Public Spaces for All: How "Public" are Public Spaces ? Case of Ahmedabad city's Riverfront Park

11

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Case of Ahmedabad city’s Riverfront Parks

Shaurya Patel | UP4012 Guide: Dr. Rutul Joshi Dissertation Year: 2016 Faculty of Planning

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

PUBLIC SPACES FOR ALL: HOW “PUBLIC” ARE PUBLIC SPACES? Case of Ahmedabad city’s Riverfront Parks

Shaurya Patel UP4012

Dr. Rutul Joshi Guide

02 - 05 - 2016

Ahmedabad

“To all the intellectually ardent people�

CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the thesis titled “Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces? Case of Ahmedabad city’s Riverfront Parks”, has been submitted by Mr Shaurya Patel towards partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Bachelors Degree in Planning, Faculty of Planning, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. This is a bonafide work of the student and has not been submitted to any other institution for the award of any Degree/Diploma.

Prof. Neeru Bansal Chair Person Dissertation Committe Date: 02 - 05 - 2016

Dr. Rutul Joshi Guide

i

UNDERTAKING I, Shaurya Patel, the author of the thesis titled “Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces? Case of Ahmedabad city’s Riverfront Parks”. hereby declare that this is an independent work of mine, carried out towards partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Bachelors Degree in Planning, Faculty of Planning, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. This work has not been submitted to any other institution for the award of any Degree/Diploma.

Date: 02 - 05 - 2016 Place: Ahmedabad

Shaurya Patel UP4012 Signature:

ii

DISCLAIMER This document describes work undertaken as part of a program of study at the Faculty of Planning, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. All views and opinions expressed therein remain the sole responsibility of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of the Institute/ University.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The idea of this thesis topic has been growing gradually in the 4 years of the Bachelors in Planning Programme at CEPT University. A sincere thanks to all the faculty members and friends who helped me in this voyage.

I would like to thank my guide Dr. Rutul Joshi. I am grateful for the guidance, liberty, motivation and practical way forward he gave me during the entire duration of the study.

I am thankful to the people of HCP Design, Planning and Management Ltd. Ahmedabad and Oasis Design Inc., Delhi. Who extended their full support for data of the research.

I am overwhelmed with my friend’s inputs and support. For bringing and balancing the philosophical and logical aspect of the thesis as well as four years of valuable inputs in all the research I carried out during my entire voyage Thank you Saswata Kolay & Himadri Panchal Last but not the least a sincere thanks to my family especially my sister, Shailja Patel for her creative and mind provoking inputs for my thesis topic, My mother and father Dhrupali Patel and Dhiren Patel for keeping me healthy, happy and keeping me ardent for the work I love.

iv

Table of Contents UNDERTAKING DISCLAIMER ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures

i ii iii iv v vi

Executive Summary

01

Background The Research Findings Conclusion

02

Part 1

05 07 09 11

Background Literature Review Why public space as a subject of interest? And who are they for?

Public Space and the Right to the City Meaning & Etymology of “Public” Aim Methodology Selection of the Site Data Collection Method

12

Part 2

29

Context Public Space Scenario Sabarmati Riverfront The narrative of two parks Usmanpura Park Finding Accessibility & Publicness: Usmanpura Park Subhash Bridge Park Finding Accessibility & Publicness: Subhash Bridge Park People’s Park?

30

14 18 23 24 25 25 25

30 35 38 40 41 58 59 69

Part 3

73

Findings Conclusion

74

References

78 83

v

List of Tables Table 1 the definitions of ‘public space’ regarding the criteria of access, actor and interest 13

by Benn and Gaus (1983) Table 2 Zone wise details of Open Spaces

30

Table 3 Categories of parks with standards

33

Table 4 Provision of Parks and Open Spaces in AMC & AUDA

33

Table 5 Usmanpura Park: Notion of people regarding entry fee

48

Table 6 Usmanpura Park: Notion of people when entry fee is increased

50

Table 7 Usmanpura Park: Kind of people you would like or dislike to see

53

Table 8 Usmanpura Park: Activities people like or dislike to see

55

Table 9 Subhash Bridge Park: Perspective about entry fee

64

Table 10 Subhash Bridge Park: What people like and dislike about the space?

66

Table 11 Subhash Bridge Park: Kind of people like and dislike to see in a public space

68

Table 12 Subhash Bridge Park: Activities that people like and dislike to see

69

Table 13 A methodology created by PPS for evaluating public space

70

Table 14 Evaluation of both the parks through methodology created by PPS, New York

71

vi

List of Figures Figure 1 Etymology of word “public” Figure 2 Process of making of questionnaire for the research Figure 3 Primary Questionnaire for the Survey Figure 4 Location of existing parks and gardens. Source: AUDA DP 2021 Figure 5 Satellite imagery showing example of parks from each category. Source: AUDA DP 2021 Figure 6 Pedestrian access of parks overlaid with residential land use. Source: AUDA DP 2021 Figure 7 Percentage of Parks and Open Space area within AMC Zones. Source: AUDA DP 2021 Figure 8 Landuse of Sabarmati Riverfront. Source: SRFDCL Figure 9 Recreational Spaces. Source: SRFDCL

23

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure come

38

10 Early Construction face of Usmanpura Park. Source: SRFDCL 11 Location of the site 12 Map showing buffers of 500m, 1000m, 1500m and 2000m respectively 13 Usmanpura Park: Zoomed in view 14 Usmanpura Park - Gender Distribution 15 Usmanpura Park - Religion Distribution 16 Usmanpura Park - Gender Distribution 17 Usmanpura Park: Which are visitors comes from 18 Usmanpura Park: Spatial location of the places 19 Usmanpura Park: % distribution of family income 20 Usmanpura Park - Age Group Distribution 21 Usmanpura Park: Income Disparity 22 Usmanpura Park: Why do you come here?

23 Usmanpura Park: Students Studying 24 Usmanpura Park: Alternative public spaces people visits 25 Usmanpura Park: Children’s Play Section 26 Usmanpura Park: Parking near the park 27 Usmanpura Park: In Afternoon 28 Usmanpura Park: Public Spaces for all?

29 Subhash Bridge Park: Zoomed in view 30 Subhash Bridge Park: Rules & Regulation 31 Subhash Bridge Park: Gender Distribution 32 Subhash Bridge Park: Religion Distribution 33 Subhash Bridge Park: Mode of Travel 34 Subhash Bridge Park: Map showing the location of areas from where people

26 27 31 33 34

34 36 37 39 39 40 40 41 42 42 42 43 43 43 44 45 46 51 52 56 57 58 58 58 59 59 60

vii 60 Figure 35 Subhash Bridge Park: % of people coming from which area 60 Figure 36 Subhash Bridge Park: Age Group Distribution 62 Figure 37 Subhash Bridge Park: Why people come here?

63 Figure 38 Subhash Bridge Park: A Muslim family having peaceful dinner at the Park 68 Figure 39 Subhash Bridge Park: Spending time with loved ones 69 Figure 40 Subhash Bridge Park: Public Space for All? Figure 41 Connection to the city is totally cut off because of high walls and creating a 71 monotonous look and activities along lower promenade 80 Figure 42 Usmanpura Park : In Morning 81 Figure 43 Usmanpura Park : In Evening

Executive Summary

2

Executive Summary Background Cities have always been elusive but the main goal of city is to give people, the places where they can find tranquillity and help them engage with one another yet at the same time providing them with freedom of thoughts and individuality.

Public sphere is the domain in which all this can easily be found and exercised. Public spaces forms a vital place where people can come together, exchange ideas, romanticise with one another, protest for a cause, form a new friendship, learn skills, and share knowledge, emotions and music. It’s a dimension of space where various activities takes place at different time because it is the only space in the city where all the emotions, feelings, the subjectivity of human being is expressed in numerous variations. People from different climate and culture come together and form public sphere and thus create places that reflects their collective needs.

In 1961, Jane Jacob in her book ‘The Life and Death of Great American Cities’ mentioned that “Cities have the capabilities of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.” This was based on the fact that cities are for the people. Many of the early/ classical urban thinkers used simple observation and common sense. Jane Jacob for example, suggested that cities needs to have public spaces, mixed uses, dense concentration, buildings with different age and dimensions and short walkable blocks. Two decades later in 1980, William H. Whyte in his book “The social life of small urban spaces” which was a pre book to the project: The Street Life Project, tried to understand the lifestyle of people in different urban spaces and why some spaces are successful over other spaces in New York. He suggested how those spaces can Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

3

be improvised with policies, design and planning.

Both famously accepted urbanist, Jacob and Whyte approach towards urban planning and design was a revolutionary step for city’s development and growth in the post- world war era. Both believed that cities are actually for the people and the city spaces belongs to people. The commonality among both the urbanist is that, they understood the importance of public space in a city. Since the earliest publication of Camillo Sitte’s book in 1889 on the art of building cities written from an intuitive and aesthetic view point to Jan Gehl’s book on Cities for People in 2010, public spaces and people have been the vortex of cities.

Indeed the fundamental aim of the public pace is to ensconce community and to arbitrate social conflict (Kostof, 1992). The public space is where we exercise our dealership, our sense of belongings and our sense of existence. Public spaces should allow people to come and go as and when they please, without the consent of any authorities, and without any declaration of a justifying purpose. The activities that are formed within the sphere of public space are understood at some level to be collective, and at some level to be individual but participation in both cases is random and institutionalized. From Greek agora to Central Park of New York, the public spaces have always been a canvas for political and social change. Demonstration of this change in design and uses of the public realm is important as it is a part of ever changing landscape. The tenacity of open space is one of the factor. A large public monument of one period with an open usable space may become a public square in another period, regardless of the shifts in the urban fabric during the interim. (Kostof, 1992) Coliseum in Rome was once a battlefield, now it is part of the Seven Wonders of the World with having one of the highest tourist attraction.

The changing landscape of public space shows the

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

4

dynamic nature and potential of public space to a great extent. The lesson of urban history was that public spaces must be viewed in three dimensions, as volumes carved out of the solid of the built fabric (Kostof, 1992). The central issue of public places is, in fact, versatility. And here the interrelation with form, in the broad sense of physical structure, becomes inescapable. Less the specific the form of the square, the more possible it is to have a public place of mixed uses (Kostof, 1992).

The story of public place is far from over. The old squares and plazas of cities are continuously being used. The public places are formulated within the city boundaries wit help of urban planning. Whether the space is used for playing football or for protesting the public space is a need for all individuals for better living.

The presence and survival of public space since time of Harappa civilization gives us a proof of togetherness and collectiveness embodied in the communities. In 21st century we have largely abandoned the sense of togetherness and collectiveness, which can be highlighted in today’s public spaces. We still want to be with other people, if not engaging them directly at least watching them stroll by. (Kostof, 1992) Are today’s public spaces losing the true sense of being public? Are today’s public space having a shift it its originality? India being a democratic country, is today’s public space democratic in nature? All these question are linking towards one question how public are today’s public spaces?

Philosophers, Planners, Architects, Designers, Artist, Painters and others who tried to understand cities have a notion that public space are at the heart or the core of any city and people are integral part of those public spaces and also are the fuels that keep the heart and core running. Humans are after all highly sociable species, company of others seems to be a fundamental belief to our existence and belonging.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

5

Public spaces have been primary part of cities, for people to come together for a common sociable purpose. Hence, people and place are regarded as the DNA of cities.

In today’s contemporary cities, public space is the element of the city where most of the convivial as well as reclusive activities takes place (Shaftoe 2008).

Since then public spaces have long been on the platter of planners, sociologist, urbanist, architects and designer. All of them have been curiously discussing and debating about public spaces; the life in a public space; the right to public spaces; the use of public spaces; the dead spaces; equality & equity in public space; the accessible spaces and so forth.

“Within the dense press of the built fabric the greatest luxury of all is empty space.”

– Spiro Kostof.

The Research Part 1 Begins with review of existing literature which covers aspects like to right to city, right to the public spaces, public spaces in today’s era and meaning of public.

With help and understanding of literature review aim and objectives have been formulated for further research.

Aim: -

To comprehend how public are public space of Ahmedabad’s riverfront park.

Objective:-

1) To understand whether Ahmedabad’s riverfront parks are accessible to all.

2) To understand publicness of these parks.

3) To find whether these public spaces are made for all.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

6

Methodology For further course of study, the methodology used for research is a mixture of quantitative, qualitative and observations Primary survey was conducted with random sampling method, with total sample size of 120 for both the Parks Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park.

Site Selection Why these sites?

1) They are at the city centre and characteristics of both these sites are different. As they are newly created public space for city of Ahmedabad, they have never been studied before.

2) Both these parks are made at different scale and have different importance at city level. Thus impact of both the park on city of Ahmedabad will widely vary and this will produce a captivating outcome for the research.

In order to fulfil the objectives of the study, two sites in Ahmedabad city of Gujarat are chosen for study:

1) Usmanpura Park

Usmanpura Park - Located on West side of Riverfront

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

7

2) Subhash Bridge Park

Subhash Bridge Park - Located on East side of Riverfront

Part 2 Discusses the field observation, analysis and inferences related to how public are public spaces a cases of Ahmedabad’s Riverfront Park. Various parameters and attributes are looked into for understanding the ‘publicness and accessibility of a space’ or in other words ‘how public is the public space’ and whether they are made for all?

Part 3 The final chapter summarise the research with findings & conclusion. Followed by references used for the research.

Findings Public space which adapts urban poor, builds social cohesion, establish gender equality, enhance safety, support economic development, improves public health, improves environment, and are easily accessible can are considered as public space made for all. Looking at the study of Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park, many of these elements are missing such as adapting urban poor, both the parks are restricting the access of urban poor one by directly not allowing them to come in and second having a paid access thus urban poor are totally discarded. Social Cohesion is missing in both the parks i.e. Subhash Bridge Park, the park has a paid access and the ideology behind the paid access is to have a control over one particular community

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

8

or religion in that area. And in Usmanpura Park the lack of adapting the accessibility of urban poor is disturbing social cohesion of the space. Hence the very nature of social cohesion is missing. Cultural exchange is limited to only one park. As Usmanpura Park have limited resources to host public events the cultural exchange is difficult to achieve. On the other hand Subhash Birdge Park have facilities that helps to facilitate cultural exchange. Gender equality is all together a new subject for study but both the parks having shown satisfying results of gender distribution, though gender equality haven’t been looked upon in the research. Safety can be considered appropriate in both the case as there are security personnel who are there for 24 x 7 for safety and security. The height of the wall can be issue for people, one if someone falls from it the person can injure or in worst case can die. And secondly even the wall gives a psychological fear, because people are not able to see what is happening in lower promenade and what is happening in the parks. The break of vision can be harmful for many visitors. Thus safety can be considered poor as of now. Economic development is as such seen on the whole 11 km stretch of riverfront there are two CBDs proposed along the banks and the proximity of both the park to CBD is within 3 km. Public health is one of the major boost that both park provides to the visitors because of proper design and landscape of the park, health of individuals is improved. Environment is considerably taken care off by the parks, though Subhash Bridge Park have more potential for improving environmental conditions compared to Usmanpura Park. As a whole many elements are still missing in both the parks yet it cannot be said it is made for all. Proper strategy and usage can make this park more inclusive in nature the parks have got the ability to become a public space for all. All it need is a proper policy and strategy to improve.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

9

Conclusion Public spaces, even in their most public form, tends to find particular flavours, a different character associated with particular combination of groups and interests, under pressure to find a fixed identity within a particular fragment of society. (Mandanipour, 2010).

If a public spaces is equally accessible to everyone, irrespective of physical abilities, age, gender, religion, income level, and social status it can be considered as a public space. When a public space forms a balance of ingredients of Social Cohesion, Urban Poor, Gender Equality, Public Health, Environment, Economic Development, and Safety it act as a true public space for all. Both the park Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park lacks in few of the ingredients mentioned above there by making it inaccessible for all, the publicness of the space is not fully achieved and it is not made for all.

In words of A. Mandanipour who suggests that “public spaces should be designed and developed, as a places that embody the principles of equality, by being accessible places, made through inclusive and democratic processes. Democratic and inclusive processes that create public space as a common good appear to be the best way of ensuring a better physical environment with social and psychological significance of the citizens. Where every day needs for public spaces are met through participative processes, the result is both physical improvement and social development, laying the foundations for further enhancement of democratic practices.”

The true form of becoming a publicly public space is achieved when a public space acts as a clay, where each individuals are a potter in itself, who are continuously re-modifying the structure of public space as and when they like it.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Part 1 The Search Background Literature Review Aim & Objectives Methodology

12

Background Literature Review Historically in urban planning, public spaces have often been described as ‘open spaces’ which includes streets, parks, squares, plazas and other publicly owned spaces which are accessible to everyone at any given point of time. (Tonnelat 2010).

The concept of ‘public’ is robust in meaning and used in a varied spectrum. ‘Public’, as an adjective, intends ‘of or concerning the people as a whole’, ‘open to all’, ‘accessible to or shared by all members of the community’, ‘performed or made openly and wellknown’ (Gove 1976; Makins 1998). Moreover ‘public’ means ‘a group of people who share a particular interest or who have something in common’, such as the audience at a play or film. (Crowther 1995; Makins 1998). Benn and Gaus (1983), who describe the concepts of ‘public’ and private’ on substratum of three criteria of ‘access’, ‘agency’ and ‘interest’, composed this empirical tool to define ‘public space’ and its ‘publicness’.

Firstly, public space can be defined as possessing four mutually supportive qualities of ‘access’; (1) physical access; (2) social access; (3) access to activities and discussions, or intercommunications; and (4) access to information (See Table 1). Secondly, public space can be defined according to the nature of agencies in control whether it is private or public.

‘Public actors’ means agents or agencies that represents and acts on behalf of society, community, city or state. While ‘Private actors refers to agent or agencies that act on their own. As per Boyer (1993), for instance, states that any contemporary reference to the “public” is by nature a universalizing construct that assumes a collective whole, while in reality the public is fragmented into marginalized groups, many of whom have no voice, position or representation in the public sphere. Therefore, public space can be defined as a space that is controlled by public actors, and used by the public, which is made up Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

13

of overlapping spheres of groups of private actors.

And finally, public space can be defined in terms of ‘interest’. Public interest means the ‘common wellbeing’, general welfare’ or ‘benefits that is controlled and received by all members of society’, on the other hand private interest refers to the benefits controlled and received by individuals’. Hence, public space refers to a space that serves the public interest. The ‘publicness’ of a new public space can be assessed by examination of its development and use processes through these three criteria. (Madanipour 1995).

Table 1 the definitions of ‘public space’ regarding the criteria of access, actor and interest by Benn and Gaus (1983)

Even the leading international institutes have join the sphere of public space, As per UNESCO “A public space refers to an area or place that is open and accessible to all people, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, age or socio-economic level. These are public gathering spaces such as plazas, squares and parks. Connecting spaces, such as sidewalks and streets, are also public spaces. In the 21st century, some even consider the virtual spaces available through the internet as a new type of public space that develops interaction and social mixing.” However, in the information age and new economy of 21st century the rise in semi-public spaces have been much of a concern for cities. Somehow today, public spaces needs to be understood with a new approach in public domain, which is accessible to the public.

The general point that can be drawn from various authors and agency is that in the contemporary cities of today public spaces may show different shades of ‘publicness’ in which the degree of ‘access’, ‘actor’ Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

14

and ‘ interest’ can vary widely. The trend for postindustrial cities and their public spaces, and the threat to their ‘publicness’ is blurring of the distinction between private and public spaces. The challenge for planners, designers, architects, developers is to deal with the rising ambiguity between the two realms in the new cityscape of post-industrial cities.

(Madanipour 2010).

Why public space as a subject of interest? And who are they for?

Public spaces are reflection of complexities of urban world and they have been an integral part of cities throughout history. So much that without it, human settlements would be unimaginable. How could people step out of their front doors if there were no public space to mediate between private territories?

Like any other part of cities, such as houses, neighbourhoods, political, economic and cultural institutions, public spaces is a part of ever-present vocabulary of urbanism. (Madanipour 2010). Over the period of time, cities have grown and changed dynamically so are its public spaces. The organic growth of medieval cities comprehend a tradition based on generations of experience in how to create cities with well-functioning synergy between life and space. But this knowledge was lost somewhere in the process of industrialization and modernization, which lead to dysfunctional city environments and spaces. (Gehl and Svarre 2013). If public spaces in one way or the other have been at the core of urban system everywhere and at all times, why do we see a current splash of interest in public spaces as a matter of social concern, political & economic action and academic research?

Recent attention to public spaces is rooted in the structural changes that societies around the world have experienced in the past thirty years whereby the provision of public goods, such as public space, has Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

15

been under pressure through the dominance of the market predicated paradigm. (Madanipour 2010).

The introduction of privatization, globalisation and liberalization in the world economy brought a new structural directions for the state and the society, which lasted for three decades with ups and downs in global financial crisis. This shift in the paradigm had major entailments for urban design, planning and development. (Madanipour 2010). Public spaces play a varied and significant role in urban societies and can be defined in numerous ways. The key feature of public spaces however is its accessibility. Without being accessible, a place cannot become public.

If public open spaces are conceived as enclosed particular places with fine-tuned identities, their flexibility and inclusiveness will be undermined, and so will their accessibility. In the processes of urban change, the conditions of accessibility are subject to change, hence changing the nature of public space (Madanipour 2010). In the controversies about the privatization of public space, it is the access to public spaces that has been circumscribed, narrowing the range of social groups who can utilize these spaces, and making these spaces accessible only to a more minuscule group of people, often predicated on their ability to pay.

The word public originates from the Latin and refers to people, denoting a relationship to both society and the state. A public space may henceforth be interpreted as open to people as a whole, and/or being controlled by the state on their behalf. Public space has been defined as diametrical to private, which is the realm of individuals and their intimate relationships; and so public space is often defined in terms of its distinction from the private realm of the household. Public has also been seen as the opposite of the personal, hence equated with impersonal. (Silver 1997), the realm of the nonintimate others. What dwells beyond personal,

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

16

however, can additionally be inter-personal, where the boundaries between personal and impersonal, private and public, can be blurred.

The distinction between the public and the private is the key theme in era of liberalization, promoting the disseverment of private and public interests and roles in order to prevent private interests encroaching on and undermining public interests. (Wacks 1993; Nolan 1995). The tension has been challenged by the critics of private property, who see this distinction as consolidating the power of the elite at the expense of the poor. (Madanipour 2010). It has also been challenged by women, who see it as consolidating the role of men in public affairs and associating the private sphere with women, hence keeping them locked in an inferior position in society. (Fraser 1989).

The subdivision of the gregarious world into public and private spheres, and the establishment and maintenance of the boundaries between them, has therefore been challenged and upbraided from a number of divergent perspective.

Yet another challenge to the notion of public sphere and public space comes from social diversity.

Public policy has often been justified as directed towards public interest. The idea of public interest has been used to explain and defend the actions of public authorities. Their critics, argues that the way the public interest has been defined is too narrow, and often privileges the elite (Madanipour 2010).

Women, the elderly, children, ethnic minorities and the poor are often are the target group that comes in vicious cycle of public spaces, and public interest introduced them is not really public in an inclusive sense. Thus, this poses a challenge to the notion of public as well as accessible public spaces for all. In spatial sense, public spaces are by definition public and as such expected to be accessible to all. The tension between the public and private can be seen Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

17

in European medieval city, as well as in many cities around the world to this day, where streets and open spaces of the city are gradually being threatened by the expanding houses and private spaces, to the extent that a minimum amount of space is left for passing through or conducting any trade activities and others (Saalman 1968).

With increase in privatization, liberalization and globalization in the world, there is a change in the dynamics of cities and everyday life globally. Marxist Philosopher Henri Lefebvre proposed the term “Right to the city” in his 1968 book Le Droit à la ville. The Right to the city has long been an umbrella concept since the time of the origin. Right to the city in way also supports and cover’s the concept right to the public spaces. Which in other sense means accessibility to a public space physically, socially and all other forms of access that Benn and Gaus (1983) described in their criteria of ‘access’, ‘interest’, and ‘agency’. One way or the other Benn and Gaus tool help the researchers to figure out the publicness of a public space, and in times, where urbanization and privatization is increasing and running parallel.

It is important to understand the significance of ‘Right to the public space’ in 21st century where cities built- environment is having humongous changes.

The nature and character of a public space depends on how it is distinguished from the private sphere.

In other words, the way in which its boundaries are constructed determines the type of public space and its quality. If the boundary is rigidly guarded by walls, gates and guards, it is no longer a public space.

In contrast, the more accessible and permeable a place becomes, the more public it will become (Madanipour 2010). According to sociologist Gregory Smithsimon, many of the commonly defended human rights (freedom of expression, of assembly, of information, of movement etc.) depend on the

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

18

availability of physical public space. Their absence routinely hinders the rights of citizens. When the rights of citizens are disturbed the notion of right to the city is also disturbed. Thus driving the question of why develop the right to public space? Public space are the lynchpin of communities and the foundation of egalitarian city (Tadum Blog 2013). Right to public space is convivial to human rights. For a space to be truly public it must be accessible to all citizens, regardless of race, age, gender, income, or religion.

It is fundamental for a public space to be comfortable and useable, safe and clean for women and men, children and elderly. And the most important is to make a space which bring people back again and again to spend time with their loved ones or with themselves.

Public Space and the Right to the City Countries like Columbia was the first in the world to introduce the right to public space in their constitution in year 1991. “It is the duty of the state to protect the integrity of public space and its assignment to common use, which has priority over the individual interest.” This was drafted when Bogota, Colombia’s capital was one of the most dangerous places on the earth because of political instability and guerrilla groups and drug dealers. By guarantying the right to the public spaces, state has made commitment to protect the social fabric of the nation. Country like Ecuador goes a step further, in 2008 by emphasising why public spaces is so important for quality of life?

It says that “Persons have the right to gain access to and participate in public spaces as a sphere for deliberation, cultural exchange, social cohesiveness and the promotion of equality in diversity. The right to disseminate in public spaces one’s own cultural manifestations shall be exercised without any constraint other than those provided for by the law, subject to the principles of the Constitution.”

The rights in in the United Nations “Universal Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

19

Declaration of Human Rights” practically depends on having a public space to exercise those rights.

Including the right to work (whether traveling to work, setting up shop on the sidewalk, lining up as a day labourer, or advertising one’s services), the right to form and join trade unions, freedom of conscience and religion (whether men praying on the sidewalk outside an overflowing mosque, the faithful street preaching and evangelizing, or observers publicly displaying their affiliation through what they wear) and the right to rest and leisure. Today, international organizations explicitly recognize this dependence of basic rights on public space. Thus UN Women (United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women) advocates improving women’s safety by “creating safe public spaces.”

UNESCO promotes the social integration of migrants with “inclusion through access to public space.”

The UN Human Settlements Programme drafted a resolution on “sustainable urban development through access to quality urban public spaces.” In each case, these UN entities see public space as necessary for achieving core aspects of their humanrights development agenda.

Whereas in India the fight for public spaces rages on, some group of women in Bangalore came together for an event “Meet to Sleep” to avow the activity of sleeping in park need not be the sole rights of men. Interestingly there are other projects initiated at various scale for right to public space one of the unique project in India is the Blank Noise, where women from different cities are told come out on streets and public spaces. Cities such as Bangalore, Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai etc. are part of the project.

They encourage women to come out on streets and stand around idly, things that man do in almost every city in India. The main motto behind this initiative is to create awareness of street harassment in India and elucidating rights of women in public spaces. Where

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

20

as in city of Ahmedabad, public demonstration was held by certain section of community in public space, seeking other backward class status majorly in field of education and employment. Protest gathered around almost quarter million people, the protest went violent and public properties were vandalized and curfew was declared in many part of the city.

Comprehending the fact that most of the activities whether good or bad happens in a public space and all these activities are connected to human rights directly or indirectly. Other efforts go farther towards public space as a right in itself, and not just a means to other rights. In the World Charter on the Right to the City, UNESCO and UN Habitat lay out the right to the city, which to a significant degree coincides with the right to public space. According to Article – 1 of World Charter on the Right to the City. Following general provisions have been described briefly in six points.

1) All persons have the Right to the City free of discrimination based on gender, age, health status, income, nationality, ethnicity, migratory condition, or political, religious or sexual orientation, and to preserve cultural memory and identity in conformity with the principles and norms established in this Charter.

2) The Right to the City is defined as the equitable usufruct of cities within the principles of sustainability, democracy, equity, and social justice.

It is the collective right of the inhabitants of cities, in particular of the vulnerable and marginalized groups, that confers upon them legitimacy of action and organization, based on their uses and customs, with the objective to achieve full exercise of the right to free self-determination and an adequate standard of living. The Right to the City is interdependent of all internationally recognized and integrally conceived human rights, and therefore includes all the civil, political, economic, social, cultural and environmental Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

21

rights which are already regulated in the international human rights treaties.

This assumes the inclusion of the rights to work in equitable and satisfactory conditions; to establish and affiliate with unions; to social security, public health, clean drinking water, energy, public transportation, and other social services; to food, clothing, and adequate shelter; to quality public education and to culture; to information, political participation, peaceful coexistence, and access to justice; and the right to organize, gather, and manifest one’s opinion. It also includes respect for minorities; ethnic, racial, sexual and cultural plurality; and respect for migrants.

Urban territories and their rural surroundings are also spaces and locations of the exercise and fulfilment of collective rights as a way of assuring equitable, universal, just, democratic, and sustainable distribution and enjoyment of the resources, wealth, services, goods, and opportunities that cities offer.

The Right to the City therefore also includes the right to development, to a healthy environment, to the enjoyment and preservation of natural resources, to participation in urban planning and management, and to historical and cultural heritage.

3) The city is a culturally rich and diversified collective space that pertains to all of its inhabitants.

4) For the effects of this Charter, the meaning of the concept of city is two-fold. For its physical character, the city is every metropolis, village, or town that is institutionally organized as local governmental unit with municipal or metropolitan character. It includes the urban space as well as the rural or semi-rural surroundings that form part of its territory.

As public space, the city is the whole of institutions and actors who intervene in its management, such as governmental authorities, legislative and judicial bodies, institutionalized social participation entities, social movements and organizations, and the community in general.

5) For the effects of this Charter, all the

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

22

persons who inhabit a city, whether permanently or transitionally, are considered its citizens.

6) Cities, in co-responsibility with national authorities, should adopt all necessary measures – to the maximum allowed by the resources available to them – to progressively achieve, by all appropriate means and with the adoption of legislative and regulatory measures, the full realization of economic, social, cultural, and environmental rights. Furthermore, cities in accordance with their legal framework and the international treaties, should dictate legislative or other appropriate provisions so they fully reflect the civil and political rights gathered in this Charter.

While the right to public spaces has not been formally recognized, it can be already identified as a “penumbra”, an implied right, such as right to privacy, that is not specifically articulated, but play’s an implicit and necessary role in exercising the other rights (Smithsimon, 2015). People who studies cities, are possibly dealing with one of the most complex systems in the universe. And the idea of right to city which coincides to right to public spaces was formulated about 50 years ago. In the era of information age, cities are considered to be central hub for live, play, and work. The current notion of right to public space is broadly a representation of other basic and fundamental human rights of a citizen which they can exercise. In 21st century, planners, architects, designers, sociologist and others are trying to comprehend the right to public space or in other words assessing the ‘publicness’ of a public space understanding the accessibility of public spaces for all.

Provision and free access to public spaces, is essential for any society. But we should not naively believe in physical determinism, cerebrating that spatial solutions are sufficient to address societal quandaries. As public space is a component of the Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

23

public sphere, we can apply the logic of the public sphere in democratic societies to analysing public space. In other words, public sphere was an integral part of an open society, a space that everyone is able to enter and participate in some collective experience. This may not amount to solving the social and economic problems, but it does provide a stage for socialization and a force to keep strong the social fabric of the city.

Meaning & Etymology of “Public”

Figure 1 Etymology of word “public”

The earliest use was in late 14th century ., “open to general observation,” from Old French public (c. 1300) and directly from Latin publicus “of the people; of the state; done for the state,” also “common, general, public; ordinary,” and as a noun, “a commonwealth; public property,” altered (probably by influence of Latin pubes “adult population, adult”) from Old Latin poplicus “pertaining to the people,” from populus “people” (see people (n.)). (Webster, 2015) From late 15th century. As “pertaining to public affairs;” meaning “open to all in the community” is from 1540s in English. An Old English adjective in this sense was folclic. Public relations first recorded 1913 (after an isolated use by Thomas Jefferson in 1807).

Public office “position held by a public official” is from 1821; public service is from 1570s; public interest Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

24

from 1670s. Public-spirited is from 1670s. Public enemy is attested from 1756. Public sector attested from 1949. Public funds (1713) are the funded debts of a government. (Webster, 2015) Public school is from 1570s, originally, in Britain, a grammar school endowed for the benefit of the public, but most have evolved into boarding-schools for the well-to-do. The main modern meaning in U.S., “school (usually free) provided at public expense and run by local authorities,” is attested from 1640s.

(Webster, 2015) In simple word “Public” means of, or relating to people as a whole of a country, state, etc. The word public has changed it course over the years but the real intention behind the word has always been collective in nature. From public to public land to public space, the one common ingredient of all is people as a whole or people together. From very origin of the word public it has always been about collectiveness of people as a whole. Even though public spaces are physical representation of the meaning of word public. Public spaces are collective in nature. Thus public spaces as a whole is a representation of people in physical reality.

Aim: Hence, the aim of the study is too comprehend how public are public space of Ahmedabad’s riverfront park.

The Primary Objectives of the Study are: 1) To understand whether Ahmedabad’s riverfront parks are accessible to all.

2) To understand publicness of these parks.

3) To find whether these public spaces are made for all.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

25

Methodology: This section presents the data collection methods used in the study and the criteria of site.

Selection of the Site In order to fulfil the objectives of the study, two sites in Ahmedabad city of Gujarat are chosen for study: 1)

Usmanpura Riverfront Park

2)

Subash Bridge Riverfront Park

Why these sites?

• They are at the city centre and characteristics of both these sites are different. As they are newly created public space for city of Ahmedabad, they have never been studied before.

• Both these parks are made at different scale and have different importance at city level. Thus impact of both the park on city of Ahmedabad will widely vary and this will produce a captivating outcome for the research.

Data Collection Method After identifying the public spaces, conducting a primary survey in those identified public spaces with help of qualitative, quantitative and observational tools. (Such as Mapping, Questionnaire, on site observations, Recording and Documenting those observation with help of audio/video/photographs and other various tools).

1) To investigate accessibility of all, publicness of a space and are these spaces made for all. Various attributes and parameter were identified within the questionnaire and those parameters and attributes were included in the primary survey. Comparative understanding was established with UN Habitats idea of public space for all in order to achieve the research aim.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

26

2) Secondary data/resources from varied sources such as library, Archives, Internet, Books, and Journals etc. is utilized in order to achieve the aim of the research.

Process of questionnaire Making

Figure 2 Process of making of questionnaire for the research

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

27

Figure 3 Data Collection Method

Figure 3 Primary Questionnaire for the Survey

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Part 2 Finding Publicness & Accessibility Context The narrative of two parks People ‘s Park ?

30

Context Public Space Scenario Ahmedabad is the 7th largest metropolis in India and largest in state of Gujarat, with 5.8 million population in municipal area and 6.3 million in urban agglomeration. The municipal area is under jurisdiction of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC), who has a jurisdiction of 466 sq.km. Ahmedabad, like many other cities in India, is going through rapid urbanization. This unprecedented growth is putting enormous pressure on public spaces. As the rapid urbanization is creating a concrete jungle which is taking over the open spaces of the city. Over the period of time, Ahmedabad has been inflicted with many wounds to its public spaces thus playground, parks, gardens, open space are becoming stories of past. The open spaces in Ahmedabad are of five different varieties: Open, Garden, Playground, Green Belts and Recreational Area, which is a total of 129 ha for the entire city. (Ahmedabad CDP). Thus when translated to per person open space it is almost 0.37 sq.m. As against the standard of 8 – 10 sq.m.

Per person. (WHO & UDRPFI Guidelines). This rapid growth rate is likely to perpetuate further damage to city’s public spaces and its public life.

Table 2 Zone wise details of Open Spaces.

West Zone comprise over 40 percent of the open spaces. There is no evidence of any recreational areas and green belts in South and Central Zones.

