349 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 original scientifi c article DOI 10.19233/ASHS.2017.23 received: 2016-02-15 EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS Špela VEROVŠEK University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Architecture, Zoisova 12, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia e-mail: spela.verovsek@fa.uni-lj.si Ljiljana ČAVIĆ CIAUD, University of Lisbon, Faculty of Architecture, Rua Sá Nogueira, 1349-055, Lisbon, Portugal e-mail: ljiljana.cavic.arh@gmail.com ABSTRACT The paper discusses a set of spatial attributes referring to urban places and design, principally focusing on the urban riverfronts and their expressions of perceived quality and spatial identity. River landscapes, riverfronts and designed urban places along the river banks are among the most visible, strong and prominent features of the river cities. They bring certain uniqueness and potential to boost urban quality and to develop places for people. Following our earlier reviews and meta-analyses, we tackle some essential defi nitions and regularly employed characteristics that refl ect the importance and relevance to riverfront development. We debate a list of place-related attributes and explain their role regarding human perception, formation of local identity and their relation to places’ appeal, in the case of two different European river cities, Ljubljana and Lisbon. Keywords: spatial attributes, spatial quality, urban riverfronts, local identity, urban design LE ESPRESSIONI DI QUALITA’ SPAZIALE E IDENTITA’ LOCALE NELLO SVILUPPO DI LUNGOFIUME URBANO SINTESI Il documento descrive una serie di caratteristiche spaziali relative alle localita’ urbane e alla progettazione, con- centrandosi principalmente sui riverfront urbani e sul loro effetto di qualità percepita e identità spaziale. I paesaggi fl uviali, il lungofi ume e località urbane progettate lungo le rive del fi ume sono tra le caratteristiche più visibili, forti e prominenti delle città attraversate da un fi ume. Essi portano una certa eccezionalita’ e potenzialità per aumentare la qualità urbana e sviluppare i posti adatti alla gente. Prendendo in considerazione le nostre revisioni precedenti e meta-analisi, affrontiamo alcune defi nizioni essenziali ed usiamo regolarmente le caratteristiche che hanno impatto sull’importanza e rilevanza per lo sviluppo del riverfront. Discutiamo un elenco di quattro particolarità relative ai luoghi sopracitati e provvediamo a spiegare il loro ruolo nella percezione umana, nella formazione di identità locale e nel loro rapporto con l’attrattività dei luoghi, nel caso di due diverse città fl uviali europee, Lubiana e Lisbona. Parole chiavi: caratteristiche spaziali, qualità spaziale, i riverfront urbani, identità locale, progettazione urbana 350 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 INTRODUCTION Rivers and river landscapes1 in urban environments have always been important factors of the development and have often been recognized as a resource and advantageous predisposition in multiple senses – as a connection, greenery, border, protection, in terms of fi sheries, industrial and port development, recreation, leisure, aesthetics, public open spaces, and of course their role of preservation and nature from the ecological perspective. Remarkable in this sense is also another factor – the creation of spatial identity – which brings, among other, spatial recognition and authenticity of a broader geographical locality. In urban environments the recognition and authentic- ity of a broader geographical locality are leaned upon the intertwinement of a large range of elements and features: from morphological structures, vegetation, climate, built structures and infrastructures, historical character and existence of cultural heritage, land use patterns, to more indirectly visible, less tangible, such as inhabitants’ hab- its and customs, governmental regulations or behaviour patterns (Verovšek et al., 2016). However, a river in a city, river landscapes and riverfronts are of the most vis- ible, strong and prominent elements in these terms – they bring certain uniqueness and potential to boost urban qualities and develop places for people. Throughout the years, the multifunctional nature of riversides revealed their potential to respond to diverse necessities, thus acquiring several meanings. From being principally traf- fi c routs in the Middle Ages and economy booster in the industrial era, they are lately being readapted to places for wellbeing and re-naturalization. These constant and successful functional and spatial reinventions of riverside areas depict their values and capacity to obtain various signifi cations in urban life. As claimed by Larice and Macdonald (2010), the tendencies towards studying, designing and creating urban places with a greater relevance to the user’s personal experience – as a response to the impersonal approach of design – have reinforced the search for alternative ways of tackling the city and its parts, includ- ing riverfronts. Therefore, the scientifi c community has developed a rich set of aspects to approach the evalua- tion and interpretation of urban reality, either in a con- ceptual/ concise/abstract way (Bosselman, 1998) or by means that provide perceptions closer to the experience (Juvančič et al., 2014). Criteria and indicators for as- sessing spatial potentials, pre-dispositions or constraints are therefore based on physical, cultural and social or purely perceptual nature of urban reality. This paper provides a descriptive overview of a set of spatial attributes related to urban riverfronts from the aspect of urban design and planning. Following our earlier reviews and other meta-analyses of the common qualities in urban environments (Ewing et al., 2006; Verovšek, 2012; Verovšek et al., 2013; Čavić and Beirao, 2014), we tackle some essential defi nitions and regularly employed characteristics that refl ect importance and relevance in terms of river banks. We select and discuss a set of place-related attributes and explain their role in terms of human perception and the role for a wider audience and users. The discussion is systematically un- derpinned by geographically two different showcases; that is, by two river cities in Europe – Ljubljana with the Ljubljanica river and Lisbon with Tagus river. PLACES’ EXPRESSIONS FOSTERING URBAN QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY Most