PUBLIC SPACES IN HERITAGE CONTEXT IN COMPARISON OF GEORGETOWN, PENANG AND EDINBURGH, SCOTLAND
NUR FADHLYANA BINTI MOHD FADHIL MARCH ADVANCED ARCHITECTURE DESIGN UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE 2016
DECLARATION
.
“I hereby declare that this dissertation submission is my own work and has been composed by myself. It contains no unacknowledged text and has not been submitted in any previous context. All quotations have been distinguished by quotation marks and all sources of information, text, illustration, tables, images etc. have been specifically acknowledged. I accept that if having signed this Declaration my work should be found at Examination to show evidence of academic dishonesty the work will fail and I will be liable to face the University Senate Discipline Committee.�
Name : NUR FADHLYANA BINTI MOHD FADHIL
Signed :
Date
: 22nd August 2016
3
ABSTRACT
.
Public spaces are fundamental areas of every city in the world. The urban public spaces are made to reflect the cities’ cultural, social and economic contexts. The essential one in a city that would welcome most people and be a tourist spot usually are public spaces with historical values. These areas usually consist of memorable, accessible, and meaningful places, with all the historical assets and monuments. However, in recent studies, most researchers have published the decline in public spaces, especially in terms of their physical design and the usage of the urban public spaces. They have listed the general causes of failure faced by most public spaces. At the end of their studies, they think it is necessary for every designer or planners to first study the actual use of a space before designing; especially who, how, why and when it is used. Right set of this circumstance, this thesis is aimed to investigate the relationship between the physical design of a public space and the activity patterns in the area. Considering the actual spaces of where historical structures are within the public spaces, the thesis will focus on the people activities in different uses of the public space including both passive and active engagements. Two types of methodological approaches are used in this thesis that are direct observations and activity mapping to be used in two selected case studies; Georgetown, Penang and Edinburgh, Scotland. These methodologies shall answer the research questions of this thesis; How do people’s activities relate to the physical patterns of an urban public space? And how people’s activities affected and encouraged by urban public space’s physical features? Briefly, by demonstrating the relationship between daily uses of the spaces related to the physical design features within public spaces in this thesis, will create awareness on urban public space design theories and practices especially for further planning process. 5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
.
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. In the process of completing this dissertation, many people have generously given their time, help and support. First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my inspiring supervisor, Professor Ashraf M. Salama for his supervisions and knowledge. Without his help and assistance, it would be difficult for me to carry on this thesis works smoothly. To my loving husband Nik Muhammad Akmal bin Azizee who has always been around throughout the process and has constantly encouraged me at times I thought that it is impossible to continue, he helped me to keep things in perspective. Words would never say how grateful I am to him coming all the way from Malaysia to Glasgow as frequently as he could just to make sure I am doing fine with my MArch. Great deals of appreciation also go to the contributions of my parents for their financial and moral support throughout the completion of my studies here. Being 6,645 miles away from them is not an easy thing for me, but holding the responsibility to finish up my studies here and to make them proud has been my aim. The dedication also goes to my little brothers and in laws whom from them I acquire strength. Not to forget, a special thanks to my friends and all students for sharing information and ideas throughout this research works. My appreciation is endless for all who gives hand on helping me intentionally or unintentionally.
Thank you!
7
TABLE OF CONTENT
.
Declaration Abstract Acknowledgement Table of Contents List of Figures List of Tables
3 5 7 9 13 19
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION 1.1 Motivation 1.2 Problem Statement and Research Question 1.3 Purpose and Significance of Study 1.4 Research Framework
21 25 27 31
CHAPTER 2 : KEY INFLUENTIAL FACTORS OF PUBLIC SPACES 2.1 Public Spaces 35 2.1.1 Definitions of Public Space 37 2.1.2 Characteristics of Public Space 39 2.2 Public Spaces in Heritage Context 41 2.2.1 Defining Urban Heritage 43 2.2.2 Functions of Public Spaces in Historic Cities 43 2.2.3 Importance of Public Spaces in Historic Cities 45 2.3 Outcomes of Literature Reviews 47 2.3.1 Place Making Principles 47 2.3.2 Failure of Public Spaces 51 2.4 Research Directions 55 CHAPTER 3 : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Methodology Approach
57
3.2
3.3
3.4 3.5
Case Studies Selection 3.2.1 Georgetown, Penang in Malaysia 3.2.2 Edinburgh, Scotland in United Kingdom Data Collection Procedure 3.3.1 Direct Observation 3.3.2 Activity Mapping Limitation of Study Conclusion
59 59 63 65 67 69 71 73
CHAPTER 4 : CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS 4.1 Case Study 1 : Georgetown, Penang 4.1.1 Contextual Study 4.1.2 Public Life 4.1.3 Public Realm 4.2 Case Study 2 : Edinburgh, Scotland 4.2.1 Contextual Study 4.2.2 Public Life 4.2.3 Public Realm 4.3 Comparative Analysis 4.4 Conclusion
75 75 77 91 109 109 109 117 125 127
CHAPTER 5 : EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS 5.1 Case Study 1 : Georgetown, Penang 5.1.1 Activity Level and Types 5.1.2 Activity Locations 5.2 Case Study 1 : Georgetown, Penang 5.2.1 Activity Level and Types 5.2.2 Activity Locations 5.3 Comparative Analysis 5.4 Conclusion
131 133 139 145 149 155 159 161
CHAPTER 6 : DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Research Contributions 6.2 Recommendations
165 169
Conclusion Bibliography
171 173
11
LIST OF FIGURES
.
CHAPTER 1 Figure 1.1 - Basic elements of place (Canter, 1977) Figure 1.2 - Sense of place (adapted from Montgomery, 1988) Figure 1.3 - Research framework
26 28 32
CHAPTER 2 Figure 2.1 - Proposed research study Figure 2.2 - Literature review framework Figure 2.3 - Conceptual framework
34 36 54
CHAPTER 3 Figure 3.1 - Data collection procedures Figure 3.2 - Map of Georgetown, Penang in Malaysia Figure 3.3 - Historical image of Padang Kota Lama used as Penang Sports and Recreation Club (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 3.4 - Padang Kota Lama is used as an exercise area today (Google image, 2016) Figure 3.5 - Map of Edinburgh, Scotland in Edinburgh Figure 3.6 - Historical image of Princes Street Garden towards the Ross Bandstand (postcard Bureau, 1977) Figure 3.7 - View towards Ross Bandstand and Edinburgh Castle (Mikehume, 2008) Figure 3.8 - The behavioural matrix with the recorded data (GoliÄ?nik, 2005) Figure 3.9 - The behavioural map in narrow sense (GoliÄ?nik, 2005)
56 58 60 60 62 64 64 66 68
CHAPTER 4 Figure 4.1 - Location plan of Georgetown, Penang Figure 4.2 - How public spaces in Georgetown is utilized (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.3 - Location of hawker stalls (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.4 - Street hawker stalls in Lorong Baru lane, Georgetown (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.5 - Historical images of street hawker (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.6 - Images of street trading (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.7 - Historical images of street trading (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.8 - Images of shopping and buying (Google image, 2016)
76 77 78 78 79 80 81 82
Figure 4.9 - Historical image of shopping and buying (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.10 - Images of relaxing and enjoying (Google image, 2016)
83 84
Figure 4.11 - Historical images of relaxing and enjoying (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.12 - Images of exercising and health (Google image, 2016)
85 86
Figure 4.13 - Historical images of people exercising in Georgetown (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.14 - Images of religious and festival (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.15 - Historical images of festivals (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.16 - Location of public realms in Georgetown (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
87 88 89 90
Figure 4.17 - Images of Tanjong City Marina (Google image, 2016) 92 Figure 4.18 - Historical images of Weld Quay (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.19 - Images of Fort Cornwallis (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.20 - Historical images of Fort Cornwallis (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.21 - Images of Padang Kota Lama (Google image, 2016)
93 94 95 96
Figure 4.22 - Historical images of Padang Kota Lama (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.23 - Images of Esplanade Seafront (Google image, 2016)
97 98
Figure 4.24 - Historical images of Esplanade Seafront (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.25 - Images of English garden (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.26 - Historical images of English garden (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.27 - Images of Green Hall Lane seafront (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.28 - Images of Friendship Park (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.29 - Images of Chulia Street Parklet (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.30 - Historical images of Chulia Street (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.31 - Images of Jalan Chee Phoon benches (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) Figure 4.32 - Images of Armenian Street Park (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.33 - Location plan of Edinburgh, Scotland
15
99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108
Figure 4.34 - Images of shopping culture in Edinburgh (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.35 - Images of shopping culture in Edinburgh (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.36 - Spill out café during summer time Figure 4.37 - Visiting historical culture Figure 4.38 - Car boot sale in Omni Park (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.39 - Open Spaces in Edinburgh city (Tourist publication, 2014) Figure 4.40 - View of Calton Hill from Holyrood Park (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.41 - View of Holyrood Park from the ground (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.42 - View of Edinburgh Castle from the West Princes Street Garden café beneath (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.43 - View of the busy East Princes Street Garden during summer (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.44 - The view of Charlotte Square (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.45 - View of the Melville Monument in St. Andrew’s Square (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.46 - The famous Meadows park during spring season (Google image, 2016) Figure 4.47 - View of Bruntsfield Links (Google image, 2016) CHAPTER 5 Figure 5.1 - Projection of site location within Georgetown, Penang Figure 5.2 - Approximate location of the site (red outline) (Google Earth, 2016) Figure 5.3 - Padang Kota Lama, Georgetown activity patterns in weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday)
110 110 112 112 114 116 118 118 120 120 122 122 124 124
130 132 138
Figure 5.4 - Padang Kota Lama, Georgetown activity patterns in weekend (11th July 2016, Monday) Figure 5.5 - Photos take for the activities done during the observation periods in Georgetown. Figure 5.6 - Projection of site location within Edinburgh, Scotland Figure 5.7 - Approximate location of the site (red outline) (Google Earth, 2016) Figure 5.8 - West Princes Street Garden, Edinburgh activity patterns in weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday) Figure 5.9 - West Princes Street Garden, Edinburgh activity patterns in weekend (14th July 2016, Thursday) Figure 5.10 - Photos take for the activities done during the observation periods in Edinburgh Figure 5.11 - Comparison Activities between Georgetown and Edinburgh Public Spaces
17
140 142 144 145 154 154 156 158
LIST OF TABLES
.
CHAPTER 2 Table 2.1 - The declination of public spaces critiques (adapted from Carmona, 2010) CHAPTER 5 Table 5.1 - Observation data in Padang Kota Lama public space during the weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday) Table 5.2 - Observation data in Padang Kota Lama public space during the weekday (11th July 2016, Monday) Table 5.3 - Observation data in Padang Kota Lama public space during all sessions Table 5.4 - Observation data in West Princes Street Garden public space during the weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday) Table 5.5 - Observation data in West Princes Street Garden public space during the weekday (14th July 2016, Thursday) Table 5.6 - Observation data in West Princes Street Garden public space during all sessions
19
50
134 135 136 150 151 152
1 INTRODUCTION
.
This chapter will introduce the problem statements, research questions, scope of works and the significance of the study. Case studies selection will be outlined and methods of study will be explained generally with the overall outline of this thesis works.
1.1 Motivation In heritage context, it is not only the walls, windows, roofs and other architectural elements that proclaim the heritage value but also its environmental quality. The dwelling patterns of a culture track the evolution of its identity, and as such acquires a heritage value to an urban space (Munasinghe, 2000). Urban spaces are parts of the city which are available for everyone use, whether they are publicly or privately owned. They play a particular role in the life of urban areas, such as memorable, accessible, or meaningful places (Madanipour, 2010). The Urban Land Institute stated that, “the public realm serves a critical function as a uniting feature for cities, and must be designed to foster an atmosphere of ‘inclusitivity’, of ‘classlessness’ that gives all residents a sense of ownership and a shared stake in their cities’. Thus, public urban space should be a comfortable area where users can spend most of their time, have a strong attachment and sense of ownership. The physical attributes of the spaces may indicate particular
meanings to the people, having a significant impact on people’s perceptions, interactions and activities (Canter, 1977). However, while designers developing spaces with new and better approaches of public space, it is said that some of the public spaces experiencing a decline in their physical design and usages. Carmona (2010) mentioned in one of his articles; ‘Contemporary Public Space: Critique and Classification’, critiques in the urban spaces started with the failure of the function and attitude of the public space itself. He mentioned about the phenomenon of invaded spaces that happened due to the loss or lack of social function and experiences in urban spaces that is now over used by traffic and private cars. It is seen that public realm has been challenged by various developments such as, increasing numbers of mobility. Plus, in ‘The Fall of Public Man’ by Sennett (1977), recorded on how developing in social, political and economic factors lead the community to search for privatization, more than a public culture. People tend to enjoy themselves indoor compare to outdoor, with new and developing technologies such as televisions and internet. Thus, in this period of change in developing cities, it is important for designers take a step back to study and investigate the functions of the public spaces; how it shall be designed? Who will be the users? Why it shall be improved and managed? And many more. It is said by Munasinghe (2000) that ‘the unique compositional orders of the urban elements, social structures based on race, caste, religion, life patterns, and activity and investment patterns, diversify the urban heritage, its component of object and idea both. As such, more place-oriented evaluation tools are needed to assess the urban heritage and its valuing community’. Designers shall take this point to understand the interrelationship between physical patterns of contemporary public spaces and people’s activity patterns within these spaces. Such researches will help to find out why and how “some places work and others do not” (Whyte, 1980). Comparison study of public spaces in different parts of the world can be searched as different places have 23
different social life of the communities, even public space usages might differ too.
