194 MAGDALENA ZM UDZTNSKA-NOWAK

REFERENCES

Baudrillard, J. (2005). Synudakry i sytrndacja. Warszawa: SjelBorowik, I. (2004). Blokowiska — habitat miejski w ogladzie socjologicznym. In: A. Majer (Ed.),

Wokol socjologii przestrzeni (pp. 153—166). Lodz: (iL.Canter, 0. (1977). Fsychology ofplace. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.Casey, E. 5. (1998). The fate af place, ei phllosophical hi.siory. Berkeley, CA: University of

California Press.Castells, M. (2003). European cities, the informational society, and the global economy. In: R.

T. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The city reader (pp. 475—485), London: Routledge.Chwalibég, K. (2009). Polska polityka architektoniczna. In: R. Janikowski & K. Krzysztofek

(Eds.), Kultura a zréwnowaiony rozwdj — irodowisko, leid przesn’zenny, dziedzicrwo (pp.127—147). Warszawa: Polski Komitet do spraw UNESCO.

Giddens, A. (2002). Ivowoczesnoié i zotsamoié, ja’i spoleczeiist,vo i.’ epoce pdtnej nowoczesnoéci.Warszawa: PWN.

Hague, C., & Jenkins, P. (Eds.). (2005). Place identily, participation and planning. London:Routledge.

Michalski, K. (Ed.) (l995). Toz’samoié w czasach zmiany rozrnowy .i’ Casve! Gandolfo.Krakôw: Wydawnietwo Zaak.

Mumford, L. (1961). The city in 11w history. New York, NY: Harvest Books.Norberg-Schulz, C. (1971). Existence, space aud archirecrure. London: Studio Vista.Norberg-Schulz, G. (1979). Genius be!: To,i’a,’ds a phenonienobogy of architecture. New York,

NY: Rizzoli.Relph, E. (1976). Place ane! placelessness. London: Pion Limited.Rykwert, 3. (2002). The seduction ofplace. London: Vintage Books.Sandercock, L (2004). Praeticing utopia: Sustaining cities. In: R. Paloscia (Ed.), The conlesied

meiropolls: Six cities ar i/re beginning of I/re 2ist cenrury (pp. 15—23). Basel: BirhauserPublishers for Architeeture.

Somer, K. (2007). Thefunenona! city. CIAM aud i/re legacy of Van Lesteren. Rotterdam: NAiPublishers.

Tuan, Y. F. (1977). Space andpbace, iheperspeenve ofexperience. Minneapolis, MN: Universityof Minnesota Press.

Venturi, R., Scott Brown, 0., & lzenour, 5. (1977). Learningfrorn Las Vegas. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.

Wallis, A. (1977). Miasto i przestrzeti. Warszawa: PWN.WalIis, A. (1979). Informaeja igwar. Warszawa: PIW.Wnuk-Lipinski, E. (2004). Sw!at rniedzyepoki. Krakéw: Znak, ISP PAN.Zmudzinska-Nowak, M. (1998). Leid i chaos jr przesrrzeni miasta. Research grant n. PBU-67

Rar-4/96, Unpublished.Zmudzinska-Nowak, M. (2006). Between global and local: Polish city space during a time of

transition. Journal of Urban Technobogy, 13(l), 33—53.Zmudzinska-Nowak, M. (2010). Miejsce: rotsamaié i zrniana. Wydawnictwo Politechniki

Slaskiej.

CHAPTER 9

A HERITAGE CLAIM TO PUBLICSPACE: EXAMPLES FROM A MIXEDNEJGHBOURHOOD IN DRAMMEN,NORWAY

Grete Swensen, Sveinung Krokann Berg andJohanne Sognnæs

ABSTRACT

The multi-ethnic neighbourhood of Strømso in Drammen in Norway isfacing a major rransformalion. The town hus undergone major renewa/processes during ilie last decade and has been presenred as a successfulexample of urban development both narionally and internationally. In thechaprer, we bok cboser at what spaces and qualities are underlined ossignjficant in this neighbourhood by ihe exa’nined appropriators ofpublicspace, and how their views rebate ro the qualiiies stated in pbanningdocuments for the area. Public spaces and meeting points can play a vitalrole in safeguarding diversity and urban cultural heritage associated withthese spaces. Fublic space represents physically defined struclures(streets, squares, parks), bul even more i;nportantly a social spaceoffering possibilities of encoun ter and activiry otherwise not displayed indre city. These qualities inighi be perceived as heritage values and

Everydny Life in the Segmented CityResearch in Urban Sociology, Volume 11, 195—221Copyright © 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing LimitedAll rights of reproduction in any form reservedISSN: I047-0042/doi:10.1 l08/Sl047-0042(2011)000001 1012

195

196 GRETE SWENSEN ET ÅL. A Heritage Claim to Publie Space

sign(ficant constituenty inherent in public space. This niakes public spacethe keeper of values that are seen as basic urban qua!i/les.

Keywords: Cultural heritage; public space; urban renewal;multicultural neighbourhoods; opportunity space; heritage byappropriation

000INTRODUCTION

Identification of heritage value is often used to capture the identity andhistorical qualities immanent iii a site. In urban areas of homogeneouscharacter or with clearly defined and designated heritage value, thisidentification is less disputable than how to capture the historical qualities Iof fragmented and heterogeneous areas. When il comes to ‘ordinary’ mixedurban areas which consist of a blend of buiklings and physical structuresfrom different periods, the chances are more likely that colliding views existamong planners, developers and inhabitants of what strategies wilI benefitthe area.

In this chapter, focus is directed towards the relationship betweenheritage and publie spaces and how publie spaces can be regarded as akeeper of qualities in an ongoing renewat process in the neighbourhoodStrømsø, Drammen. It is a neighbourhood close to the commercial centreand the riverbank, both intluential factors in making it an attractivedevelopment area. The area can at the moment be described as a compoundarea when it comes to ethnicity, functions and physical appearance. Thetown of Drammen has undergone major renewal processes during the lastdecade and has been presented as a successful example of urbandevelopment and honoured with several prizes both nationally andinternationally. In an established neighbourhood like Strømsø where awide spectrum of buildings and urban spaces from different periodscontribute to give this neighbourhood a patchwork-structure, the challengesthe municipal planners and architects face are large when they strive tosucceed their visions of establishing well-functioning integration betweenthe new and the old areas (Fig. I).

In the chapter, we ask what spaces and qualities are underlined assignificant (‘appreciable’) in this neighbourhood by the examined appropriators of public space, and how do their views relate to the qualitiesidentified or stated in planning documents for the area?

198 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. A Her/lage CIaim to Public Space 199

Local tradesmen and fifth-grade schoolchildren are deliverers ofempiricalmaterial in the survey through interviews and photo documentation alongwith observations of the use of publie space to identify which qualities areappreciated by people living and working in the area. By observing the useof public space, the user groups inhabiting and dominating the variousspaces are identified.

Urban Renewal, Heritage and Opportunity Space

Identification of the heritage value is generally used to capture the identityand historical qualities immanent in a site as potential guidelines for furtherdevelopment. If it concerns urban~reas with already clearly defined heritagevalues, it might open up a testing out at a larger scale of the restorationprineiples developed through, for instance, World Heritage Sites assignments. When it comes to more ‘ordinary’ mixed urban areas, however,which consist of a blend of buildings and physical structures from differentperiods, the chances are more likely that colliding views exist amongplanners, developers and inhabitants of what strategies wiIl benefit the area.

Heritage is often understood as buildings and other kinds ofconstructions.We are, however, focusing on the space bet ween those material objects and theway this space is appropriated and taken into use. Could the open space — andthe use of it — be denominated as ‘heritage’? Could it be valued as somethingworth taking care oP What are the funetions of these spaces: how have theybeen used traditionally, how are they used today? Who are the primary users?Is there a territorial ‘battle’ with winners and losers or do the new forms ofusebring different groups together, thereby opening up for new kinds ofcommunication? Are there qualities inherent in public space that play a vitalrole in defining which spaces are appropriated and valued?

Cultural heritage often gains its status by use of evaluation and assessmentmethods developed by national or international cultural heritage management and are safeguarded through corresponding jurisdiction. Anotherapproach is to view heritage produetion as a process, where regular use ofone’s everyday surroundings leads to appreciation of special features. Thesetwo processes have been described as heritage by designation and heritage byappropriation (Tweed & Sutherland, 2007) to elaborate what qualifies ascultural heritage and to explain why it is so. Another way of conceiving thecontingent nature of value is as a spectrum withfundaniental values at oneend and incidental values or benefits at the other (Pendlebury, 2009, p. 203).This recognizes the socially constructed nature of heritage values and that

heritage is instrumental and valued for something. The relationship betweenpublic value and heritage is used within this specirum to distinguish betweenwhat are established values, which thereby underpin the system of protectionand what are socially constructed values (Pendlebury, 2009, p. 202).

Valuing a place includes identifying the essence or sense of piace, and inparticular for sites that have not been formally identified as having heritagevalue character has been used as a means of identification (Pendlebury,2009, p. 219). Characterization is used to consider the (historic) character ofa place rather than focusing exclusively on particular places because of theirperceived special quatities (Department of Culture, Media and Sports &Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions, 2001). It isan attempt to bring together as many aspects of a place as possible, in orderto appreciate and understand it better and to understand the experience ofbeing in it (English Heritage, 2005). The first generation of preservationplans in Norway which was made according to the Planning and BuildingAct of 1965, focused strongly on character (Nyseth & Sognnaes, 2009,p. 37). These plans were formulated in a way that permitted to buildextensions to the houses, if the character of the preserved agglomeration wastaken care of. The character of an area was approached as something morethan the single objects.

Later, we will return to the complex character of Strømsø’s culturalenvironment and its heritage assets as defining an opporrunisy space ratherthan a historic place, a binary distinction described by Pendlebury,Townshend, and Gilroy (2004). They underline that when historic environment is interpreted as an opportunity space, it may bring a physical quality toregeneration that is otherwise not easily reproducible. Rather than puttingemphasis on intrinsic historic nature, regeneration may occur and relate to itshistoric setting without restraining new additions (Pendlebury, 2009, p. 200;Pendlebury et at., 2004, p. 12).

The inclusive aspect immanent in the opportunity space might also coverthe appreciation of the situatedness of reading and operating within sites,and particularly in fragmented cultural environments like Strømsø. To stressthe qualities of what is already there, As Found as a design approach hasdeveloped within architecture, urbanism and heritage studies to give what isfound on the site and its uses and interpretations of a determining role forpreservation of urban landscapes. It seeks to perceive urban landscapes asdynamic lifeworlds rather than enclosed objects and to identify opportunities rather than absolutes. The As Found principle might be described as‘picking up, turning over, and putting-with’ (Smithson & Smithson, 1990,p. 201) or as an even more inclusive approach through what Chemetoff

200 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. A Heritage C!aim to Public Space 201

describes as adoption, which ‘serve[sJ the purpose of revisiting the pastyears’ production not to bring it in line with contemporary taste, bul tofind a place for each thing in today’s city’ (Chemetoff, 2009, p. 14).

The fact that something was already there is asserted to be a positivething. As Found stresses the property of the thing, not the thing itseif andnot the activity that produced it. As Found is the tendency to engage withwhat is there, to recognize the existing, to follow its traces with interest(Lichtenstein & Schregenberger, 2001). As Found is a perceptiverecognition of reality, a new seeing of the ordinary, an openness to howprosaic things could re-energize our inventive activity (Smithson &Smithson, 1.990).

Public Space and Urban Social Lqe

Most outdoor areas in Norwegian towns are publiely accessible, eventhough most of these areas are seldom mentioned or thought of in terms ofpublic space as such. They include streets, parking lots, sites which aretemporarily vacant and in-between areas of various characters. Today mosttown planners naturally relate to issues to ensure well-functioning publicspaces in their strategic thinking, and this concerns more aspects than justform and aesthetics. Different but complementary approaches to publicspace have been used in different disciplines, and discussions on this topichave been supplemented with various socio-cultural, political and architectural perspectives (Garcia-Ramon, Ortiz, & Prats, 2004).

Public spaces in the city are social spaces of encounter and communication. Public spaces also fill people’s economic, social, spiritual and physicalneeds. They are action spaces, spaces of orientation, places of identificationand important habitats. The combination of their physical, social andtemporal dimensions forms both the physical and the spiritual framework ofpeople’s lifeworlds. Public spaces have many roles without which a citycannot function or be liveable. By providing people with an important livingspace beyond their private homes, public spaces are essential guarantors ofurban life. The quality of public spaces is a gauge of the quality of life andwithout doubt will play a significant role in deciding the future viability ofcities (Engel, 2006).

When focus has been directed to factors which are considered positivedimensions of such places, it is underlined that they can strengthen a senseof community. Both by offering possibilities for breaks from daily routinesand by providing opportunities for making bridges between people, they can

have a direci infiuence on well-being by raising people’s spirits and therebyinfluencing the general feeling of health and welfare (Cattell, Dines, Gesler,& Curtis, 2008). ‘Often quite mundane places attain symbolic significancefor people through social relations that take place there’ (Cattell et al., 2008,p. 556). Such places can have cultural values that add to the moretraditionally aceepted values of historic places that are used by heritagemanagers: ‘Living in a place for a long period of time, working in a place,narrating stories and telling myths about a place, and engaging in anyactivity can generate a particular relationship between a person, a group anda particular location’ (Low, Taplin, & Scheld, 2005, p. 15).

Plann ing to Ensure Multi-Functiona! and Multicu/tural Dimensions

Aspects of relevance to areas with a considerable amount of cultures presentare the possibilities such areas offer as ‘glimpses into otber worlds’. Thisaspect is mentioned particularly by Hajer and Reijndorp (2001) when theydiscuss the new challenges that planning for public domains in the postindustrial society raises. People tend to live in separated spheres, wherepublic spaces are one of the comnion grounds where people with differentbackgrounds and worldviews can meet. By the mere fact that differentcultural groups have different traditions for using public space, it providesoptions for making diversity visible and opens up for cultural exchange andinteraction. It can add to the particular flavour of a place and represents adimensjon of vitality, adventure and culture much appreciated and searchedfor in contemporary urban development.

Public space indicates an area open to everyone. Juridically this is mostlytrue, although some areas with a public character, such as commercialcentres, are owned by private interests. Public spaces are mostly owned bythe community, ruled by civic legislation and political decisions andmaintained by public funds. However, this is no guarantee that cveryonewill feel welcome there; some may not even be at ease. In spite of thedesignated and intended use, the space might be appropriated by specialgroups, thereby keeping others out. The activities can sometimes beinteresting for passers-by to watch and thus make the area as a whole moreattractive to walk through. At other times, the use — or the users — can be ofa kind that has a disturbing effeet on the passer-by. First it will be observedas something unfamiliar going on. Next it will be interpreted: is it ok? Orcould it somehow be threatening? This might be met with indifference. But itcould also cause negative reactions such as intruding and reprimanding,

202 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL A Fferitage C/aim to Public Space 203

positive ones such as greeting and smiling, or in some cases reactions likewithdrawing or avoiding passing or entering the area.

There will always be a fine balance, however, between appreciating theunknown and fearing the unfamiliar. In a study of urban parks in the USA,Low et al. (2005) show how a new tendency has arisen in the Americanmetropolis to reduce general access, which can be seen as a process affectingboth the ‘vitality and vibrancy of such places’. It is interpreted as a new kindof threat to public space, one not of disuse but of patterns of design andmanagement that exclude some people and reduce social and culturaldiversity. In some cases, this exclusion is the result of deliberate programmesto reduce the number of undesirable people. In others, it is a by-product ofprivatization, commercialization, historic preservation and specific strategies of design and planning (Low et al., 2005).

Town planning processes of today are grappling with issues ofcommunityparticipation and engagement, while criteria for defining heritage valuerather reflect cultural values that are regarded as having special historical orarchitectural interest designated by the heritage management. By includingchildren, local tradesmen and observed users of public space to identifycarriers of vahie for their own use and appropriation of space, this chapteraddresses the potential exclusion immanent in the designation process andby that prepares for a more user-oriented practice which is both moreinclusive and more in terms of the identity, economic potential andpluralism/diversity urged in contemporary town planning.

METHODS

The methods used in the study include observations and photo documentation of types of public spaces along with qualitative interviews, supplemented by critical reading of planning documents.

Observations and Photo Documentation

Observations were made by walking around in the area at daytime,sometimes two of US together, sometimes one alone. The observations arealso accompanied by photo documentation supporting the material. Thephotos were seen as means to Jiterally bring forward a picture of the physicaland material surroundings that define and constitute the different open

.~ spaces. They were important to be able to describe, characterize andcategorize the different spaces present in the research area.~iBoth physical and perceived borders have been sought to analyse varioustpologies of publicspace. The design of the surrounding structures doesnot only constitute the streets and squares physically but also provides themwith certain qualities experienced as ‘sense of place’. The borders can befirmly or vaguely defined, and thus give the space a distinct or blurredcharaeter.

We also wanted to study the degree to which the surrounding ‘walls’ canbe interpreted as means to stimulate or prevent contact and communication.Dothey enable or block visual contact? When they create a distance, how

~ big is it? What can be ~een and heard at this distance, and what cannot? Can• the walls be penetrated or are they absolute, more like fortifications? Do

they signal that those on one side have to be protected from those on the• other side? It was also considered important to see how people used the

different spaces, and as a by-product, even how they reacted to our• presence.

fnterviews

Based on a mapping of the areas present trades and ownership and onStrømsø’s historical business structure, an enquiry was introduced by

• telephone to a selected number of local tradesmen/proprietors located closeto the public square Bølgeplassen.

Eight of the persons contaeted accepted to participate in the enquiry andwere asked to describe their neighbourhood and define which qualities arefundamental and important for their localization and their perception ofStrømsø. The interviewees represent different trades, various periods of time

~ being located at Strømsø and places of origin. The interviews took placedUring working hours and were carried out as semi-structured conversations, based on an interview guide, emphasizing their own descriptions anduses of terminology. Methodically, they were asked to define nodes,landmarks/points of orientation, local identity and the basis for beinglocalized in the area. This draws on both visual methods as presented byKevin Lynch (Lynch, 1960) and an effort to identify qualities ‘on site’ aspresented in the As Found approach (Chemetoff, 2009; Lichtenstein &Schregenberger, 2001; Smithson & Smithson, 1990).

Contacting people by telephone might have an effect on the participationin the enquiry ending up with a selection of interviewees comfortable withr.

4-.

204 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. A Heritage C!airn to Pub/le Space 205

the theme. Persons not willing to or interested in being interviewed eitherreferred to other people expected being more qualified to answer or didn’tfind time to participate. Representativeness might not be pleaded by theinterviews completed, but same common denominators indicate certainqualities of relevance for the capture of the fragmented sense of placecharacterizing the area.

