Socially Sustainable Urban Squares: The case of Monastiraki and Syntagma Squares in Athens

Socially Sustainable Urban Squares The case study of Monastiraki and Syntagma Squares in Athens.

Evangelia Billa Manchester School of Architecture

Copyright Š 2020 Manchester, England United Kingdom All rights reserved.

Manchester School of Architecture University of Manchester Manchester Metropolitan University Copyright reserved by Evangelia Billa Master of Arts Architecture & Urbanism

2

Manchester School of Architecture MA Architecture and Urbanism Dissertation

Student: Evangelia Billa – 19000590 Supervisor: Demetra Kourri

Socially Sustainable Urban Squares: The case study of Monastiraki and Syntagma Squares in Athens.

Abstract The square is recognized as a fundamental element in each community, where various events and socializing activities take place. However, the urban square, is one of the most uncertain issues of urban planning. The design of urban squares is a challenging project, as a number of the newly designed squares fail to be sustainable and alive. The purpose of this research is to investigate the spatial aspects and social issues, so as to identify the spatial features that allow an urban square to actually play a social and cultural role. Initially, it describes a clear definition of urban squares. Thereafter, the aspects that support the social sustainability of a square will be recorded. As a case study Monastiraki and Syntagma Square, two urban squares which are important public places and are located in the touristic historic area and the city centre of Athens accordingly, have been chosen, in order to examine what of the recorded aspects they have. Ultimately, some planning and design parameters will be proposed, so as to support the creation of successful urban squares.

Key Words Sociability, public space, urban square, people, Athens city squares, attractiveness

August 2020 3

Contents

4

1

2

Introduction......................................................................................................................................6 1.1

Introduction – Problem – Aim – Objectives..............................................................................7

1.2

Content of the Study and Research Methods...........................................................................8

Literature review, Public space – Squares......................................................................................10 2.1

Historic evolution of squares..................................................................................................11

2.2

Physical Aspects of urban squares..........................................................................................11

2.2.1

Size..................................................................................................................................11

2.2.2

Morphology....................................................................................................................12

2.2.3

Identity...........................................................................................................................14

2.2.4

Physical and intangible accessibility...............................................................................14

2.2.5

Urban Equipment – Furniture.........................................................................................15

2.2.6

Climate............................................................................................................................15

2.3

3

Social Interaction in Urban Squares........................................................................................16

2.3.1

Users...............................................................................................................................16

2.3.2

Activities.........................................................................................................................16

2.3.3

Communication..............................................................................................................17

2.3.4

Comfort – Security..........................................................................................................18

Urban Context................................................................................................................................19 3.1

Athens urban transformation.................................................................................................20

3.2

The Square in Greece.............................................................................................................24

3.3

The two squares.....................................................................................................................26

3.3.1 4

Monastiraki and Syntagma Sq. through time.................................................................28

Empirical Analysis...........................................................................................................................32 4.1

Size – Typology.......................................................................................................................33

4.2

Accessibility............................................................................................................................34

4.3

Urban Equipment...................................................................................................................36

4.4

Land use.................................................................................................................................40

4.5

Identity...................................................................................................................................42

4.5.1

Identity through Symbolism...........................................................................................43

4.5.2

Identity through event....................................................................................................43

4.6

Users and Activities and Safety..............................................................................................46

4.7

Questionnaires’ answers........................................................................................................49

5

Conclusion......................................................................................................................................54

6

Appendix........................................................................................................................................56

7

Bibliography....................................................................................................................................58

8

List of images..................................................................................................................................60

5

1 Introduction

6

1.1 Introduction – Problem – Aim – Objectives According to researchers working in the urban environment, the forms of ‘street’ and ‘square’ are the main components of the outdoor public space. However, it is specified that outdoor public spaces are also other urban forms, more or less modern such as parks, pedestrian streets, playgrounds or historic sites such as the Ancient Greek Market. This research focuses on the squares as a key factor of public life in the urban environment. The square, along with the commercial street, is mentioned as the pinnacle of urban life in every city for thousands of years, from the appearance of the settlement (Sarigiannis, 1999). From the earliest civilizations, squares function as a public space for people to gather and engage in city events. As an external extension of the interior city spaces, squares contribute to the quality of life for people as a civic ground.

Over time, the square varied in form and function. Nevertheless, the square remains an “archetype” that functions as a public life carrier. Studying the free spaces and in particular the square in the history we find that it is directly linked to the functioning of the city and society (political, religious, commercial, cultural). The square, as a public space in the social context, is defined as a proposed hub of activity in the heart of an intense urban area. “It will typically be paved, enclosed by high-density structures and surrounded by or in contact with streets. It includes features that will attract groups of people and facilitate meetings” (Lynch, 1981).

The problem: There is not enough empirical research on about what are the parameters that help an urban square to be attractive to people and socially sustainable. Key literature tends to focus in universally applicable criteria, setting aside the sociocultural specificities of squares’ locales that also change with time. Furthermore, there is not enough evidence that despite the fact that the two most popular squares of Athens, Monastiraki and Syntagma are crowded, they are sustainable too.

Three research questions guide the investigation and they lead us from a generic and theoretical research to a more specific and empirical approach: • Which are the physical elements and the social characteristics that make a square successful and attractive to people?

• Which physical factors affect the social attractiveness of two famous squares in Athens (Monastiraki and Syntagma square)?

• Can the spatial characteristics of urban squares, affect themselves the attractiveness of the place?

The connotation of space and social content are interrelated, as it is difficult to conceive the one without the other. From the one hand society modifies urban space while from the other, people are affected by the place the live in. People need social interaction and urban squares can provide every-day experience on that, and support social life. The possibilities are different from one square to another, and thus, squares are not equally attractive. This thesis aims, firstly, to investigate the spatial and social factors that make an urban square socially sustainable, so as to have social and cultural importance and be more attractive for people than another one, and secondly to contribute to the understanding of the physical aspects that help promote social sustainability in a square and if themselves are enough for having an social attractive space, and possibly create a design guide from them.

The main objectives of this dissertation are: • To analyze through the literature review how key scholars perceive a square and what is important in order to design a public space.

• To investigate if Monastiraki and Syntagma Square are sustainable according to these terms.

• To examine what is the opinion of users who visit these squares and the activities that they do there in order to understand which features attract people to urban squares.

• To juxtapose scholars’ criteria for square analysis with my findings in Monastiraki and Syntagma squares.

7

1.2 Content of the Study and Research Methods In order to find comprehensive answer for the research questions the following order will be applied.

First of all, theoretical factors will be identified according to findings of the listed scholars. After that, the evaluation of each factor and its influence on the social attractiveness of at each of the squares will be investigated. At the end the opinion of the users of the squares will analyzed. The chosen methodology to investigate the case is divided into three basic parts: 1. Literature review

2. Site analysis

3. Empirical analysis (observation-questionnaires)

The possible factors which affect the attractiveness of public space may come from a multitude of fields. In order to narrow the scope of this research, only spatial and socio-spatial factors will be taken into account. Thus, the research will not include economic or other external factors.

X

X

Lynch K.

X

X

Alexander et al.

X

Krier, R.

Safety

Users

X

X

X

Marcus C.C., Francis C.

X

Whyte, W.H.

X

Cullen

Carmona M.

X

X

X

Gehl J.

Moughtin C.

Communication

Zucker P.

Identity

Climate

Aesthetic

X

Activities

Sitte C.

Accessibility

Equipment

Type

Size

Firstly, theoretical factors of the spatial analysis, gathered within the literature, will be identified. In order to do this, specific scholars and literature are selected. It begins with the examination of the main literature in order to arrive to a commonality among the definitions of squares within these works.

These researchers are selected as they are the ones that are the most referred ones in papers and articles, and used as textbooks in urban design courses. The next steps are about the detailed study of the specific squares. This is the table of Scholars and of the aspects analyzed according to each one:

X

X

X X

X X

X

X

Wolfrum S.

X

Shaftoe

X

Lennard

X

8

The second part is the historical which is accomplished and with the study of historical sources and the morphological analysis of the two squares in Athens according to certain criteria within the main literature. In order to understand and evaluate the squares better, besides the literature review this research includes the qualitative method of observation, which focused on observing the daily life of a square. After the selection of the case study areas observation process started. Monastiraki and Syntagma Squares and more specifically the user’s behaviors and activities and the pedestrian circulations, were observed by me in different hours during the day. These observations are noted down on the layouts by drawings and markings. Additionally, sketches in situ and photographs helps for the process of site analysis.