1.2 Problem Statement and Research Question In this research study, the history of a city will be focused along with its social and cultural life. This is important to see how urban spaces, change its nature and developed throughout the term. Assessing the heritage values will proposes an approach that would enhance a cultural continuity. The behavioural pattern of public spaces, particularly public squares will be studied by focusing on the relationship between the physical settings and the activity patterns of users. It attempts to understand the activity-physical patterns relationship in urban public spaces (Golicnik, 2011). The research problem addresses the lack of actual knowledge about activity patterns and their integration with physical patterns in the process of designing the contemporary urban public spaces (Golicnik, 2011). This problem forms the main reason to clarify, evaluate and analyse the relationship between physical patterns and people’s activity patterns within urban public spaces. The importance of appropriate knowledge of the relationship between physical and activity patterns is argued by several scholars including Lynch (1960), Canter (1977), Gehl (1987), Shaftoe (2008) and Carmona (2010). A literature review done will address the study regarding this specific aspects done by the famous scholars and designers of public spaces, places and people. The key questions of this research study will involve both people and the place such as how people use and experience the place? Below are the main research questions that will address the goal of this study:
25
Figure 1.1 - Basic elements of place (Canter, 1977)
a)
How do people’s activities relate to the physical patterns of an urban public space?
b)
How are people’s activities affected and encouraged by urban public space’s physical features?
In simpler point, this study attempted to clarify how physical settings impact people’s activity patterns within the urban public space. Answering such research questions will fill the gap between theory and practice in this particular part of the place–making and urban design process.
1.3 Purpose and Significance of Study As the problems occur in public spaces as mentioned Carmona (2010), Sennett (1977) and many other scholars, this research shall be done in order to stop the decline of public realms. As said stated by Carmona (2010), there will be less motivation to create new space or maintain the existing one if the declination continues. This research will propose designers to take a step back to really understand the basic elements of place (Figure 1.1). From there, this research focused on the relationship between people and the place, by examining two main components of place – physical setting and activity – and concentrates on the relationship between physical features of the urban public space related to people’s activity pattern it will provide better understanding of the function of urban spaces. In relation to Canter (1977) studies, this research study will bring designers back to view the quality or characteristic of public spaces precisely with reference to Montgomery research in 1988. Montgomery emphasized that this the quality or characteristics of a space can illustrate how design can contribute to and enhance the potential sense of place (Figure 1.2). 27
Figure 1.2 - Sense of place (adapted from Montgomery, 1988)
The study will contribute to the urban design literature by considering place theories and concepts to determine whether they are implemented in current public space designs and principles. Studying the relationship between physical settings and activities will provide a broad overview of the concepts of place theory, and identify the important role of this relationship in public space design processes. Therefore, this research will fill a knowledge gap in the field of urban design and clarify the role the built environment plays in creating relationships between physical settings and people’s activity. Analysing this relationship will add insight into and complement the application of urban design theories and practice which could lead to further study to improve the design and planning process. The purpose of this thesis is clear that are to provide an overview of public spaces and to explore the relationship between the physical and activity patterns of a public place, in this context, public squares. This study will contribute to the field of urban planning and designing as it will define the actual psychological attributes of the public spaces. The main goal of the research study is to explore how physical setting can offer different kind of human interactions to the public spaces and how to examine that the spaces succeed in providing social interactions or it is just a failed unused space. That is why two case studies are selected to make comparisons between those public spaces that might offer different interactions.
29
Figure 1.3 – Research framework
1.4 Research Framework To achieve the research goals and to answer the research questions, this research includes various chapters. Starting with the first chapter, explaining the problem statement, research question, purpose and significance of the study. This chapter will elaborate on the researches done and gives an overview of the overall report. Then, in Chapter 2, the research goes in deep study of the public spaces in general. The literature review is done to have a better understanding of the public space. A theoretical study from the famous scholars and designers is reviewed. The literature review will be done in three parts that are literature study of general public spaces, study of heritage public spaces, and the study of issues in public spaces. It is important to understand how theories of place were developed through time and follow the evolution of contemporary patterns and designs to find out what elements were applied in their planning and design process. The focus of this review is theories and concepts of public space design, which are examined, to provide an understanding of what components are involved in the planning and designing of public spaces. It is through an examination of the place theory literature that the importance of the place components – physical setting, activity pattern, and meaning– are revealed. The literature pertaining to public spaces’ physical setting and, more specifically, focused on people’s activity and the relation between these two main components of place, is essential to this study. This thesis therefore presents the main elements, principles and characteristics of places that influence people’s activity patterns within a public space. As well, it will make the argument that place theories and concepts play a major role in the public space design process and are imperative in creating socially vibrant spaces. The information and criteria derived from this literature review will be a part of the activity–physical pattern relationship analysis. This framework of place theories and principles provides the basis on which the
31
relationship between individuals’ activity and physical patterns within public spaces are investigated. Meanwhile, in Chapter 3, there are detail methods being used and adopted in order to achieve the aims and objectives of the research study. Case studies selection will also be forwarded in this chapter to give general information on the chosen site and the reason of the selections. Besides, readers are also told about the experience and difficulties faced throughout the research progress. The following chapters will be the results and analysis of the data collections. In Chapter 4, contextual analysis will be forwarded. Public space is chosen from both Asia countries and Western countries. This is to compare the values of public realm in the East and West, how culture gave impacts on the evolution of the city public spaces. Thus, in this chapter, contextual studies of the site area, the public life and public realms will be clarified. The studies continue with the data collections in Chapter 5, on the empirical analysis. All of the field data collections will be digitalised and analysed in this chapter. At the end of the chapter, readers will be forwarded with the comparisons of the data collections between the two public spaces as well as the conclusions of the studies. The last chapter will be demonstrated the outcomes of the research study. Final discussions will be resolved and recommendations on how to design a proper public space will outline. This chapter will relate back to the research questions to make sure this project has met the objectives and aims. Figure 1.3 shows the framework of this research study.
33
Figure 2.1 - Proposed research study
2 KEY INFLUENTIAL FACTORS OF PUBLIC SPACES
.
This chapter attempts to present the topic related to the research study in its conceptual context. Literature reviews of the three interested fields will be discussed. As outlined in the previous chapter, Canter (1977) informs in his research, the three elements of places include; activities, physical attribute and conceptions (refer Figure 1.1). However, to study people behaviour in relation to its environment, only two aspects will be studied and will relate to the heritage context (Figure 2.1). Thus, this chapter will focus in three theoretical studies that are; a) Public spaces in general, b) Public spaces in heritage context, and c) Declination of public spaces regarding the place making issues, see Figure 2.2.
2.1 Public Spaces Urban design is defined as actions and processes to make a better place making for people. In the Public Places, Urban Spaces (2010) book, it is said in the discussions of urban design and place making, the public realm topic is often to be less recognize even it is important to study the concept of the public realm and how it is related to the public life. Literature study stated that the public realm has physical dimensions and social dimensions; in which physical dimensions are
35
Figure 2.2 - Literature review framework
the space itself while social dimensions the activity or behaviour of people in the space. As observed by Loukaitou-Sideris and Banerjee (1998), “public life involves relatively open and universal social contexts, in contrast to private life, which is intimate, familiar, shielded, controlled by the individual, and shared only with family and friends.” Thus, it is important to study the relation of the public life of people and their spaces.
2.1.1
Definitions of Public Space
Public space is a part of the public realm. The famous explanation by Carmona (2004) define that “public space relates to all those parts of the built and natural environment where the public have free access. It encompasses: all the streets, squares and other rights of way, whether predominantly in residential, commercial or community/civic uses; the open spaces and parks; and the “publicprivate” spaces where public access is unrestricted (at least during daylight hours). It includes the interfaces with key internal and private spaces to which the public normally has free access.” As viewed above, access seems to be one of the important keys of public spaces. Even Lynch (1981) argues that open space is open when it is accessible and from there, Cooper and Francis (1998) stated that; “urban open spaces are defined as publicly accessible open places designed and built for human activity and enjoyment including parks and downtown plazas.” According to Carr et al. (1992), public space is spaces that are open, publicly accessible places where people go for group or individual activities. However, public spaces will mean different things to different people and that is why a wider scope should be studied to relate back how public spaces are connected to the public life. 37
2.1.2
Characteristic of Public Space
According to Carr et al. (1992), a public spaces need to be a meaningful place, places for people to feel attached, being democratic, provides freedom of the users’ action and behaviour, responsive and serves the peoples' needs. Below are the principle public space characteristics and will provide people’s primary needs within the public spaces: • Protection – Places where users can feel safe in an open public spaces, especially outdoors. The public spaces shall provide protection from traffic and accidents such as car accidents, protection against the harm, crime and violence and lastly protection against unpleasant sense such as wind, cold, dust, pollutions, etc. (Gehl, 2008) • Comfort – In terms of user comfort, a public space shall provide possibilities for walking (room for walking, good pavements, etc), possibilities to stay, to sit (provide benches), possibilities to see (good lighting and sight), possibilities to hear or talk (low noise level) and to have possibilities to play or do activities. (Gehl, 2008). For Carmona (2010) successful public spaces provide a comfort environment for the residents which are measured by people’s activity duration as well as considering environmental (sun, wind, etc.), physical (seating choices), psychological (space character) situations as a sense of comfort. Physical design can improve the sense of comfort. • Visually attractive – Usually, this relates to the design and detailing, Trees, plants, water and other landscape quality will provide aesthetic values. Besides, public arts also becoming famous to give visual experiences. Basically, how people perceive a space may contribute to the space use or lack of use. (Cooper and Francis, 1998) • Territoriality - Control and participation aspects are also characteristic of a public space. Shaftoe (2008) said that mark and claim territory is potentially to
39
be problematic as public spaces theoretically belongs to anyone, the public, but there are extreme cases where public spaces belongs to a group or gangs. The amount and freedom and control a space offers have been suggested as the basis for people’s use and enjoyment of an open space (Lynch, 1981). • Publicness - Public access is a critical factor to open space quality. Lynch (1981) defines accessibility in terms of open-space rights such as the right of presence, use and action. Lynch’s concept of spatial rights provides a useful measure of the effective “Publicness” of an open space (Cooper and Francis, 1998)
2.2 Public Spaces in Heritage Context The connections between historic environment and sense of place (urban spaces) are most clearly made through research that links placed distinctiveness (what makes a place distinctive), place continuously (the way a place supports people’s sense of continuity) and place dependency (how a place enables people to realize their goals) to a sense of place (Graham et al., 2009). However, it is said that the relationship between people and a space are also important aspects to indicate a sense of place. In this section, literature review of public spaces in heritage context is point out to understand how public spaces work and established in heritage context. The functions and importance of the public spaces might differ from the contemporary public spaces.
41
2.2.1
Defining Urban Heritage
Conservative is the act of protecting the past for memorial values, valuing man’s knowledge as they reinforced continuity and shaped each culture with a unique identity. Munasinghe (2000) said that a city, historic or not, ancient or not, acquires a heritage value by being an encoded setting, thus demonstrate the environmental qualities as urban heritages. In the context of urban heritages, public space is an important element of urban space and urban life. It functions as a place to have social interactions, encourage activities and a place for relaxing. Xing and Kin (2000) stated, public space contains centuries-old history in both the Western and Eastern world. Thus, the definitions will be different. Example of historical identities that are still present in today’s urban space qualities include the Greek agora, Roman forum, medieval market places, pizzas, residential squares and American city parks (Xing and Kin, 2000). Plus, according to Xing and Kin (2000), although there are increasing in the urban landscape in public spaces, business and political factors have swallowed bits by bits public spaces in order to engage with today’s overrated development of modern cities. That is why, due to the different urban development structures, public space has its own natures and characteristics.
