13

Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Harteveld, M.G.A.D. (2005) Public Interiors: Urbanism or Not?, In: Martí Casanovas, M., M. Corominas i Ayala, J. Sabaté Bel and A. Sotoca García (eds.) (2005) II PhD Seminar: Urbanism & Urbanization, Volume I. Barcelona: ETSAB, pp. 219-230.The Department of Urban and Regional Planning of the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya organized an International Seminar on Urbanism and Urbanization. Using the name of Urbanism and Urbanization, the seminar focussed on the key epistemological issue of the interface between the ongoing processes transforming the contemporary city, the practice of “making the city” through urban design and urban planning, and the research on urbanism studying them. The presented papers showed the possible contributions that researches in urbanism can make in order to develop an urban knowledge (a set of concepts, models, devices, guidelines, design tools…) engaged with the transformation and improvement of the city and the urbanization processes.‘Public Interiors: Urbanism or Not?’ clarifies the role of urbanism next to architecture in the design of interior public space. This clarification is desirable from out of the viewpoint that the urban network of public space is one of the fundamental focuses in constructing the city. Where an increasing amount of these interiors play a crucial role in the city, in general the design of these interiors is a dismissed task for urban designer. Systematic analyses of the evolution of different types of interior public spaces, such as the arcade and the mall, underline this. Still, their different epistles bring forward their different contributions in cities through time. If the position in the city and the urban context are highly relevant, I conclude, the urban design task is just as crucial as the architectural. Although designing interiors is traditionally the task of architects, in the case of interior public space it is therefore high time to share that task with urbanists.www.harteveld.org

Citation preview

Page 1: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not
Maurice
Text Box
Public Interiors: Urbanism or Not? M.G.A.D.Harteveld MSc
Page 2: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

Public Interiors: Urbanism or Not? M.G.A.D.Harteveld MSc Delft University of Technology Advisor: Henco Bekkering Abstract: The aim of my research is to clarify the urban design role next to the architectural design role concerning the design task of interior public space. From out of the viewpoint of public space, the design of public interiors is a dismissed task for urbanist. By systematic analyzing different types of interior public spaces, such as the arcade and the mall, through time, the evolution of their different contemporary urban design tasks becomes clear. In general: If the position in the city and the urban context are highly relevant, I conclude, the urban design task is just as crucial. More and more the debate around public space seems to focus on interior public space.

Reasoning from different angles, designers and critics are not limiting themselves to outdoor

space. This is not extraordinary because in present-day western society we see a lot of

exemplary interiors being part of urban life and urban structure. In everyday usage, being in the

city most often means that interior public space cannot be avoided. A part of these interiors is

even a constituent particle in the contemporary city. The aim of my research is to clarify the

urban design role next to the architectural design role concerning the design task of interior

public space. From out of the viewpoint of public space, the design of public interiors is a

dismissed task for urbanist. It is urban design task because most of these interiors arise as result

of urban control, urban pressure and urban use: In a need for high quality urban space the urban

discomfort and soreness is eliminated, in a need for extra urban space new public areas and

street levels appear and as a result of the urban use private buildings become more public and

become part of the network of public space. Millions and millions of people for example use railway stations to change trains or to enter the

city. For me a transfer at Rotterdam Central Station is as common as a walk through the street

were I live. In New York going from 7th Avenue to Grand Central on 5th Avenue, a pedestrian

tunnel and the 42nd Street Shuttle provide me with an easy hub between the two subway stations.

In Toronto an underground and elevated walkway-system links most offices and shopping

centres downtown, and in Paris arcades form comfortable connections. Not only has traffic

defined how we use the urban interiors: so has the stay. Think of the mall for example. Is it not

quite common in American suburbs to meet at the mall? Here the enclosed mall seems to

function as the new city centre. At the same time in the inner city itself department stores and

fashionable shops develop themselves as urban meeting places, introducing restaurants, cafes

and lounges.

