The Dutch system is actually a collection of different factions rather than a reformist liberal one. The famous Dutch tolerance is more about letting these groups co-exist than "lol drugs prostitutes".
Urk is not a good example of a stable society. Suicide and cocaine. That's all I will say...
Back to topic, as others has said the reason multiculturalism has failed is because of ghettoisation. They've been allowed to keep certain aspects of their society that are abnormal and sometimes unacceptable in ours. If the village people weren't so scared of brown people we could house them around the country. But instead we ghettoise them, and then the same racist people complain that their country is going to the dogs.
You reap what you sow...
Of course you're right on the Netherlands and on Urk.
But where does the whole idea of some sort of a "racism gap" between villagers and urban people come from? This might have been true in the past, and it might still be true in some countries (France, Sweden), but in many countries, like the Netherlands (and probably Belgium), it certainly isn't the case. I don't think one can say "multiculturalism has failed", it hasn't: it is a popular soundbite among politicians, but it doesn't reflect reality. In reality, people from lots of backgrounds coexist in harmony. The problem is that there are issues with Muslim minorities, sure, but that doesn't render multiculturalism itself "failed" - it is simply the new reality. And it is exactly like Famous Mortimer said: people want to live with people who are similar to them. So of course a Moroccan family would prefer to live in a neighborhood with a mosque, a halal butcher, and other Moroccans. This is normal. It's the same with European Jews, who are not "ghettoized" (anymore) at all.