Document Study

The documents studied in the project involve programme, strategy and juryreports from the city and housing exhibition located in Strømsø in theperiod 2009—20 18.’ In addition to this, a preliminary strategy note for theheritage work (Insam, 2007) and the municipal sector plan for Drammencentral area (Drammen kommune, 2006) constitute prevailing guidelines forfurther development in Strømsø regarding cultural heritage.2’3

The municipal sector plan is politically approved, while the otherdocuments must be regarded as professional initiatives contributing to thefurther process of regenerating Strømsø.

In addition, various local literatures have provided important historicdata on the use of the built environment, supplemented by maps, photos andobservations.

The Schoolchildren Project: Photo and Storytelling

Students from a primary school in the neighbourhood were invited toparticipate in the projeet. They were asked to produce a series of picturesusing mobile phones or cameras illustrating places they greatly appreciate intheir neighbourhood. The final task included writing a story describing theplace they selected as their most appreciated place. Thirty-eight pupilsparticipated, of which twenty were giris. Approximately half of the pupilswere second-generation immigrants.

When choosing the school and age group to involve in the project, thefollowing factors were emphasized: we wanted to reach children in an agegroup in which there was a chance they would still have maintained some oftheir childish curiosity concerning the areas where they live. We thereforechose the only primary school in the area (Brandengen skole), which issituated on the border between the two neighbourhoods Strømsø andTangen. A short information sheet was distributed to the headmaster, who

facilitated contaet with an interested teacher in charge of the fifth-gradeciass, and three visits were made to the school while the project was beingcarried out.

The method has some marked limitations. When children have beeninvolved in visual research projects, it has often been from one of twoangles: either as a theme for the study itself or as active participants byproviding results by use of visual media (Thompson, 2008). This projectbelongs to the last category. In such a project, children have an opportunityto be heard via their ‘visual voices’ (Burke, 2008), which has a potential toexpand perspectives to include groups and aspects which may have beenexcluded ar marginalized (Thompson, 2008). A rather similar project hasbeen performed and described by Burke (2008), who stresses that this formof project requires engagement by the researehers over a longer period oftime. This has not been possible in our case, and the project therefore hassome limitations which have been accounted for.

When interpreting the results, it is, for instance, not possible to tellwhether the teacher or other grown-ups, for instance, parents, have had amajor infiuence on either the selection of themes for photographing ar theorganizing of the story. Many children aged 12 13 years have mastered theuse of the Internet very welI, and when asked about what they considercultural heritage, this might also have influenced their views.

RESULTS

As Found: A Parch,,’ork Struciure

Strømsø is a neighbourhood undergoing urban renewal. In this area,wooden houses from the nineteenth century stand next to concrete flats fromthe 1960s and brick buildings from the late twentieth century, and formerupper class listed wooden buildings from the seventeenth century are locatedin close proximity to typical dwellings of people of more humble means. It isone of the neighbourhoods in Drammen where we still find important partsof the old wooden settlements from the seventeenth and eighteenth century,and this is mainly due to the fact that the devastating fire which hit a largepart of the town in 1866 did not reach this part of town. Part of thisneighbourhood, the lower part of Tollbugata, consists of a row of listedbuildings which are ciassified as belonging to the national heritage. A majorpart of these impressive buildings was owned by rich merchants dealing withthe export of timber. There are other areas in the neighbouring streets with

206 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. Å Heritage Claim to Publie Space 207

a more mixed population basis. Many of them originated from thenineteenth and twentieth century, and the area has from the start beendominated by a blend of houses and outbuildings with workshops. There isstil a certain degree of mixed use in the area. There is a rather highproportion of immigrant inhabitants, and several of the shop owners wereoriginally from Turkey and Pakistan, which contributes to giving the area aspecial character. During the last 45 years, there has been a tendency tobuild blocks of flats with shops and offices in the most central part of theneighbourhood, which is the upper part close to the town’s railway stationas well as the main bridge connecting the two major commercial centres ofDrammen. From an overall point of view, Strømsø is today best describedas a neighbourhood consisting of a set of different fragments, and it isdesignated by the urban plannbrs as an area with further prospects fordevelopment.

The various zones with a wide spectrum of buildings and urban spacesfrom different periods contribute to giving this neighbourhood a patchworkstructure, which can present large challenges to planners and architects withvisions of well-functioning integration between the new and the old areas.

Through our survey of how fifth-grade pupils and tradesmen/estatebrokers define their neighbourhood and an observation study of how publicspaces and squares are appropriated by various groups of users, we havetried to identify which qualities inherent in Strømsø today may be ofsignificance for the maintenance of local and situated character and by thatcultivate and strengthen the local identity.

The Mai,, Themes Accentuared in the Plans for Strømso

The present aims, strategies and tools for developing Strømsø have beensharpened lately through the ongoing city and housing exhibition for theperiod 2009—20 18. Streets, outdoor areas, squares and places to meet havebeen one of several focal themes in the city and housing exhibition, and 8out of 24 sites indicated for development are public estates and possiblesquares/green areas.’ Heritage aspeets are mainly connected to buildings,but areas where several listed buildings define a larger unity or a streetstructure are considered as cultural environments including both buildingsand the structures in-between.

From the heritage management, seven areas of Strømsø are designated aspreservation areas in addition to the city axis connecting Strømsø andBragernes across the river. Streets and squares are considered important to

safeguard, maintain and obtain coherence and activity in the apparentlyfragmented Strømsø district. Tollbugata is the main street running throughthe whole area and is a significant structural element connecting thedesignated heritage areas and a central nerve/public space definingmovement and interaction within Strømsø. Intercultural activity has beenconsidered a main feature of Strømsø throughout history, and constitutes adynamic and vivid production of footprints regarded as valuable andsignificant for the interpretation of Strømsø today. Again Tollbugata turnsout to be the focal point exemplifying how various ethnic groupsappropriate and influence the public space by establishing a wide spectrumof businesses. Vitalizing Tollbugata to reflect its time span from theseventeenth century until the multicultural present is regarded as an

4~ important strategic move in the further development of Strømsø. Heritageaspects are presented as one of several premises for the initiateddevelopment of Strømsø, but the basic premise for the ongoing exhibition/competition, named Future Built, is to promote climate-effectivearchitecture and city development. The role of heritage in this guidingprinciple is not necessarily evident.

In the appointed panel’s general comments on the submitted proposals,the importance of distinguishing between some streets generating majormeeting places and defining new uses of streets with a weaker publicôharacter is stressed. This is anticipated to strengthen the complex characterôfthe area without losing its diversity/pluralism. Regarding city spaces, theproposals favouring small-scale spaces generating buildings ciose to the

~ stjuares are preferred to obtain intimate demarcated spaces in a densepo~itive interdependency with the business and trade at street level. Nospecific architecture is given priority, but as a principle the jury has

~‘ approved the idea that the new structures facing the river, which is also animportant public space, should be designed by different architects to createvariety. In respect of heritage, the city structure and Strømsø as a unity isregarded as a cultural environment in addition to single objects. The history6f the street structure, the significance of backyards, the location ofwharfside sheds and so on are considered and have contributed to theperception of Strømsø’s history as highly fragmented and not automaticallyinstructive for a further strategy for densification.

In addition to the aims emphasized in the exhibition, the prevailingmunicipal plan for Drammen and the municipal sector plan for its centralarea give the premises for further development.2 A sector plan for street usein Strømsø is approved where the street structure is. partly aimed atsafeguarding and strengthening the historic public spaces, areas and

-1

208 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. A Heritage Claim to Publie Space 209

building struetures. In a preliminary strategy for how to follow up thecultural heritage in Drammen’s central area, Strømsø’s main street,Tollbugata, is given priority as a structural element embracing fourcenturies of city development including material struetures representingvarious epochs within this period.3 The strategic approach is meant toinciude both nimbus (common apprehension of monuments and nationaltreasures) and dissonance (diverging opinions of historical representation)both to cover the shared memory and to represent the various epochs asextensively as possible.

ObservationsOur observations have been set out to throw light on opportunity spaceimmanent in the material structures at Strømsø. By the concept opportunityspace, we here think of surroundings enabling and promoting encounter andcommunication between persons and groups of people, qualities that arecrucial to make the spaces come alive as true urban spaces. We have focusedmainly on two questions:

• Are there some features connected to the material heritage that facilitateinformal contact? Incidental meetings and informal contact can be a firststep to a more extended contact;

• How do we experience the different public spaces at Strømsø? Are theytrue public spaces with equal rights for everyone to attend, or do theyseem to be dominated or even ‘occupied’ by certain groups? The questionis reflected in the fact that when dilTerent people and cultures areassembled in small areas, feelings of ownership to certain spots and placesmight anse.

At a first glance, some groups are identified by their presence ordominance or by leaving footprints characterizing certain areas:

• the populace/the public;• car owners;• small-scale traders of immigrant origin and their customers;• skaters inhabiting the park under the highway;• boat owners populating the quay;• visitors at the graveyard;• graffiti artists and other sub-cultures.

Some selected spaces are further examined regarding their physicalexpression and their users. The recently constructed footpath along theriverbank seems to attract and be accessible to ‘everybody’. Immigrantwomen in long dresses, young mothers or fathers pushing prams, or singlemen with a dog, seem to be comfortable and relaxed when walking along theriver, alone as well as in small groups (Fig. 2).

In another newly created park, traditional park elements in old style(benches, lawns, fiowers and a fountain) are surrounded by buildings androads which don’t seem to adequately define the area as a park. In addition,this vaguely defined space seems localized in an area with a blurredcharacter. It neither belongs to the city centre on the upper side nor to theharbour area on the lower side, but is something in between. Whencompared to the newly established river park, the most striking difference isthat the river park is very vivid and well looked after, whereas this small ‘oldstyle’ park area is less used and more littered.

The skatepark is certainly dominated by skaters, but paradoxically this isnot as exclusive as one might think. Passers-by are included as observers andpeople in different ages — children as well as grown-ups — are hangingaround on the ramps when they are not used for skating (Fig. 4).

Tollbugata is the main street of Strømsø and stands out as the mainbusiness district of the greater city for immigrants from outside Europe.Although open for thoroughfare, it has the impression of being a pedestrianarea and a marketplace: clothes for sale are exposed outside of the shops,small groups of people are hanging around in front of mobile phonecompanies, Internet cafés and travel agencies and small children are sittingon the doorsteps or peeping out from display windows. When we did ourphoto documentation, the reaction from people in thc street varied betweenrejections to friendly accommodating attitudes.

JnterviewsThe public square called Bølgeplassen, named after the sculpture located inthe square, is defined by the meeting point of Strømsø’s main street,Tollbugata, the perpendicular Langes gate and the end of Schultz gate,resulting in five corner buildings defining the closure of the square (Fig. 3).This city space has been defined by the meeting streets since the layout ofStrømsø in the seventeenth century and today makes up a kind of crosssection of Strømsø’s character in terms of both buildings and activity. Thefive corner buildings house a Turkish gift store, a Turkish café, a furnitureshop, a hairdresser, a mason’s for tombstones, an undertaker’s office, aparking lot and a church. The five blocks surrounding the square consist of

Use of Publie Spaces in Stromso

GRETE SWENSEN ET AL Å Heri/age C!aim ro Publie Space 211

four seventeenth-century buildings, fine from the nineteenth century, twofrom the first half of the twentieth century, six buildings frem the period1950—1980 and eight buildings erected after 1980 (Fig. 3).

Qualities connected to this cultural environment and the surroundingparts of the city are identified and analysed by interviewing business peopleand property developers located in the vicinity of the square. Among thequalities emphasized by the persons interviewed are as follows:

• accessibility;• low thresholds;• low prices;• a preference for the urban rugged/grey areas;• long history in the area.

According to what is inherent in the opportunity space and partly the AsFound approach, these qualities underline the importance of a city spacethat is perceived as not restricted, not too organized and not too adjusted toaccommodate a predefined and narrow purpose. The appreciation of

E Strømsø’s fragmented character is expressed through a description ofStrømsø as ‘having a more attractive urban situation’ than Bragernes, whichis the present commercial centre, and also having a more homogeneousbuilding structure raised after a city fire in 1866. Strømsø’s content,

a however, differs in the informants’ view from having ‘everything’ todescription of an area where nothing exists; the former statement was madeby a retired third-generation local tradesman, the latter by a settlingrestaurateur.

In deseribing important landmarks/points of orientation, the post office,the railway station and the museum are pointed out by several of theinformants. The museum and the railway station may be connectedto monumental buildings as parts of the sites, but pointed out togetherwith the post office the use and the public character might be of significance.

For development of the area, more housing and inhabitants are expressedby all informants as a benefit based on the opinion that during the lastdecades the area has lost a lot of inhabitants, leaving the streets empty andthereby leading to a loss of public life.

Schoolchildren ‘s Visual Voices

& Schoolchildren were selected as one relevant group to obtain insight intowhat they considered as Strømsø’s major assets to enable us to learn moreabout whether there were special places in the neighbourhood peopleseemed to particularly like (or dislike) and to try to better understand what

GRETE SWENSEN ET AL, A Heritage Claim to Publie Space 213

causes these situations. To make their ‘visual voices’ (Burke, 2008) heard,the children were asked to take photos from their favourite places and writean accompanying story. The intention in this part of the project was to try toget an impression of the aspects which are important in a child’s relationshipto everyday places: number ofplaygrounds, football pitches, easily availablekiosks, ‘exciting’ places etc.

There are in total 38 presentations produced by the pupils participating inthe project. The school is situated in a mutticultural neighbourhood, and thepupils involved in the project had parents who were of Vietnamese, Turkish,Philippine, Polish, Afghan and various African as well as Norwegiandescent. The presentations have been divided into four types depicting 1.institutions, 2. assigned cultural heritage places, 3. publie and recreationalspaces and 4. diverse spaces. The first group, institutions, comprisespresentations of the library (2), their own school, Brandengen (5) and asecondary school, which was ciosed down recently (3). The cultural heritageplaces entail photos and stories about a rock carving (1 presentation), thelocal church (2 presentation), and Austad mansion, a designated heritageasset owned by the museum (1 presentation). The third group — public andrecreational spaces is by far the largest. Here we find presentationsportraying the popular riverbank (4 presentations), the pedestrian bridge (3presentations), the outdoor swimming p001 and stadium (2 presentations),the large sports arena (2 presentations), the skatepark (4 presentations) and

a local outdoor recreational area, Tegger’n (4 presentations). The moreindividual presentations are placed in the fourth group: a modern

o monument, a private beach, a football team, a shopping centre and a shop

and gallery. The stories that accompany the pictures have varied degrees ofpersonal character; while some undoubtedly are made up from informationfrom the Internet, several have the character of personal stories, evensometimes supplemented by personal poems.

A closer bok at the material presented by the pupils gives insight into whatplaces in their neighbourhood they appreciate. When the public bath and thefootball arena are picked as favourite places — primarily by boys — it is owed tothe fun these places give and the good memory they attach to them (P27, P12,P5).4 The library was chosen because it is a calm and peaceful place (P19, P7),but one of the girls also added that the place had other qualities as well; ‘Read,dress up, homework, borrowing books’ (P19). The local outdoor recreationabarea, Tegger’n, was by one pupil described this way; ‘In the summer it is greenand warm, in the winter cold and fun! We ski and toboggan down the hill. Andwe have a fabubous time! A bit gloomy at night when you pass by’ (P21). Thedescriptions two of the girls give of two designated cultural heritage sites give

GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. A Heritage C!aim to Publie Space 215

room for some reflection. The first presentation is of a church, and here thegiri, with her partly Philippine background, succeeds in pointing out the factthat there are many different culturat understandings of what churchattending means, when her poem concludes in the statement that ‘the churchprovides no tea’ (P6). In the other presentation, the pupil has produced abeautiful picture of the Austad mansion bathed in snow in a dark winternight, which has a personal poem about friendship attached (P16), whichappeals to the reader’s emotions.

Despite the fact that these presentations cover a wide spectrum of places,ei they have a rather dominant feature in common: namely that the great

majority of them are public meeting places of various types. This is also thecase for the three cultural heritage assets they have chosen: they representpublicly accessible places that the schoolchildren visit with parents, friendsor schoolmates. They underline the important role that public spaces play inehildren’s everyday lives. The popularity of the riverbank and the skateparkcan also be interpreted as a confirmation that the planners’ attempt toestablish areas which are easily accessible and well appreciated by childrenand youths have succeeded.

0

DISCUSSION

We wilI now return to the main research questions we have raised in thechapter: what spaces and their qualities are underlined as significant(‘appreciable’) in this neighbourhood by the observed and examinedappropriators of public space’? And secondarily: do we find that thesequalities coincide or collide with qualities which are stated in planningdocuments for the area?

A quality characterizing the use of this neighbourhood is aceessibility.Accessibility may be defined in broad terms of social, economic or physicalcontent. When accessibility is emphasized by the local tradesmen, it seemsmost likely that the opportunity for potential customers to reach theirlocation is in focus. Whether walking, public transport or driving ispreferred depends to a certain degree on the type of activity, but fewrestrietions and easy access by car seem to prevail. Whether restrietions ofcar access would alter the business strueture is uncertain, but one of theinformants chose to locate here because of the easy car access and another isalready on the move partly because of restrietions, while another remainsregardiess of this based on the business’ long-lasting belonging in the area.The belief that development wiJl tend to go on where access is easy, as

216 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. Å Heritage Cio/ni w Publie Space 217

expressed by Peter Smithson (Smithson & Smithson, 2005) is not necessarilycorrect; it rather indicates that this is an important quality to certain trades:

Inclusion is an aspect of accessibility. Despite the fact that theschoolchildren involved in the photo project represent at least sevendifferent nationalities, there are few signs that their cultural backgroundsplayed a decisive role in their selection of places to portray. When we bokmore closely at their choices, it is evident that easily accessible public spaceswithin walking distance from home mean a lot to young people in an urbanneighbourhood. Such places are free for everybody to attend and can:bevisited with schoolmates and other friends and thereby instigate socialinteraction across different age groups and cultural backgronnds. At .thesame time, they represent a type of meetingplace in an urban context which ~is clearly set out and considered secure from parents’ point of view. Newlyprepared places like the skatepark, the riverbank and the library are muchappreciated, along with a more rugged area like the one withcharacter:ofbeing a nature recreational• area, considered ideal as a sledging bil in thewinter and playground in the summer by children. The risk that design andmanagement might exclude some people and reduce social and culturåldiversity to which Low et al. (2005) called attention has not yet presented.aproblem.

Accessibility, however, might include a territorial battle defined b9 use. Adominant group observed as the user of public space is the car owners, whodo so through the use of assigned parking lots and temporary parking atabandoned building sites, filled up streets and post-war buildings where thefirst floors are arranged as garages. This can lead to a situation whereStrømsø is considered more as an area to supply the city than providingvaluable public spaces as such.

Low thresholds and bow prices might touch the same appreciation by localtradesmen of few restrictions, but also indicate an opportunity space forestablishing businesses which are less commercial or differ from what can beperceived as the conformable city. In Strømsø, as. in plenty of other wornareas, this has turned out to give birth to new trades otherwise not capableof existing and often localization of various cultural ethnicities. Takingphotos in one of the shopping streets dominated by immigrants was deciarednon-grata by some of the traders/inhabitant~, which consequently made theobserver appear to be a stranger or someone who did not fl in. A territorialbattle might also here be present indicating a vulnerability inherent in cityspaces principally with low thresholds.

Finding pleasure in the urban areas of a more rugged character can becomprehended as a mere preference for the worn, mature and distinguished

that is often present in these areas. Perceiving these areas as somethingunfinished or as raw material, they might also be a parallel to what TimEdensor finds in former industrial sites as possible assets for inclusion of thecontingent, ineffable, unrepresentable, uncoded, sensual, heterogeneouspossibilitiesoften sought after in contemporary cities (Edensor, 2005, p. 19).

These observations require further analysis, but raise considerationsconcerning which activities are present and which ones are desired/undesiredin the public space. Jdentifying these various types of appropriations alsoposes a claim for strategies to facilitate these activities and how to safeguarddesired qualities through planning.

‘Thequalities pointed ont might not have any obvious connection to what• can be claimed to be heritage or given legal protection. However, identifying

~these qualities might indicate aspects of what constitutes a site’s character or• ~nse of place requested both in defining cultural environments and in• planning for urban diversity. The appropriation of these areas by groups not

hécessarily planned for introduces qualities otherwise not detected whichein both safeguard variety and by that generate a broader and moreinclusive approach to what is regarded as heritage.

q-~.Strømsø is an area where urban renewal is approaching. Is there anyresonance of the approaches and qualities identified in this chapter with the

-: intentions outlined in the plans for the area, and what are the means andpractical implernentations following this?L’.The municipal plans for the area, as webl as the guidelines for the city andhousing exhibition, show us that attention has been paid to the robe thatstreets, outdoor areas, squares, and places, that is the role of publie space,plays in an urban setting. Creating small-scale spaces is given precedence,partly due to the importance placed on business and trade at street bevel.

•~: This can also be viewed as catching an important part of the bocal character

ånd therefore in accordance with some of the As Found principleshighlighting what is already there.~• Two of the main public spaces in focus for regeneration, which are absodeclared heritage areas in the strategic plan (2007), are Strømsø Torg, as

~ part of the city axis, and Tollbugata. Strømsø Torg is the main square in

~ Strømsø; it acts as a route connecting Strømsø and Bragernes and alsomakes the starting point for Tollbugata. From being an open urban areawith a mix of short-term private parking bots and bus stops, the square ishow being upgraded to create a new teeming meeting place in this part oftown as a supplement to the main square on the Bragernes side of the river.The role of the square is not clearly defined by our user groups in respect ofpreferred use, but varies from creating displeasure about car restrictions to

218 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL. Å Heritage Claim to Public Space 219

being valued as an important and accessible connection space forinfrastructure and movement both within the city and out of the city dueto the railway station located at the square and the hus station just off thesquare.

Tollbugata is Strømsø’s main street heading south-east from the squareparallel to the river. With its long history, safeguarding this street isconsidered important for rnaintaining coherence and activity in theneighbourhood. li is, however, seen as a problem that sections of thisstreet today are left partly empty. The upper and lower parts of the streetappear disconnected due to a wide motor road which renders accessibilitydifficult. In the strategic plan from 2007 special attention is paid to thisstreet and to various sections which need upgrading. The approach we canrecognize in this document is an underlying wish and intention to integratenew elements as infihl and thereby to maintain and strengthen the oldstructural elements in the townscape. The attention to how various elementsalong the street are supposed to communicate is also emphasized in themunicipal plan through the focus on vitalizing the street with respect to thewhole time span rather than giving priority to only a few selected elements.This indicates an attitude towards what Tollbugata as opportunity spacecan offer and how to find a place for each thing in today’s city as stressed byChemetoff (2009) and maintain the combination of nimbus and dissonanceindicated in the strategy for the use of cultural heritage.

The fragment of Tollbugata which consists of an unbroken line of listedbuildings from the seventeenth and eighteenth century has to relate to clearrestrictions concerning conservation of such buildings specified in theNorwegian Cultural Heritage Act. They belong to the group ‘designatedheritage’ (Tweed & Sutherland, 2007), where the planners are obliged toconsider special measures to make sure these areas to be included andsafeguarded when new plans are being developed for the area. Renewalefforts in a mixed area like Strømsø can have unforeseen consequences,because considerable parts of the townscape consist of ‘old buildings’, that isfragments of buildings from seventeenth century up until the 1960s. Parts ofthese elements and structures possess a character which contributes to givingthe neighbourhood a ‘sense of place’ which has to be acknowledged andrecognized fully if the qualities of the area are to be ensured and preferablystrengthened through development plans. This approach ineludes giving thequalities of what is a!ready Mere a determining role for preservation anddevelopment of the urban landscape.

A problem which too often anses in planning processes in Norwegianmedium-sized towns is that the planners tend to soften their grip of the

strategic planning processes the minute the plans leave ‘the drawing board’.At this stage, much of the discussions and negotiations involve developers,and their agenda is not always in accordance with what is considereddesirable by local NGOs and cultural heritage managers (Swensen, Larsen,Molaug, & Sognnaes, 2009). The importance of recognizing a city space asan opportunity to bridge the past and the future lies in perceiving city spaceas something not too restricted, not too organized and not too adjusted. Inthis discussion, the concept ‘opportunity space’ has been seen to representan approach that opens up for processes that both adopt physical diversityand make social inclusion possible.

The opportunity space discussed as an approach to identify these valuesis, however, a vulnerable position, easily wiped out when grasped byplanners carried away in the attempt to create diversity or a distinctcharacter, whether it is about a total renewal or a restoration project. Placestend to become uniform and personal initiatives and individual expressionsby the inhabitants risk being weeded out. It seems easier to argue for, andrealize, a zone with a distinct character than a zone where multitude andchange is the norm. This leads to the paradoxical conclusion thatopportunity space probably has to be protected by some kind of restricilonsto survive.

CONCLUSION

The study has revealed the multiple affiliations people who are living,working and using the neighbourhood have to the area. While from someoutsider’s point of view it can appear like a rugged area in need of beingtidied up, some people consider this an aspect which gives it a particularurban quality and charm. It reprcsents variety, both by offering space forsmall shops, workshops and affordable housing and providing easy access tocentral public institutions and recreational areas. The fact that the mainstreets in the area, like Tollbugata, are filled with activities of different types,of which small food stores with owners of Turkish or Pakistani descent andcafés and pubs play an important part, add to make this area special. Itprovides places of encounter and is a neighbourhood which opens up forglimpses into different worlds and makes diversity visible.

The appropriation of public space is chosen as an example of howqualities pointed out or taken into use by a variety of users might be agateway to how a broader and more inolusive approach to cultural heritagecan be gained. Public space represents physically defined structures (streets,

220 GRETE SWENSEN ET AL .4 Her/lage Claim to Public Space221

squares, parks), but even more importantly a social space offeringpossibilities of encounter and activity otherwise not displayed in the city.Valued as properties to safeguard and take care of, these qualities might beperceived as heritage values and significant constituents inherent in publicspace. This makes public space the keeper of values that are seen as basicurban qualities and also sought in any urban renewal projeet at stake and bythat legitimize the heritage claim indicated for these spaces.

NOTES

1. A city to live in (En by å leve i, Idékonkurranse om utvikling av Strømsøsentrum i Dranmien, September 2009). Aims, strategies and lools for Strømsødistrict (Mål strategier og virkemidler for Strømsø bydel, januar 2009). City — andhousing exhibition Oslo — Drammen 2009—20 18 (By — og boligutstilling OsloDrammen 2009—2018, prosjektbeskrivelse, November 2008). Future Built (Programbeskrivelse, November 2009). Jury report ‘A city to live in’ (April 2010). Lookto Strømsø (Ist prize winner ofcompetition), Norconsult/Alliance Architects.

2. Municipal sector plan for Drammen central area (2006) (Sentrumsplanen,Drammen kommune 2006)

3. On further work for preservation of cultural heritage in central Drammen(Oppfølging av kulturminnearbeidet i Drammen sentrum, Insam 2007).

4. The numbers refer to a list where nationality, gender and presentation themesare stated.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This chapter presents results from the research project City centredevelopment with cultural heritage as a resource in a multicultural audfragmented environment. The project is part of a five-year programmefinanced by the Norwegian Research Council titled Processes of change inurban environmenrs: cultural heritage, urban development aud regionalism.We are most grateful to the participating actors in Strømsø giving essentialmaterial and input to our study.

REFERENCES

Burke, C. (2008). Play in focus. Children’s visual voice in participative research. In:P. Thompson (Ed.), Do(ng v/stjal researc/i in//i children and young people (pp. 23—36),London: Routledge.

Cattell, V., Dines, N., Gesler, W., & Curtis, 8. (2008). Mingling, observing, and lingering:Everyday publie spaces and their implication for weIl-being and social relations. Healrh& Place, 14, 544—561.

Chemetoft, A. (2009). Vis/is: Town aud ren/tor)’ A,’ch/lecrure in dia!ogue. Basel: BirkhåuserVerlag AG.

Dept. of Culture, Media and Sports and Dept. of Transport, Local Goveniment andIhe Regions (2001). TItt historic environmene: Å force for om future. Retrieved fromhttp://www.tourisminsights.info/ONL1NEPUB/DCMs/DCMS’/o2OPDFS)HISTORIC%2OENV%2OFORCE%20-%201.pdf

Drammen kommune. (2006). Municipol seelor plan for Dra,mnen central area (Sentrurnsplanen,Drammen kommune 2006).

Edensor, T. (2005). Indusirial ru/ris: Spaces. aesghegics aud mareriality. Oxford: Berg.Engel, B. (2006), Public space in the blue eities in Russia. Progress in Planning, 66, 147—239.English Heritage (2005). Characre,’isarian, conservarion bulletin 47. Retrieved from http:

www.engIish-heritage.org.ukfpublications/conservation~buI letin-47Garcia-Ramon, M., Ortiz, Å., & Prats, M. (2004), Urban planning, gender and the use ofpublic

space in a peripheral neighbourhood of Barcelona. Cities, 21(3), 215—223.Hajer, M., & Reijndorp, A. (2001). In search cl’ new public damatn. Analysis aud siralegy.

Rotterdam: NM Publishers.Insam. (2007). Oppfolging av kulrur,ninnea,’beidet i Drammen sentrum. IJnpublished report,

Drammen.Lichtenstein, C., & Schregenberger. T. (2001). Asfound: The discoverp of lite ordinary. Baden:

Lars MOller Publishers.Low, 8., Taplin, D., & Seheld, 5. (2005). Rerhinking inban parks. Pubiic space aud cidtural

dti’ersily. Austin, TX: The University of Texas Press.Lynch, K. (1960). The image of I/le city. Cambridge: MIT Press.Nyselh, T., & Sognnaes, .1, (2009). Godt fungeren de bevaringsoinråder, NIKU rapport 34. Oslo:

NIKU.Pendlebury, .1. (2009). Conservanon in I/le age of consensus. London: Routledge.Pendlebury, .1., Townshend, T., & Gilroy, R. (2004). The conservation of English cultural built

heritage: A force for social inclusion. International Journal of Heritage Sludies, 100),Il 31.

Smithson, A., & Smithson, P. (1990). The as found” and the “found”. In: D. Robbins (Ed.),Titt inclependent group: Postwar Britain aud i/le aestherics of plenty (pp. 201—205).Cambridge: MIT Press.

Smithson, A., & Smithson, P. (2005). The charged void: Urbanism. New York, NY: MonacelliPress.

Swensen, G., Larsen, K., Molaug, P., & Sognnaes, J. (2009). Kull urarv og stedsiderniret. Byerskuhurmi/jo i krvsss/lden “tel/om bevaring og utvikling. NIKU Tema 31. Oslo: NIKU.

Thompson, P. (2003). Doing visual research with children andyoungpeople. London: Routledge.Tweed, C., & Sutherland, M. (2007). Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development.

Landscape aud Urban Planning, 83, 62—69.