A public space project on grammar, poetics and management
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
This article is a result of my PhD research activities. The main goal of the research was to understand the key factors of success and failure in public space design and management.
Accordingly, the first part of the article investigates what a public space is and what makes it successful. The term "success" is ambiguous since it refers to multiple different views on public space. A less uncertain area is that of the design quality of public spaces: many authors have treated this subject more or less explicitly, including aspects such as accessibility, the perception of space and its use. The second part of the article presents the methodology used for the study of public spaces, explaining why Zaragoza has been chosen as a case study and describes the stages of research. The third part of the article presents the case of the public spaces of the city of Zaragoza, Spain. This case study is used in order to find correspondences and discrepancies with the conclusions previously made in the literature and eventually to identify other qualities of public space design. The analysis aims to identify which factors are essentially insignificant for the success of the project (such as the available budget or the design process), and which elements, by contrast, strongly affect the attendance and the appreciation of public spaces by the population. In particular, three elements were singled out that have the potential to become the drivers of the project: "grammar" (distributive features of spaces and buildings, microclimate, etc.), poetics (identity, recognisability of the space, etc.) and management (functions performed within the area and at its borders). The fourth part of the article examines these three elements (grammar, poetics, management) and the way they may be present within different projects. In some cases, the project succeeds in creating an optimal balance between all three elements, in other cases one element prevails over the other two; sometimes there is only one element, but it is so powerful that it compensates for the others (e.g. the entertainment activities on-site can animate even an ordinary space exposed to the elements).
In conclusion, some reflections are offered regarding grammar, poetry and management, and their interrelationship.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
The Authors retain copyright for articles published in The Journal of Public Space, with first publication rights granted to the journal.
Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial Licence (CC-BY-NC) - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
You are free to:
• Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material
Under the following terms:
• Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
• NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
References
Bishop, P. and Williams, L. (2012). The temporary city. Oxon: Routledge.
Boniburini, I. (2010), " La lotta per lo spazio pubblico come pratica di cambiamento". In Bottini, F. Spazio pubblico, declino difesa riconquista. Roma: Ediesse.
Bosselmann, P. and Arens, E. (1989). "Wind, sun and temperature. Predicting the thermal comforf of people in outdoor spaces". In "Building and Environment". 24 (4): 315-320.
Brill, M. (1989). "Transformation, Nostalgia and Illusion in Public Life and Public Place", in Altman, I., Zube, E. Public Places & Spaces. New York: Plenum. Vol. 10, Human Behavior and Environment.
Caputo, P. (1997). Le architetture dello spazio pubblico. Forme del passato, forme del presente. Milano: Electa.
Carmona, M. (2010a). "Contemporary Public Space: Critique And Classification, Part One: Critique". In Journal of Urban Design. 15 (1): 123-148.
Carmona, M. (2010b). "Contemporary Public Space, Part Two: Classification". In Journal of Urban Design. 15 (2): 157-173.
Carmona, M. (2012b). "The London Way: The Politics of London's Strategic Design". In Architectural Design. 82 (1): 36-43.
Carmona, M. and Magalhaes, C. (2008). Public space: the management dimension. London: Routledge.
Carmona, M. and Wunderlich, F. (2012a). Capital spaces: the multiple complex public spaces of a global city. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Childs, M. (2010). "Creating Vibrant Public Spaces: Streetscape Design In Commercial And Historic Districts". In Journal of Urban Design. 15 (2): 287-289.
Cicalò E. (2009). Spazi pubblici. Progettare la dimensione pubblica della città contemporanea. Milano: Franco Angeli.
di Monte, P. and Gràvalos I. (2011). "10 ideas sobre el programa estonoesunsolar". In Manito, F. Ciudades creativas: vol. 3: economía creativa, desarollo urbano y políticas públicas. Barcelona: Fundación Kreanta.
Francis, M. (2003). Urban open space: designing for user needs. Washington: Island Press.
Gehl, J. (1987). Life between buildings. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
Gehl, J., and Gemzoe, L. (1996). Public spaces, public life: Copenhagen 1996. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press and the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architecture.
Gehl, J., and Gemzoe, L. (2000). New city spaces. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press.
Gehl, J. (2004). Zurich public spaces. Quality & use analyses for18 selected public streets, squares and parks. March-September 2004. . Retrieved May 9, 2014, from http://www.gehlarchitects.dk/files/pdf/Zurich.pdf
Gehl, J. and Svarre, B. (2013). How to study public life. Washington: Island Press.
Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Jacobs, A. B. (1993). Great streets. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Jacobs, A.B. (1985). Looking at cities. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard university press.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.
Labarta, C. and Alonso del Val, M. A. et al. (2009), Zaragoza 1908-2008. Arquitectura y Urbanismo, Zaragoza: Zaragoza: Colegio Oficial de Arquitectos de Aragón.
Lenzholzer, S. et al (2013). Research through designing in landscape architecture. Elsevier, Landscape and Urban Planning.
Listerborn, C. (2005). “How public can public spaces be?”. In City: analysis of urban trends, culture, theory, policy, action. 9 (3): 381-388.
Marcus, C. C. (1990). People places: design guidelines for urban open space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Monclùs, J. and Jimènez, M.A. (2008). El urbanismo de la Expo. El plan de acompañamiento. Zaragoza: Sociedad Estatal Expoagua 2008 S.A.
Németh, J. (2009). "Defining a Public: the management of privately owned public space". In Urban studies. 46 (11): 2463-2490.
Newman, O. (1972). Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. New York: Macmillan.
Newman, O. and National institute of law enforcement and criminal justice (1976). Design guidelines for creating defensible space. Washington: US government printing office.
Nucci, L. (2012). Verde di prossimità e disegno urbano: le open space strategies ed i local development frameworks dei 32+1 boroughs di Londra. Roma: Gangemi.
Palazzo, D. and Steiner, F.R. (2011). Urban ecological design a process for regenerative places. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Porta, S. (2002). Dancing streets: scena pubblica urbana e vita sociale. Milano: Unicopli.
Punter, J. (2011). "Urban design and the English urban renaissance 1999–2009: a review and preliminary evaluation". In Journal of Urban Design. 16 (1): 1-41.
Rodotà, S. (1990). Il terribile diritto: studi sulla proprietà privata. Bologna: Il Mulino.
UE (2005). Shared space. Room for everyone: a new vision for public spaces. Leeuwarden: Fryslân Province.
Whyte, W. H. (1980). The social life of small urban spaces. Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation.