Publicly accessible urban spaces in New York City are subject to different ownership models. Some are privately owned by corporations, which are called POPs. Others are publicly accessible urban spaces publicly owned by the Department of Parks and Recreation. Because there is little research about how the ownership structures of these two different ownership structures affect the accessibility and use of their different publicly accessible urban spaces, in regards to the organisation of political events. I hypothesise that there is a difference in accessibility and use, for different ownership structures, regarding political events. Political events was chosen as the main use due to the change within the political climate in the United States of America, during Donald J, Trump’s presidency. The main research question is: Is there a difference in the accessibility and use of publicly accessibly urban spaces in New York City for political events depending on their ownership structure? For each of the different ownership structures three case studies’ urban design features and rules and regulations were introduced and analysed. Following this chapter, different types of political events are introduced by including events that took place within the case studies. From which, certain urban design requirements were identified that were necessary to host different political events. After comparing the case studies’ urban design elements and rules and regulations with the identified requirements of different types of political events, it was concluded that there is indeed a difference in accessibility and use of publicly accessible urban spaces in New York City for political events. Publicly owned public spaces are more accessible and useful for hosting political events regarding the urban design elements within the case studies. However, POPs are more accessible and useful for hosting political events regarding the rules and regulation of the case studies.

The importance of air quality, especially humidity, temperature and CO2 levels, makes for the implementation of primarily mechanical ventilation techniques in modern-day swimming pools. Because it is believed that mechanically ventilated buildings have more accessible climate control abilities (Lévesque, 2015). However, with today’s climate change problems and an enhanced focus on energy sufficient building techniques, as well as the Covid pandemic, some claim that the inclusion of natural ventilation systems into our building systems could have significant advantages for designing environmental conscious buildings as well as safer and healthier buildings in regards to the spread of future airborne viruses (Allard, 1998; Zarandi, 2006; Bhagat, 2020). Therefore, this research aims to explore which natural ventilation techniques could be implemented into the design of modern-day swimming pools whilst still maintaining modern-day user comfort in regards to air quality levels (humidity, temperature and CO2 levels).