Provocative piece by Bradley Garrett on privately owned public spaces, otherwise known as “Pops.” His intro reads in part:
Part of the problem, then, with privately owned public spaces (“Pops”) – open-air squares, gardens and parks that look public but are not – is that the rights of the citizens using them are severely hemmed in. Although this issue might be academic while we’re eating our lunch on a private park bench, the consequences of multiplying and expanding Pops affects everything from our personal psyche to our ability to protest.
His point is well exemplified in the (unusually thoughtful) comments by readers, one of whom asks:
Residential squares (open to the residents of the houses surrounding the square, but not to the general public) were a feature of London architecture up to the beginning of the 20th Century and still remain closed to the public in most cases. Why is…
View original post 304 more words