Analysis of the bridge houses and their urban context

Analysis of the bridge houses and their urban context
Research rapport by Leonoor Clemens
Analysis of the bridge houses and their urban context
Research rapport by Leonoor Clemens
Research report
By Leonoor Clemens
Technische University Delft
Faculty of Architecture
Graduation studio RMIT: Mixed projects
studentnummer: 1352415
[email protected]
Tutors:
Lidy Meijers
Wouter Willers
Frank Koopman
Delft, april 2013
1
Content
1.1 Urban analysis3
11th century3
17th century4
19th-20th century5
21th century6
Conclusion7
1.2 Architectural analysis8
Overview8
Orientation9
Volumes and elevations10
Lodewijk Pieter Kramers approach11
Routing, levels, human scale and transition12
Functions13
Open-closed14
Conclusion15
1.3 Building technical analysis16
Westerkeersluis16
Willemsbrug - foundation and basement17
Willemsbrug - ground floor and roof
18
Kattenslootbrug - foundation and basement19
Kattenslootbrug - ground floor and roof 20
Van Hallbrug - foundation and basement21
Van Hallbrug - ground floor and roof
22
Beltbrug - foundation and basement23
Beltbrug - ground floor and roof 24
Bridge technology and conclusion25
1.4 Value assessment26
1.5 Reference project27
1.6 Design proposal28
1.7 Sources29
2
1.1 Urban analysis
11th century
Every scale of analysis starts with a research question which will give direction to the analysis.
For the urban analysis I asked myself the question:
What is the meaning and the use of the water in Amsterdam West over time?
Dewatering
In the 11th century there was a need for new farmland, because the population increased and there was a period of
drought and spray in the dunes. Before the peat land was ready for farmland and living the land has to be dewatered by
ditches which also served as a boundary. The reclamation began on the banks of the IJ. The drainage of the peat goes
in the direction of the IJ through those ditches and gulfs. On the mined land there grew mainly oats and barly.
After the dewatering the soil compacted, approximately half a meter per century. By land subsidence the groundwater
level became relatively higher and the land has to be dewatered deeper to make agriculture possible. The mined area
became also vulnerable to floods of the IJ. Dike construction was therefore inevitable because the peat extraction had
to be protected. The first dike was the Spaardammerdijk, constructed in 1204. In that time the dikes not only served as
flood, but also as a main traffic road. The first villages situated behind the dikes mostly on places were waterways meets
traffic roads. A good example is the village Sloterdijk constructed were the river slochter meets the Spaardammerdijk.
(Abrahamse , 2010)
De Kostverlorenvaart was dug in 1413 due to the drainage of the southern parts of the Netherlands to the IJ. It
also forms a boundary between two orientations of reclamation, the Amsteland en the Rijnland. Out of three peat lakes,
Spieringenmeer, Haarlemmermeer and Leidsemeer, arose in the 16th century the Haarlemmermeer caused by peat
extraction. The dewatering of the Haarlemmermeer to the IJ became very important and went through the Kostverlorenvaart.
Farmer behind the Spaardammerdijk (Abrahamse, 2010)
kostverlorenvaart (1413)
3
Reclamation directions in het Rijnland and the emergence of the Kostverlorenvaart (Clemens, 2013)
Urban analysis17th century
Water brought money
The Golden Age was a time of economical growth by the trade of the VOC and the wood trade with Scandinavia. Amsterdam became a rich city by the storage of wood and steel. The city enlarged by the houses build for the workers. The
growth of Amsterdam in de Golden Age period led also to investments outside the city. The most important infrastructural improvement was the construction of the Haarlemmertrekvaart at the west site of Amsterdam in 1631. The reason for
this construction was because the transport over the IJ and the dike became too dangerous. The Haarlemmertrekvaart
was mainly a connection between both cities for passengers.
The Kostverlorenvaart got, next to the function of dewatering, a second function in that time. The Kostverlorenvaart was part of an alternative trade route between Amsterdam and Leiden via the Haarlemmermeer in order to avoid
taxes. Over the Kostverlorenvaart wood and steel was transported to the southern part of the Netherlands. Besides that,
the largest sawmill park of Amsterdam was constructed along the Kostverlorenvaart. In het zaagmolenpark wood was
sawn and treated for the use in the housing and ship industry. They choose the west side of Amsterdam to construct the
windmills because of the undisturbed windage and the prevailing west wind. Ditches in the zaagmolenpark were there
for the transport in and out the area. Employees, living in the Jordaan could reach their work by connection paths over
the Singelgracht. (Abrahamse, 2010)
rt
vaa
k
e
r
t
r
me
m
Haarle
Sawmillpark next to the Kostverlorenvaart (Bakker)
kostverlorenvaart
Amstel
Rijnland in the 17th century with the Haarlemmertrekvaart, de Amstel and the Kostverlorenvaart as important trade routes (Clemens, 2013)
4
Urban analysis19th-20th century
Infrastructural increase of scale
Under King Willem I new canals were dug due to the enlargement of the accessibility of Amsterdam. In 1824 the Noordhollandskanaal is dug, in 1876 the Noordzeekanaal and in 1891 the Merwede kanaal. The harbor functioned as storage
and handling of goods like grain, wood and steel at that time. From Amsterdam the goods were transported national and
international over the canals. The function of the Kostverlorenvaart, as alternative trade route to Leiden was still there but
was less important in that time (goud voor hout, 2012). The function of the Haarlemmertrekvaart, as a connection for passengers between Amsterdam and Haarlem, was taken over by the arrival of the railway in 1839. Also goods were transported by train.