commonly speaking, the identity of a place represents the key characteristics with which a particu- lar place is associated.2 The numerous elements and features and their combinations defi ne a certain place and bring an expression of uniqueness and authentic- ity, which has been, since the earliest times, regarded as a sign of value and quality, however, not necessarily strictly correlated to what is considered architectural or urbanistic quality. The defi nition of place is closely linked to compre- hension of its identity, which by differentiation allows for place’s distinction within spatial continuity and topologic confi guration. In broader sense and using Sau- ssure’s linguistic theory of meaning-making (Saussure, 1959), the defi nition of any signifi cant entity is linked to its uniqueness in comparison to proximate or similar elements within the system. Said differently, a place as a meaningful element generates its identity twofold: a) in a relationship towards proximate and the neighbor- hood places and b) in relation to functionally similar but physically separated places. Lynch (1960) considered identity as part of the image of a city with the appearance being the most instantly perceived refl ection of its spatial identity, even if ne- glecting the subjective interpretation of it. However, counting with its counterpart, a place-related identity also inevitably refers to either subjective or objectivised cluster of ideas about the place. It represents an assem- blage of information about the place for its user or the observer. Spatial identity is in this view seen as a dy- namic, collective creation of the interaction between, on the one side the capacities for memory, consciousness, 1 Urban rivers include rivers, or river segments, which originate or fl ow in urban regions, as well as canals or channels (which are man- made but have, over time, achieved characteristics of natural rivers (Yue, 2012). 2 Place identity can commonly be defi ned in two different ways, by either the ways people express identifi cations with reference to the physical environment or the distinctiveness of the environment itself. For the purpose of this paper, place identity is confi ned to the unique or distinct character of a place (Azmi et al., 2014). 351 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 and organized construal and on the other the physical and societal structures and processes which constitute the social context (Breakwell, 1986; Lappegard, 2007). As such, the local or regional identity and character are never a stable construct, but is continuously evolving (Kaymaz, 2013) on the long term basis, however, the essence of it persists due to the more constant factors infl uencing its appearance. The later forms, what Mlinar (1994)3 calls the continuation, as one of the two most conspicuous measures that defi ne any kind of identity (identity in any sense). Consequently, the place identity is also inevitably in conjunction with tradition: “A city’s identity relates to its historical background and to the particularities that traditionally characterized that city” (Deffner and Metaxas, 2010, 52). However, respecting the spatial identity as a quality, which is pursued by many Euro- pean documents,4 proposes not rigorously preserving current state or copying the old models, but rather defi ning the spatial differentiation and continuation in an always new context and attuned to new means of accomplishing it. In terms of urban design, it suggests moving the focus from static to dynamic, from formal towards functional, from economic to social dimen- sion of urban and architectural space, that is by lived experience (Tuan, 1975) turned into a Lefebvre’s living organism (Lefebvre, 1991). From the urban planning point of view, as Mrđa and Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci (2016) ascertain, it is essential to integrate the protec- tion of places’ identity into the planning process, to create a new assessment model that will trigger a new method of specifi c planning approach. No matter how we set it, the concept of local or spatial identity predictably connects the existing urban form and confi guration, morphology and land patterns, as well as climate, vegetation, to some less tangible features (such as inhabitants’ habits and customs, governmental regulations or behavioural patterns) that defi ne the perception of a place. Therefore, the identity connects the multifractal urban characteristics and at- tributes, yet at the same time relates to what constitutes the urban quality as perceived by users. As pointed out above, not all the spatial confi gurations forming its identity are considered architectural or urbanistic qual- ity, however, many of the existing spatial attributes have recognised signifi cance of quality and identity. In the paper we do not intentionally categorise the attributes and qualities by their type, however, we discuss them from the aspect of visual physical form, socially-economic liveliness that provides urbanity and assures users’ sojourning, as well as from the aspect of spatial identity which is shared by the users through their mental perceptions. SELECTION OF URBAN ATTRIBUTES APPLIED TO URBAN RIVERFRONTS In the following chapter we introduce four urban attributes relevant to urban riverfronts and fostering urban quality and the sense of local identity as noted by literature and also judged by the expert panel in past studies (Ewing and Handy, 2009; Carmona, 2010; Verovšek, 2012; Verovšek et al., 2013; Cavic and Beirao, 2014). The selected set is put in the perspective of two geographically different showcases; the city of Ljubljana with Ljubljanica River5 and the city of Lisbon with the delta of Tagus River.6 We use three photos in a row, demonstrating the riverbank scenery according 3 Mlinar (1994) claims, there are two key measures that defi ne each identity, these are differentiation and continuation. 4 The European Urban Charter in 1992 was on the European level among the fi rst concerted efforts to bring the existing local and urban identity in line with efforts linking legislative reform with spatial and architectural development. Following this agenda, also other more contemporary planning and strategic documents highlight the need to preserve or reinforce the locally specifi c character and identities, which refer to newly created or retrofi tted places. Also, a number of contemporary policies have responded by integrating the protection of traditional cultural landscape into their objectives and measures. 5 The Ljubljanica River is the continuation of several karst rivers that fl ow from the Karst region towards Ljubljana and Ljubljana basin. After entering Ljubljana from the south, it defi nes a hoop around the northern slope of Castle hill and encircles the historical centre. In the eighteenth century, the Gruber Canal was built in an attempt to reclaim lands against frequent fl ooding, cutting through the southern end of the promontory. Today the river is considered as one of the greatest spatial potentials in the city of Ljubljana. In the outer parts of the city the riverfronts are less urbanized, greener and gradually sweeping down; however, the central part of the city river is strongly confi ned; at that time it was a unique solution (Plečnik) which was complemented by other Plečnik’s works such as monumental build- ings, open squares, canals, embankments, and riverside parks, altogether forming a strong spatial identity, which is today protected as a cultural heritage. In the last decade, the riverbanks in the section of the old city centre of Ljubljana were partly renovated. Interventions were inserted within the existing design not to overrun the existing heritage and identity. Ljubljana received The European Prize for Urban Public Space for this project in 2012. (The European Prize for Urban Public Space is a biennial competition organized by seven European institutions with the aim to recognize and encourage the recovery projects and defence of public space in cities (http://www. publicspace.org/en/prize/2012). 6 Out of 18 municipalities that compose the Lisbon Metropolitan Area, 16 have one or more waterfronts: 6 of them by the sea and 10 of them along either the Tagus or the Sado rivers estuaries. In the case of Lisbon, river and the riverside represent an important element in city development. Lisbon Riverside is nowadays, almost in its totality, placed over artifi cially constructed landfi lls which as outputs of a long process of conquering water areas, depict the relationship city has established with its river. The nature of Lisbon’s shore has been changing over centuries, moving from the rich, direct and intense city-river interplay, towards a gradual levelling of their joining area through the artifi cial and mostly industrial expansion of landfi lls which led to the extension and regulation of the shore ring. Nowadays, due to decline and relocation of industrial activities Lisbon shoreline is an artifi cially regulated area that despite its morphological uni- formity allows for diverse urban interventions and various open public space typologies (recreational, social, etc.). 352 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 to the selected spatial attribute (one of the three photos demonstrates the non-designed riverfront scenery, not specially targeting urban use or proposing attendance) and an additional non-river scenery referencing high (max) or low (min) value by this attribute in one of the two cities (Table 1, Table 2). Short descriptions are pro- vided, pointing out the features that make each scene either high or low with respect to each spatial attribute. Nature in the city – naturalness The presence and effect of natural environments and elements of nature in urban and architectural space is widely discussed and investigated. It is well documented (e.g. Balling and Falk, 1982; Ulrich, 1986; Kaplan and Kaplan, 1989: Ward Thompson, 2002; Beatley, 2010, etc.) that elements of nature or “nature in the city” bring positive effects in numerous aspects such as biodiversity, microclimate, air quality, aesthetics, variety in appear- ance, noise reduction, to more subtle and complex, such as restorative effects for humans, aroused sense of bal- ance or control and preferences by people. The concept of naturalness in these terms refers to people’s perception that a place is connected to nature if containing elements such as water, vegetation, natural materials as woods, ge- omorphological variegation or offer vistas to mountains, hills or presence of animals, etc. In this context the natu- ralness represents the relation or proportion between the man-made impact and his natural counterpart or input. The question of “real” or total naturalness does not seem to be very crucial at this point. It is apparent that ele- ments of nature in the urban realm capture adjusted form and refl ect limited essence. However, from the aspect of human perception and preferences, it does not seem to be any less effective. Beatley (2010) claims that even the smaller doses of nature in more discontinuous ways (e.g. a rooftop garden, an empty corner lot, single tree, water pass) that are incorporated or found in the compact parts of the cities, have positive effects on human wellbeing and raise the quality of living environments. Addition- ally, in the case of study referring to larger green areas or remote riverfronts (Kaplan and Kaplan, 1989), those areas were recognized as more attractive to users if moderately reformed, designed and equipped, thus in a way urban- ized, adjusted and controlled. We could claim that harsh wildness is not particularly cherished among urban users if it does not provide with basic functionalities and infra- structures, path networks and adequate sense of safety or control. However, the uncontrolled, wild spaces such as railway sidings, river corridors, canal-side banks are claimed to be important in continuity of natural habitat for plant and animal diversity allowing for restoration of wildlife, city resilience and biodiversity (Baines, 1986). Wildness in urban areas is given a value due to its special conditions to hold a memory on what urban space was before it got constructed. It is an undetermined, open and free area, which leaves space for creativity and dif- ferently from constructed natural spaces with cut grass, permits observation of ecosystem in its originality and self-organising spontaneity (Ferraton and Iotzova, 2015). According to abundant theoretical and empirical lit- erature, deductive reasoning shall lead us to the statement that river as an element in the urban environments brings rich predisposition in terms of higher levels of natural- ness. Not only is the proximity of water advantageous for the development or design of adjacent urban places, but also the often required green buffer zone/corridor7 lengthwise the river