Search

An analysis of the spatial dimension of territoriality reveals that open space which can rightly be described as yard or courtyard is not as readily provided in current planning praxis as might first appear. A main purpose for research inurban spatial morphology is to explore and develop tools to understand how urban design proposals are likely to have social outcomes. An inadequate understanding of the instruments of territoriality produces merely formal alterations which offer variety but not necessarily diversity. To reintroduce gardens and courtyards as sites of collective action requires looking critically at some past and current assumptions about how to produce appropriable space for residents. What is not studied in this paper is the effect of privatization or disturbance of public space. This paper addresses the spatial scope of action for urban designers by analyzing current detail plans of ten Swedish proposals in order to assess their territorial performance. New measures to identify what are termed exposed, disturbed, and ambiguous spaces are an attempt to forego the ubiquitous terms semi-private and semi-public in favour of more precise and performative concepts. The empirical basis of this research is a previous study which used a questionnaire and site audits to gauge user perception of open space provided in residential complexes. Results in this paper indicate that of the ten proposals studied, few provide adequate private space for residents and that opportunities are frequently missed for providing spaces for collective action. A call for better understanding of the organizing principles affecting appropriation and sense of ownership is meant not as an indictment of current planning, but rather to illuminate some of the range of options available to the urban designer in considering territorial commons. QC 20120807 Suburbia in Territorial Transformation