Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin

1
Urban nodes of soft infrastructure
in Amsterdam and Berlin
How bottom-up initiatives facilitate and stimulate
vital and viable cities
New Urban Language Conference
June 25 - TU Delft

Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | info@janssen-johann.euJanssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | info@janssen-johann.eu
0. Structure:
1) Relevance: Academic and public demand for vital and viable
neighborhoods and cities, adapted to the needs of (local)
residents, developed by and with democratic involvement of the
civic society and inhabitants
2) Research subject: Urban nodes of soft Infrastructure in
Amsterdam and Berlin
3) Case Studies: Park Frankendeal (AMS) and ExRotaprint
(BER)
- Features, characteristics, functions and effects
- Development process: actors, obstacles and barriers
4) Findings and Discussion: Characteristics, consequences and
limits of civic driven urban development in European cities
2

Academic and public demand for vital and
viable neighborhoods and cities, adapted
to the needs of (local) residents,
developed by and with democratic
involvement of the civic society and
inhabitants
1. Relevance:
3

Social, architectural and urban problems in older, pré and
postwar (modernistic) neighborhoods, lack of spatial and
social quality of new cities and new towns
Banne Buiksloot Amsterdam © Janssen &
Johann
Transvaalbuurt Amsterdam © Janssen &
Johann
IJburg Amsterdam © Janssen & Johann
4

SfA Open Call (2010)
Finding new answers and research on
innovative urban arrangements and
strategies that could respond to current and
future economic and social issues, trends
and conditions concerning the urban and
social program of the city
5

SfA Open Call (2010)
Background (findings):
- A (growing) gap between the concerns and policies of urban
planners and (local) authorities and the societal challenges and
issues in the field of education, healthcare, welfare, sports, arts
and culture, leisure, transportation and public space for meeting.
- Lack of involvement of local social and civic organizations and
citizens in urban planning and development and supply of local
community services and facilities.
- Lacking funds (partly due to the financial crises of 2008) with
traditional parties responsible for urban development and a
strong social and communal infrastructure.
6

The phenomenon of the informal city and organic
(DIY) planning attracts more and more attention
from the urban and spatial academic research
community and urban research literature
7

Definition:
1) Urban nodes of soft infrastructure are local, community
oriented urban initiatives that manifest themselves in unused
locations and spaces, like wastelands, released plots, vacant
offices, school buildings and abandoned factories.
2) On a structural basis they offer a broad and coherent mix of
cultural, economic, recreational and social facilities, functions
and services to the local neighborhood and broader city.
3) Attracted by their often appealing appearance and offered
facilities and functions, local residents, city dwellers, tourists
and other groups come to these places, to meet, work,
recreate and make use of the offered facilities and services.

Examples:
ExRotaprint (BER): Former printing machine factory in a monumental (modernistic) complex which
now contain studios, offices, craft businesses, childcare, training centers, a neighborhood canteen, a
conference and debate space and several community projects
HC AthenA (AMS): New clubhouse from a large, young hockey club, in which the building contains
a rehabilitation and physiotherapy practice, a joint gym, club canteen, a homework school, sports
BSO, a Cancer Care Center and open house for elderly and cancer patients
Timorplein complex (AMS): Large former (historical) school complex that now houses a hostel,
an educational and conference organization, craft businesses, offices for creatives, a movie theater
and restaurants with art and culture stage and large terrace and public playground
Park Frankendael (AMS): Large ecological park with several particular historical gardens, plenty of
space for water (storage), several (ecological) playgrounds, scouting and childcare organizations and
two special hospitality establishments with fidelity capability, focus on art & culture, et cetera
……… ……
ufaFabrik (BER): A large former film studio site with art and culture stage, catering, hotel,
conference center, sports and games facilities, a petting zoo, crafts, shopping, festivals, community
center and various forms of renewable energy
Brotfabrik (BER): The Brotfabrik is a cinema-cum-art and cultural center in an old, converted and
extended baker shop / bakery, with various community events and a neighborhood cafe, a beer
garden and a large terrace on the self-designed square in front of the door

