Changing public space

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Groth, J. & E. Corijn (2005), Reclaiming urbanity: Indeterminate spaces, informal actors and urban agenda setting. Urban Studies, 42(3), pp. 503-526. Guy, S. & J. Henneberry (2002), Development and developers: Perspectives on property. Oxford: Blackwell. Hajer, M. (1989), De stad als publiek domein. Amsterdam: Wiardi Beckman Stichting. Hajer, M. (2001), Het twijfelachtige genot van de leegte: Esthetisering en cultuurpolitiek. Agora, 17(2), pp. 14-17. Hajer, M. & A. Reijndorp (2001), In search of new public domain: Analysis and strategy. Rotterdam: NAi – Netherlands Architecture Institute. Hajer, M. & A. Reijndorp (2003), De ondergang van de binnenstad al publiek domein: Salzburg als treurig toekomstbeeld. Stedebouw & Ruimtelijke Ordening, 83(6), pp 20-26. Hall, P. (2002), Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth century. Oxford: Blackwell. Hall, T. & P. Hubbard, eds. (1998), The entrepreneurial city: Geographies of politics, regime and representation. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Hannigan, J. (1998), Fantasy city: Pleasure and profit in the postmodern metropolis. London: Routledge. Harvard, T. (2002), Contemporary property development. London: RIBA. Harvey, D. (1989), From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler, 41(1), pp. 3-17. Harvey, D. (2006), The political economy of public space. In: S. Low & N. Smith, eds., The politics of public space. New York: Routledge. Healey, P. (1998), Building institutional capacity through collaborative approaches to urban planning. Environment and Planning A, 30(9), pp. 1531-1546. Healey, P., S. Davoudi, M. O’Toole, S. Tavsanoglu & D. Usher, eds. (1992), Rebuilding the city: Property-led urban regeneration. London: E & FN Spon. Heckscher, A. & P. Robinson (1977), Open spaces: The life of American cities. New York: Harper & Row. Heinemeyer, W.F., M.H.M. Van Hulten & H.M. De Vries Reilingh (1968), Het centrum van Amsterdam: Een sociografische studie. Amsterdam: Polak en Van Gennep. Hénaff, M. & T.B. Strong, eds. (2001), Public space and democracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Herzog, L.A. (2006), Return to the center: Culture, public space, and city-building in a global era. Austin: University of Texas Press. Hindriks, D.V. (2006), Dordtse dromen: Onderzoek effectiviteit van het economisch beleid. Dordrecht: Rekenkamer. Hoggart, K., L. Lees & A. Davies (2002), Researching human geography. London: Arnold. Hollands, R. & P. Chatterton (2003), Producing nightlife in the new urban entertainment economy: Corporatization, branding and market segmentation. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(2), pp. 361-385. Holliday, J.C., ed. (1973), City centre redevelopment: A study of British city centre planning and case studies of five English city centres. London: Knight. Homburg, G.H.J. & S. Dekkers (2003) Cameratoezicht in de openbare ruimte. The Hague: Data Protection Authority (College Bescherming Persoonsgegevens: CBP). Hubbard, P. (1996) Urban design and city regeneration: Social representations of entrepreneurial landscapes. Urban Studies, 33(8), pp. 1441-1461. Hubbard, P. (2001), Sex zones: Intimacy, citizenship and public space. Sexualities, 4(1), pp. 51-71. Hulsman, B. (1997), Verleid door het vliegtuigperspectief: De vogelblik van stedenbouwkundigen. NRC Handelsblad, 07-03-1997. 222
Ibelings, H. (2004), Geprivatiseerde stedelijke ruimte: Gemeenschappelijke belangen van overheid en ontwikkelaar. Stedebouw & Ruimtelijke Ordening, 85(3), pp. 44-46. IVBN (2006), Ledenlijst Vereniging van Institutionele Beleggers in Vastgoed Nederland (IVBN). Retrieved on 17-01-2006 from www.ivbn.nl/webgen.aspx?WebsiteID=1&PageID=0&FramesetID=1 Iveson, K. (2007), Publics and the city. Malden: Blackwell. Jansen, T. (2006), Kerkpleinen ingericht als speelplaats. De Telegraaf, 16-09-2006. Jary, D. & J. Jary (1991), Collins dictionary of sociology. Glasgow: Harper Collins. Jessop, B. (1994), Post-Fordism and the state. In: A. Amin, ed., Post-Fordism: A reader. Oxford: Blackwell. Jessop, B. & N. Sum (2000), An entrepreneurial city in action: Hong Kong’s emerging strategies in and for (inter) urban competition. Urban Studies, 37(12), pp. 2287-2313. Jongepier, R. (1988), Het openbare stedelijke plein. Delft: Delftse Universitaire Pers. Jongstra, A. (2002), Het paradijs van de consumens. NRC Handelsblad, 11-10-2002. Khandekar, S.V. (1988), De nieuwe pleinen van Nederland: Een analyse van de ontwikkelingen