Crackling and moist houses, it’s a soil issue: GfW’s seven approaches to addressing the roots of the problem

Your house is sinking into the soil. It seems unstable on the floor. Cracklings appear on the external walls. Your indoor walls are full of mold and fungus. And now, heavy rain makes you walk in water in your garden, all around your house, in your neighbourhood. The trees don’t stay put and fall. Your health is seriously affected.
You’re not in an episode of ‘Extrapolations’. This is the reality of the 17 000 inhabitants of Tuindorp Oostzaan, in Amsterdam.
Once an ideal garden city neighbourhood in the Northen part of Amsterdam and designed according to the concepts of community spirit, greenery, village-like atmosphere, it faces nowadays increasing challenges related to houses and neighbourhood structural issues, worsening with years and climate change.
Most of the underlying issues, such as groundwater management are not to be seen by untrained eyes. Yet, they will be the key focus of the two main renovation activities of the EUI Ground for Well-Being (GfW) project: the redesign and transformation of the Plejadenplein – a main square in the centre of the neighbourhood – and the redesign of the main mobility axis of the area, Meteorenweg.
GfW seeks to tackle both the physical problems caused by the difficult soil and the social challenges in the neighbourhood in an integrated manner. Seven key components form the core of the project, before climate change worsens even more the situation.

1. Altogether: outreaching residents
Residents of the neighbourhood are at the heart of the co-design process for the renovation of the Plejadenplein and Meteorenweg. They are the experts of their daily lives and know better what is of use to those spaces. Also, chances of appropriation and adequate maintenance, together increased safety (Plejadenplein in particular faces degradations in wintertime), will be higher if the residents are on board with the technical solutions. Not to forget the immediate actions which will take place in the residents’ own houses and gardens (e.g. de-sealing and planting of greens): importantly though, these will need to be joint and shared solutions, so that the impacts are levelled (and not, for example, with water ending up in the sole greened area of the area).
Involving residents might also lead to a better community and improve social interactions. It could also be a leverage to raise awareness of other sustainability issues such as energy transition (a frequent blockage in social housings).
To achieve this, the representativity of the residents, owners or tenants of their houses, involved in the process will be central: some have been there forever and for several generations and have a low income; others moved in recently and have a higher income. Not to mention those not belonging to thess categories or with a migrant background. The residents will also need to be attracted and see what’s the added value for them and their daily life and comfort, beyond wider societal issues: indeed, as 75% of the accommodations of the area is social housing, many of the residents just try to make ends meet and their priorities lie in other issues than those covered by GfW.
GfW as therefore started to carefully communicate, both in terms of format and content: direct contacts have taken place through ethnography, anthropology, door-to -door and even via WhatsApp, as well as through intermediaries, organisations and the local church. The results of these strategies have already revealed new communication challenges and new strategies which will need to be tested.

2. Altogether: rhythm, cycles and nature
Involving residents in participatory processes through co-creation and consultations has become, to a certain extent, quite standard. These will be taking place in GfW as well, yet an additional expertise will be added to the process in the form of rhythm and health analysis. By understanding the patterns of activities of the residents and ecological cycles in a social setting, this analysis will fill in the gap between what residents do and what is being developed for in terms of architectural and urban planning perspectives.
Another approach will be ecosystemic by considering each and every one, including nature: this will be the role of the Zoöp Model, by giving nature a voice in the decision-making process. By putting in place a Speaker for the living, the Zoöp model will seek to impact the attitudes and mindsets of human taking part in the process, to recognise the intrinsic value of all species and integrate them into organisational strategies and decision-making processes.
The main challenge for this added expertise, though key to the project, will be to integrate them practically in each task and step, and to best communicate this to the residents and involve them in this process - since this means something for the decision process, operating a real mindshift, and not merely being independent tasks which have a life of their own. They should not be sacrificed to the engineering parts of the project, bound to strict timing in the overall timeframe of the project, which could end up being prioritised.

3. Regaining trust in the local government
Residents are key to the co-design process, yet, most solutions, maybe with the exception of de-sealing and greening activities in their own gardens, will need to be implemented by the municipality. To ensure resident participation, they will need to regain trust in the local government. This is especially the case as a previous consultation in 2019 for the redesign of Plejadenplein did not lead to any transformation and that residents are, at this stage, still suspicious about the process and its potential (lack of) results.
Another negative experience is the fact that few major investments are planned in this neighbourhood even though the nearby NDSM, based on the exact shipyards where workers of the Tunidorp Oostzaan used to work, has been going through major redevelopment plans for the last decades. This has left the residents of the area the feeling of being forgotten.
Finally, any daily life disturbance (e.g. with major renovation works) is a hurdle to engage residents. At the same time, the issues related to soil and water are less visible in a socially vulnerable neighbourhood where residents may not easily find their way to the municipality. The project would be their only chance to address it. The project will need a communication which does not raise false expectations, and which is honest and transparent.

4. Getting the right narrative across
For those residents aware of extreme weather, the project might appear to focus solely on Climate Change. Others do not believe in climate change. The project has already struggled to make clear that it is about the soil situation. As such, partners have worked together to create a correct common useful narrative, especially linking it to daily and visible issues (such as flooding, house cracklings, instability, fungus and health): it seems, so far to have increased interest in the project.

5. Groundwater on the top of the agenda
Soil is on the one hand where the houses, the Tuindorp Oostzaan neighbhourood lies – and on the other, what creates their instability. The subsidence of the past has already impacted the neighbourhood (green public spaces higher than sunken homes and gardens) and the threat of revoking further subsidence locks the neighbourhood in an troubling high groundwater situation.
Soil is also, the basic of biodiversity, of life – which in turn has impact on and is affected by climate change. Which closes the cycle in being affected by or counter effecting soil subsidence. All this due to groundwater levels which on a reclaimed land such as that of the neighbourhood is difficult to control – both for overfloodings and droughts.
As such, the project seeks to increase the awareness of the importance of groundwater challenges and difficult soils: soft and subsiding, compact and paved, poor soil life, crowded by underground infrastructure). The project will provide a framework and faster pace than standard approach to the (ground)water management solutions, and by doing so, will put soil and groundwater as major planning instruments into the system of the city.

6. Ambition to change the way the City of Amsterdam works
The project seeks to lead to major changes in the municipality by integrating all the five the above-mentioned elements. The project will foster collaboration between departments of the municipality of Amsterdam. It will generate a change in the cities workflow to at least identify these combined challenges in other neighbourhoods and learnings: for the proposed solutions, for the methodology (co-creation with - vulnerable - residents, integrated approach), for the partnership (complementary approaches, visions and skills).

7. Anticipating the after GfW
The project is an investment for many partners. They aim to learn from this project, gain more experience, and improve or create knowledge and own working methods. The hope to be using this project as a leverage for future projects, to be involved in more of these neighbourhoods as specialists for these kinds of projects. They will also learn to work with new partners.
For the City of Amsterdam, the project will definitely not be an end: the implementation of the renovation of the Meteorenweg will still need to be carried out after GfW. Life will not stop at the end of GfW and can definitely be anticipated.

About this resource
The European Urban Initiative is an essential tool of the urban dimension of Cohesion Policy for the 2021-2027 programming period. The initiative established by the European Union supports cities of all sizes, to build their capacity and knowledge, to support innovation and develop transferable and scalable innovative solutions to urban challenges of EU relevance.
Similar content