Afterwards, the third one, is the analysis of the squares through the opinion of their users. This approach focuses on people and helps to investigate their opinions and evaluations based on their experience. For this type of research, the quantitative method of questionnaires is applied. The second and the third step, are done in order to investigate whether the selected cases have the essential factors so as to be sustainable according to the selected leading literature.

After observations and analyses of both squares, all findings are evaluated through the discussion. The findings of all analyses are also explained with drawings. In the last chapter, the dissertation summarizes all research results and provides some general recommendations.

9

2 Literature review, Public space – Squares

10

2.1 Historic evolution of squares A square can be defined as a flat area that is the intersection of multiple activities and may be in the center of a settlement, or outside the center but in conjunction with it. It consists of fluid and compact spaces that combine multiple speeds of a city. The square as a single space is defined by a plurality of elements and activities (Tallet, 1968). It is a place of passage, gatherings, exchanges, mutual recognition, manifestation of power, uprisings. It is also an open space where social cohesion is developed.

Each square has its own story, its own identity. It is designed to meet physical and spiritual needs, and is transformed over time in different directions.

The ancient Greek square – agora – constitutes the first integrated type of square where public outdoor space is a primary element of the organization of the built space. Subsequently, the open, irregular Athenian market is replaced by that of the enclosed geometrically defined area. The Roman city has a market in geometric form, free in the center and with a covered colonnade around it. After the 4th century AD and the peaceful or violent Christianization of the eastern world, the political function of the market is gradually being lost, as also the physical urban space that it was placed. The square and the arcades around it are occupied by workshops and commercial shops, and the word “agora” -the Greek word of square until that time- was transformed and meant only the space and activity of trade – the market (Zucker, 1959) In its present form, the urban square has its origins to the western Middle Ages. The Middle Ages invents the square that is organically tied to the city. After that, during Renaissance, the square is planned with rigorous geometry and is imposed as an expression of a new culture, as it is connected with impressive architectural complexes.1 In the industrial city, the square shrinks to a hub of traffic, while social life is shifted to indoor spaces (Sitte, 1889). During the rule of the Modernism, the square disappears into the formless surrounding free space of the buildings. It comes back to the second half of the 20th century through the critical and nostalgic mood that makes it a symbol of lost urbanity.2 Modern studies highlight the square as an essential factor in the urban form and a structural element of the urban design and the city life.

2.2 Physical Aspects of urban squares 2.2.1 Size The size of an urban square is another aspect of design. It is regularly thought that it should have a big size. However, the size depends on the location and the context around. Many researchers tried to identify the ideal dimensions of a public square.

Camillo Sitte argues that the aspect of size is crucial for the aesthetic and artistic success of a square.

Firstly, he defines the maximum length in 143 meters, and the maximum width in 58 meters. Moreover, about the ratio of length to width, he points out that it should not exceed three to one in long plazas.

After that he suggests that the size of the square should have a good relationship with its principle building. The width should be double of the height of the main building, as this is the best rate for the visual relations between the square and the environment. With this ratio, when someone stands opposite the building, he can see every detail in the surroundings. With that in mind, a square shouldn’t be neither too small because the surrounding building starts to lose its proportion, nor too large, as even a massive building loses its grandiosity and looks tiny. Sitte proposed as ideal ratio of height to width the 1:2 so that the users can properly sense the main building, and this ratio shouldn’t exceed 1:4 in order to not lose the sense of enclosure (Sitte, 1889). Overall, he suggests that each square has uniquely ideal dimensions, because every time the later depend from the square’s surroundings.

1,2 Collective, Department of Architecture - Technical School and Interdepartmental Program of Postgraduate Landscape Studies, 2009. Squares of Europe, Squares of Europe. Ziti, Athens.

11

Kevin Lynch tried to identify the ideal size, by taking into consideration separately small from large squares. According to him, the ideal dimensions of small squares, which create a pleasant human environment, should be between 12 meters and 24 meters. However, almost 100-meter sides, are ideal for successful large squares. (Lynch, 1971) Alexander, Ishikawa and Silverstein’s surveys found out that the small public squares are the most preferred urban spaces in the cities and that the squares which have a diameter up to 18 meters (18 meters from the one side to the other), are used best. They suggest a maximum of 22 meters width in the short direction while the long direction can be certainly bigger than that. According to them, huge squares which look good in drawings, end up to be mostly empty spaces in real life. They evaluate the size of the squares by the number of people inside them. Thus, whether a square is small or large depends on the number of people occupying it. (Alexander et al, 1977) On the other hand, Jan Gehl introduces that the dimensions of a square should not be bigger than 100 meters, as up to this distance one is able to understand all the details of surrounding buildings. Moreover, from this distance someone is able to watch all activities by standing at a corner of the square.

While going towards the center, the walker will start to recognize other users individually at 60 meters. According to him, the dimensions of many old squares in Europe, usually fluctuate from 80 to 90 meters. In a square of this size you can see activities everywhere. He suggests that a dimension of 25 meters is appropriate so as someone to observe facial expression and detail. The dimensions of these spaces offer the best of two worlds: overview and detail. (Gehl, 1987- 2010) Finally, Moughtin writes about the negative effects of large squares and suggests that a large square is usually deprived of an enclosing character. In his opinion, when the open public space has a larger proportion, it turns into an ordinary open space instead of a square. (Moughtin, 1999) Summarizing, it is understood that even if the scholars have been many different ideas on what the ideal size of the square must be, they generally argued that it should not be too large. By their findings we can consider that the small scaled squares are more suitable for human social relationships. The suggested way to decide the size of a square, is not only to evaluate the social life and the environment of the area but also to take into consideration the number of possible users and the possible activities that will take place there.

2.2.2 Morphology A square may be a quadrangle or rectangle or circle or pretty much any other shape, and it can be open or closed (Marron, 2016). Even though the word ‘square’ points out a form itself, a public square can have any form.

Camillo Sitte, focused on the visual appearance of a city square rather than the functionality and he identified two categories, the deep type and wide type. Whether a plaza is deep or wide can be understood when the observer stands opposite the major building that dominates the whole setting. If the space is linear towards the direction of observer’s sight, then it is deep. If the space is laid in the opposite way, the square is of wide type. Sitte seems to argue that the squares should be in proportion to their major buildings (Carmona, 2003). So, his classification is not about dimensions but is dependent on the relationship between the plaza and its surroundings. (Sitte, 1965).

One of the most important theories in classifying the form of square was outlined by Paul Zucker. He identified five types of ‘artistically relevant’ urban squares: 1. The closed square: it is a square, autonomous, enclosed at least on three sides and usually has a simple geometric shape such as a square, rectangle or circle. It is interrupted only by streets leading into it and exhibits regular geometric forms and sometimes a repetition of architectural elements. It represents the purest and most immediate expression of man’s fight against being lost in a gelatinous world, in a disorderly mass of urban dwellings.

2. The dominated square: it is a square in front of or surrounded by a building or group of build-

12

ings with significant importance, such as a cathedral, a sculpture or a fountain. The pubic space is directed to that construction and acquires a particular character from that.

3. The nuclear square: it has a clearly defined shape of space formed around a center feature. The power exerted by the nucleus determines the actual size of such spaces.

4. Grouped squares: this is a complex square shape consisting of a group of organically or aesthetically linked spaces. These spaces may cover each other or penetrate one another and form a single square. This kind of square is often found in medieval cities. The squares may also be linked by means of an axis or axial relationships or have non-axial relations and being grouped around a dominant building.

5. The amorphous square: it has an abnormal spatial shape instead of a simple geometric volume. However, even if, it seems to be unorganized or formless, it displays some of the prior types’ qualities. (Zucker, 1959) For Zucker, squares rarely represent just one pure type and often have the characteristics of two or more. He stated that the particular function of a square does not automatically produce a particular spatial form and that each specific function could be expressed in many different shapes.

Rob Krier, in contrast to Sitte and Zucker who concentrated on the aesthetic effect of urban space, focused on elementary geometry as his starting point (Carmona, et. al., 2003). He classifies the squares into categories, based on their plan shape, which may be a circle, a rectangular or a triangle, as well as on their connection to the city streets. These three basic shapes are affected by modulation factors like angling, segmentation, addition, merging, overlapping or amalgamation of elements and distortion.

