OBJECT TERRITORIES

THE CRISIS OF SHARED SPACE

For all of the rampant speculation in design circles, the COVID-19 pandemic itself may leave little lasting transformation on the physical structure of the city. This would be a tragic missed opportunity to galvanize changes that should occur, regardless of our current circumstances.  2020 has been a powerful reminder that our public spaces and the quality of our shared indoor environments are in crisis. Besides the fact that we triggered this pandemic ourselves through habitat destruction and encroachment, our urban and architectural design failures have been put into sharp relief. Parks and public spaces are inequitably distributed and inadequately proportioned for the populations they serve. Transit is congested and reliant on personal vehicles with little space left for pedestrians or other forms of personal transportation. The vast majority of our buildings are sealed boxes with unfiltered, poorly oxygenated, recirculated air that increase exposure to pollutants and fuel the transmission of viruses while contributing to greenhouse gas production. The evidence continues to mount with only sporadic efforts and seemingly little will to change.

It was no coincidence the protests against the murder of George Floyd and systemic racism occurred in the sprawling asphalt parking lots of South Minneapolis. Fig. 1. Minneapolis remains one of the most racially segregated cities in the United States, and its public park system is no exception. Considered one of the best in the country, Minneapolis park system’s staffing, spending, and access is primarily driven by white affluent citizens and their neighborhoods. The Chain of Lakes attracts millions of visitors each year, in a city that is 46% non-white, only 3% of its visitors are people of color.[1] Since the protests in May, the Minneapolis Parks Board passed a resolution allowing people without permanent housing to stay in the city’s parks. Community members delivered meals, medical treatment and counseling. Three months later the encampments ballooned in size to over 500 in some parks and were subsequently cleared due to increased vehicular traffic, crime, drugs, and property damage. Fig. 2. Now, limits have been placed to keep the number of tents to 25 as long as day to day oversight is maintained by volunteer groups.

In Hong Kong, homelessness is less visible. Hong Kong’s territory is only 25% built upon, but given the density of this built area, there are very few urban public spaces. The few that exist are poorly designed or not integrated with the urban fabric. People without housing are often forced to sleep in internet cafés or fast-food restaurants. According to Doctors without Borders, some parts have seen a 50% increase in street sleepers due to restaurant closures caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.[2] The homeless, and those who share flats without bathrooms, rely on large, well-maintained, naturally ventilated public bathrooms distributed throughout the city. Nevertheless, most of Hong Kong’s locally transmitted COVID-19 cases have occurred indoors: at restaurants, offices, and dance clubs. When Hong Kong lifted the limit on building heights in 1955 most of the older colonial buildings with natural ventilation were destroyed, at the same time the invention of air conditioners proliferated on building facades of the new multistory buildings to compensate for single glazing and uninsulated concrete walls. Indoor office spaces are cramped due to high rents and sealed shut. When left unoccupied mold grows in a few days and is painted over when rented. SARS saw most of the carpet torn out of offices but it’s of little consequence to air quality or energy consumption in a city with no renewable energy sources in use.

SARS, H5N1, and H1N1 are still fresh in the collective Hong Kong memory. Well before there were any confirmed COVID-19 cases outside Wuhan or any mention of travel bans, Hong Kong citizens went into full epidemic mode. Nearly everyone was masked and sanitizing procedures were initiated in every building. As a result, Hong Kong has been able to keep the virus in the low 100/day range at its peaks. During the hottest months of the year, beaches are one of the most popular getaways for Hong Kong residents. Worried about the scenes from spring breakers at beaches in the United States, Hong Kong also closed its beaches, meaning more people went to the indoor shopping malls, a much more problematic scene for COVID transmission. Fig. 3. Taking a managed approach, South Korea created an app to reserve physically distanced spaces at their beaches, masks were provided, and one could check the population density at a given beach in order to avoid crowding. Fig. 4.  Surely being outside would be healthier than increasing the density of people inside shopping malls and restaurants. The government affords little trust to the public to maintain their own physical distancing.

In contrast to Hong Kong, Singapore has been increasing open air and naturally ventilated college campus buildings, dining halls, and restaurants despite the tropical climate. Traditional techniques for spacing buildings, raising them off the ground, sun shading, and increasing air flow are being used more and more frequently with major incentives from the government. Without a doubt this has helped reduce the impact of the viral transmission in a city also hit hard by SARS. Like Switzerland, Singapore has adopted a “build on built” strategy given its limited landmass. Companies are encouraged to utilize robotics in order to free up space in industrial areas, housing density is increased by increasing height limits and providing more mass transit and infrastructure while maintaining existing parks and open spaces. Reducing human sprawl will conserve our open spaces, lessen our infringement on ecosystems and the subsequent habitat destruction that brings humans activity in contact with dangerous pathogens. This would reduce the chances of triggering the next pandemic due to zoonotic transmission between species.

In St. Louis this year, we witnessed the provocative, dangerous, and illegal behavior of the McCloskey’s pointing guns at protestors passing their home on a private street enroute to petition their grievances in front of the mayor’s residence. This one-sided aggressive confrontation was disturbing enough even before one considers the fact that private streets still exist in St. Louis. Make no mistake, these relics from the railroad elite are intentional acts of class segregation. Is it not oxymoronic to use “private” and “street” together as a term in our cities? In 2020, the Black Lives Matter movement illustrated and reinforced the important roles that streets play in giving voice to citizens. Likewise, in Hong Kong there was no other choice but to use the street in the protests of 2014 and 2019. With the city’s lack of public spaces, residents flooded streets as the only viable venue to project a collective voice. In 2014, one of the largest highways was occupied for 79 days, becoming one of the most vibrant and visited spaces in the city. The highway was filled with food, water, and first aid stations. Office workers from central came to eat their lunches in what became a temporary central park in the center of Hong Kong. Fig 6, 7.

As a result of these events, and the COVID-19 pandemic, old problems and new opportunities are clearly visible in our cities and open spaces, opportunities that should be implemented. With the responses made to increase physical distances and reduce crowding on public transit, the world saw what it looked like to see fewer private vehicles in ordinarily congested urban arteries.  Images from Wuhan during the height of its lockdown gave the appearance of a city abandoned.  Milan, seeing an opportunity, was out front early, permanently converting 35km of roadway in the city center into pedestrian zones and bicycle lanes. Likewise, New York closed streets to cars as part of their Open Streets program to allow space for pedestrians, runners, and cyclists to spread out, particularly in areas without convenient access to public parks. Fig. 8. 83 miles of roadway was opened to cyclists, runners, and walkers, allowing nearly 11,000 restaurants to stretch onto sidewalks and streets, retailers were able to expand their storefronts beyond their front doors. People reclaimed the pavement and are now unwilling to give it back.[3] Interestingly, Janette Sadik-Khan, the former transportation commissioner of NYC who began the opening of key streets before COVID-19 for pedestrian use, is now advising officials in Milan. Could we imagine these transformations becoming permanent in New York City? In Hong Kong? Elsewhere? Absolutely!

Many cities, forced to restrict or prohibit indoor dining, rediscovered outdoor dining with inventive solutions.  For instance, New York restaurants famously pack diners into every square foot of their spaces, and even then, only to manage a small profit.  Initial restrictions only allowing food pickup and food delivery required a reframing of business, so many began exploring creative options outside.  As outdoor dining was introduced, the city allowed restaurants to convert parking lanes in front of their businesses into dining zones, creating a unique addition to street life.  As the weather cooled, plastic bubbles, and miscellaneous forms of lightweight shelters began popping up over these outdoor dining zones so that now there are a series of small-scale structures strewn along streets at a radically different scale than the majority of buildings. Fig. 9, 10. One cannot help but think of the Cushicle and Suitaloon projects by Archigram member Michael Webb have come back to life in new forms from the 1960’s.  Fig. 11. Certainly, encouraging and enabling space for outdoor dining for many months of the year is a great amenity for the public life of the city and can increase revenues for a struggling industry and its employees.

Independent of the COVID-19 pandemic, Barcelona began an experiment in 2016 in its Eixample district. Originally designed by Ildefons Cerda, the original plan of variable interconnected open spaces was subverted by overzealous developers and lax zoning that led to continuous perimeter block development. Now the streets are being converted into what Barcelona is calling “superislands,” by carving out islands of car free zones within the greater district.[4] Fig.12, 13, 14, 15. The experiment has been working in the Poblenou superisland, and within the coming years, the entire district will be a car free pedestrian zone of superislands with parking only at the perimeters and through streets. While the exact design of the streets will be chosen in a competition in 2021, 80% of the street will be shaded, with 20% of the surfaces permeable. Beyond pedestrianization and increased mobility by foot and bicycle, the reductions in summer heat loads, and reduced air pollution will benefit human health and reduce stress on Barcelona’s healthcare system. Undoubtedly, the superisland in Poblenou will have more success with its local businesses being able to operate on the streets in the open air during COVID-19.

