urban design international q …...natural lighting wind wind path airflow/airchanges natural...

The making of successful public space:a case study of People's Park Square

C. K. Heng and V. Chan*

School of Architecture, National University of Singapore, 4 Architecture Drive, Singapore 117566

People's Park Square is a lively urban node located in the heart of the historic Chinatown district inSingapore. It is well used throughout the week and is the focus of much of the pedestrian activity that goeson in the area.

This case study is part of an on-going research project on the nature of good Southeast Asian streets andurban spaces and through it, we hope to identify and document answers to such questions as: why is theSquare a successful urban space? What are the factors that make it work? What are the designable physicalcharacteristics of such spaces? What can be done to promote good streets and urban spaces?

For while the importance of creating good streets and urban spaces that provide conducive settings forpublic life is increasingly being acknowledged, the study of our regional urban environment has been, todate, largely neglected. Ultimately, the purpose of the study is to analyse the various factors involved in themakeup of successful Southeast Asian urban areas and to distill the findings into a set of physicaldesignable characteristics that can be used to facilitate the future creation of successful urban spacesadapted to our regional requirements.

Keywords: urban streets and spaces; physical designable characteristics; Southeast Asia; pedestrian activity;public life

Introduction

Objectives and methodology

This case study of People's Park Square is part ofan on-going research project on the nature of goodSoutheast Asian streets and urban spaces. Theproject was initially conceived as a result of thegrowing concern for the future of Southeast Asiancityscapes in the face of globalisation and thesubsequent replacement of traditional neighbour-hoods and indigenous urban fabrics with facelessmodern ones. While the importance of creatinggood streets and urban spaces that provideconducive settings for public life and a greatercivic consciousness is increasingly being acknowl-edged, the study of our regional urban environ-ment has been, to date, largely neglected.

Through a series of empirical studies, the researchaims to:

1. establish the criteria for good streets andurban spaces in our region;

2. identify the physical designable qualities ofgood streets and urban spaces; and,

3. compile a report that can be easily accessedby academics and designers in the region.

Ultimately, the purpose of the study is: to improvethe understanding of urban streets and spacesrelative to the Southeast Asian context; to analysethe various factors involved in the makeup ofsuccessful Southeast Asian urban areas; and, todistill the findings into a set of physical desig-nable characteristics that can be used to facilitatethe future creation of successful urban spacesadapted to our regional requirements.

The research team is currently undertaking aseries of case studies in Singapore, Malaysia,

URBAN DESIGN International (2000) 5, 47±55Q 2000 Stockton Press All rights reserved 1357-5317/00 $15.00

www.stockton-press.co.uk/udi

*Correspondence: C.K. Heng*, School of Architecture,National University of Singapore, 4 Architecture Drive,Singapore 117566

Thailand and the Philippines. Ultimately, bymeans of the case study approach, we hope toidentify and document answers to such questionsas: what are good Southeast Asian streets andurban spaces and what are the factors that makethem work? What are the designable physicalcharacteristics of such streets and urban spaces?What can be done to promote good streets andurban spaces?

Western precedents and criteria

Extant scholarship on the public realm, whileprimarily focused on discussions of Western

prototypes and contexts, provides a good basefrom which to analyse, compare and contrast thepossible criteria by which to study streets andurban spaces within the regional context. A broadreview of existing texts was undertaken and whatfollows is a distillation of the manifold factorstaken into consideration by various researchers(Tables 1±4).

Historical background of Chinatownarea

The physical development of Chinatown beganaround 1843 when land parcels were released for

The Making of Successful Public SpaceC.K. Heng and V. Chan

48

URBAN DESIGN International

Table 1 Physical dimensions as criteria by which to study urban streets and spaces

Physical dimensions

Volume Massing and enclosure Public space (open)Public space (covered)Semi-public space (enclosed)Line of enclosure

DimensionsShape and configuration

Ground plane Level changesSub-division of spaceFinishes

Overhead plane Definition of ceiling planeRelationship of overhead plane to ground/vertical plane

Vertical plane Building frontagesWalls and facades

Permeability PhysicalVisual

Level of complexity and detail Variety in sizes of elementsVariety in detailing and material

Table 2 Microclimate as criteria by which to study urban streets and spaces

Microclimate

Sun Solar studiesGlareNatural lighting

Wind Wind pathAirflow/airchangesNatural ventilationMechanical ventilationSpill-over cooling for air-conditioned spaces

Trees ShadeWater Evaporative coolingSpecialised shading elements Awnings

UmbrellasScreens

Sound Noise levelsAuditory stimulation levels

Smell

the building of homes and shophouses. A myriadrange of activities flourished in the area ± amongthem were small businesses such as goldsmiths,textile shops, pawnshops, spice and meat trading,night markets and thieves' markets, Chinesetheatres as well as places of worship for thevarious immigrants of diverse religions settled inthe surrounding area (Tyers, 1993).

