Social Interactions
Social Interactions in the Park - Nathan Phillips Square, Downtown Toronto. This park promotes social interaction by providing areas to talk and things to talk about.
William H. Whyte’s states: “The social life of public places contributes fundamentally to the quality of life of individuals and society as a whole. We have a moral responsibility to create physical places that facilitate civic engagement and community interaction.” [1] Public spaces allow a diverse group of users to connect with each other in various forms to answer their needs for social interaction. The variety of activities in each context is not limited to certain activities, from “see and hear contact” to emotionally involved connections. Through the observation and investigation of the four parks, we saw social interaction occur for three reasons: proximity, events, water, and amenities/ physical features.
Proximity
​
Proximity to residential zones or other public places leads to different degrees of engagement and interaction among the visitors. According to David Sim, there are at least three such benefits that can explain the attraction of a dense, diverse urban environment: physical proximity, common resources, and shared identities.[2] For instance, Nathan Phillips Square is very close to offices, shopping malls, and educational centers. The walking distance to offices allows coworkers to engage outside of their work environment. Whereas, in Ann Tindal Park, Palmer Park, and Bell Park proximity to residential zones brings neighbours and families together. Our observation proves the context has a direct relationship with the form that people contact. The possibility of reconnecting and maintaining the interaction in future implies a stronger connection and opens more doors for future opportunities.
Events
​
Public spaces encourage people to meet up on the ostensibly neutral ground, to interconnect with others and the environment within the context of the whole community. Welcoming different generations and diversity can contribute to the cohesion of communities. Observations suggest people are drawn to public spaces that offer special events and a variety of activities. Indeed, people tend to gather and socialize with each other where they share common resources. Community events are one of the qualities of public spaces that can create social cohesion in the community. The diversity of the events affect the community’s participation and engagement. All these four sites are well known as event spaces. Some had stronger event plans than others that lead to the success of the public space. Bell Park, Ann Tindal Park, Palmer park, and Nathan Phillips Square are hosting a variety of events for the community all year round. Observation proves the presence of events makes people stay longer in a public place and enhance the quality of their visit. Nathan Phillips Square among three other public places hosts more public events. The diversity of events in the square made it very successful compared to other public places in the city. People from other cities or countries make their way to the square along with their visit to downtown Toronto. The seasonality of the events also made the space welcoming all year round. Thanks to the diverse events, Nathan Phillips Square created a very dynamic and inclusive atmosphere. People from different parts of the town, ethnic, socioeconomic groups, ages, and abilities join and participate. What distinguishes Nathan Phillips Square from other public spaces was the presence and connection of the vulnerable group with the rest of the society. Based on this observation, they are tolerated compared to other places. Whether or not their presence is welcomed, they are part of the society and the image of the city.
Water
​
Water is an element of attraction among visitors in all four public spaces. The presence of water bodies in public spaces, beyond the social aspects, can be a desired meeting and relaxation space in the urban fabric. Despite the undeniable attraction of humans to water, it actually can be used as a tool to connect people to and achieve resilience in the urban fabric. Nathan Phillips Square’s reflection pool brought life to space. Indeed, water is the main reason for the attraction of people to the square and social cohesion in the hustle and bustle of downtown Toronto. The fountain and special lighting which is designed for the pool made the gathering spaces more pleasant. In winter, the pool provides different functionality by providing a skating rink in the middle of downtown Toronto. Water in other studied public places provides some other water activities. Based on the observation, people were more drawn to the waterfront areas to socialize. Some by feeding birds or swimming in the same area. Fundamentally, the presence of water in these spaces made the visitors journey to the space longer and more desirable.
Amenities & Physical Features
​
Amenities and physical features, such as playgrounds, art installations, chess tables, and shelters, are some of the aspects that lead to social interaction in the studied public places. Based on the observation, playgrounds were the social hub of parks and public places. People tend to stay the longest in the playground. Primarily, the actual interaction occurs between the kids and parents. Playgrounds, indeed, are the key success of these public places. Despite the absence of a playground in the Ann Tindal site, the community uses the space as a play area for kids and dogs. Chess tables in Nathan Phillips Square were the main hub for seniors. They are able to play, socialize or even watch each other’s games. Art installations in public space can be a conversation topic among people. Based on the Nathan Phillips Square observation, people were taking pictures or hanging out close to the art installations. Where in other sites such as Bell park, the presence of other animals and birds lead to social interaction between people. This phenomenon is called “triangulation,” according to William Whyte in his book The Social Life of Small Spaces. Whyte states “exterior stimulus provides a linkage between people and prompts strangers to talk to each other as Interactions though they were not.”[3]
The summary of our observation and investigation shows the existence of people and their activities are the key factor of interest and interaction in public spaces. From the modest form of contact of “seeing and hearing” to the more complex ones are all contributing to the undeniable desire of humans to socialize and interact with one another. Public events, proximity to nature (water) and physical features are the key factors of social interaction in the studied public places. Some are more successful than the other which is related to how the design took into consideration the needs and the context of the public space. On another note, the pandemic has drastically changed people’s interaction with public spaces. Now more than before, the role of public spaces is evident and they are becoming a need for any community to fulfill social, cultural, environmental and economic resilience.
[1] William Hollingsworth, Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (New York: Project for Public Spaces, 2018).
[2] David Sim, (Jan Gehl). “Being Neighbors” in Soft city building density for everyday life. Washington, USA: Island press,28. 2019.https://d2l.laurentian.ca/d2l/le/content/147365/viewContent/1264446/View.
[3] William Hollingsworth. Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (New York: Project for Public Spaces, 2018), 94.
​