STAGING URBAN

LANDSCAPES
THE ACTIVATION AND
CURATION OF FLEXIBLE
PUBLIC SPACES
THE PUBLICATION WAS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE KIND SUPPORT OF:

Sasaki Associates, Inc.

Argent LLP

Aspect Studios

LDA Design Consulting Limited

Mace Developments Limited — Shaping cities and

building sustainable communities

Marshalls plc

Savills (UK) Ltd

 B. CANNON IVERS
STAGING URBAN
LANDSCAPES
THE ACTIVATION AND
CURATION OF FLEXIBLE
PUBLIC SPACES

Birkhäuser
Basel
 CASE STUDIES

74 HARVARD PLAZA
Stoss Landscape Urbanism
Cambridge, MA, USA

86 GRANARY SQUARE
Townshend Landscape Architects
London, UK

94 WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE

CONTENTS
Denys Lasdun
London, UK

102 BRADFORD CITY PARK

Gillespies
Bradford, UK

108 POTTERS FIELDS PARK

GROSS.MAX.
London, UK
6 FOREWORD
Charles Waldheim 122 LAWN ON D
Sasaki Associates
8 PREFACE Boston, MA, USA
B. Cannon Ivers
134 A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE
Peter Elliott and Taylor Cullity Lethlean
10 THE RISE OF FLEXIBLE SPACE Melbourne, Australia
B. Cannon Ivers
138 JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A
20 THE CULTURE OF CHANGE: Kim Wilkie
A PERSONAL READING London, UK
B. Cannon Ivers
144 BATTERSEA POWER STATION
POP-UP PARK
38 THE URBAN SURFACE: SHIFTING FIELDS LDA Design
FOR CURATED EVENTS London, UK
Alex Wall
150 MOMA PS1
46 OPEN-ENDED: PUBLIC SPACES Various through the Young Architects Program (YAP)
AS COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS Brooklyn, NY, USA
Chris Reed
160 SERPENTINE PAVILION
54 FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE Various designers
Nicola Dempsey London, UK

58 GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS: 168 ROBSON REDUX

PLANNING, PROGRAMMING AND PLAY Various designers
Chris Wangro Vancouver, BC, Canada

180 RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART COMPETITION

66 SCRATCH THAT! Student competition
Sergio Lopez-Pineiro Cambridge, MA, USA
192 LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND 258 CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES
LA PROMENADE DES ARTISTES CIUDADANAS (CAAC)
Daoust Lestage Paredes Pino Arquitectos
Montreal, Canada Cordoba, Spain

198 TRAFALGAR SQUARE 262 SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK

Foster+ Partners AT HUMBOLDT FORUM
London, UK relais Landschaftsarchitekten
Berlin, Germany
204 SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE
GROSS.MAX.
London, UK 268 DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN SUBLIME:
THE UNCANNY AS A PROGRAMMATIC
208 NAVY YARD CENTRAL GREEN MOTIVATION IN NEW CITY PARKS
James Corner Field Operations F. Philip Barash and Gina Ford
Philadelphia, PA, USA
271 THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S CROSS,
214 THE GOODS LINE LONDON
ASPECT Studios Ken Trew
Sydney, Australia
275 KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS
218 SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ Kirsten Bauer
Vetschpartner
Zurich, Switzerland 278 OPEN AND INVITATIONAL: THE DESIGN
APPROACH OF JAMES CORNER FIELD
224 BENTHEMPLEIN WATER SQUARE OPERATIONS
De Urbanisten Richard Kennedy
Rotterdam, Netherlands
282 PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL CULTURE:
230 MORE LONDON PLACE DES FESTIVALS — QUARTIER DES
Townshend Landscape Architects SPECTACLES, MONTREAL
London, UK Daoust Lestage

234 BRYANT PARK

OLIN 285 INNOCENCE
New York, USA Adriaan Geuze and Annemarie Kuijt

240 SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT

Donald Insall Associates
London, UK
244 DU MUSÉE AVENUE
Various designers
Montreal, Canada
248 BERGES DE SEINE
Franklin Azzi Architects
Paris, France
254 SCHOUWBURGPLEIN (THEATRE SQUARE)
West 8
Rotterdam, Netherlands
288 AFTERWORD: DESIGN, CURATION
AND IDENTITY
James Corner
290 Visual index
296 Index
300 About the author
300 About the contributors
302 Acknowledgements
303 Illustration credits
FOREWORD
This publication and the phenomena it describes are timely
returns to topics of regularly recurring interest in the design
disciplines. The essays and insights, cases and conditions de-
scribed here offer a contemporary reading of the relations
between urban occasions and their containers. Ivers’s long-
standing commitment to the topic, the various forms of evi-
dence presented here and the impressive array of co-conspir-
ators that he assembles are testament enough to the
significance of the topic for discourse and practices in the ur-
ban arts today.
In certain respects, this research project is a welcome re-
joinder to the decades-long debates on the relationship of the
shape of the city to the experience of the urban. For a gener-
ation of architects/urbanists steeped in the failures of modern-
ist planning, such activity or event represented a significant
and fecund alternative to the stylistic baggage and cultural
regression of postmodern or neo-conservative urban projects.
Among these, many urbanists educated in Europe became
interested in the US city as a model of urban activity organised
across a thin horizontal vegetal plane. For these urbanists
(Reyner Banham, Kenneth Frampton, Rem Koolhaas, Bernard
Tschumi, Lars Lerup and Alex Wall), the density of activity or
event and the proximity of bodies in urban space came to
stand for urbanity itself, in lieu of the containers of that activ-
ity. This position allowed a generation (or more) of European
6 CHARLES WALDHEIM
CHARLES WALDHEIM
urbanists to propose propinquity and potential as more signif-
icant indicators of urbanity rather than the superficially stylised
neo-traditional forms associated with postmodern urban form.
In the discourse and practices of the urban arts in the
1980s and 90s on both sides of the Atlantic, programme or
event came to stand as primary referents of the urban project.
This tendency lent momentum to renewed interest in land-
scape as a medium of urban configuration and to infrastruc-
ture as an irrigator of urban potential. These tendencies were
also a more-or-less direct repudiation of the two other domin-
ant conceptions of urban programme or event in the post-
war era: programming of urban institutions on the one hand
and the sociology of human behaviour in urban spaces on the
other. Beginning with the mathematical modelling emerging
from World War II and manifesting through the post-war re-
construction of European cities, architectural programming
became a dominant paradigm for the development of urban
design in the 1950s. Through the optimisation of adjacencies
and efficiencies associated with flexibility, temporal change,
and computational modelling, architectural programming
came to define an approach to the design of the city from the
1940s through the 1960s. In contrast to that state-supported,
institutionally based and ideologically charged approach to
city-making, an alternative practice of urban sociology devel-
oped in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. This work was more often
based in urban planning or its adjacent fields in the social
sciences or policy and was associated with empirical observa-
tion of individual and collective human behaviour in urban
space. It would be hard to overstate the historical import of
the work of Jane Jacobs or William H. Whyte in this regard.
This approach to the design of urban spaces tended to
focus on the perceived failures of modernist planning to
­address the so-called ‘human scale’, as well as questions of
comfort, safety and security. These two paradigms of urban
space-making — programming and the sociology of urban be-
haviour — were both enormously productive in terms of discip­
linary formation as well as projective practices. Both had tre-
mendous success in reproducing themselves as discourses
and practices, with myriad built examples of each around the
world in the second half of the 20th century. Unfortunately,
these two divergent paradigms tended to reinforce disciplinary
and professional divisions between architecture and urban
design, reflecting design culture versus landscape architecture
and urban planning understood as empirical social or natural
sciences.
In response to this disjunction of realms, and the resulting
incoherence of the design disciplines’ response to the ques-
tion of the shape of the city, the discourse and practices of
landscape urbanism emerged in the past two decades. Taking
up the critical conceptual and curatorial approach to activity
and event used by the European urbanists of the 1980s cited
above, landscape urbanism proposed an unlikely alliance of
design culture and the curation of urban event. These tenden-
cies are evident in contemporary urban projects and practices
internationally, and might be summarised in three complex
and potentially contradictory conditions informing urban proj­
ects today. These impulses are evident across the essays and
case studies assembled here, and they collectively contribute
to the beginnings of a new discourse, and new practices of
contemporary urban curation.
First, much of the past quarter century of urban program-
ming, and many of the examples arrayed here, have to do with
the occupation of sites left vacant in the wake of economic
restructuring. Most recently this has to do with the ongoing
shift in the sites of industrial production and the vacancy of
formerly industrial sites associated with advanced capital. In
contemporary practice, these sites are often irrigated with
new potential through the installation of new urban infrastruc-
ture. These sites are transformed through programming and
event, in advance of their urban restructuring. Often these
event spaces are temporary, provisional occupation through
event and spectacle, as the first wave of a larger, more com-
prehensive architectural restructuring enabling the new econ-
omy through urban form. Projects such as Schouwburgplein
(Theatre Square in Rotterdam (p. 254 – 257) and Westergas-
fabriek in Amsterdam are indicative of these tendencies.
Second, contemporary practices of programmed urbanity
are often exploiting the abandonment or relative under-utili-
sation of transportation infrastructure. These are sites that
were the result of functionally optimised single-function civil
engineering projects for mobility that came to be under-utilised
relative to the economic and cultural potential of the urban
sites they occupied. Projects such as Paris Plage or the High
Line in New York along with dozens of other contemporary
comparables are illustrative of this tendency. A corollary con-
temporary trend can be found in the reoccupation of space
underneath still functioning elevated transportation infrastruc-
ture. This trend is evident in projects such as the Underline in
Miami and the Bentway in Toronto.
Third, the tendency toward the programming of urban
space in contemporary practice also reveals the increasing
hegemony of neo-liberal economic models imposed on the
shape of the city. This tendency is associated with every avail-
able urban space being programmed or filled with event.
These projects such as the redevelopment of the Southbank
in London or the recent plan for Governors Island in New York
harbour tend toward an implicit understanding of urban space
as essentially transactional. This characterisation of urban life
as formed through a series of economic relations in exchange
for occupation has been enabled through a host of practices
associated with privately owned public space, restrictions on
behaviour and speech in the public realm, and the increasing
surveillance state of the contemporary urban realm. They have
also been underpinned by another equally significant transfor-
mation in which private philanthropic models of stewardship
and maintenance (conservancies, friends’ groups, merchants’
associations) replace the historic role of the public sector and
policy in managing the urban realm. Taken together, these
tendencies indicate a coherent, if potentially contradictory, not
to say problematic future for curating citizenship in the neo-­
liberal urban landscape. This suggests that our contemporary
tendencies might continue in the near future. If so, we might
expect contemporary design culture’s menu of oft-repeated
urban tropes such as the generic culture ‘shed’, the urban
viewing ‘platform’ the programmed urban ‘surface’ and linear
park-like ‘lines’, to continue to shape the contemporary public
realm in cities around the world.
FOREWORD 7
PREFACE
Since 2007, more people reside in cities than in rural areas,
requiring urban open spaces to work hard to accommodate a
multitude of uses and cultural demands. The increased pres-
sure on public spaces and a population that is increasing ex-
ponentially demand that our squares, streets and parks are
renewed and refreshed as a cultural overlay to the urban in-
frastructure; programmed and changed as an ephemeral
stage of human encounter and provocation. The dynamism of
urban spaces in cities like London, New York, Barcelona, Paris,
Chicago, Montreal, Boston and Copenhagen demonstrates a
richness of programmability, which becomes the lynchpin of
public life and a catalyst for community cohesion. Subsequent-
ly, new energy is consistently breathed into these spaces to
stave off the quiet social decay of static monotony or, put
simply, space without change.
This also encompasses meanwhile uses, where derelict
buildings and under-utilised spaces are charged with the en-
ergy of community gatherings and visionary art installations
that rely on the interaction of the users. Although these spaces
act as placeholders for more permanent urban interventions,
for a period of months or years such spaces can serve as
places of gathering and platforms for social exchange, perfor-
mance and communal interaction. It is no longer enough to
create a space that looks beautiful yet remains static. More
often than not, it is the overlay and activation that transforms
8 B. CANNON IVERS
B. CANNON IVERS
a space, impacts adjacent communities and establishes a well-
used and appreciated patch of public realm. The space is en-
livened, an energetic atmosphere is created, which in turn
attracts more people and the pattern continues.
The sense of ‘renew and refresh’ that programmed spaces
provide can come from borrowed infrastructure, such as the
opening and closing of Tower Bridge in London, incidental
public exchanges such as the Book Fair under Waterloo Bridge
in London or through commerce, such as selling plants in low-
er Manhattan, that dramatically changes the character of the
street once business begins. Water has become indispensable,
facilitating a calendar of events, while also activating a space
on a day-to-day basis. The simple idea that a shallow film of
water can be drained away to provide a performance space
or accommodate a community event is enabling cities around
the world to establish an active and programmable stage. It
is a sign of the times. Other instances of the power of pro-
gramme are seen in the more deliberate activation of space
through theatre, dance, performance and the transformation
of a space by changing its use — importing sand, adding turf
or interactive public art. The simple alteration to the character
of a space can have a profound impact on the way people
behave in it, as seen in London’s Trafalgar Square in 2007
when the square was covered in turf and people began to
behave as if this central civic square was a park.
The flexibility of space, how the design can accommodate a
myriad of events, cultural celebrations and incidental artistic
expression, is now featuring on the agenda of more and more
client briefs in the public and private sector. Designers are
framing proposals and competition entries around an annual
calendar of events and a vision of how a proposed design can
accommodate change through overlays. Infrastructures to ac-
commodate these overlays are also being integrated into con-
structed projects, signalling the ambition to make these tem-
porary events a regular and calculated aspect of the life of the
space. This is exemplified in Rotterdam’s Binnenrotte Square
by West 8, which provided market stall anchor points and
collapsible/folding traffic kerbs.
This new-found focus on spatial performance rather than
static aesthetics can generate revenue through performance
and installation, which can be utilised to maintain the space,
while acting as a mechanism for place-making through acti-
vation and the stirring of that great human condition: curios-
ity. This approach to public space design is a relatively new
prerogative that public space designers must incorporate into
the design process in an imaginative and compelling way. The
challenge is not to fall victim to the banality of ‘less is more’
in the public canvas of our cities, favouring the capacity to hold
large events while neglecting the everyday use of the space.
This is a condition that plagues large civic and market squares
such as Boston’s City Hall Plaza and Binnenrotte Square in
Rotterdam, both of which have been the subject of recent
design efforts to address the issue. These spaces look empty
and devoid of activity, lacking a sense of purpose, attraction
or the provision of comfort on any given day. Perhaps then,
the most important aspect of the public spaces of our time is
not the fixity of designed configuration, but rather the capac-
ity of the space to be flexible and programmable in order to
accommodate an increasingly diverse citizenship as the cata-
lyst for spatial activation. This is a delicate balance to achieve
and requires careful consideration and masterful execution
through collaboration between clients, designers, event spe-
cialists and the creative team that will curate and manage the
space once it is on the ground. The most successful case stud-
ies involve all of these disciplines imbricated in a bipartisan,
non-territorial way.
Staging Urban Landscapes explores the mechanics of the
programmed space to understand how the space is managed,
how many events take place annually and what the variety of
overlaid objects is in some of the most successfully activated
spaces. The intent of the case studies is to establish what
makes a flexible space successful without being an insipid,
uninspiring space, devoid of atmosphere when absent of pro-
grammed activity. These are the questions the research ex-
plores, drawing on successful case studies in London, Boston,
Cambridge, Montreal, Vancouver, Zurich, Berlin, Melbourne,
Sydney, Rotterdam, Paris, Córdoba, Philadelphia and New
York. The culmination of this research features insight from
clients, design teams and management teams responsible for
the design, implementation and management of these case
studies in order to understand how the activation of these
spaces began with the client brief and continued through the
design process. Each case study uses drawings and diagrams
to explore the design of a space, its component parts, spatial
configuration, scale and inbuilt ‘plug and play’ infrastructure
that enables a space to accommodate a multitude of uses. The
intent of the drawings and diagrams is to explore the relation-
ship between permanence and temporality to ascertain how
the space operates on a daily basis and accommodates large
gatherings and events.
This aspect of spatial design is quickly becoming the cata-
lyst for spatial design within design professions, evolving from
the ‘landscape as art’ movement of the late 1980s and early
1990s pioneered by Peter Walker, Martha Schwartz and, to
some degree, George Hargreaves. This is not to say that these
visionary designers were not considering flexibility and various
user groups in the creation of space, but I argue that use was
subservient to aesthetics and the artistic arrangement of the
designs during this period. Hargreaves’ signature sculpted
landform work is largely inclusive of programme as seen at
Discovery Green in Houston and stated by Anita Berrizbeitia:
‘Hargreaves composes with program, rather than merely mak-
ing room for it in a plan.’ Based on the research for this book,
I postulate that the mid 1990s saw a shift in the consideration
of flexibility and programme in design. Work by West 8 at
Schouwburgplein (see p. 254 – 257) in Rotterdam and discur-
sive essays in James Corner’s Recovering Landscape, particu-
larly the text by Alex Wall, signalled a move away from fixity
towards flexibility. Stan Allen was also exploring indetermina-
cy in Points + Lines. Approaches in contemporary design to
accommodate flexibility continue to evolve and designers of
the age are required to be autodidactic when it comes to ac-
quiring the skills and knowledge to craft programmable s­ paces
that are innovative and have longevity in the face of a rapidly
changing world.
Staging Urban Landscapes is a practical, research- and
precedent-driven design tool to serve design teams in their
pursuit of mastering the execution of staging public spaces.
Additionally, it is my hope that the content of the book will
help those writing design and competition briefs, as well
as the talented teams that are enlivening spaces behind
the scenes through curated events, community engage-
ment and artistic overlays.
PREFACE 9
THE RISE
OF FLEXIBLE
SPACE
Since early civilisation, urban spaces have been designed both
as a utilitarian space of function and routine and as places of
leisure and spectacle as described by R. E. Wycherley’s study
of the Agora.1 Historically, the necessities of life — food and
commodities, exchange of goods and commerce and chance
encounter — were the agents in the activation of civic squares
and public open spaces as illustrated in the diagram by Jan
Gehl on p. 82.2 However, the invention and proliferation of the
car in the middle of the 20th century and the subsequent
car-centric planning and decision-making rendered the day-
to-day activation of public spaces less of an existential urban
phenomenon.3
This shift in city-making, in many ways signalled the decline
of vibrant city spaces. In response to this, the period from
1960 to 1980 saw the emergence of the Public Life Studies
school of thinking, spearheaded by Jane Jacobs, Jan Gehl and
William H. Whyte and later by Fred Kent of Projects for Public
Spaces.4 Concurrently, Kevin Lynch was immersed in the ‘study
of perceptions of the urban environment and urban form’ from
an experiential, anthropocentric point of view. His approach
to understanding cities at the human scale continues to influ-
ence the design of urban spaces today.5
During this period, the celebrated landscape architect Law-
rence Halprin, inspired by the dance choreography of his wife
Anna Halprin, developed ‘ecoscores’ and ‘motation’ as methods
10 B. CANNON IVERS
B. CANNON IVERS
for documenting and designing for movement and animation
in public space. Ecoscores register the flow of natural process-
es, such as the flow of a river as it coursed through a land-
scape, where ‘motation’ — movement notations — drew inspi-
ration from traditional music scores as a way of representing
movement through time and space diagrammatically. Halprin
devised ‘motation’ as an alternative form of spatial representa-
tion because he felt that the traditional plans, elevations and
sections were too static.
In stark contrast to the ‘top-down’ planning construct of
the time, Public Life Studies promoted a ‘bottom-up’ type of
spatial analysis. This approach resulted in a process of city-
making and an understanding of public space activation that
was based largely on first-hand observation of public behaviour
and sociology at the human scale. The approach established
a new set of ground rules for regaining a pedestrian-focused
scaffold to urban planning and place-making.6 Subsequently,
through observation and documentation, valuable insight
into human behaviour and patterns of occupation in public
spaces began to influence the coding and design of public
spaces.7
William H. Whyte’s seminal study The Social Life of Small
Urban Spaces defined a new method of notation that emulat-
ed musical scores or choreographed dance sequences as a
method of registering time and spatial relationships (see p. 11).
The Agora served as the centre of social
and political life in Ancient Greece. Public
spaces were activated in response to the
necessities of daily life.
Painting by Giuseppe Zocchi, showing
designed flexibility of Piazza Del Campo.
The Palio at Piazza del Campo in Siena is a
famous event that takes place annually,
transforming the space into a spectator
arena.
The Social LIfe of Small Urban Spaces,
originally published in 1980 by the Con-
servation Foundation.
In response to a new building code in Manhattan that required
developers to provide public space, new spaces were created
that were devoid of people or any vestige of activity.
This rise of ‘dead spaces’ prompted Whyte to study Sea-
gram’s Plaza, in order to extract the aspects of spatial design
that made certain spaces attract people and what, therefore,
could be introduced to enliven other spaces throughout the
city. More importantly, Whyte elucidated the power of activa-
tion in public spaces through mechanisms such as travelling
food offerings, flexible moveable seating, street performances,
incidental encounter and set events. It was this revelatory mo-
ment, rooted in commonsense observation, that repositioned
the mechanics and operational aspects of a space as impor-
tant factors in the design development and planning of the
urban landscape.8
The influence of Whyte’s work and the subsequent activa-
tion of public space was evidenced by the emergence of a
multitude of outdoor spaces, in New York particularly, that
embraced the mechanisms mentioned above. In the early
THE RISE OF FLEXIBLE SPACE 11
Halprin invented ‘motation’ based on movement and notation. The diagram score illus-
trates movement in time and space and uses musical notation as a framework. Motation
allowed Halprin to design and interpret space with an emphasis on the importance of
human movements and interactions within urban spaces.
Notation diagram by William H. Whyte from The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces and
Whyte’s study of Seagram Plaza in New York.
‘Experiment in the Environment’, 1962. Anna Halprin; the wife of Lawrence Halprin,
experimented with the methods and experience of moving through space and the
­capacity of this approach to generate environments was fundamental to the precise and
profound ­interest in choreography and movement found later in Lawrence Halprin’s
landscape designs.

1980s, when Whyte’s work was published, landscape archi-

tects were largely focused on the aesthetic arrangement of
space, with a slant towards pop-art and ‘land-sculpting’ as a
medium of expression in the landscape. The profession was
preoccupied with how the space looked rather than what it
did or how it could be used. This epoch in landscape architec-
ture, led by Peter Walker, Martha Schwartz, Warren Byrd,
­Alexander Chemetoff and George Hargreaves,9 favoured the
appearance and aesthetics of walking through and occupying
a space, but did not particularly prioritise the activation of the
space as a driver for design.

12  B. CANNON IVERS

The radical idea to give over half of the
site at the Centre Pompidou to an open-
ended flexible space inspired a new
direction for the design of public spaces.
It challenged designers to balance
the permanence of public space with
the ephemerality of public life.
However, during this period two notable architecture compe-
titions put programme and activation at the centre of the de-
sign response — the Centre Pompidou and Parc de la Villette in
Paris. The competition for the Centre Pompidou was won by
Richard Rogers and Renzo Piano in 1977. Their proposal was
groundbreaking because it set aside half of the total space
designated for the building, with the other half ‘following a
radical design strategy, devoted to the creation of a public
space — the piazza or ‘parvis’.’10 The ‘parvis’ is now a prime
space in Paris, ‘[e]njoyed by Parisians, tourists, picnickers,
buskers and those who simply enjoy watching the world go
by in one of the most popular public spaces in a city already
famous for its gardens, parks and street culture’.11
Similarly, Parc de la Villette foregrounded programme and
activity as driving forces for the design proposal. Bernard
Tschumi designed the park after emerging as the victor of a
design competition in 1982. Tschumi ‘envisioned Parc de la
Villette as a place of culture where natural and artificial [man-
made] are forced together into a state of constant reconfigu-
ration and discovery’.12
Although Rem Koolhaas and his practice OMA did not win
the Parc de la Villette competition, their narrative and approach
to illustrating programme is still often referenced as a key
moment in the emergence of activation and programmability
as threads of design and visual representation. OMA’s pro-
posal suggested a ‘method that — combining programmatic
THE RISE OF
FLEXIBLE SPACE 13
 Before public life studies became an academic field
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940

PRIMARY PUBLICATIONS

Camillo Sitte Ebenezer Howard Le Corbusier CIAM

Der Städtebau Garden Cities of To-Morrow Vers une architecture La charte d'Athènes
nach seinen (1902) (1923) (1933)
künstlerischen
Grundsätzen
(1889)

Jan Gehl’s diagram illustrates how the invention and

proliferation of the car diminished the incidental
activation of public life that occurs through the daily
routines of ordinary life.

14 B. CANNON IVERS
 Public life studies as a Public life studies become
The first public life studies strategic tool mainstream
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Jane Jacobs Aldo Rossi Robert Venturi, Steven Izenour Rem Koolhaas Richard Florida Ricky Burdett
Death and Life of L'architettura and Denise Scott Brown and Bruce Mau The Rise of the and Deyan Sudjic
Great American della città Learning from Las Vegas (1972) S,M,L,XL Creative Class The Endless City
Cities (1961) (1966) (1995) (2002) (2008)

INSPIRATION 1 1961

William H. Kevin Lynch Gordon Cullen Edward T. Hall Oscar Newman red. Michael Sorkin Barcelona red. Goldsmith,
Whyte The Image The Concise The Silent Defensible Space Variations on a Den genero- Elizabeth and
The Exploding of the City Townscape Language (1972) Theme Park brede by Goldbard.
Metropolis (1960) (1961) (1959) (1992) (exhibition 1999) What We See.
(1958) Advancing the
Observations of
Jane Jacobs
(2010)

Erving Goffman Edward T. Hall Robert Sommer

Behavior in Pub- The Hidden Personal Space
lic Places (1963) Dimension (1969)
(1966)

PUBLIC LIFE STUDIES

Jane Jacobs Jan Gehl William H. Whyte Clare C. Marcus Peter Bosselmann Urbanism
The Death and Life Life between The Social Life and Carolyn Representation on Track
of Great American buildings of Small Urban Francis of Places (2008)
Cities (1961) (1971) Spaces People Places (1998)
(1980) (1990)

Christopher Alexander, Donald Allan Jacobs Allan Jacobs PPS Jan Gehl
Sara Ishikawa and Appleyard Looking at Great Streets How to Cities for
Murray Silverstein Livable Cities (1995) Turn a Place People
A Pattern Language Streets (1985) Around (2010)
(1977) (1980) (2000)

THE RISE OF
FLEXIBLE SPACE 15
 ­instability with architectural specificity — will eventually gener-
ate a park’.13
Koolhaas continues: ‘La Villette could be more radical by
suppressing the three-dimensional aspect almost completely
and proposing pure program instead, unfettered by any con-
tainment.’14 The 49 hectares of land were previously occupied
by a 19th-century slaughterhouse, which created many logis-
tical hurdles, issues of site reclamation and questions about
how to modernise the services on the site. Site issues were
exacerbated by a lengthy list of programmatic requirements
from the client, with no clear indication of how and when the
­various elements of the programme would emerge. OMA,
therefore, approached the problem not as a design exercise
in style or expression but rather as an organisational strategy.
As stated by Alex Wall in his essay ‘Programming the Urban
Surface’:
The surface had to be equipped and staged in such a way
as to both anticipate and accommodate any number of
changing demands and programs. OMA responded with
the superposition of four strategic layers for organising dif-
ferent parts of the program: the ‘east-west strips’ of vary-
Initial hypothesis (scale: 1/20,000). The strips. Point grids, or confetti.
16  B. CANNON IVERS
ing synthetic and natural surfaces, the ‘confetti grid’ of
large and small service points and kiosks, the various ‘cir-
culation paths’ and the ‘large objects’, such as the linear
and round forest.15
OMA described their project as a ‘landscape of social in-
struments’. Wall continues:
The action of sliding one thing over another allowed for
quantitative changes without the loss of organizational struc-
tures. This framework of flexible congestion, whose char-
acter and efficacy lies in its capacity to adapt to change, set
a significant precedent in later formulations of urbanism.16
Following the la Villette competition, OMA continued to explore
programmability as a device for design. For the Yokohama Port
competition, OMA proposed a ‘continuous and formless pro-
ject which engulfs the site like a kind of programmatic lava.’
Their proposal introduced a spectrum of events to complement
the operational hours of the existing market facilities to create
a ’24-hour peak, composed of a mosaic of heterogeneous
21st century life’. 17
Yokohama Masterplan, OMA, 1991.
OMA described the Parc de la Villette proposal as ‘Nature—whether the thematic/
discovery gardens, or “real” nature—will also be treated as program. Blocks or
screens of trees and the various gardens will act like different planes of a stage set:
they will convey the illusion of different landscapes, of depth, without offering, in
passing, the substance.’ (Text by OMA)
Access and circulation. The final layer.
In 1996 the Dutch landscape firm West 8 completed Schouw-
burgplein (see p. 254 –257) in the heart of Rotterdam. The pro-
ject, described as a ‘city stage’, showed a deliberate determi-
nation to provide an open area for activation through a calendar
of events and programmatic activity. Adriaan Geuze, the found-
er of West 8, was exploring the notion of the void in the city
in his publication Colonizing the Void, which was published in
1996. In 2000, Geuze wrote a text for the book Artificial Land-
scape titled ‘Accelerating Darwin’. Paradoxically, considering
that title, ‘Accelerating Darwin’ evolved from a similar text titled
‘Moving Beyond Darwin’ that Geuze had written for the book
Modern Park Design in 1993. In this text he proclaims that
[c]ontemporary life [in cities] is a continuous escape, it is a
series of illusions, possibilities and experiences, and we are
living in a kind of multicultural rainforest. The contempo-
rary city, the new city we are living in, creates its own es-
cape. In this age there is no need to make a new environ-
ment that is adapted to man, because man can assimilate
into environment. We as landscape architects should
provide them with the tools for their behaviour. We are
going to give them the equipment to make a beautiful life
and I even think there is a need to provoke people, that
mankind can work creatively better than he has done. We
need to create surrealistic environments, we should pro-
vide anarchic environment and even subversive cities and
green areas.18
Geuze then describes Schouwburgplein as
quite empty and there is little to do there. Most of the time
there are even no people. But it can also be nice when it is
empty. Sometimes there are many things to do and there
are thousands of people. This change in the way it is used
is the character of the square.19
Marking what was to become a seminal, pivotal point within
the profession, Geuze states that ‘it was not important to com-
plete it [the square] from the very first moment. The idea was
that the square could evolve as it went along, because it could
be developed by many different artists.’20 This, I believe,
sparked a new focus on the role of landscape architects to
provide spaces of change, activated through public participa-
tion on an unfinished stage.
Additionally, this scheme demonstrated the potential for
animated objects in the landscape by introducing 35-metre-
tall cranes — originally coin-operated by users of the space but
now on a timer — to slowly, mechanically reconfigure. The lan-
guid repositioning of the cranes, stirred into action through
user participation, provides movement and change when the
space is not activated by an event. The fountains also provide
a choreography of varying heights in response to the outside
temperature, reaching the maximum height when the temper-
ature reaches 30 °C. According to Geuze: ‘Just like the squirrels,
the water is playing with and provoking the users of the
square.’ The open ‘stage’ area is flanked by long linear bench-
es positioned for maximum sun exposure and to provide seat-
ing for people-watching and a degree of anonymity. The stage
hosts civic events, artistic exhibitions and community gather-
ings and provides a cultural hub for Rotterdam.
Writing in The Artificial Landscape, Geuze more specifically
addresses the zeitgeist of the contemporary city dweller or
‘nomad’. He identifies the effects of what I refer to as the age
of instant gratification and short attention spans. He notes that
in light of technological advances,
[P]eople discover their freedom and choose their sub-cul-
tures, appropriate their own environment. Mass culture
and the media generate a collective voyage of discovery.
Instead of a tiny elite, the entire urban population takes
part. City dwellers are constantly changing their surround-
ings, as commuters, recreationists, holiday-makers. Speed
and time have replaced the traditional idea of space. Move-
ment connects the fragments in space in constantly chang-
ing configurations. City dwellers yearn for meaningful ex-
periments that go beyond the development of new park
fashions, for experiments that lead to a new genre of pub-
lic space. Interventions in public space, or rather, in the
public landscape, should no longer be focused on gener-
ating greenery. The real challenge is to create space and
structures for city dwellers to colonize in their turn. The
economy and the efficient functioning of the city are based
on an optimal layout of functions and a first-rate infrastruc-
ture. The euphoria of mass culture is the product of the
accessibility and interchangeability of the different cultures,
which is what gives urban life the proverbial combinatorial
freedom of the video clip. This freedom is paradoxical,
however. The price that is paid for it is the fully programmed
public space. Contemporary public space reflects the or-
ganization and the bureaucracy of the city. Its efficiency,
which is attuned to the collective, has a debilitating effect
on the individual. The pre-programmed space is one-dimen-
sional. Human beings are demoted to the status of road
users, recreationists, or shoppers. This pusillanimous one-
dimensionality ignores the intelligence of the inquiring ur-
banite. This demands a reaction, an ultimate manifesto; the
call for an uprising of street furniture, for anarchistic street
signage and for surrealistic and subversive public spaces. Not
in order to shock, but to elicit creativity. The new public spac-
es must expose preconceived behavior and discretion, must
provide and disorient the users. New public space will ma-
nipulate users in such a way that they become aware of their
behaviour there and then and are no longer able to relapse
into mechanical, pre-programmed behaviour. This space
transforms anonymity into exhibitionism, spectators into ac-
tors. What matters is not the design, or the beauty of the
dimensions, materials, and colors, but the sensation of a
detached culture, that which the inne-city dweller creates.21
This set the tone for the design of Schouwburgplein and
inspired a sense of ‘agoraphobia’.
THE RISE OF
FLEXIBLE SPACE 17
 The square’s decor and furnishings, which ultimately de-
termine the mood, are not fixed but arise from specific
scenarios: the position of the hydraulic lighting masts can
be manipulated by children to perform a mechanical ballet.
The pressure of the fountains is linked to the outdoor tem-
perature; there is a mobile green decor of season potted
plants courtesy of forklift truck; … there is a plug-in system
for specific events. The space and the experience of the
space are a conscious step, a choice. The square should be
more than a podium and lend itself to flexible use; the
square provokes the city dweller and demands an active
attitude. It gives the city dwellers back their fantasy and
identity.22
In 1996 Stan Allen’s entry for a ‘Logistical Activities Zone’ in
Barcelona pushed the concept of programme and deployed
the use of scores, diagrams and maps to communicate the
project temporarily beyond the static traditional representa-
tion of plans, sections and models. According to Allen, ‘[t]he
role of the notational schemas collected here is not to set
limits but to imagine multiple program scenarios and to chart
their interaction. These notations do not so much map an
exact correspondence between architecture and activity as
articulate a degree of play between form and event, a loose
fit of organisation and programme.‘23 In essence, the ambition
of the project was to establish a framework or ‘field condition’
that had enough architectural specificity to lend some struc-
ture to the project, but was programmatically indeterminate
so as to allow the future of the site to develop and evolve or-
ganically beyond the confines of the masterplan. Allen created
a ‘user manual’ with a series of guiding principles. Point six is
particularly germane to the line of enquiry here. Under the
heading of ‘Anticipation: changing life of the site in time’, he
lists: event scaffold, passive programmes, active, and pro-
Lighting mast and ventilation
towers
Floor
Understructure
Roof of
Parkinggarage
Garage 1
Garage 2
18 B. CANNON IVERS
gramme scores. Each of these descriptive categories could be
used to describe the practice of programmatic activation that
is being deployed in contemporary spatial design within an
urban context.24
Comparing this approach to that of West 8’s Schouwburg-
plein, a clear new paradigm of spatial design was emerging
that privileged overlay, indeterminacy and future expansion
over spatial fixity. Both projects aimed to provide a clear and
legible structure that would provide design specificity but
would not limit or dictate the way in which the site could be
activated with programme, events and unknown functions.
Stan Allen puts it this way:
Infrastructures are flexible and anticipatory. They work with
time and are open to change. By specifying what must be
fixed and what is subject to change, they can be precise
and indeterminate at the same time. They work through
management and cultivation, changing slowly to adjust to
shifting conditions. They do not progress towards a prede-
termined state (as with masterplanning strategies), but are
always evolving within a loose envelope of constraints.25
In 1999 Alex Wall, writing in Recovering Landscapes, speaks
to the emerging zeitgeist of spatial programmability. He notes:
‘Here, the term landscape no longer refers to prospects of
pastoral innocence but rather invokes the functioning matrix
of connective tissue that organizes not only objects and
spaces but also the dynamic processes and events that move
through them.’ Here is a call to arms for designers to revisit
their approaches to urban place-making, to concern them-
selves once again
with the provision of flexible, multifunctional surfaces as a
means to revitalize the profession. The grafting of new
 instruments and equipment onto strategically staged sur-
faces allows for a transformation of the ground plane into
a living, connective tissue between increasingly disparate
fragments and unforeseen programs.26
While the discipline of landscape architecture was pivoting
away from aesthetic fixity as the primary driver for design and
moving towards the emergence of spatial programmability,
Fred Kent and Project for Public Spaces (PPS) was continuing
to develop a method for bottom-up, community-generated
place-making. The work of PPS continues to transform often
forgotten and nondescript spaces. There are instances where
PPS works alongside the landscape architect to activate the
spaces designed and arranged by the landscape architect. This
can result in an interesting tension between the landscape
architect as spatial designer and PPS as the spatial program-
mer, raising questions about what is the appropriate amount
of additional overlay furniture and activation devices. The Har-
vard Plaza (see p. 74 – 85) is one such case study that included
a team of landscape architects from Stoss and a team from
PPS. Some argue the space is over-programmed, others revel
in the variety and quantity of additional overlays. PPS’s ‘light-
er, cheaper, quicker’ approach to community-led place-mak-
ing has a following around the world. The ’Tactical Urbanism‘
approach, led by Mike Lydon, is also making a meaningful
contribution to the transformation of spaces at a local com-
munity level. What this work tells us is that a creative spark
can pick up momentum and become a fundamentally impor-
tant space for building community cohesion, kindling conver-
sation and bringing people together around shared common-
alities. 24 Ibid., p. 88
1 R. E. Wycherley, How the Greeks Built Cities, Norton: New York, NY 1976
(2nd ed.).
2 Jan Gehl, Cities for People, Island Press: Washington, DC 2010.
3 Jan Gehl and Birgitte Svarre (eds.), How to Study Public Life, Island Press/
Center for Resource Economics: Washington, DC 2013.
4 Ibid.
5 Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA 1960.
6 William Hollingsworth Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, Mu-
nicipal Art Society of New York, Life Project Street and Cinema Ltd Direct:
Santa Monica, CA 2005.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Marc Treib, Modern Landscape Architecture: A critical review, MIT Press:
Cambridge, MA 1993
10 http://www.rpbw.com/project/3/centre-georges-pompidou. Accessed in
2016.
11 http://www.rsh-p.com/work/buildings/centre_pompidou/completed/. Ac-
cessed in 2016.
12 Andrew Kroll, ‘AD Classics: Parc de la Villette / Bernard Tschumi’, ArchDaily,
9 January 2011. Accessed 12 December 2014.
13 Rem Koolhaas and Bruce Mau, Small, medium, large, extra-large: Office for
Metropolitan Architecture, Monacelli Press: New York 1998 (2nd ed.).
14 http://www.oma.eu/projects/1982/parc-de-la-villette/. Accessed in 2016.
15 James Corner, Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape
Architecture, Princeton Architectural Press: New York 1999, p. 237.
16 Ibid., p. 238.
17 http://www.oma.eu/projects/1992/yokohama-masterplan. Accessed in
2016.
18 Adriaan Geuze, ‘Moving Beyond Darwin’, in Martin Knuijt, Hans Ophuis and
Peter van Saane (eds.), Modern Park Design, Thoth Uitgeverij: Amsterdam
1993, p. 255–56.
19 Ibid.
20 Adriaan Geuze, ‘Accelerating Darwin’, in: Hans Ibelings (ed.), The Artificial
Landscape: Contemporary Architecture, Urbanism and Landscape Archi-
tecture in the Netherlands, NAi Publishers: Rotterdam 2000, p. 256.
21 Ibid., p. 256
22 Ibid., p. 256.
23 Stan Allen, Points + Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City, Princeton
Architectural Press: New York 1999, p. 73.
25 Ibid.
26 Ibid., p. 233.
Conceptual design for Schouwburgplein
by West 8.
Cover of The Artifical Landscape by Hans
Ibelings, published in 2000 by the Neth-
erlands Architecture Institute.
Stan Allen, in Points + Lines: Diagrams and
Projects for the City, published in  1999.
Cover of Recovering Landscapes, pub-
lished in  1999 by Princeton Architectural
Press.
THE RISE OF
FLEXIBLE SPACE 19
THE CULTURE
OF CHANGE:
A PERSONAL
READING
The genesis of this book can be traced back to 2003 when I
moved to London from a small rural town in Colorado with a
population of 1652. My closest neighbour was a mile away
and our house backed on to National Forest. I had no appre-
ciation of the value of public space or even what function
public space fulfilled. I studied landscape architecture in the
late 1990s and early 2000s at Colorado State University at a
time when Peter Walker, Martha Schwartz, George Hargreaves,
Kathryn Gustafson and others of that generation were the
paragons of the profession. Looking back at this period of
enquiry, it certainly felt that our education was driven by aes-
thetics and form — what a space looked like rather than its
usability. People were included in collages largely for a sense
of scale and maybe to show how a bench might be used. The
precedent projects we were scanning from leading publica-
tions often used photographs without people, reinforcing the
point that the profession at the time was preoccupied with
composition, arrangement and the artful aesthetics of space.
Bagel gardens, gold toads, intersecting geometries, mirrored
domes and sculpted landforms adorned the covers of many
landscape publications.
I arrived in London not knowing anyone, which prompted
me to explore the city. I was commuting to work by bike, no-
ticing that a number of simply designed spaces were changed
regularly through events, performances and installations and
20 B. CANNON IVERS
B. CANNON IVERS
I began to document these spaces. With each return visit,
I would endeavour to stand in the same place and frame the
scene as I had previously done. Over time, as the photographs
multiplied, a powerful matrix of images began to crystallise for
me both the importance and the value of public space. Equal-
ly, I realised the necessity for designers to create spaces to
accommodate these overlay events and think about time in
the design process and the democratic life of the space. It is
also worth noting that I arrived in London as the creative
engine of the city was whirring into life in preparation for
hosting the 2012 Olympic Games. Since my arrival in 2003 most
of the contemporary public spaces have been completed, like-
ly influenced by the lead-up to the Olympic Games, and have
performed an important role of hosting events, performances,
installations and other methods for activating spaces, suggest-
ing that London was enjoying a public space renaissance.
 These are some of the capital’s exemplar spaces complet-
ed since 2003:
– More London, Townshend Landscape Architects 2003 (see
p. 230 –233);
– Trafalgar Square Pedestrianisation, Foster + Partners 2003
(see p. 198 –203);
– Duke of York Square, Elizabeth Banks/Robert Myers 2003;
– Princess Diana Memorial Fountain, Gustafson Porter 2004;
– Victoria and Albert Courtyard, Kim Wilkie 2005 (see
p. 138 –143);
– Southbank Centre Square 2007 (see p. 204 –207) and
Riverside Square 2005, GROSS.MAX.;
– Potters Fields Park, GROSS.MAX. 2007 (see p. 108 –121);
– Windrush Square, Brixton, GROSS.MAX. 2010;
– Exhibition Road, Dixon Jones Architects 2011;
– Jubilee Gardens, West 8 2012;
– Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, LDA Design. Hargreaves
2012 and Southpark Hub, James Corner Field Operations
2014;
– Granary Square (King’s Cross), Townshend Landscape
Architects 2012 (see p. 86 – 93);
– Leicester Square, Burns and Nice 2012;
– Lewis Cubitt Square (King’s Cross), Olin Partnership 2015;
– One St Pancras, Townshend Landscape Architects 2016.
Somerset House (see p. 240 –243) and the Royal Academy are
two projects that were completed in the early 2000s. I refer-
ence them here because they were two of the first projects in
Crabtree Fields in London is a small public open space off Mortimer Street in central London. This quiet pocket park offers respite from the energy of the city.
These images illustrate the popularity of this space during lunch hours. Like many urban open spaces, it is not the scale of green space but proximity that is most important.
London that used water to enliven the space on a day-to-day
basis, and which could be turned off to host events and re-
ceive installations. In many ways, these spaces were harbin-
gers of the role of public space in contemporary London and
how water could facilitate this new wave of flexible use and
began the movement of bringing the inside out.
Witnessing firsthand how these spaces are being received
by a city that is enjoying a rebirth of quality public space, and
the experimentation taking place within them, is the engine
behind this book. Through the process of capturing these
spaces of change, I began to dial into some of the larger f­ orces
at play in and around the spaces. I will explore these further
using London as the main reference point although they are
universally applicable around the world. Primarily, it is access
to open space that is of critical importance. In London, and in
other global cities, the proximity of open space is often more
important than scale. What appears to be a relatively unre-
markable space, inconsequential in scale, is in fact hugely
valued communal space for residents and the workforce that
revolves around it. At lunchtime on a sunny afternoon a small
THE CULTURE
OF CHANGE 21
Thousands of visitors await the daily Old Faithful eruption at Yellowstone National Park. While the event lasts no more than 45 seconds to 1.5 minutes, the sense
of anticipation in the lead-up to the eruption adds to the spectacle of the event.

22 B. CANNON IVERS
patch of grass is filled to capacity by workers escaping the
office for an hour. The other larger forces at play deal more
with sociology and psychology.
While my initial reading of the city hinged on the spaces,
the events and the spatial organisation, I also began to ob-
serve human behaviour and the factors in play in public spaces.
The first is curiosity. London’s Southbank is a living laboratory
for human interaction, efforts in place-making, environmental
psychology, sociology and artistic expression. The Southbank
has found its stride in the last 15 years, establishing itself as
one of the prime destinations in London. Observing how peo-
ple behave, and my own behaviour when walking along the
river there, reveals that people are drawn to areas where
other people are gathering. As William H. Whyte patently
observed, people do attract other people. If a small crowd is
gathered looking over a railing, it is difficult not to drift over to
observe the scene for yourself. It may be the case that what
people are looking at is not particularly interesting, but it holds
people’s attention long enough to attract other people and
builds a critical mass of curious drifters.
The second phenomenon is anticipation. We see this most
vividly at the Old Faithful geyser at Yellowstone National Park
where thousands of people gather in eager expectation for a
show that lasts no more than a few minutes. But there are
lessons here for the activation of public space and the impor-
tance of proactively tapping into that irresistible human con-
dition.

London’s Southbank is a living laboratory of creative expression and performance. Crowds of people form organically to watch street
performers and a sand artist that transforms the littoral zone of the River Thames during low tide.

THE CULTURE
OF CHANGE 23
Trafalgar Square is one of the main civic squares in central London. For two days in late
spring the square was transformed into a lawn with rolls of turf, completely changing
the way people used the space and illustrating the social agency of temporary landscape
interventions. Even putters and golf balls were provided for people to use.
A temporary restaurant, complete with live music, changed the nature of Sloane Square
from a place of movement to a space for lingering.

24 B. CANNON IVERS
Lastly, it is about the psychology of the temporary. There is
something meaningful about an event or an experience that
is ephemeral. Knowing that it cannot be visited or experienced
again prompts us to engage with a space — or a moment in
the life of that space — in a way that we may not otherwise. In
2007 Trafalgar Square was turfed with rolls of pre-prepared
lawn. Soft underfoot and comfortable to sit on, the function of
the space was transformed from a place of idle photography
and drifting tourists to one of lingering, socialising and even
playing mini-golf. This simple change of surface and the psy-
chology of the temporary made this great civic space feel and
behave like a London square, one that lasted for only a couple
of days. At Sloane Square in southwest London, a hard-paved
square that for all intents and purposes is a roundabout, was
converted into an al fresco dining experience. Black-tie waiters
and live music gave the air of sophistication and luxury and
the whole scene became a means of activation in its own
right. People stopped, took pictures and commented on the
set-up and the atmosphere. This is what William H. Whyte
called ‘triangulation’. Its presence was fleeting but it was an
experience that cannot immediately be repeated. The artificial
greening of spaces also has an interesting influence on peo-
ple’s behaviour. At Watch This Space (see p. 94 –101), a simple
carpet of artificial grass is laid out each summer to ‘soften’ the
small square outside the National Theatre on the Southbank
in London. Despite the artificial tactility of the grass, people
still gather and congregate as if it were a lawn in a way that
they would not if it was a hard-paved plaza.
Again referencing Whyte’s triangulation theory, or the no-
tion of incidental encounter, public spaces become platforms
for bringing people together in a way that they may not nat-
urally interact. While public spaces accommodate formal, pre-
planned events, the spontaneous bottom-up community gath-
erings hold equal weight and demonstrate the necessity of
free, unrestricted access to public open spaces and the foster-
ing of spontaneity. Often through the natural rhythms of city
At Watch This Space at the National Theatre Square on the Southbank of London’s River
Thames, the simple introduction of artificial grass encourages people to sit in the space,
which they wouldn’t naturally do when the space is hard paving.
Infrastructure is also a form of spatial activation. When Tower Bridge is in
operation to allow ships to pass along the River Thames, people pause
for the infrastructural performance, a type of borrowed activation.
 life, spaces are activated by commerce or the selling of plants
as evidenced in the images below in Manhattan, where a
sidewalk is transformed into a temporary garden. The specta-
cle of infrastructure, as seen in the opening of Tower Bridge,
which prompts people to pause and take in the show before
going about their busy lives or seeing the next best thing on
their tourist itineraries is a form of borrowed activation. There
are also those great initiatives that started as an idea and
grew into something lasting and meaningful, such as the Book
Fair beneath Waterloo Bridge in London, which transformed
an otherwise uninspiring underpass into something of a des-
tination that has been in place ever since.
Over the past 15 years a number of methods and devices
have emerged that enable a space to have the flexibility to
The quotidian sale of goods is also a form of spatial activation and transformation as seen on
this street in Lower Manhattan where plants on show for sale transform the street.
accommodate a multitude of events across varying scales, yet
still have a sense of comfort and animation on a day-to-day
basis when there are only a few people in the space. This is
the greatest dilemma for contemporary public realm design-
ers — how to create a space large enough and open enough
to host markets, ice-skating rinks and concerts, yet not feel
empty and windswept when no arranged activity or pro-
grammed event is taking place. This conundrum has plagued
spaces such as City Hall Plaza in Boston, for which there have
been multiple design competitions to give the space a sense
of purpose, a human-scale attractiveness and character so
that people could use it on a daily basis rather than only serv-
ing the city and community during large gatherings, concerts,
protests or festivals. As I have postulated previously, the design
The recurring event of the Book Fair under Waterloo Bridge in London turns a basic
underpass into a cultural destination. Providing simple infrastructure such as the book
storage sheds seen in the image below enables cultural gems like this to become estab-
lished and to flourish over time.
THE CULTURE OF CHANGE 27
Fountains provide daily activation for the Royal Academy courtyard, which can also be
turned off to accommodate annual large-scale art installations.
Chris Wilkinson’s Landscape to Portrait installation with the fountains turned off.
Acqua alta is the phenomenon that happens in Venice when water surges up through
the drains in Piazza San Marco. This inspired the design of the Bordeaux Water Mirror
(see p. 29), which has had a powerful influence on the flexible design of public spaces
with the use of fountains and a thin film of water.

28 B. CANNON IVERS
for flexibility is a new driver in the design of public spaces over (2005), creating his own version of the water mirror concept
the past 20 years. The design profession has made significant (see p. 138 –143). At Bradford City Park, Gillespies with Foun-
strides in devising novel approaches to satisfy the need for tain Workshop (see p. 102 –107), have realised the vision ini-
flexibility in public spaces and simultaneously establish com- tially put forward by the late architect Will Alsop to flood the
fortable spaces that can be used daily. main public space in Bradford. The water mirror has moved
The interactivity of water has had a profound impact on the beyond the idea of the pop-up fountain because of the reflec-
design of flexible spaces. I have referenced Somerset House tive drama it brings to a space, as well as the various ways in
(see p. 240 –243) and the courtyard at the Royal Academy in which visitors can interact with the water and the in-built flex-
London as examples where pop-jet fountains have been used ibility the water provides.
to bring white noise, animation and playfulness into a space   The proliferation of competitions to design temporary
for daily use. The proactive decision to be able to turn off the spaces and structures has also been considerable in the past
fountains and convert the space into a plaza as an extended 15 years. Inspired by more established temporary installations
exhibition space has made a meaningful contribution to the such as the Serpentine Pavilion (see p. 160 – 167) and MoMA
design trajectory. However, it is the French Miroir d’Eau (water PS1 (see p. 150 – 159), and fuelled by the economic crisis in
mirror) movement that has instigated a new paradigm in the 2008 and the lack of expenditure in permanent spaces, these
use of water in public spaces. The water mirror movement festivals of ephemerality are making significant contributions
found its genesis in Venice’s misfortune: the fact that Venice is to the activation of public spaces. Annual installation, as a place-
sinking at a rate of 2 mm per year.1 Aqua alta or high water is making typology, heightens the sense of anticipation and for
a term that describes the annual flooding event that happens a short period of time creates a must-see destination. Commis-
when high tides and strong sirocco winds converge on the sioned annually, the Serpentine Pavilion has established itself
Venetian lagoon. Piazza San Marco, Venice’s main public square, as one of London’s greatest architectural and design events.
sits just above sea level and each winter floods as water rises
through the drains in the square. The result is dramatic, albeit
inconvenient and disconcerting for Venetians. St Mark’s Basil-
ica reflects brilliantly on the surface of the water, something I
like to refer to as the ‘4th dimension’ that describes the added
visual experience of a space and the injection of reflective
movement and light. People interact with the water and the
piazza in a new way and the edge condition becomes that
much more important.
Inspired by this annual transmogrification of Piazza San
Marco, the fountain designers at Jean Max Llorca (JML) in Bar-
celona, in collaboration with the late landscape architect
Michel Corajoud, created the first water mirror in Bordeaux.
Completed in 2006, Bordeaux’s water mirror is the largest in
the world. It simultaneously achieves the important combina-
tion of spectacle and physical experience, reflecting the dra-
matic Place de la Bourse, yet encouraging people to interact
with the shallow 20 mm surface of water. People capture the
reflectivity of the grand adjacent architecture in the water in
a photo (spectacle) and recount stories and memories of play-
ing in the fountain (physical experience). Subsequently, Miroir
d’Eau projects have been implemented by JML in Nantes, Nice,
Marseilles, Paris and Lyon.
In the US, Kathryn Gustafson utilised the water mirror at
the Smithsonian in Washington, DC, (2007), enabling the film
of water to be drained away for large events to take place in
the courtyard. At the King’s Cross development in London,
Townshend Landscape Architects with Fountain Workshop
have created four water mirrors at Granary Square (2012) (see
p. 86 – 93), each of which can be drained away individually to
respond to various scales of events. Laurie Olin continues this
approach at King’s Cross at Lewis Cubitt Square (2015) (see Le Miroir d’Eau at Bordeaux. The fountain provides multiple atmospheres
p. 86 – 93 ). In Copenhagen, SLA created dramatic circular pools including mist that people are instantly drawn to.

at the Crystal building (2010) and Kim Wilkie transformed the A thin film of water entices people to interact with it, while also creating
a compelling composition with the surrounding skyline reflecting on the
central courtyard of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London surface.

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE 29

This is not only because of the architecture it creates, but also
because of the life within the pavilion it generates — that is,
the culture of the place through performances, discussions
and debates, symposiums and attraction around food and
drink. These surges of creative ingenuity that emerge through
temporary installations spread around the globe, inspiring a
new temporary urbanism that will continue to shape the way
our cities perform. It is important to note the influence garden
festivals have had on popular culture such as at Grand-Métis
and Chaumont, as well as annual gatherings such as Burning
Man. Below is a list of a number of ephemeral installations:
– MoMA PS1, Brooklyn, started in 1998, and subsequently
at MAXXI, started in 2011, Rome (see p. 150 – 159);
– Fourth Plinth, started in 1999, London (see p. 198 – 203);
– Serpentine Pavilion, started in 2000, London (see p. 160 –167);
– (Park)ing Day, started in 2005, San Francisco;
– Times Square Valentine Heart Design, started in 2009, New
York;
30 B. CANNON IVERS
– Warming Huts, started in 2009, Winnipeg;
– Robson Redux, started in 2011, Vancouver (see p. 168 –179);
– Du Musée Avenue, started in 2012, Montreal
(see p. 244 – 247);
– Future of Shade, started in 2013;
– Flatiron Triangle, started in 2014, New York;
– MPavilion Australia, started in 2014, Melbourne;
– Dulwich Picture Gallery Pavilion, started in 2017, London;
– Serpentine Pavilion, Beijing in 2018.
Installations and temporary exhibitions have also emerged
recently as a method to enliven public space. In 2008 artist
Luke Jerram realised Play Me I’m Yours in which 30 pianos
were installed on streets, in public squares and parks, train
stations and markets. Like a creative blank canvas, the pianos
were there for any member of the public to play and engage
with. The pianos were in place for three weeks, after which
time they were donated to local schools and community groups.
In London, some of these temporary installations and events
Winnepeg Warming Huts competition by Patkau
Architects.
LOT’s Flatiron Sky-Line design for the third annual
Flatiron Public Plaza Holiday Design Competition.
MPavilion in Melbourne designed by AL_A.
The inaugural Dulwich Picture Gallery Pavilion by
IF_DO Architects titled ‘After Image’.
Collective-LOK’s Heart of Hearts in Times Square.
One of the many PARK(ing) Day installations that
now take place globally each year.
have had a lasting legacy on the design of public space, or
what ‘social infrastructure’ might be included. In 2010, Ping(!)
London placed 100 ping pong tables throughout the city’s
main landmarks to encourage people to enjoy the sport. It was
a watershed moment and now table-tennis tables feature as
permanent elements in many contemporary designed spaces
as a way of drawing people into a space and giving them a
specific activity to engage in. More recently, Lateral Office de-
signed a public art piece for La Place des Festivals in Montreal
called Impulse (see p. 192 –197). The adult-sized, interactive
and lit see-saw has since been installed at Harvard Yard and
in London as part of the second Lumiere London lighting
festival across the city, signalling perhaps a new typology of
itinerant, participatory installations.
Other examples of overlay activities that have become
ubiquitous are winter ice-skating rinks, certainly made popular
in London by Somerset House (see p. 240 – 243) in 2000 and
arguably most famously at Rockefeller Plaza in New York. Ice
rinks are now a staple winter overlay event and a driver for
the flexible design of public spaces, exemplified most recently
by the novel Maggie Daley Park Ice Ribbon by Michael Van
Valkenburgh and Associates in Chicago. Bryant Park in New
York (see p. 234 –239) ushered in the popularity of the outdoor
cinema, and entrepreneurs have turned summer pop-up cin-
emas into a business, travelling from park to public space,
pulling people into these spaces when they may otherwise not
Play Me I’m Yours in Times Square in New York City.
have revisited a place. The proliferation of travelling food
Impulse designed by Lateral Office, was originally installed at La Place
trucks has also become a go-to overlay and a method for des Festivals in Montreal. The installation now travels and is shown
here at the historic Harvard Yard.
generating footfall and establishing a critical mass. Finally, the
humble shipping container is being utilised as a device to cre-
ate a semi-permanent meanwhile use while longer-term, mul-
ti-phased developments are financed and built. In London,
Pop-Brixton, Elephant and Castle and Croydon’s Box Park are
but a few examples of this meanwhile-use typology, which The Plaza at Harvard University (see p. 74 – 85) by Stoss also
creates a sense of place, underpinned by local businesses that introduced fixed infrastructure to support a known pro-
give the place an authenticity that appeals to the current pref- gramme. In this case, the space must accommodate a large
erence for smaller, boutique shops over large chainstores. tent/marquee twice a year during the student initiation and
In-built infrastructure that facilitates a set programme is graduation. Anchor points for the tent are designed into the
also an important consideration for the design of flexible pub- paving design, which determines the maximum size of the
lic space. Binnenrotte Square by West 8 in Rotterdam was tent. Smaller tents can be arranged within the field of anchor
completed in 1996 and included permanent fixings to anchor points to enable the space to serve a range of events of vary-
market stalls and horizontal cylindrical barriers to prevent ing scales. The Plaza, like many of the case studies in this
parking. These hinged elements can be folded into the ground book, has incorporated potable water and power which were
to allow access for setting up the market, which is an elegant included early on in the design of the space. This overcomes
solution to a very utilitarian design challenge. Binnenrotte the challenge of threading cables through the public spaces
Square hosts a market twice weekly, drawing up to 70,000 during events, or having to rely on generators. However, this
people. However, it also reflects the challenge of designing for is still not a foregone conclusion and many spaces fall victim
set events and how to make the space interesting, attractive to lack of planning at the design development stage and the
and usable on the days that events such as the market are not space suffers as a result.
taking place. In this regard, Binnenrotte Square has recently With the popularity of flexible spaces, designers, spatial
been redesigned by OKRA landscape architects, who aspire to planners and event specialists must continue to innovate to
create a more hospitable and usable space on a day-to-day maintain momentum and evolve the public space offering. A
basis by introducing more tree planting, herbaceous gardens number of exemplary projects have emerged that illuminate
and lawn areas. The green spaces are designed to be flexible, the exciting potential for the future of flexible design in public
to accommodate events, performances and installations on space. Reconfigured space is the shifting of fixed objects to
the days when the market is not operating. allow flexibility, or the movement of stationary objects — both

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE 31

mechanically and through the power of the participant — to
create change in a space.
At the main theatre at the Cornell School of Architecture,
OMA has designed flexibility into the theatre by mechanically
reconfiguring the space by folding the chairs beneath the floor
in a type of ‘transformer choreography’. What was once a
formal theatre typology is now an open-ended stage of unre-
stricted possibility. In a similarly mechanised fashion, a series
of hydraulically operated seats designed by Carmela Bogman
and Rogier Martens in Utrecht emerge from the ground, trans-
forming a transitional space, a space only for movement, into
a space for lingering. The hydraulics are operated by the users,
giving them a sense of ownership over the space. Courtyard
in the Wind by Acconci Studio uses wind-generated energy to
reconfigure a central courtyard space. A wind wheel is fixed to
the top of the adjacent building. As the wind energy is captured
and converted to electricity, a ‘turntable’ landscape transforms
the courtyard space. What was once a footpath passing through
lawn and tree planting is now interrupted by a circular band of
grass cutting through the path. Even trees planted in the turn-
table rotate, breaking the formal bosque of trees and sett pav-
ing, replacing it with a lawn. Fixed objects in the landscape can
be reconfigured without the use of machines. The landscape
practice OKRA designed a series of planters on rails in a court-
yard at Inkpot. Allowing the planters to be shifted to the perim-
eter of the space affords the courtyard with a larger space for
gatherings. It also allows users to change the space to suit their
particular needs, again empowering users to have ownership
of the space. Similarly, at the National Museum in Zurich, carts
with trees can be moved around, creating personal shade.