enriches the potential for develop- 7 Different documents on EU level use dissimilar terminology and required building offsets: Slovenian legislation proposes a 15 meter offset from the river line for new constructions and infrastructures for most rivers of the fi rst class (hydro-morphological classifi cation; Figure 1 and 2: Bringing people closer to the water and greenery of the river edge is one of the well-recognised approaches to boost the sense of naturalness 353 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 ment of quality and pleasant spaces, usually related to recreation, play and leisure. Slovenian strategical plans on the level of municipalities, which are prepared in accordance with European environmental and planning agendas, are laying great efforts to develop and make good use of areas adjacent to rivers in urban contextures. Special concern goes to approaches that bring recrea- tional and walking paths closer to water (Figure 1, Figure 2) and design solutions that offer user experience in the immediate vicinity of water and greenery along it. Spatiality – openness, spaciousness, containment and enclosure In architectural theory authors such as Joedicke (1985), claim that even though very basic, the feature of spaciousness is very important in spatial experience. ‘Spaciousness’ depends on the area or space and height of facades adjacent to it – when the space is small with high surrounding buildings, it is perceived as less spacious comparing in comparison to a larger one with a lower built surrounding (Beirão et al., 2014). Spaciousness is deemed signifi cant due to its importance for safety and utility because more spacious places provide area for satisfaction of basic human needs giving them enough room not to feel threatened by enabling their capacity to see or move (Stamps, 2010). In urban theories, less spa- cious or more contained places allow for closer human interaction and mingling giving possibility for hearing and seeing other people as crucial factor for sojourning and social interaction (Gehl, 1987). Similarly, the term of openness refers to a view, visual scope and addresses the characteristics of spatial built membrane and refers to how much of the spatial two-dimensional or three- dimensional perimeter is enclosed or open towards its background (Nasar, 2011) and relates as opposite to attribute enclosure.8 As a more narrow and focused attribute, openness of spatial boundaries participates in generating spaciousness of urban space – higher open- ness contributes to higher spaciousness. Interestingly, both attributes – openness and enclosure in different urban places – can be considered either valuable or dis- turbing in terms of human perception. There are human- related and space-related reasons for this occurrence. The spatial cognition is infl uenced by one’s previous experiences, memories and individual predispositions and preferences. The phenomenon of openness which to someone might evoke emotion of freedom could to the other represent intimidation (Arnheim, 1977). Cullen (1961), for instance, states that enclosure of an outdoor space, that is, what forms a room-like (Ewing and Handy, 2009) impression, is, perhaps, the most powerful, the most obvious, of all the devices to install a sense of position, of identity with the surroundings. The connotation one gives to an extremely broad or enclosed space, positive or negative one, will as well depend on the spatial context and the anticipations of the user. At lower urban densities, building masses become less important in defi ning space (Ewing and Handy, 2009), which is followed by the users expectations and cogni- tion, thus the spaciousness - at least in a sense of defi ned openness (Kaplan and Kaplan, 1989; Nasar, 1990, 1994) – become appreciated feature. When the contexts and reference change, the perceptions and spatial cognition reasonably follow. It is evident that riverfronts in their nature capture more spaciousness and form specifi c context in these terms due to relatively less dense urban contexture and wider buildings’ edge offsets. Along with the river width and bridges that bring certain sense of spaciousness, there is, as stated before, a green buffer zone lengthwise the river required and regulated by the architectural and planning legislation in numerous European cities.7 This brings different predispositions to such places and their potential for development as liveable and pleasant public open places. There are, of course, exceptions to this principle, referring to the existent greater building densities (e.g. old/historical urban centres), closely confi ning the river and the water line by the buildings and built infrastructures. In these cases, the sense of spaciousness remains due to the river width, but is less intense comparing to riverbanks with wider offsets of buildings. As Ewing and Handy (2009) states, at low urban densities, building masses become less important in defi ning space, and trees assume the dominant role. Rows of trees, either along the street or along the river paths can humanize the height-to-width ratio. Thus, the perceived spaciousness can be strongly affected also by trees and canopies of the green buffer zone, however, the greenery provides more transparent less solid enclosure, which, for some authors is the fi nest solution for places suffering from exceeded openness perceived. Besides, the scale of spaciousness at the riverbank sceneries can be established in different scales of spaciousness (Figure 3 and 4). Linkage – access and connectivity Accessibility and linkage are tightly interrelated attributes of urban places that raise interest of many greater offsets are required in case of protected area of nature, green zones (50 m), water protection zones, protective forests and fl ooding areas, Zakon o vodah Uradni list RS, nr. 67/02). 8 Enclosure and the related spatial containment are considered both in plan and vertical section. The amount of enclosure and the result- ing degree of containment, partially depend on the ratio of the width of the space to the height of the enclosing walls (Carmona, 2010). Enclosure refers to the degree to which streets and other public spaces are visually defi ned by buildings, walls, trees, and other vertical elements. Spaces where the height of vertical elements is proportionally related to the width of the space between them have a room-like quality (Ewing et al., 2006). 354 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 practitioners and theoreticians. One can judge the ac- cessibility of an urban place by openness of its limits, which allows for its connections or linkages to its surrounding places, both in visual and physical sense. Ewing and Handy (2009) defi ne the linkage as a feature that promotes the interconnectedness of different places and that provides convenient access between them. As they claim, the linkage refers to physical or visual9 connections longitudinally or laterally across a place, forming, as Cullen (1961) defi nes it, continuity10 of the visual or physical path. There is of course a distinctive difference between the visual and physical connections. Physical connections can be represented by the travel trajectories, whereas visual connections don’t necessar- ily (or at all) coincide with them and thus do not relate to the actual accessibility and linkage network. The actual linkage is also closely associated with intersections, net- work confi guration and urban nodes,11 the latter being reasonable accompaniment of the linkage nodes. As complex process of organization connects the different nodes of the urban fabric, connections enable one to get easily to any point, preferably by many different paths (Salingaros, 1998). Although the position of a certain place within the network of other places in the city cannot be taken as a short-term or bottom-up design quality but rather a positive or negative predisposition to it, it defi nitely im- pacts the estimated value of space in the urban matrix.12 Centrality (as opposed to positional periphery) is always an advantage in these terms and brings higher levels of accessibility and connectivity. Inversely, as with the attributes of naturalness and spaciousness that commonly reach higher values in case of riverfronts, the attribute of linkage expectably gains lower levels at places along the river. This is a reason- able impact of the waterline as an obstacle to common modes of movement.13 However, although the access from bank to bank is clearly more impeded than, for instance, in the case of a city road, we can claim that cross linkage channels gain accumulated movements in these terms (Figure 5, Figure 6). Bridges here play a crucial role by pooling the movement into defi ned currents and forming strong connection nodes, which commonly adds to liveability, dynamics and quality in societal terms. Topography and visual amplitude One of the strongest attributes that that participates in constitution of place identity is related to spatial topography and the extent to which the built structures follow and adopt the terrain confi guration. Depending Figure 3 and 4: Opening the views and spacing-out the sceneries at the riverbank can be established in different scales of spaciousness (city centre and outeards) 9 As emphasized by Lynch (1960), visual connections are necessary for orientation and for creating a coherent picture of an urban setting; however, they do not necessarily (or at all) coincide with the travel trajectories and thus do not relate to actual accessibility. 10 Cullen (1961) defi nes continuity as “a simple way to show how one type of space is directly linked to another by the physical elements.” When a physical element creates a small fi eld to move along, such as a fence or a sidewalk, continuity indicates whether a viewer is within the fi eld. It suggests a path and an uninterrupted view within the object’s fi eld (Sora et al., 2008). 11 Urban nodes are not entirely defi ned by structures in urbanistic terminology, however, most often they represent an object or place of attraction for a greater part of users (Salingaros, 1998). 12 There are well known models of spatial geometric confi gurations developed (e.g. Hillier and Hanson, 1989) that offer analysis of spatial arrangements and relational concept of space and describe the relative connectivity, accessibility and centrality in regard to possible paths, position, choice and integration. 13 In this paper we regard river as a travel network negligible in terms of traveling in the city and daily travel behaviours of the majority. 355 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 on the slope shapes and the urban design embedded, places are more or less exposed towards environment or embedded into it, which permits a stronger or weaker control over territory, infl uencing the feeling of safety, place visibility, wind protection, sun exposure (insola- tion), etc. The topographic aspect is, therefore, implicitly involved in the defi nitions of several well distinguished but structured qualities, such as visual complexity or imageability of place (Ewing et al., 2006). It is clear that terrain confi guration is an attribute that doesn’t provide with quality itself, but offers higher or lower potential for the development of it, if places are structured around topography by taking advantage of its natural benefi ts such as terraces, viewpoints, depressions as defi ned by contour, valleys, slopes; or by overcoming its slope and height obstacles for water supply, drainage, acces- sibility. The analysis of topography is often undertaken by geographers (Huggett & Cheesman, 2002) and real estate economists (Hurd, 1924), who observe the way settlements are being adapted to the environment and its impact on functionality, cost-effectiveness or the infl uence on other related processes. In urban and architectural researches, topography analyses are often conducted for comprehension of how urban heat, fl ood- ing, microclimates, temperature, landuse, etc are infl u- enced by the environment. Interesting from our point of view is the relationship that urban place establishes with the topographical features, as they profoundly defi ne its character, predefi ne its insolation, limit or enhance its usage and potentiate its visual amplitude. Visual ampli- tude in its defi nition is strongly related to topographic features of any space. It depicts the attribute of a visual fi eld a certain place propagates giving an idea about the overall visual angle and coverage from a certain place, describing the visible spatial structure of an environ- ment. Visual amplitude is dependent both on topogra- phy and built structure. Places on convex and parallel slopes, especially those, which are less enclosed, have stronger visual amplitudes. The quality of visual ampli- tude is thus partly dependent on openness; however, in this case, it does