Urban vitality

Urban vitality is the quality of those spaces in cities that are capable of attracting heterogeneous people for different types of activities throughout varied time schedules.[1][2] The areas of the city with high vitality are perceived as alive, lively or vibrant and they tend to attract people to carry out their activities, stroll or stay. However, the areas of low vitality repel people and can be perceived as unsafe.[3][4]

The Plaça Reial of Barcelona has a high vitality, with pedestrian spaces and a variety of establishments in its vicinity.

Comparatively, Plaça dels Països Catalans has a low vitality, surrounded by large streets that make pedestrian movements difficult and with few shops around it.

The urban vitality index is a measure of this quality and in recent years it has become a fundamental tool for planning urban policies, especially for the intervention of spaces with low vitality.[5] In addition, it is used for proper management of spaces with high vitality, as the success of certain areas can lead to processes of gentrification and touristification that, paradoxically, end up reducing the vitality that made them popular.[6]

The concept of urban vitality is based on the contributions of Jane Jacobs, especially those of her most influential work, The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Jacobs criticized in the 1960s the modern and rationalist architecture defended by Robert Moses or Le Corbusier whose protagonist was the private car. She argued that these types of urban planning overlooked and oversimplified the complexity of human life in diverse communities. She opposed large-scale urban renewal programs that affected entire neighborhoods and built freeways through inner cities. Instead, she advocated for dense mixed-use development and walkable streets, with “eyes on the street” of passers-by helping to maintain public order.[7]

Currently, the concept of urban vitality is revaluing Mediterranean urbanism and its history, in which public space, pedestrianity and squares are of great importance as centers of interaction and social cohesion, in opposition to the Anglo-Saxon urbanism of large urban infrastructures, long distances and car-centric.[3][4][8]