1) What are the (specific) features and characteristics of bottom-
up originated and developed Urban nodes of soft
infrastructure?
2) How do these urban nodes emerge, develop and work and
what drives and motivates their initiators?
3) Which stakeholders (actors) are closely involved in the
genesis, functioning and success of these vital urban nodes?
4) What are the benefits of these bottom-up Urban nodes and
what is their impact on the viability and vitality of the district,
neighborhood, or city as a whole?
5) What sort of problems are encountered when setting up and
operating bottom-up (Urban) nodes and what sort of
resistance and obstacles are met?
Research Questions:

Researched nodes in Amsterdam

Researched nodes in Berlin

3. Case study (detailed) examples:
Park Frankendael (Amsterdam - Oost)
ExRotaprint (Berlin - Wedding)
- Features, characteristics, functions and
effects
- Development process: actors, obstacles
and barriers

Park Frankendael (Amsterdam - Oost)

Park Frankendael: Functions and facilities
Kunst- en cultuurgebouw
Moes- en kruidentuin
Hondenuitlaatzone
Waterberging
Cultureel erfgoed
Ecologische hoofdzone
Rococo tuin
Volkstuinencomplex
Schoolwerktuinen

Park Frankendael: Development process

Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | info@janssen-johann.eu
20
Idea and
initiation phase
Exploitation and
(regular) operation phase
Realization phase
Concept, design, finance
and acceptance phase
Neighbor-
hood, civil
society
Users
Real estate
parties
Financiers
Politics
Media
Government
admini-
stration
Initiators
Park Frankendael: Actor involvement / activity

Leisure activities and facilities
Employment and local economy
Livability neighborhood
Local real-estate value
Imago & popularity
Art & cultural activities
Park Frankendael: Benefits and revenues
Health & wellbeing
Environment and ecology

Park Frankendael: Benefits and revenues
=> Employment (direct and induced): about 45 fte
=> Induced tax revenues: about 1 million euro per annum
=> Long term social, ecological and economic value: about 45 million euro
=> uplift in real-estate value (neighborhood): more then 100 million euro
=> Significant positive effects on physical and mental health and wellbeing of visitors
=> Significant positive effects on wellbeing and physical health of inhabitants of East Amsterdam
=> Significant positive effects on the livability of surrounding neighborhoods
=> Ranks fifth in most popular parks of Amsterdam
=> Yearly around 250.000 visitors
=> Amongst the highest valued parks of Amsterdam
=> Several popular catering places
=> Several popular playgrounds
=> Culture and heritage centre en historical monuments
=> Several extraordinary (historical) gardens and wandering areas
=> Important role as storage area and bufferzone for water (flood) and rain
=> Part of the ecological main structure of Amsterdam, nesting of several protected birds
=> Important function in lowering high city temperatures and the level of particulates

ExRotaprint (Berlin - Wedding)

ExRotaprint: Functions and facilities

ExRotaprint: Development process

Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | info@janssen-johann.eu
26
ExRotaprint: Actor involvement / activity
Idea and
initiation phase
Exploitation and
(regular) operation phase
Realization phase
Concept, design, finance
and acceptance phase
Neighbor-
hood, civil
society
Users
Real estate
parties
Financiers
Politics
Media
Government
admini-
stration
Initiators

Local economy
Employment (direct and indirect)
Livability neighborhood
Local real-estate value
Imago & popularity
Art & cultural activities
ExRotaprint: Benefits and revenues
Health & wellbeing
Emancipation and empowerment

ExRotaprint: Benefits and revenues
=> Employment (direct and induced: artists, entrepreneurs, et cetera): about 304 fte
=> Direct and induced tax revenues: about 3,4 million euro per annum
=> Long term social, ecological and economic value of ExRotaprint: tens of millions (euro)
=> Uplift in real-estate value (neighborhood): more then 70 million euro
=> Strong improvement of job opportunities for drop-outs and non German speaking inhabitants of Wedding
=> Small but significant positive effects on physical and mental health and wellbeing of visitors and users
=> Strong positive effects on the livability of surrounding neighborhoods in the district Wedding
=> Important role in emancipation and empowerment of people living in the district Wedding
=> Important role in educating people in the district Wedding
=> driver of growing popularity of Wedding and real-estate in Wedding and improved imago of Wedding
=> Yearly around 150.000 visitors (10.000 unique), many of them from abroad
=> Amongst the highest ranked modernistic monuments in Berlin
=> Large playground / green field: meeting place for the neighborhood
=> Popular canteen for workers and local inhabitants
=> Cultural and debating centre
=> Important (modernistic) architectural and urban monument
=> not applicable

