The Amsterdam Bijlmermeer

Following my previous post on Pruitt-Igoe, I recall another project which is similar to Pruitt-Igoe in terms of the general view that it is a failed planning project. The Amsterdam Bijlmermeer is a project which failed to achieve the objective that was set during the initial planning stages and despite several attempts of redevelopment to savage the project, it has not reached the height of success which was expected of it. This is due to the rigidity of Bijlmermeer’s planning and design. The project is, like many modernist social housing estates, designed with a powerful form-orientated physical planning which is led by a set of design principles that allows for air, light and space to enter the building. In addition, the rigid zoning of the project is meant to provide specific functions to specific zones. The consequence of the two design factors led to a failure to include a flexibility in its form to allow for human alterations through their various needs and likings. The rigid zoning led to the segregation between various zones which limited each zone to its own function. The design of Bijlmermeer was mostly based on the expectations and ideas of the planners, their vision for the future of the city and not on the expectations of the different member of the society.

The original Bijlmermeer Project

The result is that the Bijlmermeer became nothing more than cheap housings for immigrants and those who seek temporary house before moving on to better places. The high turnover of occupants and the continual influx of immigrants left little to no potential for community growth in Bijlmermeer. As a result, the Bijlmermeer was marginalised as the poor sector in Amsterdam. There are several plans to redevelop Bijlmermeer but the attempts did not achieve any significant success mainly due to the rigidity of the site.

OMA's attempt of redeveloping the Amsterdam Bijlmermeer

The failure of Bijlmermeer to develop and grow naturally was mainly due to the flaw in its initial planning where the designers failed to design for it to respond to ‘unexpected conditions’ such as the post-war economic growth in Europe that allowed people to afford better living. The fundamental concept behind Bijlmermeer was to provide a post-war social housing estate but it failed to adapt to the world that recovered from the war where suburban lifestyle became the preferred choice of living.

Whilst there were a number of broader social issues that also led to the downfall of the project it is clear that the failure to account for a larger context during the initial planning stages played a key role in not empowering its residents and thus not allowing the housing project to perform as was intended.

The Bijlmermeer and Pruitt-Igoe are two examples of where design based on planning policy and regulation led to the failure to expand on the planning brief to more than just performing its core function.  This subsequently led to rigidity in their planning and therefore limiting the livability and effectiveness of the project. I believe that the planning and architecture field has evolved significantly over the past decades to understanding the importance of site-specific analysis and demographic studies. The human aspect and immediate context or environmental condition could prove the difference in determining the effectiveness of a planning project.