# Suburbs in the Netherlands



## Ramses

I’ll show you a few google-screenshots of new suburbs in the Netherlands.

Though it looks spectacular from above, the architecture is quite often very dull and boring (imho ) I’ve got mixed feelings with this type of cityplanning. On one hand the shapes of these new suburbs are very remarkable, the use of water between circles and squares makes a residential area look like a piece of art by itself. On the other hand, the new suburbs have nothing to do with the history of the local rural area, they are superimposed like if nothing was there before.

What do you think of it? 

1. A new palm in Rotterdam (Carnisselande)









2. Squares in The Hague (Leidschenveen)









3. More squares in The Hague (Ypenburg). As you can see, they hired different developers for different plots. 









4. Huge square near Alkmaar (HAL)









5. Huge circle in Purmerend (Weidefenne)









6. A different new way of reshaping the countryside north of ‘s Hertogenbosch, residential areas like castles in the open fields. (Haverleij)


----------



## Quintana

It is exactly like you said, they may look nice from above but being at street level the repetitive architecture and the lack of facilities results in an _unheimisch_ feeling.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Every mass housing project becomes dull. Our 70's and 80's neighborhoods aren't that much better, although they have more greenery, but you can't expect a treeless polder that becomes a neighborhood to have tall trees within 5 years.


----------



## tvdxer

Very interesting. Can the average Dutch family afford to live in such a development? I understand tax rates are very high there.

Also, do residents of such suburbs tend to only drive to work, or do a lot bike like they do in large cities?

There are similar developments in the U.S. I think there's one in Sugar Land, TX like that, though probably with larger detached single-family houses.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

tvdxer said:


> Also, do residents of such suburbs tend to only drive to work, or do a lot bike like they do in large cities?


It's a mix.

These new developments are usually somewhat further away from working locations and the historic city center. (European cities often lack a huge business downtown, jobs are spread over industrial or office parks in the city).

A lot of these jobs are further away than the average distance people tend to take their bike to work, so these developments usually generates more car traffic than the older neighborhoods. 

The main problem is they build a lot of these neighborhoods, though they don't adjust the infrastructure to these spatial developments, so traffic jams are common on the entrance routes from and to these urban areas. 

Another issue is, that a lot households here have 2 incomes, and they often have 2 cars, which needs different parking-standards than the older neighborhoods. Unlike American suburbs, which usually include a private parking garage, Dutch new urban area's are usually full with cars, because you have to use the (limited) public parking lots along the streets. The street image is therefore not very scenic. 

Though this kind of spatial planning was created in order to reduce commutings from further-away-towns, by building new urban areas in the main regional city, so people tend to live closer to their jobs, but often not on biking-distance (however that differs from person to person, some don't take their bike over 4km, some still use their bike on 15km commutes). 

The usually only mode of public transportation are buses, which are usually slow, and only focused on the city center and main trainstation, rather than the job locations, so moving around with the bus is slow, and often the bike is faster.


----------



## Patrick Highrise

that first one you show isn't Nesselande --> it looks like a part of Carnisselande, that area is on the southside of Rotterdam instead of Northeast (which is Nesselande)
 On that "Palm Island" lives a friend of mine...that how I recognised it..

These suburbs are most of the time not so nice, but every now or then there actually very nice residential developments but most of the time everything looks the same anyway!


----------



## Ramses

Thanks for the note Patrick.



tvdxer said:


> Can the average Dutch family afford to live in such a development?


These housing projects are especially for the middle and higher incomes. The middle class can buy a house in the dense middle of the suburb and the people who can afford a little bit more live on the edges (often with water) of the suburbs. People with low incomes cannot afford to live here, they stay in the cities of course.


----------



## AEvolution

Ramses said:


> Thanks for the note Patrick.
> 
> These housing projects are especially for the middle and higher incomes. The middle class can buy a house in the dense middle of the suburb and the people who can afford a little bit more live on the edges (often with water) of the suburbs. People with low incomes cannot afford to live here, they stay in the cities of course.


I don't fuly agree on that one. Devellopers are forced by local governments to build at least 30% social housing in most suburbs.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

^^ Yes, but those are usually apartments. I live in such a suburb, and the cheapest houses are around 180.000 - 200.000 euro's, which is still some 290.000 dollars. 

200.000 - 250.000 euros is a typical "starters house", who those who just started on the housing market. For this budget, you usually have a small row-house with 3 bedrooms, and a yard. 

Larger family homes are usually over 300.000 euro's. (450.000 dollars). 

These red-roofed row-houses on the upper right costs about 250.000 - 350.00 euros


----------



## Sol

^^
200-250 K euros is the typical house for a starter on the market?
The modal income in the Netherlands is about 31.000 euros (gross). In that case, a man can finance his house with a mortgage loan of (4 * 31.000 =) 124.000 euros. 
So, houses of 200 K euros are only for the starter who has a partner who is also working fulltime. It's very poor. It means no time for the kids and a lot of stressful feelings. The divorce rate in such neighbourhoods is really high (some people say even 80%!). Financial distress (see the high prices of the houses), which causes the stressful feelings, is the main factor of this high rate. 
(source (in Dutch): http://www.ad.nl/binnenland/article257668.ece)


----------



## Bori427

^^Nice info Sol ><


----------



## AEvolution

^^

That's why at least 30% of housing in the suburbs is social development, usually for *rent* for about €500,- / €700,- a month. These houses are equal to the typical starters house; +/- 3 bedroom, 180m² living space and a 60m² garden.

There's also something called "koopsubsidie", which means people with a low income receive a small monthly payment from the government. Some local governments even provide low interest starters mortgages. These cost less than a normal mortgage at start, but as your income rises, so does your monthly mortgage payment. 

In a typical Dutch family men work fulltime and women part-time. Day-care centres are very expensive. Therefore it's cheaper for mothers to work part-time and take care of the children. 

It's a fact the Dutch housing market is overheated, there are simply not enough houses for everyone. Even at a construction rate of 100.000 new homes a year the market can't keep up. In most cities thousands of small, low quality houses build in the 50's and 60's, just after WWII, are being demolished. These are replaced by larger houses, meaning a lower building density. To compromise this effect large suburbs are being build at the outskirts of these cities. Holland is also the third most densely populated country in the world. Nearly every square km is populated, meaning open space is hard to come by and expensive.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

I would like to add that population density-comparison with other countries like South Korea or Taiwan can't be done properly, because their main average density comes from very dense cities, but Dutch cities are not very dense. The Delta metropolis or Randstad might be one of the least dense multi-million agglomerations in the world. Unlike many countries, our countryside relies completely on the nearby regional city. That creates many transportation problems, because of the low density of the Delta Metropolis, and the large commute from the spread-out low density semi-rural area's, public transportation is not very effecient as you might expect from a multi-million metropolitan area. Though trains are usually busy, but largely filled with students who don't have other transportation options. Therefore, our roads are the busiest in Europe with a lot of traffic jams. 

If you look at a map, and see there are a lot of motorways, that's very true, the problem is not the number of motorways, but their capacity, most motorways are only 2x2 lanes, as you might see in the countryside, but also within urban area's or on commuter routes.


----------



## skytrax

I never saw a country with more organized suburbs than Netherlands


----------



## AEvolution

^^

Chris, I fuly agree on that one.


----------



## MarkusErikssen

Nice thread. This is where i live:
http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=n...,6.013985&spn=0.011562,0.028925&t=k&z=15&om=1


----------



## AEvolution

Nice, though not realy a suburb


----------



## snot

Chriszwolle said:


> The Delta metropolis or Randstad might be one of the least dense multi-million agglomerations in the world. .


:| Maybe because Delta metropolis is not an agglomeration,...


----------



## Ch.G Ch.G

This is so fascinating. Thank you, contributors.

So, aside from bus routes, there are no viable public transportation options? Also, are there height limitations, that is, are mid-rise condominiums frowned upon (or just not desirable)?

I fully understand the complaints, but I would take this in the U.S. any day over our new subdivisions and exurban developments! It's unfortunate to hear about the banal streetscape, however, I'm sure ample amounts of mature foliage will go a long way in humanizing it.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Most cities only have bus lines. Though some larger cities have trams, a trolley bus and metro lines in Rotterdam and Amsterdam. 

To your point of height limitations, a lot of cities have them. In my city of Zwolle, it used to be 90m. There are always a lot of comments when plans arrive for somewhat higher buildings (like the ones that are higher than trees).

I remember a recent issue in my city where there was a plan for a "high building". It turned out to be a 4 floor apartment building. That shows us some about the attitude of the media towards highrises. A 40m building can often be described as "the colossal building at the shopping center" for instance.


----------



## Club_Dru

Maby the biggest suburb of the Netherlands. Its now a city. This suburb of Amsterdam is establish in 1975. Before 1975 this area was part of the Zuiderzee (Southern sea). So the land and infrastructure of Almere is just 30 years old. The current population of Almere is 185.000. The Almere municipal want this to increase to 350.000 inhabitants in 2030. At the moment Almere has six railwaystations and there are plans to have a metro/tram-connection with Amsterdam.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

I used to live in such a suburb (Zwolle-Stadshagen) until recently. Many people comment on these neighborhoods as dull, or "more of the same", though I doubt many of them actually know these neighborhoods. They are very diverse in architecture, much more variating than the 70's and 80's neighborhoods. I found it a nice place to live, but it's not really a place to live for people in their early 20's, since there's not much to do for them. Most families are young, and just started a family. They're typically 2-income households and often own 2 cars to commute to a nearby or further away city.


----------



## cjav

I live in one of those 80's neighbourhoods, they are truly all the same. Entire neighbourhoods of the same brick houses same roof tiles, similar broccoli street layout. :nuts::nuts: Glad they stopped doing that, those neighbourhoods are also very susceptible to deterioration.


----------



## MILIUX

Do you have the photos of Almere Town Centre? I really liked how new and organised it is.


----------



## RETROMANIA

Interesting! very estetic, very well designed!


----------



## pedro_auriazul

netherlands looks nice!!


----------



## fsqwy

so green!


----------



## oliver999

so beautiful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Cracovia

Im moving to Holland


----------



## Ramses

For those who are interested in pictures on streetlevel 



Ramses said:


> 2. Squares in The Hague (Leidschenveen)


On my own website you can find some of my recent pictures of Leidschenveen: http://www.geoclopedie.nl/foto/Nederland/Foto-DenHaagLeidschenveen.htm



> 6. A different new way of reshaping the countryside north of ‘s Hertogenbosch, residential areas like castles in the open fields. (Haverleij)


And here's a topic with recent pictures of these postmodern castles: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=799228


It is in Dutch, but the pictures can speak for themselves :wink2:


----------



## Jonesy55

AEvolution said:


> ^^
> 
> That's why at least 30% of housing in the suburbs is social development, usually for *rent* for about €500,- / €700,- a month. These houses are equal to the typical starters house; +/- 3 bedroom, 180m² living space and a 60m² garden.


Wow, 180m² for a suburban starter house, that's huge by UK standards. How come the houses are so much bigger over there?


----------



## ChrisZwolle

180 square meter seems to be a bit exagerrated, I lived in a suburban starters house (Price: € 240.000 or $ 310,000 that had three floors; two of 45 m2 and one of about 30, so 120 m2 in living space, and a yard of about 50 m2.


----------



## Jonesy55

^^ That's still pretty big for a first home by the standards here. Most people buying their first place will buy an apartment or terraced house which might be 50-80 sqm living area. Round here you would pay between £100,000 and £140,000 for a typical small terraced house or apartment depending on size and location.

In fact I think that the average size of all homes in the UK is only 90sqm, smaller than these Netherlands starter homes hno:


----------



## ChrisZwolle

I don't think you can find many 100,000 - 140,000 Pound terraced houses in the Netherlands that aren't crappy houses from the 50's. Most cheaper houses in the larger cities are either social housing or small apartments. You can get cheap houses in the countryside though. But the question is if you want to live there, further from jobs and services.


----------



## cristof

are they detached houses suburbs in the Netherlands or all the country is filling with these kind of suburbs?


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Detached homes are unaffordable for most Dutchmen. Most suburban homes are rowhouses or terraced houses or whatever you want to call them.


----------



## cristof

really well i think the real estate market isnt much different with the one in Belgium and yeah in Flanders there are a lot of these kind of urbanisation with mid-rise apartments and so for...but also some important "us style" suburbs around cities as Gent, Antwerp and Brussels so ...does this exist in ur country ?


----------



## ChrisZwolle

We don't have US style suburbs on large scales. Urbanizations like that are usually no more than one or two streets in a neighborhood. Typical detached homes are usually in the € 500,000+ range.

For instance, this US style house goes for € 938,000 in Zwolle, Overijssel province.


----------



## bartjee

*Leidsche Rijn, Utrecht*


----------



## Euromax

nice interesting pics!


----------



## Qaabus

ChrisZwolle said:


> For instance, this US style house goes for € 938,000 in Zwolle, Overijssel province.


A rather unfortunate example to say the least. 
The building method alone makes it incomparable to a house in the US.

Anyways, €200k gets you pretty far in large parts of the country. Not to mention in areas like east Groningen, north Friesland and Zeeuws-Vlaanderen.

€200k for this in Hengelo, Overijssel for example.









Near Roermond, Limburg.









In Assen, Drenthe.









€190k in Raamsdonkveer, Noord-Brabant.


----------



## bartjee

*IJburg, Amsterdam*

This are pictures from a big project in Amsterdam named IJburg, the houses are build on selfmade islands. 














































for more information: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=589426


----------



## amidcars

I used to live in my past days in those 70's build out and they all are the same. The same with their burandas, balcony, street dividations and all.


----------



## bartjee

*IJburg*

*From The Runner*



the runner said:


> Blok 56
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Het Havenkwartier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> De bomen groeien goed op het Steigereiland





the runner said:


> ^^
> 
> Solid 1


Last pictures didn´t work, so i have replaced the old pictures for some new ones.


----------



## lilyyin99

thats great .


----------



## bartjee

Wateringse veld, The hague










Reeshof (koolhoven), tilburg


----------



## Ribarca

Wow Wateringse veld looks pretty depressing. Just like a big prison.


----------



## Ribarca

steppenwolf said:


> Dutch suburbs/ architecture/ urban design and urbanism are better than everywhere else. they shoudl be the model for similar countries.


Architecturally possible. But conceptually it's all wrong. In a small dense country you need more compactness. The Dutch landscape gets uglier all the time.


----------



## Demolishing BA

i have mixed feelings regarding this!

developers do so much effort for birds eyes, and none for human eyes.

they should try to find a middle point.

otherwise its the same architecture of Germany in the 30s, and it's been 80 years since then. anyways it's much better than 90% of new neighbourhoods around the world. at least there's some contact with nature and a very efficient space disposition.


----------



## bartjee

*more*

Brandevoort, Helmond





































train station


----------



## Ramses

Ribarca said:


> Wow Wateringse veld looks pretty depressing. Just like a big prison.


You are actually not far from the truth. Wateringse Veld is a new suburb of The Hague (it is even still under construction), but it turns out to be a huge failure. A lot of people already want to move out of there because of rising problems with the youth-gangs.


----------



## bartjee

some pictures of Wateringse veld.





































For more pictures of Wateringse Veld: http://foto.denhaag.org/PHP/pagina.php?link=wijk.php?80&header=Wateringseveld


----------



## Ni3lS

Those aerial views are awesome. Seems to be well urban planned.


----------



## Quintana

I have been to Wateringse Veld once and the area where I was looked fine and nothing like a prison. I wouldn't want to live there myself (at least, not in my current phase of life) but I could see why families would move there. It seemed quite liveable to me with nice family housing (a lot of them semi-attached) and a lot of water.


----------



## woutero

The suburbs shown here with strong geometric forms and row houses are the norm. But suburbs with detached houses do exist. There are two kinds:

1. Those in more remote areas of the country where popularion density is lower, housing prices are lower, and where there is less pressure on the use of land.

2. Older suburbs, started around 100 years ago when increased mobility made it possible to live outside of the city for the rich.

Some examples:

(1) The remote kind:

Sneek, Friesland, in the North of the country:









Lemmer, also Friesland:









Heerenveen, Friesland:










(2) The old kind:

Laren:









Bloemendaal:









Bloemendaal (Bing Maps Aerial):









Wassenaar (Bing Maps Aerial):









The old ones are pretty expensive.


----------



## Sylv1

[email protected] said:


> I remember passing through a lake development near Goes (Zeeland) and it was fine at street level, far from what you said (though it seemed to be for the upper class).
> Apart from this I think that planned suburbs like these suit well Netherlands. It avoids messy housing developments to sprout here and there forming a chaotic rurban landscape (with the dutch density it would maybe cover the entire country). We have a lot of that stuff in France and the result is that public heavy infrastructure (sewage, bus lines...) is nearly non-existent. At least Dutch-styled suburbs imply more density, shorter commutes (by lenght), a better countryside preservation and they are just beauties from the air. :drool: :drool:



sums it up really. 

I'm a huge fan of these dutch suburbs. They should be a template for large scale urban design everywhere.

Countries like France have problems with their suburban developments (crime, decay..etc) but that's mostly a result of poor planning and maintenance, not density itself. 

Cities everywhere are running out of space and resources. They need ambitious, well planed, high density projects that cover the entire urban space, not a patchwork of independent apartment blocks. 

please keep this thread going.


----------



## woutero

*VINEX densities*

Most of these suburbs are a result of the VINEX policy (Vinex is an abbreviation, which means as much as the Fourth Report on Spatial Planning Extra). The state government used to write reports on how the country should develop. This VINEX has been the last one with a strong influence. 

It sets out basic principles of how cities should expand, how many homes are needed, and in some cases where cities should expand. Its emphasis is on building close to the cities, in order to strengthen existing services. It also favours using existing infrastructure and building new public transit. But in many cases this has not been done very succesfully.

I wonder what residential densities are in other countries. The VINEX areas are usually 30-35 dwellings per hectare (including all services, public space, infrastructure, etc.).

But there is actually a lot of diversity in this. This interesting map shows densities in six different VINEX areas. It's a report from www.ruimtemonitor.nl. More about VINEX here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinex-location


----------



## woutero

For anyone interested, here's some history about the planning policies that are responsible for these suburbs. In my previous post I explained VINEX. Here's what came before that:

1960: First Report on Spatial Planning
The concept of the Randstad as an urban ring around a green heart was introduced. The cities were stimulated to grow outward on the edges of the cities, but building in the green heart was not allowed. Also the cities were not supposed to become too big or grow together. So between the cities in the Randstad Ring there were green buffer zones. These still exist, like between Amsterdam and Haarlem, or between The Hague and Leiden, or between Delft and Rotterdam, between Naarden and Amsterdam.

1966: Second Report on Spatial Planning
The population grew so rapidly that the cities could not cope with this growth. Quickly increasing prosperity meant people wanted more, could afford more, and were more mobile. There was pressure to build outside of the city. In this report the concept of "bundled deconcentration" was introduced. It channeled suburbanization in a limited number of "growth centers". These places were seperated from their mother cities, but well connected by roads and rail. Examples of these growth centers are Purmerend, Spijkenisse, Zoetermeer, Lelystad. They have a lot of things in common with Ebenezer Howard's 'Garden City', except that these growth centers were not designed to be self-sufficient.
This report was highly modernist and filled with population projections that required an incredible amount of infrastructure (20M inh in 2000). These were all drawn in maps, where cities were reduced to abstract squares. The use of cars was seen as a good thing.

1973-1983: Third Report on Spatial Planning
This report was more of a series of reports. Soon after the second report, it became clear that the population projections were on the high side. So the need for all this deconcentration and infrastructure was less than set out in the second report. It also soon became clear that deconcentration would lead to traffic levels that would be hard to support by infrastructure. The conflict between cars and quality of life in the city was addressed.
However, a strong flow of people out of the city was already on its way. The third report added a couple of extra growth centers, but was more strict about limiting rural growth.
Th biggest thing was that it also started to bring the focus back to the city. The middle class was moving out of the cities, quickly eroding the base for services. So this third report also added instruments for urban renewal and inner city building.

1988: The Fourth Report on Spatial Planning
The Fourth report focuses on the strength of the diversity of the Dutch urban landscape as a major engine for growth. A system of cities that complement each other, well connected, with a green heart in the middle. Two other engines for economic growth were the Port of Rotterdam and Amsterdam airport Schiphol. These were called mainports. Investments in infrastructure were concentrated around these mainports.

1994: Fourth Report Extra (VINEX)
The day before the fourth report was supposed to be confirmed by the parliament, the government fell. The new government still adopted the report, but added the VINEX part to it. This set out guidelines for the development of residential districts close to the city, in relatively high densities, strengthening the population base and the services of the mother city. Connected by public transport, etc.

2001: Fifth Report on Spatial Planning
This report was never adopted by the parliament, because the government fell before it was discussed in the parliament. It did have some influence though. Most concrete point in this report was the requirement of provinces to make regional plans (which they already did), and in these plans to draw a red line around cities, towns and villages, which would serve as a growth boundary. No development would be allowed outside this red line. There were also green lines to be drawn around rural/natural areas, in which new development would be forbidden.
Even though this policy never became official, some provinces have adopted these red and green lines in their regional plan. Local plans have to be consistent with regional plans, so it does have a bit of impact.

2004: Report on Space
In 2004 the national government broke the tradition of setting guidelines for development. It did keep the requirement for provinces to make regional plans, but is no longer directive. The adagium is: "centralized if it has to be, localised when possible". Essentially this has decentralized the issue of planning. Funny thing is that provinces seem to be pretty conservative (meaning conserving green space, favouring inner city development). There are a bunch of local governments who have been proposing large scale malls outside of central cities. Generally these are either not compliant with the regional plan and therefore rejected, or they are rejected in local referenda by the people of these cities. There may be a handful of exceptions to this.

OK. Hope anyone finds this interesting enough to read.


----------



## woutero

Too much talking (sorry), here are some more pics:

Kattenbroek in Amsersfoort:









Hoogland in Amersfoort:









Pijnacker near The Hague:









Bergschenhoek near Rotterdam:


----------



## bartjee

*Vathors, Amersfoort*












egramsb said:


>


----------



## bajanssen

SASH SCF said:


> let's correct this a little bit...again


You can ad Reeshof, Tilburg in the top 5 list with currently 45.000 inhabitants, still growing to 50.000 in when finished.


----------



## SASH

^^
You can do it yourselve if you like?


----------



## bajanssen

tried and failled..... I'm not that good with computers, and its mutual.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

These caged rocks is also something recent you see everywhere.


----------



## SASH

bajanssen. Do you like it like this?



Mr_Dru said:


> The 14 largest locations by population when finnished
> 
> Utrecht Leidsche Rijn *80.000*
> Tilburg Reeshof *50.000*
> Amsterdam IJburg *45.000*
> Zwolle Stadshagen *40.000*
> Amersfoort Vathorst *30.000*
> The Hague Ypenburg *30.000*
> Rotterdam Carnisselande/Portland *30.000*
> Nijmegen Waalsprong *25.000*
> The Hague Leidschenvn. *20.000* Hoofddorp Floriande *18.000*
> Helmond Brandevoort *17.000*
> Arnhem Schuytgraaf *15.000 *
> The Hague Wateringse Veld *12.000 *
> Eindhoven Meerhoven *12.000*


----------



## bajanssen

Thank you. Don't know why I was unable to do that.....


----------



## julesstoop

In that case: let me be the one to fix that nagging spelling mistake...



> Originally Posted by *Mr_Dru*
> The 14 largest locations by population when fi*n*ished
> 
> Utrecht Leidsche Rijn *80.000*
> Tilburg Reeshof *50.000*
> Amsterdam IJburg *45.000*
> Zwolle Stadshagen *40.000*
> Amersfoort Vathorst *30.000*
> The Hague Ypenburg *30.000*
> Rotterdam Carnisselande/Portland *30.000*
> Nijmegen Waalsprong *25.000*
> The Hague Leidschenvn. *20.000*
> Hoofddorp Floriande *18.000*
> Helmond Brandevoort *17.000*
> Arnhem Schuytgraaf *15.000*
> The Hague Wateringse Veld *12.000*
> Eindhoven Meerhoven *12.000*


----------



## breda076

it's crazy that Almere is at a population of 185.000 in just 30 years
it's bigger then Breda and that is a city that excists longer
now you see how holland is growing in population


----------



## zaphod

I think those suburbs are of very good quality though larger yards would be nice.

I always despised the cul-de-sac model used in the US for subdivisions and liked the "woonerf" concept better, as it is basically used for the same purpose(kids can play outside) but does not turn a neighborhood into a insular little bubble. I wish there was more effort to import that design here by housing developers.

Nice thread.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

The woonerf concept has been abandoned since the 80's.


----------



## bartjee

*Some pictures of new districts in Amsterdam!*


----------



## cees

this might also be interisting here. Vision for 'Almere IJland' litterly almere island designed by West8 . Visions for new suburbs in the water at the westside of Almere wich make an new connection to amsterdam even more urgent and logical.
http://www.west8.nl/projects/landscape/ijland__almere_buitendijks/


----------



## julesstoop

'Almere Island' wouldn't be a correct translation, because the Dutch word for island is 'eiland', not 'IJland'. The pronunciation is the same however, which makes the spoken word 'IJland' ambiguous. 

'IJland' does however refer to the part of the lake that forms the bay of Amsterdam (roughly the body of water between the centre of Amsterdam and Almere). That part is called 'het IJ'. The word 'IJ' is related to the french word 'eau', both simply meaning water.


----------



## som942

This summer I spent some days at "Almere Buiten". I have to look for the pictures I took to post here, but it was really pleasent place. Besides that, even being so far from Amsterdam, they still got channels and are ciclying friendly


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Cycling is really not limited to Amsterdam. Of course, Amsterdam is known for it because it's a tourist city, however, cycling is the same in most Dutch cities.


----------



## som942

^^ yeah, that is really cool, and I guess you understand that for a tourist, its quite surprising to see that things for what that city is famous for are not limited to the touristic areas, but actually spread all over the country.


----------



## TugaMtl

The urban planning is very impressive. Nice pics.


----------



## Mscraper89

som942 said:


> ^^ yeah, that is really cool, and I guess you understand that for a tourist, its quite surprising to see that things for what that city is famous for are not limited to the touristic areas, but actually spread all over the country.


Actually: Amsterdam is not the bicycle-capital of Holland. The city of Groningen is, according to some figures! I live in amsterdam, but came from the south of the country and for me amsterdam is sometimes a nightmare to cycle. There are much better towns to cycle throughout the country.


----------



## woutero

^^ That is true. I live in Amsterdam as well, but have lived in other places in The Netherlands before. When I moved to Amsterdam I was very unimpressed by the bike infrastructure. I'm used to it now though.

Other cities I've lived in like Sneek, Groningen and Enschede have better bicycle infrastructure than Amsterdam.


----------



## julesstoop

And are about 10 to 100 times less important...


----------



## GSAA

Anderson Geimz said:


> Where did he live? Maybe that will offer some explanaition.


Ledche Rijn (sp?) in Utrecht, almost only ethnic Dutch people there according to him.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

GSAA said:


> Ledche Rijn (sp?) in Utrecht, almost only ethnic Dutch people there according to him.


Yeah could be, that's a very new suburb (and one of the largest in the NL).
Don't be surprised if it's 25%-30% minority in 10 years though (like Almere now).


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Good point.


----------



## julesstoop

- deleted - 
(stupid forum doesn't take me to the most recent post when I click a thread, so I reply wrongly..)


----------



## woutero

Google updated Streetview for The Netherlands. Now large parts of The Netherlands are covered, so you can check out the suburbs and the cities for yourself.

Go to maps.google.nl and drag the orange guy to wherever you want.

For instance: Weird houses in Barendrecht, suburb of Rotterdam:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=...=UPvTFw6Q1EnNraHhG3LLJg&cbp=12,51.06,,0,-4.63


----------



## bartjee

*Brandevoort, Helmond*

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.









6.









7.









8.









9.









10.









11.









12.









13.









14.









15.









16.









17.









18.









19.









20.









21.









22.









23.








24.










25.


----------



## kony

so great....................


----------



## bartjee

*Nesselande, Rotterdam*


----------



## Muyangguniang

This is so fucking nice!!!!:cheers::banana:



bartjee said:


> 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 13.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 14.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 16.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 17.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 18.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 19.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 23.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 24.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 25.


----------



## friedemann

Does someone know if this are newer developments or older but well preserved and restored buildings?


----------



## Ramses

friedemann said:


> Does someone know if this are newer developments or older but well preserved and restored buildings?


These are brand new, in fact this whole buiilt up area is new.


@Muyangguniang: I agree, but please don't quote all these pictures for a single line comment.


----------



## UAE_isthebest

^^^ Beautiful design we need more old Dutch architecture in new suburbs in Holland.


----------



## bartjee

*Vathorst, Amersfoort*



































































































































































Panootje ---->>>>


----------



## domtoren

*Leidsche Rijn - Utrecht*




























Some images of what Leidsche Rijn looks like from ground level on a rainy day. 
It is still far from finished and in many places it looks like a huge construction site. 
Soem parts are neo-traditional styled houses and other modern flats along broad avenues and esplanades.


----------



## Ian

Those brand new old style developments are a disgrace to any city


----------



## Ramses

Ian said:


> Those brand new old style developments are a disgrace to any city


Why? Lots of people want to live in such areas, so why not give them something they like? Not everyone likes those modernist appartmentblocks, residential towers or sterile new suburbs. It seems like a lot of contemporary architects are still into modernism, while society evolved into post-modernism.


----------



## Concrete Stereo

[edit: double]


----------



## Concrete Stereo

Ian said:


> Those brand new old style developments are a disgrace to any city


actually, there is a lot of controversy about this

I agree with you, it's shamelessly superficial (though it does fit the Zeitgeist rather well). But I have to say, visiting these retro-suburbs it isn't so much the architecture that is impressing, but the refined public space. Sjoerd Soeters is a very sensitive urbanist, which is obviously also proved by the Java developments in Amsterdam (which are modern in style)


----------



## emzeti

i'm from Malaysia..still following this thread, thanks for sharing pics here..


----------



## Franzl

Dutch suburbs are amazing - no country in the world has better organized cities than the netherlands - and i love how you guys embrace your architectural past in your new cityquarters - wonderful.


----------



## Suburbanist

One thing I'd like someone to explain me is why even in lower-density suburbs they love to build houses that share the lateral walls. Can't they build them truly isolated, 4-sided? I know that many photos shown here have those houses, buy my daily observation says that it is very commont to have houses with quite (relatively) huge backyards and front gardens, yet they share other two walls, creating huge "blocs", like in the Reeshof development.


----------



## Ni3lS

Yea let's keep this thread on topic.

@kaasbroodje, Your comment is is based on nothing. No one over here cares about what city you like better for going out in. That's an opinion, not a fact. So Breda doesn't have a better nightlife. It all get's quite intense here, I know everyone likes to defend their own city. Sadly that's not the purpose of this thread and we should go on with the pictures and technical facts of Dutch suburbs and the way they are planned.


----------



## julesstoop

@Suburbanist
The short answer is market forces (especially market differentiation), I guess.


----------



## domtoren

*More winter in Leidsche Rijn*

















































Some night images of Leidsche Rijn, taken on a winter evening with lots of snow.


----------



## domtoren

Suburbanist said:


> One thing I'd like someone to explain me is why even in lower-density suburbs they love to build houses that share the lateral walls. Can't they build them truly isolated, 4-sided? I know that many photos shown here have those houses, buy my daily observation says that it is very commont to have houses with quite (relatively) huge backyards and front gardens, yet they share other two walls, creating huge "blocs", like in the Reeshof development.


Well, perhaps it is because it is cheaper and more efficient to build blocks than 4-sided free-standing houses (which here are more expensive) and also because in NL building land is kept scarce, this country is densely populated and as to avoid the whole country to be transformed in one huge suburbia the transformation of agricultural or natural land in building land is restrictive and what is available has to be used with higher densities. This is not USA, Canada, Australia where land is plenty and sprawl not perceived as a problem....


----------



## bartjee

The pictures are from flickr.com

*stadshagen, Zwolle*














































shoppingcenter













































*city of the sun, heerhugowaard* (still under construction)


----------



## ChrisZwolle

That last picture is also Stadshagen if I'm not mistaken. I lived in that area for two years. A typical family neighborhood, lots of families with young children, I believe the first few years had like 6 3rd grade classes and only 1 8th grade class (Dutch system) in some elementary schools. 

Not much do to for older youths, so this area does have some problems with older youths hanging out near the shopping center, littering the park with broken beer bottles, pot and injection needles.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

^^ That's the thing I've also noticed in Estonia. Teens tend to do more stupid things in the suburbs than in the city(I mean mostly vandalizing but also drugs). One of the major reasons is, of course, that there isn't much to do in the suburbs for young people. All the clubs and cinemas and most of the sports facilities and hobby groups are in the city. (At least when talking about Tallinn)


----------



## Niyyu

..


----------



## Comfortably Numb

This is a really interesting thread. I have never been to the Netherlands, but I really enjoy looking at these pictures. On the one hand, your cities look very well planned and ergonomic. On the other hand, even the modern developments are not at all soulless or boring like suburbs in other countries. I also like the fact that many of these suburbs are not only geared towards using the car, but they also look very bike/pedestrian friendly too. You also seem to blend old & new very effectively and the older buildings themselves look very well maintained.


----------



## Suburbanist

@Confortably Numb: respectfully, I'd like to ask how can you tell a place is "souless" or "boring" only by looking at its u/c pictures?


----------



## Comfortably Numb

Suburbanist said:


> @Confortably Numb: respectfully, I'd like to ask how can you tell a place is "souless" or "boring" only by looking at its u/c pictures?


If you re-read, I was trying to say that the pictures of these suburbs did not look soulless or boring. Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Suburbanist said:


> @Confortably Numb: respectfully, I'd like to ask how can you tell a place is "souless" or "boring" only by looking at its u/c pictures?


The same way we can tell you're a wanker by reading your posts...


----------



## bartjee

*IJburg, Amsterdam*


----------



## ChrisZwolle

I gotta say the design of apartment complexes is quite similar in various VINEX areas. 

I also think the urban design in the past 20 years has great variation, yes, they share the fact it's all new and don't look all cozy yet, but you can't dismiss the fact building styles have a great deal of variation throughout these developments. Usually one street looks the same, but the next one is completely different. 

That said, I don't really like the mess in Amersfoort-Vathorst or Amsterdam-IJburg where each house is completely different from it's neighbor. That only works with detached homes, not with row houses.


----------



## julesstoop

Hmm. You don't like the canal houses in Amsterdam either then, or essentially most dutch or belgium city centers?


----------



## Suburbanist

Canal houses were built couple centuries ago, when electricity was not an "utility" and disable access were never thought about. The fact I find canal houses historically beautiful (or medieval castles, for that matter) shouldn't mean we were replicating the patter in contemporary built housing.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

julesstoop said:


> Hmm. You don't like the canal houses in Amsterdam either then, or essentially most dutch or belgium city centers?


Take a look at this, the only thing similar to the canal houses are the height and width of a building.


----------



## Wuppeltje

^^

Don't forget the mix of architecture on the canals. It was very common to change the whole facade to the fashion of that time. There are more resemblances than you actually think.


----------



## bartjee

*Ypenburg, The Hague*


























































































































































hno:


----------



## bartjee

*A Pano of Ypenburg, The Hague*


----------



## Messi

I don't know what t think about Dutch suburbs. They look so perfect, when I see them I feel like "this must be perfectionism" but at the same time they look so dull, no sign of "life" at all.


----------



## Concrete Stereo

keep up the good work guys, great thread!


----------



## Concrete Stereo

Messi said:


> I don't know what t think about Dutch suburbs. They look so perfect, when I see them I feel like "this must be perfectionism" but at the same time they look so dull, no sign of "life" at all.


Most people in the Netherlands have this 'double' feeling with the phenomenon. Personally I'm happy the developments got a bit denser these days, resulting at in a bit more life per m2. But we can have evening long discussions about the desirability or undesirability of the suburban typology, and organic vs organised, mix vs single function, homogeneity vs variety etc ...


----------



## MarkusErikssen

Messi said:


> I don't know what t think about Dutch suburbs. They look so perfect, when I see them I feel like "this must be perfectionism" but at the same time they look so dull, no sign of "life" at all.


I agree with you. Nice planned neighborhoods, but not many people on streets. Most people in neighborhoods showed above work hard, and when it's dark they are at home (sleeping)...


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Hello! We are talking about suburbs here...


----------



## julesstoop

Indeed. Is a suburb a dull place where people live, or is it simply a place where dull people live? 

You can't blame the architects, planners and developers for the latter option.


----------



## bartjee

*Houten*

From flickr.

by Buteijn













































by fotogerard









by Keesvangestel 









by josephinafoto


----------



## bartjee

*Brandevoort, Helmond*


----------



## Beetle

Last summer I made a helicopter trip close to Heerenveen. My main destination was the Abe Lenstras stadium, which I caught rather good actually, but after that fly by we passed one of the bigger new suburbs in the provence of Friesland. This neighborhood is called Skoatterswald, which will sound rather amusing to the English speaking world. 

*Helicopter fly-by.*






Ypenburg is build on the grounds of a former airforce base which in WW2 was the scene of one of the first large scale air droppings in history. The control tower, although in a rather sad shape, is still present and it will be restored.

From a distance it still looks good but this tower lacks 14 years of maintanance.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Beetle said:


> This neighborhood is called Skoatterswald, which will sound rather amusing to the English speaking world.


Actually Frisian is the one language most closely related to English.


----------



## bartjee

*Ypenburg, The Hague*

from: www.architectenweb.nl


----------



## bartjee

*IJburg, Amsterdam*

From: www.flickr.com























































































































































































































































































































































:cheers:


----------



## andrei_ro

Although I love rigorous urban planning (also considering the chaotic construction development in Romania, the country I live in), this Dutch suburbia is too much even for me. It feels like SimCity plastic neighborhoods are coming to life. I much more prefer the German city planning.


----------



## mramelet

I think Dutch people don't know the chance they have to live in cities like that.
As a french man, I live in one of these dutch suburbs built in the 70's, early 80's, (I also lived in Almere and have my family in law there) and even though the architecture is not very nice (houses are all the same), life is very pleasant. And today, the new suburbs that are build do have a nice architecture, which was the only thing missing!
I disagree with the people saying there is no life (even though it tends to be quite true in the winter).
There are always child games at every corner, making a good way to meet people letting their children play, children playing football in the streets. Yes, that's true, that's really the children (along with dogs and cats  )that make it alive, but you come in these kind of cities for the kids most of the time.
If I was single, I would go more to the city centers (Utrecht in my case) where you have everything (but not space!).
No, definitely, compared to french suburbs where I live, or any suburbs I've seen in my life, netherlands suburbs are heaven on earth.
In my place, it takes 9 minutes by train to go to Utrecht CS, and 15 minutes to go to Amsterdam Bijlmer/Arena.
So not all the VINEX locations have good public transportation, but in my case (and in the case of Almere where I lived as well), that's really untrue!


----------



## UAE_isthebest

Ijbrug, Amsterdam looks awesome really nice original designs


----------



## Josedc

absolutely innovative


----------



## JoseRodolfo




----------



## intervention

andrei_ro said:


> Although I love rigorous urban planning (also considering the chaotic construction development in Romania, the country I live in), this Dutch suburbia is too much even for me. It feels like SimCity plastic neighborhoods are coming to life. I much more prefer the German city planning.


And yet, the design and construction of these suburbs speaks to the architecture of the day and leaves a message for the future about what design was like at the time of construction. This is something that is lacking in North America; at least here in Toronto, where I live, the suburbs are all done up in a pseudo-historic (but cookie-cutter) fashion, referencing a mish-mash of Georgian, Victorian and down-right made up styles, all the while being encased in pink brick veneer. It just doesn't say anything!


----------



## XD

i thinks good


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Jellena85 said:


> I believe these suburbs would be much better places only if houses were just a little different from one another. I would feel like in a concentration camp there.


Are we viewing the same thread? There's a lot more diversity (architecture, appartements/houses) in Dutch suburbs then in the cookie cutter suburbs in other countries. Also more diversity in income and more mixing. Sure there are whole streets where the houses are the same with just some accents on the roofs, what do you expect? they're still suburbs...



> Nice solution would be if there was one four lane main street linking the suburb with the center and/or other important places , couple of two lane streets linking parts of the suburb with the main one , and a lot of dead-end , one lane streets where the bulk of people would live.


I believe this is the way NOT to build suburbs, AKA the American model.


----------



## z0nnebril

Anderson Geimz said:


> I believe this is the way NOT to build suburbs, AKA the American model.


And that's a model most of us hate! :nuts:


----------



## Webmasters

Really very interesting to know all facts, normal man can't afford the one
what a development is........out of amazination


----------



## ChrisZwolle

z0nnebril said:


> And that's a model most of us hate! :nuts:


Yeah, the Dutch absolutely despise detached homes... :|


----------



## bartjee

*IJburg, Amsterdam*


































































*IJsselstijn*


----------



## ChrisZwolle

I'm not really a fan of these street patterns in new developments. They are often not logical, with a lot of dead-ends and isolated neighborhoods that are accessible by only one road. I lived in one myself, and people had a hard time to find the right street or through route in these neighborhoods. 

Another issue is parking, almost everything is streetside parking, I don't know why they don't introduce a concept of parking underneath your house (not a garage, but a drive-in). Now every street is lined with cars.


----------



## WesP

I don't see why that is bad??? If there where no cars it would be even more boring...


----------



## bartjee

I don't think Dutch suburbs are boring.
- They are very green. 
- Life in this suburbs is really good (I live in one of these suburbs).
- They are safe for children.
- They are good organised. 
- New suburbs have a lot of variation in building styles. 

And a lot of people say there is no life in these suburbs, but that's not true. 
If the weather is good there are a lot of children playing outside and there are 
a lot of cyclist. If the weather is bad, there's almost no life on 
the streets, but that's logical. 

The view from Eemstein (Dordrecht) with Rotterdam on the background. 

Scrolll--------------->>>>>








Sorry for the big size!


----------



## skyhighNL

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/learnmore/tips/eschelman2.mspx

^^Its easy to resize your pictures


----------



## Raveolution

it's a scroll pic:banana:

resizing lowers the size and quality.


----------



## EL QUE CONSTRUYE

> Another issue is parking, almost everything is streetside parking, I don't know why they don't introduce a concept of parking underneath your house (not a garage, but a drive-in). Now every street is lined with cars.


[/QUOTE]

Excuse me, I´m just passing by...If you know at least the history of Holland, a large part of this country is situated under the sea level, which doesn´t allow to build deeply, because of the condictiones of some areas.
This doen´t mean that the engineering and arquitecturing development could not reach this objective, and further more there, that´s been beat for many many years by catastrophes. So it depends on the condictions of the grown and the concept used by the construction company called for the neighboor to be buildt.
I hope this advise could help your point of view.
Thanks.


----------



## bartjee

A nice pic from above, Noorderplassen at Almere. 



SkyBox036 said:


> Dat zoneiland hebben ze snel gebouwd:


----------



## myszoman

Well, I have read through the whole thread, and I must tell you this is impressive! Especially, the scale of organization of the developement which still keeps the diversity. The aerial photos a very SimCitylike, but it looks really comfortable from the streetview. For a man like me, with a two small children family would be perfect as I love this Duch clinker architecture. 
I'm fascinated and just going to read through the thread again. I would appreciate links to other threads in this forum concerning these suburbs (On Dutch section maybe?)
thanks


----------



## DarkLoki

Pictures from a suburb in Assen,



















And a preview of the new central area:


----------



## domtoren

*Utrecht city limits*










The front of Leidsche Rijn suburb facing the fields in Harmelen


----------



## egramsb

*Rotterdam Nesselande beach*

Scenes from an artificial beach and surroudings.
Quotes have been shortened.
All from myself in the thread Rotterdam: Newport (Nesselande)

1. may 2009


egramsb said:


>



2. may 2010


egramsb said:


>


----------



## daneo2

gives me a scandivian feeling!

hope the palmtrees will grow well there, i know a lot of places where palmtrees grow in the Netherlands so i hope these will survive here too


----------



## bartjee

Some pictures from architectenweb.nl 

Hoofddorp, Floriande 



























Eindhoven



























Veenendaal, Dragonder


----------



## bartjee

Leiden, Roomburg























































Europoort, plan tij




































kampen


















Amsterdam, IJburg













































Haarlem


----------



## Sonrise

intervention said:


> And yet, the design and construction of these suburbs speaks to the architecture of the day and leaves a message for the future about what design was like at the time of construction. This is something that is lacking in North America; at least here in Toronto, where I live, the suburbs are all done up in a pseudo-historic (but cookie-cutter) fashion, referencing a *mish-mash of Georgian, Victorian and down-right made up styles,* all the while being encased in pink brick veneer. It just doesn't say anything!


Aren't all styles originally "made up?" Just sayin'.


----------



## Hada

Hi:

I'm from what you would call an underdeveloped country, and at least from my perspective, you are very lucky to live in such nice places. Each place has its own form of beauty and there is quite a lot of diversity there. Nice.

I have only one question: Are you already implementing green technology in the new housing developments?


----------



## euromerican

Ok, but where do the rich Dutch live? I CANNOT imagine a Dutch celebrity or multi-millionaire living in these places! Please show some pictures of wealthy suburbs.


----------



## Koen Acacia

Hada said:


> Hi:
> 
> I'm from what you would call an underdeveloped country, and at least from my perspective, you are very lucky to live in such nice places. Each place has its own form of beauty and there is quite a lot of diversity there. Nice.
> 
> I have only one question: Are you already implementing green technology in the new housing developments?


Hi, thanks for the compliments. 
There's a lot of energy conservation going into new developments. Basically, because it's much easier to properly isolate a new house than an existing one, there are set emission standards (think: x amount of CO2 emission per cubic meter per year allowed when used normally) that have to be met. How those standards are being met is up to the developer/architect.
Since new technologies make it progressively easier to meet those standards, they're also getting a bit tighter every few years or so. I think we're now a few years away from new buildings being CO2-neutral altogether.