Storefront Theater by Matthew Mazzotta transforms Main Street in downtown Lyons, Nebraska, into an outdoor theatre by using an abandoned
freestanding storefront wall as its site.
Matthew Mazzotta, the Coleman Centre for the Arts and the people of York, Alabama, collaborated to transform a blighted property in downtown York into
a new public art project that is in the shape of a house, but which can physically transform into a 100-seat open-air theatre that is free for the public.
The Cornell School of Architecture’s Milstein Hall Boardroom, designed by Shohei Shigematsu from OMA New York, mechanically transforms the lecture
hall into a boardroom by revealing boardroom chairs from beneath the floor.

32 B. CANNON IVERS
The artist Matthew Mazzotta has been working with the no-
tion of reconfiguration through object-based installations. Two
of his pieces in particular are reconfigured to create venues for
social gatherings, community meetings and performances.
Open House is an installation in Alabama that transforms a
small house installation into an open-air performance space
by unfolding sections of the house on hinges to provide seat-
ing areas. The house opens in five sections to create a formal
spectator area, facing a stage or the outdoor cinema. When
the show is over, the house is folded back into place and the
house is once again an art installation. Storefront Theatre
transforms a derelict plot in downtown Lyons, Nebraska, into
an outdoor theatre. A false façade is hydraulically folded away
and terraced seating for 100 people emerges from the vacant
space behind the façade. A film screen hauled by a tractor is
parked in the street to create an outdoor cinema. At the push
of a button, the terraced seating is retracted into the vacant
plot and the façade slots back into place to restore the contin-
uous line of shops. These precedents suggest a new method
for creating flexible space, where fixed, permanent objects in
public spaces that make a place function on a day-to-day basis
can be mechanically transfigured to create an entirely flexible
space, free from any fixed constraints.
For the City of Culture celebrations in Liverpool, Diller
Scofidio Renfro experimented with mechanised movement of
trees in an installation titled Arbores Laetae (Joyful Trees).
Three hornbeam trees planted at a 10-degree angle rotate
almost imperceptibly to vary the configuration of space but
more importantly to create spectacle and cause people to
pause and linger. The change is subtle, but enough to challenge

Pop-Up by Carmela Bogman and Rogier Martens is hydraulically controlled by the residents and can be arranged in multiple configurations. The flexibility of the hydraulic
system illustrates tremendous potential for the future of public spaces designed for a multitude of uses and events.

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE 33

 the notion that a designed space needs fixity or that it is static.
At Piazza Risorgimento in Bari, MaO architects introduced a
grove of rotating benches. Users are able to rotate their bench
into a position of their preference, whether to catch more sun
or sit under the shade of a nearby tree. Groups can swivel the
benches in a way that two or three benches come in closer
contact to encourage social interaction.
Gardens festivals, such as at Grand-Métis, facilitate the cre-
ative exploration of an idea without the constraints of stand-
ards and the need for longevity. These are important venues
to test new possibilities and anticipate the future of the design
of public space. Recently, a number of installations have drawn
on the power of the participant to change the space. The in-
stallation I Like to Move It allowed visitors to move trees along
sunken rails to change both the physical layout of the space
Arbores Laetae (Joyful Trees) by Diller Scofidio Renfro for the Liverpool City of Culture.
as well as its functionality — where people might gather in the
I Like to Move It by DIXNEUFCENTQUATREVINGTSIX Architecture.
shade of the trees: ‘Trees, immobile and mute, are rootless
Around-About by Talmon Biran architecture studio.
and move as living beings. All due to human interaction.’2 The
installation Around-About draws on visitor interaction to create
a modern Zen garden. Roundabouts inspired by agricultural
machinery rotate around a centrally fixed column. Through this
interaction, the participant is responsible for composing the
patterns on the ground and creating the Zen garden. As the
gravel is kicked about, the pattern is lost until the next visitor
creates their own personal garden.
The Shed by Diller Scofidio Renfro (DSR) at Hudson Yard in
Manhattan boldly exemplifies the notion of reconfiguration to
facilitate the flexibility of open space and a myriad of pro-
grammed activities. The design concept for the Shed is pred-
icated on the fact that many of the cultural institutions in New
York do not have the scale of space to accommodate large
audiences or the ability to expand an existing venue to re-
spond to the demands of temporary shows or annual festivals.
As a result, the city often misses the opportunity to host trav-
elling shows and installations, which require flexible perfor-
mance and exhibition space.
To overcome this, DSR developed the Kunsthalle, a cultural
venue and open-ended flexible space devoid of any permanent
exhibits. Instead, the 200,000-square foot Shed is envisioned
as a venue for temporary shows, performances and set trav-
elling events such as New York’s annual Fashion Week that
currently happens under the cover of temporary pop-up tents.
The pièce de résistance of the Shed is the 140-foot-high re-
tractable covering that slides on rails to cover a public square.
What was once a 19,500-square foot open-air plaza is now a
covered performance space with inbuilt sound, lighting and
fixings for installations or dance performances. On a day-to-
day basis, the canopy neatly slides back into place over the
adjacent building, allowing the plaza to once again be a pub-
lic space that is open to the elements. When the canopy is
deployed, it doubles the size of the building’s footprint and
creates a cavernous 17,200-square foot, temperature-con-
trolled flexible stage, a fulcrum between inside and outside.
The space created by the canopy has a seating capacity of
1200 and a standing capacity of 2700. The architects designed
the ceiling of the canopy to function as a theatre deck with

34 B. CANNON IVERS

rigging and structural capability throughout the space. Accord-
ing to DSR, ‘[t]he Shed is conceived as open infrastructure that
can be permanently flexible for an unknown future. The Shed’s
“plug and play” capability allows it to be responsive to variabil-
ity in scale, media technology and the evolving needs of artists.’
Considering the advancements in the activation of public
space over the last two decades, it is exciting to hypothesise
what the next decade will hold for the design of public spaces.
Designers will evolve to be more adept at balancing the need
for open flexible spaces where events of all shapes and sizes
can take place and, at the same moment, create meaningful,
interesting and comfortable spaces for day-to-day use. Rich
and varied edge conditions surrounding these open flexible
spaces will continue to be critical to the success of our public
spaces. Will the users of the spaces we design develop ‘food-
truck fatigue’ and tire of table-tennis tables everywhere? Will
underused amphitheatres blight our cities and prompt us to
reconsider notions of fixed spaces for particular programmes?
The Shed, designed by Diller Scofidio Renfro in collabora-
tion with the Rockwell Group at Hudson Yard in New
York, can mechanically deploy a canopy to cover the
public square to create a sheltered, multi-functional
space.
The Shed under construction.
It is of critical importance how the design discipline continues
to innovate through collaboration with artists, event special-
ists, enlightened clients and politicians to enliven public space.
The mechanisation of moveable landscapes, which may have
a more formal and semi-fixed arrangement on any given day,
is likely to become the future evolution of public spaces that
are fundamentally designed to be performative as much as
they are decorative, ecological, sustainable and democratic.
1 See https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2015/jun/16/history-
flooding-sinking-city-venice-in-pictures. Accessed in August 2016
2 See http://www.refordgardens.com/english/festival/garden-135-i-like-to-
move-it.php?EC=1. Accessed in August 2016
THE CULTURE
OF CHANGE 35
38 – 45
THE URBAN SURFACE:
SHIFTING FIELDS FOR CURATED
EVENTS
Alex Wall

46 – 53
OPEN-ENDED: PUBLIC SPACES
AS COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS
Chris Reed

54 – 57
FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE
Nicola Dempsey

58 – 65
GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS: PLANNING,
PROGRAMMING AND PLAY
Chris Wangro

66 –71
SCRATCH THAT! 
Sergio Lopez-Pineiro
THE URBAN
SURFACE: SHIFTING
FIELDS FOR
CURATED EVENTS
My essay ‘Programming the Urban Surface’, describes the urban
surface as a diverse formal and multi-functional field supporting
new activities, and as an arena for the agency of design.1
Several design strategies were derived from experimental ar-
chitectural, urban design and landscape projects, including
non-programmed use, designing for impermanence, thicken-
ing, folding and the deployment of new materials. The urban
surface was conceptualised as a vital component of city build-
ing, an equal partner to the conventional binary of buildings
and landscape. The article appeared at a time when two cas-
cades of innovation were underway. The first of these was the
availability of new software applications enabling formal ges-
tures such as ‘folding’, which also produced the three-dimen-
sional coordinates for fabrication. The second cascade was
precipitated by the breakthrough of urban and landscape ecol-
ogy into landscape architecture, and the growing recognition
of the needs of the non-human world.
Today, three paradigm shifts are underway on the urban
surface, which will lead to changes in city form, enlarge what
we mean by ‘urban community’, and revalue the undeveloped
domain of human agency. Technology, particularly sensing
technologies, is the first of these and can monitor both the
mineral and living worlds of the city. Experimental projects and
installations by young designers and artists hint at spaces and
landscapes that respond to visitors’ passage through them, or
38 ALEX WALL
ALEX WALL
are crafted to offer optimal conditions of comfort. I am not
imagining a technological utopia, however; instead, I refer to
Peter Sloterdijk’s notion that nature-supportive technologies
produce a different relationship between technology and the
environment, a progression from exploitation to the co-pro-
duction with natural systems.2 The second paradigm shift in-
volves what Steward T. A. Pickett has described as the ‘ecology
of the city’, including all mineral and living systems, respecting
the rights of the non-human world.3 The city’s open spaces,
bodies of water, urban forest and nature corridors will be
equally valued to the built and social fabric, and the human
activities taking place within them. Here I am redefining the
repertoire of elements and relationships in the city as it has
increased in size and slowly reacts to changing weather and
climate. The third shift returns us to questions of public space,
not in the sense of the successful architectures of Rotterdam’s
Schouwburgplein, Copenhagen’s Superkilen or Harvard’s Sci-
ence Center Plaza, but with a view to activist places ringing
with the voices of the public. These are spaces where the
empathic power of local communities to manage social and
ecological common-pool resources becomes in itself a form of
resistance to outmoded economic systems and unrepresent-
ative governments.
The paradigm shifts point towards an expanded range and
programme for urban spaces. They will become interactive
with their users, able to manage flooding from intense rain-
storms, as demonstrated by the Water Squares by De Urban-
isten in Rotterdam (see p. 224 – 229). Landscape patches that
are subsumed by the expanding city will become an integrat-
ed and co-evolving part of the urban fabric. Finally, public
spaces might be liberated from their strict spatial boundaries,
their formal axiality, and their representation of state, church
or corporate power. Their variety will expand to include sites
and activities that are part of a public ‘good’, to be managed
by collective agreement of the local community in opposition
to growing privatisation and exclusion.
I will consider these points through a brief comparison of
a pair of little-known projects from the 1980s with a contem-
porary project that treats the urban surface as a hydrological
structure that stimulates activities, and with a park project
where both its technical equipment and park users are able
to modify microclimates and comfort levels. While the first two
are remedial, restoring, conserving and reconceiving activities
in a public realm, the second two react to climate as a new
kind of event to be engaged and celebrated. The text con-
cludes by asking what public space is for, who it belongs to
and what the significance is of the activities that take place in
an expanding public realm.

ARCADIA INVESTED
In his introduction to four projects produced in 1984 for the
Greek island of Kefalonia, Elia Zenghelis of OMA introduced the
concept of subtly interweaving technology and infrastructure
through threatened cultural landscapes, so that they could
retain their functional and representational role. For each of
the sites, the embedding of these metropolitan attributes was
intended to reinforce the essence of the place without trans-
forming it.4 Public space — here, public landscapes — is equipped
with new surfaces, fixtures and fittings allowing them to be
used for conflicting and unexpected activities.
Elia Zenghelis (OMA). Monastery and Sacred Avenue
In the valley of St Gerasimos, a sacred avenue leading from at St Gerasimos, Kefalonia, Greece, 1985. Published in
L’Architecture d’Aujourd’hui, no. 256, April 1985.
a monastery to a holy well was the site of a popular religious Model photo.
festival that included an all-night fair. Large numbers of people Painting: Zoe Zenghelis. Valley of St Gerasimos with
and vehicles were damaging the landscape and so, to enable monastery and sacred boulevard.

the festival to continue without using permanent structures, a Elia Zenghelis (OMA). Bay of Koutavos, Argostoli, Kefalonia,
Greece, 1985. Oxygenation fountains. Watercolor by
system of marble benches equipped with water and electric- Matthias Sauerbruch.
ity was used to reorder the avenue. At each end, walls framed Windmill follies. Watercolor by Matthias Sauerbruch.

THE URBAN
SURFACE 39
The park at night.

a plinth for the rebuilt monastery and a playground for the

village. The ordering of land and event was the result of a
discrete technical underpinning of the festival’s activities.
The second project involved the hydrological resuscitation
of a bay stifled by pollution and inadequate circulation, and
the transformation of its shoreline into a linear park to serve
the island’s capital, Argostoli. A programme of water sports
and ecological remediation established the water’s surface as
a field of action. While the areas along the bay’s edge were
transformed into landscapes of sport, recreation, gardens and
forest, its surface was to be programmed with self-propelling
devices oxygenating the water as they criss-crossed it.
For Zenghelis, both projects expressed the choreography
for a new arcadia. At St Gerasimos, the discrete embedding of
infrastructure and services made possible a moment of den- During the warmer months the space is used for community activities
such as dancing and socialising. Attenuated water is then discharged
sity in a rural landscape, while in the Bay of Koutavos, the into the space, which freezes to create an ice rink.
essence of the intervention was the perpetual movement on Day of the Waterfalls when the stored water is released and then falls
the project’s liquid surface. Rather than a purely technical proj- on to the public space and freezes.

ect of environmental engineering, the remediated bay is of-

fered to the public as a carnivalesque landscape, where the
boundaries between leisure, sport, and remediation have dis-
solved.
URBAN SPACE AS HYDROLOGICAL
NARRATIVE
In SMAQ Architects’ Cumulus project (2007), a mixed-use ur-
ban development forms a centre for the Grorud Valley near
Oslo. The ensemble of new buildings, consisting of small tower
blocks constructed over existing recreational and retail struc-
tures, is oriented around a public open space. The roofs of the
buildings together with the surface of the plaza actively engage
the seasonal changes of the water cycle. Summer rainfall is
captured and stored by the system of green roofs. In winter,
on the Day of the Waterfalls, the stored water is released and
then falls on to the public space and freezes, forming a thin
surface of ice in the depressed areas that weave through the
complex. In spring, the melting ice flows into the swales,
ponds, green spaces and allotment gardens. As Deane Simp-
son writes, the project itself is a flow diagram of rainwater
management that is spatially and temporally inhabited by the
public.5 Rather than being hidden in pipes, the hydrological
cycle produces a spectacle and gives identity to the public
space.

40 ALEX WALL
 T-Bane Terminal Allotment
Gardens

Allotment
Gardens

Bus Terminal
Fitness Studio

Bike Rental

Stair to
Parking

Travel Agency Pizzeria

Flower Shop

Entry Parking

Fresh Fruit Outdoor Pool

Market

Community
Center

Weekly Market
Allotment
Gardens

Public Pool

Shopping Mall Outdoor Stage

Entry to Hammam

Allotment
Gardens
Indoor Ice Skating Rink

Icecream Vacuum-Cleaning
Parlor Station
Entry
Parking
Bowling
Center
Entry to Cinema

Hot Dog
Stair to
Parking

Playground

Outdoor Cinema
(showing seating topography)
In & Out Burger

Plan Public Space Level— Summer.

Water Purification

Bus Terminal Water Purification

Fitness Studio

Bike Rental

Stair to
Parking

Pizzeria
Travel Agency
Flower Shop

Entry Parking

Fresh Fruit
Market
Water Purification
Community
Center

Shopping Mall

Public Pool

Mini Topography to
Cross the Ice Surface

Entry to Hammam

Allotment
Gardens

Indoor Ice Skating Rink

Entry
Bowling Parking
Center
Entry to Cinema
Hot Dog

Outdoor Ice Skating Surface

Bar Water Purification
Stair to
Parking

Playground Gas Station

In & Out Burger

Ball Room

Plan Public Space Level— Winter.

THE URBAN
SURFACE 41

A water cycle becomes public: diagram of the new urban centre’s water
flow throughout the season.
A MACHINE FOR THE SENSES
Philippe Rahm’s Jade Eco Park (under construction since 2016)
in Taichung, carried out with Catherine Mosbach, extends
Zenghelis’s notion of landscape boosted by infrastructure by
embedding a variety of machines within the thickened surface
of the park to selectively alter temperature, humidity, and air
quality. The 34-hectare Jade Eco Park is being built on the site
of an old airport and programmed with leisure, sports, family
and tourist facilities. Besides topography, planting and circu-
lation, the park will be inhabited by natural and artificial cli-
mate devices. These will create comfort by augmenting or
42 ALEX WALL
Climate devices to lower air temperature.
retarding existing microclimatic conditions — from hot, humid
and polluted to cool, dry and clean spaces. Rahm has given
names to these pavilions and machines hidden in landform,
such as ‘Underground breeze’ (convection), ‘Stratus cloud’
(evaporation), ‘Blue-sky drizzle’ (mist-emitting), ‘Desert wind’
(dry air blowers) and ‘Pre-industrial draught’ (pollution-
absorbing). Thus the park’s microclimates are sometimes giv-
en by biogeophysical conditions, while at other times they will
be given by artificial light, heat or coolness from the condition-
ing pavilions, surfaces or grills. In Jade Eco Park, diverse micro-
climates, comfortable and uncomfortable, natural and medi-
ated, will suggest different activities—they become part of the
programme.
THE CITY AS COMMONS
What kind of public spaces do we need now? In the face of a
precarious and uncertain future, how might public space con-
tribute to building social coherence, empathy and resilience?
For strangers and diverse groups, public spaces are necessary
for gathering and meeting and also provide ground for nego-
tiation and contestation. The vivid demonstrations that have
taken place recently in cities worldwide remind us of a rich
history of dissent. Yet demonstrations happen and then dissi-
pate, often resulting in little substantive change. What is
public space for then? The social and political struggle over
natural resources and for the right to clean air and water will
require more than demonstrations in the main public spaces
of the city to expedite change. Engagement, action and espe-
cially the appropriation and managed use of urban space are
needed.
The representative public spaces in historic cities have been
produced and paid for by established authorities.6 Yet there
are other, shared, spaces too, in addition to the authority-
owned. In the 1990s Elinor Ostrom, the Nobel Prize-winning
sociologist, showed that local communities were able to co-
operate to create and enforce rules for managing common
resources. In Ostrom’s words, they invented ‘rich mixtures of
public and private instrumentalities’.7 Against the background
of the many crises that we are facing today, thinking and
 vis
i
t or
sc
om
Northern Clearia

in
g
om

fr
warm re
s id
cool humid en
clean tia
dry l dist Northern Dryia

t
ric
rict
polluted

ist
sd
es
sin
bu
warm for Northern Coolia from
families g
dry min
Western Coolia s co
cool polluted visitor
dry Eastern Clearia
polluted cool
for businessmen
dry
clean Eastern Dryia
cool
dry
polluted Middle Dryia
cool Middle Coolia
dry
clean Middle Clearia
cool visito
rs com for
humid ing from s tourists
choo l district
polluted Southern Coolia touri
st visitors
for
students
cool
humid
polluted for
families
warm
humid cool id ential district Southern Clearia
polluted dry res
m
polluted fro
ng

i
m
warm cool

co
dry

ors
dry
polluted

t
clean

visi
cool
dry
clean Climatic lands: 5 types of users.
cool
humid
polluted

cool
humid
clean
cool
humid
vis

polluted
i
t or
sc
om
in
g

warm om
fr

humid warm re
dry s id
clean en
tia
polluted l dist

t
ric
rict

ist
sd
es
for sin
businessmen bu
m
for fro
families i ng
s co m
visitor

Microclimate on site.

for
visito students
rs com for
ing from s tourists
choo l district
enacting the commons becomes particularly urgent. Massimo touri
s t v is itors
de Angelis asks, whether ‘publicness’, as practiced in public
space, emerges in a period of crisis as a new form of commons for
families
activity.8 In their article ‘The City as a Commons’, Sheila R. Fuller
tial district
and Christian Iaione look beyond urban resources and city iden
res
m
fro
space as a ‘commons’ towards the concept of the city itself as ng
i
m

a commons, an open-access good.9 Public spaces, or an en-

co
ors

larged public realm, then become a network that supports the cool path
t
visi

dry path
city as an enabler and facilitator of collaborative decision-mak- clean path
ing structures to address political, social and economic in-
Masterplan composition – neighborhood
equality and vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. influences on activities.

THE URBAN
SURFACE 43
Rain management.

對周邊的影響 工業革命前的清淨空氣對周邊的影響

Climatic devise to increase air speed.

44 ALEX WALL
A SLICE OF THE BIOSPHERE
Twenty years after the original idea of the urban surface, tech-
nological change, rampant urbanisation, the consequences of
changing climate and social inequality demand a redefinition of
the term and a recalibration of the implied potential tools and
strategies. The tasks imagined for the urban surface require it
to be further articulated mechanically and equipped with sen-
sors. While the responsive city measures traffic, energy use,
pollution and stormwater run-off, a responsive landscape can
record nutrient flows, ecosystem services and the health and
viability of non-human diversity. The urban surface will be me-
chanical if not machinic, responsive if not yet sentient.
The contextual ground of buildings today is no longer a
nominally thick urban surface. Rather, it is a horizontal plane
mediating a slice of the biosphere, which extends from the
aquifer below through the living soils to the field of local
weather above. The urban surface — in the form of plazas,
parks, forests and the city’s roofscape — supports evaporation,
infiltration, storage, filtering and fertilisation. It will channel
water, build soils and distribute rain. It becomes a critical in-
frastructure, not concealed but visible, designed, managed
and used — the new story of the city. The regulating instrument
of the urban surface becomes an activist public realm, a com-
mons whose guiding principle is that resources should be
shared more widely throughout the city on behalf of its inhab-
itants, particularly the least powerful.
Mist, pipes, clouds.
1 Alex Wall, ‘Programming the Urban Surface’, in James Corner (ed.), Re-
covering Landscape, Yale University Press: New Haven 1999, p. 233 – 250.
2 Peter Sloterdijk, ‘How big is “big”?’, in Collegium Internationale, February
2010. Available at: http://www.collegium-international.org/contributions/
127-how-big-is-big.html
3 Steward T. A. Pickett, William R. Burch, Jr., Shawn E. Dalton and Timothy W.
Foresman, J. Morgan Grove, and Rowan Rowntree, ‘A conceptual frame-
work for the study of human ecosystems in urban areas’, in Urban Eco-
systems, 1997, 1, 185 –199. Available at: https://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/pubs/
jrnl/1997/ne_1997_pickett_001.pdf
4 Elia Zenghelis, ‘Arcadia Invested,’ in L’Architecture d’Aujourd’hui, no. 256,
April 1985, English translation by Bert McClure, p. LXXI.
5 Deane Simpson, ‘Inhabited Infrastructures: Beyond the Black Box’, in Sa-
bine Mueller and Andreas Quednau (eds.), Giraffes, Telegraphs and Hero
of Alexandria. Urban Design by Narration. Ruby Press: Berlin 2017, p. 378
6 Stavros Stavrides, ‘On the Commons: A Public Interview with Massimo De
Angelis and Stavros Stavrides’, in An Architektur, e-flux journal #17 June–
August 2010. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/document/135733677/
An-Architektur-On-the-Commons-A-Public-Interview-With-Massimo-de-
Angelis-and-Stavros-Stavrides
7 Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons — The evolution of institutions for
collective action, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 1990, p. 182.
8 Massimo De Angelis, ‘On the Commons: A Public Interview with Massimo
De Angelis and Stavros Stavrides’, in An Architektur, e-flux journal #17
June–August 2010.
9 Sheila R. Foster and Christian Iaione, ‘The City as a Commons’, in Yale Law
and Policy Review 281, Vol. 34, Issue 2 (2016), p. 282 –349. Available at:
http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1698&-
context=ylpr
THE URBAN SURFACE 45
OPEN-ENDED:
PUBLIC SPACES AS
COMPLEX ADAPTIVE
SYSTEMS
Cities and urban spaces have been rediscovered over the past
three decades as places of social and cultural vitality. In part
brought on by political leaders with the intention of ridding
their cities of crime and vagrancy, these efforts have trans-
formed places like Times Square in New York and resulted in
new spaces like Discovery Green in Houston. They are intend-
ed to draw in residents and visitors alike and give them reason
to be there in the first place. In doing so, leaders have under-
stood the reverberative economic potential of these efforts, in
terms of spending by visitors, the economic development of
surrounding areas, and the competitive value that can be
claimed for cities.
Lately the public spaces themselves have been put to work,
through programming, in order to generate revenue — espe-
cially important in an era in which government resources for
open-space creation, upkeep and management are dwindling.
But none of this explains why people want to be there in the
first place, or what we can do through design to conceive and
shape these spaces.
I argue for an approach to the design and programming of
public spaces that accommodates diversity, flexibility, adapt-
ability and open-endedness. This is an approach that allows for
various intensities of use to be played out (and to play them-
selves out) across daily, seasonal and annual environmental,
economic or other long-term cycles. In this public realm, inde-
46 CHRIS REED
CHRIS REED
terminacy is as important as planning for very specific kinds of
uses; both are necessary in setting up the right conditions for
a vibrant and multi-functional public space. To make this argu-
ment, I will draw on the research of urbanists like William H.
Whyte, on complex systems ecology dealing with adaptability
in the environment, and on our own experiences at Stoss in the
design and programming of spaces for free play and flexibility.
SOCIAL ECOLOGIES
Complex adaptive systems ecology tells us that healthy eco-
systems are characterised by dynamic change over time. An
ecosystem’s ability to adapt to new conditions or inputs (wa-
ter, climate, disturbance, etc.) while maintaining its core struc-
tures and mechanisms is what ultimately ensures success and
vitality. Within a particular ecosystem, diversity and system
variability are two key factors that ensure that the ecosystem
will be able to undergo succession and change. Healthy eco-
systems are open systems — they remain in contact with the
external environment through inputs such as heat and water
and outputs such as energy and waste. In this way, individuals
within an ecosystem and the ecosystem itself must always
be considered in relationship to their larger environments.
Dynamic interactions are the defining characteristic of healthy
environmental ecologies.
 Times Square, reconstructed as a pedestrian-only space by Snøhetta in
2017, and Discovery Green, designed in 2012 by Hargreaves Associates,
invite residents and visitors to gather, creating social and economic
reverberations in the city.
Bass River Park re-ignites social and ecological dynamics that respond to
changing environmental conditions.

FLOOD-BRACKISH

WET NEGLECT /
FLOOD FLOOD
SUCCESSION

START

DRY SPORT WINDY WET FLOOD

DRY NEGLECT / SUCCESSION

OPEN-ENDED 47

­Urban Spaces is exemplary in calling out the ways in which
Four ecosystem functions, redrawn and reinterpreted by Tomás Folch,
Nina-Marie Lister and Chris Reed, 2002/2012.
Folded benches along The City Deck in Green Bay and the scattered
granite boulders of Peter Walker’s Tanner Fountain at Harvard Plaza offer
opportunities for inventive and creative play.
48  CHRIS REED
It is not such a leap to apply these same principles to public
spaces. Flexibility and adaptability allow for public spaces to
change to accommodate different events and activities, and
even adapt to new circumstances (physical, hydrological, pro-
grammatic, political, etc.) over the long term. These qualities
encourage appropriation of many flavours, for activities that
might be planned and others that might be spontaneous or
invented. They do this in ways that appeal to people’s innate
sensibilities as curious and experimental creatures — willing
and able to explore new forms, spaces and situations on their
own terms, without prescribed ideas about the proper use of
something.
Think about kids, for instance, and their ability to make a
game out of anything or anywhere — like hopping games that
utilise the utility covers on an ordinary street or pavement.
People are incredibly inventive when given the opportunity or
the prompt. Much playground design recently has morphed
from prescribed activities on single-use pieces of equipment
to more exploratory and open-ended play environments that
encourage improvisation and free, creative play.
At Stoss, we explored ideas of open-endedness and free
and creative play in a garden installation called Safe Zone at
the International Garden Festival in Grand-Métis, Quebec. Here
a simple, undulating topography of poured-in-place, bouncy
rubber surfacing was the prompt, and people were invited to
do whatever they liked. Kids quickly made up running and
jumping games, but eventually adults were lured in — some-
times pushed as well. The construction manager encouraged
wary visitors to remove their shoes and socks to experience
the sponginess of the surface directly on their bare feet and
toes. And people opened up: exploring, moving about, finding
comfortable perches to sit on and slightly secluded depres-
sions to hide in. Gymnastics, handstands and more rough-
and-tumble games were all part of the play that emerged. The
unscripted, open-ended and indeterminate nature of the de-
sign was critical in allowing for — even prompting — this phys-
ical and social improvisation.
Flexibility, open-endedness and even indeterminacy are not
completely foreign ideas in the study and design of public
space and cities. William H. Whyte’s The Social Life of Small
people can adapt to public spaces, even those less accommo-
dating. Whyte’s studies of human behaviour, and specifically
the ways in which people gathered on the North Front Ledge
outside Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram Building in New York,
highlighted human behavioural adaptations to this space and
its environment. He studied and mapped the evolving relation-
ships of people’s positions on the plaza to changing sunlight,
to work and lunch and commuting schedules, and to each
other — noting how folks would use the space differently over
the course of the day. More recently, and at a larger scale,
urban projects like OMA’s proposal for the Yokohama Master-
plan show how the programming of an entire district might
result in dramatically different characters and combinations of
activities over the course of the day and night, if an appropri-
ate combination of facilities and public spaces has been pro-

vided. Both examples point to a need to build in flexibility,
redundancy and the ability to change and adapt — whether we
are talking about the ways in which people engage with pub-
lic space, or the ways in which public spaces and districts can
be set up to ensure a liveliness throughout the day and year.
I am describing here, in different ways and at a range of
scales, what I want to put forward as social ecologies: the
interactions of and interrelationships between various individ-
uals and each other, and between them and their environ-
ments — whether a small play garden or public space or a
larger urban district or urban ecosystem is concerned. Social
ecologies are grounded in systems or frameworks that are
clearly structured but are flexible and open-ended: they are
neither singular nor fully prescribed. Social ecologies recog-
nise humans’ innate instincts and curiosities as physical and
social beings with a wide variety of tastes, desires, needs,
moods and backgrounds. Healthy social ecologies, like healthy
ecosystems, are flexible: their embedded DNA allows for shifts
and changes in outward expression as circumstances change.
They adapt to changing situations. Life endures and thrives.
DESIGN FOR FLEXIBILITY
The Plaza at Harvard, designed by Stoss and featured as a case
study in this book (see p. 74 – 85), has established new social
ecologies in a space previously rendered lifeless by a lack of
accommodation for anything but passing through. In contrast,
the new space plays on people’s inexhaustible craving for dis-
covery, for physical and sensorial experiences, for social inter-
action of many sorts. It is flexible and is set up — equipped — to
be programmed and reprogrammed over time.
The site is an important intersection between Harvard’s
historic Yard and its expanding North Campus. According to
the University, an estimated 10,000 people used the space as
The undulating topography of Safe Zone was created with a spongy rubber surface
that prompted adults and kids alike to explore and bounce and move about.
a daily crossing prior to the redesign. This is in part due to the
depression of a local roadway underneath the space, which
funnels everyone moving from the River Houses (dormitories)
and bustling Harvard Square on the south to university facili-
ties, museums and adjacent residential neighbourhoods to the
north. But there was no accommodation for people in this
space, and it was not set up to adequately host activity. The
University’s President, Drew Faust, wanted to find places for
social interaction through her Common Spaces initiative and
looked to make this its first significant project.
The Plaza was designed both to host an ever-changing
array of events and activities and to allow for quieter mo-
ments, for unscripted events and spontaneous activities, for
openness and emptiness, and moments in which the only
activities were two or three people walking across the space
in the evening. The edge sumac groves and the area around
Peter Walker’s Tanner Fountain always offer these alternative,
quieter settings, but this calm can overtake the entire main
space too, after tents and food trucks are moved away.
The main Plaza was also designed to accommodate spon-
taneous assemblies and protests. In fact, during the first three
weeks after it opened, a student group organised a protest in
the form of a mock same-sex wedding ceremony as a stand
against policies enacted in their Southeast Asian homeland. In
this way, the plaza acts as an open system that can adapt itself
to any number of desires or circumstances that are brought
into play.
These same principles of diversity, flexibility and adaptabil-
ity that inform the space as a whole are also addressed to the
scale of the human body, in the dual seating elements incor-
porated. Custom-designed wood benches are shaped to
accommodate different bodies in different ways, and give op-
tions for how people choose to sit — cross-legged, upright,
slouchy, lounging, alone or in groups, on laps, cuddling, out-
OPEN-ENDED 49

William H. Whyte studied how people unexpectedly gathered along the ledge of Mies
van der Rohe’s Seagram Building in New York, adapting to changing sun and shade.
Assemblage of programmes for the Yokohama Masterplan, OMA, 1992.
50  CHRIS REED
right lying down and scratching your belly ... Digital design and
fabrication tools allow for simple transitions between specific
measured bench profiles, producing a wide variety of sitting
options to appeal to people’s moods or physical needs and
desires.
Seating is at the heart of an agenda for the everyday. While
the Plaza’s client was especially interested in accommodating
events and activities, we insisted that portions of the space be
scaled down and set up to invite people in even at times when
no events were taking place, and to design it intentionally for
this, so that the space did not seem empty or forlorn when an
event was not happening. Multiple forms of seating were im-
portant, as was illumination at night to make the place feel
welcoming. These kinds of design elements simply encourage
people passing through to slow down, to pause, perhaps to
sit or hang out — thereby adding another layer of life to the
space beyond the destination event.
The Plaza at Harvard established a new flexible crossroads that invites
social interaction of many sorts with an ever-changing array of events
and activities.
The Plaza also offers an alternative to daily activities with space for quiet
moments.
Digital modelling and fabrication were used to rapidly iterate the design
for the bespoke benches at the Plaza and to create a final design
with simple profiles that respond to the human body.

OPEN-ENDED 51
Programming site diagram. The Plaza was designed as a flexible
space that could accommodate a wide diversity of daily activities and
special events.
Moveable tables and chairs on the Plaza allow administrators and
users to rearrange and test the space to meet their changing
needs, whether sitting alone or gathering in groups large and small.

52 CHRIS REED

The Plaza’s embedded flexibility and diversity in a sense allows
it to assume different personalities — equally compelling when
throbbing with activity or when small groups are quietly study-
ing or moving through. It is intentionally designed to accom-
modate multiple time-scales, multiple audiences, multiple
voices and multiple agendas. It allows for fitting-out and ap-
propriation in many ways, anticipating many uses but leaving
open other possibilities too. In all these ways it embodies the
richest ideals of what public space can be — a simple platform
for the playing-out of various social lives: dynamic, evolving,
open-ended.
LEARNING: CURATION AND ADAPTATION
Healthy organisms and ecosystems adapt to changes in their
environment, shifting strategy as circumstances evolve around
them. Healthy social spaces can learn and adapt too. Here,
ongoing design and management practices become key
agents in the success of these spaces. Too often, programming
is left to groups or organisations like Project for Public Spaces
who apply generic toolkits to projects, deploying standard in-
terventions (furniture, games, etc.), adjusted only in colour or
combination to a new place. In other cases advisors or clients
go too far in filling up spaces every moment of the day. Too
much programming can be as problematic as too little — open
spaces should accommodate a full range of uses and people,
including quieter moments that are more about passive enjoy-
ment or open possibilities for unscripted events. I say this rec-
ognising the fact that we cannot dictate what is too much or
too little, that in some ways the flexibility inherent in the spa-
tial designs allows for someone else to decide this — that it is,
in fact, a sign of success and health that many different inputs
and impressions are possible here.
The administration of Harvard created a Common Spaces
team to oversee and curate activities in the Plaza. This team
has had the opportunity to test a wide range of programming
events and activities over the many years since the Plaza
opened in 2013. They move things around, try different con-
A student protest gathers between a farmers’ market and food trucks on the Plaza.
figurations of events and tents and food trucks. They test dif-
ferent activities (winter curling on fake ice!) to see what works
and what does not. They bring games and furniture and plant-
ed pots in and move them out again. And then, importantly,
they adjust. They have had successful lunchtime concerts, a
boxing match, ice-skating, arts and crafts fairs, an incredible
farmers’ market, ping pong in the grove, and even a petting
zoo (outlandishly brought to us by Projects for Public Spaces)!
Sometimes it might seem too much, but then tents are taken
down, the goats go back to their farm, and people move in to
soak up the sun and talk and hang out and watch the world
go by on a gorgeously sunny autumn day.
The curators at Common Spaces test, learn and adapt — just
as an organism within a changing ecosystem would. The
many lives of the space, the lives of the multiple publics who
occupy the space, even momentarily, go on. One day full of
people, the next evening quiet — with just a few students talk-
ing, a dad and his kid playing on a bench, a professor walking
home. What comes tomorrow and next year and a decade
from now is a little uncertain — but is a ripe and healthy and
optimistically open question.
This article is an expanded version of short essays on this topic first published
in Mohsen Mostafavi with Gareth Dougherty (eds.), Ecological Urbanism, (Cam-
bridge, MA, and Baden, Switzerland: Harvard University Graduate School of
Design and Lars Müller, 2016, 2nd ed.) and in Anthos Journal of ECLAS (‘Die
Ökologien öffentlicher Plätze/L’écologie des places publiques’, issue 3, 2016,
p. 7 –11.). Thanks to Scott Mitchell of Stoss for his assistance and efforts.
OPEN-ENDED 53
FUNDING
FLEXIBLE SPACE
High-quality urban green and open spaces have long been
considered a crucial component in our increasingly urbanised
landscapes, but as important as we know open spaces are to
a city’s greatness, municipal budgets and priorities to manage
and maintain them have been on a downward trajectory for
a long time. Like many other countries, the UK is still recover-
ing from the recent financial crisis. The impact of govern-
ment-led austerity measures across the world disproportion-
ately affects ‘cultural services’ including parks, meaning they
are often at the top of the list for funding cuts. In this essay I
focus on how we fund our open spaces within an increasing-
ly fragile economic climate and refer to case studies in London
and Sheffield to show how this happens in practice.
WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES
IN FUNDING OPEN SPACES?
Green spaces are an ongoing concern. Trees, grass and flow-
ers grow; footpaths get used and need to be looked after
through ongoing management. Green spaces should be con-
sidered as an investment, but too often parks compete for
public money with important statutory services, including
health, education and social services. Providing green and
open spaces is not a statutory service anywhere in the world,
making funding a precarious affair: when public budgets are
54 NICOLA DEMPSEY
NICOLA DEMPSEY
at risk, statutory services take precedence. A recent UK report
shows that over 90 per cent of park managers have had
revenue budgets cut and 95 per cent expect this to continue
over the next three years (Heritage Lottery Fund — HLF — ,
2016). Also, local authorities — the main custodians of UK pub-
lic spaces — operate on annual budgets, meaning that taking
a long-term view is very difficult.
SOMEONE WILL ALWAYS LOOK
AFTER THE OPEN SPACES … RIGHT?
There is an assumption that, once money is spent on creating,
changing or regenerating open spaces, they will de facto be
looked after and paid for in perpetuity. The original parks
movement was based on making places publicly accessible
forever when Victorian philanthropists donated parks to towns
and cities knowing that long-term management and mainte-
nance would occur (Conway, 1991). Ongoing research sug-
gests this is not a realistic assumption to make (Dempsey et
al., 2012, 2016). The focus on place-making is deeply ingrained
with policy-makers and practitioners. The wealth of design and
planning guidance disproportionately focuses on creating,
making and changing the landscape. It tends to consider what
comes after implementation — in other words, the place-keep-
ing, the long-term management — as a postscript. Funding
Potters Fields Park from Tower Bridge. The park is the setting of numerous events
and activities including locations for TV and films, arts festivals and a tree-dressing day.
As seen here, it is also an important everyday space.
Food markets often take place on the lawn with the backdrop of the Greater London
Authority building, the office of the Mayor of London.
Digital screens draw large crowds on to the lawns, shown here during the London
Olympics.
A view from inside Rosy The Ballerina, by raumlaborberlin, commissioned and
produced by UP Projects. This view demonstrates how art installations transform the
space and provide an alternative vantage point for Tower Bridge, a UNESCO World
Heritage Site.

bodies do the same, prioritising capital works, while paying

limited attention to how the ongoing management beyond
initial establishment will be funded. So councils have to ex-
plore new ways of sustaining open spaces financially. Activat-
ing those spaces through programmes, events, seasonal
festivities and recurring installations is one such response.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK:

A GREEN GEM ALONG THE THAMES
Potters Fields Park (see p. 108 –121) almost did not exist. It did
not originally feature in the area’s Development Masterplan
and was fought for by campaigning community members,
leading to a Public Inquiry and the park’s inclusion in 1982
(Potters Fields Trust, 2017). The L-shaped park flanks the River
Thames with expansive views towards the City of London, the
Tower of London and Tower Bridge, and also provides a quiet
stretch of park along the river. With its uniquely prominent
location, the park custodians chose to generate a constant
funding stream based on leases for events, functions and ac-
tivities. These are incredibly diverse, ranging from marketing
campaigns (including a huge shopping bag emblazoned with
David Beckham’s torso), to community and charitable events
including a children’s egg hunt at Easter and a campaign
against meningitis.
The park is managed by the Potters Fields Park Management
Trust — a not-for-profit organisation. The Trust aims ’to occupy,
promote, manage and maintain as a public open space the
park and garden area known as “Potters Fields Park” in the
interests of public welfare, including the educational and rec-
reational benefit of visitors to the park’ (Potters Fields Park,
2016). The park generates a steady income from its high-pro-
file events and activities, renting out a small kiosk, and interest
generated from a small endowment. Money raised is reinvest-
ed into the site and other open spaces in the area, including
St John’s Churchyard. Potters Fields Park does not, therefore,
need any public money for ongoing maintenance costs. The
Trust leases the Park from the Southwark Council and, as a
self-sustaining vehicle, the Trust is arguably better placed to
sustain the future of the park than the Council itself (Smith et
al., 2009). The Trust is based in the local area and thus can

FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE 55


Sheffield Midland train station with South Street Park
(green area) and Park Hill (top left) in the background.
South Street Park was regenerated to maximise the
views of the city and an amphitheatre was constructed
to create an attraction. The ‘steel steps’ were improved,
and more accessible paths were put in around the
site to link the top entrances with the station and city
centre beyond.
South Street Park: Student Colour Run Event,
29 April 2017.
56 NICOLA DEMPSEY
focus on specific needs, which might relate to particular main-
tenance requirements after a well-attended event, extensive
litter clearing, or choosing projects with community and stake-
holder involvement to reinvest revenues into projects.
As site managers, the Trust addresses potential conflicts of
interest in this publicly accessible park by maximising the in-
come from the minimum number of hire days possible. In this
way, the Trust provides events that have a benefit to the local
community, and makes the local community aware of the be-
nefits of their business model, which provides far higher stand-
ards of maintenance than the conventional council system.
THE VIEW FROM SHEFFIELD
South Street Park has been changing as a site since 2008
when its regeneration began. It is a high-profile site in terms
of its location, visible from much of the central Sheffield city
area. It lies immediately behind the city’s train station, is a
steeply sloping site (1:10 gradient) and was created in the
1960s, when the Park Hill flats were built to replace extensive
slum housing in the area. It had long been managed at a min-
imal level by the Sheffield City Council, because of the slope
and the lack of physical connection between the city centre
and surrounding housing. Local people would avoid it because
of anti-social behaviour including drug use, and the park be-
came a blot on the city’s landscape. The blot became more
visible when the city’s Supertram located a tram stop on its
doorstep in the 1990s, and later when the city’s train station
was regenerated between 2004 and 2008. This led to plans
to redesign the space to improve the experience for pedes-
trians and attract new users to this site.
The ‘steel steps’ are an important feature of the park, taking
people up from the train station in a sweeping gesture past
the grassed amphitheatre to the top of the site. The amphi-
theatre can seat 1000 people and is the main feature of the
park. This capacity means that the site is more suitable for
smaller and community-based events, which must be why the
Council is not under pressure to use the site for commercial
events. The Council suggests South Street Park as a venue to
organisers of potential events, particularly as the city’s other
parks and open spaces are often at full capacity with pro-
grammes. Since 2013, between four and seven events have
been held annually in South Street Park, most of which have
been cinema screenings and theatre productions. To date,
these theatre and cinema events have been funded through
external initiatives (for example, via the British Film Institute)
and are currently not Council initiatives or events, but this may
change in the future.
When the first theatre production was put on in the amphi-
theatre, the steps were closed off to commuters and the
non-paying public. This caused friction with local residents,
who had not been informed about a major event, leading to
complaints to the Council about restricted access along the
main pedestrian route. This has become less of a problem over
time and the Council provides notices to warn local users when
the steps are to be closed (30 minutes before and during
­performances). It can sometimes become an issue for event
organisers; for example, when a ‘15’ certificate film was
screened, they had not anticipated the need (and costs) for
grid-fencing with black sheeting erected all around the seating
as part of child protection requirements. There is also an issue
around the site not having its own electricity and water supply.
Reflecting on how commercial activity such as advertising
and marketing might form part of events in this city centre
location, I asked Council and private event organisers about
the scope for doing so in South Street Park. This received a
negative response for varied reasons. The event organisers did
not consider South Street Park to be a particularly central lo-
cation, describing the site as ‘out on a limb’, without a lot of
footfall. The Council’s event representative said that advertis-
ing was not a good idea for the park, ‘because parks should
be a haven away from that kind of thing’, and that any pro-
motions in Sheffield parks should be about nature, health and
well-being. It seems that the Council would not consider any
advertising or marketing activity in this site. With the ongoing
stringent austerity measures, and as more residents hopeful-
ly continue to move into the regenerated Park Hill flats, one
wonders if this attitude might change over time.
In conclusion, the current government has reiterated its
position that parks cannot become a statutory duty for local
authorities, on the advice of the 2016 Parks Inquiry (CLG,
2017). This strongly suggests that income-generating activities
will become a much more regular feature in parks and open
spaces. Parks have long been the setting for events but does
it mean changing our relationship with the park? We do not
have a strong tendency to use our parks after dark: should this
change? How acceptable to users is closing a green space or
a part of a park for evening events? Perhaps closure is nothing
more than an annoying necessity that needs to be extended
to more parks. This might incur short-term costs for lighting,
providing electricity and water: would such investment feasi-
bly generate sustainable income?
We can look at Potters Fields Park as a very high-profile site
and apply similar practices to South Street Park. There is real
potential to activate this space more regularly to ‘get it on the
map’ of Sheffield’s lively calendar of events. Incorporating it
into existing and temporary urban walking trails — for exam-
ple, to spot sculptures (elephants in Sheffield and sheep in
Bristol) — can significantly increase pedestrian numbers, with
costs borne by the private sector.
HLF (2016) describes how around half of UK councils are
considering selling off their green spaces or handing over
management to other organisations because of reduced
budgets and austerity measures. When considered as a stark
and over-simplistic dichotomy of parks being kept in public use
or sold off for development, it would be churlish to argue. Yet
this is happening and so it requires innovative thinking and
real changes in the attitudes of all stakeholders to understand
the social, cultural, ecological as well as financial value of our
21st-century urban green spaces.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to interviewees, colleagues (particularly my place-keeping mentor
Mel Burton) and past students who have contributed to research projects re-
ferred to in this chapter, including the Sheffield City Council, the Showroom
Sheffield and Potters Fields Park Trust. All photos are taken by the author unless
stated otherwise.
REFERENCES
Hazel Conway, People’s Parks: the design and development of Victorian
parks in Britain, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 1991.
Nicola Dempsey, Mel Burton and Rosie Duncan, ‘Evaluating the effective-
ness of a cross-sector partnership for green space management: The case of
Southey Owlerton, Sheffield, UK’, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 2015,
15, pp. 155–64. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2015.12.002
Nicola Dempsey, Mel Burton and Alice Mathers, ‘Place-keeping — respon-
sive, long-term open space management‘, Town and Country Planning, 2012,
81(10), pp. 431–36. 
Department of Communities and Local Government, Government Response
to the Communities and Local Government Select Committee Report: The Future
of Public Parks, HM Government: London 2017.
Heritage Lottery Fund, State of UK Public Parks, Heritage Lottery Fund:
London 2016.
Potters Fields Trust, Park Chronology, http://pottersfields.co.uk/history/
park-chronology. Accessed in Feb 25 2017
Harry Smith, Marcia Pereira and Mel Burton, ’Physical and institutional
requalification for long-term “place-keeping”: experiences from open space
regeneration in the United Kingdom’, conference paper, International Associ-
ation of People-Environment Studies, Culture & Space in the Built Environment
Network & Housing Network International Symposium on Revitalising Built
Environments, Requalifying Old Places for New Uses, Istanbul 2009.
FUNDING
FLEXIBLE SPACE 57
GIANT BUNNIES
AND ELECTRIC SWINGS:
PLANNING, PROGRAM-
MING AND PLAY
PATH
I contribute to this book as a practitioner whose practice is
changing. For over 30 years I worked as a producer of events
in public spaces. I started as director of a small travelling circus
working in parks and plazas across Europe and the US. A few
adventures later, I was named Director of City-Wide Events for
the New York City Department of Parks & Recreation. From
there I became an independent practitioner creating and man-
aging concerts, carnivals, festivals, art installations, expos,
brand extravaganzas and spectacles as varied as papal mass-
es and pachyderm parades. All these projects had the event
as the end goal. In recent years I have been invited to collab-
orate with municipalities, developers, designers and urbanists
on projects focusing on the creation of public space and find
myself becoming a producer of the spaces themselves.
This shift in my work coincides with the change that I have
seen in who is operating public space, how public space is
being conceived, and how it is being managed. To understand
this, one need only to look at the rise of parks conservancies
and Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) and their increasing
influence and/or control of public space.
This is a key point; those who determine how a space is
programmed will usually end up determining who uses it. Pro-
gramming has long been utilised as a tool for attracting desired
demographic groups — and for keeping ‘less desirable’ popu-
58 CHRIS WANGRO
CHRIS WANGRO
lations away. Reserving value-judgement, it is safe to say that
spaces administered by private or public-private organisations
are to a large extent less democratic than those run by public
offices.
Public and private venues are increasingly curated, and
curation is a form of control. There are rules and ‘curated’
restrictions on who may use the space, and often what hap-
pens in the space is decided by property owners or a space’s
controlling board. Downside: the loss of the local community’s
organic input into the creation of the space. Upside: the po-
tential to design the experience of a space so that it becomes
a well-loved, well-used public asset.
As more spaces are being managed by private and
semi-public entities, there is an increasing trend to programme
these spaces. Unfortunately, people who have little or no ex-
perience creating, producing or programming are doing much
of this work. In such a setting, risk-taking is often frowned
upon and creativity plays second fiddle to the ‘tried-and-test-
ed’. Understandably, there is a tendency for property manag-
ers to utilise what they see around them, and this has bred a
go-to portfolio of ‘activations’. At the time of writing, this port-
folio includes food trucks, ping-pong tables, cornhole (a simple
lawn game where beanbags are tossed towards a hole in a
slanted piece of wood), more food trucks, outdoor films and
maybe a yoga class or two. Not that any of these are inher-
The Lot, overlooked by phase 2 of the
Highline, involved the conversion of a
vacant car park into a platform for social
interaction and artistic expression.
Overview of the Lawn on D during
Oysterfest.
ently bad, but as a portfolio of public programming, there is
nothing innovative, exciting, media-worthy or particularly
sponsor-worthy on the list.
What I think we all strive for is the creation of public space
with a distinct tone and tenor that appeals and responds to
the needs of the community. And to go one step further, we
aim to build space that creates community. There are essen-
tially two ways to do this: 1) Enter into a space as a curator
with a portfolio of ideas, projects and events and parachute
that into the venue. 2) Collaborate with the local community
and enlist their help to create an informed, relevant and di-
verse programme.
CASE STUDY LAWN ON D (LOD)
Early in 2014, the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority
(MCCA) was completing plans for a new park space, a 1.1-hec-
tare parking lot that became known as the Lawn on D (LOD).
I was recruited by HR&A’s strategic development team, and
named ‘official impresario’ by the MCCA’s chief visionary How-
ard Davis. My initial assignments were to help the design team
evaluate the plans for the space and to create a strategic road-
map for the initial season(s) of programming.
DESIGN NOTES
When I started on the project, Sasaki had already completed
plans for the LOD’s basic layout and design. The space was to
be open and event-friendly, designed to host and attract all
types of programming. Reviewing these plans with an eye
towards event production in the four key areas below I found
the following:
1) Vehicle access
Event production brings vehicle traffic into a space. Many
spaces try to ban all vehicles but restrictions invariably fail. I
would suggest that designing paths that can sustain vehicles is
a better and safer way to go. Working with Sasaki we created
paths through the LOD that could handle the weight of a 40-
foot semi-container or stage-truck, as well as accommodate a
large vehicle’s turning radius. We widened one area of path-
way in order to accommodate a temporary stage. We broad-
ened the existing entry to make it easy for vehicles to enter the
space safely from the street, and created another wide gate-
way at the opposite end of the park so that a vehicle could go
straight through the space without needing to turn around.
2) Power
Event production requires power, and providing easily acces-
sible power will limit the need for producers to bring gener-
GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS 59
Plan of Lawn on D illustrating its activation.
ators into the space. Limiting generators is generally a good
thing as they are rarely pretty or quiet, this also reduces traffic
through the space — a good thing despite the improvements
mentioned above. The expense of generator rental can be
prohibitive for smaller community organisations putting on
events. Installing power helps attract these organisations and
support community programming in the long run.
Power needs be placed around the space so that it is eas-
ily accessible. For the LOD we added a major power box with
the requisite capacity for events and 110volt power taps were
added to lamp poles throughout the area for more general
needs. It should be noted that ideally the power box is located
within 100 feet of where a stage might likely be placed, and
located in such a way that cables running from the box to the
stage cross as few major pedestrian pathways as possible.
3) Water
Drinkable water is obviously best, but having any water on site
is a plus. Non-drinkable water is required for everything from
landscape maintenance to washing dishes. Drinkable water
allows for all manner of things from water fountains to misting
stations, which can be literal lifesavers. We did manage to add
a bit of water access to the LOD plan, but this was complicated
60 CHRIS WANGRO
by difficult drainage issues. Puddling in some areas was al-
most unavoidable.
4) Emergency exits
The initial LOD plans we worked from did not include a fence
around the space. There was much conversation about the
pros and cons of fencing and ultimately it was decided
that this particular space would benefit from an enclosure. It
was key for us at that point to be sure that nowhere in the
space was more than a couple of hundred feet from an open-
ing, in order to be able to meet the emergency exit require-
ments for Temporary Public Assembly permits needed for
special events.
THE ROADMAP AND BEYOND
I started the roadmap process with a ‘deep dive’ investigating
programmes being held in comparable and noteworthy spaces
in the region, nationally and internationally. The goal was to
create an inventory of programmes in order to learn what was
working and why. Most importantly, I met with a broad spec-
trum of individuals and organisations in the community. This
included civic anchors such as Harvard’s ART Theater and the
Boston Children’s Museum, as well as commercial producers
and promoters. I also met with more homegrown posses such
as the people behind terrific local events like PorchFest and the
Boston Music Awards. Some of these meetings were friendly,
some were adversarial, as locals were suspicious of an out-
sider and sceptical of a large state-funded project. Some of
those I met I knew I would never work with; some I hoped
might become partners critical to our success. It was a wide-
scale brain-picking and pulse-taking exercise that proved es-
sential. This phase also served another important function — it
showed the community that we cared about what they had to
say and allowed them to participate and contribute.

R&D phase goals:

To understand:
– What programming in the region is working and why
– What there is too much of
– What is missing
– Who is doing great stuff that we can learn from and/or
include
– Who is doing great stuff that we can host and help make
better
– Who can we expect to be our principal audience(s) and
how do we get them to consider a trip to our venue
worthwhile.
Elevated view from the Convention Centre overlooking the Lawn on D
showing the perimeter enclosure and entrances. The Play Day event is
With this understanding, I had the unusual opportunity to in- activating the space.
fuse everything from our bar decor to the concert line-up with Chris Wangro moderating a discussion between a panel and the
a common and informed vision. audience at a forum he hosted exploring playfulness and public art.

SWING TIME; A STAR IS BORN

While surveying the scene in Boston, I was warned repeated-
ly that it was an extremely divided city of distinct neighbour-
hoods and communities. The goal of having people leave their
comfort zone to travel to a dead zone of the city in order to
spend time in a fairly sterile and shade-less few acres along-
side a large ugly building was something of a challenge.
My colleagues at HR&A had a key insight — they identified
the need for an agent of change that would help transform the
space, a centrepiece to make this new park pop. My goal was
to find a physical structure that would act as an icon and defin-
ing element for the space, something that would both encap-
sulate and broadcast the spirit of the park. We also felt that the
space was too wide-open for the day-to-day use we anticipat-
ed. We wanted a physical divider that would split the site into
zones that allowed for different types of simultaneous usage.
Anything that could achieve all this was not going to be
cheap. Our client was not easily swayed but we made our case
and ultimately the powers that be gave us their backing. The
hunt was on. Mutually agreed objectives were that this
‘change agent’ would be ‘design & tech forward’, which was
in keeping with the image the MCCA was aiming to create, and
as the LOD sat in a dead zone with few pedestrians passing at
night, we would need to include light or projection so that
passing drivers would take note.
Initially the ‘big idea’ was to work with Janet Echelman, a
Boston-based artist whose large-scale public works had be-
come synonymous with new forms in public art. As can hap-
pen our project with Janet folded at the eleventh hour for
external reasons. Though calamitous at the time, this proved
to be fortuitous as it allowed me to hone in on a project that
would better represent the spirit of the venue and achieve our
specific goals.
PLAY AS A UNITING PRINCIPLE
I had been working on a definition of the space in terms of its
character and spirit; the focus of my thinking had centred on
the idea of playfulness. The goal was to infuse the space with
a relaxed and joyful spirit — from the furniture and brightly
coloured bar to the art installations and schedule of events. I
had begun to think of the LOD as a place where Bostonians
could be brought together simply by having fun.
One of the things that made replacing the Echelman project
daunting was that I was committed to finding a project creat-
ed by a local. There were other possibilities — notably a high-
tech installation by a Canadian experiential design team.

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS 61


Janet Echelman’s work eventually activated the
Greenway in downtown Boston, creating the
opportunity for Swing Time to be designed for the
Lawn on D.
Lawn on D provides many opportunities for play for
both children and adults, including lawn games,
foam shipping containers and Play Day installations.
62 CHRIS WANGRO
However, launching the space with a cultural import was not
the way to win over the community, nor would it have been
right for a project that was state-funded.
I researched regional artists, arts groups, cultural and com-
munity organisations but came up empty-handed until I called
Höweler + Yoon. My first conversation with architect/designer
Meejin Yoon was a gift: within minutes we began discussing
play. Meejin had been working with her students on ideas
relating to a large-scale play structure. We saw that there could
be a play piece that would embody all the project’s goals:
Swing Time was born.
Swing Time delivered on many fronts. It set the tone for the
space by declaring it a sophisticated playground. Physically it
split the space in two, yet did so in a way that allowed visibil-
ity and flow-through. Seductively sculptural and iconic, the
swings also had to be tried — to be experienced. It quickly
became a destination and ‘the unofficial selfie capital of Bos-
ton’. The work drew crowds of all ages and backgrounds as
well as attention from local, national and international media.
As to the investment’s tangible return on investment, the team
leasing the LOD for private events found that Swing Time be-
came their strongest selling point when renting the space.
Swing Time also opened the door for us to present a variety
of other large-scale playful projects; it created buy-in from
MCCA, excitement in the community and a general expectation
for more.
Overview of Swing Time during the Play
Day event, demonstrating how Swing
Time creates enough of a separation
between the tent and the lawns but is
transparent enough so that it does not
create a barrier.
Swing Time, coined the ‘selfie capital of
Boston’, attracts all ages to enjoy the
swings in multiple ways.
At night Swing Time transforms the Lawn
on D with glowing rings of colour that
people are instantly drawn to like moths
to a lamp.