2.2.2
Functions of Public Spaces in Historic Cities
In the article by Project for Public Spaces (2010), historic places are in high ranking on the Public Spaces list. This is because historical spaces are more human-scaled, vibrant and user friendly. The article attempts to highlight how place making of urban space can function in preservations of the heritage city. They take efforts to “save the places where great moments from history – and the important moments of everyday life – took place by revitalizing neighbourhoods
43
and communities, sparking economic development and promoting environmental sustainability” (Project for Public Spaces (2010). According to the National Trust, historical sites possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and associations. Thus, it is important to preserve them as the historical moods and emotions will bring memories to the people. Below are functions of public space which might help in preserving the heritage sites (project for Public Spaces, 20101); • Restore historic social functions of a building or historic district • Approach people on how historic places were created in the first place • Expand the impact of preservation projects • Expand the constituency for preservation movement (and vice versa)
2.2.3
Importance of Public Spaces in Historic Cities
According to Litvin (2005), historic living city is a combination of places, which have been blessed by its people’s heritage values. Its environment can be described as a relic of past events, occupations and ownerships. In the context of historical living city, the communal activities that have been inherited in hundreds of years are the source of liveliness. This can be referred to as a reflection of culture, values and worldwide, resulting in lifestyle, which is the main factor to understand the operative system of the city, and the way people respond to behave in it (Rapoport, 1977). Furthermore, these influences create a rich blend of cultures, sub-cultures, customs, traditions, artworks; through the manifestation of folk-culture and sub-cultures, creating a juxtaposition of a very unique society and built environment (Idid, 2008). The interaction of human with the past and the present surroundings produce an urban dynamism and creates the spirit of the
45
place. The daily lifestyles make a strong impact on the usage of space. The little plaza, the wall along the street, the space under a family tree, the streets, the spaces under the roof of the house entrance doors and all of the spatial surroundings create the possibility for social life. The existence of the place contributes to the development of social life in the community (Dumreicher and Kolb, 2008). In other words, public spaces, which accommodate daily as well as communal activities, are an important source of liveliness in living historic cities.
2.3 Outcomes of Literature Reviews From the previous sections, the overview of public spaces is done generally as it is important to relate back the functionalities of a public space before designing a space. Studies on the originality of how public space was used in historical period also was reviewed. Thus, it is important to study the relationship between people and places need to be done so that designers can design a better people place. In this section, we will focus on why does some public space doesn’t work or unsuccessful in their functionality.
2.3.1
Place Making Principles
As recommended by Banarjee (2001), urban designers need to focus on the concept of public life before designing a public space because public life is traditionally associated with public spaces. Basically, a successful public spaces are characterized by the presence of people. Patsy Healey (2005) studied the interrelation between people and place, activities and territories: “Places are as many social nodes as physical sites, evident in the meanings given to them as much as in the interactions which take place within them. It is impossible to avoid the intense and deep conflicts that routinely surface when planning interventions
47
aimed to improve particular place qualities are initiated. Where do planners start in considering our core focus on ‘people and place’ relations?”. The structure of the built environment identifies the places where particular activities take place, and determines which areas are to be used by whom and what for. In general, it identifies social interaction, movement patterns, and human activities (Bornberg, 2008). Carmona (2010) believes that understanding the relationship between people (society) and their environment (space) is a necessary component of urban design and considers it in a social dimension (Carmona, 2010). People and built environment are obviously related: it is difficult to see a ‘space’ as being without social context, and equally, a social context without a spatial component. People and their environment are interactively related and affect each other. Carmona (2010) believes that by creating the built environment, urban designer's influence patterns of use and, thus, of social life. He then adds that physical features are thus neither the exclusive nor necessarily the dominant influence on activity patterns, though what people are able to do is constrained by environmental opportunities provided for them. Therefore, pattern of activity not only depends on the situation, but also depends on social, cultural and perceptual context (Carmona, 2010). It is worth mentioning that a valuable distinction between ‘potential’ and ‘effective’ environments exists, whereby a physical setting is a potential environment, providing a range of environmental opportunities regarding what people are able to do (Carmona, 2010). Thus, while designers create potential environments, people create effective environments. The relationship between people and their environment is, thus, best conceived as a continuous bilateral process in which people create and modify spaces while at the same time being influenced by those spaces. Rather than determining people’s activity, urban design can be seen as a means of addressing the probabilities of particular activities occurring within the space (Carmona, 2010).
49
2.3.2
Failure of Public Spaces
There are observations on the fall of public spaces. Many researchers have given their comments and critiques regarding this issue. One of the main reasons is the development of technology and mobility. There is less interaction between the people, thus public spaces are neglected. People started to use the car rather than walking through the city. Increasing autodependent gives problems in terms of environmental, economic and social (Newman and Kenworthy, 2000). The next failure of public spaces is caused by the privatization of public spaces. Ellin (1996) has concerned how the public culture ended due to social and civic functions in public spaces are being avoided since people are more comfortable being in private realms or indoor to do activities, gain information and have entertainment. Whilst all of those behaviours usually done in public spaces, now that people have technologies such as television and the internet, the public spaces are being avoided. Nevertheless, Brill (1989) and Krieger (1995) argue that the perceptions of public realm itself has met failure due to the false notion that in reality public spaces have never been “...as diverse, dense, classless or democratic..� as it imagined. There are many more comments and critiques being forwarded by researchers. The critiques and their exploration within the literature are fully summarized in Table 2.1. However, some authors argue that the reported decline in this realm is much exaggerated. For example, Lees (1994) argues that contemporary public spaces still contain important aspects of urban life, and although many primarily commercial public spaces lack wider civic functions, we should remember that commercial space has always been built into public space and vice versa.
51
Table 2.1 – The declination of public spaces critiques (adapted from Carmona, 2010)
Critiques
Summarization
Researcher Discussions
Neglected space
Public space that is neglected physically and socially
Chatterton and Hollands 2002; Loukaitou-Sideris 1996; Roberts and Turner 2005; Trancik 1986; Tibbalds 2001; Worpole and Knox 2007; Worpole 1999
Invaded space
Public space that is used for car movements
Buchanan 1988; Duany, PlaterZyberk, and Speck 2000; Ford 2000; Garreau 1991; Gehl and Gemzoe 2000; Graham and Marvin 2001; Lefebvre 1991; Llewelyn-Davies 2000
Exclusionary space
Public spaces with physical and psychological barriers to accomplish designs and managements pride
Engwicht 1999; Gehl 1996; Whyte 1980, 1988; Hall and Imrie 1999; Imrie and Hall 2001; Johns 2001; Lofland 1998; Lang 1994; Malone 2002
Consumption space
Public spaces that fail to address the relentless commodification
Boyer 1994; Carmona et al. 2003; Hajer and Reijndorp 2001; Mattson 1999; Sorkin 1992
Privatised space
Public spaces that are privated for political debate and social exclusion
Boyer 1993; Ellin 1999; Kohn 2004; Low and Smith 2005; Loukaitou-Sideris and Banerjee 1998; Mandanipour 2003; Minton 2006; Nemeth and Schmidt 2011
Segregated space
Reflecting the desire of affluent groups in many societies to separate themselves from the rest of society
Boddy 1992; Blakely and Snyder 1997; Bentley 1999; Low and Smith 2005; Miethe, 1995; Oc and Tiesdell 1997; Sennett 1977; Webster 2001
Insular space
Public space that fails to halt domestic and virtual realms
Aurigi 2005; Banerjee 2001; Castells 1996; Ellin 1996; Graham and Marvin 1999; Mitchell 1995; Oldenburg, 1999; Sassen 1994
Invented space
Public spaces with formula-driven entertainment
Crang 1998; New Economics Foundation 2004; Sircus 2001; Wilson 1995; Yang 2006; Zukin 1995
Scary space
Public spaces where crimes are dominated to the perception of the place
Atkinson 2003; Davies 1992; Ellickson 1996; Fyfe 1998; Jacobs 1961; Kilian 1998; Kohn 2004; Lynch and Carr 1991; Mitchell 1995; Murphy 2001; Minton 2009; Welsh and Farrington 2002
Homogenised space
Generally presiding over a homogenisation of the public built environment in the face of the relentless forces of globalisation, overregulation and the claims culture
Beck 1992; Boyer 1994; Bentley 1999; CABE 2007; Carmona 2001; Fainstein 2001; Goldsteen and Elliott 1994; Light and Smith 1998; Sennett 1990
53
Figure 2.3 - Conceptual framework
2.4
Research Directions
Urban designers, planners and architects have both practical and academic environments to make a successful urban public space. To understand the actual use of public spaces, literature and examinations of places shall lead to an opportunity of a good design outcomes. Based on the literature reviews in previous sections, physical and activity principles can lead to the functional attributes. Figure 2.3 will focused the directions of this research works that will lead how research methodologies can be done, considering the relationship between people activities and the place settings.
55
Figure 3.1 - Data collection procedures
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
.
To gain a strong result in this research study, combination of study methods is used to investigate the relationship between physical setting and the activities in the public spaces. In this chapter, the explanation of research methods will include a literature review of previous studies on the methods chosen, the selection of the site studies and the limitation that might occur throughout the data collection procedures.
3.1 Methodology Approach This study is expected to investigate the activity patterns with physical features of public spaces. According to the past research, a combination of methods can be applied to explore the activity and physical relationship. Direct observations and activity mapping can the methodological approach for data collection and shall demonstrate the relationship between daily uses of the space related to the physical design features within public spaces. The methods chosen can be illustrated in Figure 3.1 and a detailed explanation shall be reviewed in the following sections, together with the site selection information.
57
Core Zone Buffer Zone
Figure 3.2 - Map of Georgetown, Penang in Malaysia
3.2 Case Studies Selection Public space is chosen from both Asia countries and Western countries, specifically on heritage site. Two sites are chosen to compare the values of public realm in the East and West, how different culture gave different impacts on the evolution of the city public spaces. Georgetown, Penang is chosen from Asia, while the West country chosen is Edinburgh city, Scotland. Both of these cities are listed in the UNESCO World Heritage City. It relies on a selected public space in Georgetown, Penang and Edinburgh, Scotland for which data will be collected from field observation and activity mapping
3.2.1
Georgetown, Penang in Malaysia
Penang is one of the state in Malaysia that is located in the Northwest Coast of Peninsular Malaysia by the Strait of Malacca. Georgetown is the capital of Penang that has been awarded as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 2008. It is a well preserved cultural and historical heritage city. Walking down the streets of Georgetown is like walking through the paths of history. This multicultural city of three main ethnics; Malays, Chinese and Indians have preserved their cultures very well and still continue to practice their native traditions. Thus, in the city’s historic core, urban form of old colonial buildings, narrow streets and lanes with foods, shops, public arts and places of worship in this diverse population can be found. Erik said in his article titled Malaysia’s Colonial Past and Multicultural Heritage in Georgetown, Penang, “only here in Malaysia, we can see a Muslim mosque stands right next to Chinese temple and across a Christian church along with the Hindu festival passing on the street.” Therefore, this city is a good platform to be studied as Asia’s public spaces in heritage context.
59
2Figure 3.3 - Historical image of Padang Kota Lama used as Penang Sports and Recreation Club (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
Figure 3.4 - Padang Kota Lama is used as an exercise area today (Google image, 2016)
The area chosen for this public space study will be at Padang Kota Lama. The Padang Kota Lama is a field (Malay word; Padang) or ground created by the British colonies in front of the Town Hall. Consist of 69,650sqm, the open area is one of the most popular sites on Penang Island where most of the events will be held here such as exhibitions, festivals and political rallies. While on the daily basis, the space is used for relaxation and exercise, especially in the morning and evening. The area consist of a basketball court, playground, English garden, food court and some monuments or structures. Unfortunately, the research said that there were several structures on Padang Kota Lama that have been demolished since the Second World War and never rebuilt after that, such as the clubhouse buildings of the Penang Sports Club (Cricket Section) and the Penang Recreation Club (Figure 3.3), the Vermont Memorial, a cost iron pavilion for the public, as well as the Municipal Band Stand, a pavilion for public entertainment and ceremonies (mygeorgetown. May. 2010).
61
Core Zone Buffer Zone
Figure 3.5 - Map of Edinburgh, Scotland in Edinburgh
3.2.2
Edinburgh, Scotland in United Kingdom
Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, located in the northern part of the United Kingdom. The Old and New Towns of Edinburgh were listed as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1995. They are one of the most beautiful cityscapes in the world with the unique character of the Medieval Old Town and Georgian New Town (Figure 3.5). It is stated from The Old and New Towns of Edinburgh World Heritage Site (Management Plan 2011 – 2016) that, “the urban form of both towns have a dramatic reflection of significant changes in European urban planning, from the inward looking, defensive walled medieval city of royal palaces, abbeys and organically developed burgage plots in the Old Town, through the expansive formal Enlightenment planning of the 18th and 19th centuries in the New Town, to the 19th century rediscovery and revival of the Old Town with its adaptation of a distinctive Baronial style of architecture in an urban setting.” Thus, as worldly known city, Edinburgh will undertake better understanding of the city public spaces to compare with others. The north area of West Princes Street Garden is chosen to be the case study. It is a 63,485sqm hilly gardens located parallel to Edinburgh Princes Street and is bounded to its south area by a railway line. The green area provides a scenic route for crossing the city centre East-West. There are children play park and fountain at the west end of the park, floral clock displays on the staircase at the entrance at the foot of the Mound, Ross Bandstand, Gardener’s Lodge and more than ten monuments and memorials. The Ross Bandstand and its surrounding terraces were developed in 1935 and has since played host to many rock, pop and brass bands, plays, orchestras and classical concerts over the years even today.
63
Figure 3.6 - Historical image of Princes Street Garden towards the Ross Bandstand (postcard Bureau, 1977)
Figure 3.7 - View towards Ross Bandstand and Edinburgh Castle (Mikehume, 2008)
3.3 Data Collection Procedure The chosen methodologies as discussed above, are to have content analysis, field assessment (behaviour mapping) and direct observations on both case studies (Figure 3.1). The aim of these methods is to pass schematic annotations of public spaces. It will takes point of view how a public space differs from each other. By doing these methods, successful design and place making can be achieved in a place. To explore the activity pattern of a public space in relation to its physical setting, the primary methods of direct observations and behaviour map will be used. Direct observations are done to portray a perceived image of public spaces in the same time to record the behaviour pattern of the community with the existing physical attributes of the spaces. Another method is by doing activity mapping of the site area by two different techniques. The techniques include behavioural mapping matrix (Bechtel et al, 1987) by producing tables that can fit the activities done, user’s age, and gender and the second technique are a drawn behaviour mapping in the narrow sense that can be done with extra coding and more detail. The results of these data collections will then be digitalized to have better and stronger understanding of the research answers. The environment chosen in both Georgetown and Edinburgh in this research study is during the same period of time in which the weather being warm and the outdoor activity is nice and pleasant. Study of Georgetown can be done anytime as it lies on the equator and the users are usually the same amount every month. While in Edinburgh, the study is to be done in the month between June to September that are during summer time when people enjoy doing outdoor activities. Thus, in this research study, July is chosen as the time to do the observations. The observation and mapping data are done in four sessions which will last for at least 30 minutes since the sites are too big to be observed across the entire spaces. The data sessions include; morning (10am), afternoon (12pm), late afternoon (2pm) and evening (6pm) – during the weekday as well as weekends.
65
Figure 3.8 - The behavioural matrix with the recorded data (GoliÄ?nik, 2005)
3.3.1
Direct Observation
This method will provide direct and first-hand experience to the researcher as well as giving the chance to record types and activities done in the space. There are two techniques of observation as mentioned by Michelson (2011) that are participant and non-participant. Participant observation is a method in which the researcher considers themselves as the participant who experiencing the same activity and behaviour in the site. Usually, doing this technique will takes time because researchers will need to adapt their activities to the ongoing activities. The second technique of observation involves visual observation in which the researcher will trace the activities done by others and records every movement. This observation can be done by taking notes, doing photo surveys or recording videos. These observation methods have been done by Gehl in his book Life between Buildings (1987) where he tracks the activities and location of the activities and physical settings. He counted the amount of people in the public spaces and documented what the people did and all the settings that make the space works. Gehl has made these observations by photographing and mapping. Thus, following Gehl methods, photo surveys and video recording will be done in both Georgetown and Edinburgh to support the observation techniques. These medias will provide a clear evidence and temporal consequences of activities in the space. The following section will describe how to produce a behavioural map while doing direct observations.
67
Figure 3.9 - The behavioural map in narrow sense (GoliÄ?nik, 2005)
3.3.2
Activity Mapping
Activity mapping is a method of observing people’s activities and movements relate to physical characteristics of built environment components and attributes (Cosco et al., 2010). It can be done by doing behavioural map which is an extended tool of observation of photo and video techniques. A map is the most important medium that can trace a physical layout of a space. It can record both basic and comprehensive information about the environment and movements of the place. This method can be developed by two techniques that are behavioural mapping matrixes, behavioural maps in a narrow sense and combination of both techniques in digital medium. a) Behavioural Mapping Matrix The literature review by Golicnik (2005) shows that behavioural tables were used in her research studies. The table usually consists of rows representing activities or behaviour and columns representing the physical attributes. The table features usually are complex and can collect more than one information, which is why Golicnik produces a behavioural matrix (Figure 3.8). The same method will be used in this research study. b) Behavioural Mapping in Narrow Sense Following Golicnik (2005) works, an informative map is created with a list of symbols for the expected activities done in the public spaces. The process shall be as comprehensive as possible by having proper coding and counting system before the study is done. Symbols can be different in gender. Figure 3.9 is example of behavioural mapping that can be done in this research study.
69
3.4 Limitation of Study As mentioned above, there will be some restraint in collecting data in both site studies. This should be taken into consideration in achieving the goal and objectives of the study. Those limitations have been identified and explained as below: a) Duration First, the duration of this research study. The duration of this research is only three months starting from 6th June 2016 until 22nd August 2016. Hence, it causes limitation in term of accuracy of data, reliability of methods used, transferability of the findings and validity of the recommendations. Therefore, the researcher has to utilize the time given efficiently in gathering the data and making a critical analysis of the subject matter. b) Financial Constraint The second limitation shall be the financial constraint. Cost plays an important role in conducting a project especially for this research project as it includes two case studies that are far away from each other. c) Manpower Thirdly, manpower is one of several limitations that are faced by researcher in preparing the research works. Due to lack of manpower, researcher is facing some difficulties such as conducting the field work observations in the proposed period which can affect the accuracy of data.
71
3.5 Conclusion In order to answer the research questions set out in this research study, two case studies were experimented parallel to quantitative analysis. By doing direct observation on site and activity mapping, this research is expected to focus on the evolution of historic designed public space and its pattern of use. Georgetown, Penang and Edinburgh, Scotland were chosen as site study as both of the sites are on the UNESCO heritage city list. In addition, both of the case studies have different levels of activity as well as diversity in physical features in heritage context. Collecting data acquired to investigate the physical settings impact on peoples’ activity pattern by the methods mentioned above will directs the research to acknowledge the activity pattern of people within the selected site and can imposed to improve people’s flows throughout the public space associated with the design features.
73
4 CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
.
This chapter provides data collections of the case studies in the methods of doing a literature review, content analysis and through direct observations. Delivering data in this chapter will be in two sections as there are to site study; Georgetown and Edinburgh. In every section, contextual study, an explanation of the public life and information about the public spaces will be highlighted. Some of the images in this chapter are taken while data is collected as doing a photo survey is one of the techniques of direct observation. However, due to limitations of time, accessibility to the site study and man power images from previous research regarding the site are taken as a back-up. Analysis and data of the case studies are also taken from the literature review and from the city council of the site study.
4.1 Case Study 1 : Georgetown, Penang 4.1.1
Contextual Study
Malaysia is one of the countries in Southeast Asia that are developed rapidly in their economic sectors. Manufacturing stands as the highest that contribute to its economic and tourism rank in the second earnest. Mazumder et al, 2009, said that Malaysia is famously known for its natural and heritage resources. Malaysia combination of religious pluralism, historic townscapes, and living heritage are said to attract tourist from all around the world to pay a visit.
Figure 4.1 - Location plan of Georgetown, Penang
One of the famous destinations is the unique Georgetown in Penang (Figure 4.1). Georgetown is located in the central part of Penang Island where there is an overlap among the commercial, administrative and heritage buildings, as well as religious activities. This position of the Georgetown heritage area is a boost because city centres reflect the social context of cities due to the diversity of people in different positions, such as retailing, housing, entertainment, and a mix of civic, administrative and professional services (Balsas, 2004).
4.1.2
Public Life
Georgetown has an extremely rich culture and its public life. Social interactions are seen to happen in most public spaces. Not only in parks, squares, streets, fivefoot ways, but also at the back lanes. Figure 4.2 indicates public life that happens in the public realm. Beyond this part, Georgetown daily activities in public spaces will be explained before study on specific spaces being recorded.
Socialize & Eat
Trade & Work
Shop & Buy
Relax & Enjoy
Exercise & Health
Religion & Festival
Figure 4.2 - How public spaces in Georgetown is utilized (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
77
Figure 4.3 - Location of hawker stalls (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
Figure 4.4 - Street hawker stalls in Lorong Baru lane, Georgetown (Google image, 2016)
a) Socializing & Eating Georgetown is famous for their street foods or hawker foods which offer variety types of foods such as Malays food, Chinese and even Italian food. Penang was ranked one of the top ten street food cities in Asia by CNN Travels and was voted to be the top culinary destination in 2014 by Lonely Planet. Its’ cheap food and easy to buy anytime of the day in some places (Figure 4.3) attract not only tourist, but also the locals. Food stalls or hawker stalls in Georgetown are set up in five footway, in back lanes, and also on the side of the street (Figure 4.4 – 4.5). This shows that public realm in Georgetown is well in use by the society.
Figure 4.5 - Historical images of the street hawker (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
79
Figure 4.6 - Images of street trading (Google image, 2016)
b) Trading & Working Trading and working take place along the streets of Georgetown. Four main streets that were used for thoroughfares during historical times were; Beach Street, Light Street, Pitt Street (now Masjid Kapitan Keling Street) and Chulia Street. Even there are markets, but spill out markets surrounding the streets can be seen in fresh food trading. Besides, along with the streets also can be found convenience stalls that sell drinks, snacks, cigarettes and newspapers.
Figure 4.7 - Historical images of street trading (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) 81
Figure 4.8 - Images of shopping and buying (Google image, 2016)
c) Shopping & Buying When trading and working is done, automatically, shopping and buying joined along the public spaces. Most of businesses in Georgetown are seen to extend their spaces into five footway, back lanes, and some even extending towards the street. The famous shopping activities not only in Georgetown, but other cities in Malaysia as well are the night markets (pasar malam) and morning markets. (pasar tani / pasar pagi). Shopping is something of a national pastime, and the market represents a place with a blend of cultures, with people from all races getting together to buy and sell local foods, clothes, household necessities and various knickknacks.
Figure 4.9 - Historical image of shopping and buying (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
83
Figure 4.10 - Images of relaxing and enjoying (Google image, 2016)
d) Relaxing & Enjoying It is stated in the MyGeorgetown: A Public Space Project (2010) final report that, only 4.2% of the George Town World Heritage Site is allocated to formal public space. The spaces are located at the north east of the city which are around the Fort, State Assembly Building, Town Hall, City Hall and Dewan Sri Pinang. Padang Kota Lama at the centre of this space is the green area that can act as open spaces for relaxing and enjoying. Other than the open area of the Padang Kota Lama, society tends to relax and enjoy by the streets, five-footways and back lanes. This is due to the tropical climate of Georgetown, demands people to find places to shade, shelter and escape from the extremes of the weather. The back lanes, for example, offer a quiet space, away from the busy main streets where people can rest in the shade of buildings and trees. Besides, the five footway usually been used as spaces to rest, chat with friends or read the newspaper.
Figure 4.11 - Historical images of relaxing and enjoying (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
85
Figure 4.12 - Images of exercising and health (Google image, 2016)
e) Exercising & Health In the development of Georgetown, less emphasis was given to the provision of public space, especially open spaces for exercising. There are a number of sports clubs were established by the colonial administration, which still exist today, however, they are located at the outskirts of the city. Within the Georgetown World Heritage Site, the Penang Cricket Club was established in 1900 on the Padang Kota Lama. Studies stated that the Penang Cricket Club, originally a single storey clubhouse, was extended in later years into a two storey building situated next to the Town Hall, however this building no longer exists. The Esplanade, however, still remains today and is the only significant open space for exercise other than the field (Padang Kota Lama). It can be observed that the field is in use in the morning for Tai Chi, and during the evening with several groups playing football, jogging, cycling, and children playing kites. Furthermore, there are badminton and basketball courts located close to Fort Cornwallis and are in regular use by the community. The Esplanade therefore is a vital space for the local community and should be promoted as a venue for sports, exercise and health.
Figure 4.13 - Historical images of people exercising in Georgetown (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) 87
Figure 4.14 - Images of religious and festival (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
f) Religion & Festivals Having multiracial community in Malaysia, gives opportunity to celebrate a vast number of festivals each year. The diverse ethnic population and rich cultural heritage provide for an almost constant celebration of faith, culture and history. During big festivals such as Eid, Deepavali, Chinese New Year and Christmas, a practice known as "open house" (rumah terbuka) is commonly done. Open house means that everyone is invited to attend to celebrate the festivals together despite of their background. Open houses are normally held at the home and food are also prepared by the host. However, there are also open houses held at larger public venues, often utilizing the street space with marquees and tents to accommodate the crowds.
Figure 4.15 - Historical images of festivals (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) 89
Figure 4.16 - Location of public realms in Georgetown (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
4.1.3
Public Realm
Figure 4.16 shows 10 identified formal public spaces in the Georgetown World Heritage Site. The public spaces measure a total of 17.6 acres, which is equivalent to 3.8% of the land area. Below are public realms in Georgetown with reference to Figure 4.16 map; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
Tanjong City Marina Fort Cornwallis Padang Kota Lama Esplanade seafront English Garden Green Hall Lane seafront Friendship Park Chulia Street Parklet Jalan Chee Phoon Benches Armenian Street Park
91
Figure 4.17 - Images of Tanjong City Marina (Google image, 2016)
a) Tanjong City Marina The Tanjong City Marina (formerly the Church Street Pier) is a tremendous open public space close to the ferry terminal. Once developed to accommodate yachts and boats, but is no longer maintained. The public space in this area has met declination and failure caused by the unused marina and is poorly maintained.
Figure 4.18 - Historical images of Weld Quay (mygeorgetown.my, 2010) 93
Figure 4.19 - Images of Fort Cornwallis (Google image, 2016)
b) Fort Cornwallis Fort Cornwallis is a fort built by the British East India Company in the late 1700s. It is now becoming one of the tourist attractions with a nominal entrance fee (RM2 adults RM1 child). It has an open space with a large open air amphitheatre inside the walls. The public realm has been maintained by enhancing the space with improved planting and maintaining area inside the fort to make it as an outdoor performance venue which will be made available to local artists and stage performers for free. Around the area are located hawker stalls (food court), a basketball court and children’s playground. While Fort Cornwallis is expected to be one of the commercial venues for performance to take place, the managements are aware to ensure the historic features are being preserved.
Figure 4.20 - Historical images of Fort Cornwallis (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
95
Figure 4.21 - Images of Padang Kota Lama (Google image, 2016)
c) Padang Kota Lama The Padang Kota Lama is a green space or field that was created by the British colonies in front of the Town Hall. It is located adjacent to the historic Fort Cornwallis and also becoming the venue of all important events in the Penang Island. The venues include numerous exhibitions, festivals along and political rallies as it is the only significant open space in the city that can accommodate large crowds. On a daily basis, the area is used for exercise and relaxation, particularly in the early morning and evening. The basketball court and children’s playground attract younger people and families. There were several structures on Padang Kota Lama that have been destroyed or dismantled such as the clubhouse buildings of the Penang Sports Club (Cricket Section) and the Penang Recreation Club, the Vermont Memorial (Figure 4.22), a cost iron pavilion for the public, as well as the Municipal Band Stand, a pavilion for public entertainment and ceremonies. These were destroyed during the Second World War and never rebuilt.
Figure 4.22 - Historical images of Padang Kota Lama (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
97
Figure 4.23 - Images of Esplanade Seafront (Google image, 2016)
d) Esplanade seafront On the seaward side of Padang Kota Lama located The Esplanade, a waterfront across Jalan Tun Syed Sheh Barakbah main road (original name was Esplanade Road, and now the name is Jalan Padang Kota Lama). The Esplanade was a historical area which it was the first area cleared by Francis Light in 1976. The area locates important historic structures such as Millennium Monument, Speakers' Square and the Cenotaph, erected by the British to remember those who died in World War I.
Figure 4.24 - Historical images of Esplanade Seafront (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
99
Figure 4.25 - Images of English garden (Google image, 2016)
e) English garden A small garden is located in the area of the Penang Town Hall. At the centre of the garden is a fountain donated by local 19th century millionaire, Koh Seang Tat. The fountain is named the Municipal Fountain or Koh Seang Tat's Fountain. The Municipal Fountain was donated by Koh Seang Tat in 1883 in conjunction with the opening of the Penang Town Hall.
Figure 4.26 - Historical images of English garden (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
101
Figure 4.27 - Images of Green Hall Lane seafront (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
Figure 4.28 - Images of Friendship Park (Google image, 2016)
f) Green Hall Lane seafront Green Hall Lane is a continuous waterfront from The Esplanade that runs parallel to Jalan Tun Syed Sheh Barakbah main road. As same as The Esplanade, Green Hall Lane seafront offers seating area which facing the tree. Local people usually come here to fish. Figure 4.27 shows the area of the public realm.
g) Friendship Park Friendship Park (Figure 4.28) is a new urban park, landscaped and wellmanicured with walkways, lighting and benches that allow visitors to rest in the shade (mygeorgetown, 2010). The main feature of the park is a sculpture which commemorates the 5th Forum of the Tourism Promotion Organisation for Asia Pacific (TPO) that was held in Penang in 2012. The participants of the forum had planted Bucida Molineti trees during their visit. In the park also the fountain built by the city council, Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang (MPPP) and the developer.
103
Figure 4.29 - Images of Chulia Street Parklet (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
h) Chulia Street Parklet Across the street from the now closed art-deco Pg Odeon Cinema building, which straddles both Lebuh Leith and Lebuh Chulia along Jalan Penang is a small urban parklet where people are able to sit and relax. Previously, the area was a roundabout. With its rounded designs with rounded wall before, was no doubt to become a common resting place.
Figure 4.30 - Historical images of Chulia Street (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
105
Figure 4.31 - Images of Jalan Chee Phoon benches (mygeorgetown.my, 2010)
Figure 4.32 - Images of Armenian Street Park (Google image, 2016)
i)
Jalan Chee Phoon benches
Another small urban parklet is located at the southern end of Jalan Chee Phoon, at its junction with Jalan Penang (close to the Police Station. The section of the road was closed off to traffic and developed with a number of benches shaded by a collection of trees. This space has invited people to shade themselves from the heat and sun.
j) Armenian Street Park The Armenian Street Park is located at the junction of Armenian Street and Acheh Street. In the late 18th century, it was once an Acehnese-Malay Kampong. Every evening from around 3pm till 7pm, there will hold a flea market for local people to come and sell second-hand goods.
107
Figure 4.33 - Location plan of Edinburgh, Scotland
4.2
Case Study 2 : Edinburgh, Scotland
4.2.1
Contextual Study
Edinburgh is the Scotland capital that has two distinct areas: the Old Town, dominated by a medieval fortress; and the neoclassical New Town, whose development from the 18th century onwards had a far-reaching influence on European urban planning. The Old and New Towns of Edinburgh has been one of the most beautiful cityscapes in the world and were selected by UNESCO in 1995 as a World Heritage Site. The city has many significant historic buildings. Edinburgh has become a magnet to visitors from across the world to value its heritage elements. The renewal and revival of the Old Town in the late 19th century, and the adaptation of the distinctive Baronial style of building for use in an urban environment, influenced the development of conservation policies for urban environments. With the hilly topography of the city, Edinburgh townscape consist of gardens, historical building such as castles, churches and museums, monuments, and many other townscapes which were designed to take full advantage of the topography, while forming an extensive system of private and public open spaces.
4.2.2
Public Life
British cultural life is said to have more leisure time and money to have social interactions and have entertainments for themselves (Storry and Childs, 1997). In Edinburgh, it is seen that shopping, relaxing, cafĂŠ and pub entertainment and museum culture are absorbed in the society to have public interactions outdoor.
109
Figure 4.34 - Images of shopping culture in Edinburgh (Google image, 2016)
Figure 4.35 - Images of shopping culture in Edinburgh (Google image, 2016)
a) Shopping Princes Street provides an excellent shopping experience which the society seems to enjoy at a leisurely pace. It is one of Europe's most impressive settings as people can visually look upon the panorama across Princes Street Gardens to the majestic Castle and Old Town.
b) Relaxing Edinburgh famous with its parks and gardens. Even in the city centre itself, more than 15 green parks can be accessed. In the evening and especially during summer time, people are seen to have picnics in the parks. Arthur’s Seat, Castle Rock, Calton Hill, Corstorphine Hill, the Braid hills and Craiglockhart Hill are the examples of parks that visitors can go for relaxing and leisure.
111
Figure 4.36 - Spill out cafĂŠ during summer time
Figure 4.37 - Visiting historical culture
c) CafĂŠ and Pub Entertainments The principal place of entertainments outside the house will be pubs of the cafe. Studies have suggested that British pubs were the most welcoming place for people. Usually, during the summer time in Edinburgh, pubs and cafes will extend their services towards outdoors, in the footway, to enable people to feel the outdoor breeze.
d) Historic Visits Culture In the survey done by Storry and Childs (1997), a common leisure activity of British culture is also by visiting the museums, galleries and other historical sites and institutions. Since Edinburgh is one of the UNESCO World Heritage Sites, this culture has become one of the social activities during the weekends. Even in Princes Garden consist of more than 10 monuments for people to study.
113
Figure 4.38 - Car boot sale in Omni Park. (Google image, 2016)
a) Car Boot Fairs Car boot sales or boot fairs are a form of market in which private individuals come together to sell household and garden goods. It is famously done in the United Kingdom. The occasions, usually done in car park area during the weekend as that is the only time the car park not in used. In Edinburgh, there are several locations of the car boot and the famous one in the New Town of Edinburgh is at Omni Carpark.
115
Figure 4.39 - Open Spaces in Edinburgh city (Tourist publication, 2014)
4.2.3
Public Realm
Different from Georgetown which have less open public spaces, Edinburgh city consists of 238.5 acres of significant open space (Figure 3.0). 55% of public parks and gardens met the citywide quality standard of ‘good’ and making the city centre to receive the highest number of visitors and workers that make use of open space.
a) Calton Hill Calton Hill, located in the central of Edinburgh, just to the east of the New Town. People can optically discern stunning scenic vistas of the city from the pitcher's mound. In that respect are several iconic monuments and buildings up on the hill including the National Monument, the Dugald Stewart Monument, Nelson's Monument, the Old Royal High School, the Robert Burns Monument, the Political Martys' monument and the City Observatory. The Royal Terrace Garden on the north is withal a component of the pitcher's mound.
b) Holyrood Park Holyrood Park is a hilly park encompasses 650 acres of acres and was once a royal hunting estate but is now publicly accessible. The highest degree of the mound in which turning the famous attraction there is the upper side of Arthur’s Seat which rises to 251m. At that place are three lochs in the park, St Margaret’s Loch, Dunsapie Loch, and Duddingston Loch. The remains of St Anthony’s Chapel can be seen above St Margaret’s Loch.
117
Figure 4.40 - View of Calton Hill from Holyrood Park (Google image, 2016)
Figure 4.41 - View of Holyrood Park from the ground (Google image, 2016)
c) West Princes Street Gardens West Princes Street Gardens are located directly beneath Edinburgh Castle. It is the largest part of Princes Street garden which the smaller section is the East Princes Street Gardens. The gardens are on the website of the old Nor’ Loch, which was drained, filled in with the diggings for the structure of the New Town and later converted into parkland. West Princes Street Gardens runs from St Cuthbert’s Church & St John’s Church on the West End of Princes Street across to The Mound where you’ll find The National Gallery of Scotland. In the park, located more than ten monuments and historical structures.
d) East Princes Street Gardens As said above, East Princes Street Gardens the smaller park of Princes Street Gardens. Although it is the smallest, it is usually the busiest to compare with the West Princes Street Garden. It lies beside Waverley Station and the National Galleries. The famous and significant landmark of the park is the Gothic style Scott Monument. The tower stands over 200ft and offers spectacular vistas over Edinburgh from 3 different viewing decks. The East Princes Street Garden will be transformed as a Winter Wonderland every November for Christmas Eve. The park hosts Edinburgh’s ice rink, one of Europe’s largest outdoor ice rinks.
119
Figure 4.42 - View of Edinburgh Castle from the West Princes Street Garden cafĂŠ beneath (Google image, 2016)
Figure 4.43 - View of the busy East Princes Street Garden during summer (Google image, 2016)
e) Charlotte Square Charlotte Square can be found at the westward end of George Street and was initially meant to mirror St Andrew Square in the east terminal. The square is a private park which serves the local residents there. However, every August, the garden will be used as the Edinburgh Book Festival. At the centre of the west side of Charlotte Square, located West Register House which was formerly a St George Church. Historically, the inventor of the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell was born in 1847 close to Charlotte Square at 14 South Charlotte Street, making it a famous area in Edinburgh.
f) St Andrew Square St Andrew Square can be found at the east end of George Street. It is said that the first phase of the construction of the New Town began with St. Andrew Square at 1772. At the centre St Andrew Square, located the column of the Melville Monument, commemorating Henry Dundas, the first Viscount Melville. While on the east side of the square is the impressive Dundas House, a domed mansion, which was made by Sir William Chambers. It was the designated site for St. Andrew’s Church, but in 1821 it was bought over by The Royal Bank of Scotland who converted it into their main office.
121
Figure 4.44 - The view of Charlotte Square (Google image, 2016)
Figure 4.45 - View of the Melville Monument in St. Andrew’s Square (Google image, 2016)
g) The Meadows The Meadows is a large public park to the south of the city centre. It is a big expanse of green-space with tennis courts, cricket pitches, a croquet club and a children’s playground. When the sunlight gets out it becomes a popular spot to unwind with a book, kick a football or have a barbecue in one of the spots there. It is likewise the popular training spot for local runners & joggers and has a circumference of exactly one mile mapped out. In the summer months it hosts the Meadows Festival, a free community festival which has been running since 1974. The park is also used to host venues for the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. On the first Sunday in March each year the Meadows Marathon takes place.
h) Bruntsfield Links To the South of Melville Drive is Bruntsfield Links, an open green space crisscrossed with footpaths and a tree lined bike path and sight of park benches scattered around to unwind on. In that respect is too a free pitch and putt golf course. Bruntsfield Links is believed to be the oldest golf course in the world with the first game of golf having been met here as early as the mid 1400s. The Golf Tavern, alongside the Bruntsfield Links course, claims to have been established as early as 1456. There is also a children’s play area and The Meadows Croquet Club on the far side of Bruntsfields Links.
