Tactical Spaces

EXPERIENCING TACTICAL SPACES:

BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACES THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY ARCH9063 URBAN FORM AND DESIGN ASSESSMENT 3

PREPARED BY Nayonika De

NOVEMBER 2020

1 Keywords: public spaces, managing public space, private spaces, Australia, tactical urbanism, common spaces, pop-up urbanism, temporary urbanism.

Methodology: This essay has been written based on desktop research. The author has tried to find the topic of interest from the unit outline. Tactical urbanism concept has been made use of to explore the role of urban design and place management. The essay explains the relation between public and private spaces with the example of a case study and also presents the research and general limitations.

Introduction: Rapid urbanization and densification has increased the importance of urban public spaces and at the same time has opened doors to experiment with common spaces (Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020). The urban common spaces impact both the physical and mental wellbeing of the users (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). According to UN Habitat (2017), high quality of public spaces have proven to enhance public health, economy, civic coherence, quality of life, and flourishing ecosystems (Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020). The recent strategic and urban planning policies, emphasize on resilience and sustainability, place making and place image which are challenging the urban areas around the world (Magalhães and Carmona, 2008).

Comprehending the policies also means understanding the role of the built spaces including the common spaces (Magalhães and Carmona, 2008). Urban common spaces with varied functions play a role in experiencing urban life (Magalhães and Carmona, 2008) and in determining the quality of life in cities across the world (Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020). Now, public space management has been identified crucial in urban planning and design (Magalhães and Carmona, 2008; Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020) as the consequential challenges, like climate change and circular economy impact both the physical and social aspects of common spaces (Carmona, 2013; Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020).

The management of common spaces is a component of urban governance with policies and processes that deal with the incongruous needs and demands of the communities utilizing such spaces (Magalhães and Carmona, 2008). The collaborative intervention, regulation and conflicts of common space usage among users and investment are the dimensions that comprises public space management (Magalhães and Carmona, 2008).

Differentiating public and private spaces: The development of a built environment has redefined urban spaces.

According to Madanipour (2006) the local government and the state actively regulate the spatial planning and its functioning but in terms of urban renewal, the private stakeholders play a significant part in executing the long term strategic plans for the cities.

2

The emergence of neoliberalism, has reshaped the economy thus impacting the allocation of urban common spaces (Madanipour, 2006). Common spaces consist of both public and private infrastructure comprising parks, roads, urban transport etc.

(Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020).

Role of urban designers: The misconception of cities working in a linear manner and the built environment being considered as mere objects (Silva, 2016) has given scope and role to various professionals to develop and experiment with new spaces.

In recent decades the change in the use of urban spaces and the uncertainty related to it, the role of urban designers in designing cities is on rise (Madanipour, 2006; Silva, 2016). The urban designers are the creators and they work on the cities that in itself is adaptable even with varied issues and gaps (Silva, 2016). The urban designers have come to appreciate and embrace the new ways of designing the urban spaces and thus have involved the public in this process (Silva, 2016). It is interesting to note how people make use of spaces on a daily basis and observing this to design spaces is what makes urban designers unique. People have found ways to experience various common spaces and the public investments in these urban public spaces, has progressed to greater levels of engagement in recreational and physical activities among people (Shanahan et al., 2016; Jens and Gregg, 2020), thus leading to community approval and satisfaction (Hadavi and Kaplan, 2016; VĂślker, Matros and Clabsen, 2016; Jens and Gregg, 2020). Maintenance and management of the public spaces for the wellbeing of the neighbourhood incorporates views and concerns of the residents along with collaboration with the government to actively participate and influence decisions to improve design solutions where the public spaces turn to the common good with social access (Iaione 2016; Jens and Gregg, 2020).

Issues with place management: The dilemma arises whether the conventional management of common spaces is relevant in defining and the roles of the common spaces (MagalhĂŁes and Carmona, 2008). And at the same time, common space management is not immune to the transformations that impact the amenities and spaces experienced by the public (MagalhĂŁes and Carmona, 2008). Management of urban common spaces comes with a cost. The concept of cost-effective common spaces clashes with the provision of urban public spaces which ultimately has adverse impacts on the well-being of the communities using it. Earlier the accessibility and essential quality of public spaces has been penalized from the incompetency of public and private authorities to formulate strategies that focus on the combined management of common spaces. According to the UN Sustainable Development framework 2030, public spaces need a lot of scrutiny to deliver widespread access to secured, inclusive and accessible common spaces, especially for women and children, senior citizens and differently abled people.