Finally, after any combination of shapes and factors, are created either regular or irregular urban space forms.

In all the possible spatial forms, a variety of possible building sections, plays an important role in urban space’s quality. Ultimately, Space can be open to the environment or closed by walls, arcades, colonnades from the streets around. (Krier, 1975).

The morphology is a significant aspect for the perception of a square. It is understood that even if a square might have a common or a unique type, is for sure that its form is affected by the surrounding environment.

Picture 1, Zucker’s typology of urban squares

Picture 2, Urban square spaces, Rob Krier, 1975-1991

13

2.2.3 Identity The identity of a space is defined by the elements and activities or events taking place in it. Public squares contribute to preserve the history and identity of cities but they also do have an identity themselves. There are no two identical squares in the world. Like few other spaces, they speak to us of the very substance of the city planning, of ambitions that stretch back way before the moment of their construction (Collective, Dep of Arch. - Technical School and Interdepartmental Program of Postgraduate Landscape Studies, 2009).

The aspect of identity is directly related with symbolic roles which associated with squares usually throughout history. The identity of a place in people's perception goes beyond its material design elements, but is linked to events and happenings in that particular space. The symbolic meaning dedicated to a place is the most important element for its perception and its identity (Moughtin, 2003).

Lynch (1960) defines the identity of a place, as particularity and distinction from other places and serves the recognition of its individuality. People’s awareness of their environment is linked to architectural and urban forms. Thus, squares give identity to places, with their particularity as a form of urban public space, where they are located (Moughtin, 2003).

Sitte (1965) introduces focal points in squares as elements, that attract users while contributing to the square’s identity and image. A focal point can be created by using any design element like a fountain, a sculpture or a monument. However, sometimes the centre of the squares should be kept free and focal elements should be placed along to edge, close to pedestrian routes.

2.2.4 Physical and intangible accessibility Access to a square is a transition from the wider area of the city to a more specific with unique form and character area. Urban squares are public areas; thus, all the citizens should have access to them.

But when is a square successfully accessible?

Lynch (1981) suggests that the city elements should strongly relate to each other for being accessible.

Concerning the squares, they are surrounded by the elements of the city, the streets, the sidewalks, the pedestrian ways and roads which ought to link them with surrounding streets directly. Moreover, he mentioned the importance of visual access of the squares from the edges. There must be a visual relationship between them and the squares should be certainly visible from the edges (Lynch, 1981).

When access between them is easy, people from the surroundings will be attracted to this square, which they can see from away.

According to Sitte (1889) The first condition for an attractive and functional square is to be accessible for everyone and particularly without vehicle traffic. In the same perspective, Gehl (1987) thinks that one big disadvantage of not being considered a square sustainable, is vehicles. In order to promote the importance of pedestrian accessibility, Gehl figures terms like “walking traffic”, “pedestrian streams” and “sidewalk capacity”. Moreover, he states that with some physical precautions can increase the pedestrian accessibility. For instance, on the condition that pedestrian accessibility isn’t obstructed, if the ground level of the square and level of the surrounding roads are different, this could result in making the square a special place. After that, the ground floor materials of the squares can be selected specifically for preventing the intrusion of vehicles at the perimeters of the square. He mentions that these design solutions not only enhance the pedestrian traffic but also, strengthen the city life. Thus, accessibility is needed not only for physical and visual links, but also for enabling the squares to become comfortable spaces and increases their usage so as to meet human needs. (Gehl, 1987) Lastly, Cullen (1995) states that in a complete square should exist pedestrian priority. The pedestrian areas must be clearly marked and points to the pavements, and in order to establish the pedestrian priority. Pedestrian density and as a result the sustainability of the squares increases so long as the vehicles get out of the way of the pedestrian as the traffic is not respectful to the walking users (Cullen, 1995).

14

Therefore, urban squares should support the pedestrian activities and be accessible to all. There should not be any barrier which prevents people’ access in them because If people cannot reach it, the square is going to be empty. According to the scholars the most successful squares are those which are completely pedestrianized and have many connections to the surrounding area. But does the absence of pedestrian roads affect big squares like Syntagma, which is surrounded by roads for cars?

2.2.5 Urban Equipment – Furniture Street furniture is a term which includes all equipment, used in an urban public space such as lighting, seating and boundary elements, benches, bins, monuments, and statues. Street furniture significantly affects the quality of the squares and enhances the image, perceived from the environment. Seating elements are important actors in the use of the square and they affect directly its social sustainability.

Well-placed seats aid the users to observe and enjoy the environment and thus enables spontaneous social interactions and activities. Beside the placement, the seats should be easily accessible and in a variety of types, such as benches, steps or short walls. Furthermore, in order to enhance the local identity for urban squares, “particular” furniture that fits the environment should be designed. (Carmona, 2003) Furthermore, according to Whyte (1980) the trees and the greenery in variation, is important to occupy a portion of the square so as to provide visual interest for people sitting there or passing through.

Most people are drawn to stay in a square for its oasis effect and so need something visually pleasing to attract their attention.

2.2.6 Climate Climate and temporal conditions are also aspects be studied by scholars, to find out how they affect social attraction on urban squares. To begin with, Alexander et al., (1977) mention that climate changes, different period of the day, sun lights and shades inside the square affect significantly users’ preferences and they add that the south side of the square, except for the squares in the desert climatic conditions, is more preferred than the north side, as it has more sun. Thus, they suggest the surrounding buildings to be on the north side while squares, as an urban open space, be located on the south.

On the other hand, Moughtin (1987) suggests that the surrounding structures should be used as a protector of the users against temporary bad weather conditions, giving as an example the arcades located around the Italian squares. Marcus & Francis (1997) describe squares designed by considering the climatic and temporal dimensions and mainly the sunlight. According to them, so as to have successful squares the design solution should permit the use of the square in different weather conditions, as well as providing various activities for users. Finally, the designers should make plans considering the direction of the winds and placing the buildings in such a way to allow the sunlight in.

It is understood that scholars agree that the weather conditions play a huge role to the occupancy of a square and the duration of the activities been realized there. But in every case, the climate factors affect the sociability of a place in combination with the elements of the square or the buildings around it. Climate and temporal conditions are also aspects be studied by scholars, to find out how they affect social attraction on urban squares.

Picture 3, Sunny parts of outdoor place

(Alexander, et. al. 1977)

15

2.3 Social Interaction in Urban Squares Marcus and Francis (1998) support that the medieval town square, is often seen as a supreme multifunctional public space with high social interaction and it is a prototype of a successful square in terms of sociability (Korosec-Serfaty, 1982). It used to be the heart of a city, its outdoor living and meeting place for citizens of all ages and mixed categories who were gathering there to buy food, celebrate, hear the news, collect water, talk politics, or watch the world go by. However, today’s urban square is not used the same way as then but is it less important to contemporary people?

People have a strong demand for social interaction in nature. There is a close relationship between life and people’s need for social connection. Daily activities in the urban public spaces create the opportunities for the interpersonal contacts and relationships, and make people take part in communication and experience others’ activities in different status. By providing these opportunities the public space fulfils the natural needs and makes the social life joyful and meaningful.

2.3.1 Users Taking into consideration the above, in order to investigate how successful is a square, we should observe if there are people in it and what they are doing. A square should bring people together as people go there to be “with others”. The others are not necessarily identified. On the contrary, they are frequently anonymous. But they are expected to be open to contact, to be warmly disposed towards the other users of the public space (Korosec-Serfaty, 1981) For Whyte (1980), people generally prefer not to be in a deserted square, and since people are attracted to other people, the crowded squares are more successful than the non-occupied ones. What is more, he states that in order for an urban space to be “best-used”, it has to include a good number of couples and groups of people.

Lennard (2008) studies the users’ attitude and he observes that people in public space encounter each other as complete human beings, and not in terms of specific roles, such as employer-employee. Their status, social or economic position, knowledge or fame is not as important as personal qualities, graciousness, cordiality and charm. In this sense sociability makes for more democratic relations and reminds us ancient Greece, where the square was a symbol of the democracy.

2.3.2 Activities A successful square should attract the users with a variety of activities. Studies investigating uses taking place in squares, indicate that people use squares to meet with friends, rest for a while and relax, have something to eat or drink, walk through the greenery, watch other people, shop, and engage into various activities such as open air theaters, concerts, festivals, social events etc. Designers of a square should mix the proposed activities so as everybody feel welcome. Thus, programming is a considerable social-managerial aspect to be count. Management of the square should organize events and performances taking place in there and inform the public about them (Marcus, Francis, 1998).

