identity for the place. The feature of being iconic can fit both old and modern buildings. However, the study focuses on contemporary iconic architecture that became a trend in the 1990’s, using technology and radical design forms by famous architects. Amsterdam has a dominant image of traditional architecture, an image that is replaced rapidly by international style buildings, and a few Iconic buildings. This replacement is promoted by policies encouraging creativity while urbanizing more and more lands around the city center. NEMO center is a good example of a successful iconic building as a touristic attraction and a landmark for the city center. However, compared to Guggenheim Bilbao, the city is still developing its contemporary Iconic architecture, where the Bilbao effect does not seem to be the first priority rather than redevelopment and gentrification of suburbanites within the city. Keywords: Iconic Architecture, Amsterdam, Bilbao Effect, City Image I. INTRODUCTION Problem Statement Among one of the major features giving the city its unique image, is architecture. Architecture creates the identity of the city in a way that makes it unique and identifiable from others. Therefore, prosperous societies always tend to build architectural landmarks to identify their cities and themselves, this is clearly seen in the spacious, gigantic cathedrals in European cities, as well as the ultra-complicated ornaments in Gothic architecture. These types of architecture are meant to be “Iconic”, different from the other average buildings of the city, as their function exceeds the normal physical activities (residence, commerce) to a surreal role expressing the identity of the city, and -of course- the values of local society. However, the “Iconic Architecture” meant in this study is not the old architectural marvels of the cities, as these buildings were breakthroughs only in their time (in terms of technology), but now they are more recognized for their historical and cultural originality. In contrast, the study focus on the Iconic architecture as a new trend of postmodern architecture where the uniqueness of these buildings comes from their ultra-modernity, the technology used to build them, the novelty and aesthetic sensation for the form of the building and how much the building express the values and qualities of its physical and nonphysical environments. Examples of Iconic Architecture can be found in almost all world cities, such as Dubai (Burj Khalifa, Palm Islands), London (Swiss Re-Tower, Shard tower, London Eye) and Sydney (Opera Sydney, Harbor Bridge) and Singapore (Bay South Garden, Marine Bay). Modern Iconic architecture promotes the city image and attracts more tourists to come and see these technological and aesthetic marvels, a phenomenon that is often known as “Bilbao effect”. However, some cities (especially in Europe) are resisting this trend, refusing to change their face. For example, Paris has adopted many urban policies to control shapes and heights of the buildings in the city, in order to preserve the superiority and uniqueness of the Eiffel tower, which was built in 1889 (too old to be modern iconic). Another example is Amsterdam, where the dominant architectural image is still the traditional colonial brick buildings, with an increasing number of “international style” systematic glass buildings, and very little modern iconic architecture. Significance The significance of this study lies in its novel approach to criticize the image of Amsterdam city regarding architecture, and the apparent domination of the modern buildings invading the classic character of the city. The study responds to many questions about the future of Amsterdam, and people’s reaction to this change. In addition, the study sets up a holistic comparative study on contemporary iconic buildings within Amsterdam, uncovering the similarity pattern behind being iconic, and demonstrates whether the city is experiencing a significant Bilbao effect or not. http://indusedu.org Page 19 Muhammad Hegazy Ali, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Social Sciences, ISSN 2249-9482, Impact Factor: 6.301, Volume 06 Issue 12, December 2016, Page 19-34 Question and Sub-issues The main question of this study: “To what extend is the trend of Modern Iconic Architecture changing the face of Amsterdam?” this question focuses on the effects of “Iconic Architecture” phenomenon on Amsterdam, and if the city’s municipality and residents promote this trend or resisting it. Moreover, a number of sub issues are discussed and investigated; including exploring the architectural image of Amsterdam, examples of modern iconic architecture, comparing the “NEMO” museum to Guggenheim museum in Bilbao as both of them plays a vital role in changing the urban image of the city. Methodology The methodology of this study is generally a deductive quantitative, includes three themes; the first part will discuss the image of the city and Iconic architecture in terms of definitions, approaches, features and the mutual connections between them, by reviewing and analysis of related literature. The second part will explore the architectural image of Amsterdam in general, reviewing the main three types of buildings (Traditional, international style, modern iconic), then examples of the modern iconic architecture in Amsterdam will be reviewed to conclude features and urban policies behind their creation. Fieldwork and site visits will be the main source of data, as well as related literature and governmental reports. The third part set up a comparative study between “Nemo” building in Amsterdam and Guggenheim museum in Bilbao, Spain. The comparison will focus on the historical approaches, functions, policies and effects of the buildings on both cities. Limitations of the study The main limitations can be expressed as follows: First, the sample size for the comparative study regarding iconic buildings in Amsterdam is limited to 11, the criteria of choosing what is more “iconic” than the other depends mainly on the availability to visit, and its unorthodox shape. However, the discussion of other relevant factors is beyond the scope of this paper. Secondly, the study was geographically limited to the city of Amsterdam. As a result, the evaluation and analysis of Guggenheim Bilbao relies on literature analysis and available data, but not on field visits or face-to-face inspection. Image of the City and Iconic Architecture In his book “The image of the city”, Kevin Lynch stated that structuring and identifying the environment is a major ability among all mobile animals, where a set of indicators are used, such as the visual sensation of color, shape, motion, light as well as other senses such as smell, sound, and touch. Clear city image enables one to move easily and quickly, and the more vivid and integrated is the physical setting, the sharper is the image of the city. (Lynch, 1960, pp. 3-4) In fact, the image of the city is its character, unique features, as well as the perception of observers towards it. It can be defined as “the extent to which a person can be recognize or recall a place as being distinct from other places” (Muge Riza, 2011, p. 294). This image, more like the face of the city, can be formed according to many aspects, some are natural (landscape, topography, climate), where the others are man-made (Built environment, Architecture, Hardscape), as well as the nonphysical features such as culture and traditions. Cities are recognized and have their own identity for many reasons, physical and nonphysical. For example, traditions of local people in Delhy, international events in Cannes, European institutions in Brussels, and dazzling nature of Morondava (Madagascar) (see Figure and Figure1). However, architecture is one of the most effective factors that form the image of the city, specially the iconic architecture. Figure1.1 Institutional building in Figure1.2 Morondava nature. Brussels. Source: (Author) Source: (Vassen, 2010) Iconic architecture can be defined as those types of buildings that are well known inside the profession, as role models for some supremacy in technology, aesthetic values, and form. This fame always spread among the non-professionals too, as recognition of building uniqueness and aesthetics, and sometimes for historical value. Sklair states that the building as an icon is not a nonsense celebrity, but for “processing specific symbolic/aesthetic qualities, qualities that are the subject of considerable debate within the recent rise of blogosphere, debate to which the general public actively contributes” (Sklair, 2010). http://indusedu.org Page 20 Muhammad Hegazy Ali, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Social Sciences, ISSN 2249-9482, Impact Factor: 6.301, Volume 06 Issue 12, December 2016, Page 19-34 In general, Iconic buildings are not limited by time. Giza pyramids