219

Page 3: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

These long lists of examples underline the idea that private buildings can be public. They are

public by their social meaning and value, which reaches much further than the building itself

and in which their urban nature is turned into an interior (Solà Morales 1992). In social science, interior public spaces are public, because they are part of the so-called public

realm. The public realm is defined as the sphere of action and speech and contrasts to the private

realm of the household, as the sphere of necessity, or shortly as a sphere of existence, survival

and reproduction of life (Arendt 1958: 54-58). This definition is closely related to terms as

bürgerliche öffenlichkeit or just öffenlichkeit, translated as public sphere (Habermas, 1962

translated 1989). By using a term as ‘realm’, a reference is made to a region under the dominion

of a king. In this line of thinking the public realm could be defined as an area controlled by the

public or the people. For architectural and urban science this notion emphasises a dilemma. In general, urbanism and

architecture meet on the edge between the publicly and privately owned domains. Since the late

Nineteenth Century, people began to differentiate between urbanism and architecture. Urbanism

gained independence with the invention of terms like urbanización (Cerda 1863) and städtebau

(Baumeister 1876) and with the institutionalization of the discipline as in the form of public

works departments. Urbanism plans and organizes the city, while architecture plans and forms

the building and its premises (Heeling 1991). But what if interiors become public? Urbanism

and architecture may have become independent disciplines, but the distinction between them

has grown blurred.

In the same time period the transformation of public space from a publicly to a privately owned

domain is a remarkable phenomenon. The transition of public space is revealed in outdoor

spaces covered with a comfortable roof and in the rise of buildings which have public meaning.

What does this mean for architecture and urbanism? Is the building replacing the city? Is the

city becoming a building? Or has nothing changed at all? Should interior public space be

redefined as a part of the city in a building? Or is it just a building in a city? Does this polemic

between the city and the building, the public and the private, mean a new disciplinary edge? Or

does it signal open borders? Are we dealing with a new coexistence or a new collaboration?

Using as examples the typological evolutions of the arcade and the mall, I would like to

illustrate how these interior public spaces came to acquire their dualistic nature. By learning

from their history, the contemporary design tasks of public interiors can be understood and

(re)defined.

The Arcade: How a building type becomes part of the network of public space

220

Page 4: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

Although the arcade is an interior public space characteristic of Nineteenth-Century bourgeois

society (Benjamin 1972 translated 1982, Geist 1979 and Doisneau 1981) the origin of this type

goes back to initiatives of Paris nobility in the late Eighteenth Century. This was the time of the

first travel reports of the Napoleonic journeys to Arabia. One of them was the journey of

Volney. This eminent Orientalist described with great astonishment the lively and successful

trade in the bazar ou marché couvert (Volney 1783 – 1785: 209 and 247). Most likely inspired

by these stories, Louis Philippe, duke of Orleans, enjoined the architect Victor Louise to design

such a bazaar in the palace gardens. The trade profits would pay off his debts, accrued by his

tendency to gamble and his unlucky speculations (Geist 1970: 452). The first design drawing

clearly shows a European variant of the bazaar. This is a notion of great interest, because similar

building types appeared in London some years later. Still the real breakthrough in typology,

both figurative and literal, came after the Salle d’Opera of the Palais Royal burnt down. Before

the first design could be built, the design assignment was expanded to include a new theatre;

and, perhaps more significantly, the bazaar would be lengthened from street to street. With this

new architectural design the building became an important short-cut through the large building

block formed by the palace. It was a much-needed and comfortable connection in the Paris

before Haussmann. This Galerie de Bois (Louis 1786 – 1788?) became a huge success. Just after the French Revolution the bourgeoisie embraced the concept of this design. In a need

for new public space for tout de Paris (Geist 1970: 449) more arcades were built on the grounds

of the expelled noblesse. All over the inner city of Paris systems of arcades appear, such as the

system of Passage des Panoramas, Passage Jouffroy and Passage Vendeau (Thayer 1800, Letuc,

Travers and Roussel 1845 and 1846). All three in alignment of each other, they formed together

a clean, paved, luxurious and modern public space to shop and to stroll in an unhygienic city.

The fundamental typological change from ‘a marketplace or an assemblage of shops where

goods are exposed for sale’ to ‘an arched or covered passageway’ (Porter 1913: 126 and 77) and

the representation of this new idea defines the birth of the arcade type. In contemporary perspective the arcade is a roofed shopping street. The arcade was once a

passage. Nowadays it is has the connotation of a street. For this definition the designs of the

Galeries Saint Hubets in Brussels (Cluysenaar 1846 – 1847) and the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele

in Milan (Mengoni 1865 – 1867) are most important. The Brussels arcade differs in many ways

from the Parisian arcade. The arcade is strategically designed to open up the heart of the city.