----------



## im_from_zw038

Zwolle (east holland, province Overijssel)



im_from_zw038 said:


> _Na Zwolle-Zuid (35.000) is Stadshagen de tweede grote stadsuitbreiding voor Zwolle. Deze Vinex-wijk, gebouwd richting Kampen, is een van de grotere van Nederland.
> Als Stadshagen l klaar is, staan er 8500 woningen en wonen er ongeveer 23.000 mensen. De wijk Werkeren maakt deel uit van Stadshagen I en bestaat uit vier woonbuurten, met elk een eigen karakter en sfeer. Vanaf 2010 wordt het tweede deel van Stadshagen ontwikkeld met daarin nog eens circa 4500 woningen. Uiteindelijk wonen er bijna 40.000 mensen in Stadshagen in 2020. Met recht kun je wel stellen dat hier een nieuw stadje uit de grond gestampt wordt.
> 
> Om aan te geven hoe groot Stadshagen wordt: vanaf het uiterste punt van Stadshagen ben je straks sneller in Kampen dan in het centrum van Zwolle. Stadshage krijgt 2 tramhaltes van de Regiotramlijn die in 2012 gaat rijden (kampen, kampen zuid, stadshagen-werkeren, stadshagen-centrum, voorsterpoort, (veerallee?), zwolle NS)
> 
> Stadshagen-Zuid (met studentenboot en bruggen over het Zwarte water. Het groen aan het water, rechtsonder, wordt momenteel bouwrijp gemaakt voor de wijk Frankhuis aan het water, 600 woningen) zie foto 30-34
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zwolle.nl
> Milligen (foto 25-29)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zwolle.nl
> Stadshagen centrum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zwolle.nl
> De tippe. De groenstrook tussen de twee wijken (Westenholte links, stadshagen rechts) is waar mijn fotoserie begint.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zwolle.nl_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.destentor.nl
> 
> 1 Werkeren gezien vanaf het nu nog onbebouwde De Tippe (ik sta nu rechtsonder op de luchtfoto hierboven.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 Zomaar een zijstraat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3 Viaduct bij het Hoge huis. Hier komt tramhalte Werkeren.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 Gezien vanaf het toekomstige De Tippe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5 En nogmaals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6 Dit fietspad doorkruist De tippe, gezien richting S'heerenbroek, wat practisch aan Zwolle vastplakt in de toekomst.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6 De lijn waarop de Regiotram gaat rijden ligt straks midden in de wijk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7 Kijkend naar het zuiden, met rechts Voorsterpoort.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8 Werkeren is nog steeds in ontwikkeling. Grote gaten moeten nog gevuld worden.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 Dit hou je helaas niet tegen, ook niet in deze verder smaakvolle buurt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 Mooie huizen, het ziet er rustig uit, en van het veelbesproken rechtoe-rechtaan gehalte van veel Vinex wijken merk je hier weinig. De sloot lijkt echter helaas op een open riool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11 De bestrating kan me hier wel bekoren. Veel prettiger dan in de Bloemkoolwijken van eind vorige eeuw.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12 Er zal hier nog flink wat tijd gaan zitten in de openbare ruimte.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 13 Bouwrijp maken Deelplan 3.2 + 3.6, vlek 12.2, fase 3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 14 Dit zie je nog veel, huizen zijn opgeleverd en soms al bewoond, terwijl de omgeving nog een wildernis is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15 Geclusterde zorgvoorzieningen in het midden van de wijk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 16 Het zonnehuis, een verzorgingstehuis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 17 Opnieuw zo'n vlek midden in de wijk waar nog gebouwd moet worden.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 18 Dimence, voor verslaving en psychiatrie, al denk ik dat je van dit bouwsel spontaan psychotisch wordt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 19 Een fraaie woning....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20...in een omgeving die nog volop in ontwikkeling is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 21 Aparte architectuur waarvan de functie mij onduidelijk is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22 Op de route naar Milligen vind je meerdere basketbal/voetbalveldjes, vaak omgeven door water en met prachtige bomen eromheen. Een hele grote vooruitgang in vergelijking met bijv. Zwolle zuid, waar goedkope trapveldjes onder geluidswallen werden gerealiseerd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 23 Wonen langs 1 van de vele sloten in Stadshagen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 24
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 25 Milligen, een buurt aan de Milligenplas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 26 Een prachtig appartementencomplex. Er staan daar 4 of 5 van.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 27 Even een cola gedronken, me verbazend over hoe rustig het was daar aan het water. De whytemerplas in Zuid is altijd afgeladen met mooi weer. De mensen moet dit plekje nog ontdekken denk ik.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 28 Inclusief palmboom voor het boulevardgevoel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 29 Je wandelt links zo de vrije natuur in. Plannen voor woningbouw op die locatie zijn heel ver weg na fel protest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30 Langs het zwarte water terug naar het centrum, met hier een van de 3 bruggen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 31 Appartementencomplexen van de Zwarte Hond architecten. Dit is het oudste deel van de wijk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 32 De onbewoonbaar verklaarde studentenboot onder de rook van Frankhuis en Holtenbroek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 33 You've got mail......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 34
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bedankt voor het kijken


----------



## Koen Acacia

euromerican said:


> Ok, but where do the rich Dutch live? I CANNOT imagine a Dutch celebrity or multi-millionaire living in these places! Please show some pictures of wealthy suburbs.


If you're rich I don't think you're going to live in what I would call a suburb over here. You're either going to live in places like this:
http://www.funda.nl/koop/wassenaar/huis-47517602-raadhuislaan-1/fotos/
or this:
http://www.funda.nl/koop/amsterdam/huis-10269792-keizersgracht-686/fotos/#foto-1
or this for example:
http://www.funda.nl/koop/aerdenhout/huis-74067951-bentveldsduinweg-3/fotos/(you can click thorough for more pictures).

Suburbia is more of a middle-class thing really. If you're going to be really rich, it's going to be either a luxurious townhouse in/near the city center, or something in a more estate-like setting. There are some exceptions of course, but it just doesn't make a lot of sense to develop, say, several thousand houses in the 2 million+ category, while the demand in that segment for any particular location probably wouldn't exceed a few houndred or so.


----------



## DarkLoki

euromerican said:


> Ok, but where do the rich Dutch live? I CANNOT imagine a Dutch celebrity or multi-millionaire living in these places! Please show some pictures of wealthy suburbs.


Some wealthy suburbs (never been there so i could be wrong about some of the neighbourhoods).

Overgooi

Hilversum
Not much to see on streetview.

Wassenaar
Same, but look a the satellite pictures.


----------



## Mr_Dru

euromerican said:


> Ok, but where do the rich Dutch live? I CANNOT imagine a Dutch celebrity or multi-millionaire living in these places! Please show some pictures of wealthy suburbs.


A lot of selebs or millionares are living in 't Gooi or downtown Amsterdam.

*'t Gooi *(near Amsterdam 20km)



























*Amsterdam Centre*
Canalhouses, prices starting from €400.000 up to €4 million or more.


----------



## Concrete Stereo

for €400.000 you'd be lucky to get the basement


----------



## mike7743

intensivecarebear said:


> ^^just ignore this guy... clueless people like him will look at cookie cutter American suburbia where all the houses look the same, everyone MUST drive a car, etc. and fail to see this as 'socially engineered human warehousing' .
> 
> just a typical example of ignorant 'Europe= evil socialist' attitude all too common in the states these days



you're a moron of the highest degree. does talking crap about America makes your little irrelevant small country feel good or something? lol @ your insecurities.


----------



## Ramses

Here's a new suburb in my town: Wateringse Veld. These commies are not very attractive:










mike7743 said:


> you're a moron of the highest degree. does talking crap about America makes your little irrelevant small country feel good or something? lol @ your insecurities.


Please don't reply in this topic when you have nothing to contribute


----------



## Concrete Stereo

They seem quite allright to me


----------



## Ramses

Concrete Stereo said:


> They seem quite allright to me


Too bad my English is not so good, so i'm forced too keep it short:


The scale of this project in Wateringse Veld is quite big and there isn't much variation. So this area makes you feel anonymous and irrelevant. 

Along with this the social problems of the Schilderswijk haved moved to this Vinex-location with its new inhabitants. Every corner of the street is now a territory of another streetgang with another nationality. This commie-alley is the center of this failed new suburb Wateringse Veld.

This is a 21st century Bijlmer.


----------



## Dardani6

f it


----------



## desertpunk

...


----------



## MR. Bacon

Poor guy, it is time for you to leave your comments elsewhere.. We try to talk about DUTCH suburbs here! To post a picture of an almost demolished building is sad.. Maybe it is time to start your own 'ghetto' threat ;-)

ON TOPIC: I am not a fan of the suburbs, but I think the quality of the architecture is getting better over the last few years. More diversity in height and architecture makes it more "alive". The lack off facilities make the neighborhoods boring in the first few years. But my opinion is bases on what i hear from work (construction/ project-development) and friends.. I have always lived in rented apartments in the city. 

But we have to remember that these houses are affordable for young people like myself. It is almost impossible to buy your first house in the city.. It is to expensive or you live in a "closet" in a bad neighborhood. 

PS: sorry for my english. It has been a while.


----------



## desertpunk

MR. Bacon said:


> Poor guy, it is time for you to leave your comments elsewhere.. We try to talk about DUTCH suburbs here! To post a picture of an almost demolished building is sad.. Maybe it is time to start your own 'ghetto' threat ;-)
> 
> PS: sorry for my english. It has been a while.


You know what? You're right. I'll erase my reply to the US bashing jerk above and let you guys continue with this delightful discussion.


----------



## MR. Bacon

Thanks, and for your information. I have nothing against America (and its suburbs). I also don't know how and why this discussion started but it is better to stop. It is good to ask critical questions, butt here is no need for throwing mud at each other.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

I don't think these Dutch "VINEX" locations are particularly affordable. Housing prices usually start around € 250,000 for decent single family homes, and around € 200,000 for really small ones. But if you have a single income, you need to have an annual income around € 40,000 to afford a € 200,000 home as a first time buyer. How many people make that kind of money in their twenties? 

If you have a household income of € 25,000 there is no way you can afford a house in such a suburb. That's why people also move into Belgium and Germany, where housing prices start around € 150,000 for a detached single family home. Much more affordable.


----------



## intensivecarebear

mike7743 said:


> you're a moron of the highest degree. does talking crap about America makes your little irrelevant small country feel good or something? lol @ your insecurities.


First off I'm American who has happened to live in many different countries. So nice try with your pathetic little insults about my 'irrelevent little country':lol:. And please explain to me how anything I said was moronic. American suburbia is just as much a product of social engineering as the Netherlands, which is what some Americans on this thread seem to fail to realize. My comment was a response to another poster's lame commie bashing post. 
Please get a life and stop trolling, and educate yourself before you make misinformed comments that make you and other Americans look more and more ignorant and arrogant... and I say this as a concerned fellow citizen. Have a nice life...

Now let's get back to the pics:cheers:


----------



## Concrete Stereo

There's a cultural difference. US will always look American, NL will look Dutch. Don't blame New York for not looking more like Amsterdam, don't blame Amsterdam for not looking more like New York.

US has and has always had a culture of the urbanism of individualism. The city as a more or less random collection of individual buildings. The Netherlands has and has always had a culture of the urbanism of ensemble. Europe in general traditionally has a strong feeling of responsibility for the quality of the collective. Military engineers, civil engineers, urbanists have always defined the city not only from military and water engineering, but also from the quality of the ensemble - at least since the enlightenment. The 17th century canal districts, the 19th century speculation, the 20th social housing and the present commercial project development have all been a result of the balance of the collective and the individual, beauty and function, price and quality, rule and exception. There's no Dutch word for laissez faire, it’s not part of the culture, perhaps because there's too little space. Also politically, society is not seen as primarely a random collection of individual demands, but a collective mechanism, with a collective demand, which can and has to be optimized. It is seen as the main job of the state to optimize the context in the best status quo, economically, spatially, socially. 

Let's not have a discussion about clichés. Garden city vs ghetto, bike vs car, suburb vs rowhousing. 

@Desertpunk: Bijlmer is controversial in NL (it's considered the worst neighborhood of the country), but this picture shows a building that is unuccupied in preparation for demolition or rehabilitation. It’s not that bad, the part of the Bijlmer that has survived the sledgehammer and is not radically changed look like this:

http://maps.google.nl/maps?f=q&sour...=-WNzXzwo1RART8RnTk242A&cbp=12,343.75,,0,6.04


[edit] ok, bit late with my comment


----------



## bartjee

*Almere Poort (U/C)*

From flickr.com


----------



## Positronn

Is that soil only sand? Cause it looks so white.


----------



## Mr_Dru

Positronn said:


> Is that soil only sand? Cause it looks so white.


The soil used to be water. Almere is build on a man made island of 2.412,30 km².

Almere is establish in 1970. The first inhabitans came in 1980 and Almere has now 188.000 inhabitants. It's not far situated from Amsterdam. Most people that live there are Amsterdammers or work in Amsterdam. I'ts kinda a huge subburb of Amsterdam.


----------



## julesstoop

Positronn said:


> Is that soil only sand? Cause it looks so white.


Most of the soil in this huge 'polder' is actually very fertile. My parents live there and it's unbelievable what their garden looks like in just five years.


----------



## Positronn

Thank you guys for the explanation. Very interesting the point that this apparently lifeless soil is also fertile.


----------



## DarkLoki

That is not really correct. The soil in Flevoland is indeed very fertile clay ground but for construction it is useless. The soil cannot support houses so they dig away all the non-supporting clay till they get to a better layer and then they fill the hole up again with sand. So that is why the ground in the new suburb looks like a desert.


----------



## julesstoop

Thanks for making that part clear.

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. In 50 years or so, all of it will look like this:


----------



## Sonrise

ArthurK said:


> When watching the pictures in this thread, people might think all Dutch suburbs look like this. But that's not true. Most of the pictures in this thread are taken in large scale developments. Many of these projects are part of the VINEX-program of the central government. These new suburbs are situated close to the existing cities and have a high density compared with typical suburbs in other countries.
> 
> The early VINEX-districts were very boring, with houses which are all looking the same. This lead to a lot of critics in The Netherlands. The more recent developments are more creative, with IJburg (Amsterdam) and Vathorst (Amersfoort) as good examples. Although the districts were designed as suburbs, I must agree with euromerican about the density of these neighborhoods: they are very "urban suburbs".
> 
> Fortunately, there a lot of new suburban development areas which are not like those VINEX-districts. Especially if you go to the smaller cities, in less dense populated areas of The Netherlands than the Randstad region. Those modern non-VINEX suburbs have a smaller scale and are usually a mix of detached and semi-detached houses. There are parcels available for people who want to design and build their own house. But it's not such chaotic like Belgium, because of the extensive regulations regarding construction and spatial planning. Just a few pictures of suburban developments with a lower density than the VINEX-areas shown on many pictures in this thread:
> 
> *So-called "free parcels" where you can build what you want, although it has to meet a lot of criteria imposed by the government*:
> 
> 
> Semi-detached houses, designed and build by a construction company:
> 
> 
> More creative and custom-made houses, like this with a parking lot for your boat:
> 
> 
> You can find developments like the ones shown above virtually anywhere in The Netherlands. Those very massive VINEX-districts are usually close to the main cities in the central and western part of The Netherlands, where there is too less space available for housing projects to allow low-density developments.


Isn't that an oxymoron? lol


----------



## domtoren

*Utrecht Leidsche Rijn*










Modern architecture in Utrecht Leidsche Rijn


----------



## feng20

sfd


----------



## Luli Pop

mike7743 said:


> you're a moron of the highest degree.* does talking crap about America makes your little irrelevant small country feel good or something? lol @ your insecurities*.


that´s the moronest (allow me the expression) answer ever!


----------



## Ramses

julesstoop said:


> Anyhow, it doesn't matter. In 50 years or so, all of it will look like this:
> image


Do we get another war in the near future? :?


----------



## cjav

Who needs a war, we have immigration :lol:


----------



## jbkayaker12

intensivecarebear said:


> First off I'm American who has happened to live in many different countries. So nice try with your pathetic little insults about my 'irrelevent little country':lol:. And please explain to me how anything I said was moronic. American suburbia is just as much a product of social engineering as the Netherlands, which is what some Americans on this thread seem to fail to realize. My comment was a response to another poster's lame commie bashing post.
> Please get a life and stop trolling, and educate yourself before you make misinformed comments that make you and other Americans look more and more ignorant and arrogant... and I say this as a concerned fellow citizen. Have a nice life...
> 
> Now let's get back to the pics:cheers:


My fellow American, just an observation on this particular thread about the suburbs in the Netherlands. So far I have read insults about American suburbia on this thread but I just have to make this comment. I have seen more variation of homes built in just ONE of the master planned communities in Las Vegas, Summerlin in particular, compared to pretty much what I have seen in all of the pages in here combined. I will take American suburbia's cookie cutter homes over the homes featured here anytime.


----------



## bartjee

As a Dutch man, my opinion about America isn't that good. 
- The differences between poor and rich are to big.
- American people drive big polluting cars, they use to much oil. 
- A lot of American people have overweight.
- Everything must be big: big houses, big garage, big fridge etc.

For example: Las Vegas



























Sorry, but I think I like it much more to live in a Dutch rowhouse than living in a American detached house in neighbourhoods looking like this.

My backyard at this moment:



























Some Detached houses u/c in Blauwe Stad (Groningen)


----------



## jbkayaker12

Unfortunately you see blocks upon blocks upon blocks of rowhomes as attractive and by the way Las Vegas Suburbia has far more architectural styles in homes and the landscaping is better considering it is in a desert environment compared to what has been shown on this thread. I have seen more trees and vegetation in the Vegas suburbs than what has been posted here. By the way you need to work on your gardening skills. I wont even post photos of my garden here but it will certainly blow your garden out of the canal.


----------



## bartjee

jbkayaker12 said:


> Unfortunately you see blocks upon blocks upon blocks of rowhomes as attractive


Have you really seen this whole threat, because if you have watched this threat you see not only rowhouses, but also detached houses and a lot of two under one barbers. I have also posted a lot of pictures from suburbs who are not finished yet, so they remain to become green. Also my neigbourhood is just finished for four years and there still some projects under construction. 



jbkayaker12 said:


> and by the way Las Vegas Suburbia
> has far more architectural styles in homes and the landscaping is better considering it is in a desert environment compared to what has been shown on this thread.


Make an American suburbs threat and show me some pictures!!



jbkayaker12 said:


> I have seen more trees and vegetation in the Vegas suburbs than what has been posted here. By the way you need to work on your gardening skills. I wont even post photos of my garden here but it will certainly blow your garden out of the canal.


My backyard is not finished yet, the green still has to grow. And by the way, a lot of people like my backyard a lot! I tried to make a nice maintenance free backyard. Show me some pictures of your backyard?


----------



## Jonesy55

Grow up you guys please.


----------



## jbkayaker12

Jonesy55 said:


> Grow up you guys please.


Hehehe the Dutch people are very touchy, they like to hurl insults but cannot handle a simple taste of their own medicine.


----------



## bartjee

Do I have insulted someone? No, I just give my opinion. Here in holland we live in a democracy were everyone can say what he/she wants and we respect others opinion. You may also give your opinion about our suburbs, but give me the right reason why you think it is, show me proof.


----------



## Jonesy55

Suburbanist said:


> I meant that planning priorities in most European countries (and in North America and Australia)* should be*, first and foremost, massively expand the urbanized/developed areas regardless of agricultural land loss and so on. Today _some_ urban planners sound more like environmentalists from WWF or Greenpeace than real planners interested in expanding the footprint of the cities they're supposed to plan!


Why *should* planners do this? Because you want them to?

Is there any rule anywhere saying that planners must seek to expand cities as much as possible? Why shouldn't planners take into account concerns about the impact of urban expansion on areas outside the city? Why should planners actively engineer an environment that limits random interactions with neighbours etc? and why would living further away from existing settlement convey 'exclusivity', and why should this be something planners strive for?

There is no absolute reason why they shouldn't do these things either but it should imo be a matter for the community to decide through its democratic processes, otherwise its just another top-down imposition onto society by the planning profession.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Pay no mind to Suburbanist. Just be gratefull he's in no position to execute his disastrous ideas.


----------



## Spookvlieger

*BELGIAN CITY AND TOWN CENTERS*

delete


----------



## Spookvlieger

delete


----------



## gzhenfeng3

For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net
For more images visit:http://www.15usd.net


----------



## Suburbanist

Jonesy55 said:


> There is no absolute reason why they shouldn't do these things either but it should imo be a matter for the community to decide through its democratic processes, otherwise its just another top-down imposition onto society by the planning profession.


The planning processes in most cities (at least in Europe) is flawed. Only "concerned" parties attend meetings, which are dominated by "engaged" agents.

I prefer something more straightforward to make such decisions: the real estate market. If there is a demand for the type of city planners think is best, people will buy estates on it. Otherwise, because agricultural land is so (relatively) cheap and our (European) incomes are so high we can pretty much import everything we eat, market forces will ensure land is put to a better use if people are willing to buy estates in new developments and so.

Of course we need some degree of planning like providing the transportation, communication and utilities to whatever housing pattern emerges. Of course, different people have different expectations and disposable money, hence different types or housing patterns will find their niche.

The only question this approach leaves unsolved is that a housing pattern chosen by some people might indirectly affect the housing pattern chosen by other people. But that is the price you pay to have relatively free (real estate) markets and small government.


----------



## Jonesy55

The problem with a purely market based approach though is that you replace a one person one vote approach with a one $/€/£/¥ one vote system. 

The planning process in a democratic system might be influenced more by some 'engaged' people than by others but at least everybody has the choice to be 'engaged' if they want to, in a purely market based system it will be dominated by those with the deepest pockets and it is not usually possible to simply become much richer to compensate for that. Which imo makes the system flawed.

In such a system a corporation with €10bn at its disposal will always be able to have far more influence over the direction of planning policy than a family with €100,000. In the absence of democratic control the deepest pockets would effectively be able to shape the urban area and the wider environment in their strategic interests.

There is also of course the well documented problem that contrary to Adam Smith's assertion regarding the invisible hand, it is common for individually rational decisions to lead to collective situations that people don't actually want and that are certainly sub-optimal, collective democratic input into the planning system is a way of mitigating this.

Societies throughout history have always been a balance between the individual and the collective, if you veer to far towards the extreme at either end imo then that produces negative results, a purely market driven system with no democratic control for me would be too far to the individualistic extreme.


----------



## JoseRodolfo

Suburbanist said:


> *I prefer something more straightforward to make such decisions: the real estate market.* If there is a demand for the type of city planners think is best, people will buy estates on it. Otherwise, because agricultural land is so (relatively) cheap and our (European) incomes are so high *we can pretty much import everything we eat, market forces will ensure land is put to a better use if people are willing to buy estates in new developments and so.*


:cripes::crazy::blahblah::doh::sly:


----------



## Suburbanist

Jonesy55 said:


> Societies throughout history have always been a balance between the individual and the collective, if you veer to far towards the extreme at either end imo then that produces negative results, a purely market driven system with no democratic control for me would be too far to the individualistic extreme.


The question is how to "tune" this control you mention.

As I said, I'm far from being totally skewed at the private actors in the market. I think a central planning commission should establish general guidelines. But those guidelines should be based on what developers want to build and buyers want to buy/rent.

Otherwise, we start seeing people using the planing process (in a broad sense) to avoid inevitable change to their places and cities, or to extract concessions.

Here in Tilburg, for instance, it took 6 (six!) years to "plan" a new area for development in the northern outskirts of the town. You read it right: just to plan. No groundbreaking. Discussions, discussions, discussions. Meanwhile the housing prices have skyrockets and waiting lists for housing in the "organized rental market" were above 2 years. There was even some rift against foreign high-paid university workers and researchers (I'm a grad student there) outbidding flats and driving prices further up, to the point, as a friend of mine once told me, that they tried to pressure the university to pressure young single researches not to rent entire flat to themselves where a couple + 1 child could live, but instead share apartments :nuts:

If the city had more lax planning processes and allowed developers to build all over the place, aiming to form a 3-axis starred conurbation Breda-Tilburg-Eindhoven-Den Bosch (with Tilburg at its very center of course :lol, we wouldn't have such hideous situations of people trying to put an employer (an a very big one in the city) mingling with its high skilled workforce housing options.

