The influence of political structures and local community engagement on placemaking in train stations A case study of Glostrup Multifunctional Station Sustainable Cities Thesis Aalborg University of Copenhagen Mohammad Ghannam Study No. 2094407 Date: October 2th, 2019 Abstract Traditionally the development of a train station focuses on transportation manners for commuters. The challenge in modern train stations is the quality of the public space, which adds value to citizens through sustainable measures. It is crucial to strengthen participation for better development of train stations. There is a lack of involvement, and throughout the thesis, it is demonstrated that the argument is two- folded. The first one is local, about local development, inclusion, and achieving locally sustainable objectives. The other is about the system level. In order to handle the urbanization, new ways of governing are fundamental to achieve an optimal train station that comprehends all aspects of the transportation system. In a paradigm of transport where time-travel is at the center, there is not enough focus on the quality of the trip as a whole for people. The quality of the space is affected by the existing infrastructure that puts some limitations on the recreation of the place. Other challenging aspects of urban spaces, at the stations, are better transport modes, energy-efficiency, pollution reduction and policy framework. The focus on train stations is relevant for the development of sustainable cities since it offers quality of life, efficient connectivity, optimal and innovative use of public spaces and reduction of human footprint. The purpose of this thesis is to explore the influence of the political structure and the local community concerning strengthening placemaking in train stations. The paper seeks to examine the complexities of stakeholders’ involvement to govern the process to achieve the concept of placemaking. The theoretical framework focuses on the governance approach used in the Glostrup project, which shows that there is a need for a proactive strategy that strengthens the public space on stations. Through interviews with key stakeholders related to Glostrup station’s development, their fluctuating involvement in the process illustrates the upcoming barriers of engaging the local community to contribute to the municipality's plans and strategy. In conclusion, the political framework put forward by the City Council is pivotal for the development of the train station to manage sustainable objectives and strengthen the quality of the public space. Further studies are needed to investigate the impact of including key actors’ interests through co-finance and public-private partnerships. I Acknowledgement I am thankful for all the support I received in the last semester. I want to express the greatest appreciation to my supervisor, associate professor, Andres Felipe Valderrama Pineda from Aalborg University in Copenhagen for his solid constructive suggestions. Furthermore, I would like to offer a special thanks to the urban planner Rasmus Hansen from Glostrup Municipality and City Council member Piet Papegeorge for giving comprehensive inside knowledge. Additionally, express gratitude to Jimi Okstoft, Emma Liisberg and Søren Ipsen for accepting to be interviewed in order for giving me knowledge on the subject. Lastly, I would like to thank all the people that participated in the survey. II Table of Content Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................... I Acknowledgement .................................................................................................................................... II List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................... V List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... VI 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Problem analyses............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Research question ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Case study ....................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3.1 Description of the station and surroundings (Original thesis) ................................................. 9 1.4 29 principles (Original thesis) ....................................................................................................... 12 1.5 Delimitation .................................................................................................................................. 12 2.0 Theory ............................................................................................................................................... 14 2.1 Litterateur review .......................................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Theoretical framework .................................................................................................................. 14 2.3 Concept of placemaking................................................................................................................ 15 2.4 Governance ................................................................................................................................... 18 2.4.1 Urban governance .................................................................................................................. 18 2.4.2 The concept of Good Governance ......................................................................................... 19 2.4.3 From governance to New Public Governance ....................................................................... 20 2.4.4 Governance and placemaking ................................................................................................ 21 2.5 Co-creation and Public Participation ............................................................................................ 22 2.5.1 Public participation ................................................................................................................ 24 2.6 Combination of Theoretical approaches excerpt .......................................................................... 28 3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 30 3.1 Research design............................................................................................................................. 30 3.2 Qualitative research ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.3 Stakeholder analysis ...................................................................................................................... 32 3.3.1 Stakeholders analysis of Glostrup Station ................................................................................. 33 3.4 Qualitative interviews ................................................................................................................... 35 3.5 Survey ........................................................................................................................................... 36 3.6 Document analysis ........................................................................................................................ 37 4 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 40 III 4.1 Stakeholder analysis ...................................................................................................................... 40 4.2 Governance and Decision-making process ................................................................................... 47 4.2.1 The process ................................................................................................................................ 49 4.2.2 The governance structure - Place-sensitive project ............................................................... 56 4.3 Type of co-creation ....................................................................................................................... 59 4.4 Guidelines for the vision from Gehl Architects ............................................................................ 59 4.4.1 Public hearing period ............................................................................................................. 60 4.5 Gate 21 project .............................................................................................................................. 61 4.6 The influence on placemaking ...................................................................................................... 63 4.6.1 Sense of community ............................................................................................................... 64 4.6.2 Sense of place........................................................................................................................