3

This provides all the member nations the legit platform until 2030 to improve the public spaces in an integrated way (UN Habitat, 2017; Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020). The sharp rise in urban growth has increased the pressure on the existing number of public spaces and this transition demands modification of the existing public spaces (Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020). Having said so, there’s also a scope to renew the common spaces (Duivenvoorden, Hartmann, Brinkhuijsen and Hesselmans, 2020) and also investigate to find potential urban spaces. Regarding including the public spaces in the urban setting, there are visible conflicts between cost effectiveness on one side and sustainability, resilience, purpose and wellbeing of the public on the other side (Jens and Gregg, 2020). In recent years, bottom-up urbanism has gained prominence and has been appreciated for delivering innovative urban design solutions that are often constrained by huge construction cost, context, tradition, administration, considerable timeline and complex requirements of different stakeholders (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). This kind of urbanism conventionally includes the swift assemblage of resources in common spaces by various urban actors to rapidly tackle previously unmet public space issues (Stevens and Dovey, 2018).

Tactical urbanism: Tactical urbanism has now turned into a new strategic planning layout and is of interest to both the government and the private stakeholders (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). With the rise in popularity of temporary/pop-up projects, they are being tied to the long-term transformation of the built environment and its utilization patterns (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). According to Stevens and Dovey (2018) temporary/pop-up urbanism is said to have expanded the use of urban common spaces. Pop-up urbanism is adaptable in utilizing the underused common spaces and improving them for a diverse population by including various activities for people to experience (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Temporary urbanism gives way to new uses in the existing common urban spaces that were not accessible earlier, thus leading to new forms of public life (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). A recent example is the changing of the use from car-parking with that of parklets in Australia and Europe.

Tactical urbanism proves its efficacy by utilizing constrained spaces, infrastructure and limited resources. It adapts to diverse uses and users in the existing common spaces. Tactical urbanism deals with the challenges of increasing densities and sustainability (Oswalt et al. 2013; Nemeth and Longhorst 2014; Stevens and Dovey, 2018). In Berlin, a survey on temporary public space usage, categorized different public space projects into activity classifications: culture, community gardening, food, and playing (SfS Berlin 2007; Stevens and Dovey, 2018). While other research includes active recreation, public art and performance (Lydon and Garcia 2015; Douglas, 2015; Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Although good common space designs have always contributed to the diversity of functions, temporary/pop-up urbanism provides new facilities, like street furniture, bike lanes, and zebra crossings (Stevens and Dovey, 2018).

4

Pop-up urbanism has succeeded in identifying the vacant and derelict spaces that have a huge potential to be explored and utilized for a diverse range of activities that are excluded from the conventional public spaces (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). By broadening the range of activities, pop-up urbanism makes such spaces inclusive and increases social equity (Stevens and Dovey, 2018).

It goes beyond the top-down monotonous, conventional and rigid ‘single method’ to redesign a place of expression for diverse groups. And such temporary spaces provide a rich mix of activities simultaneously for space and time (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). With time, they have surmounted the legal and physical barriers that hinder certain groups of people from using different common spaces in the name of protection (Valverde 2005; Stevens and Dovey, 2018). On the other hand, there remains a question of why there is so much derelict urban spaces (Stevens and Dovey, 2018)? What role is the government playing in spatial planning to densify and intensify (Stevens and Dovey, 2018)? So then, to what extent tactical urbanism projects are capable of addressing the failures in the process of spatial and strategic planning (Stevens and Dovey, 2018)? The boom in the capitalist market since the 1970s has influenced urban growth and at the same time it has produced imbalanced infrastructure with neglected spaces for a long timespan (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Neoliberalism has focussed on economic development in terms of moderating spatial planning in the urban regions around the world (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). The state withdraws from investing in the urban areas and the private stakeholders have a stronger grip to influence spatial planning and design of public spaces (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Neoliberalism encourages incorporating arrangements like tax cutting and free enterprise market to maintain the competition to capture the valuable land in the cities (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). This produces quasi-public spaces that are under the control of private stakeholders (Stevens and Dovey, 2018) and not necessarily the government.

Again the question arises to what extent is temporary/tactical projects considered austerity urbanism or does it act as a bandage for the decaying spaces in the cities (Tonkiss 2013; Stevens and Dovey, 2018)? And how inclusive are the pop-up urban spaces (Stevens and Dovey, 2018)?

The amalgamation of privatization, gentrification and displacement along with tactical urbanism practice can exclude and ostracise groups of users (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). However, users like customers, artists and potential investors are welcomed by the private stakeholders as they add value to the underutilized public spaces (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Temporary business supported by the regulation free market is a threat to the sustenance of the local enterprises as they privatize common spaces (Stevens and Dovey, 2018).

Temporary projects have been deprecated for intruding abandoned urban spaces with objectionable uses (Stevens and Dovey, 2018; Kamvasinou and Roberts 2014; SolĂ -Morales 1994) like shelter for the homeless (Stevens and Dovey, 2018; Barron 2014; Carr and Lynch 1968, 1981). According to Tonkiss (2013) and Douglas (2014) pop-up design interventions have been deliberately positioned in such spaces to discourage forbidden activities and displace the marginalized.

5

But then, the question arises why would the homeless need to even make use of such abandoned spaces? So, does the city not belong to them? Do they have no rights and social security? The spatial planning and design is then questionable. Innovation and experimentation with permanent urban design solutions are precarious in nature and at the same time are costly and timeconsuming (Dotson 2016; Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Whereas, tactical urbanism facilitates the urban design process by minimizing the cost and time duration and also leaves a room for innovation and experimentation (Bishop and Williams 2012; Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Creative public space ideas can be applied in the underutilized common spaces, explored and further refined in practice as these urban spaces become a laboratory for pop-up project experimentation (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Most of the emphasis is given on the process of tactical urbanism and not the end results (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). The challenge to redesign public spaces is dependent on practicing and researching urban planning and urban design fundamentals (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). The conventional planning system of working with master plans to achieve the probable set of outcomes now-adays has a very lean opportunity to develop highly resilient spaces like the way tactical urbanism can deal with informality, place and space based variation and uncertainty (Stevens and Dovey, 2018).

Case Study: The pandemic in 2020 brought in a lot of uncertainties and has reminded how crucial are the public spaces and what roles do they play in making the cities liveable (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). It is of utmost importance for urban designers to retrofit common spaces as soon as possible to maintain the physical and mental well-being of the public (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). Tactical urbanism during the pandemic has demonstrated how flexibly and swiftly the potential urban common spaces can be configured at a lowcost along with maintaining the social activities (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). Australia too has been practicing temporary urbanism since 1980 when the Swanston Street was redesigned into a green oasis overnight in Melbourne (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). This aided the public to rethink the city centre as a space designed for socio-economic revival (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). This project went beyond the conventional social interaction and redesigned a common space for people. It increased the vitality of streets, involved the public and enhanced the sense of place.

Social enterprises and the public played a key role in delivering this project (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). Government as an important stakeholder enabled the other stakeholders in boosting public amenities (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020). This micro scale experimental project in Melbourne offered a simple, time efficient and a cost effective solution for people to experience common spaces (Daly, Dovey and Stevens, 2020).

6

Image Source: (left- Trove, right- The Conversation) The images above show the transformation of the Swanston Street in Melbourne as a result of the implementation of tactical urban design. It shows the contrast of the use of public space in Melbourne.

Assemblage and tactical urbanism: The concept of assemblage based on the work of Deleuze and Guattari from 1987, has been identified to strengthen the concept of tactical/pop-up urbanism. It is based on the philosophy of transition instead of focusing on fixed urban forms, designs and identities of various urban spaces (Dovey 2010; Stevens and Dovey, 2018). By engaging with the public to understand their interest and well-being using the idea of urban life as a conglomeration of flows of desire (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Desires for instance, security, aesthetically pleasing views and privacy—are the forces that positively impact the city (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Needs and interests of the communities emerge through experiencing urban life and urban spaces (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Pop-up/tactical/temporary urbanism directly involves the expanding public needs through innovation and experimentation (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). Thus, pop-up/tactical urbanism projects practices designing and claiming potential common spaces by not awaiting the state to influence the public interest (Stevens and Dovey, 2018).

Limitations: While unwrapping the relation between tactical urbanism and neoliberalism it is important to understand that neoliberalism promotes privatization of public spaces which excludes certain sections of the society (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). The privilege to make profit in the free market economy needs to be considered before redesigning temporary/pop-up projects (Stevens and Dovey, 2018). In terms of general limitations, this essay does not include quantitative data to analyze the case study and the research in general.

Reference list: Berlin, S., 2007. Urban Pioneers - Temporary Use And Urban Development In Berlin. [online] Jovis.de. Available at: https://www.jovis.de/en/books/details/product/urban-pioneers.html Carmona, M., 2013. The Place-Shaping Continuum: A Theory Of Urban Design Process. [online] Tandfonline.com.

Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13574809.2013.854695?needAccess=true Daly, D., Dovey, K. and Stevens, Q., 2020. We Can't Let Coronavirus Kill Our Cities. Here's How We Can Save Urban Life. [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/we-cant-let-coronavirus-kill-our-cities-heres-howwe-can-save-urban-life-137063 Dovey, K. (2010). Becoming Places. London: Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203875001 Duivenvoorden, E., Hartmann, T., Brinkhuijsen, M. and Hesselmans, T., 2020. Managing Public Space – A Blind Spot Of Urban Planning And Design. [online] Reader.elsevier.com. Available at: https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0264275120313809? token=557FEEFE4FE47BD48D68AA6E3A4C5DA333D9252C4A5A33D98501D5AC8E48F436DFE02CEE636A6FF2D53EA1 A220949670 Fran Tonkiss (2013) Austerity urbanism and the makeshift city, City, 17:3, 312-324, DOI: 10.1080/13604813.2013.795332 Grichting, Anna. (2014). Review of 'terrain vague: Interstices at the edge of the pale' by Manuela Mariani and patrick barron (editors). London & New York, Routledge, 2014, 256 pages, ISBN 978-0415827683. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR. 8. 171-172. 10.26687/archnet-ijar.v8i1.362.

Hadavi, S. and Kaplan, R., 2016. Neighborhood Satisfaction And Use Patterns In Urban Public Outdoor Spaces: Multidimensionality And Two-Way Relationships. [online] Reader.elsevier.com. Available at: https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S1618866715300273? token=02C27C681BCB298EE6EF7888ECA42772B48517434F8038FC0010EE6C3A09FDC9DA4195A501DB63472BC88CC 306D403D7 Iaione, C., 2016. The CO-City: Sharing, Collaborating, Cooperating, And Commoning In The City. [online] Wiley Online Library. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajes.12145 Jens, K. and Gregg, J., 2020. How Design Shapes Space Choice Behaviors In Public Urban And Shared Indoor SpacesA Review. [online] Reader.elsevier.com. Available at: https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S2210670720308106? token=6D0E9C1C19CA23CB2E0F8F4375005E708267DB02DD6D9DFA4ABBB9DEA0EBDCF3237B152DCABD5F4C7ECE C981C4BF1DCF Kamvasinou, K. and Roberts, M., 2013. Interim Spaces: Vacant Land, Creativity, And Innovation In The Context Of Uncertainty. [online] Taylor & Francis. Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9780203522172/chapters/10.4324/9780203552172-23 Madanipour, A., 2006. Roles And Challenges Of Urban Design: Journal Of Urban Design: Vol 11, No 2. [online] Tandfonline.com. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13574800600644035?needAccess=true

Magalhães, C. and Carmona, M., 2008. Dimensions And Models Of Contemporary Public Space Management In England: Journal Of Environmental Planning And Management: Vol 52, No 1. [online] Tandfonline.com. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09640560802504704?needAccess=true Nemeth, Jeremy & Langhorst, Joern. (2014). Rethinking urban transformation: Temporary uses for vacant land. Cities.

40. 143–150. 10.1016/j.cities.2013.04.007.

Oswalt, P., Overmeyer, K. and Misselwitz, P., 2013. Urban Catalyst: The Power Of Temporary Use. [online] Urbancatalyst.net. Available at: http://www.urbancatalyst.net/downloads/2013_UC_Extract_eng.pdf Shanahan, D., Franco, L., Lin, B., Gaston, K. and Fuller, R., 2016. The Benefits Of Natural Environments For Physical Activity. [online] Springer Link. Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40279-016-0502-4.pdf

Silva, P., 2016. Tactical Urbanism: Towards An Evolutionary Cities’ Approach? - Paulo Silva, 2016. [online] SAGE Journals. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0265813516657340 Solà-Morales, I. (1994). Terrain vague. In C. Davidson (Ed.), Anyplace. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Stevens, Q. and Dovey, K., 2018. Pop-Ups And Public Interests: Agile Public Space In The Neoliberal City. [online] Springer Link. Available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-90131-2_20 Taylor Dotson (2016) Trial-and-error urbanism: addressing obduracy, uncertainty and complexity in urban planning and design, Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 9:2, 148-165, DOI: 10.1080/17549175.2015.1029511 Valverde, M., Taking 'land use' seriously: toward an ontology of municipal law, Law Text Culture, 9, 2005. Available at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/ltc/vol9/iss1/3 Völker, S., Matros, J. and Claßen, T., 2016. Determining Urban Open Spaces For Health-Related Appropriations: A Qualitative Analysis On The Significance Of Blue Space. [online] Springer Link. Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12665-016-5839-3.pdf Williams, Stewart. (2013). The temporary city. Australian Planner. 50. 278-279. 10.1080/07293682.2013.812934.

Image source: Daly, D., Dovey, K. and Stevens, Q., 2020. We Can't Let Coronavirus Kill Our Cities. Here's How We Can Save Urban Life. [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/we-cant-let-coronavirus-kill-our-cities-heres-howwe-can-save-urban-life-137063 n.d. Melbourne : Swanston Street, C. 1858; 1858. [image] Available at: https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/239052311? keyword=Melbourne%20Swanston%20Street