Recently, The Guardian made waves with a story on the spread of “pseudo-public spaces” in London. Pseudo-public spaces appear to be typical public spaces such as parks and plazas, but are privately owned and subject to (often secret) rules that are enforced by private security. Some of London’s most prominent landmarks are surrounded by corporate-owned plazas such as the London Eye, King’s Cross, and even City Hall. As the The Guardian explains:
“ [Pseudo-public spaces] appear unrestricted to the average person as long as they are behaving in ways that corporate landowners approve of, such as passing through on the way to work or using the area for spending and consumption. It is only by exhibiting unsanctioned behaviour – holding a political demonstration, for example, or attempting to sleep rough in the area – that citizens are able to discover the limitations on these seemingly public sites.”
People have a general expectation of what is permissible in public spaces. For the most part, the rules are fairly permissive in a truly public space, and the first amendment generally applies to individual activity. In pseudo-public spaces, however, not only are the rules unclear, but the ownership of these spaces is often opaque to the greater public. This disruption to longstanding notions of public space is subtle, but has major implications for cities and the public realm. The Guardian report quotes Tony Leach of the organization Parks for London as saying:
“I’m a strong believer that parks are our last remaining truly democratic public spaces, and that should continue. A lot of our great protest and reformist movements started in parks because they were natural gathering places. These spaces are a representation of our freedom in society, which is little by little being eroded. I think a lot of people just don’t realise it.”
Pseudo-public spaces are created through concessions from local governments to property owners – often when the local government can’t afford to build or maintain the infrastructure. It may at the time sound good in theory, but this isn’t simply contracting out park maintenance. Rather, this is a privatization of the public realm in the densest parts of a great city. Sound familiar?
In Minneapolis, The Commons park in Downtown East exhibits many characteristics of a pseudo-public space. It’s publicly owned but its use is reserved for Vikings and other stadium events on certain days. One year ago at its opening, commentators raised questions about its pseudo-public/private nature. As MinnPost’s Peter Callaghan wrote:
“Who would run it? Who would pay for it? Was it public or private or somewhere in between — the worst of both worlds?”
Meanwhile, the city still struggles to pay for its construction, maintenance, and programming. There are plenty of other nebulous pseudo-public spaces in the area: Gold Medal Park, the plazas at US Bank Stadium and Target Field, and, of course, there’s that never-ending question about what the skyways are.
The Guardian has produced a map of London’s pseudo-public spaces for the public to see where these spaces have crept into their city. How many spaces like this are in our own Twin Cities? Share what you know. Let’s bring this information into the public realm.