Abstract
The relation between street art, the city, and urban planning is complex. Unlike typical infrastructure, street art is temporary in nature, a kind of soft infrastructure, limiting the representation in national and regional policies. There is also negative stereotyping about the perception of street art as forms of resistance, rebellion, and vandalism which create NIMBY syndrome making certain spaces undesirable. However, street art is increasingly being recognised as an important urban design element to beautify cities. It is also an expression of public participation regarding how citizens consume public space. Planning is an important tool to mobilise street art, as it holds the ability to influence how cities define their local narrative. Street art is underpinned by a network of localised planning regulations that are inconsistent from region to region, subjecting street art to planning disputes.
Using qualitative methods, the research aims to identify how the current planning legislative frameworks have impacted the production of street art in Aotearoa-New Zealand’s urban context. Utilising Aotearoa-New Zealand urban centres Christchurch, Dunedin, and Wellington as case studies, illustrates the discrepancies in strategies.
The research found that there are positive and negative aspects that impact the street art production. Perceptions emphasised the need for more consistent directive and leadership across Aotearoa-New Zealand, but still ensures innovation, creativity, and narratives of space are reflected throughout art in urban spaces. It was identified that localised planning approaches stem from the creative city movements where the aspirations of the creative class are aspired to through tailored strategies—removing homogeneity between urban ideals. Recognising the relevance of the creative cities model in localised provisions is fundamental in the production of street art across Aotearoa-New Zealand’s urban realms. Privatisation, ownership, and sense of space are debates that increase the complexity of this research.
Creating a more enabling approach to street art allows both communities to have a say, and street artists to maintain greater self-expression. However, the lack of leadership from national government is reflected in the planning frameworks. Recommendations for improving street arts impact within the urban realm include:
- National government to implement a consistent definition of street art to provide a consistent understanding
- Centralise greater advocacy for street art helping fragmentation
- A policy shift to provide permissive planning regulations
- Provide greater education opportunities surrounding awareness of the role street art has on urban development
Adopting these recommendations may help street art become a more enabling process and positively impact the production of street art in urban areas. Implementing these recommendations involves greater collaboration and the need for a sufficient balancing act between national and local government, key stakeholders involved in the public art discourse, and the local community.