New Developments in the 21st century-14

‘Trends in Inner City Development in the 21st century; How to proceed?’, Max Jeleniewski, 2015 1

Trends in Inner City

Development in the

21st Century;

How to Proceed? A European perspective Max Jeleniewski

2015

23-1-2015


Trends in Inner City Development in the 21st century;

How to proceed?

A European perspective

Max Jeleniewski MSc, Rijswijk, 2015

[email protected]

23-1-2015

Contents

1. Introduction 5

2. Modernism 6

3. Public Investments in the Inner Cities 9

4. Public Private Partnerships 10

5. Outline of a new period 12

Literature 15


1. Introduction

The urban landscape in Europe has witnessed dramatic changes in the past 65 years. A

number of political, social and economic transformations determine its present condition and

appearance. The restoration of Europe right after the World War II was carried out according

to Modernistic ideas.

In Europe the first urban development crisis came in the late 1960s. All over Europe people

demanded a political change. The pressure from revolutionary-minded people made

politicians review their approaches to urban development. Hence, new concepts emerged

and based on the ideas of e.g. the American journalist Jane Jacobs, who advocated

comfortable living in urban centres, with their own specific individual environment and

character. This was reflected e.g. in the construction of social housing in the inner cities.

During that period the private investment in cities were decreasing. As a result only public

investments were available for urban programmes in inner cities. This situation asked for a

different approach since public authorities were not able anymore to generate the necessary

resources themselves. A new period started with an important role for the private sector in

inner cities in the 1990s. As a result, the revenues of insurance companies and pension

funds were flowing back to the inner cities, there were new investments in the restructuring of

urban territories and the redevelopment of industrial and harbour zones. This was done

through a strong cooperation between municipal authorities and private companies. Such

projects were based on the principle of integrated development. Monuments, including those

of the industrial era, gained significance in this period.

The real estate investment bubble however, collapsed in 2008. The credit crisis of 2008 was

followed by a banking- and Euro-crisis. Finding financial means for urban development

became difficult. The supply market of the previous period had turned into a demand market.

On the other hand however, some cities and metropolitan areas perform very well. Growing

real estate prices can still be found in a few prosperous cities and/or metropolitan areas,

such as London, Paris, Milan, Munich, Berlin and Moscow. Economic growth on the national

level had been halted, but it continued in the most prosperous and dynamic cities and

regions.

Today we are in a new period. This new period has to provide solutions that arise from the

new reality. The solution, however, is not in actions, but in a change of thinking about urban

development and its relation with the economy. So the question is: How can we draw lessons

from the previous periods of urban development in order to better be prepared for and

possibly steer the outcome of the most recent crisis in the years to come?

To do so I will first give a description of the different periods of urban development after the

World War II. I distinguish three different periods. Each of these periods is correlated to the

social, financial, economic and political developments of that specific time. Each of the

periods started with enthusiasm, full of idealism and the will to perform better than before.

Then each of the periods sets and faces a crisis, which functions as a turning point in urban

development.


Earlier I distinguished three successive periods in Europe1:

1 Modernism after the World War II.

2 Public investment in the Inner Cities; the time of urban renewal.

3 Public Private Partnership later referred to as area development.

From 2005 we witness the outlines of a new period. In this essay I will discuss the different

periods and successive turning points. This may tell us something about the present new

period of urban development.

2 Modernism

Although Modernism is an architectural and urban development concept that emerged back

in the 1930s under the influence of communistic ideas, it was only possible to fully implement

its ideology after the World War II. The distinct features of this approach were strict functional

separation and reordering of the four main urban functions: living, working, recreation and

traffic. The main aim of the movement was to eradicate housing problems in cities worldwide,

such as diseases due to contaminated water, air pollution, health problems, etc. Modernists

had a radical view of the future, building new transportation infrastructure and expanding the

boundaries of the cities. The period was closely related to the recovery of the battered cities

in the World War II. This period started in the late 1940s and ended in the late 1970s.

For national and local politicians in Europe the reconstruction of cities and infrastructure was

priority number one. After the World War II, Europe had to be rebuilt literally from scratch.

The capital needed for urban development had

evaporated. The private sector as well as the public

sector, central and local government, had limited

resources. The accumulation of capital had to start from

the beginning.