South Bridge Road was the main thoroughfare atthe time, leading from the city to the harbour. Therapid expansion of the population base inland

towards the Duxton area and Pearl's Hill wasdue to increasingly overcrowded living condi-tions in the central Chinatown area as well as toimprovements introduced to the transportationsystem ± first with the steam train in 1885, thenwith the electric train in 1905 and the trolley bus in1929.

In the 1960s, with the adoption of urban renewalas the champion of progress, many traditionalbuildings around Pearl's Hill and New BridgeRoad were demolished and redeveloped as part


49


Table 3 Amenities as criteria by which to study urban streets and spaces

Amenities

Furnishing Fixed SeatingTablesTelephonesAutomated cash machines etc.

Semi-fixed Shop displaysStall-front glass cabinets

Non-fixed DustbinsPushcarts, makeshift stalls(cobbler stations etc.)SeatingTables

Food and beverage provisions Stall/vendor

Retail outlet KiosksPushcartsServery countersDispensers

Covered pedestrian facilities Walkways Height and widthContinuityWeather protection

Table 4 Activities as criteria by which to study urban streets and spaces

Activities

Circulation Vehicular: primary, secondary, tertiaryPedestrian: primary, secondary, tertiaryMain flows of trafficRoutes and connectionsMain points of entry into the area

Pedestrian use and activities Dynamic-active: main and secondary routes, intensive nodesPassive-staticTypes of activities

Uses/activities Variety of different activities in each area Passive: standing, sitting, eating,talking, sleepingActive: walking

Land use Land use at district level Number of typesMix of use

Tenant mix: retail, commercial, parking and services, institutional/public, foodand beverage, office

Public/private nature of space/use Boundaries of public access

of the government's overall plan and drivetowards modernisation.

Historical background of People's Park

People's Park can be defined as the area boundedby New Bridge Road, Park Road and Pearl's Hill.In the early 1900s, the park acted as a green retreatfor Chinatown residents who lived and worked inovercrowded conditions nearby. The nightlife inthe area was particularly vibrant ± `Action startssoon after sunset. A lot of people mill around: itineranthawkers set up stalls in their usual prime locations,and people come to be entertained by storytellers, newstellers, acrobats and magicians' (Archives and OralHistory Department, 1983).

People's Park Market was set up in 1922 by theMunicipal Authority and was the scene of muchcommercial activity as well as entertainment.Goods sold included meat, vegetables, cookedfood and small items, and storytelling and othervarious forms of street entertainment were con-ducted in the open space in front of the market.

Unfortunately, the market was burnt down onChristmas Eve of 1966. Most of the hawkers fromthe market were later resettled in People's ParkCentre (which was completed in late 1968 on thesite of the old market).

People's Park and Eu Tong Sen Street were theformer sites of shophouses and two importanttheatrical halls ± Heng Seng Peng, where Canto-nese, Peking and Hokkien opera were performed,and Heng Wai Sun, where Cantonese opera wasthe mainstay ± all of which were demolished tomake way for People's Park Centre.

The square as we know it today is directlybounded by People's Park Complex, People'sPark Centre, Ocean Group (OG) Building and theMajestic Theatre. (The Majestic Theatre, formerlyknown as Tien Yien Moh Toi, was originally builtin 1927 by Mr Eu Tong Sen as a theatre forcantonese opera. It was later converted to acinema and renamed Queen's theatre and, subse-quently, Majestic Theatre.) The Southern Hotel,located along Eu Tong Sen Road adjacent to theMajestic Theatre, opened for business in 1927 andwas then the tallest building in Chinatown and,besides hotel rooms, also housed a variety of uses,

including a tea-house cum opera performancearea on the roof terrace, a restaurant and offices.

The planning and land use principles adopted inthe new developments (People's Park Complexand People's Park Centre) emulated those of thetraditional shophouse typology in that theyincorporated residential units on the upper levelswith commercial and business uses on the lowerfloors. This made it possible to resettle and retainmost of the displaced population within the areawhilst achieving higher residential densities alongwith more intensive commercial use.

People's Park Square was a significant milestoneof architectural development in Singapore in the1970s for a number of reasons. Firstly, it intro-duced the modern air-conditioned shoppingcentre prototype that had previously beenunknown in the local scene but, perhaps moreimportantly, it grouped together around a pedes-train-oriented space a collection of buildings thatwas varied not just in age, but also in style,function, form and class.

