Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Dr. Niraj Verma, Corey Nolan, MPA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
As an avowedly interdisciplinary area of inquiry, the scholarship on public space has been informed not just by urban design but also by the social sciences, public health, engineering, law, and other disciplines. Such a marriage of traditions has changed the game multiple times and, in some cases, eventually transformed the field. This paper will explore how this game-changing might become more systematic – an arranged marriage rather than an extended courtship! -- so scholars and practitioners studying public space might effectively integrate tensions and criticism from related fields.
Our example comes from universal design (also called design for all) and urban design’s critique of its rigidity and one-size-fits-all stance (Nelischer and Loukaitou-Sideris (2023). The critique mocks the universal design of physical, tangible spaces that facilitate access and use by people of any age and ability (Lynch et al. 2018). But, while an imaginary, generic user may not be appropriate, embracing inclusivity and access is certainly consistent with urban design’s ethos. How might our thinking on public space credibly address this criticism without dismissing it altogether? How might we endogenize this conflict within our scholarship?
We respond to this in three parts. First, drawing on previous scholarship (Verma 2011), we use Sunstein’s idea of incomplete theorization to develop a set of dialectical tensions or dilemmas between urban design and universal design. Next, we address these dilemmas and cast them as “essential tensions” for the scholarship on public space (Verma 1995). Finally, using the case of fair housing laws in the United States (Nolan 2023), we illustrate how these ideas might help to include some lessons from fair housing in the design of public spaces.
References
Lynch, H., Moore, A., Edwards, C. and Horgan, L. (2018) Community Parks and Playgrounds: Intergenerational Participation Through Universal Design. National Disability Authority. [Online].
Nelischer, C. & Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2023) Intergenerational Public Space Design and Policy: A Review of the Literature. Journal of planning literature. [Online] 38 (1), 19–32.
Nolan, C., OLH Technical Services., HUD. (2023) 'Fair Housing Act: Common Violations and Solutions.' [Online]
Verma, N. (2011). ‘Urban Design: An incompletely theorized project’, in Tridib, B & Loutkaitou-Sederis, A. Companion to Urban Design. 1st ed. London: Taylor & Francis Group.
Verma, N. (1995) What is Planning Practice? The Search for Suitable Categories. Journal of planning education and research. [Online] 14 (3), 178–182.