This P4 report investigates how participatory practices can address conflicting stakeholder interests during the removal of curbside parking, a key challenge in the transition towards low-car cities. While literature often highlights the benefits of parking removal for traffic flow, safety and urban livability, such interventions frequently generate resistance rooted in competing values and lived experiences. Through case studies in Leiden, Rotterdam and Amsterdam as well as six qualitative interviews with both organizers and participants, this research identifies recurring value conflicts: spatial, temporal, economic and equity-related and explores how participation can be used to manage them.
The findings demonstrate that, while participation does not resolve conflict, it can facilitate constructive negotiation when certain conditions are met. These include trust, clear communication, meaningful feedback and a well-defined scope. The study provides an empirical framework of nine enabling conditions for participatory conflict management, reinterpreting participation not as a tool for consensus, but as a platform for navigating value tensions. This supports a shift towards more inclusive and reflexive planning practices, especially relevant under the legal requirements of the new Dutch Environment and Planning Act.

Key Message: Participation can support urban transitions not by eliminating disagreement, but by creating the conditions for fair and open negotiation of conflicting interests.

Keywords: Participatory planning, stakeholder conflict, curb parking removal, low-car city, urban governance, value regimes, Arnstein’s ladder, conflict management, public space, participation conditions, urban sustainability, trust, legitimacy