JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
Third Places Building the Soft Infrastructure
Giorgees, Odette
Date:
2023-05-05
Abstract:
A fruitful city is one layered with a set of three urban fabrics: the primary layer and the secondary layer create the hard infrastructure of a city. These two layers encompass the first place (home, shelter) and the second place (work, school), respectively. The tertiary layer constructs the soft infrastructure, which constitutes the third place. Third places are the in-between spaces of the city that allow for social encounters to occur. Healthy encounters that turn into friendships strengthen a city’s soft infrastructure, which American Sociologist Eric Klingenberg defines as the social systems and networks that support and sustain a community. This tertiary layer can be thought of as the third leg which supports and stabilizes a table.
Klingenberg argues that most cities are planned to support the hard infrastructure that contributes to the physical attributes of a place, however often times it is the soft infrastructure (the social infrastructure) that enables a city’s sustainability and longevity (Klingenberg, 2018). North American suburbs lack the essential third layer needed to sustain life.
This thesis investigates the suburbs of Hamilton, Ontario to understand the deficiency of the suburban city. Through methods of on-site observations, community engagements, and urban analysis it is evident that Hamilton, Ontario lacks the soft infrastructure that is much needed for its longevity. This research proposes an intervention framework and public placemaking strategies that allow cities to implement third places at the appropriate scale, density, and use per context. This third-place framework will enable and encourage deficient cities to develop the soft infrastructure of the tertiary layer.
Description:
North American suburbs lack public spaces that promote encounters that turn into meaningful relationships and build the soft infrastructure of a city. This thesis investigates the role of third places as a strategy for activating public life in the privatized grids of single-use zoned suburbs. By conducting a case study in the suburbs of Hamilton-Mountain Ontario using a diverse methodology; new understandings of third-place implementation strategies begin to emerge. The aim of this research is to identify urban forms at the appropriate scale and density per context that frame places of civic gathering to attract people. This thesis is conceptually framed by previous literature on placemaking, public spaces, third places, encounters, and soft infrastructure. The research draws upon the work of the Gehl People Institute on public space and placemaking, including the “Inclusive Healthy Places framework” (Gehl Institute) and David Sim’s “Soft City” (forwarded by Jan Gehl). The Gehl Institute’s body of research focuses on inclusive design processes and architectural forms that support public activity. Additionally, the research utilizes the “What Makes a Great Place framework” developed by the Project for Public Spaces (PPS) to measure the social and programmatic qualities of spaces. Jan Gehl, in his book “Life Between Buildings,” critiques suburbia for its lack of public places, specifically the absence of third places. He argues that suburban environments prioritize private spaces and personal automobiles, resulting in a disconnected and isolated community. Gehl observes that public life in suburbs is limited to the spaces between buildings, such as streets and parking lots, which are designed primarily for cars rather than pedestrians. This creates a hostile environment for human interaction and chance encounters, leading to social isolation and loneliness. Third places, such as cafes, parks, and community centers, are essential in creating a sense of community and promoting social interactions. These places encourage spontaneous social encounters and provide opportunities for people to engage with each other and form social bonds. By incorporating social third places into suburban design, communities can create more vibrant and livable environments, where people can connect with each other and enjoy a sense of belonging. Eric Klingenberg’s “Palaces for the People” explores the importance of a city’s soft infrastructure in comparison to its hard infrastructure and emphasizes the role of third places as catalysts for building a city’s soft (social) infrastructure. According to Klingenberg, “soft infrastructure refers to the social networks, institutions, and norms that support a community’s collective life” (Klingenberg). Ray Oldenburg’s “The Great Good Place” (1989) coins the term “third place” and defines it as social surroundings that separate the first place (home) and second place (work). Oldenburg mentions coffee shops and other gathering places as examples of third places, however, in this thesis, the third place is further defined by its ability to bring people together, its architectural form within a built environment, its level of activity, and its level of commercialism. Urban theorists including Jane Jacobs’ “Eyes on the Street” and Hardt & Negri’s “Commonwealth” also contribute to the understanding of encounters as a means to increase tolerance towards alterity and strengthen social infrastructure. Questions explored in this thesis include understanding what steps can be taken to incorporate third places in suburban areas with single-use zoning, and what specific architectural and environmental features define the ideal third place. It is important to consider these questions in order to create built environments that foster a sense of community and promote social connections. By understanding the key components of an ideal third place, urban planners, architects, and community leaders can work together to create spaces that gather people and enhance the overall livability of suburban areas. Residential districts need to include third-place zones in order to enhance the social and public life of the community. There is a need for increased implementation of third places in both new and existing suburban residential developments. The architectural design of these third places should facilitate gathering in a flexible manner within the existing context, where public activity is not being driven primarily through commercial and consumption purposes, but rather a balanced ratio of completely non-commercialized public spaces and commercialized spaces. Third places should also provide necessary amenities for social activity, including an indoor-outdoor