123
Figure 4.46 - The famous Meadows park during spring season (Google image, 2016)
Figure 4.47 - View of Bruntsfield Links (Google image, 2016)
4.3
Comparative Analysis
Every city in the world has its own uniqueness. Georgetown, Penang is located in the north of Peninsular Malaysia, which located in the continental of Asia. While Edinburgh, Scotland is one of United Kingdom city, in the continent of Europe. Basically, United Kingdom is a country that rules by westerner while in the country has been colonized by other countries. However, although Georgetown has been colonized by the British from 18th to the 20th century, but we can see there is a big difference between these two cities. Historic cities have gone through different circumstances and experiences. All of these circumstances and experiences have made the city special and different from each other. Culture is a natural process for identity of a city, in which Georgetown and Edinburgh have different behaviour and ways of life. However, the public life study of both cities, we can see there are a bit similarity of people spending their free time. They both shops, relaxes, eats, and many more, but in different manners, As we can see, in Malaysia, the ways of life will be the same throughout the year, but different in Edinburgh, the amount of people spending their free time outdoors are varied according to the season of the year (spring, summer, autumn and winter). In addition, the famous public life in Georgetown is eating from the hawker stalls. The eating spaces are everywhere, not only in shops, but along the street and even in lanes. Different from the proper Edinburgh, which food place can only be in shop lots, consists of bars, cafes and restaurant. Even if there are spill out cafes, the arrangement is in proper manners with allocated area for pedestrian pathway. Furthermore, contextual study of Edinburgh shows that the local (even the visitors), appreciated histories more than people in Georgetown. This is because we can see how the historic structures and building in Georgetown is not well maintained and destroyed carelessly. For examples, the Penang Sports Club (Cricket Section) and the Penang Recreation Club, the Vermont Memorial, a cost iron pavilion for the public, as well as the Municipal Band Stand are the structures that are no longer standing in Padang
Kota Lama. Culture is important for the existence of a society, because it unites people together and there comes the function of public spaces. The usage of famous public spaces in Georgetown seems to be more for sports and exercising. Since Georgetown is located at the seaside, relaxing area will be the area towards the seafront. In contrast, Edinburgh public spaces are mainly used for relaxing and bonding place. Plus, as said above, public spaces in Georgetown are also becoming a place to find foods. In any public spaces, hawker stalls selling street food can be found. Thus, it can be concluded that public realms in Georgetown succeed as an eating places while in Edinburgh public realms is used as relaxation place.
4.4
Conclusion
Since historical ages, public spaces have become a hub for social interactions to occur. This chapter has focused on the contextual studies of the site area of Georgetown and Edinburgh. After acknowledging the public life of the case studies and list of public realms in the site areas, a more detailed observations can be done. In the next chapter is the empirical analysis done to do a quantitative study since we have already understood the behaviour and ways of life of the local people. Besides, to challenge the issue of public space’s failure, this chapter is one of the tools to know which public spaces in Georgetown and Edinburgh are famously used and which are not in used and why failed to function as a public realm. The study of public realms in this chapter leads to the selection of public space that will be the location of the empirical study. In the next chapter, a stronger analysis of the research study will be outlined. Activities done by people in public spaces will be experimented in relation of the physical features of the historic sites.
127
5 EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
.
In this chapter, readers will expose with the data collections of both site studies; Georgetown and Edinburgh, which will focus on ONE area or public space in each site. In Georgetown, public space chosen to be researched in this study is at Padang Kota Lama while in Edinburgh, West Princes Street Garden is chosen. The outcomes of research observation results and analysis will be discussed in this topic by using the methods explained in the previous chapter (direct observations and activity mapping). The main focus is to observe on-site design features and activity locations, and how physical elements affect the activities of the people. This empirical analysis will study the usage-spatial relationship, especially for the active and passive activity level. By doing the research studies, it can illustrate how long stay passive engagement such as sitting, standing and laying down might be related to long stay active engagements such as cycling, exercising, walking and playing ball games.
129
Georgetown World Heritage Site Boundary Core Zone Buffer Zone Site Study: Padang Kota Lama
Figure 5.1 - Projection of site location within Georgetown, Penang
5.1
Case Study 1 : Georgetown, Penang
The following sections will show the observation results, data analysis and findings of the public space chosen in Georgetown that is the area around Padang Kota Lama. This area was chosen due to its popularity of public realm in the Georgetown heritage city since 1952 (Heritage Management Plan, 2012). The boundaries of the site as in Figure 5.1, includes both Fort Cornwallis and the Padang Kota Lama. The area is one of the famous tourist destinations. It is intangible and functioned socially, spiritually and culturally. Figure 5.2 shows the physical historical elements in the site area that is still visible and in used. The Padang area is used for sports (basketball and cricket), jogging and cycling area, as a playground, for entertainment and as a food court. The Padang Kota Lama also contains the “Speaker Corner� for citizens to express their opinions. It is used for important State functions and ceremonies. Even important festivals usually held in this area. While the Fort Cornwallis is an intact structure that demonstrate different phases of military architecture and engineering. It is considered as an important tool for educating tourist and local people about the history of the Georgetown area. During the four observation daily sessions, there are multiracial people within the space and variety activities are done. There are individuals, group of students, and even children with their parents in the area doing activities such as meeting, sitting, playing, eating and even leisurely walking. All types of activities and location were pin pointed and jotted in both matrix table and activity map. In the following subsections, the results and analysis will be explained.
131
q
q
e
b
f
k
t s
l
m
c
p o
c
i b
h
d
q
g n
a
r
LEGEND Historical Structure
Green Spaces
a. Fort Cornwallis
l. Padang Kota Lama
b. Fort walls
m. Aligned trees
c. Entrance to the Fort d. Gunpowder magazines e. Seri Rambai Canon f. Other canons
Roofed Building n. Store rooms o. Hawker stalls p. Kiosk / Amenities building
g. Archaeology (inside the Fort) h. Francis Light statue
Special Feature
i. Amphitheatre and ancillary
q. Walkway
j. Flagstaff
r. Carpark
k. Lighthouse
s. Basketball t. Playground
Figure 5.2 - Approximate location of the site (red outline) (Google Earth, 2016)
5.1.1
Activity Level and Types
The first observation was done to study the weekend activities on site area that is on 9th July 2016, Saturday. A total number of 729 people were marked with their activity level (Table 5.1). In the morning, 128 people were enjoying the spaces (18%) and 159 people (22%) in the afternoon enjoying their lunch time. While, 162 people were recorded using the spaces in the late afternoon between 2pm to 4pm (22%) and another 38% of overall people in that day use the Padang Kota Lama area in the evening; the busiest time of the day and week. In terms of the activity levels and activity types, only 27% of the people engage passive activities such as sitting and standing in different time of the day. Another 73% from 729 people recorded, were actively interacting with each other; with prominent numbers of 144 people walking or passing through all day (27% from 532 active people). Since Padang Kota Lama offers place for sports and exercising activity, 219 people come to the area for the active engagements. The activities include jogging, marching exercise, cycling, basket balling, footballing, and playing in the playground for the kids. The next data was taken on 11th July 2016 (Monday) for the weekday’s study. 565 people are studied throughout the day (Table 5.2). There are 91 people using the space in the morning (16%), 164 people were relaxing in the afternoon (29%), 100 people in the late afternoon (18%) and the most people of the day were recorded in the evening with the total of 210 people (37%). From the collected data on Monday, among the passive activities, sitting on benches was the prominent activity by the people who used the public space which are 42% from 178 people engaging passive activities (3% laying or sleeping, 34% sitting on the ground and 21% people standing).
Time Activity Level
Passive Engagement
Active Engagement
Activities Types
A
LA
E
%
Laying
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Sitting (on ground)
3
20
13
20
56
8%
Sitting (on bench)
16
13
26
36
91
12%
Standing
4
10
15
21
50
7%
Walking
31
32
39
42
144
20%
Jogging
15
0
0
13
28
4%
Marching
21
10
0
0
31
4%
Cycling
8
3
0
6
17
2%
Motorcycling
3
8
10
14
35
5%
Eating
0
35
38
23
96
13%
Playing basketball
13
5
0
20
38
5%
Playing football
7
10
0
45
62
9%
Playing playground
5
10
8
20
43
6%
Fishing
2
3
13
20
38
5%
128
159
162
280
729
100%
Total Table
M
Subtotal
2 – Observation data in Padang Kota Lama public space during the weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday)
Time Activity Level
Passive Engagement
Active Engagement
Activities Types
M
A
LA
Subtotal
E
%
Laying
0
1
5
0
6
0%
Sitting (on ground)
5
15
18
23
61
11%
Sitting (on bench)
12
28
12
22
74
13%
Standing
3
12
7
15
37
6%
Walking
28
38
28
39
133
23%
Jogging
8
0
0
13
21
4%
Marching
12
16
0
0
28
5%
Cycling
6
3
5
8
22
4%
Motorcycling
0
2
1
3
6
1%
Eating
22
36
3
15
76
13%
Playing basketball
10
0
0
15
25
4%
Playing football
0
0
0
28
28
5%
Playing playground
4
8
7
17
36
6%
Fishing
6
3
0
8
17
3%
Total 116 162 86 206 570 100% Table 3 – Observation data in Padang Kota Lama public space during the weekday (11th July 2016, Monday)
135
Activity Level
Passive Engagement
Active Engagement
Activities Type
Weekend Total
Weekday Total
Total People
% of Usage
Laying
0
6
6
1%
Sitting (on ground)
56
61
117
8%
Sitting (on bench)
91
74
165
13%
Standing
50
37
87
7%
SUBTOTAL
197
178
375
29%
Walking
144
133
277
21%
Jogging
28
21
49
4%
Marching
31
28
59
5%
Cycling
17
22
39
3%
Motorcycling
35
6
41
3%
Eating
96
76
172
13%
Playing basketball
38
25
63
5%
Playing football
62
28
90
7%
Playing playground
43
36
79
6%
Fishing
38
17
55
4%
SUBTOTAL
532
392
924
71%
OVERALL TOTAL 729 570 1299 100% Table 5.3 - Observation data in Padang Kota Lama public space during all sessions
According to the collected data, with regard to the timing, evening was the most populated time, which 280 people can be found during the weekend and 206 during the weekday (refer Table 5.1 and Table 5.2). This is because, most of them are there for exercising since the Padang can be used to play football and there are also area for people to jog and cycling. The less populated time is during the late afternoon in weekday as it is working hours and the temperature during that time are usually as hot as 33 degrees Celsius. Thus, people choose to be indoor or in a shaded place during the time. Next, from Table 5.3, data show that Padang Kota Lama is famous for eating places since there are hawker stalls, food court, ice cream motorcycle and food trucks around the area, with 13% of the population went there to find food (the second highest activity in Padang Kota Lama). The same percentage of 13% is used for people who play footballs at the Padang especially in the evening.
137
Figure 5.3 - Padang Kota Lama, Georgetown activity patterns in weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday)
5.1.2
Activity Locations
By referring to Figure 5.2, clearly there are several design features that can generate activities in the public spaces. The historical structures around Padang Kota Lama area will absolutely be the place where people will visit and study. Observations show that activities like walking, standing while taking notes, sketching and capturing pictures can be seen where historical structures are located. These types of activities usually end around one to two hours for each person to value the heritage elements. There are also tourists cycling around the area to visit and enjoy the Georgetown UNESCO heritage site in which Padang Kota Lama being the starting checkpoint of their routes. Next, green area of Padang Kota Lama are spotted to be the place for people to play footballs and if the weather is comfortable, we can observe people lying, sitting or even picnicking at the Padang. Aligned trees around the field provide shade for people to relax beneath. During the observations made, people are seen to choose these shaded grounds to be seated. Some public workers were noticed laying and sleeping underneath while taking their breaks. In between Padang Kota and the historical Fort Cornwallis, lie special design features that were built for the community usage, such as basketball and cricket court, children's playground, pedestrian walkway and carpark. On the basketball court can be seen people playing basketball in the morning and evening. If there is no game played, the basketball court will be used for marching exercise by students in the area, usually during the afternoon. While earlier in the morning, some elders will use them to do tai chi exercises. The children's playground is always occupied with people since the location of the area is shaded with trees. While the children play, the parents will be seated in the sitting area around the playground to monitor their children. That is why the area is always occupied as it provides comfort and safety to the users.
139
Figure 5.4 - Padang Kota Lama, Georgetown activity patterns in weekend (11th July 2016, Monday)
The next design feature that is always being used and contribute to 25% of walking and jogging activities is the pedestrian walkway in the area. There are times that cycling activity can be found utilising the walkway. The pedestrian walkway also located across the main road towards the seaside. This pedestrian walkway is the busiest which most people use this area to enjoy the seaside atmosphere. In addition, the sea barriers or walls are being used as sitting area created place making to the people and to those who are fishing on the sea side. In addition to those activities, there are also roofed building which being the place to find food. As explained in the literature review, Georgetown is famous with their hawker foods and street foods. Having food court in the area (between Padang Kota Lama and Fort Cornwallis), this public realm become one of the main eating place in Georgetown. That is why eating becomes the second most activity done in the site area, not only by the food court, but also food trucks and motorcycle food cart at the street sides. The following behaviour maps illustrate the activity's location during both observations (weekend and weekday) sessions (Figure 5.3 and Figure 5.4).
141
Figure 5.5 - Photos take in the activities done during the observation periods in Georgetown.
(Figure 5.5 continues)
143
Edinburgh World Heritage Site Boundary New Town of Edinburgh Old Town of Edinburgh Site Study: West Princes Street Garden
Figure 5.6 - Projection of site location within Edinburgh, Scotland
5.2
Case Study 2 : Edinburgh, Scotland
The second public space researched site area is the north area of West Princes Street Garden, Edinburgh. Princes Street Garden is one big park, but is separated by the mound in between the east and west gardens. The West Princes Street Garden is the biggest to compare with the east garden which covers only one third of the west garden. The west garden is also divided into two by the railway line. The area is selected due to its popularity among the local and visitors in Edinburgh. Its strategic location in the central of the historical buildings and structures and also near the main train station, makes the place as a perfect research site location. As the first case study, the following sections will discuss the observation results according to the methodologies explained in previous chapters of the north West Princes Street Garden. The boundaries of the site are shown in Figure 5.6 below. Walking into every part of the Edinburgh heritage site can connect the visitors to the site as the area is culturally and historically preserved, and West Princes Street Garden is one bit of the heritage area. The garden has geological and botanical scientific interest which makes the place a great area to relax, eat lunch and play around. As a large and strategic public realm, events, festivals and special occasions, usually be set in this area. Plus, having a bandstand with seating (The Ross Bandstand), make the place a perfect setting for concerts. Moreover, the public space locates more than ten other historical structures as part of the garden feature. The structures include the Ross Fountain, the Floral Clock and numerous statues of figures such as the poet Allan Ramsay, reformer Thomas Guthrie, obstetric pioneer James Simpson and many others (see Figure 5.7).
145
g f
b
c
d
e
k o
p
k i
j
n k
h
a
LEGEND Historical Structure
Special Feature
a. The Floral Clock monument
k. Green spaces
b. Allan Ramsay statue
l. Trees
c. Royal Scot’s Grey statue
m. Benches and Seatings
d. The Call statue
n. Walkway
e. Thomas Guthrie statue
o. Children Playground
f. James Simpson statue
p. Spill out cafe
g. Dean Ramsay statue h. Robert Louis Stevenson statue i. The Ross Fountain j. The Ross Bandstand
Figure 5.7 - Approximate location of the site (red outline) (Google Earth, 2016)
a
Eight observation sessions were done (in four sessions on the weekend and four sessions on weekday), where people of all ages and genders are contemplated. They come individually or in groups, doing either passive activities or active activities. As explained in data collection methods section in the previous chapter, type of activities and location were pin pointed and jotted in both matrix table and activity maps.
5.2.1
Activity Level and Types
Observation on weekend in West Princes Street Garden was taken on 9th July 2016, Saturday. A total number of 1025 people were marked with their activity level (Table 5.4). There are 168 interactions take part in the morning that is 16% of overall correspondent, 451 people in the afternoon (44%), 267 people during late afternoon (6%) and at least a number of 139 people in the evening (14%). From the data, it can be said that the visitors as well as the local people like to be in the public realm during the afternoon, the hottest time in the day. Most of the public space users in Edinburgh can be seen enjoying passive activities more than active activities. About 57% of the people tend to do passive engagement which includes 2% of laying and 55% of sitting (on the ground and bench). Thus, only 43% of other activities are active engagements with the most active movement done by people in the garden is walking (67% of the active engagements). The second day data collection was taken on the 14th July 2016 (Thursday) to study the weekday’s activity patterns. The total number of 912 people was studied throughout the day (Table 5.5). Same as on the weekend, afternoon time is the most populated periods of the day. Half of the total number of people (455 people) are observed in their activity levels and types. 146 people used the area in the morning (16%), 252 people in the late afternoon (28%) and lastly, 59 people, which is only 6% of the total people enjoy using the garden in the evening.
149
Activity Level
Laying Passive Engagement
Active Engagement
Time
Activities Types
M
A
LA
Subtotal
E
%
0
2
10
4
16
2%
37
145
72
10
264
26%
98
132
42
26
298
29%
Standing
0
2
3
0
5
0%
Walking
27
88
100
82
297
29%
Walking with dog
0
0
3
1
4
0%
Jogging
1
0
3
0
4
0%
Cycling
0
1
0
0
1
0%
Rolling down
0
1
0
0
1
0%
Jumping
0
1
1
0
2
0%
Playing running
3
0
2
0
5
0%
Playing football
0
10
0
4
14
1%
Playing frisbee
0
0
3
0
3
0%
Playing playground
2
26
11
5
44
4%
Eating
0
43
17
7
67
7%
Sitting (on ground) Sitting (on bench)
Total 168 451 267 139 1025 100% Table 5 – Observation data in West Princes Street Garden public space during the weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday)
Time Activity Level
Passive Engagement
Active Engagement
Total
Activities Types
M
A
LA
Subtotal
E
%
Laying
0
0
9
0
9
1%
Sitting (on ground)
0
33
70
10
113
12%
Sitting (on bench)
7
140
72
13
232
25%
Standing
17
5
1
0
23
3%
Walking
116
235
73
29
453
50%
Walking with dog
0
0
1
1
2
0%
Jogging
0
0
0
2
2
0%
Cycling
2
0
0
1
3
0%
Rolling down
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Jumping
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Playing running
0
2
2
0
4
0%
Playing football
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Playing frisbee
0
0
0
3
3
0%
Playing playground
2
10
7
0
19
2%
Eating
2
30
17
0
49
5%
146
455
252
59
912
100%
Table 6 – Observation data in West Princes Street Garden public space during the weekday (14th July 2016, Thursday) 151
Activity Level
Passive Engagement
Active Engagement
Activities Type
Weekend Total
Weekday Total
Total People
% of Usage
Laying
16
9
25
1%
Sitting (on ground)
264
113
377
19%
Sitting (on bench)
298
232
530
27%
Standing
5
23
28
1%
SUBTOTAL
583
377
960
50%
Walking
297
453
750
39%
Walking with dog
4
2
6
0%
Jogging
4
2
6
0%
Cycling
1
3
4
0%
Rolling down
1
0
1
0%
Jumping
2
0
2
0%
Playing -running
5
4
9
0%
Playing football
14
0
14
1%
Playing frisbee
3
3
6
0%
Playing playground
44
19
63
3%
Eating
67
49
116
6%
SUBTOTAL
442
535
977
50%
1025
912
1937
100%
OVERALL TOTAL
Table 5.6 - Observation data in West Princes Street Garden public space during all sessions
From the collected data on Thursday, among the passive activities, sitting on benches was the prominent activity by the people who used the public space which are 62% from 377 people engaging passive activities. Another 30% of the passive activities are people sitting on the ground, 6% of them are standing and 2% enjoy laying. While the most active involvement in the garden is people walking (50% of the total people observed), followed by 5% of people enjoying eating and 2% of overall people playing playground (mostly children). Other active engagements have rarely been done by the users. According to the collected data, it can be concluded that active and passive activities at West Princes Street Garden are balanced. Half of the people will involve actively in the garden and the other half will passively join in. The most activity observed in this site area is walking with 29% of 1927 total people doing it, followed by 27% of them enjoy sitting on the benches provided in the garden. The summary data of both weekend and weekday activity levels and types can be analysed in Table 5.6.
153
Figure 5.8 - West Princes Street Garden, Edinburgh activity patterns in weekend (9th July 2016, Saturday)
Figure 5.9 - West Princes Street Garden, Edinburgh activity patterns in weekend (14th July 2016, Thursday)
5.2.2
Activity Locations
West Princes Street Garden is located in between the historical buildings and structures. In fact, there are more than ten structures can be seen to be part of the garden area. People are seen to use the garden as relaxing place overviewing the Edinburgh castles, hills area, and historic building in Old Town of Edinburgh City. The green spaces in West Princes Street Garden take up to 95% of the garden area. During the observations, the green spaces are seen to fully utilise by the people. They use the spaces to have picnic in groups of 2 up to 15 people. These people will use as much time to enjoy by playing football, Frisbee, jumping, rolling down the hill area and running among themselves. Not only that, there are also people just having their free time by passively sit the ground, reading books or lying. The pedestrian walkway provided in the garden has contributed 39% of the garden users to walk in the peaceful garden. Along the pedestrian walkway, benches are aligned from one end to another. There are almost 100 benches in the garden which resulted 27% of 1937 observed people choose to sit on the benches. In the west part of the site area are located seating area for spill out cafÊ’ and children's playground, overviewing the Ross fountain. Most of people with children and families tend to go here to eat while the children enjoy playing at the playground. Benches also are aligned around the playground area for parents to observe their children. However, the usage of the open green area usually varies in period of staying there doing what they are doing. The weather usually becomes the main subject issue of people staying in the spaces. People tend to stay longer with the present in the sun. This is because, being one of Scotland’s country, temperature can be instantly low without the sun. Figure 5.8 and 5.9 is the behaviour maps.
155
Figure 5.10 - Photos take in the activities done during the observation periods in Edinburgh
(Figure 5.10 continues)
157
Georgetown 800
Edinburgh
750
700 600 530 500 377
400
277
300 200
172
165 117
49 39 06 6 4 01 02 09
28
25 6
116
90
87
100
79 63 63
14 0 6
59
41 55 0 0 0
0
Passive Engagement
Active Engagement
Figure 5.11 - Comparison Activities between Georgetown and Edinburgh Public Spaces
Fishing
Motorcycling
Marching
Eating
Playing basketball
Playing playground
Playing frisbee
Playing football
Playing -running
Jumping
Rolling down
Cycling
Jogging
Walking with dog
Walking
Standing
Sitting (on bench)
Sitting (on ground)
Laying
0
5.3
Comparative Analysis
According to this empirical analysis taken throughout the observations on the field, total number of 1299 people in Georgetown and 1937 people in Edinburgh are examining what they are doing, where the locations of the activities, how long they stay and with whom they did the activities were all taken in behaviour matrix and mapping methods. In Figure 5.11, we can see how local people in Edinburgh support walkability (39%) more than in Georgetown which the percentage of people walking and passing through in Georgetown is just 21%. The percentage of people with passive engagement in Edinburgh is much higher that is 50% of the overall people observed. This shows how local people really make use the public spaces as a place to relax. To compare with people in Georgetown, only 29% of the observed people passively sat and enjoy the public space. The others choose to be there just to do active activities such as eating and exercising. In terms of the transition number of people using the public spaces, it can be seen there are differences in both sites. In Georgetown, people are increasing as closer it is to the night time. The public spaces are becoming crowded, especially at night time as community in the area find it is conveniences to spend their time alone or with their family being outside. Most of the time used to find food at the public spaces, not only in any parks, square, or courtyards, but also in the streets or back lanes. This is so much different from the western communities, especially in Edinburgh. From the quantitative surveys done, we can see people are becoming lesser as the day went by. People choose to be indoors for many reasons, especially the weather and outdoor temperature. Although during summer season, the temperature during night time is still not comfortable for them to hang outdoors. The only place the communities will be if it is not in their own house is the pubs and cafes which are not considered as a public space.
159
This proves the contextual analysis done in the previous chapter that the public spaces in Edinburgh, Scotland functions as a relaxation place while in Georgetown, Penang, people come to their public spaces to find food and exercising, That is why Padang Kota Lama spaces consist of exercising are such as a football field, basketball court and pathway to jog as that is how the activities related to the physical features there. By night time, these places will become places to find foods as hawker stalls are usually movable and flexible. While in Edinburgh, more benches and green spaces are designed for people to sit and relax.
