What makes a city: Urban quality in Euralille, Amsterdam South Axis and Rotterdam Central

  • Jan Jacob Trip


Many HST station areas take shape as what we may call international business centres: locations that aim to attract the offices of, in particular, internationally-oriented producer services. Euralille, for example, was developed explicitly as a European Business Centre; in Amsterdam, international banks did in effect initiate the development of the South Axis before local authorities joined in. The HST may facilitate the development of an international business centre mainly for two reasons. First, it provides additional transport facilities, which are important as knowledge-intensive activities still very much depend on face-to-face contacts. Second, it provides an image that suits international business. Neither is indispensable: exemplary centres of international business such as La Défense or Canary Wharf can do without. But for cities of a somewhat smaller calibre, the HST is considered a must-have.


Real Estate Public Space Station Area Shopping Centre Functional Programme 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alsop Architects (2001) Rotterdam Central Ontwerp Masterplan. Projectbureau Rotterdam Central/Alsop Architects, Rotterdam/LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertolini L (2000) Planning in the Borderless City: A Conceptualisation and an Application to the Case of Station Area Redevelopment. Town Planning Review 71:455–475Google Scholar
  3. Bertolini L, Spit T (1998) Cities on Rails: The Redevelopment of Railway Station Areas. Spon, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruijn P de (2005) The Intentional City: Applying Local Values and Choice in a Global Context. Assuring Civic Quality, Achieving Urban Excellence. Paper presented at the IFHP Spring Conference, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  5. Dovey K (1998) Multiplicities and Complicities: Signifying the Future at Euralille. Urban Design International 3/8:89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DRO [Gemeente Amsterdam, Dienst Ruimtelijke Ordening] (1998) Masterplan Zuidas, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  7. DRO [Gemeente Amsterdam, Dienst Ruimtelijke Ordening] (2001) Visie Zuidas; Stand van zaken maart 2001. AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. DRO [Gemeente Amsterdam, Dienst Ruimtelijke Ordening] (2004) Visie Zuidas; Stand van zaken maart 2004. AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  9. Florida R (2002a) The Rise of the Creative Class and how it’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, and Everyday Life. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Florida R (2002b) Rebuilding Lower Manhattan for the Creative Age: Implications for the Greater New York Region. Prepared for the Regional Plan Association and the Civic Alliance, www.creativeclass.orgGoogle Scholar
  11. Franke S, Verhagen E (eds) (2005) Creativity and the City: How the Creative Economy Changes the City. NAi Publishers, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  12. Gemeente Rotterdam (2003) Programma van Eisen Rotterdam Centraal. RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  13. Gemeente Rotterdam (2005) Concept Stedenbouwkundig Plan Stationslocatie. RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  14. Gospodini A (2002) European Cities in Competition and the New ‘Uses’ of Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design 7:59–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacobs J (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Kloosterman R, Trip JJ (2004) Gestold Modernisme: Een Analyse van de Rotterdamse Economie vanuit een Postindustrieel Perspectief. In: Becker F, Hennekeler WR van, Sie Dhian Ho M, Tromp B, Linthorst M (eds) Rotterdam: Het Vijfentwintigste Jaarboek voor het Democratisch Socialisme. Mets & Schilt/Wiardi Beckman Stichting, Amsterdam, pp 39–57Google Scholar
  17. Kloosterman R, Trip JJ (2006) Planning for Quality? Assessing the Role of Quality of Place in Developing High-Speed Railway Stations. Paper presented at the International Conference on ‘Urban Conditions and Life Chances’, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  18. Kooijman D, Wigmans G (2003) Managing the City: Flows and Places at Rotterdam Central Station. City 7:301–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koolhaas R, Mau B (1995) Small, Medium, Large, Extra Large. 010 Publishers, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  20. Koolhaas R, Nouvel J, Portzamparc C de, Vasconi C, Duthilleul JM (1996) Euralille: The Making of a New City Centre. Birkhäuser, Basel/Boston/BerlinGoogle Scholar
  21. Kresl PK (1995) The Determinants of Urban Competitiveness: A Survey. In: Kresl, PK, Gappert G (eds) North American Cities and the Global Economy: Challenges and Opportunities. Sage, Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi, pp 45–68Google Scholar
  22. Ploeger R (2004) Regulating Urban Office Provision: A Study of the Ebb and Flow of Regimes of Urbanisation in Amsterdam and Frankfurt am Main, 1945–2000. University of Amsterdam, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  23. Rowley A (1998) Private Property Decision-Makers and the Quality of Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design 3:151–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Salet W, Majoor S (eds) (2005) Amsterdam Zuidas European Space. 010 Publishers, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  25. Segedy JA (1997) How Important is ‘Quality of Life’ in Location Decisions and Local Economic Development? In: Bingham RD, Mier R (eds) Dilemmas of Urban Economic Development: Issues in Theory and Practice. Sage, Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi, pp 56–81Google Scholar
  26. Spaans M (2002) The Implementation of Urban Revitalization Projects. Delft University Press, DelftGoogle Scholar
  27. Team CS (2005) Voorlopig Ontwerp Rotterdam Central.www.rotterdamCentral.nlGoogle Scholar
  28. Tilman H (1994) Vruchtbare Reductie van de Complexiteit: De Stedebouw van Euralille. De Architect, 12:22–30Google Scholar
  29. Trip JJ (2006) Measuring Quality of Place: A Comparative Analysis of Quality of Place in Amsterdam and Rotterdam and Its Role in Large-Scale Urban Redevelopment. Paper presented at the Planning Research Conference ‘Global Places, Local Spaces, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. UCL [University College London] (2001) The Value of Urban Design. CABE/DTLR/ Thomas Telford, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. VROM [Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieu] (2003) Nieuwe Sleutelprojecten in Aantocht; voortgangsrapportage December 2003. The HagueGoogle Scholar
  32. www.saem-euralille.frGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Jacob Trip
    • 1
  1. 1.OTB Research Institute for Housing, Urban and Mobility StudiesDelft University of Technologythe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations