UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date:___________________ I, _________________________________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: in: It is entitled: This work and its defense approved by: Chair: _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ Public space in the Millennium Case study of Millennium Park, Chicago, IL A thesis submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of Requirements for the degree of Master of Community Planning in the School of Planning of the College of Design, Art, Architecture, and Planning August 17, 2006 by Sinem Metin B.A., City and Regional Planning, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey 2004 Committee Chair: Menelaos Triantafillou, MLA, AICP Committee Member: Frank Russell, March Reader: David Edelman, Ph.D., AICP ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to explore meaningful places and clarify their importance in urban life in the 21st century. This research argues that the quality of urban life is based on the experience of urban open spaces. Such experience is what creates meanings and has not been given the necessary level of attention by many professionals in urban design. The outcome, therefore, may not always provide the user needs, which is the key factor for successful public places in the last couple of decades. This paper argues that the ambitions of designers should meet with the expectations of users to create meaningful public spaces. My interest in this study requires a phenomenological inquiry of necessary clarifications of terms. The research question, ‘Meaning for whom?’, needs to be answered by using empirical research method to identify what is conceived by outsiders as well as what is perceived by insiders. When we talk about 21st century complex and vibrant metropolitan cities, one of the most famous and attractive cities in U.S. is Chicago where took the attentions to its lakefront and skyline with the city’s one of the latest works; Millennium Park. The plan and process had already given an idea about how conspicuous the park would be. Since my concentration is on contemporary public places, Millennium Park is a place to study at the intersection of urban design and culture. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all my committee members for their guidance and encouragement. Their patience and support towards the unlucky situations I had been through this year were valuable and considerable. I would like to thank my committee chair, Prof. Menelaos Triantafillou, for all the professional or casual, but pleasant, conversations we had through out the year while assisting him. They have always inspired me and enlightened for new ideas. My committee member, Frank Russell, has always been a support since my first quarter in Cincinnati while working on Niehoff Studio. And special thanks to my reader and my advisor, Dr. David Edelman, for his guidance not only for school, but also for daily life in Cincinnati. I, also, would like to acknowledge my dear friends Poonam, Narkar, Ruth Marfil, Nazanin Tork, Duygu Karadeniz, Brendan Weaver and all other friends in DAAP for their support and the pleasant memories. I would like to mention the name of the most valuable person for all the faculty members and students, Connie Dean, for all the work she had done for all of us. Finally, I cannot thank enough to my precious family who listened, encouraged, and supported me in all the ways I know in life. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures…………………………………………………………………….………2 List of Table………………………………………………………………….……………4 Chapter 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………….……5 2. Literature Review…………………………………………………………….……8 2.1. Space & Place ………………………………………………………….……8 2.2. Sense of Place………………………………………………………….……9 2.3. Importance of Meaning in Urban Design……………………….…11 2.4. Meaning for Whom? ………………………………………………………13 3. Methodology…………………………………………………………………………18 4. Case Study……………………………………………………………………………21 4.1. Millennium Park, Chicago, IL…………………………………………..21 4.2. Location and History……………………………………………………….23 4.3. Locale……………………………………………………………………………25 4.3.1. Jay Prietzker Pavilion…………………………………………....26 4.3.2. BP Bridge………………………………………….......................31 4.3.3. Crown Fountain…………………………………………………...34 4.3.4. Cloud Gate………………………………………….....................40 4.3.5. Lurie Garden………………………………………….................46 4.3.6. Additional Amenities…………………………………………....50 4.4. Sense-of-Millennium Park………………………………………….......52 5. Findings & Conclusion…………………………………………....................58 6. Bibliography………………………………………….....................................63 1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure.1: Formation