5.4
Conclusion
The relationship of the design elements and the activities done are observed in this chapter by counting number of public space users, group of ages and their genders, size of groups, the active and passive engagements, the length of stay, location of the activities done and many related points. The data collections show the success of natural design elements for attracting users to stay longer in the study area. For example, the calm sea at Georgetown has invited people to spend their time at the designated public spaces. Besides, grassed area in Edinburgh parks used to extend staying time of the users. Even having aligned trees in Padang Kota Lama has enhanced the social activities and attracted groups of people to use the public spaces. In both contextual and empirical analysis done, we can understand the public spaces more especially who use the public spaces? When the public spaces are used? And mainly, what is the function of the public spaces in both sites? Thus, in the upcoming chapter, discussions of overall research’s contributions will be explored related with the data collections from both analysis chapters (Chapter 3 and Chapter 4). Recommendations will also be outlined as references for designers to design a good public space. Overall conclusion also will be presented before the thesis ended. 161
6 DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
.
This thesis examines the interaction between activity patterns and the design features of the urban space and focuses on the following matters: a) How do people’s activities relate to the physical patterns of an urban public space? b) How are people’s activities affected and encouraged by urban public space’s physical features? In order to address these questions, this research employs a combined method to understand the importance of actual use of the urban space. In addition, through reviews of urban public space literature and research methods to find the relationship between both activities and design features, helps the research reveal the activity pattern correlated with the design features of both Georgetown and Edinburgh public space. The following sections will discuss the contributions of this research studies and recommendations that can be made for future planning and designing.
163
6.1 Research Contributions This research has contributed in many ways, especially in giving information of the public life and the public realms in Georgetown and Edinburgh. Readers have already know the life and culture of people in Georgetown and Edinburgh through the contextual analysis chapter and how the Asian and Western is different in the way they use the public spaces. The data collections in both contextual and empirical analysis have shown the relationship of natural designs (example; trees, hilly ground, sea) and physical designs like benches, seating, and pavement walkway with the social use of the public spaces. Having natural elements in public spaces can attract people to have a long stay in the space since it provides peacefulness and calmness to the users. However, that is not the licences for planners to destroy structures, especially the historical monuments. Architecture student learnt about structures, people, history, art and everything that are related to a design. They should be able to create people-place fit to save the community culture at the same time developing the public spaces. Next, in terms of methodological contributions, the research combined direct observation and activity mapping methods to collect data which researcher needs to directly deal with the relationship of the space and activities done. The evaluation of the data collections is reflected by the individual or cultural groups of people’s preferences setting of a public space such as relaxing, exercising, eating places and many more. According to Sonnenfeld (1966), people with overlapping experiences will likely to express similar preferences for familiar environment related to their previous experiences although they might not consciously aware. The research has shown that the attachment to places were contributed by the people’s satisfactions to the place. Active engagement by the people proves the space has a sense of accomplishment which community is developed and strengthened. In Georgetown public spaces for example, has provided food, security and accessibility to the community. The same success is gained by the users of Edinburgh’s public spaces.
165
Thus, this research study has practically contributed in empirical knowledge about the design requirements for a long stay users such as informal exercising and sports done in the public spaces. The passive engagements will also benefit designers to plan and manage sitting areas, shading devices and even increase the security protection that will attract people to leisurely use public spaces in a long stay. Even transitory activities are usually related to both engagements. This method of data collection proves that designers can get useful information and knowledge on the public spaces they wanted to manage or design. They will likely get the general layout of the spaces that suit the person's preferences. Practically, from the results of the research study, we can observe what the people needs in the public spaces. Every activity in the public spaces are accomplished by people in both ways passively or actively in regards to their needs and perceptions of the spaces. From there, an effective and responsive design guideline can be achieve to the other similar spaces.
167
6.2 Recommendations The thesis objective to make a better place for people can now be explained by answering the following questions; Who will be the users of the public spaces? When the public spaces are used? What should the public spaces be? How should the public spaces designed? It can be concluded that the criteria of a good design are to have firmness, commodity and delight. Below are the main points taken on why Padang Kota Lama, Georgetown and West Princes Street Garden, Edinburgh success to be a people place and should be a guideline for other similar spaces. a) Accessibilities and inclusivity Having a good pedestrian infrastructure inside and outside the public realm, will strengthen the connectivity of the place and enhance the public spaces to be more accessible and inviting to the people. A well designed landscapes are nice to visit, attract more users and resulted in a lively space. b) Livability and sociability Public spaces are the spine of a city life. They create social interactions, which bring people together. Both Georgetown and Edinburgh have rich public life and a well-designed spaces. They can make people stay longer in their public spaces which increase the sociability of the city. c) Wellbeing and Health Having a natural design space with hilly ground, green areas, aligned trees and seaside views make Georgetown and Edinburgh a calm place to linger. The walkable and accessible cities promote healthy lifestyle without having to depend on mobile transportations. Therefore, the above should be the main priority not only in designing the public spaces but also in shaping the city.
169
CONCLUSIONS
.
This thesis was set out to improve understanding of the relationships between activity patterns and design features of the urban space. Therefore, reviewing theories of urban public spaces in general and in heritage context is done to understand the components of the space and their potential relationships. The aim of this research paper is to study on the two components of space – activity and physical settings. Thus, the literature review on public spaces leads to the functions and usage of a public realm. From there, issues on public spaces are being unfolded and resulted in the development of a methodology that combined direct observations and activity mapping. This method is a key contribution of this research as the data collection procedure to reveal the common patterns of activities that appear by the effects of urban design features. The methods of reviewing and analysing the site in terms of its contextual study and empirical study help the readers to understand the community of both sites as well. Knowing how the public life in Georgetown basically represents how the Asian people live their cities. To focus on, the public spaces in Asia usually are more intense than the one in Western cities. It served to more users with variety usages. Moreover, public spaces are so lively and crowded as markets, hawker stalls, sport courts open past midnight. This is so much different to compare Georgetown with Edinburgh, an example of the Western city. The night time tends to be empty in western city streets and public spaces. This dynamic of usage in Asia is cultural because people tend to eat outside frequently as the foods are cheap and varies. In general, this research has successfully contributed to the acknowledge readers to study on the relationship of physical design and the activity patterns in public spaces. Plus, having general knowledge of the basic functions of public spaces in contrast of the Asian culture and the Western culture. 171
BIBLIOGRAPHY
.
A. Ghafar Ahmad. (1998). Urban Tourism in Malaysia: Heritage cities of Georgetown, Malacca and Kota Bharu. Paper presented at the 2nd. International Seminar on European Architecture and Town Planning Outside Europe, Malacca 2-5 November 1998. Abercrombie, P., Plumstead, D. (1949). A Civic Survey & Plan for Edinburgh. Edinburgh Tweeddale Court. Banerjee, T. (2001). The Future Of Public Space: Beyond Invented Streets and Reinvented Places, APA Journal, 67(1) 9–24. Bechtel, R. B., Marans, R., and Michelson, W. (1987), Methods in Environmental and Behavioural Research. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Bentley, I; Alcock, A; Murrain, P; McGlynn, S & Smith, G (1985) Responsive Environments: A Manual for Designers,Architectural Press, London Bergman, A. (2014) A Struggle for Public Space: A Case Study of Three Parks in Stone Town, Zanzibar. Bornberg . R., (2008),“Identity by spatial design: Topos, a principle derived from historic and vernacular cultures”, Urban Design International, 13, 182–200. Brill, M (1989) Transformation, nostalgia, and illusion in public life and public space, in Altman & Zube (1989) (editors) PublicPlaces and Spaces, Plenum, New York, 7–29 Canter, D (1977) The Psychology of Place, Architectural Press, London Carmona, M & Sieh, L (2004) Measuring Quality in Planning, Managing the Performance Process, Spon Press, London
173
Carmona,M., Tiesdell,S., Heath,T., and Oc,T., (2010). Public places, urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. Ma: Architectural Press. Boston. Carmona, M. (2014) Re-theorising contemporary public space: a new narrative and a new normative, Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Link; http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014.909518 Carr, S; Francis, M; Rivlin, L G; & Stone, A M (1992) Public Space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge City Council. (2010). The Old and New Towns of Edinburgh World Heritage Site: Management Plan: 2011-2016. Edinburgh World Heritage, Historic Scotland, Edinburgh (Scotland). Cooper, M.C, Francis, C, (1998),“People Places: Design guidelines for urban open space”, John Wiley & Aons Inc. Toronto Cosco, N., Moore, R., Islam, M., (2010),“Behaviour Mapping: A method for linking preschool physical activity and outdoor design”, Medicine and science in sports and exercise, American College of Sports Medicine, 513-519. Dadson, P., (1999). Joined up conservation: the space between buildings. Context 61, Institute of Historic Buildings. March 1999 www.ihbc.org.uk. Egli, N. (2012). Public Space in Multicultural Context: The Case of Malacca Malaysia. EPFL Publishing, Malaysia. Ellin, N (1996) Postmodern Urbanism, Blackwell, Oxford Gehl, J, (1987),“life between buildings: using public space, Van nostrand reinhold company, New York. Gehl, J (2008) Lively, attractive and safe cities – But how?’ in Haas, T (2008), New Urbanism and Beyond: Designing Cities forthe Future, Rizzoli International, New York, 106–108
Gin, O.K. (2002). From colonial outspot to cosmopolitan centre: the growth and development of Georgetown, Penang from the late 18th century to late 20th century. Expanded version of paper presented at the international symposium on urban and architectural histories under colonial rule in Asia. GeotheInstitute, 6-7 September, 2000, Taiwan. Golicnik, B., Marusic, M. (2012). Behavioural Maps and GIS in Place Evaluation and Design, Application of Geographic Information Systems, Dr. Bhuiyan Monwar Alam (Ed.), InTech, DOI: 10.5772/47940. Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/application-of-geographic-informationsystems/behavioural-maps-and-gis-in-place-evaluation-and-design Golicnik, B., (2011),“Analysis of patterns of spatial occupancy in urban open space using behavior maps and GIS”, Journam of Urban Design International, 16 (1), 36-50. Golicnik, B., (2005), People in Place: A Configuration of Physical Form and the Dynamic Patterns of Spatial Occupancy in Urban Open Public Space, HeriotWatt University, Edinburgh. Graham, S (2008) Urban network architectures and the structuring of future cities, in Haas, T (2008), New Urbanism and Beyond: Designing Cities for the Future, Rizzoli International, New York, 212–218. Idid, S. Z. (2008), Melaka as a World Heritage City. Malaysia: The Melaka State Government and Melaka Historic City Council. Kostof, S. (1992). The city assembled; the elements of urban form through history. Bulfinch Press Book. Hong Kong. Krieger, A (1995) Reinventing public space’, Architectural Record 183 (6), 76–77 Larice, M., Macdonald, E. (2000). The Urban Design Reader Second Edition. University of Utah and University of California Loukaitou-Sideris, A & Banerjee, T (1998) Urban Design Downtown: Poetics and Politics of Form, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
175
Lynch, K (1981) A Theory of Good City Form, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Lynch, K (1960) The Image of the City, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Madanipour,A. ,(2010),“Whose Public Space? International case studies in urban design and development”, London; New York: Routledge Michelson, W., (2011),“Sociological influences companion to urban design”, In “Influences of Sociology on Urban Design” Edited by Tridib Banerjeaa and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris (2011), Routledge Montgomery, J., (1998),“Making a city: Urbanity, Vitality and Urban Design”, Journal of Urban Design, 3, 93-116. Munasinghe, H., (2000) Heritage Protection and Cultural Identity: the case of urban space, Nordisk Arkitekturforskning 2000:3, 75-81 Newman, P & Kenworthy, J (2000) Sustainable urban form: The big picture, in Williams, K; Burton, E & Jenks, M (2000)(Editors) Achieving Sustainable Urban Form, E & F N Spon, London, 109–120 Project
for Public Space (2010) Placemaking Meets Preservation. http://www.pps.org/blog/placemaking-meets-preservation/
Link:
Pushkarev, B., Zupan, J. M. (1975). Urban Space for Pedestrians. Regional Plan Association Rapoport, A (1977) Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a Man-Environment Approach to Urban Form and Design,Pergamon Press, Oxford Rasouli, M. (2013) Analysis of Activity Patterns and Design Features Relationships in Urban Public Spaces Using Direct Field Observations, Activity Maps and GIS Analysis: Mel Lastman Square in Toronto as a Case Study. University of Waterloo, Canada. Sennett, R (1977) The Fall of Public Man, Faber & Faber, London.
Shaftoe, H. (2008). Convivial Urban Spaces: Creating Effective Public Places. University of the West of England. Storry, M., Childs. P. (1997). British Cultural Identities. Liverpool John Moores University, England Xing, N., Kin, W. M. S. (2000). Historic Definitions of Public Space: Inspiration for High Quality Public Space. International Journal of the Humanities, Volume 7, Issue 11, 39-56 Whyte, W H (1980) The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, Conservation Foundation, Washington DC.
WEBSITE http://edinburghcouncilmaps.info/atlas/cecatlas.html http://www.edinphoto.org.uk/0_a_o/0_around_edinburgh_princes_street_gardens_0_po stcards_old_bandstand.htm http://penangmonthly.com/ http://pegis.penang.gov.my/ http://mygeorgetown.my/
177