program. Community engagement research conducted in Hamilton-mountain Ontario concluded that communities living in the residential districts of Hamilton-Mountain suburbs are in need of spaces that support their social life and community gatherings. There simply are not enough public spaces. Existing public spaces within these suburbs do not support and foster social activity to their fullest extent. According to a study by the National Library of Medicine, people who live in more socially connected communities experience greater well-being and happiness (Jessica Martino et al., 2015). Third places such as cafes, libraries, and parks provide opportunities for people to interact and connect with their neighbors, leading to stronger social bonds and increased feelings of belonging (Oldenburg, 1989). Furthermore, a lack of third places in suburbs has been linked to increased social isolation and loneliness. According to a study by Cigna, loneliness has become a public health epidemic, with nearly half of Americans reporting feeling alone or left out (Cigna, 2018). Third places can provide a solution by creating opportunities for people to connect and form meaningful relationships. Research also suggests that third places can have a positive impact on local economies. According to Gensler research public spaces can increase property values and attract new businesses, leading to economic growth and job creation (J.T. Theeuwes, 2021). The evidence suggests that North American suburbs can benefit greatly from the incorporation of more third places. These spaces can lead to greater well-being, social connection, and economic growth. Though one can argue that incorporating social third places in the suburbs will increase traffic congestion. While it is true that social third places such as cafes, parks, and community centers can attract people and lead to increased traffic, this can be mitigated through smart urban planning. By incorporating pedestrian-friendly infrastructure, such as sidewalks, bike lanes, and public transit options, people can be encouraged to use alternative modes of transportation. Additionally, the creation of mixed-use developments, where residential and commercial areas coexist, can reduce the need for people to travel long distances for their daily needs. Others might oppose that suburban residents do not need social third places because they can socialize within their homes. Suburban residents may have space for socializing within their homes, however, social third places can provide unique benefits that cannot be replicated at home. Social third places provide a sense of community, facilitate intergenerational and cross-cultural interactions, and can serve as a neutral ground for meeting new people. Additionally, social third places can offer amenities such as public Wi-Fi, meeting rooms, and performance spaces that may not be available within people’s homes. Nonetheless many suburban residents utilize their first place (home) as a third place by default due to lack of third places. Developers with differing perspectives may argue that developing third places in the suburbs is too expensive. While creating third places may require investment, the benefits far outweigh the costs. Third places can increase property values, attract new businesses, and create jobs. Additionally, third places can reduce the need for costly public services such as policing and emergency response, as they can serve as informal community hubs where people can self-regulate neighborhoods. Third places can assist in decreasing crime by increasing visibility and social cohesion, creating well-lit and well-maintained public spaces, and involving local residents in the planning and management of third places, communities can ensure that they are safe and welcoming for everyone. Additionally, research has shown that third places can have a positive impact on mental health, reducing the incidence of stress-related illnesses and substance abuse. The limitations of this study and framework is when applied to a specific context, the inter-subjective realities of a place must be accounted for according to each individual site. Other potential limitations to consider may include issues with sample size and representativeness, the potential for researcher bias, the generalizability of findings to other contexts, and the limitations of the research methods used. In the future, research can build upon the gaps and limitations of this thesis by validating the strategies developed in this thesis through the development of third places in multiple contexts. Key findings in this research include tactical strategies to increase public life in the privatized grids of suburbia. Understanding third places as an architectural typology (form) and understanding third places as a zoning requirement (function). This thesis research on promoting third places to build social infrastructure in suburbia is primarily of great relevance to the current field of architecture and urban planning. As cities and suburbs continue to undergo growth and transformation, professionals in these fields play a vital role in shaping the built environment to meet the changing needs of communities. Recently there has been a growing interest in social infrastructure as a means of enhancing community resilience, social cohesion, and overall well-being. This thesis advances the larger body of existing literature by addressing a crucial gap, namely the lack of attention given to the importance of third places in suburbia. By demonstrating the benefits of these spaces and offering practical solutions for integrating them into existing suburban layouts. Through case studies, this research aims to inform and inspire future planning efforts. The work also contributes to the broader discourse on sustainable developments, livability, and community building, all of which are pressing concerns for architects and urban planners in the 21st century. By advancing this area of research, the thesis has the potential to foster more thoughtful and inclusive urban environments that promote social connection and well-being. Parts of the findings in this thesis are completed in collaboration with Madison Nelson as her thesis focuses on urban form and missing middle-housing typologies. Though our research and sites remained independent the collaboration allowed us to exchange findings on urban planning strategies to create a cohesive framework and intervention proposal.
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Search DSpace
Browse
-
All of DSpace
-
This Collection