Is temporary the new permanent

Abstract

This report aims to contribute to what extent temporary use adds value to the urban environment and to prove the long-term benefits of temporary use. It aims to eliminate the gap of knowledge for property owners. Mere, it can also be valuable for other private parties or municipalities as it provides insight in the added value of temporary use in urban areas and offers a start for the use of temporary initiatives in urban planning, ultimately aiming to improve and upgrade areas within the city. Property owners could be stimulated to focus on this new option in the building life cycle instead of leaving a building structural vacant as these owners can benefit from higher property prices. The research and its outcome; the recommendations, can be used by property owners that are coping with (structural) vacant properties. The outcome of the research can facilitate the choice for temporary use as an “interim” option for their portfolio or real estate as it incorporates the creation of property value in the future. Other private parties may also be interested as many parties experience vacancy and search for a beneficial solution. Structural vacancy can be problematic for the urban area. Different scales of problems are associated; socially, this vacancy enhances problems of insecurity and social uncertainty, which again encourages vandalism, break-ins and illegal occupancy and will eventually downgrade the area. Economic problems have direct effect on the owner of a building; a vacant building does not generate income and will only provide for costs (Remoy & Voordt, 2007, p. 1). Indirect effect of the structural vacancy is the deterioration and decay of the urban area that influences the image and attractiveness of the area for residents and businesses. Due to the economic crisis of 2008, public and private parties lack of economic resources while temporary initiatives offer a quick manner and low investment, which unlocks the potential of the site short-term, instead of in the next 10 years and therefore counteracts the disadvantages of structural vacancy (Bishop & Williams, 2012). However, it is unclear to what extent temporary use adds value to the urban environment. Property owners are unaware of the long-term benefits of temporary use. This lack of knowledge creates additional uncertainty and leads to less willingness to choose the option of temporary use. Thus, property owners need insight and confirmation of these benefits to be able to assess the added value in relation with the costs and revenues. The aim of the research is to find the answer to the following main research question: “ How can temporary adaptive re-use of vacant spaces have added value for the urban area and contribute to the property value?” “ How can a strategy be developed that optimises this added value?”