GIANT BUNNIES MATTER

When meeting with artists and arts presenters in the region,
I heard many complain of the ‘white men or horses’ nature of
public sculpture in Boston. It was clear that the visual arts
programme at LOD needed to create a counterpoint to that
tradition. The hunger for something ‘other’ gave us a tremen-
dous opportunity to offer something different. Our experience
with Swing Time proved that scale and playfulness had reso-
nance in the city; what could be a better follow-up than giant
bunnies?
Amanda Parer’s Intrude is a striking piece; it is a series of
mass-scale, illuminated, inflated white rabbits. Despite its
monumental scale it is a work that does not take itself too
seriously. It is childlike and slightly silly, yet carries an environ-
mental message that is slyly thought-provoking. This made
Intrude a terrific antidote to Boston’s self-important public art
tradition. On encountering it, people respond to Intrude with
a smile. It is hard to resist. The work is playful on multiple
fronts, not the least of which is its Wonderland-ish ability to
transform the space. Confronting the work changes one’s
sense of size and self within the environment; everyone simply
feels different standing amid a field of 7 metre tall rabbits. The
work and its playful spirit have a democratising effect.
Swing Time did more than create dynamic seating for the
space; it achieved the goal of offering playfulness to a city that
needed permission to let its hair down. It also set the bar for

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS 63

People line up to experience the Intrude installation.

the space, creating a sense that the LOD was presenting pro-
jects not to be missed. Intrude carried that spirit and message
forward. After just one weekend, demand to see Intrude was
so great that we had to close the gates of the LOD and queues
formed up and down the block.
One look at that queue told you that word-of-mouth had
carried to a huge cross-section of population, and the invest-
ment in Intrude had paid off.
A NOTE ON PARTNERSHIPS
It is standard practice in public space management to host or
issue permits for event organisers, exhibits and community
organisations. Often these outside groups are seen as invaders
and the relationship between their producers and venue man-
agement is adversarial. This is not only a waste of energy, it
is a waste of opportunity. Seeing outsiders as partners — and
treating them as such — can be mutually beneficial. Event pro-
ducers, artists and organisers can and will carry word of the
space back to their communities. Their experiences and com-
munity word-of-mouth is powerful and important. Their net-
works, connections and capabilities can become great assets
to the space and its programming.
Treating organisers as partners can also create a wealth of
resources for the space and other programmes. For example,
a music producer presenting a concert in the space might well
support another organisation’s family festival with music; an
arts organisation that creates a mural project might well de-
sign graphics for other programmes. The point is that by sup-
porting and embracing outside organisers as partners, you
build a collaborative internal community that can support and
enrich each other’s work.
There are many ways to offer support to those you host.
Offering the venue for free is always best and there are few
better ways to attract great programmes to your space — but
this is not always viable. Bolstering programmes by offering
venue resources is also meaningful; it will create better events,
collaborative spirit and general goodwill. The resources you
offer need not be financial: staffing, marketing and access to
basic equipment and infrastructure can be a big draw.
Finally, as programming budgets are usually tight, attract-
ing projects to a space by treating producers as partners is a
powerful way to create strong and diverse programming that
by nature of its design is likely to be a collaboration of, by and
for the people.

64 CHRIS WANGRO
Intrude in the daylight still provides
a spectacle and the foam shipping
containers play feature double as a
makeshift seating for groups to gather
and socialise.
In 2015, the Lawn on D hosted Intrude,
a collection of illuminated over-sized
bunnies, simultaneously statuesque and
cuddly.

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS 65

SCRATCH
THAT!
As this book demonstrates, the planning and design of public
spaces in parallel to and in coordination with a curatorial plan
is a design trend that has been gaining traction in the recent
past. This is to say that the future performance of public spaces,
via the curation of the events that will be taking place within
them, is now playing a role in the conception and design of
public space. It could be argued that, according to this trend,
public space is no longer considered to be only physical space
but, rather, it is seen as a combination of physical space with
a curatorial program.
As a spatial typology, public space is now undergoing a
transformation similar to that experienced by museums in
the 1980s and early 90s. At that time, curatorial practices
became consolidated as programmes capable of adding new
dimensions to museums’ traditional physical spaces. Through
their ever-changing curatorial programmes, curators added a
new temporal dimension to the static character of museums’
physical spaces. From that point onward, a museum’s char-
acter would no longer be exclusively defined by the building’s
physical presence; rather, the museum’s exhibition and event
programmes would become an essential defining factor.
Through their permanent use of media, curators also contri-
buted to the reconstruction of the museum’s identity. A mu-
seum’s identity would no longer be exclusively defined by the
building’s physical presence either. The use of public media as
66 SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO
SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO
a disseminating agent would also become an essential defin-
ing factor.
In this new paradigm, public space has come to be under-
stood as a place offering ever-changing programmatic fulfill-
ment that is permanently broadcast via social media. The con-
tinual superimposition of temporary occupations by different
publics can avoid a single, permanent and exclusive public. For
this reason, the curation of a constantly changing set of spatial
opportunities can be an appropriate technique for enabling
heterogeneous and contradictory publics — a critical condition
for an open and pluralistic society. It may be argued that a
curatorial plan could potentially guarantee equal access to all
types of publics, especially to those who might feel intimidat-
ed or at a disadvantage under normal circumstances.
However, curatorial programmes present several draw-
backs that are due precisely to their own strengths. In this
essay I point out a few of these but the primary one is that
curatorial programmes are obviously curated. In this new para-
digm, the definition of publicness within these public spaces
rests upon the curators themselves. And, regardless of the
curators’ intentions and programming agenda, publicness
cannot be controlled by a handful of individuals. A curated
strategy, then, may seem to run counter to the very principle
of publicness as a characteristic that is defined by many
people, not only by a few.
Through a palimpsestuous process similar to the methods fol-
lowed by the public spaces described in this book, this text
surveys a variety of approaches in order to confront the design
of public space as a medium that can enable cultural diversity.
Similar to the operating procedures followed by the public
spaces analysed in this book, this text is written as a series of
positions that need to be erased or overlaid in order to make
room for new ones. In this regard, this article is both medium
and message: through its own structure the text embodies the
arguments it discusses.

CURATING CHANGE
Public space is not only the physical presence of the public
realm, it is also the space where publics (both already existing
and newly formed) gain political visibility. This process has
been thoroughly described by Don Mitchell in his analysis of
the People’s Park in Berkeley, California. As he explains, ‘by
claiming space in public, by creating public spaces, social
groups themselves become public. Only in public space, for
example, can the homeless represent themselves as a legiti-
mate part of “the public”. Insofar as homeless people or other
marginalised groups remain invisible to society, they fail to be
counted as legitimate members of the polity. And in this sense,
public spaces are absolutely essential to the functioning of
democratic politics.’1
Based on these relationships between physical space and
social realm, the definition of public space is a complex matter
since what is referred to as ‘the public’ is a formless, hetero-
geneous, multi-faceted, fragmented and constantly changing
social body. The public spaces included in this book are per-
haps examples of a new way of reconceptualising public space
so that it is capable of accepting multiple publics, sensibilities
All images accompanying this article on public space are pictures of
and forms of expression. Times Square, New York.
By curating events, these public spaces seem to embrace New York action in solidarity with Ferguson, Missouri, encouraging
openness, acceptance and diversity. In this context, curation a boycott of Black Friday consumerism, 2014.

appears to become a political act, ideal for the construction

and definition of public space. However, through their curation,
access and exposure in these spaces are also being carefully
controlled, regulating change for the consumption of a specif-
ic and selected public. Therefore, despite its political potential,
curation can be a way of accidentally or willfully hiding those
publics that remain ‘unselected’ … wait, scratch that then!

SCRATCH THAT! 67
AT YOUR OWN RISK
What is required for public space to be truly public is the al-
lowance ‘for contest and struggle’.2 ‘What makes a space
public is democratic control over that space, and therefore the
willingness to allow a space to host sometimes contentious
publics.’3 Don Mitchell and Richard Van Deusen’s analysis of
the Downsview Park competition points toward the defining
characteristic of public space. To this end their text highlights
the difference between open and public space, pointing out
that ‘most of the open space that is planned in modern West-
ern cities — parks, plazas, shopping malls, arcades — is decid-
edly not public: its purpose is to control and direct social inter-
action, to police it, rather than to provide a stage on which
various publics can come together in all their often contentious
Times Square after New Year’s Eve party, 2007.
Inside Out New York, 2013 by the French artist JR.
68 SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO
differences and spark a conflagration of public, political, and
social interaction. In fact, much contemporary open space de-
sign stands opposed to public space.’4
In this regard, Liana Finck’s characterisation of the difference
between private and public property wittily exemplifies this dif-
ference: ‘Private! Do not enter. Public! Enter at your own risk.’5
Due to the relative stability of Western democracies, the
design of public space has shifted from concerns regarding
the portrayal of the public realm to concerns regarding its
consumerist performance. The activities shown by many of the
public spaces in this book are, from a political point of view,
quite harmless. However, it is probably due to their lack of
political intensity that these public spaces enjoy a high degree
of popularity. While most of these spaces should probably be
labelled as open and not necessarily as public — following
Mitchell and Van Deusen’s ideas — they demonstrate a certain
lightness that is surely at the core of their success as places
of public interest.
Projects and texts discussing the reimagination of public
space tend to assume that political relevance should be pres-
ent at all times in the design of public space. However, the
reconceptualisation of public space could potentially originate
from a position at the other end of the spectrum of political
weight, benefitting from the lightness that is exemplified in the
public spaces shown in this book.
The objective in the construction of public space should be
the design of a space that remains open and indeterminate to
different publics so that people can appropriate it according to
their political leanings, religious beliefs or aesthetic forms of
expression. The projects analysed in this book show how this
perpetual change of function and occupation can be the means
of addressing multiple publics and sensibilities. However, if
what we call public space is to be fully public, these shifts and
the different opportunities they enable should allow more risks,
testing the acceptance of a public that might only be concerned
with the enjoyment of a carefully curated and safe experience
… wait, we might need to scratch that too then!
LOW-COST GRAVITAS
Due to their role in the construction and definition of the pub-
lic realm, public spaces are expected to embody a well-defined
character and gravitas. Due to the multiplicity of publics, how-
ever, such spaces must engage with temporary, overlapping
and often contradictory sensibilities and occupations. The de-
sign question that emerges is, what type of character and
gravitas can be achieved with temporality and spontaneity?
The dichotomy constructed by the conflicting and compet-
ing forces of the permanent and the temporary has shaped
the design of public space since World War II. The 1940s’
modern focus on a new type of monumentality epitomised by
Sigfried Giedion, Josep Lluís Sert and Fernand Léger and their
‘Nine points on monumentality’ was later questioned by those
1960s’ projects embracing instantaneity and flexibility exem-
plified, for instance, by Archigram’s ‘Instant city’. At the ex-
tremes of this dichotomy shaped by permanence and tempo-
rality are two distinct types: the monument and the pop-up. Sessions from US Attorney to Federal Judge. In the letter Mrs
The monument as the permanent fixture with fixed cultural King argued that Sessions’ well-documented racist practices
meaning, will only come down, sometimes violently, when the should prevent him from becoming a federal judge. To the
sociocultural and politico-economic context changes. The pop- surprise and consternation of many people, Senator Warren
up is the fleeting consumerist instant without obvious mean- was stopped and silenced by the Senate majority leader Mitch
ing but which, through its sharing, becomes a powerful vehi- McConnell, who justified the action by explaining that ‘Senator
cle for social consciousness. Most public spaces of the last 60 Warren was giving a lengthy speech. She had appeared to
years have been conceptualised and designed as outcomes of violate the rule. She was warned. She was given an explana-
this dichotomy. tion. Nevertheless, she persisted.’8
This dichotomy, however, has been recently influenced by The opportunity for protests to exist and persist is an es-
technological advances as well as cultural and economic sential feature of dissent. Speakers’ Corner, located on the
changes — all gravitating around social media — that appear to northeast edge of Hyde Park in London, has been a ‘tradition-
have shifted its point of equilibrium. The traditional balance al site for public speeches and debates since the mid 1800s
was achieved by accepting that public space was capable of when protests and demonstrations took place in Hyde Park’.9
providing character and gravitas through permanence (core)
while moveable parts (furniture) were able to provide the
changing content, constructing diverse temporal frames ca-
pable of addressing different publics and sensibilities within a
fixed and determined physical space. In this traditional bal-
ance, most of the financial investment was placed on the core,
defined by different physical elements such as the construction
of the ground, for example. However, when the financial bur-
den becomes too high, or when the core risks become obso-
lete as quickly as the current context seems to suggest, op-
portunistic design strategies seem to indicate that we can get
rid of gravitas altogether and just accept temporality: evanes-
cence without a core. No monument, just a pop-up. No grav-
itas, only enjoyment.
The influence of the low cost involved in setting up this new
condition has been explored previously by Alejandro Zaera-Polo
in his article ‘No frills and bare life’,6 in which he interrogates a
change in design sensibility that is necessary due to financial
and cultural shifts. In the current context, then, flexible pro-
gramming and quick and low-cost adaptation coupled with
social media emerge as the main sensibility through which to
design public space, setting up a new point of equilibrium. In-
stagram, for example, has the power of transforming unknown
and out-of-the-way places into destinations.7 The physical pop-
up installation of the 20th century has acquired its virtual equiv-
alence with its pop-up digital presence of the 21st century.
As the projects in this book demonstrate, this shift is now
widespread and has defined its own set of paradigms and
design techniques. This consolidation seems to indicate, for
instance, that in the current moment physical gravitas has
been completely replaced by instant social media and, conse-
quently, consumerism via temporary programming and digital
sharing has completely depoliticised public space … wait, let’s
scratch that then!

NEVERTHELESS, SHE PERSISTED

In the US Senate debates preceding the confirmation of Jeff
Sessions as the US Attorney General to serve under President
Trump, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) attempted to read
a letter written in 1986 by Coretta Scott King, the widow of
Martin Luther King Jr, when she opposed the elevation of
V-J Day in New York, 1945: crowds gather in Times Square to celebrate
the surrender of Japan.
.
Marines with the Special Marine Ground Task Force demonstrated the
Marine Corps Martial Arts Program as well as displayed weaponry in
support of Fleet Week, New York, 2010.

SCRATCH THAT! 69
 Car race New York–Paris, 1908: car inspection before the start in Times Square.
Times Square at night, 2013.

This space came into being due to a series of protests that

On the morning of 19 June 2015, in Times Square, the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, with wildlife and conservation partners, hosted its
second ivory crush event.
Sree Sreenivasan teaching a social media class in Times Square during
Social Media Weekend 2016.
Looking south as people relax in the new furniture of Times Square
on a cloudy midday 2016.
resulted in the 1872 Park Regulations Act, a piece of legislation
that regulated the right to meet and speak freely in Hyde Park.
Due to this opportunity for free speech, the ideas voiced and
shared at this Speakers’ Corner, as well as at others through-
out the world, played an important role in several defining
moments of the construction of modern society: from women’s
suffrage to the eight-hour day. Because these achievements
mostly took place at the end of the 19th and beginning of the
20th centuries, speakers’ corners might be considered a thing
of the past but their impact has remained until today.
In a speech given in London in 2014 to both Houses of the
UK Parliament, the German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel
recalled her first visit to London in the spring of 1990: ‘We
walked through Hyde Park looking for the Speakers’ Corner,
which — especially for us as East Germans — was legendary,
the very symbol of free speech. I hope that is not an insult to
you, the members of the British Parliament.’10

70 SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO
As digital versions of traditional speakers’ corners, different
forms of social media, Twitter for example, now offer the op-
portunity to speak without having to be physically present at a
specific space or place. In many ways, it could be argued that
Twitter has ungrounded speakers’ corners. Despite this assess-
ment, speech in public continues to be a powerful and neces-
sary vehicle for democratic discussions,11 as it has been contin-
uously demonstrated by popular uprisings such as the Occupy
movement in the US and UK or the 15-M movement in Spain.
The public spaces analysed in this book are mostly concep-
tualised and designed to enable programmatic and functional
flexibility according to consumerist patterns and trends estab-
lished by its curators via moveable furniture and amplified by
its users via digital social media. Dissent, though, cannot be
curated or programmed. Speakers’ corners allowed for multi-
ple points of view to be shared at once but these were never
curated. Rather, space was merely made available and persis-
tence, not curation, became the selective force.
If free speech is to have a visible and relevant presence in
public space, its programming needs to be much looser. Ac-
cordingly, consumerist patterns and trends might need to be
relegated to a lesser role in the conceptualisation and design
of public space, probably resulting in a decrease of the popu-
larity of public space itself … wait, we need to scratch that
then!
REVERSIBILITY
The disciplines of anthropology and ethnography have shown
the many roles that space plays in both the physicalisation of
our societal relationships as well as in the construction of new
cultural relationships. For this reason, the disciplines invested
in the design of the built environment can be described as
instruments for materialising sociocultural forces into physical
spaces. Physical spaces, in return, help shape and change
traditions, rituals and habits. Undoubtedly, most designers
aspire to master this feedback loop.
However, this mirroring between forces and spaces can be
too restrictive in the design of public space. A traditional way
of avoiding this problem has been to think of space as a frame-
work that loosely fits many societal protocols and enables
different types of activities. Peter Smithson expressed this
positioning in an interesting manner: ‘In a way, what I am
explaining is like a children’s party. The mother organises cer-
tain possibilities for play, but whether the party goes well or
not depends on the invention of the children. The mother is
designing a framework.’12 This approach to design severs the
links between sociocultural forces and spatial organisations,
and puts emphasis instead on the events planned to take
place.
A different way of understanding this connection between
forces and spaces can be achieved through perpetually revers-
ible building processes. In this context, temporality implies not
just the duration of an activity but also a specific physical con-
text that will have to be undone once the activity is finished.
In their analysis of the Kumbh Mela, a religious event that
takes place in India every twelve years and involves the con-
struction of a temporary city for five to seven million people,
Rahul Mehrotra and Felipe Vera use the term reversibility to
address questions of temporality and adaptation within cur-
rent discourses of urban planning and design.
‘Reversibility can be examined in two contrasting dimen-
sions: on one hand its material aspects, which translate in a
physical reversibility of the constructed armature that supports
the existence of the Kumbh Mela. And on the other hand there
are the immaterial agreements that frame a reversible political
and institutional framework that supports the construction
and organization of the ephemeral city.’13
In lieu of permanence and memory, reversible spaces sug-
gest ephemerality and adaptation, which brings us back to the
first point of this short text on the importance of curating
change … wait, scratch that!
1 Don Mitchell, The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public
Space, Guilford Press: New York 2003, p. 129.
2 Don Mitchell and Richard Van Deusen, ‘Downsview Park: Open space or
public space’, in Julia Czerniak (ed.), CASE: Downsview Park Toronto, Pres-
tel: Munich, New York and Harvard University Graduate School of Design:
Cambridge, MA 2001, p. 104.
3 Ibid., p. 113.
4 Ibid., p. 103.
5 Cartoon by Liana Finck. Accessed 4 January 2017: http://www.instagram.
com/p/BLbWaIUDmv2/
6 Alejandro Zaera-Polo, ‘No frills and bare life: Cheapness and democracy’,
Log no.18, Winter 2010, p. 15–27.
7 Alissa Walker, ‘Hashtag tourism: Using Instagram to explore our neigh-
borhoods’, Curbed, 21 December 2016. Accessed 15 February 2017:
http://www.curbed.com/2016/12/21/13436308/instagram-hashtags-public-
art-placemaking
8 Amy B. Wang, ‘“Nevertheless, she persisted” becomes new battle cry af-
ter McConnell silences Elizabeth Warren’, The Washington Post, 8 Febru-
ary 2017. Accessed 17 February 2017: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/08/nevertheless-she-persisted-becomes-new-
battle-cry-after-mcconnell-silences-elizabeth-warren/
9 ‘The Royal Parks: Hyde Park, A Royal Park: Speakers’ Corner.’ Accessed 24
January 2017: http://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/hyde-park/things-to-
see-and-do/speakers-corner
10 ‘Speech by Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel in London’, Thursday 27
February 2014. Accessed February 8, 2017: http://www.parliament.uk/
documents/addresses-to-parliament/Angela-Merkel-address-20130227.
pdf
11 For an interesting description of the origins of democratic assemblies and
the important role that physicality played in their construction see, Peter
Sloterdijk, ‘Atmospheric politics’, in Bruno Latour and Peter Weibel (eds.)
Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy, MIT Press: Cambridge,
MA. and ZKM/Center for Art and Media: Karlsruhe 2005, p. 944– 951.
12 Catherine Spellman and Karl Unglaub, Peter Smithson: Conversation with
students, Princeton Architectural Press: New York 2005, p. 81.
13 Rahul Mehrotra and Felipe Vera, ‘Reversibility’, 720, no. 4 Summer 2014:
p. 5.
SCRATCH THAT! 71
 CASE STUDIES

BRADFORD CITY PARK

p. 102 – 107

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

p. 108 – 121
LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DES ARTISTES
p. 192 – 197

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE

p. 94 – 101

RADCLIFFE WALLACH GARDEN

p. 180 – 191
ROBSON REDUX
p. 168 – 179

BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK

p. 144 – 149

DU MUSÉE AVENUE
p. 244 – 247

HARVARD PLAZA
p. 74 – 85

LAWN ON D
p. 122 – 133
GRANARY SQUARE
p. 86 – 93

A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE

p. 134 – 137

SCHOUWBURGPLEIN
p. 254 – 257

MOMA PS1
p. 150 – 159
SERPENTINE PAVILION
p. 160 – 167

THE GOODS LINE

p. 214 – 217
 NAVY YARD CENTRAL GREEN
p. 208 – 213

TRAFALGAR SQUARE
0°°

p. 198 – 203

BRYANT PARK
p. 234 – 239

MORE LONDON
p. 230 – 233

BENTHEMPLEIN WATER SQUARE

p. 224 – 229

SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT

p. 240 – 243

CENTRO ABIERTO DE
ACTIVIDADES CIUDADANAS
(CAAC)
p. 258 – 261
JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A
p. 138 – 143

SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY
PARK AT HUMBOLDT FORUM
p. 262 – 265

SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE

p. 204 – 207

SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ
p. 218 – 223

BERGES DE SEINE (shown ½ scale here)

p. 248 – 253
HARVARD PLAZA
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

LOCATION: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA

COMPLETION: 2013
SIZE: 4500 square metres
CONTEXT: University/campus
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Project for Public Spaces,
Interboro Partners, MVVA
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Farmers’ market, ice-skating rink,
curling mats, fire pits, food trucks, live music, flexible
furniture, covered tent space

0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The plaza space at Harvard University sits to the north of the historic
Harvard Yard, at a confluence of pedestrian movement that is the
busiest intersection on the Harvard campus. The original layout of the
space consisted of a nondescript lawn area bisected by footpaths
aligning with desire lines, a strategy that can be seen across the
entire campus. The space lacked character or focus, excluding of
course the now-revered Tanner Fountain that Peter Walker installed
in 1984. The location of the space, its spatial arrangement and limit-
ed public offering resulted in a space of transit — somewhere passed
through to get from one place to another without taking time to linger
and take in the surroundings. This, to a degree, was also the senti-
ment some planners at Harvard University held about Harvard Yard.
As a result, in 2009 the campus started an initiative called Com-
mon Spaces, charged with the task of ‘fostering a stronger sense of
community across Harvard by providing opportunities to share space
and experiences’. The first initiative for the Common Spaces team was
the introduction of moveable chairs following advice from Fred Kent,
founder of Project for Public Spaces. The chairs encourage people to
linger in Harvard Yard, rather than simply passing through it. The
non-intrusive provision of colourful moveable chairs made a notice-
able contribution to the atmosphere of the Yard, as people attract
people and a sense of ‘something going on’ materialised. Building on
the successful experiment in the Yard, guided by Project for Public
Spaces, the Common Spaces team began to experiment with addi-
tional ways in which the existing plaza space could be reimagined. It
was determined early on that the space needed to be revamped,
redesigned and repurposed to provide a space for campus-wide use
and gatherings.

Aerial view overlooking the eastern edge of the plaza where food trucks, moveable
tables and chairs, ice cream kiosks and a chess set combine to create a lively
atmosphere.
Colourful moveable chairs were introduced to Harvard Yard as the first initiative of the
Common Spaces committee to activate the campus-wide open spaces. In what was
otherwise a space that people passed through, the chairs have created a space
where people now linger, socialise and gather in small groups. The simple introduction
of these chairs has made a noticeable contribution to the atmosphere of the historic
Harvard Yard.

74 STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

Prior to the redesign of the Plaza, the design team experimented with possible
overlay activities to gauge the popularity and effectiveness of the various social
events. Clockwise from top left: the social activators include moveable chairs and
tables, prototype testing of the custom benches, moveable planters, a large
tent that hosted music, boxing and graduation festivities and an ice-skating rink.
Over a ten-month period, as a permanent design for the space was
being considered, the Common Spaces team introduced a series of
temporary installations to test the popularity and probability of po-
tential programmatic elements that could be incorporated into the
design for the permanent space. The initial temporary overlays includ-
ed an ice rink, trees and bamboo in moveable planters, pop-up en-
tertainment within a large tent and food trucks. These took place on
the existing lawn surface.
Although the existing space was nothing more than a threadbare
lawn with criss-crossing footpaths, the programmatic overlays suc-
cessfully encouraged people to linger there. This created a critical
mass, transforming the plaza from a place of transit to a gathering
space. As the programmed cultural overlays gained momentum, the
Common Spaces team expanded to include a dedicated employee
associated with the Office of the Arts at the University, acknowledging
that a creative curation of programme would be needed to sustain
the life of the new plaza space once implemented. As temporary
events in the plaza space became more popular, student requests to
perform, protest and organise added a fresh dimension to the pro-
gramme of the space. These student initiatives activated the space
without organisational cost, aside from the hourly fee for the pro-
gramme coordinator. After a ten-month testing period, a list of suc-
cessful programmatic overlays was written into the brief that would
guide the design and implementation of the permanent space.
The design firm Stoss won the commission to redesign the space,
known now as The Plaza, which was completed in 2013. Their design
responded to pedestrian desire lines between campus facilities
and rigorously explored multiple configurations of potential pro-
gramme overlays to activate the space. Stoss developed a notational
language inspired by Lawrence Halprin’s motation studies and William
H. Whyte’s research at Seagram’s Plaza to choreograph how the
space would be used and activated over a 24-hour period, as well as
through the changing seasons (see p. 78).
The final design that emerged consisted of a large flexible open
space on the western end of the plaza with a strong seating edge to
the south benefitting from the shade of the mature trees in the adja-
cent Harvard Yard. To the north, intimate areas with seating beneath
gingko and sumac trees with fern understorey planting offset the
openness of the plaza. According to Chris Reed, founder of Stoss, the
day-to-day was the most important programme consideration for
the design team. The space had to accommodate large events such
as ice-skating and graduation ceremonies but, more importantly, it
Interboro Partners was commissioned in 2015 to develop a winter deck to increase accessibility, provide seating and storage, and to shield the
mechanical plant required for the ice-skating rink. The modular timber elements are rearranged in the summer months for additional seating
and flexible platforms for performances and social gatherings.
76 STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM
needed to be lively and vibrant on any day of the week. The eastern
third of the plaza is the anchor of the site and is activated daily by
food trucks and people socialising and relaxing on clustered seating
and picnic tables. The pedestrian thoroughfare linking Harvard Yard
to Josep Lluís Sert’s Harvard Science Center holds the edge of this
active space naturally, which leaves the open area of the plaza to be
programmed accordingly.
The strong seating edge to the south is the signature element of
the scheme, both for its design execution and for its unexpected con-
tribution when the plaza is not in use. Complex timber and concrete
benches, beautifully crafted using cutting-edge fabrication technolo-
gy, create a variety of ergonomic configurations that allow users to
be creative in the way they use the benches. This sculpted complex-
ity also acts as a foil for the expansive and minimal arrangement of
the plaza. Without the sculptural qualities, scale, quantity, complexi-
ty and sensual character of the benches, the plaza would risk being
pedestrian and bland. By assuming the role of an aesthetically pleas-
ing ‘sculpted object’, the benches become interesting to look at and
admire rather than being reduced to empty benches that do nothing
but clutter the space when not occupied. The timber has taken on a
rich patina, which when lit by the setting sun in the evening, coupled
with the sound of live music in the background, contributes to a
magical atmosphere.
The decision to have a flexible open area was the result of a re-
quirement for a large tent that would be assembled and disassembled
on a regular basis to facilitate campus events and ceremonies. The
final design included built-in foundations for the tent and pop-ups for
water and power. The large tent, which has a maximum capacity of
1000 people, is rented by the University. The flexible open area of the
plaza hosts a number of regular programmed events. A farmers’ mar-
ket is held every Tuesday throughout the summer and the University
does not charge the organisers because the market fosters a sense
of community, both within and beyond the campus. The market is
valuable in that it provides a sense of anticipation and regularity, and
this is worth more to the University than the revenue that would be
generated from charging for the market.
In the winter, the Common Spaces team erects an ice-skating rink
that is free to use and charges $ 5 for skates, which goes towards
covering the cost of the rink and its operation. It is a valuable pro-
grammatic overlay that stitches the campus community together,
while providing a much-needed activity in the months when program-
ming the space is more challenging. Project for Public Spaces created
G
D E F
:;
This overhead view of the plaza illustrates how the space is activated by food trucks, flexible overlay elements and the farmers’ market. Tanner Fountain, visible at the bottom of the
image, is now operational again after being out of commission for a number of years.
a winter programme, which introduced fire pits and curling mats. The
fire pits are supervised by a member of the fire department and
pre-packaged S’mores can be purchased from the ice-skating kiosk.
Interboro Partners was commissioned to design additional seating
elements to contribute to the winter overlay and these were imple-
mented in 2015 and again in 2017 with a more ambitious design.
The food trucks, which occupy the eastern edge of the space, are
the backbone of the programmatic calendar. Their daily presence is
fundamental to the activation of the plaza. The first truck arrives at
8:30am and with it come people and healthy commotion. The tables
and chairs are rarely empty around this area. Throughout the day, up
to five food trucks are parked on the plaza until 7:00 pm; they are
charged $ 50 a day by the University. The Common Spaces website
provides a timetable for the trucks, indicating the type of food and
the hours of operation as a way for users to engage with the Common
Spaces initiative.
With the design of flexible, programmable spaces, which requires
open areas to accommodate large gatherings or repeat events, care-
ful consideration is necessary to ensure the space is not empty, banal
and uninspiring when not in use. The space also needs to offer a
variety of events both surprising and predictable with a sense of
anticipation and excitement. The plaza manages this balance well due
to strong design execution and strategic programme planning
throughout the design process. In particular, the benches and plant-
ing provide a degree of complexity and seasonal variation to capture
the attention when the large open space is without programme or
events. Lastly, the plaza benefits from a steady footfall of pedestrian
traffic and a student body that participates in the performance-based
HARVARD PLAZA 77
 large tent large tent
0000

casual hang-out
move out
ice-skating
informal event

arts first

1800

food trucks
ping pong

farmer’s market
fire pits
tour
live music

food trucks

1200

curling
housing day

commute
passer-by move in/classes begin
0600

commencement
J

The notation diagram above, inspired by the work of William H. Whyte, proposes methods
to activate the plaza throughout the year. The drop-down diagrams indicate the layout of
each major regular event: farmers’ market, tent for graduation, winter overlay with
ice-skating rink and the seating area with food trucks. Original notation diagram provid-
ed by Stoss with alterations by B. Cannon Ivers.

78 STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

 pm
ntil 7
tay u
ks s
N

c
o 2 tru
Farmer’s market ends Up t
O

Tent set up for move-in

cks
S

A large tent is erected 5 tru

twice a year during u p to
with
graduation and when riod
h pe
students are moving onto lunc
campus in the fall. Peak
A

Tent removed for the summer

J

Farmer’s market begins

es
The market happens every arriv
ruck
Tuesday from June to od t
J

st fo
November from 11– 4 pm. am fir
22 stalls make up the market. 8:30

Graduation ceremony
M
A

Tent erected for graduation

Winter layout removed

M
F
J

Winter layout set up

Each winter a 20 × 15 m ice-
skating rink, 3 curling mats
and 3 fire pits are set up. The
fire department is on hand to
25

32 m
m

monitor the fire pits where

students make S’mores from
kits purchased on the plaza.

m
117

55 m
North
20
m
32
m
D

oval
rem
se snow
to ea
yout
er la
ck wint
d ba
Strippe

During the winter months the majority of overlay objects are

removed and stored in a warehouse off campus to make snow
removal more efficient. A small number of chairs remain in
the plaza, as do the signature timber and concrete benches,
although these have been designed to be de-bolted and
removeable. The food trucks still occupy the plaza throughout
the winter.

HARVARD PLAZA 79
activation of the space. Tanner Fountain serves an important function 1 Jan Gehl, Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space, The Danish Architectural Press:
Copenhagen, 2006 (6th ed.).
in providing informal seating and children’s play in the shade of a
magnificent oak tree on the edge of the space, where users can be
spectators watching other users as performers. This edge condition
is of fundamental importance in the design of public space and is
often where people want to sit and rest in public space. Jan Gehl
explains this aspect in his book Life Between Buildings.1

The diagrams above explore the potential activities and event configurations produced
by Stoss during the design development of the project.

The colour bands below each image indicate when each social overlay is present on the plaza.
The gradient scale includes grey for winter, pink for spring, blue for summer and orange for autumn.

The winter layout begins in December and runs until late March. The layout includes an
ice-skating rink, three curling mats, three fire pits and temporary spectator seating
designed by Interboro Partners.
The farmers’ market happens every Tuesday on the plaza from June to November from
11 am—4 pm. Twenty-two stalls make up the market. The University does not charge
the organisers of the market to use the plaza. The arrangement of the stalls varies from
week to week, which adds to the overall animation of the space, but the regularity
builds anticipation and ensures a critical mass of people each week.

82 STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

 Inbuilt tent foundations
to receive the tent twice
a year

Food truck and maintenance

access from adjacent Oxford
Street

o
+
o
o Utility corridor shown in grey

Underground steam corridor

shown in blue

o
+

The plaza has a number of design infrastructures to accomodate event overlays. Tent
foundations enable the tent to be quickly erected and the plaza has been engineered for
vehicle loading and to utilise the existing steam exchange running across the plaza.
Power points are provided in various locations as in-ground hookups ( × ) as well
as hookups embedded in furniture and light columns ( o ). Potable water hook- ups are
associated with adjacent buildings with hot and cold water supplies ( ).
The hot water is used for the installation of the ice rink because the cold water freezes
instantaneously.

A large tent is erected twice a year for events related to graduation in May and again in There is a short period of time when the large flexible space remains open after the
the autumn when students are moving on to the campus. The tent is taken down in mid winter overlay and the tent is erected for graduation ceremonies.
June and the farmers’ market takes place on the open plaza. Other spontaneous events
happen during this time, such as yoga, group dance sessions and student gatherings.

HARVARD PLAZA 83
Live music and a comfortable place to sit in the sun and shade is a
reliable combination for encouraging people to linger in a public
space. Power supply ensures that the stage and musical equipment
can be easily set up.
The large tent provides respite from the sun on hot days for more
formal events.
There is often live music being played on the plaza, which leads to
spontaneous dancing as a subsequent and unplanned activity in the
space.

These views, taken from the same vantage point, illustrates how the custom benches have a sculp-
tural quality when not in use, and how the overlays of the farmers’ market and the tent bring activi-
ty into the space.

84 STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

In 2018, Interboro created an installation called Wavelength on the northern edge of the plaza.
This suggests an additional type of activation for the site, which may be run as an annual competi-
tion in the future.
The US camping tradition of roasting marshmallows and making S’mores happens on the plaza and
S’mores packs can be purchased from the ice-skating hire caravan. A fire warden is in attendance
when the fire pits are in operation. The fire station is visible in the images (pitched roof above the
food truck).

Each year the Common Space team design a winter overlay to

enliven the harsh New England winters. This includes ice-skating
and curling mats.

HARVARD PLAZA 85
GRANARY SQUARE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Townshend Landscape Architects
LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2012
SIZE: 7700 square metres
CONTEXT: In close proximity to major rail hub, University of the Arts
London and urban residential areas and commercial office buildings
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Argent (client and developer), Allies and
Morrison Masterplan Team, Fountain Workshop
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Strawberries and cream for Wimbledon tennis
tournament, pumpkin-carving display, Lumière Lighting Festival,
floating cinema, concerts, food markets, art installations and fitness
activities
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Granary Square is the central space of the 57-hectares Argent devel-
opment at King’s Cross in London. The space consists of four separate
water features measuring 6 × 22 metres with 1080 individual foun-
tains designed by Fountain Workshop. Each of the four water features
can be turned off individually to enable the space to accommodate
a variety of events and installations across a multitude of scales, as
well as activating the space on a daily basis through choreographic
‘dancing’ fountain sequences. Fountain Workshop also created an app
that allows visitors to play a version of the game Snake with the
fountains. Sculpted granite benches are placed to the north and south
of each fountain and flexible deckchairs are scattered throughout the
space.
The site is bordered to the north by the University of Arts London,
also known as Central Saint Martins, which ensures a constant footfall
and a creative cohort utilising the square. At the west end of the site,
a grid of 24 box-clipped lime trees provides a shady respite from the
otherwise open and south-facing square. Beneath the trees are bright-
yellow bistro tables and chairs and soft underfoot self-bound gravel.
In the northwest corner of the site, the ground floor of the building
86 TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
0 250 m
provides catering outlets, with al fresco dining overlooking the square.
To the south, terraced stone lounger steps overlook Regent’s Canal,
which is animated by narrow boats coursing through the site. These
terraced seats are used for art installations, pumpkin-carving displays,
dance performances and spectator seating for the Floating Cinema
that holds screenings each summer. Each lounger terrace measures
1.8 metres wide × 430 millimetres high, which provides a generous
sun-drenched place to relax and socialise. The terraces are wrapped
in artificial grass signalling the arrival of spring, which has a surprising
effect on the space and visually enhances the arrival experience when
crossing the bridge over the canal.
Granary Square owes much of its success to the Argent King’s
Cross masterplan, developed with Allies and Morrison architects. The
King’s Cross development is one of London’s most successful modern
developments. Although the masterplan is still not fully complete, it
has already delivered many of London’s most celebrated new public
spaces, which are proactively enlivened by an active arts programme
and calendar of events. The arts programme is coupled with ‘mean-
while uses’, and this has fostered a sense of community as the near-
Granary Square hosts a screen each year for viewing the Wimbledon tennis tournament.
The work titled Across the Buildings by Felice Varini can be seen in the background.
Up to 3000 candle-lit pumpkins are arranged on the canal-side steps at Granary Square
each year.
A view across Granary Square shows the arrangement of the fountains, box-clipped lime trees, seating and the lounger terrace overlooking the canal. It is the combination of these
landscape features and the proactive curation by Argent that makes Granary Square a successful public space. The temporary art work Across the Buildings by Felice Varini is
one example of the success of public art at Granary Square.
Even before any of the buildings were constructed, Granary Square was a major public space hosting concerts and public events. The Bird Cage installation can be seen lit up in the
distance with King’s Cross and St Pancras transport hubs in the background.

GRANARY SQUA
RE 87
An overview of Granary Square, showing the lounger terraces in the foreground and the
fountains in the background. This image also shows the importance of public art within
the masterplan at King’s Cross, with Felice Varini’s work Across the Buildings on display.
The Waterlicht installation by Studio Roosegaarde transforms Granary Square as part of
the annual Lumière London Lighting Festival.
88 TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
Although the water ‘pads’ and fountains are left on during the screening of the
Wimbledon tennis tournament, there is still adequate spectator space and children will
play for hours in the fountains, allowing families to remain in the space for the entire
afternoon.
The ability to turn off the ‘pads’ of water and fountains, enables the square to host
various cultural events and food markets.
Lewis Cubitt Square sits to the west of Central Saint Martins art school building.
The square measures 90 × 40 metres and consists of five shallow water features
* Potable water connection
with 11 playful arching fountains per feature (55 in total), seating and a generous + Power and Comms box
hard-paved area. Inspired by the way that Granary Square was being programmed,
Lewis Cubitt Square was designed to host events. Fountains are drained to create
an open, hard-paved square to host markets, a craft beer festival, outdoor cine- 90 m
ma, fitness sessions and cultural events such as Strawberry and Screen during the
Wimbledon tennis tournament. The square has capacity for 2250 people. The
trees and understorey planting soften the edge of the space and create a comfort-
able and attractive edge condition overlooking the open square. The space in-

40
m
cludes 14 16-amp supply points and a central events supply for a stage/outdoor
cinema. A central wifi access point is integrated into a lighting mast above the
trees. The hard-standing area has been designed to accommodate 361 kilo-

5m
newtons / square metre loading for lorries and events. The fountains can take
147 kilonewtons / square metre. Five 13-metre-high lighting masts are set within
the planted areas to provide adequate lighting across the square.
12 m
Granary Square measures 103 × 44 metres and has four ‘zero-depth’ fountains
measuring 18 × 6.75 metres, which are flanked by bespoke granite benches on
the north and south sides designed by Ian McChesney. Within the shallow planes
of water, there are 1080 individual fountains, each of which can be programmed
in a multitude of sequences to animate the space. Each plane of water can be
drained away, enabling the space to be used in a variety of ways across different
scales. The fountain designers have also developed an app so visitors can play
the game Snake with the fountains. To the west of the fountains, there are
24 square-clipped lime trees with bistro-style moveable chairs beneath them,
providing a quiet shaded edge overlooking the more active square. Outdoor
++ *
dining terraces face on to the square, creating an active frontage. The space is
lit by two 13-metre-high light masts and the central square has a loading
*
capacity of 105 kilonewtons / square metre.

103
m
To the south of Granary Square, a series of eight terrace seats measuring
37 × 19 metres overlook the canal that courses through the site. The steps are 18 m
1800 millimetres wide × 430 millimetres high, which creates a generous lounging

6.75 m
area. The steps are wrapped in artificial grass each spring and host dance per-
formances, pumpkin-carving competitions and outdoor cinema viewing with the
Floating Cinema on a houseboat on the canal. The south-facing orientation
of the steps make them a destination for lunch socials and day-to-day relaxation.
*
*
19 m

44 m

37 m

Granary Square sits to the south of the

University of Arts London (also known as
Central Saint Martins). The main square
North
provides a series of fountains and seating
under trees. Terraced loungers overlook
the canal to the south and Lewis Cubitt
Square to the west of Central Saint Martins
provides further flexible space for events.

GRANARY SQUA
RE 89
A set of lounging terraced steps overlooking the canal are
transformed during Halloween with a pumpkin-carving
display.
The lounger terraces hosts a variety of art installations
and temporary events. This image was a fresh flower
takeaway event.
The steps have also been used for impromptu dance
performances as spectators travelling along the canal
stop momentarily to enjoy the performance. This in turn
attracts more people because we are all curious and
when a crowd gathers we want to see the action first-
hand.
The Floating Cinema is produced by UP Projects and is a
free event, although spaces can be booked to guarantee
a seat.

90 TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

by residential units are completed. These meanwhile uses have
included a natural swimming pool, a sculptural swing called the Bird
Cage and a temporary, although hugely successful, theatre for paid
stage performances.
The activation of both Granary Square and Lewis Cubitt, a space
to the north of Granary Square designed to host events, are funded
through an Argent marketing budget, which is written into the busi-
ness plan. Argent’s place-making philosophy is to provide public
space and allow people to use and enjoy the spaces before the build-
ings are complete, asking the question of ‘what’s in it for the locals?’.
The proposals for events that the team receives are discussed inter-
nally with a multi-disciplinary team at Argent before the final selection
is agreed, as well as where the event should happen within the de-
velopment. The event location may be chosen on the basis of scale,
size or desired atmosphere.
This process focuses the curation of events and the overall direc-
tion of the life of the spaces throughout the development. As many
as 147 events have been held within the development annually, with
67 of those generating sponsorship income. A key component in the
growing success of the events and public spaces is due to Argent’s
funding a full-time photographer on their staff to document the events
and spread the excitement across the internet and social media. Fi-
nally, the temporary provision of toilets is fundamental to keeping
people in the spaces. This is often an oversight when planning for
programmed activities and can make or break the success of the
curation of a space.  

This image illustrates how the water ‘pads’ or zero-depth water features contribute to
the ambience when the space is quieter, reflective and poetic. The four water features
reflect the tastefully lit building façade and the sculptural trees in the distance. The use of
water creates various atmospheres, which is a fundamental characteristic of Granary
Square.
With 1080 individual fountains, Granary Square is a lively destination in the summer
months and is the ‘main event’ of the space. The arrangement of the design provides
adequate space to sit and watch children and families playing in the water features, or
simply to sit and people-watch. The clipped lime trees provide a degree of shade and
respite from the sun.
This image illustrates the flexibility that the water features provide. The fountain in the
foreground has been drained away to allow more space for deckchairs and socialising.
The other three fountains provide play and entertainment for residents and visitors to the
space. This image also showcases Felice Varini’s Across the Buildings. Public art has
been critical to the success of place-making at Granary Square and King’s Cross as a
whole. Art curators work with the King’s Cross Team on a three-year cycle.
The dramatic illumination of the 1080 fountains is a spectacle as night falls on Granary
Square. Fountain Workshop, the designer of the fountains, developed a smartphone app
that allows visitors to play the classic game Snake with the light and the fountains.
The combination of relaxation, water play, temporary markets and food trucks creates
an attractive atmosphere at Lewis Cubitt Square.
Outdoor fitness classes bring the community together around an activity. Here the foun-
tains are still in operation so that other users can still engage with the space. A tempo-
rary art installation acts as backdrop and conceals the construction site next door.
KERB Street Food activates the space with al fresco dining and cafe tables and chairs,
while the fountains entertain families for the day.
Inspired by the way Granary Square was being activated with events, Lewis Cubitt
Square was designed as a flexible platform to accommodate markets, outdoor cinema,
concerts and seasonal events. The square has capacity for 2250 people.

92 TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

During the Strawberry and Screen event for the Wimbledon tennis tournament, the fountains are drained away and the
space is filled to capacity with spectators.
During the quieter times of the Strawberry and Screen event, the fountains can be turned on to enliven the space, which
also cools the air and allows people to splash around in the fountains while watching the Wimbledon tennis tournament.

GRANARY SQUA
RE 93
WATCH THIS
SPACE—ROYAL
THEATRE
ARCHITECT: Denys Lasdun
LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 1976
SIZE: 1550 square metres
CONTEXT: Riverside location in central London
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Recently redesigned by GROSS.MAX.
and Haworth Tompkins
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Oversized furniture — ‘Armchair Theatre’,
theatrical performances, artifical grass surface, food trucks,
performances
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Watch This Space is a 23 × 45-metre hard-landscaped space on the
Southbank, on the River Thames in London. The space is part of the
National Theatre building designed by Denys Lasdun in 1976; it sits
to the northwest of the building and is flanked by the Waterloo Bridge
flyover. There is a cafe on the ground floor of the National Theatre,
slightly elevated above the square, which adds to the foot traffic
across the space and the active atmosphere. Additionally, there is a
cafe/bar beneath the Waterloo Bridge flyover associated with the
British Film Institute, as well as the daily book market that has been
sited there since 1982, now a destination in its own right. Adjacent
to the space is a sculpture titled The Arena, designed by John Maine.
The combination of these cultural facilities is a driver for the success
of Watch This Space. It is also important to note the popularity of the
Southbank as a destination for tourists and locals alike, ensuring a
steady footfall of idle passers-by that stumble across the square.
Over-sized pieces of furniture called Armchair Theatre are placed in the space every sum-
mer, designed by Angus MacKechnie and built by a team at the National Theatre. The
regularity of this installation signals the start of the summer theatre programme. The
furniture is used in a variety of ways and can be arranged to accommodate the different
performance stages and installations.
94  DENYS LASDUN
0 75 m
The small square was branded Watch This Space, a title that encap-
sulates the transient and ephemeral nature of the space. For 15 years
the space has been used as a modern platform for events and per-
formances throughout the summer, providing free concerts and en-
tertainment for people walking along the Southbank or for visitors
coming to a specific performance, all of which are free of charge.
Throughout the summer months the space is transformed almost daily
with a new theatrical performance or installation. Bright colours adorn
Denys Lasdun’s Brutalist architecture and give the space an edgy, tem-
porary and party-like atmosphere. The relationship between the space
and the building is also worth recognising, because the various levels
of the building enable larger crowds to assemble for the more popu-
lar performances happening in the space. The Waterloo Bridge flyover
also serves as a spectator area for passers-by who are simply crossing
the river and are drawn into the performance happening below.
When not activated with cultural performances, the modest space includes installations
and exhibits, often reflecting the programme happening inside the theatre. Additionally,
the external walls double as an extension of the space and marketing for the activities
happening on the space below. This increases the visibility to passers-by on the bridge
above who would not otherwise look down onto the space from Waterloo Bridge.
 The Southbank Walk Watch This Space (Theatre Square)

Sculpture The Arena

by John Maine Book fair underneath Waterloo Bridge

Th
e
Ri

North
ve
rT
ha
m
es

ne ge
ut li Brid
nc oo
Sec
tio terl
Wa

The Southbank Walk Sculpture The Arena by John Maine Stepped spectator seating Theatre Square National Theatre — tiered overlook

6.5 m

28 m 4.5 m 19 m

15 m dia. Sculpture The Arena

The area is activated not only by Watch This Space but also by The Arena and the book market that takes place under Waterloo Bridge. The strong relationship between
these three elements increases footfall and activates the space. The Arena is used informally for play, community gatherings and wheel sports, and is formally activated with
installations.

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE 95

 Active
fronta
ge

3.4 m
.6 m
13.5 m

45 m

m
23
LARGE / EXTRA LARGE:
When large events are taking place at Theatre
Square, the building designed by Denys
Lasdun acts as a stacked spectator area. The adjacent
Waterloo Bridge performs the same function.
Capacity: 5000 at three people per square metre.

Th e a t
re Sq
uare

e s ing
idg all in
'The A

br k st o d
rena'

c
low oo es
be nd b al fr
MEDIUM TO LARGE

a fe/
Ca
Watch This Space at Theatre Square hosts more
than 150 free concerts, festivals and children’s events
annually. There is a broad scale of events, which
demonstrates the overall capacity of the space.

‘Ar
lls
sta
en
a’ Sc

ok

ulp
Bo

tur
e 15
m dia.
Symbiotic relationship
with Theatre Square and the
Southbank book market

The design of the building includes a number of external terraces. When DAILY TO SMALL EVENTS
events are taking place at Watch This Space, these outdoor terraces act The National Theatre is a major attraction on London’s
as spectator areas and increase the viewing capacity in the square. Addi- Southbank. In 2013/14, 1.4 million people visited
tionally, Waterloo Bridge acts as a viewing platform for passers-by who the theatre. This volume of footfall ensures the daily
stumble across the performances happening below. activation of Theatre Square.

The Arena on any given day adds a sculptural object to the experience of walking along the Southbank, one of London’s greatest attractions and an area with highly diverse offerings to
the public. The void created by The Arena is filled with informal community events and formal seasonal festivities. The sculpture was designed by John Maine and installed in 1983.

96 DENYS LASDUN
The Watch This Space festival runs through the summer until September. The festival took place in the square at the main entrance to the National Theatre until it was relocated to
a new space on the northeast side of the building in 2016 following the refurbishment. The matrix of images above shows the variety and popularity of the free theatre festival
and installations. During the refurbishment a 225-seat temporary auditorium called The Shed was built in the space. The bright-red structure was designed by Haworth Tompkins to
provide temporary performance space while Haworth Tompkins renovated the 1970s building designed by Denys Lasdun.

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE 97


The Arena is a 15-metre-diameter
sculpture by the artist John Maine,
which was installed in 1983. The sculp-
ture can be used in a variety of ways
ranging from informal play and a stage
for community dance events to a plat-
form for a sand castle competition with
imported sand.
terl
Wa
Storage facilities that house
the books each night
Active frontage and an al fresco
dining area activate the space
when the book market is closed.
98 DENYS LASDUN
Oversized pieces of furniture covered with artificial grass were designed
by the director of Watch This Space, Angus MacKechnie, and fabricated
by an in-house team at the National Theatre. Titled Armchair Theatre,
these elements signal the start of summer for the Southbank and the
beginning of the summer festivities that take place from July to Septem-
ber. There are two chairs, one sofa, a lamp and a large coffee table.
These anchor the space during performances and are magnets for chil-
dren, tourists and frequent visitors.
Moveable tables and chairs and umbrellas are added to the space in early
spring when the weather begins to warm up and the internal cafe can
spill out into the square.
Theatre Square is a simple square with gentle steps leading up to the
Southbank walk along the River Thames. The steps function as spectator
seating during the festival. When the square is not in use as part of the
Watch This Space summer festival, it remains empty, occasionally display-
ing travelling installations.
North
ge
Brid
oo
Since 1982 the Southbank book market has been set up under Waterloo
Bridge. Benefitting from the steady pedestrian traffic on the Southbank,
the market is open daily until 7pm. The books are stored each night in
seven storage containers that sit against the river balustrade. Eight tables
are filled with books, maps and antique prints on a daily basis. Vendors
pay to rent the space and sell the books and monitor their tables each
day.
 SEMI-PERMANENT: Umbrella (14 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Table and Chairs (20 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Lamp (1 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

m
2.1
2.2 m

m
TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Chair (2 no.) 5.5
SEMI-PERMANENT: Square Umbrella (6 no.)
J F M A M J Ju A S O N D
J F M A M J Ju A S O N D
2.2 m

m
1.5
2
m

TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Sofa (1 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Table (1 no.) SEMI-PERMANENT: Branded Deckchair (12 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D
J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE 99

The oversized Armchair Theatre draws people into the space, encouraging them to linger
and relax in the space. During events and performances, dancing and playing activates
the space, even attracting other people to come and watch the dancing.
 Custom-branded deckchairs are a lightweight, inexpensive way of inviting people
of all ages into the space.

Watch This Space is the brainchild of Angus MacKechnie. The external

performance space spawned from the need to ‘unearth new audi­
ences’ according to MacKechnie, who programmed Watch This Space
for ten years, a difficult brief because a new audience is a ‘fluid quan-
tity’. By extending the theatre offering into the public sphere, Watch
This Space engaged with the public in a profoundly new way, without
tickets and without asking for anything in return. Watch This Space
enabled any demographic or social class to have a full summer of
events and entertainment without buying a single ticket. The new
type of public space emerged at a time when economic conditions
limited the amount of capital expenditure for permanent spaces and
events. Watch This Space was a harbinger of the rise of the flexible
space — the power of the inside coming out into the public realm and
the latent success of the pop-up that is now prevalent in urban set-
tings around the world. The space set a new precedent for the acti-
vation of public spaces in London, prompting other cultural institu-
tions around the capital to establish recurring annual installations and
events such as winter ice-skating rinks, summer outdoor cinemas,
food trucks and cultural markets and festivities.
The eye-catching element of Watch This Space is a collection of
oversized furniture called Armchair Theatre. These pieces were de-
signed by MacKechnie and fabricated by a team within the National
Theatre. The furniture has become a symbol of the start of the sum-
mer festivities within the space, with tourists flocking for a selfie on
the large lounger seat or next to the oversized lamp. This simple in-
stallation —  nothing more than low-cost construction materials
wrapped in artificial grass — gave Watch This Space the ‘instagram-
mable’ objects needed to pull people off the riverside walk and into
the space. In 2016 Haworth Tompkins completed the refurbishment
of the National Theatre and GROSS.MAX. redesigned the plaza that is
Watch This Space. The space remained as originally designed and
GROSS.MAX. improved and modernised the paving.

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE 101

BRADFORD CITY
PARK
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Gillespies

LOCATION: Bradford, UK
COMPLETION: 2012
SIZE: 2.4 hectares
CONTEXT: City centre
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: CAL Architects, Fountain Workshop
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Bradford Festival, three-day art festival,
Christmas Lights Switch On
BUDGET: £ 24 million
CURATION AND MANAGEMENT BUDGET: £ 450,000

0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Bradford City Park is the centrepiece of Bradford town centre. The
space is bordered by the 19th-century Grade 1-listed City Hall building,
a gallery and a retail offering, drawing people into the heart of the
space throughout the day. The main feature of Bradford City Park is
the central water feature, the largest of its kind in the UK, measuring
76 × 58 metres with a maximum depth of 220 millimetres when filled
to capacity.
Throughout the day, the water feature changes the character and
use of the space. At the start of each day, the fountain is empty, giv-
ing the appearance of a grand, flexible civic square, a fitting typology
in front of the City Hall building. As the day progresses, the depth of
the water rises, revealing the key desire lines through the space and
ensuring smooth flows of pedestrians, while also creating three sep-
arate interactive water features. Each of the smaller features can be
independently drained to allow more hard-standing areas for pro-
grammed events, school gatherings and performances. By mid-after-
noon, the fountain is fully charged, holding 600 cubic metres of water
and acting as a water mirror to reflect the 19th-century clock tower
and the animation of clouds passing overhead.
Since the water is drained away each day, costly maintenance,
treatment and cleaning are minimised. This dramatic water feature
completely transforms the character and functionality of the space
from a large civic public square into an interactive and playful foun-
tain. Within the water feature, 54 perimeter jets provide choreo-
graphed animation to the space and engage the visitors, children and
adults alike. In the centre, a spectacular geyser reaches 30 metres
into the air, and is encircled by 6-metre-high ‘barrier’ fountains to
deter people from getting too close to the geyser. Clustered play jets
sit within the three individual pools that are defined by the footpath.
The fountains are lit by 24 LED lights, which adds additional anima-
tions and changes the space at night. The artist Wolfgang Buttress
designed ten lighting columns to look like giant water reeds around
the central fountain. These elements contain smart lighting features
that work with the LEDs to create a dramatic night scene. The light

Fountains are a critical element of the space. The fountains provide spectacle with the dramatically lit geyser as well as interactive fountains for play and enjoyment.

102  GILLESPIES
 Blasting up to over 30 metres in the air, this is the Fifty-four vertical fountains run around the edge of the
highest urban fountain in the UK. Twenty barrier Mirror Pool. They can be programmed to produce
fountains reach up to 6 metres high and provide a hundreds of different combinations including ‘cele-
safety barrier to deter people from getting too brate’ (simultaneous), ‘chase’ (sequential) and ‘shy’
close to the central fountain. At night 24 bright (diminish as you walk towards them). At night the
LEDs light the fountain, adding another degree of perimeter fountains are lit by three primary-colour LED
animation and variety to the space. lights to produce thousands of beautiful colours.

The artist Wolfgang Buttress designed the ten Play jets from
lighting columns to look like giant water reeds. 50 millimetres to
These elements contain smart lighting, allowing 600 millimetres Spontaneous
the fountain LEDs to look their best, and the height geyser jets
light columns also feature clever motion sensors 10 arching jets.
and laser projectors which create a subtle laser only operate
show at night. when the mirror
pool is empty.

76 m

m
58

The 370-square-metre Mirror Pool is the largest urban feature

North in the UK and measures 58 metres wide × 76 metres long with
a maximum depth of 220 millimetres.

Diagram showing the set-up for a large-scale Diagram illustrating the configuration for Diagram for a small event with the pool partly
concert configuration. a seated event. filled and the fountains operational.

BRADFORD CITY PARK 103

EMPTY:
The fountain begins each day in an empty state, with a series
of mist emitters blanketing the square in an atmospheric
haze. The fountain measures 76 × 58 metres, covering an area
of 370 square metres.
REVEALING PATHS:
As the fountain fills with water, pathways are revealed
and defined by the shallow water (220 millimetres
maximum). The pathways divide the feature into three
separate pools that can be drained in any combination
to create more intimate events spaces as shown above.
REFLECTIVE POOL:
When the pool is fully charged, it acts as a water mirror,
reflecting the adjacent 19th-century architecture, and ani-
mates the space by reflecting the moving clouds and people
passing through the space. The pool holds over 600 cubic
metres of water and is drained daily, which reduces the need
for specialist cleaning operations and other costly routine
maintenance.

104 GILLESPIES
Bradford City Park demonstrates the importance of flexible space and the myriad ways that a space can be used by the community for celebrations, installations
and as a successful everyday space with water play.

BRADFORD CITY PARK 105

 Forty-seven built-in anchor points at 3-metre spacing
for outdoor market stalls. These were not implement-
ed as part of the final project; however, the proposed
feature does illustrate the intent of the design team
to integrated infrastructure to accommodate tempo-
** rary events.

**
**

* Power hook-ups for events and celebrations

**

Vehicular access route for event preparation and

performances

106 GILLESPIES
The spectacular central geyser fountain
reaches 30 metres into the air.
columns also feature motion sensors and laser projectors that create
a subtle interactive laser show at night.
The drainable water feature allows the space to be used as a
flexible stage for events and performances and has held a capacity of
up to 20,000 people for the hour-long Christmas Lights Switch On
celebration. During the year ten major events take place within the
space, including the three-day arts and music festival called the Brad-
ford Festival, which includes added overlay infrastructure, yet still
provides a capacity of 10,000 people. In addition, the space was used
for approximately 95 different events in 2015. The space provides
power supplies and water points, but there are no built-in foundations
for tents or other structures. The central area was designed to with-
stand heavy vehicle loading.
The events team is made up of an events manager, an events of-
ficer and an assistant, who devise and manage the Council-organised
events: Armed Forces Day, Bradford Festival, Summer Fun Days — one
day a week during the holidays, showing films and setting up fun
activities — Christmas Lights Switch On, three ballet and opera screen-
ings streamed live from the Royal Opera House in London and sports
celebrations, such as the Bradford teams winning major competi-
tions. The events team also takes bookings for the space. The Coun-
cil owns a number of tent structures, which are stored at the City Hall
building. The space is maintained by City Centre managers who act
as wardens during the day.
The annual budget for the Council-organised events is £ 450,000.
The events team also receives annual revenue from the incidental
events (in the region of £ 8000 in 2015), with growing commercial
interest suggesting the space may generate more revenue in the
future.
BRADFORD CITY PARK 107
POTTERS FIELDS
PARK
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: GROSS.MAX.

LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2007
SIZE: 1.5 hectares
CONTEXT: Riverside park in central London
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Piet Oudolf
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Thames Festival, regular installations and
performances, food festivals and cultural celebrations
BUDGET: £ 3.2 million
CURATION AND MANAGEMENT BUDGET: £ 20,000 events budget
and £ 160,000 maintenance
0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Potters Fields Park is situated on the Southbank of the River Thames
in London, adjacent to the World Heritage Site Tower Bridge and the
Greater London Authority headquarters, the home of the Mayor of
London. The park includes two different spaces, an open lawn area
with terraced seating looking north across the Thames towards the
Tower of London and a ‘community garden’ of perennial planting
designed by renowned plantsman Piet Oudolf. The park is also adja-
cent to More London, a high-quality semi-private public space with
fountains, planting and an amphitheatre, which is discussed as a case
study in this book (see p. 230 – 233).
The high-profile location of the park has made it a popular location
for corporate-sponsored installations, utilising Tower Bridge as a
backdrop to signal the prominent central London location next to the
halls of political power and influence in the capital. The park was set
up as a trust to enable the park to determine how revenue generated
from the corporate-sponsored installations could be used to maintain
and safeguard the facility over time and maintain the world-class per-
ennial garden, Piet Oudolf’s only designed public garden in central
London.
In 2003 the magician and illusionist David Blaine was suspended
in a Perspex box above Potters Fields for 44 days, ostensibly without
food. This stunt took place before the park was redesigned by GROSS.
MAX., but it was a precursor to the role that Potters Fields would play
as a stage for events, installations, festivities and cultural celebra-
tions. The park was reopened in 2007 and since that time it has
hosted myriad events. Approximately 30 events are held in the park
each year and around five of those are repeat events. The licensed
capacity of the park is 4000 people but the maximum the park man-
agement team allows is 3000 people. The management team consists
of a manager, a part-time administrator and three contract gardeners

During the 2012 Olympic festivities, a car company advertises their range
of cars using a long jumper on the lawn at Potters Fields.
A half-buried and over-sized swimmer acts as a point of interest at the lawn
at Potters Fields.

108  GROSS.MA X.
Rosy The Ballerina, by raumlaborberlin, commissioned and produced by UP Projects, creates a focal point and a destination on the lawn.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK 109

 Contents 5.1 Damage, repairs and reinstatement ....................................................................... 10

6 General ....................................................................................................................................... 10
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4
6.1 Animals ............................................................................................................................... 10
2 Booking the Park ...................................................................................................................... 4
6.2 Deliveries and collections ............................................................................................ 10
2.1 Bookings, deposits and payments ............................................................................. 4
6.3 Facilities ............................................................................................................................. 11
2.2 Deposits against additional costs ............................................................................... 5
6.4 Tree protection ................................................................................................................ 11
2.3 Fees and charges.............................................................................................................. 5
6.5 Lighting .............................................................................................................................. 11
2.4 Management of events ................................................................................................... 5
6.6 Filming ................................................................................................................................ 11
2.5 Site visit ............................................................................................................................... 5
6.7 Keys ..................................................................................................................................... 11
Documentation required: .............................................................................................................. 5
6.8 Location/how to find us ............................................................................................... 11
2.6 Event Safety Plan ............................................................................................................. 5
6.9 Opening hours ................................................................................................................. 11
2.7 Insurance............................................................................................................................. 6
6.10 Security and stewarding .......................................................................................... 12
3 Health and Safety..................................................................................................................... 6
6.11 Plans ................................................................................................................................ 12
3.1 Health & Safety ................................................................................................................. 6
6.12 Police ............................................................................................................................... 12
3.2 Event Safety Officer (ESO) ........................................................................................... 6
6.13 Vehicle access .............................................................................................................. 13
3.3 Accidents, prevention and notification ..................................................................... 7
6.14 Waste management .................................................................................................. 13
3.4 Children and Young People ........................................................................................... 7
7 Construction, Design & Management Regulations CDM 2015 .............................. 13
3.5 Evacuation ........................................................................................................................... 7

3.6 Wind Management ........................................................................................................... 7

4 License Requirements............................................................................................................. 8

4.1 Premises Licence .............................................................................................................. 8

4.2 Sale of alcohol ................................................................................................................... 8

4.3 Serving of Free Alcohol .................................................................................................. 8

4.4 Control of Noise ................................................................................................................ 9

4.5 Temporary Structures .................................................................................................... 9

5 Damage ...................................................................................................................................... 10

2 3

The website for Potters Fields includes a calendar of events, a photo gallery and a news board. The Trust behind the project
also provides a ‘Guide to Running Events’ at the site. This illustrates the importance of the flexibility of the space to generate
revenue and maintain a sense of variety and change in the space.

110  GROSS.MA X.
Within the guidance document, an illustrative plan explains the layout of the park, indicating the measurements of the lawns and the power supply locations.

who maintain the Oudolf garden, oversee the lawns and returfing as events. All the other events that take place are external and, therefore,
required. More importantly, the gardeners act as community liaisons, hire the space. This generates an income for the park of £ 260,000
developing relationships with locals, informing tourists about the his- per year. The total revenue of the park is £ 400,000 per year, which
tory of the park and identifying plants in the garden for people who covers the cost of garden maintenance, repair to the lawns and staff
are visiting the park to see Oudolf’s work. salaries and allows the Trust to improve the park’s infrastructure,
The park’s infrastructure includes two power points and a potable refurbish the footpaths and enhance the park as it evolves and its
water supply that was installed as demands increased. While the park uses change. As of 2016/17 the budget for landscape maintenance
hosts a number of events, the access was specifically designed to and improvements was £ 128,184; for repairs and improvements to
limit the size of vehicle that can access the site, which determines the the hard landscape the budget was £ 30,000.
type of event that can take place on the lawns. The events take place
on the open lawn areas and there are very clear guidelines for the
types of structures. The website provides a ‘Guide to Running Events’
that covers all the operational issues.
The management team only programmes one or two community
events per year from an annual budget of £ 20,000. The park will seek
local, council and government sponsorship and grants for larger

POTTERS FIELDS PARK 111

 Community perennial garden
Planting design by Piet Oudolf

Greater London Authority: Office of the Mayor of London

Design by Foster + Partners

Events lawn

Tower Bridge World Heritage Site

North

Terraced seat edge with

views to Tower Bridge
and the Tower of London
directly across the River
Thames from the park

The success of the site as a platform for corporate sponsorship and adver-
tising owes its success to the backdrop of the World Heritage Site of
Tower Bridge. The space is designed for flexibility but also for everyday
use and the design provides a series of terraced steps for tourists and
locals to lounge and enjoy views across the Thames to the Tower of
London as well as Tower Bridge. At the southern end of the site, a peren-
nial garden designed by Piet Oudolf adds seasonal colour and variation to
the project and provides a quiet garden away from the throngs of people
moving along the riverfront.

112 GROSS.MA X.
Herbaceous perennial and ornamental grass garden
maintained by three gardeners paid for by the funds
generated by the events lawn.

4
Lawn

Pop-up power supply

EVENTS LAWNS:
3
30 events annually
Lawn
5 annual recurring events 2
3000 person capacity Lawn
£ 400k of revenue generated to park
lar access
Vehicu

fe
ca

cafe

There are two key elements to the design of Potters Fields: a flexible lawn
with terraced seating and a colourful perennial community garden. The
lawn provides the platform for sponsored installations, community gath-
erings and cultural events, which ensures something different is happen-
ing throughout the year, providing interest, intrigue and fuelling antici-
pation. The garden also performs a similar role as colours and textures
emerge and then fade throughout the year. Between the flexible lawn
and the vibrant community garden, Potters Fields Park is in
a state of perpetual change.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK 113

The lawn hosts a variety of sponsorship installations,
cultural celebrations and community gatherings. This
variety of events animates the site, brings change and
a sense of intrigue and anticipation. The pages that
follow showcase a selection of the sponsorship instal-
lations, cultural events and community celebrations
that happen at Potters Fields Park.

114  GROSS.MA X.
As the flexible lawn space accommodates a calendar of colourful events, installations and performances, the Piet Oudolf-designed garden is also giving a perfor-
mance as the garden undergoes dramatic changes from spring to autumn. The following pages demonstrate how the garden changes with the seasons, from three
keys points within the garden. This natural metamorphosis is a type of spatial activation in its own right. It ensures there is something new on each visit. Clockwise
from top left shows the garden from March to December.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK 115

Sponsorship installations and cultural events taking place on the flexible
lawn at Potters Fields with Tower Bridge as an iconic landmark.

116  GROSS.MA X.
The Piet Oudolf-designed perennial garden puts on a dramatic performance throughout the seasons, with new colours, textures and architectural seed heads.
Clockwise from top left shows the garden from March to December.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK 117

Sponsorship installations and cultural events taking place on the flexible
lawn at Potters Fields with Tower Bridge as an iconic landmark. In 2003,
before Potters Fields was redesigned by GROSS.MAX., the illusionist David
Blaine spent 44 days in a glass box suspended above the park.
The garden undergoes a dramatic transformation and drifts of planting reveals new colours, textures and forms. The evergreen yew hedges give the garden
structure while the perennials put on a show. Clockwise from top left shows the garden from March to December.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK 119

 The management team at Potters Fields Park annually replace parts
of the lawn that are hardest hit by the events. This takes place from
late October due to the event calendar.
In previous years the team has re-laid about 15 per cent of the
lawns and drill-seeded about 65 per cent, which has been a success-
ful maintenance strategy.
This figure has come down every year from 2010, when the team
drill-seeded all the lawns and had little success. In 2011 the team
returfed 85 per cent of the lawns.
Each year the head gardener and his team try to bring down the
amount of returfing. Additionally, they are looking at ways of dealing
with the deep, heavy compaction from the estimated 8 – 9 million
people passing through More London and Potters Fields Park annu-
ally. This is proving to be one of the main issues for the management
of the park.
The Trust has consulted with a soil specialist and his recommen-
dations are to hollow tine the lawns (create aeration holes), remove
the waste created and fill the holes with a green mulch to get more
organic material into the soils. Despite feeding five times annually the
soils are still relatively sterile.
Once the lawn is reinstated, it is returned to an open lawn area
for day-to-day activities for tourists, local employees and community
members as well as for accommodating a wide range of events and
installations.

Since the lawn is so heavily used for events, it occasionally needs to be returfed. The biggest chal-
lenge for the team is the compaction of the soil from the estimated 8 – 9 million people passing
through Potters Fields Park annually.

120  GROSS.MA X.
The head gardener Ian Patrick Mould and his team tending to the Piet Oudolf-designed perennial garden.

The revenue generated from the sponsorship installations makes possible the employment of two full-time gardeners and caretakers for the Piet Oudolf-designed gardens and the rest
of the space. The gardeners also serve as a community liaisons, meeting and conversing with local dog walkers and park users, as well as providing information about the gardens for
tourists and visitors.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK 121

LAWN ON D
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Sasaki Associates

LOCATION: Boston, MA, USA

COMPLETION: Spring 2014
SIZE: 1.1 hectare
CONTEXT: Emerging innovation district near a convention centre
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: HR&A, Utile, Chris Wangro, Höweler + Yoon
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Ping-pong tables, food trucks, food tent,
cornhole boards, art installations, Jenga blocks, bocce, children’s events,
carved pumpkin display, live music concerts
BUDGET: US$ 1.5 million
CURATION BUDGET: US$ 1.4 million

0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Lawn on D represents a new kind of experimental, curated pub-
lic space. The site measures 145 × 80 metres and is largely a flat open
space with sloped banks flanking the longer edges of the rectangular
space. The Sasaki design provides three equal-sized lawns that meas-
ure 30 × 27 metres, tarmac paths enlivened with brightly coloured
paint and patternation and a ‘planted frame’ around the perimeter of
the site. The design also includes a tent structure measuring 30 × 15
metres, which houses a bar, grill and multiple picnic tables. The south-
eastern corner has a finer-grain playfulness with bright-orange light-
ing columns and catenary lighting, bright-green tessallating geometry
painted on the tarmac, ping-pong tables, seating areas and adequate
space for food trucks to set up shop. Two bright-orange pathways
give a ‘yellow-brick-road’ effect leading to the convention centre,
which houses the public toilets for the space. Writing for Landscape
Architecture magazine, Elizabeth Padjen describes the Lawn on D like
this: ‘It’s a schoolyard. Anyone who has ever seen a New York City
neighborhood playground will recognise it immediately. Flat. Asphalt
paving. A fence. A swing set. People playing games. Others hanging
back, watching. A couple of authority figures discreetly monitoring
the action, ready to jump in if things get out of hand. A big building
looming behind it all. The Lawn on D takes that basic model and amps
it up into the realm of urban cool. It’s cheap. It’s modest. It’s ambi-
tious. It’s owned by a behemoth of a public agency, but it’s one of the
coolest spaces in the city.’
In many ways the Lawn on D feels like a pop-up installation, now
featuring in cities worldwide as a way for communities to repurpose
unloved patches of open space that authorities do not have the time
or resources to do anything with. However, the Lawn on D is much
more deliberate and curated, with years of planning to make it a real-
ity. In 2010 the convention centre was developing plans to expand,

During an outdoor cinema showing of Jaws, the Lawn on D is filled with

inflatable dinghies.
During the winter months, the Lawn on D features an ice maze. This attraction
adds something different from the offerings of other public spaces and in
turn makes the Lawn on D a destination.

122 SASAKI ASSOCIATES

The area west of the tent has a more intimate scale than the rest of the Lawn on D. Ping-pong tables, food trucks, tables and chairs, seating areas, playful lighting and
bold paving makes this place feel lively and energised.

L 123
but to do so in a way that would give it a competitive edge and reim-
agine how conventions could be held. Part of the expansion plans
included a park, which in reality would have been more of an events
space that would be open to the public. The design team had no
precedent for the type of events space they envisioned. An idea was
presented to the board of the convention centre to develop the walk-
way that connected the adjacent hotel and the convention centre
(now the bright-orange paths through the Lawn on D) and the adja-
cent 1.1-hectare site. The team concluded that they would try out a
number of different ideas to gauge which events and elements
worked, both for the public and for the convention centre. The know-
ledge gained through this ‘eyes-wide-open experiment’ as the team
referred to it, would guide the design. It was imperative that the site
generated publicity, for the existing convention centre and for the
emerging innovation district. The board gave approval to commit $ 1.5
million for the construction of the Lawn on D and $ 1.4 million for the
first year of programming the space (excluding other operating costs).
The construction of the Lawn on D was completed in August 2014,
and the ‘eyes-wide-open experiment’ soon followed. Chris Wangro’s
The Lawn on D is a platform with a variety of overlays at different scales
and complexities. The Intrude installation was one of the more dramatic
events in the space, but the daily use of the lawn is equally important,
such as the foam shipping-container play elements, which are stored on
site when not in use.
124 SASAKI ASSOCIATES
expertise in programming public spaces was instrumental in creating
the much-needed buzz for the lawn to gain traction and become a
destination. Chris helped to get an events team in place to manage
the events and curate the activities. It was important that the events
did not feel as if they had been parachuted into the space, but rather
grew organically from the character and personality of South Boston.
Chris and his team alongside HR&A worked with local community
groups and artists to give the lawn an identity and brand recognition.
The opening was a success, fed not by extensive marketing or pro-
motion but rather by social media. The main success came from the
Höweler + Yoon installation called Swing Time, an interactive public
art piece.
EXPERIMENT AND ENTERTAIN
Elizabeth Padjen called it ‘Boston’s proclaimed selfie capital’. Swing
Time does have a pull like gravity, with people of all ages lining up for
a place on one of the 19 circular swings, playfully lit and changing
colour through public participation. The swings have been so success-
ful that Höweler + Yoon has revisited the detailing and materiality to
withstand the pressures of its success. It was not just Swing Time that
was a draw for the space, the calendar of events that Chris curated
included concerts, food trucks, a screening of Jaws with rubber life
rafts to set the mood, themed weekends, a ski hill, fire pits and an ice
maze. All of these were supported on a day-to-day basis with lawn
games such as bocce, giant Jenga, cornhole and Adirondack chairs
for lounging in the sun. The lawn also hosted significant installations
titled Intrude, which populated the lawn with giant inflatable bunnies
and Pentalum, an inflatable and colourful maze that took over the
entire lawn.
The design team puts the success of the Lawn on D down to the
sense of safety that the lawn provides, the opportunity for people-
watching and the variety and range of events throughout the year.
Another key point to make about the activation of the space here is the
inclusion of an alcohol licence. One cannot underestimate the signifi-
cance of this, as it effectively created one of Boston’s only public open
spaces where visitors could lounge on the lawns sipping white wine
and cocktails, conjuring images of the freedom of European parks.
Small moveable stands sell beer and wine throughout the park, which
has now evolved to include craft brew nights, and the alcohol helps
to fuel the energy of the live music and concomitant dancing evenings.
After the Lawn had been open for 18 months, more than 230,000
people had visited it, throwing into question what the future of the
space should be and how it could ever be a temporary experimental
space. A change in political leadership jeopardised the permanent
space that would replace the Lawn on D. It threatened the Lawn on
D because of the cost-cutting measures that were taking place and
the fact that the Lawn had an annual budget of $ 2 million. Due to
this, it was determined that the Lawn on D would need to ‘wipe its
own face’ if it was going to remain the popular destination it had
become, and it would have to generate a revenue. Citizens Bank
donated $ 250,000 in sponsorship, and now has an ATM kiosk at the
entrance. The space is now referred to as the Lawn on D Powered
by Citizens Bank. Visiting food trucks no longer feature in the space
as a contract with a local restaurant to serve food and drinks with a
wine and beer licence has been implemented. The convention centre
pockets 15 per cent of the gross take from the food and drink offering.
Both this tent and the large catering tent are now owned outright
rather than rented. The lawn games and food and beverages are
available for use on Thursday afternoons and evenings, Fridays and
weekends.
An additional tent for small private events has been added to the
northern edge of the Lawn on D near the convention centre with a
The Pumpkin Fest is a weekend-long event that begins with a collective pumpkin-carving session throughout the day on Saturday and Sunday and then the pumpkins go on display on
Sunday evening. It is a great example of community involvement and a simple way to add a sense of spectacle to a space.

new feature swing from Höweler+ Yoon called the Halo Swing. With
a capacity of 350 people, at the time of writing, the tent already has
80 bookings for the 2017 season at a cost of $ 4000 – $ 5000 per day.
Some of the bookings will utilise the entire site at a cost of between
$ 17,000 – $ 25,000 and often provide their own activities, such as
bouncy castles. These revenue-generating efforts have cut the $ 2.3
million loss to a projected $ 250,000 – $ 350,000 loss for the year. The
Lawn on D initially had a ‘principal park supervisor’, an operations
and a production director to help with technological requirements.

L 125
 The eastern section of the Lawn on D provides two open lawn areas
measuring 27 × 31 metres for lawn games, concerts, weekly yoga and
large-scale installations. These lawns are flanked by sloping banks where
visitors can seek shade and respite from the sun and view the wealth of
installations and interactive events that take place on the lawns. The
sloped lawns are an important design feature and contribute to the suc-
cess of the space by providing a desirable edge condition and spectator
perch. The banks also include a number of small-scale artistic installations
m and formal gathering areas.
31

27
m Swing time is an installation by Höweler + Yoon Architects and is the
most popular element of the Lawn on D. The lightweight structure
supports 14 circular swings for children and adults. By night they are
illuminated by solar power captured during the day. Swing Time sits
near the tent, separated by enough space for leisurely lawn games
and quick access to food and drinks.

The tent anchors the Lawn on D, providing

food, soft drinks, alcohol, food trucks and
places to sit and play ping pong. The geo-
metric pattern painted on the ground plane
adds to the energy of the space. Overhead
lighting creates a lively atmosphere by night
and a safe access route to the convention
9

centre and across the street to the adjacent

m

26

hotel.
m

m
31
m
30
15
m
it
ex
e
cl
hi
ve
e
ic
rv
Se

14
5
m
m
14

41
m

26

ss
m

12

ce
ac
e
cl
hi
Ve
m
66

In 2016 a second permanent tent was implemented at the Lawn

on D as a venue for private hire and as a mechanism to generate
revenue to contribute to the maintenance and programming of
the overall space. Adjacent to the tent is a private lawn area with
North
games and seating away from the larger lawns and Höweler +
Yoon installed a second swing feature here called the Halo Swing.

126 SASAKI ASSOCIATES

The plan above shows the indicative landscape plan developed by Sasaki prior to Chris Wangro getting involved and
working to develop Swing Time as the prime feature of the lawn. The diagrams above indicate potential configurations
for temporary uses in the space.

L 127
 SEMI-PERMANENT: Sun Lounger (7 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Lighting

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Cornhole Pairs (8 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Love Seat (3 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Cocktail Bar (2 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Bocce Set (2 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D SEMI-PERMANENT: Adirondack Chairs (22 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Halo Swing

PERMANENT: Swing Time Installation (1 no.)
J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

128 SASAKI ASSOCIATES

 SEMI-PERMANENT: Child-size Table and Chairs (4 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Tables and Chairs (3 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Soft Play Shipping Containers (12 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Table-tennis (5 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Picnic Tables in Tent (20 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Food Trucks (4 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Jenga Blocks (3 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D
TEMPORARY: Fire Pits (3 no).

D J F M A M J Ju A S O N

SEMI-PERMANENT: Side Tables (8 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Food and Bar Tent 15 × 30 m (1 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

L 129
The two lawns are activated by lawn games such as bocce, giant Jenga blocks, cornhole and children’s play-foam shipping containers. The lawns
are used as yoga platforms and to accommodate large-scale installations and performances, such as the inflatable Pentalum installation, which
creates a surreal colourscape for visitors. Here, people are queuing for the event.

130 SASAKI ASSOCIATES

Concerts, televised sports games and community events are a large part of the calendar of events. The open space of the lawns and the covered
tent provide flexibility to accommodate a variety of events at different scales. Alcohol is served in the tents, which naturally leads to dancing.

L 131
Swing Time by Höweler + Yoon Architects is the centrepiece of the Lawn on D. It has been described
as the ‘selfie capital of Boston’ with its vibrant changing colours and languid swinging motion. There is
often a queue of people waiting for their turn on the swings. The architect continues to update the
materiality of Swing Time to stand up to the increased use, since the feature was designed as a tem-
porary installation.

132 SASAKI ASSOCIATES

Amanda Parer’s Intrude installation. Large-scale and ambitious installations, either as feature art installations or seasonal displays, characterise the success of the
Lawn on D project. It is this ambitious curation that has made this experiment in social engagement a success. Pumpkin Fest and Play Day are two of the staple
events that happen each year.

L 133
A’BECKETT URBAN
SQUARE
ARCHITECTS: Peter Elliott and Taylor Cullity Lethlean
LOCATION: Melbourne, Australia
COMPLETION: Spring 2014
SIZE: 2,800 m2
CONTEXT: University Campus
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Artist Ash Keating
RECURRING OVERLAYS/FEATURES: Ping pong, sports courts,
barbecue area, wifi, spectator seating, public art, moveable planters
BUDGET: AU$ 1.2 million
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
A’Beckett Square transformed a 2800-square-metre car park at RMIT
University in Melbourne. Like other pop-up projects, A’Beckett Square
is a holding space while the university determines redevelopment
plans. The square is dominated by two brightly coloured multi-use
sports courts. This defining feature differs from the other case studies
examined as part of this research by putting sports and recreation at
the heart of the space. The two main courts measuring 15 × 31 metres
are separated from two half-court practice areas by a 40-metre-long
timber bench. This bench, half of which has a seat back for spectator
seating, acts as a staging area for teams to prepare for games, but
also has a spatial function in defining the space.
The eastern edge of the site is more intimate in scale and function
and includes five linear benches up to 10 metres in length, 20 move-
able containers with trees and planting and a sheltered barbecue area
that overlooks the sports courts. There is also a ping-pong table and
moveable chairs with tables on wheels that can easily be rolled into
the adjacent road, expanding the space as needed. A defining feature
Table-tennis tables, placed on artificial turf, add interest to the space and provide the
campus community with a playful addition to the public space.
134 PETER ELLIOTT AND TAYLOR CULLIT Y LETHLEAN
0 75 m
of the space is the treatment of the adjacent walls that have been
transformed into a striking mural by Melbourne artist Ash Keating.
The installation, titled Natural System Response, represents urban
forests and desert landscapes, created using airless spray from fire
extinguishers filled with paint and retroactively pressurised. This back-
drop adds the eye-catching element that initially pulls people into the
space who may otherwise not know about it.
In truth, footfall is not a problem due to the proximity of the space
to the university. The space is a popular place for active recreation,
but also for people-watching and relaxation. According to the archi-
tects, the creative approach to the space was to keep the space de-
liberately lean, inspired by demountable installations. The choice to
use bold colours was driven by the intent to distinguish between the
active sports court areas and the quieter soft zones delineated by a
carpet of artificial grass. This pays for the scheduled sports, which
include futsal, volleyball, basketball and netball. The space is predom-
inantly used as a free play space for students and is therefore avail-
able for them to use as they wish.
What the future of this space holds is uncertain, as is often the
case with temporary or pop-up designed spaces. It is possible that
the university may expand and introduce a building in place of the
sports courts. Alternatively, the City of Melbourne has plans in the
works for an extension to the underground rail network and is con-
sequently seeking space above ground for equipment to undertake
this significant infrastructure project. I’m told that the university and
the students may lose the courts as a result. Whatever the future
holds, this is a strong example of how creative curation of under-used
space and how the conversion of a static car park can serve the com-
munity and enliven the public realm.
The site is divided into an active zone and a social zone. The active zone, with brightly painted sports courts, provides two full-length basketball courts and multi-use games areas,
as well as two half-court warm-up areas for basketball games. A 40 × 1.5-metre-long bench separates the warm-up area from the main sports courts, doubling as a spectator
seat and a place for players to store their belongings and get ready for a game. The social zone is defined by artificial turf and includes 23 moveable planters and five long benches.
This area also includes a covered barbecue area and looks across the sports court to the mural that wraps the site on two sides, created by Melbourne artist Ash Keating.

Long benches and moveable planters from recycled materials give the space an urban
feel and provide plenty of spectator seating to watch basketball games or for socialising.
The long feature bench separates the practice courts from the main full-length basketball
courts. It provides a perch for players to get ready and for people to sit and watch the
games.

A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE 135

 A 40 × 1.5-metre-long bench separates the half-court warm-up
courts from the two full-length basketball courts. A portion of
the bench has a seat back for spectator seating, and the other
is open and more flexible for players to prepare for the game.

8
m
m
16
43
m

m
14

m
50
The social section of the space is defined visually by
artificial turf, which contrasts against the colourful and
playful character of the active area. The social space Two multi-use games courts, measuring
includes five long benches at various lengths from 15 × 31 metres, dominate the space, provid-
10 metres to 5 metres, 23 moveable planters with plant- ing free recreation for students and locals,
ing and trees and a shaded barbecue area. and in turn activate the public space.
13
m

Terraced spectator seats hold the edge of the

space and provide an ample area for relaxing,
sunbathing and watching the sports games.

m
35
m 31
15
m

North
56
m

m
50

The adjacent road provides additional flexible space,

where rolling tables and chairs can be placed to
provide additional seating and encourage people to
linger and relax in the space.

136 PETER ELLIOTT AND TAYLOR CULLIT Y LETHLEAN

 PERMANENT: Ping Pong Table (1 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Barbecue (3 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Rolling Table and Chairs (6 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Timber Planters (23 no.)

PERMANENT: 40m Feature Bench (1 no.) J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Overhead Lights 15m (7 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Basketball (2 full and 2 half courts)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Benches (5 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

PERMANENT: Flexible Structure (1 no.)

J F M A M J Ju A S O N D

A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE 137

JOHN MADJESKI
COURTYARD V&A
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Kim Wilkie

LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2005
SIZE: 3175 square metres
CONTEXT: Open-air courtyard at the Victoria and Albert Museum
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Fountain Workshop and Texxus
RECURRING OVERLAYS: London Design Festival annually in September,
children’s programme, village fete, summer party
BUDGET: £ 2 million

0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The John Madjeski Courtyard is a central green space and water fea-
ture at the Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A) in London. Kim Wilkie
won the competition to design the new garden at the V&A in 2003.
The competition featured designs by six internationally acclaimed
landscape architects and was judged by a panel of experts from the
realms of horticulture and design. The competition for the garden was
supported by the Friends of the V&A. Flexibility was a key part of the
design brief and I recall seeing Martha Schwartz’s competition pro-
posal at a public exhibition, which proposed a series of planters on
rails that could be shifted to the perimeter to create an open flexible
square. While Martha’s proposal was unsuccessful, it did illustrate the
courtyard’s prerequisite to deliver a highly flexible space. Kim Wilkie’s
solution includes a shallow water feature that can be drained away
to reveal a ‘stage’ surrounded by gentle steps that act as an elegant
amphitheatre. Examples of the effectiveness of this approach can be
seen in the following pages where the square accommodates a vil-
lage fete and acts as a platform for outdoor performances.
Like the museum, entry to the courtyard for the general public is
free. The main elements of the space are the elliptical water feature
measuring 20 × 41 metres with seating steps and two gentle ramps
with fountains incorporated into the steps at the ramp locations. The
central pool area is also a feat of geometric stone-cutting precision,
with each stone cut individually by a company called Texxus. The
water depth is approximately 200 millimetres and people are wel-
come to wade into the pool.
Two lawn areas adjacent to the elliptical pool measure 20 × 20
metres and provide areas for relaxation and picnicking, overlooking
the pool. At the perimeter edge of the lawns, 24 glass planters en-
hance the formal symmetry of the space. Originally these planters
were planted with citrus trees, which were to be replaced by clipped

In 2016 Achim Menges used robotics to construct the Elytra Filament Pavilion. The performative aspects of this installation point towards a novel form of spatial activation
that showcases the making of art rather than the display of art.

138 KIM WILKIE

In 2006 United Visual Artists installed Volume. The installation took place on the plaza revealed by draining the water feature. This image demonstrates the multi-functionality of the
central water feature, which offers the flexibility of being drained in order to create a hard plaza space to accommodate installations and allow crowds of people to gather.

holly in the winter and then brought back out in the summer months. 10th anniversary of the V&A being the official home of the London
However, the strategy changed due to budgetary constraints and the Design Festival. On average, 25 events take place in the courtyard
planters have been planted with evergreen bay trees. I make note of each year and approximately half of those are repeat events. These
this because, as is seen with the Orangery at Versailles, the subtle events take place during the peak summer season. The garden re-
change of vegetation (although dramatic in the case of Versailles) mains open and managed throughout the year for visitors to the
adds something different to a space and is an important device to museum to enjoy. On the last Friday of every month, the museum and
introduce a freshness and vitality to the public realm. The outer pe- courtyard extend the open hours for contemporary events, artists,
rimeter is planted with a variety of seasonal bulbs and perennials and designers and programme. The space often hosts private events and
there are two large liquidambar trees in the northern corners of the has the capacity for 600 guests.
space, all of which put on a colourful transformation throughout the
year, bolstering the changing nature of the courtyard. An outdoor cafe
station was added to the courtyard with tables, chairs and umbrellas
to support the permanent interior cafe. The tables and chairs are
clustered in the northern edge of the courtyard to get maximum sun
exposure. This introduction has contributed to the active character
and atmosphere of the courtyard.
The courtyard frequently features an installation as an extension
to the exhibits within the museum. The London Design Festival installs
a temporary installation every year in September and 2018 will be the

JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A 139

 41 m

20 m
The central water feature creates a playful space
in the summer months with people of all ages
walking through the water. The pool remains in
place through the winter and can be drained 31 m
away in an hour to allow the central space to
function as a plaza. Two ramps provide access
into the pool and contain playful fountains.

m
20

46 m
23 m

Two level lawn areas and trees in glass

planters flank the central water feature.
On any given day these lawns provide
space for relaxing and socialising, as this
is a popular weekend destination. During
installations and cultural events, the
lawns provide additional spectator space.
The planters around the edges were
originally designed to change with the
seasons to provide further variety to the
space and originally included citrus
trees, which were later changed for bay
trees.
m
46

The enclosed character of the courtyard creates

a surprisingly tranquil space considering it is 69 m
adjacent to central London roads with high
traffic volumes. At the edge of each building is
a 1-metre-wide planting strip, bringing colour
North
and seasonal change to the space.

The subtle sunken water feature provides generous stepped seating with elegant ramps to access the water, with lawns at the upper terrace providing space for socialising,
people-watching and quiet reflection.

140 KIM WILKIE

 Central area filled as a water feature with adjacent lawns. The water feature can be drained away to create
a flexible space.

The images above show the flexibility that the central water feature provides. On any given day it is a playful, soothing water feature that children and families are drawn to.
For formal events such as a village fete, the drained pool can dramatically transform into an active plaza. The images above also show the capacity of the space to
exhibit temporary installations, illustrated here with the 2016 Elytra Filament Pavilion by Achim Menges, an installation developed using robotics on display to further
engage with the public.

JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A 141

The upper images show the Volume installation by United Visual Artist and the 2014 installation by the late Zaha Hadid titled Crest,
both shown as part of the London Design Festival.
The V&A is the main space for the London Design Festival, now in its tenth year, that takes place each year in September. Clockwise
from top left for the bottom four images: Stack ‘M Up by Martino Gamper (2009), Blow and Roll installations by Zieta Prozessdesign
(2010), You Know, You Cannot See Yourself So Well as by Reflections by Frida Escobedo (2015) and a dance performance once
the pool is drained.

142 KIM WILKIE

2015 Installation You Know, You Cannot See Yourself So Well as by Reflections by Frida Escobedo.
Mirror Mirror installation by Jason Bruges Studio in 2010.
During the summer, the fountain can be drained to create a spectator area for music performances.

JOHN MADJESKI COURT

BATTERSEA
POWER STATION
POP-UP PARK
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: LDA Design

LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2013
SIZE: 1.5 hectares
CONTEXT: Brownfield site adjacent to one of London’s
most iconic industrial buildings
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Simpson Haugh Architects and
Exterior Architecture
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Community celebrations, music
performances, film festivals, food markets
0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Power Station Pop-up Park opened in May 2013 and hosted the has been cordoned off and unreachable for so long, but the delight
annual Chelsea Fringe Festival as its first overlay event, a grassroots and entertainment devised by the events team encouraged people to
horticulture event that corresponds to the prestigious Chelsea Flower stay and linger and return throughout the summer months. The Pop-
Show in London. The park sits to the north of Battersea Power Station up Park provides a glimpse of how the future park will perform. It will
overlooking the River Thames and was the first public open space to be a stage for a multitude of events, performances and installations.
be created there in the history of the Power Station. Battersea Power On a day-to-day basis, the open aspect of the lawns will allow people
Station, an industrial-age icon that has been derelict for 30 years, is to relax and look out across the river. The project manages to care-
currently undergoing one of the most ambitious regeneration efforts fully accommodate the need for flexibility with the desire to have an
in the UK. As part of the regeneration, the Pop-up Park was designed attractive space when occupied by only a few people.
to create a setting for the phase 1 marketing suite so that potential
investors could get a personal view of the impressive Power Station.
The Pop-up Park was also intended to be a platform on which gath-
erings and events could be held to build the brand and foster the
spirit of community that would be at the heart of the development
even before the first new residents moved in.
LDA Design, commissioned to create the design for the permanent
public realm of the development, was tasked with designing the park.
The design creates two flexible spaces: a lawn measuring 90 × 30
metres and a hard-standing space measuring 30 × 30 metres. This
approach enabled the space to accommodate large gatherings, uti-
lising both the hard-standing areas and the lawn, or smaller events
could be held in the hard-standing area only, contained by trees and
with the new phase 1 marketing suite in the background. Existing
utility elements that had to remain on site were clad with timber and
utilised by the events team to contribute to the vibe and energy of the
events they were hosting. To create more intimate areas and varied
spaces, clusters of trees in raised planters were used to create seating
areas and a place to sit in the shade and watch the events or enjoy
lunch from the food festivals. Flanking the northern edge of the lawn
is an 80-metre-long rain garden that takes all of the surface water
from the adjacent hard-standing area to sustain a perennial garden
that changes from month to month. The planting design was intend-
ed to provide a sense of something new and different at each visit,
so it was not just the social calendar that was transforming the space
but the rooted gardens fulfilling the transformative role as well.
Throughout the summers of 2014 and 2015, the events team
developed an enticing programme of events, ranging from food par-
ties, concerts and the Fire Festival to the Power of Summer outdoor
The Pop-up Park shown in the context of the existing Battersea Power Station, with the
cinema by Everyman Cinema, all against the backdrop of the Power first phase of the development under construction to the right of the image, which was
Station. The building provided an irresistible draw for people since it completed in 2017.

144 LDA DESIGN

The central lawn space was used as a spectator space for a series of concerts and per-
formances; shown here is the Ignite festival with the band Jungle and the Power Station
animated by Projection Artworks.
Existing site infrastructure was clad in timber and used as a playful hand-painted bill-
board by Bread Collective. This created an edgy and lively atmosphere for the Power of
Summer outdoor cinema.

Authenticated
BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK 145
 For larger events, the lawn became a gathering area
and a performance space. It also gave visitors a
place to lounge in the shadow of one of London’s

37
m
most iconic buildings. Irrigation and ‘self-repairing’
grass helped to keep the lawn lush and attractive. In
the lifespan of the Pop-up Park the lawn was never
replaced even though it was well used for events and
daily use.

93 m The hard-paved area measures 106 × 37 metres, but

20
m

the main flexible space without any tree planting or

obstructions is 63 × 37 metres. This space enabled
marquees, food stalls and stages to activate the
Pop-up Park. The adjacent seating area beneath the
trees acted as a counterpoint to create more intimate
areas, doubling as spectator areas and perches for
people-watching.

m
106
The Pop-up Park included a hard-paving area with
tree planters that doubled as seats to create intimate
seating areas, a lawn area and an 80-metre-long
rain garden that captured all the surface water drain-
37
m

age and separated the hard space from the lawn.

The planting in the rain garden was designed to
m display a ‘star performer’ each month, ensuring a
63
colourful display and something new for those who
visited the site often.

m
180
59
m

The Power Station Pop-up Park was a temporary park that

was in place for two summers from May 2014 to 2016.
The park overlooked the River Thames and was built directly North
north of the iconic Battersea Power Station. The park opened
in time to host the Chelsea Fringe Festival, a grassroots
horticulture event that coincides with the Chelsea Flower
Show. The Pop-up Park accompanied a marketing suite
for the first phase of the regeneration of the Power Station.
The park was open to the public via an underpass to the
west of the site.

146 LDA DESIGN

At a corporate event, street performers entertain the crowds from temporary stages.
The layout of the Pop-up Park provided flexible space on a central lawn, as well as a
generous hard landscape area for other events. An 80-metre-long rain garden planted
with perennials added to the changing nature of the site, with new colours and textures
emerging throughout the year.
The Power Station Pop-up Park was opened officially for the Chelsea Fringe Festival in
May 2013, a grassroots event equivalent to the more established Chelsea Flower
Show. The lawn included an engaging sculpture called Bloom that morphed and grew
through participation with the visitors to the park.
The Fire Festival transformed the site into a spectacular art installation, drawing huge
crowds to the site.

Authenticated
BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK 147
For the summers that the Pop-up Park was in place, food festivals and cultural celebra-
tions created a lively atmosphere, with people coming to socialise and take the opportu-
nity to see the Power Station up close, as the site had been disused and fenced-off for
three decades.
The Power of Summer outdoor cinema by Everyman Cinemas with the Power Station as
a backdrop, plus beanbag seating, created a destination for the summer.
The Pop-up Park included areas for gathering and also intimate spaces to relax and
linger.

148 LDA DESIGN

The Fire Festival against the backdrop of two industrial-age cranes along the River Thames.
The Pop-Up Park during the Chelsea Fringe Festival.

Authenticated
BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK 149
MOMA PS1
DESIGNER: Various through the Young Architects Program (YAP)

LOCATION: Brooklyn, NY, USA

COMPLETION: Annually since 1998
SIZE: 1900 square metres
CONTEXT: Courtyard at MoMA, the Museum of Modern Art
in Long Island
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Each installation is designed by
a different design team
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Architecture installation to accompany
the annual ‘Warm Up’ music festival
BUDGET: Various; circa US$ 80,000 for the installation

0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
For 19 years MoMA PS1 in Long Island, NY, has hosted an architec-
tural and music series in the outdoor courtyard. The Young Architects
Program (YAP) began in 1998. The annual installation has provided
emerging architecture talent with a platform to design and implement
creative ideas for the MoMA PS1 courtyard. The purpose of the instal-
lation is to provide visitors to the museum with an outdoor space, and
each installation must provide seating, shade and water. Each suc-
cessful architect follows a programme and tight budget and takes the
project through every stage of the process, from design to implemen-
tation. The brief requires the architect to address environmental
issues, including recycling and sustainability. The installation is built
each year in June to support the summer music series Warm Up,
featuring experimental music with DJs and live bands. The event is
curated by the Architecture and Design Department at MoMA and
MoMA PS1. Bloomberg Philanthropies has supported YAP since 2007
and will continue to sponsor the installation until 2018. Each project
also receives generous sponsorship for other groups or individuals to
realise the installation. The budgets vary but, as an indicator, the 2010
Pole Dance had a budget of $ 80,000.
MoMA and MoMA PS1 have also partnered with MAXXI in Rome,
Constructo in Santiago, Istanbul Modern in Istanbul and MMCA in
Seoul to create an international extension of YAP. In 2011 two entries
were selected, with one installed at MoMA PS1 and another at MAXXI
in Rome. The dedicated website features proposals and winners of
the annual competition, as well as interviews with the curators and
videos of the installation process.
The process of choosing an architect for the project each year
involves deans of architectural schools and the editors of architecture
publications putting forward up to 20 students, recent graduates from
architecture programmes and established architects who are pushing

Part of the brief stipulates that the installation must include water to provide visitors with Each summer the VW Dome is erected in the PS1 courtyard as a flexible events space
a place to cool down. The image above shows the 2014 installation by The Living. for the Sunday Sessions, providing live, real-time art exhibits, performances and installa-
tions. The dome was first installed in 2010 and is funded by Volkswagen.

150 YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

The 2018 installation titled Hide and Seek by Dream the Combine includes a runway, collective hammock seating areas, atmospheric clouds of mist
and mirrors that move with the wind or with human touch.

151
 18 m

17 m

45
m
The installation space in the courtyard is divided into

61
three rooms. Many of the architecture installations

m
have engaged all three rooms.

36 m

The steps between the courtyard and the museum create

a raised platform where performers and DJs entertain a
crown of spectators at the lower level of the space,
mingling and socialising around the annual architecture
installation.

The MoMA PS1 is in Brooklyn in an area characterised

by large industrial blocks, wide streets and large car
parks, with adjacent apartment blocks. The gallery court-
yard is enclosed by high walls to create a contained
space accessible only through the gallery.

North

152 YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

The 2017 installation titled Lumen by Jenny Sabin Studio.

new materials, styles or techniques. The invited designers submit a

portfolio of their work, which is reviewed by a panel of experts and
curators. The finalists develop initial ideas and the winner is an-
nounced in February, leaving four months to fully design and imple-
ment the installation.
The courtyard also accommodates the VW Dome, a geodesic dome
that hosts the Sunday Sessions at MoMA PS1. The Sunday Sessions
invite visitors to experience art live and in real time. The sessions in-
clude performances, music, dance, conversations and moving image
to challenge contemporary culture and encourage a creative and im-
aginative dialogue. The sessions are sponsored by Volkswagen of
America, who have sponsored the tent since its inception in 2012.
2016 Installation Weaving the Courtyard by Escobedo Soliz Studio.
2015 Installation COSMO by Andrés Jaque.
2015 Warm Up Festival with COSMO as a backdrop.
2014 Installation Hy-Fi by The Living.

154 YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

2012 Installation titled Wendy by HWKN.
2013 Installation titled Party Wall by CODA.
2011 Installation titled Holding Pattern by Interboro Partners.
2011 Installation titled Holding Pattern by Interboro Partners.

155
2010 Installation titled Pole Dance by SO-IL.
2009 Installation titled Afterparty by MOS.
2008 Installation titled Public Farm One by WORK Architecture Company.
2007 Installation titled Liquid Sky by Ball-Nogues Studio.

156 YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

2006 Installation titled BEATFUSE by OBRA.
2005 Installation titled SUR by Xefirotarch.
2005 Installation titled SUR by Xefirotarch.

157
 2004 Installation titled Canopy by nARCHITECTS.
2003 Installation titled Light-Wing by Tom Wiscombe of Emergent.
2002 Installation titled Playa Urbana by William E. Massie.

158 YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

2001 Installation titled SubWave by ROY.
2001 Installation titled SubWave by ROY.
2000 Installation titled Dunescape by SHoP.
2000 Installation titled Dunescape by SHoP.
1999 Installation by Philip Johnson.
1998 Installation titled Percutaneous Delights by Gelatin.

159
 SERPENTINE
PAVILION
DESIGNER: Various

LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: Annually during the summer, on-going
SIZE: 750 square metres
CONTEXT: Adjacent to the Serpentine Gallery in Kensington Gardens
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: ARUP and AECOM
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Associated cafe, performance space
and cultural venue with lectures and discussions
BUDGET: Varies; 2014 cost £968,000 to build and was sold for
£450,000 0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Serpentine Pavilion is a temporary summer installation that takes
place annually in the lawn space directly east of the Serpentine Gallery
in Kensington Gardens in London. The level lawn space is approxi-
mately 25 × 30 metres, surrounded by mature trees and the two-sto-
rey gallery. In 2000, instigated by a response from Princess Diana to
attend a celebratory dinner following renovations to the gallery in
1997, the late Zaha Hadid was invited to design an installation that
would encapsulate the future of architecture. Historically, pavilions
within the Royal Parks in London, of which Kensington Gardens is one,
could only be erected for one month, but the Secretary of Culture,
Media and Sports interceded so that effectively the first outdoor cafe
at the Serpentine Gallery could be created. This put into motion one
of the most successful temporary architecture installation series in
the world. A pavilion has been built every year since 2000, except for
2004 when MVRDV proposed to completely cover the gallery to create
an artificial mountain and unfortunately the proposal was never real-
ised. Forty per cent of the budget for the pavilion is generated by the
sale of the pavilion after the summer season.
The designer for the annual pavilion is chosen by a curatorial
committee and the key stipulation is that the architect cannot have
completed a building in the UK at the time of their selection as the
pavilion architect. The provision of a food and beverage offering in
the form of a cafe is key to the design of the pavilion to encourage
people to linger within the pavilion. While the Serpentine Pavilion is
about architecture and creating a temporary and striking structure, it
is also about creating a place, a summer destination for locals and
tourists alike. The pavilion series is a spectacle to attract people and
offers an experience that sparks conversation and fuels debate. It also
creates a chic and trendy location for lounging and generating social
media posts. In 2006 the first non-stop conversation or marathon
took place. During this 24-hour series, Rem Koolhaas interviewed ‘72
leading figures in the UK, mapping the city through the protagonists

A cafe is a staple aspect of the annual pavilion, creating a lively and attractive place to linger The 2015 Serpentine Pavilion by Selgascano featured highly tactile materials that
throughout the life of the pavilion installation. Gallery Pavilion 2005 designed by Álvaro Siza and engaged visitors in a powerful way.
Eduardo Souto de Moura and Cecil Balmond with Arup.

160 VARIOUS DESIGNERS

 25
m
30 m

North

For most of the year the site of the Serpentine Pavilion is a patch of lawn outside of the Serpentine Gallery, set within Kensington Gardens. Construction of the annual
pavilion begins in the spring in time for the opening in early summer. Throughout the time that the pavilion is in place, a series of talks and cultural events makes
the installation more than an architectural piece, it becomes a cultural destination.

SERPENTINE PAVILION 161

 who inhabit it’. In 2007 the artist Olafur Eliasson continued a mara-
thon experiment to map the overlaps and interfaces between art and
science, while 2008’s Manifesto Marathon examined the relationship
between art and politics.
As Philip Jodidio identified in his comprehensive book Serpentine
Gallery Pavilions, published in 2011, these commissions adopt Cedric
Price’s view that architecture should be more than hardware: it should
also be about content. The marathons are about going beyond the
fear of pooling knowledge, a sketch for a transdisciplinary school. In
2008 Frank Gehry’s pavilion was a performative space that hosted
the British composer Thomas Adès for Park Nights. This has become
a significant aspect of all the pavilions. The pavilion also features a
Family Sunday, to encourage children to engage with artists and de-
signers to respond creatively to the architecture of the pavilion.
In 2016, the 16th year of the pavilion series, four additional
25-square-metre Summer Houses were created to celebrate the re-
tirement of Dame Julia Peyton-Jones from the Serpentine Gallery. This
was the first time that more than one pavilion had been erected in

2000 Installation by Zaha Hadid.

2001 Installation by Daniel Libeskind with Arup.
2001 Installation by Daniel Libeskind with Arup.
2002 Installation by Toyo Ito and Cecil Balmond with Arup.
2002 Installation by Toyo Ito and Cecil Balmond with Arup.

162 VARIOUS DESIGNERS

Kensington Gardens. Bjarke Ingels Group’s (BIG) Unzipped Wall, com-
plemented by the four Summer Houses, was a powerful conclusion
to Peyton-Jones leadership of the programme.
The effect of the Serpentine Pavilion goes beyond a statement of
architecture. The summer programme is an exercise in place-making,
creating performances, lectures and debates and the chance for peo-
ple to engage in a conversation about the trajectory of design and
creative culture. The cafe encourages people to linger in the shade of
the pavilion and assess the architecture to engage at the ground
level with other visitors to the site. For the short period that the pa-
vilion is in place, June to October, it becomes a destination in London.
While the architectural responses are fascinating, my interest with
the pavilion is its effect on the ground and what it does culturally and
within the realm of social media. The Serpentine Pavilion exemplifies
the possibility of a temporary installation to become a destination.
The Serpentine Galleries and WF Central in Beijing will partner in 2018
to install the first Serpentine Pavilion outside of the UK, which will be
designed by JIAKUN Architects.

2004 Proposal by MVRDV, (unrealised).

2004 Proposal by MVRDV, (unrealised).
2003 Installation by Oscar Niemeyer.
2003 Installation by Oscar Niemeyer.
2005 Installation by Álvaro Siza and Eduardo Souto de Moura
and Cecil Balmond with Arup.

SERPENTINE PAVILION 163

2006 Installation by OMA/Rem Koolhaas and Cecil Balmond with Arup.
2006 Installation by OMA/Rem Koolhaas and Cecil Balmond with Arup.
2007 Installation by Olafur Eliasson and Kjetil Thorsen.
2007 Installation by Olafur Eliasson and Kjetil Thorsen.
2008 Installation by Frank Gehry.

164 VARIOUS DESIGNERS

2009 Installation by Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa of SANAA.
2010 Installation by Jean Nouvel.
2010 Installation by Jean Nouvel.
2011 Installation by Peter Zumthor and Piet Oudolf.
2011 Installation by Peter Zumthor and Piet Oudolf.

SERPENTINE PAVILION 165

2012 Installation by Herzog & de Meuron and Ai Weiwei.
2012 Installation by Herzon & de Meuron and Ai Weiwei.
2013 Installation by Sou Fujimoto.
2013 Installation by Sou Fujimoto.
2014 Installation by Similjan Radić.
2014 Installation by Similjan Radić.

166 VARIOUS DESIGNERS

2015 Installation by Selgascano.
2015 Installation by Selgascano.
2016 Installation by Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG).
2016 Installation by BIG.
2017 Installation by Francis Kéré.
2018 Installation by Frida Escobedo.

SERPENTIN167
ROBSON REDUX
DESIGNER: Various

LOCATION: Vancouver, BC, Canada

COMPLETION: Annually, from 2011 to 2015
SIZE: 79 × 24 metres
CONTEXT: Adjacent to Robson Square and Vancouver Art Gallery
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Engineering department at
Viva Vancouver
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Temporary street installation taking place
during the summer months when the road is closed to traffic.
BUDGET: C$ 40,000 for design and implementation and
C$ 5000 honorarium 0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Robson Redux is a temporary installation to transform the 800 block
of Robson Street in Vancouver into a public space from July to Sep-
tember. The international design competition to reimagine the street
took place annually from 2011 to 2015 before the city of Vancouver
set in motion plans to permanently remove bus traffic and convert the
street into a pedestrian-only space to unite the street with the adja-
cent Robson Square and strengthen the relationship with the Vancou-
ver Art Gallery. The street runs north to south and is 79 metres long
by 24 metres wide. The base plan as part of the brief allocates a space
for the installation directly opposite the art museum that measures
30 metres in length by 6.82 metres wide. However, from the instal-
lations, it appears that this is an indicative measurement since many
of the installations run the full length of the street.
The genesis of Robson Redux began with Vancouver hosting the
Winter Olympics in 2010, and the Canadian team winning the gold
medal in ice hockey. As the heart of Vancouver, Robson Square be-
came the civic place of celebration, with people filling the street to
celebrate the win. Seeing the jubilation and social engagement of
people in the street inspired a small team within the engineering
department at Viva Vancouver to develop ideas to ‘convert street
spaces into people spaces’. The city was already considering pedes-
trianising the street and the excitement of the Olympics galvanised
their commitment. However, it took seven years to come to fruition.
In 2011 Viva Vancouver put out a call for ideas to activate public
spaces in Vancouver. Picnurbia was born; however it was intended
for a residential area and the residents protested against its installa-
tion. They liked the idea but felt it was in the wrong place. At the same
moment, a membrane at the 800 block of Robson needed to be re-
placed after the Winter Olympics, which meant the road would need
to be closed. This presented Viva Vancouver with the opportunity to
keep the road closed through the summer months until September
and install Picnurbia. Even before the tape had been cut to open the
installation, it was a success with people flocking to it. Viva Vancouver
funded and fabricated Picnurbia with an internal team, which inherently

2015 Installation titled Porch Parade by Design With Company. 2014 Installation titled Urban Reef by Kaz Bremner, Jeremiah Deutscher and Higher Works.

168 VARIOUS DESIGNERS

 Robson Redux transforms the 800 block of Robson Street into a summer
destination from July to September. The street sits adjacent to Vancouver
Art Gallery and Robson Square and is the civic heart of Vancouver. The
regularity of the annual installation adds anticipation, engages with the
24 m community and gives locals something to look forward to and enjoy in the
summer months. The competition has gained international recognition,
attracting 89 entries in 2014.
6 m m Ho
f ro

6.8 m The street is 79 × 24 metres and the brief identifies a 30 × 6.82-metre

portion of the street for the installation. However, most installations are
stretched along the entire length of the street, suggesting this dimension
r by

is only a guide.
St

30
m

79
m

North

ROBS169

The lightweight, low-cost materials of temporary installations do not limit the
functionality of a space. Picnurbia is testament to the transformative potential
of low-cost, temporary events.
170  LOOSE AFFILIATES
shaped the fabrication portion of the brief for future proposals and
installations. Picnurbia was in place from the Canada Day long week-
end through to Labour Day (1 July to 5 September).
Inspired by the success of the Winnipeg Warming Huts annual
competition, Viva Vancouver established the Robson Redux annual
competition. In 2012 and 2013, Viva Vancouver put out expressions
of interest to people on procurement frameworks but the quality and
quantity declined significantly, with only nine to ten entries. There was
criticism from the local design communities due to the lack of hono-
rariums and the absence of any indication of a budget or a brief.
However, Robson Redux did guarantee that the idea would be imple-
mented, which incentivised potential designers to submit ideas.
In 2014 the competition was formalised with a solid brief, a clear
budget and an entrance fee. Additionally, Viva Vancouver appointed
a social media specialist to garner support and spread the word with
‘taste makers and influencers’. A dedicated website was constructed,
the People’s Choice award was established and there were major
events and speakers at the opening of the installation. The 2014 call
for entries resulted in 89 entries from around the world. A jury and
the Viva Vancouver staff would select a winner, and the actuality of
the project getting built within the budget was a driving factor in the
decision-making process, a lesson that was learned with Picnurbia.
The People’s Choice award added an important dimension to the pro-
ject because it engaged with the community on multiple levels. The
final year of the Robson Redux was 2015. In April 2016 the city put in
motion plans for the 800 block of Robson Street to become a perma-
nent pedestrian space that would create a seamless pedestrian block
with Robson Square, which is also being redesigned.
Since Robson Redux, a team dedicated to public spaces and
streets has been established within the engineering department at
Viva Vancouver, testament to the success of Robson Redux and the
transformative role the temporary installations had on the city. Rob-
son Redux did not invent the idea of closing the street to traffic, but
it most certainly demonstrated the lasting measurable impact the
new space would have on the city and its citizens.
It is likely that Robson Redux has come to a natural conclusion
since the street has now been permanently closed to traffic. Viva
Vancouver’s philosophy is to ‘Innovate, Incubate, and Integrate’. This
approach will no doubt guide the activation of the new permanent
space, paying homage to Redux.
2011: PICNURBIA
Design team: Loose Affiliates
In the summer, Vancouverites leave their neighbourhoods and head to
the beach, inhabiting the edge of the city. Picnurbia suggests an alter-
native to this exodus, creating a downtown zone for people to gather
and picnic.
At Picnurbia, the summer act of picnicking is heightened by an
‘über-­picnic-blanket’. This undulating landscape provides spaces for
people to hang out and play in alternative formations, providing a
new experience of urban picnicking.
Picnurbia offers space for people to come together, relax and
watch. Inserted into the urban downtown neighbourhood, a commu-
nity where people already live, work and visit, the site is intended to
become an easily inhabited summer zone. Picnurbia is designed to
offer an ‘on-the-block’ amenity where people can drop by on purpose
or stumble upon more informally as they walk or bike home. This will
establish Picnurbia as a summer node, carried on mouth-to-mouth,
‘Let’s meet at Picnurbia’.
Text by Loose Affiliates
 ROBSON
RE AuthenticatedDUX 171
 2012: POP ROCKS
Design team: AFJD Studio and Matthew Soules Architecture

Pop Rocks, a temporary architectural installation commissioned by

the City of Vancouver, transformed a block of Robson Street in down-
town Vancouver during the summer of 2012. Pop Rocks is a radically
experimental temporary design that borrows post-industrial waste on
its way to be recycled.
Pop Rocks deploys 15 large pillow-like forms, made from post-
industrial waste, across a city block to create an alien landscape that
offers a soft place to rest while inhabiting a monumental presence at
the centre of the city.
Pop Rocks is radically sustainable, responding to the City of Van-
couver’s ambition to become the greenest city in the world by 2020.
The installation is constructed entirely from reused materials that will
be recycled at the end of the project. Each of the soft forms is sewn
from recycled Teflon-coated fibreglass fabric provided from the refur-
bishment of the tensile membrane roof of Canada Place, a local icon-
ic building. Pieces of the roof were sewn by a local sailmaker into
shapes that were filled with recycled polystyrene beads provided
by Mansonville Plastics, a company that recycles polystyrene from
throughout Metro Vancouver. Pop Rocks’s design methodology marks
a departure from traditional top-down design methods towards a
contingent, emergent and tactical design ethos.

Text by AFJD Studio

The comfort and delight of Pop Rocks encouraged people to linger in the space longer
than they may have done if the installation was purely sculptural. The interactive aspect
of temporary installations is important.

172 AFJD STUDIO AND MATTHEW SOULES ARCHITECTURE

 2013: CORDUROY ROAD
Design team: Hapa Collaborative

The history of settlement in the Northwest has long referenced the

term ‘corduroy roads’, describing the use of rough-cut planks or logs
laid side to side, running perpendicular to the road’s direction.
Our vision for the temporary installation on the 800 block of Rob-
son Street was to make reference to a past condition, an often inter-
im solution before a final goal, and to highlight this state of transition.
The use of simple planks is a direct material connection to the past,
while the ability of the material to bridge the road represents a po-
tential future condition. The playful configuration of the decking cre-
ates uniform, curbless connections across the road, while the unique-
ly coloured benches create informal seating, vantage points and a
new form of public realm.

Text by Hapa Collaborative

The simply inclusion of the humble umbrella provides cover and respite from hot
summer days and periods of rain. This encourages people to linger in the space where
chance encounters may happen.

174 HAPA COLLABORATIVE

 2014: URBAN REEF
Design team: Kaz Bremner, Jeremiah Deutscher and Higher Works

The winning design, known as Urban Reef, stemmed from two ideas
highlighted in the competition brief. The first was the concept of en-
gaging Vancouver’s urban vibrancy. While Vancouver is frequently
noted for its natural setting and scenic amenities, a rich urban fabric
and culture exists that the City wanted to highlight through the Rob-
son Redux competition. The second idea was the underlying theme
for the competition: connection.
The design of Urban Reef folds these two ideas together while
responding to the specific qualities of the site, creating a public sculp-
ture and armature for socialising and performance. Through the ac-
tivity that Urban Reef generates, from street performances to casual
chance encounters, the project’s goal was to connect people to one
another and to the space in a new way.
The installation acts in much the same way as a reef in the ocean,
as an armature that facilitates the life around it by creating a vibrant
new ecosystem. By the simple addition of Urban Reef to the 800 block
of Robson Street the surrounding plaza is repurposed and Vancouver’s
urban vibrancy has a place to come to life.
Urban Reef’s form was generated through a series of sections that
suggest different types of occupation ranging from lounging to tiered
seating for watching performance and overlapping benches to enjoy
friends. These sections morph into one another as the installation
snakes along the site creating a dynamic form that sparks curiosity
and invites exploration. While the changing sections suggest different
ways of occupation, the plan responds to the existing context and
organises the surrounding space for a variety of uses.

