<p>The objective of this study was to uncover what aspects of urban plazas and parks that are most important for users’ evaluations of places’ aesthetics and microclimate (the characteristic climate for a limited space). This was done by investigating people’s general ideas of plazas and parks (the prototypical concepts) and compare these with place users’ descriptions of four specific places. Interviews with two groups (31 and 24 persons respectively) were carried out in order to collect this information. Aspects commonly mentioned in the descriptions, but not included in the prototype, were considered salient and schema-irrelevant (perceived as outstanding but not needed as a defining attribute of the place). This part of the result was related to evaluations of aesthetics and microclimate of the specific places, as well as to subjects’ explanations of some of these evaluations. Evaluations were collected in 716 questionnaires and 1115 on-site interviews, and the explanations in the 24 persons interview concerning specific places. The results indicate that for urban places to be emotionally appreciated they have to manifest some kind of effect of contrast, i.e. they have to embrace some salient schema-irrelevant aspect outstanding enough to work as a centre of the total experience of the place. Furthermore, the results indicate that a separation between emotional and practical aspects of place experiences is needed. In view of that, for urban places to be practically useful, they have to have a prototypical character. For a plaza to be prototypical, it has to be experienced as an enclosed and mainly hard-grounded open square, with good opportunities for commerce and social life. A park has to be green and be able to house a range of activities such as relaxing, picnics and walking.</p>

The objective of this study was to uncover what aspects of urban plazas and parks that are most important for users’ evaluations of places’ aesthetics and microclimate (the characteristic climate for a limited space). This was done by investigating people’s general ideas of plazas and parks (the prototypical concepts) and compare these with place users’ descriptions of four specific places. Interviews with two groups (31 and 24 persons respectively) were carried out in order to collect this information. Aspects commonly mentioned in the descriptions, but not included in the prototype, were considered salient and schema-irrelevant (perceived as outstanding but not needed as a defining attribute of the place). This part of the result was related to evaluations of aesthetics and microclimate of the specific places, as well as to subjects’ explanations of some of these evaluations. Evaluations were collected in 716 questionnaires and 1115 on-site interviews, and the explanations in the 24 persons interview concerning specific places. The results indicate that for urban places to be emotionally appreciated they have to manifest some kind of effect of contrast, i.e. they have to embrace some salient schema-irrelevant aspect outstanding enough to work as a centre of the total experience of the place. Furthermore, the results indicate that a separation between emotional and practical aspects of place experiences is needed. In view of that, for urban places to be practically useful, they have to have a prototypical character. For a plaza to be prototypical, it has to be experienced as an enclosed and mainly hard-grounded open square, with good opportunities for commerce and social life. A park has to be green and be able to house a range of activities such as relaxing, picnics and walking.