Placemaking: The Power To Change

Journal of Biourbanism #1&2/16 Vol. V INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF BIOURBANISM All rights reserved Issue poems by Michaela Lamdan with photographs by Sara Bissen and Stefano Serafini Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by the International Society of Biourbanism, as Publisher of the Journal of Biourbanism. No part of these pages, either text or image may be used for any purpose other than personal use. Reproduction, modification, storage in a retrieval system or retransmission, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, is strictly prohibited without prior written permission. JOURNAL OF BIOURBANISM INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF BIOURBANISM Publisher Editor in Chief Stefano Serafini stefano.serafini@biourbanism.org Managing Editor Sara Bissen #1&2/2016 Vol. V Published November 2017 ISSN 2240–2535 © 2017 International Society of Biourbanism Rome ITALY e-mail jbu@biourbanism.org www.journalofbiourbanism.org www.biourbanism.org The Journal of Biourbanism JBU is a biannual peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary, international online journal. The journal takes an incisive look into the bios/life of urbanism through perspectives in architecture, planning, environmental studies, and other social sciences. The journal aims to critically review and define the notions of biourbanism. Assessing human-centered or needbased design sensibilities is a predominant concern, while attempting to address the disconnect between theory and practice in participating disciplines. The journal publishes cutting-edge research, methodologies, and innovative design approaches on biourbanism. Editorial Board Sara Bissen, Antonio Caperna, Nikos Salingaros, Stefano Serafini Advisory Board Michel Bauwens, P2P Foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Michael Batty, The Bartlett, University College London, Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis–CASA, London, UK; Harald Bodenschatz, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany; Mariano Bizzarri, Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome, Italy; Adrian Bejan, Duke University, Pratt School of Engineering, Durham, NC, USA; Marco Casagrande, Bergen Arkitekthøgskole, Bergen, Norway; Jaap Dawson, Delft Technical University, Delft, The Netherlands; Carlos Gershenson, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, DF, Mexico; Alessandro Giangrande, Università degli Studi Roma Tre, Rome, Italy; Svetlana K. Gural, Tomskiy Gosudarstvennyy Universitet, Tomsk, Russia; Besim S. Hakim, American Institute of Certified Planners, Albuquerque, NM, USA; Sergey N. Kharlamov, Tomskiy Polytekhnicheskiy Universitet, Tomsk, Russia; Robert J. Koester, Center for Energy Research Education Service–CERES, Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA; Sinan Logie, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi and MAD-Mekanda Adalet Derneği, Istanbul, Turkey; Sylvie R. Lorente, Duke University, Pratt School of Engineering, Durham, NC, USA; Michael W. Mehaffy, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm, Sweden; Achille Paolone, Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome, Italy; Juval Portugali, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel; Yodan Rofé, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beersheba, Israel; Ashraf M. Salama, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK; Nikos A. Salingaros, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA; Giuseppe Sermonti, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, Italy; Eleni Tracada, College of Engineering and Technology, University of Derby, Derby, UK; Fabrizio Vescovo, Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome, Italy; Khaldoun Zreik, Université Paris 8, Saint-Denis, France. CONTENTS EDITOR’S NOTE: THE SILENCE OF DESIGN 9 Stefano Serafini CITIES AND LANDSCAPES AS SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS 25 Sergio Los ARCHITECTURE WITH IDENTITY CRISIS: THE LOST HERITAGE OF THE MIDDLE EAST 81 Marwa Al-Sabouni GENERATIVE PROCESSES FOR REVITALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT 99 Besim S. Hakim MIDDLE-OUT: HOW COMPLEX NETWORKS MADE OBSOLETE THE BOTTOM-UP VS. TOP-DOWN CONTRAST 109 Alessandro Giuliani THE ECONOMIC, DEMOGRAPHIC, AND TECHNOLOGICAL EVOLUTION OF THE CITY 117 Antonino Galloni BIORURAL 133 AN INTERVIEW WITH DR. MICHAEL R. ROSMANN Sara Bissen HOUSING AS A VERB: A CRITIQUE OF HABITAT III’S NEW URBAN AGENDA 143 AN INTERVIEW WITH ROBERT NEUWIRTH Sara Bissen A STRUCTURE-FREE STRUCTURE: BEING AS UNKNOWING 153 Michaela Lamdan MIND THE GAP: A DISCUSSION OF PHILOSOPHICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DICHOTOMIES 165 Melissa Sterry FROM HELL TO BABEL: CREATING VALUE IN THE ECOCENE 187 Rachel Armstrong THE THEORETICAL BASIS OF WELL-BEING AS A MOTIVATION FOR DESIGN 201 Gayle Souter-Brown PLACEMAKING: THE POWER TO CHANGE 219 Angelica Fortuzzi CONNECTING THE SPACES OF CO-WORK: JOY OF EXPEDITION IN A GROWING TRAJECTORY 229 Elina Alatalo & Ari Jokinen DISCUSSIONS & REVIEWS URBAN EMERGENCE MANIFESTO 249 PARADISE DESIGN 251 Urška Škerl DATA-DRIVEN DESIGN 257 Davide Barbieri SUBCODES IN LINGUISTICS AND DESIGN: A COMPARISON ABOUT BIOPHILIA AND LANGUAGE 259 Stefano Serafini DO CITIES BECOME SMART? 