Jacquelyn Lekhraj

William H. Whyte undertook the task of identifying what characteristics of open space (mainly parks and plazas) make them more visited and used in comparison to others. He did so by setting up cameras overlooking plazas and surveyed the types of people (gender, age, and profession) who used the space and whether or not they came alone or in groups. One conclusion that Whyte drew that I found particularly interesting was that, “the best-used places also tend to have a higher than average proportion of women” (Whyte 450). The justification he provided was that women are more particular about where they are willing to sit in terms of it’s cleanliness and the existence of “annoyances”. Based on my observations of Verdi Square, this seems true. Verdi Square had several bench areas, but very few people sitting. Those who were sitting were all male ages ranging from about 17 to 65. The main annoyance that existed at Verdi Square was the hustle and bustle of commuters entering and exiting the train station located in the center of the square. Whyte also observes the social interactions that take place in open space. He suggests that plazas are not ideal spaces for meeting people. Rather, an open street that’s filled of eateries is more likely to see socializing. An example he provides, that I have visited is the South Street Seaport. The rush and tight space capacity essentially forces people to be near each other during lunchtime (Whyte 450).

The basic conclusion that Whyte draws from all his research is that there is no more clear cut correlation between the popularity of a plaza or strip and “the amount of sittable space” (452). The amount of space that can be sat in is the crucial determining factor in people’s decision to occupy a space or not. This although seemingly obvious is a very accurate deduction that many plaza designers overlook. As a New Yorker, I myself look for an area with seating during my leisure time or breaks at work while I’m in the city. For example, in the summer, I will not take my break outside in Union Square Park (which is across the street from my employer) unless I can see that there is, as Whyte would call it “integral seating” available; that being steps in the entrance to the park. Whyte therefore suggests that removing impediments such as pikes, metal or jagged rock from steps would enhance the popularity by widening the seating area. However, “integral space” isn’t the most important seating asset according to white. On the contrary, it’s movable chairs. These provide people “with choice” (453). People can find a preferential spot to sit, and go there. I’ve participated in as well as witnessed this very act. For example in Bryant Park, people often move their chairs from the outskirts of the lawn, onto the lawn if they’d prefer to sit in the sun, and vice versa is also true if one prefers to sit in the shade along the perimeter. Therefore the aesthetics of the chair is not important to the popularity of the space, rather the move-ability is.

VERDI SQUARE:

OBSERVATIONS (conducted on Saturday March 6th from 3:15-4:00pm)
– The “square” resembles more of a trapezoid
– There are only two entrances both of which lead into the street. This guides pedestrian movement parallel to the subway station.
– High traffic area primarily due to the subway entrance.
– Only three people are sitting at the benches. One teenager, a middle aged man, and a senior citizen all of whom are male.
– There are two types of seating areas: granite benches and regular wooden benches
– The square is enclosed by black metal fencing
– People who enter the square are either entering the subway station or walking through it to the next street.
– There are many tourists and people shopping
– Verdi square is 0.06 acres and established in the name of Giuseppe Verdi a renowned composer.