Quality public spaces belong in all neighborhoods, regardless of income or racial makeup.  In many cities, there are certain parks that sustain themselves through private conservancies that drastically increase funding over municipal investment.  In St. Louis for example, where we worked on a competition a few years ago, we clearly saw the disparity between non-profit funded parks like Forest Park or Tower Grove, which have lush flora and abundant programming and the financially challenged Fair Ground Park in North City which receives much less investment and maintenance.[5]  Cities enable these disparities by allowing such dedicated funding in an inequitable system of public/private partnerships prioritizing select locations and populations.  A more equitable distribution would not only improve the quality of life of residents but also help increase property values in underserved neighborhoods.

Where they exist, reimagining forlorn infrastructures as parks and greenways offers one way of increasing public space, particularly in dense areas. The Highline, connecting Hudson Yards to the West Village along the west side of Manhattan, was nearly demolished when then Mayor Giuliani saw it as a blighted structure. The foresight of Friends of the Highline and support of the design community saved this unique relic and turned it into a highly successful park in a neighborhood without such spaces. Other New York success stories include Brooklyn Bridge Park (formerly shipping piers), Domino Park (formerly a sugar factory), and Fresh Kills Park (formerly a landfill). Fig. 16. These can be great economic generators for redeveloping neighborhoods while providing needed recreational space. Toronto’s “Bentway” under the Gardiner Expressway or Singapore’s “Rail Corridor” park along the closed Malaysian Railways line have captured this same opportunity and spirit.

Public transit serves as critical infrastructure in the city but also exists as important points of public space.  Daily commutes fell in most places as businesses moved their operations online or laid people off.  Subways and buses actually feel manageable in terms of density at the moment due to low ridership pressure on systems.  On the flipside, these systems face a massive fiscal shortfall whether they are primarily funded by riders or local tax revenue.  Local governments have little to offer due to massive losses in tax revenue due to business closures.  Without aid from the national government, many transit systems project severe cuts to service and postponement of capital improvements.  Lower wage residents who depend on transit suffer the most as routes to work dwindle or commute times increase. Fare structures should be revised to support the people who rely on transit the most, while more options should be made to allow for safe commuting via cycling routes.

Meanwhile, people are spending more time inside due to the pandemic, making the lack of space for home offices, insufficient residential bandwidth, and general poor health of the indoor environments more apparent.  As many companies contemplate an at-home distributed work force even after the pandemic, the spatial arrangement of residences may need to be reconsidered.  Reduced occupations of office buildings do not easily translate into adequate space for those working at home.  And what happens to those unleased commercial properties and how might they be reappropriated?  We should reconsider how homes and industrial areas could change for increased live-work situations, something not unheard of before massive urban growth and exclusionary zoning.

Most of the older residential buildings rely on inefficient on window air conditioning units which do not pull in fresh air from the outside.  These issues along with the building industry’s reliance on petrochemical products that continue to emit VOCs into indoor air contribute to Sick Building Syndrome. Well-intentioned environmental initiatives such as “Passive House,” which call for extremely tight building enclosures, result in spaces even more dependent upon mechanical ventilation and recirculated indoor air. The inability to simply open a window has a psychological effect in normal times and has become a big constraint on spatial use during this pandemic. Increased awareness of healthy and renewable materials certainly helps improve indoor air quality but in new construction and renovations owners are only incentivized by voluntary marketing programs like LEED or BREEAM.  Finding ways to better incentivize or even mandate the use of renewable energy and reduce heat island effect in cities will go a long way towards improved public space. Our building facades, rooftops, highways, and parks have untapped space and surface area for renewable energy generation, something that is becoming easier and more affordable to implement with building-integrated photovoltaics. Initial investment typically remains a challenge, but once implemented they save money that can be reinvested into our shared spaces, while at the same time improving environmental conditions, reducing pollution, and mitigating global warming.

This pandemic will eventually be resolved, at least until the next one - but do we (and more importantly our policy makers) have the will and stamina to confront these blatant inadequacies and deficiencies in our urban public spaces and our shared interior environments? The need for change could hardly be more apparent. In many cases, it’s even quite simple to achieve.  The creativity and inventiveness we are seeing in New York, Barcelona, Singapore, and elsewhere should be an inspiration for radical transformations to the quantity and quality of our shared spaces - inside and out. If not now, then when? Let’s make the most of this tragic situation and change our shared urban and interior spaces for the immediate and long-term future.

Marcus Carter + Michael Kokora, 2019

Global Urbanism Studio Dispatch, Washington University

1 https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/inequality-in-american-public-parks/502238/

2 https://msf-seasia.org/news/19070

3 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/12/17/nyregion/nyc-open-streets.html

4 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-11/barcelona-s-new-car-free-superblock-will-be-big

5 This funding disparity whereby nice parks reside in financially stable neighborhoods and parks in disrepair reside in struggling neighborhoods mimics the public school systems where by two schools within the same district can have radically different amenities depending upon how much parents can contribute to the PTA for supplemental funding.