界定私有公共空间的城市规划标准(POPS)

IF 0.3 4区 艺术学 0 ARCHITECTURE Prostor Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI:10.31522/p.31.1(65).10
Zejnulla Rexhepi, S. Gašparović, Tihomir Jukić
{"title":"界定私有公共空间的城市规划标准(POPS)","authors":"Zejnulla Rexhepi, S. Gašparović, Tihomir Jukić","doi":"10.31522/p.31.1(65).10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research is based on the systematic literature review related to the definition of Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS). POPS arise as a bonus of the urban planning concession resulting from negotiations between private investors and city administration. The question arises whether, during their formation, the urbanistic criteria that ensure public space quality are sufficiently represented, or the superior private interest results in critical urban quality aspects. By comparatively analyzing the definitions’ key features, nine specific POPS aspects have been identified and classified into two categories according to basic criteria: impact on investors and on broader urban contexts. The results show that a group of spatial criteria (usage impact, user’s perception, connectivity, urbanity and socialization) have been neglected or ignored in defining POPS. Current definitions do not consider the importance of POPS influence in a wider urban context and POPS is not, in any way, controlled or connected to the comprehensive process of urban planning, which can lead to a neglect of the fundamental roles and quality of public space. Further studies should focus on analyzing the impact of POPS in a broader urban context as well as defining mandatory urban planning criteria for insuring the quality of public space.","PeriodicalId":42738,"journal":{"name":"Prostor","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urban Planning Criteria for Defining Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS)\",\"authors\":\"Zejnulla Rexhepi, S. Gašparović, Tihomir Jukić\",\"doi\":\"10.31522/p.31.1(65).10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research is based on the systematic literature review related to the definition of Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS). POPS arise as a bonus of the urban planning concession resulting from negotiations between private investors and city administration. The question arises whether, during their formation, the urbanistic criteria that ensure public space quality are sufficiently represented, or the superior private interest results in critical urban quality aspects. By comparatively analyzing the definitions’ key features, nine specific POPS aspects have been identified and classified into two categories according to basic criteria: impact on investors and on broader urban contexts. The results show that a group of spatial criteria (usage impact, user’s perception, connectivity, urbanity and socialization) have been neglected or ignored in defining POPS. Current definitions do not consider the importance of POPS influence in a wider urban context and POPS is not, in any way, controlled or connected to the comprehensive process of urban planning, which can lead to a neglect of the fundamental roles and quality of public space. Further studies should focus on analyzing the impact of POPS in a broader urban context as well as defining mandatory urban planning criteria for insuring the quality of public space.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42738,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prostor\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prostor\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31522/p.31.1(65).10\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prostor","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31522/p.31.1(65).10","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究基于与私有公共空间(POPS)定义相关的系统文献综述。POPS是私人投资者和城市管理部门之间谈判产生的城市规划特许权的红利。问题来了,在其形成过程中,确保公共空间质量的城市化标准是否得到了充分的体现,还是卓越的私人利益导致了关键的城市质量方面。通过对定义的主要特征进行比较分析,确定了POPS的九个具体方面,并根据基本标准将其分为两类:对投资者的影响和对更广泛的城市背景的影响。结果表明,在定义POPS时,一组空间标准(使用影响、用户感知、连通性、城市性和社会化)被忽视或忽视。目前的定义没有考虑到持久性有机污染物系统在更广泛的城市背景下的影响的重要性,持久性有机污染系统在任何方面都没有受到城市规划的控制或与城市规划的全面过程相联系,这可能会导致忽视公共空间的基本作用和质量。进一步的研究应侧重于在更广泛的城市背景下分析持久性有机污染物排放系统的影响,并确定确保公共空间质量的强制性城市规划标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Urban Planning Criteria for Defining Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS)
This research is based on the systematic literature review related to the definition of Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS). POPS arise as a bonus of the urban planning concession resulting from negotiations between private investors and city administration. The question arises whether, during their formation, the urbanistic criteria that ensure public space quality are sufficiently represented, or the superior private interest results in critical urban quality aspects. By comparatively analyzing the definitions’ key features, nine specific POPS aspects have been identified and classified into two categories according to basic criteria: impact on investors and on broader urban contexts. The results show that a group of spatial criteria (usage impact, user’s perception, connectivity, urbanity and socialization) have been neglected or ignored in defining POPS. Current definitions do not consider the importance of POPS influence in a wider urban context and POPS is not, in any way, controlled or connected to the comprehensive process of urban planning, which can lead to a neglect of the fundamental roles and quality of public space. Further studies should focus on analyzing the impact of POPS in a broader urban context as well as defining mandatory urban planning criteria for insuring the quality of public space.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Prostor
Prostor ARCHITECTURE-
自引率
66.70%
发文量
10
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal PROSTOR publishes scientific papers from all branches of architecture and urban planning as well as texts from other fields of science (art history, archaeology, ethnology, sociology, geography, civil engineering, geodesy, forestry, design...) if their content relates to architectural issues.
期刊最新文献
Rooting Art-Based Interdisciplinary Practice An Overview of Listed Summer Residences and Villas in Zagreb Sinan the Architect’s Process of Creating Spatial Typology The Impact of Public Open Space on the Image of Small Towns Centres in Slovenia Chair Architectonics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1