not relate to the perception in terms of spaciousness but to proportion and variety of the vistas encompassed. The more enclosed places tend to obtain lower visual amplitude and less powerful views. Visual fi elds are usually addressed by isovist and viewshed methodologies. While isovist represents the portion of space that can be ‘overviewed’ from a certain spot, viewshed shows objects and parts of the objects that are visible from specifi c spatial point. Isovist depict shape of the view from certain location as being carved out by built and topographic obstacles, whereas views- heds14 are about the visibility of features.15 Viewsheds are commonly used where terrain heights come into play (Weitkamp, 2011). Thus, the visual amplitude can be depicted by viewshed representing a possible visible coverage towards urban – or landscape from a certain point – the greater the visible portion, the stronger the visual amplitude. By applying the attribute of visual amplitude to riv- erfronts and river scenery, we can for sure confi rm both: potentials and weaknesses deriving from topographical predispositions of the riverscapes. By taking into ac- Figure 5 and 6: Bridges accumulate the movement currents and form strong connection- and activity- nodes 14 A viewshed is the geographical area that is visible from a location. It includes all surrounding points that are in line-of-sight with that location and excludes points that are beyond the horizon or obstructed by terrain and other features (e.g., buildings, trees); (Weitkamp, 2011). 15 Inversely, the area from which a structure, object or a standpoint can be seen may be called the zone of visual infl uence. It is the area from which a particular object/point is theoretically visible. Zones of visual infl uence have been used extensively in wind farm develop- ment. A cumulative zone of visual infl uence is used to defi ne the cumulative effects of many developments (The European Wind Energy Association, 2012). 356 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 count the concave form of the river bed and surround- ing slopes, one can make inferences on lover visual amplitudes. From a specifi c standpoint on the riverfront, the visible coverage is commonly lower due to lower position, while convex and higher slopes would provide more extensive views and consequently more visual complexity. However, if taking into account commonly lower building densities along riverfronts, or greenery that allows transparency, or the possibilities offered by the bridges, one can also make reasonable inferences on some higher visual amplitude, compared to places lying higher from the riverbed where/if the building densities are higher. The attribute of visual amplitude is therefore very much dependent on the micro location and its topographical, as well as build confi guration, also the river width, stream meandering and the nature of river slopes, which are frequently dependent on geology of the river basin (Figure 7, Figure 8). DISCUSSION In an attempt of the urban design and planning to achieve the quality within the spatial attributes exam- ined and discussed in this paper, many different tactics occur. Each place can be seen through a set of ideas about how it should perform, what functionalities it should promote, what form it would capture and how it should be organized to provide with well-balanced pub- lic life and distributions, well designed and functional furniture, quality environment in terms of visual appeal, orientation, or noise/air pollution etc. There are great dif- ferences among different kind of places (plazas, squares, streets, banks, parks, atriums…) and their potentials to develop certain urban qualities. However, there are also great variances, among a particular kind of places – in our case riverfront spaces and their relation to the city form and layout. And yet, there are differences in per- ceptions of the qualities, as being contingent on various pre-established conditions such as the cultural context. For example, the concept of spaciousness/openness and enclosure within the context of North American cities cannot be compared with European or Asian ones. In the same way as we are born into the language and culture, we are born into the spatial context. Our cultur- ally infl uenced and therefore almost intrinsic concept of space is present as a reference to understanding and valuing new realities. We applied our review to the riverfronts in Ljubljana and Lisbon regarding set of selected attributes. Between these two cities, there are two crucial deviances that further drag most of the spatial characteristics, these are, size of the river and the position of the river within the city fabric, and the size of the city distances that provide different scales, especially in terms of spaciousness, link- age and visual amplitudes. Lisbon’s case offers greater distances, and the Tagus delta, due to its broadness, provides with the sceneries and spaces on a different scale regarding spaciousness, while Ljubljanica scales lower and fl ows through the very central part of the city, thus allowing for more proximate social interactions. Although it is evident, that riverfronts in their nature capture more spaciousness and form specifi c context in these terms due to relatively less dense urban con- texture, the two cases revised, show great differences also regarding openness of the public spaces nearby. It is evident that Tagus River creates a sea-like impression in its lower fl ow (river delta). The distances between the banks crate a perception of separation which literally results in inexistent cross linkage for the pedestrians. Bridges providing the linkage are well-distinguished but offer almost exclusively the transport function for motorized traffi cs. Number of bridges affects visual Figure 7 and 8: Slight river curves commonly establish richer sceneries with higher visual amplitudes as opposed to sceneries by straight banks 357 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 amplitude of the places twofold. On one side, when ob- serving from a place, a higher number of bridges chunk visual fi eld into smaller portion diminishing visual am- plitude of a place. When observed from outside, more bridges offer more opportunities to capture better stand/ view point, widening the visual fi eld towards a certain place on the bank. The attribute of visual amplitude in these two cases is of course very much dependent also