In the early years of this period, restoring the

(economic) infrastructure has been an important policy

priority. In subsequent years, the late 1950s and 1960s,

the residential and retail structure has been addressed.

The housing shortage was immense after the demolition

of European cities during the war. Serial housing

development became important. The Modernistic ideas

suited very well the demand for urban development at that time. Housing production was

cheap and could be implemented fast.

The ‘bible’ of the movement, La Charte d'Athenes2, was drawn up during the 4th CIAM

(Congrès International d'Architecture Moderne) in 1933 aboard the vessel SS Patris, on its

way from Athens to Marseille. The Charte d'Athenes was published in 1943 by Le Courbusier

and contains a detailed description of the city of the future. The Modernistic ideas as

expressed in the Charte d'Athenes contained the right ingredients to meet the high demand

for housing.

1 Jeleniewski, Max, ‘Nieuwe Stedelijke Ontwikkelingen in de 21ste eeuw; Hoe nu verder?, Rijswijk, 2014. Before I presented these ideas in several international conferences; e.g. in Riyadh (2007), Moscow (2011) and Brighton (2013). 2 Le Corbusier, ‘The Athens Charter’ (1933), translated from the French by Anthony Eardley, New York, 1973


“CIAM demanded that housing districts should occupy the best sites, and a minimum amount

of solar exposure should be required in all dwellings. For hygienic reasons, buildings should

not be built along transportation routes, and modern techniques should be used to construct

high apartment building spaces widely apart, to free the soil for large green parks”3.

There are many international examples of Modernism. One of the most known is the

realisation of the new capital Brasilia in Brazil. The start of that project was at the end of

1950s. The city is based on an urban plan, made by Lucio Costain, in the shape of an

airplane. A broad central boulevard was made, where all the government buildings were

located. Architect Oscar Niemeyer designed a large number of monumental buildings.

Other examples of applications of the ideas of Modernism can be found in the city of

Chandigarh, India (the new capital of the state of Punjab) and the district Pruitt Igoe, St.

Louis, Missouri in the United States.

The Pruitt–Igoe housing scheme in St Louis, Missouri, was designed in accordance with the

modernistic ideals. The housing complex, made up of 14 storeys, was built in 1951. July 15th

1972 the Pruitt–Igoe housing scheme had to be demolished. The 1982 film Koyaanisqatsie,

directed by Godfrey Reggio with music composed by Philip Glass, has shots of the

demolition and is still an impressive document4. The experiment had failed because of the

social problems connected with the implementation of the ideas of the Modernism.

In Europe as well larger projects arose. In the

1950s and 1960s in almost all European cities

architects made plans for and implemented major

urban projects. The idea was that the old should

be replaced by the new. Plans for inner cities

included the demolition of large parts of historic

city centres and homes that were built in the late

19th and early 20th centuries. Some city centres

had to be rebuilt from scratch as their centres had

been (partly) demolished during the World War II.

The demolition of Pruitt Igoe housing estate

The centre of Rotterdam is such an example. The inner city was bombed in the early

morning of May 14, 1940 by the German Air Force. Only a few buildings remained standing:

the town hall, the post office and cynically also the police headquarters. The first plans to

reconstruct the inner city date back to 1940-1945, but it is after the war that rebuilding really

started. The inner city was rebuilt according to the ideas of Modernism. The plan included the

construction of residential complexes (in 10-12 layers), set in between green areas in the

centre of the city. The first pedestrian shopping area in the world was built in Rotterdam; the

Lijnbaan. The first part was completed in 1953. In the 1950s and 1960s, it became a great

commercial success. Architects from all over the world come to Rotterdam to see the results.

3 Mumford, “The CIAM Discourse on Urbanism, 1928-1960”, The MIT Press, 2000 4 Koyaanisqatsi: Life Out of Balance, is a 1982 film directed by Godfrey Reggio with music composed by Philip Glass and cinematography by Ron Fricke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Reggio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Glass

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Reggio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Glass

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Fricke


One of the most striking other examples of modernism is Les Halles in Paris. Les Halles

used to be the wholesale market of Paris, but due to congestion had to move in 1970 to one

of the suburbs of Paris, Rungis. The redevelopment of Les Halles replaced the old market

with a large complex, including an important subway station and a big shopping mall, four

levels underground. The large-scale redevelopment of Les Halles is the reason for the book

"L'Assissinat de Paris"5 in which the writer Louis Chevalier follows the ideas of Jane Jacobs.

