SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 66
Downloaden Sie, um offline zu lesen
MA in Urban Design
Evaluating the design and functionality
of a small urban space:
has modern technology altered social dynamics in small urban
spaces? If so, what are the implications for the future of
their design?
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
A good public space is not an afterthought.
Larry Houstoun (2011)
4. Ingredients for Successful Public Spaces
Available from: http://lhoustoun.wordpress.com/public-spaces/
[Accessed 6 June 2012].
2 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation
This study was completed for the
MA in Urban Design at the University
of the Western England, Bristol. The
work is my own. Where the work of
others is used or drawn on it is
attributed.
Signature:
Approximate word count: 17,305
(excluding acknowledgements,
bibliography, references and
appendices)
The author would like to thank the
following people for their encour-
agement, guidance and support in
the development and completion of
this dissertation.
Dr. Louis Rice of the University of the
West of England, for your academic
guidance through the course of the
masters programme and this disser-
tation.
The professional organisations who
have approved and supported me
during this research. Special thanks
to Anne Pauley of JEMB Realty for
granting permissions to observe the
James Center II Plaza. Thanks also to
M.Paul Friedberg & Partners for pro-
viding historic images of the plaza.
All interviewees who have contribut-
ed to this dissertation, for giving up
their valuable time and insights.
My friends, Melissa Barber, Anne
Davlin, Gale Schurman, Jonathan
Uzzle and Sarah Watt for providing
your valuable input and support.
Finally, I would like to thank my
mother, sister and neice for your sup-
port, patience and kindness during
my life transition this past year. This
dissertation is dedicated to Jesse
Owen Long, the newest addition
to the Long family tree. n
All images were taken by Gale Schurman,
MultiSync Photography © unless otherwise
indicated. Illustrated maps and images are
not to scale.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
2 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation
We are hard-wired with
a desire for congenial
places to gather. That’s
why it’s particularly sur-
prising how much we
overlook the importance
of public places today.
Jay Walljasper (2005)
Ode Magazine
In praise of streets, parks, squares, cof-
fee shops, and other beloved
hang-outs
Available from: http://www.pps.org/
our_place/
[Accessed 15 July 2012]
MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
ABSTRACT
3
This research explores the physical,
social and virtual features that create
a convivial small urban space.
William H. Whyte, who three decades
ago systematically investigated
urban design physical features in
The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces
(1980), reviewed social interactions
within these spaces providing the
urban design community with a co-
hesive list of what makes and shapes
a successful small urban space. These
recommendations were primarily
physical features that promote social
interactions within a predetermined
environment. Today, in the 21st
century, there is a call to observe,
survey, measure, evaluate and assess
how the increase in virtual modern
mobile technology has shifted the
dynamics and social interactions of
small urban public spaces.
In order to understand what a public
space is, it is important to review na-
tional guidance, such as the Ameri-
can Planning Association, CABE and
National Planning Policy Framework
to determine their explicit definitions
of what makes a public, private and
semi-private space or realm.
This dissertation attempts to analyse
how important physical features are
to provide safety, shelter, comfort
and entertainment within a public
space, following the methodology of
William H. Whyte (1980). Today, with
the constant evolution of modern
mobile technologies, and their fre-
quency of use in small urban public
spaces, this dissertation seeks to
determine what today’s public realm
users’physical, social and virtual
needs are.
Whyte’s urban design guidance was
assessed to determine the advised
ways of achieving distinctive, inclu-
sive urban design in small public
spaces. In total 61 questionnaire par-
ticipants contributed to the outcome
of this dissertation who were made
up of local working professionals,
students and a few visitors.
The definition of public, semi-public
and private urban space was ex-
plored, the importance of physical
features, the importance of acces-
sibility and connectivity to surround-
ing buildings and streets, the social
dynamics within, and an investiga-
tion to determine which aspects of
modern mobile technologies are
deemed the most frequently used
and the most important in today’s
environment.
The researchers’initial belief was
that new mobile technology incor-
porated in urban design should be
implemented when planning small
urban spaces to foster a renewal
of public social interactions verses
private social communication within
these spaces. The type of approach
to small urban public spaces, which
is important and should be aimed for
in view of the professionals inter-
viewed, is a public space which re-
flects the local community’s culture
and needs, a place where locals feel
safe, at home and connected. n
Open space is now
firmly part of statutory
and community planning
processes. Compre-
hensive planning poli-
cies for open space are
fundamental to social
inclusion, community
cohesion, health and
well-being.
CABE (2009)
Open space strategies
Best practice guidance
Available from: http://webar-
chive.nationalarchives.gov.
uk/20110118095356/http://www.cabe.
org.uk/files/open-space-strategies.pdf
[Accessed 29 July, 2012].
CONTENTS
4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
acknowledgements.............................................p. 2
abstract	 ............................................................p. 3
CONTENTS	 .......................................................pp. 4-5
1.0	Introduction ................................................ pp. 6-7
1.1	Introduction..................................................................p. 6
1.2	Why choose the study topic?..................................p. 6
1.3 	 Who was the influence for study? ................. pp. 6-7
1.4	 Location background................................................p. 7
2.0	Literature Review.....................................pp. 8-13
2.1	Introduction..................................................................p. 8
2.2	What planning and design theories
are available?................................................................p. 8
2.3	 What is a small urban space?..................................p. 9
2.4	What visual qualities make up a small
urban space?.................................................................p. 9
2.5	 Why are small urban spaces important?..........p. 10
2.6	How do we define success in terms of
small urban spaces?.................................................p. 10
2.7	Why do we need successful small
urban spaces?.............................................................p. 10
2.8	What physical features contribute to
successful small urban spaces?...................pp. 10-11
2.9	What social features contribute to
successful small urban spaces?............................p. 11
2.10	What defines virtual technology in
small urban spaces?........................................pp. 11-12
2.11	What virtual features contribute
to successful small urban spaces?.......................p. 12
2.12	How do technologies change people
and their social relations?.............................pp. 12-13
2.13	Summary......................................................................p. 13
3.0	MEthodology............................................pp. 14-25
3.1	Introduction................................................................p. 14
3.2 	 Scope of the study....................................................p. 15
3.3	 Mixed Method............................................................p. 15
3.4	 Qualitative Design....................................................p. 15
3.5	 Quantitative Design........................................pp. 15-16
3.6	 Case Study Design....................................................p. 16
3.7	 Theory of Design..............................................pp. 16-17
3.8	 Site History.........................................................pp. 17-19
3.9	 Site Selection.....................................................pp. 19-20
3.10	 Research Questions..................................................p. 20
3.11	Methodology..............................................................p. 20
3.12	Equipment...................................................................p. 21
3.13	 Data Analysis Software............................................p. 21
3.14	 Pilot Studies.................................................................p. 21
3.15	 Observational Survey.....................................pp. 21-22
	 3.15.1	 Survey Method...................................pp. 21-22
	 3.15.2	 Initial Time Frame......................................p. 22
	 3.15.3	 Additional Surveys....................................p. 22
3.16	Questionnaire.............................................................p. 22
	 3.16.1	Distribution.................................................p. 22
3.17	Plaza-user behavioural observations........pp. 22-23
3.18	 Justification of Methods.........................................p. 23
3.19	 Analytical Review.............................................pp. 23-24
3.20	 Justification of Analytical Review........................p. 24
3.21	Permissions..................................................................p. 24
3.22	Weaknesses.................................................................p. 24
3.23	 Ethical Challenges............................................pp. 24-25
3.24	Summary......................................................................p. 25
4.0	FINDINGS..........................................................pp. 26-51
4.1	Introduction................................................................p. 26
	 4.1.1	 Observational survey................................p. 26
	 4.1.2	Questionnaire.............................................p. 26
	 4.1.3	Plaza-user behavioural observations...p. 26
Public spaces are
favorite places to meet,
talk, sit, look, relax, play,
stroll, flirt, eat, drink,
smoke, peoplewatch,
read, soak in sun-
shine and feel part of a
broader whole. They are
the starting point for all
community, commerce
and democracy.
Walljasper, J. (2005)
In praise of streets, parks, squares,
coffeeshops, and other beloved
hang-outs
Ode Magazine
Available from: http://www.pps.org/
our_place/
[Accessed July 15 2012]
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
CONTENTS
5
4.2	 Locating the plaza............................................pp. 26-27
4.3	 Historical reference...................................................p. 27
4.4	 General observations...............................................p. 27
4.5	 Observational Survey..............................................p. 28
	 4.5.1	 Monday, August 27th.......................pp. 28-30
	 4.5.2	 Conclusions for Monday..........................p. 30
	 4.5.3	 Wednesday, August 29th.................pp. 31-32
	 4.5.4	 Conclusions for Wednesday............ pp.32-33
	 4.5.5	 Friday, August 31st............................pp. 34-35
	 4.5.6	 Conclusions for Friday......................pp. 35-36
	 4.5.7	 Tuesday, September 4th...................pp. 37-38
	 4.5.8	 Conclusions for Tuesday..................pp. 38-39
	 4.5.9	 Thursday, September 13th..............pp. 40-41
	 4.5.10	 Conclusions for Thursday................pp. 41-42
4.6	 Additional Findings..................................................p. 42
	 4.6.1	 Physical features........................................p. 42
	 4.6.2	 Food vendors .............................................p. 43
	 4.6.3	 Sitting places..............................................p. 43
	 4.6.4	 Ease of accessibility...................................p. 43
	 4.6.5	Shade............................................................p. 43
	 4.6.6	 Gender placement.....................................p. 44
	 4.6.7	Conclusion...................................................p. 44
4.7	Summary......................................................................p. 44
4.8	 On-site questionnaire..............................................p. 45
	 4.8.1	 Demographic profiles ......................pp. 45-46
	 4.8.2	 Seasons and frequency............................p. 46
	 4.8.3	 Why, what and how long?...............pp. 46-47
	 4.8.4	 Activities and time spent on them?.......p. 47
	 4.8.5	 Mobile technology use.............................p. 47
	 4.8.6	 Environment for mobile
		 technology use...................................pp. 47-48
	 4.8.7	 Plaza engagement when using/not using...	
		 mobile technologies.................................p. 48
	 4.8.8	 Who are mobile technology-users?......p. 48
	
4.8.9	 How much time do plaza-users spend
		 using mobile technologies?....................p. 48
	 4.8.10	 Respondents comments..........................p. 48
	 4.8.11	 Questionnaire conclusions.............pp. 48-49
4.9	 Plaza-user questionnaire visual mapping.pp. 45-50
	 4.9.1	 On-site observation visual map.............p. 50
	 4.9.2	Findings...............................................pp. 50-51
5.0	DISCUSSIONS..................................................pp. 52-56
5.1	Introduction................................................................p. 52
5.2	 William Whyte.............................................................p. 52
5.3	Analysis.........................................................................p. 52	
	 5.3.1	 Physical Features.......................................p. 52
	 5.3.2	 Social behaviours......................................p. 52
	 5.3.3	 Virtual features...................................pp. 52-53
5.4	Limitations...................................................................p. 53
5.5	Conclusions.................................................................p. 53
	 5.5.1	 Physical Features...............................pp. 53-54	
	 5.3.2	 Social behaviours......................................p. 54
	 5.3.3	 Virtual features...........................................p. 54
5.6	 Defining the impact.................................................p. 55
5.7	 Design implications..................................................p. 55
5.8	 Further study.....................................................pp. 55-56
6.0	BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................pp. 57-58
7.0	APPENDICES....................................................pp. 59-65
7.1	 University letter for permissions..........................p. 59
7.2	 E-mail correspondence for permissions............p.59
7.3	 Observational survey signage...............................p.60
7.4	 Visual map...................................................................p. 60
7.5	 On-site Questionnaire....................................pp. 61-62
7.6	 Questionnaire comments.............................pp. 62-63
7.7	 Questionnaire compiled data......................pp. 64-65
Successful places have
attractive and comfort-
able outdoor spaces.
CABE
Seven principles of good design
Available from: http://webar-
chive.nationalarchives.gov.
uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.
org.uk/councillors/principles
[Accessed 15 July 2012]
INTRODUCTION
6
1
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
1.1	Introduction
Small urban spaces form an es-
sential part of the structure of any
city. They either evolve organically
due to changing street layout and
city development or are specifically
designed. Christopher Alexander
et al (1977 p.518) explains that“an
outdoor space is positive when it
has a distinct and definite shape, as
definite as the shape of a room, and
when its shape is as important as
the shapes of the buildings which
surround it. These spaces are vital for
the surrounding communities and
act as‘breathing spaces’for a city.
When urban spaces are designed, it
is imperative that they are created
with much consideration placed
on who, what, why and how these
spaces will be used. It is vital that
these small urban spaces attract
people rather than alienate them.”
Urban designers need to consider
the space, it’s scale and provide
physical features that will encourage
and foster comfort, safety, play and
social dynamics as well as accom-
modating for individual anonymity.
And now, in the 21st century, with
modern mobile technologies, urban
designers need to be cognisant of
virtual features of a small urban
space and how this technology
affects the users and the space. This
dissertation describes one small
urban open space in the down-
town business district of Richmond,
Virginia, U.S.A. and evaluates the
present urban design features within
the Plaza, mirroring William Whyte’s
methodology, to observe, survey and
report plaza-users mobile technol-
ogy use within the urban space to
determine whether the introduction
of modern mobile technologies has
isolated or influenced social interac-
tions in these spaces.
1.2	Why choose the study topic?
Having a professional background
in multimedia and graphics since
1996, the researcher has always had
a keen interest in artistic conception,
designing and presenting pleasing
visual stimulants in private or public
forums traditionally through brand
identities, publications, marketing
materials, photography or video.
With the increase in mobile technol-
ogy use in our society, the researcher
had noticed a shift in the human
mindset and behaviour.
The researcher first noticed this shift
in human dynamics when sitting
around a dinner table in a restau-
rant in Coral Gables. The researcher
noticed that she was the only person
not on the phone or texting at the
table. This virtual personal commu-
nication from dinner guest members
connecting with people located in
other, external spaces was a new
phenomenon. Later, in 2004, the
researcher went to a multimedia
conference in Dallas, and noticed
that even while the speakers were
on stage disseminating key informa-
tion, most of the audience were on
their mobile technologies, texting,
blogging or tweeting to a cyber com-
munity. This new mobile experience
of wi-fi internet use in the public
realm contrasts with the traditional
wired internet use from the home or
workplace.
Understanding the use of mobile
technologies in a small urban space
is important to determine what
physical features are still success-
ful in encouraging convivial social
behaviour within the space and what
additional virtual and technologi-
cal features should be considered to
adjust to the needs of users now and
in the future.
1.3 	Who was the influence for
study?
William Whyte in The Social Life of
Small Urban Spaces (1980) studied
the life of plaza’s in New York City, de-
Places should be able to
accommodate change
over time, create conti-
nuity with the past and
respond to new social,
market or environmental
demands.
CABE (2011)
Seven principles of good design
Available from: http://webar-
chive.nationalarchives.gov.
uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.
org.uk/councillors/principles
[Accessed July 15 2012]
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
INTRODUCTION
7
1
termining through time-lapse video,
observation, interviews and visual
mapping how people used the pla-
zas, what physical features of a plaza
were beneficial to social interaction
and the success of the plaza. Whyte
determined that certain features and
human activities provided appropri-
ate shelter, entertainment and social
engagement for plaza-users, and
these greatly contributed to the suc-
cess verses the failure of a plaza.
The plaza’s that Whyte studied were
already designed and in use, with
predetermined physical features,
such as, fountains, bench seating,
concrete ledges, street food ven-
dors, etc. However, Whyte’s study
took place during an era that did not
include the use of modern mobile
technologies, and therefore the
researcher was interested in deter-
mining how physical attributes and
human social behaviours may have
changed or not changed with the
introduction of these technologies in
small urban spaces.
The researcher chose to consider
a methodology of research which
included a combination of visual
observation and mapping and inter-
cept questionnaires to help ascertain
the opinions of present plaza-users
understanding of physical, social and
virtual features that are successful,
detracting or are needed to encour-
age social interactions. By determin-
ing which physical features still, to
this day, support and encourage
social interactions within an urban
space, then perhaps these physi-
cal features could be incorporated
in new urban space designs or the
renovation of existing urban spaces
to increase social dynamic interac-
tions. Through visual observation
and questionnaire distribution one
can determine how plaza-users us-
ing mobile technologies utilize the
physical features identified, what
additional features are important to
them, how they interact socially and
with the space in general.
1.4 	Location background
Outdoor activities in public spaces
can be divided into three categories,
each of which places very different
demands on the physical environ-
ment: necessary activities, optional
activities, and social activities (Gehl,
1987). But, what attracts people
most, it would appear, is other
people (Whyte, 1980). n
What is new, and some-
what unexpected, for
example, has been
the popularity of virtual
spaces — chat rooms,
virtual worlds, Twitter,
Facebook, etc. ­— that
some argue will sup-
plant our need to meet
and interact in traditional
public space, and will
eventually lead to new
forms of urbanism.
Alessandro Aurigi (2005)
Making the Digital City: The Early Shap-
ing of Urban Internet Space
p. 17-31
LITERATUREREVIEW
8
2
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
2.1	Introduction
In order to present an accurate and
in-depth study, it is important to
review existing literature to help
understand, define, and review what
a small urban space is. Whyte (1980,
p.16) points out that urban plaza’s
are predominantly used by young
office workers from nearby build-
ings and that the elemental point
about good urban spaces is supply
creates demand. Whyte (1980 p.16)
continues to state that“a good new
space builds a new constituency. It
stimulates people into new habits—
al fresco lunches—and provides new
paths to and from work, new places
to pause.”
2.2	What planning and design
theories are available?
There are varying policies and advice
given in national, regional and local
documents regarding policies on
urban space. All seem to agree that
good quality design and manage-
ment of public spaces will contrib-
ute to active usage of space and
the health, wealth and vitality of
the surrounding communities. The
National Planning Policy Framework
(2012 8.69 p.16) states that plan-
ning systems play an important role
in facilitating safe and accessible
developments, containing clear and
It is important to
plan positively for the
achievement of high
quality and inclusive
design for all develop-
ment, including indi-
vidual buildings, public
and private spaces and
wider area development
schemes.
National Planning Policy Framework
(2012)
Achieving sustainable development
7. 57 p.15
Available from: https://www.gov.
uk/government/uploads/sys-
tem/.../2116950.pdf
[Accessed June 8 2012]
Figure 1: The Place Diagram
legible pedestrian routes, and high
quality public space, which encour-
age the active and continual use of
public areas.
It has been said that we must trans-
form our parks, streets and squares
into attractive, vibrant places that
help to create sustainable commu-
nities (CABE 2004). There is further
explanation that open space is now
firmly part of statutory and commu-
nity planning processes. Comprehen-
sive planning policies for open space
Source: pps.org. [online] http://www.pps.org/reference/grplacefeat/ [Accessed July 18, 2012].
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
LITERATUREREVIEW
9
2
are fundamental to social inclusion,
community cohesion, health and
well-being (CABE 2009).
PPS has developed The Place Dia-
gram that illustrates four key quali-
ties that make a space successful
and they are:
accessible; people are
engaged in activities there;
the space is comfortable
and has a good image; and
finally, it is a sociable place:
one where people meet each
other and take people when
they come to visit.
PPS also introduced The Power of
10 design theory, which suggests
that every place should have at least
10 reasons to visit it. These could
include a place to sit, playgrounds
to enjoy, art to touch, music to hear,
food to eat, history to experience,
and people to meet. Whatever poli-
cies and practices are available to the
planners, designers and communi-
ties, it is clear that urban space is a
vital place for interaction. Ultimately,
public spaces are about the people
(Shaftoe 2008).
2.3	What is a small urban space?
The traditional urban design can
be regarded as the evolved state of
urban form immediately prior to the
onset of large-scale industrialisation
and urbanisation (Carmona et al
2010).
Small urban spaces are usually lo-
cated in cities, towns or villages and
have urban areas within or around
them. Small urban spaces can be
considered parks, green spaces or
other open land use. Generally, small
urban spaces are open to the public,
however some are semi-public, semi-
private, or privately owned.
A public space only exists to the
extent that it is controlled as a com-
mons by agreement for all public to
use. Semi-public space is defined as
a private space which is accessible
to the general public, for example, a
shop or a Public House. Semi-private
space is defined as a space that is
access controlled and only acces-
sible to residents and associated
people only. If privately owned and
managed, it is usually owned by
surrounding higher education cam-
puses, community parks, institutions
or corporations. All these small urban
spaces can provide an aesthetic and
psychological relief from surround-
ing urban development in today’s
hectic world.
There are different types of typology
of urban space. These can be broken
into traditional or innovative types
of space (Francis 1986). Francis states
that examples of traditional urban
open spaces include public parks,
neighborhood parks, playgrounds,
pedestrian malls and plazas. Inno-
vative urban open spaces can be
unstructured spaces, such as traffic
underpasses and streets, neigh-
bourhood and community spaces,
farmer’s markets and trails, vacant
land and waterfronts.
2.4	What visual qualities make up
a small urban space?
The small urban space can be a
positive or a negative space. An
outdoor space is positive when it
has a distinct and definite shape,
and when its shape is as important
as the shapes of the buildings which
surround it. Positive urban space
can be partially enclosed, with ease
of accessibility where paths lead to
and from surrounding areas and the
space area which exists is convex.
There are three main space-defining
elements to an urban space; the
walls, the floor and the ceiling (sky).
These three factors provide a visitor
to the space with a sense of enclo-
sure, safety and comfort (Alexander
et al 1977).
Placemaking capitalizes
on a local community’s
assets, inspiration, and
potential, ultimately
creating good public
spaces that promote
people’s health, happi-
ness, and well being.
PPS, Project for Public Spaces (2011)
What is Placemaking?
Available from: http://www.pps.org/
reference/what_is_placemaking/
[Accessed July 17 2012]
LITERATUREREVIEW
10
2
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
However sophisticated
the simulations of
cyberspace become,
they are unlikely to be a
total substitute for the
buzz and unpredictability
of real life being played
out 360 degrees around
you.
Henry Shaftoe (2008)
Convivial Urban Spaces
Creating Effective Public Places.
Chapter 2, p.11
London: Earthscan
2.5	Why are small urban spaces
important?
Small urban spaces are important to
provide an outlet for urban dwellers
to escape to, meet, talk, sit, look, re-
lax, play, stroll, flirt, eat, drink, smoke,
people watch, read, soak in the sun
and feel part of a broader whole. It is
indicated that experiencing people,
who speak and move about, offers
a wealth of sensual variation. No
moment is like the previous or the
following when people circulate
among people. The number of new
situations and new stimuli is limitless
(Gehl 1987).
2.6	How do we define success in
terms of small urban spaces?
The Project for Public Spaces (PPS,
2009) declares that great public
spaces are where celebrations are
held, social and economic exchanges
take place, friends run into each
other, and cultures mix. They are
outdoor spaces that front the streets
outside of corporations, institutions,
libraries and educational facilities.
PPS has identified four key qualities
that make a public space successful;
	 •	 accessible
	 •	 active
	 •	 comfortable
	 •	 social
Public spaces are essentially dis-
cretionary environments where
people choose to go and use them
when they could conceivably go
elsewhere. Therefore visiting a small
urban space is an individualistic, per-
sonal choice. The success of an urban
space is contingent on its popularity,
which is measured by the number of
users who visit the park, night or day.
It’s success can be achieved through
a multi-faceted approach of grass-
roots outreach to tap local commu-
nity assets, inspiration, and potential
combined with excellent planning,
design and management (Carmona
et al, 2010).
2.7	Why do we need successful
small urban spaces?
It has been said that good spaces
are nutrients of urban life. They help
keep our heart happy and are a vital
ingredient in creating a community
where there is tolerance and respect
for each other, where the so-called
“big society”happens naturally
(Sarah Gaventa (2010) The Guardian).
Urban spaces and streets are where
democratic voices talk and are heard
debating, protesting, celebrating
and commiserating. Urban space is
important as a democratic platform
and without such convivial space,
cities, towns and villages would be
mere accretions of buildings with no
purposeful opportunities for casual
encounters and positive interac-
tions between friends or strangers
(Shaftoe 2008).
Research over the past decade focus-
ing on previously neglected aspects
of open space quality has provided
recognition of the social, psychologi-
cal, and economic benefits of urban
open space (Francis 1986). There is
a keen awareness that urban dwell-
ers need open healthy space that is
easily accessible in light of the in-
creasing levels of obesity that result
from inactive lifestyle. The Biophilia
hypothesis, originally proposed by
Edward O. Wilson in 1984, suggests
that human beings have an innate
and very strong link with the natural
world, and that close contact with
the latter reduces human stress, anxi-
ety and aggression.
2.8	What physical features con-
tribute to successful small urban
spaces?
It was determined that a crucial influ-
ence on whether people will use or
avoid urban public spaces is the de-
gree to which they feel safe in them.
Comfort and safety in open urban
spaces are imperative to the success
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
LITERATUREREVIEW
11
2
of the convivial space. Excellent de-
sign and management promote pop-
ularity and therefore increased visita-
tion and more“eyes on the street”
deflecting crime, bad social behav-
iour and misconduct (Shaftoe 2008).
Whyte observed during his study of
New York parks and plazas, that flex-
ible seating space was important to
allow visitors personal options. It is
also important that an urban open
space has balanced protection from
the natural elements (wind, rain,
sun, snow) whether through natural
enclosure (tree canopies, shrubbery,
overhangs or roofs) or through built
enclosure (three-sided open spaces
surrounded by buildings). Accessible
water features provide open space
users with touchable, splashable
and audible entertainment. Water
provides all sensory stimulation and
acts as a white noise within an open
space allowing for a sense of privacy
during intimate conversations. Food
vendors around an urban open
space, by default, have become the
caterers of the city’s outdoor life
where eating, schmoozing or just
standing becomes an active triangu-
lation node (a stimulus that prompts
strangers to talk which can be a
physical object or a visual sighting)–
a cluster point. Street performers
and public artwork also fall into the
triangulation node category, allow-
ing people to stop, watch, appreciate
and acknowledge either individually
or with groups. Whyte reported that
in observing the social effects within
an urban open space, we can find
how they can be anticipated and
planned (Whyte 1980).
2.9	What social behaviours con-
tribute to successful small urban
spaces?
Whyte (1980) stated that the rela-
tionship to the street is integral, and
it is far and away the critical design
factor to an active and social urban
space. He continued to say that a
good plaza starts at the street corner.
If it’s a busy corner, it has a brisk
social life of its own. Sight lines and
visibility for the onlooker and space
user are essential to provide a sense
of comfort and security, personal
empowerment and connectivity
with the social aspect of the site.
Whyte discusses the importance of
triangulation, specifying that street
characters make a city more amiable.
These street characters, whether
public art, entertainment performers
or natural performers, provide some
external stimulus that links people
together and encourages social
interactions between them. The fluc-
tuation of street activity surround-
ing an open urban space, the office
buildings, retail, residential and just
plain doorways that are open at all
hours of the day and night, keep the
active streetscape and urban space
alive. Gehl (1987) talks about three
modes, yet fairly broad requirements
of public spaces that include space
for; necessary outdoor activities,
optional recreational activities and
social activities.
2.10	What defines virtual technol-
ogy in small urban spaces?
Hampton (2010 p.701) suggests that
“virtual technology in small urban
spaces means internet access in pub-
lic parks, plazas, markets, and street
which has been made possible by
the proliferation of broadband wire-
less internet in the form of municipal
and community wi-fi and advanced
mobile phone networks. This access
to virtual accessibility is a method
of communication with other geo-
graphically located social commu-
nities. Where as before, wi-fi was
restricted to one’s personal realm
or professional environment, now
this personal wi-fi connectivity is
available in the public realm.”
Hampton goes on to state that to-
day’s internet access in public spaces
may reshape the public realm. This
may change the focus of urban
To begin with, it is self
evident that to be in
the presence of other
human beings is reas-
suring! Perceiving their
presence - through look-
ing, hearing and touch-
ing - enables each of us
to experience ourselves
as less alone.
Lennard, H. L. 
Crowhurst Lennard, S. H. (1984)
Public Life in Urban Places
Chapter 1, p.5
London: Gondolier Press
LITERATUREREVIEW
12
2
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
design in urban spaces to allow more
wi-fi communication to provide
plaza-users with the comfort and
accessibility that is expected today
(Hampton 2010).
2.11	What virtual features con-
tribute to successful small urban
spaces?
In The Social Life of Wireless Urban
Spaces, Hampton (2010 p.704) indi-
cates that while there is an extensive
literature in sociology and urban
planning on the role of benches, wa-
ter, trees, security, vendors, and other
infrastructure for social life of urban
spaces, little attention has been paid
to the role of media. While Whyte
was a pioneer in physical features
creating human behaviours and
social interactions that contribute to
a successful small urban space, his
studies pre-date mobile technolo-
gies of today. However sophisticated
the simulations of cyberspace be-
come, they are unlikely to be a total
substitute for the buzz and unpre-
dictability of real life being played
out 360 degrees around you (Shaftoe
2008). Contemporary public space is
increasingly constructed through the
articulation of physical and elec-
tronic spaces (McQuire et al, 2008).
Urban public spaces are increasingly
a place for the use of mobile phones,
portable video games, and most
recently devices that can connect to
wireless internet (Hampton 2010).
There is no doubt that virtual fea-
tures play an integral role in lifestyles
today. With the fast evolution of vir-
tual mobile communications, urban
designers will need to be cognizant
of virtual features required within
urban spaces in the future.
Direct meetings in public spaces
can now be replaced by indirect
Figure 2: Mobile technology use in an
urban space, Geneva, Switzerland.
Source: Ailsa Long, March 2012
Smart Phone use. Laptop and iPod use.
telecommunication. Active pres-
ence, participation, and experience
can now be superseded by passive
picture watching, seeing what others
have experienced elsewhere (Gehl
1987). During the recent Spatial
Vibrations Symposium in Spain
(2011), Professor Dr. Joan Busquets
discussed that many European cities
as well as other countries have a
new type of public space emerging
that is trying to reconsider some of
the values of traditional space. But
Busquets specifies that it should
also incorporate the ambitions of
the 21st century. Busquets believe
that by creating value into the public
space, you change the value of the
whole city.
2.12	How do technologies change
people and their social relations?
Traditionally, communities were
formed in a geographical area, with-
in a locality, so neighbours were able
to meet, greet and share news. This
enabled them to create a common
identity (Clark 2007). However, with
today’s highly mobile lifestyles, it has
become harder for connectivity with
surrounding communities as people
relocate more often and commute
from/to work. The modern mobile
technologies allow people to join
virtual communities (i.e. online social
Through the mass
media we are informed
about the larger, more
sensational world
events, but by being
with others we learn
more about the com-
mon but equally impor-
tant details.
Gehl, J. (1987)
Life Between Buildings
Using Public Space.
Chapter 1, p.22
New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
LITERATUREREVIEW
13
2
networks) that provide one way to
connect distributed members, but
their“hiding-behind-a-screen”access
model might not be enough to stir
up the feeling of belonging (Neman-
ja et al, 2011, pg. 3).
It is believed that the effects of new
technologies are not direct, but
negotiated through people’s con-
struction and use of them. Over time,
these interactions create a whole
new landscape (Humphreys 2005).
Man paradoxically uses communica-
tion technologies to build societies
that do not communicate in the
distance but that build a distance in
communication (Casalegno 2004).
He continues to emphasise that
through the interactions taking place
in cyberspace, we face the creation
of several communities: The Internet,
a matrix for new human relation-
ships, allows the encounter—virtual
and/or real—between people who
share some affinities.
Hampton (2010 p.711) notes in The
Social Life of Wireless Urban Spaces
that internet users are relatively
detached from their physical set-
ting, but they represent yet another
diverse activity for others to observe
within public spaces. This could
indicate that the mobile media users
within the urban space are now the
cause of the triangulation effect,
where the users become the ob-
served. As William H. Whyte (1980)
pointed out in The Social LIfe of Small
Urban Spaces, what attracts people
most is other people.
Being detached from your surround-
ings but being connected to your
cyber community may provide just
the right incentive for urban design-
ers in the future to focus their atten-
tions on the importance of“good”
urban space design that promotes,
provides for and encourages good
social and virtual interactions be-
tween present space and virtual
space users.
2.13	Summary
In review, an urban space is defined
by the surrounding built form and
the spaces between. The three
space-defining elements of an urban
space are the walls, the floor and
the sky. These three factors provide
a visitor to the space with a sense
of enclosure, safety and comfort. A
small urban space can be an impor-
tant space for activities, democratic
discussions and social interactions.
Physical features (i.e. seating, food,
shelter and accessibility) , social
features (e.g. sight lines, visibility,
planned or not planned entertain-
ment) and nowadays, virtual features
(modern mobile technology access)
are key to the success of a small
urban space. In order to determine
how to maintain small urban space
social dynamics moving forward, it
is important to observe, question
and evaluate behaviours within the
space, compare them with Whyte’s
previous findings from his study
of a predetermined plaza environ-
ment, and from this, determine what
features are necessary to encourage
social interactions in an era of mod-
ern mobile technologies. n
METHODOLOGY
14
3
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
3.1	Introduction
This mixed-method empirical ex-
ploratory research has three specific
objectives, with a final aim to under-
stand the relationship between phys-
ical features, social interactions and
how new mobile technologies influ-
ence or effect social dynamics within
a small urban space. The purpose of
this research was to determine the
physical features within predesigned
plaza’s, once identified by William
H. Whyte (1980) that to this day, are
important features to encourage use,
participation and social interaction
within a small urban space. The fol-
lowing are physical features that Wil-
liam Whyte uncovered as essential
for a successful plaza; sitting space,
shelter, food, and proximity to the
street. Whyte investigated additional
social aspects of a successful plaza
pointing out the necessity of triangu-
lation, capacity of the plaza and the
need for a variety of plaza-users. The
second focus of this research was
to determine how, if any, changes
exist with social dynamics within a
small urban space due to the use of
modern mobile technologies. The
third focus of this research was to
see what physical features combined
with virtual features are needed
within an urban space for user com-
fort, satisfaction and social interac-
tion. This study consequently makes
an important contribution through
the collection and analysis of empiri-
cal data on the relationship between
physical, social and virtual features of
a small urban space.
This chapter explains and justifies
the research strategy adopted; the
selection of data collection meth-
ods, sample selection and the data
analysis completed. Any concerns of
reliability, valididy and viability are
also addressed.
In order to define the focus and
explore the issues highlighted by the
literature review, a 5-stage approach
was developed for this study:
Stage 1:
Literature review: This consisted of
reviewing the most relevant and
up-to-date literature on small urban
spaces and mobile technology.
Stage 2:
Defining and refining the focus: This
included reviewing the findings of
the literature review, identifying im-
portant areas that would be useful to
include in the observational research
and questionnaire development.
Stage 3:
Site selection: Determining and
choosing an existing small urban
space in which to study the issues
identified in Stage 1 and 2.
Stage 4:
Data collection: This included taking
panoramic photographs over a five
work-day period, still photography
of virtual mobile technology useage
within the plaza, visual mapping
techniques to determine placement,
movement and activities and finally,
conducting a one-on-one ques-
tionnaire within the plaza with 60
participants.
Stage 5:
Analysis: This stage consisted of
reviewing panoramic photographs,
in-depth analysis of the visual maps
and compiling data from the ques-
tionnaires, using Microsoft Excel
for chart development and Adobe
Illustrator for maps and illustration
production. Enabling the Research
Questions to be answered and form
the conclusion of the report.
The literature review identified a
significant lack of research into
modern mobile technology within
small urban spaces and it’s effect on
social behaviour within these spaces.
1. James Center Property
1051 E Cary St Ste 610, Richmond, VA
23219
0.00mi (804) 225-8197
Maps
Source: Bing.com
Source: Bing.com
Figure 4: Map indicating James Center II Plaza
located in Richmond, Virginia on the east
coast of the United States.
Figure 3: Map indicating Richmond, Virginia
on the east coast of the United States.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
METHODOLOGY
15
3
In addition, none of these studies did
comparisons on previous physical
attributes within urban spaces that
contributed to social interactions,
and how these attributes are used in
today’s environment where modern
mobile technologies are prevelant.
3.2 Scope of the study
Due to the time and resource con-
straints of the study, it is confined to
an analysis of one urban semi-public
plaza in Richmond, Virginia, United
States. This is a case study. A signifi-
cant amount of data was collected
and analysed, from which conclu-
sions are drawn in later sections.
The aim of this study has been to
observe, survey, measure, evalu-
ate and assess how the increase in
virtual mobile technology useage
has shifted/not shifted the dynamics
and social interactions of small urban
public spaces. This study, following in
the footsteps of William Whyte’s ini-
tial small urban space study from the
late 1970s of physical features that
were considered essential and social
behaviours that naturally occured for
a plaza’s success, determined which
physical features and social plaza
activities remain important today,
and what additional virtual features
are/or are not required.
3.3	 Mixed method
This research is considered a mixed
method approach. The concept of
using a variety of mixed methods
quite probably originiated in 1959,
when Campbell and Fiske used
multiple methods to study validity
of psychological traits.This includes
collecting data using mixed methods
that included observations and in-
terviews (qualitative data) combined
with traditional quantiative data.
Brewer (1989 p.21) states that by
enlarging the scope of research to
which it is applied, the multimethod
perspective holds out the larger
promises of more sociologically
significant conclusions and greater
opportunities for both verification
and discovery.
In this study, a concurrent mixed
method procedure was facilitated
that converged quantitative and
qualitative data in order to provide
a comprehensive analysis of the
research problem.“In this design,
the investigator collects both forms
of data at the same time during the
study and then integrates the infor-
mation in the interpretation of the
overall results.”(Creswell 2009 p. 82)
3.4	 Quantitative design
According to Neuman (1997 p.106)
the language of quantitative re-
search is a language of variables,
hypotheses, units of analysis, as
well as casual explanations. It is
considered a positivist approach
to research. Neuman continues to
ascertain that quantitative research
design uses a deductive logic: one
that starts with a general topic, then
narrows down to research questions
and hypotheses and finally, tests the
hypotheses against empirical evi-
dence. While this study does incor-
porate some quantitative data pulled
from the questionnaire analysis, the
design is considered predominantly
qualitative due to the small study
and questionnaire participation.
3.5	 Qualitative design
Qualitative and quantitative styles
of research differ in many ways, but
in others they are complementary.
When the data is collected in the
form of written paragraphs rather
than numbers, different research
techniques and strategiies are put
into place. Neuman (1997 p.327)
indicates that qualitative research
adopts assumptions about social life,
objectives for research, and ways to
deal with data that are often at odds
with a quantitative approach. Patton Source: http://thejamescenter.com/index1.html
Figure 6: Historic image of Canals and exca-
vation of James Center II Plaza.
Source: http://article-new-ehow-images-a07-jb-dl-
hotels-west-richmond-virginia-1.1-800x800
Figure 5: View of downtown Richmond,
Virginia.
METHODOLOGY
16
3
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
(1990, p. 14) specifies that qualitative
methods typically produce a wealth
of detailed information about a
much smaller number of people and
cases. He also states that a qualitative
design needs to remain sufficiently
open and flexible to permit explora-
tion of whatever the phenomenon
under study offers for inquiry.
Qualitative designs continue to be
emergent even after data collection
begins (p.196). This tends to increase
the understanding of the case stud-
ied, however it can reduce the ability
to generalize.
This study focuses on qualitative
data documented through events,
recording people’s opinions and ex-
periences (with words, gestures and
tone), observing specific behaviours,
studying questionnaires and examin-
ing visual images.
3.6	Case study design
There have been many definitiions
given for case study research; Yin
(1994 Chapter 1, p.8) clarifies that
case studies are the preferred strat-
egy when“how”or“why”questions
are being posed, when the investiga-
tor has little control over events, and
when the focus is on a contemporary
phenomenon within some real-life
context. The case study’s unique
strength is its ability to deal with a
full variety of evidence­—documents,
artifacts, interviews, and observa-
tions (Yin, 1994).
This case study design , as a research
strategy comprises an all encompas-
ing method­—data collection and
data analysis. This study includes
documentation and archival records,
interviews and direct observation to
draw analysis from.
Strategy Form of
research
question
Control
over be-
havioural
events?
Fo-
cuses on
contem-
porary
events?
Survey who,
what,
where,
how
many,
how
much
no yes
Case
study
how, why no yes
3.7	Theory of design
The components of this research
design contain the study’s question,
study’s proposition, unit of analysis,
data analysis and conclusions.
The case study will show how
the use of modern mobile
technologies has affected or not
affected the social dynamics
within a small urban space. Us-
Figure 9: Series of Architectural
renderings of James Center II Plaza.
Source: Courtesy of M. Paul Friedberg  Partners.
Source: http://thejamescenter.com/index1.html
Figure 8: View of James Center II Plaza.
Source: Courtesy of M. Paul Friedberg  Partners.
Figure 7: Architectural models of James
Center II Plaza.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
METHODOLOGY
17
3
ing this knowledge, what con-
siderations do Urban designers
need to incorporate when
designing or redesinging small
urban spaces for public use.
3.8	Site history
The James Center II Plaza is located
in downtown Richmond, the capital
of the commonwealth of Virginia in-
land on the east coast of the United
States. The city of Richmond was
founded in 1737 and to date has an
estimated population of 204,2141
.
Richmond is the center of the Rich-
mond Metropolitan Statistical Area
(MSA). The Richmond Metropolitan
Area has an estimated population of
1,269,380.
Geographically, Richmond is located
at the fall line of the James River, 108
miles south of Washington DC. It is
surrounded by the counties of Hen-
rico and Chesterfield and is serviced
by Interstates 95 and 64 and en-
circled by Interstate 295 and the
Virginia State Route 288.
Prior to the formation of the city, the
Powhatan and Shocquohocan Native
American tribes had lived and culti-
vated the land. The city of Richmond
was settled by English colonists
from Jamestown in 1609, and offi-
cially founded in 1737. Richmond is
steeped in Revolutionary War history,
with many early presidents origi-
nating from the area. In 1782, after
being burned down by British troops
during the Revolutionary War, Rich-
mond was rebuilt and became one
of the largest manufacturing centres
in the country with iron works, flour
mills, tobacco facilities along with the
slave trade.
1
U.S. Census Bureau, 2010. [Accessed 16 July 2012]
James Center II Original Canal Stones Original Canal Stones Boatman’s Tower Food CartFigure 11: Aerial view of James Center II Plaza.
Figure 10: Illustration of James Center II Plaza, camera placement for panormaic shots.
METHODOLOGY
18
3
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
Today, Richmond’s downtown
economy is made up of law, finance,
state and federal government.
Between 1963 and 1965, there was
a“downtown boom”that led to the
construction of 700 buildings in the
city with a lean towards architec-
tural classicism. An example of this
would be The Virginia State Capitol
designed by Thomas Jefferson and
Charles-Louis Clérisseau in 1785.
The James Center II Plaza in down-
town Richmond was selected for the
study as it has a rich history and is a
vibrant transient small urban plaza
in the central business district. The
Plaza is located at 10th and Cary
Street and most of what is now the
James Center was occupied by the
great Turning Basin of the James
River and Kanawha Canal.
The Turning Basin of the James River
and Kanawha Canal was a huge man-
made body of water that was three
blocks long, from what is now 8th
Street to 11th Street and one block
wide, from just inside Cary Street to
Canal Street. The Canal and Basin
were the transportation focus of the
city, and clustered near the edge of
these features were tobacco ware-
houses, flour mills and iron works.
The Turning Basin served as a termi-
nal for canal barges to unload, turn
around and prepare for their return
trips. The main imports were English
woolens, French perfumes, Brazilian
coffee, and East Indian spices with
the export business primarily made
up of tobacco, cotton, flour and coal.
In 1985, the developers of the 2.5
million square foot James Center,
began to design and build the larg-
est mixed-use project to date that
would be submerged in the history
of Colonial and Civil War Richmond.
During the excavation of the site,
remains of 63 canal boats that had
been abandoned more than 200
years ago were unearthed. During
the development, the focus was
on the design of the streetscape to
reflect the history of the city and to
bring a modern twist to the space.
The surrounding buildings were built
to provide drama to the city’s skyline
with triangular notches, rounded
corners, odd angles and reflective
glass providing a sharp contrast to
the square and rectangular block
buildings surrounding the James
Center.
Purposefully, the buildings were set
back from the street with interweav-
ing pathways and seasonal plantings
and trees. The original Kanawha
Figure 12: Illustration of James Center II Plaza, camera placement for panormaic shots.
James Center II Plaza, Richmond, VA
Opened May, 1987 Typology Part-enclosed, Hard
and soft
surfaces, square
Type Pedestrian way Predominant
Surface
Concrete, Inlaid stone
Height of Buildings 21 storeys No of accesses 3, from street level
Major Axis North-East Location Downtown Rich-
mond, Virginia
Active frontages None
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
METHODOLOGY
19
3
Canal stones were inlaid into the
landscaping as seating and retaining
walls and represent the original canal
lock outlines when viewed from
above.
The plaza’s central vista is the 45-foot
limestone tower housing a 25-bell
carillon and cast figures of bargemen
and mules that rotates on the half
hour to the tune of changing melo-
dies crafted by Koninkiijke Eijsbouts,
from the Netherlands. This tower was
designed as a tribute to the canal life
of 1785-1879.
3.9	Site Selection
The researcher chose the study site
of James Center II Plaza because the
