| Safety and security are important components of public space management. Although deemed necessary for creating viable spaces, heavy-handed security is frequently criticized for restricting social interaction, constraining individual liberties, and excluding undesirable populations. Nowhere are these issues more pertinent and pronounced than in privately owned and operated spaces.;This dissertation examines spaces provided as part of an incentive zoning program in New York City, whereby developers receive bonus floor area in exchange for the provision and maintenance of these plazas, atriums, and lobbies. Because these spaces are designed and managed by the private sector, they are often more strictly controlled than their uniformly regulated, publicly owned counterparts. Yet few studies have empirically tested these assertions or documented the variation within this universe of privately owned space.;Through several statistical analyses, I first develop a descriptive typology of New York City's 503 bonus spaces. I then create and apply a comprehensive methodological index that quantifies the degree to which a space is controlled. The index includes twenty indicators ranging from legal or access restrictions to surveillance and policing measures. I find that not all bonus spaces are explicitly controlled as commonly claimed, but that access to and inclusion in these spaces is often selectively restrictive, or filtered, supporting expectations from previous studies.;Through factor and regression analyses, I determine that this filtered control is most likely present in newer, high-profile spaces that represent successful models of the incentive zoning program. To understand how and why these models are produced, I conduct qualitative analyses in two representative bonus spaces: Trump Tower and Sony Plaza. I uncover the political, economic, and social context in which these spaces were constructed, providing further insight into motivations behind their production.;These filtered management schemes are an increasingly popular and powerful technique for controlling public space, a trend only exacerbated by zoning regulations that reward developers with financial incentives for employing this approach. As this filtering encourages an "appropriate" clientele through a combination of design and management schemes, this trend has a deleterious impact on a more inclusive, democratic public sphere. |