The enlargement of the harbor caused an increasing population of the city of Amsterdam. The city had to be extended to accommodate all its inhabitants. J. Kalff made an urban plan for the extension of the city in 1888. The Kostverlorenvaart forms the boundary of that plan. The former sawmill area became a neighborhood for the working people and there
was a park for leisure, the westerpark. In that Westerpark, the gasfactory was constructed in 1883 at a safe distance of the
city and next to the railway in case of the gas supply. The Westergasbrug over de Haarlemmertrekvaart was constructed
in 1886 to realize a passage for the kole ships used for the gasfactory (Smit, 2010). Since plan Kalff the Kostverlorenvaart
was surrounded by neighborhoods and polders. Bridges were constructed to make crossings between the neighborhoods
and the houses in the polder possible and also controlled the traderoute. The city counted bridge funds (bruggelden) for
al kind of ships which are passing a bridge. In 1970, the bridge funds were abolished. Therefore the skipper has to pay
15 cent at daytime and 30 cent in the evenings and on Sundays. Since 1972 the city introduced the ‘binnenhavengelden’,
charges for anyone with a (pleasure) vessel who sails through Amsterdam or occupies a berth. Ships pays per ton weight
and pleasure yachts per night (Kruizinga, 1973).
1886 iron drawbridge, Westergasfabriek
1919 Tasmanbridge
1784 Tolbrug, the forerunner of the Wiegbrug 1885 double bascule Beltbridge
(Beelbank archief Amsterdam)
5
1877 iron bascule Willemsbrug
1891 iron bascule Kattenslootbrug
Plan Kalff (Kaartenkamer, TU Delft Bouwkunde)
Urban analysis21th century
Network
With different extension plans, the one of Kalff and the AUP, the context
of the kostverlorenvaart have changed. Starting in the 19the century the
kostverlorenvaart is not an independent structure in the polder anymore.
It slightly became a structure within neighborhoods. The boundaries of the
water became quays, planted with trees and used by the inhabitants of the
neighborhoods. At the junction where the water meets a new constructed
road a bridge was build. The increasing use of cars and the upcoming
tram network caused a high intense traffic situation over the bridges. The
quays were more or less used for pedestrians.The direction of the road is
leading over these paths.
De regenboog_kinderdagverblijf
Westerperk
Haarlemmerpoort_stadspoort
Marnixplantsoen
Westerparkschool
Geuzenkade
Amsta locatie de Werf_zorg voor ouderen en mensen met beperking
De Waterkant_openbare basisschool en daltononderwijs
crossings
traffic road
route along the water
Stadsboerderij Zimmerhoeve
(source: maps.google.nl)
route through streets
6
Urban analysisConclusion
What is the meaning and the use of the water in Amsterdam West over time?
- The context of the Kostverlorenvaart and the Westerkanaal have changed over time
De regenboog_kinderdagverblijf
- It was a structure for dewatering and transport and it now
is inner city water for ships and leisure
- Traffic over the bridges is dominated by cars, busses and trams
Westerperk
- Quays are mainly used for destination traffic and pedestrians/bicycles,
BUT:
- The quays are meaningless for Amsterdam West, because:
- There is no continuity in the design of the quays
- There is no continious route along the waterfront, because sometimes buildings block the route
- The quays do not have a lot of attractive functions which promote its use
Haarlemmerpoort_stadspoort
Marnixplantsoen
Westerparkschool
Geuzenkade
Amsta locatie de Werf_zorg voor ouderen en mensen met beperking
De Waterkant_openbare basisschool en daltononderwijs
Quays in Amsterdam West (Clemens, 2013)
(source: maps.google.nl)
7
Stadsboerderij Zimmerhoeve
1.2 Architectural analysis
Overview
The architectural analysis starts with the question:
What is the relation between the bridge houses and the water/the bridge?
346
In the area of Amsterdam West there are six bridges with bridge houses, recognizable by their bridge
number. Two bridges are build under modern architecture by Zicht architecten and Mathieu Ponsen.
Four bridges are built in the style of the Amsterdamse School designed by architect
Pieter Lodewijk Kramer.
The architectural aspects which are researched for this analysis are the orientation, the volumes,
the design method of Pieter Kramer (proportion, routing, human scale), the function and the relation
between open and closed facades. These architectural aspects could position the bridge houses in their
broader context of the bridge and the water. It will gives a good inside in the relation as also the difference
between the modern and the Amsterdamse school houses.
Piet Kramer,
Amsterdamse School
151. Willemsbrug, 1928
151
151
155. Kattenslootbrug, 1952
155
155
171
Modern architecture
346. Westerkeersluis, 2005
346
171. van Hallbrug, 1932
171
324
173. Wiegbrug, 1987
173
324. Beltbrug, 1930
324
173
(Source: maps.google.nl)
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
8
O rArchitectural
i e n t analysisOrientation
ation
(source: google maps)
173
324
171
155
151
346
Situation
9
(Source: google.maps, Clemens, 2013)
Section
Waterviews
Architectural analysisVolumes and elevations
151. Willemsbrug
155. Kattenslootbrug
171. Van Hallbrug
324. Beltbrug
173. Wiegbrug
Volumes
346. Westerkeersluis
Elevations
North
North
North-west
East
North-east
West
South-east
All bridge houses, as part of a bridge, do have a connection with the water.
The volumes show what the degree of the connection is. In some cases the
volume is standing in the water. In other cases the volume lies inside the
bridge. And only the house of the Willemsbrug stands at land and is just
facing the water. The elevations tell how many facades make a direct
connection with the waterfront.
North-west
North-west
North-west
North-east
North-east
South-east
South-west
South-west
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
10
Architectural analysisLodewijk Pieter Kramers approach
Pieter Kramer, born in 1881, worked as esthetical architect at the bridge department of the Publieke Werken Amsterdam
from 1911 till 1952. Lodewijk Pieter Kramer was born and worked all his life in Amsterdam and his style belonged to
the Amsterdamse school. Besides his work at the bridge department he worked as independent architect, sometimes
in corporation with other Amsterdamse school architects like J.M. van der Mey and M. de Klerk. De Dageraad (1922)
in Amsterdam is one of his best known work. When Kramer starts working at the Publieke Werken W.A. de Graaf was
the director. His predecessor A.W. Bos felt that the service could use a leading architect. So J.M. van der Mey became
esthetical adviser of the bridge department where Pieter Kramer starts as assistant in 1911. From 1916 Pieter Kramer
took over the job of van der Mey and became the esthetical adviser. Both architects represented the expressionism of
the Amsterdamse school. Also the municipality of Amsterdam harbored this style. The architects were given every
opportunity to apply this style in buildings, bridges and furniture. In the forty years Kramer worked for the Publieke Werken he realized around 200 bridges for the city of Amsterdam. His design principles became clear in his buildings and
bridges. He starts with simple, big forms which he adapted to urban conditions. He finished his design with a lot of original details. In case of the bridge design he was not only designing the bridge, but also the bridge house, the iron railing,
sitting facilities and the greenery plan. He also worked with sculpters, like Hildo Krop, who made a lot of sculptures on or
around the bridges of Kramer. By adapting a lot of different elements in the design, the crossings of Kramer became so
called ‘bridge landscapes’, organically fit into the environment (Kohlenbach, 1994).
Kattenslootbrug (Clemens, 2013)
Kattenslootbrug (Archief NAi)
11
Pieter Kramer (Kohlenbach, 1994)
Architectural analysisRouting, levels, human scale and transition
151. Willemsbrug
346. Westerkeersluis
155. Kattenslootbrug
171. van Hallbrug
Bridge connection - Kramer
Ent rance
346. Westerkeersluis
173. Wiegbrug
A
A
-1
155. Kattenslootbrug
A
F l o o r l eEvnet lr a n c e
T r a n s i tFi ol on o r l e v e l
Transition
Floor levels
Human scale
346. Westerkeersluis
Transition
Transition
Entrance
Floor level
Entrance
Floor level
Transition
Bridge connection - Kramer
Bridge connection - Others
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
-1
-1
A
A
-1
A
A
Every house has in particular a relation with the bridge. Their entrance is
mainly on the level of the bridge, at the pedestrian side. Only the
Kattenslootbrug and the Wiegbrug can also be entered at the level of the
water.
A
A
173. Wiegbrug
tion - Others
173. Wiegbrug
A
346. Westerkeersluis
-1
Bridge connection - Others
higher then the bridgelevel, with the result that the bridgehouse can only be
entered by taking the stairs. The raised floorlevel ensures that the view over
the water aswel as the view on the road becomes more clear.
A
id
346. Westerkeersluis
g e 324.c Beltbrug
onnec
A
A
A
-1
171. Van Hallbrug
Br
171. Van Hallbrug
155. Kattenslootbrug
A similarity between all the bridgehouses is that their floorlevel is always
151. Willemsbrug
173.A Wiegbrug
A
173. Wiegbrug
Bridge connection - Others
T r a n s i t i o n T r a n s i t i o Fn l o o r l e v e l F l o o r l e v eEl n t r a n c e E n t r a n c e
Entrance
Floor level
Transition
A
Entrance
B r i d g e c o n n e c t i o151.
n -Willemsbrug
Others
324. Beltbrug
Every
house
has in particular
a relation
the bridge.
entrance
is
The way
the bridgehouses
make
a fysicalwith
connection
withTheir
the bridge
differs
A
mainly
on the
level
of the bridge,
at the pedestrian
side.
the in the
per house.
In the
bridgehosues
of Kramer
there mainly
is aOnly
continuity
-1 and the Wiegbrug can also be entered at the level of the
Kattenslootbrug
material use. The
color of the brick in the railing is the same of the brick used
water.
in the facade of the houses. In the Kattenslootbrug you can see a gradual
change of the railing to the house. In, for example, the Willemsbrug the
transitionzone
is muchallharder.
There is an obvious
junction
between
the railing
A
similarity between
the bridgehouses
is that their
floorlevel
is always
and thethen
wall the
of the
house. with the result that the bridgehouse can only be
higher
bridgelevel,
bridgehouses
in the
last decades
thethat
transition
entered In
bythe
taking
the stairs.designed
The raised
floorlevel
ensures
the view over
A
fromwater
the bridge
less becomes
clear. It seems
be new structures
the
asweltoasthe
thehouse
view isonmuch
the road
moretoclear.
by an excisting bridge. At the Westerkeersluis the retaining wall forms the
transition
between
the bridgemake
and the
modern
house andwith
at the
the
The
way the
bridgehouses
a fysical
connection
theWiegbrug
bridge differs
transition
achieved
by the little of
crossing
quay
to entrance.
per
house.is In
the bridgehosues
Kramerfrom
there
mainly
is a continuity in the
material use. The color of the brick in the railing is the same of the brick used
in the facade of the houses. In the Kattenslootbrug you can see a gradual
change of the railing to the house. In, for example, the Willemsbrug the
transitionzone is much harder. There is an obvious junction between the railing
and the wall of the house.
In the bridgehouses designed in the last decades the transition
from the bridge to the house is much less clear. It seems to be new structures
by an excisting bridge. At the Westerkeersluis the retaining wall forms the
transition between the bridge and the modern house and at the Wiegbrug the
transition is achieved by the little crossing from quay to entrance.
A
324. Beltbrug
346. Westerkeersluis
A
-1
A
173.
Wiegbrug A
A
A
-1
A
A
A
12
Architectural analysis Functions
A bridgehouse is the residence of the bridge keeper situated near the bridge. A bridge keeper guards the bridge and
operates the bridge form in- or outsite the house. He is responsible for the timely and safety opening of the bridge for
the passing ships. But also responsible for the waiting vehicles on the road.
The residence of the bridge keeper has to fit in a minimal amount of space, like the numbers below shown. The
organization of the floor plan is based on the use of one person and is equal in all of the brigde houses of Kramer. At
the ground floor there is a hall, a toilet and an operating room, like a tiny living room, where the bridge keeper can sit
and have a maximum overview over the water and the road. The Westerkeersluis has more functions within the bridge
house. This building is also used as meeting room and there is a service desk. The basement of al the houses is mainly
used for storage.
Transformer room
Storage (salt)
Operating room
Hall
Toilet
Staircase to basement/ bicycle
Kitchen
Meeting room
Service desk
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
W01- 2
346 Westerkeersluis
Height
2,40m
2,35m
5378
908
173
7
2206
394
24
43
3829
6609
17
2568
13
2965
910
708
2453
B
3016
2143
2496
muurbestaande
gebouw
3255 brug open
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL
PRODUCT
12731
6152
1500
333
2352
182
v1
d2
4
Groundfloor
Groundfloor
Bedieningsgebouw Westerkeersluis
Height
2,25m
2,50m
5
v6
NIVO WERKRUIMTE
1 : 50 23 april 2004
muurbestaande
989
2145
vA
W01- 3
d7
LUX Architecten
Nieuwpoortkade 2a
1055 RX Amsterdam
tel 020 6060 728
9476+
[email protected]
www.luxarch.nl
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
600
354
733
1843
ca. m
1513
480
70
2453
550
1029
800 70
aten
NIVO KELDER
Basement
23
1471
900
2093
600
Surface Height
Basement = ?
?
Groundfloor= ?
?
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
Height
max. 3.60m
2,80m
173 Wiegbrug
13
C
5103
1372
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
Height
3,75m 2,88m
324 Beltbrug
Surface
Basement = 34,3m2
Groundfloor= 25,8m2
vE
Bedieningsgebouw Westerkeersluis
NIVO KADEMUUR
1 : 50 16 juli 2004
LUX Architecten
Nieuwpoortkade 2a
1055 RX Amsterdam
tel 020 6060 728
[email protected]
www.luxarch.nl
Basement
(Source: Zicht architecten, Archief Amsterdam)
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
Height
2,70m
2,90m
171 Van Hallbrug
Surface
Basement = 15,6m2
Groundfloor= 15,6m2
4
dD
155 Kattenslootbrug
Surface
Basement = 23,9m2
Groundfloor= 23,9m2
211
v3
151 Willemsbrug
Surface
Basement = 23,7m2
Groundfloor= 23,7m2
4529
4240
1375
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
Surface
Basement = 34,5m2
Groundfloor= 58m2
Architectural analysis Open-closed
The relation between open and closed facades depends on the style and the architects who
designed the building.
For Kramer the bridge house has to serve the function of the bridge keeper, to overview
the waterways and the road. Kramer has a very functional approach in case of the window openings. Therefore big openings are only constructed in the operating room, the place where the
bridge keeper is controlling the bridge. The openings have minimum sizes, they are big enough to
have the perfect overview and they are made to guide the viewpoints. In case of the Beltbrug there
are two big openings in the direction of the waterway at the side façades of the building. In the
front façade there is a smaller window from where you can see and control the vessels in front of
the bridge. In the toilet and the hall little openings are serving the function of daylight. The windows
are too small and the glass is not clear to have look outside. But they are big enough to let in a
sufficient amount of daylight.