Design intentions and analysis

People's Park Square is one of the most successfulurban spaces in Singapore (see Figure 1 for plan).It has been acclaimed as `a successful design'`built for people' shortly after it was built and isstill very successful today, attracting large num-bers of users (Loo, 1982, p. 28). At almost any onetime, one could find elderly people (both resi-dents and non-residents of the immediate sur-roundings), office workers, shop-keepers,labourers (from nearby construction sites), ven-dors, cobblers, tourists, housewives, children andteenagers using the square in a variety ofmanners. While the crowd of users may fluctuateduring the day and reach a peak during eveninghours, there are always enough passersby duringthe rest of the day to lend the place an air ofconstant activity (Figure 2). Some may be there toshop or sightsee, others are happy just sittingaround people-watching, chit-chatting, or simplywaiting (Figure 3). With the intensity of pedes-trian activities, it is little surprise that streetvendors such as newspaper stands/stalls, cob-blers and lottery ticket sellers attempt to maketheir living there. People's Park Square promisesto be ever more successful when the subwaystation of the new North East line is open in 2002.


50


Th

eM

ak

ing

of

Su

ccessfu

lP

ub

licS

pace

C.K

.H

eng

and

V.

Ch

an

51

UR

BA

ND

ES

IGN

Intern

ational

Figure 1. Plan of People's Park Square.

The success of the square was not an accident.The so-called square was initially a road that URAhad `block(ed) up ¼ and juxtaposition(ed) thebuildings and put in some features, streetfurniture, plants, etc. to make it come alive'(Loo, 1982, p. 89). An earlier study shows thatthe square was planned, designed and anticipatedto function the way it is currently functioning.The intentions and strategies were clearly articu-lated. `The plaza (was) intended to group thebuildings in a meaningful way ¼ we want(ed) togenerate movement, complementary movementof people from one building to another and viceversa ¼ to identify which are the areas thatpeople will walk along and make footpaths forthem to walk along. Identify where people maywant to sit, to rest and to have lunch and to talk.'The space, according to the designer, should notonly be safe but also pleasant to walk andenjoyable so as to `encourage more of thepedestrian to move ¼ through the space.' To thedesigner, `a pedestrian mall is only able to succeedif you are able to link buildings together function-ally, visually and to create a space ¼ frame thespace and to make the space more meaningful'(Loo, 1982, p. 86). The space has to be flexiblecatering to various activities and `must appeal toeverybody'. It must not be differentiated `that thisarea is exclusively for tourists and that for locals'or it `will fail completely.' (Loo, 1982, p. 85).

Even at a larger scale, involving the area in


52


Figure 2. The bustle of various activities in the squarethroughout the day.

Figure 3. Users both passing through and lingering in the square.

general, the objectives and strategies were equallyclear. Adequate servicing and loading areas mustbe provided and fire-fighting and emergencyvehicles allowed access even into the landscapedsquare. To make the square successful, `you are totell the people there to park their cars at theparking stations outside and not at the door.'Three car parks were built after some persuasion:at HDB's People's Park Centre, at People's ParkComplex and at OG Departmental Store so thatthere are `3 major magnets almost surroundingthe square to ensure that the people who drivethere can park at any of the car parks there andwalk through building to building' (Loo, 1982,p. 84). And all these were envisaged in a largerscheme which involves the creation of links acrossUpper Cross Street and a Major Main OpenSquare in front of Subordinate Court, OldMinistry of Labour Building and Furama Hotel.

The factors listed in the earlier section arecertainly useful in helping us understand thesuccess of the People's Park Square. Under theheading of amenities for instance, there arekiosks, seating, the clock tower, signage, planters,trees and flowers, a fountain (until recently)streetlighting etc. We have chosen, after extensiveanalysis however, to focus for the purpose of thispaper on three important factors grouped underthe heading of context and linkage system, inter-face and spatial system, climate and proportion.This is not to slight the importance of all the otherfactors which together are critical in ensuring asuccessful public space but to highlight certaincritical factors that are specific to this urban spaceand its surroundings.

Context and linkage system

One of the reasons People's Park Square is able tofunction as well is its location, close to offices andresidential and hotel areas. The good provision ofpublic transport and parking facilities is alsoimportant. More important however is the factthat the square was planned in such a way that itnot only linked up all the buildings at its edgesbut is also connected to other buildings andcarparks beyond those immediately surroundingit (Figure 4).

Hence it taps on a much larger pedestriannetwork and becomes the confluence of severalpaths. Many people use the square as a pleasantshort cut while others have to cut across thesquare to access a carpark or a nearby taxi stand.

Although the location of People's Park Square isan important factor, the deliberate creation of acontext of linkages reinforces its strength andfurther enhances its success.

Edge interface and spatial system

Jan Gehl in his Life Between Buildings reiteratesChristopher Alexander's comment regarding theimportance of the edge: ìf the edge fails, then thespace never becomes lively.' Indeed, the edges ofPeople's Park Square deserve careful observation.All but one of its edges are permeable bothvisually and physically to various extends. Eventhen, the edge constituted by the blank wall ofMajestic theatre did not always function as ablank wall. A niche in the wall provided, until therecent construction works, a popular fruit/fruitjuice kiosk. Just as important along this wall wasthe side door of the cinema/theatre that at regularintervals during the day poured out a steadystream of moviegoers after each screening session.Adjacent to this edge is the glass vitrine of OGDepartment Store, perceptually permeable butonly accessible through glass doors at specificlocations. This edge, though not as active as therest, however offers the opportunity for shoppersto rest on benches provided along it.

The other edges offer interesting lessons for thedesign of public spaces. While the buildingsdefining those edges are large in footprint andundeniably contemporary, the nature of the edgesis less so. They are made up of narrow frontagesalong a walkway open to the square. These shop/store fronts are mostly no wider than 5 m andoffer a wide range of goods and services clearlyvisible and accessible along the walkway andfrom the public open space. The narrow shopfronts are able to give to the edges visual varietyand to the passersby a wider range of goodsoffered and hence catering to different groups ofpeople. The informal atmosphere created is alsounintimidating to most people and thereforepromotes more intensive use and patronage.

Equally important is the fact that these edges areonly rather thin àctivity screens' linking thePeople's Park Square to the indoor spaces of thesurrounding buildings. Designed with that inten-tion in mind, the indoor city rooms (or atriums) ofthe People's Park Complex are linked almostseamlessly to the public space of the square. Thesame is true for the ìnterior space' of the foodcentre and that of OG Departmental Store. In so


53


doing the outdoor open space of the squaremerges with the indoor space of the adjacentbuildings to form a seamless spatial system that isconnected not only visually but also by activities.This system is in turn linked via linear connectors,in the form of bridges, to buildings and carparksbeyond its immediate perimeter (Figure 5).

Climate and proportion

A final point that merits some emphasis is the factthat this square was initially a road closed offbecause `it serve(d) no useful purpose' (Loo, 1982,p. 83). Hence the proportion of this open space islong and narrow instead of large and ample, asmost squares and plazas would be in the Westernworld. Despite this, or rather because of this, thePeople's Park Square is far more successful than itwould have been otherwise. A comparison withsome other squares in Singapore is revealing. Thelarge Ngee Ann City Square or the outdoor openspace in front of Tong Building both alongOrchard Road, or the open plazas in front ofcommercial buildings both in the city centre and

in the new towns are less successful during theday. This is especially so when there are few or nosubstantial trees to provide the much neededshade.

In the case of People's Park Square, the narrow-ness of the T-shape public space (75 m by 20 mand 125 m by 20 m) in conjunction with the tallerbuildings around it renders the square shadedmost of the day. A daylighting study shows that atleast 25% of the square is shaded 65% of the day(7am±7pm). Taking into account the shade pro-vided by the trees, most of the square is shadedthroughout the day. This is an important factor asthe harsh tropical sun discourages any prolongeduse of unshaded open space during the day. Thefact that most of the square is shaded during theday also means that the square is cooler thanother plazas in the evenings when the accumu-lated heat begins to radiate from the heatedsurfaces into the cooler surroundings.

This study of People's Park Square is only part of


54


Figure 4. Context and linkage of the square to the surrounding district.

our more extensive study on the nature ofsuccessful streets and public spaces in the region.Hopefully with the progress of the research insimilar public spaces in our neighbouring coun-tries, we could derive a better understanding ofthe factors behind the making of successful streetsand urban spaces in our region.

References

Alexander, C. (1977) A Pattern Language: Towns, Build-ings, Construction. Oxford University Press, NewYork.

Archives and Oral History Department (1983) China-town: An Album of a Singapore Community. TimesBooks International, Singapore.

Gehl, J. (1987) Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space.Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

Gehl, J. (1994) The Challenge of Making Human Quality in

The City. (Seminar held at the Faculty of Architec-ture and Building Estate Management, NationalUniversity of Singapore.) Singapore.

Lang, J. (1994) Urban Design: The American Experience.Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

Loo, S.K. (1982) Evaluation of an outdoor urban space,People's Park Mall. (Unpublished dissertation forthe School of Architecture, National University ofSingapore.) Singapore.

Rapoport, A. (1977) Human Aspects of Urban Form:Towards a Man±Environment Approach to Urban Formand Design. Pergamon Press, Oxford.

Rapoport, A. (1987) Pedestrian Street Use: Culture andPerception. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

Rapoport, A. (1990) History and Precedent in Environ-mental Design. Plenum Press, New York.

Rudofsky, B. (1969) Streets for People. Van NostrandReinhold, New York.

Tyres, R. (1993) Singapore Then and Now. LandmarkBooks, Singapore.

Whyte, W.H. (1980) The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces.Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC.


55


Figure 5. The square within the spatial system of the surrounding district.

urban design international q …...natural lighting wind wind path airflow/airchanges natural...

Documents