Don't get me wrong: this pattern replicate all over Europe. From where I come from before living in NL, Italy, problems are sometimes worse.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Suburbanist said:


> Here in Tilburg, for instance, it took 6 (six!) years to "plan" a new area for development in the northern outskirts of the town. You read it right: just to plan. No groundbreaking. Discussions, discussions, discussions.


Oh cut the bullshit. The planned expansion in the northeast is still in the planning stage because it isn't needed yet. Meanwhile the last areas in de Reeshof (big expansion in to the west) are being developed and when those are done, the city needs a new place to start expanding. No shortage in (highrise) developments in the inner city as well as renovated old neighbourhoods. The problem is that de Reeshof and the planned northeast expansion are already too far from the city center and you can only survive there with a car.
Once again I reiterate how lucky we are not to have the likes of you in any position of power, otherwisewe would already have undense sprawl/ugly housing all the way to Breda and Eindhoven.
If anything, buying your own house in developments like this has been way to easy and not enough people live in appartments in the city in the Netherlands (one of the densest countries in the world).




> Meanwhile the housing prices have skyrockets and waiting lists for housing in the "organized rental market" were above 2 years.


Housing prices have stagnated/gone down and the time it takes to sell a house has gone way up, courtesy of the crisis. Don't lie like that...
Waiting list of 2 years on the rental market is nothing...



> There was even some rift against foreign high-paid university workers and researchers (I'm a grad student there) outbidding flats and driving prices further up, to the point, as a friend of mine once told me, that they tried to pressure the university to pressure young single researches not to rent entire flat to themselves where a couple + 1 child could live, but instead share apartments :nuts:


I suspect this is more bullshit. None of my friends had any problem whatsoever in finding appartements both in the private rental market as in the buying market. And they all live alone!



> If the city had more lax planning processes and allowed developers to build all over the place, aiming to form a 3-axis starred conurbation Breda-Tilburg-Eindhoven-Den Bosch (with Tilburg at its very center of course :lol, we wouldn't have such hideous situations of people trying to put an employer (an a very big one in the city) mingling with its high skilled workforce housing options.


It does not make on iota of a difference if these cities actually physically connect or not. What matters is good infrastructure. From Tilburg you can be in Breda or Den Bosch in 15 minutes and Eindhoven in 20. City center to city center.


----------



## Suburbanist

Anderson Geimz said:


> Meanwhile the last areas in de Reeshof (big expansion in to the west) are being developed and when those are done, the city needs a new place to start expanding.


Reeshof (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=...81923,4.997921&spn=0.030027,0.077162&t=h&z=14), in my opinion, is one of the best new suburban development areas in the country, and I'm not saying that because it is in Tilburg.

Water + nice houses + parks + decent local commerce + segregated bike paths + good connections with nearest motorway (A58). 

I just love Reeshof :cheers: . 



> The problem is that de Reeshof and the planned northeast expansion are already too far from the city center and you can only survive there with a car.


Not quite like that. Reeshof has its own train station. I guess they have buses every 10 min, but those buses will take ages to reach downtown Tilburg. In any case, the development is quite spacious, has space for stand-alone housing and so on. If Breda promoted and likewise eastward expansion, the cities could merge, and that would be awesome!

The reason these developments are far from downtown includes the presence of a groundwater recharge protected area and adjacent forests: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=...1.55957,5.0247&spn=0.030042,0.077162&t=h&z=14 in the west, and an industrial park next to downtown in the northeast http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=...72269,5.109501&spn=0.030034,0.077162&t=h&z=14



> If anything, buying your own house in developments like this has been way to easy and not enough people live in appartments in the city in the Netherlands (one of the densest countries in the world).


The price for inner city apartments with equivalent areas are just too high. In any case, you don't even have to look into statistics to know that Reeshof is a family paradise, with a lot of kids in the parks, nice brand new elementary schools and so on, while the crowd living in "Centrum" is definitively different.

I know it is anecdotal, but the McDonalds store near the Reeshof has a "family perfect picture" crowd: toddlers, parents, kids socializing outside (instead of teenagers smoking outside) and so.



> It does not make on iota of a difference if these cities actually physically connect or not. What matters is good infrastructure. From Tilburg you can be in Breda or Den Bosch in 15 minutes and Eindhoven in 20. City center to city center.


Hum, I dare to disagree with you in that respect. On peak times, it can take 40 min to drive to Breda, and 45 to Den Bosch. Unless you live within walking distance from train stations, you'll have to add +10 to +20 minutes in each point... In Tilburg, majority of employment centers are *not* within 10 min walking distance from train station. Indeed, dowtown Tilburg near the train station is quite empty by Dutch standards.

Anyhow, maybe I was just dreaming Breda, Tilburg, Ben Bosch and Eindhoven could become one medium-density conurbation so we would have a Randstad of our own in Noord Brabant.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Suburbanist said:


> Reeshof (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=...81923,4.997921&spn=0.030027,0.077162&t=h&z=14), in my opinion, is one of the best new suburban development areas in the country, and I'm not saying that because it is in Tilburg.
> 
> Water + nice houses + parks + decent local commerce + segregated bike paths + good connections with nearest motorway (A58).
> 
> I just love Reeshof :cheers: .


And what does a suburban area have to do inside city limits? Yes it is a 100 times better than suburban areas in other countries, but still it should have been more dense and more varied, since it is in the city. The furthest point is almost 10 km from the city center which is very far for a Dutch city.



> Not quite like that. Reeshof has its own train station. I guess they have buses every 10 min, but those buses will take ages to reach downtown Tilburg. In any case, the development is quite spacious, has space for stand-alone housing and so on. If Breda promoted and likewise eastward expansion, the cities could merge, and that would be awesome!


No it would be pointless and wastefull.



> The reason these developments are far from downtown includes the presence of a groundwater recharge protected area and adjacent forests: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=...1.55957,5.0247&spn=0.030042,0.077162&t=h&z=14 in the west, and an industrial park next to downtown in the northeast http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=...72269,5.109501&spn=0.030034,0.077162&t=h&z=14


Bullshit. Those areas are too far to be urban residential also. 50,000 people live in De Reeshof, a little more density on the side facing the city center would have done a lot. I even could have seen a lightrail to the university and on to De Reeshof in that scenario.



> The price for inner city apartments with equivalent areas are just too high. In any case, you don't even have to look into statistics to know that Reeshof is a family paradise, with a lot of kids in the parks, nice brand new elementary schools and so on, while the crowd living in "Centrum" is definitively different.
> 
> I know it is anecdotal, but the McDonalds store near the Reeshof has a "family perfect picture" crowd: toddlers, parents, kids socializing outside (instead of teenagers smoking outside) and so.


It's boring. Environments like that create small minded individuals...
(MacDonalds are you kidding me?!)



> Hum, I dare to disagree with you in that respect. On peak times, it can take 40 min to drive to Breda, and 45 to Den Bosch. Unless you live within walking distance from train stations, you'll have to add +10 to +20 minutes in each point... In Tilburg, majority of employment centers are *not* within 10 min walking distance from train station. Indeed, dowtown Tilburg near the train station is quite empty by Dutch standards.


Wow. This has to be your most idiotic statement. It truely exposes your thought processes...
You ever stop to think why it takes 45 minutes at times BY CAR? Maybe because there are too many cars in the first place?! It didn't even occur to you that I was talking about train. It always just takes 15 minutes by train and contrary to what you claim a lot of people do live within 10 minutes walking distance of the trainstation. And otherwise there's always the bus or -I dunno- bikes? (since this is the Netherlands). And you are aware that the entire area around the trainstation is going to be massively redeveloped?



> Anyhow, maybe I was just dreaming Breda, Tilburg, Ben Bosch and Eindhoven could become one medium-density conurbation so we would have a Randstad of our own in Noord Brabant.


And the point of that being?!


----------



## Suburbanist

Anderson Geimz said:


> And what does a suburban area have to do inside city limits? Yes it is a 100 times better than suburban areas in other countries, but still it should have been more dense and more varied, since it is in the city. The furthest point is almost 10 km from the city center which is very far for a Dutch city.


Tilburg has its fair share of high-density housing, like here: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...59237,5.072615&spn=0.007511,0.027466&t=h&z=16

Reeshof is an oasis compared to the rest of the city, with bigger houses, a lot of open space for water, a lot of houses built with private access to water and so. It is a different - and quite successful - model. The average Marteen living in Reeshof is quite different from the average Joe living in the Westpoint, for instance.




> It's boring. Environments like that create small minded individuals...
> (MacDonalds are you kidding me?!)


This is as prejudicial as someone who likes that kind of housing saying that everyone living in Tilburg downtown is junk-prone, heavy drinker and doesn't want to take responsibility in life. Nobody is inherently better for living in a 24-story or in a stand-alone housing.

I guess parents love the Reeshof environment, or at least they seem to have chosen that development en masse. 

I don't like McDonalds that much, but it is a family program many ppl do here. 



> You ever stop to think why it takes 45 minutes at times BY CAR? Maybe because there are too many cars in the first place?!


hno: Maybe because there are too few lanes on A58 and N65? ChrisZwolle, one of the biggest Dutch contributors to SSC and moderator of the Infrastructure forum, would kindly agree with me.

There are quite enough train services to/from Tilburg and nearby cities (6x hour to Breda, 4 to Eindhoven, 4 to Den Bosch). People keep driving because for those who drive it is more convenient and efficient to use the car. But this specific discussion is without the scope of this thread. 83,7% (according to Eurostat 2008) of motorized trips in Netherlands, measures as kmXpax are done by private cars (12,1% by train, the rest by tram, buses and ferries), so cars are prioritized by people living here. But Tilburg 3 train stations have quite good Park-n-Ride facilities and those parking places have decent turnover.



> And you are aware that the entire area around the trainstation is going to be massively redeveloped?


Yes, I know there are plans to take half of the Spoorlaan (the westbound lands) and shift them to the other side of the station, where today are located ProRail facilities, and connect two sides of the city, so westbound traffic will flow from the other site of the station between the two nearest viaducts. I have the 2020 brochure with me too.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

What's a Marteen?

People "chose" to live in De Reeshof mainly because they can get a certain amount of square meters for a certain kind of price. Most of the rest is an aside. There are good schools and parks closer to the city center too.
People are not that different at all.
The point is that the rest of us are subsidising the greater costs that developments like De Reeshof bring. But at least people there are also paying their tax to the city unlike suburbanites that leech of the city services (*cough*Goirle*cough* --> should have been annexed 10 years ago).

Anyway I probably know more people in De Reeshof than you do. Most of them will gladly live somewhere else and if not that, they still resent the distance and the boring environment.Other factors "force" them to live there anyway (again, it's not that bad, it's just that it could have been a lot better ).


----------



## tripleseis

I love the examples of modernism shown in this thread. Thrilling reading. I wish town planners and builders built suburbs like this in the UK, but we're unfortunately stuck with the same identikit housing estates built to traditional standards which in this day and age tend to fall apart after 5 minutes.

Here's something that's just caught my eye on Google while looking around Breda:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=...=ejT9Pd7FdD7jQxie-MJ5qg&cbp=12,53.27,,0,-4.73

It feels like you don't have to travel far in the Netherlands to find interesting homes.


----------



## bartjee

Suburbanist said:


> Reeshof (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=...81923,4.997921&spn=0.030027,0.077162&t=h&z=14), in my opinion, is one of the best new suburban development areas in the country, and I'm not saying that because it is in Tilburg.
> 
> Water + nice houses + parks + decent local commerce + segregated bike paths + good connections with nearest motorway (A58).
> 
> I just love Reeshof :cheers: .


I live in the Reeshof. The architecture could have been better in some areas, the connections with the nearest motorway becomes better and better. It's indeed very green and there are good bike paths. I live about 300 meter from the train station and the busstation is in my street.

Some pictures of houses/appartments in several places.


----------



## droplul

Beautiful beautiful beautiful. ****, why are you guys so awesome. You make us all look bad.


----------



## Spookvlieger

delete


----------



## Spookvlieger

This one gives me the shivers! Nice architecture but jezus so dark, cold and harsh. That square is almost as worse as one in the concrete suburbs of London or Paris. I like the rest of the pictures but this onehno:


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Yeah, that square looks like some kind of Soviet-style square. The architecture there is not my taste either too many separate windows.


----------



## intensivecarebear

yeah very harsh design. my least favorite thus far. They could have at least mixed up the color scheme a bit and put in some greenery to make it more "human-scale'


----------



## bartjee

I think this picture is made during a sunset, what makes it look very dark. If the square was greener, it had looked a lot more liveable. I like the architecture a lot! I post more pictures later today.


----------



## Eric Offereins

^^ I have to agree with that. It would be a good setting for a SF movie or something.


----------



## bartjee




----------



## bartjee




----------



## Quintana

Those first two pictures have nothing to do with suburbs, do they  The 1st one (Tilburg) is near the city centre, the 2nd one (Eindhoven) is in the middle of the city.


----------



## seb.nl

Indeed... Centerburbs  (Pretty tower in Eindhoven nonetheless)


----------



## ChrisZwolle

>


Damn, that looks like a Führerbunker or something. Who would want to live in such a "house"?


----------



## JoseRodolfo

ChrisZwolle said:


> Damn, that looks like a Führerbunker or something. Who would want to live in such a "house"?


I was thinking the same. In the other hand I would love to live in a house like this:


----------



## desertpunk

ChrisZwolle said:


> Damn, that looks like a Führerbunker or something. Who would want to live in such a "house"?


That's been a big issue with modern, contemporary architecture in the US. It's stylish and sexy stuff that wins awards and fawning applause but people don't want to live in them. Contemporary homes usually re-sell at a discount over here and builders don't like them because they're slow movers. They're great for entertaining or for a second home or pied-a-terre but as primary residences, they just don't appeal to many people. Over here, they're popular with young urban couples with no children and empty nesters who've downsized and can afford to pay a price for entertaining their friends in style or who travel a lot and are rarely at home.


----------



## LtBk

I probably missed the answer, but how popular are these Dutch urban suburbs with the general population?


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Considering hundreds of thousands of people have moved into these neighborhoods in the last decade or two, they're quite popular. It's about the only affordable new housing close to larger cities. 

VINEX locations are always located near the larger cities, as opposed to large-scale growth of distant towns. They are technically not suburbs, as they usually fall under the jurisdiction of the existing municipality, although they tend to be suburban in nature. However, these locations have a large scale of demographic mix, and are certain not homogenous in structure, although they do have a large concentration of young families. 

I lived in a VINEX location myself, there were schools that had 12 classes of grades 1 - 5, but only 3 classes of grades 6 - 8.* Most pupils are very young. 

* dutch grades 1 - 8 are the ones you're going through before going to high school.


----------



## Zanovijetalo

Bunch of great architecture and smart sub/urban planning here, beautiful


----------



## UAE_isthebest

Some Beautiful houses! I would love to see something like this in my city! :cheers:


----------



## EuroMaster

joshsam said:


> This one gives me the shivers! Nice architecture but jezus so dark, cold and harsh. That square is almost as worse as one in the concrete suburbs of London or Paris. I like the rest of the pictures but this onehno:


I understand your opinion. I think we can find the answer that there is no living creature on the street, 
because the place is not welcoming you in a certain way. There is not any little shop or café on 
ground level of the buildings. There is no tree or other green what could make it like a garden for everybody. 
Some architects think there job is to only stackle bricks.


----------



## Suburbanist

EuroMaster said:


> I understand your opinion. I think we can find the answer that there is no living creature on the street,
> because the place is not welcoming you in a certain way.


Maybe the pics were taken in the summer, when it is already light out by 5h30.

Maybe the building are not still occupied.



> There is not any little shop or café on
> ground level of the buildings. There is no tree or other green what could make it like a garden for everybody.
> Some architects think there job is to only stackle bricks.


Cheers to modernism. Ground shops fully opened to the street spoil most buildings, if they are not commercial ones. We need to reverse the trend of thinking of building as mere appendages of streets.

Not every single district must look like it were a busy touristic area with restaurant chairs interfering with free flow of pedestrians on the curbside, for instance. It's better to keep business inside the buildings and let them shine, alone and without this visually pollution brought by too much ground floor activity, as if ground floors were a separate entity from the above-ground ones.

It also incentives people to work more and be more productive if they don't have much action to see from their windows (though I don't link that much the windows' design of these building shown above).


----------



## eklips

Suburbanist said:


> Not every single district must look like it were a busy touristic area with restaurant chairs interfering with free flow of pedestrians on the curbside, for instance. It's better to keep business inside the buildings and let them shine, alone and without this visually pollution brought by too much ground floor activity, as if ground floors were a separate entity from the above-ground ones.
> 
> It also incentives people to work more and be more productive if they don't have much action to see from their windows (though I don't link that much the windows' design of these building shown above).


People are social animals and wether you want it or not, as far as interractions are concerned, the street is one of the most important symbolical places where they take place.

The general trend in urbanism (at least in Europe) in places where there is no street activity is generally a demand for it to be increased.
For example in France everytime there is a municipal election, candidates always promise more "commerces de proximités" (litterally 'proximity shops'), this ought to tell something.


----------



## thryve

Suburbanist-- people come first. People are the priority-- not creating a "perfect", "sterile", clean look for buildings and their ground floors.

Have you studied the work of Le Corbusier, and just as notably, his critics? Or for that matter, has nobody ever told you that your ideas are very outdated? We've learned the mistake of creating empty, sterile spaces which may LOOK pretty or progressive when new, but lack any activity, "eyes on the street", or other people-mindededness, safety-mindedness, etc.


----------



## ArthurK

Suburbanist said:


> Not every single district must look like it were a busy touristic area with restaurant chairs interfering with free flow of pedestrians on the curbside, for instance. It's better to keep business inside the buildings and let them shine, alone and without this visually pollution brought by too much ground floor activity, as if ground floors were a separate entity from the above-ground ones.


You are creating "dead" districts when separating business from other functions. Those business districts will be abandoned at night, while the residential neighborhoods are almost empty during office hours. This generates a lot of safety issues in both districts. We have made those mistakes in The Netherlands too many times. The modernist VINEX-districts are the most recent examples of this.

Now, those VINEX-districts are growing. That's because these neighborhoods attract a lot of young families, who need bigger houses in a safe area to raise their children. But I assure you, the decline will already start within 15 to 20 years. The children have been grown up and went to the city for study. The parents have stayed, but the attractiveness of the area will be gone. The houses need maintanance and need to be upgraded to cope with the changing demands of the people. And they are still far, far away from where the action is.


Suburbanist said:


> It also incentives people to work more and be more productive if they don't have much action to see from their windows (though I don't link that much the windows' design of these building shown above).


That might be true for factory workers; they need not to be distracted so they can continue with their individual task. But for most other types of work, people and interaction are very important. It might sound to you as a waste of time when colleagues go out together for lunch, but actually that's one of the most important times of a working day. Talking about their personal lives, reflecting on things they see on the street, getting to know what people really think... It's no waste of time at all. People won't become more productive by physical and socially isolating them of the rest of the world during office hours; the opposite is true. 

I expect the traditional office will become far less important the next decade. People will be doing their individual tasks at home, so they can take care of their children at the same time. Meetings will take place in the office, or in a restaurant or a Starbucks nearby. The focus will shift from input (work 8 hours/day) to output (finish this task) or outcome (make this work). This requires a different type of office buildings, situated in a different environment.

Regarding spatial planning, I really like the vision of Jane Jacobs. Mixing different functions makes neighborhoods succesful and keeps them succesful. The Netherlands is an interesting country because you have great examples of mixing functions (especially almost all city centers), and great examples of the opposite: the creation of "sleeping cities" due to those large scale housing developments (where hardly any jobs are located) and office parks far away from anything except an highway ramp.

This large scale construction of residential-only districts is a main cause of the traffic problems in The Netherlands. Everyone living in those sleeping cities needs to go by car to their work, causing a lot of traffic jams. It is also very hard to serve those locations by public transport, because you have a very high demand during peak hours, but in between nobody wants to go there. And it's a very heterogeneous demand, which is very hard to manage with public transport.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Well said, great post!

But off course Suburbanist knows better than Jane Jacobs...


----------



## Trabbuco

ArthurK said:


> Now, those VINEX-districts are growing. That's because these neighborhoods attract a lot of young families, who need bigger houses in a safe area to raise their children. But I assure you, the decline will already start within 15 to 20 years. The children have been grown up and went to the city for study. The parents have stayed, but the attractiveness of the area will be gone. The houses need maintanance and need to be upgraded to cope with the changing demands of the people. And they are still far, far away from where the action is.


I disagree. You say that the decline will start within 15 to 20 years when al the children have grown up. I don't think that's gonna happens with the new suburbs (vinex). In the past, after WWII, they builded a lot more cheap and soulless homes, because the housing shortage was extreme. The newer vinex-wijken have bigger, timeless and better and more expensive homes. Also, the city must keep the facilities in the neighbourhoods. And than it doesn't matter that there less children. You can also renovate the neigbourhood.


----------



## ArthurK

^^ I doubt VINEX-districs are timeless. In fact, it's just a modernism revival: blue print planning, large scale project development, homogeneous houses, geometrical paterns, focus on "green" public space like parks and lawns. The latest VINEX-developments have more diversity, but it's _planned diversity_. So actually it's still blue print planning.

It is true they've build a lot of cheap houses in the 50s and 60s, like the Bijlmer in Amsterdam. It was pure modernism. But don't forget the 70s, when the developments had a post-modernist approach. Intimate neighborhoods, with curved streets and a lot of small dead end roads. Almere-Haven is an example of such a district. You can already see the decline begin in those 70s neighborhoods. The housing development since the 90s is some sort of modernist revival. Of course, people now think this is "the new, modern way of building houses which will last forever", but they were also saying this in the 50s and 70s.

I don't think we continue with this way of building houses for the next decades. VINEX won't be timeless, it will always be inmediately linked to the 90s and early 21st century. In my vision, we will soon stop with those large scale developments outside the existing boundaries of the city. We will shift to a _compact and intense city_ philosophy, with redevelopment of former industrial areas or outdated social housing blocks. Or what to think about those large railway yards in the city, which are just slightly used or can be relocated. We've already seen such developments (example: NDSM-eiland in Amsterdam), and I think we will see a lot more in the future. In think there will be demand for more high quality apartements inside or close to the city center. After decades of large scale development and suburbanization, we will go to a period of redevelopment and re-urbanization.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Actually I can see many 80's neighborhoods declining, because all the youths are now adults and live elsewhere. I think it's a natural cycle.


----------



## Ramses

ArthurK said:


> ^^ I doubt VINEX-districs are timeless. In fact, it's just a modernism revival


It is not a revival, because modernism never really left this country. Almost everything in the current vinex-locations is build in neo-modernist architecture.



> After decades of large scale development and suburbanization, we will go to a period of redevelopment and re-urbanization.


Because people want to go back to the city, or because they are forced to go back? (because not enough houses will be built on the countryside?)


----------



## ArthurK

I would say "because they are no longer forced to leave the city". Nowadays, young families leave the city because they need a bigger house, suitable for small children (so no appartment) and for an affordable price. It's very hard to find such accomodation within the city.

I expect we will see many social housing districs of the 50s and 60s and former industrial estates being redeveloped into modern high-density neighborhoods. Those houses will be attractive to young families, since they are safe for children with all the facillities of the city nearby.

