Changing public space

8 Private-sector involvement in the cases
Many cities in Western Europe (…) are managing to maintain relatively open and socially
democratic public spaces, even though commercialisation and privatisation may be encroaching.
Graham & Marvin (2001: 233)
8.1 Introduction
Public spaces redeveloped jointly by the local government and the private sector without any
exception show high ratings on the dimension ‘funshopping’. Retail can thus be regarded as an
important precondition for the private sector to become involved in the redevelopment of public
space. This was one of the research findings revealed by the six-dimensional diagrams discussed
in the previous chapter. But is this a correct conclusion? In the present chapter we continue to
investigate the relation between the characteristics of public space and the actor composition.
When looking at the research objects, what are the effects of private-sector involvement in the
redevelopment of urban public space in the Netherlands? Does it lead to an increase in the available
redevelopment budget? Does it affect the free access of public spaces; will these become more
restricted or remain open and democratic spaces like Graham and Marvin (2001) contend above?
To answer the third research question on the basis of empirics, this chapter solely focuses on the
PPP research objects: the Beurstraverse in Rotterdam, the Statenplein in Dordrecht, the Van
Heekplein in Enschede, and the Loeffplein in ’s-Hertogenbosch. The other four publicly realised
projects are only referred to when illustrative for the redevelopment of the four PPP squares.
Because the research objects were selected on the basis of criteria (Section 5.2.2), they reveal
a number of similarities. The PPP squares have all been redeveloped during the last decade
with support of the private sector. All four are located within the historic city centre. Yet each
project lacks a dominant historic character and is relatively large, either because it resulted from
WWII-bombings (Beurstraverse, Van Heekplein) or of (large-scale) demolition activities in the
1960s (Statenplein, Loeffplein). Neither was the main central public space of the city. As such,
the areas could be thoroughly redeveloped without much resistance from the local population
and historic preservation organisations. In all four projects, the redevelopment of public space
was linked to the construction of new buildings, which mostly combined retail on the ground
floor and housing on the upper floors. The public spaces were reduced in size and redeveloped
simultaneously with the construction of the new building. The PPP squares therefore suggest
that the private sector is interested in redevelopment when it involves public space that has
limited historicity and offers the possibility of comprehensive physical restructuring.
Like the preceding two chapters, this chapter is largely based on the semi-structured
interviews with the actors involved in the redevelopment of the cases. However, because it
specifically deals with these key players (Section 8.2) and their opinion about the possible
effects of the private-sector involvement (Section 8.3), the interviews are now used in a more
161