researcher frequented the plaza dur-
ing lunchtimes when she worked in
downtown Richmond and found the
small urban space easily accessible
and convivial.
The researcher briefly considered a
selection of sites in Richmond, Virgin-
ia, including: Kanawha Plaza, Monroe
Park Plaza and James Center II Plaza.
The two plaza’s, also located in the
central business district of down-
town Richmond, that were consid-
ered, were not selected because
they had little foot traffic, few visitors
and were poorly maintained. The
Kanawha Plaza (see figure 15), a
public city park and plaza, house a
few homeless people and some visit-
ing skateboarders (see figure 14), but
was primarily an unused and barren
park and plaza. The Kanawha Plaza
is located in the center of four 3-lane
major roadways that weave through
the downtown Richmond area. This
plaza is primarily used by thorough-
fare foot traffic and is poorly main-
tained by the City of Richmond. The
water feature rarely runs and the
surrounding noise barrier cement
walls create the feeling of isolation
and danger.
The other plaza has no known name
or identity (see figure 16) and it
is located in front of an enclosed
parking garage. This plaza is poorly
maintained. It is primarily used as a
thoroughfare by local business foot
traffic. The stone work along the
plaza is damaged and broken, and
the pathways are weed-infested with
broken brick paving.
Both small urban plaza’s are located
within a one mile radius of the James
Center II Plaza. However, James Cen-
ter II Plaza was chosen as the selcted
site on the grounds that:
1. 	It is a small urban plaza, cen-
trally located in the heart of
downtown metropolitan Rich-
mond city.
2.	It has a varied group of people,
doing a variety of things, that
represent a metropolitan cen-
tral business district.
3.	It has constant foot traffic and
visitors passing through it dur-
PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long.
Figure 15: Panoramic photograph of Kanawa Plaza
PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long.
PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long.
PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long.
Figure 16: Parking Garage Plaza, two streets
away from James Center II Plaza.
Figure 14: Skateboarders on Kanawa Plaza
broken fountain feature.
Figure 13: Kanawa Park and Plaza.
METHODOLOGY
20
3
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
ing the weekdays.
4.	There is easy access to street
food vendors, and inside the
James Center II there is access
to restaurants, banking, hotel,
restaurant and sports facilities.
5.	It is well maintained and has
behind-the-scenes security
patrols providing a sense of
safety.
The James Center II Plaza in down-
town Richmond, Virginia was se-
lected as the small urban area for the
subjective qualitative single-case
study. It is officially considered a
private plaza managed by JEMB
Realty, which is responsible for the
management of the surrounding
commercial buildings, James Center
1, 2 and 3. However, the plaza itself is
unofficially a semi-public plaza which
is open, easily accessible and has a
high frequency of use by the general
public and tenants.
The small urban space has a large
number of local working profession-
als from diverse occupations as well
as frequent visitors and a selection
of local downtown residents. James
Center II Plaza also is used for a
variety of different functions, particu-
larily during the lunch hour, by local
employees, visitors and residents
alike. There are seasonal events that
are held in the plaza, from lunchtime
zumba classes in the spring and local
jazz music during the summer, to
the switching on of the downtown
Christmas lights during the holiday
season. The pedestrian desire lines
lead plaza-users into and out of the
James Center II building towards
East Cary Street, 10th Street or down
towards Shockoe Bottom further
east.
3.10	Research questions
In order to access the relationships
between physical, social and virtual
features within an urban small space,
the following Research Questions
were addressed:
1.	Are Whyte’s previously ob-
served successful physical and
behavioural features of a small
urban space still relevant today
for social interaction?
2.	Is there a change in social
dynamics within a small urban
space due to the increase use
of modern mobile technolo-
gies?
3. 	Are physical features combined
with virtual features needed
within an urban space for user
comfort, satisfaction and social
interaction?
3.11		 Methodology
This section describes the methods
used in data collection and analy-
sis but also addresses alternative
methods considered and why the
preferred method was chosen.
Data Recorded
•	 Time and date of observation
•	 Physical characteristics of site
•	 Social characteristics of site
•	 Human behaviour within site
•	 Modern technological uses
within site
Figure 17: East to west view of
James Center II Plaza.
Figure 18: South view of James Center II
Plaza.
Figure 19: Northwest view of James Center
II Plaza.
Figure 20: East view of of James Center II
Plaza.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
METHODOLOGY
21
3
3.12	Equipment
Official background research:
•	 Preapproved permissions
sheet
•	 Printed observation sheet
For plaza observation:
•	 Pre-printed visual maps
•	 Pre-printed questionnaires
•	 Pens
•	 Clipboards
For timing observation:
•	 Smart phone and watch
For photographing plaza activities:
•	 TriPod
•	 Nikon DS300 camera and lens
For personal comfort:
•	 Water
•	 Snacks
•	 Notebook and pens
•	 Rucksack
3.13	 Data analysis software
Microsoft Excel was used to analyse
the numerical data drawn from the
questionnaire. Adobe Photoshop
was used to create panoramic shots
of the plaza and activities within the
plaza. Adobe Illustrator was used
to create summary visual maps of
plaza placement and activities, and
InDesign was used to develop the
document.
3.14	 Pilot studies
A pilot study was carried out to
ensure that the questionnaire was
practicable and there was a solid
balance of different parts of the
study. This pilot study was sent
electronically to a select group of six
workers in the downtown Richmond
business district, who worked close
to the James Center II Plaza. These
were people who worked in the
financial and advertising industries.
This preliminary test determined if
the order and questions made sense
to the audience. Although there was
an inclination to include qualitative
and quantative research questions,
the need for statistical significance
was curbed for the more qualitative
aspects of the study. Due to time
and resource limitations, one site
study was appropriate to achieve
significant qualititative results.
3.15	Observational survey
This subjective, qualitative, single
case study incorporates a mixed-
method approach. Using non-par-
ticipant/naturalistic observational
survey measurements is a“means
to gather information about behav-
iours of interest, but with the goal
that your presence does not alter
the behaviour you are observing”
(Devlin 2006 p.52). Observational
measurements permit the evalu-
ation researcher to understand a
program or treatment to an extent
not entirely possible using only the
insights of others obtained through
interviews (Patton 1990 p.23). Empir-
ical research was conducted to avoid
plaza-users being aware that they
were being studied, which assisted
in collecting images reflective of ev-
ery-day plaza life. Observations and
surveys were conducted at James
Center II Plaza site over several week
work days. In return for participat-
ing in the questionnaire survey,
participants, who chose to enter a
drawing, could win a $25 Starbucks
gift certificate. Eighty-eight percent
of those contacted agreed to partici-
pate in both the questionnaire and
enter the Starbucks gift certificate
drawing, yielding 61 completed
questionnaire surveys.
3.15.1	 Survey Method
The type of research is defined as a
‘longitudinal survey’, in which differ-
ent groups of plaza users are sur-
veyed at different points in time. The
panoramic photographs were shot
by a volunteer research assistant
and were taken from two specific
angles at the plaza (see figure 10),
using a tripod and ground markings
to ensure consistency and accuracy
We are in an age of
sweeping change.
Communities
engaged in Placemak-
ing benefit from the ac-
celeration that authentic
community-centered
digital methods can
enable.
Latorre, D. (2011)
Digital Placemaking – Authentic Civic
Engagement
VP of Digital Placemaking,
Available from: www.pps.org/blog/
digital-placemaking-authentic-civic-
engagement/
[Accessed 11 August 2012]
METHODOLOGY
22
3
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
of shots. However, marks could move
due to weather, pedestrian foot
traffic or other factors.
3.15.2	 Initial Time Frame
The research was gathered over a
five working day (non-consecutive)
period. The first week observations
and questionnaires were distributed
and collected on Monday, Wednes-
day and Friday, and the second
week on Tuesday and Thursday. The
research was gathered during a 2
1/2 hour time frame , with photo-
graphs taken every fifteen minutes
(11:30 a.m. until 2:00 p.m.) during the
business lunch period. William Whyte
(1980 p.18) states that“around noon,
the main clientele begins to arrive.
Soon, activity will be near peak and
will stay there until a little before 2:00
p.m.” This was indeed the case at the
James Center II Plaza.
The research days were organized
this way to avoid a non-typical run of
activity or inclement weather chang-
es and also to prevent any potential
influencing of behaviour due to the
researcher’s visible presence within
the plaza. The research time frames
were determined having conducted
preliminary observation and noting
that the largest volume occupancy of
the plaza was during the lunch hours
between 11:30 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. Be-
fore and after work-hour plaza activ-
ity was virtually non-existent during
weekdays and also at weekends.
3.15.3	 Additional Surveys
With the availability of additional
resources and extended time frames,
more surveys could be completed
using the same criteria but spanning
seasons to incorporate accurate data
on plaza usage and physical, social
and virtual features needed through-
out the year.
3.16	Questionnaire
A questionnaire was conducted
in tandem with the observational
survey. This mixed method approach
to real-life questions is important, be-
cause it allows triangulation of data;
and if the results of different meth-
ods coverage (agree, or fit together),
then we can have greater confidence
in the findings (Gillham, 2007 p.28).
The questionnaire itself contains
a combination of open and close-
ended questions that were used for
content and statistical analysis. These
questions focus on physical and
virtual features of an urban space
and the plaza-user experience of the
space.
3.15.1	Distribution
Due to resource and time constraints,
the questionnaire was conducted
using convenience purposeful
sampling. The key question for the
researcher is: are the people in this
sample similar to those in the target
group? (Gillham 2008 p.18) About
10 questionnaires were distributed
electronically to local working pro-
fessionals and the remainding 52
were distributed one-on-one during
intercept on-site interviews to busi-
ness professionals, near-by residents
and visitors of the plaza. In total 61
questionnaires were completed and
returned to the researcher, with only
five plaza-users requesting to abstain
from the questionnaire due to their
infrequent plaza usage or not having
enough time during their lunch time
break.
3.17	 Plaza-user behavioural
observations
When the researcher was conduct-
ing the observational survey, general
plaza-user behavioural observations
were made and visually mapped ac-
cordingly. Plaza users were observed
during the research time frame, their
placement, their movement and in-
teractions and their technology use-
age within the plaza. This observa-
tion determined patterns of certain
Figure 21: Examples of mobile technology
use in James Center II Plaza, Richmond,
Virginia.
Smart Phone use
Tablet use
E-reader use
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
METHODOLOGY
23
3
physical, social and virtual features
that plaza-users gravitated towards.
3.18	 Justification of methods
In 1980, William Whyte used time-
lapse video cameras during his
observation of public spaces. While
this produced great insight into
human behaviours, physical plaza
attributes and provided interesting
results, there are questions regarding
the practical and ethical consider-
ations when using videography. The
presence of video equipment in a
space could, in fact, alter the regular
behaviour that occurs within that
space. Videography can be perceived
as secretive whereas photography
is considered more visible and“in
full”view. The researcher determined
that timed panoramic photography
would yield the best visual results
without jeopardising the anonymity
of the plaza-users. Also, Whyte had a
team of researchers to assist with his
research that spanned several years,
whereas this research project had
limited resources and a restricted
time frame. One main disadvantage
of observation methodology is that
the presence of the observer can
affect the situation that is under
observation.
With more time to conduct research,
more evidence-based research
would have been collected. Due to
time constraints and limited resourc-
es, five days was considered a valid
study period. The study days were
not concurrent and spread out over a
two week period to take into consid-
eration exogeneous events, such as
climatic, social and political changes.
Ideally, an assessment of the plaza
over different seasons would provide
a better understanding of the extent
mobile technologies play with social
dynamics within the plaza and what
physical features are still required for
these virtual experiences through
the varying seasons. The researcher
was required to fit within the time
restrictions, so this was unavoidable.
The conclusions have taken this into
account.
3.19	 Analytical review
An analytical review was presented
for each panoramic photographic
‘still’taken. This review was con-
ducted to determine the number
of plaza-users using mobile tech-
nologies, their placement within the
plaza and any social behaviours and
cluster patterns that evolved from
observation. This information was
then collated and presented through
written and visual representations to
address the research question.
Illustrated plans were drawn (see
figure 34) to show different social
phenomena including, gender
placement, cluster patterns, mobile
technology use, and plaza usage in
relation to features within the space.
Ideally, triangulation methodology
would be the best method for this
study, however with limited budget
and short time frame constraints
affected the amount of triangula-
tion that was practical. Certainly, one
important strategy for conducting
evaluation research was to employ
multiple methods, measures, re-
searchers, and perspectives–but to
do so reasonably and practically.
(Patton, M. Q. 1990 Qualitative Evalu-
ation and Research Methods 2nd ed.
p.187)
The primary analysis was done dur-
ing the lunch time period, from 11:30
a.m. until 2:00 p.m. at the James
Center II Plaza to understand the
plaza usage and movement during
this active time of day. This analysis
was conducted to concentrate on
the use of the public space, move-
ment, location, cluster development,
mobile technology useage and social
interactions. Using mapping and
area illustrative maps, the analaysis
Figure 22: Examples of mobile technology
use in James Center II Plaza,
Richmond, Virginia.
Smart Phone use
Laptop and iPod use
E-reader use
METHODOLOGY
24
3
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
focused on certain areas, character-
istics and use within those areas. In-
formal people observations and data
averaged out across all days studied
to compile single graphs or where
comparative data did not exist they
were drawn up for each day of as-
sessment. This demonstrated which
areas were frequently used and at
which times and for what activities.
3.20	 Justification of analytical
review
Photographic documentation and
observing plaza-users, movement/
locations and activities, were consid-
ered a logical and practical way to
analyse the data. Plans and illustra-
tions used to address the research
question were appropriate to visu-
ally document spatial patterns and
phenomena. A more quantitative
method of plaza-user count charts
and tables would have produced a
less visually expressive result. The
panoramic photographs of the site
and the commentary provides more
detailed and insightful evidence to
back up assertions made.
3.21	Permissions
The main obstacle that the research-
er had to overcome was getting
approval and permissions from Anne
Pauley, Management Agent of JEMB
Realty for James Center II Plaza. This
included email communications be-
tween the Agent and the head office
of JEMB Realty in New York. This pro-
cess took approximately two months
to complete, and then, the research-
er was required to sign a“Hold Harm-
less Agreement.”At which point,
dates for the observational survey
at the plaza were agreed upon and
the research was approved to move
ahead. Security guards at James
Center II Plaza were informed and on
each day of observation and photog-
raphy, the researcher and volunteer
photographer would checked in with
the Chief of Security on site.
3.22	Weaknesses
As the paper only studied one site,
there is the issue of subjectivity of
site selection. However, the purpose
was to consider the extent of plaza
usage, movement, location, cluster
development, mobile technology
useage and social interactions in a
downtown urban plaza.
In order to create a more in depth
report, the plaza could have been
observed over a 12 month period
through the various seasons to
distinguish patterns in usage and ac-
tivities within the plaza from Spring
to Winter. However, due to time and
resource limitations, this was not
feasible at this time. Further studies
could yield a clearer understanding
of plaza usage, movement, location,
cluster development, mobile tech-
nology useage and social interac-
tions in a downtown urban plaza.
The plaza, on previous non-planned
observation by the researcher, was
not used during the weekday eve-
nings or at weekends. This plaza is
strictly a weekday business plaza.
Due to time and resources, the
observation was restricted from
11:30 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. during the
work week lunch hour. If a plaza had
been chosen for the study that had
constant 24-hour usage, and was
observed during 24-hour cycles, the
results analysed could have been
significantly different.
Another limitation of the study
concerns the inability to have flexible
physical attribute arrangements. This
plaza, similar to the plaza’s that Wil-
liam Whyte studied in New York, had
established physical features with no
flexibility for change. This inability to
make subtle changes to the physical
environment to determine certain
human behaviours hindered the op-
portunity to see varied results.
Another potentially significant
limitation was that some leading
edge modern mobile technologies
were absent from the plaza. This,
of course, raises the possibility that
the plaza-users for whom modern
mobile technologies are important
may forego this site in favour of
another plaza where those features
are present. In this instance, the need
for these kinds of features would not
have necessarily been identified with
the plaza-users that were surveyed.
As a result, the lack of interest in
these needs of modern technological
features could well be understated
and underrepresented.
3.23	 Ethical challenges
It was important, during the research
observation, that the research should
be designed, reviewed and under-
taken to ensure integrity and quality.
Therefore the following measures
were undertaken to ensure that:
•	 All the research assistants and
participants were informed
fully about the purpose, meth-
ods and intended possible use
of the research and what their
input entailed and involved.
•	  Any harm to participants was
avoided at all costs. No physi-
cal contact was made with the
participants and no psycho-
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
METHODOLOGY
25
3
logical damage was incurred
by the research conducted.
•	 The confidentiality and
anonimity of the individuals
remained secure during the
plaza being photographed
and during on-site question-
naire distribution to plaza
tenants and visitors alike.
•	 The core principle of ethical
codes were conducted ­— that
of informed consent.
•	 During the photograph ses-
sions signage was placed
strategically next to the
photographic equipment to
clarified the purpose of the
research and stating that any-
one wishing to be removed
from photographs would be
removed, upon request.
•	 The questionnaire itself was
distributed voluntarily and
explained, in the one-on-one
intercept interviews, that re-
sponses would be confidential
and no personal information
would be released or sold.
•	 Participants could choose to
withdraw at any time and this
was explained to them by the
researcher either verbally or in
writing.
•	 People whom the researcher
understood to be vulnerable
plaza-users were not targeted
for research involvement, for
example, children under 18
and disabled and therefore
were not approached.
•	 An incentive of a $25 (equiva-
lent to £15) Starbucks gift
certificate, should the partici-
pant choose to be included in
the free drawing, was avail-
able upon completion of the
questionnaire and ONLY if the
participant felt comfortable
providing their name and
email address for the drawing
entry.
•	 All images were stored
electronically and all ques-
tionnaires were stored in a
safe and secure environment,
electronically protected by
passwords to be destroyed at
a later date.
•	 All research methods con-
ducted would not lead to
unethical behaviour in others.
Only standard approaches
to research were undertaken
involving professional people
and the general public.
3.24	Summary
In review, the approach taken by
the researcher was to design a
methodology that was an empirical
mixed-method with primary focus
on qualitative research using one
case study. This approach incorpo-
rated on-site questionnaires, obser-
vational surveys as well as photo-
graphic documentation to collect
significant data for a well-rounded
analysis on the plaza space, physi-
cal attributes, activities and plaza-
users experiences at James Center
II Plaza. This analysis will assist in
evaluating, in an already predeter-
mined environment, what physical
features and human behaviours
remain consistent today, and how
mobile technologies may/may not
have affected behaviours within the
small urban space. n
It’s a story about how
we will communication
and use technology in
the future.
Corning Incorporated (2012)
A Day Made of Glass 2 HD
Available from: www.youtube.com/
watch?v=jZkHpNnXLB0
[Accessed 21 August 2012]
FINDINGS
26
4
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
Figure 23: Illustration of James Center II Plaza, downtown Richmond.
4.1	Introduction
The researcher was tasked with
studying a small urban space, and
evaluating the physical features that
encourage and foster comfort, safety,
play and social dynamics as well as
accommodating for individual ano-
nymity. The researcher observed, sur-
veyed and reported plaza-users wi-fi
mobile technology use within the
urban space to determine whether
the introduction of mobile technolo-
gies has isolated or influenced social
interactions in these spaces.
4.1.1	 Observational survey
The observational survey conducted
included a series of“time-lapse”
photographs taken at fifteen min-
ute intervals between 11:30 a.m.
and 2:00 p.m. during the business
lunch hour shot from the peripheral
region of the downtown plaza (see
figure 10). Each half hour time frame
is analytically described for each
survey day. The objective was to
evaluate the plaza features, flow and
movement, usage and to investigate
the frequency of mobile technology
useage within the plaza.
4.1.2	Questionnaire
The on-site questionnaire was
completed during the five day ob-
servational survey time frame. These
intercept on-site questionnaires were
distributed to plaza-users by the
researcher in person during the on-
site observational survey, and some
were distributed electronically. The
objective of the questionnaire was
to collect feedback from plaza-users
on their plaza experience, preferred
usage and placement, as well as
their mobile technology preferences
within the plaza.
4.1.3	 Plaza-user behavioural
observations
The Plaza-user behavioural observa-
tions were made using visual map-
ping techniques that were con-
ducted by both the researcher or
assistant and also visual mapping
within the questionnaire completed
by the respondents. The researcher
observed plaza-users movement,
placement and activities within the
plaza. This helped assertain the pre-
ferred placement of plaza-users for
varied activities.
4.2	Locating the plaza
The James Center II Plaza is a semi-
public plaza located in downtown
Richmond’s central business district.
It is owned and operated by JEMB
Realty Corporation. James Center
includes three office towers that
together form a showpiece of the
downtown Richmond skyline. The
site includes over 986,000 square
feet of office space, a fitness facility,
five restaurants, a 1,600 car parking
garage and a 50,000 square foot re-
tail atrium that connects to an Omni
Hotel.2
The plaza is within walking
distance of the financial district to
historic Shockoe Bottom, the city’s
most fashionable shopping and
dining district with its cobblestone
streets and restored warehouses
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
FINDINGS
27
4
containing unique assortments of
exclusive apparel stores, galleries,
restaurants, hotels and apartments.
4.3	Historical reference
The plaza is situated on the corner
of 10th Street and East Cary Street,
and was once occupied by the Great
Turning Basin of the James River and
Kanawha Canal. The Canal and Basin
were the transportation focus of the
city, surrounded by tobacco ware-
houses, flour mills and iron works.
The Turning Basin served as a termi-
nal for canal barges to unload, turn
around and prepare for their return
trips importing and exporting goods.
During the early stages of construc-
tion, the workers digging at the site
discovered the remains of several
canal boats dating back 200 years.
The remains of 63 Kanawha Canal
boats were recorded and all were
salvaged and preserved which took
precedence over the construction.
The construction was planned and
developed to integrate historic with
contemporary by incorporating
triangular nodes, rounded corners,
odd angles with reflective glass
that stand out in sharp contrast
to the historic surroundings. As
building began, every detail of the
streetscape contributes to the goal
of making James Center a“people
place”. The Plaza, one of the focal
points of the project, was designed
to offer ample seating for outdoor
lunches, concerts, or quiet relaxation.
The seating is comprised of stones
which lined the walls of the Great
Turning Basin, and which have been
arranged to resemble a canal lock
when viewed from above. The clock
tower, features revolving sculpted
figures reminiscent of the workers
who toiled on the river barges.3
4.4	General observations
In figure 24, you will see the plaza
pedestrian desire lines as well as the
traffic flow around the plaza. Figures
25 and 26 show how little the plaza
has changed in over twenty years
from it’s original design. The physical
features have remained the same,
with only the tree canopy’s maturing
with age. Typically, during this sea-
son, the sun does not access the pla-
za until approximately 11:45 a.m. and
retreats behind the buildings by 1:15
p.m. The Plaza has three food carts
located on the city-owned street
corners; one located on the plaza
peripheral, and two located across
the road from the plaza. During dif-
ferent seasons, certain programmed
entertainment occurs within the
plaza, increasing plaza usage.
Figure 24: Traffic patterns and pedestrian desire lines at James Center II Plaza
Source: Courtesy of M. Paul Friedberg  Partners. Source: Photography by Ailsa Long
Figure 25: Aerial view of James Center II Plaza
c1990s.
Figure 26: James Center II Plaza clock tower
and barge boatmen sculpture.
2,3
Available from: http://www.thejamescenter.com/index1.html [Accessed 27 Oct, 2012]
FINDINGS
28
4
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
4.5	Observational survey
The visual panoramic observational
survey was taken over five working
days within a two week time frame
during the business lunch hour from
11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. The re-
search team included the researcher,
one volunteer photographer and
one documentary observer who
participated during the five day ob-
servational period.
4.5.1	 Monday 27th August
11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
•	 At 11:30 am, the local street
corner food vendors begin to
set up their stalls in prepara-
tion for the lunch time crowd.
•	 There is a pattern of smokers
taking a smoke break by exit-
ing the building and smoking
in the front entrance while
checking their smart phones or
having general conversations
with other smokers.
•	 There are a few cell phone
users that are on their own,
checking messages and mak-
ing calls.
•	 A small selection of transitional
pedestrians were crossing
through the plaza coming to-
and-from their destinations.
•	 This time frame accomodates
the“regular”plaza users as
well as the early lunch“grab-
bers”with the occasional smart
phone“reviewers”.
•	 The central seating area ap-
pears to be more populated
by early lunch time plaza-users
providing the best people-
watching views.
12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m.
•	 This period accommodated a
Monday 27th August, 2012
11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
FINDINGS
29
4
Monday 27th August, 2012 (continued)
12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m. mix of lunch groups, transition-
al pedestrian foot traffic, smart
phone users with fewer visible
smokers at the entrance.
•	 The lunch groups were located
on the two exterior wall seat-
ing looking into the plaza for
prime people-watching, with
trees behind them as natural
barriers around the exterior of
the plaza.
•	 There are individual mobile
technology users who are
walking and talking on their
devices.
•	 The central seating area was
also popular for lunch-time
dining, meeting and greeting.
•	 The pedestrian pathways
around the exterior of the
plaza are frequented by
pedestrian foot traffic only.
•	  Triangulation occurs primarily
at the corner of 10th and Main,
by the food vendor cart.
•	 Casual encounters occur on
the pathways within the plaza
to and from the building to the
street.
•	  During lunch time, the plaza-
users sit either alone, in two’s
or in groups of three.
1:30 pm - 2:00 pm
•	 From 1:30 until 2:00 p.m. there
is a rise in plaza-users who eat
alone.
•	 There is a significant amount of
smart phone “reviewers”walk-
ing through the plaza.
•	 The smokers return to the
entrance doorway around
1:45 p.m.
•	 The street vendors begin to
FINDINGS
30
4
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
1:30p.m.1:45p.m. finish off serving the late lunch
eaters, and prepare to break-
down their carts.
•	 The transient pedestrian foot
traffic reduces significantly by
1:30 p.m.
•	 The plaza maintenance crew
empties rubbish bins and col-
lects debris left over from the
plaza lunch crowd.
4.5.2	 Conclusions for Monday
From general observations in the
past, the chief plaza activity occurs at
lunch hour during the working week
days. From close observations dur-
ing the 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. time
frame, certain plaza-user movements
and activities can be seen.
•	 The street food vendor is an
integral part of the plaza life.
As Whyte (1980 Chapter 4
p. 52) states,“Food attracts
people, who attract more
people.”The vendors situate
themselves on the outskirts
of the plaza, on the street
corner, on city pavement,
within the busiest pedestrian
throughfare. Whyte (1980
Chapter 5 p.54) states that a
successful plaza“starts at the
street corner, it has a brisk
social life of its own.” This
placement enables maxi-
mum food sale potential,
but allows for the congrega-
tion of customers to cause a
triangulation effect, provid-
ing perfect opportunities for
casual business or personal
encounters and community.
•	 The smokers prefer to stay
close to the entrance of the
building, where smoking is
allocated and they bring mo-
bile technologies with them
to keep them occupied dur-
ing their smoke break. They
frequently smoke alone, but
some smokers will bring a
friend. The smoking area also
causes a triangulation effect,
where like-minded smokers
can meet and greet.
•	 The primary seating activity
occurs within the central
plaza seating region, with
the original raised canal
ledge seating. This seating
has two backsides deep
capability allowing for
maximum seating capacity.
The inlaid canal stone ledges
on the green space are also
used often with only single
seating capacity. The plaza
edges, under the tree cano-
py, are also popular seating
locations with maximum
viewing capabilities of the
whole plaza.
Monday 27th August, 2012 (continued)
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
FINDINGS
31
4
4.5.3	 Wednesday, August 29th
11:30 a.m. - 12:15 p.m.
•	 At 11:30 am, the local street
corner food vendors begin to
set up their stalls in prepara-
tion for the lunch time crowd.
•	 There is a pattern of smokers
taking a smoke break by exit-
ing the building and smoking
right by the front entrance, the
designated smoking area.
•	 A small selection of transitional
pedestrians were crossing
through the plaza coming to-
and-from their destinations.
•	 This time frame accomodates
the“regular”plaza users as well
as the early lunch“grabbers”.
•	 Very few mobile technology
plaza-users were visible.
•	 The central and side seat-
ing area appears to be more
populated by early lunch time
plaza-users providing the best
people-watching views.
•	 Visibly, the Bell Tower and
steps, considered a vista or
public art piece, does not
appear to act as a triangulation
point in the social life of this
plaza. Few people congregate,
meet or sit on the steps.
12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m.
•	 The plaza-use is it’s busiest
during this time frame.
•	 There appears to be a mix
of lunch groups. The larger
groups (3 + people) sit on the
peripheral seating, with the
smaller groups preferring seat-
ing in a more central location.
•	 There is a small amount of
transitional pedestrian traffic,
Wednesday 29th August, 2012.
11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
FINDINGS
32
4
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
Wednesday 29th August, 2012 (continued)
12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m. a few mobile technology users
and only a couple visible smok-
ers at the building entrance.
•	 The corner food cart acts as a  
meeting, greeting and grab-
bing food stop.
1:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
•	 During this time frame, there
is a rise in single“eaters” with
a few parties of two eating or
conversing.
•	 The maintenance crews begin
their clean-up at 1:45 p.m. after
the lunch-time plaza-use rush.
•	 Only a select few smokers ap-
pear at the designated smok-
ing area at the front entrance
after the lunchtime rush.
4.5.4	 Conclusions for Wednesday
Here are some of the researcher’s
findings from close observations
during the 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
time frame, visually reviewing certain
plaza-user movements and activities.
•	 Very little mobile technology
use occurs within the plaza.
The mobile technology use
that does occur is primarily
done by individual plaza-
users, not within groups.
•	 The sun exposure within
the plaza seems to dictate
the frequency of plaza-use.
When the sun is at it’s fullest
exposure within the plaza
(11:45 a.m. until 1:45 p.m.), is
when the highest plaza-use
occurs.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
FINDINGS
33
4
1:30p.m.1:45p.m.
Wednesday 29th August, 2012 (continued)
•	 The largest groups of lunch
plaza-users occurs during the
12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. time
frame.
FINDINGS
34
4
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
4.5.5	 Friday 31st August
11:30 a.m. - 12:15 p.m.
•	 Smokers primarily smoke in
the door entrance designated
smoking area between 11:30
a.m. and 12:00 p.m.
•	 During this time frame there
are a few transitional pedestri-
ans crossing through the plaza
to reach their destinations.
•	 This time frame consists of
single lunch eaters with the
occasional small lunch groups.
•	 Again there is only a small
group of mobile technology
plaza-users and smart phone
“reviewers”visible. The primary
plaza-user that brings technol-
ogy with them into the plaza
are single plaza-users.
•	 The primary seating choice
locations are within the central
zone or on the more centrally
located peripheral edges.
12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m.
•	 During the 12:30 p.m. through
1:00 p.m. there appears to be
an increase of lunch groups
(large and small), transitional
pedestrian traffic and smart
phone“reviewers”.
•	 The lunch groups tend to sit on
the exterior wall seating look-
ing into the plaza for prime
people-watching experience.
•	 This plaza, is not“special
needs”equipped. The stairs
down into the plaza prevent
disabled plaza-users from en-
tering using this desire line.
•	 The Bell Tower is still not used
by plaza-users for either seat-
ing or for casual business or
personal encounters.
PHOTOGRAPHY: Gale Schurman, MultiSync Photography.
Friday 31st August 2012
11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
FINDINGS
35
4
Friday 31st August 2012 (continued)
12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m.•	 The main pedestrian thorough-
fare is along 10th and Main
street along the northeast and
northwest of the plaza periph-
ery.
•	 The three entrances to the
plaza from the street are the
pedestrian desire lines through
the plaza.
1:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
•	 The plaza users are mini-
mal during this time period,
although there are left over
small groups of plaza-users
and lunch“eaters”.
4.5.6	 Conclusions for Friday
•	 The Bell Tower, is not used
as a seating area or a meet-
ing place, where traditionally
public art or vistas do act as an
attraction point for plaza-users.
•	 From general observations, it
appears that there is an equal
balance of single men and
single women who use mobile
technologies within the plaza.
•	 The single plaza-users bring
their mobile technologies
while in the plaza. It would
seem that as a single plaza-
user, bringing mobile technol-
ogies into the space, provides
the user with a connection to a
cyber community and there-
fore not actually alone within
the physical space.
•	 The majority of plaza-users
prefer to sit under the periph-
eral and central tree canopy’s
for shade. Whyte (1980 Chapter
1 p.18) explains that the best
plaza’s he studied, afforded
a good view of the passing
FINDINGS
36
4
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
1:30p.m.1:45p.m.
Friday 31st August 2012 (continued)
scene and the pleasure of be-
ing comfortably situated under
a tree for shade while doing
so. Although, there are a select
group of plaza-users who
prefer to sit in direct sunlight
during their lunch hour.
•	 The overlapping foliage on
the peripheral of the plaza
provides a combination of
sunlight and shade which en-
courages plaza-users to sit, eat,
watch and stay.
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
FINDINGS
37
4
4.5.7	 Tuesday 4th September
11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
•	 There was some transient pe-
destrian foot traffic in and out
of the plaza, to and from the
street to the buildings.
•	 This time frame accomodates
the early lunch“grabbers”
with single“eaters”and small
groups and the occasional
smart phone“reviewer”.
•	 One bicyclist sits and rests at
noon, although the plaza does
not accomodate for cyclists as
there are no bike racks present
at street level.
•	 At 12:15 p.m., one solo plaza-
user sits on the steps of the
Bell Tower to use his smart
phone.
12:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m.
•	 The plaza users primarily sit
within the central zone of the
plaza during this time frame.
•	 During 12:30 p.m. through 1:30
p.m. there appears to be an
increase of lunch groups (two
to five) and transitional pedes-
trian traffic.
•	 There is an increase in  mo-
bile technology plaza-users.
Predominantly in the desig-
nated smoking area infront
of the entrance to the build-
ing. These technology users
predominantly stand or pace
when using their devices at the
entrance to the building.
•	 At 1:00 p.m. the plaza has
random encounter and conver-
sationalist groups who remain
in the main throughfare paths
into and out of the plaza.
Whyte (1980 p.21) noted that
Tuesday 4th September 2012
11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
FINDINGS
38
4
Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013
Tuesday 4th September 2012 (continued)
12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m. people tended not to move
out of the main pedestrian
flow. They prefered to stay in
it or move into it or remain in
the center of the flow of pedes-
trian foot traffic.
1:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
•	 Within this time frame , the
final lunch crowd are finishing
up their lunch break.
•	 The transitional pedestrian
walks through the park to their
destination.
4.5.8	 Conclusions for Tuesday
•	 When plaza-users use mobile
technologies, they tend to sit
when located within the plaza,
but tend to stand and pace,
when smoking within the des-
ignated smoking area beside
the main entrance doorways.
•	 The plaza, while accomodating
to local pedestrian plaza-users,
does not seem to visibly acco-
modate bicyclists or alternative
transportation plaza-users.
•	 The chance encounter plaza-
users, located themselves in
the middle of the pedestrian
traffic flow on the pathways
through the plaza. Whyte
(1980 Chapter 1 p.21) pointed
out that if you were in the cen-
ter of the crowd, you have the
maximum choice of leaving or
continuing the conversation.
•	 It is apparent that the very
clear sightlines in and out of
the plaza creates a sense of
May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long
FINDINGS
39
4
1:30p.m.1:45p.m.
Tuesday 4th September 2012 (continued)
safety and provides an
environment that street users
want to be a part of. The plaza
is at eye level and distinctly
associated with the street.
While this plaza is semi-public
and maintained by a private
company, it is easily accessible
to the general public and does
not forbid passers-by from
entering, sitting, eating and
relaxing.
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure
Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...civej
 
The promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communities
The promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communitiesThe promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communities
The promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communitiesarmandogo92
 
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban ...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to  improving urban ...Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to  improving urban ...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban ...IJMER
 
CNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For Impact
CNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For ImpactCNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For Impact
CNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For ImpactMallory B.E. Baches
 
Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?
Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?
Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?Brave New Alps
 
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIES
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIESIMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIES
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIESBlaise Nkubiyaho
 
Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)
Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)
Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)UzmaAbid5
 
Paper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New Urbanism
Paper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New UrbanismPaper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New Urbanism
Paper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New UrbanismErik-Jan van Oosten
 
Adaptive capacity fuad-luke,a
Adaptive capacity  fuad-luke,aAdaptive capacity  fuad-luke,a
Adaptive capacity fuad-luke,aM K
 
SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction
SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction
SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction Social Innovation Exchange
 
Imrul kayes architecture portfolio
Imrul kayes architecture portfolioImrul kayes architecture portfolio
Imrul kayes architecture portfolioImrul kayes
 
Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...
Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...
Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...Aberdeen CES
 

Was ist angesagt? (17)

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF WALKABILITY OF INDIAN STREET: A CASE...
 
The promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communities
The promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communitiesThe promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communities
The promise and pitfalls of new sustainable communities
 
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban ...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to  improving urban ...Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to  improving urban ...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban ...
 
Re-Imagining Infrastructure
Re-Imagining InfrastructureRe-Imagining Infrastructure
Re-Imagining Infrastructure
 
CNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For Impact
CNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For ImpactCNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For Impact
CNU24 Open Innovation: Design For Good / Design For Impact
 
Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?
Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?
Commons & community economies: entry points to design for eco-social justice?
 
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIES
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIESIMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIES
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SPACES IN CITIES
 
Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)
Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)
Urban design (the functional dimension of designing an urban area)
 
Paper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New Urbanism
Paper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New UrbanismPaper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New Urbanism
Paper: Comparing landscape urbanism and New Urbanism
 
CCDS Theory component
CCDS Theory componentCCDS Theory component
CCDS Theory component
 
Adaptive capacity fuad-luke,a
Adaptive capacity  fuad-luke,aAdaptive capacity  fuad-luke,a
Adaptive capacity fuad-luke,a
 
Entering the Symbiocene: A Transversal Ecosophy-Action Research Framework to ...
Entering the Symbiocene: A Transversal Ecosophy-Action Research Framework to ...Entering the Symbiocene: A Transversal Ecosophy-Action Research Framework to ...
Entering the Symbiocene: A Transversal Ecosophy-Action Research Framework to ...
 