The arcade is larger, wider and much higher. Also the gate-like entrance is much bigger. I

discovered that these dimensions are equal to those of the Uffizi in Florence (Vasari 1560 –

221

Page 5: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

1574). Though precise research may clarify even more, it is already obvious that this architect

introduced the notion of a street in the arcade type. The monumental design and the strategic

position in the city define an important step in the evolution of the arcade. The accessibility and

the urban usage are greater than in the earlier Parisian cases, thanks to the arcade’s composition

and position. With this design the arcade became more public. This typological change validates

the slogan on the entrance façade of Saint Huberts. It says Omnibus Omnia, which can be

translated as ‘Everything for Everyone’. Although no one was excluded from the Parisian

arcade, in the bourgeois society public representation was still dependent on the presence of

people before whom it was displayed (Habermas 1962 translated 1989: 10). As a result, the

arcade in Paris was first and foremost a bourgeois space. In the years of the Belgian project, society was changing rapidly. In the new Belgium state the

public interest was reflected in the design of the arcade. For its importance as a national symbol,

King Leopold I signed a royal decree stating that the construction was in the public interest and

that the necessary expropriations would be authorised. Appended to this decree was a set of

building regulations which varied from building materials to sewage and fire regulations

(Leopold 1839). Such regulations underscore the significance of the public. In the project in

Milan they extend even further. The design competition itself was organised by the local

government. The architect Mengoni consulted Cluysenaar (Geist 1970: 385). Both arcades are

designed with street façades in the interior, emphasising the typological transformation of the

arcade into a street. The Galleria differs in the scale of restructuring the inner city. With its huge

monumental design it connects two important squares: the Piazza della Scala with the Piazza del

Duomo. It has four interior streets connected by a covered square; at the same time it forms

almost by itself the entire building block. In the following decades all over the world the smaller passages decline and other arcades are

being privatized or demolished. They die because they are not contributing to the urban

structure, they are not publicly financed or do not have huge dimensions, like the examples of

Brussels and Milan. In these cities the arcade became real freely accessible public space. During the renaissance and resurrection of this type in the 1970s, the arcade evolved again

(Lauter 1984, Kief-Niederwöhrmeier and Niederwöhrmeier 1986). In the arcade designs of

Gänsemarkt Passage, Hanseviertel and Galleria (Graf and Schweger 1979, Gerkan and Mang

1980, Haussmann and Haussmann 1983) in Hamburg, the comfort is optimised. In a need for

controlling the climate and a better management, the entrance door is introduced. This seems in

contradiction to the goals which the Kommission zur Belebung der Innerstadt had (Sack 1984:

7, 8). The investments in the arcades may well have enlivened the city, but the entrance doors

222

Page 6: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

created new barriers in public life. They isolate activities within the building from the life of the

street (Sennet 1977: 12, 13). Nonetheless, the arcades do increase connections in the city,

thereby enhancing the urban structure. Thus although more private in a social sense, they are

part of the network of public space, even though for only part of the day. The mall: How a public space type becomes part of the building complex In the Hamburg arcades we see the influences of the mall; the urban sorrow is eliminated, the

space is conditioned and in general the quality is improved. Though influenced by the arcade,

the mall has its own origin. Just as in the case of the arcade, the contemporary mall has its roots

in the social context of the nobility. These roots are even older than those of the arcade. In the

Seventeenth Century the London Pall Mall (Le Nôtre ca. 1666) was designed as a track for

ground billiards. The French landscape architect Le Nôtre advised the British King Charles II to

reserve a playing area for this popular continental game. In the game a ball is pushed with a

paille though a metal ring or a mail: maille (Prichard 1981). The track was a public access area

on the edge of the city. As a typological name for a public space, the bastardised word ‘mall’

was not completely strange to the language. Mall sounds familiar to some other words with a

public connotation; such as the Latin mallum, meaning public assembly, or the Gothic mapl, a

market place (Porter 1913: 887). While fashion changed and the game went indoors, the outdoor

space of Pall Mall remained a beloved strolling place. The introduction of the first public gas

lightning here in 1807 attests to its enduring popularity. These urban transformations made the

track a mall in the sense of a ‘promenade for pedestrians’ or a ‘public walk, a level shaded

walk’ (Porter 1913: 887). Was it due to the success of Pall Mall in the succeeding years that the Grand Avenue in