Why should someone want to live in dull sleeping towns, if they could get the same quality within the central city?


----------



## Ramses

ArthurK said:


> Why should someone want to live in dull sleeping towns, if they could get the same quality within the central city?


Wel, only if the central city can provide their new citizens with quiet green neighbourhoods with enough parkingspace (for two cars per house), woonerven and only working autochthonous neighbours. Perhaps then they will come back. But i can imagine most big cities don't have enough space left to create neighbourhoods like this within their municipal boundaries.


----------



## Koen Acacia

LtBk said:


> I probably missed the answer, but how popular are these Dutch urban suburbs with the general population?


Financially, VINEX houses have been a success. I've seen cases where house prices have gone up by 20 percent in a few years time. In the current market, that's pretty impressive.
OTOH, if you look at the reason WHY people are selling within a few years, then there certainly is a group of people that regrets moving there. They find it dull, talk about their area as "the graveyard", complain that all lights are out after 9PM and so on. Mostly a neighbors thing btw, they usually couldn't care less about the architecture. I'd say that the large majority is pretty happy living there, but there's still a significant group that really regrets having moved from their older neighborhood.

My bet is (as good as anyone else's of course) that it's a pretty good area for a certain type of person. If you like a more secluded lifestyle then VINEX should be great for you. If you'd rather have a more convivial neighborhood, then moving there might not be a good idea.


----------



## JPBrazil

JoseRodolfo said:


> I was thinking the same. In the other hand I would love to live in a house like this:


Loved it... :drool:

Does anybody know the architect who designed it?


----------



## Suburbanist

The VINEX areas are great IMO. As for the argument that people will get older and children will leave their houses, well, that happens all the time. It's a cycle. We are not living amidst any period of particular higher-than-the-trend-curve natality rates.

Think of student houses: people move there, get their degrees, and move out. As families get older, they will move elsewhere and new young couples with children will move in.

In any case, trends and preferences have been more fragmented than ever. There will be families willing to raise their 2 children in a 30th story 120m² small apartment. There will be families willing to live far from downtown and so to have extensive green areas frequented mostly by other families (and not the local college crowd, for instance), bigger houses, private lawns and so. So there will be space for these two and any ohter trend that appears and fade.

*Again, I remind that architects, urban planners and so are a pretty much self-selected group. Sometimes they fail to recognize their optimum solutions don't appeal to the regular folk on town*.

As for term of "where the action is" as referring to Downtown attractiveness, I think it is a biased evaluation. For the average SSC forummer (young, 18-35, without children or partner, living alone or with their family), lack of pubs opened until late, clubs and so could be a sign of "dull-ness". However, for many families this could be attractive for lack of nuisance. It is worth considering that parents might find such neighborhoods more attractive than a multi-story building.

It is not wrong to enjoy a "busting" street life, it is not wrong to completely dislike it and avoid it in favor of quieter neighborhoods.

I want to move to a VINEX, probably will do that in summer 2012, specifically to the Reeshof. I have been there countless times. It will take me longer to go to my workplace (now I live in front of my university, literally less than 5 minutes walking to our research office), but it will provide me space and comfort. Particularly, it will provide me free parking for the car I'm planning to buy by then and 2.3 times the build-up area (not to count the private courtyard) I could rent for the same price in the center of Tilburg.

There must be options for different urban arrangements that suit different lifestyles. Just because one doesn't like a neighborhood that is "dead" after 9PM one should not assume nobody else likes them, and vice-versa. As much as somewhere like the Canal Belt in Amsterdam would be the last place I wanted to live in this country, I understand some people have a fascination for that kind of neighborhood and don't mind paying an utterly expensive rent to be "close to action". We should respect each others' options and let the market supply us with suitable housing.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

^^ What do you do on your free time in the suburbs?

It's not a rhetorical question, I really want to know.


----------



## Suburbanist

Rebasepoiss said:


> ^^ What do you do on your free time in the suburbs?
> 
> It's not a rhetorical question, I really want to know.


Anything you would do elsewhere:

- going to the local park
- running/jogging
- visiting friends wherever they might live
- getting the car and going out for a movie, supermarket, restaurant, club

You are not only determined and defined by the housing arrangement you live in.


----------



## Ramses

@suburbanist: Since you got the line "_Ph.D under development_" beneath your username, i am very curious about your research. Are you studying something in urban planning?


----------



## Suburbanist

^^Real estate financial issues among other subjects in Banking.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

Suburbanist said:


> - *getting the car* and going out for a movie, supermarket, restaurant, club
> 
> You are not only determined and defined by the housing arrangement you live in.


You just proved my point. Parents claim that suburbia is a great place to raise children but what do the children/youth themselves think about it? When there is sufficient PT, living in suburbia is survivable for a teenager but when there isn't, someone from the family has to be a taxi driver for a large part of the day and that does no good to anybody. 
I say this because I am 18 and I have been living in an apartment in a suburb of Tallinn for 6 years now. With the recent suburbanisation of Tallinn a lot of my friends from school have moved to suburbs with their families. Where do you think I usually meet those friends? In the city centre, of course. Fortunately I live close enough to Tallinn to have a more or less decent public transport connection.


----------



## Koen Acacia

Suburbanist said:


> In any case, trends and preferences have been more fragmented than ever. There will be families willing to raise their 2 children in a 30th story 120m² small apartment. There will be families willing to live far from downtown and so to have extensive green areas frequented mostly by other families (and not the local college crowd, for instance), bigger houses, private lawns and so. So there will be space for these two and any ohter trend that appears and fade.


Yup, the trick is getting the mix right. Some people like suburbs, some don't. Nothing wrong with either group as far as I'm concerned.



> *Again, I remind that architects, urban planners and so are a pretty much self-selected group. Sometimes they fail to recognize their optimum solutions don't appeal to the regular folk on town*.


Suburbanists are a self-selecting group as well though.



> As for term of "where the action is" as referring to Downtown attractiveness, I think it is a biased evaluation. For the average SSC forummer (young, 18-35, without children or partner, living alone or with their family), lack of pubs opened until late, clubs and so could be a sign of "dull-ness". However, for many families this could be attractive for lack of nuisance. It is worth considering that parents might find such neighborhoods more attractive than a multi-story building.


Sorry, that's just not true. First off, it's not about "the action" in the sense of clubs etc. at all. It's much more about that hairdresser or that Indonesian restaurant around the corner. It's about knowing who the postman is. We're not talking about hyper-urban hard partiers here, we're simply talking about people who like a somewhat higher level of connectedness than a VINEX area provides.

Secondly, about VINEX-area's being "the" family-friendly option: for a six year old kid, that low level of action means safety, but for a 14-year old teenager it means boredom. A thirty-year old parent might not go clubbing anymore but that still doesn't mean that they like to sit home all evening. Parents, too, like to go to the occasional restaurant and have a glass of wine or two without having to take a taxi back. It really isn't about families vs. singles, it's simply about preferences. Some families like their peace and quiet, some don't. Some singles like a lot of action around them, and some (like you) can't wait to get out of all that.


----------



## Koen Acacia

Suburbanist said:


> - getting the *car *and going out for a movie, supermarket, *restaurant*, *club*


Wait, I know one more:

- getting fined for drunk driving.


----------



## Suburbanist

Koen Acacia said:


> Y
> Sorry, that's just not true. First off, it's not about "the action" in the sense of clubs etc. at all. It's much more about that hairdresser or that Indonesian restaurant around the corner. It's about knowing who the postman is.


Why restrict yourself to one hairdresser and one corner restaurant when you can have your car and access 50 hairdressers and 70 restaurants within a 45-min drive? 

I'm not negating your assertions, just stating that there are advantages on having stand-by auto mobility.



> Secondly, about VINEX-area's being "the" family-friendly option: for a six year old kid, that low level of action means safety, but for a 14-year old teenager it means boredom. A thirty-year old parent might not go clubbing anymore but that still doesn't mean that they like to sit home all evening. Parents, too, like to go to the occasional restaurant and have a glass of wine or two without having to take a taxi back. It really isn't about families vs. singles, it's simply about preferences. Some families like their peace and quiet, some don't. Some singles like a lot of action around them, and some (like you) can't wait to get out of all that.


Exactly. Different housing arrangements exist because people have different preferences. I don't mind going to a restaurant and not drinking so I can drive (which makes me a happy "chauffeur" for friends and girls btw), and I go out relatively often. Still, I love to be on control of my immediate surroundings, in the sense I can get into a car in - say - my garage -, go to the parking lot near the university without having to face strangers or even neighbors when I don't want social interaction (e.g., when I'm commuting to work and 100% mentally focused on the workday, I'd prefer to meet as few strangers as possible).

So arrangements like VINEX have their appeal for a crowd that thinks and decides differently than those who don't like them. They are not better nor worse, just different because not every household value the same amenities, design and characteristics as the ideal ones (for me, the ideal housing arrangement is a gated community btw).


----------



## julesstoop

I have 70+ restaurants and god knows how many hairdressers within a 30 min walk, or a 10 min bicycle drive, just to name a few of the available options. Living in the city saves me the cost of having to drive a car.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Especially for Suburbanist:

http://www.nrc.nl/binnenland/article2611662.ece/Vinexwijken_versterken_segregatie_tussen_arm_en_rijk

Not surprised if he thinks this is a good thing though.

(btw I just fell to my knees thankfull he's not actually going to be an urban planner, plus not surprised Suburbanist about your area of study...)


----------



## JoseRodolfo

Suburbanist said:


> ^^Real estate financial issues among other subjects in Banking.


This explains it all. For him everything must be under market´s "rules" and it will be allright.


----------



## Suburbanist

Anderson Geimz said:


> Especially for Suburbanist:
> 
> http://www.nrc.nl/binnenland/article2611662.ece/Vinexwijken_versterken_segregatie_tussen_arm_en_rijk
> 
> Not surprised if he thinks this is a good thing though.
> 
> (btw I just fell to my knees thankfull he's not actually going to be an urban planner, plus not surprised Suburbanist about your area of study...)


I prefer to influence city planning on the other, usually most powerful side: money in real estate  Not that I have much, but in the sense of working to push market-friendly policies for uses of urban land.



JoseRodolfo said:


> This explains it all. For him everything must be under market´s "rules" and it will be allright.


Market equilibrium is one of many ways of allocating resources and exchanging property, goods and services. Because market is driven by money, it is amoral, political-blind and un-emotional. As such, it works more efficiently in many cases than ad-hoc solutions. And it certainly works better than social engineering schemes aiming to "transform" realities that are ok (like Western individualism and consumption-based society). But that is another discussions, though this "urge" to "reinvent" cities is a relevant one within it.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

Suburbanist said:


> Market equilibrium is one of many ways of allocating resources and exchanging property, goods and services. Because market is driven by money, it is amoral, political-blind and un-emotional. As such, it works more efficiently in many cases than ad-hoc solutions. *And it certainly works better* than social engineering schemes aiming to "transform" realities that are ok (like Western individualism and consumption-based society). But that is another discussions, though this "urge" to "reinvent" cities is a relevant one within it.


It's very easy to let "consumers" or "the market" to decide everything but I doubt that the consequences are what most of us wish for.
If you want to see what happens when there is virtually no control over what's being built and where, come to Estonia(or just surf on Google Maps around Tallinn). During the good years(roughly 2003-2007) real estate business was booming and what we've been left now is many, many uncompleted suburbs, often lacking public transport, schools, kindergartens, sidewalks, even unpaved roads aren't unseen. And you can't demand for the road to be paved because the company that sold you the plot has gone bankrupt. That's market equilibrium for you. There HAS to be at least some governmental control over where and what is being built.


----------



## Suburbanist

Rebasepoiss said:


> It's very easy to let "consumers" or "the market" to decide everything but I doubt that the consequences are what most of us wish for.
> If you want to see what happens when there is virtually no control over what's being built and where, come to Estonia(or just surf on Google Maps around Tallinn). During the good years(roughly 2003-2007) real estate business was booming and what we've been left now is many, many uncompleted suburbs, often lacking public transport, schools, kindergartens, sidewalks, even unpaved roads aren't unseen. And you can't demand for the road to be paved because the company that sold you the plot has gone bankrupt. That's market equilibrium for you. There HAS to be at least some governmental control over where and what is being built.


I'm not favoring new subdivisions without sanitations, or incomplete infrastructure. Of course there must be a system in which financial guarantees, by third parties (to reduce agency risks and moral hazard in their strict microeconomic senses) preferably, are in place to avoid such situations.

I also favor - strongly - building codes, earthquake-, flood-, and fire-proof codes where applicable, and construction security too.

What I think it should be let to the market is to decide which types of arrangements (more or less dense, with or without PT, bigger or smaller dwellings etc.) should be built. It is, or it should not be up for a government to dictate: "well, I don't want people living too sprawled because it will hurt local business, hence I'll forbid new suburbs for 10 years to force people live in more compact places" and so on.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

^^ I still think there should be special zones for suburban development. This way it's easier to provide people with all the necessary public benefits such as schools, kindergartens, the fire brigade, ambulance, family doctor etc. 
Because you know how people are with these kinds of things: they build a house in the middle of the forest, so to say, but still demand good public services from the government.


----------



## thtisangvei

*Selling Dumpall of the dumps are getting checked for validaty before we sell them. If there is something wrong with the dump, we will replace it with no questions.*

i undertake oders for fresh and updated Dumps, cvv fullz, cvv2 and bank logins,webmail ! "all country"
About bank login(i make transfer of amount you want in an account that you give)

Selling Dumps
Selling Dumpall of the dumps are getting checked for validaty before we sell them. If there is something wrong with the dump, we
will replace it with no questions.
Minimum order 5 Dumps


CONTACT INFO.
yahoo id ; [email protected]
yahoo id; [email protected]
icq;617441931
ICQ:634514456
ICQ:611484312

5Dumps platinium=300$
10Dumps visa and mastercard=250$
20 dumps classic=250$

wrong with the dump we will replace it with no questions.
Minimumu Order 5

5=150$ for all five
50=1000$ for all 50pcs
More than 100=25$ each

CVV Fullz USA.
I give no free test ok 150usd for minimum of 10 pcs
MSR606 180USD
EMBOSSER 200USD
ATM SKIMMER WINCOR 550USD
NCR 400USD
LIBERTY RESERVE HACK 150USD

CVV2 AND Bank logins
I Seller Cvv2 (US,UK,AU,Italia,EURO,... and dob+sn+full info
and bank login
DESCO F.C.U. Balance 83.000$
MIDSTATE C.U., INC Balance 32.000$
PROVIDIAN NATIONAL BANK Balance 43.000$
USAA SAVINGS BANK Balance 13.000$
CENTRAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY Balance 90.000$
THE ADIRONDACK TRUST COMPANY Balance 9.000$
KEYSTONE SAVINGS BANK BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. (USA) Balance 21.000$
HIBERNIA NATIONAL BANK Balance 90.000$ CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA, N.A. Balance 71.000$
CITIBANK SOUTH DAKOTA, N.A. Balance 65.000$
LLOYDS TSB BA
Fresh Cards. Selling Dumps, Cvvs, Fullz.
Hello. We selling fresh dumps with original Track1 and Track2.
There are normal cc`s with cvv code,USA fullz,UK+DOB.
All stuff is checked and approved.
ONLY ORIGINAL INFO!
We have approved fresh dumps from USA, large bases. Visa Classic, MC Standart - $40. Visa Gold, Platinum, Business, Signature - $70.
For orders other 100 pcs:
Visa Classic, MC Standart - $40. Visa Gold, Platinum, Business, Signature - $50.
We have EU dumps also.
Visa Classic, MC Standart - $80. Visa Gold, Platinum, Business, Signature - $100.
Formate is:
5401683030957507=090910120000294 ;
B5401683030957507^DAVIES/TOKUBO ^09091012000000294000000
Prices for normal CC is so:
USA - $3.
UK - $8.
Others - $10.
Formate is:
Card Number | Exp. Date | CVV/CVV2 | First Name | Last Name | Street | City | State | Zip Code | Country | Phone | Type Of Card | Bank Name |
If you r interested in Fullz:
USA - $20.
UK(cvv+dob) - $30
We sell information only good quality, We don't offer bull**** stuff. Less price have rippers only.
Be patient ih have any delays. We do all so fast how we can. we thank for your understanding.
Service takes care of valid only, not their balance.
It's available to sort cvvs by Classic/Gold/Platinum types, not giving any warranty of high
amount balance.
Service can deny to process Ur requerst witout explanation of reasons.
I SELL LOGINS AND CVV,s 1 Visa card..................................3$
1 master card.............................4$
1 amex card................................3$
1 Dicover card............................5$
1 Company card..........................10$
1 Uk Card Normal CC...................8$
1 Uk Card With DOB ...................10$
1 Track 1& 2 CC.......................................40$
1 Fresh Fullz .........................................30$
1 Dead Fullz ..........................................15$
1 Paypal vefified without balance==50$
1 Paypal verified with 1000$ balance ==100$
BALANCE IN CHASE ..............................70K TO 155K ========225$
BALANCE IN WASHOVIA.........................24K TO 80K===========125$
BALANCE IN BOA......................................75K TO 450K==========400$
BALANCE IN CREDIT UNION.....................ANY AMOUNT==========300$
BALANCE IN HALIFAX...............................ANY AMOUNT=========300$
BALANCE IN COMPASS............................ANY AMOUNT=========400$
BALANCE IN WELSFARGO........................ANY AMOUNT=========400$
YOU CAN CONTACT FOR MANY MORE OTHER BANK LOG YOU NEED...
1 COMERSUS SOFTWARE WITH BANK LOG IN AND BANK CREDIT CARD CODE ==========2000$
2 COMERSUS SOFTWARE WITHOUT BANK LOG IN AND BANK CREDIT CARD CODE ==========1500$
3 NEW WESTERN UNION HACKING BUG FOR WORLD WIDE TRANSFER ====================500$
4 NEW PAYPAL LOG IN HACKWARE FOR HACKING FRESH PAYPAL =======================650$
5 NEW SHOP ADMIN HACKWARE FOR HACKING ONLINE SHOP FOR CREDIT CARD============2000$
6 NEW CREDIT CARD AMOUNT CHECKER FOR PEOPLE WANTING TO KNOW AMOUNT ON CC===320$
7 NEW CREDIT CARD VALIDATOR FOR VALIDATING ANY FULL CC INFO =====================320$

Return Policy:
All Checked Dumps have not replacement.unchecked Dumps pickup withing 24 hr & declined 12 hrs we replace.

Replace/refund happens if you place correct request in:
>12 hours for only Decline[05]:
05 | Decline | Do Not Honor

>24 hours for Hold-Call / Pick Up Card:
04 | Hold-Call Or Pick Up Card
07 | Hold-Call Or Pick up Card | Pick Up Card - Special Condition
41 | Hold-Call Or Pick up Card | Pick Up Card - Lost
43 | Hold-Call Or Pick up Card | Pick Up Card Stolen

The rest of responses will not be replaced, especialy:
01 | Call | Refer To Issuer
02 | Call | Refer To Issuer - Special Condition
13 | Decline | Amount Error | Invalid amount
51 | Decline | Insufficient Funds
N4 | Decline | Exceeds Issuer Withdrawal Limit
61 | Decline | Exceeds Withdrawal Limit
62 | Decline | Invalid Service Code, Restricted
65 | Decline | Activity Limit Exceeded
93 | Decline | Violation, Cannot Complete


Please read it carefully:
1. We don't send binlist so ask for it
2.you can ask dumps without pin for free but don't ask for Dumps+pin for test. We don't give D+P for testing.
3.We sell information only good quality, We don't offer bull**** stuff. Less price have rippers only.

If you can't trust our service, we have good reviews in this post or ask us for forum's list where we have been registered
DO:
1.Contact to our support and choose dumps you want. Also, here you can ask price.
2.Calculate total price and submit your order.
3.Wait.We have 24 hours(maximum) to complete your order.
4.Please we are very busy because we handle many orders a day. Please refrain person not serious. We are dealing with professionals. Thank you for your understanding!

CONTACT INFO.
yahoo id ; [email protected]
yahoo id; [email protected]
icq;617441931
ICQ:634514456
ICQ:611484312


----------



## Shezan

really like the suburbs around Shiphol Amsterdam Apt


----------



## bartjee

*Witbrant-West, Tilburg*

Last Friday I made some pictures from the neighbourhood where I live.


----------



## JPBrazil

^^

Looks wonderful, thanks for sharing.

PS: I'd like to see it in Google Maps, can you send me the link please?


----------



## Leesome

^ There's a street name in one of the pics "Wolvegastraat", if you go to holland and type it in, it'll bring up the location! ; )


----------



## Suburbanist

bartjee said:


> Last Friday I made some pictures from the neighbourhood where I live.


This is one of two best places to live in Tilburg IMO. Awesome houses, nice landscaping and easy connections to A58, the city of Tilburg and the train station.


----------



## JPBrazil

Leesome said:


> ^ There's a street name in one of the pics "Wolvegastraat", if you go to holland and type it in, it'll bring up the location! ; )


Thanks for the info, I'm checking it on Street View.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

Suburbanist said:


> This is one of two best places to live in Tilburg IMO. Awesome houses, nice landscaping and easy connections to A58, the city of Tilburg and the train station.


Not to mention the awesome streetlife, wide selection of stores, restaurants and bars, the diverse population.

:nuts:

Imagen living in a neighbourhood where you have to take the car and drive for 15 min just to get icecream, or a neighbourhood that is completely dead after 9PM...yeah


----------



## bartjee

@ Suburbanist: It's indeed a very nice neighbourhood to live in, but many people find the houses are build a little bit too close together, why the backyard isn't that big. 

More pictures:









Primary school



























Nice nature


----------



## Suburbanist

Anderson Geimz said:


> Not to mention the awesome streetlife, wide selection of stores, restaurants and bars, the diverse population.


The poster lives in that area and said he likes it. Maybe he can give more insight on that.

As for



> awesome streetlife


what if you like calm places where your curtains can be left open without many people staring the inside? what if you don't care how busy/not busy is your street?



> wide selection of stores, restaurants and bars,


some people like to shop elsewhere or with their car. This is not necessarily wrong. Tilburg has many places, including a relatively new (not retrofitted) building on top a major commercial complex downtown. It is an expensive place to live as is Witbrant Ost. Different preferences, different options of living arrangements.



> the diverse population


is it a crime NOT to want to live amidst a diverse population, demographically speaking (age, income, nationality, family status, children status etc?). I, for instance, am single, young and live far away from family, yet I'd trade my apartment for a house in such development in a blink if I could afford it.



> Imagen living in a neighbourhood where you have to take the car and drive for 15 min just to get icecream, or a neighbourhood that is completely dead after 9PM...yeah


Some people are concerned about that, some don't care about that. On the contrary, about downtown living, I could say: "imagining living a place where drunk teenagers roam in front of your place on summer nights yelling and playing, where it takes 10 minutes to find a spot to park your car and where annoying smells come up from the nearby producer's market hold every Saturday morning, when the entrance of your building gets blocked by a fried fish stand".


----------



## bartjee

Anderson Geimz said:


> Not to mention the awesome streetlife, wide selection of stores, restaurants and bars, the diverse population.


Remember, it´s a suburb not the city centre. 