271 William Arthurs A MEDITERRANEAN SOCIAL BUILDER FROM THE 14TH CENTURY 273 Stefano Serafini FREE SOIL REPUBLIC 277 Sara Bissen NEWS IN RECOGNITION OF THE FIRST HONORARY MEMBERS 285 TO THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF BIOURBANISM Stefano Serafini ISTITUTO NAZIONALE DI BIOARCHITETTURA 291 Stefano Serafini FIRST MASTER IN PSYCHOLOGY AND ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY 292 Stefano Serafini A SCHOOL OF ARTISTRY IN SICILY 293 Ciro Lomonte NEWARK WITHHELD 294 Sara Bissen CITTÀ PASOLINI 299 Ruth Pérez-Chaves A CENTER FOR SPATIAL JUSTICE IN ISTANBUL AND BEYOND 301 Sinan Logie A LETTER FROM 1067 PACIFICPEOPLE 303 Andrea Haenggi JBU #1&2/16 219 Placemaking: The Power to Change Angelica Fortuzzi Architect, International Society of Biourbanism, Italy ABSTRACT Placemaking is an approach to designing and planning public spaces, including their management, which is becoming widespread not only in the United States but worldwide. The idea of placemaking is revolutionary because of its approach to urban issues that opens up new possibilities of participatory design. The focus of the practice is on the place, consequently on the community that uses and lives in it because public space symbolizes the “connective tissue” of communities, hence the importance of its care. This paper outlines the issues and major trends emerging from recent placemaking experiences.
: resilience, placemaking, sustainability, just cities, right to the city, third place, community, collaborative, open source JBU #1&2/16 220 efinin hat ma es a oo city is more a matter of heart an soul than en ineerin nrique Pe alosa, he free om to ma e an rema e our cities an oursel es is, I ant to ar ue, one of the most recious yet most ne lecte of our human ri hts avid arvey, A PR C SS FC A Placemaking is considered both a practice and a way of thinking. t is an approach to designing and planning public spaces, including their management, which is becoming widespread not only in the United States but internationally. t is a practical tool for bottom up, community driven processes to improve a neighborhood, a city, or a region. ualities that define placemaking are “collaborative, culturally aware, context sensitive, multi disciplinary, visionary, inspiring, inclusive, transformative, flexible” conversely, the process is not “imposed from above, project focused, design driven, static, one dimensional, reactive, exclusionary, privatized” Project for Public Spaces, c. The idea of placemaking is revolutionary because the approach to urban issues starts from a different angle than usual, opening up new possibilities. The focus of the practice is on the place, consequently on the community that uses and lives in it because public space symbolizes the “connective tissue” of communities, hence the importance of its care. The aim of placemaking is to spread more people oriented urban development models and people centered town planning principles, returning public spaces to the people. Therefore, the shape of the environment should facilitate social interaction and improve a community s quality of life, in other words, create livable and pulsating places. Since the human being is at the center of this practice, the community becomes the main placemaking process expert. onsequently, placemaking takes advantage of the local community s resources, motivation, and capability. t is an evolving process that creates a sense of belonging linking neighborhoods, supporting social justice, and community safety as well as economic development and environmental sustainability. The final goal is to promote people s healthiness, happiness, and well being by making effective, beautiful, and pleasant public spaces. Placemaking is the result of a combination of physical characteristics, activities carried out, and the meaning that places represent for people. Succinctly, it is a way to unfold the “genius loci” of a place. P AC S P P : SC A The most successful placemaking projects demonstrate the importance of the practice over the outcomes, as it happens in community design and planning processes. The experiences prove that the effects of the