Text by Kaz Bremner, Jeremiah Deutscher and Higher Works

The various ergonomic configurations that the Urban Reef provides invites people of all
shapes and sizes to find a comfortable perch and soak up the atmosphere of the street.

176 KAZ BREMNER, JEREMIAH DEUTSCHER AND HIGHER WORKS

 2015: PORCH PARADE
Design team: Design With Company

The porch is the architectural element that connects people and build-
ings to the city. It is where you cool off on a hot summer day. It is
where you greet neighbours passing by. This project presents an ad
hoc arrangement of typical domestic front porches, complete with
appropriate accoutrements, in a parade along Robson Street. Each
porch straddles the sides of a single party wall, creating a spatially
complex, yet simply constructed neighbourhood. As a whole, the
porches appear abstract and unfamiliar in their new context and ar-
rangement. However, when fully activated with visitors, the project
presents a lively and familiar atmosphere for downtown Vancouver.
The project uses conventional materials and construction tech-
niques, ensuring that the project can be completed on time and on
budget. Further, the elements made for the new construction (porch-
es, etc.) were donated to the local chapter of Habitat for Humanity
for porches on their home builds.

Text by Design With Company

The typology of the front porch has an enduring familiarity in the minds of many people.
Coupled with bright colours, people are drawn into the more intimate spaces that Porch
Parade creates.

178 DESIGN WITH COMPANY

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC
ART COMPETITION
DESIGNER: Student competition

LOCATION: Cambridge, MA, USA

COMPLETION: Biennial, on-going
SIZE: 19 × 15 metres
CONTEXT: Within the Radcliffe University Common near Harvard
University
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Stoss Landscape Urbanism as design
phase consultant
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Biennial public art installation designed
by students from Harvard or Radcliffe Universities chosen
by a panel of professionals and campus affiliates 0 75 m
BUDGET: US$ 40,000 for design implementation and US$ 10,000
prize money

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Radcliffe Public Art Competition is a biennial competition and in-
stallation that takes place within the Radcliffe University Common in
Cambridge, MA. As part of a masterplan by Stephen Stimson land-
scape architects, a 31 × 26-metre site was designed adjacent to Brat-
tle Street, a major pedestrian route leading to the heart of Harvard
Square. It is also important to note that the site sits opposite the
American Repertory Theatre. Within this space, there are permanent
landscape elements to hold the edge of the site, including areas of
planting and two rows of trees on the north and south edge of the
site. Additionally, seven solid granite seats are permanent features on
three sides of the space. The rest of the space is a flexible self-bound
gravel material, which is easy to lift and reinstate measuring 19 × 15
metres.
With the installation of the permanent landscape, the parameters
were set to create a testing ground of ideas that would see a new
installation occupy the space every two years. Before formally launch-
ing a competition, the founder of Stoss, Chris Reed, was asked to
design a temporary installation following a cross-campus collabora-
tion between Radcliffe University and the Harvard Graduate School of
Design (GSD). Stock-Pile as the installation was titled, was implement-
ed in 2009, setting in motion the Radcliffe Public Art Competition.
The competition is sponsored by Susan S. and Kenneth L. Wallach.
The sponsors see the garden as a metaphor: ‘This open space, like
the Radcliffe Institute, is about experimentation and excitement, en-
couraging the kind of discoveries an established university needs to
move ideas forward.’ According to the Dean of Radcliffe University,
Lizbeth Cohen, ‘[w]e launched this student competition hoping to
provide an opportunity for students to create public art to be enjoyed
by the University and Cambridge communities. But we had no idea how
strong the response would be.’ The aim of the public art competition

Latent (e)Scapes by Christina Geros filled the space with dynamic acrylic LED lights and The site of the Wallach Garden is defined by self-bound gravel and bordered by seating,
planted landforms in 2015. planted areas and trees. The central self-bound gravel area defines the boundary for the
biennial design competition. In this image, Latent (e)Scapes is being implemented.

180 STUDENT COMPETITION

Overhead view of the 2015 installation, showing the permanent edges of the space and the central area that is transformed biennially by the winning student entry.

Authenticated 181
RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART COMPETITION
The above masterplan shows the Wallach Garden adjacent to Brattle Street. Pedestrians on Brattle Street are drawn into the space by the installations.

182 STUDENT COMPETITION

The central area of Wallach Garden
measures 15 × 19 metres and is surfaced m
16
in self-bound gravel, which is easy to 22
m
remove to install the installation. This m
15 19
defines the boundary of the design com- m
petition site, with the surrounding streets,
planted areas and tree planting remaining
undisturbed or affected by the installa-
tions.

As part of the implemented landscape

masterplan, the site is planted with rows
of trees on two sides and generous
planted areas to the edges. Solid granite
seats are also a permanent feature and
edge three sides of the site.

31 m
m 26

Wallach Garden sits within the beautiful

Radcliffe Campus, adjacent to Brattle
Street in Cambridge, MA.

North

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART CO183


Stoss Landscape Urbanism was the first designer to implement a project at the Wallach Gardens
titled Stock-Pile in 2009. The first design competition was implemented in 2013 and since then a
new design has been implemented on a two-year cycle.
184 STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM
is to make visible the creativity of the student body and make Radcliffe
Yard a more dynamic, visible and attractive place for the campus.
According to Anita Berrizbeitia, the chair of the Department of Land-
scape Architecture at Harvard GSD, ‘[the competition] initiates a con-
versation about the role of public art and design at the university and
its relationship with the city and the larger public’.
The design competition is unique in that it gives students the
opportunity to realise a project on the ground, marrying academic
theory with the practice of design. The design brief requires the stu-
dents to develop a construction budget for realising the installation
as well as a detailed explanation of the materiality of the proposals
and how the ideas will be delivered, working with Stoss as the design
phase consultant. Radcliffe has recently put in place an intensive win-
ter workshop designed to equip applicants to understand the sensi-
tivities of place-specific works of art that function as a public space,
as well as offering mentoring to improve their submissions and re-
solve some of the technical aspects of the designs.
As of 2016, the formal competition has had three ‘cycles’ and
including the Stoss installation, the site has been reconfigured four
times since 2009. In 2016 an undergraduate student won the award
for the first time, with the previous two winners hailing from masters
of design programmes at the GSD. Each year the quality and quantity
of submissions increases, due in part to the fact that the winner of
the competition is awarded a $ 10,000 prize. A $ 40,000 budget, fund-
ed by the Wallachs, covers the procurement of materials, labour
costs, installation and restoration of changes made to the garden.
Radcliffe is an ecologically minded organisation, and often reuses
materials from previous installations like self-bound gravel, soil, light-
ing, plant material and seating, when appropriate. There is a different
budget for the design phase, which includes design consultant costs
to implement the work of art, also funded by the Wallachs.
In 2013 the winning scheme Saturate the Moment was selected
from 20 design submissions; the 2015 winner Latent (e)Scapes was
selected from 22 entries; and the 2016 winner titled 73 Brattle was
selected from 40 submissions. From the pool of submissions, up to
five teams are selected to develop their ideas further before present-
ing to a jury made up of Harvard and Radcliffe faculty.
2009: STOCK-PILE
Design team: Stoss Landscape Urbanism
… a storage pile or heap of material; a reserve supply of something
essential; a gradually accumulated reserve of something, esp. some-
thing vital or indispensable (Webster’s Third New International Dic-
tionary of the English Language Unabridged)
This installation occupies a temporary site in Radcliffe Yard, sched-
uled to be turned over for construction lay-down space within two
years.
The essential elements of landscape construction — stone, aggre-
gate, sand, soil: diverse and rich in colour, shape and texture — are
arranged in simple piles on a north–south grid. Two are planted with
ancient ferns. All start stacked impossibly steeply, poised to sub-
side — each of its own accord, in keeping with its inherent physical
and structural characteristics.
The installation was completed in celebration of the 10th anniver-
sary of the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study.
Text by Stoss Landscape Urbanism
 2013: SATURATE THE MOMENT
Design team: Keojin Jin and Juhun Lee

Jin and Lee’s design was inspired by the shell of the desert beetle,
which collects condensation to survive. The surface of Saturate the
Moment is designed to collect condensation, which will nourish plants
below it and perpetuate a dynamic cycle. Jin described the work as
an opportunity to ‘think more deeply about our environment and how
a physical, low-tech object can interact with the energy and vibrant
atmosphere around it’.
The landscape sculpture consists of a resin composite framework
whose parallel lines resemble a schematic of rippling radio waves that
fold in on themselves. The structure is set atop a large swatch of lawn.
The ambitious project required the use of innovative materials. The
undulating ribs of the piece were made at a boatyard, using marine
construction products.

Text by Keojin Jin and Juhun Lee

RadCliffe Competition 2nd Phase

186 KEOJIN JIN AND JUHUN LEE

Shortlisted competition entry titled Lost Star Matrix by Cali Pfaff and Hope Hardesty,
Harvard Graduate School of Design.
Shortlisted competition entry titled Anti-Object by Mariano Gomez Luque, Pablo Roquero,
Matt Scarlett, Harvard Graduate School of Design.
Various images of the winning entry Saturate The Moment and the various ways in
which people interact and observe the installation.

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART CO187

 2015: LATENT (E)SCAPES
Design team: Christina Geros with ULR Studio

An interactive and kinetic media installation, Latent (e)Scapes ex-

plores the natural-synthetic landscape through systematising the
implicit and explicit impacts of human and non-human forces within
the garden. Finding inspiration in the swaying grasses of the prairies
and coasts, the work calls into question our roles within everyday
environments and creates an immersive experience contrasting the
typical urban landscape.
The installation can be seen as a physical metaphor of an attitude
towards symbiotic relationships between natural and synthetic, the
implicit and the explicit, the static and kinetic manifestations of ener-
gy. As human impact is registered through the synthetic elements,
the interactivity makes explicit the synthetic nature of the ecology,
while the effect of natural environmental forces are simultaneously
implied in the structure and material of the installation. This inter-
weaving of natural/synthetic ecologies serves as a critique and
method in which artificial systems could possibly be designed to
mimic, co-exist and co-create within the natural-synthetic landscape
of the Anthropocene.

Text by Christina Geros with ULR Studio

188 CHRISTINA GEROS WITH ULR STUDIO

The main image above and opposite illustrate the dramatic effect of the installation when night falls. Sketch ideas and 3D rendered plans show the creative
process of designing Latent (e)Scapes.

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART CO189

 2017: IN SEARCH OF 100 YEARS AT
73 BRATTLE STREET
Design team: John Wang
Wang’s inventive design proposal is titled In Search of 100 Years at 73
Brattle. Now the site of the Wallach Garden, 73 Brattle was the street
address for the Sawin Building, a private residence that Radcliffe pur-
chased from Cambridge businessman Moses Sawin in 1917 and turned
into a structure that housed Radcliffe College classrooms, furthering
the education of women. The building was demolished in 1932 and
the space was an under-utilised garden until the Radcliffe Institute
unveiled the first installation of the Public Art Competition in 2013.
Wang’s installation will create a garden on the former building’s
footprint, which highlights the changing history of Brattle Street and
Radcliffe’s place in that evolution. Granite blocks will establish the
building’s footprint, while benches and drawing or writing surfaces
will invite people to gather and share ideas. The proposed use of the
In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle Street by John Wang.
Shortlisted competition Reflections, entry by Tomastu Ito and Hui Wang, Harvard Graduate
School of Design.
190 JOHN WANG
garden reflects the Radcliffe Institute’s commitment to convening
scholarly exchanges across disciplines and with the public. Wang
relied on the Schlesinger Library at the Radcliffe Institute to discover
the many roles the site has fulfilled over the years. Based on that
research, Wang proposes: ‘the creation of this gathering space aims
to further the goal of today’s Radcliffe, just as Sawin House once did
by creating an enjoyable space for interactions and conversation.’
The jury selected Wang’s design from more than 40 design sub-
missions. The submissions shared innovative perspectives on a wide
variety of topics, including the juxtaposition of poverty and wealth,
biological processes, land use, urban history, and play.
Text by John Wang
Shortlisted competition Radcliffe Slum, entry by Ignacio Cardona, Harvard
Graduate School of Design.
 In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle Submission by: John Wang
Harvard College Class of 2016
History of Art and Architecture
Cabot House

From Demolished Classrooms to Historic Gathering Space

Designated Area

Reclaimed Granite
as textured benches

Granite Tile Paving

Sawin House

Frosted Glass Panel

Former Plot of 73 Brattle

Former
Designated Edge
Building Footprint

Illustrative view of In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle Street by John Wang, an undergrate student of Harvard College with a concentration
in the history of art and architecture at Harvard College.

Shortlisted competition Above Ground, entry by Johanna Cairns and Taylor Baer, Shortlisted competition Chora, entry by Ruth Chang and Maia Peck, Harvard Graduate
Harvard Graduate School of Design. School of Design.

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART COMPETITION 191

LA PLACE DES
FESTIVALS AND
LA PROMENADE
DES ARTISTES
URBAN DESIGNER AND ARCHITECT: Daoust Lestage

LOCATION: Montreal, Canada

COMPLETION: 2012
SIZE: 6.2 hectares
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Festival of Light winter installation,
Montreal Jazz Festival, art installations, performances
BUDGET: C$ 95 million
0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
La Place des Festivals and La Promenade des Artistes are two signi-
ficant public realm spaces within a major renewal project within the
theatre district in Montreal known locally as ‘le Quartier des Specta-
cles’. Daoust Lestage was commissioned to formalise a network of
open theatres surrounding Place des Arts, which is the cultural heart
of Montreal. The project transformed existing surface car parks into
outdoor theatres for everyday urban life and large-scale ephemeral
events, such as the Jazz Festival and the Festival of Light.
La Place des Festivals is the largest space, measuring 189 × 70
metres, and magnifies the ‘stage’ to the scale of the city. The space
is divided through contrasting materials consisting of a gently sloping
lawn with 350 trees that serve the day-to-day use of the site, frame
the square, and provide a more intimate edge to the hard gran-
ite-paved area that comes to life with the largest interactive fountain
in Canada. The fountain is critical to the success of the scheme be-
cause it provides animation and spectacle and makes the space feel
busy when only a few people are coursing through it. Simply turning
off the fountains transforms the space into a city stage, capable of
accommodating huge crowds for large-scale events such as the Jazz
Festival. Red and white curtains of water and a 12-metre-high central
‘geyser’ fountain are programmed to respond to movement, light
and sound, strengthening the sense of something new happening in
the square, thereby staving off stagnation while fostering public in-
teraction.
Edging the square are four mega-lighting structures, which for-
malise the ‘wall and ceiling’ of the outdoor theatre and act as an
urban beacon when seen from a distance. The 25-metre-high features
immediately give the space a signature identity and signal to visitors
that they have arrived. The other important element of La Place des
Festivals are the Vitrines Habitées, which are two 40-metre-long ×
4-metre-wide glass and aluminium boxes designed to allow views
into and through the restaurants set within the boxes. By night these
structures become part of the spectacle of the place as they whirr into
life with the culture of the city.

Festival of Lights at La Place des Festivals. Kurt Perschke’s Red Ball project installed at La Promenade des Artistes in 2014.

192 DAOUST LESTAGE

Lateral Office’s 2015 installation titled Impulse brings a playful component to La Place des Festivals to enliven the square during the winter months.

LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DESAuthenticated

ARTI STES 193
 22 m The sloping lawn and steps overlook the fountain area and together provide
a more relaxed space for people to use daily. The sloped character also func-
tions as an amphitheatre during larger festivals and cultural events.

The central space is defined by a flexible hard landscape with fountains

and a generous seating edge at the base of the sloped lawn area. The
fountains add daily animation and provide a play feature in the summer
months. The fountains can be turned off for large events such as the Jazz
Festival that takes place in the space each year. Two restaurants edge the
space to the north with views across the space. Twenty-five-metre-high
27 m
light columns define the edge of the space and give the overall design a
50 m signature identity when approaching from afar, providing a ‘wall’ and
‘ceiling’ for the space.

Seven lightweight structures are arranged along the

length of La Promenade des Artistes. The structures act as
a scaffold to display art installations and exhibitions, while
also accommodating kiosks during festivals and events.

m
3.5
40
m

9.
5
m
m
45

3.0
m
30
m

m
30

9 m
18

17
0
m
70
m

9m

North

194 DAOUST LESTAGE

La Promenade des Artistes is a long linear space to the north of La
Place des Festivals. The key feature that activates the space and pro-
vides a sense of ‘renew and refresh’ are the Vitrines Evènement, a
series of seven lightweight architectural frames. Serving as a sort of
scaffold, the frames define the edge of the space and support ephem-
eral installations that reinforce the cultural vitality of Quartier des
Spectacles. Installations within the vitrines have ranged from Kurt
Perschke’s Red Ball project to the 2011 art installation 21 Swings,
which used the vitrines to create a fun and playful atmosphere. The
interactive installation generates musical notes through the move-
ment of the swings. Nine swings emulate a piano, six give the sound
of a guitar and the remaining six create the sound of a vibraphone.
The tone of the musical notes responds to the height and strength of
the swing. The installation is designed to be a collective installation,
with the best sound being generated when all of the swings are in
motion. Again, user participation is a critical contributing factor to La
Promenade des Artistes, as it is for La Place des Festivals.
The success of both spaces is evidenced by the forward-thinking
planning for flexibility in order to create platforms on to which the
creative culture of Montreal could be exhibited. In many ways, neither
of the spaces are ever complete because they are in a state of per-
petual change, reinvention and creative expression. These projects
represent the very best of designing for flexibility, curation and col-
lective curiosity and invention. The people of Montreal have claimed
the district as their own — the ultimate sign of success.

La Place des Festivals is able to accommodate enormous crowds for major cultural events like the
Jazz Festival and still has more intimate areas where smaller events can take place and not feel
inconsequential within the expanse of the space.
La Place des Festivals changes dramatically throughout the seasons, displaying one of the greatest light festivals
in the winter months. A creative calendar of events, coupled with a flexible design, ensures that the space offers a lively
public realm and an attractive draw for locals and tourists alike.

196 DAOUST LESTAGE

 The 2011 art installation 21 Swings uses the scaffold of the structures on La Promenade
des Artistes to create a fun, playful atmosphere. The interactive installation generates
musical notes with the movement of the swings. Nine swings emulate a piano, six
give the sound of a guitar and the remaining six create the sound of a vibraphone.
The tone of the musical notes responds to the height and strength of the swing. The
installation is designed to be a collaborative installation, with the best sound being
generated when all the swings are in motion.
La Promenade des Artistes creates a scaffold for the space to change through creative
curation. Seven structures are repurposed with art installations, exhibits and displays
and used as kiosks during festivals and events. Past installations include Guy Laliberté
photos of an 11-day journey in space and Kurt Perschke’s Red Ball project.

LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DESAuthenticated

ARTI STES 197
TRAFALGAR
SQUARE
ARCHITECTS: Foster + Partners

LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2003
SIZE: 4.8 hectares
CONTEXT: Main civic square in central London adjacent to
the National Gallery
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Atkins, PWP Landscape
Architects
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Cultural festivals, carnivals/fairs,
winter celebrations

0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Trafalgar Square could be described as one of London’s leading civic
spaces that features on the itinerary of most visitors to London. The
key design move that has enabled Trafalgar Square to serve as a
flexible and programmable space capable of holding up to 15,000
people was the pedestrianisation of the road that separated the
square from the National Gallery. The closure of this road as part of
the Foster + Partners design not only united the square with the Na-
tional Gallery, but it also created an upper terrace that is used for
circulation, street performances and as a spectator area for large
events and performances. The change from a road to a pedestrian
area was transformational.
Another change that redefined the role of the square was the
Greater London Authority and the Mayor of London’s office assuming
daily operational responsibility and control of it. This also included
managing and overseeing the Fourth Plinth public art component of
the square through a Commissioning Group Panel that directs and
oversees the installation of internationally renowned public art with-
in the public realm. Since 2003 Trafalgar Square has hosted a multi-
tude of events, covering every major cultural, religious and sporting
achievement since that time. The square is also used for commercial
events, rallies and demonstrations, all of which must be booked on-
line through a comprehensive application form.
The square is approximately 100 × 100 metres and includes two
fountains designed by Edwin Lutyens, a large plinth topped with Nel-
son’s Column and four large-scale lion sculptures. Even though the
square has a number of these fixed items, there is still a degree of
flexibility to host various events. At the foot of a grand staircase lead-
ing from the square to the upper terrace, there is a 30 × 20-metre area
that is level, open and suitable for installations, displays and perfor-
mances. With events set up in this area, the grand staircase assumes
a new role as an informal spectator seating area, the fountains act as
dramatic ‘props’ on stage left and stage right and Nelson’s Column

The hedge maze occupies Trafalgar Square as a temporary installation. Spectators fill the northern steps of Trafalgar Square for the annual Passion of the Christ
performance. During performances the steps and elevated viewing deck at the National
Gallery double as spectator space.

198 FOSTER + PARTNERS

 2m

5m
Since 1999 an annual art installation has been installed
on the Fourth Plinth. For 150 years there was debate
about what should stand on the plinth. In 1998 three
contemporary sculptures were commissioned and dis-
played temporarily. Following this, public opinion and
guidance from Arts Council England determined that the
installation on the Fourth Plinth should remain annual
and temporary rather than a permanent sculpture. Since
2003 the installation has been commissioned by the
Mayor of London.

The square consists of generous steps to the north that

overlook two fountains designed by Edwin Lutyens, Lord
Nelson’s Column surrounded by four large bronze lion
sculptures and open space. The northwest corner of the
site is held by the Fourth Plinth, which acts as a platform
for an annual art installation. 100
m

m
20
m
Trafalgar Square is a major civic space in London, located

85
adjacent to the National Gallery, which is one of London’s
most popular art galleries. The design by Foster + Partners
architects united Trafalgar Square with the National
Gallery by removing vehicular traffic to the north of the
square and converting the street to a pedestrian-only
space.

North

TRAFALGAR SQUARE 199

 and Big Ben as a dramatic backdrop. For larger events, the plinth of
Nelson’s Column acts as a staging area. The space at the base of the
steps becomes a generous standing spectator area with additional
seating and gathering space on the steps with the upper terrace and
the steps to the National Gallery completing the full spectator ‘arena’
space. In this regard, the change in level between the upper terrace
and the main square is a contributing factor to the success of the
programming of the square because it provides a natural stage/spec-
tator relationship.
The Fourth Plinth is of particular interest and importance to the
square. Since 1999 the plinth has presented, on a temporary basis,
a contemporary public art piece. The ephemeral quality of the Fourth
Plinth brings added animation, anticipation and change to the space.
In 2009 Antony Gormley presented One and Other on the Fourth
Plinth, which introduced a new manifestation of the temporary instal-
lation and the activation of public space. For 100 consecutive days,
over a 24-hour period, a member of the public would occupy the
Fourth Plinth for an hour. This, more than any inanimate object that
has been placed on the plinth, created a spectacle and engaged an
audience largely because it changed frequently and because it played
on one of our most basic characteristics: curiosity. Visitors and locals
alike were drawn to the installation because they were being enter-
tained and amused, even their beliefs challenged. Moreover, the in-
stallation was changing hourly, so a return visit would result in a
different performance. The Fourth Plinth is still one of the only typol-
ogies of this kind. However, the model has resulted in a multitude of
‘pavilions’ and temporary installations around the world.

Between 1996 and 2003 Foster + Partners dramatically transformed Trafalgar Square by removing traffic between the square and the National Gallery at the northern edge
of the square. The upper terrace now doubles as a flexible space, where street artists and buskers often perform. The images above show the ‘before’ and ‘after’ of the upper terrace
of Trafalgar Square between the Square and the National Theatre.

200 FOSTER + PARTNERS

Trafalgar Square functions as a prime civic space in central London. The square changes throughout the year through numerous cultural celebrations, artistic installations, sponsored
events and peaceful protests. The Trafalgar Square Christmas tree has been gifted to the people of London from Oslo, Norway, since 1947. It is in the square from early December
to early January. How a space accommodates these fixed annual set pieces is also an important element of staging urban landscapes.

TRAFALGAR SQUARE 201

 The Fourth Plinth is an annual art installation that sits on
the northwest corner of Trafalgar Square. A new installa-
tion has been installed each year since 1998. The plinth
was empty for 150 years, due to insufficient funds to
erect an equestrian statue of William IV.

1999: Ecce Homo by Mark Wallinger.

2000: Regardless of History by Bill Woodrow.
2001 Monument by Rachel Whiteread.
The Fourth Plinth remained empty until 2003 when the Greater London
Authority and the Mayor of London assumed control of Trafalgar Square
and the Fourth Plinth.
15 September 2005 to late 2007: Alison Lapper Pregnan’ by Mark Quinn.
2007: Model for a Hotel, formerly Hotel for the Birds by Thomas Schütte.

202 FOSTER + PARTNERS

6 July to 14 October 2009: One and Other by Antony Gormley.
24 May 2010 to January 2012: Nelson’s Ship in a Bottle by Yinka Shonibare.
23 February 2012 to April 2013: Powerless Structures by Michael Elmgreen
and Ingar Dragset.
25 July 2013 to 17 February 2015: Hahn/Cock by Katharina Fritsch.
5 March 2015 to 6 September 2016: Gift Horse by Hans Haacke.
29 September 2016: Really Good by David Shrigley.
28 March 2018: The Invisible Enemy should Not Exist by Michael Rakowitz.

TRAFALGA203
SOUTHBANK
CENTRE SQUARE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: GROSS.MAX.
LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2004
SIZE: 2500 square metres
CONTEXT: Adjacent to the Southbank Centre in central London
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer food market, installations
as part of the London Design Festival
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Southbank Centre Square sits to the southeast of the Southbank Cen-
tre, formerly known as the Royal Festival Hall. The square is approxi-
mately 100 metres in length and between 25 and 35 metres wide. It
was identified in the Rick Mather Architects masterplan that there
were conflicts around the Southbank Centre between cars and pedes-
trians, predominately related to circulation, navigation and move-
ment. The masterplan reorganised the site so that all of the entrances
to the building were at ground level and that a mix of uses such as
cafes, foyers and retail space all related to the arts were installed. The
new active ground-floor uses diversify the user groups visiting the
Southbank Centre and extend the times when people visit the site.
This move has had a profound effect, evidenced by the sheer volume
of people at the Southbank Centre at any given time. Additionally, this
has elevated the importance of the public realm, namely the South-
bank Centre Plaza to the southeast and Festival Riverside that fronts
on to the Southbank Walk and the River Thames.
Bands of lighting within the space perform like an ‘equaliser’ on a stereo in response
to the performances taking place within the building, bringing the inside outside and
connecting the square to the building in a visually interactive way.
204 GROSS.MA X.
0 250 m
The Southbank Centre Square was designed by GROSS.MAX. as part of
the first phase of the masterplan. The square is paved in natural stone,
with reflective modules interspersed throughout the square, which
reflect the colourful lighting at night adding to the atmosphere of the
space. Additionally, there are five bands of lights incorporated into
the ground plane that act as an ‘equaliser’ on a stereo to reflect the
sounds of performances that are taking place inside. The dynamic
lighting feature pulses with the volume and crescendos of the perfor-
mances, powerfully linking the inside with the outside. During the
opening ceremony, the square became a spectator area as film foot-
age was cast across the southern façade of the building.
Three light columns with a spectrum of filters hold the southern
edge of the square and create a festive and playful atmosphere by
night. The lower ground floor of the building is an active space that
spills out on to the square and provides al fresco dining. Since the
square opened in 2007, it has acted as a flexible space to extend the
Projections on to the façade of the Southbank Centre at the opening of the refurbishment
of the building. The space to the south of the building became a spectator area to watch
the show.
 25 m

The square was designed by GROSS.MAX. and includes a homogenous

paving detail, interspersed with polished modules that reflect the light.
Three multi-coloured light columns are located on the southern edge
of the site. Five featured paving bands, including embedded light fea-
tures, act as dynamic stereo ‘equalisers’ depicting the soundtrack of the
performances taking place inside the Southbank Centre.

10
m0
Jeppe Hein’s Appearing Rooms has activated the space every summer
since the Southbank Centre retained the fountain as a permanent feature
in 2006. The outer fountain walls create one large room, which is divided
further by internal fountain walls to create four smaller rooms. The foun-
tains reach 2.3 metres in height and randomly rise and fall to surround
people that are interacting with the fountain. People wait for one of the
fountain walls to disappear so they can move into the next room. The
fountain engages a range of users from young children through to seniors.
It measures 7 × 7 metres.

m
35

7m
7m

The square sits to the south of the

Southbank Centre, formerly known as
the Royal Festival Hall. The space was
conceived as part of a masterplan for
the site by Rick Mather Architects,
which dropped an elevated road and
opened up pedestrian connections
between the Southbank Centre and
nearby Waterloo Station. The square
is bordered by the Hayward Gallery
on the east and an elevated railway
to the west.

North

SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE 205


Previously, the site was overshadowed by an elevated
road with no active frontage at the ground floor.
Reflective paving and multi-coloured light creates an
interesting atmosphere in the night.
The flexibility of the square means that temporary struc-
tures can be erected for community events and to act as
an extension to the Southbank Centre. The food market is
a regular feature from Friday to Monday.
Large-scale installations often feature on the square
as part of the London Design Festival that takes place
annually in London in September. Shown here is Prototile
by Amanda Levete.
206 GROSS.MA X.
arts from the Southbank Centre out into the public realm. During the
London Design Festival, the space often hosts a contemporary sculp-
ture designed by a leading UK architect. Throughout the summer, a
weekend market is held in the square, which is popular with tourists
and locals alike.
Festival Riverside Square sits to the north of the building and con-
sists of two public squares split across two levels. The upper level
provides a wonderful perch overlooking the River Thames and the
popular Southbank Walk, with ample bistro-style seating served by
an indoor cafe. At the eastern edge of the square, there is a large
open hard space at the interface with the Hayward Gallery. The space
is too far from the cafe to extend the bistro seating, so it has ended
up as a kind of leftover space. The open space would prove to be an
ideal setting for the Jeppe Hein installation Appearing Rooms. The
installation was a travelling art installation that migrated around Eur-
ope, activating frontages to art institutions with a playful grid of foun-
tain partitions that invites views to participate with the art piece. In
2006 the Southbank Centre purchased Appearing Rooms and it has
since become a harbinger of the summer months and warmer weath-
er and is popular with people across all age groups and demograph-
ics. It is not uncommon to see people in dress trousers and shirts
soaked through because they were having too much fun with the
fountain and got stuck between Appearing Rooms. The fountain is
visible from the lower level at the Southbank Centre Square, which
pulls people to the upper level and into the Southbank Centre.
Between the Southbank Centre Square, Festival Riverside and Ap-
pearing Rooms the public realm at the Southbank Centre creates an
attractive and engaging complement to the more formal perform-
ances taking place inside.
When the Appearing Rooms installation is not in place, the upper terrace of the
Southbank Centre is empty and open.
Appearing Rooms is a magnet for people in the summer months, drawing people to
the upper terrace.
The empty space without the fountain is nothing more than a transitional space.
Appearing Rooms becomes a destination on the upper Festival Riverside Square,
dynamic, interactive and in a state of constant change.
People often linger and watch the animation of Appearing Rooms trapping people
in partitions of water, escaping to an empty room before the next wall of water
appears. This idle people-watching creates critical mass and makes the space feel
active. This confirms William H. Whyte’s observation that people attract people.

SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE 207

NAVY YARD
CENTRAL GREEN
ARCHITECTS: James Corner Field Operations

LOCATION: Philadelphia, PA, USA

COMPLETION: 2015
SIZE: 2.02 hectares
CONTEXT: Set within a 485 hectares urban development promoting
business growth and smart-energy innovation
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Hammock grove, bocce court,
amphitheatre, social track, table-tennis, communal picnic table,
fitness station
BUDGET: US$ 9.6 million

0 75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Central Green is a 2.02 hectares public space set within an ambitious
new urban development in Philadelphia. The business campus has
11,000 employees and includes the $ 35 million office building at 1200
Intrepid, designed by BIG Architects and fronting Central Green. The
design includes a series of individually programmed rooms, providing
variety for the people that work at Navy Yard. While each room has
a very specific use, collectively the spaces form one multi-functional
park that represents a trendy working environment with flexible col-
laborative space, playful games rooms and collective dining experi-
ences to keep the employee base developing ideas over lunch.
The rooms provide a range of activities for different user groups.
The space is contained by the Social Track, a .2-mile-long (320 metres)
circular running track with three 2-metre-wide lanes and a metrics
marker that displays the time and gives runners a measure of the
distance travelled. Within the social track, rooms for quiet reflection
such as the hammock grove, the sun lawn/amphitheatre, open lawns,
rain gardens and flowering meadows are coupled with active rooms
such as table-tennis and bocce courts, fitness stations and a commu-
nal dining area. The individual rooms are held together with the use
of a single yellow colour, used on the furniture, running lanes, table-
tennis tables, signage, fitness station and the bocce balls. Dedicated
parking for food trucks completes the range of go-to overlays to en-
liven public space.
Central Green represents a shift in the design of active landscapes,
encouraging users to engage with the landscape in a prescribed way.
This case study is set apart from the other project examples because

The fitness station room at Central Green reinforces the sense of health and well- Open lawn areas with canary yellow bistro-style chairs provide flexible and open lawn
being that Central Green and the whole Navy Yard development promote. Fixed space to complement the programmed rooms and provide seating for lunch gatherings
fitness features are complemented by flexible yellow ‘fitness furniture’. around food trucks.

208 JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS

Central Green is dramatically arranged in a series of nested rings that looks striking from above, while at ground level the circuitous path system that
the circles create gives the impression that the park is bigger than it actually is.

NAVY YARD CENT209

 Central Green is surrounded by a number of four-storey
office buildings, including BIG Architects’ $ 35 million
building at 1200 Intrepid, to house the 11,000 (and
growing) employee base. In addition to a variety of
rooms, Central Green includes 304 trees, 42 types of
groundcover, 10,105 shrubs and more than 13,600
bulbs. It also has dedicated parking areas for food trucks.
The park covers five acres.

North

210 JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS

 A purpose-made fitness station
with pull-up bars and other
Two bocce courts hold pride of place at exercise equipment adds to
Central Green, flanked by lawn space the sense of health and well-
with bright-yellow Adirondack chairs being that Central Green and
for spectator seating and idle relaxation. the entire Navy Yard develop-
The bocce courts are 15 × 2.5 metres, ment promote. Brightly colour-
recessed into the groundplane, doubling ed flexible ‘fitness furniture’
as an informal seating edge. The courts can be used for step-ups,
sit within a 19-metre-diameter room. crunches and other individual
fitness regimes.

As a counterpoint to the
Three canary yellow table-tennis tables add
active rooms within Central
to the Central Green brand and provide
Green, the hammock grove
employees with a chance to compete with
provides a quiet and protect-
their colleagues.
ed place of retreat and relaxa-
tion with six bright-yellow
hammocks tucked within a
pine grove. The ground plane
is covered in pine needles,
reinforcing the sense of being
in a forest.

The sun lawn is a raised

amphitheatre with four terraced
seating areas overlooking a small
half-circle lawn ‘stage’. The structure
houses restrooms and storage areas A bold x-shaped picnic table brings peo-
for Central Green, concealed by an ple together to continue discussing ideas
elegant timber screen. The feature and further the creative exchange of
is 25 metres in diameter and the ideas. Each arm of the table is 6 metres
terrace seats are between 14 and in length and it sits within a 16-metre-
18 metres long × 2.5 metres deep diameter room encircled by trees.
(500 millimetres seat and 2 metres of
lawn). The small stage is 3.5 metres
wide × 15 metres long.

The social track is 100 metres in

diameter and defines the core layout of
Central Green. Three 2-metre-wide
running ‘lanes’ and a metrics marker
allow users to measure the distance
they have covered while socialising
with colleagues. Five laps around the
track equals one mile. Timber loungers
line the social track, acting as a relaxing
spectator space.

Central Green provides a number of pro-

grammed rooms, as well as sustainable
and diverse flowering and wet meadows.
The rooms cover a range of uses from
active to quiet: table-tennis, bocce, fitness
stations, communal dining, an amphithe-
atre/sun lounge, a hammock grove, per-
ennial meadow, wet meadow and open
lawn areas. The smallest room, contain-
ing three table-tennis tables, is nine
metres in diameter and the wet meadow
is 36 metres in diameter. A social track
structures the space. The design of the
park is a deliberate external representa-
tion of the hipster workspace — flexible,
fun and intended to foster self-expression
to further creativity.

NAVY YARD CENT211

Aerial view of Central Green showing the various active and quiet rooms and the wet meadows, open lawns and perennial flowering meadows.
the programme is defining the ‘permanent’ spatial arrangement of
the design, rather than a space being designed to accommodate
events and programme, which may come later, implemented by a
different agency when the landscape architect is no longer involved.
This scenario often results in disparate activities, over-filled spaces
with too much going on, and no sense of visual or aesthetic cohesion.
Central Green avoids that by carefully determining the use, the space
requirements for that use and then designing to those parameters,
before emphatically uniting the uses with the single bold colour and
geometry, the bright canary yellow that instantly brands the park and
lifts the mood.
Central Green challenges us to reconsider the role of the designer
in shaping space. Is the role of the designer to orchestrate the activ-
ities of a space, calibrate the intensity from adrenaline-pumping to
quiet reflection and predetermine the movement through the land-
scape analogous to a modern-day William Kent carefully curating the
scenographic movement through the Rousham Gardens? Perhaps this
is something landscape architects have always done and this ap-
proach to provide a series of set pieces, each with a creative name,
is not novel in the world of design. However, Central Green has done
something fresh and unique. It has not shied away from being pre-
scriptive about defining a space around an activity. Flexibility does not
need to feature here, because each type of use is neatly catered for
and the design still demonstrates a sensitivity in its recognition that
212 JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS
people also need space where they can create their own fantasy and
programme, moments of quietude and tranquility — moments of
being, not doing. The diversity of playful rooms gives the sense of a
lot going on even when the space is devoid of crowds of people,
something that is important in the age of instant gratification and
social media where success is measured on popularity, tweets and
image posts.
The approach to creating active rooms is becoming more common
in urban public spaces, which I believe Central Green has influenced.
Will the design of public spaces continue this trajectory, with creative
efforts from design teams invested in devising the next best game to
populate an active room, or will the ubiquitous food truck and table-
tennis table drift away in favour of more unprogrammed open space?
Can strong, bold prescriptive designs like Central Green adapt to re-
spond to changing habits and behaviours, signalling a new type of
pseudo-temporary landscape where a strong framework of ‘perma-
nent’ rooms is implemented and the lighter, more easily swappable
elements evolve to match the emerging raison d’être of social spaces?
Each nested ring has a specific social use to activate the space and encourage conversation and the exchange of ideas. The images clockwise from the top left
show: the hammock grove nestled in evergreen pines, bocce courts with Adirondack chairs, canary yellow table-tennis tables, the Social Track with 2-metre
lanes and a metric marker, the collective dining table and the terraced amphitheatre with a lawn ‘stage’.

NAVY YARD CENT213

THE GOODS LINE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: ASPECT Studios

LOCATION: Sydney, Australia

COMPLETION: 2015
SIZE: 500 metres in length and 15 – 25 metres in width
CONTEXT: Elevated public space adjacent to cultural institutions
such as the Powerhouse Museum, ABC studios and the University
of Technology Sydney
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: CHROFI Architects
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Table-tennis, children’s water play
area, ‘Amphitheatre’ seating, communal dining, fitness stations,
communal seating for 20 with power points and wifi and study pods 0 75 m
BUDGET: AU$ 15 million

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Goods Line is an elevated public space in Sydney, that has been
converted into a new civic spine from a former railway line. Before it
was opened to pedestrians, the space had not welcomed people for
a century and a half. The new linear space fulfills the vision of the New
South Wales government to connect the areas of Central to Darling
Harbour. In doing so, the civic spine now connects 80,000 students,
locals and visitors to the destination attractions of Sydney. The Goods
Line is flanked by Frank Gehry’s newest building for the University of
Technology Sydney, dubbed the ‘paper bag’. The design represents
a new shift in the design of public space by providing a series of
‘platforms’ for a variety of user groups. The platforms can be used in
a variety of ways, including public entertainment, recreation, studying
and cultural festivals, as well as prescribed uses such as play, table-
tennis and fitness stations, communal dining for 20 people with
power points and wifi and quieter ‘study pods’, as the design team
describes them, under the shade of fig trees.
The project introduces a fresh nomenclature for this type of approach
to design — social infrastructure. Social infrastructure suggests a de-
liberate design move by the landscape architect to inject the space
with fixed programmes that establish a ‘social’ culture, where stu-
dents, tourists and locals can hang out and spark new conversations
and relationships. It is a modern-day nod to William H. Whyte’s central
tenet of ‘triangulation’: the notion that when an event or programme
is presented in public space, it offers the opportunity for people to
strike up a conversation that would otherwise not happen. Terraced
amphitheatre seating encourages students to linger in the space, idle
passers-by might play a pick-up game of table-tennis while local
families with small children develop a relationship as their children
play together in the water play space. The variety of platforms pro-
vides a range of social experiences that cater to the individual and
collective groups across a multitude of age ranges and social classes.
According to the designers, ‘the strong overarching narrative of the

Table-tennis and raised lawn platforms hold the edges of the Goods Line, allowing the More intimate areas off the main circulation spine include spaces like the fitness station,
central walkway to remain a pulsing pedestrian link. set within trees and at a slightly lower level than the main route.

214 ASPECT STUDIOS

The aerial view of the Goods Line shows the amphitheatre seating, fitness station and the ‘seating for 20’ communal dining space that provides
power points and wifi.

THE
GOODSAuthenticated
LINE 215
 Table for 20
with Power Points
and Wifi

12
m
7.5
m

35 m 23 m

Children’s Water Play Space

7m

12 m
Table-tennis
8m

Terrace Seating
and Steps

16 m
7m

Fitness Station

4m
42 m

The ‘Transformer’ Pavilion by Chofri Architects (not completed) Table-tennis

6.5 m

Private Function Music Concert Outdoor Cinema Large Function Cocktail Bar

20
m
270 m

North

216 ASPECT STUDIOS

The ‘seating for 20’ provides a generous communal dining area and flexible gathering
space, complete with power points and wifi, to encourage people to hang out in the
space and foster a strong social culture in it.
The terraced amphitheatre is used casually as a place to sit and socialise on any given
day. The space can also have a more formal use, as illustrated here during an outdoor
cinema screening. The central walkway remains open so that people walking through
the space can stop and take in the show.

Goods Line is about the move from rail infrastructure to social infra-
structure. It’s the movement of a new commodity: culture, creativity
and community.’ The design represents the urban shift away from a
place rich in industrial heritage to a place replete with ‘social interac-
tion, creative industry and the promotion of innovation’.
Due to the linear nature of the site, the design consists of a direct
pedestrian and cycle route down the centre of the space with the
social platforms holding the edges of the space. People can slow the
pace and become spectators on the fringes of the central walkway.
Beneath a healthy line of mature fig trees, elevated platforms extend
through the trees to create intimate and quieter areas with generous
seating space, the study pods. Visitors can step off the concrete walk-
way into planted areas where the historic railway lines intermingle
with soft planting and bold, playful furniture — all branded in bright
yellow.
CHROFI Architects proposed to build a flexible pavilion structure
called the Transformer on the western end of the Goods Line. The
pavilion was never constructed but, had it been, it would have pro-
vided an internal flexible space for functions, events, cinemas, a cock-
tail bar and music concerts.

THE GOODS
LAuthenticatedINE 217
SECHSELÄUTEN-
PLATZ
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Vetschpartner

LOCATION: Zurich, Switzerland

COMPLETION: 2014
SIZE: 1.6 hectares
CONTEXT: Adjacent to the opera house
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Zach und Zünd Architekten
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Burning of the Böögg, Circus Knie,
Zurich Film Festival, live outdoor opera screening, winter
market
0 250 m
BUDGET: CHF 26.6 million

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Sechseläutenplatz is the largest public square in Zurich and is located
on the east shore of Lake Zurich. The Opernhaus (Opera House) and
Bernhard Theatre buildings sit to the south of the plaza providing a
strong edge to the space. Previously the site was a surface car park
for the Opera House, before parking was pushed below ground as
part of the project. During the construction of the underground car
park, prehistoric pile dwellings were discovered, which led to the
works being suspended for nine months for careful archaeological
work to take place to preserve this important discovery. The artifacts
uncovered in the dig are now a permanent exhibition accessed from
a stand-alone building in the square that goes below ground to the
excavation site.
The brief for the project was to create a ‘place of international
appeal’ that could provide a significant space for residents of Zurich
and visitors alike. The space already hosted an annual tradition known
as Burning of the Böögg, which is winter in effigy in the form of a
snowman that is burned during Sechseläuten in late spring (the third
Monday in April) to mark the beginning of summer. As part of the
design process, the design team analysed the multiple events that
were taking place in the space to provide the infrastructure to facili-
tate these events. This included the integration of the anchors for the
Circus Knie tent within the paving, which makes the circular diameter
of the circus tent visible in the ground plane with anchor covers, and
26 bronze plaques that make reference to the city’s history.
It was the government’s vision that events could be held in the
square for up to 180 days per year. The main events include the Circus
Knie, Zurich Film Festival, winter markets with up to 100 stalls, the
Burning of the Böögg and the open-air screening of opera perfor-
mances. Clear parameters also state that the square must have full
public access for at least 120 days, functioning as the main public

The space sits adjacent the opera house and Lake Zurich. The scale of the space The Christmas Fair provides up to 100 stalls and an ice-skating rink, creating a strong
accommodates the Circus Knie and ‘pebbles’ of tree planting provide a more human seasonal atmosphere and serves as a destination in the winter months.
scale. The design incorporates the required anchor points for the tent into the permanent
design of the space.

218 VETSCHPARTNER
The House of Switzerland transformed Sechseläutenplatz for the 2014 European Athletics Championship in Zurich as a dynamic meeting point for the duration of the championship.
square. Summer events are, therefore, restricted to certain areas of
the square.
The design of the Sechseläutenplatz is characterised by a hard-
paved open area that is made up of 110,000 Vals quartzite paving
modules measuring 130 × 1300 millimetres. The paving was rigorous-
ly tested for day-to-day slip resistance and cleaning, as well as ensur-
ing the material would withstand the Burning of the Böögg, which
required additional firebrick to be installed. The stone was also tested
against elephant excrement, a likely occurence from the Circus Knie
events. In total, the Val quartzite covers 12,600 square metres. In the
centre of the space, a circle of textured quartzite marks the location
of the Burning of the Böögg during the annual Sechseläuten festival.
On the edges of the site, five amorphous pockets of soft underfoot
paved areas coupled with moveable chairs and tree planting give the
square a more intimate feel for day-to-day use and bring an important
human scale to the space. These ‘pebbles’ are planted with 21 red
oak trees and 35 tulip trees. Two of the ‘pebbles’ are associated with
the two cafes that are in the space, which also serve as access to the
299-space car park over two levels. The moveable chairs often spill
out of the tree-planted ‘pebbles’ as people are free to arrange them
across the square to suit their personal seating preferences. There is
a fountain in the northern portion of the square closely linked to the
cafe and tree-planted areas. The fountain can be programmed to a
piece of music and the individual fountains can reach eight metres in
height. Parents can sit under the shade of the trees and watch their
children interact with the fountain, making this an important feature
in the space. A 50 meter long bench holds the southern edge of the
space, acting as a sculpture when not in use.
The integration of infrastructure at Sechseläutenplatz facilitates
the various events with rooms under the square that provide the
hidden systems for lighting, the distribution of power for events and
the control rooms and pumps for the fountain.
SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ 219
The Sechseläuten is a traditional holiday that takes place in the spring each year in Zurich. The climax of the festival is the Burning of the Böögg, where an effigy
of a snowman is set alight with explosives.

220 VETSCHPARTNER
 Sechseläutenplatz operates on two levels to create a space for events
and cultural celebrations as well as for the day-to-day. To break down
the expansive character of the space, five ‘pebbles’ are planted with
trees to create more comfortable and enclosed spaces, and moveable
chairs allow people to occupy the space as they choose. The edge effect
that the pebbles create is an important design consideration when
creating flexible public space. People feel safe and comfortable under
the trees but have an open, unobstructed view across the square.
57 m

The transformation of Sechseläutenplatz

from a surface car park created a
much-needed central public space for the
city of Zurich. It serves as prime program-
mable space for large formal events,
provides the opportunity for people to
experience the adjacent performances of
the Opera House and to continue the
50 m long-standing cultural tradition of the
Burning of the Böögg. Although the space
hosts a wide array of events throughout
the year, the square must remain without
any events for 120 days per year.

100 m

170 m

North
Sechseläutenplatz sits adjacent to Zurich’s
main Opera House (Opernhaus) and the
open expanse of Lake Zurich. It is the
largest open space in Zurich.

The transformation of the space from a surface car park to Zurich’s largest open space was afforded by the logic to give the space to people and put the cars
below ground.

SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ 221
At the centre of the square, a textured circle demarcates the staging of the Burning of the
Böögg, an example of how programme articulates the space. Smaller articulations in
the paving are formed by the anchor points for the Circus Knie tent. This type of integrated
infrastructure demonstrates the shift in public space towards functionality coupled with
aesthetics.
Built-in infrastructure is placed throughout the plaza to provide access points to power
and water supplies to ensure the square can be fully activated with events and cultural
celebrations.

222 VETSCHPARTNER
Each summer live streaming of the opera takes place in the plaza. The physical
connection between the inside and outside becomes a powerful tool for spatial
activation.
Market stalls and festivals often feature in the space, bringing a new experience
to the city for the residents and visitors.
The ‘pebbles’ break down the scale of the plaza to create more comfortable,
human-scaled spaces.
An access chamber is built into the plaza to maintain the pump room.
The set-up for the annual Sechseläuten creates a spectacle in the space and
reason for the community to convene in the plaza.

SECHSELÄUTENPAuthenticate
dLATZ 223
BENTHEMPLEIN
WATER SQUARE
URBAN DESIGNER: De Urbanisten
LOCATION: Rotterdam, Netherlands
COMPLETION: 2013
SIZE: 7500 square metres
CONTEXT: Urban location near a university
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Sports, skateboarding, stage
and spectacle of the water cycle
BUDGET: € 3.4 million
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Benthemplein Water Square is a public space in Rotterdam, which
doubles as an active square as well as a dramatic design for water
attenuation. The first of its kind, the ‘water square’ retains rainfall
from both the adjacent paving areas, and the adjacent buildings.
Traditionally, this stormwater would be fed into the sewer system and
discharged into adjacent canals or attenuation basins off site. The
Water Square enables the adjacent buildings to be detached from the
drainage system and, in doing so, creates a dramatic spectacle that
categorically transforms the character, use and appearance of the
space after a storm.
Three sunken areas, programmed with sports courts, skateboard
areas and an open platform for dances and performances, define
Benthemplein and structure the space. Seating steps and lounger
terraces face on to the spaces, providing space for relaxing and so-
cialising and for spectator seating areas. During cloudbursts, open-
drainage channels direct water into these sunken spaces, flooding
the sports courts, platforms and seating areas, creating a reflective
The dry basin provides a performance platform with stepped seating and
spectator areas.
224 DE URBANISTEN
0°°
0 75 m
surface that picks up the movement of the clouds and creates an
added dimension to the space. What was previously an active central
area is now a void, with the activity transferred to the interstitial
spaces between and around the charged attenuation areas. Two shal-
low basins receive adjacent surface water drainage and the central
feature, which is deeper than the other basins, is filled when the rain
falls consistently for a longer duration. The basins are fed by oversized
stainless steel channels intended to make the water cycle visible and
an inherent part of the space. The design of the channels also enables
skateboarders to engage with the edges of the channels so that the
features serve to activate the space during days without rain. The
stainless steel channels are fed by a ‘rain well’, a pipe connected to
an undergound storage tank. When it is full, the water rises to the
pipe and down the stainless channel. The water from the well is ac-
tually water from the adjacent buildings that is channelled below
ground before resurfacing in the well. The ‘water wall’ fills the deep
basin in the centre of the space and emulates the intensity of water
The sunken public spaces act as large water-retention basins, capable of holding
1.7 million litres of water during periods of heavy rainfall.
This sequence of visualisations
demonstrates how the space
is transformed by a rain shower
and how people are able to
interact with this natural phe-
nomenon.
Water fills the plaza from water gathered from nearby Water forms one element of the activation strategy of the
buildings and the adjacent surface during periods of site, but during dry periods the space operates on a
deluge. The diagrams above illustrate the water move- number of levels to allow students and the community to
ment strategy to fill the attenuation basins. engage with the space.

The process of directing water to the basins is made visible, adding to the event and spectacle of the space changing from an active plaza to a water-filled and reflective space.
The process of making water drainage visible is a less overt form of spatial activation, yet has a transformational effect on the space.

226 DE URBANISTEN
 32 m

Three attenuation basins define rooms of activity on

dry days, which include basketball courts, skate

17 m
22
parks and a platform for performances, education
and informal gatherings.

m
29
17 m

14 m

m
22

14
m

The Water Square is an interconnected system of

water attenuation, where the process of collecting
water animates the space with channels of captured
rainwater and attenuation basins that are ball and
wheel-sport courts when the basins are not charged
with water.

The surrounding architecture

plays a critical role in the opera-
tions of the Water Square. The
buildings create enclosure and
definition to the square as well as
capturing rainwater to transform
the square’s three basins during a
storm.

North

BENTHEMPLEIN WATE 227

Primarily, the use of the space is sports-driven, including ball and wheel games. The space also provides a platform
and a flexible stage for a multitude of events: a spontaneous skate contest, baptising ceremonies and outdoor
church services conducted by the adjacent local church including a piano concert. Additionally, markets and neigh-
bourhood summer fairs in the space are often organised by the community.
The impermanence and temporality of the water’s transformation of the square signals a new precedent for activating public space. In this instance,
it changes not just the use but the atmosphere and emotive qualities of public space.
falling from the sky through a series of outlets that spill water depend-
ing on the intensity of the storm. After a storm, the two shallow basins
discharge into an underground filtration system, which naturally
seeps back into the water table. After 36 hours the central basin dis-
sipates back into the open water system of the city to prevent water
stagnation and avoid any water-borne bacteria from forming.
The ‘water square’ has introduced an alternative method to the
traditional means of spatial activation by making visible the water
cycle. Aside from the powerful and important environmental message
that the Benthemplein Water Square communicates about urban
cooling and the natural systems at play, the square is primarily a
social space. For the majority of the time, the space is active with ball
games, wheel sports and informal performances and there is a per-
manence about the life of the space. Following a storm the space is
transformed, introducing a peaceful temporality with the reflective
surface of the attenuation basins. What was once an active, noisy and
kinetic space is suddenly devoid of movement, sound and human
interaction. As the water slowly dissipates, the active life of the space
returns and the cycle repeats itself. Further, the space is never in a
static state. It is either animated by activity, sports, performances and
idle conversation or it is in a state of transformation with flowing
water, dramatic cascades and the emergence of reflective pools. This
project, more than any other case study in this book, points to a new
paradigm in the melding of culture and ecology, of human interaction
and natural systems. It is weather as event, climate as change.
BENTHEMPLEIN WATER SQUARE 229
MORE LONDON
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Townshend Landscape Architects

LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2005
SIZE: 7500 square metres
CONTEXT: Riverside commercial development adjacent to the
office of the Mayor of London and UNESCO World Heritage Sites
Tower of London and Tower Bridge
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Foster + Partners masterplan
RECURRING PROGRAMME: Outdoor cinema, fitness classes,
theatre performances, temporary art installations, travelling
0 75 m
photography, Mayor of London Thames Festival

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Scoop is the central space of the More London development on
the Southbank of the River Thames in London. More London was
masterplanned by Foster + Partners and includes the headquarters of
the Greater London Authority, the office of the Mayor of London, also
designed by Foster + Partners. More London is adjacent to London
Bridge Station, one of London’s busiest multi-modal transport hubs.
As for Potters Fields Park (see p. 108 – 121), the UNESCO World Heri-
tage Site of Tower Bridge acts as the backdrop to the project, inform-
ing the overall layout of the masterplan and the landscape. The Tower
of London sits across the river from More London.
Below the open space are a number of basement offices, there-
fore Townshend Landscape Architects designed a solution to deliver
natural daylight to the underground meeting rooms. Rather than cre-
ating a utilitarian aperture, the designers developed a stepped outdoor
auditorium capable of hosting concerts, performances and outdoor
cinemas for up to 800 people. Additional events include temporary art
installations, exhibitions, drama and educational programmes to
bring tourists, local community members and employees from the
adjacent offices into the space. In particular Southwark Theatre’s Dra-
ma Education Partnership holds local fitness classes, free film screen-
ings, theatre and music performances in addition to the Mayor’s
Thames Festival. The Scoop also hosts the London Bridge City Summer
Festival and a Christmas market.
The calendar of events that take place in the Scoop allows a play-
ful and varied sense of community to emerge. Whether it is a lunch-
time fitness session or a staged performance, the Scoop brings a di-
verse mix of people into the heart of what is otherwise a corporate
setting in the shadows of London’s political power. The Scoop holds
approximately 100 events per year and approximately 25 per cent of
those are repeat events, both monthly and annually. A team of three

The Telectroscope by artist Paul St George was a temporary installation in 2008 London Riviera at More London sits to the north of the Scoop and activates an open
that allowed Londoners and New Yorkers to connect in real time. paved area. It serves breakfast, lunch, dinner, drinks and coffee and adds free summer
entertainment.

230 TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

The Scoop is a central performance space in the More London development adjacent to the River Thames, the office of the Mayor of London and the backdrop of the World Heritage
Site Tower Bridge and Tower of London. The amphitheatre provides south-facing seating and a spectator area for performances. The sunken area also allows natural daylight to reach
the offices beneath the plaza.

MORE LONDON 231

 To the south of the Scoop, structured bands of
planting and seating beneath the shade of
semi-mature oak trees provide the space with
an important human-scale edge condition with
36 m
an intimate, planted feel.

The Scoop is a sunken amphitheatre that

20
functions as a lightwell to allow natural day-

m
light into the basement offices below the
adjacent plaza. Twelve amphitheatre seats
measuring 800 × 400 millimetres overlook the
open, flexible performance space.

On the upper terrace of More London,

four bands of fountains activate the
space. Two-metre-wide seats act as
platforms for people to relax comfortably
in the space.

8m

16 m

More London is a contemporary urban development

North
masterplanned by Foster + Partners on the Southbank
of the River Thames. The Greater London Authority
building is the office of the Mayor of London and sits
adjacent to the Scoop, a sunken amphitheatre in
the heart of the plaza.

232 TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

organises and facilitates the events: Head of Events and Communica-
tions, Events Manager and Assistant Communications Manager. The
Scoop is actively promoted on a dedicated website, communicating
weekly events and happenings in the space, which are all free-of-
charge and open to the public. The space is managed and maintained
by dedicated cleaning, engineering and security teams. Most of the
events that take place in the Scoop are designed by others, including
set design and facilities. The Scoop team has marquees, which are
stored near the facility in the estate office. The budget for the Scoop
and the associated events is generated from a service-charge contri-
bution from the tenants of the More London development. Addition-
ally, the space generates an income from branded promotional events.
The open space between the Scoop and the River Thames, called
More London Riverside, hosts travelling exhibits and cultural installa-
tions. During the summer months the London Riviera bar and coffee
shop provides a relaxed atmosphere with deckchairs and palm trees.
The London Riviera is the latest addition to More London, reinforcing
the acceleration of the activation of this public space with overlay
events and installations.
More London and the Scoop demonstrate the agency of the pub-
lic realm to create meaningful places that draw communities to-
gether. The sustained efforts of a dedicated team to enliven the space
ensure that there is always variety to generate renewed interest and
anticipation for those that frequent the space daily and those visiting
for the first time.

The Scoop was designed as a lightwell to deliver natural daylight into the
meeting rooms beneath the plaza. Rather than an engineered response,
the landscape architects designed an amphitheatre and stage capable
of holding 800 people. The Scoop has an established calendar of events
to ensure something is always happening in the space to enliven More
London and encourage the community to come together.

MORE LONDON 233

BRYANT PARK
URBAN DESIGNER: OLIN
LOCATION: New York, USA
COMPLETION: 2013
SIZE: 4 hectares
CONTEXT: Adjacent to New York Public Library
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: William H. Whyte
RECURRING OVERLAY: HBO Summer Screen,
winter market
BUDGET: US$ 18 million
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Bryant Park is located between Fifth and Sixth Avenues and 40th and
42nd Streets in Midtown Manhattan. The New York Public Library sits
to the east of Bryant Ppark, providing a backdrop to the open lawn
space. The Park’s simple arrangement is one of its great successes. The
space consists of a slightly sunken central lawn space measuring
91 × 65 metres. The northern and southern edges are lined with three
rows of mature London Plane trees on either side, towering over the
lawn and bringing a comfortable human scale to a space surrounded by
Manhattan skyscrapers. The relationship between the open lawn and
the shaded edges exemplifies the edge effect explained by Jan Gehl in
Life Between Buildings.1 People sit under the protection of trees, over-
looking the sun-drenched lawn. This spatial relationship, coupled with
the change of level, is a critical consideration when designing spaces
to be flexible enough to accommodate cultural events and installations.
The rich edge condition creates an attractive and comfortable space
for the day-to-day use of the space during the times when the larger
flexible spaces are not used for events or programmed activities.
The HBO Bryant Park Film Festival began in 1993 and has taken place
annually since then.
234 OLIN
0 250 m
Bryant Park has not always been the successful, attractive, must-see
park that it is today. In the 1970s the park was derelict, neglected
and considered unsafe. Police barricades became necessary at all
entrances to the park after 9.00 pm. An initiative to transform the park
over a four-year period from 1979 to 1983 consisted of a series of
programmed cultural overlays that included book and flower markets,
cafes with moveable bistro-style chairs, proposed by Laurie Olin, and
other entertainments. This coincided with the New York Public
Library’s plans to renovate the buildings and improve Bryant Park.
William H. Whyte analysed the site and concluded that aspects of the
existing condition of the site were reinforcing the unattractive appear-
ance and uses of the park. He suggested the removal of iron railings
and overgrown landscape to make the space more accessible, both
visually and physically.
Laurie Olin and his team then redesigned the park to have more
visibility, to feel safer and to invite the public in. The ASLA identified
Bryant Park as a ‘landmark experiment in design and social program-
Some say that the public/private partnership model puts too much programme and
events into Bryant Park. The day-to-day use of the park is equally important and the
moveable chairs allow people to make the space their own.
The HBO Summer Film Festival is one of the most popular events at Bryant Park. The outdoor cinema has inspired a similar use in other major cities as a method of bringing people
together in public spaces.
ming created in response to sociology and behavioural research’,
which was largely led by the work of William H. Whyte. In addition to
the physical improvements — introducing more entrances, access
ramps and paths to improve circulation, and public restrooms — planned
programming, entertainment and concessions were an important
consideration for the design team. The central lawn was enlarged
and the edge condition was improved with two 300-foot perennial
borders designed by Lynden Miller that are visible throughout the
park. The lawn is in fact a green roof, sitting atop the extension of the
New York Public Library, where more than three million volumes are
stored.
Since its completion, the park continues to sustain a year-round
calendar of events, including concerts, performances, ice-skating rink,
winter markets and outdoor cinema. The HBO Bryant Park Film Festi-
val began in 1993 and has taken place annually since then. The use
of outdoor film at Bryant Park has inspired the enlivenment of many
similar spaces around the world, now a reliable device for activating
public spaces.
A key initiative of the design team was to ensure that Bryant Park
was sustainable economically. To achieve this, the restoration of the
park involved introducing a new era of financing public spaces
through public/private partnerships. Bryant Park is managed by a
not-for-profit private company, originally organised to generate pri-
vate funds for the restoration of the park. The corporation, in partner-
ship with the New York Parks Department, agreed to take over the
park for $ 1 a year for 35 years to manage and activate it. The com-
pany is responsible for maintenance of the space and programming,
which is entirely financed by private equity, with a significant portion
generated from local merchants, property owners, neighbours and
citizens. It is the largest organisation in the USA to manage a public
park with private funding. When it opened in 1991, it had a budget
six times greater than the city’s budget for maintaining the park
BRYANT PARK 235
The central lawn is slightly sunken from the tree-
lined edges and measures 85 × 55 metres. Due to
the intensity of use throughout the year, the turf
is replaced annually.

55
m

Outdoor film at Bryant Park has inspired similar use

in many spaces around the world. The films are
shown throughout the summer on Monday nights.
The lawn opens at 5 pm to allow people to gather
85 m
and socialise before the film begins 30 minutes after
sunset.

The open lawn fronts the New York

Public Library, which provides the
lawn with a distinct backdrop. The
north and south edges of the space
are defined by impressive rows of
mature London plane trees. These
tree-lined edges are critical to the
space, creating dappled shade areas.
Up to 2000 moveable chairs are in
use around the park.
155 m

180 m

Bryant Park is surrounded by towering

New York architecture, defining a pro-
foundly important open space. It signals
the necessity of flexible, open spaces that
can host a multitude of events catering
for different demographics and cultures.
One of the challenges of the success of
the park is turning down applications for
events.

North

236 OLIN
before the public/private partnership was established. During the
summer, the park employs about 55 people who manage security,
sanitation, gardening and special events. Each year 400 chairs have
to be replaced through wear-and-tear and up to eight are stolen. The
Bryant Park Restoration Corperation maintains the number of chairs
in the park at around 2000. The park offers free wifi funded through
corporate sponsorship, encouraging visitors to linger in the park, con-
tributing to the atmosphere and in turn attracting more people.

1 Jan Gehl, Life between Buildings: Using Public Space, Island Press: Washington, DC 2011
(6th ed.).

Programming has included events such as the Seventh on Sixth fashion shows (which
no longer happens), the JVC Jazz Festival, the New York Times Young Performers Series,
lunchtime concerts by Juilliard students, the HBO Bryant Park Film Festival on Monday
nights, the Kaleidoscope Circus, boules and chess games and full-size temporary tennis
courts. Year-long attractions are the Bryant Park Grill, the Bryant Park Café, and six kiosks.
The kiosks include Foccacia Fiorentina (pasta and sandwiches), Simon Sips (coffee),
ice cream stalls and Café Crème (crepes, sandwiches and beverages). Bryant Park can be
rented for private events, provided they are open to the public and approved by
the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation and BPRC.

BRY237
 In addition to the larger, more formal events such as
ice-skating, the Christmas market and outdoor cinema,
Bryant Park also provides smaller, more intimate events.
These include the Reading Room beneath the trees,
community concerts and the annual global event Diner
en Blanc. Yoga and the square dance also happen on
the lawn.

238 OLIN
SOMERSET
HOUSE FOUNTAIN
COURT
ARCHITECTS: Donald Insall Associates
LOCATION: London, UK
COMPLETION: 2000
SIZE: 3700 square metres
CONTEXT: Adjacent to Somerset House, Courtauld Gallery and
Kings College London
ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Dixon Jones masterplan,
OCMIS Fountain Designers
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer Series, Film4 Summer Screen
and Winter Skate, Photo London, ‘Now Play This’, historically the
London Fashion Week, bespoke events at a cost of £ 35,000
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Edmond J. Safra Fountain Court at Somerset House is one of Lon-
don’s main public spaces. The courtyard is 65 × 48 metres and is en-
closed by dramatic 18th-century facades. The courtyard is one of the
first contemporary spaces in London designed as a flexible space and
subsequently programmed with a range of activities, installations and
performances. Writing for The Guardian in 2000, architecture critic
Jonathan Glancey noted: ‘It will be one of Britain’s finest cultural ven-
ues and an example of how, across the country, we might begin to
rethink the way we use public buildings, public space and the public
realm.’ In the late 1990s Dixon Jones Architects was commissioned to
develop a masterplan for Somerset House and re-establish the impor-
tant 18th-century building as an attraction for London and a centre
for the arts. Key to the vision of the masterplan was to transform the
central parking area used by the Inland Revenue Service into a space
that could be used by the public and would be capable of hosting
open-air events and seasonal installations — by day a space sheltered
from the noise and pollution of the major streets adjacent to Somer-
set House and by night a destination for ‘intelligent entertainment’.
240 DONALD INSALL ASSOCIATES
0 75 m
Donald Insall Associates developed the design following the Dixon
Jones masterplan. The courtyard is paved in a single granite surface
that unifies the space and creates an uncluttered, flexible stage. At
the centre of the courtyard, 55 choreographed water-jet fountains
spray six metres into the air to animate the space on a daily basis,
creating a playful atmosphere with children and families playing in
the fountain. With the flick of a switch, the fountains can be turned
off to create a 3700-square-metre stage for a multitude of events.
In 2000, shortly after the completion of the courtyard, a tempor-
ary ice-skating rink was installed for the first time. The ice rink, now
known as Skate, has taken place every year since and has become a
popular destination between November and January. It has inspired
ice-skating rinks in many of London’s best-known landmarks. What
began as an experiment in space activation has become a place-mak-
ing model for establishing a seasonal attraction across the capital. In
2001 the fountains were turned off to accommodate the first live
music concert by the US band Lambchop, which again resulted in a
recurring annual event called the Summer Series that showcases a
London’s Largest Living Room in the Edmond J. Safra Fountain Court, Somerset House,
for the launch of the London Festival of Architecture 2008. Furniture designed by
Studio Weave and Eley Kishimoto, Living Room carpet designed by Studio Myerscough.
Creative direction by Gerrard O’Carroll.
The Teaser is a light-box installation, a three-dimensional transformation of the book
The Academic Year by Rut Blees Luxemburg and Alexander Garcia Duttmann and
illustrates the flexibility that the fountains provide, with half of them left turned on for
atmosphere and play.
 Bistro-style tables and chairs edge the fountains at Somerset House, providing overflow
space from the cafe.
Counterpoint dance performance in 2010 took place in the fountains, telling a compelling
story of 21st century London with an all-female cast, choreographed by Shobana
Jeyasingh, with the sound artist Cassiel.

range of performers for ten days in July. In 2004 the first Film 4 Sum-
mer Screen transformed the courtyard into an outdoor cinema with
surround-sound and state-of-the-art projections. Now in its 14th sea-
son, the Film 4 Summer Screen runs for two weeks in August, screen-
ing 14 films across a range of genres and generations from classics
to cartoons. In addition to the movie, DJs spin sets inspired by the
films, which are followed by live introductions from producers or film
stars. The Film 4 series is the largest outdoor cinema of its kind in
London and often sells out immediately. London Fashion Week took
place in the courtyard from 2009 to 2016 until it moved to Store Stu-
dios near Somerset House. Since 2015, Photo London has been held
in the courtyard in May, the largest photography exhibition of its kind
in London.
In addition to the staple events at the courtyard — Skate, London
Fashion Week, Summer Series, Photo London and Film 4 — the court-
yard is used as a platform for annual installations such as the London
Festival of Architecture, which demonstrates the flexibility of the space
as only some of the fountains may be turned off. Impromptu dance
performances also take place within the fountain. With a standing
capacity of 1500 and a seating capacity of 550, the courtyard can
also be rented out for private events for £ 35,000.

SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT 241

The overall dimensions of the courtyard are 48 × 65 metres, which is all
hard paving with natural stone. In the centre of the courtyard there are
55 water jets that add to the atmosphere of the space. The jets animate
the space with white noise and children playing in the fountains and can
be turned off to create a large flexible space for events.

m
48

m
65
18
m
48
m
The architecture that surrounds the courtyard is impressive and
gives the courtyard an atmosphere of grandeur. The space is
appropriately scaled to complement the character of the archi-
tecture.

The courtyard at Somerset House is one of London’s greatest

open spaces and is located on the Strand, a lively street
in central London. One of the campuses of King’s College
London, part of the University of London, is adjacent to
Somerset House, increasing the amount of footfall into the
space. People can also walk through the courtyard to get to
the Thames, where there is also the River Terrace and Café.

North

242 DONALD INSALL ASSOCIATES

The courtyard hosts a calendar of set events such as Skate, the Summer Series Music Festival, Film 4 Summer Screen, Photo London and London Fashion week, which has since
moved out of the courtyard to Store Studios. In addition to these larger events, the courtyard showcases a multitude of smaller installations by emerging and established artists.
Before it was transformed into one of London’s vibrant public spaces, it was a car park for the Inland Revenue Service, as seen in the photo above.

SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT 243

DU MUSÉE
AVENUE
DESIGNER: Various
LOCATION: Montreal, Canada
COMPLETION: Annually since 2012
SIZE: 350 Square metres
CONTEXT: Adjacent to Montreal Museum of Fine Arts
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer installation following
pedestrianisation of the street
BUDGET: C$ 25,000
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Du Musée Avenue is a 57-metre-long road in Montreal, Canada.
The street is bordered by the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, the Pa-
vilion of Canadian Art, the Claire and Marc Bourgie Pavilion and the
Michael and Renata Hornstein Pavilion for Peace. Although the street
is normally open to traffic, the edges of the street contain sculptures,
transforming it into a sculpture garden associated with the Museum
of Fine Arts.
Since 2012, the street has been closed annually from May through
to October to create a pedestrianised street, where an installation
extends the idea of the sculpture garden. Each year, a design team is
invited by the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts and the construction
budget is funded and commissioned by the City of Montreal in asso-
ciation with the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts. The first installation
was by Claude Cormier+ Associés, titled TOM (Temporary Overlay
Marker). Using 3500 utilitarian highway markers, the street was
transformed, inspired by the emotive qualities of passing through a
field of daisies.
2016: Dance Floor by Jean Verville Architects.
244 VARIOUS DESIGNERS
0 75 m
In 2013 Cormier experimented with TOMs II, this time drawing inspir-
ation from Van Gogh’s painting ‘A Field of Poppies’. Densifying the
number of TOMs to 6000, created an even more dramatic installation
than in 2012. The team utilised the slope of the street so that for
viewers looking up the street the silhouette of the backdrop of the
Mount Royal Park designed by Frederick Law Olmsted was incorpo-
rated into the scene of poppies.
Cormier continued his use of the TOM device in 2014, densifying
the installation further to 10,000 TOMs, which created a work of art
that reflected the craftsmanship of a Fabergé egg. This coincided with
an exhibition of work by the artist Fabergé in the Museum of Fine Arts.
Consisting of two-sided TOMs, the installation produced a different
visual effect when viewed from the top of the street or the bottom.
This encouraged visitors to walk up and down the street to engage
with the installation from different angles and vantage points.
In 2015 the installation was awarded to NIPPAYSAGE, titled Laby-
rinth. Visitors interacted with the maze, which wove both sides of the
2017: TOM IV by Claude Cormier.
TOM IV in 2017, showing the street transformed into a performance space during the temporary installation.
street together, playfully introducing visitors to the 22 permanent
works of art by Québécois, Canadian and international artists that can
be admired in the Museum’s Sculpture Garden. Breaking the orthog-
onal geometry of the labyrinth, large bright-orange platforms created
opportunities for performances and informal seats for people to relax
and take in the atmosphere that was created by closing the street to
cars and introducing the interactive art piece.
Dance Floor, installed in 2016, built on the interactivity of Labyrinth
to create a bold installation that invited visitors to dance across the
avenue. Designed by Jean Verville Architects, over 5000 footprints
created a striking installation, rendered in a shimmering metallic hue;
the pattern was reminiscent of hammered gold — a nod to the theme
of the Museum’s Pompeii exhibition that was running concurrently.
On the edge of the street, cubes were installed for seating or as ele-
vated dance platforms.
2017 saw the return of Claude Cormier’s TOM installation, this
time taking inspiration from the firework celebrations during Expo 67,
celebrating the 50th anniversary of this seminal event. Double-sided
TOMs swirl up and down the street in a spectrum of colours, with
bright-pink platforms placed throughout the street for seating, perch-
ing and incidental performances. The installation is largely something
to look at, but the transformation of the vehicular street to a public
space enables the space to host events and concerts, making the
installation something more than just a visual art piece.
DU MUSÉE AVENUE 245
 The street measures 57 × 6.2 metres and
is edged by soft grass areas and sculp-
57 m tures and tree planting. There is a signifi-
cant topographic change to the street
and a backdrop of Mount Royal Park.

6.2 m
The street is framed by the Pavilion of
Canadian Art, the Claire and Marc Bourgie
Pavilion and the Michael and Renata
Hornstein Pavilion for Peace. The street,
normally open to traffic, is closed in the
summer for the installation.

North

Illustrative plan of the 2017 TOM installation courtesy of Claude Cormier + Associés.

246 VARIOUS DESIGNERS

2012: TOM (3500 Temporary Overlay Markers) by
Claude Cormier, inspired by walking through fields of
daisies.
2013: TOM II (6000 Temporary Overlay Markers) by
Claude Cormier, drawing inspiration from van Gogh’s
‘Field of Poppies’ painting.
2014: TOM III (10,000 Temporary Overlay Markers) by
Claude Cormier drawing inspiration from a Fabrege
Egg.
2015: Labyrinth by NIPPAYSAGE inspired by Mount
Royal Park and the decorative texture of the trees.
2016: Dance Floor by Jean Verville Architects, the
gold colour inspired by the Pompei exhibit.
2017: TOM IV by Claude Cormier taking inspiration
from the fireworks as part of the 50th anniversary of
Expo 67.
2018: Moving Dunes by NÓS Architectes and produced
in collaboration with MU is inspired by From Africa
to the Americas: Face-to-face Picasso, Past and
Present being presented at the Montreal Museum
of Fine Arts.

DU MUSÉE AVENUE 247

BERGES DE SEINE
ARCHITECTS: Franklin Azzi Architects

LOCATION: Paris, France

COMPLETION: 2013
SIZE: 2.3 kilometres long and 4.5 hectares
CONTEXT: South bank of the River Seine opposite the
Tuileries Gardens and the Louvre
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer installation following
the pedestrianisation of the street
CONCEPT: Lille3000/ Didier Fusillier, Thierry Lesueur
DESIGN: Azzi Architecture/ Franklin Azzi, Anne Magdalena
PRODUCTION: Carat Sport/Olivier Bischoff, Julie Gavrel 0 250 m
GRAPHICS AND COMMUNICATION: Change Is Good/José
Albergaria, Rik Bas Backer
ORGANISATION: Artevia/Alain Thuleau, Pierre Grand,
Annette Poehlmann
BUDGET: € 35 million

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The promenade Berges de Seine is a public open space created by
the closure of a former highway that ran along the left bank of the
River Seine. The public promenade runs from the 7th arrondissement
of Paris between Pont de l’Alma and the Musée d’Orsay, passes under
four bridges, and sits across the river from the Tuileries Gardens near
the Louvre. In 2001, Paris began to experiment with the closure of
the highway by restricting traffic on Sundays, opening the promenade
for pedestrians, runners and families.
In 2008 the architect Franklin Azzi developed a vision for the
promenade, creating a series of rooms along the 2.3-kilometre length
of the promenade, all of which could be dismantled within 24 hours
should the Seine flood, which it did spectacularly in 2018. It offers
different experiences based on three themes: nature, sports and cul-
ture. A key feature of the promenade is the floating garden, which
was designed by Jean Christophe Choblet and includes hammocks,
sun loungers, incidental children’s play features and a Tetris-style con-
crete block-seating area overlooking the river, 60 trees and extensive
planting. Five tethered barges make up the gardens, which have been
secured to the bottom of the river. The garden sits at the western end
of the Berges de Seine; it bookends the space while a series of terrace
steps that bridge over the promenade linking Berges de Seine to the
Musée d’Orsay functions analogously at the eastern end of the prom-
enade.
The promenade has been designed as a series of rooms with a
powerful introduction and conclusion through the steps and the float-
ing garden respectively. Starting the journey at the eastern end of the
promenade, the terrace steps arc over to promenade so pedestrians
on Berges de Seine can continue along the promenade and exit onto
the upper promenade using the retained highway off-ramps to access
the Musée d’Orsay. The steps provide direct access to the museum,

Temporary games, art installations and painted graphic installations combine Along the length of the Berges de Seine, shipping containers titled ZZZZ have been
to create a playful and engaging 2.3-kilometre promenading experience along converted to flexible spaces that can be rented as offices, co-working hubs or for private
the south bank of the Seine. parties. Working with wood engineer Jean-Louis Vigier, Franklin Azzi designed a simple
stacked timber seat that is configured in various ways.

248 FRANKLIN AZZI ARCHITECTS

A view of the seating steps at the foot of the Musée d’Orsay with graphic installations on the road by Change Is Good.

BERGE249

while also creating a comfortable area to sit and relax and take in the
impressive ensemble of the river and the Tuileries Gardens opposite
the river. After passing under the steps, visitors enter the first room
of the promenade. The wide, open space is activated with a variety
of shapes, games and typography painted on the road. This includes
a large maze and a world map. A number of shipping containers have
been redesigned to include generous windows and seating areas,
and these can be rented as office spaces, co-working hubs and ven-
ues for parties. There is also an outdoor gym tucked against the ex-
isting retaining wall separating the upper and lower promenade. The
first of a series of seats made of stacked timber is placed here and
250 FRANKLIN AZZI ARCHITECTS
To create a continuous journey along the Berges de Seine and provide access to the
Musée d’Orsay, Franklin Azzi designed a stepped seating area that people on the
promenade can walk beneath. The steps are used casually for socialising and relax-
ing as well as for formal events such as concerts and outdoor cinema.
The artists of Change Is Good enlivened the road surface with patternation and a
scale comparison study with different animals.
continues along the full length of the promenade — a signature feature
of the project.
Passing under the Passerelle Léopold-Sédar-Senghor, an elegant
pedestrian bridge, the second room includes five tipis, which can be
reserved for meetings and gatherings. The floorscape has been articu-
lated with a variety of painted life-sized animals to show a compari-
son of scales with humans, a long-jump metric and artistic pattern
throughout. This room also features a 20-metre-long chalkboard as
a temporal sort of graffiti wall. Shipping containers converted into
cafes sit centrally in this room, with picnic tables with integrated
board games and deck-chairs overlooking the river. This room re-
mains flexible, showcasing a travelling fashion photography exhibi-
tion, for instance, when I visited. Public toilets and large bin stores
have been tucked against the existing wall and a more permanent
public toilet is integrated into the wall itself. The stacked timber
benches are set up as parcours and fitness stations.
Between Pont de la Concorde and Pont Alexandre III the prom-
enade is transformed into a hub of restaurants, bars and cafes with
a number of floating venues. The next significant experience is a play
area and climbing wall at the base of Pont des Invalides. Designed as
a bouldering wall, encouraging climbers to climb horizontally rather
than vertically, this feature is one of the most successful aspects of
the project, challenging adults and children alike through a sequence
of climbing holds and rope features. Berges de Seine concludes with
the verdant and effective floating gardens at Pont de l’Alma as a
significant punctuation point to the playful, varied and imaginative
spaces of Berges de Seine.
Temporary Tipis d’Anniversaire, or Birthday Tepees, can be hired out for parties.
A 20-metre long chalkboard allows anyone to be a street artist. The simple inclusion
of the chalkboard transforms the structural embankment wall into a feature of the
Berges de Seine.
Climbing play wall.
A 100 m running track designed and installed by Change Is Good is located near the
climbing wall play area. The Berges de Seine weaves play, sports, relaxation and
nature to create a place for all.
Hammocks on the floating gardens by Niki de Saint Phalle.
 The first stretch of the Berges de Seine is adjacent to the Musée d’Orsay.
Seating steps connect Berges de Seine to the museum, allowing people
to pass under the steps to continue walking along the river. Change Is
Good created a series of painted installations including a maze, a world
map and a life-size scale comparison that stretches from a whale to a
penguin. There are a number of shipping containers for flexible uses as
well as an open area for photo exhibitions. A 20-metre-long chalkboard
at the base of the embankment wall transforms this otherwise empty
structural wall into an ever-changing art mural.

or
gh
en
r-S

362 m
da
Sé
d-
ol
op
Lé
lle
re
se
s

m
Pa

30
Between Pont de la Concorde and
Pont Alexandre III, the Berges de
Seine is transformed as a food
hotspot, with floating restaurants
and takeaway food stalls with plenty
of seating and deckchairs. Two
floating restaurants — Rosa Bonheur

23
m
and Flow — provide a more formal
dining experience with lively views of
the activity along Berges de Seine.

405 m

or
n gh
- Se
ar
S éd
d-
ol
op
Lé
le
el
er
ss
Pa
de
or
nc
Co

Pont Alexandre III

la
e
td
n
Po

252 FRANKLIN AZZI ARCHITECTS

 At the end of Berges de Seine, where the promenade meets Pont de l’Alma, is one of
the main natural features of Berges de Seine called Jardins flottants (floating gardens)
bearing the name of the late artist Niki de Saint Phalle. The city wished to pay tribute
to the artist who passed away in 2002. The five interlocking barges each represent a
characteristic of the landscape along the banks of the Seine. This includes the central
island, which is mostly hard paving, the prairie island, planted with long grasses, the
apple orchard island and the wild and naturalistic island for the birds. The floating
gardens include hammocks, lounger seats, a stacked concrete seating area overlook-
ing the river and incidental play elements.

m
15

15 m
170 m

365 m

A small nook at the base of Pont des

Invalides transforms the embankment
wall into a climbing feature for children
25 m
and adults alike. Designed as a type of
bouldering wall, visitors traverse along
the wall using rock-climbing holds, cable

18.
bridges and ropes. The route is designed

5m
so that all ages can use the climbing
m
7.5

wall and transforms an otherwise dead

space into a highlight of the promenade.
There are two stand-alone play elements
for younger visitors. There is also a four-
111 m lane 100-metre dash graphic installation
designed by Change Is Good that passes
under Pont des Invalides.
Invalides

ma

North
l’Al
de
Pont des

t
Pon

BERGE 253
SCHOUWBURGPLEIN
(THEATRE SQUARE)
URBAN DESIGNERS: West 8
LOCATION: Rotterdam, Netherlands
COMPLETION: 1996
SIZE: 1.23 hectares
CONTEXT: Adjacent to the municipal theatre, concert hall with
restaurants and cafes
RECURRING OVERLAYS: Installations, yoga, sports days
BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
Schouwburgplein translates in English to Theatre Square. The space
sits at the heart of Rotterdam and is bordered by the city’s largest
cinema complex, the city theatre, the music hall and is close to Eur-
ope’s largest port. New restaurants and cafes now surround the
square, demonstrating the attraction and success of the space to
transform the area into a place of culture and entertainment. In the
words of the designer of West 8: ‘Nowhere else in the world is there
a square so relevant to its context.’
The space was realised between 1991 and 1996 and, since its
opening, it has hosted multiple installations, festivals and cultural cele-
brations. As I have noted in my introductory essay (The Rise of Flexible
Space, see p. 10 – 19), Rotterdam’s Theatre Square has had a profound
influence on the trajectory of the landscape architecture profession,
ushering in a new method for the design of public space that privileges
flexibility over fixity. The square may initially appear as an empty and
simple space, but in truth it is an extraordinary urban platform upon
The concept diagram by West 8 shows the layering of elements in the space and the
playful activation of the plaza with spotlights.
254 WEST 8
0 75 m
which the citizens of Rotterdam can express themselves and bring their
own programme and entertainment. The design celebrates the ‘void’
at the heart of the city that is the result of the 1985 Inner City Plan that
resulted in high-rise towers in this location. The space recognises the
possibilities of an open space with a full view of the city that lies wait-
ing for people, culture and creative prowess to bring life to the space.
The main open area of the square measures 138 × 36 metres and
up to 90 m wide at the southern edge, and is slightly raised above the
adjacent surface to strengthen the notion of the space as the ‘city
square’. The edges of the square are lit at night, giving the sense that
the square is floating above the city. The space is defined by the
theatre on the west side and 15-metre-high ventilation towers that
are finished with LED lighting to form a digital clock across three
towers. The striking feature of the space is the family of dynamic,
participant-powered (coin-operated) hydraulic cranes that animate
the space in a myriad of configurations and choreography. Reaching
The hydraulic cranes create spotlit pools of light on the surface.
A maze breathes new life into the space. The seating edge maintains the day-to-day use.
a maximum height of 26.5 metres, the cranes illuminate the square
with pools of light, transforming people simply walking through the
space into performers. The eastern edge of Theatre Square is the
comfortable edge of the site. South-facing and therefore receiving lots
of sunlight, its long bespoke benches provide visitors with various
ways of sitting and watching people move through the space. The
configuration of Theatre Square is predicated on the indeterminacy of
uses at different times of the day and how the movement of the sun
informs the uses of the square.
The ‘stage’ area is articulated with chevron timber paving, which
contrasts with the steel planks that run lengthwise across the site. A
modest but successfully proportioned fountain at the southern end of
the site provides activity and entertainment when the square reaches
its full use in the summer months. A long linear service trench runs
the length of the western edge of the square and electrical connec-
tions and mechanical anchoring points are incorporated into the
design of the raised platform, which allows the space to be easily
activated with public events such as the Latin carnival, dance music
parades, the World Harbour Days, the International Film Festival and
informal gatherings, markets and artistic installations.
The paradigm shift in conceptual design thinking that Theatre
Square has introduced is couched in the place-making ideas explored
by William H. Whyte, Jan Gehl and Fred Kent, who expound the idea
that if a space is provided that people can adjust to suit their own
individual uses, then they will. The square also demonstrates the
power of ephemerality through installations, temporary events and
pop-ups. The square provides spaces for people to experiment in, but
it is also actively programmed to showcase a variety of installations.
These in turn give the square a renewed appearance.
SCHOUWB 255
There are four kinetic cranes that are the
signature elements of the space. Capable of
reaching a maximum height of 26.5 metres,
the cranes are like curious transformers
overlooking the space and their form is
changed by coin-operated machines. By
night, they act as spotlights, changing
pedestrians into performers.

On the eastern edge of the space there

is a zone with customised seating and
15-metre-tall ventilation shafts for the
underground car park. These plinths
provide a digital clock for the space.

The main open portion of the square is

6m
95 × 36 metres and is paved in aluminium 48 m 95 m
planks with platforms of timber laid in a
chevron pattern. This portion of the
square provides an open, flexible space
overlooked by the seating edge and
illuminated by the kinetic cranes.

21 m

36 m
138 m

The open, flexible area of the square measures

138 × 90 metres and is up to 90 m wide at the
southern end. The eastern edge of the space
is a spectator area where people can sit and
watch people as performers on the plaza. A
band of play fountains is located at the south-
ern end of the square. There is a linear service
trench on the western edge of the site that
provides the space with a power supply for
temporary events.

90 m

Schouwburgplein fronts the Pathé

theatre in Rotterdam and was designed
by West 8 as an urban stage and a
space to celebrate the void in the city.

North

256 WEST 8
The Flying Carpet installation transforms Theatre Square and demon-
strates how temporary installations can dramatically change the appear-
ance of space to provide a sense of renewal and revitalisation. Other
overlay installations include Rising Water sound installation by Amund
Sjølie Sveen, which placed red triangular speakers in the space. Sports
also feature, with basketball and a dunk contest.

SCHOUWB 257
CENTRO ABIERTO
DE ACTIVIDADES
CIUDADANAS (CAAC)
ARCHITECTS: Paredes Pino Arquitectos

LOCATION: Córdoba, Spain

COMPLETION: 2010
SIZE: 1.2 hectares
CONTEXT: Adjacent to a hospital and high-speed railway station
RECURRING OVERLAY: Weekly Market
BUDGET: € 3.3 million

0 250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
The Centro Abierto de Actividades Ciudadanas or Open Resident’s
Activity Centre (CAAC) occupies a triangular site in Córdoba, Spain, that
measures 209 × 138 metres. The site sits in the context of new hous-
ing in close proximity to the Córdoba railway station, with connections
to Madrid. The space also fronts a new hospital. It is a space of leisure,
commerce and flexible use that acts as the urban heart of Córdoba
for celebrations and community gatherings.
Designed by Paredes Pino Arquitectos for the City of Córdoba, the
project consists of a number of raised circular canopies that vary in
height between four and seven metres to emulate the shadows cast
from a forest. The canopies vary in diameter from seven to 15 metres
so that as the sun moves across the sky, the shadows may overlap
providing complete shade and shelter from both inclement weather
and hot summer days to enable a market to take place on the site
twice a week. The tops of the canopies are brightly coloured, making
them visible from the adjacent residential buildings and turning the
space into a landmark. The underside of the canopies is reflective
white, which bounces light throughout the space. Rainwater is col-
lected by the canopies and passes through the support of each can-
opy, and this prevents intense rainfall on the surface of the market
square. Playful lighting is incorporated into the canopies to reduce
additional clutter and to throw colour and varying intensity of shad-
ows across the ground plane. While the canopies create a seemingly
interconnected roofscape, they meet the ground plane in such a way
that the space remains flexible.
The ground plane is designed as a giant activity board with games
set into the paving or painted on the surface. The ground plane also
includes articulations in the paving to situate the market stalls when
the surface is transformed from a place of movement and leisure to
a place of commerce and employment. The paving includes colourful
painted circles arranged in a large circle around the central support.
A patchwork of rectilinear planting of varying shades of colour, both
contrast with and complement the circular forms of the umbrella
canopies. The edge of the market square is raised to create a seating
edge and to establish a green planted perimeter to the space with
trees and understorey planting.

Colourful canopies, mimicking the shadow of a forest, provide cover for a weekly market.

258 PAREDES PINO ARQUITECTOS

The colourful canopies are the defining elements of the space. They are visible from nearby balconies and add to the character of the neighbourhood.

The CAAC exemplifies the approach of multiplying the ground, to create

a dramatic space that remains open-ended and flexible. Through this
flexibility the ground plane is multiplied and is, therefore, greater than
the sum of its parts. The elevated canopies dramatically situate the
project in the urban grain of Córdoba. However, the space remains
relatively unfixed, inhibited only by the structural columns of the can-
opies. The project also demonstrates the successful design of flexible
space to accommodate a fixed activity such as the market, while si-
multaneously designing for an unknown set of events and activities.
The movement of the sun and the animation of shadows across the
surface become part of the animation of the space. Devoid of any
formal programme or planned activity, the space is in a state of con-
stant change as the shadows dance and reconfigure across the sur-
face of the market square.

CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES CIUDADA

AuthenticatedNAS 259
The distinctive element at the CAAC is the use of circular
canopies that vary in height between four and seven
metres to emulate the shadows cast from a forest. The
canopies vary in diameter from seven to 15 metres and
display eight different colours. They collect rainwater
that is directed to the centre of each canopy into a
downpipe within the support column.

The CAAC plaza beneath the canopies has been

designed as a playboard with various games and
paving articulations that people can engage with
when the space is not being used by the market,
which happens twice a week. The canopy sup-
port columns are spaced circa 15 metres apart.
15
m
m

The square measures 137 × 208 metres in a triangu-

7
13

lar shape. The edges of the site are held by 208

m
raised planters in a geometry as if the canopies
were cut from the planters. The central area
is covered by raised canopies to create a shaded
area for the market.

The CAAC sits within a residential

area near a major rail hub. The
space fronts a recently completed
hospital.

North

260 PAREDES PINO ARQUITECTOS

The canopies themselves change with lighting and shadows. The surface beneath the canopies is a type of gameboard, which also hosts a weekly market.

CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES CIUDADA

AuthenticatedNAS 261
SCHLOSSPLATZ —
TEMPORARY
PARK AT HUMBOLDT
FORUM
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: relais Landschaftsarchitekten

LOCATION: Berlin, Germany

COMPLETION: 2009
SIZE: 4.7 hectares
CONTEXT: Historic palace site, adjacent
to Berlin Cathedral and edged by two canals
0 250 m
BUDGET: € 1.4 million

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT
As part of the construction of the Humboldt Forum, one of the most
striking and symbolic places of the Berlin city structure became a
public space for a limited time. During this transition phase, the design
aimed to create an open system in which a wide range of intermedi-
ate uses as well as construction and excavation activities could be
integrated. The scaffolding became legible through the wooden board-
walks, which functioned as spatial connection and tied the entire site
together as lines of circulation but also provided a platform for social-
ising. These boardwalks passed through the site, lightly touching the
ground to reinforce the temporary character of the project, while
revealing the archaeological excavations of the former palace.
These 2.5-metre-wide untreated European larch boardwalks con-
verted to a structure through which the ephemeral ground below
could be discovered and observed. The open-ended, unfinished qual-
ities of the conceptual approach were expressed in the use of transi-
tional low-cost materials, which corresponded to the flexible uses of
the site. The boardwalks acted as guides for understanding the site
in both its former state through the demolition of the Palace of the
Republic and its exposed foundations, and the future of the site with
the construction of the Humboldt Box exhibition space and the con-
struction of the underground station. After clearing the site and re-
moving the asphalt pavement, the area level was lowered so that the
boardwalks hovered about 30 centimetres above the ground. The
archaeological excavation areas were framed and developed by the
wooden platforms. Information panels were mounted along the
boardwalks and provided information on the history of the place, on
the demolition of the Palace of the Republic and the future plans of
the Humboldt Forum. The base of the former national monument was
accentuated as a raised terrace and was available for cultural activi-
ties. The stairs adjoining the cafe of the Kunsthalle were designed as
a wooden seating area, which invited passers-by to relax and linger.
The design addressed the perception of the contextual present
and the temporality of the site. Therefore, authentic relics such as the
exposed foundation walls of the city castle (Stadtschloss), the bound-
ing walls of the Palastwanne, i. e. the trough-like foundations of the
Palace, as well as the pedestals of the former Kaiser Wilhelm Nation-
al Monument were highlighted and conveyed the historic importance
of the precinct. Within the bounding walls, the topography was slight-

The temporary walkways gently touch the ground, reinforcing the temporary nature of the space.

262 RELAIS LANDSCHAFTSARCHITEKTEN

Illustrative plan of the temporary park with all three phases complete.
This sequence of images, from left to right, shows the three phases of the project.

ly inclined towards the River Spree and a play and sports lawn was The temporary activation of this important space safeguarded one of
laid, framed by the existing foundation walls of the palace. At this Berlin’s main historic locations as a place for the people to use and
point, the wooden boardwalks aggregated and consolidated to form enjoy. The design team created a bold simplicity that connected the
a generous sun deck and wooden promenade along the banks of the site to the surrounding buildings and the River Spree. The temporali-
Spree. The design, in this historically and culturally dense context, ty of the site was reinforced in the phased construction of the project,
aimed to reveal the hidden, establish a certain openness and com- where the design took into account the future construction of the
municate the broad cultural potential of the site for events, celebra- Humboldt Forum by Italian architect Franco Stella. This critically im-
tions and installations. portant building will occupy the entire site once complete.
In collaboration with the landscape architects, the project Sound-
track in Berlin was realised under the artistic direction of Georg Weck-
werth as part of the second phase of the building. These were alter-
nating computer-controlled sound works specially developed for this
location by international artists. On a length of approximately 50 me-
tres, several loudspeakers were integrated into the wooden bridge
adjoining the palace to the west, from which the multichannel com-
positions could be heard in temporally different intervals.

SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK AT

HUMBOLDT FOR AuthenticatedUM 263
The Temporäre Kunsthalle Berlin, a temporary exhibition
venue on the western side of the Schloßplatz held
a number of contemporary art exhibitions overlooking
the excavation of the former palace walls.

The temporary Humboldt Box building with a temporary art installation on the lawn.

264 RELAIS LANDSCHAFTSARCHITEKTEN

 45 m
The timber boardwalks ramped down
from the adjacent streets at a higher level
to connect people across the site. The
ramps also created places for people to
sit and relax on the edge of the board-
walks. These acted as edges to lawn

15
areas, defining the perimeter and con-

5m
tainment of a series of different-size lawn
spaces.

The overall temporary landscape

measured 206 × 185 metres, com-
prised of lawn spaces and boardwalks
with seating edges. On the western
m
side of the site there was a temporary 206
art gallery with terraced seating.

18
m5
77
m

There is a strong historic context

to the site, with archeological
excavations of the former palace
walls and views to the Berlin
Cathedral. There are two canals
to the east and west of the site.

North

SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK AT

HUMBOLDT FOR AuthenticatedUM 265
 268 – 270
DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN SUBLIME:
THE UNCANNY AS A PROGRAMMATIC
MOTIVATION IN NEW CITY PARKS
F. Philip Barash and Gina Ford

271 – 274
THE REDEVELOPMENT
OF KING’S CROSS, LONDON
Ken Trew

275 – 277
KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS
Kirsten Bauer

278 – 281
OPEN AND INVITATIONAL:
THE DESIGN APPROACH OF JAMES
CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS
Richard Kennedy

282 – 284
PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL CULTURE:
LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS — QUARTIER DES
SPECTACLES, MONTREAL
Daoust Lestage

285 – 287
INNOCENCE
Adriaan Geuze and Annemarie Kuijt

288 – 289
AFTERWORD: DESIGN, CURATION
AND IDENTITY
James Corner
DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN
SUBLIME: THE UNCANNY AS
A PROGRAMMATIC MOTIVATION
IN NEW CITY PARKS
The 21st century is experiencing a resurgence of investment in urban
public spaces. Once considered largely for tourists or for the expres-
sion of a crisp civic identity — like the verdant Boston Common or
Boston’s windswept ceremonial City Hall Plaza — city spaces are now
responding to new, unanticipated pressures of the great urban mi-
gration. Today, expectations of our city parks, plazas and streets are
much higher and demands much more diverse. Visiting families and
resident hipsters, retirees and students, street performers and French
bulldogs all vie for a place in today’s public realm. And all of them
must have a ‘thing to do’ or, perhaps more to the point we’ll raise
here, must be able to feel ‘at home’.
What typology fills these incongruent demands? A far cry from the
pastoral escape promised by Olmsted or the shaggy authenticity of
urban parks of a generation past, urban spaces espouse the park-
as-platform approach, unwittingly moving towards a banality of pro-
gramming formulas. For such spaces, success is a series of sympa-
thetic programmatic adjacencies: a dolled-up stage set. Just add
human actors. And yet, for all of its elaborate staging, the performance
lacks magic.
What of magic? Terms like sublime or awe-inspiring, wild or terri-
fying, sacred or magical have left our lexicon — they seem needlessly
florid to describe the everyday. Yet the spaces that are most mean-
ingful, the spaces that draw us back time after time, are precisely
those that exercise upon us an effect that is irreducible either to the
trade jargon of design or to bland entertainment programming. They
intend, rather, to have us tremble in desire, delight, disorientation.
They titillate us with expectation. They paralyse us with awe. They
release us into wonder.
The Riverwalk re-design connects people with the river on multiple levels and introduces new activity within the archways.
268 F. PHILIP BARASH AND GINA FORD
F. PHILIP BARASH AND GINA FORD
In a strict psychoanalytic sense, these kinds of spaces produce the
sensation of the ‘uncanny’. In contemporary American use, uncanny
means something like ‘discomforting’ or ‘disorienting’. Like most other
emotional responses, the uncanny has a wide range of intensities,
from mild surprise to terror. In German, as Freud observes in ‘The
Uncanny’, the word unheimlich comes from the root heimlich, mean-
ing familiar — or, literally, homely. Yet some uses of heimlich ascribe
to it a sinister and secretive cast: ‘Where public ventilation has to stop,
there heimlich machinations begin,’ he quotes. What appears com-
fortable and familiar in one context — like the domestic hearth — seems
like inappropriate ‘machination’ in another. These dual aspects of the
word — the one familiar, the other discomforting; the homely and the
unhomely — converge on a spatial metaphor of private and public
space.
In exploring our approach to recent urban park programming,
design and construction, we could easily focus on the physical con-
stituent parts of space design and use. We focus instead on the meta-
physical dimension: the ways that a deeper integration of familiar
programming ideas into a landscape can evoke this sense of ‘the
uncanny’. The following examples each bring the park user into closer
contact with experiences — of natural dynamics, engaged body expe-
riences and social collisions — that are simultaneously familiar and
jarring. These are spaces at the intersection of domestic familiarity
and its corollary: that ‘unhomely’ effect that the best public spaces
force us to encounter and embrace. They confront us with a pro-
gramme that engages senses and feelings, asking us to see things
anew, to rethink the normative experiences of traditionally defined
programmatic typologies.  
Chicago Riverwalk: a place to perch
in the Jetty.
Chicago Riverwalk: at the water’s
edge in the Marina.
Chicago Riverwalk: The Cove.

DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN SUBLIME 269


Smale Riverfront Park: inter-generational play.
Lawn on D: face-to-face with the ‘Other’.
AT THE WATER’S EDGE: CHICAGO RIVERWALK
The Chicago Riverwalk is a six-block stretch of new public realm
threaded along the main branch of the Chicago River. The site itself is
humbling in scale, a powerfully memorable canyon of space lined by
skyscrapers and punctuated by Chicago’s iconic bascule bridges. Its
identity is inextricably of the city.
Our charge was to build new land to create a continuous walkway.
In response we forewent previous precedents of high-banked edges,
standard-height handrails and fixed programme. Instead, the new pub-
lic walkway was set just about at the level of the river’s average eleva-
tion. No barrier separates Chicagoans and visitors from the primordial
fear and desire that water represents. Here, at the edge of city and
water, the Chicago River figures both as a safe, engineered product and
as an ancient natural force. Importantly, each block’s shape and pro-
gramme is inspired by a different river-based typology — the path leads,
for instance, past the Marina (a place to watch boats), the Cove (a place
to slide a kayak into the water) and the Jetty (a place to perch out over
the water and fish).
But none of these are spaces for passively viewing the river. Rather,
they invite physical engagement with water. In this way, ‘programme’
is nested in physical experience rather than a prescribed one. Walking
along the new blocks brings an exciting unfolding of new and diverse
270 F. PHILIP BARASH AND GINA FORD
encounters, from the densely packed din of social interaction to a
profoundly intimate closeness to the river surface. The presence of
constant change in this landscape, whether via seasonal change
or ever-changing flood dynamics, makes nature tangible in the midst
of a city.
SPACES OF RISK: CINCINNATI’S SMALE RIVERFRONT PARK
In the past three generations, spaces for play have become severely
constrained. High fences keep kids in. Soft surfaces guard from injury.
Standardised equipment is shaped for children of different ages — and
placed apart to minimise overlap between rambunctious older kids
and the younger ones. Seating at edges allows parents to watch over
their kids (or, more likely, get lost deep in their iPhones). To under-
stand how these risk-free spaces limit learning and imagination, we
recently launched a research initiative of play spaces as a programme
element in contemporary urban park design.
This research informed an approach to designing play spaces,
such as the Smale Riverfront Park in Cincinnati, that stand in strong
contrast to traditional play guidelines. At Smale, the space is bound-
less — no fence holds anyone in or keeps anyone out. Instead, planting
and natural elements are used to create many subtly protected
spaces. Play elements are designed to encourage collaboration. Some
features require, for instance, the cooperation of a team to activate
or simultaneous engagement to make the experience fun. Kids and
parents are encouraged to hide, play, splash, roll, jump, slide, climb
and get dirty (in real mud). It is a play space that encourages imagi-
nation and risk. It draws people from throughout the region who long
for the familiar — but forgotten — wonder of childhood.
FACING ‘OTHER’: THE LAWN ON D
Boston’s Lawn on D (see p. 122 – 133) is a temporary, experimental
landscape aimed at announcing and giving identity to a burgeoning
new urban corridor along Boston’s D Street. The Lawn is a testing
ground for use and programming strategy that will eventually inform
the design of a permanent event space associated with a planned
convention centre expansion. Conceived as a platform for innovation
and an armature for infinite programming, we designed the Lawn to
accommodate endless possibilities into 9.7 hectares. As the Lawn is
radically impermanent, its design was guided by cost-effective imple-
mentation, flexibility and ease of transformation.
Inspired by the humanistic principles of prospect — refuge and the
bombastic clarity of formal parterre gardens, the Lawn on D is a series
of wildly coloured geometric surfaces framed by a continuous planted
buffer. Hosting fire pits and food trucks, table games and ice mazes,
the plaza is a welcoming place for chance encounters and unexpected
interactions. Whether watching Jaws from a life-raft, playing bocce
with friends or touching giant glowing inflatable bunnies, visitors to the
lawn are treated to an ever-changing array of experiences. In com-
munion with a throng of strangers from throughout the city, gathered
in the shadows of outsized bunnies, it is a kind of magic — greater than
the sum of its programmatic parts.
Embedded in these projects — beyond a critique of unquestioned
or banal programme formulas or predestined design solutions — are
glimpses of the uncanny. In a cultural context of internet rabbit holes,
social media ‘echo chambers’ and screen-time quotas, we are seeking
to shake some part of our park users’ psyches, waking them to experi-
ences both familiar and disruptive. These are not parks to escape the
city. These are not knolls to take a nap. These are not homey spaces.
No: these are places to meet strange experiences and strangers,
places where we find ourselves talking about uncomfortable topics
or, at least, thinking about them. These are places to be present, to
feel and to leave having been woken up.     
THE REDEVELOPMENT
OF KING’S CROSS, LONDON
INTRODUCTION
The King’s Cross (KX) development site occupies 57 hectares of re-
dundant and derelict railway land to the north of KX and St Pancras
stations. Goods traffic declined and ceased altogether in the 1950s
as road transport replaced rail. Access to the railway lands remained
restricted and the area became associated with transitional land uses
and with crime, including prostitution and drugs. Hampered by plan-
ning blight, the transformation of KX finally became possible by the
decision in 2004 to use St Pancras station as the London terminus for
Eurostar. Further impetus was provided by the selection of nearby
Stratford in East London as the location for the 2012 London Olympics
and this also unlocked funding for the redevelopment of King’s Cross
station.
APPROACH
Argent were selected in 2000 to work with the landowners to form a
partnership to deliver the regeneration of the site. Argent’s successful
development at Brindleyplace in Birmingham had demonstrated the
importance of the public realm and estate management in creating
and enhancing places with a distinctive and enduring quality. This
philosophy of a public realm-led approach to development was de-
veloped on a much larger scale at KX.
… [I]t is the framework of the public realm, the streets and the
squares, the places and the parks, which are the lasting legacy of
development on this scale… The framework engenders connec-
tivity both within and beyond the masterplan site, providing ac-
cessibility from and into the areas round, for both public transport
and pedestrians. Without this interaction, the new ‘set piece’
open spaces within the development itself would be starved of
the vital transfusion of people which can bring them alive, and
transform them from spaces into places …
David Partridge, Managing Partner, Argent
The strategy for KX recognised the importance of attracting people in
order to bring vitality and purpose to urban spaces. Generating the
footfall needed to sustain the early food and beverage outlets, was a
commercial necessity too. The wider strategy to increase visitor num-
bers and change perceptions about KX involved running events and
the ‘activation’ of spaces.
The need to bring more people to the site was also partly driven
by the approach to the sequence of construction. The streets and
square were to be built first to provide the context and infrastructure
for individual plots and, proportionally, the intention was that there
would always be more public realm than occupied buildings. Visitors
were crucial to enliven the public squares while the on-site population
of KX built up. Visitor numbers provided an impression of what it would
be like to live and work at KX on completion to potential residential
KEN TREW
and office occupiers and explains why the ‘invigoration’ of the site
was funded as a marketing cost!
Feedback from extensive public consultation endorsed the view
that these ‘soft’ place-making issues were seen as equally important
to the structure of the public realm. After years of neglect there was
pressure to open up the site quickly and to create a clean and safe
environment for local people passing through as well as tenants and
visitors. Argent’s response was to prioritise the early infrastructure
works and build Granary Square, the central open space and access
to it from the stations via King’s Boulevard. This strategy had a very
practical basis in the need to provide access for the 4500 staff and
students of the University of the Arts London (UAL) by September 2011,
but it was also designed to bring people into the heart of the scheme
at the earliest opportunity. They would then be able to see what the
new KX was going to be like and enjoy the amenities on offer.
With such a large, complex and lengthy development, it was im-
portant to deliver a public realm with ‘timeless’ qualities that would
endure long into the future. This meant allocating sufficient resources
to the long-term maintenance of the estate and avoiding designs that
were overly fashionable and therefore likely to be short-lived in their
appeal. Promoting active enjoyment of the main squares and routes
was the priority; the public realm was designed as a neutral back-
ground, a stage, to encourage public activity and support a changing
programme of events to attract and entertain.
CURTAIN UP
Planning consent was given in December 2006 and work started on
site in 2007. As construction progressed, preparations were made to
open the first part of the estate to the public. These included making
arrangements for cleaning, litter collection, security, servicing, events
and public art. Having been, as it were, in sole possession of the site
since 2000, it was an odd sensation to think about sharing it with
other people. Would they like it? Had we made the right choices?
At this stage Argent had committed to the design of the public
realm, but there were still decisions to be made about the ways in
which it was to be brought to life. Argent opted to commission public
art through a series of three-year fixed-term commissions. The first
curators (2012–15) were Michael Pinsky and Stéphanie Delcroix, who
developed the RELAY programme for KX. An Advisory Panel was es-
tablished to oversee the selection of curators, artists and installations
to ensure a consistent approach to providing high quality of art at KX.
The initial events programme was also curated by an external
team (We Are Groundbreaking) but was later brought in-house by
Argent, supported by Produce UK. The aim was to create ambassa-
dors for KX, by providing them with a great experience so that they
would tell our story for us: the message was ‘KX is changing, come
and see’. The initial events were designed to celebrate construction
milestones, inviting the (1000+) development team of consultants,
THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S
AuthenticatedCROSS 271

contractors and local stakeholders. A programme followed aimed at
tenants, local families and visitors, which included a short-term res-
taurant in an old petrol-filling station, a temporary sports pitch and
music events in Granary Square. Events were selected for their rele-
vance to the KX story and their contribution to London-wide festivals
such as the Chelsea Fringe, the London Olympics and the growing
range of national and international architectural tours.
GRANARY SQUARE AND THE FOUNTAINS,
OPENING IN JUNE 2012
Granary Square was the first and largest area of public realm to be
built at KX. The layout of the square was largely determined by its
contribution to the setting of the listed Granary building and its past
use as a canal basin (and latterly as a storage yard). The fountains
were acknowledged to be a modern interpretation of the old canal
basin and created a focal point to the square (and the development
272 KEN TREW
Granary Square opened in June 2012
with dancers in the fountains heralding
what would be the first of a series of
events that would put King’s Cross on the
cultural map of London.
Granary Square in 2007 as site clearance
began. After rail uses ceased in the
1950s, the site had become a road
freight depot.
as a whole). Some minor changes were incorporated in the final
design: further trees were added at the periphery to green up the
canal frontage and large timber benches and bistro chairs were also
introduced to increase seating numbers. The white fountain lights
were upgraded to colour to enhance the display and the large stone
sculptures were redesigned by Ian McChesney.
When Granary Square officially opened to the public in June 2012,
it hosted a range of events including the reception of the Olympic
torch by barge from Regent’s Canal. The telecasting of Andy Murray’s
Olympic tennis success in 2013 (complete with deckchairs) attracted
more than 3000 people and demonstrated the potential of the space
as a stage for large events. From the beginning, the square was suc-
cessful in attracting a wide range of visitors and local families, par-
ticularly in the summer when the majority of the events of all sizes
and attractions were held. Despite some initial apprehension about
what behaviour was and was not permitted, soon both children and
dogs literally took the plunge and the fountains became an urban

beach. Families would arrive early with their towels and lunchboxes
to secure the best sites for the day. The south-facing steps down to
the canal were also a hit with sun-seekers and those who just want-
ed to watch the boats go by.
The granite seating was a little uncomfortable and artificial turf
was laid on the steps as an experiment in spring 2013, adding a
welcome layer of green to the square. This seasonal clothing of the
steps is now repeated annually from the beginning of spring to the
end of autumn, helping to mark the seasons at KX. It has also proved
to be the catalyst for curating the steps as a location for short, tem-
porary displays. In December 2014, Winter Sun, a demountable cov-
ered stage was commissioned to accommodate a cafe/bar with live
music. It was located in the wooded area within the Square and was
subsequently moved to Lewis Cubitt Square where it has been adapt-
ed as a stage for music and dance with seating provided.
LEWIS CUBITT SQUARE, OPENING IN 2014
Due to the success of Granary Square as a meeting place and urban
‘water park’, a decision was taken to reduce the number of events
there in order to avoid closing the fountains during the summer. As a
result, the design for Lewis Cubitt Square was altered to cater for
events hosting up to 2000 people. The west-facing side of the square
incorporates a linear arrangement of water jets and a buffer of plant-
ing between the square and the adjacent road. The large paved area
provides maximum flexibility for hosting events and has been used
for everything from Welsh beer festivals to fashion shows and a Di-
wali festival. The design of the building(s) on the eastern side of the
square is still to be finalised, but the intention is that it will incorporate
some degree of noise protection for the new canal-side flats that are
nearing completion. In the meantime, the events programme for the
square has been modified to take account of potential impacts on
residents.
The Identified Flying Object (commonly known as The
Birdcage) by Jacques Rival was the first piece of public
art at King’s Cross and is now located adjacent to King’s
Cross station. The swing inside the structure is popular
with all age groups.
KERB is a street food collective that has been involved
with King’s Cross since 2012. The stalls are still to be
found on King’s Boulevard, their original home, but now
have a wider role in supporting functions and events
across the site.
THE EVENTS PROGRAMME
The physical development of KX has been matched by growth in
events and marketing along with a retail strategy that encourages
both short- and long-term leases favouring a ‘quirky’ mix of interna-
tional and independent retailers. Together these strands have blend-
ed to create a strong identity for KX as a place and as a ‘destination’.
Between 2013 and 2016 the number of events increased from 67
to 138 per year with around 130,000 attending per annum. The cost
of a two-day weekend festival can range from a few thousand pounds
(GBP) with external partners/sponsors for the KX estate, up to £250,000
for the estate fully funding the event and delivering the appropriate
pan-London/national marketing. This programme is managed by one
full-time member of staff with support from the estate management
team in licensing events and dealing with issues including access,
The box-headed lime trees in Granary Square provide welcome
shade in the summer and a more intimate scale within the main
square. The loose bistro chairs and tables contrast with the formal
seating around the fountains and are in demand for relaxing and
impromptu business meetings.
THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S
AuthenticatedCROSS 273

safety and insurance. Events are now being targetted towards a spe-
cific KX audience with input from the in-house marketing team that
has doubled in five years from five to ten. Their input includes dedicat-
ed PR, marketing and design. Social media is an important part of the
toolkit the marketing team uses to promote events at KX; other digital
elements include regular newsletters and a constantly updated web-
site with engaging ways to get involved. Visitor numbers have in-
creased steadily from five million in 2014 with ten million expected for
2017, exceeding projections. On completion, it is anticipated that there
will be about 42,000 people living and working at KX and up to 20
million visitors a year. The events programme will continue but prob-
ably on a smaller scale; and the ambition is that the developer’s con-
tributions to the events programme will be matched by those of other
partners and tenants wanting to promote ‘their KX’.
There is a general perception based on press coverage and cus-
tomer feedback that events at KX are much more than a marketing
tool and have become an intrinsic part of its identity, as important as
the physical layout of the public realm and buildings. Other regener-
274 KEN TREW
The Varini art installation was designed to be viewed from
the viewing platform overlooking Granary Square. At street
level, the shapes seemed to be randomly placed, but from
an observation point at the junction of King’s Boulevard and
Goods Way, the geometric forms magically came together.
It was only from this one viewpoint that you could see the
whole picture.
Lewis Cubitt Square can host up to 2000 people for large
events. The green edge provides seating and shade and
is perforated to provide links between the square and the
adjacent Stable Street.
Lewis Cubitt Park lies immediately to the north of the square
and is occasionally used to provide additional capacity for
larger events. The first stage of the park included a temporary
public art project (now removed) called Of Soil and Water.
It consisted of a pond for swimming, using naturally filtered
water, and was created by Ooze Architects and artist Marjet-
ica Potrč.
ation projects in the UK have adopted a similar approach, with varying
degrees of success. However, this approach should not be seen as a
panacea for poor masterplanning and place-making. The events need
to have some basis in the ‘genius loci’ or spirit of the place, its histo-
ry and its character. In this respect KX has benefitted from an authen-
tic heritage of film-making, nightclubs and ‘alternative’ lifestyles of
people who lived in and used the area from the 1960s to the 1980s.
These times are still fondly remembered. The current events pro-
gramme has built on that image of KX as being different to other parts
of London, a place to meet, relax and enjoy yourself.
While KX has enjoyed a successful start, there is more to come,
as the final buildings and gardens are completed and the new retail
hub at the Coal Drops Yard opens in 2018. It will then be possible to
see the full benefits of the physical and social strategies that have
shaped the development and delivered the place-making principles
that are now synonymous with KX.
KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT
STUDIOS
Over the last quarter of a century, a number of large-scale place-mak-
ing projects have been pivotal in transforming the life of Australia’s
major cities. Among them are: the post-Expo South Bank develop-
ment in Brisbane by Media 5 and Denton Corker Marshall (1992); the
Federation Square cultural precinct in Melbourne by Lab Architecture
Studio and karres+brands landscape architects (2003); Darling Quar-
ter in Sydney by fjmt architects and ASPECT Studios (2011); Victoria
Square/Tarndanyangga in Adelaide by T.C.L landscape architects and
Tonkin Zulaikha Greer (2014); and Yagan Square in Perth by Lyons,
iredale pedersen hook, and ASPECT Studios (2018). The place-mak-
ing strategies used in these projects span the ever-shifting space
between prescribed or set activation and ephemeral, curated activa-
tion. Commerce, cultural facilities, outdoor dining, play, community
consultation and active event curation are all part of the toolbox.
South Bank initially used artificial beaches, play spaces, canals and
its butterfly aviary (now gone) and anchored these with retail and
cultural facilities and more traditional promenades and streets. Fed-
eration Square carved a traditional Italian-style piazza out of a cultur-
al precinct, using its complex topographic slope as a highly perform-
ative link that works as an outdoor amphitheatre featuring a stage
and public screen, with few explicit design elements apart from seat-
ing edges and places for outdoor dining. Flexibility, liberation in the
play of the slope, and the views out to the city beyond combine with
highly curated events by private-public management to activate the
space. Darling Quarter combines intricate, large-scale water play with
public life and retail. Tarndanyangga combines modernity and First
Peoples’ place in an event-driven approach. Yagan Square will bring
leisure, cultural, retail and indigenous values into one place.
Activation of space and place-making is the process of creating
meaningful and layered places, bringing together and expressing the
essential qualities of place, the landscape, its history, social rituals
and cultural significance into the design of place. It aims to promote
human interaction, connection to the street, and to allow people to
participate in their public domain. The most successful examples of
place-making operate and succeed on a number of levels and benefit
ASPECT Studio use
approaches to
activation in public
spaces. STRUCTURED ROOMS FOR ACTIVATION
KIRSTEN BAUER
from a highly collaborative design process, including artists, architects,
local experts and end users of a place — the public. Successful place-
making also extends beyond the physical design and delivery and
integrates long-lasting ‘place management’ and ongoing activation
through curated events. The following are important considerations
for successful place-making which underpin ASPECT’s approach to
public activation.
PUBLIC DEMOCRATIC LIFE: To ensure public enjoyment is not contin-
gent on private commerce, while recognising the beneficial synergies
between public life and commercial activity. Equity and full access are
essential in the public realm.
THE RIGHT SCALE is critical.
FIXED VERSUS FLEXIBLE ACTIVATION: Every space needs its own
particular solution with regard to prescribed activation elements such
as play spaces, fitness equipment, stage, sports courts and furniture
on the one hand and flexible, less prescribed places such as lawns,
walkways and parkland.
SOFT AND HARD INFRASTRUCTURE: Soft infrastructure means
place-programming features and events (such as pop-up stores and
festivals); it works in tandem with the hard infrastructure such as
seating and spatial arrangement.
BEWARE OF OVER-ACTIVATION: Not all places need more activation.
The success of a public space should not depend solely on pro-
grammed activation.
ROOMS VERSUS OVERLAY: Context and functional ambition deter-
mine which strategy to use. Segmenting activation into more defined
‘rooms’ works for activities that need some separation and ensure
choice, while overlapping activation is good for creating inter-age and
broader social interactions.
OVERLAY OF PROGRAM FOR ACTIVATION TEMPORARY INSERTION OF ACTIVATION
KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS 275

COMMUNITY ACTIVATION: Community buy-in is critical; the hope is
that the community self-generates events and programmes for the
place.
POP-UPS: Pop-ups offer opportunities to experiment with activation
to see ‘what works’ and to activate spaces otherwise vacant for long
periods of time. However, quality investment in permanent public
spaces cannot be offset by pop-ups, and initial investment may over-
run eventual social benefit.
EXPLICIT ACTIVATION: Highly graphic and visible design can empha-
sise the changing point in the history of the landscape where design
is explicitly intended to activate a space.
CRAFTED INTIMACY: Small, well-crafted moments can serve to con-
nect the community to the history of a site and neighbourhood in
order to enable intimate and meaningful experiences.
Some key projects illustrate our approach to activation.
THE GOODS LINE, SYDNEY (see p. 214 – 217)
A series of urban rooms, connected along a former railway line, each
is an open and flexible space or has a prescribed activation element.
The types of activation are driven by synergy with adjacent land use,
such as education (with the provision of study space) or street (with
276 KIRSTEN BAUER
The Goods Line. A series of urban rooms, with both fixed
and flexible activation.
Promenade space is open, but framed to hold multiple
events at Junction Place.
public steps and amphitheatre). The overt graphic colour of yellow is
used to identify and mark activities such as seating, communal table,
fitness areas and ping pong.
JUNCTION PLACE, WODONGA
A series of large-scale urban rooms connected along a former railway
line. The rooms, a quite large square and a park are comprised in turn
of smaller rooms of activity. The key activation spaces are the very
long promenades designed for weekly farmers’ markets and outdoor
dining that spills from the repurposed historic buildings. When not
activated by events, the smaller, more intimately crafted elements
connect to history and enable more casual public life.
HARTS MILL, ADELAIDE
A catalyst to bring new activities to a disused dock area, a heritage
building has been repurposed as a gallery and community space and
a new play and market space. The explicit forging of a new identity
was made physically evident through the use of the former flour mill
processes in the play space design.
BOX HILL GARDENS MULTI-PURPOSE SPACE, MELBOURNE
A new recreation space with multiple sport programmes laid over
two landscape terraces inserts contemporary social and recreation
activities into a historic park. The overlaying of sporting activities such
as basketball, cricket, netball, tennis and badminton brings different
social and age groups together. The graphic nature of the play surface
Connection between industrial process of heritage
building and play space.
Box Hill Gardens multi purpose space. Physical and
graphic expression of overlay of programme.
Highpoint Shopping Centre, Harts Mill, Adelaide. Move-
able play items, furniture and table-tennis tables provide
visitors with opportunities for free activities.

distinguishes it from traditional green parkland and the more gentle
activities found there.
HIGHPOINT SHOPPING CENTRE, MELBOURNE
This pop-up project to enliven an unpopular entry space at a large-
scale shopping mall was instigated by the mall owner to provide more
diversity of use by the local community and to test the potential to
fully redesign the forecourt. The design provides free activities, en-
courages the community to stay and play, and the use of cheap and
easy-to-maintain-and-install materials avoids over-investment.
DOCK SQUARE TEMPORARY ACTIVATION SPACE, MELBOURNE
A pop-up developed as part of a larger urban-precinct high-rise
development, this project will run for five years. It was driven by
community desire for more active recreation, an urban gym and a
space for dogs. The project keeps costs and energy use to a moderate
level by reusing materials from the precinct construction process. The
design elements may be reused and relocated.
DANDENONG POP-UP PARK, MELBOURNE
This semi-permanent pop-up park is a connector between a long-term
urban regeneration programme and a main train station, partnered
with social enterprise to build and manage the park. Local council and
community groups run the space, and it has become a very popular
football field with young people from new immigrant communities.

KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS 277

OPEN AND INVITATIONAL: RICHARD KENNEDY

THE DESIGN APPROACH

OF JAMES CORNER FIELD
OPERATIONS

It is a great time to live in cities. Life happens in the city — it is where

the action is! And much of the life in cities takes place in the public
realm. We do appear to be in a period of renewed optimism involving
urban parks and public spaces: there is a remarkable array of exciting
and vibrant new parks around the world — projects that are more
inventive, well-crafted and diverse than at any previous point in his-
tory. More than ever, parks are understood as stages where public
life can be played out — open, flexible and engaging spaces for coming
together; dramatic spaces for social theatre; recreational spaces for
play, health and well-being; ecological spaces improving the quality
of water, air, food and natural habitat; and regenerative spaces con-
tributing to the economic competitiveness of their cities. Beautifully
designed public spaces do indeed become living platforms around
which people interact and commingle, observe and entertain, play
and simply take in the scene.
In other words, great design matters. The art of design and place-
making requires imagination and invention to create settings that
invite and inspire diverse and vibrant forms of public activity and in-
teraction. Great parks are sufficiently ‘open‘ to flexibly accommodate
a wide variety of programmed events, from recreation and play, food
markets and festivals, concerts and performances to arts, culture and

The High Line:

Food carts and open-air cafe in the semi-enclosed
Chelsea Market Passage.
Ever-surprising art interventions at the Billboard.
Invitational seating terraces and viewing frame at the
Sunken Overlook.
Interactive and playful transformation of the High Line’s
structure at the Pershing Square Beams.

278 RICHARD KENNEDY

The Navy Yard Central Green:
The framework for organising play consists of two devices: first, a 1000-foot-long
meandering arbour planted with native woody trees and vines to create a shaded path-
way and unifying element; second, a series of six outdoor ‘play nests’ arranged
on alternating sides of the arbour.

education. At the same time these parks must be sufficiently inviting,

offering settings and features that are welcoming and appealing to a
broad spectrum of the public on ordinary, unprogrammed days.
These notions of ‘openness’ and ‘invitation’ form the basis of
much of our design work at James Corner Field Operations. We can
point to several recent projects that utilise well-organised and imag-
inative frameworks that equally accommodate ‘openness’ — flexible
spaces to support a diverse and evolving calendar of organised and
improvised programmes throughout the year — and ‘invitations’.
These offer intimate spaces and features that welcome a diversity of Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’s South Park Plaza:
use and experience, and support everyday use and enjoyment. Stage, terraces and park overlook at the Theatre Room, designed in
collaboration with LDA Design.

THE HIGH LINE

While much has been written about the history, inception and design
of the High Line in Manhattan, it is the vibrancy of its life and the di-
versity of activity that continues to surprise and astound. The mosaic
of uses — from casual to curated — is extraordinary, and the park’s
intense activity and popularity has exceeded everyone’s expectations.
The design language and framework of the High Line can be under-
stood most simply as a systematic promenade, meandering through
highly diverse plantings, and punctuated with opportunistic and
­theatrical ‘stages’. These include the Sundeck and Water Feature, the
10th Avenue Square and Sunken Overlook, the West 23rd Street
Lawn, the Woodland Flyover, the 12th Avenue Seating Steps — all
aiming to heighten the experience of being above the city at that
particular place at that particular time.
Since the opening of Phase 1 in 2009, the Friends of the High
Line have cultivated an ever-expanding and ever-adapting culture of
­programming at the park. This ranges from cultural events involving
performances; community programmes focused on wellness, fitness
and play; youth programmes produced by local teens focused on arts,
culture, horticulture and social equity; and an inspiring public art
­programme incorporating site-specific commissions, performances,
video programmes and billboard interventions. With the Friends’
c­ uratorial approach to programming and their commitment to ex-
panding their invitations through intensive outreach across the city,
the vibrancy of use and diversity of experience on the High Line will
only continue to exceed expectations.
THE NAVY YARD CENTRAL GREEN
Once a collection of wetlands and meadows at the centre of a massive
Naval Facility, the 2.2-hectares Central Green is now the physical cen-
tre of the Navy Yard in Philadelphia, one of the city’s most innovative
and progressive commercial developments and burgeoning neigh-
bourhoods. The design can be understood as a framework for collect­
ive activity. Recognising the trend in 21st-century workplaces to pro-
vide shared amenities — collective spaces for collaboration, health and
wellness, or eating and drinking — the design organises a variety of
attractions and features to encourage outdoor activity and interaction
within and for the entire campus.
A framework of nested ‘rings’ organises the site’s circulation
and shapes a unique collection of active and passive spaces. Taken
on its own, the framework of rings is visibly powerful — the striking

OPEN AND INVITATIONAL 279


geometry is meant to draw people outdoors and into the shared
space. A closer reading of the framework reveals a rich collection of
settings and attractions: some spaces are open, flexible and informal
(the open lawn, flowering meadows and loose seating), while others
are invitations for activity and play (a hammock grove, an outdoor
conference room, bocce courts, games tables, fitness stations and an
outdoor amphitheatre). The flexibility of the framework is twofold: the
arrangement of spaces accommodates a broad set of activities and
experiences for today’s workplace tenants with specific elements
being interchangeable and adaptive as needs, preferences and trends
evolve over time.
SHELBY FARMS PARK’S WOODLAND DISCOVERY
PLAYGROUND
In an effort to expedite implementation of the Shelby Farms Park
Masterplan, the Shelby Farms Park Conservancy supported a number
of early projects that had a significant impact on subsequent fund-
raising and public confidence. The first of these projects was the
Woodland Discovery Playground — a 0.8-hectare playground at the
centre of the park. This early investment in play was an effort to fore-
ground inclusivity and family-oriented activity, while cultivating
healthy development of children’s physical and social well-being.
The framework for organising play consists of two devices: first,
a 1000-foot-long meandering arbour planted with native woody trees
and vines to create a shaded pathway and unifying element; second,
a series of six outdoor ‘play nests’ arranged on alternating sides of
the arbour. Each nest is topographically shaped and scallopped into
circular hollows, and each offers a rich variety of invitations to play
that incrementally increase in challenge, adventure and risk across
the space: an open lawn, a sand nest, a slide nest, a swing nest and
a climbing nest, all inviting outdoor discovery and sensory experienc-
es, which specifically target children of different ages, developmental
abilities and interests. While programmatically focused on play, the
playground is still fundamentally open and flexible, as each visit offers
new possibilities to slide, climb, run, scramble, swing, build, find and
discover.
280 RICHARD KENNEDY
Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’s South
Park Plaza:
The interactive water labyrinth as the
centrepiece of the Event Room, designed
in collaboration with LDA Design and
Fountain Workshop.
QUEEN ELIZABETH OLYMPIC PARK’S SOUTH PARK PLAZA
Prior to the 2012 Olympic Games, the Lower Lea Valley in the heart
of East London had become one of London’s most physically frag-
mented, environmentally compromised and socially deprived districts.
The 2012 Olympics reversed this pattern, allowing the remarkably
diverse communities surrounding Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park to
become the beneficiaries of this significant urban transformation and
investment. As the centrepiece of the wider Olympic parklands; as a
counterpoint to the nature-oriented, northern portion of the park; and
as an inviting and inclusive park for the communities of East London,
James Corner Field Operations conceived the South Park Plaza as a
21st-century ‘pleasure garden’. In this way, the Plaza would build
upon London’s great tradition of pleasure gardens, from Vauxhall and
Marylebone to Ranelagh and Cremorne — all destination parks re-
nowned for their beautiful landscapes, cultural attractions, mystery,
dreaminess, surprise and fun.
The South Plaza is organised around a clear geometrical frame-
work of connections, spaces and features. The Arc Promenade serves
as the main armature along which all spaces are organised. A series
of ‘event platforms’ carved out of tall meadow plantings support the
primary event and attraction spaces. The design is clearly legible,
playful and varied, while at the same time capable of supporting a
diverse range of uses. This theatrical event site, set within a larger
network of ecological green systems, waterways and world-class
attractions, offers ‘something for everyone’. East London residents,
regional visitors or international tourists can all enjoy the scenic and
social on a daily basis, and eventful and active when programmed.
Today, the sheer spectacle of myriad visitors from all walks of life,
strolling, sitting, bicycling, playing, climbing, performing, acting out
and just taking in the scene and place, is extraordinary.
CLEVELAND’S PUBLIC SQUARE
Opened in June 2016, the 2.4-hectare Public Square at the centre of
downtown Cleveland dramatically reconfigures once fragmented
quadrants into a newly unified whole. The design bestows a bold and
iconic new identity to the Square, while addressing key challenges of
Cleveland’s Public Square:
The Fountain Plaza with its mirror pool
and jets that can be turned off to create
an open and flexible Square.
The flexible Event Lawn with its elevated
corners that tilt towards the sun and
skyline views.

unification, clarification and activation. The design organises space ‘event platforms’ of Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’s South Plaza; and
and activity through three unifying moves: first, the ‘perimeter gar- the ‘civic rooms’ of Cleveland’s Public Square have all become one of
dens’ frame the outer edge and invite visitors into the Square’s inte- the signature spaces of their cities, populated and activated by their
rior with seating and green, tactile and seasonal plantings; second, diverse communities and representative of the optimistic turn towards
the ‘ribbon promenade’ is the primary line of movement through the the renewed potential of parks for the 21st-century city.
Square, linking all the spaces and tying the corners to the centre; and,
third, the ‘civic rooms’ — the Event Lawn and Fountain Plaza — that
serve as the large-scale, flexible spaces that accommodate activity
and use throughout the year. Taken as a whole, the Square offers
experiences small and large — intimate and delightful for the everyday
and generous and accommodating for spectacle and events.
Each of these five parks offers a different framework for organising
spaces to invite a diversity of use and experience, whether for calm,
play or theatre — while also flexibly accommodating new and different
activities and forms of use over time. The ‘stages’ of the High Line; the
‘rings’ of the Navy Yard Central Green; the arbour and ‘nests’ of Shel-
by Farms Woodland Discovery Playground; the ‘promenade’ and

OPEN AND
INVITATIO AuthenticatedNAL 281
PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL DAOUST LESTAGE

CULTURE: LA PLACE DES

FESTIVALS — QUARTIER DES
SPECTACLES, MONTREAL

Creating a successful public realm requires more than the construc-

tion of high-quality spaces. It requires active participation by the com-
munity. In the best urban spaces, these two components should
interact to produce a stronger ensemble: uniting permanent and
ephemeral culture.
Permanent culture is manifested in the built forms of public space.
Designing for these sites requires intertwining multiple layers to cap-
ture the complexity of the civic realm. From urban design, landscape,
lighting and architecture, down to industrial design, graphics, kinetic
installations and signature pieces of artwork, all elements must con-
tribute to a well-proportioned and comfortable environment, particu-
larly at the pedestrian scale. At the conceptual level, the overarching
narrative for the design of these spaces should draw upon the genius
loci, in order to root the design to its context. Even more important in
this era of globalization, public spaces are most successful when they
are forged from the history and traditions of a specific place.
Ephemeral culture, by contrast, is an essential part of the public
realm that cannot be rigidly incorporated into a design. Its form is
always changing, as different events take shape, cultural moments
pass and people gather and disperse. In many ways it seems impos-
sible to design for these ineffable parameters, yet through careful
consideration, functional urban objects and multi-use spaces can set
the stage properly. Even when the future needs of a space are uncer-
tain, providing generous pieces of public infrastructure that people
can interact with in multiple ways ensures that a place is well used
for years to come.
La Place des Festivals was commissioned to host major events
such as the Montreal Jazz and Just for Laughs festivals. Originally the
site of car parks and with very little pedestrian life, the square was to
accommodate up to 25,000 people yet celebrate the quiet moments
of urban life when less heavily used. A varied spectrum of activation
was required, demanding attention to detail and design strategies
spanning from the city to the object. La Promenade des Artistes, the
east-west connection between the two main squares of the Montre-
al Theatre District (Quartier des Spectacles), is an urban connector on
a challenging site composed of the back façades of cultural buildings.
It was designed to offer people an animated pedestrian route, struc-
tured and given rhythm by the lightweight concrete and steel frames
that define the space at pedestrian scale. These ephemeral vitrines
also serve as an armature for kiosks, performances and exhibitions
showcasing the cultural life of Montreal throughout the year.
A rich and continuous dialogue with the client (Quartier Interna-
tional de Montréal), city officials and event organisers was essential
throughout planning and design. By understanding the technical
requirements of the festivals and forming a strong working relation-
ship with each group, QIM and Daoust Lestage were able to empha-
sise the importance of high-quality urban design and architecture. Côté jardin (stage left) and côté cour (stage right)
become the articulating language, contrasting the soft,
The most important challenge was undoubtedly finding the proper green landscape with the hard black-and-white granite
balance between the everyday and special event modes. During surface of the plaza.

282 DAOUST LESTAGE

La Place des Festivals captures the transient nature of the festival, drawing the playfulness of nightlife into the daily experience of the city.

­ erformances, one could imagine that all visual obstacles should ide-
p the events group came to see that no single element, activity or event
ally be removed to optimise views to the stage, hard surfaces maxi-
mised to facilitate the movement of the crowd and seating minimised
to reduce impediments — all strategies that run counter to the creation
of a welcoming place for people on a more typical day. Retaining the
planted landscape, for example, was a struggle throughout the pro-
cess. The trees and the inclined green surfaces that formed a type of
‘urban origami’ were a signature element for the project and, while
not optimal for performances, they were essential components for
softening the edges of the square, breathing air into the Quartier and
providing shade in summer. Agreements were ultimately reached as
could dominate the scheme; that the space would ultimately be a
living, changing thing; and each piece would have to be flexible
enough to accommodate this reality. Every component Daoust Lestage
designed had to take on this multi-purpose mandate. For example, on
La Place des Festivals hundreds of interactive fountain heads and
lights animate the space while in urban mode in the warmer months
but these are shut down for event purposes and during the winter.
The mega-lighting structures lining the square act as icons for the
district and define the wall and ceiling planes of a large outdoor room
created for visitors. On event days they define the edges of the urban

PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL

CULAuthenticatedTURE 283

The foot recess at the linear bench beside the square,
which becomes a trough for cables during shows.
theatre, while also providing scenographic lighting, power, data and
water to the set and stage.
Similarly, the moveable concrete benches or ‘urban sofas’ and
other modular street furniture were designed to be welcoming and
comfortable for small gatherings on non-festival days and to encour-
age public interaction in combinations conceived as ‘urban lounges’.
At the same time, these heavy and durable elements were designed
to be moved via forklift so they could be rearranged like sectional
furniture and moved completely out of the way during large events.
This type of flexibility informs the smallest details, like the foot recess
at the linear bench beside the square, which becomes a trough for
cables during shows. Every element was designed to be as function-
al for thousands of people as it would be for just one person.
The final elements that Daoust Lestage introduced to the site were
two linear buildings at the eastern edge of La Place des Festivals,
glazed volumes referred to as ‘inhabited vitrines’ (vitrines habitées).
True to their name, these structures provide an essential piece to
complete the public assemblage: all-weather restaurant spaces that
The theatrical curtains of water and light rise 2.2 metres, creating an experiential
light and soundscape.
284 DAOUST LESTAGE
ensure a public presence on the square late into the evening and
through all seasons of the year. By maximising the glazed area and
transparency of the building envelopes, the vitrines habitées become
porous pavilions, with the crowds dining while acting alternately as
audience and spectacle.
The continued evolution of the Quartier since the projects’ opening
in 2009 has required ongoing stewardship. While good design and
public engagement were essential at the outset of the project, the
long-term maintenance and management of the hundreds of different
activities, events and festivals that take place on the site each year is
equally important. The Quartier des Spectacles Partnership, a not-for-
profit organisation originally created in 2003, took on a larger role
following the opening of the new plazas, and is responsible in large
part for their continued success.
The Partnership is now the guardian of the spaces; it is responsible
for the technical quality of installations during the festivals, ensuring
the design vision is carried out and even expanded from year to year.
In the process, they have become an important ally and advocate for
public design in Montreal, creating new programmes to encourage
design thinking and civic engagement, including open competitions
like Luminothérapie, the interactive light installation constructed on
the plaza each winter, and spring events including the ‘21 Balançoires’
(21 Swings) installation by design studio Daily tous les jours. This
artwork was originally conceived for the ephemeral vitrines on La
Promenade des Artistes, and has returned for several years and trav-
elled to many cities around the world.
In a part of the city that was still seldom visited on foot a few years
ago, the design and construction of these spaces and urban elements
has provided a spark that has led to a space that is active and lively
all year round. While the built forms have created an iconic sense of
the Quartier as the heart of the city of Montreal, it is the ongoing
high-quality programming and public engagement that have made it
into a permanent stage at the centre of the city. Parades for national
holidays or victorious sports teams and cultural festivals now all end
at La Place des Festivals. It has transformed into a true civic destina-
tion: the perfect place to gather, to watch and to celebrate.
The largest interactive fountain in Canada, its theatrical curtains of water and light
are composed of 235 jets and 470 lights. The focal point of the plateau is the central
fountain that rises 12 metres above the surface of La Place des Festivals.
INNOCENCE
INTOXICATING CITIES: BARCELONA
AND PARIS 1980 – 1990
The death of Franco and the definitive Spanish move towards democ-
racy lent new self-confidence to Catalonia. Nationalism and rivalry
with Madrid played, and continues to play, a large role for the region.
This was also the golden age for the football club FC Barcelona. Tra-
ditionally, Catalonia has been the gateway to Europe for the Iberian
peninsula, which opened up new prospects when Spain joined the
European Community in 1986. An explosive growth in tourism to the
Costa Brava and Barcelona lent great impetus to Catalonia and
Barcelona was awarded the 1992 Olympic Games. It was decided,
borne on this wave of euphoria, to build an Olympic city on the beach
at Montjuic and to welcome the world in a beautiful historic city. A
unique urban revitalisation project was begun, which initiated the
demolition of derelict buildings in order to then transform those sites
into squares or small parks. The designs had to relate to the Mediter-
ranean typology of popular public space. The residents of each par-
ticipating neighbourhood benefitted from the programme and took
ownership of the new urban spaces.
For young architects, designing a small square was an exception-
al opportunity to establish a reputation. In the absence of any build-
ing, they tried to apply their design talents to every element in the
exterior space. In the sparse relief of their sites, they saw an oppor-
tunity for breathtaking compositions of zig-zagging ramps, retaining
walls and slanted steps. Squares were paved with stone in diagonal
relation or with concrete, which could sweep up from the flat surface
to articulate individual spots.
Streetlights, pergolas, shading structures, railings, trellises and
bins were designed with great ambition and rather pretentiously
made in intrusive materials like stainless steel and corten steel. Unlike
in public spaces in the rest of the world, the streetlights were twisted
or slanted. Trees were selected on the basis of their architectural
appearance. A fountain or water feature was situated on the square,
which usually arose from the composition of the base and the retain-
ing walls. Each square was provided with a modern abstract artwork.
The same design approach was also used for the showcase Olympic
Games projects, such as the Sants Station Square, the Olympic Water-
front and the slopes of Montjuic. Large and idiosyncratic shading
structures and light poles were designed. Striking architectural detail-
ing seemed an end in itself. The architects were given carte blanche
in their designs and worked outside the usual catalogue standard for
materials and outside the prevailing management programme for the
city’s exterior spaces. This seemed to mark an end to the years of
political stagnation and decay. The construction industry and archi-
tecture enjoyed a boom. The postwar cultural impasse and the design
talent that had been kept undeveloped for decades was like a volca-
no that erupted with hot dollops of lava landing in every neighbour-
hood. This hardened and solidified lava became Barcelona’s proud
welcoming sign for visitors to the Games. The bustling everyday life
ADRIAAN GEUZE AND ANNEMARIE KUIJT
Translation by Michael O’Loughlin
on the more than 100 little squares and parks beneath the Mediter-
ranean sun in the eternally Gaudiesque tourist Barcelona came as a
revelation. The subtle urbanist interventions focused on public space,
and this seemed to be the recipe for successful urban renaissance.
At the same time, the French president was presenting his political
legacy. Mitterand introduced his grands projets, intended to recali-
brate Paris’s reputation as the prototype of the ultimate city. To the
fore among these grands projets were two new urban parks, Parc de
la Villette and Parc André Citroën. An international competition was
announced for the design of Parc de la Villette on the site of the old
slaughterhouses. The Parc de Bercy, commissioned by the former
President of France (1974 – 81) Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, was also re-
alised on the site of the beloved wine cellars opposite Mitterand’s
Grande Bibliothèque. For the first time since Napoleon III’s boulevards
and the 19th-century parks, Paris was being updated as a concept.
Paris and Barcelona were proof that exterior spaces could bring the
city to life. The Olympic squares would be a turning point for urban
design and the design of public spaces, the equivalent of Mies van der
Rohe’s influence on architecture with the German Pavilion, designed
for the World Fair in Barcelona in 1929. There were two eras: before
Barcelona and after Barcelona.
The renaissance of the Catalan capital through the realisation of
hip exterior spaces and the new Parisian parks were imitated in Eur-
opean cities during the economic boom of the 1990s. The flood of
projects led to a new specialisation within architecture and landscape
architecture: the design of exterior space. It became a professional
emancipation with viral characteristics. Study trips, publications and
conferences sprang up, annual prizes were established, with cities
engaging in real competition. In art, design and architecture faculties,
a new generation of students graduated in the design of squares and
parks. Lyon, Stockholm, Helsinki, Copenhagen, Reykjavík, Manchester,
London, Glasgow, Berlin, Hamburg, Moscow, Amsterdam and Ant-
werp modeled themselves on Barcelona, though without the context
of the Mediterranean sun and without the cheerful public culture of
Latin society. The new Barcelona formula was applied to European
squares, shopping streets and waterfronts. New parks were being
constructed everywhere. The new discipline was imitated in China,
Southern Korea and North America. Everyone would get their own
Ramblas, every city its Bercy.
In historical terms, the Barcelona style arises from an architectur-
al attitude to design in which the exterior space is not the natural
urban void, but is seen as an object. In this approach, the unpreten-
tious urban space cannot invite urban activity or a seasonal atmos-
phere. The European city derives its character from public space with
its own style and tradition. This is produced by the standards for trees
and material ornament. Each city has its own DNA. Urban manage-
ment was always based on a modest catalogue and enduring local
customs. All that changed after Barcelona. The urban void would bear
the signature of the coquettish architect of the day. The predictable
I285

The little Garden of Paradise by the Upper Rhenish Master displays a hortus
conclusus, an enclosed garden. The hortus conclusus is a traditional motif in
painting which in the Middle Ages symbolised Mary’s innocence.
obstacle-free void between façades and buildings would disappear.
The urban space inspired a lost, restless design, in which each com-
ponent was given an explicitly architectural role. The space became
an interior, stuffed with furniture, sculptures and objects with stylised
detail. The new international attitude embraced a generic decorative
modernism, without context, without dogma, without narrative. The
new urban space lacked modesty and sobriety. The urban environ-
ment was no longer a naturally neutral domain — the public space —
but became the glittering goal, the destination, the object.
A CULTIVATED INNOCENCE
Political leaders envisaged the transformations of brownfield sites and
the gentrification of rundown neighbourhoods. Working with the real-
estate market, programmes were set up in which the approach to
exterior space and parks played an important role. This was a great
stimulus to the new professionals. The emancipation of the design of
the exterior space went hand in hand with a major innovation in
graphics: Adobe’s Photoshop software. For local government officials
and clients who couldn’t read architectural plans and for developers
who wanted to back up their promises, the artist’s impressions was
vital. Photoshop was developed as a technique for collage and copy-
ing, in which each image could be evoked or combined and coloured.
Photoshop offered designers a graphic rhetoric of self-quoting clichés.
This made designing external space an easy sampling practice, for a
constant reproduction of the generic Barcelona style. Photoshop was
like painting for amateurs and had a huge influence on mannered
design.
The architects cultivated a benevolent world of harmony and in-
nocence. The artists’ impressions have a Mediterranean sky where it
is always springtime, with blooming plants and blossoming trees.
There are balloons. Happy children are playing in the foreground.
Women are strolling, sitting, chatting. People are captured in an in-
nocent moment of happy interaction. Water is safe and inviting to the
touch. Cars and commerce behave themselves. The images display a
286 ADRIA AN GEUZE AND ANNEMARIE KUIJT
humourless and idealised cultural and ethnic self-image. All danger
has been banished. The artists’ impressions are in every way the
grotesque contemporary equivalent of medieval prints and paintings
of Paradise — Mother and Child in the garden. In paradise it is always
spring too, people do not age, there is the tree of knowledge, there
are fruits and flowers and birds. The people love, sing, read, garden.
Paradise is safe and enclosed. The water babbles, but unlike in the
Photoshop pictures, there is a snake in the tree, biding its time. The
new Photoshop collage technique degenerated into the brazen dis-
play of good intentions. With their illustrated designs, the architects
sold fake propagandistic manifestos for the new Utopia, with purely
well-meaning and innocent public space.
MASS CULTURE AND THE ACCELERATION
OF THE MODERN CITY
The illusion of idealised and innocent exterior space is in sharp con-
trast to the rapid evolution of the contemporary city. People used to
travel to a city, looking for the protection of securely defined spaces
with their own landmark institutions. The city was the destination.
Now, we are constantly travelling through the city. The border be-
tween city and nature has faded away, the city extends itself endless-
ly with sub-centres containing suburbs, malls, business parks and
wastelands. The original agricultural landscape has been hacked to
pieces and is only recognisable in fragments. The new topography is
an amorphous urban fabric shot through with a spaghetti of infra-
structure. The lines of movement of rail and highway are usually
walled-in, daubed and full of screaming billboards. Athletic bridges,
stadiums, highway slip roads and metro stops are the new focal
points in the mental map.
This contemporary city is a three-dimensional moving decor; a
chaotic, sometimes hypnotically cinematic, experience of images and
sounds. The city displays the euphoria and brashness of mass culture
in a visual bombardment of thousands of clichés from the media and
everyday commerce. Images and sensations are barely consistent,
more like a hybrid culture of shards and fragments. The familiar image
of streets, squares and parks with public platforms and public build-
ings turns out to be outdated. We have only recently become ac-
quainted with the new public domains of ubiquitous television, the
highways, transport terminals, the malls and the lobbies. On top of
that, the internet arrived. The media has an enormous influence on
the city. A hybrid form of domains has emerged, everything seems
turned upside down. The tables of the ubiquitous coffee chains are
occupied by people working on their laptops. For students, the coffee
chain has become the new library.
The shopping streets and boulevard façades seem to coincide
with internet pages. Old, unlovely abbattoirs, industrial skeletons and
harbour warehouses turn out to be centres of innovation with prime
real estate. Smart apps turn student rooms into short-stay hotels,
and every car becomes a taxi. The mobile phone delivers more infor-
mation and entertainment than all the newspapers, cinemas and
concert halls could ever dream of. Museums, restaurants and shops
all look similar. The egos of branding are driving the authentic soul
out of the city. Cities are beginning to look like each other and lose
authenticity. People hardly figure in them any more as individuals but
as abstract caricatures of their subculture in permanent mutual con-
gestion: commuter, shopper, worker, tourist, dog-owner, school-
child, jogger. They are recognisable as such, in their appropriate
costumes, and they move as if in a pre-programmed ritual dance. In
a trance, to the beat of their smartphones, they navigate the pre-
ferred route according to their satellite. Addresses have a ranking or
assessment, or they do not exist. Public places are increasingly
semi-public, private domains. These inviting and delineated domains
of shopping centres, lobbies, terminals and event spaces confuse
and manipulate their public with their controlled openness, their own
security and management.
Even the little public space that is left is strictly limited and laid
out, so much so that it is questionable whether such a thing as public
space even exists any more. The space has strict codes that refer to
specific legal use. The street is subdivided and laid out for individual
functions and this has made public space one-dimensional. In the
contemporary city the space confines and worries you. Each zone is
limited to familiar and desirable behaviour. In this way, public space
deprives the city-dweller of creativity and intelligence. Whereas hu-
man evolution shows us that we can adapt to anywhere and that
adaptation is in fact our greatest talent, it is this exact characteristic
that the city dweller is being deprived of. This is even more true of the
desire for encounter, exploration, play, contemplation and challenge.
Living in this truncated biotope, the city dweller is constantly exposed
to the seduction of commerce, and the odours of unhealthy food. The
city dweller is being trained to become a walking, fast-eating primate.
Individual public consumption has become the norm in the city street
or on the park bench. Public space will soon become adaptive and
interactive, data-driven. Sensors will measure everything and adjust
the characteristics of the space. Shop windows with facial recogni-
tion, pavements with guidance and talking kerbs, LED streetlighting
manipulating colour, temperature, neighbourhoods with micro-field
wifi and self-driving cars. The fear of terrorism, riot and accidents have
legitimised camera surveillance of the entire city. That has led to play,
improvisation and suspicious behaviour no longer being acceptable.
The expression of ethnic, religious, political or gender-based activity
is also frowned upon. CCTV circuits with behaviour and facial recog-
nition record all movements, witnessing every encounter. Ongoing
dealings with time and place are stored away for evaluation. The
beaten-down and weakened city dweller is distraught and withdraws
into individual air bubbles, choosing the relative security of the sub-
cultures that avoid interaction.
design is no longer relevant. There is a great need for discussion,
academic and even political, about the public realm, about freedom,
and about the important values of the Western world. There is a need
for a new extra realm of public urban space: the fundamental public
space. This space must guarantee privacy, freedom from surveillance
and constant monitoring and must be safeguarded from any func-
tional claims and commercial manipulation. The authentic classical
space, the Agora and the English common are excellent prototypes
for this desire. This space must be a forum, a safe platform for improv-
isation, play and exploration. Freedom of expression is a fundamental
principle here. The space must have multifunctional uses and be open
to pop-up culture. The new Agora has to affirm citizens’ rights, and
in principle you could even place a guillotine there. Only then would
you have a truly public realm.
Designers have to once again lend meaning to this new genera-
tion of shared, common space. It is inevitable that their quest will lead
to space that is simple in the architectural sense. The city dweller,
stripped of dignity and individuality, seems strongly attracted to in-
formal, improvised spaces, the delicious anonymity of spaces that
have not yet been appropriated by city branding and programme. Car
parks, abandoned factory sites, harbours and warehouses are mag-
nets. It would seem that they offer the best guarantee to satisfy a
natural desire for freedom and democracy. Commerce, aesthetics and
formality are a threat to this. Unpretentious, leftover spaces offer the
perfect status quo to inspire designers.

THE NEW AGORA

The user of the contemporary urban space has become a victim,
prisoner of an unscripted conspiracy. He or she can no longer depend
on the old categories and references, not knowing how far freedom
extends into the public space, manipulated at all times by commerce
and restricted by rules of behaviour, spied on by cameras, with algo-
rithms determining what is inappropriate activity. Even the combined
talents of all the Catalan designers together could offer no solace in
the current situation of anti-terrorism buffers, CCTV, legal standards,
fast-food banners, ongoing festivals and the addiction to wifi access.
Barcelona’s Olympic squares of yesteryear are overrun by millions
of semi-naked tourists. Additionally, the world’s most legendary
promenade, the Ramblas, was chosen for a perverse terrorist attack.
This deed left far more traces behind it than just the blood on the
hexagonal paving stones. The relaxed urban stroll now demands per-
manent vigilance and a state of high alert. Bollards, police in hi-vis
vests and armed soldiers have become part of the streetscape.
It is true that in New York, capital of the free spirit, the members
of the Occupy movement were allowed to express themselves — as
long as they stayed away from Wall Street. An invisible red line had
been drawn somewhere, three miles from Downtown, indicating how
far political freedom could be extended into the public space. In North
America, Australia and Asia, as well as in Europe, real-estate mag-
nates exert great influence over important urban spaces. They pro-
gramme the space and are constantly restricting the target groups.
In the contemporary urban environment the quest for innocence
is a perilous adventure but it cannot be disputed that designing pub-
lic space needs a new perspective. The contemporary city dweller
longs for an unambiguous view. The world of innocence and generic

I287
AFTERWORD:
DESIGN, CURATION
AND IDENTITY
Public spaces in the city have long been valued for their various social
and ecological functions, as well as for their capacity to imbue a place
with a unique identity. Public spaces reflect the particular time and
culture of a place, shaping its identity, while lending a specific char-
acter and eventfulness that inevitably distinguishes one city from an-
other. Hyde Park, Trafalgar Square and the various parks and gardens
of London offer a unique profile and a set of experiences that are quite
different from the squares and piazzas of Rome or the boulevards and
parks of Paris, for example. Each city has its own unique character,
and each particular space has its own individual detail, feeling and
sense of place.
For the past few decades cities around the world have sought to
further enhance and diversify their public spaces, partly for the same
social and ecological reasons that have always supported the value
of public space, but also for renewed priorities around identity. Cities
are looking to leverage their own unique attributes in an effort to
differentiate themselves from other cities, to present a competitive
advantage in terms of attracting investment, residents, workers, busi-
nesses and visitors. Increasingly, this interest leads not only to inven-
tiveness with regard to physical design (what a place looks and feels
like) but also in terms of its programming and activation. Markets,
parades, festivals, performances, assemblies and other events enrich
the culture, identity and experience of any particular place. There is
an inevitable reciprocity, or synergy, between the physical, designed
characteristics of a space and the events that take place in it at any
given moment in time.
This wonderfully creative and instructive book speaks to the di-
verse range of social occasions that can occur in a variety of public
spaces around the city. Some of the spaces described are photo-
graphed from a single vantage point at different times to capture the
variations of use over a long period – music festivals one day, arts and
sculpture the next, food markets another day, winter ice-skating the
next, and so on. Sometimes a kind of collage-like displacement oc-
curs, when one sees expansive areas of grass and flowers with deck
chairs in the otherwise stone-hard Trafalgar Square for example, or
the dramatic lighting of the massive Battersea Power Station façade
with colourful and cinematic imagery, a dramatic backdrop for con-
certs, events and art. These kinds of theatrical surprise evoke a sense
of wonder and play, effectively revitalising habitually overlooked or
taken-for-granted backgrounds into provocatively new and fresh ex-
periences. Given the duration of time, the eventfulness of a particular
place only gets richer and deeper as more visits yield more varied
kinds of experience, encounter and memory. One day emptiness and
solitude, another a spectacle of colour and sound, another a bustling
market, another a massive bloom of flowers, and so on, as the vaga-
ries of weather, season and the specific nature of the occasions them-
selves lend an ever-accruing depth of consciousness, with layers of
special and unrepeatable experiences. Such is the richness of life — the
reason why, as social animals, humans like to be immersed in places
288 JAMES CORNER
JAMES CORNER
with other people, and often with other people who are diverse and
different. Think of the cosmopolitan vitality of the bazaar, the specta-
cle of the theatre, the bustling crowds of the market or the pleasures
of simply passing time in the green urban park. Many of the examples
and images in this book speak beautifully to the richness of life in the
varied public spaces of the city, and they do so in often surprising and
inventive ways, with all sorts of new uses, colourful settings, unusual
activities and surreal experiences.
The inventiveness of spatial activation has today become a spe-
cialty itself. Public space programmers, curators and directors are
now widely sought after, bringing with them an entrepreneurial sense
of mission and a creative eye for drama. Often, locality is the key in-
spiration — looking to leverage the peculiarities of the place: local
weather, neighbourhood, vibe, context and particular people, groups
or adjacent actors. New York’s High Line still maintains an air of counter-
culture and ‘edge’ in its programming, for example, reflective of its
industrial history and diverse neighbourhood context, and curated by
the very capable and creative Friends of the High Line. In fact there
are several ‘curators’ of the High Line — arts, horticulture, community
and special events — each occasion nuanced to reflect imaginative
reinterpretations of the High Line mystique, while catering to a diverse
range of interest groups. Special efforts are made to reach out to
diverse and often underserved social groups to ensure a sense of
equitable inclusion and participation, leading to special cultural
events, ethnic food festivals, local music, special education sessions
and other such locally inspired occasions, authentic to the place.
Similarly, many cities and developers are looking for the special
‘place-making’ ingredients that will help their own projects distin-
guish themselves, with programming now front-and-centre.
We are seeing in cities everywhere a renewed optimism and com-
mitment to the activation of public space, largely because it is fun and
people are drawn to it but mostly because of the emphasis upon local
identity, and the capacity of amped-up locality to catalyse investment
and community. Programming also, obviously, helps not only in at-
tracting people but with revenue generation that can also help sup-
port the expenses of orchestrating events, maintenance and upkeep.
So in cities all around the world we are seeing increased interest,
investment and expertise devoted to the activation and curation of
public spaces.
However, amid all of this excitement for programming and activa-
tion, might we not also detect a depreciation of interest in the design
of the physical space itself? After all, in the world of programming,
‘design’ can be viewed as an impediment or a limitation. Image and
look may still be important, if only superficially, while programmers
prefer an ‘open’ and ‘flexible’ arrangement, with little encumbrance.
Spaces whose design is primarily driven by a mandate of maximum
flexibility can often end up with very similar characteristics: furniture
is temporary and moveable; surfaces level, flat and expansive; planting
limited to edges and ideally in moveable planters; lighting confined to
tall masts for maximum flexibility; water features mandatory for play-
ful interaction, but designed to be turned off at any time to provide
useable floor area; a token big icon or artwork somewhere for image;
and large access points with hidden cameras for security and surveil-
lance. First impressions might be of a modern, minimalist space, clean
and unencumbered, but ultimately these spaces are bland with little
personality, charm or capacity to uplift the spirit, just a vacant ‘any-
where’ emptiness awaiting activation.
‘Programming the urban surface’ and a design vocabulary of
sheds, platforms, stages, plinths, theatres, frames, equipment, infra-
structures, utilities and similar invitations for infinitely flexible use can
all too easily lead to impoverished or formulaic physical designs. It is
surprising to many to learn that the High Line, for example, was never
designed for programme or activity per se; the design was simply
inspired and informed by its history and unique aura and atmosphere
as a ‘found object’ in the context of Manhattan’s West Side. The cu-
rators were brought in after the design to interpret how its various
spaces might be most effectively appropriated. Similarly, the magnif-
icent Bryant Park is first a strong and clear design before it is the
amazing theatre of richly varied programming that it supports. It is all
too easy to dismiss, overlook or discount the design of the physical
setting as the event begins to assume the headlines.
Landscape architects and urbanists should definitely worry when
they encounter various agencies who think that all the designer needs
to do is to create a relatively simple enclosure, with a flat and level
surface, supplied with electricity and water at key spots, and scat-
tered with colourful off-the-shelf moveable furniture. In their mind’s
eye, the programmers want maximum flexibility, a blank canvas; the
events they will conjure up are what matter most; design can be too
much of a limitation on what is possible.
This mentality misses the value that good design brings to locality,
to identity, to everything that imbues urban eventfulness with place
and specificity. To see the same open spaces in every city — with red
tables and chairs scattered around a relatively uninspired open sur-
face of either gravel or lawn, with a standard café pavilion and some
random interactive features — fails to meet the measure of what it
means to create uniquely designed environments that are peculiar to
and resonant with their place and time, that precipitate a vital sense
of special identity, and that create the very ‘theatre’ for life to play out
in newly dramatic ways. Good design provides flexibility and space
for a wide variety of possible events and activities, while also shaping
the constraints and characteristics that demand novel approaches
toward programming. Generic design supports generic programming;
place-specific, inventive design invites new interpretations and new
possibilities for programming and activation.
There are many examples in this book of colourful appropriations
of inventive installations, activations and curated programmes, but
the truly exceptional examples are those that marry uniquely de-
signed places with creative programming. Truly great and timeless
places foreground a powerful synergy between the designed setting
and the sheer range of experiences that the space might then sup-
port, often specific to locale, environment and culture. Such reciproc-
ity is essential to good design and to the artful enrichment of diverse
urban cultures, and this book is testament to the powerful appeal of
good design, artful curation and the shaping of local identity.

AF289
 Fit
ne
ss
(Ou
tdo
Fit or
ne Gy
ss m)
(So :C
cia en
l Tr tra
ac lG
k): ree
Ce np
ntr .2
al 08
Gre –2
en 13
p. 2
08
–2
13
Fit
ne
ss
(10
0m
Tra
c k):
Be
rge Fit
sd n
eS p. ess
13
ein
ep 4 – (Bas
.2 13 ket
48 7 ba
ll):
–2 A’B
53 ec
ke
tt Ur
ba
nS
qu
are

Fo
p. od T
74 ru
– 8 ck: Ha
mm
5 Ha
rva oc
rd k:
Pla Ce
ntr
za al
Gre
en
p.
20
8–
21
3

Ha
p. mmo
24
8 – ck: B Ice
25 e -sk
3 rges ati
de ng
Se :H
ine arv
ard
Pla
za
p.
74
–8
5 Lig
Ha Sq hting
lo ua
Sw re : A’B
p.
ing
:L 13 ecke
aw 4 – tt U
13
n on 7 rban
Dp
.1
22
–1
33
La
mp
p.
94 : Wa
–1 t
01 ch T
his
Sp
ac
e

Jen
ga
Blo
ck
s:
La
wn
on
Dp
.1
22
–1 Lig
33 hti
ng
:L
aw
n on
Dp
.1
22
–1
33

292
 Lin
eA
rt (
Ma
ze
): B
erg
es
de
Se
ine
p.
24
8–
Lin 25
3
e
p. Art
24
8 – (Scal
25 e C
3 om
pa
ris
on
): B
erg
es
de
Se
ine

Pic
n
Lin p. ic Ta
21
eA
rt ( 4 – ble:
Wo 21 The
7 G
rl dM oo
ds
ap Lin
): B e
erg
es
de
Se
ine
p.
24
8–
Pic 25
n 3
p. ic Ta
12 Pic
2 – ble:
13 Law Sq nic T
3 ua a
n on re ble
p. (
D 13 Whe
4– e
13 ls): A Pic
7 ’B ec p. nic T
74 a
ke
tt – 8 ble:
Ur 5 Ha
ba rva
n rd
Pla
za

Pic
nic
Tab
le:
Ce
ntr
al
Gre
en Pic
p. t
20
8– p. ure F
20
21
3 8 – ram
21 e (D
3 is pla
yB
oa
rd)
:B Pla
erg yE
es lem
de
sS en
ein ts:
Pla e La
wn
p. tform on
74
– 8 : Ha Dp
.1
5 rva 22
rd –1
Pla 33
za
Pla
nte
rs:
Ha
rva
rd
Pla
za
p.
74
–8
5

Pla
tfo
rm
(St Tre
ag e
e): p. 1 Pla
Ha 44 nter
rva –1 : B Tre
rd 49 att
Pla e rse e
za a p. Pla
13 n
p.
74
Po
we 4 – ter:
–8 r 13 A’B
5 Sta 7 ec
tio ke
Tre nP tt Ur
p. e Pla op ba
13 -Up nS
8 – nter Pa
rk
qu
are
14 : V&
3 A Co
urt
ya
rd

VISUAL
AuthenticatedINDEX 293
 Se
at
(Ad
Se iro
at: nd
Wa ac
tc k):
hT La
his wn
Sp on
ac Dp
ep .1
.9 22
4– –1
10 33
1
Se
at: Se
Wa a
tc hT p. t (Su
12
his 2 – n Lo
Sp 13 un
ac 3 ge
ep r):
.9 La
4– wn
10 on
1 D

Se
at
(De
ck
Sea ch
air
t (S ): L
un aw
Lou n on
ng Dp
er)
: La .1
wn 22
on –1
Dp 33
. 12
2–
13
3

Se
at:
Th
e Go
od
sL Se
ine a
p. 2 p. 1 t: Ch
14 22 ildr
–2 – 1 en
17 33 ’s s
et
up
:L
aw
n on
D

Sh
ipp
ing
Co
nta
ine
r: B Se
a
erg p. t: Ta
es 12
de 2 – ble a
Se 13 n
ine 3 d Ch
p. 2 air
48 s:
–2 La
wn
53 on
D

Se
a
Gra t: Ta
Wa nary ble a
tch Sq nd
Th uar Cha
is S e/L i
pa ew rs: H
ce is a
p. Cub rvard
94
– 1 itt p. Plaz
01 86 a p
-93 . 7
4–
85
Str
uc
tur
e(
Sw
ing
Tim
e):
La
wn
on
Dp
.1
22
–1
33

Str
p. 1 uctur
92 e (V
–1 i
97 trine
s):
La
Pro
me
na
de
de
sA
rtis
tes

294
 Tab
le:
La
wn
on
Dp
.1
22
–1
33

Str Tab
p. 1 uctur Th le-te
eG
34 e (B n
–1 oo nis:
37 arbe ds H
Lin arva
cu e(
e):
A’B Bra rd Pl
ec nd aza
ke ed
tt Urb ) p p. 74
.2
an 14 – 85
Sq –2
ua 17
re

Tab
Ce le-te
ntr
al nnis
Gre (B
en ran
p. ded
20
8 – ): La
21 wn
3 on
Dp
Ten .1
22
t: L –1
aw 33
n on
Dp
.1
22
–1
33

Ten
t: H
arv
ard
Pla
za
p. 7
4–
85

Tee
pe Um
e: bre
Be
rge lla
sd :H
eS arv
ein ard
ep Pla
.2 za
48 p. 7
–2 4–
53 85

Um
bre
lla:
CA
AC
p. 2
58
–2
61

Um
Ha brel
rva la:
rd W
Pla atc
za h T
p. his
74 S
– 8 pac
5 e p.
94 Um
–1
01 bre
lla
:W
atc
hT
his
Sp
ac
ep
.9
4–
10
1