Anderson Geimz said:


> Imagen living in a neighbourhood where you have to take the car and drive for 15 min just to get icecream, or a neighbourhood that is completely dead after 9PM...yeah


15 min drive by car just to get an icecream:lol: I only have to go by bike for 5 min to get an icecream and in just 10 min I´m in the city centre by bus. 

for example:


----------



## niterider

Is there a reason why communal car-parks are so common in The Netherlands? Of course density requirements etc may make individual driveways for everyone unpractical, but is it a cultural thing? In the UK it is common for apartment buildings but they are avoided where possible. Even government-built (social) housing often don't use them.
Just curious because if it's down to squeezing as X number of spaces into an area, on-street parking can also accommodate large numbers of spaces well too, without having to build car-parks


----------



## Suburbanist

niterider said:


> Is there a reason why communal car-parks are so common in The Netherlands? Of course density requirements etc may make individual driveways for everyone unpractical, but is it a cultural thing? In the UK it is common for apartment buildings but they are avoided where possible. Even government-built (social) housing often don't use them.
> Just curious because if it's down to squeezing as X number of spaces into an area, on-street parking can also accommodate large numbers of spaces well too, without having to build car-parks


It has to do, mostly, with the different street plan of new developments. The innermost residential streets barely have space for parking and are meant for "all uses", hence no curbside separating footpath from roadbed and so.

These parking lots are usually constructed in a way that it uses the backside of buildings, mostly. They have strict restrictions (much more than in, say, France or UL) about the amount of sunlight new apartments and houses need to be exposed to, so it is usually unlawful to build a set of multistory buildings face one another, for instance.

Underground garages are expensive to build due to poor soil.


----------



## niterider

I see. Does anyone else find them distasteful though? Efficient yes, but less practical (carrying items to/from your home, cleaning your car, security etc).


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ I do. I prefer closed garages near detached houses where you can walk from the garage to the kitchen/room/gazebo without being exposed to the elements.


----------



## tvdxer

Rebasepoiss said:


> ^^ What do you do on your free time in the suburbs?
> 
> It's not a rhetorical question, I really want to know.


Seriously?

There are a TON of leisure activities equally or better suited to the outer suburbs (or rural areas) than the city. Including:

* Horseback riding
* Hunting
* Fishing
* Riding ATVs / 4x4ing
* Amateur radio / DXing
* Classic car collecting / restoration
* Hobby farming
* Geocaching 
* Crafts
* etc. etc. etc.


----------



## tvdxer

These pictures look like government-subsidized housing projects for poor and jobless people in the U.S. Some also look like student housing:


























The building pictured hear bears a faint resemblance to a high-rise apartment building in Minneapolis that used to be known as the "Crack Tower" (or "Crack Stack", as in "crack cocaine") and is now known as "Little Somalia", because it is now almost completely occupied by Somali refugees and their children:










They would be far below the standards of most working-class people in the U.S.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

tvdxer said:


> Seriously?
> 
> There are a TON of leisure activities equally or better suited to the outer suburbs (or rural areas) than the city. Including:
> 
> * Horseback riding
> * Hunting
> * Fishing
> * Riding ATVs / 4x4ing
> * Amateur radio / DXing
> * Classic car collecting / restoration
> * Hobby farming
> * Geocaching
> * Crafts
> * etc. etc. etc.


Suburbs and rural areas are way different, especially since we are talking about the Netherlands here. Most of these activities occur in rural areas not suburbs. Apart from classic car collecting, hobby farming and crafts(to some extent), I don't see why these activities have to be strictly connected with suburbia. And these 3 "suburban activities" aren't really that popular since they require too much time when you have a job, wife and 2 kids. I wanted to know what options regular people who have office jobs and a family have to do with their free time *in* the suburbs.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

tvdxer said:


> They would be far below the standards of most working-class people in the U.S.


Actually those houses are of far greater quality than your average American working class home.

Those last two towers are quite expensive.


----------



## tvdxer

Rebasepoiss said:


> Suburbs and rural areas are way different, especially since we are talking about the Netherlands here. Most of these activities occur in rural areas not suburbs. Apart from classic car collecting, hobby farming and crafts(to some extent), I don't see why these activities have to be strictly connected with suburbia. And these 3 "suburban activities" aren't really that popular since they require too much time when you have a job, wife and 2 kids. I wanted to know what options regular people who have office jobs and a family have to do with their free time *in* the suburbs.


You asked what you would do with your free time in suburbs, I gave you examples. With the exception of horseback riding and hobby farming, all those are perfectly practicable in suburbia. You know, life isn't all going to the hippest new urban bars and clubs with your friends (personally, I look down on the kind of people who think that way). And with the shorter workweeks and MUCH longer vacations enjoyed in Europe, I would think the Dutch would have ample time to do those things, as Americans, with far less vacation and longer work hours, do.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

^^ I'm just saying that suburbia doesn't really widen up the choices for free time activities, it's more the opposite. But enough of that.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ If your time is FREE, why would you want necessarily to spend it in a 1-km radius from your house, unless you are very poor?


----------



## Slagathor

Horse back riding? What is this? The 19th century?


----------



## tvdxer

Slagathor said:


> Horse back riding? What is this? The 19th century?


Umm, no. Many families around here choose large plots of land on which they can build stables (or a stable is already built) to house horses, which they ride and even take to competitions (dressage, etc.). Probably an activity for the uber-rich in the Netherlands and most of Europe, but here even a middle-income family can afford to take part.


----------



## tvdxer

Rebasepoiss said:


> ^^ I'm just saying that suburbia doesn't really widen up the choices for free time activities, it's more the opposite. But enough of that.


Oh yes it does. Maybe not if you're a 20-year-old socialite, but middle-age adults will find activities that are practical in suburbia but not in the inner urban area. Even I will say that, and I'm not necessarily a proponent of suburbia (at least in its HOA, car-centered incarnation) or anything.


----------



## cjav

Slagathor said:


> Horse back riding? What is this? The 19th century?


Srsly any idea how many dutch people own horses. I think ten of thousand or even hunderds.


----------



## Suburbanist

cjav said:


> Srsly any idea how many dutch people own horses. I think ten of thousand or even hunderds.


Even if you don't own a horse, you can still rent one in many places. Is just another animal-related leisure activity, or a sport in case of serious business.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

tvdxer said:


> Umm, no. Many families around here choose large plots of land on which they can build stables (or a stable is already built) to house horses, which they ride and even take to competitions (dressage, etc.). Probably an activity for the uber-rich in the Netherlands and most of Europe, but here even a middle-income family can afford to take part.


You seriously don't know what you are talking about and now have shown it on multiple occassions.

I doubt you have ever been outside the US or even your state...


----------



## tvdxer

Anderson Geimz said:


> You seriously don't know what you are talking about and now have shown it on multiple occassions.
> 
> I doubt you have ever been outside the US or even your state...


Ummm...I've been to France, Spain, Morocco, Costa Rica, and Canada, in addition to several U.S. states.


----------



## Slagathor

tvdxer said:


> Umm, no. Many families around here choose large plots of land on which they can build stables (or a stable is already built) to house horses, which they ride and even take to competitions (dressage, etc.). Probably an activity for the uber-rich in the Netherlands and most of Europe, but here even a middle-income family can afford to take part.


I grew up on the Dutch countryside, I could show you a few places where they'll let you ride a horse for a buck an hour. But aside from the occasional lunatic from the big city with all sorts of warped ideas about nature, nobody's actually dull or brain dead enough to go for it. Riding horses, please. What a ridiculous idea.


----------



## cjav

ff slagathor, now I know you are just joking. 


@tvdxer, ignore Geimz. He is just a troll, not worth it. He just goes around insulting anyone who disagrees with him. 

NOC/NSF indicates that in 2008 that 'paardensport' not sure what it amounts to exactly is roughly 4% of total sports practiced in the Netherlands. 
Most popular being football with 23%. 

In 1900 it was apparently iceskating and 'kaatsen' what ever that is.

in the 50's football and gymnastics were very popular.


----------



## Trabbuco

@dtvxer

I do not agree;
Who says that the houses in picture 1 are so exspensive, and maybe there live poor dutch people to. And even if it's not, you cant make a judgement, because you only see the half of those houses. And the appartments on picture 2 are probably big luxury appartment, on a nice location with parks and water. And the last two towers are just nice appartments, similar to the (mostly depressing) appartment blocks in the U.S.


----------



## Anderson Geimz

tvdxer said:


> Ummm...I've been to France, Spain, Morocco, Costa Rica, and Canada, in addition to several U.S. states.


OK, you've just confirmed that you're just dumb then...


----------



## cjav

Anderson Geimz said:


> OK, you've just confirmed that you're just dumb then...



yay for the constructive posts of Geimz..:bash:


----------



## Koesj

Slagathor said:


> I grew up on the Dutch countryside, I could show you a few places where they'll let you ride a horse for a buck an hour. But aside from the occasional lunatic from the big city with all sorts of warped ideas about nature, nobody's actually dull or brain dead enough to go for it. Riding horses, please. What a ridiculous idea.


Funny thing this right here, you calling it rididuclous. I've grown up on the countryside too and as a 20-something socialite I totally get the point of owning a horse in this country. It isn't something I'd do myself but the place I grew up in got sold to exactly the kind of people who appreciate not only the recreational aspects of it but were pretty serious about getting into animal husbandry. This was in the Achterhoek/Liemers mind you, but I've seen the same kind of thing in Twente and Groningen and it wasn't just a rich guy's (or gal's) plaything. 

By the way what about the thousands of verzorgpony's? Having seen different kinds of US suburbia just a week ago (and having to drive to strip-malled Targets, Home Depots and Best Buys at least 7 times) I could easily equate living in a pretty rural environment in Oost-Gelderland, like I did myself, with living in sub- or exurban conditions in GA, the particular state I was visiting. Commuting distances to Arnhem or Nijmegen are probably the same as driving into even downton Macon or Savannah out of a new leafy green subdivision. Although traffic is much worse even in the _shitty rural_ Achterhoek :|

Hell, with municipal bureaucrats who snoop around streets for illegal porches and gazebos absent, I gather there's way more freedom to do whatever you want on your plot in US suburbia than any backwater krimpgemeente in this country.


----------



## desertpunk

In my city, Albuquerque, equestrian activities are very much a niche lifestyle. The very wealthy often own large estates with horses and equestrian facilities. We had one guy who built a $5 million, 45,000 sq. ft. stables on his property. Middle class horse lovers usually rent stable spaces and keep their horses near areas where they can ride on weekends. One small suburb has lots of horse trails and a mixed wealthy/middle class population. But most of the 'suburban' types live in communities where having a horse is impossible. You really have to want that lifestyle over here. :cheers:


----------



## Anderson Geimz

cjav said:


> yay for the constructive posts of Geimz..:bash:


Maybe just read what he actually writes and stop stalking me dipshit...


----------



## Jonesy55

desertpunk said:


> In my city, Albuquerque, equestrian activities are very much a niche lifestyle. The very wealthy often own large estates with horses and equestrian facilities. We had one guy who built a $5 million, 45,000 sq. ft. stables on his property. Middle class horse lovers usually rent stable spaces and keep their horses near areas where they can ride on weekends. One small suburb has lots of horse trails and a mixed wealthy/middle class population. But most of the 'suburban' types live in communities where having a horse is impossible. You really have to want that lifestyle over here. :cheers:


There are quite a few people I know who have or have had horses for equestrian recreation. I don't think tvdxer is correct, you don't need to be super-rich, its not a cheap hobby but middle class or some working class people can afford it if that's what they want to spend their money on, if you want personal horse swimming pools and private race tracks etc then it will be a millionaire's hobby but if you just want to keep and ride a horse then it doesn't have to cost a fortune. Most people don't want to spend their money on that though so it is a niche activity.

The people I know with horses tend to keep them in rented paddocks/stables and drive out from their suburban homes to do whatever they do with them, you could do that from an urban apartment or a sprawling exurb, it doesn't make much difference. Obviously people living in rural areas might keep them in a field next to their home.


----------



## cjav

Anderson Geimz said:


> Maybe just read what he actually writes and stop stalking me dipshit...


Hardly my fault you keep posting provocative retarded crap in just about any section of this forum.


----------



## bartjee

*IJburg, Amsterdam*


----------



## bartjee

*Voorburg (The Hague)*


----------



## BE0GRAD

A Swiss has told my sister that only criminals live in these neighborhoods


----------



## bartjee

In Switserland they can only dream about neighbourhoods like this


----------



## Mike____

BE0GRAD said:


> A Swiss has told my sister that only criminals live in these neighborhoods


he must be drunk


----------



## BE0GRAD

bartjee said:


>



This architecture is wonderful ! Is this neighborhood relatively new? If it is ,than it's a perfect example of reusing old, traditional architecture. Europe should build more such neighborhoods which take into account the heritage of the country or region and not blindly imitate some other parts of the world that are building only in soulless ,globalized architectural styles.


----------



## Suburbanist

BE0GRAD said:


> This architecture is wonderful ! Is this neighborhood relatively new? If it is ,than it's a perfect example of reusing old, traditional architecture. Europe should build more such neighborhoods which take into account the heritage of the country or region and not blindly imitate some other parts of the world that are building only in soulless ,globalized architectural styles.


Most of them are not new, not even "typically Dutch", just houses hastily built in the 70's.

In any case, I disagree with your statement. People should be free, provided some hard guidelines like volume, height, ceilings, clearance are respected, to build houses in whatever style they want. We are not an open museum condemned to die with centuries-old styles that can't be replaced by others of 2010's taste! For that you have historical districts, heritage buildings and so.

It amount to architectural dictatorship say people in Netherlands (or elsewhere) can't build, buy and live in post-modern global-inspired buildings just because "it's not the heritage of the country". Who cares about how people lived 300 years ago and how they built houses in certain ways before they had electricity, the Internet, artificial cooling/heating and so?


----------



## endrity

Suburbanist said:


> Most of them are not new, not even "typically Dutch", just houses hastily built in the 70's.
> 
> In any case, I disagree with your statement. People should be free, provided some hard guidelines like volume, height, ceilings, clearance are respected, to build houses in whatever style they want. We are not an open museum condemned to die with centuries-old styles that can't be replaced by others of 2010's taste! For that you have historical districts, heritage buildings and so.
> 
> It amount to architectural dictatorship say people in Netherlands (or elsewhere) can't build, buy and live in post-modern global-inspired buildings just because "it's not the heritage of the country". Who cares about how people lived 300 years ago and how they built houses in certain ways before they had electricity, the Internet, artificial cooling/heating and so?


I think the question that you should ask yourself is how much of a variety you are allowed to experiment with. While in theory what you are saying sounds great, you should take a look at what recent uncontrolled building developments have done to the emerging world. Forget destroying cultural heritage. Very often living neighborhoods have become a huge mess. 

So, before raising the flag of "freedom" high, you should explain what the guidelines should be. Clearly height is one, you can't have someone build a huge apartment complex in a neighborhood like this. Also, some quality of construction should be maintained. The last question is probably style, how much should it merge with the others. I guess that's where I might agree with you up to some point.


----------



## Dezz

BE0GRAD said:


> This architecture is wonderful ! Is this neighborhood relatively new? If it is ,than it's a perfect example of reusing old, traditional architecture.


Unlike Suburbanist says, these neighbourhoods were build in the 1930's and yes they are typically Dutch


----------



## Suburbanist

endrity said:


> I think the question that you should ask yourself is how much of a variety you are allowed to experiment with. While in theory what you are saying sounds great, you should take a look at what recent uncontrolled building developments have done to the emerging world. Forget destroying cultural heritage. Very often living neighborhoods have become a huge mess.
> 
> So, before raising the flag of "freedom" high, you should explain what the guidelines should be. Clearly height is one, you can't have someone build a huge apartment complex in a neighborhood like this. Also, some quality of construction should be maintained. The last question is probably style, how much should it merge with the others. I guess that's where I might agree with you up to some point.


I thought of variety in terms of style and design, not size, height etc. I totally agree it doesn't make sense to put a 10-story building in a street with 2-story houses. Same goes for things like building all houses with a binary alignment option with curbside, either facing it or reasonably detached from it pushed back into the plot. You also need to, where applicable, set standards for driveways. Height is a more obvious parameter that needs standardization across a neighborhood.

What I don't think it should be regulate is, for instance, color of walls, the design of the house and so. If someone wants to build a brutalist house next to a post-modern one next to a minimalist one next to a revival one, so be it. Just aesthetics, not functionality is affected, so it's better to leave such decisions for individual real estate developers or individual owners. Of course, when you are building a whole neighborhood (like a Vinex) the developer can have more overall control over the style and harmonization of the buildings there, but on land plots set aside for development of individual units (unfortunately rare in Netherlands, while Belgium has no problem with that), the restrictions should be objective on those parameters, not subjective like "a planning committee will decide if the style of the house fits the surrounding houses".


----------



## ArthurK

Suburbanist said:


> Most of them are not new, not even "typically Dutch", just houses hastily *built in the 70's*.


Yeah right. :stupid:

Those typical 1930s neighborhoods can be found in any Dutch city. They are still popular places to live: good quality of housing, relatively green neighborhoods and many houses have yards. It's just unfortunate they all lack sufficient parking space, as you can see on some of the pictures.

The Dutch 1920s/1930s neighborhoods are influenced by some of the _Garden City_ principles of Ebenezer Howard. If you put it in that way, they are definitely not unique. But those 1930s districts are much more compressed and feel more urbanized than the _garden cities_.


----------



## Concrete Stereo

It's both. In any case, urbanism is the key to beauty, but it takes good architecture to get real beauty. 

Whether the ensemble is in the collective design, like the charming 30's neighbourhoods, or the 10's/20's Amsterdamse school cityblocks, or the ensemble is in a the collection of individual designs - like the 17th century canal districts or the 2000's Java island is not really relevant. Both approaches can create great cityscapes. 

For the IJburg extension which fills most of the last pages this balance is not always reached. Actually, as a whole, it is disappointing after the succes of Java. Fragments are great individual designs, but urbanism which can be better. And there is good urbanism, but slightly lacking individual design. But this neighbourhood is very interesting for being an testlab of finding the balance - much of it is an experiment between restriction and freedom, between the demands of urbanism and the practice of scale and logic of real estate developers. IJburg is a bit of a patchwork, but there are several fragments where this high quality is reached (pleasing both developer, user and city), in different ways, and they're a starting point.


----------



## constipation

i believe those houses r expensive,moreover netherland is small size country with high concentration of population..


----------



## BE0GRAD

Suburbanist said:


> Most of them are not new, not even "typically Dutch", just houses hastily built in the 70's.
> 
> In any case, I disagree with your statement. People should be free, provided some hard guidelines like volume, height, ceilings, clearance are respected, to build houses in whatever style they want. We are not an open museum condemned to die with centuries-old styles that can't be replaced by others of 2010's taste! For that you have historical districts, heritage buildings and so.
> 
> It amount to architectural dictatorship say people in Netherlands (or elsewhere) can't build, buy and live in post-modern global-inspired buildings just because "it's not the heritage of the country". Who cares about how people lived 300 years ago and how they built houses in certain ways before they had electricity, the Internet, artificial cooling/heating and so?


Every country with it own history and culture should respect its particularities. If we use only globalized culture (architecture, music...) we would lose the thing that differentiate us from other cultures creating a dull, uniform world with no differences. If we take any example of globalized architecture, lets say Gogenheim museum in Bilbao, it would fit equally well in Rio, Moscow, Cairo, Shanghai or Berlin. In other words, globalized architecture "has no soul" and belongs nowhere. On the other hand , when building a Dutch inspired neighborhood in Shanghai it becomes clear that it doesn't belong there. 

I'm not saying we shouldn't build in modern styles at all, nor that we should always use 100% authentic old architecture, but every country, especially European ones should invent a modern interpretation of their traditional architecture in order to remain really different.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ What is the point of remaining "artificially different"? I see this line of argumentation paired with those who whine youth (French/Italian/German/Spanish) teenagers listening mostly to American-British pop-music, or some fierce opposition electronic music draws because "it is global without any local roots". Or opposition to McDonalds because it makes places "lose their regional gastronomic identity" or other non-sense.

People should be able to eat, listen and build houses as they want.


----------



## BE0GRAD

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ What is the point of remaining "artificially different"? I see this line of argumentation paired with those who whine youth (French/Italian/German/Spanish) teenagers listening mostly to American-British pop-music, or some fierce opposition electronic music draws because "it is global without any local roots". Or opposition to McDonalds because it makes places "lose their regional gastronomic identity" or other non-sense.
> 
> People should be able to eat, listen and build houses as they want.


Yes. People should be able to eat, listen and build houses as they want, but the state should be the one who will ,in various ways, inspire them to remain loyal to their own local cultures. Do not live in a illusion that these changes happen "naturally". How ever cruel it might sound, people are like sheep, they can't make collective decisions. They need to follow a shepherd. If the state doesn't take that role though education and legislation following the principals of preserving national and regional heritage and traditions, than this role will be taken by international corporations though media and propaganda following the principals of globalization and maximum profits . 

Inventing the modern interpretation of traditional styles isn't artificial , it is the evolution of local particularities that was stopped by the arrival of globalization. What's really artificial, is introducing local traditions of one area to a completely different environment. Las Vegas is a good example of that.

As for youth teenagers, I think it all depends of how they perceive the identity of their country. If a country defines it self in a globalized way ... free for all , like most western countries do, than the young population will act according to principals of globalization. But if a country defines it self as a country of the local people and local culture ,like per example Serbia and Greece than the youth will be more tented to listen to local traditional music ... or the modern interpretations of it. That is exactly the case in Serbia and Greece.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ I guess this is just another case of agreeing to disagree. I don't see a point of a country, in a totalitarian way, heavy-handing and micromanaging something as benign and irrelevant as choice or architectural styles of its building stock. As for regional (sub-national) heritages, I prefer to see them forgotten and obliterated by national, or even Western-globalized identities.

Heritage have a value as an historical subject, but that doesn't mean it should be forced upon its inhabitants (like "you should live in a house with 3 small windows and a red roof, and not a glass window with a stainless steel framed roof, because your ancestors lived like that"). 

For countries that want to modernize themselves, building global-fit buildings, be them post-modernist single-detached houses or hundred-meter high skyscrapers, is a good way for its inhabitants, more specifically real estate developers, to show that image. I trust real estate developers more than government bureaucrats to decide on, as I consider, irrelevant things like historical inspiration for new buildings. Let the bureaucrats concentrate on planning appropriate infra-structure for new neighborhoods, zoning laws etc.


----------



## BE0GRAD

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ I guess this is just another case of agreeing to disagree. I don't see a point of a country, in a totalitarian way, heavy-handing and micromanaging something as benign and irrelevant as choice or architectural styles of its building stock. As for regional (sub-national) heritages, I prefer to see them forgotten and obliterated by national, or even Western-globalized identities.


Nonsense. First, it is not totalitarian heavy handing, it is responsible acting of a state. When something in a society goes wrong, a state is there to intervene whether we speak of security, economy, education, culture or anything else. Second, it is not micro managing but macro managing. The state is not there to tell you what to eat ,what music to listen or where to go out ,but to explain to you what is wrong and why and to inspire you to act with social responsibility. It is not there to forbid you to smoke , but it should explain to you why you should stop doing it and give you incentives to stop it but it is ultimately your decision to smoke or not. The same goes with everything else including tradition and architecture. Its intervention is not concentrated on a individual , but on the entire population with the aim that the most of the people (not necessarily the entire population) follows its recommendations voluntarily. Calling that responsible behavior totalitarian seams like the thinking of an anarchist. 



Suburbanist said:


> Heritage have a value as an historical subject, but that doesn't mean it should be forced upon its inhabitants (like "you should live in a house with 3 small windows and a red roof, and not a glass window with a stainless steel framed roof, because your ancestors lived like that").