The Ecological Turn: Why and How Can We Best Articulate Slow Art and Ecology...
The Ecological Turn: Why and How Can We  Best Articulate Slow Art and Ecology...The Ecological Turn: Why and How Can We  Best Articulate Slow Art and Ecology...
The Ecological Turn: Why and How Can We Best Articulate Slow Art and Ecology...
 
SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction
SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction
SI LIVE Research Session - TEPSIE Introduction
 
Imrul kayes architecture portfolio
Imrul kayes architecture portfolioImrul kayes architecture portfolio
Imrul kayes architecture portfolio
 
Entering the Symbiocene: a theory-method framework to reverse Silent Spring
Entering the Symbiocene: a theory-method framework to reverse Silent SpringEntering the Symbiocene: a theory-method framework to reverse Silent Spring
Entering the Symbiocene: a theory-method framework to reverse Silent Spring
 
Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...
Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...
Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated managem...
 

Andere mochten auch

2016 Children's Garden Tour
2016 Children's Garden Tour2016 Children's Garden Tour
2016 Children's Garden TourPark Pride
 
Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1
Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1
Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1Park Pride
 
Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...
Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...
Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...CaBASupport
 
Jasper Cabinet River Centre project
Jasper Cabinet River Centre projectJasper Cabinet River Centre project
Jasper Cabinet River Centre projectMatthew Crane
 
Climathon filling voids is money making
Climathon filling voids is money makingClimathon filling voids is money making
Climathon filling voids is money makingIrina Breniuc
 
Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014
Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014
Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014Matthew Crane
 
Umm uauim - climathon 2016
Umm uauim - climathon 2016Umm uauim - climathon 2016
Umm uauim - climathon 2016Irina Breniuc
 
Urban Design - Sydney
Urban Design - SydneyUrban Design - Sydney
Urban Design - Sydneysuzettemccrea
 
Climathon rulmnetul verde
Climathon rulmnetul verdeClimathon rulmnetul verde
Climathon rulmnetul verdeIrina Breniuc
 
Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...
Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...
Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...Achim von Malotki
 
Subs above ground thomas geoghegan
Subs above ground thomas geogheganSubs above ground thomas geoghegan
Subs above ground thomas geogheganCKMCforstudents
 
Urban area report
Urban area reportUrban area report
Urban area reportLiew Zhi
 
Jordan’s New Urban Landscape: Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...
Jordan’s New Urban Landscape:  Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...Jordan’s New Urban Landscape:  Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...
Jordan’s New Urban Landscape: Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...Amman Institute
 
Hs ii, lecture 11, wbg online
Hs ii, lecture 11, wbg onlineHs ii, lecture 11, wbg online
Hs ii, lecture 11, wbg onlineplimanysid
 
Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409
Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409
Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409Paromita Roy
 

Andere mochten auch (20)

Kevin Kennon Architects Overview
Kevin Kennon Architects OverviewKevin Kennon Architects Overview
Kevin Kennon Architects Overview
 
2016 Children's Garden Tour
2016 Children's Garden Tour2016 Children's Garden Tour
2016 Children's Garden Tour
 
Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1
Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1
Atlanta: Designing the Country's Most Playful City Part 1
 
Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...
Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...
Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust presentation on Sustainable Urban Drainage soluti...
 
Jasper Cabinet River Centre project
Jasper Cabinet River Centre projectJasper Cabinet River Centre project
Jasper Cabinet River Centre project
 
Climathon filling voids is money making
Climathon filling voids is money makingClimathon filling voids is money making
Climathon filling voids is money making
 
Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014
Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014
Jasper Downtown/Riverfront Plan Presentation May 21, 2014
 
Umm uauim - climathon 2016
Umm uauim - climathon 2016Umm uauim - climathon 2016
Umm uauim - climathon 2016
 
Urban Design - Sydney
Urban Design - SydneyUrban Design - Sydney
Urban Design - Sydney
 
Climathon rulmnetul verde
Climathon rulmnetul verdeClimathon rulmnetul verde
Climathon rulmnetul verde
 
Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...
Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...
Critical assesment of the Sustainable Urban Drainage component of the Church ...
 
Site 6 suds
Site 6 sudsSite 6 suds
Site 6 suds
 
Subs above ground thomas geoghegan
Subs above ground thomas geogheganSubs above ground thomas geoghegan
Subs above ground thomas geoghegan
 
Urban area report
Urban area reportUrban area report
Urban area report
 
Jordan’s New Urban Landscape: Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...
Jordan’s New Urban Landscape:  Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...Jordan’s New Urban Landscape:  Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...
Jordan’s New Urban Landscape: Achieving Inclusive Urban Planning | Amman Ins...
 
Urban landscape
Urban landscape Urban landscape
Urban landscape
 
Landscape ecology
Landscape ecologyLandscape ecology
Landscape ecology
 
Urban Plaza
Urban PlazaUrban Plaza
Urban Plaza
 
Hs ii, lecture 11, wbg online
Hs ii, lecture 11, wbg onlineHs ii, lecture 11, wbg online
Hs ii, lecture 11, wbg online
 
Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409
Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409
Great Pavements Delhi Romi Roy 040409
 

Ähnlich wie Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure

Participation in the Planning and Design of Public Open Space
Participation in the Planning and Design of Public Open SpaceParticipation in the Planning and Design of Public Open Space
Participation in the Planning and Design of Public Open SpaceJulie Meyer
 
Case Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docx
Case Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docxCase Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docx
Case Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docxcowinhelen
 
2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentation
2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentation2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentation
2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentationAhmed H.Radwan
 
Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013
Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013
Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013Taurai Chiwanza
 
Architecture For Special Needs
Architecture For Special NeedsArchitecture For Special Needs
Architecture For Special NeedsAngel Evans
 
Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...
Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...
Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...Dr Igor Calzada, MBA, FeRSA
 
Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...
Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...
Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...UK_UAC
 
presentation on public realm.pptx
presentation on public realm.pptxpresentation on public realm.pptx
presentation on public realm.pptxutsosaha1
 
Living+ kickoff slideset
Living+ kickoff slidesetLiving+ kickoff slideset
Living+ kickoff slidesetMikko Särelä
 
Living+ platform in Aalto University
Living+ platform in Aalto UniversityLiving+ platform in Aalto University
Living+ platform in Aalto UniversityAalto_Living
 
Architecture resarch week presentation
Architecture resarch week presentationArchitecture resarch week presentation
Architecture resarch week presentationGalala University
 
Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...
Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...
Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs
 
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...IJMER
 
Theories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis Essay
Theories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis EssayTheories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis Essay
Theories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis Essaydouglasloon
 
Y1 s1 b4_agricultural bodies
Y1 s1 b4_agricultural bodiesY1 s1 b4_agricultural bodies
Y1 s1 b4_agricultural bodiesKarl Barrett
 

Ähnlich wie Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure (20)

Participation in the Planning and Design of Public Open Space
Participation in the Planning and Design of Public Open SpaceParticipation in the Planning and Design of Public Open Space
Participation in the Planning and Design of Public Open Space
 
Presentation1.pptx
Presentation1.pptxPresentation1.pptx
Presentation1.pptx
 
Case Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docx
Case Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docxCase Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docx
Case Law Analysis - Intellectual PropertyIn this unit, you will .docx
 
2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentation
2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentation2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentation
2019 arch eg 150 cairo - human scale- in public spaces-presentation
 
Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013
Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013
Taurai Chiwanza Dissertation 2013
 
Architecture For Special Needs
Architecture For Special NeedsArchitecture For Special Needs
Architecture For Special Needs
 
Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...
Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...
Bridging European Urban Transformations ESRC Workshop Series in Brussels UT E...
 
Space syntax
Space syntaxSpace syntax
Space syntax
 
Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...
Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...
Introduction: Making Urban Environments Age-Friendly (UK Urban Ageing Consort...
 
presentation on public realm.pptx
presentation on public realm.pptxpresentation on public realm.pptx
presentation on public realm.pptx
 
Living+ kickoff slideset
Living+ kickoff slidesetLiving+ kickoff slideset
Living+ kickoff slideset
 
Living+ platform in Aalto University
Living+ platform in Aalto UniversityLiving+ platform in Aalto University
Living+ platform in Aalto University
 
Architecture resarch week presentation
Architecture resarch week presentationArchitecture resarch week presentation
Architecture resarch week presentation
 
First draft
First draftFirst draft
First draft
 
Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...
Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...
Evaluation of Aesthetic, Functional, and Environmental Effects on the Design ...
 
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...
Analyzing the indicators walkability of cities, in order to improving urban v...
 
Theories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis Essay
Theories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis EssayTheories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis Essay
Theories of Architecture and Urbanism Comparative Analysis Essay
 
Y1 s1 b4_agricultural bodies
Y1 s1 b4_agricultural bodiesY1 s1 b4_agricultural bodies
Y1 s1 b4_agricultural bodies
 
Mid City Book
Mid City BookMid City Book
Mid City Book
 
Urban Design - functional dimension
Urban Design - functional  dimension Urban Design - functional  dimension
Urban Design - functional dimension
 