The open spaces is dominated in form of Garden.

In all the five zones the per capita open space works out to be less than 0.7 sq.m. There seems to be major shortfall in terms of open green areas.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Source: Ahmedabad CDP (2006)

31

There are about 100 parks in the city of Ahmedabad.

Private agencies like Mother Dairy, Amul, Dairy Den and others work on leasehold basis with AMC for the development and maintenance of these parks (Ahmedabad CDP).

As per AUDA DP 2021, Parks and open spaces are linked to form a “green network” that will provide wide range of social and environmental benefits to the society. The wide range of parks and open spaces gives a valuable input for improving quality of life for citizens with regards to work, live and visit. AUDA DP 2021 identifies four different components as parts of green network i.e.

1) 2) 3) 4)

Figure 4 Location of existing parks and gardens.

Source: AUDA DP 2021

Parks and Gardens Open Spaces Green Streets and Urban Groves

As per AUDA DP 2021 “Parks are green landscaped Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

32

areas that act as lungs of the city. Parks provide pollution free and pedestrian friendly areas for a varied range of social activities. The activities can include leisure, relaxation, formal and informal gatherings such as senior citizens’ laughing club, and recreation such as jogging and so on. “Parks can accommodate different recreational and leisure depending on their size and location. Distributed such that their catchment areas cover most residential households within a comfortable walking distance.”

AUDA has identified and categorized four different scales of parks and gardens for Ahmedabad on basis of size; location; and use.

1)

Neighbourhood Park - This category includes parks that are small but more evenly distributed throughout the residential areas. These parks usually serve the adjoining residential neighbourhoods which are within a comfortable walking distance.

2) Community Park - This category includes parks that can support more active recreational activities, landscape features and other supporting public toilets etc.

3) City Park - This category includes parks that are important at the city level. City parks are large landscaped areas that offer a wider range of recreational facilities and features. These parks are usually easily accessible by public transport.

4) Regional Park - There is another category of parks which functions at the regional level. Regional parks are large areas, corridors or networks of open space which are publicly accessible and provide a range of facilities and features offering recreational, ecological, landscape, cultural or green infrastructure benefits.

Ahmedabad has parks that falls under the first three Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

33

categories of park. However Ahmedabad doesn’t have any regional level park as of now.

Figure 5 Satellite imagery showing example of parks from each category.

Source: AUDA DP 2021

The following two table shows size, pedestrian access and catchment area by category of park. And the distribution of parks in AMC and AUDA region.

Table 3 Categories of parks with standards.

Source: AUDA DP 2021

Table 4 Provision of Parks and Open Spaces in AMC & AUDA. Source: AUDA DP 2021

The following map highlights residential areas with walkable pedestrian access to parks. (Figure 6) Currently, 7.43 Sq.km. area is under parks, gardens and open spaces. Out of total area of 466 Sq.km. of AMC area.

This shows that just 1.54% area is covered with parks, gardens and open spaces. The lack of open spaces had

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

34

put an immense pressure on upgrading the infrastructure

Figure 6 Pedestrian access of parks overlaid with residential land use.

related to public spaces. The major issue that public

Source: AUDA DP 2021

spaces of Ahmedabad is facing is the insufficient city level and community parks.

As well as poor distribution of

neighbourhood level parks. But the most important of them is how and what is happening in the already existing park? Are those parks and gardens publicly accessible for all?

Even though Ahmedabad lack’s in parks, the most fundamental question that arise is here is to understand what is the scenario of existing parks?

Are those parks democratic in nature? Are those parks people’s park?

Especially in case of Ahmedabad the parks and gardens plays the most prominent role in order to understand how public these public spaces are.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Figure 7 Percentage of Parks and Open Space area within AMC Zones.

Source: AUDA DP 2021

35

Sabarmati Riverfront Sabarmati River flows north south direction and is a monsoon fed river. Sabarmati bisects Ahmedabad in eastern and western halves. It always have been an integral part of the city since Ahmedabad’s foundation. Earlier, the river was the primary source for water. Today, water is supplied from varied sources.

Nonetheless, the river will always be important for the city. It has provided space for cultural and recreational activities. Father of our Nation, Mahatma Gandhi established his ashram along the river bank during the freedom movement. Riverbanks were used for multipurpose activities such as to launder clothes, to dye textiles, in summers it was used for farming.

It even became the informal economic hub and it established ‘Ravivari Bazaar – Sunday flea market which is almost a 600 year old market. Over the period of time many poor and migrants started to live along the bank of river as an informal settlements.

The river edge became characterized by unplanned and uninventive development. People who can afford to protect their properties and themselves from flood erosion, started to build walls along the river edge. The poor citizens who lived along the banks were the most vulnerable from flood erosion as they lacked all kinds of infrastructure facilities. Sewage waste and industrial waste were dumped in the river creating a unhealthy and harmful environment for all living beings. Because of all these conditions the river became inaccessible for all the citizens. By the 1970’s, citizens were only able to access and enjoy the heart of the city through bridges.

Efforts to improve and develop the river leads way back in the 1960s, Bernard Kohn a French Architect, who was the first to propose a part development of a Sabarmati Riverfront from Gandhi Bridge to Sardar Bridge. The proposal include a mix of commercial, recreational and residential development along both

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

36

the banks. There has been multiple occasions where number of people and group came together and proposed development along the banks.

Events Chronology (Source: SRFDCL) 1964 Bernard Kohn, French architect residing in Ahmedabad creates a proposal for Integrated Planning & Development of Sabarmati Riverfront, calling for reclamation of 30 hectares of land.

1966 Kohn’s proposal is claimed technically feasible

by Government of Gujarat after technical studies are completed.

1976 Riverfront Development Group proposes an incremental approach to reduce the need for initial capital investment.

1992 National River Conservation Plan proposes construction of sewers and pumping stations at the periphery of the city as well as upgrading of existing sewage treatment plants.

1997 Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) sets up a Special Purpose Vehicle - Sabarmati Riverfront Development Corporation Limited (SRFDCL) to manage the construction and development of the final riverfront project.

Figure 8 Landuse of Sabarmati Riverfront Source: SRFDCL

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

37

The main aim of the project was to improve environmental aspects, social upliftment and urban rejuvenation for whole of Ahmedabad. The core vision or the ideology behind the development was to reclaim the river edge as a public asset, improve its spatial structure and habitat conditions and restore the city’s relationship with the river. (SRFDCL)

Land Use Component: Public/Recreational Spaces The project devotes around seventy hectares, more than a quarter (26%), of the reclaimed land towards creating public spaces in the heart of the city. These open spaces range from public parks and gardens to shaded plazas and urban forests. The parks shall enhance liveability in the neighbourhoods and provide the city with much needed green spaces and respite from the dense built environment. The plazas on the other hand will offer public places for social gatherings, and informal activities to take place.

Figure 9 Recreational Spaces.

Source: SRFDCL

Riverfront Park: Subhash Bridge Park The park is envisaged as an extension of Gandhiji’s Sabarmati Ashram, across the river, providing a serene and contemplative backdrop to the Ashram and maximising this vista. Simultaneously, it will serve as a much needed park for Shahibaug-Dudheshwar neighbourhoods. The park has been designed to meet the needs of a diverse range of people. It has been recently completed and is open to the public since October 2013. (SRFDCL) Area - 6.19 Ha

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

38

Riverfront Park: Usmanpura Park The park is one of the many public gardens created along the riverfront in this project. It will serve as a neighbourhood park and strengthen the green space network on the western part of the city. The park has been open to the public since October 2013.

(SRFDCL) Area - 1.8 Ha Both these parks comes as a rescue to existing public spaces of Ahmedabad. As such the city has insufficient city level public spaces. A 26% boost to public spaces gave an immense opportunity to better quality of life for the people. Interestingly the most recent development of green public spaces in city of Ahmedabad are the parks and gardens along riverfront. Even after the needed push to the public spaces the question is still warm in the air. Are these public spaces made for all? How public are both these parks? Are these parks accessible by all?

The narrative of two parks Cities change. Ahmedabad’s public spaces attunes the dynamic of the city. They consume themselves and are a reborn. From Manek Chowk to Municipal Market all of them are remade, repurposed and are reborn. Fabric of public space is created out of the material provided by the past and are now the part of future.

This includes its cultural, social and economic fabric – Public spaces are formed, inhabited, acquire Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Figure 10 Early Construction face of Usmanpura Park Source: SRFDCL

39

value, are appropriated, decline and are recreated.

Ahmedabad’s public space have ability to change in this way.

Subhash Bridge Park Usmanpura Park

Figure 11 Location of the site

Subhash Bridge Park

Usmanpura Park

Figure 12 Map showing buffers of 500m, 1000m, 1500m and 2000m respectively

Usmanpura Riverfront Park and Subhash Bridge Park are newly built, in hope to have the ability to be dynamic in nature. (See Figure 8 for location.)

Usmanpura Park is around 1.8 Ha and is located on the western bank of the river. Whereas Subhash Bridge Park which is about 6.19 Ha is located on the

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

40

eastern bank of the river. Both these parks as per the location, size and use have adopted to all the three category of parks. From smallest neighbourhood park to city level Park, they act for all category except for regional level category. The Subhash Bridge Park gave an enormous push for the public spaces for citizens of eastern Ahmedabad. As east zone of Ahmedabad has just around 17 ha of open spaces which includes all types of spaces. The (figure 9) gives us an idea about the pedestrian access and catchment coverage of both the parks.

Usmanpura Park Usmanpura Park is about 600m long and width ranging from 10 to 60m with an area of 1.8 Ha. The park has free access and is open from morning 6:00 am till noon 12:00 pm. And from 2:00 pm till 10:00 pm. At sharp 10:00 pm all the visitors are evacuated from the park. Even both the sides of riverfront are closed sharp at 10 pm every day. 11 km stretch on both the sides of the bank is closed and is guarded by more than 700 private security personnel. Isn’t our right to the public space under threat?

Usmanpura Park on the other hand has 5 security personnel who are there for 24 hours. Guarding and manning the public parks which has a gender distribution of 58% male and 42% female.

1) Visitors timing are from morning 6:00 am to noon 12:00 pm. And from noon 2:00 pm to night 10:00 pm.

2) Visitors are strictly prohibited for using any kind alcohol, drugs and intoxicating products in the park.

3) Visitors are strictly prohibited from throwing garbage/rubbish in the park, pluck flowers or plant and damage any property within the premises.

4) Disorderly conduct, misbehaving and dangerous activities are prohibited.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Figure 13 Usmanpura Park: Zoomed in view

Figure 14 Usmanpura Park - Gender Distribution

41

5) Bringing personal pet into the park is strictly prohibited.

6) Vendors are not allowed in the premises.

7) The authority has all the rights to stop entry and exit of the visitor.

8) Visitors are requested to park their vehicles in dedicated parking areas.

9) All visitor must comply with the rules/ regulations mentioned above and they should not break any rule/regulation. If they do so, a strict action against them would be taken and they would be fined.

The rules and regulation signage is created in one language i.e. Gujarati, thereby making it exclusive for only just one linguistic user. Hence inclusiveness is breached for other language users.

Finding Accessibility & Publicness: Usmanpura Park Diversity of people is something which is important in all sense whether it has to do with urban planning or policy making. All requires and must keep in mind what kind of people are coming to a particular location as it is really important to understand the functionality of that spaces. And also it helps to understand how public those public spaces are. In Usmanpura Park, the dominant religion which is identified is Hinduism more than 60% of population coming to Usmanpura Park is Hindu. 20% of population coming to the park represent Islam. Rest others are Jainism which is at 12% and Christianity & Sikhism is at 3% each. In terms of religious distribution of people in Ahmedabad.

Figure 15 Usmanpura Park - Religion Distribution

Since long there has been a generic observation that Ahmedabad is split in two half, the western half is highly dominated by Hinduism following people and the eastern side of Ahmedabad is dominated by Islam following people. Which is also seen in case of Usmanpura Park (See Figure 12). As mentioned Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

42

in chapter 1 the word public originated from Latin which is concerned with people as a whole. Religion distribution in a public spaces acts as a parameter to understand the accessibility of kind of people coming in a public space.

One of the most important parameter to understand the accessibility is to learn the pattern of mode of travel of people. How people travel to Usmanpura Park? What mode of travel they prefer to reach the destination? To reach Usmanpura park 45% people prefer 2 wheeler, followed by 20% people who take a bus to reach the destination. Interestingly the walk and 4 wheeler user percentage is similar i.e. 17% each. But when analysed people who commute through walking are living in proximity of 1000m. 4 wheeler users are basically the long distance traveller.

In order to understand from which location people are coming from we asked people there origins of travel. It spread across whole of Ahmedabad from Chandkheda in north to Maninagar in south, Thaltej in west to Nikol in east, people travel to Usmanpura Park from many different locations across whole of Ahmedabad. (See Figure 16)

Figure 16 Usmanpura Park - Gender Distribution

Figure 17 Usmanpura Park: Which are visitors comes from.

When we question the publicness of the spaces it is

Figure 18 Usmanpura Park: Spatial location of the places

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

43

Figure 19 Usmanpura Park: % distribution of family income

Figure 20 Usmanpura Park - Age Group Distribution

Figure 21 Usmanpura Park: Income Disparity

important to understand the income level of a person.

Family income is one of the parameters which help us to achieve the aim of the study. During the survey the most fascinating outcome was that, 82% people had family income of 60000 & above, this shows that the people who comes to the parks are from wealthy family. They basically fall into category of upper lower income group, middle income group, and high income group. The park culture is highly influenced and dominated by these people as they have better quality of life than other 18% people who fall in range of 50000 to 10000 per annum income. Income background gives us a glimpse of the accessibility for people. It determines what kind of people can afford to come to a public space.

There were many cases where people are not able to afford to come to the place. If the park starts to charge or public transportation cost increase. Such determinants influences the accessibility of different income groups. As EWS and LIG cannot afford to come to public spaces like Usmanpura Park even though the entry is free, they are restricted because affordability is threaten Usmanpura Park is rich in bio-diversity but not rich in people diversity. When quantified on average there are about 500 – 700 visitors who visit Usmanpura Park daily. There are many socio – economic excluded groups in context of religion distribution, physical accessibility with regards to mode of travel and income distribution. As usual the most vulnerable groups in public spaces are the poor and homeless as they can’t afford to come to public spaces as there luxury of life is to have a good food and healthy living at end of the day. 18% of people coming to Usmanpura Park are having annual income lower than 50000 rupees. On the other hand the mode of travel also plays an important role 20% people are dependent on public transportation to access the park. If in case the price of the public transportation Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

44

increases there are chances that people will lose the access to public spaces. Public spaces are our shared living spaces. The importance of public space Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

Figure 22 Usmanpura Park: Why do you come here?

45

is inherently connected to the importance of coming to that space.

One has to form a purpose for visiting a space.

Whether it has to do with a private space or public space, purpose needs to be formed in order to visit that space. Meanwhile it is important to understand why people come to place. In case of Usmanpura Park, most of the visitors who visits the park, visit it for purpose of walking & jogging (Basically taking

Figure 23 Usmanpura Park: Students Studying

care of their personal health). While others loved to spend their time with children’s, family members, friends and loved ones. The important thing here is to understand what kind of themes evolved for visiting a space. There are elements such as peace, relaxation, enjoyment, timepass, fun etc. Which are directly related to the physical, mental and emotional wellbeing of human being. Such kind of themes are directly affecting the quality of life of a person in a space. The trending theme that emerged in age group of 18 – 25 years of age is related to studying. Looking at the surrounding land use along Usmanpura Park Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

46

there are various schools and colleges nearby thus the space has emerged as hot spot for students to study because it provides them with atmosphere of studying. Many who come with their children to spend time in park finds enjoyment and relaxation from their daily life. There are many overlaps in themes on why people come this place? Such as spending time with loved ones seems to be a relaxation for many, when people come with their family to this space they seems to have fun and same time they find peace. Overlaps of different themes are bound to happen in a public space because public space is collectively formed by individual people and their notion. The very idea of public space and democracy is to have the flexibility to express the freedom and

practice various ideologies.

Space is a representation of characteristics of human thoughts and value of human aspirations. Themes such as peace, enjoyment, fun, relaxation, spending time, resting and others are the aspirations that a person wants to find in a space. Steven Johnson rightly said that our thoughts shapes our spaces and in return the space shape us. It’s an infinite feedback loop we design the space and the space design Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Figure 24 Usmanpura Park: Alternative public spaces people visits

47

us in back. The most prominent thing that a public space needs to satisfy is the individual aspirations and thoughts in a space. It is difficult to calculate or evaluate whether the subjectivity of a space is achieved by each individuals in a public space.

People tend to use varied spaces throughout the day for different purpose. It is really important to understand why people visit any other alternate space and whether those spaces help themselves feel the same way? Why was it important to study the alternate public spaces, because it helps to identify the nature of publicness and accessibility of Usmanpura Park?

Do people choose Usmanpura Park over other public spaces? During the survey, I asked question to the visitors whether they go to alternate public space. In case of Usmanpura Park, 59% of people don’t go to any place except for Usmanpura Park. Law Garden and Parimal Garden are the alternative spaces that people tend to visit. The priority for the visitors who are coming to Usmanpura Park is static in nature.

The visit to other alternate spaces is skewed across western side of Ahmedabad. This shows the unequal distribution of public spaces in Ahmedabad. As well as lack of public spaces distribution in all zones of Ahmedabad. And also the accessibility of these public spaces.

To further understand the publicness and accessibility of a public space, questions regarding what visitors think about entry fee where asked. Three main themes emerged out from this question 1) Agreed Themes (People who think Yes they are willing to pay for the entry fee and why) 2) Disagreed Themes (People who think No they are not willing to pay for the entry fee and why) and 3) Undecided Themes (People who still have no idea or they haven’t responded to the question)

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

48

Most of the yes themes a.k.a. Agreed themes revolves around the idea of Cleanliness & Maintenance, Improved Services, Reducing Nuisance & AntiSocial elements from the park. People who are ready to pay are the ones who wants better cleanliness & maintenance of park with improved services and facilities such as public toilet, drinking water facility, lifts for people who disabled or elder who cannot walk and go to lower promenade of riverfront. These same people tend to have a notion that paying will reduce the nuisance in a public space, they don’t want anti- social elements (Those who doesn’t follow the societal norms such as public kissing is not allowed, holding hands in public is not allowed etc.)

They believe that paying for something will in return give better people and better people means better public space. This questions the fundamental of inclusiveness of a public space. Public spaces needs to cater all the wants and desire of every individual who are present there. For a public space to create genuine publicness and accessibility for all, there must be rules that channelize the interactions among individuals.

On the other hand there are people who just don’t want to pay to enter a space, irrespective of any Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Table 5 Usmanpura Park: Notion of people regarding entry fee in Usmanpura Park

49

particular reason why they don’t want to pay. The belief that we already pay tax to the city includes access to public space for free. People think that when they pay tax that means they have free access to public space or any part of the city. There are even more curious notions that public is free, basically it is a public space so it is free. Economic affordability is one of the themes that emerged out from the survey, when people are unable to afford a particular goods or services they restrict themselves to that commodity.

This applies to even public spaces, when a space is charged for access it becomes inaccessible for many users. Even the physical accessibility (transportation) to a public space is determined by economic affordability. One must have an affordable mode of transport to connect to a public space.

Connectivity and accessibility to a public space is highly dependent on transportation system and that too on whether those system are affordable for all the citizens of the city. There are even many who thinks that because they come for particular purpose or activity especially walking, jogging etc. don’t want to pay because they are there for just an hour or two.

Even the idea of quota based access that means people who are of certain age or belong to certain part of the society have free access to public space like Usmanpura Park. Students had this notion that being students they have a right to free access to Usmanpura Park so do the elderly who thinks being elder they have special access to a public space.

There were others who even thought that having free entry will encourage more people to come. And many where there who had no idea and did not comment or provide any information regarding the entry fee in Usmanpura Park.

Situational base question like if entry fee is increased to rupees 20, 30, 40 or more will you come? Why? Such question was asked in order to further analyse the spaces publicness and accessibility. As similar

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

50

three themes were framed out from the analysis.

The ideology of people did not change even though when they were asked situational based question most of the people had similar thoughts as previously mentioned regarding the entry fee. Couple of new notion emerged such as free access to other gardens people suggested that if the price is charged and if it increases they will counter argue with the fact that other parks and gardens have free access and as those parks and gardens are free the will visit them more frequently than Usmanpura Park. Transport affordability was new notion that broke out because people where concern that as such parks and gardens are increasing the cost of entry fee, the transportation system might have to compensate with the increase in cost of public space entry fee. This might lead to lesser accessibility for the public. Situational based questions shows that people who agreed to visit the park even after the entry fee increases belongs to family income group of more than 60000 per annum.

The income disparity and thoughts regarding the visit to public space widely defers. Income inequality in one way or other is hampering into the built environment and quality of life of the city whether it is a private open space or public open space. Income inequality determines the accessibility of many users of a public space in today’s contemporary cities.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Table 6 Usmanpura Park: Notion of people when entry fee is increased

51

The most crucial part of public space understanding is to know the liking and disliking of public space.

What people like or dislike about this space? Why is it important to understand the likeliness factor is because people are tend to visit a space based on cognitive understanding and introspection of that space. What is found in Usmanpura Park can be seen in the below table. (Table 7)

Figure 25 Usmanpura Park: Children’s Play Section

The important thing what people like about Usmanpura Park is its Atmosphere and Environment (Includes Views, Greenery & Nature) Peacefulness is one of the attributes that boomed out in the survey many people like the peacefulness of this place.

Garden Design with clean & fresh air is something that emerged as trend for morning visitors. On one hand where security personnel are kept for moral policing there are people who prefer and want them to be there for their own safety and security. There are many who did not like the way the garden was design and maintained, they complain about lack of trees and plants in Usmanpura Park. With poor state Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

52

of drinking and public toilet amenities. Interestingly there is a group of section who likes everything about this park from that small little drinking facility to children parks they like everything.

As earlier mentioned transportation system plays a huge role for physical accessibility of people to a public space. So does parking space, parking space provides people with opportunity to be welcomed to a space. With advancement in technology and automobile the car and other modes of transport are playing a crucial role in mobilizing people from one place to another, but it is important to understand the nodes of these mobility. Parking spaces acts as nodes for such mobility. And nodes near public spaces improves the accessibility for all. When asked about parking fee? People had varied answers and justification for whether they want to pay for the parking fees or not. People who are willing to pay for parking fees have different notions regarding why they want to pay. Notions such as it will improve parking management when it is paid and this will reduce theft & damage of the vehicles Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

Figure 26 Usmanpura Park: Parking near the park

53

On the other hand people who are not ready to pay justify the idea of parking fee by using public transportation and Non-Motorized Transportation.

This will save people’s time of finding parking outside a public space. Use of public transportation and NMTs at large scale will also contribute to social benefits and environment benefits for all. Interestingly people tend to have a belief that there is hug space along riverfront freely available for parking. It is important here to know that riverfront project is still in developmental stage so there are piece of land which are still not under construction and are utilized for parking. People who pay tax feels that they free right to park near Usmanpura Park. The very idea of taxation has been utilized and interpreted in multiple instances. As of now there is no paid parking along west side of riverfront then why suddenly charge for parking near Usmanpura Park? Parking acts a node for people to come and enjoy a public space. Paid parking or unpaid parking will have an implication on the accessibility of a public space.

People, place and activity together forges the idea of publicness of a place. In Usmanpura Park, during the survey, there was deliberate attempt to understand what kind of people and what kind of activity does a visitor like or dislike to see in the space.

What kind of people would you like or dislike to see here?

Table 7 Usmanpura Park: Kind of people you would like or dislike to see

Many people would love to see children, elderly, young people as a part of public space. But on the other hand there are these spheres of social character Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

54

of a person, that people prefer to see it in a public spaces these are Good and well-mannered people, Mature & Cultured people, Sincere people. These characteristics shows the social accessibility of a public space. People want other people whose social character is acceptable in a public space. On other hand there are many dislikes people don’t like college students as most of the couples who visit Usmanpura Park falls in the category of college students. College students and people associated with Public Display of Affection (PDA) are having overlaps with couples who visit the parks. There are individuals who perform certain types of activities (Kissing, Hugging, and other intimate and allied activities) in a public space which sounds gross to other people who are having social biasedness towards these kinds of activities.

There are instances where elderly and family oriented people who visits the park complain directly to the urban local body to remove such kind of people who do Public display of affection. The ULB has given authority to private security personnel in public space to prevent the happening of such kind of activities.

One way or other the core idea of being a public space is being redefined by moral policing, which has taken over public spaces and the behavioural aspect of public spaces totally changes because of this. There are many instances in many cities across India where police have beaten up couples who are part of activities associated with public display of affection.

People don’t want other people who are considered to be nuisance, vulgar & loud in Usmanpura Park. Over and above that they don’t want beggars roaming in a public space nor do they want misbehaving and antisocial elements in Usmanpura Park. Judgemental ideology has risen on this occasion. Public spaces are place where people silently judge others for their doings. Whether it is a superstar walking down the street or homeless in search of home. Human beings Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

55

are political and judgemental creature and these characteristics are well established in public space.

Beggars is socially excluded from public spaces, when the vision of the park itself suggest that it is made for all then when seen in reality the beggars are prevented from entering the park. Such kind of exclusion forms an anti-inclusive spaces in the society. Activities are one of the components that is important to understand in a public space. Questions regarding what kind of activities they would like to or dislike to see here were asked. The following themes emerged out from the surveys.

Table 8 Usmanpura Park: Activities people like or dislike to see

Use & activities reincarnate the public spaces, without multiple activities taking place in a public space the public space’s publicness is under poor performance. The major theme that was found while taking survey was that people want to have fun & enjoyment when they are with their friends or children. Activities which creates fun & enjoyment for all is highly likeable. Followed by daily base activities to cyclical activities that takes places. At the same time people don’t want anti-social activities (banned & criminal activities) taking place in Usmanpura Park. Even public display of affection is not suitable for people as a form of activities. Activities creates a process of active participation and inclusiveness of social groups. It is important that flexible and beneficial activities takes place in public spaces.

Finally asking people whether they think Usmanpura Park is a public space for all. 82% agreed that yes

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

56

it is a space for all. Even though people have their personal thoughts towards particular elements connected to public space one needs to understand a public spaces as thing of all. Keeping in mind the ground reality what is happening and what is the truth.

People feel it is a space for all but there are situations and elements they haven’t yet analysed on day to day basis that hawkers, street vendors, beggars and others are being excluded from Usmanpura Park.

Intellectuality among visitors whether they understand the meaning of public space for all is also missing to a great extent in Usmanpura Park.

Usmanpura Park plays a significant role in bringing importance of public space at a neighbourhood level as well as city level open space. The nature of Usmanpura Park being totally public is still controversial as there are elements that have been excluded from the space in context of policy, design, as well as human intervention. Usmanpura Park’s timing and access is itself is restricting users, as Monday it is close. And rest other days the park gets Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Figure 27 Usmanpura Park: In Afternoon

57

Figure 28 Usmanpura Park: Public Spaces for all?

close at night 10:00 pm. limiting the time frame can discard many users from using the park to full extent.

In policy context, vendors and animals (dogs, cats, etc.) are not allowed to enter the whole stretch of riverfront this gives us an idea why these kinds of parks are comparatively less in number of people and have less activity and liveliness. Look at Law Garden or Parimal Garden there are street vendors from morning till evening making the place livelier by bringing in food and culture of Ahmedabad i.e.

Street food. Looking at the land use plan of riverfront, and being a 11 km long public stretch, one way or another it is being commercialized and this will change the very nature of publicness in a space.

London is one such fine example where privatization and commercialization have changed the course of publicness and accessibility of public space.In order to become a true public space, ontology of each human being needs to be satisfied irrespective of any discrimination. Public space will always be reestablished once people take over it. It is in itself an organism by its own. Like water it is adaptable to any shape and form, in same way public spaces is dynamic, and it needs to keep reshaping itself like water.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

58

Subhash Bridge Park Subhash Bridge Park is twice in length it is almost 1200m with a width that ranges from 30-60m.

Subhash Bridge Park covers an area of 6.19 Ha, which and is one of the largest park of Ahmedabad.

The park attracted many users from Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi to President of China Xi Jingping.

Many powerful and influencing person have visited the park since its opening in October 2013.

The park has a paid access which is guarded and manned by 32 security personnel. Where each person above 12 years of age have to pay rupees ten, children and senior citizens pay rupees five. And students who can bring a letter from their school, institution, colleges and university can have access by paying rupees one. Physically challenged and children below five years of age have free entry. It is astonishing that mentally challenged people have been excluded here so are the people who cannot afford to pay five to ten rupees as entry fee. On basis of gender distribution 55% are male and 45% are female. Both the parks have almost equal distribution in context of gender parity.

The park gives free access for people who come in morning from 6:00 to 8:00 am. From 8:00 to 9:00 am the park is closed for cleaning and maintenance.

Overall timing for the entry of the park starts from morning 6:00 am to night 10:00 pm. On Monday both, Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park are closed. The rules and regulation in Subhash Bridge Park is similar to that of Usmanpura Park. Subhash Bridge Park have been given special importance from global too local levels. Has the park been made for all? How public is this park? How accessible this

Figure 29 Subhash Bridge Park: Zoomed in view

Figure 30 Subhash Bridge Park: Rules & Regulation

park is for the people? Evaluating publicness and accessibility for Subhash Bridge Park. These are some of the questions that needs to be answered.

Figure 31 Subhash Bridge Park: Gender Distribution

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

59

Finding Accessibility & Publicness: Subhash Bridge Park

Figure 32 Subhash Bridge Park: Religion Distribution

Figure 33 Subhash Bridge Park: Mode of Travel

Diversity in case of Subhash Bridge Park, is really skewed. The most dominant religion group coming to park is Islam. Islam consist of 63% of total population in context of this park. Followed by Hinduism at 30%. Jainism (3%) and Christianity (4%) are similar to Usmanpura Park. The main purpose behind the development of Subhash Bridge Park was to give a serene and contemplative back drop to the Gandhi ashram. As previously mentioned Ahmedabad population in generic is split in two halves where Islamic population is living on the eastern edge and Hindu followers are pre dominantly living on the western edge of the city. Even both these park shows the same divide where almost 60% of population is dominated by Hinduism followers in Usmanpura Park which is on the western bank of the river and on the other side Subhash Bridge Park occupies 63% of Islam followers. This shows disparity of religion among both parks.

When we look into mode of travel, for Subhash Bridge Park we see 45% of the trip takes place through 2 wheeler, followed by 4 wheeler at 27% and walk and bus combined forms a total of 28%.

Two wheeler have been the core to access public in both the cases. Especially city of Ahmedabad has a special love for two wheelers. Out of total of 34 lakh registered vehicles 22 lakh vehicles are registered as two wheeler in Ahmedabad. Usmanpura and Subhash Bridge parks are fascinated by two wheelers. Thus what we see here is that both the parks are accessible with almost every mode of transport including NMTs. Even though when the park is accessible by all means, it is important to see from which areas people prefer to come to Subhash Bridge Park.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

60

Dudheshwar area, which is a future proposed CBD

by AMC has the highest number of footfall who are coming to Subhash Bridge Park. What we see is that most of the people who are coming to Subhash Bridge Park are coming from the eastern side of Ahmedabad. Eastern side of Ahmedabad lacks public spaces thus the influx of population is high from the eastern Ahmedabad.

Family income also plays a crucial role in order to understand the accesibility of people in a public space. What we see in Subhash Bridge park it is astonishing as 92% people who are coming to the park have a strong economic background (60000 & above). Remaining 8% of people have income less than 50000 rupees per annum. Thus when any cost of transportation or even the entry charge gets increased people will drop out. Because of paid access of park many users are excluded as they can’t afford to buy a ticket for the park entry. Someway the line of being public is deminishing in case of Subhash Bridge Park as there are kinds of rules and regulation and over and above that there is an entry charge which heavily acts as constrain for publicness of the park. This matters for those whoes thoughts are aligned towards communityness because it represents the sense of commanlity, of “we” that is Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Figure 34 Subhash Bridge Park: Map showing the location of areas from where people come

Figure 35 Subhash Bridge Park: % of people coming from which area

Figure 36 Subhash Bridge Park: Age Group Distribution

61

important for functioning of public spaces. It also matters to the groups that are excluded or isolated in sense of geography as well as accessibility (which means economic affordability) of transportation system.

Public spaces are public in nature. But when the government or even the private agency starts to take entry charges for the facilities there are certain sections of group in the society who will not be able enjoy and afford the essence of public spaces. Private ownership and management of public space is an illusion in itself. People’s park are those who have been recognized as a refuge for homeless people, togetherness, sense of community, essences of sharing is established from its very origin. Quality of life of those people gets affected as they are unable to access any open public spaces. The true meaning of being public is marginalized especially in the case of Subhash Bridge Park. Thus public spaces occupies an important – but contested – ideological position in democratic societies. (Mitchell, 2014).

Purpose of coming to a place is well established.

During survey in Subhash Bridge Park, we asked visitors why they come here. Astonishingly the reasons are almost similar compared to Usamanpura Park. People have pre-determined purpose to visit Subhash Bridge Park, they have already set up a mind-set to visit this place. Ranging from walking to finding peace people, create reasons to come to this place. Rarely there are visitors who are wandering around the park without any purpose. Important thing for a public space is to accept a single wanderer to bunch of people. All must be able to cater to place, with having their own personal privacy maintained at the same time. Subhash Bridge Park is designed beautifully with at a national level influential scale.

But question is whether it caters to the need of each visitors who come to the park?

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

62

Similarity among themes is found out between both Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park. Many themes are similar such as walking, jogging, spending Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

Figure 37 Subhash Bridge Park: Why people come here?

63

time with other, etc. Themes are similar but there is vast cultural usage difference between both the parks. In Subhash Bridge Park as 63% visitors are Muslim, the space usage within the park changes. As observed many Muslim people come with their family together to eat and spend time with others on daily basis or weekends. It was provoking that the family size between religions was varied and changing. On average a family size of Muslim family was around 6 -7 people together. Whereas Hindu and other religion had a family size 4 – 5 people.

Figure 38 Subhash Bridge Park: A Muslim family having peaceful dinner at the Park

For Subhash Bridge Park, the most important thing is to understand the importance of entry fee for the park. As the park have paid access, Rs. 10 for Adults, Rs. 5 for children & senior citizens and Rs. 1 for school/institution students. There is a minimal amount of entry fee charged to access one of the most beautiful garden of Ahmedabad. As per the supervisor who are in charge of the park, suggest that they are charging fee in order to earn basic revenue to maintain and clean the park. Constructed at cost of Rs. 6 corer, the garden has gotten national level Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

64

importance, because of many VIP people visiting the park for political as well as business purpose.

The park is more of a kind of destination Park, where people come with pre-established reasons. The entry fee makes it more restricted for people who have economic as well as transport affordability in serious situations. Themes that emerged out after the survey for understanding there perspective about the entry fee are as follows. (See Table 9)

Similarity of thoughts among visitors is definitely seen. Most of them agreed to pay when the park will have better cleanliness and maintenance as well as improved services. There are group of people who would rather pay just to find peace and natural beauty in park. Again the same thought paying will reduce the nuisances & anti- social element from entering the park there by having a controlled access. During the interview with the manager of the Subhash Bridge Park, he precisely said that the main reason why they have established a paid access is because of kind of people living in the surrounding neighbourhood.

(Suggesting it in religious point of view, especially his thoughts inclined towards one particular religion: Islam).

Furthermore he said that controlled access was a necessary thing in this area, as there are particular community (again suggesting Muslim people) living in nearby neighbourhood which can be dangerous, violent and sometimes nuisance for other visitors who come to park. In order to have a hold in that area Riverfront Park like Subhash Bridge Park have Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

Table 9 Subhash Bridge Park: Perspective about entry fee

65

a paid access. The reason can be associated with politics and political landscape of Ahmedabad city.

Having biased thoughts towards one community questions the very vision of the Riverfront Park as well as riverfront project as a whole. Inclusiveness is one of the fundamental focus of the riverfront project.

Is Subhash Birdge Park missing the very core vision of the project?

