Social Usage

One may describe the city in its social aspect as a special framework directed toward the creation of differentiated opportunities for a common life and a significant collective drama (L. Mumford, 1938).

Good public space attempts to cater for interaction between people and to add a sense of community. It can serve as a series of nodes where the collective drama of city life can unfold. The urban park and square are examples of public spaces that have been containers for this urban expression of life. Cities present a different set of characteristics when compared to rural life. Anonymity and greater freedom from intimate groups often cause a state of anomie. Public space can facilitate inclusion and social interaction on different scales. This interaction can manifest itself through spontaneous conversations struck up by chance meetings of those we already know, with strangers we randomly encounter, through special community and identity building events (e.g. art exhibitions, musical events) or simply by sitting down on a park bench and watching other people as they act within the space.

How

public

space

is

physically formed has a profound effect upon the nature of its use. Social and anti-social behaviour often emerges directly from design factors. Public space at its best serves to provide places of community that are safe, comfortable and enjoyable. Public space is important for the liveability of a city, as an asset for illustrating an historical character and a canvas to portray a citys unique identity. Frequently public space fails to give a city the benefits originally intended in it's design stage. Public spaces are a reflection of social values and culture. They are an expression of the relations between social, economic and physical realities, and signify the broader culture or society in which they exist. They can gain meaning through the various activities and functions which they perform. When public spaces are absent in a society, people become more cut off from each other and social contact becomes more problematic. Anonymity and anomie that are associated with an urban lifestyle are less easily overcome when good public space is absent.

Urban

public

space

developments have been expensive undertakings and have come under some criticism. Questions like: what useful purpose do they serve? often emerge. Frequently the open nature of public space is seen as wasteful within a crowded urban environment. The pressure to dedicate more space to the

automobile, to commercial purposes and to private residential areas is a major threat to public space and conflict can arise. The modernist style of planning that was inspired by Le Corbusier saw no logic in leaving an open space in a city centre as a meeting point for people rather than cars. The damage this style of planning causes lies in the destruction of social networks that add to peoples quality of life and enjoyment of the city.

These architects and designers who placed the personal automobile at the top of their planning agendas, have come under criticism for creating spaces that are similar to a great visible ego rather than spaces that are designed to enhance peoples urban experience. Pedestrian streets were turned over to car use while squares became junctions and intersections. The impact of this kind of planning can be seen in many American cities like Detroit and Los Angeles. The lifeblood of many cities, social activity, drained away as a result. William H Whyte wrote of this problem in smaller cities stating that they have torn down old buildings and not replaced them. parking lots and garages become the dominant land use, often accounting for more than fifty percent of downtown. This seemingly shortterm view of public space by planners may be representative of wider discourses on modernity. As Marshall Berman pointed out The painter or novelist or philosopher of modern life is one who concentrates his vision and energy on its fashions, its morals, its emotions, on the passing moment and all the suggestions of eternity that it contains.

The destruction or absence of social networks invariably leads to a general absence of people which in turn can leave the city streets, squares and parks open to anti-social behaviour, increased social segregation, crime and vandalism. The physical destruction that occurs can ruin the historical fabric of a city and remedying this destruction is often not possible or becomes prohibitively costly.

That is not to say that the destruction of quality urban space was intended, but it was one significant result of negating public space and prioritising the car. Traffic dominated space detracts from pedestrian interaction as the automobile becomes the focus of attention rather than other people. Traffic also detracts from the overall aesthetic quality. One important point that must be made is that automobiles are often conveniently identified as the culprits responsible for the ills of cities and the failings or problems found within urban planning. The car is not the only cause of the degradation of public space but it is a notable causal factor. The bubble like environment of the personal automobile has attracted many people into avoiding the public sphere. Almost everything within a car can be altered to suit its occupant. This can range from the type of music to temperature and seat height. The occupant is shielded from the surrounding city and the public by a metallic and plastic case. D.Drummond writes that the automobile has replaced the ancestral home of the 19th century as the conspicuous status seeking object. It enables the new elite not only to display its wealth but also to travel between the non-threatening spaces within which it exists. The following time-lapse video of a German public square is a good illustration of how the automobile has been given a central role of importance spatially while pedestrians flows are moved to the periphery:

Benefits of Public Space

Well-designed, managed and maintained public space can be one of a citys most valuable assets, and can provide long-term benefits. It can reduce crime levels, bestow a sense of place, increase social interaction, aid a sense of community, encourage tourism, boost surrounding business, and become centres for recreation for a wide range of age groups. To develop these spaces for the private sphere in search of capital gain only is to ignore the nuanced nature of public space. Noted Geographer Steven Flusty pointed out that traditional public spaces are increasingly supplanted by privately produced, although often publicly subsidized, privately owned and administered spaces for public aggregation. A citys public spaces need not be devoid of business or enterprise however. The availability of food added to the quality of a public space. This could open doors for many small local businesses. Environmental benefits emerge from public spaces such as pedestrianised streets and urban parks. These benefits include: less air pollution due to a lower level of motorised vehicles, better air quality due to the presence of trees and plants, lower noise pollution than a car filled street, and a more aesthetically pleasing environment. Natural Elements

Sun, shade, wind, water and vegetation all play important roles in the quality of a public space. Their presence can influence how enjoyable a space is for people to spend time in or pass through. Sunshine in climates such as Ireland or Sweden is very favourable for a public space. People enjoy having lunch or picnics and generally being in the warmth of the sun for a period. On a day with high levels of sunshine in countries with hotter climate people also like to have the option of shade open to them without having to leave the public space. Community and Public Urban Space A city is more than the sum of its inhabitants. It has the power to generate a surplus of amenity, which is one reason why people like to live in communities rather than in isolation (G.Cullen, 1961).

The individual is embodied within the city, and the spaces through which they move are held together by administrative surfaces such as the cash economy, as well as material surfaces. These administrative surfaces or systems of urban life do not always complement the formation of community or encourage meaningful interaction. The cash economy provides a shallow exchange of money for product. In certain situations technology can have more interaction with an individual than other people can. Modernity has brought with it a series of technologies that replace personal interfaces (ATM machines for example).

Public space can offer a realm in which the lifeworld and community can prevail through establishing social contact. Community is vital to a citys liveability, safety and survival. Degradation of public space, loss of community, decline of public transport and reliance on the automobile decrease the overall liveability of a city. Public space has been consistently eroded through privatisation and the prioritising of traffic over pedestrians. Privatisation leads to space becoming more regulated and less open to people who do not serve a purpose that directly relates to it. This has been seen to happen throughout many cities in the United States and Western Europe. This privatisation can occur in what often officially remains public space.

Defensive architectural strategies are often employed in the private sphere and increasingly in the public one. This is done to prevent unwanted access or misuse. Vandalism is a very common example of misuse. CCTV systems are being used in many cities and are rapidly being introduced to others. People who pass under the gaze of a CCTV camera become more self-conscious and aware that certain behaviour is expected and that other behaviours are prohibited. H.Koskela calls the process of people being observed by this technology falling under the gaze without eyes. Many private homes are places where defensive architecture is heavily used. This has been largely an attempt to separate the home from its surroundings due to fear of intrusion, violence or theft. Alarm systems, pressure pads, dead bolt doors, photoelectric sensors that activate security lights, panic buttons and many more technologies are becoming popular. This attempt to create a bubble has been controversial as some have said it represents turning away from the wider community.

Strategies such as gating, policing and other surveillance systems,and defensive urbanism do provide certain people with a limited sense of security. But such settings do not, according to recent studies,always diminish actual danger. And they also contribute to accentuating a general sense of fear by increasing paranoia anddistrust(N.Ellin, 1997).

Corporate, residential and institutional spaces make most use of this defensive architecture. These types of defensive architectural strategies can be found within original design plans or implemented following the distortion of a space from its intended purpose. This can be seen where barriers are erected to prevent skate boarders using places. Multiple agendas are at work within the public sphere. A question of, What is your purpose here? can emerge where security guards are employed in these types of areas. William H. Whyte noted that it takes real work to create a lousy place and by this he means space that is purposefully made uncomfortable through design or human action. Metallic seating barriers and spiked poles are further examples of this defensiveness. Sexism in Public Space The city and its public spaces are associated both with fear and with delight, with danger and heady freedoms (L.McDowell, 1999).

The city has long been a place of both emancipation and conflict for women. Public space played a role as a site for both. Sexism persisted through the different historical periods from the Greek origins of public space to the modern period and it still persists today in various forms. The movement of women within public spaces has long been a contested issue. Women were excluded from the agora when the men made decisions relating to their city as women had no vote. If a woman was seen too often in a public space such as a square in late nineteenth century England, then her reputation was tarnished. A woman could easily be labelled as fallen or immoral by male dominated society. The public sphere was thought of as a place for men to carry out their business and to converse. The presence of a female within public space symbolically threatened the patriarchal hierarchy on which society functioned. The private sphere and especially the domestic home were associated with the female and for a woman to leave this sphere she needed a valid reason or to be accompanied. Research has shown that womens use of and movement through public space differs from that of men. Feminist Geographer Gill Valentine points out that everyday most women in western societies negotiate space alone. Many of their apparently taken for granted choices of routes and destinations are in fact the product of coping strategies women adopt to stay safe. Differences in movement patterns of men and women within cities, at different times of the day and night have been recorded. The city has been both a place of emancipation and control for women historically. The feminist critique that the overall layout of cities in general reflects a patriarchal capitalist societys expectations of what type of activities take place, where and by whom has a conceptual bearing on public space as a geography of safety and sexism. The city centre, and thus any public space, can end up being a place filled with fear rather than an enjoyable civic entity. Making streets safer for women makes streets safer for everyone.