Dissertation_UrbanDesign_FINAL_LR_Secure

  • 1. MA in Urban Design Evaluating the design and functionality of a small urban space: has modern technology altered social dynamics in small urban spaces? If so, what are the implications for the future of their design? May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long A good public space is not an afterthought. Larry Houstoun (2011) 4. Ingredients for Successful Public Spaces Available from: http://lhoustoun.wordpress.com/public-spaces/ [Accessed 6 June 2012].
  • 2. 2 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation This study was completed for the MA in Urban Design at the University of the Western England, Bristol. The work is my own. Where the work of others is used or drawn on it is attributed. Signature: Approximate word count: 17,305 (excluding acknowledgements, bibliography, references and appendices) The author would like to thank the following people for their encour- agement, guidance and support in the development and completion of this dissertation. Dr. Louis Rice of the University of the West of England, for your academic guidance through the course of the masters programme and this disser- tation. The professional organisations who have approved and supported me during this research. Special thanks to Anne Pauley of JEMB Realty for granting permissions to observe the James Center II Plaza. Thanks also to M.Paul Friedberg & Partners for pro- viding historic images of the plaza. All interviewees who have contribut- ed to this dissertation, for giving up their valuable time and insights. My friends, Melissa Barber, Anne Davlin, Gale Schurman, Jonathan Uzzle and Sarah Watt for providing your valuable input and support. Finally, I would like to thank my mother, sister and neice for your sup- port, patience and kindness during my life transition this past year. This dissertation is dedicated to Jesse Owen Long, the newest addition to the Long family tree. n All images were taken by Gale Schurman, MultiSync Photography © unless otherwise indicated. Illustrated maps and images are not to scale. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation We are hard-wired with a desire for congenial places to gather. That’s why it’s particularly sur- prising how much we overlook the importance of public places today. Jay Walljasper (2005) Ode Magazine In praise of streets, parks, squares, cof- fee shops, and other beloved hang-outs Available from: http://www.pps.org/ our_place/ [Accessed 15 July 2012]
  • 3. MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long ABSTRACT 3 This research explores the physical, social and virtual features that create a convivial small urban space. William H. Whyte, who three decades ago systematically investigated urban design physical features in The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980), reviewed social interactions within these spaces providing the urban design community with a co- hesive list of what makes and shapes a successful small urban space. These recommendations were primarily physical features that promote social interactions within a predetermined environment. Today, in the 21st century, there is a call to observe, survey, measure, evaluate and assess how the increase in virtual modern mobile technology has shifted the dynamics and social interactions of small urban public spaces. In order to understand what a public space is, it is important to review na- tional guidance, such as the Ameri- can Planning Association, CABE and National Planning Policy Framework to determine their explicit definitions of what makes a public, private and semi-private space or realm. This dissertation attempts to analyse how important physical features are to provide safety, shelter, comfort and entertainment within a public space, following the methodology of William H. Whyte (1980). Today, with the constant evolution of modern mobile technologies, and their fre- quency of use in small urban public spaces, this dissertation seeks to determine what today’s public realm users’physical, social and virtual needs are. Whyte’s urban design guidance was assessed to determine the advised ways of achieving distinctive, inclu- sive urban design in small public spaces. In total 61 questionnaire par- ticipants contributed to the outcome of this dissertation who were made up of local working professionals, students and a few visitors. The definition of public, semi-public and private urban space was ex- plored, the importance of physical features, the importance of acces- sibility and connectivity to surround- ing buildings and streets, the social dynamics within, and an investiga- tion to determine which aspects of modern mobile technologies are deemed the most frequently used and the most important in today’s environment. The researchers’initial belief was that new mobile technology incor- porated in urban design should be implemented when planning small urban spaces to foster a renewal of public social interactions verses private social communication within these spaces. The type of approach to small urban public spaces, which is important and should be aimed for in view of the professionals inter- viewed, is a public space which re- flects the local community’s culture and needs, a place where locals feel safe, at home and connected. n Open space is now firmly part of statutory and community planning processes. Compre- hensive planning poli- cies for open space are fundamental to social inclusion, community cohesion, health and well-being. CABE (2009) Open space strategies Best practice guidance Available from: http://webar- chive.nationalarchives.gov. uk/20110118095356/http://www.cabe. org.uk/files/open-space-strategies.pdf [Accessed 29 July, 2012].
  • 4. CONTENTS 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 acknowledgements.............................................p. 2 abstract ............................................................p. 3 CONTENTS .......................................................pp. 4-5 1.0 Introduction ................................................ pp. 6-7 1.1 Introduction..................................................................p. 6 1.2 Why choose the study topic?..................................p. 6 1.3 Who was the influence for study? ................. pp. 6-7 1.4 Location background................................................p. 7 2.0 Literature Review.....................................pp. 8-13 2.1 Introduction..................................................................p. 8 2.2 What planning and design theories are available?................................................................p. 8 2.3 What is a small urban space?..................................p. 9 2.4 What visual qualities make up a small urban space?.................................................................p. 9 2.5 Why are small urban spaces important?..........p. 10 2.6 How do we define success in terms of small urban spaces?.................................................p. 10 2.7 Why do we need successful small urban spaces?.............................................................p. 10 2.8 What physical features contribute to successful small urban spaces?...................pp. 10-11 2.9 What social features contribute to successful small urban spaces?............................p. 11 2.10 What defines virtual technology in small urban spaces?........................................pp. 11-12 2.11 What virtual features contribute to successful small urban spaces?.......................p. 12 2.12 How do technologies change people and their social relations?.............................pp. 12-13 2.13 Summary......................................................................p. 13 3.0 MEthodology............................................pp. 14-25 3.1 Introduction................................................................p. 14 3.2 Scope of the study....................................................p. 15 3.3 Mixed Method............................................................p. 15 3.4 Qualitative Design....................................................p. 15 3.5 Quantitative Design........................................pp. 15-16 3.6 Case Study Design....................................................p. 16 3.7 Theory of Design..............................................pp. 16-17 3.8 Site History.........................................................pp. 17-19 3.9 Site Selection.....................................................pp. 19-20 3.10 Research Questions..................................................p. 20 3.11 Methodology..............................................................p. 20 3.12 Equipment...................................................................p. 21 3.13 Data Analysis Software............................................p. 21 3.14 Pilot Studies.................................................................p. 21 3.15 Observational Survey.....................................pp. 21-22 3.15.1 Survey Method...................................pp. 21-22 3.15.2 Initial Time Frame......................................p. 22 3.15.3 Additional Surveys....................................p. 22 3.16 Questionnaire.............................................................p. 22 3.16.1 Distribution.................................................p. 22 3.17 Plaza-user behavioural observations........pp. 22-23 3.18 Justification of Methods.........................................p. 23 3.19 Analytical Review.............................................pp. 23-24 3.20 Justification of Analytical Review........................p. 24 3.21 Permissions..................................................................p. 24 3.22 Weaknesses.................................................................p. 24 3.23 Ethical Challenges............................................pp. 24-25 3.24 Summary......................................................................p. 25 4.0 FINDINGS..........................................................pp. 26-51 4.1 Introduction................................................................p. 26 4.1.1 Observational survey................................p. 26 4.1.2 Questionnaire.............................................p. 26 4.1.3 Plaza-user behavioural observations...p. 26 Public spaces are favorite places to meet, talk, sit, look, relax, play, stroll, flirt, eat, drink, smoke, peoplewatch, read, soak in sun- shine and feel part of a broader whole. They are the starting point for all community, commerce and democracy. Walljasper, J. (2005) In praise of streets, parks, squares, coffeeshops, and other beloved hang-outs Ode Magazine Available from: http://www.pps.org/ our_place/ [Accessed July 15 2012]
  • 5. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long CONTENTS 5 4.2 Locating the plaza............................................pp. 26-27 4.3 Historical reference...................................................p. 27 4.4 General observations...............................................p. 27 4.5 Observational Survey..............................................p. 28 4.5.1 Monday, August 27th.......................pp. 28-30 4.5.2 Conclusions for Monday..........................p. 30 4.5.3 Wednesday, August 29th.................pp. 31-32 4.5.4 Conclusions for Wednesday............ pp.32-33 4.5.5 Friday, August 31st............................pp. 34-35 4.5.6 Conclusions for Friday......................pp. 35-36 4.5.7 Tuesday, September 4th...................pp. 37-38 4.5.8 Conclusions for Tuesday..................pp. 38-39 4.5.9 Thursday, September 13th..............pp. 40-41 4.5.10 Conclusions for Thursday................pp. 41-42 4.6 Additional Findings..................................................p. 42 4.6.1 Physical features........................................p. 42 4.6.2 Food vendors .............................................p. 43 4.6.3 Sitting places..............................................p. 43 4.6.4 Ease of accessibility...................................p. 43 4.6.5 Shade............................................................p. 43 4.6.6 Gender placement.....................................p. 44 4.6.7 Conclusion...................................................p. 44 4.7 Summary......................................................................p. 44 4.8 On-site questionnaire..............................................p. 45 4.8.1 Demographic profiles ......................pp. 45-46 4.8.2 Seasons and frequency............................p. 46 4.8.3 Why, what and how long?...............pp. 46-47 4.8.4 Activities and time spent on them?.......p. 47 4.8.5 Mobile technology use.............................p. 47 4.8.6 Environment for mobile technology use...................................pp. 47-48 4.8.7 Plaza engagement when using/not using... mobile technologies.................................p. 48 4.8.8 Who are mobile technology-users?......p. 48 4.8.9 How much time do plaza-users spend using mobile technologies?....................p. 48 4.8.10 Respondents comments..........................p. 48 4.8.11 Questionnaire conclusions.............pp. 48-49 4.9 Plaza-user questionnaire visual mapping.pp. 45-50 4.9.1 On-site observation visual map.............p. 50 4.9.2 Findings...............................................pp. 50-51 5.0 DISCUSSIONS..................................................pp. 52-56 5.1 Introduction................................................................p. 52 5.2 William Whyte.............................................................p. 52 5.3 Analysis.........................................................................p. 52 5.3.1 Physical Features.......................................p. 52 5.3.2 Social behaviours......................................p. 52 5.3.3 Virtual features...................................pp. 52-53 5.4 Limitations...................................................................p. 53 5.5 Conclusions.................................................................p. 53 5.5.1 Physical Features...............................pp. 53-54 5.3.2 Social behaviours......................................p. 54 5.3.3 Virtual features...........................................p. 54 5.6 Defining the impact.................................................p. 55 5.7 Design implications..................................................p. 55 5.8 Further study.....................................................pp. 55-56 6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................pp. 57-58 7.0 APPENDICES....................................................pp. 59-65 7.1 University letter for permissions..........................p. 59 7.2 E-mail correspondence for permissions............p.59 7.3 Observational survey signage...............................p.60 7.4 Visual map...................................................................p. 60 7.5 On-site Questionnaire....................................pp. 61-62 7.6 Questionnaire comments.............................pp. 62-63 7.7 Questionnaire compiled data......................pp. 64-65 Successful places have attractive and comfort- able outdoor spaces. CABE Seven principles of good design Available from: http://webar- chive.nationalarchives.gov. uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe. org.uk/councillors/principles [Accessed 15 July 2012]
  • 6. INTRODUCTION 6 1 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 1.1 Introduction Small urban spaces form an es- sential part of the structure of any city. They either evolve organically due to changing street layout and city development or are specifically designed. Christopher Alexander et al (1977 p.518) explains that“an outdoor space is positive when it has a distinct and definite shape, as definite as the shape of a room, and when its shape is as important as the shapes of the buildings which surround it. These spaces are vital for the surrounding communities and act as‘breathing spaces’for a city. When urban spaces are designed, it is imperative that they are created with much consideration placed on who, what, why and how these spaces will be used. It is vital that these small urban spaces attract people rather than alienate them.” Urban designers need to consider the space, it’s scale and provide physical features that will encourage and foster comfort, safety, play and social dynamics as well as accom- modating for individual anonymity. And now, in the 21st century, with modern mobile technologies, urban designers need to be cognisant of virtual features of a small urban space and how this technology affects the users and the space. This dissertation describes one small urban open space in the down- town business district of Richmond, Virginia, U.S.A. and evaluates the present urban design features within the Plaza, mirroring William Whyte’s methodology, to observe, survey and report plaza-users mobile technol- ogy use within the urban space to determine whether the introduction of modern mobile technologies has isolated or influenced social interac- tions in these spaces. 1.2 Why choose the study topic? Having a professional background in multimedia and graphics since 1996, the researcher has always had a keen interest in artistic conception, designing and presenting pleasing visual stimulants in private or public forums traditionally through brand identities, publications, marketing materials, photography or video. With the increase in mobile technol- ogy use in our society, the researcher had noticed a shift in the human mindset and behaviour. The researcher first noticed this shift in human dynamics when sitting around a dinner table in a restau- rant in Coral Gables. The researcher noticed that she was the only person not on the phone or texting at the table. This virtual personal commu- nication from dinner guest members connecting with people located in other, external spaces was a new phenomenon. Later, in 2004, the researcher went to a multimedia conference in Dallas, and noticed that even while the speakers were on stage disseminating key informa- tion, most of the audience were on their mobile technologies, texting, blogging or tweeting to a cyber com- munity. This new mobile experience of wi-fi internet use in the public realm contrasts with the traditional wired internet use from the home or workplace. Understanding the use of mobile technologies in a small urban space is important to determine what physical features are still success- ful in encouraging convivial social behaviour within the space and what additional virtual and technologi- cal features should be considered to adjust to the needs of users now and in the future. 1.3 Who was the influence for study? William Whyte in The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980) studied the life of plaza’s in New York City, de- Places should be able to accommodate change over time, create conti- nuity with the past and respond to new social, market or environmental demands. CABE (2011) Seven principles of good design Available from: http://webar- chive.nationalarchives.gov. uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe. org.uk/councillors/principles [Accessed July 15 2012]
  • 7. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long INTRODUCTION 7 1 termining through time-lapse video, observation, interviews and visual mapping how people used the pla- zas, what physical features of a plaza were beneficial to social interaction and the success of the plaza. Whyte determined that certain features and human activities provided appropri- ate shelter, entertainment and social engagement for plaza-users, and these greatly contributed to the suc- cess verses the failure of a plaza. The plaza’s that Whyte studied were already designed and in use, with predetermined physical features, such as, fountains, bench seating, concrete ledges, street food ven- dors, etc. However, Whyte’s study took place during an era that did not include the use of modern mobile technologies, and therefore the researcher was interested in deter- mining how physical attributes and human social behaviours may have changed or not changed with the introduction of these technologies in small urban spaces. The researcher chose to consider a methodology of research which included a combination of visual observation and mapping and inter- cept questionnaires to help ascertain the opinions of present plaza-users understanding of physical, social and virtual features that are successful, detracting or are needed to encour- age social interactions. By determin- ing which physical features still, to this day, support and encourage social interactions within an urban space, then perhaps these physi- cal features could be incorporated in new urban space designs or the renovation of existing urban spaces to increase social dynamic interac- tions. Through visual observation and questionnaire distribution one can determine how plaza-users us- ing mobile technologies utilize the physical features identified, what additional features are important to them, how they interact socially and with the space in general. 1.4 Location background Outdoor activities in public spaces can be divided into three categories, each of which places very different demands on the physical environ- ment: necessary activities, optional activities, and social activities (Gehl, 1987). But, what attracts people most, it would appear, is other people (Whyte, 1980). n What is new, and some- what unexpected, for example, has been the popularity of virtual spaces — chat rooms, virtual worlds, Twitter, Facebook, etc. ­— that some argue will sup- plant our need to meet and interact in traditional public space, and will eventually lead to new forms of urbanism. Alessandro Aurigi (2005) Making the Digital City: The Early Shap- ing of Urban Internet Space p. 17-31
  • 8. LITERATUREREVIEW 8 2 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 2.1 Introduction In order to present an accurate and in-depth study, it is important to review existing literature to help understand, define, and review what a small urban space is. Whyte (1980, p.16) points out that urban plaza’s are predominantly used by young office workers from nearby build- ings and that the elemental point about good urban spaces is supply creates demand. Whyte (1980 p.16) continues to state that“a good new space builds a new constituency. It stimulates people into new habits— al fresco lunches—and provides new paths to and from work, new places to pause.” 2.2 What planning and design theories are available? There are varying policies and advice given in national, regional and local documents regarding policies on urban space. All seem to agree that good quality design and manage- ment of public spaces will contrib- ute to active usage of space and the health, wealth and vitality of the surrounding communities. The National Planning Policy Framework (2012 8.69 p.16) states that plan- ning systems play an important role in facilitating safe and accessible developments, containing clear and It is important to plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design for all develop- ment, including indi- vidual buildings, public and private spaces and wider area development schemes. National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Achieving sustainable development 7. 57 p.15 Available from: https://www.gov. uk/government/uploads/sys- tem/.../2116950.pdf [Accessed June 8 2012] Figure 1: The Place Diagram legible pedestrian routes, and high quality public space, which encour- age the active and continual use of public areas. It has been said that we must trans- form our parks, streets and squares into attractive, vibrant places that help to create sustainable commu- nities (CABE 2004). There is further explanation that open space is now firmly part of statutory and commu- nity planning processes. Comprehen- sive planning policies for open space Source: pps.org. [online] http://www.pps.org/reference/grplacefeat/ [Accessed July 18, 2012].
  • 9. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long LITERATUREREVIEW 9 2 are fundamental to social inclusion, community cohesion, health and well-being (CABE 2009). PPS has developed The Place Dia- gram that illustrates four key quali- ties that make a space successful and they are: accessible; people are engaged in activities there; the space is comfortable and has a good image; and finally, it is a sociable place: one where people meet each other and take people when they come to visit. PPS also introduced The Power of 10 design theory, which suggests that every place should have at least 10 reasons to visit it. These could include a place to sit, playgrounds to enjoy, art to touch, music to hear, food to eat, history to experience, and people to meet. Whatever poli- cies and practices are available to the planners, designers and communi- ties, it is clear that urban space is a vital place for interaction. Ultimately, public spaces are about the people (Shaftoe 2008). 2.3 What is a small urban space? The traditional urban design can be regarded as the evolved state of urban form immediately prior to the onset of large-scale industrialisation and urbanisation (Carmona et al 2010). Small urban spaces are usually lo- cated in cities, towns or villages and have urban areas within or around them. Small urban spaces can be considered parks, green spaces or other open land use. Generally, small urban spaces are open to the public, however some are semi-public, semi- private, or privately owned. A public space only exists to the extent that it is controlled as a com- mons by agreement for all public to use. Semi-public space is defined as a private space which is accessible to the general public, for example, a shop or a Public House. Semi-private space is defined as a space that is access controlled and only acces- sible to residents and associated people only. If privately owned and managed, it is usually owned by surrounding higher education cam- puses, community parks, institutions or corporations. All these small urban spaces can provide an aesthetic and psychological relief from surround- ing urban development in today’s hectic world. There are different types of typology of urban space. These can be broken into traditional or innovative types of space (Francis 1986). Francis states that examples of traditional urban open spaces include public parks, neighborhood parks, playgrounds, pedestrian malls and plazas. Inno- vative urban open spaces can be unstructured spaces, such as traffic underpasses and streets, neigh- bourhood and community spaces, farmer’s markets and trails, vacant land and waterfronts. 2.4 What visual qualities make up a small urban space? The small urban space can be a positive or a negative space. An outdoor space is positive when it has a distinct and definite shape, and when its shape is as important as the shapes of the buildings which surround it. Positive urban space can be partially enclosed, with ease of accessibility where paths lead to and from surrounding areas and the space area which exists is convex. There are three main space-defining elements to an urban space; the walls, the floor and the ceiling (sky). These three factors provide a visitor to the space with a sense of enclo- sure, safety and comfort (Alexander et al 1977). Placemaking capitalizes on a local community’s assets, inspiration, and potential, ultimately creating good public spaces that promote people’s health, happi- ness, and well being. PPS, Project for Public Spaces (2011) What is Placemaking? Available from: http://www.pps.org/ reference/what_is_placemaking/ [Accessed July 17 2012]
  • 10. LITERATUREREVIEW 10 2 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 However sophisticated the simulations of cyberspace become, they are unlikely to be a total substitute for the buzz and unpredictability of real life being played out 360 degrees around you. Henry Shaftoe (2008) Convivial Urban Spaces Creating Effective Public Places. Chapter 2, p.11 London: Earthscan 2.5 Why are small urban spaces important? Small urban spaces are important to provide an outlet for urban dwellers to escape to, meet, talk, sit, look, re- lax, play, stroll, flirt, eat, drink, smoke, people watch, read, soak in the sun and feel part of a broader whole. It is indicated that experiencing people, who speak and move about, offers a wealth of sensual variation. No moment is like the previous or the following when people circulate among people. The number of new situations and new stimuli is limitless (Gehl 1987). 2.6 How do we define success in terms of small urban spaces? The Project for Public Spaces (PPS, 2009) declares that great public spaces are where celebrations are held, social and economic exchanges take place, friends run into each other, and cultures mix. They are outdoor spaces that front the streets outside of corporations, institutions, libraries and educational facilities. PPS has identified four key qualities that make a public space successful; • accessible • active • comfortable • social Public spaces are essentially dis- cretionary environments where people choose to go and use them when they could conceivably go elsewhere. Therefore visiting a small urban space is an individualistic, per- sonal choice. The success of an urban space is contingent on its popularity, which is measured by the number of users who visit the park, night or day. It’s success can be achieved through a multi-faceted approach of grass- roots outreach to tap local commu- nity assets, inspiration, and potential combined with excellent planning, design and management (Carmona et al, 2010). 2.7 Why do we need successful small urban spaces? It has been said that good spaces are nutrients of urban life. They help keep our heart happy and are a vital ingredient in creating a community where there is tolerance and respect for each other, where the so-called “big society”happens naturally (Sarah Gaventa (2010) The Guardian). Urban spaces and streets are where democratic voices talk and are heard debating, protesting, celebrating and commiserating. Urban space is important as a democratic platform and without such convivial space, cities, towns and villages would be mere accretions of buildings with no purposeful opportunities for casual encounters and positive interac- tions between friends or strangers (Shaftoe 2008). Research over the past decade focus- ing on previously neglected aspects of open space quality has provided recognition of the social, psychologi- cal, and economic benefits of urban open space (Francis 1986). There is a keen awareness that urban dwell- ers need open healthy space that is easily accessible in light of the in- creasing levels of obesity that result from inactive lifestyle. The Biophilia hypothesis, originally proposed by Edward O. Wilson in 1984, suggests that human beings have an innate and very strong link with the natural world, and that close contact with the latter reduces human stress, anxi- ety and aggression. 2.8 What physical features con- tribute to successful small urban spaces? It was determined that a crucial influ- ence on whether people will use or avoid urban public spaces is the de- gree to which they feel safe in them. Comfort and safety in open urban spaces are imperative to the success
