IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cjudxx/v19y2014i1p53-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Public Space

Author

Listed:
  • Vikas Mehta

Abstract

Public space plays an important role in sustaining the public realm. There is a renewed interest in public space with a growing belief that while modern societies no longer depend on the town square or the piazza for basic needs, good public space is required for the social and psychological health of modern communities. New public spaces are emerging around the world and old public space typologies are being retrofitted to contemporary needs. Good public space is responsive, democratic and meaningful. However, few comprehensive instruments exist to measure the quality of public space. Based on an extensive review of literature and empirical work, this paper creates a public space index to assess the quality of public space by empirically evaluating its inclusiveness, meaningfulness, safety, comfort and pleasurability. Four public spaces in downtown Tampa, Florida, are examined using the index and several applications for public space planners, designers and managers are suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Vikas Mehta, 2014. "Evaluating Public Space," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 53-88, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:cjudxx:v:19:y:2014:i:1:p:53-88
    DOI: 10.1080/13574809.2013.854698
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13574809.2013.854698
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13574809.2013.854698?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beata Fabisiak & Anna Jankowska & Robert Kłos, 2020. "Attitudes of Polish Seniors toward the Use of Public Space during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-17, November.
    2. Kędra, Arleta & Maleszyk, Piotr & Visvizi, Anna, 2023. "Engaging citizens in land use policy in the smart city context," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    3. Abdulaziz Alzahrani, 2022. "Classification of Urban Spaces: An Attempt to Classify Al-Baha City Urban Spaces Using Carmona’s Classification," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    4. Pritam Ahirrao & Smita Khan, 2022. "Evaluating public open spaces through the lively planning integrative perspective: a developing country context," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 5225-5257, April.
    5. Tauri Tuvikene & Wladimir Sgibnev & Wojciech Kȩbłowski & Jason Finch, 2023. "Public transport as public space: Introduction," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(15), pages 2963-2978, November.
    6. Morikawa, So & Aoyama, Miwa & Kato, Hironori, 2023. "Development of railway station plazas: Impact on land prices of surrounding areas," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1-14.
    7. Adam Wronkowski, 2024. "Discovering the meaning of contemporary urban squares for its users—a case study of Poznan, Poland," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. I-Ting Chuang & Qingqing Chen & Ate Poorthuis, 2023. "Categorizing urban space based on visitor density and diversity: A view through social media data," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(6), pages 1471-1485, July.
    9. Sarah Williams & Chaewon Ahn & Hayrettin Gunc & Ege Ozgirin & Michael Pearce & Zhekun Xiong, 2019. "Evaluating sensors for the measurement of public life: A future in image processing," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 46(8), pages 1534-1548, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cjudxx:v:19:y:2014:i:1:p:53-88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cjud20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.