Jane Jacobs criticized in her famous book in 1961 the modernistic way of looking at urban

development and city architectural design. She comes up with the term human scale to show

how new strategies to enhance actual city performance6. The French book described the

megalomaniac plans in Paris in the 1960s and 1970s. The book was a plea for the human

scale, the diversity of the city and public life in the city. In this way the book is an

‘assassination’ of the Modernistic ideas.

In former Eastern Europe, the urban development has been also under strong influence of

the principles of Modernism. Whether it is Prague, Warsaw, Tirana, Almaty or Moscow,

everywhere new neighbourhoods

emerged with high-rise apartment

buildings (with 5, 12 or 20 floors). They

were mostly located at the outskirts of

cities, sometimes in the inner cities. As a

consequence the densities in the

suburbs, compared to inner cities,

became very high. This is in

contradiction with the free market theory

that land costs and densities fall down

the more the land is situated from the

city centre.7 The Petrzalka neighbourhood in Bratislava

On the other hand big infrastructural projects were implemented to connect the suburbs with

the city centre. The monumental character of the city was not always acknowledged8. A good

example of these developments is Bratislava, with the inner city projects and the Petrzalka

neighbourhood in Bratislava. This neighbourhood was built in the 1960s and 1970s on the

other side of the river Danube and now houses more than 120,000 inhabitants.

Modernism was characterised by a top-down approach, that is where the planners

determined how people should behave and live in the city. Districts were developed on

strictly defined principles of urban planning. In the early 1970s a process of democratisation

within the low income areas started. People demanded access to decision-making. There

was a tendency towards a more bottom up approach. More public investments were needed

to implement this shift of policy; Urban Renewal became the new buzz word. By 1975 the

period of Modernism was really over.

5 Chevalier, Louis, ‘The Assassination of Paris’, Chicago/London, 1977/1994 6 Jacobs, Jane, ‘The death and life of great American cities’, New York, 1961 7 Bertaud, Alain and Renaud Bertrand, ‘Cities without Land Markets. Lessons of the Failed Socialist Experiment’, World Bank discussion papers 227, Washington, 1994 8 Urban Agenda, ‘Which Management Model is better for Russian Cities’, in: ‘Lessons from the Moscow Urban Forum 2011’, Moscow, 2012


3 Public Investment in the Inner Cities

The war in Vietnam, rock music instead of jazz, the protests against private developers or

speculators; there was something new in the air in the 1960s. Under the influence of bottom

up thinking a new public policy was introduced, aimed at improving the housing conditions of

the lower income groups in the inner cities. Lower income groups had been living in these

neighbourhoods for decades, centuries; renting houses in poor conditions from slumlords. In

the time of Modernism housing policy was focused on new residential areas, whereas

housing conditions in the inner cities were neglected. The time had changed, primary

attention was paid improving the poor housing situation of low income people in the old

neighbourhoods in and around the inner cities.

Public pressure made the municipalities start improving these neighbourhoods. The

principles of urban renewal or ‘building for the neighbourhood' were implemented. The large

majority of the residents had low income. These low income groups lived in the worst

houses, in the slums and adjacent alleys. In the 1970s and 1980s, most of these districts

underwent a complete metamorphosis in the physical sense. New buildings replaced the old

slum houses and alleys and other houses were being renovated. This was social housing

with low rents. The new rents were higher than the old rents but thanks to central and local

government subsidies the new rents were kept at an affordable level. In this way the

(physical) living conditions were significantly improved.

The city of Rotterdam in the Netherlands

has been at the forefront of social housing,

especially in the early days of urban

renewal9. In other Dutch as well as in

German and other European cities (e.g. The

Hague, Berlin and Glasgow) this approach

was copied.

Everywhere in Europe the social crisis was

evident in the late 1960s, also in Eastern

Europe. Protest meeting at the Sorbonne University Paris 14 May 1968

The invasion of the Russian army in Czechoslovakia, the crisis in Poland and the student

movements at the universities were clear examples of this social unrest. In Western Europe

the social crisis was translated into new urban policies, however this was not the case in

Eastern Europe. This meant that in Eastern Europe the ideas of Modernism remain prevalent

in urban development for a much longer period. This came to an end only with the fall of the

Berlin Wall in 1989.

Private developers and investors, meanwhile, slowly withdrew their investments from the

(inner) cities. Private investment in inner cities dried up in the mid 1980s. In the end all main

9 Priemus, Hugo, ‘Stadsvernieuwing; Problemen en Perspectieven. Analyse van de Rotterdamse aanpak’, Alphen aan de Rijn, 1978


investments in inner cities (infrastructure, housing and public space) had to be financed with

public money, which became a financial and social burden for local governments.

On the other hand the Western European cities witnessed a process of massive immigration

from countries in Northern Africa, Turkey and former colonies. These groups increased the

demand for social housing dramatically. An acceleration of new inner city social housing

programmes was necessary. With the massive immigration the demography of the inner city

population changed completely. Inner cities became an area with huge social problems and

the commercial areas in the inner cities were deteriorating fast. This urged the need for the

inflow of private capital to inner cities.

In this same period, in countries where the market was more relaxed (UK and especially the

United States), a new phenomenon came up: Gentrification10. Young Urban Professionals

came to settle in the underdeveloped inner city areas, chasing out people with low incomes.

Sometimes, private developers to pursue their goals used unscrupulous methods. It was an

expression of a market that no longer was functioning properly. The balance became lost,

giving room to a new approach.

With these changes the urban renewal period came slowly to an end. The period of urban

renewal continued for years until the mid-1990s. The seeds for Public Private Partnership

had been planted.

4 Public Private Partnerships

A new phenomenon in the United States was picked up in Europe in the last years of the

1980s: Public Private Partnerships (PPP)11. Local governments and private developers

worked together in partnership in renovating inner cities. In order to do so both developers

and municipalities had to make different arrangements and had to work together more

closely; a process that needs time. It is the return of the private sector investing in inner

cities.

The following definition of a Public Private Partnership was used in the early years of this

period Public Private Partnership was defined if12:

“- one or more governments are involved, and;

- one or more private parties are involved; who

- work together to a common aim;

- that is set in an organisational context;

- whereby each party can identify themselves with the common aim;

- these actors contribute resources, are sharing revenues and are accepting the risks

involved."

The period of Public Private Partnerships meant that private parties gradually invested again

in inner cities. The focus was initially on the redevelopment of areas in the city that have

been historically underdeveloped and/or use a lot of space: waterfronts, port areas, industrial

10 Smith, Neil & Peter Williams (ed.), ‘Gentrification of the city’, Boston, 1986 11 Committee for Economic Development, ‘Public-private partnership; an opportunity for urban communities’, New York/ Washington, 1982 12 Akro Consult/Seinpost, ‘Publiek-private samenwerkingsvormen in de burgerlijk- en utiliteitssector’, Zoetermeer/Den Haag, 1987


areas, etc. At the same time there was a renewed attention to the monumental character of

the (inner) city.

Projects in this period had in common that they were focussed on specific areas of the urban

fabric of inner cities. The term ‘area development’ did not exist in the 1980s but is slowly

introduced in the 1990s. In contrast to the large inner city projects of the 1960s and 1970s

the ‘area development’ was more related to the historic urban fabric.

Examples of ‘area development’ can be found

everywhere in Europe. To name a few: Canary

Wharf in London, Hafen City (195 ha) in

Hamburg, in Orriols, Valencia (Spain; the

Valencia Model) and several in France:

Marseille (495 ha), Bordeaux and in Paris;

Rive Gauche (around the Bibliotheque

National de France (BNF), 130 ha) and

Boulogne Billancourt (former Renault factory;

84 ha)13.

Sometimes the legal framework was adapted to the new reality. The French projects make

use of a special national legal arrangement for Public Private Partnerships; the Société

d'Economie Mixte (SEM). In Spain new regional legislation was introduced to facilitate area

based development plans14.

Area development is "the development of a demarcated area in all its aspects, aimed at

bringing together public and private interests. Area development is a form of Public Private

Partnership15."

Paris, Boulogne – Billancourt. Plan for the Redevelopment of the former Renault complex; “Developpement Durable”.

The focus of this period was no longer on the low-income groups, as it was in the urban

renewal period, but was aimed at the more affluent residents. Cities were seen as the basis

of economic development. Both Richard Florida16 and Charles Landry17 were indicating some

13 Val de Seine Amenagement, ‘Ile de Seguin Rives de Seine; Le Development Durable en Actions’, Paris, 2010 14 Donker, Henk, “Gebiedsontwikkeling op zijn Valenciaans”, in: Geografie, 2011 15 Franzen, Agnes & Zeeuw, Friso de; ‘De engel uit graniet’, Delft, 2009 16 Florida, Richard, ‘The Rise of the Creative Class, and How it is Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life’, New York, 2003 and Florida, Richard, ‘The Great Reset: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity’, New York, 2010


elements of the new period in their writings over the past ten years. Richard Florida

acknowledged different “Great Resets” in the past 200 years in the United States. One of the

Great Resets is the present crisis. However he does not focus on the other trends we

witness here in Europe. On both continents however the value of the creative sector in the

economic development of cities became important. He argued that industry and/or trade is

no longer essential to economic development. While Florida's emphasised the economic

value of human creativity, Landry saw the need for a new cultural thinking and the use of the

creativity. This ran parallel with the introduction of internet, the rise of social media and

innovations in electronics like the iPad.

And yes, same as has been evidenced for other periods, the period of Public Private

Partnerships ended with a crisis; the credit- or financial crisis of 2008. Earlier there were

some first signs of the coming crisis, few people saw this, but it became evident only with the

collapse of the Lehman Brothers bank September 15th 2008. This was a clear signal for the

need of a new beginning, a new period.

5 Outline of a new period

It is general acknowledged that in the context of history crisis inevitably give rise to

periodically changes in economy. This implies also changes in urban development. In the

previous chapters I have given a description of three periods of urban development in

Europe after the World War II:

1 The period of Modernism. This period started after the World War II and ended

around 1975.

2 The period of Public investment in the inner cities. This period started in the 1960s

and ended around 1995.

3 The period of Public Private Partnerships. This period started around 1985 and will

end somewhere around 2015.

In modernism an optimistic and a somewhat utopic view on society prevailed. It is the time of

large urban development projects all around Europe. The period ended with a lack of

flexibility and a too rigid top-down approach. The student revolts and factory strikes lead to a

new way of thinking. There was an economic crisis (1968) and an oil crisis (1972). The

turning point is the combination of social unrest and the first economic (international) crisis

after the World War II.

The period of urban renewal showed a shift to more public investments in urban

development. The human scale became important. The public investments lead to the

production of social housing in cities, but also to demographic changes. The fall of the Berlin

wall marked the end of the cold war. Francis Fukuyama wrote his famous essay "The End of

History"18. By the end of the 1970s the lack of private investment in (inner) cities became

evident. The turning point around 1990 is a political and real estate crisis. There is a

complete political shift to neo liberalism. Across Europe, we find many new initiatives to get

cities back on the map.

17 Landry, Charles, ‘The Creative City, a Toolkit for Urban Innovators’, London, 2000 18 Fukuyama, Francis, ‘The end of History and the last Man’, New York/Toronto, 1992


We also have seen the period of public private partnerships. In this period the European

Union expanded from 12 member states in 1990 to 27 in 2007 (and 28 in 2014). Privatisation

is a buzz-word in Western as well as in Eastern Europe. In urban development concepts

such as city marketing, waterfront projects and brown field development became important.

The projects again became larger; a programme approach was introduced to create

integrated projects. Public and private parties worked together to redevelop inner cities in a

new setting: Public Private Partnerships. This approach proved promising in the beginning.

Many projects and programmes start in inner cities. Over time however it goes wrong. After

the Russian crisis, the Internet crisis, the rise of populism and international terrorism (9-11),

there is a new turning point; the credit crisis. A lack of confidence in the economy is evident.

Financial products have become too complicated.

Not everywhere in Europe we witnessed exactly the same developments. The three periods

are visible in Western Europe. Central and Eastern Europe followed a different path, but

anyway ended up in same credit-crisis as in Western Europe. In countries like Russia and

China however, we still see today many elements of Modernism19.

Each of the periods shows three phases:

- Pioneering phase

- Stabilisation phase,

- Crisis or turning point; followed by a reduction phase (runs synchronously with the

pioneer phase of the next period).

The duration of a full period is about 30 years. Roughly this period can be divided in a 10-

year pioneering phase, a 10-year period of stabilisation, followed by a crisis, and phasing out

for another 10-year.

The periods are partly overlapping each other. The reason for this is that planning,

implementation and financing of real estate projects take a long time realise. For construction

projects it takes 5 to 10 years to complete a project and for area development this can be

even 20 to 30 years.

Modernism Urban Renewal

Public Private Partnership

New period

Scale Large projects Human scale Large programmes

Human scale

Main actor Public/private

Public Private/public Private

Planning Blue print

Sectoral Strategic Flexible

Implementation Directive

Bottom up Partnership Facilitating

Turning point Economic and social crisis

Lack of private investments

Credit crisis ?

Prevailing elements of each period of urban development in Europe

19 Jeleniewski, Max and Shi Nan, ‘Whether Russian Cities should follow the European or Chinese Model’, in: ‘Urban Agenda; Cities for People; Lessons from the Moscow Urban Forum 2011’, Moscow, 2012


The question remains, how the new period will develop. In the words of Richard Florida we

can identify already emerging tendencies as new consumption patterns, new forms of

infrastructure and a radically altered and much denser economic landscape.20 Obviously new

concepts are necessary. In the previous scheme the main elements of each period are

shown, including a prediction for the New Period. In Europe the outlines for the new period

are21:

- We entered a prolonged time of low economic growth, combined with a fast aging

population;

- There is a strong diversification in urban development; some metropolitan areas and

cities do (much) better than others;

- Successful (inner) cities do not include only retail, but also housing, culture, creative

sector, leisure and catering. Flexibility between functions is condition ‘sine qua non’;

- At the local level, cities and regions are the motor or the hub of economic development;

- The time of large restructuring projects/programmes and brown field developments is

over, the role of project developers is less prominent;

- The human scale is back again in urban development;

- The guiding principle in urban development in the coming years is organic and

incremental development;

- To secure the quality of public space is a precondition for investments in real estate;

- New concepts based on a bottom-up approach are emerging, e.g. cradle to cradle22,

temporary projects, guerrilla- and pop-up stores;

- Identity is the buzz-word. What matters is the DNA of individual metropolitan areas and

cities.

This new approach has consequences for the organisation of the process. Each period has

influence on the roles and relation between public and private sector. At the moment we see

the following happening:

- The private sector will have a more proactive role and will have to take more risks;

- Local governments will have a more restricted role in the implementation of urban

development, due to the lack of sufficient funding;

- Within local governments a reorientation of the departments of urban development is

needed; this means e.g. a shift from project- to programme-management.

The present legislation does not take these changes into account. The democratic processes

however should be respected. The public authorities will have less means to steer on details

and should steer on more general urban policies.

This New Period - a period of diversification - will eventually come to an end, just like any

other earlier period. Based on the length of the earlier periods we can predict that this will

happen around 2035, with a crisis around the year 2025. To speculate what type of crisis is

too early, but it will an economic crisis, increasing social inequality and could be very well

related to environmental problems or specific progress in science; e.g. nano-technology.

Meanwhile we need to set out good antennas to monitor the changes in urban development.

20 Florida, Richard, ‘The Great Reset: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity’, New York, 2010 21 E.g. Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, ‘Gebiedsontwikkeling Nieuwe Stijl: eerste stappen in de praktijk’, Den Haag, 2014 22 Braungart, Michael & W. McDonough, ‘Cradle to Cradle’, New York, 2007


Background Literature

1. Akro Consult/Seinpost, ‘Publiek-private samenwerkingsvormen in de burgerlijk- en utiliteitssector’, Zoetermeer/Den Haag, 1987

2. Bertaud, Alain and Bertrand Renaud, ‘Cities without Land Markets. Lessons of the Failed Socialist Experiment’, World Bank discussion papers 227, Washington, 1994

3. Bosma, Koos & Helma Hellinga (ed.), ‘Mastering the City I & II, North-European City Planning 1900-2000’, NAI, Rotterdam, 1997

4. Boyer, Christine, ‘Cybercities, Visual Perception in the Age of Electronic Communication’, Princeton, New York, 1996

5. Braungart, Michael & W. McDonough, ‘Cradle to Cradle’, New York, 2007 6. Burgers, J. & J. Vranken, ‘How to make a successful Urban Development Programme;

Experiences from nine European countries’, (UGIS Collection 3)’, Antwerpen/Apeldoorn, 2004 7. Castells, Manuel, ‘The City and the Grassroots; a Cross-Cultural Theory of Urban Social

Movements’, London, 1983 8. Castells, Manuel, ‘The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Volume I, II and III’,

Oxfort, 1998 9. Chevalier, Louis, ‘The Assassination of Paris’, Chicago/London, 1977/1994 10. Committee for Economic Development, ‘Public-private partnership; an opportunity for urban

communities’, New York/ Washington, 1982 11. DeClerck, Joachim, ‘Building for Brussels; Architecture and Urban Transformation in Europe,

44 Projects’, Marseille, 2011 12. Donker, Henk, ‘Gebiedsontwikkeling op zijn Valenciaans”, in: Geografie, 2011 13. Franzen, Agnes & Zeeuw, Friso de, ‘De engel uit graniet’, Delft, 2009 14. Florida, Richard, ‘The Rise of the Creative Class, and How it is Transforming Work, Leisure,

Community and Everyday Life’, New York, 2003 15. Florida, Richard, ‘The Great Reset: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash

Prosperity’, New York, 2010 16. Fukuyama, Francis, ‘The end of History and the last Man’, New York/Toronto, 1992 17. Glaeser, Edward, ‘The Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer,

Smarter, Greener, Healthier and Happier’, New York, 2011 18. Hall, Sir Peter, ‘Cities in Civilization’, New York, 1998 19. Jacobs, Jane, ‘The death and life of great American cities’, New York, 1961 20. Jeleniewski, Max, ‘Culture as Vehicle for Urban Regeneration; The case "Noord aan de Rotte"

in Rotterdam’, in: ‘Cultures of Cities; Transformations Generating new Opportunities’, Rotterdam, 2001

21. Jeleniewski, Max, ‘Nieuwe Stedelijke Ontwikkelingen in de 21ste eeuw; Hoe nu verder?, Rijswijk, 2014

22. Jeleniewski, Max and Shi Nan, ‘Whether Russian Cities should follow the European or Chinese Model’, in: ‘Urban Agenda; Cities for People; Lessons from the Moscow Urban Forum 2011’, Moscow, 2012

23. Landry, Charles, ‘The Creative City, a Toolkit for Urban Innovators’, London, 2000 24. Le Corbusier, ‘The Athens Charter’ (1933), translated from the French by Anthony Eardley,

New York, 1973 25. Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, ‘Gebiedsontwikkeling Nieuwe Stijl: eerste stappen in de

praktijk’, Den Haag, 2014 26. Mumford, ‘The CIAM Discourse on Urbanism, 1928-1960’, The MIT Press, 2000 27. Priemus, Hugo, ‘Stadsvernieuwing; Problemen en Perspectieven. Analyse van de

Rotterdamse aanpak’, Alphen aan de Rijn, 1978 28. Powell, Kenneth, ‘City Transformed; Urban Architecture at the Beginning of the 21st Century’,

London, 2000 29. Sassen, Saskia, ‘The Global City; New York, London, Tokyo’, London 1991 30. Saunders, Doug, ‘Arrival City: The Final Migration and Our Next World’, Toronto, 2010 31. Smith, Neil & Peter Williams (ed.), ‘Gentrification of the city’, Boston, 1986 32. Val de Seine Amenagement, ‘Ile de Seguin Rives de Seine; Le Development Durable en

Actions’, Paris, 2010 33. Wagenaar, Cor, ‘Happy; Cities and Public Happiness in Post-War Europe’, Amsterdam, 2004


Information:

[email protected]

Max Jeleniewski has more than thirty years experience in restructuring, implementing and managing Urban Development Programmes for Local Governments and International Development Assistance Programmes. He has a long term experience in lecturing Urban Development and Inner City Development throughout Europe. In the Netherlands he is Manager Inner City for the local government of The Hague. He is member of the

Academy and is guest lecturer at several (international) universities. Before he worked for OBR in Rotterdam and for Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS).

New Developments in the 21st century-14

Documents

Transcript of New Developments in the 21st century-14