Social life in spaces

Aims and method:

William ‘Holly’ Whyte’s work established the benchmark for observational studies of how people use public spaces. His work utilised photographic time lapse techniques to examine New York’s open spaces created as a result of the city’s incentive zoning regulations.

Key findings:

· Social spaces exhibit a good location, preferably on a busy route and are both physically and visually accessible

· Social spaces have streets that are part of the ‘social’ space; cutting a space off from the street with railings or walls isolates it and reduces its use

· Social spaces are level or almost level with the pavement; spaces significantly above or below this are less used

· Social spaces have places to sit – both explicit (benches, seats, etc) and integral (steps, low walls, etc.)

· Social spaces often have moveable seats, enabling choice, and the communication of character and personality

· Less important factors include sun penetration, aesthetics (what mattered was how people used the space), and the shapes and sizes of spaces.

Reference:

Whyte, W. (1980) The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, New York, Project for Public Spaces

www.arch.mcgill.ca/prof/luka/urbandesignhousing/.../Whyte1980-2000-excerpts1.pdf

Determinants of space occupancy and use

Aims and method:

Reports on a research project that explored the use and experiences of new and regenerated public spaces in London. Within the single city meta-case study, 14 mixed method local cases formed the core of the research, chosen to explore the diverse range of contemporary spaces in London, and incorporating user interviews and time-lapse observation of the spaces.

Key findings:

· ‘Amenities’ – cafes / restaurants, shops, big screens, band stands, kiosks, markets, sports facilities, toilets, seating, etc. – and ‘features’ around and in a space – fountains, paddling pools, street pianos, public art, sculptural furniture, play equipment, skating opportunities, etc. – encourage engagement with the space, learning through play and informal social exchange

· Visual permeability into and through a space encourages through movement and a sense of ‘publicness’ but does not guarantee either. By itself visual permeability has little to do with space animation which is determined much more by the attractors, amenities and features on a space

· Users, on average, stay longer in soft spaces than in hard spaces

· Grass is highly conducive to relaxation, play and social exchange, it is comfortable, flexible and allows users to position themselves to take advantage of micro-climatic conditions

· Different users are attracted by different microclimatic qualities, some seek shade and others sun, all seek shelter in inclement weather. Spaces that allow a degree of choice are more comfortable for a greater number of users across a greater part of the year.

· High levels of transient use generally stimulate high levels of situated activity, with the highest density of such activities occurring in the interstices between dominant lines of movement and around key features and amenities

Reference:

Carmona, M. (2014). The Place-shaping Continuum, A Theory of Urban Design Process. Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), 2-36

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13574809.2013.854695

Vital Neighbourhood Spaces

Aims and method:

Examines whether nearby nature contributes to the vitality of urban neighbourhood spaces. The authors made 758 observations of individuals in 27 relatively barren and 32 relatively green outdoor common spaces in an inner-city neighbourhood – Ida B.Wells – a large public housing development in Chicago, USA.

Key findings:

· The research found on average 90% more people using green than barren spaces, and, on average, 83% more individuals engaged in social activity in green versus barren spaces.

· Results indicate that the presence of trees and grass is related to the use of outdoor spaces, the amount of social activity that takes place within them, and the proportion of social to non-social activities they support

· The observations were particularly marked in relation to female use of the spaces.

· The location of the spaces examined (front, back, or side of the apartment building) was not related to the amount of social activity observed.

Reference:

Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & Depooter, S. F. (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighborhood spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678-700.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0193841X04264945

Streetscape Features Related to Pedestrian Activity

Aims and method:

Explores the impact of built environment characteristics on travel behaviours. Specific attention is paid to how pedestrians perceive and respond to micro environments presented by streetscapes. An assessment of relationships between 20 streetscape features and pedestrian traffic volumes, recorded in 588 blocks located in New York, are used to justify varied pedestrian counts against a range of controllable-explanatory variables. These variables include development density, land use diversity, street network design, destination accessibility, and distance to transport..

Key findings:

• Features that positively increase pedestrian traffic include active frontages and street furniture.
• Influential street furniture features include signage, benches, parking meters, dustbins, newspaper boxes, bollards, and street lights among other features that enhance the complexity of a streetscape. T
• he effectiveness of these features is increased when they are in harmony with established land uses, public safety measures, and similar design elements.
• Active Frontages that offer transparency with ground floor uses are able to facilitate street vitality independently of proportions of retail present at a location.

Reference:

Ewing, R., Hajrasouliha, A., Neckerman, K., Purciel-Hill, M., Greene, W. (2016). Streetscape Features Related to Pedestrian Activity. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 36(1), 5 - 15

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0739456X15591585