Negotiating public space
Careful citymaking by research through design for everyday democracy in Rotterdam
N. Krabbenborg (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
Irene Luque Martin – Mentor (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
C.E.L. Newton – Mentor (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
This thesis investigates how careful citymaking, as both a spatial and a processual practice, can support everyday democracy in Rotterdam. At a time of growing democratic erosion and declining trust, public space reflects and reproduces the conditions of today’s democracy. As the space where everyday interactions and encounters take place, public space serves as the platform for everyday democracy. How it is designed and how it comes into being therefore matters.
Using the theoretical lenses of plural democracy and everyday life, the research addresses four key questions; (1) it identifies the main challenges to plural democracy and the role of public space within this context, (2) examines where and how democratic citizenship finds expression in the daily routines of Rotterdam’s citizens, (3) explores alternative democratic futures and their spatial conditions taking Oostplein as its base and (4) defines the meaning of careful citymaking through a spatial design proposal for Oostplein. The methodology combines literature research, fieldwork, participatory methods, spatial imaginaries and iterative design to explore how a spatial designer can act responsibly when shaping the environment of others. These are brought together in both a processual and a spatial response, with everyday democracy as the guiding lens.
The research finds that active citizenship is subordinated to daily routine, constrained by time, obligations and perceived safety. Rotterdam’s public space prioritises movement over encounter, limiting its democratic potential. Yet spatial design can interrupt this and invite people to participate in everyday democratic life, when carefully executed. By mapping conflicting desires and making design decisions open to discussion in an ongoing negotiation, careful citymaking connects spatial design directly to democratic thinking. Here careful citymaking does not emerge as a fixed method, but as a design posture, one that treats public space as a shared responsibility.