  • 11. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long LITERATUREREVIEW 11 2 of the convivial space. Excellent de- sign and management promote pop- ularity and therefore increased visita- tion and more“eyes on the street” deflecting crime, bad social behav- iour and misconduct (Shaftoe 2008). Whyte observed during his study of New York parks and plazas, that flex- ible seating space was important to allow visitors personal options. It is also important that an urban open space has balanced protection from the natural elements (wind, rain, sun, snow) whether through natural enclosure (tree canopies, shrubbery, overhangs or roofs) or through built enclosure (three-sided open spaces surrounded by buildings). Accessible water features provide open space users with touchable, splashable and audible entertainment. Water provides all sensory stimulation and acts as a white noise within an open space allowing for a sense of privacy during intimate conversations. Food vendors around an urban open space, by default, have become the caterers of the city’s outdoor life where eating, schmoozing or just standing becomes an active triangu- lation node (a stimulus that prompts strangers to talk which can be a physical object or a visual sighting)– a cluster point. Street performers and public artwork also fall into the triangulation node category, allow- ing people to stop, watch, appreciate and acknowledge either individually or with groups. Whyte reported that in observing the social effects within an urban open space, we can find how they can be anticipated and planned (Whyte 1980). 2.9 What social behaviours con- tribute to successful small urban spaces? Whyte (1980) stated that the rela- tionship to the street is integral, and it is far and away the critical design factor to an active and social urban space. He continued to say that a good plaza starts at the street corner. If it’s a busy corner, it has a brisk social life of its own. Sight lines and visibility for the onlooker and space user are essential to provide a sense of comfort and security, personal empowerment and connectivity with the social aspect of the site. Whyte discusses the importance of triangulation, specifying that street characters make a city more amiable. These street characters, whether public art, entertainment performers or natural performers, provide some external stimulus that links people together and encourages social interactions between them. The fluc- tuation of street activity surround- ing an open urban space, the office buildings, retail, residential and just plain doorways that are open at all hours of the day and night, keep the active streetscape and urban space alive. Gehl (1987) talks about three modes, yet fairly broad requirements of public spaces that include space for; necessary outdoor activities, optional recreational activities and social activities. 2.10 What defines virtual technol- ogy in small urban spaces? Hampton (2010 p.701) suggests that “virtual technology in small urban spaces means internet access in pub- lic parks, plazas, markets, and street which has been made possible by the proliferation of broadband wire- less internet in the form of municipal and community wi-fi and advanced mobile phone networks. This access to virtual accessibility is a method of communication with other geo- graphically located social commu- nities. Where as before, wi-fi was restricted to one’s personal realm or professional environment, now this personal wi-fi connectivity is available in the public realm.” Hampton goes on to state that to- day’s internet access in public spaces may reshape the public realm. This may change the focus of urban To begin with, it is self evident that to be in the presence of other human beings is reas- suring! Perceiving their presence - through look- ing, hearing and touch- ing - enables each of us to experience ourselves as less alone. Lennard, H. L. Crowhurst Lennard, S. H. (1984) Public Life in Urban Places Chapter 1, p.5 London: Gondolier Press
  • 12. LITERATUREREVIEW 12 2 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 design in urban spaces to allow more wi-fi communication to provide plaza-users with the comfort and accessibility that is expected today (Hampton 2010). 2.11 What virtual features con- tribute to successful small urban spaces? In The Social Life of Wireless Urban Spaces, Hampton (2010 p.704) indi- cates that while there is an extensive literature in sociology and urban planning on the role of benches, wa- ter, trees, security, vendors, and other infrastructure for social life of urban spaces, little attention has been paid to the role of media. While Whyte was a pioneer in physical features creating human behaviours and social interactions that contribute to a successful small urban space, his studies pre-date mobile technolo- gies of today. However sophisticated the simulations of cyberspace be- come, they are unlikely to be a total substitute for the buzz and unpre- dictability of real life being played out 360 degrees around you (Shaftoe 2008). Contemporary public space is increasingly constructed through the articulation of physical and elec- tronic spaces (McQuire et al, 2008). Urban public spaces are increasingly a place for the use of mobile phones, portable video games, and most recently devices that can connect to wireless internet (Hampton 2010). There is no doubt that virtual fea- tures play an integral role in lifestyles today. With the fast evolution of vir- tual mobile communications, urban designers will need to be cognizant of virtual features required within urban spaces in the future. Direct meetings in public spaces can now be replaced by indirect Figure 2: Mobile technology use in an urban space, Geneva, Switzerland. Source: Ailsa Long, March 2012 Smart Phone use. Laptop and iPod use. telecommunication. Active pres- ence, participation, and experience can now be superseded by passive picture watching, seeing what others have experienced elsewhere (Gehl 1987). During the recent Spatial Vibrations Symposium in Spain (2011), Professor Dr. Joan Busquets discussed that many European cities as well as other countries have a new type of public space emerging that is trying to reconsider some of the values of traditional space. But Busquets specifies that it should also incorporate the ambitions of the 21st century. Busquets believe that by creating value into the public space, you change the value of the whole city. 2.12 How do technologies change people and their social relations? Traditionally, communities were formed in a geographical area, with- in a locality, so neighbours were able to meet, greet and share news. This enabled them to create a common identity (Clark 2007). However, with today’s highly mobile lifestyles, it has become harder for connectivity with surrounding communities as people relocate more often and commute from/to work. The modern mobile technologies allow people to join virtual communities (i.e. online social Through the mass media we are informed about the larger, more sensational world events, but by being with others we learn more about the com- mon but equally impor- tant details. Gehl, J. (1987) Life Between Buildings Using Public Space. Chapter 1, p.22 New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
  • 13. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long LITERATUREREVIEW 13 2 networks) that provide one way to connect distributed members, but their“hiding-behind-a-screen”access model might not be enough to stir up the feeling of belonging (Neman- ja et al, 2011, pg. 3). It is believed that the effects of new technologies are not direct, but negotiated through people’s con- struction and use of them. Over time, these interactions create a whole new landscape (Humphreys 2005). Man paradoxically uses communica- tion technologies to build societies that do not communicate in the distance but that build a distance in communication (Casalegno 2004). He continues to emphasise that through the interactions taking place in cyberspace, we face the creation of several communities: The Internet, a matrix for new human relation- ships, allows the encounter—virtual and/or real—between people who share some affinities. Hampton (2010 p.711) notes in The Social Life of Wireless Urban Spaces that internet users are relatively detached from their physical set- ting, but they represent yet another diverse activity for others to observe within public spaces. This could indicate that the mobile media users within the urban space are now the cause of the triangulation effect, where the users become the ob- served. As William H. Whyte (1980) pointed out in The Social LIfe of Small Urban Spaces, what attracts people most is other people. Being detached from your surround- ings but being connected to your cyber community may provide just the right incentive for urban design- ers in the future to focus their atten- tions on the importance of“good” urban space design that promotes, provides for and encourages good social and virtual interactions be- tween present space and virtual space users. 2.13 Summary In review, an urban space is defined by the surrounding built form and the spaces between. The three space-defining elements of an urban space are the walls, the floor and the sky. These three factors provide a visitor to the space with a sense of enclosure, safety and comfort. A small urban space can be an impor- tant space for activities, democratic discussions and social interactions. Physical features (i.e. seating, food, shelter and accessibility) , social features (e.g. sight lines, visibility, planned or not planned entertain- ment) and nowadays, virtual features (modern mobile technology access) are key to the success of a small urban space. In order to determine how to maintain small urban space social dynamics moving forward, it is important to observe, question and evaluate behaviours within the space, compare them with Whyte’s previous findings from his study of a predetermined plaza environ- ment, and from this, determine what features are necessary to encourage social interactions in an era of mod- ern mobile technologies. n
  • 14. METHODOLOGY 14 3 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 3.1 Introduction This mixed-method empirical ex- ploratory research has three specific objectives, with a final aim to under- stand the relationship between phys- ical features, social interactions and how new mobile technologies influ- ence or effect social dynamics within a small urban space. The purpose of this research was to determine the physical features within predesigned plaza’s, once identified by William H. Whyte (1980) that to this day, are important features to encourage use, participation and social interaction within a small urban space. The fol- lowing are physical features that Wil- liam Whyte uncovered as essential for a successful plaza; sitting space, shelter, food, and proximity to the street. Whyte investigated additional social aspects of a successful plaza pointing out the necessity of triangu- lation, capacity of the plaza and the need for a variety of plaza-users. The second focus of this research was to determine how, if any, changes exist with social dynamics within a small urban space due to the use of modern mobile technologies. The third focus of this research was to see what physical features combined with virtual features are needed within an urban space for user com- fort, satisfaction and social interac- tion. This study consequently makes an important contribution through the collection and analysis of empiri- cal data on the relationship between physical, social and virtual features of a small urban space. This chapter explains and justifies the research strategy adopted; the selection of data collection meth- ods, sample selection and the data analysis completed. Any concerns of reliability, valididy and viability are also addressed. In order to define the focus and explore the issues highlighted by the literature review, a 5-stage approach was developed for this study: Stage 1: Literature review: This consisted of reviewing the most relevant and up-to-date literature on small urban spaces and mobile technology. Stage 2: Defining and refining the focus: This included reviewing the findings of the literature review, identifying im- portant areas that would be useful to include in the observational research and questionnaire development. Stage 3: Site selection: Determining and choosing an existing small urban space in which to study the issues identified in Stage 1 and 2. Stage 4: Data collection: This included taking panoramic photographs over a five work-day period, still photography of virtual mobile technology useage within the plaza, visual mapping techniques to determine placement, movement and activities and finally, conducting a one-on-one ques- tionnaire within the plaza with 60 participants. Stage 5: Analysis: This stage consisted of reviewing panoramic photographs, in-depth analysis of the visual maps and compiling data from the ques- tionnaires, using Microsoft Excel for chart development and Adobe Illustrator for maps and illustration production. Enabling the Research Questions to be answered and form the conclusion of the report. The literature review identified a significant lack of research into modern mobile technology within small urban spaces and it’s effect on social behaviour within these spaces. 1. James Center Property 1051 E Cary St Ste 610, Richmond, VA 23219 0.00mi (804) 225-8197 Maps Source: Bing.com Source: Bing.com Figure 4: Map indicating James Center II Plaza located in Richmond, Virginia on the east coast of the United States. Figure 3: Map indicating Richmond, Virginia on the east coast of the United States.
  • 15. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long METHODOLOGY 15 3 In addition, none of these studies did comparisons on previous physical attributes within urban spaces that contributed to social interactions, and how these attributes are used in today’s environment where modern mobile technologies are prevelant. 3.2 Scope of the study Due to the time and resource con- straints of the study, it is confined to an analysis of one urban semi-public plaza in Richmond, Virginia, United States. This is a case study. A signifi- cant amount of data was collected and analysed, from which conclu- sions are drawn in later sections. The aim of this study has been to observe, survey, measure, evalu- ate and assess how the increase in virtual mobile technology useage has shifted/not shifted the dynamics and social interactions of small urban public spaces. This study, following in the footsteps of William Whyte’s ini- tial small urban space study from the late 1970s of physical features that were considered essential and social behaviours that naturally occured for a plaza’s success, determined which physical features and social plaza activities remain important today, and what additional virtual features are/or are not required. 3.3 Mixed method This research is considered a mixed method approach. The concept of using a variety of mixed methods quite probably originiated in 1959, when Campbell and Fiske used multiple methods to study validity of psychological traits.This includes collecting data using mixed methods that included observations and in- terviews (qualitative data) combined with traditional quantiative data. Brewer (1989 p.21) states that by enlarging the scope of research to which it is applied, the multimethod perspective holds out the larger promises of more sociologically significant conclusions and greater opportunities for both verification and discovery. In this study, a concurrent mixed method procedure was facilitated that converged quantitative and qualitative data in order to provide a comprehensive analysis of the research problem.“In this design, the investigator collects both forms of data at the same time during the study and then integrates the infor- mation in the interpretation of the overall results.”(Creswell 2009 p. 82) 3.4 Quantitative design According to Neuman (1997 p.106) the language of quantitative re- search is a language of variables, hypotheses, units of analysis, as well as casual explanations. It is considered a positivist approach to research. Neuman continues to ascertain that quantitative research design uses a deductive logic: one that starts with a general topic, then narrows down to research questions and hypotheses and finally, tests the hypotheses against empirical evi- dence. While this study does incor- porate some quantitative data pulled from the questionnaire analysis, the design is considered predominantly qualitative due to the small study and questionnaire participation. 3.5 Qualitative design Qualitative and quantitative styles of research differ in many ways, but in others they are complementary. When the data is collected in the form of written paragraphs rather than numbers, different research techniques and strategiies are put into place. Neuman (1997 p.327) indicates that qualitative research adopts assumptions about social life, objectives for research, and ways to deal with data that are often at odds with a quantitative approach. Patton Source: http://thejamescenter.com/index1.html Figure 6: Historic image of Canals and exca- vation of James Center II Plaza. Source: http://article-new-ehow-images-a07-jb-dl- hotels-west-richmond-virginia-1.1-800x800 Figure 5: View of downtown Richmond, Virginia.
  • 16. METHODOLOGY 16 3 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 (1990, p. 14) specifies that qualitative methods typically produce a wealth of detailed information about a much smaller number of people and cases. He also states that a qualitative design needs to remain sufficiently open and flexible to permit explora- tion of whatever the phenomenon under study offers for inquiry. Qualitative designs continue to be emergent even after data collection begins (p.196). This tends to increase the understanding of the case stud- ied, however it can reduce the ability to generalize. This study focuses on qualitative data documented through events, recording people’s opinions and ex- periences (with words, gestures and tone), observing specific behaviours, studying questionnaires and examin- ing visual images. 3.6 Case study design There have been many definitiions given for case study research; Yin (1994 Chapter 1, p.8) clarifies that case studies are the preferred strat- egy when“how”or“why”questions are being posed, when the investiga- tor has little control over events, and when the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within some real-life context. The case study’s unique strength is its ability to deal with a full variety of evidence­—documents, artifacts, interviews, and observa- tions (Yin, 1994). This case study design , as a research strategy comprises an all encompas- ing method­—data collection and data analysis. This study includes documentation and archival records, interviews and direct observation to draw analysis from. Strategy Form of research question Control over be- havioural events? Fo- cuses on contem- porary events? Survey who, what, where, how many, how much no yes Case study how, why no yes 3.7 Theory of design The components of this research design contain the study’s question, study’s proposition, unit of analysis, data analysis and conclusions. The case study will show how the use of modern mobile technologies has affected or not affected the social dynamics within a small urban space. Us- Figure 9: Series of Architectural renderings of James Center II Plaza. Source: Courtesy of M. Paul Friedberg Partners. Source: http://thejamescenter.com/index1.html Figure 8: View of James Center II Plaza. Source: Courtesy of M. Paul Friedberg Partners. Figure 7: Architectural models of James Center II Plaza.
  • 17. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long METHODOLOGY 17 3 ing this knowledge, what con- siderations do Urban designers need to incorporate when designing or redesinging small urban spaces for public use. 3.8 Site history The James Center II Plaza is located in downtown Richmond, the capital of the commonwealth of Virginia in- land on the east coast of the United States. The city of Richmond was founded in 1737 and to date has an estimated population of 204,2141 . Richmond is the center of the Rich- mond Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The Richmond Metropolitan Area has an estimated population of 1,269,380. Geographically, Richmond is located at the fall line of the James River, 108 miles south of Washington DC. It is surrounded by the counties of Hen- rico and Chesterfield and is serviced by Interstates 95 and 64 and en- circled by Interstate 295 and the Virginia State Route 288. Prior to the formation of the city, the Powhatan and Shocquohocan Native American tribes had lived and culti- vated the land. The city of Richmond was settled by English colonists from Jamestown in 1609, and offi- cially founded in 1737. Richmond is steeped in Revolutionary War history, with many early presidents origi- nating from the area. In 1782, after being burned down by British troops during the Revolutionary War, Rich- mond was rebuilt and became one of the largest manufacturing centres in the country with iron works, flour mills, tobacco facilities along with the slave trade. 1 U.S. Census Bureau, 2010. [Accessed 16 July 2012] James Center II Original Canal Stones Original Canal Stones Boatman’s Tower Food CartFigure 11: Aerial view of James Center II Plaza. Figure 10: Illustration of James Center II Plaza, camera placement for panormaic shots.
  • 18. METHODOLOGY 18 3 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 Today, Richmond’s downtown economy is made up of law, finance, state and federal government. Between 1963 and 1965, there was a“downtown boom”that led to the construction of 700 buildings in the city with a lean towards architec- tural classicism. An example of this would be The Virginia State Capitol designed by Thomas Jefferson and Charles-Louis Clérisseau in 1785. The James Center II Plaza in down- town Richmond was selected for the study as it has a rich history and is a vibrant transient small urban plaza in the central business district. The Plaza is located at 10th and Cary Street and most of what is now the James Center was occupied by the great Turning Basin of the James River and Kanawha Canal. The Turning Basin of the James River and Kanawha Canal was a huge man- made body of water that was three blocks long, from what is now 8th Street to 11th Street and one block wide, from just inside Cary Street to Canal Street. The Canal and Basin were the transportation focus of the city, and clustered near the edge of these features were tobacco ware- houses, flour mills and iron works. The Turning Basin served as a termi- nal for canal barges to unload, turn around and prepare for their return trips. The main imports were English woolens, French perfumes, Brazilian coffee, and East Indian spices with the export business primarily made up of tobacco, cotton, flour and coal. In 1985, the developers of the 2.5 million square foot James Center, began to design and build the larg- est mixed-use project to date that would be submerged in the history of Colonial and Civil War Richmond. During the excavation of the site, remains of 63 canal boats that had been abandoned more than 200 years ago were unearthed. During the development, the focus was on the design of the streetscape to reflect the history of the city and to bring a modern twist to the space. The surrounding buildings were built to provide drama to the city’s skyline with triangular notches, rounded corners, odd angles and reflective glass providing a sharp contrast to the square and rectangular block buildings surrounding the James Center. Purposefully, the buildings were set back from the street with interweav- ing pathways and seasonal plantings and trees. The original Kanawha Figure 12: Illustration of James Center II Plaza, camera placement for panormaic shots. James Center II Plaza, Richmond, VA Opened May, 1987 Typology Part-enclosed, Hard and soft surfaces, square Type Pedestrian way Predominant Surface Concrete, Inlaid stone Height of Buildings 21 storeys No of accesses 3, from street level Major Axis North-East Location Downtown Rich- mond, Virginia Active frontages None
  • 19. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long METHODOLOGY 19 3 Canal stones were inlaid into the landscaping as seating and retaining walls and represent the original canal lock outlines when viewed from above. The plaza’s central vista is the 45-foot limestone tower housing a 25-bell carillon and cast figures of bargemen and mules that rotates on the half hour to the tune of changing melo- dies crafted by Koninkiijke Eijsbouts, from the Netherlands. This tower was designed as a tribute to the canal life of 1785-1879. 3.9 Site Selection The researcher chose the study site of James Center II Plaza because the researcher frequented the plaza dur- ing lunchtimes when she worked in downtown Richmond and found the small urban space easily accessible and convivial. The researcher briefly considered a selection of sites in Richmond, Virgin- ia, including: Kanawha Plaza, Monroe Park Plaza and James Center II Plaza. The two plaza’s, also located in the central business district of down- town Richmond, that were consid- ered, were not selected because they had little foot traffic, few visitors and were poorly maintained. The Kanawha Plaza (see figure 15), a public city park and plaza, house a few homeless people and some visit- ing skateboarders (see figure 14), but was primarily an unused and barren park and plaza. The Kanawha Plaza is located in the center of four 3-lane major roadways that weave through the downtown Richmond area. This plaza is primarily used by thorough- fare foot traffic and is poorly main- tained by the City of Richmond. The water feature rarely runs and the surrounding noise barrier cement walls create the feeling of isolation and danger. The other plaza has no known name or identity (see figure 16) and it is located in front of an enclosed parking garage. This plaza is poorly maintained. It is primarily used as a thoroughfare by local business foot traffic. The stone work along the plaza is damaged and broken, and the pathways are weed-infested with broken brick paving. Both small urban plaza’s are located within a one mile radius of the James Center II Plaza. However, James Cen- ter II Plaza was chosen as the selcted site on the grounds that: 1. It is a small urban plaza, cen- trally located in the heart of downtown metropolitan Rich- mond city. 2. It has a varied group of people, doing a variety of things, that represent a metropolitan cen- tral business district. 3. It has constant foot traffic and visitors passing through it dur- PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long. Figure 15: Panoramic photograph of Kanawa Plaza PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long. PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long. PHOTOGRAPHY: Ailsa Long. Figure 16: Parking Garage Plaza, two streets away from James Center II Plaza. Figure 14: Skateboarders on Kanawa Plaza broken fountain feature. Figure 13: Kanawa Park and Plaza.
  • 20. METHODOLOGY 20 3 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 ing the weekdays. 4. There is easy access to street food vendors, and inside the James Center II there is access to restaurants, banking, hotel, restaurant and sports facilities. 5. It is well maintained and has behind-the-scenes security patrols providing a sense of safety. The James Center II Plaza in down- town Richmond, Virginia was se- lected as the small urban area for the subjective qualitative single-case study. It is officially considered a private plaza managed by JEMB Realty, which is responsible for the management of the surrounding commercial buildings, James Center 1, 2 and 3. However, the plaza itself is unofficially a semi-public plaza which is open, easily accessible and has a high frequency of use by the general public and tenants. The small urban space has a large number of local working profession- als from diverse occupations as well as frequent visitors and a selection of local downtown residents. James Center II Plaza also is used for a variety of different functions, particu- larily during the lunch hour, by local employees, visitors and residents alike. There are seasonal events that are held in the plaza, from lunchtime zumba classes in the spring and local jazz music during the summer, to the switching on of the downtown Christmas lights during the holiday season. The pedestrian desire lines lead plaza-users into and out of the James Center II building towards East Cary Street, 10th Street or down towards Shockoe Bottom further east. 3.10 Research questions In order to access the relationships between physical, social and virtual features within an urban small space, the following Research Questions were addressed: 1. Are Whyte’s previously ob- served successful physical and behavioural features of a small urban space still relevant today for social interaction? 2. Is there a change in social dynamics within a small urban space due to the increase use of modern mobile technolo- gies? 3. Are physical features combined with virtual features needed within an urban space for user comfort, satisfaction and social interaction? 3.11 Methodology This section describes the methods used in data collection and analy- sis but also addresses alternative methods considered and why the preferred method was chosen. Data Recorded • Time and date of observation • Physical characteristics of site • Social characteristics of site • Human behaviour within site • Modern technological uses within site Figure 17: East to west view of James Center II Plaza. Figure 18: South view of James Center II Plaza. Figure 19: Northwest view of James Center II Plaza. Figure 20: East view of of James Center II Plaza.
  • 21. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long METHODOLOGY 21 3 3.12 Equipment Official background research: • Preapproved permissions sheet • Printed observation sheet For plaza observation: • Pre-printed visual maps • Pre-printed questionnaires • Pens • Clipboards For timing observation: • Smart phone and watch For photographing plaza activities: • TriPod • Nikon DS300 camera and lens For personal comfort: • Water • Snacks • Notebook and pens • Rucksack 3.13 Data analysis software Microsoft Excel was used to analyse the numerical data drawn from the questionnaire. Adobe Photoshop was used to create panoramic shots of the plaza and activities within the plaza. Adobe Illustrator was used to create summary visual maps of plaza placement and activities, and InDesign was used to develop the document. 3.14 Pilot studies A pilot study was carried out to ensure that the questionnaire was practicable and there was a solid balance of different parts of the study. This pilot study was sent electronically to a select group of six workers in the downtown Richmond business district, who worked close to the James Center II Plaza. These were people who worked in the financial and advertising industries. This preliminary test determined if the order and questions made sense to the audience. Although there was an inclination to include qualitative and quantative research questions, the need for statistical significance was curbed for the more qualitative aspects of the study. Due to time and resource limitations, one site study was appropriate to achieve significant qualititative results. 3.15 Observational survey This subjective, qualitative, single case study incorporates a mixed- method approach. Using non-par- ticipant/naturalistic observational survey measurements is a“means to gather information about behav- iours of interest, but with the goal that your presence does not alter the behaviour you are observing” (Devlin 2006 p.52). Observational measurements permit the evalu- ation researcher to understand a program or treatment to an extent not entirely possible using only the insights of others obtained through interviews (Patton 1990 p.23). Empir- ical research was conducted to avoid plaza-users being aware that they were being studied, which assisted in collecting images reflective of ev- ery-day plaza life. Observations and surveys were conducted at James Center II Plaza site over several week work days. In return for participat- ing in the questionnaire survey, participants, who chose to enter a drawing, could win a $25 Starbucks gift certificate. Eighty-eight percent of those contacted agreed to partici- pate in both the questionnaire and enter the Starbucks gift certificate drawing, yielding 61 completed questionnaire surveys. 3.15.1 Survey Method The type of research is defined as a ‘longitudinal survey’, in which differ- ent groups of plaza users are sur- veyed at different points in time. The panoramic photographs were shot by a volunteer research assistant and were taken from two specific angles at the plaza (see figure 10), using a tripod and ground markings to ensure consistency and accuracy We are in an age of sweeping change. Communities engaged in Placemak- ing benefit from the ac- celeration that authentic community-centered digital methods can enable. Latorre, D. (2011) Digital Placemaking – Authentic Civic Engagement VP of Digital Placemaking, Available from: www.pps.org/blog/ digital-placemaking-authentic-civic- engagement/ [Accessed 11 August 2012]
