"True public space, like true democracy, can be disruptive, even unruly. The public square is not a mall or a theme park, insulated and isolated from reality. It's serendipitous, not controlled; open to all, not restricted to the privileged few. Here, the have-nots can confront the haves and the outs can harangue the ins--sometimes with deadly consequences."
The premise of his article was that public space is necessary and can’t be replaced by the Internets. But, what about sprawl and the green-eyed monster that the Millennium Park success has unleashed? Those were barely mentioned, and I fear, his defense works more as an intellectual exercise than a call to action. Nonetheless, I’m glad someone’s paying attention to this stuff.