Washington was redesigned and renamed The Mall? (L'Enfant 1791, Downing 1851)

Unfortunately I lack a definitive answer. At the time a market grew around The Mall (Reps

1991). It could well have given rise to our contemporary conception of a mall: a pedestrian

shopping area, an urban shopping precinct along a street closed to traffic. But how did the mall

evolve from a public outdoor space to a more private enclosed space? And how did what was

originally an urban design task become a purely architectural task? A European city again plays an important role in helping us to answer the question. In

Rotterdam the modern era begins with the design of Lijnbaan (Van den Broek en Bakema 1949

– 1953). In a time when business streets were becoming pedestrianised it was designed as the

functionalist main street (Kostof 1992: 239, 240). As an open-air pedestrian shopping street the

Lijnbaan was an example for many architects and urban planning departments in Europe and the

United States. In cities such as Stockholm with the design of the Trog and in Seattle with the

223

Page 7: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

design of Northgate (Markelius 1952 – 1962, Graham 1950) the influences of the Lijnbaan are

most obvious. In the design of Southdale Center in Edina (Gruen 1954 – 1956) link with the

Lijnbaan appears to be less clear. Here it is not primarily the form of the designs which are

comparable; what is worthy of comparison are the concepts and the design of the pedestrian

spaces, together with the configuration of shops and anchor stores. My studies in the Dutch

National Architectural Archives NAi have shown that the architect Gruen consulted his Dutch

colleagues Van den Broek en Bakema in the 1950s. This fact makes the Rotterdam case as

important as the London and Edina cases. In an attempt to create high-quality urban space, designers tried increasingly to banish urban

discomfort from the mall. The Lijnbaan is closed to car traffic. It gives space to the promenade,

and the public space is partly covered by shelters. At Southdale the architect fully controlled and

conditioned the climate by enclosing the mall completely for the first time. He set an example

by making urban space comfortable in a cold climate. The enclosed mall at Edina can be

compared in a social sense with the Hamburg arcades: the space became less public. In an urban

sense the difference is critical. This suburban mall lacks any connection with the traditional

network of public space, except with the highway. It is an autonomous and introverted space.

This variant of the type is a vulnerable one, as we see today. Designed not only for a specific

use but also for a specific public, the space depends solely on that public. What happens when

that public changes it habits, moves away, or even dies? In the second half of the Twentieth Century, the content of the mall expanded. It was not merely

shops and restaurants. The West Edmonton Mall (Sunderland 1981 – 1985) for example has 10

anchor stores, 800 shops and more than 110 restaurants, 26 movie theatres, a casino, a bungee

jump and a rock climbing wall, a replica of the Santa Maria and amazingly enough seven indoor

amusement parks--all under one roof. In this mall, controlling the urban climate acquired a new

meaning. In the design of Bourbon Street and Europe Boulevard in the complex, the experience

seems to be controlled as well. With the help of such disciplines as econometrics, landscaping

and psychology, the mall design was optimised. It must have been the success of these kinds of

formulas that led to the mall boom in the 1980s, with the WEM as the unrivalled climax. Due to

this success the evaluated type was introduced again on the European continent. In designs such

as the Metro Centre in Newcastle – Gateshead (Hall 1984 – 1987 / V&A Design 2004) we see

the same introverted world as in the American counterparts. A still-growing concrete

construction made this mall the largest in Europe. The number of shops increases and an indoor

amusement park, several movie theatres and leisure facilities are introduced. By designing a

complete introverted mall, without any connection to its urban context, the mall becomes a city

within a city. I wonder: do we still need the outdoor world?

