Week 10.1: Impact of Physical Space - NGUYEN KIM CHI (응웬김찌)
1. Summary of the Public Observation Assignment
For Week 10, we explored the idea that physical space is not neutral it shapes our behavior, interactions, emotions, and even our social identities. As part of this, we were assigned a Public Observation task: visit a public space, observe how people behave and interact in it, and reflect on how the design of that space contributes to what we see.
I chose to observe a public park near my campus on a sunny Saturday afternoon. I brought a small notebook, chose a bench with a wide view of a playground, walking path, and picnic area, and watched people come and go for about 45 minutes. I paid attention to the age, gender, and group size of the people; what they were doing (sitting, walking, talking, playing); how they interacted with each other and the space; and how they navigated different areas.
What quickly became clear was how much the design of the park influenced human activity. The wide walking paths invited strolling and jogging. The layout of benches mostly facing outward or toward scenic areas encouraged individual rest or quiet companionship, but not group interaction. The playground was fenced and had soft flooring, which created a clearly demarcated “safe zone” for families with children, and as a result, most people without kids tended to avoid that area entirely.
I also noticed how the unwritten social rules of space operated. Strangers generally maintained a respectful physical distance, and when someone sat down on a bench, others would often skip the next one and choose the one after that, preserving a sort of “buffer.” People made an effort to smile or nod when passing one another on the path, but there was little verbal interaction between unfamiliar groups.
This assignment, while simple on the surface, turned out to be one of the most revealing of the semester.
2. Interesting and Unusual Discoveries
One unexpected observation was how space itself encouraged or discouraged certain behaviors. For example, I noticed that in the areas where trees created a canopy and the benches were more secluded, couples and solitary readers tended to cluster. In contrast, the open grassy area attracted groups of friends playing frisbee or doing casual group workouts.
But the most interesting thing I observed was how people adapted to space that didn’t quite meet their needs. For example, two teens who clearly wanted to skateboard had no designated place to do so. After a few awkward moments in the main walking path (drawing annoyed glances), they eventually migrated to an empty section of the parking lot and used the curb to practice tricks. Similarly, a group of older adults sat at a picnic table meant for four and awkwardly pulled over extra folding chairs to expand the space for six people illustrating a mismatch between the park’s design and the needs of real-life social gatherings.
Another detail I found fascinating was how people created micro-environments within the public space. A woman brought her own portable speaker and yoga mat to carve out a temporary fitness zone. A parent brought chalk to draw hopscotch for her child on a paved section. These small, temporary changes showed how individuals creatively reshape space to make it feel more personal and suitable to their goals.
Finally, I was struck by how age, ability, and comfort with public spaces varied. Older adults generally stayed on the benches or walking paths, while younger children were more exploratory. People with disabilities were underrepresented, and the only wheelchair-accessible path wasn’t connected to the playground area. This raised questions for me about how “public” a space really is if it doesn’t accommodate the full diversity of the public.
3. Questions and Areas for Further Discussion
One key question this assignment raised for me is: Who gets to feel comfortable in public space, and who is excluded intentionally or not by its design? The park seemed welcoming on the surface, but small details like lack of ramps, limited seating for larger groups, and no clear space for teens suggest that not all groups are equally considered in the design process.
This makes me think more broadly about how space is a form of social control. It shapes where we’re allowed to be, what we’re encouraged to do, and how we interact with others. For example, spaces with lots of surveillance (like visible cameras or security personnel) may discourage loitering or hanging out, which can disproportionately affect young people or marginalized communities. Similarly, benches that are uncomfortable for lying down can subtly deter homeless individuals from using the park to rest. In this way, design choices down to the shape of a bench or the location of a trash can carry values and power.
Another point I’d love to discuss in class is the tension between shared use and individual ownership of space. While parks are public, people often act like certain areas are “theirs” temporarily a family might spread out and occupy a large zone, or someone playing music might claim the airspace. When does personal use cross into taking up too much space in a shared environment? How should urban planners balance flexibility with structure?
This observation exercise reminded me that space isn’t just a backdrop for life it’s an active player in shaping our experiences, often in ways we don’t consciously realize. It also raised important questions about inclusion, equity, and the kind of society we build when we design public environments.
Final Thoughts
Doing this observation wasn’t just fun it was surprisingly eye-opening. It made me realize how often I move through spaces without really noticing how they’re affecting me or others. Going forward, I’ll be more mindful of how physical space invites or limits my actions, and I’ll be thinking critically about how to design spaces that truly welcome everyone. Even a simple bench or path can tell a story if we learn how to read it.
Comments
Post a Comment