in de na-oorlogse periode gebaseerd op een zestal case studies. Stedebouw & Volkshuisvesting, 69(4), pp. 123-131. Kirby, A. (2008), The production of private space and its implications for urban social relations. Political Geography, 27(1), pp. 74-95. Klaassen, P. (1994), Pleinen ingedeeld naar functie en schaalniveau. Agora, 10(1), pp. 22-23. Klijn, E.H. & G.R. Teisman (2000), Governing public-private partnerships: Analysing and managing the processes and institutional characteristics of public-private partnerships. In: S.P. Osborne, ed., Public-private partnerships: Theory and practice in international perspective. London: Routledge. Kohn, M. (2004), Brave new neighborhoods: The privatization of public space. New York: Routledge. Kohnstamm, P. (1993), Urban renewal and public-private partnership in The Netherlands. In: J. Berry, S. McGreal & B. Deddis, eds., Urban regeneration: Property investment and development. London: E & FN Spon. Konijnenbelt, W. (1999), Van wie is de openbare ruimte? Bestuur-juridische aspecten van beheer en gebruik van openbare ruimten in de stad. In: R. Van der Wouden, ed., De stad op straat: De openbare ruimte in perspectief. The Hague: Social and Cultural Planning Office. Korthals Altes, W., S. Nieuwenhuizen, M. Stevens & N. Harkes (2003), Organisatie van prestatie: Regie in de stedelijke ontwikkeling. Rotterdam: ECORYS-Kolpron. Koskela, H. (2000), ‘The gaze without eyes’: Video-surveillance and the changing nature of urban space. Progress in Human Geography, 24(2), pp. 243-265. Koster, E. (2001), ‘De rol van de dirigent ligt mij het beste’. Blad van Nederlandse Architecten, October 2001, p. 9. Kreukels, T. (1999), Instituties en de stedelijke openbare ruimte. In: R. Van der Wouden, ed., De stad op straat: De openbare ruimte in perspectief. The Hague: Social and Cultural Planning Office of the Netherlands. Krier, R. (1975), Stadtraum in theorie und praxis. Stuttgart: Karl Krämer Verlag. Krikke, B. & M. Wienk (2006), Het plein als ontmoetingsplek. ROM, 24(11), pp. 22-29. LAE Foundation (2006), Fieldwork. Basel: Birkhäuser. Leedy, P.D. (1997), Practical research: Planning and design. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Lefebvre, H. (1990), The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell. Lenzholzer, S. (2005), Northernmost Barcelona? A critique of Mediterranean public design in Northern Europe. Paper presented at the 22nd conference on passive and low energy architecture, Beirut (Lebanon) 13-16 November 2005. Lofland, L.H. (1973), A world of strangers: Order and action in urban public space. New York: Basic Books. Lofland, L.H. (1998), The public realm: Exploring the city’s quintessential social territory. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. 223
Page 1 and 2:
Changing public space The recent re
Page 3 and 4:
Changing public space
Page 5 and 6:
Netherlands Geographical Studies 37
Page 7 and 8:
Contents Figures 9 Tables 11 Voorwo
Page 9 and 10:
7 Fear and fantasy in the cases 147
Page 11 and 12:
Figures 1.1 Outline of the thesis 2
Page 13 and 14:
Tables 2.1 Development of European
Page 15 and 16:
Voorwoord Al reizend ervaart men he
Page 17 and 18:
1 Changing role of public space in
Page 19 and 20:
23 per cent of the geographical pub
Page 21 and 22:
Mentzel (1993: 104):* the place whe
Page 23 and 24:
home country but also evaluate publ
Page 25 and 26:
1. How have the design and manageme
Page 27 and 28:
and agency as complementary forces
Page 29 and 30:
of public space, it could also make
Page 31 and 32:
2 Development and typology of Dutch
Page 33 and 34:
periods, the table illustrates the
Page 35 and 36:
Figure 2.1 The Vismarkt (fish marke
Page 37 and 38:
1985 on behest of the communist lea
Page 39 and 40:
Figure 2.2 Neude in Utrecht in 1989
Page 41 and 42:
(Prak, 2002; Meyer et al., 2006). B
Page 43 and 44:
ecause its situation has altered th
Page 45 and 46:
connection can also be less clear-c
Page 47 and 48:
can also explain why certain square
Page 49 and 50:
3 Current trends in the design and
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 3.1 Sign of CCTV in Barcelon
Page 53 and 54:
easy access (Lofland, 1998). This c
Page 55 and 56:
how entertainment has gone through
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 3.2 The Beestenmarkt in Delf
Page 59 and 60:
Dynamics in production structures
Page 61 and 62:
surveillance cameras, their operato
Page 63 and 64:
at redeveloped derelict sites that
Page 65 and 66:
4 Private-sector involvement in the
Page 67 and 68:
urban policy in the 1980s after an