Heritage makes us unique. It is what differentiate one culture form another and what makes this world diverse as it is. Ignoring heritage leads to a uniform ,dull, globalized world where everywhere there is one race, one language, one culture, one customs... The state shouldn't impose the respect of it's culture. It should teach its people to do it with their own free will. it shouldn't be copying blindly its culture from past ages. It should invent a modern interpretation of it. What most supporters of globalization do is mix evolution of one culture with replacement of one culture by another one. First thing preserves diversity , the second one destroys it. 



Suburbanist said:


> For countries that want to modernize themselves, building global-fit buildings, be them post-modernist single-detached houses or hundred-meter high skyscrapers, is a good way for its inhabitants, more specifically real estate developers, to show that image. I trust real estate developers more than government bureaucrats to decide on, as I consider, irrelevant things like historical inspiration for new buildings. Let the bureaucrats concentrate on planning appropriate infra-structure for new neighborhoods, zoning laws etc.


Architectural style has nothing to do with modernization. You can build a technologically hyper advanced building in tradition-inspired style, and a technologically primitive building in some globalized ultra-fancy style. 

But what I'm interested is to know do you support diversity or uniformity. Because if you support globalization than we support completely different goals. I like the idea that when I go to China, I see something completely different than at home ... something characteristic for local people (architecture, cuisine, language, customs...). If you like the idea that everywhere there is everything and that everywhere there are the same things as in your country than there is perhaps no point of continuing the discussion since our views on the future of this world are completely different.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ In a nutshell, without going much off-topic, I believe in transversal and longitudinal diverse. I don't think and don't like the idea that everyone and everything (a.k.a., buildings included) would or should all look the same everywhere. However, in our digital society where it's been easier than ever to have contacts with other cultures and people that live next door or the other side of the Globe (provided you speak same language), diversity is less a function of a place than self-identification, lifestyle etc. So I think societies will grow more internally diverse, but less distinguishable from one another, which is a positive thing.

To make comparison easier: I think we will diversify more and more the way we eat, as diverse food becomes more widespread available. But that doesn't mean people will be eating only stuff from a 400km radius, instead, you will find fans - and eaters - of Chinese food everywhere in the World, eaters of Italian food everywhere in the World, and people from China will not eat only Chinese food but food from everywhere, as Italians eat food not only from Italy.

Architecturally speaking, I think we'll not see just one pattern of architecture worldwide, but we'll see individually distinguishable patterns and styles everywhere around the World. Think of star architects like Fuskas, Hadid, Niemeyer, Libeskind, Calatrava... they are styles by themselves, not territorially identified with nowhere in the World. And none of them "dominates" the business of landmark buildings, but you can find works from them in many different places.

Mass architecture will more or less follow these trends. People build Italian-inspired villas in US or Canada. Others build American-inspired massive suburban houses in Slovakia, China or Brazil. Another group goes for de-localized ("could be everywhere", not particularly identified with a place) post-modernist houses... everywhere. 

So I don't think every house will look the same, but cities will stop being 'unique' in the sense of having very narrowly defined architectural styles that could make you look and name them. They will, more and more, be recognized for landmarks, odd buildings etc. 

This preoccupation is not new: in the early 1900's, there were already some respectable writers complaining that mass-production of clothes had rendered Europeans all alike, French laymen were dressing like the British and not much different than the Germans. Today, we even make fun of those ancient "national" clothing styles, it is trendy to be "tuned" with the latest global urban fashion developments. Indeed, in my very humble opinion, what has happened to fashion is a predictor of what is going to happen with architecture. We never had, anytime in history, more fashion diversity than now in any single city, people use clothes to "make a statement", identify with a group (or avoid identification with a group) and so on! Cities will never have more diversified buildings and housing stock, but they will not be, in any way, restricted to local traditions. It will be easier to find diversity WITHIN a city, harder to find diversity BETWEEN cities or countries.


----------



## FlyingDutchman

Architecture is related to time and society it's designed for. This explains why architecture today is equal in a lot of countries, because of globalization. (Even tough there are still a lot of differences looking at regions/countries)

Designing buildings like 100 years ago is like still watching at a black white TV out of 1940 or using a horse to transport yourself.


----------



## BE0GRAD

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ In a nutshell, without going much off-topic, I believe in transversal and longitudinal diverse. I don't think and don't like the idea that everyone and everything (a.k.a., buildings included) would or should all look the same everywhere. However, in our digital society where it's been easier than ever to have contacts with other cultures and people that live next door or the other side of the Globe (provided you speak same language), diversity is less a function of a place than self-identification, lifestyle etc. So I think societies will grow more internally diverse, but less distinguishable from one another, which is a positive thing.


Self-identification. I agree. That's where the state should intervene with reinserting (Holland) or maintaining (Serbia) a healthy dose of moderate nationalism. That would encourage most of the population to identify them selves primarily as a member of an ethnic group (and thus preserving it from extinction) and not as a member of some temporary movement or fashion that is just a tool for multinational corporations for making bigger profits. If a state doesn't intervene in mentality making of its population, large capital will do it instead of it... and that can't be good. 



Suburbanist said:


> To make comparison easier: I think we will diversify more and more the way we eat, as diverse food becomes more widespread available. But that doesn't mean people will be eating only stuff from a 400km radius, instead, you will find fans - and eaters - of Chinese food everywhere in the World, eaters of Italian food everywhere in the World, and people from China will not eat only Chinese food but food from everywhere, as Italians eat food not only from Italy.
> 
> Architecturally speaking, I think we'll not see just one pattern of architecture worldwide, but we'll see individually distinguishable patterns and styles everywhere around the World. Think of star architects like Fuskas, Hadid, Niemeyer, Libeskind, Calatrava... they are styles by themselves, not territorially identified with nowhere in the World. And none of them "dominates" the business of landmark buildings, but you can find works from them in many different places.
> 
> Mass architecture will more or less follow these trends. People build Italian-inspired villas in US or Canada. Others build American-inspired massive suburban houses in Slovakia, China or Brazil. Another group goes for de-localized ("could be everywhere", not particularly identified with a place) post-modernist houses... everywhere.
> 
> So I don't think every house will look the same, but cities will stop being 'unique' in the sense of having very narrowly defined architectural styles that could make you look and name them. They will, more and more, be recognized for landmarks, odd buildings etc.


But that what you are saying is what I was mentioning as a negative outcome. If you have everything everywhere like you've said (food, architecture...) than everywhere it's the same thing basically. It means that per example in Holland you have all cultures and styles and if you go to China you have everything you have back home which would be a very sad thing. Even the internal diversity will partially fade away over time because of mixing with other cultures ,and even if we ignore that fact ... having the same internal diversity everywhere can't really be called diversity but uniformity. 



Suburbanist said:


> This preoccupation is not new: in the early 1900's, there were already some respectable writers complaining that mass-production of clothes had rendered Europeans all alike, French laymen were dressing like the British and not much different than the Germans. Today, we even make fun of those ancient "national" clothing styles, it is trendy to be "tuned" with the latest global urban fashion developments. Indeed, in my very humble opinion, what has happened to fashion is a predictor of what is going to happen with architecture. We never had, anytime in history, more fashion diversity than now in any single city, people use clothes to "make a statement", identify with a group (or avoid identification with a group) and so on! Cities will never have more diversified buildings and housing stock, but they will not be, in any way, restricted to local traditions. It will be easier to find diversity WITHIN a city, harder to find diversity BETWEEN cities or countries.


1. It has already happened with architecture. 

2. I believe it is much better to identify your self with an ethnic or national group than with a temporary fashion group because unlike ethnic groups which purpose is to strengthen cohesion among people, fashion groups have a purpose to take money from people for some company. It is much better to primarily feel as Dutch and try helping your ethnicity/country than to be a fan of Lady Gaga and loosing time and money on venerating a temporary product of some corporation. Time and money that could of been spent much better. 

I'm not saying you shouldn't listen to Lady Gaga. Liking that music is OK , but identifying with her is not.



FlyingDutchman said:


> Architecture is related to time and society it's designed for. This explains why architecture today is equal in a lot of countries, because of globalization. (Even tough there are still a lot of differences looking at regions/countries)
> 
> Designing buildings like 100 years ago is like still watching at a black white TV out of 1940 or using a horse to transport yourself.


Well no. Comparisons with black TVs and transport are related to technological advance ,and what we're talking here is style and culture.


----------



## FlyingDutchman

^^ 
You're wrong there! Architecture is not about style or culture. Architecture is about vision. What does the architect think is best for the people who use the building and how would it function in the best way.

EDIT: How the building functions is 'off course' heavily influenced in the society it's placed in. For example, electronic devices and cars are heavily changing the designs of buildings. The old facades (which you are actually talking about) can't be explained in modern societies and changed functions of buildings, the only reason for one of those facades are aesthetics.

If culture and style would influence architecture so much, why did architecture change so much?


----------



## im_from_zw038

MADE BY STUDIOJOZ.NL: SUBURBS (VINEX) IN THE CITY OF ZWOLLE (STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION, 4500 HOUSES LEFT TO BUILD)


----------



## Guaporense

BE0GRAD said:


> Nonsense. First, it is not totalitarian heavy handing, it is responsible acting of a state. When something in a society goes wrong, a state is there to intervene whether we speak of security, economy, education, culture or anything else. Second, it is not micro managing but macro managing. The state is not there to tell you what to eat ,what music to listen or where to go out ,but to explain to you what is wrong and why and to inspire you to act with social responsibility. It is not there to forbid you to smoke , but it should explain to you why you should stop doing it and give you incentives to stop it but it is ultimately your decision to smoke or not. The same goes with everything else including tradition and architecture. Its intervention is not concentrated on a individual , but on the entire population with the aim that the most of the people (not necessarily the entire population) follows its recommendations voluntarily. Calling that responsible behavior totalitarian seams like the thinking of an anarchist.


There are degrees of authoritarianism. State incentives for preserving local cultural traditions represents a very small degree of it.



> Heritage makes us unique. It is what differentiate one culture form another and what makes this world diverse as it is. Ignoring heritage leads to a uniform ,dull, globalized world where everywhere there is one race, one language, one culture, one customs... The state shouldn't impose the respect of it's culture. It should teach its people to do it with their own free will. it shouldn't be copying blindly its culture from past ages. It should invent a modern interpretation of it. What most supporters of globalization do is mix evolution of one culture with replacement of one culture by another one. First thing preserves diversity , the second one destroys it.


Modern capitalistic globalized society is the most diverse society ever. We have punks, goths, metalheads, hippies, nerds, etc. Other societies are way less diverse.

Modern globalization is transforming many simple societies into a single unified complex global society.


----------



## Trabbuco

^^
Wat a beautiful pictures! Amazing!


----------



## Arrrgh

^^ I feel sick when I look at them...


----------



## Ian

It seems that you have to walk a lot to go to a shop or public transportation..?


----------



## Suburbanist

Ian said:


> It seems that you have to walk a lot to go to a shop or public transportation..?


Not really, there are some buses stops along that route, headway 15min. if I'm not wrong (but I"m lazy to check it on 9292ov right now).

In any case, those houses are usually sought by families with children or empty nests (as they have different typologies in the same neighborhood) who already use car a lot. Moreover, because Zwolle (as most of NL) is completely flat, biking is quite easy and it means an increased range of non-motorized access to shops and so.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Bicycle infrastructure is good to excellent in those new developments. Buses run every 15 minutes, but are mostly empty outside rush hour. No street is more than about 300 m from a bus stop. 

A problem in these shopping areas is that they ban cyclists from parking near the shop entrance.


----------



## quadi

fortunately, in Belgium things like that are impossible (photos)! I prefer the Belgian chaos instead of this!


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ What is wrong with this development, quadi? Is just the fact it is planned do the smallest detail that bothers you?


----------



## bartjee

I love suburbs that look so well ordened:drool: Much better than that mess in Belgium. These neighbourhoods prove that you don´t have to live in a detached house to live nice. Beautiful pictures!


----------



## Mike____

^^damn why the hell does it always have to be dutch suburbs VS belgian suburbs ? arrgh -__-"
they are both great.


----------



## quadi

ok, of course there are a lot of advantages about these suburbs, but I think it's too much ordered! it's too clean, I like clean buildings but it's not good when whole the residential is like that, people have to give a personal touch to their houses, especially in suburbs!


----------



## desertpunk

quadi said:


> ok, of course there are a lot of advantages about these suburbs, but I think it's too much ordered! it's too clean, I like clean buildings but it's not good when whole the residential is like that, people have to give a personal touch to their houses, especially in suburbs!


Agreed. Overplanned, sterile, antiseptic, utopian Potemkin Villages are seriously unattractive to me.


----------



## Trabbuco

quadi said:


> ok, of course there are a lot of advantages about these suburbs, but I think it's too much ordered! it's too clean, I like clean buildings but it's not good when whole the residential is like that, people have to give a personal touch to their houses, especially in suburbs!


When these kinds of suburbs are getting older, they get a sole.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

It takes time indeed. The 80's neighborhoods we have were once like that as well. Remember these were often built in treeless polders, there are actually more trees now than before, but it takes time before vegetation becomes more mature.


----------



## inno4321

Good!!!!!


----------



## BE0GRAD

Guaporense said:


> Modern capitalistic globalized society is the most diverse society ever. We have punks, goths, metalheads, hippies, nerds, etc. Other societies are way less diverse.
> 
> Modern globalization is transforming many simple societies into a single unified complex global society.



This has already been commented I think. Punks, goths, metalheads etc. are globalized temporary cultures and they are ultimately the product of multinational companies since they are the ones who are financing and shaping them. I'm not against these cultures but taking into account that unlike local traditional cultures they already have rich private mentors ,the state should therefore support the preservation and evolution of the cultures that are really the product of local people and not multinational companies. 

Single complex unified society would be a catastrophe for global diversity since everywhere it would be the same ... with no local particularities.


----------



## BE0GRAD

desertpunk said:


> Agreed. Overplanned, sterile, antiseptic, utopian Potemkin Villages are seriously unattractive to me.


Certain degree of personal touch to the houses would certainly be welcome.


----------



## Jonesy55

BE0GRAD said:


> This has already been commented I think. Punks, goths, metalheads etc. are globalized temporary cultures and they are ultimately the product of multinational companies since they are the ones who are financing and shaping them. I'm not against these cultures but taking into account that unlike local traditional cultures they already have rich private mentors ,the state should therefore support the preservation and evolution of the cultures that are really the product of local people and not multinational companies.


I don't necessarily agree with that, multinational corporations might jump on the bandwagon of these sub-cultures but they didn't create them, they emerge from the population long before corporations recognise them and seek to profit from them.


----------



## Slagathor

BE0GRAD said:


> Certain degree of personal touch to the houses would certainly be welcome.


Fortunately the modern suburbs have looser rules in that respect. Give it time, and people will start to change their house by adding sun rooms or dormers or garages. Other people just change the 'style' of their house with paint and smaller adaptations. 

If you look through the neighborhoods that were built in the 1980s, as ChrisZwolle said, those have gotten a lot more... 'human' over the years as passing families and generations leave their mark


----------



## Ian

BE0GRAD said:


> This has already been commented I think. Punks, goths, metalheads etc. are globalized temporary cultures and they are ultimately the product of multinational companies since they are the ones who are financing and shaping them. I'm not against these cultures but taking into account that unlike local traditional cultures they already have rich private mentors ,the state should therefore support the preservation and evolution of the cultures that are really the product of local people and not multinational companies.
> 
> Single complex unified society would be a catastrophe for global diversity since everywhere it would be the same ... with no local particularities.


agree 100%... the sad goal nowadays seems that every city has to become some sort of 'little earth' on its own.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ I think that is, indeed, a positive development! See, you don't need to move elsewhere to escape some local lifestyle you don't like in your town, you just live like you want, wherever you want. 

The average person has much more access to diversity in its daily life than anyone before. You are not bounded, or cursed, to live a certain way just because you live in a certain place. That is called FREEDOM.

Just to go on the offtopic a little more, I give you a plain example: until 80 years ago, diet was pretty much constrained by what was grown near the city ou live. Sure, salt and some other items have been shipped from far away, but most of your diet would be a boring selection (everything you repeat everyday becomes boring after a while) of 200km-grown products if not less.

Now, you can have reasonable sushi for reasonable prices wherever you live. Or South-American beef cuts. Or Norwegian shrimps. Or tropical fruits waaay far from any tropical region. 

You could also think in terms of arts: in the past, the most likely fun would be a BORING folk group doing some stupid dance. But that was all you could get. Now, with some clicks of Youtube, you can find yourself a fan of any music style, be it some massive international pop-rock substyle, or an obscure set of music being done by few people scattered around the globe. You don't have more a "city music scene" that you would have to move to if you were a musician and liked that style, you can just play it anywhere and broadcast it!


----------



## Anderson Geimz

desertpunk said:


> Agreed. Overplanned, sterile, antiseptic, utopian Potemkin Villages are seriously unattractive to me.


You don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about...


----------



## BE0GRAD

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ I think that is, indeed, a positive development! See, you don't need to move elsewhere to escape some local lifestyle you don't like in your town, you just live like you want, wherever you want.
> 
> The average person has much more access to diversity in its daily life than anyone before. You are not bounded, or cursed, to live a certain way just because you live in a certain place. That is called FREEDOM.
> 
> Just to go on the offtopic a little more, I give you a plain example: until 80 years ago, diet was pretty much constrained by what was grown near the city ou live. Sure, salt and some other items have been shipped from far away, but most of your diet would be a boring selection (everything you repeat everyday becomes boring after a while) of 200km-grown products if not less.
> 
> Now, you can have reasonable sushi for reasonable prices wherever you live. Or South-American beef cuts. Or Norwegian shrimps. Or tropical fruits waaay far from any tropical region.
> 
> You could also think in terms of arts: in the past, the most likely fun would be a BORING folk group doing some stupid dance. But that was all you could get. Now, with some clicks of Youtube, you can find yourself a fan of any music style, be it some massive international pop-rock substyle, or an obscure set of music being done by few people scattered around the globe. You don't have more a "city music scene" that you would have to move to if you were a musician and liked that style, you can just play it anywhere and broadcast it!


I believe you did not understand the point. No one said any culture should be banned or suppressed. Everyone would and should be free to admire what he likes. So your mentioning of freedom doesn't make sense since there is no question of abolishing or reducing it. The point is that the state should promote local traditional cultures in the way that the people start admiring it with their own free will. 

I'll mention the example of Serbia. Here you also have fans of heavy metal, techno and other globalized cultures but yet, people still love the most local music whether we speak of traditional or modern interpretations of it. In the same manner in Belgrade we have chinese, indian, thai, mexican restaurants but people still prefer local cuisine the most ... and they all do it freely with no one forcing them. Everyone is free to listen or eat whatever he wants but still local culture is dominant. That is what makes us unique in some way and that is what state should preserve .

...and globalized cultures ARE the product of multinational companies because without them they would not become global due to the lack of funding. If we let capitalism to shape global culture, in the end we will have a dull uniform world where everything is the same and where everyone thinks the same with just an illusion of diversity. Evolution can teach us that uniformity is one of the best ways that something goes wrong since there are no different approaches to various problems and therefore no alternatives if the one and only approach proves to be wrong.


----------



## Nemanja034

BE0GRAD said:


> I believe you did not understand the point. No one said any culture should be banned or suppressed. Everyone would and should be free to admire what he likes. So your mentioning of freedom doesn't make sense since there is no question of abolishing or reducing it. The point is that the state should promote local traditional cultures in the way that the people start admiring it with their own free will.
> 
> I'll mention the example of Serbia. Here you also have fans of heavy metal, techno and other globalized cultures but yet, people still love the most local music whether we speak of traditional or modern interpretations of it. In the same manner in Belgrade we have chinese, indian, thai, mexican restaurants but people still prefer local cuisine the most ... and they all do it freely with no one forcing them. Everyone is free to listen or eat whatever he wants but still local culture is dominant. That is what makes us unique in some way and that is what state should preserve .
> 
> ...and globalized cultures ARE the product of multinational companies because without them they would not become global due to the lack of funding. If we let capitalism to shape global culture, in the end we will have a dull uniform world where everything is the same and where everyone thinks the same with just an illusion of diversity. Evolution can teach us that uniformity is one of the best ways that something goes wrong since there are no different approaches to various problems and therefore no alternatives if the one and only approach proves to be wrong.


Today's nations, tomorrow's planetary colonies, never over with diferences... but must evolve to something before a new step. And between two steps there is technological developement, and globalization as a product of it. It is silly speaking about local, in time we think about warp engines, and teleportations, that's a way ahaed of national and local communities. Simply new technologies gives us a possibility for further education, learning languages, and communicate, and that naturally obliterates frontiers. What i m against is the way that process goes on, and here we come to same topics of how money and individuals controle system and economy, and everything that comes with that. It is only the question about what society is, and what it should be, and no matter if society is global or local. 

If we speak about tradition, how can we describe it? As a museum of historical habits of people of certain region? We lost those habits the moment we entered to postmodern era. Serbia, has something own. But its still a mixture of foreign influences, turk, byzantine, or austrohungarian... or maybe russian? Italian?. France and German neoklasicism has its diferences, but it was based on same foundations and philosophy, and in time when influences were much slower. So how influences do the work today? Here we are, speaking not on original serbian, but on english on world forum, and topics is suburbs in the netherlands? And some argentinians, chinese, or algerians for example do influence our minds and thoughts, as they could not do so easy a 100 years ago.


----------



## Jonesy55

Aren't Burek and Cevapcici Ottoman imports? Should the Serbian state be promoting these items as part of local culture or should they concentrate on truly local cuisine not brought in by foreign rulers?


----------



## Buffalo Soldier

BE0GRAD said:


> This has already been commented I think. Punks, goths, metalheads etc. are globalized temporary cultures and they are ultimately the product of multinational companies since they are the ones who are financing and shaping them. I'm not against these cultures but taking into account that unlike local traditional cultures they already have rich private mentors ,the state should therefore support the preservation and evolution of the cultures that are really the product of local people and not multinational companies.
> 
> Single complex unified society would be a catastrophe for global diversity since everywhere it would be the same ... with no local particularities.


I believe you are making several mistakes here (in my opinion)

Punks, Goths, metalheads, hippies, nerds, ... you say they are temporary. There's no proof for that. They are young cultures, but they still exist.

You seem to think that local traditional cultures on the other hand are more or less static. I don't believe that. There's more cultural differences between Flemish/Belgian/Western Europan culture these days & the fifties, than there is between punks & hippies. All cultures change, even those who we call 'traditional'

I think the huge correlation between culture & geography is history. There's television, satellite, internet,... 100 years ago, a region had a culture, because there were no other peers, this has disappeared completely. Every place would be the same? Maybe, but everyone within that place would be different.

And to end with: Western European culture was also shaped by a multinational company: Christianity. This makes modern cultures not that different from traditional cultures.


----------



## BE0GRAD

Buffalo Soldier said:


> I believe you are making several mistakes here (in my opinion)
> 
> Punks, Goths, metalheads, hippies, nerds, ... you say they are temporary. There's no proof for that. They are young cultures, but they still exist.
> 
> You seem to think that local traditional cultures on the other hand are more or less static. I don't believe that. There's more cultural differences between Flemish/Belgian/Western Europan culture these days & the fifties, than there is between punks & hippies. All cultures change, even those who we call 'traditional'


You are right. We still can't say if they are temporary, but they are the product of large capital and not of the local people. With that perspective, we can say that unlike globalized ones, traditional cultures have a soul since they are not made for making money but for the pleasure of ordinary people. the author of some traditional folk song didn't have in mind how much money he'll get form that. On the other hand ,the vast majority of authors of commercial music think only about that. 