Jan Gehl (1987) suggests that outdoor activities in public space can be divided into three categories.

The first one is the “necessary activities.” These are the compulsory activities in which people have to participate at different degrees and they are mostly related with walking, such as walking to work or school, getting the mail, waiting the bus or walking a dog. Because these activities are essential, physical environment can only have a slight influence over their occurrences. Gehl claims that these activities would occur throughout a year in every type of weather, as participants are engaged to do them.

16

The second type of activities Gehl identifies is “optional activities,” which occur when there is a desire to participate in these activities and a time and a place favorable to participating in these activities. It only can take place when people are willing to participate in some activities. Furthermore, time and place also should be suitable. These activities include: going for a walk to breathe fresh air, standing and enjoying the surrounding views, sitting and having a sunbath. Even if these activities only occur under suitable weather conditions, their frequency is also dependent on the non-weather-related environment. For example, in dense urban settings of low-quality optional activities exist at a minimum level, in contrast with a good physical environment, where there is high frequency. This relationship is significant for physical planning of squares, because occurrence of optional activities relies mainly on outer physical conditions.

“Social activities” are the third category which contains activities that depend on the participation of others in public space. Such activities emergence when people gather in a place and socialize, like when children playing, friends coming together to converse, or even passersby briefly communicates. These activities happen spontaneously and can occur in a wide variety of settings. Gehl says that usually these activities are “resultant” from activities in the other two categories as people in the same space meet.

Thus, the improvements of the conditions for necessary and optimal activities in public space can support indirectly the social activities. Though the setting of physical environment does not have the direct effect on social activities’ quality and intensity, the design can influence the opportunities for meeting and communicating.

Picture 4, Graphic representation of the connection between outdoor quality and outdoor activities, according to Jan Gehl theory. An increase in outdoor quality gives a boost to optional activities in particular. The increase in activity level then invites a substantial increase in social activities.

As we said before square is has a central character in the urban structure. This center is identified at the level of the social organization of the city, with its most vital point, where important events, meetings, transactions or even political developments take place, activities that happen in Monastiraki and Syntagma square.

2.3.3 Communication Communication is something that affects the sociability in a public area. Without communication there is no social interaction among people and without social interaction there is no social sustainability.

However, communication happens in various ways.

According to Gehl (2010), four types of communication could be identified in public spaces, be categorized by the distance of people.

1. Intimate distance: 0-45 cm, contacts are more emotionally and tied to our feelings; the situa-

17

tion is secure and comfort.

2. Personal distance: 45cm-1.2m, contact distance for family and friends’ conversation.

3. Social distance: 1.2-3.7m, good physical expression for ordinary conversation.

4. Public distance: more than 3.7m, formal contact and one-way communication, not participating in what is happening. Less than 100 meters is a distance for understanding body language and recognizing gender. In less than 25 meters it starts decoding emotions and facial expressions and less than 7 meters is a distance that all senses can be used to experience in detail.

Greek people are known for their convenience and desire for expression and communication. This fact leads to the existence of many forms of communication in their urban squares, among other places.

2.3.4 Comfort – Security Finally, in order for people to communicate in a public space, they have to feel comfortable. Specifically, the preference to a square is connected with the feel of comfort. Once an individual experience a comfortable sitting place and feels that he is in a safe environment, this delineates the relationship (Shaftoe, 2008). Carmona (2003) mentions that urban design can be successful, only when it is perceived as safe. The users pay attention to the safety of a place as, it affects directly their interaction with the environment. There is a considerable amount of people choosing crowded squares in order to feel safe. Jane Jacobs’s view (1961) is that population concentration is an asset to the urban user and acts as a means of maintaining security. After a few years Shaftoe (2008) supports that a safe and secure environment is generated through providing spaces with firstly minimized crime opportunities and antisocial behavior; and on the other hand, providing maximized help options in any safety threats.

From another point of view Whyte (1980), studies how the ratio of women and men is affected by the safety. According to his investigation women are more sensitive and selective compared to men when it comes to the use of urban space. The number of women is usually bigger than the number of men in the most used squares. It is observed that the small percentage of women in a square, indicates a problem with the space. Thus, the squares predominated by women are considered as successful. Finally, like Jacobs, he suggests that in order to feel secure, people prefer to go to crowded places where they can be close to the other users.

18

3 Urban Context

19

Picture 6, Actual condition 1835

Picture 5, Proposal of Kleanthis and Schaubert 1832

Picture 8, Actual condition 1843

Picture 7, Updated proposal Leo Von Klenze's plan, 1834

20

3.1 Athens urban transformation From ancient times to the end of Ottoman period 1833 AD The earliest known settlement in Athens dates from the Neolithic Period. That period began in Greece in about 6500 BCE (McGregor, 2014). The first inhabitants built their huts on the north and south slopes of the Acropolis hill.

During the Classical era (480-323 B.C), there were constructed around Athens a circular fortification and the Long Walls, which extended the defense line to the Piraeus port. Pericles implemented a building program, focusing on the Acropolis hill. On the south slope, a theater and conservatory were placed, and around the rock was the “Peripatos” (walking), which became the favorite promenade of the Athenians. The Agora took the shape of a large complex with a central open square surrounded by public buildings, temples, altars and statues. In many places there were fountains and clusters of trees.

The residential areas were spread around the Acropolis and the Agora, in an organic plan with narrow and unpaved streets.

In the 2nd century, Roman Emperor Hadrian to facilitate the lives of residents, constructed aqueducts, roads, bridges and sewerage. Moreover, he built a Library and a Gymnasium and expanded the city to the east, increasing its overall area. However, in 267, the Scandinavians attacked and almost everything was burnt down. Athens shrank in the north of the hill, to 1/6 of its old size.

The 5th century during the Byzantine Period (330-1204), the first Christian churches were built inside the walls and many ancient temples were converted into churches. In 529, Athens became a provincial town, but it was not abandoned because its castle provided security. The area was densely populated in the 10th century, when there was great urban development. During 800 - 1204 Athens was filled with Byzantine churches, which stood out, due to their elaborate architecture. In the middle of the 12th century, Athens described as a crowded city, surrounded by gardens and cultivated fields. In 1204, the city surrendered to the Latin knights.

During the Ottoman domination (1456 – 1833), many monuments were saved because their transformation into mosques, was forbidden. The Acropolis was settled by the Ottoman commander and the rock was filled with houses. During the years of Ottoman-Venetian warfare (1684-1977), monuments of classical antiquity, such as the Parthenon, suffered catastrophic disasters. During the years of the Ottoman conquest, the lower city was expanded six times as it was in Latin Era. There was lack of organized street plan and the aqueduct of the city was depleted. There were no cemeteries, the uses of the land were undefined, while the roads followed the design of the ancient road network. Temples, monasteries, mosques, foreign monasteries, bazaars, baths coexisted peacefully. In 1778, a new short wall was built, following the traces of the ancient one. There were about 10,000 residents at that time.

Inside the walls apart from the residential area, there are also unbuilt and agricultural areas. On 1833, after the national liberation movement, Ottomans left permanently.

The First City Plan Before Athens became the capital of the new Greek state (1934), it has a significant size of 12,000 inhabitants (Sarigiannis, 2000). The expansion of Athens needed a plan, which was designed by S. Kleanthis and E. Schaubert, in 1832. It was affected by the Hippodamian grid system and it was based on the principles of neoclassicism, which formed on a symmetrical monumental form and its main idea was the development of the new city to the north, along with the restoration of the center of the ancient city, through excavations around from the Acropolis (Galani, 2004).

This plan was intended for 40,000 residents, covering 2,890 acres and anticipated long-term expansion of the urban fabric. The design consists of a triangular geometric shape. At the top of the triangle, there was the Administrative Center, with the Palace and various public buildings. The avenues, were 38 meters wide and contributed to the protection of the Center from heavy traffic. The plan also suggested the creation of a Spiritual Center, which would be located on the site of today’s Syntagma Square. The plan was completed with the creation of a Shopping Center area, which had six arched buildings at the

21

center, and a large Food Market that was expanding beside.