Kunstquartier Bethanien (Berlin - Kreuzberg)

Kunstquartier Bethanien: Functions and facilities

Kunstquartier Bethanien: Development process

Characteristics, consequences and limits of
civic driven development of Urban nodes of
soft infrastructure in European cities
4. Findings and Discussion:

1) Successful Urban nodes of soft infrastructure are conspicuous places
with a broad and eclectic offer of community oriented functions and
facilities, including attractive cheap catering and place for meeting
2) Bottom-up initiated Urban nodes of soft infrastructure often have
considerable (local) economic, social and cultural impact and are
important drivers of innovation
3) Origination and succes of bottom-up initiated Urban nodes of soft
infrastructure cannot be planned by politics, planners or developers
4) Initiators of Urban nodes are barely noted or acknowledged by politics
and traditional stakeholders involved in urban planning and
development
5) Origination of urban nodes is often hindered by planners and politics
6) German initiators generally operate much looser and independent from
(local) authorities then their Dutch counterparts.
Findings:

Hard /
physical
infra-
structure
Neigh-
borhood /
civil society
Real estate
parties
Users
Traditional urban development actors
Soft
infrastructur
e
parties
Urban
development
Commercial
companies
Soft infra-
structure
Spaces
(housing,
working)
Media
Financiers
Politics
Government
(admini-
stration)

Real estate
parties
Users
Bottom-up urban development (actors)
Politics
Media
Neigh-
borhood
civil society
Urban node
(places)
Government
(admini-
stration)
Financiers
Soft infra-
structure
Initiators

Urban
node
Users
Initiators
Actors involved (detail)
Voorziening
aanbieders
Buurt
bewoners
(groepen)
ParticipantenHuurder -
aanbieders
Kleine
ondernemers
freelancers
Reïntegratie
aanbieders
Huurders
ontmoeten en
maken gebruik
van voorzieningen
huren
ruimte
bieden diensten en
voorzieningen aan
Kunstenaars
huren ateliers en
studioruimte
investeren en
organiseren mee
laten er mensen
reïntegreren
huren
huren werkruimte
Maat-
schappelijke
organisaties
huren
kantoorruimte
Neigh-
borhood
civil society
Buurt
bewoners
Buurt
bewoners /
ondernemers
(lokale)
Experts
Sym-
pathisanten
Vrijwilligers
maken
gebruik van
lobbyen
tegen
helpen,
ondersteunen
lobbyen voor
schenken
geld
adviseren
(vrijwillig)
gaan mee-
participeren
Tegen
standers
Sym-
pathisanten

Government
(admini-
stration)
Urban node
(location)
Initiators
Financiers
Groter
publiek
Banken
Overheid
Fondsen
MVO
Stichtingen
Participanten
Beleggers
lenen
kopen en
verpachten
lenen,
investeren
investeren,
co-financieren
crowdfunden
(investeren,
schenken)
schenken
subsidiëren,
lenen,
investeren
Bestuurders
Ambtelijke
diensten
Centraal
stedelijke
bestuurdersLokale
(stadsdeel)
bestuurders
Gemeentelijk
grondbedrijf
Gemeentelijk
ontwikkelings
bedrijf
Advies- en
expertise
centrum
Vrienden,
familie en
relaties
lenen,
investeren
Provinciale
bestuurders
adviseert
bepalen en voeren
beleid uit
adviseert,
zet standaarden,
verkoopt - verhuurt
dragen visie uit,
bepalen beleid
adviseert,
ontwikkelt,
financiert
dragen visie uit,
bepalen beleid
dragen visie uit,
bepalen beleid
dragen visie uit,
bepalen beleid

Knooppunt
(locatie)
Real-estate
parties
Initiatief
nemer(s)
Vastgoed
beheerders Gemeentelijk
vastgoed
adviseurs
Vastgoed
eigenaren
Ontwik-
kelaars
Gemeentelijk
vastgoed of
grondbedrijf
Media
verkopen of
verhuren
faciliteren verhuur,
beheer of overname
van vastgoed
nemen vastgoed
in beheer
kopen vastgoed
en ontwikkelen
bepaalt erfpacht,
grond- en vastgoedprijs
of verkooppropcedure
Centrale
stad
politici
Lokale
(stadsdeel)
politici
steunen of
verwerpen
steunen of
verwerpen
Politics
besteden
aandacht aan
Landelijke
politici
steunen of
verwerpen

Discussion: Key issues
- There is still a large gap between the informal (civic) actors and the complex,
official urban planning regime with its formal procedures, goals, language, et
cetera
- Governmental and urban planning practice still are mainly focussed on top-
down (blueprint) planning and involvement of traditional urban development
stakeholders
- Politics, planners, developers, architects and users are mainly focussed on
products (buildings, square meters) and financial outcomes, instead of
dynamic processes, soft outcomes and facilities and (soft) infrastructure
promoting the vitality and viability of neighborhoods and cities
- Governmental and urban planning practice still are mainly sectoral organized
which hinders initiatives and integral policy development focussed on viable
and vital cities and neighborhoods

Urban node
(Place)
Neigborhood
civil society
Initiators
Soft
infrastructure
parties
Users
Traditional vs bottom-up development
Media
Traditional
urban development
(facilities, services,
infrastructure, public
space and buildings)
Gap
Politics
Real-estate
parties
Financiers
Government
(admini-
stration)

Discussion: Issues that need attention
- The legal form of Urban node initiatives (in the Netherlands)
- The valuation and transfer of communal land and buildings on Urban node
initiators / local community and civic initiatives
- Valuation and acknowledgment of the importance of the proceeds, effects
and impact of bottom-up initiated Urban nodes of soft infrastructure on the
vitality and viability of neighborhoods and cities
- Financing / funding the development of Urban nodes; specifically the
purchase of land and buildings
- Financing / subsidizing Urban node exploitation
- Mobilization of sufficient financial and real-estate expertise to create a good
plan and build a solid business case for development of the Urban node
- Cooperation between local (urban) authorities, traditional urban development
parties and bottom-up initiators of Urban nodes of soft infrastructure
41

Discussion: Conclusion
Instead of thinking in financial soundness and financial results of plans,
in bricks, volume and involvement of professional parties, local
authorities should put more trust in passionate, often highly skilled
citizens who want to improve and develop the local urban environment
and social infrastructure. More attention should given by (local)
authorities in creating circumstances and a planning and development
structure that stimulates the arise and development of sustainable, vital,
viable neighborhood and city quarters through local, urban bottom-up
initiatives.

Acknowledgements
1) The Creative Industries Fund NL, formerly the Netherlands
Architecture Fund (SfA), especially Maarten Tas and Tim de
Boer
2) All those who have contributed with their knowledge, input and
enthusiasm to the success of this research project. Special
thanks goes to the interviewees; founders of urban nodes and
other stakeholders like, administrators, civil servants, experts,
et cetera
3) Members of the consultative group: Vincent Kompier, Stefan
Metaal, Jan Poolen and Eric Frijters
4) Jeroen Bakker for ICT support
5) Yvonne Siegmund for designing schemes and diagrams

Website: www.vitaleknooppunten.nl

Researchers:
Rainer Johann (Master of Science and Doctorate) works as an urbanist in research,
teaching and practice. Former visiting Professor at Bauhaus-University Weimar (2007).
Since 2008 assistant professor at HCU Hamburg, department of Urban and
Neighborhood Planning. Studied Architecture in Cologne (2000) and Urban planning in
Delft (2002). Worked with ASTOC (Cologne), UrbanUnlimited (Rotterdam), De
Architekten Cie (Amsterdam) and with The Netherlands Environmental Assessment
Agency (Den Haag). Since 2012 partner at Janssen & Johann, Studio for Urbanism
(Amsterdam - Berlin).
Nico Janssen (Master of Science and Arts) works as an independent researcher,
strategist and policy-adviser specialized in scenarioplanning, innovation and the creative
and cultural industries. Studied Management and Engineering and Applied Psychology
at the University Twente in Enschede. Former councillor at the district Amsterdam East
and strategist and partner at The Ruijter Strategy (Amsterdam), Consultant at The Dutch
Municipality Bank (The Hague) and lecturer and researcher at the Amsterdam University
of Applied Sciences. Since 2012 partner at Janssen & Johann, Studio for Urbanism
(Amsterdam - Berlin).

Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin

Similar to Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin