Changing public space

comprised of many stores with a ‘fun’ nature. The Loeffplein is only occasionally used for smallscale
events such as street theatre. There are also no permanent facilities available. This also
applies to the Arena area. There are no sidewalk cafés present on the Loeffplein, except for a
small terrace in the sunken plaza of the Arena, but this only makes up a small percentage of
the total surface. Therefore, the Loeffplein (with and without Arena) has a low rating on the
dimension ‘sidewalk cafés’.
Figure 7.4 shows that safety has not been a central issue in the redevelopment of the Markt
and Loeffplein. In general, ’s-Hertogenbosch has implied few safety measures such as CCTV
and the closure of particular parts of the city. Yet the city occupies the 39th position in Marlet
and Van Woerkens’ (2007) safety ranking and is thus less safe than the average large city in the
Netherlands. Therefore, there does not seem to be a clear-cut relation between crime levels and
security measures in ’s-Hertogenbosch. The high rating on ‘funshopping’ of both the Markt
and Loeffplein can be explained by the city’s relatively modest industrial past. Except for a few
factories that were located in the city, ’s-Hertogenbosch has been an administrative and service
sector-oriented city for a long time, especially compared to cities as Rotterdam and Enschede.
According to an interviewed public-sector representative, the city therefore recognised the
importance of retail in the city centre at a relatively early stage. This resulted in several projects to
strengthen the centre’s retail function, including the 1993 policy plan as well as the foundation of
the Centre Management, including the local government, Fortis Bank, the merchant association
and the association of local entrepreneurs (see Section 6.5.3). The city thus focuses on ‘fantasy’ by
stimulating retail rather than on ‘fear’ by implementing security measures.
7.6 Comparing the research objects on fear and fantasy
From the descriptions in Chapter 6 and the previous sections, it has become clear that the
eight research objects have both differences and similarities. Except for the Grote Markt in
Dordrecht, all public spaces have more or less been pedestrianised (some are car free, others
are open to traffic during fixed delivery hours or partly accessible for motorised traffic). This
transformation has been described in Section 2.5 as a general trend in Dutch public space and
occurs in redevelopment projects throughout Europe: “One of the dominant interventions in the
regeneration of medium-sized European city centres has been the separation of transportation
modes, in particular the pedestrianisation of streets and squares …” (Tan, 2006: 13). With
respect to the manifestation of fear and fantasy the research objects show more variation. The
Beurstraverse and Loeffplein (including the Arena) turned out to be secured public spaces. On
the other hand, the Schouwburgplein, Statenplein, Van Heekplein, and Markt proved to be
examples of themed public spaces. In the other research objects, the outcome was more balanced.
The Grote Markt showed an almost equal coverage of the upper and lower part of the diagrams,
indicating that it is neither a dominantly secured nor a dominantly themed public space. This
also applies to the Oude Markt.
As a result of the selection procedure outlined in Section 5.2, the function and the actors
involved in the research objects also show differences and similarities. The Oude Markt and
Grote Markt differ in function; the Oude Markt is a vibrant café square while the Grote Markt
is currently used as parking square. However, they have in common that the redevelopment
155