However, in 1834, due to reactions from landowners, the plan was modified by Leo von Klenze. The new proposal had less strict geometry and it was a compromise between state planning and private interests, with many streets either narrowing or being removed, and public spaces reduced. Moreover, Klenze modified the locations of the squares, public buildings, as well as the Administrative Center and the Palace. Finally, he placed two streets perpendicular to Athena Street, as well as the location of the University, the Academy and the Library in the north-eastern part of the city, where all of them are today. In 1860, Klenze’s plan was partially changed for a population of 50,000. Apart from some modifications, this plan formed the core of the city and the shape of the center of modern Athens.

(Galani, 2004)

Contemporary age (1945- today) Over the years, population grew up to 453,000 in 1920, while in 1928, after the great wave of refugees from Asia Minor, it reached the figure of 802,000 residents (Sarigiannis, 2000). The result was the creation of new neighborhoods around the city.

Modern Athens began to change rapidly after 1945, when more and more people arrived. Massive construction of block of flats was necessary, so as to solve the problem of housing. The urbanization reached a peak in the 1960s and 1970s, imposing an extension of the urban fabric in all directions. In that time, there was no place for the aesthetic pursuits and creation of communal spaces. Into a few years, the neoclassical buildings with courtyards transformed into high-rise buildings that altered the urban landscape. The exception in this transformation was the Plaka neighborhood. Furthermore, that time many streams were built and an industrial zone constructed nearby. Thus, Athens became a noisy, hostile city with little green, inadequate public spaces, high traffic problem and polluted atmosphere.

The population increased from 1.490.000 in 1959, to 3.900.000 in 2019.

The metro, which operates from 2000, improved significantly the traffic problem and created new roads between the city centre and the surrounding neighborhoods. The undertaking of the 2004 Olympic Games was the reason for a partial regeneration of the historic center. The Connection of Archaeological Sites created a big “archaeological promenade� with sidewalks and seating areas, offering immediate access to archaeological sites.

Today, Athens is a metropolis that tends to spread on the borders of Attica with almost 4 million residents. It is a lively and diverse city, which has a lot of memories of its past hidden at every corner of the city.

Table 1, Athens land use changes 1961-1991, National Centre For Social Research, (Avdelidi, 2010)

Athens (km2)

%

419,3

73,8

66,9

4,3

271,3

17,6%

16%

1%

64,7%

22

456,8

Other areas

Buildings

Water

Forest

Agricultural areas

Buildings

Total areas

1991

Water

Forest

Agricultural areas

Land use

1961

Total areas

Year

35,2

68

0,8

323,1

30,3

7,7%

14,9%

0,2%

70,7%

6,6%

Picture 9, Athens urban evolution 700 DC - 1990 AD

24

3.2 The Square in Greece In ancient Greece, as a focal point of the city, the square functioned simultaneously as commercial center, a gathering place for citizens and a location for races and spectacles. This form expressed the pluralism of the democratic governance of the city-state. The market was in direct visual contact with the roads that connected it to the city without being shaped by them, while it was open to the surrounding area, which usually included other public functions (Aravantinos, 1997).

With the formation of the modern Greek state at the beginning of the 19th century, the authorities focus on the establishment of new cities and on the transformation and regeneration of urban, public and private space of the existing ones. Despite the different needs and perceptions of urban planning, the presence of the square is dominant in all cases. Apart from the functional needs of the city and the interest in creating a space that encourages sociality (an area of ​​leisure, collective living and business), the symbolic character attributed to the square by the new designs is even more important. The notions of civil liberty, equality and accessibility are embedded in a new space whose power seems accessible to all (Patestos, 1993). The square expresses the public sphere in its physical, political and social dimensions.

Until the 19th century, the shape of unstructured surfaces in the urban fabric was usually random or restricted by the topography and the building rules. But during the 19th century can be distinguished two types of squares: the existing open spaces that are organically adapted to the evolution of the grid and the new squares, which are created from scratch in new cities or districts in accordance with the requirements of urban planning in the Western world (Collective, Dep of Arch.

- Technical School and Interdepartmental Program of Postgraduate Landscape Studies, 2009).

In the new urban plans of Athens, the squares have a pivotal role. They gather around the major highways of the city, have direct connection with the new public buildings and provide the open space that allows the development of the public life and the socialization of the residents. The modern Greek square integrates dynamically the urban activities and experiences of the inhabitants, and combines the functions that have historically accumulated with modern needs (Aravantinos, 1997). The evolution of the square in Greece is directly linked to the history of its cities and their transformations. The case of the capital, Athens, is not an exception.

25

3.3 The two squares The chosen squares are the Monastiraki and Syntagma, two of the most famous urban spaces in Athens city centre, and specifically in the Historic centre. They are located less than 800 m from each other, and they are connected by Ermou, which is a pedestrian road and the most famous commercial area in Greece.

The station square – Monastiraki Monastiraki square is the result of an architectural competition, be constructed in 2007. The site has always been a passage as it is located among important archaeological sites, the Ermou commercial street and the bazaar. This is a central and multilevel point of the city, as under it there is the underground station and some ancient monuments. The transformation which took place in 2007, was based on these multiple aspects of space as a station-passage-square. An open square to cross was created. It is a Mediterranean square, with a surface be covered with colorful cobblestones which form streams.

The architects tried to transform a transit area into a station, meeting and event space, where multiple identities can meet (Domes, 2009).

The official square – Syntagma Syntagma, Athens’s official square, is one of the most central in the capital. In front of the Hellenic Parliament, it is located at the end of Ermou Street, Athens’ most commercial street and acts as a collector for its visitors. It is also a ceremonial public space where the state holds a dominant position in terms of control and functions; its attributes include a relation to symbolic / imaginary constructions and notions as well as historical events, large size and central position. Moreover, it hosts major and central events organized by a variety of actors such as the State, actors of the economy and social movements.

(Pettas,2017) Syntagma Square also relates to Lefebvre’s (1974) description of abstract space: “We already know several things about abstract space. As a product of violence and war, it is political; instituted by the state, it is institutional. On first inspection it appears homogeneous; And indeed, it serves those forces which make a tabula rasa of whatever stands in their way, of whatever threatens them – in short, of differences”.

Picture 11, Location of Monastiraki and Syntagma sq. in the Athens city

26

Picture 11, Location of Monastiraki and Syntagma sq. in the Athens

Picture 12, Monastiraki Square 2018

Picture 13, Syntagma Square 2019

27

3.3.1 Monastiraki and Syntagma Sq. through time

28

29

30

31

4 Empirical Analysis

32

4.1 Size – Typology Monastiraki is a medium size urban square located in the historic area of Athens. Its sides touch the buildings around apart from the north side, where there is a high traffic central road. According to the scholars’ opinion has the right size to be successful, as its sides are 50-70 meters.

On the other hand, Syntagma is bigger that is should be, as its sides are bigger than what Gehl defines as a limit – 125 m > 100 m –, but it is acceptable by the users, as it is the main square in the capital. Syntagma square is inscribed in a rectangle created by the major city roads with heavy traffic around it. It does not touch the fronts of the building blocks and is an autonomous spatial unit. The second part of the square, is in the east of square and it is divided by Amalia’s avenue, and is located in front of the Greek Parliament. Even if it is a part of the Parliament, it is conceived as an extension of Syntagma square.

According to Zucker’s typology Monastiraki is the closed type square, as it is autonomous and enclosed on three sides, be interrupted only by streets leading into it. Krier’s theory justifies the fact that Monastiraki has no specific form, as it is affected by the organic plan of the surrounding environment. Monastiraki sides have a ratio 4:5, when the ratio 1:3 and less forms clearly the distinction between street and square spaces. (Carmona, 2003). Syntagma square, fits into the category of a dominated square, as it is in front of the historic building of Greek parliament, which gives it a particular character. The square has a rectangular shape with total area of 14,370 m2. The width-to-length ratio is almost 1:1.

33

Picture 15, maps of accessibility

4.2 Accessibility Monastiraki Square seems to comply with researchers’ requirements for successful accessibility, as it is easy to get to by foot and by other ways. Concerning the circulation, in its underground station two lines that pass by connect it with four different directions of the city, the port of Piraeus with the northern suburbs of Athens, as well as the southern suburbs with the airport. Coming closer it should be mentioned that Monastiraki is next to a very important intersection of the commercial streets Athena and Ermou. Moreover, people think that the accessibility to the square is easy as they can use different means of transport to reach there. Many people use it as a junction, where they can change the way they travel. And lastly pedestrian exchange from the surroundings happens easily, as the pedestrian zone of the square is connected with four pedestrian roads, that lead into the Flea Market, the restaurants and the ancient monument. Parking at the square is forbidden, and people use to leave their cars in the roads close to it. Bicycle parking stand is provided beside the station. Unfortunately, there is no bicycle road, but this absence is noticed in many city’s areas.