The more modern designed bridge houses like the Westerkeersluis and the Wiegbrug has
another approach in case of the use of openings. Of course these houses also serve the function
of the bridge keeper and will give the bridge keeper the perfect overview. But the application of
glass is not only limited to the operating room. The Westerkeersluis for example has a glass strip
al around the building. Both in the operating room as in the meeting room the glass has maximum
sizes, almost from floor to ceiling. It will give these both rooms an environmental panorama view,
also when the function of the room does not asking for it. Only at the entrance façade and the side
façade the glass is not dominating the total façade. Closed panels and the form of the roof structure reduce the amount of glass in these facades.
Willemsbrug
Van Hallbrug
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
Beltbrug seen from the waterside (Clemens, 2013)
Westerkeersluis seen from the waterside (Clemens, 2013)
Beltbrug seen from the bridge side (Clemens, 2013)
Westerkeersluis seen from the bridge side (Clemens, 2013)
Kattenslootbrug
Wiegbrug
Beltbrug
Westerkeersluis
14
Architectural analysis Conclusion
What is the relation between the bridge houses and the water/the bridge?
General
- By being part of a bridge which is crossing the water, the bridge houses make a physical connection with the water
- The approach of Kramer to make a ‘bridge landscape’ ensures a direct relation between the bridge and the bridge house
- The function of the bridge house generates the organization of the floor plan and the view
- The view and facade openings of Kramers houses are just related to the water and the road
Per house
15
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
The Westerkeersluis makes a connection with the
bridge by the placement on an existing basement. The
volume of the existing basement is standing in the
water where a direct relation is made. The windows
are al around the building, but the largest glass
surfaces are facing the waterfront.
The volume of the van Hallbrug lies within the volume
of the bridge with one flat facade, which makes an
optimal bridge relation. By being a volumes within the
abutment there are only two facades directly facing the
waterfont. The organisation of the smallest house is
very functional and the window openings are limited to
the operating room, like al the Kramer houses.
The willemsbrug does not make a physical connection
with the water, because the house is standing on the
land. But the round shaped windows, highlights by
the roof structure, at the front facade provide a maximum overview over the water. The connection with
the bridge is made by Kramers approach of a bridge
landscape; the material use, the form of the bridge and
the bridge house are very harmonious.
The Beltbrug has ‘eyes’ on the water and the road by a
very precise placement of the windows. The volume is
standing outside the brigde structure, besides the quay
and makes therefore with two facades a
connection with the waterfront. The relation with the
bridge arise out of a clear transition zone. The brick
masonry railing of the bridge goes in five steps over in
the facade of the bridge house.
The Kattenslootbrug is a very obvious example of Kramers bridge landscape. Bridge and house are designed under the same conditions with visible transition
zones. The volume of the house is standing outside
the volume of the bridge, so the connection with the
water is very direct. There even is stairs which makes
the connection between the bridge and the water level.
Openings in the facade are very carefully chosen and
are guiding the bridge keepers view.
The modern bridge house of the Wiegbrug is standing,
on a concrete pillar. Together they form an independent structure in the water. The water makes a connection with the bridge house at al four of the facades.
The entrance of the bridge house is at the level of the
water instead of the bridge. Therefore the house does
not make a, direct or indirect, connection with the rest
of the bridge.
1.3 Building technical analysisWesterkeersluis
In case of the building technical analysis I wanted to investigate ‘How
the
structures could serve the position and function of the
bridge houses?’
The former bridge house of the Westerkeerlsuis is built in 2005 by Zicht
architecten. They founded a new house on an existing basement , an leftover of
the previous bridge house. The steel construction makes big spans and openings
possible.
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
Photos of the steel structure (source: Zicht Architecten)
The façade is made out of mint- colored coniseal, 3mm polyurethaan coating and glass with outside sunshading.
W01- 2
4529
4240
1375
211
v3
4
steel tube
vE
908
173
5378
staalplaat
dD
2206
24
43
3829
394
7
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
C
708
2965
910
2568
13
17
6609
5103
2496
3016
2143
1372
2453
B
staalplaatbetonvloer
wooden parts
coniseal cladding
existing basement- reinforced
concrete with brick masonry
cladding
muurbestaande
gebouw
3255 brug open
12731
6152
1500
333
2352
182
v1
d2
4
Roof construction - steel profiles
5
v6
muurbestaande
989
NIVO WERKRUIMTE
1 : 50 23 april 2004
d7
B
bearing steel beams,
I profiles
Section AA
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
9476+
[email protected]
LUX Architecten
Nieuwpoortkade 2a
1055 RX Amsterdam
tel 020 6060 728
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
eningsgebouw Westerkeersluis
vA
2145
Coniseal constructed on
a wooden underlayment.
These wooden tiles are placed
against steel tubes (main construction). Space in between
the skeleton could be used for
installations, derived from the
air grids in the outer wall.