224

Page 8: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

Towards the future of public interiors If I compare the evolution of the Nineteenth-Century European arcade with the development of

the Twentieth-Century American mall, I reach a remarkable conclusion. While the arcade type

became transformed into a public interior as an integral part of the network of public space, the

mall type grew into an introverted public space denying the outdoor world. In the first case the

building became more open by its urban usage, its urban design and its urban planning. In the

second case the space became more enclosed by its architectural approach, its focus on the

interior programme, climate and experience. Designs such as Centro in Oberhausen and the Moll d’Espanya in Barcelona (RTKL Associates

Inc 1994 – 1996, Viaplana and Piñón 1995) are less introverted than conventional malls. In

these designs a new step in the transformation of the mall type has been made. Partial outdoor

activities are introduced and a strong connection of the public interior to the rest of the public

space is made. Different from the arcade both locations remain somewhat isolated in the urban

tissue. In some American cases the extreem isolated suburban mall seems to become the new

downtown (Crawford 1992: 24). Fifteen years ago I visited The Gardens (The Forbes Co 1988)

in Palm Beach just after its opening. I remember how amazed I was by its size and atmosphere.

Today it is a worthy representative of the mall boom. Since its opening many other malls have

cropped up near Palm Beach. At base they differ very little from each other. But the public

wants variation and differences: After the revitalisation of the historic downtown of Palm

Beach, renamed CityPlace (Elkus 1994 – 2000), the public turned its back on the mall and chose

unexpectedly the outdoor space. Inspired by the European city, the redesign of the original

downtown did restore the traditional public space. Despite the fact that a small-scale mall is

included in the design, the new downtown is in general open to various kinds of environmental,

ecological and social influences. Having these variations the combination of interior public

space and outdoor space designed as a whole has most likely got a better future than an

autonomous public interior. This fall the developers of the competitive mall will open

Downtown at the Gardens (Oliver, Glidden, Spina & Partners 2005). “We are creating an

atmosphere much like CityPlace”, explained the developers in the newspapers. Will there be

two downtowns? In general in the United States the influences of New Urbanism seem to ring in

a new age for the mall. Several projects like the ones in Palm Beach are appearing. While

redesigning some malls, more and more malls are abandoned now, leaving empty boxes

(Herman 2001). Like the arcade if the mall does not urbanize, in the wide sense of the word, it

seems to die. Rendering urban, interior public spaces will be urbanism.

225

Page 9: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

In general: Urban usage is changing and will continue to change. At a certain point in the

evolution of public interiors, buildings can become part of the city or else parts of the city can

become buildings. The result is confusion. Disciplinary borders do change, but the key force

behind the current confusion is twofold: urbanism defines new types of public space while

architecture defines them as new building types. It is both. From the perspective of interior

public space, the city need not be content with empty boxes such as those in North America. If

the position in the city and the urban context are highly relevant, the urban design task is just as

crucial. Although designing interiors is traditionally the task of architects, in the case of interior

public space it is therefore high time to share that task with urbanists.

226

Page 10: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

Galerie de Bois in Paris, France Galeries Saint Huberts in Brussels, Belgium (drawing by Victor Louise) (photo by Maurice Harteveld) Bourbon Street in the West Edmonton Mall in Downtown at the Gardens in Palm Beach, Edmonton, Aberta (phot by Matthias Huijgen) Florida (sketch by Craig Menin)