of sense-of-place Figure.2: Perceived, conceived, and lived space Figure.3: Desired place-making process Figure.4: Location of Millennium Park Figure.5: Plan of Millennium Park Figure.6: Location of Millennium Park in Grant Park Figure.7: Lakefront Chicago before Millennium Park was built Figure.8: Overview of Millennium Park Figure.9: Overview of Millennium Park Figure.10: Jay Prietzker Pavilion Figure.11: Jay Prietzker Pavilion night view Figure.12: Jay Prietzker Pavilion during a concert Figure.13: Jay Prietzker Pavilion from the BP Bridge Figure.14: Speakers of the Great Lawn Figure.15: The Great Lawn Figure.16: BP Bridge’s connection to the Grant Park Figure.17: Overview of the BP Bridge Figure.18: A view from the BP Bridge Figure.19: BP Bridge with its users Figure.20: Overview of the Crown Fountain Figure.21: Public participation Figure.22-23-24: Splitting faces Figure.25: Public participation Figure.26: Public participation Figure.27: The Cloud Gate Figure.28: The Cloud Gate Figure.29: View from inside Figure.30: View from outside Figure.31: Public Participation Figure.32: Public Participation Figure.33: Public Participation 2 Figure.34: Public Participation Figure.35: Plan of the Lurie Garden Figure.36: A view from inside Figure.37: View of the Pavilion from the Lurie Garden Figure.38-39: McDonalds Bike Station Figure.40-41: Ice Rink Figure.42-43: Wrigley Square Figure.44: Millennium Park attendance 3 LIST OF TABLES Table.1: Jay Prietzker Pavilion ID Card Table.2: Comparison of ambitions and comments of Jay Prietzker Pavilion Table.3: BP Bridge ID Card Table.4: Comparison of ambitions and comments of BP Bridge Table.5: The Crown Fountain ID Card Table.6: Comparison of ambitions and comments of the Crown Fountain Table.7: The Cloud Gate ID Card Table.8: Comparison of ambitions and comments of the Cloud Gate Table.9: The Lurie Garden ID Card Table.10: Comparison of ambitions and comments of the Lurie Garden Table.11: Attendance of Millennium Park Table.12: Millennium Park ID Card Table.13: Comparison of ambitions and comments of Millennium Park Table.14: Summary of perceived, conceived, and lived Millennium Park Table.15: Design ideologies and their practices in Millennium Park 4 1. INTRODUCTION Urban open spaces have been under threat because of industrialization, globalization, and the shift from modernism to post-modernism. Contemporary, multicultural society has experienced increasing standardization and uniformity in urban form, which caused transformations in the character and theory of culture, society, and community. The combination of increased spatial and social distance impacted society with a wide range of negative social consequences; such as loss of sense of community, loss of meaning, lack of cultural identity and place identity, and so on. The outcomes of modernist urbanism were placelessness (Relph 1976), non-place (Weber 1964), and rootedness (Heidegger 1971) and urban design was mostly directed towards place-making. Urban design, thus, has aimed to create a sense-of-belonging in places. The common interest described with a framework of public realm in design decision making process to increase the quality of life. The response to these complex challenges is the expanding recognition of the importance of public places in urban life. Public spaces are expected to inspire public life, and in a number of cities there has been an increase in the renewal of public space types to meet a variety of needs (Carr, et al., 1992). The role of design in achieving a fulfilling urban open space experience has come to national prominence and the expression of place has encouraged architects, planners and urban designers to be concerned with place-making, rather than simply sequence of spaces. The emergence of new forms in places resulted with new approaches for place-making. While conventional methods define place in its spatial, physical, and visual aspects, contemporary place-making approaches require a balanced consideration of tangible and intangible aspects of place. Planners and designers used to pay more attention to the material form of place instead of its social aspects (Arefi and 5 Menelaous 2005:4). The configuration of places, their material content, and their symbolic interpretations provide opportunities for social interaction, therefore, attract and encourage human life. It has become more commonly understood that successful urban public spaces are ones well-used by people (Francis 2003). Therefore ‘use’ became a requirement for good public places. Many authors have shown that creating a sense of meaning in the outcomes of daily experiences, identifying, and sense-of-place, is an important feature to attract users to public places (Cresswell 2004;