on the micro location and its topographical, as well as build confi guration, the river width, stream meandering, and the nature of the river slopes grading down the riverfronts and holding the bridges’ edges. In the central part of Ljubljana on the distance of 10 km, there are 20 bridges, of which 9 is exclusively proposed for non- motorised traffi c (pedestrian, bike). This proportion ranks high in comparison to most of the European cities, and by taking in the account also the slight meandering of the river, we can claim that Ljubljanica’s riverfronts are well pre-dispositioned in terms of visual amplitudes to- wards the riverbank, but are quite constrained regarding visual amplitude from riverbank locations. Differently, in case of Tagus, visual amplitude from the riverside is rather high due to wideness of river’s delta and lack of proximate bridges that would work as visual constrains. Due to the lack of bridges, visual amplitude towards the places is low since stand/viewpoints are non-existent. Likewise, both, the linage with the connectivity and the characteristics related to spaciousness are almost in diametric contrast within these two rivers, however in both cases these provide with the uniqueness and adds to the geo-local identity and appeal. CONCLUSION Urban rivers with appurtenant riverbanks hold specifi c predispositions in terms of developing urban Table 1: Selected spatial attributes; Ljubljana – Ljubljanica River 358 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 places. They form distinct spatial arrangements to evolve place-based qualities, and promising possibilities to foster local identity. As claimed by the European centre for river restoration (ECRR, 2017), there are more than 50% of people in the world now living in cities and more than 75% live near a river. Rivers are increasingly valued as part of the urban environment; successful urban river restoration is as much about establishing trust with local people, boosting their sense of identity with their rivers, as it is about improving fl ows and habitats. There are in- deed great differences among diverse urban rivers, their expanse, geomorphology, river profi le and confi guration of the banks, as well as how they are embedded into the urban fabric and integrated into the socio-cultural, ecological, economic and managerial structures of the city. In the article we delve into the selection of spatial attributes, which appear to be more common for the riv- erscapes and places along the river banks. We put them in the perspective of two unlike cities with unique and rather dissimilar riverscapes, to demonstrate the differ- ences and similarities and validate choice of the picked attributes. The characteristics relating to naturalness, distinct topography and spatiality, as well as particularity regarding linkage, are important factors concerning the development of river-by places and their urban design. Not all determine the quality itself, but rather the spe- cifi c potential to be used in a constructive way from the aspect of visitors, residents and users. Likewise, from the aspect of the river sceneries and the spatial identity, these attributes are vital in bringing unique or distinct character to places longwise the river, which is to be recognized and recalled vividly by the users/observers in comparison to other places of the city, however, although not necessarily strictly correlated to what is considered architectural or urbanistic quality. The discussion we expose and consider important in this article is especially the gradual shift in designing, which tends to put forward the actual user‘s experience. The debated research and Table 2: Selected spatial attributes; Lisbon – Tagus River 359 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 fi ndings related to the exposed attributes correspond- ingly represent a rich repository of knowledge to answer questions about spatial qualities, their meanings, ways of their achievement and the ultimate aims at pragmatic value of responsive, well-recognizable and user-friendly structure and shape. The perpetual challenge, however, is how to apply this knowledge to specifi c geo-local en- tity and how to assure the non-confl icting riparian uses among ecological, economic and social functionalities, while concurrently boosting the aesthetic, visual and lo- cally distinct expression in the process of urban planning and design. 360 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 IZRAZI PROSTORSKE IDENTITETE IN KAKOVOSTI URBANIH PROSTOROV PRI RAZVOJU MESTNIH REČNIH NABREŽIJ Špela VEROVŠEK Univerza v Ljubljani, Fakulteta za arhitekturo, Zoisova 12, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija e-mail: spela.verovsek@fa.uni-lj.si Ljiljana ČAVIĆ Univerza v Lizboni, Fakulteta za arhitekturo, Rua Sá Nogueira, Lizbona, Portugalska e-mail: ljiljana.cavic.arh@gmail.com POVZETEK Razprava o kvalitetah urbanega prostora in identiteti, ki jo prostori nosijo, je stalnica strokovne, znanstveno-raz- iskovalne, tudi umetniške diskusije v disciplinah, povezanih z načrtovanjem in urejanjem urbanih prostorov. Članek obravnava sklop prostorskih lastnosti, ki se nanašajo na oblikovane urbane prostore in sicer s poudarkom na razvoju obrečnih mestnih nabrežij ter njihovega izraza prostorske identitete in kakovosti. Obrečni prostor, mestna nabrežja in oblikovani nizi prostorov na rečnih bregovih so lahko eden bolj močnih dejavnikov prepoznavnosti prostora in njegove kakovosti. Prinašajo namreč specifi čen izraz prostorske identitete, hkrati pa nosijo ugodne možnosti za razvoj funkcionalnih in uporabniku prijaznih prostorov. Sledeč našim predhodnim študijam in obstoječi literaturi na tem področju v članku obravnavamo nekatere osnovne pojme prostorskih kvalitet, ki odražajo pomen za razvoj ali revitalizacijo rečnih obrežij ter prostorov na bregovih urbanih rek. Razprava sledi širim osnovnim prostorskim atributom, ki so značilni za obrečni prostor, pri tem pregledno izpostavimo njihovo vlogo za uporabnika in njegovo zaznavanje, pomen, ki ga imajo za razvoj prostorske identitete in pomen, oziroma potencial ki ga nosijo za nastanek odzivnih in, s strani uporabnikov, dobro sprejetih prostorov. Dana izhodišča in referenčne vrednosti prikažemo na primerih dveh evropskih rečnih mest, to je, Ljubljane z Ljubljanico in Lizbone z rečno delto toka Tajo. Ključne besede: prostorski atributi, prostorske kvalitete, mestna nabrežja, prostorska identiteta, urbano