227

Page 11: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

Bibliography

Arendt, H. (1958) The Human Condition, The University Press, Chicago, USA. Baumeister, R. (1876) Stadt-Erweiterungen in Technischer, Baupolizeilicher und Wirtschaftlicher Beziehung, Ernst und Korn, Berlin, Germany. Benjamin, W. (1972 (1940) transl. 1982) The Arcades Project, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA / London, England. Cerda, I. (1869, transl. 1999) The Five Bases Of The General Theory Of Urbanization, Electa, Madrid, Spain. Cerda, I., (1869) Teoria General de Urbanizacion, Barcelona, Spain. Crawford, M. (1992) The World in a Shopping Mall. In: Sorkin, M. (1992) Variations on a Theme Park. The New American City and the End of Public Space, Hill and Wang, New York, USA. Doisneau, R., and B. Delvaille (1981) Passages et galleries du 19e siècle, ACE Editions, Paris, France. Geist, J.F.; Passagen. Ein Bauwtyp des 19. Jahrhundert. Munich, Germany. Habermas, J. (1962 transl. 1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, MIT Press, Cambridge, USA. Heeling, J. (1991) Stuurman op de wilde vaart. Oration (Inauguration), Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft, The Netherlands. Herman, D. (2001) Mall. In: Chung, J.C., J. Inaba, R. Koolhaas, and S.T. Leong (2001) Harvard design school guide to shopping. Project on the city 2, Taschen Verlag Benedikt, Cologne, Germany. Kief-Niederwöhrmeier, H., and H. Niederwöhrmeier (1986) Neue Glaspassagen. Lage Gestalt Konstruktion Bauten 1975 – 1985. Verlagsanstalt Alexander Koch, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany. Kostof, S. (1992) The city assembled. The elements of urban form through history. London, England. Lauter, W. (1984, transl. 1992) Passages, Dortmund, Germany. Leopold I or George Christiaan Frederik van Saksen-Coburg-Gotha (1839) Februari 6th, City Archive of Brussels, Dossier Travaux Publics, 940/1-3, Brussels, Belgium. MacKeith, M. (1985) Shopping arcades, a gazetteer of extant british arcades 1817- 1939, Londen, England / New York, USA. Porter, N. (1913, red), Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, G & C. Merriam Co.

228

Page 12: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

Prichard, D. M. C. (1981) The History of Croquet, [Col.], Cassell, London, England. Reps, J.W. (1991) Washington on View: The Nation's Capital Since 1790, UNC Press, Chapel Hill, USA. Sack M. (1984, transl. 1992) De renaissance van de Passage, In Lauter, W. (1984, transl. 1992) Passages, Dortmund, Germany. Sennet, R. (1977) The Fall of Public Man, Knopf, New York, USA. Solà Morales, M. de (1992), Openbare en collectieve ruimte. De verstedelijking van het privé-domein als nieuwe uitdaging, In: Oase No 33, SUN, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Volney, C.F. Chassebœuf (1783 – 1785) Voyage en Ēgypte et en Syrie, 2 Volumes, Vol. 1, Parijs, France. Design Cases Cluysenaar, P. (1846 – 1847) Galeries Saint Hubets, Brussels, Belgium,. Downing, A.J. (1851) The Mall, Washington, USA. Elkus, H. (1994 – 2000) CityPlace, Palm Beach, USA. Gerkan and Mang (1980) Hanseviertel, Hamburg, Germany. Graf and Schweger (1979) Gänsemarkt Passage, Hamburg, Germany. Graham, J. (1950) Northgate, Seattle, USA. Gruen, V. (1954 – 1956) Southdale Center, Edina, USA. Hall and Newcastle United developers (1984 – 1987) / V&A Design (2004) Metro Centre, New Castle – Gateshead, England. Haussmann, T. and R. Haussmann (1983) Galleria, Hamburg, Germany. L'Enfant, P. (1791) Grand Avenue, Washington, USA. Le Nôtre, A. (ca. 1666) Pall Mall, London, England. Letduc, Travers and Roussel (1845 – 1846) Passage Jouffroy, Paris, France. Letduc, Travers and Roussel (1846) Passage Vendeau, Paris, France. Louis, V. (1786 – 1788?) Galeries de Bois, Paris, France Markelius, S. and Town Planning Office of Stockholm (1952 – 1962) Trog, Stockholm, Sweden Mengoni, G. (1865 – 1867) Galleria Vittorio Emanuele, Milan, Italy. Oliver, Glidden, Spina & Partners, and JPRA Architects (1999 – 2005) Downtown at the Gardens, Palm Beach, USA.

229

Page 13: Public Interiors Urbanism or Not

II International Ph.D.Seminar on Urbanism Urbanism & Urbanization 2005

RTKL Associates Inc (1994 – 1996) Centro, Oberhausen, Germany. Sunderland, M. (1981 – 1985) The West Edmonton Mall, Edmonton, Canada. Thayer (1800) Passage des Panoramas, Paris, France. The Forbes Co (1988) The Gardens, Palm Beach, USA. Van den Broek, J. en J. Bakema, 1949 – 1953) Lijnbaan, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Vasari, G. (1560 – 1574) Uffizi, Florence, Italy. Viaplana, A and H. Piñón (1995) Moll d’Espanya, Barcelona, Spain.

230