action of “making” go far beyond the “place”, as a consequence of its iterative and collaborative elements, repetitive actions, and cooperative approach. The main changes take place in the mentality of the people involved. ommunities are no longer passive users but active participants in the making of change. The practice of “making places” enriches both communities and social life and gives power to people. n addition, the process of placemaking produces a dual effect, a virtuous cycle that reverberates not only in the spaces themselves but also on the JBU #1&2/16 221 individuals and communities that are active in those sites. Susan Silberberg writes that an effective placemaking project “builds connections, creates civic engagement, and empowers citizens in short, it builds social capital” Silberberg, , p. , and people benefit from the social and physical features of the place. R C S R AP P C T R RBA S Since the th century, fast urban growth increasingly driven by a functionalist logic has created towns that did not meet the real needs of their inhabitants, who were considered only as numbers in a development plan. The city became a place of contradictions and chaos with conflicts between this “rational ideal static image” and the ever changing community that strives to live in those spaces. n the s, architects, urbanists, sociologists, and journalists such as evin ynch and ane acobs started to study the city and urban planning with a different approach. They examined the disorder of their contemporary cities and urban fabrics that strongly contrasted with the efficient and abstract model of the modern city. ynch and acobs analyzed the use of public spaces and how the city was experienced the meaning of public spaces for people, what kind of life those spaces supported, and their weaknesses and potentialities. n this way they laid the base for a new approach, a new way to comprehend, design, and program public spaces. ith his studies, ynch highlighted the fact that cities are networks of different personal experiences and perceptions that create a personal image “structuring and identifying the environment is a vital ability among all mobile animals. any kinds of cues are used the visual senses such as smell, sound, touch, kinaesthesia, sense of gravity, and perhaps of electric or magnetic fields” ynch, , p. . Such personal image is called the en ironmental ima e. t is relevant “how closely it is linked to our sense of balance and well being” and the relation with different environments that “resist or facilitate the process of image making”. ynch stressed that “the city is in itself the powerful symbol of a complex society” and is defined by three components identity, structure, and meaning ynch, , pp. . ynch s work had great influence on the current of thought that stresses the importance of urban design on a human scale and in the placemaking practice. e noticed the possibilities opened by porous spaces “ n edge may be more than simply a dominant barrier if some visual or motion penetration is allowed through it if it is, as it were, structured to some depth with regions on either side. t then becomes a seam rather than a barrier, a line of exchange” ynch, , p. . acobs was inspired by ynch s studies in her exploration of the urban situation in the United States the factors that create the life and spirit of the city, and the reasons why some places are better than others. acobs stressed the importance of public spaces and the web of paths that form the social fabric and vital spaces of neighborhoods, which endorse human relations and create trust and civic respect. er approach put the people at the center of urban processes. acobs emphasized the role of the mi it in urban fabric, with a diversification of population, as a way to increase livability, safety, and civic sense “ city s very structure consists of a mixture of uses, and we get closest to its structural secrets when we deal with the conditions that generate diversity” acobs, , p. . She underlined the concept that life attracts life. hen dealing with cities “we are dealing with life at its most complex and intense”, with the “inclusiveness and the literally endless intricacy of life”, which are the characteristics of cities, ever changing complex systems that cannot be simplified in JBU #1&2/16 222 one static image. She highlighted the need for an urban strategy, able to illuminate and clarify life, “its meanings and order in this case, helping to illuminate, clarify and explain the order of cities” acobs, , pp. . ith a systematic approach, illiam hyte developed acobs approach to cities and urban spaces hyte, . e investigated the essential elements for the development of social life in public spaces, providing the