oblikovanje 361 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY Arnheim, R. (1977): The Dynamics of Architectural Form. Berkeley and Los Angeles, University of California Press. Azmi, N. F., Ahmad, F. & A. S. Ali (2014): Place Identity: A Theoretical Refl ection. Open House Interna- tional, 39, 4, 53–64. Baines, C. (1986): The wild side of town. BBC. Available at: http://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/clc/452780 (Accessed: 20 January 2016). Balling, J. D. & J. H. Falk (1982): Development of visual preference for natural environments. Environment and Behavior, 14, 5–28. Beatley, T. (2010): Biophilic Cities: Integrating Nature Into Urban Design and Planning. Washington, Island Press. Beirão, J., Chaszar, A. & L. Cavic (2014): Convex - and Solid-Void Models for Analysis and Classifi cation of Public Spaces. In: Gu, N. et al. (eds): CAADRIA 2014, 19th International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research. Kyoto, Kyoto institute of technology. Bosselmann, P. (1998): Representation of Places. Berkeley, University of California Press. Breakwell, G. M. (1986): Coping with Threatened Identity. London, Methuen. Carmona, M. (2010): Public places – urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design (2. ed.). Amsterdam, Elsevier. Cavic, L. & J. Beirão (2014): Open Public Space Attributes and Categories – Complexity and Measur- ability’. Magazine AR Architecture, Research, 2014/2 Volume XV, 15–24. Cullen, G. (1961): The Concise Townscape. London, Architectural Press. Deffner, A. & T. Metaxas (2010): Place marketing, local identity and branding cultural images in Southern Europe. In: Ashworth, G. & M. Florek (eds): Towards effective place brand management: branding European cities and regions. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 49–68. Ewing, R. & S. Handy (2009): Measuring the Un- measurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walk- ability. Journal of Urban Design, 14, 1, 65–84. Ewing, R., Handy, S., Brownson, R. C., Clemente, O. & E. Winston (2006): Identifying and measuring urban design qualities related to walkability. Journal of Physi- cal Activity and Health, 3, 223–239. Ferraton, D. & M. Iotzova (2015): Changing our narratives of wild spaces in the city. Available at: http://www.citiesforpeople.ca/en/story/changing-our- narratives-of-wild-spaces-in-the-city-an-interview-with- dominique-ferraton-and-maia-iotzova (Accessed: 20 January 2016). Gehl, J. (1987): The Life between Buildings. New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold. Hillier, B. & J. Hanson (1989): The Social Logic of Space. New York, Cambridge University Press. Huggett, R. J. & J. Cheesman (2002): Topography and the Environment. New Jersey, Pearson Education. Hurd, R. M. (1924): Principles of city and land val- ues. New York, Cambridge University Press. Joedicke, J. (1985): Space and Form in Architcture: A Circumspect Approach to the Past. Berlin, Kraemer. Juvančič, M., Hočevar, M. & T. Zupančič (2014): Improving communication and changing attitudes in architectural practices : digital architectural education tools for non-experts. Open house international, 39, 4, 91–100. Kaplan, R. & S. Kaplan (1989): The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. New York, Cam- bridge University Press. Kaymaz, I. (2013): Urban Landscapes and Identity. In: Ozyavuz, M. (ed.): Advances in Landscape Architec- ture. InTech, 739–759. Lappegard, A. H. (2007): Identity and Place: A Criti- cal Comparison of Three Identity Theories. Architectural Science Review, 50, 1, 44–51. Larice, M. & E. Macdonald (2010): The urban design reader. London, Routledge. Lefebvre, H. (1991): The production of space. 5th ed. Oxford, Blackwell. Lynch, K. (1960): The Image of the City. Cambridge, MIT Press. Mlinar, Z. (1994): Individuacija in globalizacija v prostoru, Ljubljana, SAZU. Mrđa, A. & B. Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci (2016): Herit- age touristscapes: a case study of the Island of Hvar. Annales Series Historia et Sociologia, 26, 3, 553–572. Nasar, J. L. (1990): The evaluative image of the city. Journal of the American Planning Association, 56, 41–53. Nasar, J. L. (1994): Urban design aesthetics the evaluative qualities of building exteriors. Environment and Behavior, 26, 3, 377–401. Nasar, J. L. (2011): Environmental psychology and urban design. In: Banerjee, T. & A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds): Companion to urban design. London, Rutledge, 54–69. Salingaros, N. A. (1998): Theory of the urban web. Journal of Urban Design, 3, 1, 53–71. Saussure, F. (1959): Course in general linguistics. New York, The Philosophical Library. Sora, K., Gross, M. & E. Yi-Luen (2008): Comput- ing Spatial Qualities for Architecture. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA), Min- nesota, University of Minnesota, 472–477. Stamps, A. E. (2010): Effects of area, height, elonga- tion, and color on perceived spaciousness. Environment and Behavior, 43, 2, 147–181. The European Wind Energy Association (2012): Wind Energy – The Facts: A Guide to the Technology, Economics and Future of Wind Power. London, Rout- ledge. 362 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 2 Špela VEROVŠEK & Ljiljana ČAVIĆ: EXPRESSIONS OF SPATIAL QUALITY AND LOCAL IDENTITY IN URBAN RIVERFRONTS, 349–362 Tuan, Y. (1975): Place: An experiential Perspective. Geographical Review, 65, 2, 151–165. Ulrich, R. S. (1986): Human responses to vegetation and landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 13, 29–44. Verovšek, Š. (2012): Development of presentation techniques for communicating interdisciplinary spatial contents to lay public. PhD Thesis. Ljubljana, University of Ljubljana. Verovšek, Š., Juvančič, M. & T. Zupančič (2013): Understanding and Interpreting Urban Space (in)forma- tion. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 11, 2, 135–155. Verovšek, Š., Juvančič, M & T. Zupančič (2016): Recognizing and fostering local spatial identities using a sustainability assessment framework. Annales. Series historia et sociologia, 26, 3, 573–584. Ward Thompson, C. (2002): Urban Open Space in the 21st Century. Landscape and Urban Planning, 60, 2, 59–72. Weitkamp, G. (2011): Mapping landscape open- ness with isovists. Research In Urbanism Series, 2, 1, 205–223. Yue, J. (2012): Urban Rivers: A Landscape Ecologi- cal Perspective. Hydrology: Current Research, 3, 125, 12–17 Zakon o vodah (2002). Uradni list RS, nr. 67/02.