Page 69 and 70:
(1989) defines as the transformatio
Page 71 and 72:
3. A shift from public sector to pr
Page 73 and 74:
through a blend of architectural de
Page 75 and 76:
4.3.1 Role and objectives of local
Page 77 and 78:
uildings and to emphasise that they
Page 79 and 80:
increase in the number of rules or
Page 81 and 82:
for the dispossessed, which Mitchel
Page 83 and 84:
process (i.e., longer duration, mor
Page 85 and 86:
5 Research design and methodology I
Page 87 and 88:
Figure 5.1 Cultural square: Museump
Page 89 and 90:
(Slager, 2007). There are also hybr
Page 91 and 92:
5.2.2 Inventory of Dutch city squar
Page 93 and 94:
Table 5.3 Research objects in the n
Page 95 and 96:
Appendix C consists of an interview
Page 97 and 98:
concepts have been specified in six
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 5.7 Permanent stage on the G
Page 101 and 102:
6 Urban policy and spatial structur
Page 103 and 104:
document to stimulate the diversifi
Page 105 and 106:
six museums in the area, which were
Page 107 and 108:
emphasises the need for well-connec
Page 109 and 110:
Figure 6.2 Schouwburgplein Central
Page 111 and 112:
Table 6.3 Timeline of developments
Page 113 and 114:
Figure 6.4 Beurstraverse Bijenkorf
Page 115 and 116:
Table 6.4 Policies and changes in p
Page 117 and 118:
The Spuiboulevard was the first pro
Page 119 and 120:
Table 6.5 Timeline of developments
Page 121 and 122:
is unclear when the real redevelopm
Page 123 and 124:
Figure 6.9 Statenplein Scheffersple
Page 125 and 126:
success to a strong project leader,
Page 127 and 128:
6.4.1 Policy and structure in Ensch
Page 129 and 130:
Figure 6.12 Oude Markt 7021 Stadsgr
Page 131 and 132:
the market. However, the market ass
Page 133 and 134:
etail stores. The Van Heekplein thu
Page 135 and 136:
After all actors were involved and
Page 137 and 138:
government realised it needed to pr
Page 139 and 140:
compared to 36 per cent in 2000. Th
Page 141 and 142:
this therefore also includes the Pe
Page 143 and 144:
Figure 6.19 Loeffplein Bloemenkamp
Page 145 and 146:
Loeffplein and the Stoa (Figure 6.1
Page 147 and 148:
problems). In addition, it appointe
Page 149 and 150:
7 Fear and fantasy in the cases 7.1
Page 151 and 152:
cafés. The members of the consorti
Page 153 and 154:
esidential square located outside t
Page 155 and 156:
also perceive it that way; they eva
Page 157 and 158:
comprised of many stores with a ‘
Page 159 and 160:
actors involved in the cases in mor
Page 161 and 162:
confirms the work of several author
Page 163 and 164:
8 Private-sector involvement in the
Page 165 and 166:
8.2.1 Role and objectives of the lo
Page 167 and 168:
Discussions during the focus group
Page 169 and 170:
and investors hardly contribute to
Page 171 and 172:
the architects responsible for the
Page 173 and 174: 2) a decrease in the free access of
Page 175 and 176: There is also a compulsive pressure
Page 177 and 178: they argued that property owners ar
Page 179 and 180: They were all refuted until V&D and
Page 181 and 182: In addition to a longer duration, p
Page 183 and 184: In a similar vein, one informant em
Page 185 and 186: 9 Conclusions, reflections, and imp
Page 187 and 188: were laid out in the 1950s as parts
Page 189 and 190: ‘supply side’. This includes th
Page 191 and 192: Van Heekplein (i.e., Foruminvest, H
Page 193 and 194: edevelopment of the PPP squares was
Page 195 and 196: more restricted due to private-sect
Page 197 and 198: Glossary Chief Government Architect
Page 199 and 200: Appendix A Interviews and focus gro
Page 201 and 202: Table A.5 Case-study interviews on
Page 203 and 204: (1) (2) (3) City a Population b Nam
Page 205 and 206: 2. Object: changes in the design an
Page 207 and 208: Capacities: Role of investor Respon
Page 209 and 210: Table E.2 Main Dutch investors invo
Page 211 and 212: Samenvatting Veranderende openbare
Page 213 and 214: Beurstraverse. Het Van Heekplein in
Page 215 and 216: in hun eigendom, maar ook in de rui
Page 217 and 218: uimte leiden. Tenslotte kunnen de b
Page 219 and 220: References Aarts, M., ed. (1995), E
Page 221 and 222: Burgers, J. (2003), De historische
Page 223: Gemeente Enschede (1999), H.J. van
Page 227 and 228: Mitchell, D. (2001), Postmodern geo
Page 229 and 230: Rishbeth, C. & N. Finney (2006), No
Page 231 and 232: Van de Wiel, J. (1996), De winkelfu
Page 233 and 234: Curriculum vitae Rianne van Melik w
Page 235 and 236: NEDERLANDSE GEOGRAFISCHE STUDIES /
show all

Changing public space

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?