The Amsterdam Bijlmer ArenA Station (ABAS) is a unique and complex station area within the Dutch public transport network. It is located in the rapidly growing Amsterdam Zuid Oost, where the station serves a dual function that creates operational tensions. On the one hand, it acts as a critical daily commuter hub for the residents and workers of the area. On the other hand, it serves as the primary entrance to the largest entertainment district in the Netherlands, hosting three major venues: the Johan Cruijff ArenA, the Ziggo Dome and AFAS Live.
Currently, there is no standardised tool or benchmark in the Netherlands to identify such specific event related transit nodes. Because of the unique characteristics of the Amsterdam Bijlmer Arena Station,
there is the opportunity to compare this Dutch complex station to other nodes in Europe in the event context. This thesis addresses that gap by analysing the current system and looking across the border to
find best practices in Europe. As well as coming up with a structured way to assess these observations and to systematically operationalise the comparison. Therefore, the main research questions are:
1. "How is the redevelopment of Amsterdam Bijlmer ArenA Station approached in terms of integrated decision-making, and what lessons can be drawn from comparable international transit-nodes in event context?”
2. “How can recurring aspects from international cases be systematically operationalised in a Comparison Tool, and how can this tool be implemented and applied to a complex multi-actor
infrastructure project like ABAS?”

This research concludes that while Amsterdam Bijlmer ArenA is a mature and critical node in the Dutch network, its physical design can learn and profit from European transit nodes in the event-context to improve its operational performance. The Comparison Tool from this research is an effective instrument to identify maturity gaps in the researched aspect, making the translation from qualitative insights to measurable differences. In addition, for stations near event areas, the tool is especially relevant because it highlights
aspects that traditional infrastructure planning often misses. Hence, this comparison tool can be a powerful communication aid in the early phases of an infrastructure project. Especially for different
stakeholder arenas, like the analytical arena, where specialists justify certain design choices, and also the policy arena, where those elements and choices are translated to the main stakeholders involved.