At city scale and looking at the political landscape of Ahmedabad the major two public spaces of Ahmedabad that is Subhash Bridge Park and Kankaria Lake which are located on eastern side of Ahmedabad city have paid access And with high population of particular community. Whereas all other spaces on the western side of Ahmedabad have free access. Where is the inclusiveness? Why is one side of the whole city have a paid access and other side of the city have free access? Are our public spaces strategically politicalized for particular purpose? This is all together a whole different subject of study but one must understand that, inclusiveness of any space whether it is a house garden or a public garden, the element of togetherness and pure intentions of being together must be created/established in that space.

Couple of situational based questions were put forward to the visitors such as If the entry price increase to Rs. 20, 30 or 40 and more will you come to park? Most of the answers inclined towards not coming to the park. Visitors suggested that as they pay tax free access is mandatory. Again the point of economic and transporat affordability was raised to a great extent. They also suggested that they will visit alternative space if the entry fee is higher than nominal charges. On the other side of the coin they will come if there are more new activities and facilities.

And the existing facilities are improved till it becomes the state of art facilities.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

66

Themes that emerged, when asked about what visitors like and dislike about the space are as follows.

(See Table 10)

Critical thing to learn here is about the enclosed gates within the park restricts people’s movements to other spaces as well as lower promenade. Many visitors are irritated by the fact that as it is a paid access there is just 2 entry point and there are about 4 exit points including gate number 1 which is just made for VIP people. This shows that high priority and importance is given to VIP visitor but not a common visitor. A common visitor have to struggle to find gates to enter the park. Gates near lower promenade are closed there are just two gates which has entry and exit points one has to show ticket to enter and exit the place. There are several users who are not obeying the security check thus having a verbal spat between the security personnel and the visitor. Some visitor tend to have various reasons for not brining or entering the park without ticket from having my phone forgotten to my son is inside. Many ideas are thrown out to the security personnel just to enter the park without ticket. Whether the access is paid or not it is a moral responsibility of visitor to have his or her own discipline while caring any activities within the premises. Again the same issue of public display of affection is very much on rise in parks like Subhash Bridge Park and Usmanpura Park. The crucial thing for both the park whether you like the space or not is that there is a moment when you enter your psych towards both the spaces changes dramatically because these two spaces are formed in formal manner and there is self-conscious thought Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

Table 10 Subhash Bridge Park: What people like and dislike about the space?

67

that when we enter these spaces we need to become someone or something.

With paid access to the park. There is also a paid parking in Subhash Bridge Park with Rs.5 for two wheeler and Rs.10 for Four Wheeler. Paid parking has been introduced here since October 2013, the revenue they created is direct money no official records are kept on what that money is utilized for or are those money used to improve any of the services. Parking has been a core subject of study for urban planning and public spaces as it forms a linkage between accessibility and mobility of a space.

During the survey, the acceptability of paid parking was higher in morning because people who come for morning walk, jogging, and to exercise have free parking this make them happier. But during the entire day when park reopens at 9:00am till evening 10:00pm paid parking takes place. People have this notion of paid parking being safer and secured and will prevent theft of their vehicles. Furthermore, paid parking has enabled to manage the parking space more efficiently and even for long run creating a sense on psychological improvement for parking users to park their vehicles properly. There are many users who encourage the use of public transport as well as non-motorized mode of transport i.e. walking and cycling to come to a public space. Like junctions are connected through multiple linkages of roads, in same way a public space needs to be connected with various modes of transport for now the accessibility from public transport especially bus is poor. And there by encouraging more people to come to the place by taking there on private vehicles and increasing the demand of parking availability.

The whole stretch outside of park of 1.2km long is used as parking space just for Subhash Bridge Park.

Parking strategy is required for this park as it is a large scale city level park with higher importance then Usmanpura Park.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

68

People are the subject and core of studying public spaces, their behaviour towards a space determines the activity they are looking forward to join into. It is important for the research to understand kind of people, people like and dislike to see here. And kind of activities they like and dislike to see in Subhash Bridge Park. The survey formed themes that helps in comprehending the further research. The themes that emerged during the question ask for what kind of people visitors like or dislike to see here are as follows. (See Table 11)

People and activity goes hand in hand. The social character of person determines what kind of activity he or she wants to pursue in a public space. There is a negative vibe for people who display affection publicly in both the parks. One has an awkward moment when public display of affection takes place making it a moral question and further enhancing the problem of moral policing in both Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park. Social biasness and prejudice has taken over the public sphere and changed the dynamics of public space to a great extent, where one has to become judgemental about one another in public domain. And determining what is right and what is wrong to do in a public space. Yes there are moral conducts and ethos that one must need to keep in mind while being a part of public sphere. But one cannot emboss those conducts and ethos on someone else. Public space evolves into a people’s place when all and each individuals can exercise their own freedom.

Activities that takes place determines what kind of freedom people expect in a public spaces. For a Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Table 11 Subhash Bridge Park: Kind of people like and dislike to see in a public space

Figure 39 Subhash Bridge Park: Spending time with loved ones

69

public space to increase its publicness needs to identify the types of activities that space wants to cater too. The survey was conducted to understand the kind of activities people are expecting in Subhash Bridge Park.

Table 12 Subhash Bridge Park: Activities that people like and dislike to see

Figure 40 Subhash Bridge Park: Public Space for All?

People are the one who determines whether the space will be considered as a total public space or not. Public space has been a long subject of debate and study since the time of Greek agora. Definitions of public has been changing from its very core but one thing that always have stayed in common is the commonality and togetherness of people found in a public space. In world of academics definition of public space will keep on changing based on the needs of people. In case of Subhash Bridge 83% people agreed it is a public space for all. There are many perspective which they haven’t analysed or used while coming to this conclusion of determining it a public space for all.

People’s Park?

If public space arise out of a dialectic between representation of space and representational spaces, between the ordered and the appropriated, then they are also, and very importantly spaces for representation (Mitchell, 2014). The fundamental

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

70

argument that has been running through The Right to the city is the privatization of public spaces – enclosure in malls, overregulated for stakeholders who can get profits at expense of marginalized population of the society like homeless and poor, guarded and manned by security personnel for behavioural attitudes.Public spaces have become the centre stage for the drama in the city. Each cities have been blessed with beautiful public spaces.

Ahmedabad’s riverfront public space i.e. Usmanpura Park & Subhash Bridge Park are facing the challenge of becoming better. Both these parks have shown a tremendous potential of being a public space but the parks haven’t reached the ultimate potential because there are multiple issues that are being identified in these spaces. In order to understand the performance and potential of the riverfront parks. Methodology from Project of Public Space, New York has been adopted to evaluate riverfront parks. Evaluation of public space take place with four parameters (i.e. 1) Comfort & Image 2) Access & Linkages 3) Uses & Activities and 4) Sociability) and these four parameters have four attributes for evaluation. (See Table 13)

All these parameters have four other measurable attributes combine together they form an average score for the parameter. The lower the score the better is the place.

Over here during the evaluation process we asked the visitors to evaluate the place based on their perception towards the park. Looking at the score card what we see is that Subhash Bridge Park is leading in three parameters out of four i.e. Comfort & Image, Access Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Table 12 : A methodology created by PPS for evaluating public space

71

Table 13 : Evaluation of both the parks through methodology created by PPS, New York.

& Linkage and Sociability.Whereas uses & activities in both the parks have got similar scores this gives us an idea that riverfront project has whole have distributed similar kind of activity along both the stretch of the parks. Activities such as Segway, Golf Cart, Boating, etc. are easily available in both the place. Diversity of different activities established by riverfront authority is similar but when seen with perspective of people’s use the activities have diversity of activities from walking to finding peace. (As mentioned earlier) The activity and use have been monotonous as off now in both the parks may be because the riverfront as a whole is yet to develop and grow into its full potential.

Monotonousness is one of the character seen at the lower promenade because of the presences of long walls which are tactically built to adopt flooding.

Figure 41 Connection to the city is totally cut off because of high walls and creating a monotonous look and activities along lower promenade

Genuineness of inclusive approach for both the parks is clearly in a limbo. There is a religious divide within the park itself. The age group distribution is totally skewed, creating activities which are socially not acceptable especially public display of affection. Both the parks are limiting freedom of expression to a great extent because of the moral policing i.e. is the private security personnel controlling the way people behave in a public space. The question here is whether these spaces are considered to be public space? Well as per visitors who regularly use it consider both the park as public space. But fact that they haven’t looked upon the inequality, economics, politics, religion and many other elements that determines the public space. Legitimacy of true public space will also be changing over the course of time, but elements such as people, activities and design will always determine the true essence of public space.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

Part 3 Seeked Findings Conclusions

74

Findings Meaning of any space is linked to the actual elements and changes in the physical space defined by order and form of the built environment. The social interaction in both the parks are limited in nature, there by restricting the freedom of space.

Many visitors view the public space as a place of freedom, where anything can be done. Others believe that space must be controlled and regulated and people should follow certain social rules the way they behave. Diverse users claim different territories through different activities and attitudes of usage and appropriation. The space of conflict is shaped by different behaviours influenced by gender, age, group and culture. The conflict is usually between ordinary users and people who manage and participate in maintenance of both the park.

This situation gives rise to a series of frequently competing social interactions, which have a negative effect on physical and social life of a public space.

For example the spots that are used for public display of affection in both the parks. These kinds of conditions creates an unpleasant environment for many visitors thus chance of anti – social behaviour is on rise because of it. People are worried about their public environment as many elements are changing and shifting in course of time. Many conflicts arise between those under the banner of protection and right use of the space and those not willing to follow rules of communality. The misuse of Children Park’s equipment is very common in both the parks, as adults are happily in notion of becoming a child and there by using the children’s space for their own enjoyment. Though there has been very few complain regarding illegal activity taking place in both the parks, which is good sign for visitors as well as for the public space to be safer for all. The other argument that the promoters of public space push forward, is that there is a lack of education about how to use and how Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

75

to behave properly in public, and lack of respect for others. Certain situation arise where the visitor starts to vandalize and destroy the property of park. In this case control of the use of public space is necessary for betterment of all Authorities have set up various signs instructing people about how to behave in the park, thereby inviting them to take care of plants, tree and equipment of the park.

Conflicts about the way public spaces are controlled have also taken place in many patch of riverfront.

Excessive control by those taking care of the spaces is on rise. So education is necessary for those managing and controlling public space and its uses, too much of protection intensify the idea of privatization of space. Both Usmanpura Park and Subhash Birdge Park is having an intensified control over the space there by the idea of privatization of space is very much meaningful for both the parks.

This is true that people who are taking care of the park sometimes forgets that this space is public and it should be manoeuvred with regards to its publicness. The character of publicness of these parks is challenged by those who over control the space based on the elements they can manipulate.

Freedom is one of the inherent characteristic of public space. An urban space that is freely used and that provides the opportunity of interesting encounters is an invaluable asset for all, thereby making better communities for further development.

Freedom must be negotiated, and visitors and managers should find a common ground to practice, both freedom of use and also respect for other people’s right. This means responsible management and responsible use of public space. However both the management and the visitors need to keep their personal motive aside over public motives. As this will allow higher publicness, permanence and liveability for a public space.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

76

Looking at the objective of the study publicness here is the ability or state of being public. The publicness of space is modifying for both the parks because of the controlled access. Moreover, lack of public spaces deprives the community of the opportunity for acquiring collective education, learning and social values because of this the very nature of publicness keeps on shuffling. Both the parks of riverfront have been stigmatized in name of religion, income inequality, age and most important is the activities within the controlled space. Psyche of an individual changes whether that person is visiting Usmanpura Park or Subhash Bridge Park at any time of the day because of controlled access. Control spaces are more like a brain washing tool where people have to establish a pre-determined thoughts in order to access the space of controlled freedom. Liquidity is far more important for any space to achieve its publicness.

Publicness just not in strength of numbers but also in strength of freedom, accessibility, and psyche.

Publicness of space is determined by the accessibility of the space. Accessibility not just in sense of physical aspect but also social and information aspect.

Accessibility have all together got different definitions but in context of public spaces it refers to as the quality of being at hand when needed. Mode of travel is one of the attributes that will determine the physical accessibility of the space. Looking at mode of travel in both the parks 2 wheeler are preferable choice of coming to both the park. Social accessibility of a space keeps on changing, depending on the kinds of people visiting the place. If the place provides opportunity for the visitors to have a social interaction with one anther then the space is socially accessible.

The riverfront parks i.e. Usmanpura Park & Subhash Bridge Park social access is contested spatially and symbolically.

One of the objective was to comprehend whether Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

77

both the parks are made for all? Looking at the recent publication of UN Habitat on Public spaces (2014), UN Habitat have identified theoretical approach for making an inclusive public space which is made for all. Public space can be seen as a multi-purpose functionality of various elements such as economy, social exchange, and cultural exchange. Public space which are made for all are the ones who reprogram themselves with the changes Public space which adapts urban poor, builds social cohesion, establish gender equality, enhance safety, support economic development, improves public health, improves environment, and are easily accessible can are considered as public space made for all. Looking at the study of Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park, many of these elements are missing such as adapting urban poor, both the parks are restricting the access of urban poor one by directly not allowing them to come in and second having a paid access thus urban poor are totally discarded. Social Cohesion is missing in both the parks i.e. Subhash Bridge Park, the park has a paid access and the ideology behind the paid access is to have a control over one particular community or religion in that area. And in Usmanpura Park the lack of adapting the accessibility of urban poor is disturbing social cohesion of the space. Hence the very nature of social cohesion is missing. Cultural exchange is limited to only one park. As Usmanpura Park have limited resources to host public events the cultural exchange is difficult to achieve. On the other hand Subhash Birdge Park have facilities that helps to facilitate cultural exchange.

Gender equality is all together a new subject for study but both the parks having shown satisfying results of gender distribution, though gender equality haven’t been looked upon in the research. Safety can be considered appropriate in both the case as there are security personnel who are there for 24 x 7 for safety and security. The height of the wall can be issue for people, one if someone falls from it the person can

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

78

injure or in worst case can die. And secondly even the wall gives a psychological fear, because people are not able to see what is happening in lower promenade and what is happening in the parks. The break of vision can be harmful for many visitors. Thus safety can be considered poor as of now. Economic development is as such seen on the whole 11 km stretch of riverfront there are two CBDs proposed along the banks and the proximity of both the park to CBD is within 3 km. Public health is one of the major boost that both park provides to the visitors because of proper design and landscape of the park, health of individuals is improved. Environment is considerably taken care off by the parks, though Subhash Bridge Park have more potential for improving environmental conditions compared to Usmanpura Park. As a whole many elements are still missing in both the parks yet it cannot be said it is made for all. Proper strategy and usage can make this park more inclusive in nature the parks have got the ability to become a public space for all. All it need is a proper policy and strategy to improve.

Conclusion After investigating both the cases from Usmanpura Park and Subhash Bridge Park, through theoretical as well as practical framework of place and process, can we no answer the question that was posed as the title of the thesis, and identify how public are public spaces? The complexity of urban planning, urban design, development and management process of the cases and the constellation of people’s behaviour and perception towards a space they are located in, makes it impossible to find a simple answer. But across both the cases, we are able to identify a recurring themes in regards to the use of the space, the activities, the publicness, the accessibility and other direct and indirect elements associated with public space. Instigating space with a process of inclusion and exclusion of the associated elements, creating Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

79

space with overlapping meanings. We can see how public spaces are crucial for all urban communities, irrespective of size of the city, its economic or political base, and cultural conformations. Public spaces, as significant material and social components of cities, are therefore subject to intense process of social interaction through their quality and character are determined. (Madanipour, 2010) The case studies presented in this thesis map out the changing landscape of public space. Public open spaces are transforming from being engrafted in the social fabric of the city to being a part of more impersonal and fragmented urban environments.

The decline of public space reflects a breakdown in social and spatial linkages and a deterioration of the city as a whole (Mandanipour, 2010). Public space provides linkages to both private as well as public spheres, and it represents the quality, the character and the most important the urban life of the city.

The chapter two details out how public spaces are changing alongside the changing nature of the city development, in other words, they are going a transition from a communicative/expressive to a subservient character. Public spaces that once were meaningful places are becoming a mere part of robust developmental practices. They are at risk of being taken over by influential self-interested minorities, being privatized in the name of safety, security and exclusivity, further fragmenting the urban society.

The particular character of public spaces may be subservient or communicative/ expressive. As a subservient spaces, they are used as a means to an end, such as the development of riverfront as a public spaces, for purpose of gaining commercial profit for businesses, or the paid and gated access of Subhash Bridge Park, for the perceived safety of the users from particular community or religion. Public spaces may physically change very slowly, but socially they are like

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?

80

water, embodied with new beliefs and behaviours.

Public space is more than just “Usmanpura Park & Subhash Bridge Park” as essential as that function is. It is also a delegation of the self-awareness that comes from public control and ownership, as contested and problematic as these may be. Public space is a place of direct interaction. It is a practical vision of the public space that determines its very publicness and accessibility. The most of the public space in Ahmedabad city has always been a hybrid (Mixture of private & public essence) and definitely a contradictory space. Depending on the level of political, economic and cultural power and influence, individuals and organization can shape and determine some of the features of the public space.

Public spaces, even in their most public form, tends to find particular flavours, a different character associated with particular combination of groups and interests, under pressure to find a fixed identity within a particular fragment of society. (Mandanipour, 2010).

Figure 42 Usmanpura Park : In Morning

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

81

If a public spaces is equally accessible to everyone, irrespective of physical abilities, age, gender, religion, income level, and social status it can be considered as a public space. In words of A. Mandanipour who suggests that “public spaces should be designed and developed, as a places that embody the principles of equality, by being accessible places, made through inclusive and democratic processes. Democratic and inclusive processes that create public space as a common good appear to be the best way of ensuring a better physical environment with social and psychological significance of the citizens. Where every day needs for public spaces are met through participative processes, the result is both physical improvement and social development, laying the foundations for further enhancement of democratic practices.” The true form of becoming a publicly public space is achieved when a public space acts as a clay, where each individuals are a potter in itself, who are continuously re-modifying the structure of public space as and when they like it.

Figure 43 Usmanpura Park : In Evening

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

82

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

83

REFERENCES Amin A., (2006) Collective culture and urban public space. Available from: http://www.publicspace.org/en/ text-library/eng/b003-collective-culture-and-urban-public-space [Accessed 20 December 2015].

Benn, S.I. and Gaus, G.F., (1983) The Public and Private: Concepts and action’, in S.I. Benn and Gaus (eds) Public and Private in Social Life, London: Croom Helm; Newyork: St Martin’s Press. Available From: https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/274859892_Public_and_Private_in_Social_Life [Accessed 14 January 2016] Borja J., (1998) Citizenship and Public Space. Available from: http://www.publicspace.org/en/text-library/ eng/11-ciudadania-y-espacio-publico [Accessed 20 December 2015].

Boyer, M.C., (1993) The city of illusion: New York’s public places in P. Knox (ed.) The restless Urban Landscape, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Carmona M., Heath T., Oc T., and Tiesdell S. (2003) Public Places – Urban Spaces: The Dimensions of Urban Design. 2nd ed. Oxford: Architectural Press.

Crowther, J., (1995) Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, Oxford University Press.

Fraser N., (1989) Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse and Gender in Contemporary Social Theroy, Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press.

Fecht S., (2012) Urban Legend: Can City Planning Shed Its Pseudoscientific Stigma? Available from: http:// www.scientificamerican.com/article/urban-legend-can-city-planning-shed-its-pseudoscientific-stigma/?wt. mc=SA_Facebook-Share [Accessed 22 December 2015].

Gehl J., and Svarre B., (2013) How to Study Public Life. 1st ed. Washington, Covelo, London: Island Press.

Harvey D., (2012) Rebel Cities: From The Right to the City to Urban Revolution. London and New York: Verso Available from: https://books.google.co.in/books?id=IKJE02gfP0cC&printsec=frontcover&dq=rights+to+th e+city&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_gMrEr6zKAhXHc44KHRIhDMsQ6AEIMTAE#v=onepage&q=rights%20 to%20the%20city&f=false [Accessed 12 January 2016] Gove P.B., (1976) Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica Keleg M., Latif A M., Salheen., (2015) LIVABLE PUBLIC SPACES AS A MEANS FOR LIVABLE CITIES. Available from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284284266_LIVABLE_PUBLIC_SPACES_AS_A_MEANS_

FOR_LIVABLE_CITIES [Accessed 22 December 2015].

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

84

Lin J., and Mele C., The Urban Sociology Reader 2nd Ed. London and New York: Routledge Available form: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=JXfm_pQ4aXQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA429&dq=Rights+to+city& ots=UNTRKZ-a86&sig=mqX23OOJ5xaQ5oMHUG8LEk4oolA#v=onepage&q=Rights%20to%20city&f=false [Accessed 10 January 2016] Makins M., (1998) Collins Concise Dictionary, Glasgow: HarperCollins.

Madanipour A., (2010) Whose Public Space? International case studies of in urban design and development.

1st ed. 2nd Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge Madanipour, A. (1995) Dimensions of urban public spaces: the case of the metro Centre, Gateshed’, Urban Design Studies 1: 45-46 Mehrabian A., (1976) Public Places and Private Spaces: The Psychology of Work, Play, and Living Environments.

1st ed. New York: Basic Books Inc. Publishers.

Morange M., Spire A., (2015) A Right to the City in the Global South? Available from: http://www.metropolitiques. eu/A-Right-to-the-City-in-the-Global.html [Accessed 20 December 2015].

Neal Z., (2009) Seeking Common Ground: Three perspectives on Public Space. Available from: https://www. msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-seekingcommon.pdf [Accessed 22 December 2015].

Nolan L., (1995) Standards in Public Life: First Report on the standards in Public Life. London: HMSO. Saalam H., (1968) Medieval Cities, London: Studio Vista.

Shaftoe H., (2008) Convivial Urban Spaces: Creating Effective Public Places 1st ed. UK and USA: Earthscan Silver, A., (1997) Two different sorts of commerce: friendship and strangership in civil society. In J. Weintraub and K. Kumar ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Smithsimon G., (2015) The Right to Public Space. Available from: http://www.metropolitiques.eu/The-Rightto-Public-Space.html [Accessed 20 December 2015].

Surayamarayanan A., (2015) The Right to Public Spaces. Available from: http://www.newindianexpress.com/ education/edex/The-Right-to-Public-Spaces/2015/04/27/article2779416.ece [Accessed 20 December 2015].

Tadum., (2013) The Right to Public Space. Available from: http://www.tadamun.info/2013/07/01/the-right-topublic-space/?lang=en#.VpiIcxV97IX [Accessed 10 January 2016]

Public Spaces for All: How “Public” are Public Spaces?

85

Tadum., (2014) The Right to Public Space in Egyptian Constitution. Available from: http://www.tadamun. info/2014/02/16/the-right-to-public-space-in-the-egyptian-constitution/?lang=en#.VpiIeBV97IX

[Accessed

10 January 2016] Thompson et al. (2011) Space Place Life: Learning from Place 1. London and New York: Routledge.

Tonnelat S., (2010) The sociology of urban public spaces. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/313641/ The_Sociology_of_Urban_Public_Spaces [Accessed 22 December 2015].

UNESCO (2015) Inclusion through Access to Public Spaces. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/new/ en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/urban-development/migrants-inclusion-in-cities/good-practices/ inclusion-through-access-to-public-space [Accessed 22 December 2015].

UNESCO., (2004) World Charter for The Right to the City. Available from: http://www.urbanreinventors.net/3/ wsf.pdf [Accessed 20 December 2015].

Wacks R., (1993) Privacy, Aldershort, UK: Ashgate.

Whyte W., (1980) The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. 7th ed. New York: Project for Public Spaces.

Wikipedia., (2015) Patidar reservation agitation. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patidar_ reservation_agitation [Accessed 20 December 2015].

Low.M.S., Zuniga.D.L., (2012). The Anthropology of space and place. Locating culture. 12th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Kostof.S, (1992). The City Assembled: The elements of urban form through history.1st ed. Hong Kong: Thames and Hudson.

Mitchell.D., (2014). The Right to the City: Social Justice and The fight for Public Space. United States of America: The Guildford Press.

Harvey.D. (1973). Social Justice and the City: Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Republished Oxford: Blackwell Publishing) Harvey.D. (2000). Spaces of Hope. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Harvey.D. (1996). Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Public Spaces for All: How “Public� are Public Spaces?