I don't think traditional cultures are static. I think they are not promoted enough since they don't have much support. All cultures, including traditional ones evolve , but many people are mixing evolution of a culture and its replacement by another. If traditional cultures get enough support from the state, they will continue their evolution. But what we have now is that local cultures are dying out and being replaced by globalized cultures ... not because they are inferior, but because they are not supported. Serbia and Greece per example still respect their cultures in this or that way ,and that's what makes them more unique than some other countries that prefer being globalized. 



Buffalo Soldier said:


> Every place would be the same? Maybe, but everyone within that place would be different.


Would they really be different? I don't think so. Globalization means massive mixing and massive interaction. If you mix all the different cultures, mentalities, religions, races and languages of this world ,after some time ... lets say 200 years, they will all blend into ONE culture, ONE mentality, ONE religion, ONE race and probably even one language. So with globalization, represented by the logic of "multiculturalism" , we would get an artificial temporary local diversity but after some time even that so called diversity would be gone and we would have a dull , uniform world with one and only official ideology. A disaster. hno:


----------



## Jonesy55

> the author of some traditional folk song didn't have in mind how much money he'll get form that. On the other hand ,the vast majority of authors of commercial music think only about that


I think you are overly cynical and exaggerate the influence of "corporations and capital" in newer global cultural movements.

There are many, many songwriters and musicians for example in all genres whose primary concern is not profit but simply love of music whether it be punk, electronica, jazz, hip-hop, turbofolk or whatever.


----------



## poshbakerloo

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ What is wrong with this development, quadi? Is just the fact it is planned do the smallest detail that bothers you?


Its quite often communities that are planned that are the worst places...


----------



## BE0GRAD

Jonesy55 said:


> I think you are overly cynical and exaggerate the influence of "corporations and capital" in newer global cultural movements.


I don't think it is an exaggeration (assuming you understood what I wanted to say). Its just that this influence is not easily visible. 



Jonesy55 said:


> There are many, many songwriters and musicians for example in all genres whose primary concern is not profit but simply love of music whether it be punk, electronica, jazz, hip-hop, turbofolk or whatever.


I agree, but these are still a small minority. As for most of the songs we hear in the media, in the end it is some high official in the corporation and not the composer who decides whether the song will be supported or not.


----------



## BE0GRAD

poshbakerloo said:


> Its quite often communities that are planned that are the worst places...


They are hardly worse than unplanned communities.


----------



## ajaaronjoe

.........,•✯´.........´*✫
.......♥*......... .... __/\__
.......*♥....... .......*-:¦:-*
...¸.•✫.......... ……/.•*•.\
...~`,`~................. |
¸....✫.................. *•*
´¸...*♥..´¸...........*♥♫♥*
´¸¸♥*................✯•♫•♥•*
´¸.•✫ .............. *♥•♫•♫♥*
~`,`~............. ✯♥•♦♫♥•♥*.
`.✫`.............. *♥☺♥•♥•☺♥*.
●/................✯♥•♥♠♫♥#♥•♥*..
/▌................*♥♫•♥♫•♥♫♥•♫♥*
/ \....................... ╬╬╬╬.
MERRY CHRISTMAS.•*´¨`*•.¸¸.•*´¨`*•.¸¸.•*´¨`*•.¸¸.•*´¨`*•.¸


----------



## TheInsider

im_from_zw038 said:


> MADE BY STUDIOJOZ.NL: SUBURBS (VINEX) IN THE CITY OF ZWOLLE (STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION, 4500 HOUSES LEFT TO BUILD)


what a nice shot/picture ruined by a stupid copyright watermark. some people need to relax on these copyright issues. it's just a picture of residential neighborhood, no one is going to make a profit off of it, jeez.


----------



## Suburbanist

TheInsider said:


> what a nice shot/picture ruined by a stupid copyright watermark. some people need to relax on these copyright issues. it's just a picture of residential neighborhood, no one is going to make a profit off of it, jeez.


I guess in many cases this copyright issues have nothing to do with profit itself, but with the fact someone else might start using those pictures without crediting you. I'm in no way a professional photographer and I mostly shot only highways, but I'd be bothered A LOT if some newspaper or other obscure blog used my pics without crediting me. It's not about money, but about misrepresentation.


----------



## im_from_zw038

Slagathor said:


> Beats the Rivierenbuurt in The Hague which looks more like Brandevoort's retarded cousin.


that's horrible hno::nuts::bash:


----------



## Quintana

The idea was nice but unfortunately it was constructed on the cheap (unlike Brandevoort it seems). It doesn't surprise me that quite a few of those houses are already up for sale. I have been in one of them and it was terribly impractical with a kitchen at the first floor and the living/dining room on the second. A shame because the location is really nice, just a stone's throw away from the city's two major railway stations and the city centre (and one of the red light districts of course).


----------



## ChrisZwolle

Quintana said:


> (and one of the red light districts of course).


So, what more could a family wish for? :lol:


----------



## domtoren

*Dutch suburbs in typical grey weather*

Assen, bus sluice (obstacle designed to let pass buses but cars no way!) 










Assen, Kloosterveen 



















Utrecht, Vleuten, Leidsche Rijn


----------



## euromerican

There's just so much being built! Where are they getting all these people to fill the suburbs from? I thought Dutch people were having less and less kids, and the population was going down...?


----------



## JLAG

Buffalo Soldier said:


> That's a non-argument i hear to often on these forums.
> 
> If it looks good, you should build it.
> 
> It's like saying no-one should make blues-music anymore, only electronic music...


I second that.

Are all those buildings in Brandevoort new? Fantastic.


----------



## ChrisZwolle

euromerican said:


> There's just so much being built! Where are they getting all these people to fill the suburbs from? I thought Dutch people were having less and less kids, and the population was going down...?


There are a few reasons. First, the Dutch population is still growing. Second, there is a demographic shift, less people per house, which means more houses are needed for the same population. Then you have the problem that some central cities have too much rental housing, with very expensive housing left over, so people move to surrounding cities which have affordable housing. This is simply suburbanization. 

We have a lot of neighborhoods that were designed for middle-class income in the 1950's and 1960's but then the middle class moved out and the empty housing was filled up by lower income groups. I don't think this is much different from what you find elsewhere in Europe or North America.


----------



## Suburbanist

euromerican said:


> There's just so much being built! Where are they getting all these people to fill the suburbs from? I thought Dutch people were having less and less kids, and the population was going down...?


Netherlands have the the highest fertility rate in Western Europe, above the "replacement level", and attracts a reasonable number of immigrants, most of them from European Union.

Chris also pointed out other reasons. Households are getting smaller, and there is more of a culture of youngster moving to their own house (like in US) instead of staying with their families until older ages (like in Italy, France or Spain) or marriage.


----------



## Dezz

Suburbanist said:


> The Netherlands have the the highest fertility rate in Western Europe, above the "replacement level"


This isn't true, I think France has the highest fertility rate in Western Europe. For the Netherlands this rate is 1.77, so well below replacement level. But, as others already pointed out, due to immigration the population is still growing with about 80.000 per year.


----------



## bartjee

*Reeshof, Tilburg*

Today I made a walk through the Reeshof. The weather was beautiful.


----------



## thebig C

Nice pics. Reeshof has a nice settled feel to it. Would it be an affluent area?

I particularly liked the apartment block and the houses in the first 2 pics.


----------



## bartjee

^^Thanks, there's a nature area in the reeshof called the "Dongevallei". It's made by humans as almost every nature in the Netherlands. 

Some pictures I also made yesterday.


----------



## gattone

*Electric fence?*



bartjee said:


>


----------



## Spookvlieger

Dezz said:


> This isn't true, I think France has the highest fertility rate in Western Europe. For the Netherlands this rate is 1.77, so well below replacement level. But, as others already pointed out, due to immigration the population is still growing with about 80.000 per year.


You also should take those vertillity rates next to immigrants rates...Then you see who makes the new kids hno:


----------



## Suburbanist

gattone said:


> *Electric fence?*


Yes. They have some cows running around that greenery and as so need to keep them within the limits of their grassland (which is quite generous btw). Animals are there just to enhance the landscape. Here are the specimen kept there:



















It must be said that electric fence is the best way to control livestock: the shock doesn't hurt them, but herds learn fast and quickly to avoid coming close to the fence. It's incredible.


----------



## rd77

Trabbuco said:


> I think Ypenburg is the ugliest suburb of the Netherlands.


Haven't visited this thread for a while, so sorry for bumping up an old topic: Don't know if Ypenburg is the ugliest suburb of the Netherlands, but it definitely is a godawful s**thole of a place. Unfortunately, I have a few friends and relatives that live there, so I can't avoid to visit the place a few times a year.

The whole area was built only 10 years ago or so (end 90s/early 00s), but already there are gangs of youth loitering around. Lots and lots of houses for sale (made worse by the economic crisis). Sales are largely due to either people moving on to newer parts of Ypenburg or getting divorced. While I find Ypenburg a depressing-looking place, my personal belief is that the problems of the area are mostly caused by the population mix. A lot of the white trash from deprived neighbourhoods closer to the city center of The Hague (such as Transvaal, Schilderswijk, Zuiderparkbuurt) moved to Ypenburg and that did not help the social climate in the area. Last New Year's Eve, Ypenburg saw pretty much the same kind of riots and misbehaviour that the older areas of The Hague are used to. Not good. 

Personally, I do not like any VINEX area whatsoever and am saving up, so I can either stay in The Hague (but in a nicer house than I live in right now) or move to Voorburg, which also has very nice areas, and is still very close to the city.


----------



## rd77

Quintana said:


> The idea was nice but unfortunately it was constructed on the cheap (unlike Brandevoort it seems). It doesn't surprise me that quite a few of those houses are already up for sale. I have been in one of them and it was terribly impractical with a kitchen at the first floor and the living/dining room on the second. A shame because the location is really nice, just a stone's throw away from the city's two major railway stations and the city centre (and one of the red light districts of course).


Friends of mine live in this development and I agree with you for the most part. While I find the houses on the whole attractive, their layout is often impractical. Architecture looks cheap indeed. Surrounding neighbourhood is still not too great either. Having said that, I would jump at the chance of buying one of these. Really close to the city center, garage under the house, good amount of space, kids can play safely in the courtyard and prices (from the back of my head) of around €400k per house. I'll get over that crappy layout, no problem.


----------



## DVBB

yuvaly1 said:


> Very aesthetic and well-organized, I love it!


me too

and that channels...


----------



## jordi21

Where is the people?


----------



## Slagathor

Inside. It's cold here.


----------



## Fabri88

Batavier said:


> Thanks for the picture but I think that might actually be a holiday village, and not a suburb.


You're right guy! But it is pretty typical Dutch style!

I've never been in the Netherlands but I would love walking down that streets. I love regular and schematic things!

I live in Italy, our towns are very irregular! I don't like Italian towns 'cept for historical downtowns! The only schematic town I know in Italy is Palmanova (in the Province of Udine)


----------



## Trabbuco

Fabri88 said:


> I took this picture during my flight from Vienna Schwechat to London Heathrow!
> 
> Flight OS461 on 25th June 2010 (that it was also my 22nd birthday)
> 
> The suburb is located in Breskens, Zeeland (51°24'N - 3°32'E).


It is a camping called ''DroomPark Schoneveld''. But there are suburbs in Holland that look similar.


----------



## domtoren

*IJburg Amsterdam*














































as seen from across IJmeer lake


----------



## peezet

Fabri88 said:


> I took this picture during my flight from Vienna Schwechat to London Heathrow!
> 
> Flight OS461 on 25th June 2010 (that it was also my 22nd birthday)
> 
> The suburb is located in Breskens, Zeeland (51°24'N - 3°32'E).


It's former fort Willem I
but nowadays in use as a holiday resort.

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Willem_I_(Breskens)


----------



## delirious&zen

BE0GRAD said:


> Apart from being ugly , this house poses the lack of privacy problem too. Who would like to live here?


calvinist-protestant people from holand like them


----------



## julesstoop

I'm a catholic Dutchy (at least originally, I consider myself atheist now) but I would love to live there. All that light seems wonderful and I like the modernist style. The privacy problem is easily dealt with, obviously. Grow some nice trees in the garden and use curtains when and where necessary.


----------



## pbrdpbrd

*"Gated Suburbs"*

I live in Arizona and here the gated suburban communties are not because of a security issue, rather is a desire of the people living in the gated communities to enhance their privacy by restricting access to people that do not belong to their neighborhood.


----------



## Natataek

Osseveld and Woudhuis, relatively new suburbs in Apeldoorn.
Designed by famous post-modern architect Ashok Bhalotra. Nicely designed IMO; better than the newer vinex wijken (less retro crap), and having been brought up in England (knowing how shit the suburbs are there) this is quite a paradise!


----------



## Luli Pop

I started liking NLs suburbs, but now everything posted are shoe boxes.

I was about to say they look like Playmobil houses but then I remembered even then don´t live in shoe boxes.


----------



## SO143

Natataek said:


>


Is this in Netherlands?


----------



## Natataek

Yes of course. Why do you ask?


----------



## SO143

Natataek said:


> Yes of course. Why do you ask?


awww, it 100% looks the same as towns in UK 

i was a bit surprised


----------



## Trabbuco

-Edit-


----------



## Natataek

SO143 said:


> awww, it 100% looks the same as towns in UK
> 
> i was a bit surprised


Haha, pull the other one! Show me the town in the U'K that looks like this and i'll eat my hat!

...you should've gone to Specsavers!


----------



## Natataek

For clarity's sake:





































Perhaps these give a better impression of the area in question.


----------



## DiscoZimpy

A lot of these jobs are further away than the average distance people tend to take their bike to work, so these developments usually generates more car traffic than the older neighborhoods.


----------



## DiscoZimpy

In a typical Dutch family men work fulltime and women part-time. Day-care centres are very expensive.


----------



## DiscoZimpy

Therefore it's cheaper for mothers to work part-time and take care of the children.


----------



## Junk

A very quick photo series shot in a suburb of my home town called Kerkerhout:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=52.109563,4.372795&spn=0.008513,0.022724&t=h&z=16

1. 









2. This type of passage behind houses is quite typical of Dutch suburbs. Doors to the houses' sheds/garages are built into the wall on the left.









3. The typical terraced housing.









4. The part of Kerkehout nearer to The Hague consists of spacious urban villas.









5.


----------



## tripleseis

Just got back from a trip to the Netherlands and I must say the residential areas are on the whole lovely. Luckily we managed to get free bike hire while in Utrecht (courtesy of the Centraal Museum!) so we got to cycle around some residential areas while going to see the Rietveld Schröder Huis. Everything is so much calmer traffic wise too (except the motorways of course).


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ I hate traffic calming for most of it, particular when applied to urban expressways. Traffic hierarchization is the way to go IMO. Cars, people walking and bikes should not mix a lot.


----------



## sharon0902s

looked nice, and all buildings are in order from above. 
As I live in China, I can't find any city like yours


----------



## tripleseis

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ I hate traffic calming for most of it, particular when applied to urban expressways. Traffic hierarchization is the way to go IMO. Cars, people walking and bikes should not mix a lot.


I wasn't specifically on about traffic calming, more I felt that motorists in the Netherlands actually drove more civilised. Anyway, your speed bumps are miles better than ours, they aren't very high, clearly marked and not in abundance like ours in the UK. UK speed bumps are too high, badly positioned in many cases and falling apart through wear and tear and potholes. Anyway, we're going off topic now.


----------



## jbkayaker12

Natataek said:


> Osseveld and Woudhuis, relatively new suburbs in Apeldoorn.
> Designed by famous post-modern architect Ashok Bhalotra. Nicely designed IMO; better than the newer vinex wijken (less retro crap), and having been brought up in England (knowing how shit the suburbs are there) this is quite a paradise!


Looks like an industrial complex, rows upon rows of warehouses.


----------



## spacetweek

AEvolution said:


> It's a fact the Dutch housing market is overheated, there are simply not enough houses for everyone. Even at a construction rate of 100.000 new homes a year the market can't keep up. In most cities thousands of small, low quality houses build in the 50's and 60's, just after WWII, are being demolished. These are replaced by larger houses, meaning a lower building density.


I'm interested in this idea. Are these small homes privately owned? In that case how is it legal for them all to be demolished?


----------



## woutero

^^
They are owned by affordable housing agencies (woningcorporaties). They own and manage what is public housing in most other countries. In The Netherlands these companies were never public, but in the post WWII era they did receive a lot of subsidies.

The kinds of buildings that are being demolished look like this:
http://bit.ly/jKfLfz (street view link).


----------



## bressoitalia

amazing places, i need to see all these places.....


----------



## swerveut

Great pictures and very nice and modern styling of townhouses! Very architecturally stimulating!

Two questions however:

- Is most dutch house construction done with concrete and brick or with wood (North American style)? 

- A lot of these houses (especially on earlier pages of the thread) look impossibly small in size... maybe will accommodate just one room on top of another on top of another and a staircase on the side. Is that how they really are? Anyone got some *interior* plans or pictures they can post also??


----------



## farodkhaledmossad

BE0GRAD said:


> Apart from being ugly , this house poses the lack of privacy problem too. Who would like to live here?


I do, since privacy can be dimmerized by a few simple additions already said here.

My readings in this thread didn´t gave me an exact idea of how expensive are those townhouses, can someone from Netherland help me with that. I appreciate. 

Tks and keep the great work, loved this thread and the pictures in it.


----------



## thebig C

This thread seems to have died a bit. Which is a shame because I love it

Have you NL guys any more pics to show the world?


----------



## GuyFromMoss

Hello. I am really impressed by this thread.

In fact I am moving to the Netherlands in January, I can't wait to explore more of this really, really cool country. 

I've been to the Netherlands quite some times now, and what amazes me is that nothing is really ugly. In Norway, where I live, there is plenty of really hidious residences, both detached houses, apartments and rowhouses. In the Netherlands most of the architecture seems to be of a very high standard. Everything is also very clean and neat, eg. I have never seen a unkept dutch forecourt. And the planning, focus on bikes and public transportation is just marvelous. Unfortunately, I think most other Europeans what cheap tacky architecture rather than high-quality modern style. The Norwegian dream is to have a tacky, ugly mansion far away from everything else, yet they compain that the public transportation is bad, and the schools are far away. I hope Norwegian politicians will take a trip to the Netherlands one day, to see how nice urban planning can be! 

I love the use of colors in some of these new VINEX developments, I would love to live in one of those places in the future. Especially one of those houses that are close to the water. 

M


----------



## domtoren

*Leidsche Rijn, Utrecht*


----------



## domtoren

*Houten (suburb of Utrecht)*

Houten was developed from the seventies around the old village, now it has a modern city centre and a secundary centre at Houten-Castellum. Both are located around railway stations. 
Hiuten is a family-oriented suburb and has many row and (semi)detached houses and boasts an extensive cycling network. Cars cannot pass easily into the city, as it is divided in compartments accessible only from the ring road but not from another compartment. 
Here are some images from Castellum, the most recent part, with its town centre which has a shopping centre, streets with Romanb and Italian names, a part with Roman/Italian-looking houses and apartments around the station. 

The Fietstransferium is a parking garage for bicycles, commuters can take the train after parking their bike there for free:



















Italianate streets in the town centre:



















Dual use building: primary school downstairs, apartements upstairs:










Culture and children's centre:










Street scene:


----------



## domtoren

*Leidsche Rijn, Utrecht*


----------



## bartjee

*Oosterheem, Zoetermeer*

The new shoppingcentre



Momo1435 said:


> vandaag





Michiel said:


> 19 mei:
> 
> 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. De laagste toren is al opgeleverd
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5.


----------



## estlander

I guess, this 1990ies (blue monkey face houses) happens to all sort of "in current style" planning. They end up with unhappy locals and cheaper sales outviews.









This villa is so like german architect Hans Scharoun (Lobau, 1933 f. ex)

These (next 3 pics) buildings and whole environment looks also so estonian or finnish. I would definitly live there and I would be happy.


























These next (4 pics this time) places look splendid living environment:


































And if to look next house - I must admit, the details make it the most unboring house. Its a great fun to live in it. Its a pearl to every suburb.










Guys - good thread and well done!


----------



## cloud32

^^ i agree! For someone living in suburban Britain (with boring identi-kit houses that look the same in every single city across the country) its great to see all the experimental designs The Netherlands posses and how people seem so willing to move into anything, no matter what it looks like (which is the compelte opposite here it seems, if a house is not victorian/georgian/tudor in apperence people dont want to know - or thats what developers seem to think). Britain needs some of this experimental energy... desperatly.


----------



## cloud32

Having read more into this thread i see there is actually quite alot of negative views surrounding those new developements...

After reading this thread I've revisited a programme i watched quite a while ago that looks into house design here in the UK and The Netherland's new homes are used mainly as an example of good planning and design. I'm not sure wether the programme is available in countries outside the UK but I will send a link anyway as I find it extremally interesting and it gives an insight into how the UK view your new developements... Enjoy!

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-perfect-home/4od#2930014


----------



## intervention

I'm generally a huge fan of all modern design coming out of the Netherlands but the pseudo-gabled house design in some of these large buildings is frightening!


----------



## SoroushPersepolisi

anything?!! this was such a live thread

bring back the posts!


----------



## AmoreUrbs

The Dutch planning is probably the best in the world, because it's a perfect compromise of quiet living and density, in other European countries this is not done to the same extent.. some just seem to follow the US model in a horrible way, like France (Toulouse as an example).. But what I can't really like, is the bland and modernistic look of many houses, as in general I don't like a big part of modern architecture (with exceptions); I hate everything being the same style too, but some of these are just too much, and the same style is repeated in the same district, it's almost robotic.. they should abandon it (for cities too) and go for a more typical classical European look, it's the only thing these suburbs and the new Dutch city squares lack..
One thing in particular I'd like to know: is a Dutch average family able to buy a detached house? Are apartments mostly for lower classes?


----------



## The Blond Guy

I especially like the view of those suburbs form the sky. Here are some examples form the village of Lemmer.


----------



## sean188

Please excuse me for resurrecting an old thread but I was just wondering why so many terraced Dutch houses have two front doors. I was thinking it might be because they are duplexes with stairs up to the upper part or does the second door lead into a storage room e.g. for bikes?


----------



## Cadîr

del.


----------



## Batavier

The Blond Guy said:


> I especially like the view of those suburbs form the sky. Here are some examples form the village of Lemmer.


I think houses in the first picture are holiday or secondary homes, it is not allowed to use them as permanent residence. Friesland has many of these homes as it is a province where many people go for their (water sports) holidays.



sean188 said:


> Please excuse me for resurrecting an old thread but I was just wondering why so many terraced Dutch houses have two front doors. I was thinking it might be because they are duplexes with stairs up to the upper part or does the second door lead into a storage room e.g. for bikes?


Many houses in the Netherlands are semi-detached, the doors next to each other are of two different homes. Duplexes are not built any more, in the fifties and sixties of last century duplexes where built to reduce the housing shortage. There are still various examples in older parts of Dutch cities. The houses where merged after some time to become terraced houses. 

Here is an example from my home town. On the left there are duplexes and on the right merged houses.

It is not very common to build houses with two front doors. Storage rooms or bicycle sheds are usually on the garden side of the house and reachable via the garden entrance


----------