foundations that make a public place enjoyable for people. is investigations on pedestrian behavior and city dynamics formed the basis for the placemaking approach. The innovative idea behind it was that the design of the city should be people centered to meet the needs of its inhabitants. Therefore he encouraged a bottom up approach in designing public spaces stressing the concept that design should start with a comprehensive understanding of the way people use and would like to use spaces. e highlighted the importance of learning by observing and talking to people to discover their needs, and then using this knowledge to create urban realities that facilitate civic engagement and community interaction. s a disciple of hyte, red ent developed and applied hyte s studies and in founded the “Project for Public Spaces”, a non profit organization that is one of the most active in placemaking practice and dissemination. t the same time, in , hristopher lexander published one of his seminal works, A attern an ua e lexander, shikawa, Silverstein, , in which he identified a web of interrelated patterns from large to small on the designing scale, with the somewhat provocative intention of providing people and communities guidelines to be able to design by themselves. n this debate, an ehl underlines the importance of the human scale in urban design. n a city designed for people the scale would be smaller, spaces would be safer since people use them, and the quality of life would dramatically improve as do relations between people. T P T CA A CRAT C S F RBA SPAC S n the late s, to regain a sense of democracy of places, the debate also focused on the “right to the city” Silberberg, , p. . any philosophers and urbanists, such as enri efebvre and later avid arvey, argued against a top down approach and administration of the public realm, which they considered as a limit to social exchange and relationships efebvre, . These authors, in fact, stressed that people have the right to shape their urban spaces “The right to the city is far more than the individual liberty to access urban resources it is a right to change ourselves by changing the city”. avid arvey writes “ t is, moreover, a common rather than an individual right since this transformation inevitably depends upon the exercise of a collective power to reshape the processes of urbanization. The freedom to make and remake our cities and ourselves is, want to argue, one of the most precious yet most neglected of our human rights” arvey, , p. . Urban space fosters a civic and democratic sense. ay ldenburg identifies urban spaces as “third places” that he describes as “the places of social gathering where the community comes together in an informal way, to see familiar and unfamiliar faces, somewhere civic discourse and community connections can happen” as cited in Silberberg, , p. ldenburg, . ldenburg stresses that the urban spaces are a “neutral ground”, where people may gather freely, feeling at ease, without playing the role of host. nrique Pe alosa stresses the role of public spaces as an indicator for the level of democracy in a society “Public space dedicated to pedestrians can be an equalizer a means to more inclusive JBU #1&2/16 223 society. n public space people meet as equals, stripped bare of their social hierarchies”. e remarks that it is only in free time that the difference in the quality of life by social classes is enormously evident. The alternative to television for lower income people is public space “ ver the next few decades, lower income citizens will have access to computers and a wide array of electronic equipment. hat they will not have is access to green spaces and sports facilities unless governments act today”. ence, the importance Pe alosa points out of factors such as plazas, promenades, bicycle paths and pavements, waterfronts, parks and public sports facilities. These “show respect for human dignity and begin at least to compensate for inequality in other realms”, since a just city and a “democratic city must be designed for the most vulnerable of its members” Pe alosa, , pp. . ichard Sennett stresses the importance of public spaces “porous and incomplete open spaces at the heart of the cities” are the democratic potentiality of urban spaces, providing “opportunities for democratic engagement”. oreover Sennett emphasizes that “when the city operates as an open system incorporating porosity of territory, narrative indeterminacy and incomplete form it becomes democratic not in a legal sense, but as physical experience” Sennett, , pp. . F C S :T P R C T SA Placemaking in the United States involves many different experiences and activities led mainly by organizations and professionals, some of which are very