Syntagma Square is a central point of Athens and is connected by public transport to every quarter of the city center and its suburbs. Thus, it has four subway exits, two of them inside the square, many bus stops around the square which connect city centre with every area of the city, as well as a tram stop on Amalia. Finally, two large taxi cabs west and south of the square serve the citizens. As it is surrounded by motorways there are a lot of pedestrian crossing and that’s why respondents don’t find difficult the accessibility to it. There are no parking areas near the square and people tend to leave their cars in the small roads close to it. The main access to it is through the axis defined by the imaginary continuation of Ermou street. This is the only pedestrian street leading to the square, and its commercial use is one of the reasons Syntagma is always crowded. The construction of the metro in 2000, made underground access from the entrances and exits of the metro, an alternative route that makes the space accessible in a different way and gives pedestrians the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the urban square through daily access.

35

Picture 16, map of urban elements

4.3 Urban Equipment According to the scholars’ opinion the quality and organization of urban elements are prime indicators of the quality of an urban space, in addition to contributing to an identity and character of a square in general (Carmona, 2003). Monastiraki square does not offer the tradition form of benches for sitting, as there are two sculpted wooden constructions that are used for that purpose, that simultaneously cover the air ducts of the underground. In a central point of the square there is artwork construction, which covers the airducts of the underground. These particular elements enhance the local identity, that Carmona indicates. Furthermore, there are some integral seating places built into the square that people use for sitting. However, they are not enough for the figure of users. People always occupy the short walls around the church and the monuments for sitting. Moreover, shaded sitting areas are demanded, especially for the summer months as the temperature in the capital of Greece can reach 40oC.

Picture 17, urban elements in Monastiraki square

The outdoor parts of restaurants, situated at the east side of the square provide sitting places. Specifically, they are equipped with tables and umbrellas, and they are fenced by greenery elements, occupying that way the public place. Their style is various and not particularly harmonized with square’s identity.

Besides the sitting equipment, the square provides enough as waste bins and lighting in its sides. People feel the square is vibrant and hospitable, even if the lighting elements in the square are not a main actor and they don’t have a specific design concept. In the evening Monastiraki is also illuminated by the reflected lights of the surroundings.

The element of water is absent from the visual scenery of the site. However, if someone goes close to the floor opening for ancient monuments under the square, they will hear Iridanos river flowing under the square. Green spaces including trees and flowers are a few on the site and there is no effect of Whyte’s oasis. Unfortunately, the greenery elements are almost unnoticed as there are only a few small trees inside the square. The big trees on the east of the square are used for shading the table of the restaurants. The height and mass of the existing planting does not cut off the view of an activity in the area, but their quantity and quality are not considered satisfactory by the people.

To conclude, the size of the furniture does not dominate the square and according to the users, their

37

placement does not obstruct the pedestrian movement something that Carmona mentions as a successful aspect.

On the other hand, Syntagma is a geometrically designed square with linear paths within it. It has a central axis which divides the square into two equal parts. In the centre of the square there is a fountain acting as a focal point of the square. Water is also observed in two linear spaces in two opposite sides of the squares to create a boundary between the different level of the roads and the square.

In the two sides of the axis there is a lot of vegetation such as large flower beds and high planting. The tall and dense vegetation inscribed in an imaginary rectangle, creates an introvert with a reference point to the fountain and the axis leading to the Parliament.

Generally, in the Syntagma Square there is a strict separation of hard (moving and stopping zones) and soft areas (green). Urban equipment such as benches and short columns, and the vegetation help to organize the space. Moreover, there are many sculptures located on either side of the main axis. There are enough lights scattered in square so as not to exist dark corner. The seating benches do not block pedestrian move, but unfortunately, they are not placed in a way to support social interaction as Carmona (2003) indicates. On the west side of the square there are big stairs which connect square’s level with the elevated sidewalk in front of the Parliament. From the highest level of the staircase someone can see the whole square. The same stairs are used especially by young people for sitting in groups and socializing.

Picture 18, Young users doing activities in the stairs of Syntagma square

38

39

Picture 19, Land use near the two squares

40

4.4 Land Use Monastiraki square is surrounded by historic buildings such as the library of Hadrian, the church of Pantanassa, the Tzistarakis mosque and the train station. In addition, in the square there are three modern buildings that two of them had refurbished facades, and they are used as commercial buildings in the ground floor and cafes and restaurants in the upper levels. On the east side of the square are located the traditional Greek restaurants which attracts a lot of tourists. In the west side there is the start of flea market of the historic quarters. Generally, in the whole area there are small shops and services, which target the visitors in Athens. One of the Athenian rivers, Iridanos, is passing through the square in a lower level. In the centre of there is an opening from where one can see and hear the river flowing. At the lower level of the train station, next to the train lines, someone can see the archaeological excavation site next to the river bed of Iridanos. At the lower level from the square there is the open courtyard of the church of Pantanassa.

Picture 20,opening from where one can see and hear the river Iridanos

Picture 21, Pantanassa church and the wall around it.

Picture 22, Shops with touristic trade.

Syntagma Square constitutes a major touristic landmark of Athens. Its surrounding area hosts economic and administrative functions and uses, businesses of multiple scales, services and several administrative buildings such as the Parliament, embassies, ministries and public services. At the western part of Syntagma Square is the start of Ermou Street, which is the most commercial street in Athens. The northern side is occupied by luxury hotels. On the west, on the other hand, there are food and commercial uses, which are attractive to pedestrians and mainly to tourists.

Picture 23, Hotels in the north side of Syntagma

Picture 24, The south side of Syntagma

41

Picture 25, nodes that affect the identity of the square

42

4.5 Identity 4.5.1 Identity through Symbolism The characteristic identity of the square is related to its location in the city. The fact that Monastiraki is such a vibrant and colorful square is directly linked to the economic and social variety of the Athenian Center. The square is a gateway to areas with different identities. It is a node among the commercial Ermou Street which leads to the official center in Syntagma, the folk area which leads to Omonia Square, the touristic routes to Plaka and the alternative leisure neighborhood of Psiri and Gazi. Both squares are considered unique by the interviewees and the first thoughts they have about them, are directly connected with their surrounding environment, a fact that supports Lynch theory about individuality.

As mentioned in previous chapter the concept of identity is related with symbolic roles of a square. Squares furthermore can become distinct places for a group of people or a society within which, there exists such a collective cultural, historical, religious or other social and political value for them. Monastiraki square has symbolic role, as it is a landmark for the touristic area, and signifies the entrance to the ancient quarters. In addition, it contributes to the cohesion of society and strengthens the bonds between its members, as it is in a strategic position where different economic and social groups, coming from neighbor areas, meet each other.

Coming to the tangible elements, Monastiraki square’s identity is affected by many focal nearby architectural elements. Unfortunately, the fact that it has more than two focal centers, confuse the users and make their orientation difficult, as they claim in the comments of the questionnaires.

One the other hand, in Syntagma square the building that dominates is the Greek parliament, which gives the square its identity, creates a specific focal point for locals and visitors and finally it ensures that the square is a symbolic center of the city and nation.

The case of Syntagma is an example in Sitte’s theory of focal points, as it is undoubtable that the Parliament as a monument and a building of status, contributes to the character of the square.

According to the scholars’ opinion, both squares have more or less, acceptable physical aspects to be successful. But let’s investigate if they are these characteristics that helps them achieve it.

4.5.2 Identity through event So, according to the previous the physical setting and the visual landscape of public environments affect users’ behavior. Like the past years, citizens during the years of the economic crisis, gathered in Syntagma Square, around the Greek Parliament to protest, so as to express their disaffection with the government and to complain about the bad financial situation. In this way, there is a great separation between the people of the square and those inside the parliament building.

Thus, Syntagma square acts as the space where many people with common beliefs can unite, and so when citizens think of the square, the specific kind of ideology comes to mind and vice versa. That is the reason that the people who have been asked, connects the term of “protest place” with Syntagma square. It can be considered that Syntagma square is transformed into the “tangible” space of the ideology of each group of users and thus, acquires an identity equal to the ideology of the actors. That justifies Moughtin’s study, which supports that the perception of a place is affected by its historical symbolisms.