VISUAL
AuthenticatedINDEX 295
INDEX
SUBJECT INDEX
2012 London Olympics 271
4th Dimension 29
Accelerating Darwin 17
Adaptability 46, 48, 49
Adaptive systems 46
Advertising 57, 108
Age of instant gratification 17, 212
Agora 10, 287
Al fresco dining 25, 86, 92, 96, 98, 204
Amphitheatre 35, 56, 57, 108, 138,
194, 208, 211, 213, 214, 215, 217,
231, 232, 233, 275, 276, 280
Anchors 60, 126, 218
Annual installations 101, 241
Anthropology 71
Architectural frames 195
Artificial beaches 275
Artificial grass 25, 86, 89, 98, 101, 134
Arts programme 63, 86
Assemblies 49, 71, 288
Barbecue (BBQ) 134, 135, 136, 137
Basketball 134, 135, 136, 227, 257, 276
Bazaar 288
Beanbags 58, 80
Book Fair 8, 27, 95
Borrowed activation 27
Built-in foundations 76, 107
Burning of the Böögg 218, 219, 220,
221, 222
Café 237, 242, 289
Calendar of events 8, 9, 17, 57, 86, 110,
124, 131, 196, 230, 233, 235
Canopy 34, 35, 158, 258, 259, 260, 261
Car Park 59, 134, 152, 192, 218, 219,
221, 243, 256, 282, 287
Carnivals 40, 58, 198, 255
Chalkboard 250, 251, 252
Chance encounter 10, 176, 270
Chelsea Fringe Festival 144, 146, 147,
149, 272
Christmas 102, 107, 218, 230, 238
Circus Knie 218, 219, 222
Climate as change 229
Climbing wall 250, 251, 253
Commercial events 57, 198
Community activation 276
Community cohesion 8, 19
Competitions 27, 29, 89, 284
Competitive advantage 288
Concerts 27, 53, 58, 86, 87, 92, 94, 96,
122, 124, 126, 131, 144, 145, 217,
230, 235, 237, 238, 245, 250, 278
Consumption 67, 287
Craft Beer Festival 89
Cultural diversity 67
Cultural overlay 8, 76, 234
Curated Events 9, 38, 275
Curation 7, 53, 58, 66, 67, 71, 76, 87,
91, 133, 134, 195, 197, 275, 286, 289
Curling 53, 74, 77, 79, 81, 82, 85
Dancing 40, 84, 100, 124, 131
Day of the Waterfalls 40
Deckchairs 86, 91, 101, 233, 252, 272
Democracy 287
Demonstrations 42, 69, 198
Demountable installations 134
Desire lines 74, 76, 102
296
Digital presence 69
Diner en Blanc 238
Dinghies 122
Diversity 45, 46, 49, 52, 53, 67, 212,
277, 279, 281
Ecology of the city 38
Edge condition 29, 35, 82, 89, 126,
232, 234, 235
Educational programmes 230
Emergency exits 60
Ephemeral culture 282
Equity and full access 275
Ergonomic configurations 76
Ethnography 71
Festival of Light 192
Festivals 27, 29, 30, 34, 55, 58, 96,
108, 144, 148, 194, 196, 197, 198,
214, 223, 254, 272, 273, 275, 278,
282, 284, 287, 288
Field Condition 18
Fire pits 74, 77, 79, 81, 82, 85, 124,
129, 270
Floating Cinema 86, 89, 90
Floating Garden 248, 251, 253
Food markets 55, 86, 88, 144, 278,
288
Food trucks 31, 49, 53, 58, 74, 76, 77,
79, 80, 92, 94, 101, 122, 123, 124,
126, 129, 208, 210, 270
Fountains 17, 18, 28, 29, 39, 60, 86, 87,
88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 102, 103, 108, 138,
140, 192, 194, 198, 199, 219, 232,
240, 241, 242, 256, 272, 273
Funding 54, 55, 91, 235, 271, 273
Giant Bunnies 58, 63
Greater London Authority (GLA) 55, 108,
198, 202, 230
HBO Summer Screen 234
Health and well-being 57, 208, 211, 278
Human behaviour 6, 7, 10, 23, 48
Human scale 7, 10, 218, 219, 234
Hydraulic cranes 254
Ice maze 122
Ice rink 31, 40, 76, 83, 240
Identity 18, 40, 66, 124, 192, 194, 268,
270, 273, 274, 276, 280, 288, 289
Improvisation 48, 287
Incidental encounter 11, 25
Indeterminacy 18, 48, 255
Indigenous values 275
Infrastructure 7, 8, 9, 18, 26, 27, 31, 35,
39, 40, 42, 64, 83, 106, 107, 111, 134,
145, 214, 217, 218, 219, 222, 271,
275, 282
Instant city 68
Insurance 274
Interactive 8, 31, 38, 102, 107, 124,
126, 188, 192, 195, 197, 204, 245,
278, 280, 283, 284, 287, 289
Intimacy 276
Jenga blocks 122, 129, 130
Kumbh Mela 71
Layered places 275
Lighting 18, 34, 57, 89, 102, 103, 122,
123, 126, 128, 192, 204, 219, 254,
258, 261, 282, 283, 284, 287, 288
London Design Festival 138, 139, 142,
204, 206
Low-cost adaptation 69
Lumiere London 31
Luminothérapie 284
Maintenance 7, 55, 56, 60, 83, 102,
104, 111, 120, 126, 235, 271, 284,
289
Markets 27, 30, 55, 88, 89, 92, 101,
218, 228, 234, 235, 255, 276, 278,
288
Marketing 55, 57, 64, 91, 94, 124, 271,
273, 274
Marketing suite 144, 146
Meanwhile uses 8, 91
Memory 71, 288
Metric marker 213
Miroir d’Eau 29
Montreal Jazz Festival 192
Motation 10
Motion sensors 103, 107
Moveable landscapes 35
Moveable parts 69
Moveable tables and chairs 52, 98
Multiplicity of publics 68
Multi-purpose mandate 283
Natural swimming pool 91
Nested rings 209
Notation 10, 12, 18, 76, 78
Occupy movement 71, 287
Olympics 55, 168, 271, 272, 280
Outdoor cinema 31, 33, 89, 92, 101,
122, 144, 145, 148, 217, 230, 235,
238, 241, 250
Palio 11
Parcours 250
Paris Plage 7
Park-as-platform 268
Participatory installations 31
Parvis 13
Pavilions 42, 160, 162, 200, 284
Pedestals 262
Pentalum 124, 130
Performers 23, 82, 127, 152, 237, 241,
256, 268
Permanence 9, 13, 38, 68, 69, 71, 88,
229
Photo London 241, 243
Photoshop 286
Physical experience 29, 270
Piazza 11, 13, 29, 34, 275, 288
Picnic tables 76, 122, 129, 250
Place-making 9, 10, 18, 19, 23, 29, 54,
91, 163, 255, 271, 274, 275, 278, 288
Planters 32, 75, 76, 134, 135, 136, 137,
138, 139, 140, 144, 146, 260, 288
Play Day 61, 62, 63
Play nests 280
Play spaces 270, 275
Playgrounds 40, 48, 62, 122, 280
Pleasure gardens 280
Plug and play 9, 35
Plug-in system 18
Pluralistic society 66
Pop-up 29, 31, 34, 69, 76, 101, 122,
134, 255, 275, 276, 277, 287
Postmodern 6
Power of the participant 32, 34
Programmatic elements 76
Protests 27, 49, 69, 70, 201
Psychology 23
Psychology of the temporary 25
Public Art 8, 31, 32, 61, 63, 88, 91,
124, 180, 184, 198, 200, 271, 273,
274, 279
Public life studies 10
Public participation 124
Public realm-led approach to develop-
ment 271
Public/Private partnerships 235
Publicness 43, 66
Pumpkin Fest 125
Reciprocity 288
Reconfiguration 31, 33, 34
Recycling 150
Regeneration 56, 144, 146, 271, 277
Repeat events 77, 108, 139, 230
Restrooms/toilets 91, 122, 211, 235,
250
Reversibility 71
Running lanes 208
Scale 123, 124, 130, 131, 133, 134,
192, 198, 206, 218, 219, 223, 232,
234, 242, 250, 252, 270, 271, 273,
274, 275, 276, 277, 281, 282
Sculpture gardens 244
Seasonal variation 77
Seating 11, 33, 49, 50, 57, 63, 65, 76,
77, 82, 86, 87, 89, 95, 98, 108, 113,
122, 123, 126, 134, 135, 136, 138,
140, 144, 146, 148, 150, 174, 176,
180, 184, 194, 198, 200, 206, 208,
211, 214, 215, 216, 217, 219, 224,
231, 232, 241, 245, 248, 249, 250,
252, 253, 255, 256, 258, 262, 265,
270, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 278,
279, 280, 281, 283
Security 7, 233, 237, 271, 286, 287,
289
Selfie 62, 63, 101, 124, 132
Sense of place 31, 288
Service trench 255, 256
Shipping container 31, 62, 65, 129, 130,
248, 250, 252
Social activators 75
Social coherence 42
Social ecologies 46, 49
Social infrastructure 31, 214
Social media 66, 69, 70, 71, 91, 124,
160, 163, 170, 212, 270, 274
Social rituals 275
Social theatre 278
Sociology 6, 7, 10, 23, 235
Soft and hard infrastructure 275
Spaces of change 17, 21
Spatial programmability 18, 19
Speakers’ Corner 69, 70, 71
Spectators 17, 82, 90, 93, 152, 198,
217
Sponsored installations 108, 113
Sponsorship installations 114, 116,
118, 121
Spontaneity 25, 68
Static monotony 8
Storage 27, 45, 76, 98, 184, 211, 224,
272
Strawberry and Screen 89, 93
Study pods 214, 217
Sun loungers 128, 248, 295
Surveillance 7, 287
Sustainability 150
Tents 31, 34, 49, 53, 107, 131
Terrace seats 89, 211
The City as Commons 42
Theatres 192, 289
Theatrical surprise 288
Tipis 250, 251
Triangulation 25, 214
Twitter 71
Umbrella 81, 98, 99, 139, 258
Uncanny 268, 270
Under-utilised 8, 190
urban community 38
Urban eventfulness 289
Urban surface 16, 38, 45, 289
Utopia 38, 286
Vehicle access 59
Viewing platform 96, 274
Vitrines Evènement 195
Water attenuation 224, 227
Water cycle 224
Water mirror 29
Water park 273
Water play 92, 105, 214, 216, 275
Water supply 57, 111
Weather as event 229
Websites 77, 110, 111, 150, 170, 233
Wifi 89, 134, 214, 215, 216, 217, 237,
287
Yoga 59, 83, 126, 130, 238, 254
INDEX OF NAMES Elliott, Peter  134 – 137
Elmgreen, Michael  203
Acconci Studio  32 Emergent 158
Adès, Thomas  162 Escobedo, Frida  142–143
AECOM  160 – 67 Escobedo Soliz Studio  154
AFJD Studio  172 – 173 Exterior Architecture  144 – 149
AL_A 30 Fabergé 244
Albergaria, José  248 – 253 Finck, Liana  68
Alexander, Christopher  15 fjmt architects  275
Allen, Stan  9, 18 Florida, Richard  15
Allies and Morrison Masterplan Folch, Tomás  48
Team  86 – 93 Ford, Gina  268 – 270
Appleyard, Donald  15 Foster+Partners  198 – 203, 230 – 233
Archigram 68 Fountain Workshop  29, 86 – 93,
Argent  86 – 93, 271 – 274 102 – 107, 138 – 143, 280
Artevia  248 – 253 Frampton, Kenneth  6
ARUP  160 – 167 Francis, Carolyn  15
ASLA 234 Franco, Francisco  285
ASPECT Studios  214 – 217, 275 – 277 Franklin Azzi Architects  248 – 253
Atkins  198 – 203 Freud, Sigmund  268
Azzi Architecture  248 – 253 Fritsch, Katharina  203
Azzi, Franklin  248 – 253 Fujimoto, Sou  166
Backer, Rik Baas  248 – 253 Fuller, Sheila R.  43
Baer, Taylor  191 Gamper, Martino  142
Ball-Nogues Studio  156 Garcia Düttmann, Alexander  240
Balmond, Cecil  160, 162, 163, 164 Gavrel, Julie  248 – 253
Banham, Reyner  6 Gehl, Jan  10, 14, 15, 234
Banks, Elizabeth  20 Gehry, Frank  162, 164
Barash, F. Philip  268 – 270 Gelatin 159
Bauer, Kirsten  275 – 277 Geros, Christina  180, 188 – 189
Belcic, Larissa  189 Geuze, Adriaan  17, 285 – 287
Berrizbeitia, Anita  9 Giedion, Sigfried  68
Bischoff, Oliviewr  248 – 253 Gillespies  102 – 107
Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG)  163, 167, 210 Giscard d’Estaing, Valery  285
Blaine, David  108, 118 Glancey, Jonathan  240
Bloomberg Philanthropies  150 Goffman, Erving  15
Bogman, Carmela  32–33 Gomez Luque, Mariano  187
Bosselmann, Peter  15 Gormley, Antony  200, 203
Bread Collective  145 Grand, Pierre  248 – 253
Bremner, Kaz  176 – 177 GROSS.MAX.  21, 94, 101, 108 – 121,
British Film Institute  57, 94 204 – 207
Brown, Denise Scott  15 Gustafson, Kathryn  20, 29
Burdett, Ricky  15 Gustafson Porter  20
Burton, Mel  57 Haacke, Hans  203
Buttress, Wolfgang  103 Hadid, Zaha  160, 162
Byrd, Warren  12 Hall, Edward T.  15
Cairns, Johanna  191 Halprin, Anna  10, 12
CAL Architects  102 – 107 Halprin, Lawrence  10, 12, 76
Carat Sport  248 – 253 Hapa Collaborative  174 – 175
Cardona, Ignacio  190 Hardesty, Hope  187
Cassiel 241 Hargreaves Associates  47
Change Is Good  248 – 253 Hargreaves, George  9, 12, 20
Chang, Ruth  191 Harvard Graduate School of Design
Chemetoff, Alexander  12 (GSD)  180, 187, 190, 191
CHROFI Architects  214 – 217 Haworth Tompkins  94, 97, 101
CIAM 14 Hein, Jeppe  205, 206
Claude Cormier+ Associés  244, 246 Heritage Lottery Fund  54
CODA 155 Herzog & de Meuron  166
Cohen, Lizbeth  180 Higher Works  176 – 177
Coleman Centre for the Arts  32 Howard, Ebenezer  14
Collective-LOK 30 Höweler + Yoon  62, 122 – 133
Colorado State University  20 HR&A  59, 61, 124 – 133
Common Spaces, Harvard  53, 74, 76, HWKN 155
77 Iaione, Christian  43
Conway, Hazel  54 Ibelings, Hans  18
Corajoud, Michel  29 IF_DO Architects  30
Cormier, Claude  244, 245, 247 Interboro Partners  74, 76, 77, 155
Corner, James  9, 208 – 213, 288 – 289 iredale pedersen hook  275
Cullen, Gordon  15 Ishikawa, Sara  15
Daily tous les jours  284 Ito, Tomastu  190
Daoust Lestage  192 – 197, 282 – 284 Ito, Toyo  162
Davis, Howard  59 Izenour, Steven  15
de Angelis, Massimo  43 Jacobs, Allan  15
Delcroix, Stéphanie  271 Jacobs, Jane  7, 10, 15
Dempsey, Nicola  54 – 57 James Corner Field Operations
Denton Corker Marshall  275 208 – 213, , 278 – 281
Design With Company  168, 178 – 179 Jaque, Andrés  154
De Urbanisten  224 – 229 Jason Bruges Studio  143
Deutscher, Jeremiah  176 – 177 Jean Max Llorca (JML)  29
Diana, Princess of Wales  160 Jean Verville Architects  244, 245, 247
Diller Scofidio Renfro (DSR)  33, 34, 35 Jenny Sabin Studio  153
DIXNEUFCENTQUATREVINGTSIX Jerram, Luke  30
­Architecture  34 Jeyasingh, Shobana  241
Dixon Jones Architects  21, 240 – 243 JIAKUN Architects  163
Donald Insall Associates  240 – 243 Jin, Keojin  186 – 187
Dougherty, Gareth  53 Jodido, Philip  162
Dragset, Ingar  203 Johnson, Philip  159
Duong, Luat  189 karres+brands landscape architects  275
Eichelman, Janet  61, 62 Keating, Ash  134 – 137
Eliasson, Olafur  162, 164 Kennedy, Richard  278 – 281
Kent, Fred  10, 19, 74
Kéré, Francis  167
Kim Wilkie  20, 138 – 143
King, Coretta Scott  69
King, Martin Luther Jr  69
Kishimoto, Eley  240
Koolhaas, Rem  6, 13, 15, 16, 160, 164
Kuijt, Annemarie  285 – 287
Lab Architecture Studio  275
Laliberté, Guy  197
Lasdun, Denys  94 – 101
Lateral Office  31, 193
LDA Design  144 – 149, 279, 280
Le Corbusier  14
Lee, Yuhun  186 – 187
Léger, Fernand  68
Lerup, Lars  6
Libeskind, Daniel  162
Lister, Nina-Marie  48
Loose Affiliates  170 – 171
Lopez-Piniero, Sergio  66 – 71
LOT 30
Lutyens, Edwin  198
Luxemburg, Rut Blees  240
Lydon, Mike  19
Lynch, Kevin  10, 15
Lyons 275
MacKechnie, Angus  94, 98, 101
Magdalena, Anne  248 – 253
Maine, John  94, 98
MaO architects  34
Marcus, Clare C.  15
Martens, Rogier  32–33
Matthew Soules Architecture  172 – 173
Mazzotta, Matthew  32–33
McChesney, Ian  272
McConnell, Mitch  69
Media 5  275
Mehrotra, Rahul  71
Menges, Achim  138, 141
Merkel, Angela  70
Michael Van Valkenburgh and
­Associates  31
Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig  48, 50, 285
Miller, Helen  189
Mitchell, Don  67, 68
Mitchell, Scott  53
Mitterand, François  285
MOS 156
Mosbach, Catherine  42
Mostafavi, Mohsen  53
Murray, Andy  272
MVRDV 163
MVVA 74
Myers, Robert  20
nARCHITECTS 158
Newman, Oscar  15
Niemeyer, Oscar  163
NIPPAYSAGE  244, 247
Nishizawa, Ryue  165
NÓS Architectes  247
Nouvel, Jean  165
OBRA 157
O’Carroll, Gerrard  240
OCMIS Fountain Designers  240 – 243
OKRA  31, 32
Olin, Laurie  29, 234
OLIN Partnership  21, 234 – 239
Olmstedt, Frederick Law  244, 268
OMA  13, 16, 32, 39, 48, 50, 164
Ooze Architects  274
Ostrom, Elinor  42
Oudolf, Piet  108 – 121, 165
Padjen, Elizabeth  122, 124
Paredes Pino  258 – 261
Parer, Amanda  63, 133
Partridge, David  271
Patkau Architects  30
Peck, Maia  191
Perschke, Kurt  192, 195, 197
Peyton-Jones, Julia  162, 163
Pfaff, Cali  187
Piano, Renzo  13
Pickett, Steward T. A.  38
Pinsky, Michael  271
Poehlmann, Annette  248 – 253
Potrč, Marjetica  274
Potters Fields Park Management
Trust 55
Price, Cedric  162
Produce UK  271
Project for Public Spaces (PPS)  10, 19,
53, 74
Projection Artworks  145
PWP Landscape Architects  198 – 203
Quinn, Mark  202
Radcliffe University  180
Radić, Similjan  166
Rahm, Philippe  42
raumlaborberlin  55, 109
Reed, Chris  46 – 53, 76, 180
relais Landschaftsarchitekten  262 – 265
Rick Mather Architects  204, 205
Rival, Jacques  273
Rogers, Richard  13
Roquero, Pablo  187
Rossi, Aldo  15
ROY 159
Saint Phalle, Niki de  251, 253
SANAA 165
Sasaki Associates  59, 122 – 133
Sauerbruch, Matthias  39
Scarlett, Matt  187
Schütte, Thomas  202
Schwartz, Martha  9, 12, 20, 138
Sejima, Kazuyo  165
Selgascano  160, 167
Sert, Josep Lluís  68, 76
Sessions, Jeff  69
Shigematsu, Shohei  32
Shonibare, Yinka  203
SHoP 159
Shrigley, David  203
Silverstein, Murray  15
Simpson, Deane  40
Simpson Haugh Architects  144 – 149
Sitte, Camillo  14
Siza, Álvaro  160, 163
SLA 29
Sloterdijk, Peter  38
SMAQ Architects  40
Smith, Lance  189
Smithson, Peter  71
Snøhetta 47
SO-IL 156
Sommer, Robert  15
Sorkin, Michael  15
Souto de Moura, Eduardo  160, 163
Sreenivasan, Sree  70
Stephen Stimson landscape architects 
180, 182
St George, Paul  230
Stoss Landscape Urbanism  19, 31, 48,
49, 53, 74 – 85, 180 – 191
Studio Myerscough  240
Studio Roosegaarde  88
Studio Weave  240
Sudjic, Deyan  15
Sveen, Amund Sjølie  257
Talmon Biran architecture studio  34
Taylor Cullity Lethlean  134 – 137
T.C.L landscape architects  275
Texxus  138 – 143
The Living  154
Thorsen, Kjetil  164
Thuleau, Alain  248 – 253
Tonkin Zulaikha Greer  275
Townshend Landscape Architects  20,
21, 29, 86 – 93, 230 – 233
Trew, Ken  271 – 274
Trump, Donald  69
Tschumi, Bernard  6, 13
ULR Studio  188 – 189
United Visual Artists  139
UP Projects  90, 109
Utile  122 – 133
Van Deusen, Richard  68
van Gogh, Vincent  247
Venturi, Robert  15
Vera, Felipe  71
Vetschpartner  218 – 223
Viva Vancouver  168, 170
Volkswagen  150, 153
Walker, Peter  9, 12, 20, 48, 49, 74
Wall, Alex  6, 9, 16, 18, 38 – 45
Wallach, Susan S. and Kenneth L.  180
Wallinger, Mark  202
Walsh, Cara  189
Wang, Hui  190
Wang, John  190 – 191

INDEX 297
Wangro, Chris 58 – 65, 122 – 133 INDEX OF PROJECTS
Warren, Elizabeth 69
We Are Groundbreaking 271 21 Balançoires (21 Swings), installati-
Weckwerth, Georg 263 on 195, 197, 284
Weiwei, Ai 166 A’Beckett Urban Square, Melbourne,
West 8 9, 17, 18, 21, 31, 254 – 257 Australia 134 – 137
Whiteread, Rachel 202 Across the Buildings, London, United
Whyte, William H. 7, 10, 11, 12, 15, 23, Kingdom 91
25, 46, 48, 50, 76, 78, 207, 234 – 239 After Image, installation 30
Wilkinson, Chris 28 Afterparty, installation 156
Wilkie, Kim 29 Alison Lapper Pregnant, installation 202
William IV, King of the United King- Anti-Object, installation 187
dom 202 Appearing Rooms, installation 205,
Wiscombe, Tom 158 206, 207
Wisniewski, Andy 189 Arbores Laetae, Liverpool, United
Woodrow, Bill 202 Kingdom 33, 34
WORK Architecture Company 156 Armchair Theatre, London, United
Wycherley, R. E. 10 Kingdom 94, 98, 100, 101
Xefirotarch 157 Around-About 34
Yoon, Meejin 62 Bass River Park 47
Young Architects Program Battersea Power Station, London, United
(YAP) 150 – 159 Kingdom 144, 288
Zach und Zünd Architekten 218 – 223 Battersea Power Station Pop-up Park,
Zaha Hadid Architects 142 London, United Kingdom 144 – 149
Zenghelis, Elia 39, 40, 42 BEATFUSE, installation 157
Zenghelis, Zoe 39 Benthemplein Water Square, Rotterdam,
Zhou, Ziyin 189 The Netherlands 224 – 229
Zieta Prozessdesign 142 Bentway, Toronto, Canada 7
Zocchi, Giuseppe 11 Berges de Seine, Paris, France 248 – 253
Zumthor, Peter 165 Binnenrotte Square, Rotterdam, The
Netherlands 9, 31
Bird Cage, installation, London, United
Kingdom 87, 273
Blow and Roll, installation 142
Bodyscapes, installation 189
Book Fair under Waterloo Bridge,
London, United Kingdom 8, 27, 94
Boston Children’s Museum, Boston,
Massachusetts, USA 61
Boston Common, Boston, Massachusetts,
USA 268
Box Hill Gardens multi-purpose space,
Melbourne, Australia 276 – 277
Bradford City Park, Bradford, United
Kingdom 102 – 107
Brindleyplace development, Birmingham,
United Kingdom 271
Bryant Park, New York City, New York,
USA 31, 234 – 239, 289
Canopy, installation 158
Centre Pompidou, Paris, France 13
Centro Abierto de Actividades Ciudadanas
(CAAC), Córdoba, Spain 258 – 261
Chicago Riverwalk, Chicago, Illinois,
USA 268 – 270
Christmas Lights Switch On, Bradford,
United Kingdom 107
City Hall Plaza, Boston, Massachusetts,
USA 9, 27, 268
Consequence of Engagement, installation
189
Corduroy Road, installation 174 – 175
Cornell School of Architecture, Ithaca,
New York, USA 32
COSMO, installation 154
Courtauld Gallery, London, United
Kingdom 240
Courtyard in the Wind 32
Crest, installation 142
Croydon’s Box Park, London, United
Kingdom 31
Crystal Building, Copenhagen,
Denmark 29
Cumulus, Gorud Valley, Norway 40
Dance Floor, installation 244, 245, 247
Dandenong Pop-Up Park, Melbourne,
Australia 277
Darling Quarter, Sydney, Australia 275
Discovery Green, Houston, Texas, USA
9, 46, 47
Dock Square temporary activation space,
Melbourne, Australia 277
Downsview Park, Toronto, Canada 68
Duke of York Square, London, United
Kingdom 20
Dulwich Picture Gallery Pavilion, London,
United Kingdom 30
Du Musée Avenue, Montreal, Canada
30, 244 – 247
Dunescape, installation 159
298
Ecce Homo, installation 202
Eighteen Turns, Serpentine Gallery
Pavilion 2001, London, United
Kingdom 162
Elephant and Castle, London, United
Kingdom 31
Elytra Filament Pavilion, London, United
Kingdom 138, 141
Exhibition Road, London, United
Kingdom 21
Federation Square cultural precinct,
Melbourne, Australia 275
Flatiron Public Plaza Holiday Design
Competition 30
Flatiron Triangle, New York City, New
York, USA 30
Floating Cinema, London, United
Kingdom 90
Flying Carpet, installation 257
Fourth Plinth, London, United Kingdom
30, 198 – 203
Future of Shade 30
German Pavilion, Barcelona World
Fair 285
Gift Horse, installation 203
Governors Island, New York, USA 7
Granary Square (King’s Cross), London,
United Kingdom 21, 29, 86 – 93, 271,
272, 273, 274
Grande Bibliothèque, Paris, France 285
Hahn/Cock, installation 203
Halo Swing, Boston, Massachusetts,
USA 126
Harts Mill, Adelaide, Australia 276
Harvard Plaza, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
USA 31, 38, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 74 – 85
Harvard Science Center, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, USA 76
Harvard University, Cambridge, Massa-
chusetts, USA 19, 53, 74 – 85
Harvard Yard, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
USA 31, 49, 74, 76, 84
Heart of Hearts, installation 30
High Line, New York City, New York,
USA 7
Highpoint Shopping Centre, Melbourne,
Australia 277
Holding Pattern, installation 155
Humboldt Box, Berlin, Germany 264
Hy-Fi, installation 154
Identified Flying Object (‘The Birdcage),
installation 273
I Like to Move It, installation 34
Impulse, installation 31, 193
In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle
Street, installation 189, 190 – 191
Intrude, installation 63, 64, 65, 124,
133
Jade Eco Park, Taichung, China 42
John Madjeski Courtyard V&A, London,
United Kingdom 138 – 143
Jubilee Gardens, London, United
Kingdom 21
Junction Place, Wodonga, Australia 276
Kings College, London, United Kingdom
240
King’s Cross development, London,
United Kingdom 29, 86, 270 – 274
Labyrinth, installation 244, 245, 247
Landscape to Portrait, installation 28
La Place des Festivals and La Promenade
des Artistes Montreal, Canada 31,
192 – 197, 282 – 284
Latent (e)Scapes, installation 180, 181,
188 – 189
Lawn on D (LOD), Boston, Massachusetts,
USA 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65,
122 – 133, 270
Le Miroir d’Eau, Bordeaux, France 28,
29
Lewis Cubitt Square (King’s Cross),
London, United Kingdom 21, 29, 92,
273, 274
Light-Wing, installation 158
Liquid Sky, installation 156
London’s Largest Living Room, installation
240
Lost Star Matrix, installation 187
Louvre, Paris, France 248
Lumen, installation 153
Maggie Daley Park Ice Ribbon, Chicago,
Illinois, USA 31
MAXXI, Rome, Italy 30, 150
Milstein Hall Boardroom, Cornell School
of Architecture, Ithaca, New York,
USA 32
Mirror Mirror, installation 143
Mirror Pool, Bradford, Uniteds Kingdom
13, 102 – 107
Model for a Hotel, installation 202
MoMA PS1, Brooklyn, New York City, New
York, USA 30, 150 – 159
Montjuic, Barcelona, Spain 285
Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, Montreal,
Canada 244 – 247
Monument, installation 202
More London, London, United Kingdom
20, 230 – 233
Mount Royal Park 244
Moving Dunes 247
MPavilion Australia, Melbourne, Australia
30
Musée d’Orsay, Paris, France 248
National Gallery, London, United Kingdom
198
National Theatre, London, United
Kingdom 25, 96, 97, 101
Natural System Response, mural
134 – 137
Navy Yard Central Green, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, USA 208 – 213, 279,
281
Nelson’s Ship in A bottle, installation
203
New York Public Library, New York City,
New York, USA 234
Of Soil and Water, installation 274
Olympic Waterfront, Barcelona,
Spain 285
One and Other, installation 200, 203
One St Pancras, London, United
Kingdom 21
Open House, installation 33
Opera House, Zurich, Switzerland 221
Parc André Citroën, Paris, France 285
Parc Bercy, Paris, France 285
Parc de la Villette, Paris, France 13, 16,
285
Paris Plage, Paris, France 7
(Park)ing Day, San Francisco, California,
USA 30
Party Wall, installation 155
People’s Park, Berkeley, California,
USA 67
Percutaneous Delight, installation 159
Piazza Del Campo, Siena, Italy 11
Piazza Risorgimento, Bari, Italy 34
Picnurbia, installation 168, 170 – 171
Ping(!) London, London, United King-
dom 31
Playa Urbana, installation 158
Play Me I’m Yours, Installation, Times
Square, New York City, New York,
USA 30, 31
Pole Dance, installation 150, 156
Pop-Brixton, London, United Kingdom
31
Pop Rocks, installation 172 – 173
Porch Parade, installation 168, 178 – 179
Potters Fields Park, London, United
Kingdom 21, 55, 108 – 121, 230
Powerless Structures, installation 203
Princess Diana Memorial Fountain,
London, United Kingdom 20
Public Farm One, installation 156
Public Square, Cleveland, Ohio,
USA 280 – 281
Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, London,
United Kingdom 21
Radcliffe Public Art Competition,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
180 – 191
Radcliffe Slum, installation 190
Really Good, installation 203
Red Ball, installation 192, 195, 197
Reflections, installation 190
Regardless of History, installation 202
Rising Water, sound installation 257
Riverside Square, London, United
Kingdom 21
Robson Redux, Vancouver, Canada 30,
168 – 179
Rockefeller Plaza, New York City, New
York, USA 31
Rosy The Ballerina, London, United
Kingdom 55, 109
Royal Academy Courtyard, London, United
Kingdom 21, 28, 29
Safe Zone, installation, Grand-Métis,
Canada 48, 49
Sants Station Square, Barcelona,
Spain 285
Saturate the Moment, installation
186 – 187
Schlossplatz — Temporary Park at
Humboldt Forum, Berlin, Germany
262 – 265
Schouwburgplein, Rotterdam, The
Netherlands 7, 9, 17, 18, 38,
254 – 257
Scoop at More London, London, United
Kingdom 230 – 233
Seagram Building, New York City, New
York, USA 48, 50
Seagram Plaza, New York City, New York,
USA 11, 12
Sechseläutenplatz, Zurich, Switzerland
218 – 223
Serpentine Pavilion, Beijing, China 30,
163
Serpentine Pavilion, London, United
Kingdom 30, 160 – 167
Shelby Farms Park, Memphis, Tennessee,
USA 280, 281
Smale Riverfront Park, Cincinnati, Ohio,
USA 268, 270
Somerset House, London, United King-
dom 240
Somerset House Fountain Court, London,
United Kingdom 21, 29, 31, 240 – 243
Soundtrack in Berlin, project 263
South Bank development, Brisbane,
Australia 275
Southbank, London, United Kingdom
7, 23, 25, 94, 98, 108
Southbank Centre Square, London, United
Kingdom 21, 204 – 207
Southpark Hub, London, United Kingdom
21
South Park Plaza, London, United
Kingdom 280, 281
South Street Park, Sheffield, United
Kingdom 56, 57
Stack ‘M Up, installation 142
St John’s Churchyard, London, United
Kingdom 55
Stock-Pile, installation 180, 184 – 185
Storefront Theater, Lyons, Nebraska,
USA 32, 33
Strawberry and Screen, event, London,
United Kingdom 93
SubWave, installation 159
Superkilen, Copenhagen, Denmark 38
SUR, installation 157
Swing Time, Boston, Massachusetts,
USA 62, 63, 64, 124, 126, 127, 132
Tanner Fountain, Harvard Plaza, Cam-
bridge, Massachusetts, USA 48, 49,
74, 82
The Arena, sculpture, London, United
Kingdom 94, 95, 96, 98
The Goods Line, Sydney, Austra-
lia 214 – 217, 276
The High Line, New York City, New York,
USA 278 – 279, 281, 288
The Shed, Hudson Yard, New York City,
New York, USA 34, 35
The Teaser, installation 240
The Telectroscope, installation 230
Times Square, New York City, New York,
USA 30, 46, 47, 67, 68, 69, 70
Times Square Valentine Heart Design,
New York City, New York, USA 30
TOM (Temporary Overlay Marker), installa-
tion 244, 246, 247
Tower Bridge, London, United King-
dom 8, 26, 27, 55, 108, 114, 116,
118, 120, 230
Tower of London, London, United
Kingdom 230
Trafalgar Square, London, United Kingdom
8, 24, 25, 198 – 203, 230, 288
Transformer, pavilion 217
Underline, Miami, Florida, USA 7
University of Arts London, London, United
Kingdom 86
Unzipped Wall, London, United King-
dom 163
Urban Reef, installation 168, 176 – 177
Victoria and Albert Courtyard, London,
United Kingdom 20, 29
Victoria and Albert Museum, London,
United Kingdom 138 – 143
Victoria Square/Tarndanyangga, Adelaide,
Australia 275
Volume, installation, London, United
Kingdom 139
VW Dome, New York City, New York,
USA 150, 153
Warming Huts, Winnipeg, Canada 30,
170
Watch This Space — Royal Theatre, Lon-
don, United Kingdom 94 – 101
Weaving the Courtyard, installation 154
Wendy, installation 155
Westergasfabriek, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands 7
Windmill follies 39
Windrush Square, Brixton, London,
United Kingdom 21
Woodland Discovery Playground, Shelby
Farms Park, Memphis, Tennessee,
USA 280, 281
Yagan Square, Perth, Australia 275
Yokohama Masterplan, Yokohama, Japan
16, 48, 50
You Know You Cannot See Yourself So
Well as by Reflections, installation
142, 143
INDEX OF PLACES Waterloo Bridge, London, United
Kingdom 8 27
Adelaide, Australia 275, 276 Winnipeg, Canada 30, 170
Amsterdam, Netherlands 7, 285 Wodonga, Australia 276
Antwerp, Belgium 285 Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming,
Barcelona, Spain 8, 18, 285, 286, 287 USA 22, 23
Bari, Italy 34 Yokohama, Japan 16, 48, 50
Bay of Koutavos, Argostoli, Kefalonia, York, Alabama, USA 32
Greece 39, 40 Zurich, Switzerland 9, 218 – 223
Beijing, China 30, 163
Berkeley, California, USA 67
Berlin, Germany 9, 262 – 265, 285
Birmingham, United Kingdom 271
Bordeaux, France 28, 29
Boston, Massachusetts, USA 8, 9, 27,
59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 122 – 133,
268, 270
Bradford, United Kingdom 102 – 107
Brisbane, Australia 275
Bristol, United Kingdom 57
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 19, 31,
48, 74 – 85, 180 – 191
Chaumont 30
Chicago, Illinois, USA 8, 31
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA 268, 270
Cleveland, Ohio, USA 280 – 281
Copenhagen, Denmark 8, 29, 38, 285
Córdoba, Spain 258 – 261
Ferguson, Missouri, USA 67
Glasgow, United Kingdom 285
Gorud Valley, Norway 40
Grand-Métis, Canada 30, 34, 48
Hamburg, Germany 285
Helsinki, Finland 285
Houston, Texas, USA 9, 46
Istanbul, Turkey 150
Liverpool, United Kingdom 33, 34
London, United Kingdom 7, 8, 9, 20,
21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 54,
55, 70, 86 – 93, 94 – 101, 108 – 121,
138 – 143, 144 – 149, 198 – 203,
204 – 207, 230 – 233, 240 – 243,
270 – 274, 281, 285, 288
Lyon, France 285
Lyons, Nebraska, USA 32, 33
Manchester, United Kingdom 285
Marseilles, France 29
Melbourne, Australia 9, 30, 134 – 137,
275, 276, 277
Memphis, Tennessee, USA 280
Miami, Florida, USA 7
Montreal, Canada 8, 9, 30, 31,
192 – 197, 244 – 247, 282 – 284
Moscow, Russia 285
Nantes, France 29
New York City, New York, USA 7, 8, 9,
11, 30, 31, 34, 35, 46, 48, 50, 67, 68,
69, 70, 122, 150 – 159, 234 – 239, 278,
279, 288, 289
Nice, France 29
Oslo, Norway 40
Paris, France 7, 8, 13, 29, 248 – 253, 285
Perth, Australia 275
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA 9,
208 – 213, 279
Piazza San Marco, Venice, Italy 28, 29
Place de la Bourse, Bordeaux, France
29
Reykjavík, Iceland 285
Rome, Italy 30, 150
Rotterdam, Netherlands 7, 9, 17, 31, 38,
224 – 229, 254 – 257
San Francisco, California, USA 30
Santiago, Chile 150
Seoul, South Korea 150
Sheffield, United Kingdom 54, 56, 57
Siena, Italy 11
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.,
USA 29
Speakers’ Corner, Hyde Park, London,
United Kingdom 69, 70
St Gerasimos, Kefalonia, Greece 39, 40
Stockholm, Sweden 285
Sydney, Australia 214 – 217, 275, 276
Taichung, China 42
Toronto, Canada 7
Utrecht, Netherlands 32
Vancouver, Canada 30, 168 – 179
Venice, Italy 28, 29
Washington, D. C., USA 29
INDEX 299
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
B. Cannon Ivers is a landscape architect whose professional work
includes urban parks, education and business campuses, public
spaces and shared private courtyards in the UK, UAE, Finland, Italy,
Greece, Belgium and the USA. He frequently contributes to design
discourse through publications examining 3D design and digital fab-
rication, spatial programmability and cultural vitality, intelligent water
design and high-impact, low-maintenance planting design. He gradu-
ated from Colorado State University where he received the Landscape
Architect of the Year award and the top honours award from the Amer-
ican Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA). He holds a Master in
Landscape Architecture degree with Distinction from the Harvard
University Graduate School of Design, where he was again awarded
the highest honours by the ASLA. Cannon is a chartered member of
the Landscape Institute in the UK where he lives with his wife and
two children in London.
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
F. Philip Barash lives and writes at the intersection of design and
cultural critique. He has contributed critical essays, reviews and inter-
views to national publications that focus on design discourse. As a
curator and place-making expert, Barash has worked with civic and
non-profit organisations to articulate and promote a strong sense of
place, including the Chicago Architecture Foundation, the Poetry Foun-
dation, the Obama Presidential Center and the National Park Service.
He is an alumnus of the University of Detroit Mercy and the University
of Chicago, and currently lives in Boston with his partner and their cat.  in 1990, thereby establishing an international reputation for their sin-
James Corner (RLA, ASLA) is the Founding Partner and CEO of James
Corner Field Operations. He has devoted the past 30 years to advanc-
ing the field of landscape architecture and urbanism through his
leadership on high-visibility, complex urban projects at Field Opera-
tions, as well as through teaching, public speaking and writing. His
work has been recognised by the National Design Award, the Amer-
ican Academy of Arts and Letters Award in Architecture, the AA&D
Black Pencil Award and the Chrysler Design Award. His work has been
published widely and exhibited at the New York Museum of Modern
Art, the Cooper-Hewitt Design Museum, the National Building Muse-
um, the Royal Academy of Art in London, and the Venice Biennale. His
books include The High Line (Phaidon, 2015), The Landscape Imagin-
ation (Princeton Architectural Press, 2014) and Taking Measures
Across the American Landscape (Yale University Press, 1996). Corner
is an Emeritus Professor of Landscape Architecture and Urbanism at
the University of Pennsylvania School of Design, and serves on the
Board of the Urban Design Forum.
300
Nicola Dempsey (PhD) is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of
Landscape at the University of Sheffield. Her research focuses on
place-keeping, which conceptualises the design, planning and man-
agement of places as an ongoing process that, simply put, does not
end when the contractors leave the site. With its focus on the long
term, place-keeping involves the examination of partnership, govern-
ance, funding, policy, design and communication. The place-keeping
research is underpinned by a process of ‘post-occupancy evaluation’
of everyday landscapes in our towns and cities, which calls on her
extensive experience of researching public space in the urban envir-
onment. By applying a long-term perspective to urban landscapes,
her research contributes to an understanding of the impact of differ-
ent perspectives held by those who influence, and are influenced by,
urban change. 
Gina Ford is a landscape architect, and Co-founder and Principal of
Agency Landscape+ Planning. Underpinning her two decades of prac-
tice are a commitment to the design and planning of public places
and the perpetuation of the value of landscape architecture via
thought-leadership, teaching, writing and lecturing. Her work has
received awards from the American Society of Landscape Architects,
the American Planning Association and the American Institute of Ar-
chitects, among others. She is on the board of directors for the Cul-
tural Landscape Foundation and was the recipient of the Harvard
Graduate School of Design’s Charles Eliot Traveling Fellowship and
Wellesley College’s Shaw Fellowship.
Adriaan Geuze is the Founding Partner and Design Director of West 8,
a leading, international design practice. Having set up the firm in
1987, Geuze and West 8 were awarded the prestigious Prix de Rome
gular approach to planning and design of the public environment. This
also set the stage for what has become a substantial portfolio of
commissions around the globe. Geuze’s vision of a truly interdisciplin-
ary practice involves some of the most talented landscape architects,
urban designers, architects, planners, engineers and industrial de-
signers in the field today. It is built upon the notion of incorporating
contemporary culture, urban identity, architecture, public space and
engineering within one design, using context as the point of depar-
ture. West 8 has implemented large projects such as Governors Island
in New York, Madrid Rio, Toronto Central Waterfront and Miami Beach
SoundScape Park.
 
Richard Kennedy (RLA, ASLA) is a Senior Principal at James Corner
Field Operations. With more than 15 years of professional experience,
he is currently leading Field Operation’s San Francisco office, whose
portfolio includes the design of the Presidio Tunnel Tops Project and
Resilient by Design’s Bay Area Challenge. He also led the design and
implementation of Cleveland’s Public Square, Shelby Farm Park in
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
B. Cannon Ivers is a landscape architect whose professional work
includes urban parks, education and business campuses, public
spaces and shared private courtyards in the UK, UAE, Finland, Italy,
Greece, Belgium and the USA. He frequently contributes to design
discourse through publications examining 3D design and digital fab-
rication, spatial programmability and cultural vitality, intelligent water
design and high-impact, low-maintenance planting design. He gradu-
ated from Colorado State University where he received the Landscape
Architect of the Year award and the top honours award from the Amer-
ican Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA). He holds a Master in
Landscape Architecture degree with Distinction from the Harvard
University Graduate School of Design, where he was again awarded
the highest honours by the ASLA. Cannon is a chartered member of
the Landscape Institute in the UK where he lives with his wife and
two children in London.
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
F. Philip Barash lives and writes at the intersection of design and
cultural critique. He has contributed critical essays, reviews and inter-
views to national publications that focus on design discourse. As a
curator and place-making expert, Barash has worked with civic and
non-profit organisations to articulate and promote a strong sense of
place, including the Chicago Architecture Foundation, the Poetry Foun-
dation, the Obama Presidential Center and the National Park Service.
He is an alumnus of the University of Detroit Mercy and the University
of Chicago, and currently lives in Boston with his partner and their cat.  in 1990, thereby establishing an international reputation for their sin-
James Corner (RLA, ASLA) is the Founding Partner and CEO of James
Corner Field Operations. He has devoted the past 30 years to advanc-
ing the field of landscape architecture and urbanism through his
leadership on high-visibility, complex urban projects at Field Opera-
tions, as well as through teaching, public speaking and writing. His
work has been recognised by the National Design Award, the Amer-
ican Academy of Arts and Letters Award in Architecture, the AA&D
Black Pencil Award and the Chrysler Design Award. His work has been
published widely and exhibited at the New York Museum of Modern
Art, the Cooper-Hewitt Design Museum, the National Building Muse-
um, the Royal Academy of Art in London, and the Venice Biennale. His
books include The High Line (Phaidon, 2015), The Landscape Imagin-
ation (Princeton Architectural Press, 2014) and Taking Measures
Across the American Landscape (Yale University Press, 1996). Corner
is an Emeritus Professor of Landscape Architecture and Urbanism at
the University of Pennsylvania School of Design, and serves on the
Board of the Urban Design Forum.
300
Nicola Dempsey (PhD) is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of
Landscape at the University of Sheffield. Her research focuses on
place-keeping, which conceptualises the design, planning and man-
agement of places as an ongoing process that, simply put, does not
end when the contractors leave the site. With its focus on the long
term, place-keeping involves the examination of partnership, govern-
ance, funding, policy, design and communication. The place-keeping
research is underpinned by a process of ‘post-occupancy evaluation’
of everyday landscapes in our towns and cities, which calls on her
extensive experience of researching public space in the urban envir-
onment. By applying a long-term perspective to urban landscapes,
her research contributes to an understanding of the impact of differ-
ent perspectives held by those who influence, and are influenced by,
urban change. 
Gina Ford is a landscape architect, and Co-founder and Principal of
Agency Landscape+ Planning. Underpinning her two decades of prac-
tice are a commitment to the design and planning of public places
and the perpetuation of the value of landscape architecture via
thought-leadership, teaching, writing and lecturing. Her work has
received awards from the American Society of Landscape Architects,
the American Planning Association and the American Institute of Ar-
chitects, among others. She is on the board of directors for the Cul-
tural Landscape Foundation and was the recipient of the Harvard
Graduate School of Design’s Charles Eliot Traveling Fellowship and
Wellesley College’s Shaw Fellowship.
Adriaan Geuze is the Founding Partner and Design Director of West 8,
a leading, international design practice. Having set up the firm in
1987, Geuze and West 8 were awarded the prestigious Prix de Rome
gular approach to planning and design of the public environment. This
also set the stage for what has become a substantial portfolio of
commissions around the globe. Geuze’s vision of a truly interdisciplin-
ary practice involves some of the most talented landscape architects,
urban designers, architects, planners, engineers and industrial de-
signers in the field today. It is built upon the notion of incorporating
contemporary culture, urban identity, architecture, public space and
engineering within one design, using context as the point of depar-
ture. West 8 has implemented large projects such as Governors Island
in New York, Madrid Rio, Toronto Central Waterfront and Miami Beach
SoundScape Park.
 
Richard Kennedy (RLA, ASLA) is a Senior Principal at James Corner
Field Operations. With more than 15 years of professional experience,
he is currently leading Field Operation’s San Francisco office, whose
portfolio includes the design of the Presidio Tunnel Tops Project and
Resilient by Design’s Bay Area Challenge. He also led the design and
implementation of Cleveland’s Public Square, Shelby Farm Park in
Memphis, the award-winning South Park at Queen Elizabeth Olympic
Park in London and the Urban Metabolism exhibition for the 2014
International Architectural Biennale in Rotterdam. Kennedy holds a
Master in Landscape Architecture degree with Distinction from
Harvard University, where he was awarded the Jacob Weidenmann
Prize for Excellence in Design, and a BA in Landscape Architecture
from Cornell University. He has taught and lectured at the University
of Pennsylvania School of Design and at other design institutions.
Daoust Lestage has worked since 1988 as a multidisciplinary firm
concerned with design at every scale, to bridge the limitations of
traditional design practices and overcome boundaries between urban
design, architecture, landscape, graphic, interior, industrial and fur-
niture design. The approach for each project is based upon a careful
understanding of the space or site’s current and historical character-
istics in order to anchor the proposed intervention with the intrinsic
qualities of its surroundings, revealing traces of the past through a
resolutely contemporary language. Characterised by their simplicity,
the firm’s designs demonstrate an ability to conceptualise projects of
varied nature and scope. From large-scale urban improvement pro-
jects and architectural schemes to interior and furniture design, the
team has acquired unique expertise in planning, design and realisa-
tion of diverse and award-winning projects with over 100 project
awards at provincial, national and international levels. These acco-
lades recognise Daoust Lestage’s preoccupation with the realisation
of significant, high-quality projects, and their commitment to well-
considered design that creates enduring environments at urban and
architectural scales.
Sergio Lopez-Pineiro is the founder of Holes of Matter, a research
and design practice exploring voids as sources of freedom, diversity
and spontaneity. Lopez-Pineiro is a lecturer at the Harvard Graduate
School of Design where he teaches studios and seminars on architec-
ture, landscape architecture and urbanism. He has held the Reyner
Banham Fellowship at the University at Buffalo (2006–07) and the
Daniel Urban Kiley Fellowship at Harvard University (2014–15). His
work has been supported by the New York State Council on the Arts
and the MacDowell Colony and has been published by a+t, MAS Con-
text, Bracket, arq: Architecture Research Quarterly, Places and 2G,
among others. Lopez-Pineiro graduated from Escuela Técnica Super-
ior de Arquitectura de Madrid and received his MArch from Princeton
University, where he was awarded the Suzanne Kolarik Underwood
Prize. A registered architect in Spain, Lopez-Pineiro has worked at
No.mad and Foreign Office Architects.
Chris Reed is Founding Director of Stoss Landscape Urbanism. He is
recognised internationally as a leading voice in the transformation of
landscapes and cities, and he works alternately as a researcher, strat-
egist, teacher, designer and advisor. His work collectively includes
urban revitalisation initiatives, climate resilience efforts, speculative
propositions, adaptations of infrastructure and former industrial sites,
dynamic and productive landscapes, and numerous landscape instal-
lations, all producing vibrant public spaces that cultivate a diversity
of social uses and cultural traditions. Reed is the co-editor of Projective
Ecologies (Actar, 2014) and a contributing author to leading publica-
tions across the globe. He is a recipient of the 2012 Cooper-Hewitt
National Design Award in Landscape Architecture and a Fellow of the
American Society of Landscape Architects. He is Professor in Practice
of Landscape Architecture and Co-Director of the Master of Landscape
Architecture in Urban Design Program at the Harvard University Gradu-
ate School of Design.
Ken Trew, BSc (Hons), Dip LD, FLI, trained as a landscape architect
and became a Fellow of the Landscape Institute in 1993. His early
experience was at Michael Brown Partnership as a consultant for
public-sector housing projects in London. He moved to BDP where he
became a landscape partner and developed expertise in Environmen-
tal Impact Assessment (EIA). Later he moved to Oxford and joined RPS
as Operational Director. Trew has contributed to publications on land-
scape assessment and acted as an expert landscape witness at many
planning inquiries. In 2000 he was commissioned by Argent to under-
take the EIA for King’s Cross and in 2007 he joined the project delivery
team in London. He was responsible for managing the design and
implementation of the public realm at King’s Cross and also for the
Paradise development in Birmingham. He retired from Argent in 2016
but remains a consultant for King’s Cross and on projects at Totten-
ham and Birmingham.
Charles Waldheim is a North American architect, urbanist and edu-
cator. Waldheim’s research examines the relations between land-
scape, ecology and contemporary urbanism. He coined the term
‘landscape urbanism’ to describe the emergent discourse and prac-
tices of landscape in relation to design culture and contemporary ur-
banisation. On these topics he is the author of Landscape as Urban-
ism: A General Theory (Princeton University Press, 2016) and editor of
The Landscape Urbanism Reader (Princeton Architectural Press,
2006). Waldheim is the John E. Irving Professor at Harvard University’s
Graduate School of Design where he directs the Office for Urbaniza-
tion. He is a recipient of the Rome Prize Fellowship from the American
Academy in Rome, the Visiting Scholar Research Fellowship at the
Study Centre of the Canadian Centre for Architecture, the Cullinan Chair
at Rice University, and the Sanders Fellowship at the University of
Michigan.
Alex Wall is Professor of Practice in the School of Architecture at the
University of Virginia (UVA), and Director of the Urban Design Certifi-
cate. After receiving his Diploma at the Architectural Association, he
worked at OMA in London and Rotterdam (1982–89). Between 1998
and 2013, he was Professor of International Urban Design at Karls-
ruhe Institute of Technology, Germany, focusing on integrated multi-
scale design and planning. In 2005 he published Victor Gruen: from
urban shop to new city (Actar). He was a partner of UMnet / `asp´-
Stuttgart between 2009 and 2013, winning competitions for a proto-
type energy-efficient office building, and the urban centre of the Tuz-
la Logistics City, Istanbul. At UVA, his current research is titled ‘Resilient
Settlement and Productive Aquatic Landscapes: Framing Long-term
Redevelopment Strategies for Virginia’s Coastal Communities’. His
most recent paper, ‘Sprawl is Dead, Long Live the Low-density City’,
is part of MIT’s Infinite Suburbia project (2017).
Chris Wangro, one-time circus ringmaster and former tsar of Special
Events for the City of New York, is acclaimed as one of the most im-
aginative impresarios of public events in the US. For more than three
decades, Wangro produced a dizzying variety of projects that includ-
ed dozens of prestigious arts festivals, concerts and cultural exposi-
tions. He has created and directed presidential summits, papal visits
and massive public spectacles. He has masterminded benchmark
events for the United Nations, humanitarian organisations and NGOs
worldwide. His work has won numerous awards, captured global
media attention and generated over a US$ 100 million for people in
need. In recent years Wangro has turned his focus towards the de-
velopment of public space and is known for combining decades of
programming and producing experience with an uncommonly joyful
and creative approach to place- and community-making.
Authenticated
ABOUT THE AUTHOR / ABOUT THE CONTRIBUT ORS 301
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It has been a pleasure to create this book, largely because of the in- Atsuko Kunigi at ASPECT Studios; Isaac Amin, Rachel Caltagirone and
credible people that I have met throughout the process. The success Steve Alderson of Argent. It has been a pleasure communicating with
of our public spaces begins with the energy and creativity of the you and I’m grateful for your support. I’d also like to thank Tricia
people tasked with designing a place, the teams considering the cu- Lewis at the Bryant Park Corporation and Meg Rotzel from Radcliffe,
ratorial calendar to keep the life of the space fresh and interesting both of whom helped enormously with sourcing photographs. Fur-
and the clients who see the enduring value of creating quality public ther, I am grateful to all the photographers who have generously
realm — and are willing to pay for it, maintain it and enliven it. Without supported this project with their images that capture the culture,
the tireless determination from all those involved to push the profes- energy and life of the spaces that are featured in this book. Many of
sion forward, many of the projects featured here would not have been these performances and installations are fleeting, and without your
realised. photographic eye, these moments would not be captured. There have
I am grateful for the sustained patience and encouragement from also been many colleagues and friends on various continents that
my wife and children, who consistently carved out space to allow me have assisted with images of installations or suggested projects that
to progress the drawings and text for this book. And to my mother I should consider for the case studies and I’d like to thank Alex Cassini
and father for inculcating curiosity, creativity and ambition in my life in this regard for his sustained support.
from a young age. A special thanks to Charles Waldheim, Chris Reed Thank you also to Michael O’Loughlin for the masterful translation
and Sergio Lopez-Pineiro for their considered guidance and instruc- of Adriaan Geuze’s text from Dutch to English. I’d also like to thank
tion as I was developing the concept for this book during my time at Adriaan Gueze for taking the time to write his essay and then revisit
the Harvard Graduate School of Design. I am grateful that our friend- the text to strengthen the conclusion (and Michael for translating it
ship and collaboration was extended with this project and I look for- again).
ward to other shared projects. Thank you to Neil Mattinson, Andrew Finally, I would like to thank James Corner for concluding this book
Harland, Rob Aspland, Benjamin Walker and the wider team at LDA with the clarity and precision that has defined his writing and design
Design for their support and encouragement over the past decade. work over the past decades. It is an honour and a privilege to feature
I am grateful to Brad Goetz, Merlyn Paulson and Kelly Curl, from your text within Staging Urban Landscapes.
my alma mater Colorado State University, for their support with this
book project and encouragement over the years. 
Thank you to the team at Birkhäuser: Henriette Mueller-Stahl,
Andreas Müller, Heike Strempel, Rosa Ainley and Silke Nalbach for
patiently putting the content of the book together. It was a pleasure
to work with you all. I’m also grateful to the sponsors: Sasaki, Argent,
ASPECT Studios, LDA Design, Mace, Marshalls and Savills. I hope the
content of this book inspires your teams and enriches the built envir-
onment realms you operate within.
Many of the contributors in this book are at the apogee of their
careers — influencing the trajectory of the profession, inspiring the
next generation of young designers, both pedagogically and profes-
sionally, advancing design discourse through the delivery of projects
on the ground — still they made time to produce thought-provoking,
challenging, edifying and entertaining texts to complement the case
studies. A special thanks to Alex Wall, Chris Wangro, Gina Ford and
Adriaan Geuze for the face-to-face discussions via video conferencing,
often late in the evening or at the weekend, and to every other con-
tributor who I contacted on multiple occasions by phone and email.
Thank you to Richard Kennedy for your creativity and vision in leading
our generation to shape the future of design. I’m very much looking
forward to sharing in the landscape architecture profession with you
over many decades to come.
I’d also like to thank the teams behind the contributors: Scott
Mitchell at Stoss; Margaret Jankowsky and Chelsi Parani at JCFO;
Annemarie Kuijt at West 8; Marie-Josée Gagnon at Daoust Lestage;

302
ILLUSTRATION
CREDITS
All illustrations not mentioned below
were taken or drawn by B. Cannon Ivers.
20min.ch 223 bottom left
Adam Aswald 159 upper middle right
Agence Rol 70 top right
Alex Cassini 247 bottom right
Alison Meyer 30 top right
Amund Sjølie Sveen 257 middle right
Amy Tomasso 74 bottom right
Andrew Ho 97 lower middle (middle)
Andrew Latreille 168 bottom left, 176
top, 176 middle, 177
Andrew Lloyd 279, 280 top right, 280
bottom
Angelito Jusay 234 bottom left, 235,
237 middle left, 238 top, 239
Anthony Reynolds Gallery 202 top left
Anthony Worsdell 203 top right
Art in the City 192 bottom left, 192
bottom right, 196 top left, 196 top right,
196 upper middle (all), 196 lower middle
(all), 197 middle, 197 bottom left, 197
bottom right
Art Poskanzer 48 botom
Aurélien Guichard 94 bottom right
Balmond Studio 162 bottom right
Barrett Doherty 84 top right, 278 middle
right
Bianca Mauro 59 middle, 61 all, 62
bottom, 63 top, 63 middle, 64, 65 all,
122 middle, 122 bottom, 124 all, 125,
130 all, 131 all, 132 all, 133 all
Bob O’Connor 180 bottom right
Bread Collective 145 bottom
Brendan De Souza 56 middle
Bruce Petschek 62 top
Bryant Park Corporation 234 bottom
right, 237 top right, 237 bottom left
© 2000 Hélène Binet Courtesy of Serpen-
tine Galleries 162 top
© 2003 Richard Bryant/archaidi-
mages 163 middle right
© 2005 Sally Tallant 163 bottom right
© 2005 Sylvain Deleu 160 bottom left,
162 middle right, 162 bottom left
© 2006 John Offenbach Courtesy of
Serpentine Galleries 164 top left
© 2007 Deborah Bullen Courtesy of
Serpentine Galleries 164 middle right
© 2007 Luke Hayes Courtesy of
Serpentine Galleries 164 middle left
© 2009 Claire Byrne Courtesy of
Serpentine Galleries 165 top
© 2010 Philippe Ruault 165 middle left
© 2011 Hufton & Crow 165 bottom left
© 2012 Iwan Baan Courtesy of Serpenti-
ne Galleries 166 top left
© 2013 Jim Stephenson 166 middle
left, 167 top right,
© Iwan Baan Courtesy of Serpentine
Galleries 167 middle left
© Jim Stephenson 167 top right, 167
middle right
© Loz Pycock 164 bottom right, 166
bottom left, 202 bottom right
Canadian Centre for Architecture 50 top
Cara Protzco 156 top right
Cars Coop 108 middle
CatbirdinGreece 11 top
Cecil Barnes 154 bottom
Chensiyuan 70 middle right
Chiara Isserlis 193
Chris Bruntlett 251 middle right
Christina Geros, SHO 188 bottom left,
188 bottom right
Claude Cormier + Associés 244 bottom
right, 245, 246 bottom, 247 top left, 247
top middle, 247 lower middle left, 247
bottom left
Colin Miller 237 bottom right, 238
bottom left, 238 bottom right
Corporal Patrick P. Evenson 69 bottom
Courtesy of Canadian Centre of
Architecture 50 top
Courtesy of Diller Scofidio Renfro in
collaboration with Rockwell Group 34
top left, 35 top left, 35 middle left
Courtesy of the Massachusetts
Convention Center Authority 269 all,
270 middle
Cycle Fun Montreal 196 bottom left
Daoust Lestage 283 right, 284 top left
David Iliff 24 top, 201 top right
David Joseph 159 middle left
Design With Company 168 bottom left
De Urbanisten 224 bottom right, 225
all, 226 all, 228 all, 229
Denise Oliveira 150 bottom left
Deverill Jenkins 165 middle right
Diane Salazar 116 middle left
Don Brice 280 top left
Eddy Motion 218 bottom right
Ed Reeves courtesy of London Design
Festival 142 top right
Ed Schipul 47 middle
Elia Zenghelis and Elias Veneris, OMA,
Athens (painting by Zoe Zenghelis) 39
Elizabeth Sellers 143 bottom right
Event Industry News 105 bottom right
Florian Groehn 214 bottom left, 214
bottom right, 215, 217 top
Frank Blaser 223 top left
Fred Romero 250 middle left
Fuzheado 70 middle left
Gary Hoyer 202 lower middle left
Garry Knight 203 upper middle right
Gerold Guggenbuehl 223 top right
Gifas 222 bottom
Grumpylumixuser via Wikimedia Common
License 28 bottom
Guardian 195 top
Gwen Webber 156 bottom left
Halkin Mason Photography 208 bottom
left, 209, 212, 213 all
Hannah Gray 114 top, 114 middle, 114
bottom left, 114 bottom middle, 116 top,
116 middle right, 116 bottom right, 118
middle, 118 bottom, 120 all
HAPA Collaborative and Joshua Dool
Photography 174 all, 175
House of Switzerland 219
Hufton + Crow 166 bottom right
Penny Williams 247 top right
inatheblue 29 bottom
Interboro Partners 76 all, 85 middle right
itchymoblog 204 bottom left
Iwan Baan 278 bottom left
Iwan Baan Courtesy of Diller Scofidio
Renfro in collaboration with Rockwell
Group 35 middle right
Iwan Baan Courtesy of Serpentine
Galleries 167 top left
Jacques Leroy for Franklin Azzi Architects
249
Jake Belcher 31 bottom
James Bryant 243 bottom right
James Corner Field Operations 208
bottom right
Jane Roberts 202 lower middle right
Jean Gagnon 196 bottom middle, 197 top
Jeff Knowles 241 top
Jennifer Lenhart 251 bottom
Jesse Zryb 59 top
Jessica Sheridan 155 top right
Jim Henderson 70 bottom left
Jim Stephenson, courtesy of Serpentine
Galleries 160 right
JML Water Feature Design 29 top
Joakim Boren 30 middle right
Joe the Explorer 114 bottom right
John Adrien courtesy United Visual
Artists 139, 142 top left
John Gollings 30 middle left, 134
bottom, 135 all
John Horner Photography 63 bottom
John Sturrock, courtesy of King’s Cross
Central Limited Partnership 86 bottom
left, 86 bottom right, 87 all, 88 top, 88
bottom left, 88 bottom right, 90 top, 90
middle left, 90 bottom, 91 all, 92 all, 93
all, 272 all, 273 all, 274 all
Jon Barraclough 34 top right
Jonathan Green 147 bottom right
Josef Pinlac 238 middle right
JR 68 bottom
Justin Bettman for Times Square Art 30
bottom left
Karen Firestone 238 middle left
Katherine Isidro 85 upper left
Katyboo 28 top left
Kelvin Woo 141 bottom right
Keven Law 108 bottom
Kevin Grady, courtesy of the Radcliffe
Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard
University 186 top, 186 middle, 186
bottom left, 187 top, 188 lower middle,
190 middle
Krista Jahnke 170 bottom, 173
Lawrence Halprin 12 top
Light Surgeons 204 bottom right
Luke Hayes 28 top right
Luke Jerram 31 top
Manuel Bauer 222 top
Marc Cramer 195 bottom, 282, 284
bottom left, 287 bottom middle
Marco de Swart 255
Maria Azzurra Mugnai 68 top
Maria Spadafora 105 top left
Marja Van Bochove 257 top right
Marjoleinnyssen Courtesy of Serpentine
Galleries 163 top right
I Martin Bond 34 middle, 34 bottom
Martina Alagna 88 middle
Mary Kay 248 bottom right, 251 top left
Matthew Mazzotta 32 top, 32 middle
Matthew Neilson 150 right
Maxime Brouillet 244 bottom left, 247
upper middle left
Maxime Dufour 248 bottom left, 250 top
Mel Burton 55 top left
Michael Grimm 47 top Ed Schipul
(Discovery/Green) 47middle
Michael Haug 218 bottom left
Miguel de Guzmán 154 top right
Mina Carson 251 top right
The Museum of Modern Art and MoMA
PS1 154 middle, 155 bottom right, 156
bottom right, 157 all, 158 all, 159 top left,
159 lower middle right, 159 bottom right
Montreal Visitors Guide 196 top middle
MVRDV 163 middle left, 163 bottom left
Neil Turner 102 bottom left
Nelvin C. Cepeda 30 bottom right
Nicola Di Turi 11 middle right
Oerend Hard 257 bottom left
Olololrororo 90 middle right
OMA 16, 39 all, 50 bottom
OMA New York 32 bottom left, middle,
right
Paredes Pino Arquitectos 258 bottom
left, 258 bottom right, 259, 261 all
Patkau Architects 30 top left
Paul Appleyard 203 lower middle right
Penny Williams 247 top right
Peter Culley 206 top
Peter MacDiarmid 243 bottom left
Philafrenzy 201 bottom left
Philip Winn Courtesy of Projects for Public
Space 85 middle left
Philippe Rahm architects, Paris 42 all,
43 all, 44 all, 45 all
Potters Fields Park 110 all, 111
Prioryman 203 middle right
Rag Ririn 257 top left
Rebecca Harmer 144 bottom
Reimagine 168 bottom right
relais Landschaftsarchitekten 263 all
Renee Hoeflaak 257 middle left
Authenticated
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS / ILLUSTRATION CR EDITS 303
Richard Haughton 241 middle
Robin Forster, courtesy of LDA Design
279 all, 280
Roeldinkstra 257 bottom right
Roger Jones, Geographic Society 141
middle right
Rogers Stirk Harbour Architects 13 bottom
Roland zh 223 middle left, 223 bottom
right
Roland ZH 220
Rowa Lee 278 bottom right
Ruben Segovia 85 middle right
Rudy Bender 12 bottom
Rut Blees Luxemburg 240 bottom right
Ruth Hartnup 172 top
Sahar Coston-Hardy 281 all
Sam Walker 200 top
Sasaki 60, 123, 127 all, 268 all, 270 top
Schouwburgplein Facebook 254 bottom
right
Scott Lynch 151, 153 all, 154 top left,
155 top left, 155 bottom left
Sean Dempsey 202 upper middle left
SHO 180 bottom left, 188 top, 188
upper middle, 189 top
Simon Whitbread 217 bottom left
SMAQ Architecture, Urbanism, and
Research, Berlin 40 all, 41 all
SO-IL 156 top left
Somerset House 243 top left, 243 top
right, 243 middle left, 243 middle right
Stefan Müller 262 bottom left, 262
bottom right, 264 top left, 264 top right,
264 middle right, 264 bottom left
Stephen Stimson landscape archi-
tects 182
Steve Stills 97 bottom middle
Stewart Morris 231
Stoss 47 bottom, 51 bottom, 52 all
Stoss Landscape Urbanism 75 all, 184
all, 185 all
Stoss/Charles Mayer 51 top left
Stoss/Chris Reed 51 top right
Stoss/Mike Roemer 48 middle
Stoss/Yvan Maltais 49
Studio Daniel Libeskind 162 middle left
Studio Weave 240 bottom left
Subwave by Roy 159 top right
surveyor.in-berlin.de 264 bottom right
Su Yuen Ho/Battersea Power Station
Development Company 148 bottom left,
149 all
Susan St. Lawrence 203 bottom left
Taylor Herring 116 bottom left
Telegraph and Argus 105 top right, 105
middle right, 105 bottom left
The All-Nite Images 67 all
The Girl Next Shore 148 bottom right
Theresa Arzadon-Labajo 171
Tim Green 105 middle left, 107
Timothy Schenck, courtesy of Friends of
the High Line 278 top right
Toby Honey 203 top left
Tom Dolan 84 middle left, 84 bottom left
Trademark Tours 53
Traveldigg 198 bottom left
Tylar Greene/FWS 70 top left
Upper Rhenish Master, Städel Museum,
1410/1420 286
UP Projects 109
V&A 138 bottom, 142 middle left, 142
bottom left, 142 bottom right, 143 top
Vancouver Public Spaces 170 middle
Vancouver Public Space Network 172
bottom
Vetschpartner 221
Victor De Jesus 102 bottom right, 103
bottom left, middle and right
Villa d’Arte 11 middle left
VIVA 170 top
Viva Vancouver 172 middle, 176 bot-
tom, 178 all, 179
West 8 18 bottom left, 254 bottom left
Whereourtimewent 148 top
Wikimendia Commons 67 all, 68 all, 69
all, 70 all
Wim Kuijkin 224 bottom left
Yannick Grandmont 284 bottom right
Zefrog 24 bottom right
Zieta Prozessdesign 142 middle right
L AYOUT, COVER DESIGN AND T YPESET TING
Silke Nalbach, Mannheim

FRONT AND BACK COVER ILLUSTRATION

B. Cannon Ivers, London

PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Henriette Mueller-Stahl, Berlin

COPY EDITING
Rosa Ainley, Whitstable, Kent

TRANSL ATION FROM DUTCH P. 285–287

Michael O’Loughlin, Dublin

PRODUCTION
Heike Strempel, Berlin

LITHOGRAPHY
bildpunkt Druckvorstufen GmbH, Berlin

PAPER
120 g/m² Amber Graphic

PRINTING
Grafisches Centrum Cuno GmbH & Co. KG, Calbe, printed in UltraHDprint

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018937446

Bibliographic information published by the German National Library

The German National Library lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the
material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustra-
tions, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in other ways, and storage
in databases.
For any kind of use, permission of the copyright owner must be obtained.

ISBN 978-3-0356-1189-2
e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-0356-1046-8.

© 2018 Birkhäuser Verlag GmbH, Basel

P.O. Box 44, 4009 Basel, Switzerland
Part of Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Printed on acid-free paper produced from chlorine-free pulp. TCF ∞

Printed in Germany

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 www.birkhauser.com