active in the practice and promotion of the placemaking concept. ne of the most active is the Project for Public Spaces PPS , a non profit planning, design, and educational organization. ounded in , PPS has been a pioneer in the field, with roots in the work and study of illiam . hyte. Project for Public Spaces has developed and published a harvest of interesting guidelines and tools for people, to aid in designing and maintaining public spaces and empowering communities and their sense of belonging. Since its foundation, the organization has worked with numerous partners such as public and private organizations, federal, state, and municipal agencies, business improvement districts, neighborhood associations, and civic groups, while engaging in projects with over , communities in countries. nother organization, a very active opinion leader in placemaking practice is Place akers . This planning and design firm is effective in addressing placemaking in all its issues from planning and urban design, to context specific coding and community engagement. The main goals of their actions are to nurture human needs by cultivating good environments and places, empower communities and connections, and open up new opportunities by designing resilient, soul satisfying places to enhance livability. They all suggest and are inspired by the thought and work of ane acobs, hristopher lexander, ikos Salingaros, eon rier, an ehl, ay ldenberg, and eff Speck, just to name a few. Tactical urbanism starts from the idea that an urban place may be easily improved by small, quick, cheap, often temporary demonstrative actions and projects. The aim of these actions is to improve the quality of living in those places, so that a small part of a city will become more enjoyable and lively. The idea is that the livability of a city could often start from community focused, incremental, small scale steps on the street, block, or in the building. These actions are also seen as a test prior to making substantial political and financial commitments. JBU #1&2/16 224 Projects and actions are frequently named as o u urbanism with pop up caf s or shops, uerilla urbanism with guerrilla gardening or painting, city re air, I o It ourself urbanism with demonstrative actions like open streets, play streets, street fairs, park ing day, pavement to plazas, chair bombing, food carts trucks, and mobile vendors. ll of them are characterized by community centered and realistic goals ydon, artman, arcia, Preston, oudstra, Sennett, . The tactical urbanism approach is defined by five main characteristics activate the change put forward answers for local planning challenges short term tasks and realistic expectations maximum results with little risk and the development of social capital between citizens and the public private institutions and organizations involved in the process ydon, artman, arcia, Preston, oudstra, . Part of the tactical urbanism approach, the etter lock oundation , was established in ak liff, allas, T in . The idea quickly spread to cities like ew ork, emphis, oston, and Saint ouis. n the transformation process of a etter lock project, communities are quite active and provide feedback. t starts when a group of people, that is neighbors, community experts, and property owners, gather to make a commercial block in an underused neighborhood corridor more livable. The community provides all the necessary resources to make the place into a pedestrianized neighborhood node for citizens with bicycle paths, lights, greenery, caf s with seats, and pop up trades. etter lock turns out to be a bottom up approach and model of urban design, an open sourced action, and a demonstration tool. t temporarily changes a place to develop its potential, and to create a walkable, pulsating, neighborhood space. P AC A T n the placemaking process, there are three main steps. The first involves analyzing and discovering not only the place but also the people and the community, the life and the lifestyle, and then collecting all of the information. t is fundamental to perceive a place as a whole, with a fresh eye, observing carefully the smaller scale issues. n brief, actively watching, listening, and asking to discover local community needs and aspirations. t would help to ask questions about quality places in close proximity places that need to be developed, their connections with the surroundings and with the local community, and looking at the dimension of the space and how it affects relations between people. The information gathered is used to produce a shared vision for that place, which represents the second step of the process. This vision can be used as a base on which to develop the third step, an im lementation strate y t is very