  • 22. METHODOLOGY 22 3 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 of shots. However, marks could move due to weather, pedestrian foot traffic or other factors. 3.15.2 Initial Time Frame The research was gathered over a five working day (non-consecutive) period. The first week observations and questionnaires were distributed and collected on Monday, Wednes- day and Friday, and the second week on Tuesday and Thursday. The research was gathered during a 2 1/2 hour time frame , with photo- graphs taken every fifteen minutes (11:30 a.m. until 2:00 p.m.) during the business lunch period. William Whyte (1980 p.18) states that“around noon, the main clientele begins to arrive. Soon, activity will be near peak and will stay there until a little before 2:00 p.m.” This was indeed the case at the James Center II Plaza. The research days were organized this way to avoid a non-typical run of activity or inclement weather chang- es and also to prevent any potential influencing of behaviour due to the researcher’s visible presence within the plaza. The research time frames were determined having conducted preliminary observation and noting that the largest volume occupancy of the plaza was during the lunch hours between 11:30 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. Be- fore and after work-hour plaza activ- ity was virtually non-existent during weekdays and also at weekends. 3.15.3 Additional Surveys With the availability of additional resources and extended time frames, more surveys could be completed using the same criteria but spanning seasons to incorporate accurate data on plaza usage and physical, social and virtual features needed through- out the year. 3.16 Questionnaire A questionnaire was conducted in tandem with the observational survey. This mixed method approach to real-life questions is important, be- cause it allows triangulation of data; and if the results of different meth- ods coverage (agree, or fit together), then we can have greater confidence in the findings (Gillham, 2007 p.28). The questionnaire itself contains a combination of open and close- ended questions that were used for content and statistical analysis. These questions focus on physical and virtual features of an urban space and the plaza-user experience of the space. 3.15.1 Distribution Due to resource and time constraints, the questionnaire was conducted using convenience purposeful sampling. The key question for the researcher is: are the people in this sample similar to those in the target group? (Gillham 2008 p.18) About 10 questionnaires were distributed electronically to local working pro- fessionals and the remainding 52 were distributed one-on-one during intercept on-site interviews to busi- ness professionals, near-by residents and visitors of the plaza. In total 61 questionnaires were completed and returned to the researcher, with only five plaza-users requesting to abstain from the questionnaire due to their infrequent plaza usage or not having enough time during their lunch time break. 3.17 Plaza-user behavioural observations When the researcher was conduct- ing the observational survey, general plaza-user behavioural observations were made and visually mapped ac- cordingly. Plaza users were observed during the research time frame, their placement, their movement and in- teractions and their technology use- age within the plaza. This observa- tion determined patterns of certain Figure 21: Examples of mobile technology use in James Center II Plaza, Richmond, Virginia. Smart Phone use Tablet use E-reader use
  • 23. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long METHODOLOGY 23 3 physical, social and virtual features that plaza-users gravitated towards. 3.18 Justification of methods In 1980, William Whyte used time- lapse video cameras during his observation of public spaces. While this produced great insight into human behaviours, physical plaza attributes and provided interesting results, there are questions regarding the practical and ethical consider- ations when using videography. The presence of video equipment in a space could, in fact, alter the regular behaviour that occurs within that space. Videography can be perceived as secretive whereas photography is considered more visible and“in full”view. The researcher determined that timed panoramic photography would yield the best visual results without jeopardising the anonymity of the plaza-users. Also, Whyte had a team of researchers to assist with his research that spanned several years, whereas this research project had limited resources and a restricted time frame. One main disadvantage of observation methodology is that the presence of the observer can affect the situation that is under observation. With more time to conduct research, more evidence-based research would have been collected. Due to time constraints and limited resourc- es, five days was considered a valid study period. The study days were not concurrent and spread out over a two week period to take into consid- eration exogeneous events, such as climatic, social and political changes. Ideally, an assessment of the plaza over different seasons would provide a better understanding of the extent mobile technologies play with social dynamics within the plaza and what physical features are still required for these virtual experiences through the varying seasons. The researcher was required to fit within the time restrictions, so this was unavoidable. The conclusions have taken this into account. 3.19 Analytical review An analytical review was presented for each panoramic photographic ‘still’taken. This review was con- ducted to determine the number of plaza-users using mobile tech- nologies, their placement within the plaza and any social behaviours and cluster patterns that evolved from observation. This information was then collated and presented through written and visual representations to address the research question. Illustrated plans were drawn (see figure 34) to show different social phenomena including, gender placement, cluster patterns, mobile technology use, and plaza usage in relation to features within the space. Ideally, triangulation methodology would be the best method for this study, however with limited budget and short time frame constraints affected the amount of triangula- tion that was practical. Certainly, one important strategy for conducting evaluation research was to employ multiple methods, measures, re- searchers, and perspectives–but to do so reasonably and practically. (Patton, M. Q. 1990 Qualitative Evalu- ation and Research Methods 2nd ed. p.187) The primary analysis was done dur- ing the lunch time period, from 11:30 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. at the James Center II Plaza to understand the plaza usage and movement during this active time of day. This analysis was conducted to concentrate on the use of the public space, move- ment, location, cluster development, mobile technology useage and social interactions. Using mapping and area illustrative maps, the analaysis Figure 22: Examples of mobile technology use in James Center II Plaza, Richmond, Virginia. Smart Phone use Laptop and iPod use E-reader use
  • 24. METHODOLOGY 24 3 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 focused on certain areas, character- istics and use within those areas. In- formal people observations and data averaged out across all days studied to compile single graphs or where comparative data did not exist they were drawn up for each day of as- sessment. This demonstrated which areas were frequently used and at which times and for what activities. 3.20 Justification of analytical review Photographic documentation and observing plaza-users, movement/ locations and activities, were consid- ered a logical and practical way to analyse the data. Plans and illustra- tions used to address the research question were appropriate to visu- ally document spatial patterns and phenomena. A more quantitative method of plaza-user count charts and tables would have produced a less visually expressive result. The panoramic photographs of the site and the commentary provides more detailed and insightful evidence to back up assertions made. 3.21 Permissions The main obstacle that the research- er had to overcome was getting approval and permissions from Anne Pauley, Management Agent of JEMB Realty for James Center II Plaza. This included email communications be- tween the Agent and the head office of JEMB Realty in New York. This pro- cess took approximately two months to complete, and then, the research- er was required to sign a“Hold Harm- less Agreement.”At which point, dates for the observational survey at the plaza were agreed upon and the research was approved to move ahead. Security guards at James Center II Plaza were informed and on each day of observation and photog- raphy, the researcher and volunteer photographer would checked in with the Chief of Security on site. 3.22 Weaknesses As the paper only studied one site, there is the issue of subjectivity of site selection. However, the purpose was to consider the extent of plaza usage, movement, location, cluster development, mobile technology useage and social interactions in a downtown urban plaza. In order to create a more in depth report, the plaza could have been observed over a 12 month period through the various seasons to distinguish patterns in usage and ac- tivities within the plaza from Spring to Winter. However, due to time and resource limitations, this was not feasible at this time. Further studies could yield a clearer understanding of plaza usage, movement, location, cluster development, mobile tech- nology useage and social interac- tions in a downtown urban plaza. The plaza, on previous non-planned observation by the researcher, was not used during the weekday eve- nings or at weekends. This plaza is strictly a weekday business plaza. Due to time and resources, the observation was restricted from 11:30 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. during the work week lunch hour. If a plaza had been chosen for the study that had constant 24-hour usage, and was observed during 24-hour cycles, the results analysed could have been significantly different. Another limitation of the study concerns the inability to have flexible physical attribute arrangements. This plaza, similar to the plaza’s that Wil- liam Whyte studied in New York, had established physical features with no flexibility for change. This inability to make subtle changes to the physical environment to determine certain human behaviours hindered the op- portunity to see varied results. Another potentially significant limitation was that some leading edge modern mobile technologies were absent from the plaza. This, of course, raises the possibility that the plaza-users for whom modern mobile technologies are important may forego this site in favour of another plaza where those features are present. In this instance, the need for these kinds of features would not have necessarily been identified with the plaza-users that were surveyed. As a result, the lack of interest in these needs of modern technological features could well be understated and underrepresented. 3.23 Ethical challenges It was important, during the research observation, that the research should be designed, reviewed and under- taken to ensure integrity and quality. Therefore the following measures were undertaken to ensure that: • All the research assistants and participants were informed fully about the purpose, meth- ods and intended possible use of the research and what their input entailed and involved. • Any harm to participants was avoided at all costs. No physi- cal contact was made with the participants and no psycho-
  • 25. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long METHODOLOGY 25 3 logical damage was incurred by the research conducted. • The confidentiality and anonimity of the individuals remained secure during the plaza being photographed and during on-site question- naire distribution to plaza tenants and visitors alike. • The core principle of ethical codes were conducted ­— that of informed consent. • During the photograph ses- sions signage was placed strategically next to the photographic equipment to clarified the purpose of the research and stating that any- one wishing to be removed from photographs would be removed, upon request. • The questionnaire itself was distributed voluntarily and explained, in the one-on-one intercept interviews, that re- sponses would be confidential and no personal information would be released or sold. • Participants could choose to withdraw at any time and this was explained to them by the researcher either verbally or in writing. • People whom the researcher understood to be vulnerable plaza-users were not targeted for research involvement, for example, children under 18 and disabled and therefore were not approached. • An incentive of a $25 (equiva- lent to £15) Starbucks gift certificate, should the partici- pant choose to be included in the free drawing, was avail- able upon completion of the questionnaire and ONLY if the participant felt comfortable providing their name and email address for the drawing entry. • All images were stored electronically and all ques- tionnaires were stored in a safe and secure environment, electronically protected by passwords to be destroyed at a later date. • All research methods con- ducted would not lead to unethical behaviour in others. Only standard approaches to research were undertaken involving professional people and the general public. 3.24 Summary In review, the approach taken by the researcher was to design a methodology that was an empirical mixed-method with primary focus on qualitative research using one case study. This approach incorpo- rated on-site questionnaires, obser- vational surveys as well as photo- graphic documentation to collect significant data for a well-rounded analysis on the plaza space, physi- cal attributes, activities and plaza- users experiences at James Center II Plaza. This analysis will assist in evaluating, in an already predeter- mined environment, what physical features and human behaviours remain consistent today, and how mobile technologies may/may not have affected behaviours within the small urban space. n It’s a story about how we will communication and use technology in the future. Corning Incorporated (2012) A Day Made of Glass 2 HD Available from: www.youtube.com/ watch?v=jZkHpNnXLB0 [Accessed 21 August 2012]
  • 26. FINDINGS 26 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 Figure 23: Illustration of James Center II Plaza, downtown Richmond. 4.1 Introduction The researcher was tasked with studying a small urban space, and evaluating the physical features that encourage and foster comfort, safety, play and social dynamics as well as accommodating for individual ano- nymity. The researcher observed, sur- veyed and reported plaza-users wi-fi mobile technology use within the urban space to determine whether the introduction of mobile technolo- gies has isolated or influenced social interactions in these spaces. 4.1.1 Observational survey The observational survey conducted included a series of“time-lapse” photographs taken at fifteen min- ute intervals between 11:30 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. during the business lunch hour shot from the peripheral region of the downtown plaza (see figure 10). Each half hour time frame is analytically described for each survey day. The objective was to evaluate the plaza features, flow and movement, usage and to investigate the frequency of mobile technology useage within the plaza. 4.1.2 Questionnaire The on-site questionnaire was completed during the five day ob- servational survey time frame. These intercept on-site questionnaires were distributed to plaza-users by the researcher in person during the on- site observational survey, and some were distributed electronically. The objective of the questionnaire was to collect feedback from plaza-users on their plaza experience, preferred usage and placement, as well as their mobile technology preferences within the plaza. 4.1.3 Plaza-user behavioural observations The Plaza-user behavioural observa- tions were made using visual map- ping techniques that were con- ducted by both the researcher or assistant and also visual mapping within the questionnaire completed by the respondents. The researcher observed plaza-users movement, placement and activities within the plaza. This helped assertain the pre- ferred placement of plaza-users for varied activities. 4.2 Locating the plaza The James Center II Plaza is a semi- public plaza located in downtown Richmond’s central business district. It is owned and operated by JEMB Realty Corporation. James Center includes three office towers that together form a showpiece of the downtown Richmond skyline. The site includes over 986,000 square feet of office space, a fitness facility, five restaurants, a 1,600 car parking garage and a 50,000 square foot re- tail atrium that connects to an Omni Hotel.2 The plaza is within walking distance of the financial district to historic Shockoe Bottom, the city’s most fashionable shopping and dining district with its cobblestone streets and restored warehouses
  • 27. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long FINDINGS 27 4 containing unique assortments of exclusive apparel stores, galleries, restaurants, hotels and apartments. 4.3 Historical reference The plaza is situated on the corner of 10th Street and East Cary Street, and was once occupied by the Great Turning Basin of the James River and Kanawha Canal. The Canal and Basin were the transportation focus of the city, surrounded by tobacco ware- houses, flour mills and iron works. The Turning Basin served as a termi- nal for canal barges to unload, turn around and prepare for their return trips importing and exporting goods. During the early stages of construc- tion, the workers digging at the site discovered the remains of several canal boats dating back 200 years. The remains of 63 Kanawha Canal boats were recorded and all were salvaged and preserved which took precedence over the construction. The construction was planned and developed to integrate historic with contemporary by incorporating triangular nodes, rounded corners, odd angles with reflective glass that stand out in sharp contrast to the historic surroundings. As building began, every detail of the streetscape contributes to the goal of making James Center a“people place”. The Plaza, one of the focal points of the project, was designed to offer ample seating for outdoor lunches, concerts, or quiet relaxation. The seating is comprised of stones which lined the walls of the Great Turning Basin, and which have been arranged to resemble a canal lock when viewed from above. The clock tower, features revolving sculpted figures reminiscent of the workers who toiled on the river barges.3 4.4 General observations In figure 24, you will see the plaza pedestrian desire lines as well as the traffic flow around the plaza. Figures 25 and 26 show how little the plaza has changed in over twenty years from it’s original design. The physical features have remained the same, with only the tree canopy’s maturing with age. Typically, during this sea- son, the sun does not access the pla- za until approximately 11:45 a.m. and retreats behind the buildings by 1:15 p.m. The Plaza has three food carts located on the city-owned street corners; one located on the plaza peripheral, and two located across the road from the plaza. During dif- ferent seasons, certain programmed entertainment occurs within the plaza, increasing plaza usage. Figure 24: Traffic patterns and pedestrian desire lines at James Center II Plaza Source: Courtesy of M. Paul Friedberg Partners. Source: Photography by Ailsa Long Figure 25: Aerial view of James Center II Plaza c1990s. Figure 26: James Center II Plaza clock tower and barge boatmen sculpture. 2,3 Available from: http://www.thejamescenter.com/index1.html [Accessed 27 Oct, 2012]
  • 28. FINDINGS 28 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 4.5 Observational survey The visual panoramic observational survey was taken over five working days within a two week time frame during the business lunch hour from 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. The re- search team included the researcher, one volunteer photographer and one documentary observer who participated during the five day ob- servational period. 4.5.1 Monday 27th August 11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. • At 11:30 am, the local street corner food vendors begin to set up their stalls in prepara- tion for the lunch time crowd. • There is a pattern of smokers taking a smoke break by exit- ing the building and smoking in the front entrance while checking their smart phones or having general conversations with other smokers. • There are a few cell phone users that are on their own, checking messages and mak- ing calls. • A small selection of transitional pedestrians were crossing through the plaza coming to- and-from their destinations. • This time frame accomodates the“regular”plaza users as well as the early lunch“grab- bers”with the occasional smart phone“reviewers”. • The central seating area ap- pears to be more populated by early lunch time plaza-users providing the best people- watching views. 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. • This period accommodated a Monday 27th August, 2012 11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
  • 29. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long FINDINGS 29 4 Monday 27th August, 2012 (continued) 12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m. mix of lunch groups, transition- al pedestrian foot traffic, smart phone users with fewer visible smokers at the entrance. • The lunch groups were located on the two exterior wall seat- ing looking into the plaza for prime people-watching, with trees behind them as natural barriers around the exterior of the plaza. • There are individual mobile technology users who are walking and talking on their devices. • The central seating area was also popular for lunch-time dining, meeting and greeting. • The pedestrian pathways around the exterior of the plaza are frequented by pedestrian foot traffic only. • Triangulation occurs primarily at the corner of 10th and Main, by the food vendor cart. • Casual encounters occur on the pathways within the plaza to and from the building to the street. • During lunch time, the plaza- users sit either alone, in two’s or in groups of three. 1:30 pm - 2:00 pm • From 1:30 until 2:00 p.m. there is a rise in plaza-users who eat alone. • There is a significant amount of smart phone “reviewers”walk- ing through the plaza. • The smokers return to the entrance doorway around 1:45 p.m. • The street vendors begin to
  • 30. FINDINGS 30 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 1:30p.m.1:45p.m. finish off serving the late lunch eaters, and prepare to break- down their carts. • The transient pedestrian foot traffic reduces significantly by 1:30 p.m. • The plaza maintenance crew empties rubbish bins and col- lects debris left over from the plaza lunch crowd. 4.5.2 Conclusions for Monday From general observations in the past, the chief plaza activity occurs at lunch hour during the working week days. From close observations dur- ing the 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. time frame, certain plaza-user movements and activities can be seen. • The street food vendor is an integral part of the plaza life. As Whyte (1980 Chapter 4 p. 52) states,“Food attracts people, who attract more people.”The vendors situate themselves on the outskirts of the plaza, on the street corner, on city pavement, within the busiest pedestrian throughfare. Whyte (1980 Chapter 5 p.54) states that a successful plaza“starts at the street corner, it has a brisk social life of its own.” This placement enables maxi- mum food sale potential, but allows for the congrega- tion of customers to cause a triangulation effect, provid- ing perfect opportunities for casual business or personal encounters and community. • The smokers prefer to stay close to the entrance of the building, where smoking is allocated and they bring mo- bile technologies with them to keep them occupied dur- ing their smoke break. They frequently smoke alone, but some smokers will bring a friend. The smoking area also causes a triangulation effect, where like-minded smokers can meet and greet. • The primary seating activity occurs within the central plaza seating region, with the original raised canal ledge seating. This seating has two backsides deep capability allowing for maximum seating capacity. The inlaid canal stone ledges on the green space are also used often with only single seating capacity. The plaza edges, under the tree cano- py, are also popular seating locations with maximum viewing capabilities of the whole plaza. Monday 27th August, 2012 (continued)
  • 31. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long FINDINGS 31 4 4.5.3 Wednesday, August 29th 11:30 a.m. - 12:15 p.m. • At 11:30 am, the local street corner food vendors begin to set up their stalls in prepara- tion for the lunch time crowd. • There is a pattern of smokers taking a smoke break by exit- ing the building and smoking right by the front entrance, the designated smoking area. • A small selection of transitional pedestrians were crossing through the plaza coming to- and-from their destinations. • This time frame accomodates the“regular”plaza users as well as the early lunch“grabbers”. • Very few mobile technology plaza-users were visible. • The central and side seat- ing area appears to be more populated by early lunch time plaza-users providing the best people-watching views. • Visibly, the Bell Tower and steps, considered a vista or public art piece, does not appear to act as a triangulation point in the social life of this plaza. Few people congregate, meet or sit on the steps. 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. • The plaza-use is it’s busiest during this time frame. • There appears to be a mix of lunch groups. The larger groups (3 + people) sit on the peripheral seating, with the smaller groups preferring seat- ing in a more central location. • There is a small amount of transitional pedestrian traffic, Wednesday 29th August, 2012. 11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
  • 32. FINDINGS 32 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 Wednesday 29th August, 2012 (continued) 12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m. a few mobile technology users and only a couple visible smok- ers at the building entrance. • The corner food cart acts as a meeting, greeting and grab- bing food stop. 1:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. • During this time frame, there is a rise in single“eaters” with a few parties of two eating or conversing. • The maintenance crews begin their clean-up at 1:45 p.m. after the lunch-time plaza-use rush. • Only a select few smokers ap- pear at the designated smok- ing area at the front entrance after the lunchtime rush. 4.5.4 Conclusions for Wednesday Here are some of the researcher’s findings from close observations during the 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. time frame, visually reviewing certain plaza-user movements and activities. • Very little mobile technology use occurs within the plaza. The mobile technology use that does occur is primarily done by individual plaza- users, not within groups. • The sun exposure within the plaza seems to dictate the frequency of plaza-use. When the sun is at it’s fullest exposure within the plaza (11:45 a.m. until 1:45 p.m.), is when the highest plaza-use occurs.
  • 33. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long FINDINGS 33 4 1:30p.m.1:45p.m. Wednesday 29th August, 2012 (continued) • The largest groups of lunch plaza-users occurs during the 12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. time frame.
  • 34. FINDINGS 34 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 4.5.5 Friday 31st August 11:30 a.m. - 12:15 p.m. • Smokers primarily smoke in the door entrance designated smoking area between 11:30 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. • During this time frame there are a few transitional pedestri- ans crossing through the plaza to reach their destinations. • This time frame consists of single lunch eaters with the occasional small lunch groups. • Again there is only a small group of mobile technology plaza-users and smart phone “reviewers”visible. The primary plaza-user that brings technol- ogy with them into the plaza are single plaza-users. • The primary seating choice locations are within the central zone or on the more centrally located peripheral edges. 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. • During the 12:30 p.m. through 1:00 p.m. there appears to be an increase of lunch groups (large and small), transitional pedestrian traffic and smart phone“reviewers”. • The lunch groups tend to sit on the exterior wall seating look- ing into the plaza for prime people-watching experience. • This plaza, is not“special needs”equipped. The stairs down into the plaza prevent disabled plaza-users from en- tering using this desire line. • The Bell Tower is still not used by plaza-users for either seat- ing or for casual business or personal encounters. PHOTOGRAPHY: Gale Schurman, MultiSync Photography. Friday 31st August 2012 11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
  • 35. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long FINDINGS 35 4 Friday 31st August 2012 (continued) 12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m.• The main pedestrian thorough- fare is along 10th and Main street along the northeast and northwest of the plaza periph- ery. • The three entrances to the plaza from the street are the pedestrian desire lines through the plaza. 1:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. • The plaza users are mini- mal during this time period, although there are left over small groups of plaza-users and lunch“eaters”. 4.5.6 Conclusions for Friday • The Bell Tower, is not used as a seating area or a meet- ing place, where traditionally public art or vistas do act as an attraction point for plaza-users. • From general observations, it appears that there is an equal balance of single men and single women who use mobile technologies within the plaza. • The single plaza-users bring their mobile technologies while in the plaza. It would seem that as a single plaza- user, bringing mobile technol- ogies into the space, provides the user with a connection to a cyber community and there- fore not actually alone within the physical space. • The majority of plaza-users prefer to sit under the periph- eral and central tree canopy’s for shade. Whyte (1980 Chapter 1 p.18) explains that the best plaza’s he studied, afforded a good view of the passing
  • 36. FINDINGS 36 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 1:30p.m.1:45p.m. Friday 31st August 2012 (continued) scene and the pleasure of be- ing comfortably situated under a tree for shade while doing so. Although, there are a select group of plaza-users who prefer to sit in direct sunlight during their lunch hour. • The overlapping foliage on the peripheral of the plaza provides a combination of sunlight and shade which en- courages plaza-users to sit, eat, watch and stay.
  • 37. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long FINDINGS 37 4 4.5.7 Tuesday 4th September 11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. • There was some transient pe- destrian foot traffic in and out of the plaza, to and from the street to the buildings. • This time frame accomodates the early lunch“grabbers” with single“eaters”and small groups and the occasional smart phone“reviewer”. • One bicyclist sits and rests at noon, although the plaza does not accomodate for cyclists as there are no bike racks present at street level. • At 12:15 p.m., one solo plaza- user sits on the steps of the Bell Tower to use his smart phone. 12:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. • The plaza users primarily sit within the central zone of the plaza during this time frame. • During 12:30 p.m. through 1:30 p.m. there appears to be an increase of lunch groups (two to five) and transitional pedes- trian traffic. • There is an increase in mo- bile technology plaza-users. Predominantly in the desig- nated smoking area infront of the entrance to the build- ing. These technology users predominantly stand or pace when using their devices at the entrance to the building. • At 1:00 p.m. the plaza has random encounter and conver- sationalist groups who remain in the main throughfare paths into and out of the plaza. Whyte (1980 p.21) noted that Tuesday 4th September 2012 11:30a.m.11:45a.m.12:00p.m.12:15p.m.
  • 38. FINDINGS 38 4 Ailsa Long | 11022988 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | May 2013 Tuesday 4th September 2012 (continued) 12:30p.m.12:45p.m.1:00p.m.1:15p.m. people tended not to move out of the main pedestrian flow. They prefered to stay in it or move into it or remain in the center of the flow of pedes- trian foot traffic. 1:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. • Within this time frame , the final lunch crowd are finishing up their lunch break. • The transitional pedestrian walks through the park to their destination. 4.5.8 Conclusions for Tuesday • When plaza-users use mobile technologies, they tend to sit when located within the plaza, but tend to stand and pace, when smoking within the des- ignated smoking area beside the main entrance doorways. • The plaza, while accomodating to local pedestrian plaza-users, does not seem to visibly acco- modate bicyclists or alternative transportation plaza-users. • The chance encounter plaza- users, located themselves in the middle of the pedestrian traffic flow on the pathways through the plaza. Whyte (1980 Chapter 1 p.21) pointed out that if you were in the cen- ter of the crowd, you have the maximum choice of leaving or continuing the conversation. • It is apparent that the very clear sightlines in and out of the plaza creates a sense of
  • 39. May 2013 | MA Urban Design Masters Dissertation | 11022988 | Ailsa Long FINDINGS 39 4 1:30p.m.1:45p.m. Tuesday 4th September 2012 (continued) safety and provides an environment that street users want to be a part of. The plaza is at eye level and distinctly associated with the street. While this plaza is semi-public and maintained by a private company, it is easily accessible to the general public and does not forbid passers-by from entering, sitting, eating and relaxing.