New Design for the REMBRANDTPARK Amsterdam Yves Martens Buiting Bosontwikkeling

1. New Design for the REMBRANDTPARK Amsterdam Yves Martens Buiting Bosontwikkeling In cooperation with

2. BACKGROUND New design Rembrandtpark Construction of a new road Wet ecological corridor Re-design of the park

3. LOCATION REMBRANDTPARK

4. IMPRESSION WITH PICTURES

5. BACKGROUND Three themes: • Trees • Routing and safety • Design and use 2nd evening in september: theme Trees Two other themes to be discussed in November during 3rd evening

6. WORKSHOP • Presentation 2nd evening • Two other themes used to discuss for this workshop Main questions: • How can GIS be used in preperation for the 3rd meeting?

7. AGENDA 2nd evening TREE SURVEY FRAMEWORK DESIGN MODEL STUDY DISCUSSION

8. TREE SURVEY • NUMBER 246 bomen • PURPOSE monitor present qualities • MEASURMENTS AND CHARACTERISTCS • tree species • diameter breast height • tree height • vitality • crown projection and shape • damage and/or faults

9. TREE SPECIES

10. VITALITY

11. CROWN PROJECTION

12. SHAPE OF TREE WITH LIVING CROWN < 2 METER SHAPE OF TREE WITH LIVING CROWN 2 TO 4 METER OTHER TREES • SHAPE OF THE CROWN / DIRECTION

13. NO DAMAGE MECHANICAL DAMAGE • DAMAGE AND/OR FAULTS

14. FRAMEWORK DESIGN • ECOLOGICAL CORRIDOR • CLOSED AND GREEN BORDER • STARTING POINT WATERWAY • SAFETY • SPONTANEOUS PROCESSES • BEAUTIFUL TREES

15. ECOLOGICAL CORRIDOR connection between “Schipluidensingel” and the Rembrandtpark

16. CLOSED BORDERgreen screen between park en Lelylaan (=road)

17. STARTING POINT WATERWAYconnection on “Schipluidensingel” is fixed

18. SAFETYgentle slope (minimum 1:3)

19. BEAUTIFUL TREES & SPONTANEOUS PROCESSES remain as many beautiful trees as possible

21. MODEL STUDY4 alternatives • CONNECTION CULVERT • QUAY or DAM-WALL • GENTLE SLOPE, 1:3 • DUBBLE SLOPE WITH TERRACES

22. Alternative 1: CONNECTION CULVERT

23. CONNECTION CULVERT does not suffice to the ecological corridor

24. Alternative 2: QUAY OR DAM-WALL

27. QUAY OR DAM-WALL

28. QUAY OR DAM-WALL

29. QUAY OR DAM-WALL Only suffice to the demands for ecology and safety when using a very special and expensive construction.

30. Alternative 3: SLOPE 1 : 3

32. GENTLE SLOPE 1 : 3

33. GENTLE SLOPE 1 : 3Better alternative from ecological point of view, but it gives little possibilities for further design of the park.

34. Alternative 4: DUBBLE SLOPE 1 : 3 WITH TERRACES

36. DUBBLE SLOPE 1 : 3 WITH TERRACES

37. DUBBLE SLOPE 1 : 3 WITH TERRACESwide slope with groups of trees on the slopes and terraces

38. DISCUSSION

39. In cooperation with

40. Workshop What we learned: • Among some people trust is lost, which causes problems • Certain information on maps can trigger emotion and anger • There is a difference between public participation and public decision • Visualization techniques are unlimited but information on the map should be accurate and complete • Well defined plan eases the acceptance

41. Task for the workshop We are going to prepare 2 themes for the 3rd evening! • Theme routing and safety • Theme further design and use

42. Theme routing and safety • What is the best routing? (Cyclist vs joggers) • How can we make a safe design? (Streetlights vs dark spots)

43. Theme further design and use 1. Interaction between park and surroundings? (how is the park experienced from the inside) 2. Zoning? (division recreational areas vs nature)

44. TASK Every group gives (3) recommendations on how to use GIS in this project. Material: paper pen maps of the park

45. REMEMBER • Trust among citizens is slowly regained • Technically everything is possible, but (financial) resources are limited

46. Results of the workshop Your ideas will be integrated in the CoPack! Your ideas will be used in preparation of the 3rd public meeting in November in Amsterdam!