**5. Public spaces in city function**

Public place represents, by its nature and destination, an area accessible to the public even if no person is present; any place accessible to the public, the main features chosen by the public spaces consist in the fact that they are public (not private), they have free access and are used by several people in a common area. Public spaces have played an important role throughout history. From the time that humans first defined private spaces, public spaces have served as places where people have come together to exchange ideas, becoming centers for free speech and public discourse. Defined as an environment of simple reciprocal observability, a practical intersubjectivity among people in order to make possible their ability of communication and socialization, or an ensemble of scenes where a group of organized and politically oriented actions is exposed, the public space defines the place where all the constituent activities of the political fact take place [18]. The form of contemporary public space is the reflection of the evolution of the political aspects, because it is based on the opposition between the private spaces, which belongs to families and the public space, which do not belong to practically anyone, but which, on the contrary, is available to all and in which social actors interact. In this public space, therefore, practices, discourses, and activities are constituting the political fact taking place. However, is this idea of public space open to everyone? Is there any reality? Isn't there any potential for domination of certain groups? Nowadays, the public space is regarded as a conflict and contested battleground for power too. Accessible, but filtered, public markets are essential. Physically, they are easily accessible, at the intersection of the streets and the "hubs" of the transport flows, of people, of goods, and of the lights of the streets. However, they are filtered and bounded in an invisible, but rigorous way. The market is not accessible to everyone: camcorders, police, and security are watching and selecting who "deserves" to have access to these spaces. Moreover, yet, it is threatened by privatization, but by individualism. In the interest of someone, the public interests are for private interests; for example, business, another tendency is the lack of interests of the divisions vis-à-vis public employment. "The individual is the most diligent citizen of the citizen." That required for securing clarity with reference to the lifestyle of moderating the market relations and marketing which is reflected in the total moving of social-consequences on the esthetics and visual appearance of the publicsector premises. The markets, as the decency of the public space, have undergone significant transformations and have become the subject of "passive waiting"—the subject of looking, not living, which is called as "Allocation space." In passage space, in any case, there is a resistance to total marketing. For example, some public spaces remain dedicated to cultural and identity expression, while others are taken over by youth and subcultures. The markets still have some space for leisurely walks, not related to consumption.

#### **5.1 Urban space in history**

Dialectically justified, it is difficult to specify a clear limit of separation between character and specific, with a permanent overlap area. We cannot speak of their total overlap, because, in relation to the motivations stated above, the distinction between character and specificity is evident not only conceptually but also practically. The possibility, however, of the reciprocal crossing of the general and the singular (in the sphere of character and specific features) from one to the other, during the evolution of the urban phenomenon, should not be neglected. Through the process of topic selection, the general features have been polished, gradually becoming character traits that, retained over time, are today constituted as elements of specificity. There are also numerous examples of cases in which traits initially giving specificity to an urban space, considered valid and taken over as a model, later became character traits, tending even to a broader generality—an aspect involving today, in a way. In particular case, it is a requisite to discuss the topic of industrialized urban construction. But not only temporally but also spatially, an interference between character and specificity is possible, meaning that what is characteristic of a confined space may be a specific element for a larger territory—for the city. In general, however, the singular elements conferring specificity to an urban space are revealed as elements of specificity and for all other possible

**17**

*City Phenomenon between Urban Structure and Composition*

territorial framings—remaining within the respective framing of a specific singular presence (Campanile from San Marco Square in Venice) or registering in an also generalizer with specific value. It is shown from the above that, in order to detach the character and specificity of an urban space, it is necessary to pay attention to the space and time and regarding the mastering of the modernization process in relation to understanding the particular value of the urban space (of the city as a whole), it is necessary to recognize the valid behaviors of that generalizer with a specific value. Thus the risk of losing the specific is higher. However, we do not have to imagine the specificity of an exclusive space as a postcard image. As a surprise of the urban form, it refers not to a metaphysically understood form, but a totality of manifestations wearing a multitude of static and dynamic expressions. The behaviour of using the space which has to answer to the following questions (how it responds to the requirements how it adapts), as well as the behavior in that space, intervene in defining the specificity, but, at the same time, also being positioned as an object of its influence. Acquired in human consciousness through perception and sensation, the particularity of urban space also encapsulates a series of values of chance, because as Kevin Lynch notes: "always in a city at any moment you can see or hear something new, unmarked until that time, and these things often depend also on the environment, and on the continuation of the events that led us here, and on the memory of past experiences. It can also be thinking of a random determination of the specificity, a possible determination considering that it supports the spatial differentiation—results to some extent and from what happens within the

Urban space represents the spatial concentration of the economic, social, cultural, and political activities, different from the nonurban/rural spaces by the population density or the characteristics of the way of life. Urban spaces embody a general reading of many factors; it presents the social life of the city is closely linked to the urban space. The relations between social life and urban space are the object of study of the urban disciplines. In the urban space, people interact and develop their social relations, enjoy or be scared, have or take possession of certain urban spaces, develop feelings of affection for some, or have memories related to others. Urban space is a term characterized by polysemy, flexibility, but also ambiguity. Therefore, it is difficult to reach a unique definition of urban space, generally accepted in all socio-human sciences. However, we will try to provide some main coordinates. It is important to understand the urban space take importance from public space, where the public space includes all the spaces freely used in the day to day by the general public, such as streets, squares, parks, and public infrastructure. Some aspects of privately possessed spaces, such as the facades of buildings or domestic gardens, also contribute to public space and are therefore considered by urban design theory. Some of the writers on this discipline are Gordon Cullen, Jane Jacobs, Christopher Alexander, William H. Whyte, Kevin Lynch, Aldo Rossi, Robert Venturi, Colin Rowe, Peter Calthorpe, and Jan Gehl. Public spaces are frequently subject to the overlapping responsibilities of multiple agencies or authorities and interests of nearby owners, as well as the requirements of multiple and sometimes competent users [19]. The public space is associated with "sociability," with the potential of meeting and communication between strangers. This implies that people come to the public space and remain there for the meeting with others; they use the space for meetings as a stage for specific social interactions. However, today, the "space of the move" is being replaced more and more with the "space of passage." Public spaces became places full of people

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90443*

respective spaces, so by chance.

**5.2 The public spaces and the city social life**

#### *City Phenomenon between Urban Structure and Composition DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90443*

*Sustainability in Urban Planning and Design*

public discourse. Defined as an environment of simple reciprocal observability, a practical intersubjectivity among people in order to make possible their ability of communication and socialization, or an ensemble of scenes where a group of organized and politically oriented actions is exposed, the public space defines the place where all the constituent activities of the political fact take place [18]. The form of contemporary public space is the reflection of the evolution of the political aspects, because it is based on the opposition between the private spaces, which belongs to families and the public space, which do not belong to practically anyone, but which, on the contrary, is available to all and in which social actors interact. In this public space, therefore, practices, discourses, and activities are constituting the political fact taking place. However, is this idea of public space open to everyone? Is there any reality? Isn't there any potential for domination of certain groups? Nowadays, the public space is regarded as a conflict and contested battleground for power too. Accessible, but filtered, public markets are essential. Physically, they are easily accessible, at the intersection of the streets and the "hubs" of the transport flows, of people, of goods, and of the lights of the streets. However, they are filtered and bounded in an invisible, but rigorous way. The market is not accessible to everyone: camcorders, police, and security are watching and selecting who "deserves" to have access to these spaces. Moreover, yet, it is threatened by privatization, but by individualism. In the interest of someone, the public interests are for private interests; for example, business, another tendency is the lack of interests of the divisions vis-à-vis public employment. "The individual is the most diligent citizen of the citizen." That required for securing clarity with reference to the lifestyle of moderating the market relations and marketing which is reflected in the total moving of social-consequences on the esthetics and visual appearance of the publicsector premises. The markets, as the decency of the public space, have undergone significant transformations and have become the subject of "passive waiting"—the subject of looking, not living, which is called as "Allocation space." In passage space, in any case, there is a resistance to total marketing. For example, some public spaces remain dedicated to cultural and identity expression, while others are taken over by youth and subcultures. The markets still have some space for leisurely walks, not

Dialectically justified, it is difficult to specify a clear limit of separation between character and specific, with a permanent overlap area. We cannot speak of their total overlap, because, in relation to the motivations stated above, the distinction between character and specificity is evident not only conceptually but also practically. The possibility, however, of the reciprocal crossing of the general and the singular (in the sphere of character and specific features) from one to the other, during the evolution of the urban phenomenon, should not be neglected. Through the process of topic selection, the general features have been polished, gradually becoming character traits that, retained over time, are today constituted as elements of specificity. There are also numerous examples of cases in which traits initially giving specificity to an urban space, considered valid and taken over as a model, later became character traits, tending even to a broader generality—an aspect involving today, in a way. In particular case, it is a requisite to discuss the topic of industrialized urban construction. But not only temporally but also spatially, an interference between character and specificity is possible, meaning that what is characteristic of a confined space may be a specific element for a larger territory—for the city. In general, however, the singular elements conferring specificity to an urban space are revealed as elements of specificity and for all other possible

**16**

related to consumption.

**5.1 Urban space in history**

territorial framings—remaining within the respective framing of a specific singular presence (Campanile from San Marco Square in Venice) or registering in an also generalizer with specific value. It is shown from the above that, in order to detach the character and specificity of an urban space, it is necessary to pay attention to the space and time and regarding the mastering of the modernization process in relation to understanding the particular value of the urban space (of the city as a whole), it is necessary to recognize the valid behaviors of that generalizer with a specific value. Thus the risk of losing the specific is higher. However, we do not have to imagine the specificity of an exclusive space as a postcard image. As a surprise of the urban form, it refers not to a metaphysically understood form, but a totality of manifestations wearing a multitude of static and dynamic expressions. The behaviour of using the space which has to answer to the following questions (how it responds to the requirements how it adapts), as well as the behavior in that space, intervene in defining the specificity, but, at the same time, also being positioned as an object of its influence. Acquired in human consciousness through perception and sensation, the particularity of urban space also encapsulates a series of values of chance, because as Kevin Lynch notes: "always in a city at any moment you can see or hear something new, unmarked until that time, and these things often depend also on the environment, and on the continuation of the events that led us here, and on the memory of past experiences. It can also be thinking of a random determination of the specificity, a possible determination considering that it supports the spatial differentiation—results to some extent and from what happens within the respective spaces, so by chance.
