Parks, Squares and Political Events:

Difference in accessibility for political events depending on ownership structures

More Info
expand_more

Abstract

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.