PUMA

 The PUMA exercise was great to understand the infrastructure of the city, its urban planning, and design and was also incredibly intuitive to destinations I had already planned on going to. I think this is the main reason I found it not just educational, but enjoyable and fun as well. Naomi and I started one morning at a gluten-free bakery I found online and I had the best croissant of my entire life. I was worried it was out of the way since it was in a more residential neighborhood with a large pedestrian-only area. However, after reading the paper we realized we were incredibly close to most of the exercises exploring pre-war buildings and the infrastructure surrounding them. I have a suspicion this was intentional, and the activities naturally drew us to areas with lots of people, amenities, and things to do. The question is, did the infrastructure we were exploring, specifically the changes, facilitate this vibrancy, or was the infrastructure put here because of existing vibrancy?

Utilizing google maps to view street changes over time helps answer this question. The areas of development appear to be dense in the google street view from years ago so this may have played a role in the decision to redo the infrastructure in these neighborhoods. However, the vibrancy of the streets has improved significantly based on the historic and current photographs and my own experience in the area. The De Pijp neighborhood is a vibrant and bustling area with no parking and pedestrian and bike-only areas that make the busyness feel mellow and inclusive instead of overwhelming. 

Neighborhoods of this size and density do exist in major US cities but they are overrun by car parking. The density is more sparse in the US, which I view as an opportunity for MORE space for bicycle infrastructure and public space utilization. US cities and Amsterdam differ not just in their spatial factors but also in the historical context. This activity gave me an interesting insight into the historical context of the city. The infrastructure in the United States is much newer and spaced out than in Amsterdam. This, in my opinion, allows for more consistent infrastructure within US cities. Many of the inconsistencies in Amsterdam infrastructures I noticed during the PUMA activity were done to preserve the historic character of the areas. I think historic preservation is important which is why the lack of historic buildings in the US will allow for more consistent and spacious infrastructure. 

I really enjoyed this activity and loved how it allowed us to choose our own adventure and explore infrastructure in our own way. The way it facilitated interactions with infrastructure, residents, and transit of Amsterdam. One aspect I would’ve loved to explore more is the relationship between housing and income levels and transit. I feel like I don’t have a good grasp of how income is dispersed in Amsterdam and if there are distinctly wealthy and non-wealthy areas or if the income is more mixed. PUMA activity facilitated really in-depth interactions with the city and really elevated my understanding of Amsterdam.