43

On the other hand, Monastiraki Square, because of its size and location, hosts political event and protests of smaller scale, which in combination with other activities (artistic, tourist, commercial) give it a “colorful� identity.

Talking all above into consideration, we can conclude that the identity and character of the square are inseparably connected with the users and their social activities and that’s how public spaces function as an element that links people cultures and places.

44

45

4.6 Users and Activities and Safety Monastiraki square is filled all day by a crowd that is consisted by people of different ethnicities, locals, tourists and immigrants of all ages, alone and in groups who use the square and its elements in different ways and coexist in a harmonic way. The square continues to gather daily a variety of people and a variety of traditional and alternative activities as in the years before its transformation. The necessary activity (Gehl) that makes a big group of people to pass through the square in order to be distributed to the areas around, is caused mainly by the existence of the underground exit in the square.

In the table below the activities identified in Monastiraki square are classified according to Jan Gehl activity categories.

ACTIVITIES FREQUENCY

big

NECESSARY

OPTIONAL

SOCIAL ACTIVITIES

(walking) – passing through

sitting around

children playing

working use of train station

taking photographs

organized art events

food at traditional Greek restaurants and fast food

music or shows from multinational groups,

outdoor trade with and without a license

protest events shooting commercials for fashionable products and services cooking and providing free food for the homeless

small

However, besides Gehl strict way of categorizing activities, there are other more aspects that can affect them. The dominance of tourism is very obvious in the square and its surroundings as there are plenty of uses referring to visitors. Temporary events that attract tourists happens in various ways in every corner of the square. Moreover, the touristic services and leisure places such as cafes and restaurants, along with the use of buildings, demand more and more public space. Beside the Regulation of Monastiraki Square, which is approved by the Municipality of Athens and specifies that “It is forbidden to allocate part of the Square for the placement of bank seats” (Chapter C, Article 1 (paragraph a) defines the fine for the infringement to be EUR 200 / m2), they tend to expand and invade into the public space of square with tables and other equipment like labels for advertising. After that, the multicultural element of the place, and the range of users discourage a group of people to socialize or spent time in the square. Finally, during observation session, illegal activities, such as drug trafficking, are noticed something that makes people feel unsafe. A cause for that is the lack of police around as well as the density of the users, where illegal users can be hide. According to people view, they don’t feel like there is enough safety in Monastiraki sq. There is a big percentage of who think that there are “undesirable” group of people in the square.

46

The pictures below demonstrate different activities that take place in Monastiraki.

Picture 24, Free Food from Social Cuisine, March 2015 Picture 25, dancers’ show in the middle of the square

Picture 26, Use of the square’s public area for private equipment Picture 27, Street musicians

Picture 28, outdoor trade Picture 29, event for World Without War and Violence Group

Syntagma Square is an alive and that way a successful square as, first of all, it is a reference point for Athens, that over the centuries has been marked in the collective consciousness of the Athenians as the landmark of their city. Secondly, it is an area of ​​collective expression, such as parades, protests, outdoor events, celebrations, political speeches, cultural events of the municipality and so on. In these cases, the square itself is the reception area of ​​public life and the end point of the routes into the city.

Finally, Syntagma is a transfer station for human activities as its location, is directly linked to points of the city of political economic and cultural interest, which transform it to an intermediary hub for human activities. The following table classifies activities of Syntagma square according to Jan Gehl categories.

47

ACTIVITIES FREQUENCY

big

NECESSARY

OPTIONAL

SOCIAL ACTIVITIES

(walking) – passing through

sitting around

Seasonal events

working

taking photographs

use of underground station

Tourists’ visit

small

Children playing music or shows from multinational groups

protest events

Even if Syntagma square is a landmark itself, users’ presence is developed as part of everyday economic activities, such as commuting to and from workplaces and spaces of consumption. Thus, the square operates according to the economic territory that is the surrounding area. Associations develop due to the square’s position through individual practices such as crossing, short breaks and as a meeting point.

Thus, Syntagma is a square that hosts a bigger number of users, because of its location. Cafes and restaurants occupy a small part of its surface and they don’t constitute a purpose for visiting the place.

Furthermore, as a ceremonial public space, some other actors use the place such as the State, local authorities, political parties, and social movements. Nevertheless, Syntagma Square is considered by the respondents one of the most vibrant square in Athens, combining a wide range of events. Underground passers-by, tourists, service workers, street-goers, teenagers with skateboards, the consumer crowd heading to Ermou street and those who simply use the square for rest create a colorful puzzle that gives to Syntagma Square, a metropolitan character.

A different kind of users A result of the Greek socio - economic crisis of recent years is the increase of homeless people in Athens city centre. They choose popular squares to settle in due to the high traffic, so that they have greater security and some financial support from the passers-by. In the case of Monastiraki Square they have been settled on Ermou street, beneath the arcades that lead to the square, in order to protect them from the weather. In Syntagma square they can be found near the green areas where the trees provide a sense of safety. Even if these people are not dangerous, and maybe they are in greater risk than the temporary users, their appearance increases the sense of unsafety.

Finally, it can be noticed that in both squares, the last years local people don’t use cafes and bars around the square for leisure time, but they occupy the rooftops around the square, for that purpose.

That can be considered as a barrier that they put between themselves and the “undesirable” population which makes the society gap bigger and lead to the opposite direction of social sustainability.

These last two points are alarming and they threat the sociability of such alive urban spaces. Today their impact is small, but if the suitable attention won’t be given, maybe the image of many public areas will change in the future.

48

4.7 Questionnaires' Answers

The questionnaires ask users how they personally experience the squares of Syntagma and Monastiraki squares, specifically how they evaluate factors of attractivity in each square. The intention of the questions been posed to people non relevant with architecture and urbanism, is to have a look at squares from user’s perspective and analyze how they perceive it.

Data were collected in the months of January and February, 2020 and the questionnaires were filled online. The outcomes of the questions are recorded in a form of column tables. The results do not illustrate very distinct differences, but they present slight trends, which have to be carefully proceeded. The answers are not described in a separate text, but they are referred during the empirical analysis instead, so as to be compared with the scholars’ research and the writer’s observation findings.

Very helpful are the comments about the squares, that interviewees were urged to write at the end of the questionnaires, as they expressed different opinions which help to evaluate, in a qualitative way, the social sustainability in the two squares.

49

Questionnaires' Answers

50

51

53

Picture 30, Christmas evening in Syntagma square, December 2019

Picture 31, Sunday evening in Syntagma Square, 22-03-2020, No social sustainability

5 Conclusion The general objective of this dissertation was to improve the understanding of the relationship between people and urban space, specifically between users and squares. This concept was narrowed and converted into a specific problem definition. The aim of this thesis was to find out what can make a city square attractive for people and which spatial factors form the social attractivity. For this purpose, two main city squares in Athens, were chosen as a case study.

Even if, Monastiraki and Syntagma squares are different in character, size and the rest physical aspects, the social attractivity is high in both of them. More specifically, based on a literature review, their physical aspects are adequate in accordance with the scholars’ observations, so as to attract and maintain big figures of users. Moreover, the people who have been asked even if they point out some negative characteristics, they state that they will not stop visiting these two squares as they are unique and each one offers them different experiences and feelings. What we can conclude from the analysis above, is that squares are defined by its constructed characteristics but also from the users’ behavior and what is happening in society in different periods of time. Moreover, some design principles can transform a square to a more successful one, while some squares can have the same image through the years and be equally successful.

The crucial factors, according to the respondents affecting the social attractivity the most, are firstly squares’ overall historical identity, and secondly, the diversity of mixed uses the squares and their surroundings offers, which attract variety of people and subsequently increase the local flow of people. The good connection with the whole city, as well as the conveniently located urban elements are significant factors that encourage a varied type of visitors spend time in the square. If someone will ask if Syntagma and Monastiraki are socially sustainable squares, the answer be taken from the previous analysis is yes. Sociability in a public space does not require a big number of people passing through it, but a big number of people who use the place and communicate during their presence on it.

Furthermore, it should be mentioned that even if scholars have examined physical aspects and have written down norms for the design of sustainable squares, through this research, it can be understood that specifically the social sustainability of an urban square is affected by certain factors of each local society which has different culture and history.

An urban square is for users and about them, so on order to create an attractive one, someone should study the local people, their customs and their needs.