W01- 8
www.luxarch.nl
W01- 2
B
dD
9476+
9221+
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
1375
211
C
B
VA
65
100
8
70
v3
50
230
173
120
50
4
150
10
140
300
72
120
59
vE
173
5378
4529
4240
170
91
var. schuin verloop
100
908
200
50
var. schuin verloop
40
285
145
2965
B
2380+
2496
3016
2143
A
10 70
v1
6152
d2
1500
4
333
2352
Floor construction- steel profiles
ningsgebouw Westerkeersluis
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
1 : 50 23 april 2004
5
v6
B
NIVO WERKRUIMTE
muurbestaande
989
182
1000
182
VAR.
60
122
20
5620+P b.z. nieuwe vloer
5620+P
220
409
5520+P
5210+P
5210+P
5150+ b.z. oude vloer
VA
5150+ b.z. oude vloer
VE
techn. kast
2380+
muurbestaande
gebouw
3255 brug open
12731
5620+
5150+ (bestaand)
80
70
600
2568
6609
10
60
1000
18
700
80
35
80
C
900+vl
70
var. schuin verloop
325
20
257
254
keuken zie W-03
balie zie W-03
195
6475+P
220
187
281
182
409
94
80
302
61
2206
kabels
18
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
7
394
24
4
3
3829
13
17
910
708
2453
1372
kast zie W-03
60
vA
2145
d7
doorsnede
CC
LUX Architecten
Nieuwpoortkade 2a
1055 RX Amsterdam
tel 020 6060 728
9476+
[email protected]
www.luxarch.nl
Bedieningsgebouw Westerkeersluis
I profiles on
construction paws
bearing core with stability braces
existing basement- reinforced
concrete with brick masonry
cladding
150+
doorsnede BB
Section BB
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
A
135 20
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
5103
bedieningspaneel
brug 346
ca. 450
bepalen a.d.h. van frontdeksel
165
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
dD
doorsneden BB en CC
1 : 50
27 febr. 2004
LUX Architecten
Nieuwpoortkade 2a
1055 RX Amsterdam
tel 020 6060 728
[email protected]
www.luxarch.nl
16
Building technical analysisWillemsbrug - foundation and basement
The Willemsbrug is designed by architect Pieter Kramer in 1925. In the houses he
accentuates the different functional elements by seperate them in different forms.
The source of the forms can be found in nature. The roof has en expressive form
as also have the windows (Smit, 2010). The house is standing apart of the bridge,
but is founded on the same foundation. The building is constructed out of red brick
(like the bridge is) and wood, because wood lends itself to vaulted constructions.
exhaust smoke
exhaust air
‘houtgraniet’
natural ventilation:
fresh air
reinforced concrete floor lays on brick masonry
warm air by stove
465
water from toilet sink
Red brick
water from toilet
Installation scheme
reinforced concrete floor lays on concrete foundation
510
brick masonry walls
Steens Crossbond
floor support by foundation and brick masonry wall
reinforced concrete
basement floor
concrete 1:3:4
cement:sand:gravel
reinforced concrete
foundation floor
wooden pile foundation with reinforced concrete floor
17
Force scheme
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
Building technical analysis
Willemsbrug - ground floor and roof
woorden beam
woorden lintel
windowframe
Vaulted roof structure
Vaulted roof constructed out of diagonal sloped wooden beams.
trimmer joists around chimney
brick masonry walls with wooden lintel and wooden bearing windowframes
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
ceiling beams bear by the brick masonry wall and the wooden lintel
load bearing masonry walls and wooden windowframes
18
Building technical analysisKattenslootbrug - basement and facade
exhaust smoke
exhaust air
The Kattenslootbrug is designed by Pieter Kramer in 1950, two years before he left
the bridge department of De Publieke Werken. Although at that time a progressive
austerity prevailed, the bridge and the house are regonizable as one designed by
Kramer (Smit, 2010). The house of the Kattenslootbrug is the biggest one of the
four houses in Amsterdam West. The house has an reinforced concrete basement
and a red brick masonry façade. like the rest of the bridge and the sitting facilities.
The house has a simple gable roof form.
10
7
215
Red brick
natural ventilation:
fresh air
warm air by stove
water from toilet
Installation scheme
Steens Crossbond
‘Rollaag’
reinforced concrete lintel
outer layer, cladding
inner layer, bearing
1970
reinforced concrete
‘Vlechting’
concrete bearing box with probably wooden or concrete foundation piles
19
Brick masonry facade
Force scheme
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
Building technical analysis
wooden purlins span from masonry wall to wooden
Kattenslootbrug- ground floor and roof
standing wooden roof sheathing over purlins
Roof structure - gable roof
cavity brick wall
concrete slab
440
the concrete slab supports two wooden trusses, they work together
540
Ground floor
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
concrete slab and wooden ceiling beams span from wall to wall
the connecion between the concrete slab and the wooden beam
20
Building technical analysisVan Hallbrug - foundation and basement
groundfloor level
The van Hallbrug from 1932 is a bridge and a house where the expressionist
architecture of Kramer is recognizable like the unusual placement of the
window frames on the brickwork and the cap shaped roof. Forced by the cuts
and the increase use of reinforced concrete the roof of the van Hallbrug is
made out of this material instead of the more expensive material wood (Smit,
2010). The cladding is made out of orange-brown colored brick.
orange/brown brick
Steens Crossbond
basement floor level
350
exhaust air
exhaust smoke
natural ventilation:
fresh air
masonry walls bear the reinforced concrete ground floor in two directions
warm air by stove
480
Basement, ‘steens’ brick walls. Reinforced concrete floor spans in two directions
Installation scheme
concrete (1:4:8) underneath basement floor, brick masonry walls constructed
all around
natural stone (belgisch hardsteen at waterside
pile foundation plan
21
foundation - piles and concrete floor
Force scheme
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
Building technical analysis
Van Hallbrug - ground floor and roof
reinforced concrete vaulted roof
reinforced concrete vaulted roof structure
Roof above wall:
reinforced concrete roof supported cavity wall
Roof above window: reinforced concrete roof supported
by wooden lintel.
