Carmona, M. (1). Contemporary Public Space, Part Two: Classification. Journal of Urban Design, 15(2), 157–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13574801003638111
There are a series of discrete but related critiques of the contemporary public space situation, and it was these that the first part of this paper identified and organized. These drew on different scholarly traditions to highlight the key tensions at the heart of the contemporary public space debate. It revealed that critiques of public space could broadly be placed into two camps: those who argue that public space is over-managed, and those who argue that it is under-managed. This second part of the paper begins by arguing that both over and under-management critiques result in the same end, a homogenization of public space, although these outcomes may not be as stark as many of the critics would have us believe. What is clear is that the critiques reveal a range of public space types and means of classification. These are used in a final section of this paper to suggest a new typology of public space, one based on how public space is managed.
This research notes that contemporary trends in public space design and management are resulting (over time) in an increasingly complex range of public space types and proposes the following classification: natural/semi-natural urban space, civic space, public open space, movement space, service space, left over space, undefined space, interchange space, public ‘private’ space, conspicuous spaces, internalized ‘public’ space, retail space, third place spaces, visible private space, interface spaces, user selecting spaces, private open space, external private space, and Internal private space.
Description of method used in the article
Identifying and organization of the multifarious critiques of contemporary public space and impact of contemporary trends on public space followed by classification to suggest a new typology of public space, one based on how public space is managed.