0. Abstract Urban Regeneration is a major planning endeavor in Denmark, with over 500 million Danish kroner invested annually. Issues in Gellerupparken and Toveshøj in the western part of Aarhus is tried dealt with in a large urban regeneration effort. As a cornerstone in the change-making is a municipal office project in the making by Aarhus Municipality, which seeks to involve residents in the area by providing a publically accessible ground floor. With the use of a range of theories concerning the role of citizens and democracy within urban planning, as well as sociology of technology, this thesis seeks to answer to which degree the municipal building can facilitate a meeting between residents in the area, municipal employees and visitors. Interviews with the municipality uncovered that local residents where not invited in the design of the building. Furthermore, the building is designed to have an Aarhus Identity, not a local identity, and the project can be interpreted as contributing to a gentrification of Gellerupparken and Toveshøj, which is suspected by groups of local residents. The building provides office spaces for 1000 employees and is likely to draw visitors. However it is theorized that it is built with the aim of attracting new businesses and gaining legitimization with the overall citizens in Aarhus, and not the locals, where the locals are the least taken into concern in the design of the building. This is a possible hindrance for the residents to use the building, and therefore for the meeting to take place. However, the municipal office building is designed with a degree of flexibility, and a discursive configuration is able to take place, where negative developments can be atoned for to some degree, and the building can gain local ownership and attract local residents. 1 Indhold 0. Abstract ............................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Problem Field ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Urban Regeneration in Denmark................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Urban Regeneration in Gellerupparken and Toveshøj .................................................................. 6 2.3 The state of the area ..................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 The objectives of the masterplan and the disposition plan ........................................................ 10 2.5 Current changes in the area. ....................................................................................................... 14 2.6 The municipal office building ...................................................................................................... 16 2.7 Summary...................................................................................................................................... 16 3. Problem Formulation ........................................................................................................................ 17 3.1 Justification and contribution of the research question ............................................................. 17 3.2 Structure of the thesis ................................................................................................................. 18 4. Theories and Concepts ...................................................................................................................... 19 4.1 Critical Theory.............................................................................................................................. 19 4.1.1 System-world and lifeworld ................................................................................................. 19 4.1.2 Citizens’ Communicative power in urban planning .............................................................. 20 4.1.3 The rationality of the planner .............................................................................................. 22 4.1.4 Democracy and sustainability .............................................................................................. 24 4.2 Sociology of technology .............................................................................................................. 25 4.2.1 What buildings do................................................................................................................. 26 4.3 Application of theories ................................................................................................................ 28 5. Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 29 5.1 Research strategy and type of investigation ............................................................................... 29 5.1.1 Explanatory and predictive investigation ............................................................................. 29 5.1.2 Case study ............................................................................................................................. 31 5.2 Qualitative approach ................................................................................................................... 31 5.2.1 Interpretation and quality assessment ................................................................................ 32 5.3 Overview of data ......................................................................................................................... 33 5.3.1 Semi-structured and unstructured interviews ..................................................................... 33 5.3.2 Focus group interview .......................................................................................................... 33 5.3.3 Overview of interviews ......................................................................................................... 34 5.3.4 Challenges in data collection ................................................................................................ 36 2 5.3.5 Documents ........................................................................................................................... 37 5.4 Observation and participation..................................................................................................... 37 5.4.1 Participation ......................................................................................................................... 37 5.3.4 Movements within the area ................................................................................................. 37 5.4.5 Location ................................................................................................................................ 38 6. Process and design ............................................................................................................................ 39 6.1 The process of design .................................................................................................................. 39 6.2 The design of Meet Aarhus ......................................................................................................... 42 6.3 The role of the residents in the urban regeneration ................................................................... 45 7. Analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 48 7. 1 The building as an actor.............................................................................................................. 48 7.1.1 Heterogeneous design .......................................................................................................... 48 7.1.2 Black-boxing. ........................................................................................................................ 50 7.1.3 Interpretative flexibility ........................................................................................................ 52 7.1.4 Summary............................................................................................................................... 53 7.2 The change-making agency ......................................................................................................... 54 7.2.1 Strategic or utopian approach to social sustainability ......................................................... 54 7.2.2 Rationality of the municipality and the planner ................................................................... 56 8. Discussion .......................................................................................................................................... 63 8.1 Public domain? ............................................................................................................................ 63 8.2 Utopia or dystopia ....................................................................................................................... 65 8.3 Discursive reconfiguration ........................................................................................................... 67 8.4 The meeting between different citizens ....................................................................................