To conclude, for scholars and the respondents, the number of users in a square is the main indicator for successful and socially sustainable square. So, we understand that is not possible to write down specific guide of physical criteria for the designers in order to plan a successful square. Social sustainability is a more complex subject which is affected not only by physical aspects of a place, but also by its users and their intentions, which in their turn are affected by the signs of the times and their characteristics. An example from the current history, is the world tragedy happening in our days - Corona Virus. It is obvious how social distancing which is imposed in the majority of countries, affects the public space. There is no sociability in squares, because there are no people to occupy them. Today, even the most crowed or famous squares in the world seem lifeless as there is no sociability in them. The same is happening in Athens, where even in Syntagma square you can see a few people passing through the place but not actually use it.

55

6 Appendix

56

Questionnaire Question 1

2

Answer

I am:

○ local resident

Age Group:

○ visitor / other ○ <25 years old ○ 26-50 years old ○ >50 years old disagree agree ←

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

The square represents a significant symbol (landmark) of the city.

The square is vibrant and does not feel like empty.

The square is clean and well-maintained.

The condition of the facades of building surrounding the square is good.

The square and its surroundings are not disturbed by noisy traffic.

The square has a good access for pedestrians from its surroundings.

The square is accessible by public transport or other private vehicles (bus, car, bike) from its surroundings The square provides enough of seating places.

The square provides places protecting against the weather.

The square offers enough of functional amenities (bins, lamps).

The square provides enough of green elements (trees, shrubs, flowers, grass) Variable activities are present at the square (reading, taking pictures, playing, eating etc.)

People visit and evidently use the buildings surrounding the square.

Walkability of square is not disturbed by any negative barriers or limits.

Square provides enough of restaurants, café or other similar places assigned for sitting and eating.

The square is attractive at the first sight, it welcomes and attracts people.

The square causes a feeling of safety.

Various cultural activities and programs often take place at the square.

This is a place where you would choose to meet your friends.

People have good opportunities to start communicating and socializing.

There are no «undesirable» people at the square.

Other comments or/and suggestions: (optional)

57

→

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

5 5 5

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5

1

2

3

4

5

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5

1

2

3

4

5

7 Bibliography Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., 1977. A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction.

Oxford University Press, New York.

Aravantinos, Ath., 1997. Urban Planning. Towards a Sustainable Urban Development. Symmetry, Athens.

Carmona, M. (Ed.), 2003. Public places, urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design. Architectural Press, Oxford; Boston.

Collective, Department of Architecture - Technical School and Interdepartmental Program of Postgraduate Landscape Studies, 2009. Squares of Europe, Squares of Europe. Ziti, Athens.

Cullen, G., 1995. The concise townscape. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford ; Boston.

Cutini, V., 2014. Spatial Analysis of Urban Squares, TeMA - Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment. doi: 10.6092/1970-9870/2476.

Domes magazine 0909, 2009. “Urban nodes” – “Astikoi Komvoi”

Galani, N., 2004. Athens Unification Archeology Program: The Renovation of the Historic City Center.

Athens: ECHA

Gehl, J., 2010. Cities for people. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Karydis N. Dimitris, 2008. The Seven Books of Town Planning. Athens: Papasotiriou

Dannenbrink, Robert F. “Nova Series NR1, 112 Pp Perla Korosecserfaty The Main Square/Functions and Daily Uses of Stortorget in Malmö 1982 ARIS Stroudsburg, PA.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 1983: 358–362. Web.

Krier, R., Rowe, C., 1991. Urban space, 5. imp. ed. Academy Editions, London.

Lefebvre H., 1991. The production of space. Blackwell, Oxford.

Lennard, S.H.C., Lennard, H.L., 2008. Genius of the European square: how Europe’s traditional

58

multi-functional squares support social life and civic engagement: a guide for city officials, planners, architects and community leaders in North America and Europe. International Making Cities Livable Council, Carmel, CA.

Marcus, C.C., Francis, C. (Eds.), 1998. People places: design guidelines for urban open space, 2nd ed. ed. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

McGregor, James H., 2014. Athens. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Monioudi-Gavala, T., 2015. The Greek city from Hippodamus to Cleanthes. [ebook] Athens: Hellenic Academic Libraries Link. Available Online at: http://hdl.handle.net/11419/2927

Moughtin, C., 2004. Urban design: street and square, 3. ed., repr. ed. Architectural Press, Amsterdam.

Patestos, K., 1993. Square Design and City Architecture, Architectural Themes, 27.

Pettas, D., 2017. The production of space under conflict conditions. Athens Social Atlas.

Sarigiannis M. Georgios, 2000. Athens 1830-2000 Evolution - Town Planning – Transport. Athens: Symmetria

Sitte C., Collins, George R, S., 1986. Camillo Sitte: the birth of modern city planning; with a translation of the 1889 Austrian edition of his City planning according to artistic principles. Rizzoli, New York.

Tallet, Margaret, September 1968. Townscape, El espacio público en algunos pueblos de las islas griegas. Architectural Review N° 859.

Whyte, W.H., 1980. The social life of small urban spaces. Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C. Wolfrum, S., Brandis, N. von, Janson, A. (Eds.), 2015. Squares: urban spaces in Europe. Birkhäuser, Basel.

Zucker, Paul., 1959. Town and square: from the agora to the village green. Columbia University Press, New York.

59

8 List of images front cover:

Redefining the city Athens, Resilience Strategy for 2030, pdf. available at: https://ww w.100resilientcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Athens_Resilience_Strate gy_-_Reduced_PDF.compressed.pdf

Picture 1:

Zucker, Paul., 1959. Town and square: from the agora to the village green. Columbia University Press, New York.

Picture 2:

Krier, R., Rowe, C., 1991. Urban space, 5. imp. ed. Academy Editions, London.

Picture 3:

Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., 1977. A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press, New York.

Picture 4:

by author, 2020-01-25

Picture 5:

Sarigiannis M. Georgios, 2000. Athens 1830-2000 Evolution- Town Planning – Transport.

Athens: Symmetria

Picture 6:

Sarigiannis M. Georgios, 2000. Athens 1830-2000 Evolution- Town Planning – Transport.

Athens: Symmetria

Picture 7:

Sarigiannis M. Georgios, 2000. Athens 1830-2000 Evolution- Town Planning – Transport.

Athens: Symmetria

Picture 8:

Sarigiannis M. Georgios, 2000. Athens 1830-2000 Evolution- Town Planning – Transport.

Athens: Symmetria

Picture 9:

map of Athens urban evolution 700 DC - 1990 AD, by author, 2019-12-27

Picture 10:

map of Athens square, by author, 2019-12-27

Picture 11:

map by author, 2020-01-09

Picture 12:

available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/phuongphoto/49114209123/

Picture 13:

available at: https://www.efsyn.gr/node/186460

Picture 14:

map by author, 2020-01-25

Picture 15:

map by author, 2020-01-25

Picture 16:

map by author, 2020-01-22

Picture 17:

by author, 2020-01-15

Picture 18:

Low flights in Syntagma Square, V. Mathioudakis available at:

https://www.efsyn.gr/nisides/73255_oi-raper-kai-oi-skateboardades-tis-plateias

Picture 19:

map by author, 2020-01-29

Picture 20:

by author, 2020-02-10

Picture 21:

by author, 2020-02-10

Picture 22:

by author, 2020-02-13

Picture 23:

available at: https://www.tornosnews.gr/en/files/800px_Attica_06_13_Athens_05_ Syntagma_Square_n_central_Athens_pulsing_with_new_hotels_279127475.jpg

60

Picture 24:

available at: https://news.gtp.gr/2018/11/16/syntagma-square-welcome-new-elia-er mou-athens-hotel/

Picture 25:

available at: https://www.protothema.gr/greece/article/431207/sussitio-agapis-sto- monastiraki-sti-mnimi-tou-adoni-vardi/

Picture 26:

by author, 2019-12-24

Picture 27:

by author, 2019-12-24

Picture 28:

by author, 2019-08-29

Picture 29:

available at: https://left.gr/news/sima-eirinis-2015-sto-monastiraki-poses-zoes-akoma

Picture 30:

available at: https://www.travelstyle.gr/christoygenna-stin-athina-6-1-yperochoi-tro poi-gia-na-mpeite-sto-klima/

Picture 31:

photo by author, 2020-03-22

back cover:

Redefining the city Athens, Resilience Strategy for 2030, pdf. available at: https://ww w.100resilientcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Athens_Resilience_Strate gy_-_Reduced_PDF.compressed.pdf

61