Wooden lintel above window openings
ceiling beams with purlins between the roof structure
brick cavity wall
inner layer on reinforced floor
350
brick wall
480
Ground floor, bearing outer walls and chimney wall
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
from the ground floor brick cavatiy wall with bearing inner layer
window detail
22
Building technical analysisBeltbrug - foundation
and basement
The Beltbrug (1930) is an exception of the bridge houses designed by
Kramer. It was the first bridge house with a flat roof. Probably Kramer
wanted to introduce a new architecture style in Amsterdam West of
which the adjacent buildings were a example. This is also one of the
first bridges where he used the yellowish colored brick, by the same
reason as mentioned before (Smit, 2010).
yellow brick
reinforced concrete
470
Belgisch hardsteen to avoid rising damp
Steens Crossbond
730
reinforced concrete basement walls
reinforced concrete walls, basement
pile foundation plan of bridge included the bridge house
23
foundation - piles and concrete floor
reinforced concrete interior walls
different concrete (1:3:5) floor levels deposited on foundation
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
Building technical analysis
concrete lintel
Beltbrug - ground floor and roof
wooden beams
wooden purlin
lowest part of the roof
highest part of the roof
inner layer
outer layer
concrete lintel
roof structure - flat roof constructed out of beams and purlins devided
by a reinforced concrete lintel
concrete lintel
brick cavity wall
brick cavity walls on reinforced concrete box, inner layer is bearing
Window detail
reinforced concrete panels
ground floor plan
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
different reinforced concrete floor levels lie down on concrete box
floor level detail: reinforced beams out
of floor covered with concrete pannels.
spaced used for channels and pipes
from i.a the transformer
reinforced concrete panels
24
Building technical analysisBridge technology and conclusion
The bridge houses are designed and also build as part of the bridge. A bascule bridge consists mainly out of two elements, the abutments and the opening road sections. The abutments are constructed in the water on both sides of the
quays. In Amsterdam most of these abutments have a wooden pile foundation. The bridge house is from the start part
of the abutments and is part of the foundation plan. Over this foundation plan a reinforced concrete floor and reinforced
concrete walls are constructed. Within these walls there is space for the opening mechanism of the bridge. The basements of the bridge houses are on the same level of the abutments. Over the abutments the opening road sections will
constructed and the bridge is ready. The reinforced bearing walls of the abutments will be covered with a brick masonry
façade. The first layer of the façade and the edges of the abutments will be constructed out of natural stone (belgisch
hardsteen) to avoid rising damp and to protect the brick masonry against collisions with ships (Smit, 2010). As part of
the abutments the bridge house will not be recognizable as a house. From the bridge level on it starts to be a building
founded on the reinforced concrete walls underneath and with the same cladding.
Conclusion
How the structures could serve the position
and function of the bridge houses?
- The bridge and the bridge house have the
same pile foundation, they both
arise out of the same foundation.
- From the basement on the bridge house
releases itself from the bridge and
starts to have an own identity, it became an
authority.
- The outer walls are bearing, no inner
bearing walls.
- Lintels in the bearing walls make big
window openings possible.
- The vaulted roofstructures highlights the
orientation and the view.
Bridge technology (Clemens, 2013)
25
Basement of the bridge with the opening installations
(Clemens, 2013)
1.4 Value assessment
Urban scale
Architectural scale
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
Building technical scale
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
(Source: Clemens, 2013)
(Source: maps.google.nl, Clemens, 2013)
+ Kostverlorenvaart as historic structure
+ Bridges and houses of Kramer
+ Existing paths over quays
- The dominant traffic stream over the bridges
- Quays which are not accessible or blocked by buildings
- Failing connection between bridge and quay
+ Kramers approach of the ‘bridge landscape’
(including the continuity of form, material and color)
+ The form, height and position of the bridge houses which
emphasize and characterize the controlled and overviewing function
+ Carefully chosen window openings
- basements (moister and lack of daylight)
- Glass surfaces without extra function
- No entrance at bridge level
+ The vaulted roof structures
+ Foundation as part of the bridge
+ Typical Amsterdamse school masonry bonds
+ Window openings orientated on the water and the road
- Materials, not part of a certain style
- not original elements like doors, alu
windowframes, plasters, floor finish ect.
26
1.5 Reference project
Stadswaterpark Rotterdam - Bokkers van der Veen Architecten en Planners
‘Stadswaterpark’ is designed as a floating park on the inner city waters of Rotterdam. The park has something for
everyone, from nature to adventure playground and a catering pavilion. The function of the park is to make the
inner city more lively and greener.
