Changing public space

(Needham, 2006). Although the care for public space has not been completely privatised, the
role of the private sector has increased by broadening the sense of proprietorship and ownership.
4.3.2 Role and objectives of the private sector
The property developer is often regarded as the key coordinator and catalyst for development
(Healey et al., 1992; MacLaren, 2003). Developers produce buildings and public spaces as longterm
investment opportunities for private investors. In this section, we focus on three types of
developers: financial organizations (e.g., banks with a development branch), contractor-related
developers, and independent property companies. These three types are the most prevalent in
the redevelopment of public space (Appendix E; Morley, 2002). The development profession in
the Netherlands gradually advanced in the 1960s and 1970s. Until then developers had also been
active, but on a smaller scale. Most projects were designed for single users, and were often custom
built by contractors. When projects became bigger and the need for investment increased, the
contractors started to adopt the role of principal. These first developers were often linked to
financial institutions. Under Dutch law, banks were not limited to their role as lender but could
merge with insurance companies and invest directly in (speculative) undertakings. Gradually,
developers acquired the necessary know-how of project development. In addition to the changing
profile of the users, the quality, aesthetics, and design of projects became just as important as their
functionality. This led to the rise of independent property developers who were not connected
to any particular contractor or financial institution. Today, developers are often held responsible
for the comprehensive development of entire areas. They are also increasingly able to acquire
potential (re)development land at a very early stage (Segeren, 2007). To avoid that developers
will become too influential, a new law (Grondexploitatiewet) has recently been accepted in the
Senate (Eerste Kamer). The law enables the local government to enforce developers to financially
contribute to the construction costs. It will become effective in 2008 (Schreuder, 2007a).
Property developers focus on the production of buildings. Why, then, are they interested
in the redevelopment of public space? Punter (1990) has observed a growing awareness among
developers that it is in their own interest to invest in the quality of the public realm. They are
motivated by the opportunity to appropriate the development value of the sites, which is a
function of the gap between the value of the land in its existing use and its potential value in an
improved use, less the costs of acquiring the land and making the improvement (Carmona et al.,
2003). Doing so, they enhance the value of the scheme and its long-term potential (Loukaitou-
Sideris & Banerjee, 1998; Priemus, 2005: Blank, 2007). The idea is that public space of good
quality facilitates the sale or lease of the developed property, since people rather live, work, or
shop on a good street or nice square than on an unattractive street or square. The developer of
Battery Park City in New York, for example, acknowledges that public spaces are essentially
tools to increase the land’s market value: “I look at it as leveraged money. You’re spending money
to make money …” (Serpico, in Kohn, 2004: 149). Ibelings (2004) adds that developers have
gained insight in the socio-cultural meaning of their work, and that the difference in motivation
and goals between public and private parties had decreased. Lohof and Reijndorp (2006) also
acknowledge that public and private parties seem to have a common goal to improve public space
and attract a desired public to the city centre. There is also a cooperative interest among these
parties, as they are depended on each other to achieve their own goals (Section 4.2.2). According
to Ibelings (2004), developers are also better able to express their ambition to create beautiful
74