important to be simple and start on a small scale, with feasible improvements that can produce immediate benefits to citizens and the neighborhood. A A C AT T PPS T B Project for Public Spaces uses a number of reference tools for communities placemaking processes. ere are just a few of them to give a glimpse of the process. PPS recognizes that the community is the main expert in a placemaking project since are the depositaries of the local knowledge, needs, and desires. PPS approach incremental, slow changes and uses temporary, inexpensive streetscape components. involved in s a premise, communities is based on JBU #1&2/16 225 The first tool is called “ Principles” Project for Public Spaces, b . These guidelines point out the main aspects and issues that have to be carefully considered to develop a good and effective placemaking process suggestions and capacities from the community represent the basis from which to start to imagine a public space. To make a place implies a wider vision and the need to satisfy key attributes like accessibility, activities, comfort, and networking. good network and cooperation is fundamental to access a pool of resources and expertise observe a space and how it is used to fearlessly undertake new things shaped to meet the needs of the community pay attention to the functionality of a space and its potentiality of being enjoyed by people. reating synergy between activities and elements is another core factor. The last principle stresses the importance of management and good care of a public space as a key element for its success. The “Power of ” is another easy framework dedicated to communities and stakeholders. The main idea is that “any great place itself needs to offer at least things to do or reasons to be there” Project for Public Spaces, a . haracteristic of the “Power of ” is to proceed with small scale projects to achieve bigger ones. The goal is to create a network, focusing on the excellence of a community or place, then the area would achieve a critical mass. f course, for a good network, there is need for synergy on a different scale involving places, neighborhoods, cities, and regions creating a collection of interesting communities. “ ighter, quicker, cheaper” is an attitude and a powerful slogan that echoes the tactical urbanism approach. The goal is to create short term, incremental, low cost actions on a smaller scale as a testing mode “ideas can be efficiently implemented, assessed, then tweaked and customized based upon a community s response” Project for Public Spaces, . The Place iagram is another tool for communities igure which allows for evaluating a place in the placemaking process using four main criteria “access and linkage” “comfort and image” “sociability”, and “uses and activities”. The four issues are expanded with intangible qualities and measurable data. or “access and linkage”, a successful place should be evaluated by its accessibility and its connection with its surroundings. The grade of comfort of a place involves the perception of the following qualities “safe, clean, green, walkable, seatable, spiritual, charming, attractive, historic” while the measurable qualities will be “crime statistics, sanitation rating, environmental data” Project for Public Spaces, d . The same criteria applies for the other two issues “sociability” and “uses and activities”. T A S P S RC n conclusion, there are some major trends emerging from recent placemaking experiences. The key issue is programming since places can always be improved, and the process does not really have an end. ight activities demonstrate potentialities and empower people. Partnerships between private and public sectors are valuable achievements of the process because interactions and networking are even more important than practical results. urthermore, the placemaking goal is to focus on the needs of contemporary cities and the empowerment of people and communities in order to respond to the ongoing challenges. than ent stresses the concept of placemaking as an unfolding process “builds capacity for things to happen that wouldn t normally occur in a project driven approach” Silberberg, , p. . oreover, Susan Silberberg notes that placemaking “emphasizes flexibility, embraces impermanence, shares information, and draws on unorthodox sources for influence” bidem, p. . JBU #1&2/16 226 Figure The Place the uthor . iagram is a community tool mage courtesy of Project for Public Spaces, sourced by Figure Placemaking sketch by by the uthor . loyd angle mage courtesy of Project for Public Spaces, sourced JBU #1&2/16 227 rank ryan highlights the new paradigm “that is non hierarchical, community centred, and fundamentally and uniquely democratic in character” ryan, , p. ix , in other words, the new model will be open source. The practice of placemaking is spreading to such an extent that a forum called the uture of Places was held in Stockholm une , with the topic “Transforming ities through Placemaking and Public Spaces” and three strategic themes such as “ overnance of Place”, “Place apital”, and “ ealthy ommunities”. The forum was organized by the nite ations uman Settlements ro ramme U abitat , ro ect for ublic S aces, and A son ohnson oun ation. uture of Places is the name of the first of three forums that led to the abitat conference in to contribute to the definition of public space through a people centered approach for the “ ew Urban genda” of the st century. The conference aimed to promote a shift in the traditional planning and management of cities, hence to emphasize the necessity and positive reward for the livability of cities that comes from a human centered approach to urbanization. ence, the importance of public spaces for any successful regeneration strategy in urban development processes. “The social dimensions of public spaces are essential in terms of democracy, inclusiveness and openness” uture of Places, . To conclude, only by a socially just and democratic governance and a shared communitarian product will the city be a place of genuine democracy and happiness. The sociologist ichard Sennett stresses that the real strength of the city is the strength of reciprocity, and ichard urdett writes that reciprocity defeats alienation and anger rbani, , p. . s nrique Pe alosa points out “ ealization of one s potential is very close to the definition of happiness” Pe alosa, , p. , and happiness is a birthright and an aspiration of every human being. R F R C S lexander, . . he timeless ay of buil in . ew ork xford University Press. lexander, ., shikawa S., Silverstein, . . A attern lan ua e construction. ew ork xford University Press. o ns, buil in s, etter lock oundation. . ow to build a better block. etrieved from http betterblock.org how to build a better block ryan, . . , oreword. n S. lark . Teachout ds. , Slo emocracy e isco erin community, brin in ecision ma in bac home pp. vii xi . unction, T helsea reen Publishing. hite iver rbani, . , ecember . a citt futura. urdett acciamo come a ondra . a e ubblica. etrieved from http ricerca.repubblica.it repubblica archivio repubblica la citta futura burdett facciamo come londra.html uture of Places. . n onference on uture of laces hel une , in Stoc holm, S e en. etrieved from http futureofplaces.com future of places i ehl, . arvey, . . ities for eo le. ashington, . The right to the city. e sland Press. eft e ie , , . JBU #1&2/16 228 acobs, . . he eath an life of reat American cities. ew ork riginal work published efebvre, . ydon, . he ro uction of s ace. xford andom ouse. lackwell. ., artman, ., arcia, T., Preston, ., oudstra, . ds. . , arch . actical urbanism Short term action, lon term chan e. ew ork The Street Plans ollaborative. etrieved from https issuu.com streetplanscollaborative docs tactical urbanism vol final ynch, . . he ima e of the city ambridge, The T Press. ldenburg, . . he reat oo lace af s, coffee sho s, boo stores, bars, hair salons, an other han outs at the heart of a community. ew ork arlowe ompany. Pe alosa, . . Politics, power, cities. n . urdett . Sudjic ds. , he en less city urban a e ro ect by the on on School of conomics an eutsche Ban s Alfre errhausen Society pp. . ondon Phaidon. Place akers. he . etrieved from http www.placemakers.com Project for Public Spaces. a, anuary . he o er of A lyin scale. etrieved from http www.pps.org reference the power of lacema in at e ery Project for Public Spaces. b, ugust . le en rinci les for creatin laces. etrieved from http www.pps.org reference steps Project for Public Spaces. d, ecember . http www.pps.org reference grplacefeat reat community hat ma es a successful lace Project for Public Spaces. c, ecember . hat is lacema in http www.pps.org reference what is placemaking etrieved from etrieved from Project for Public Spaces. , arch . i hter, uic er, chea er A lo cost, hi h im act a roach. etrieved from http www.pps.org reference lighter quicker cheaper a low cost high impact approach Sennett, . . he uses of isor er ersonal i entity an city life. ew ork . . orton. Sennett, . . The open city. n . urdett . Sudjic ds. , he en less city he urban a e ro ect by the on on School of conomics an eutsche Ban s Alfre errhausen Society pp. . ondon Phaidon. Silberberg, S. . laces in the ma in o lacema in buil s laces an communities. ambridge, assachusetts nstitute of Technology. etrieved from https issuu.com mit dusp docs mit dusp places in the making hyte, . . . he social life of small urban s aces. oundation. ashington, onservation