ConWa: Contested Waterfront Transformation
This project investigates the outcomes of prevailing policy ideals of social inclusion in spatial development as they face variations of increasingly financialized urban growth machines.
The aims and goals for redeveloping land are tied to moral values. What is considered important, and what not? It can even be argued that the phenomenon of redevelopment itself is tied to a value system, or belief system, of constant growth. This constant growth is, of course, connected to the theory of the urban growth machine, as well as the financialization of land. Regardless, an often-overlooked consequence of development is the reshaping, or in some extreme cases even elimination, of the existing culture of the area in question. In that sense, the rebranding and redevelopment of land becomes a matter of heritage management.
As the objectives of economic growth remain at the heart of urban planning processes, it becomes relevant to examine the way in which existing built fabric is evaluated and handled. What types of buildings or infrastructures are considered preservable? The most typical categorization of built heritage is to view a certain building or a certain area as a “representation of national heritage”. That, then, begs the question of whose narrative the idea of “national heritage” represents. How much of this argument is based in the one-dimensional value system of land capitalization, and how much reflects heritage that the local communities relate to?
The problem that built heritage faces today is being caught in the in-between of rapid growth and stagnant conservation. It seems that a building either faces demolition and brand-new development, or static preservation that makes it unable to change or transform. In other words, the focus either lays on what an area could become, or what an area once has been, but not on what it currently is.
Areas need to grow and change as humanity keeps growing and changing. However, a top-down approach might lead to the segregation or elimination of existing cultures or sub-cultures. A grassroot approach to redeveloping an area might be the gateway to not only identify overlooked heritage, but also create a more flexible and natural transition as the area grows. Social and political participation throughout planning processes could make it possible for local communities to do value identification in their own areas. Furthermore, ensuring proper access to services, housing, and public spaces plants a seed for any contemporary culture to flourish. Rather than removing certain cultures, urban planning processes should be sensitive and self-aware when approaching an area with the purpose of land redevelopment in mind.
28.10.2024
Viola Schulman
Project Employee
This project investigates the outcomes of prevailing policy ideals of social inclusion in spatial development as they face variations of increasingly financialized urban growth machines.