The inner city water in Rotterdam differs from the inner city water in Amsterdam in a functional way. The
water near the Binnenrotte does not mean anything for the shipping, it is even not accessible for big ships. The
bridges over the water are not openable, so the water can only be used by low private boats. This means that the
water does not take into account the rules of the inland navigation. But because there is no route over the water
you do not will see a lot of private boats either.
In comparising with the Kostverlorenvaart the Delfsevaart and the Steigersgracht has a dead end, this will
explain the duckweed you see at google.maps, there is no stream. Also the bounderies of the water in Rotterdam
differs from the boundaries of the Kostverlorenvaart. The Steigersgracht is dominated by highrise buildings and
high quays. Also the surroundings of the Delfsevaart have a high density of about seven storie high buildings.
Sometimes buildings are build directly to the water, which make the quays unaccessible for pedestrians. The
quays are more or less the backgardens of the more attractive streets like the Meent and the Hoogstraat, hided for
the public. The quays are high and there is no green.
Stadswaterpark Rotterdam (www.bokkersvanderveen.nl)
27
Sweets - Space&Matter
Sweets started out as an idea to create a distributed hotel concept for the city of Amsterdam that optimally
re-uses existing small scale real estate as individual hotel suites. They will use the vacant bridge houses to
realize their idea.
I really like this idea, but after analyzing I also have my doubts. First of all I do not think a private
function will fit the buildings. At the moment the bridge houses are not in use (a few houres a day) the windowscreens are closed and the buildings will look very obsolete. Althought the building has the meaning to have a
wide and open view and have contact with the water and the road al the time. In case you put a hotel room in it,
the guests will also close the screens to have some privacy, so the obsolute image will be maintained, which is
in contrast with the meaning the houses are build for.
Since I visite the houses I also put question at the surfaces. Most of the houses are so small that you
can hardly put a double bed in it. A place for sanitair is hard to find. In their current situation the basements do
not have windows, do have a lot of moisture damage and are therefore not suitable for any function.
The last thing I worry about in case of the hotel rooms is the traffic noise. Over al the bridges, exept
the van Hallbrug, trams are passing by. These trams (and also cars ofcourse) do make a lot of noise and let the
house vibrate. They start driving every day around 5:30 AM and will disrupting the sleep.
Sweets (www.spaceandmatter.nl)
1.6 Design proposal
The urban design proposal is about making the quays, in perpendicular
direction of the bridges, more accessible and uniform by creating a route.
The existing paths over the quays could be included in this route, but
paths over the water could be added for a total feeling of water experience
and differentiation of the route. Keep in mind that there still are big barges
passing over the water.
Within this public network the bridge houses will be little landmarks, orientation points within the route. They should be interesting
public spots with a short stay character. Short stay because in my opinion
the houses are not suitable for more than one night stay because of their
inside space and the traffic noise. Trams are passing every ten minutes
since approximately 5:30 in the morning, creating a lot of noise courses
that lets the buildings vibrate.
The program should cause coherence between the six houses.
The houses and their programm could also serve as an unifying factor
between different districts. The bridgehouses need a public instead of a
privite function. The former overviewing function gives the houses an open
character. By puting in a privite function the houses will be closed for the
majority and so will be their elevations . A public function will emphazie
their open sight.
(Clemens, 2013)
28
1.7 Sources
Literature
Articles
Kohlenbach, B., ‘Herwaardering voor Pieter Kramer, 1881-1961’. In ‘Ons Amsterdam (1994) p.136-134
Books
Abrahamse, J.E., et al, Tussen Haarlemmerpoort en Halfweg. Bussum, 2010
Bakker, T., De vroegste industriegebieden, Amsterdam, 2013
Boer, W., Amsterdamse Bruggen 1910-1950. 1983
Clemens, L., Afbeeldingen en foto’s. Delft, 2013
Hoeven, C van der, Louwe, J., Amsterdam als stedelijk bouwwerk, een morfologische analyse. SUN, 1985
Horst, A van der., Goud voor Hout. Amsterdam, 2012
Kuizinga, J.H., Amsterdam, stad der duizend bruggen. 1973
Smit, F.V., Bruggen in Amsterdam : infrastructurele ontwikkelingen en brugontwerpen van 1850 tot 2010. 2010
Speet, B., Historische atlas van Amsterdam. SUN, 2010
29
Pictures
Abrahamse, J.E., et al, Tussen Haarlemmerpoort en Halfweg. Bussum, 2010
Amsterdams gemeente Archief
Archief NAi
Bakker, T., De vroegste industriegebieden, Amsterdam, 2013
Beeldbank, archief Amsterdam
Clemens, L., Afbeeldingen en foto’s. Delft, 2013
Maps.google.nl
Kohlenbach, B., ‘Herwaardering voor Pieter Kramer, 1881-1961’. In ‘Ons Amsterdam (1994) p.136-134
Website Bokkers van der Veen architecten en planners, www.bokkersvanderveen.nl
Website space&matter, www.spaceandmatter.nl
Website Zicht architecten, www. zichtarchitecten.nl