Designing Public Space With[out] Public Participation?A Study on Hatir Jheel, Dhaka

Host School: Architecture and Design Faculty | Ozyegin University | Istanbul

2016 Design Communication European Conference C

hapt

er 0

4 •

Sess

ion

D1

• Pa

rtici

pato

ry D

esig

n an

d C

olla

bora

tion

0034

6

Chapter 04 | Session D1Designing Public Space With[out] Public Participation?A Study on Hatir Jheel,Dhaka

Saima Musharrat | Texas A&M University, [email protected]

Keywords: public space; inclusiveness; public participation; planning process; Hatir Jheel

AbstractIn a developing country like Bangladesh where the practice of urbanism is merely seen as either successful or miscarried milestones set by the government rather than an inclusive design process, it’s not a surprise that the projects are often devoid of people’s active involvement. However, the importance of including the users a space is designed for is undisputable, particularly from the perspective of New Urbanism concept advocating for ‘citizen-based participatory planning and design’ process. Public spaces are the urban connectors and points of reference in a city, thus rendering the design process as a better-suited opportunity to reflect the desires of its denizens. This paper investigates the unseen opportunities of public participation in sketching out the public spaces of Dhaka, taking Hatir Jheel as a case study. Hatir Jheel is a lake designed with the vision of connecting the existing traffic network to ease the congestion, retaining water, repelling pollution and illegal settlers along the waterbody and reinvigorating the urban activities on the waterfront. Despite having every potential to be an all-encompassing public urban design project realized from people’s aspirations, Hatir Jheel doesn’t live up to the expectations of becoming one. With the research question in mind ‘What role can public participation have in designing public spaces?’, this topic is explored in four sections, (1) literature review of the role of inclusive and participatory process in urbanism illustrated with two case studies in two different contexts, one in Belgium and another in Nepal, (2) public space as seen in the context of Dhaka, (3) the frequent breach between the above-mentioned concept and the reality, exemplified through the case study of Hatir Jheel and finally through these steps, (4) the paper aims to look for the recommendations for developing a toolkit to make participatory process in designing public space possible in developing countries. The paper concludes that in introducing the citizen engagement in the developing countries, public spaces

can act as starting points and the planners should take the role of advocating and mediating people’s needs.

1. Introduction

Whom does a city belong to? This is a question that many scholars have tried to answer in their multifarious and elaborate quests. But it goes without saying that people are the core element of a city. Without people, no city exists. During recent years, urban planners and different professionals have been striving towards sustainable development. By accepting the current concept that sustainable growth comprises the balance among environmental, economic and social development of a particular area, we also acknowledge that gathering information on that area is the precondition for coming up with conditions of sustainability (1). Undoubtedly, the most accurate source of information for any development, especially placemaking of an area is the people who live there. However, many developing countries including Bangladesh fail to address the importance of including public participation in their planning process. In order to start this practice, public places can be the best beginning points as they are not only participatory landscapes but also should be accessible places developed through inclusive processes (2). In the quest of understanding the role of participatory process in designing public space, the paper first investigates the role of citizen participation in designing public space in general. Then it unravels the difference between the approaches taken in two different case-studies. By situating itself in the setting of Dhaka, it discusses the case-study of Hatir Jheel, followed by recommendations and a toolbox for similar projects in similar contexts.

2. Participatory Process in the Planning and Design of Public Space

Public participation is an organized, and at times institutionalized procedure that enables the public to communicate their needs and values to influence the

Design Communication Association

Inclusiveness in Design

Cha

pter

04

• Se

ssio

n D

1 •

Parti

cipa

tory

Des

ign

and

Col

labo

ratio

n00

347

decision and design process of institutionalized power (3). Founded in 1990, the International Association of Public Participation (4) states that the concept of public participation is centered on the principle that those who are affected by a decision possess the right to be engaged in the decision-making process. Also known as public involvement, citizen participation, citizen engagement, collaborative decision-making, or facilitated problem solving; participatory process in the planning and design is the most effective technique as a multi-way conversation method between different stakeholders and the public (3). But participation does not have a sole underlying principle or consensus of meaning attributed to the concept. Open to diverse interpretations by different policy makers and practitioners, the need for defining the standards and ethics of participation is thus the first step for the participatory process. As for designing the public space, the Project for Public Spaces (PPS) emphasizes

on the action of “placemaking” by the practitioners (5). Besides, the user needs for comfort, safety, enjoyment, accessibility and identity should also be addressed during the public participation (3).

2.1 The Role of Inclusiveness in Public Space

Apart from functioning as the essential breathing space in a built environment, the public space in a city also enhances the social ties and social control for the future generations (6). During the course of history, open public spaces have been an indispensable part of the society for their physical, social, political, symbolic and environmental role (7). They can be regarded as ‘shared resource’ and ‘common good’ of a society (8). Thus these spaces become a prerequisite for the “expression, representation, preservation and/or enhancement of democracy” (9), even since the ancient Greeks defined them as ‘Agora’ or ‘gathering

Fig 1. The matrix of Public Participation in Designing Public Space (MIT CoLab)



hapt

er 0

4 •

Sess

ion

D1

• Pa

rtici

pato

ry D

esig

n an

d C

olla

bora

tion

0034

8

space’ (8). Two years back, this expression of freedom was exemplified in the protests that opposed the Turkish government’s decision of redeveloping one of Istanbul’s green parks called Gezi (10). What William H. Whyte had carried out more than forty years ago in his Street Life Project in order to understand how the public space was used by people stands relevant even to these days (11). And what element other than inclusiveness defines this all-embracing quality of public space so perfectly? During recent years, planners and designers are not regarded as the omniscient experts in the planning process any more as seen in the rational planning. Rather, the growing need of including the public during the planning process has been recognized by many (3). Citizen participation undeniably empowers the citizens through granting them access to resources, information and decision-making (12). This user-centered approach simultaneously contributes to the creation and development of identity and sense of place in a more ‘socially durable’ public space (8). But unfortunately, this aspect continues to be the most overlooked part of any design and planning process, especially in developing countries (3). Instead of bluntly adopting so-called ‘best practices’ manuals, the practitioners have to take the responsibility for involving the public in the process and putting forth their aspirations (3). In this way, both practitioners and public benefit from mutual learning (3).

2.2 Public participation in Different Contexts

Before investigating the scenarios of public participation in what can be broadly categorized as the developed and the developing countries, this paper aims to dissect the meaning and notion of public space in these two different socio-cultural contexts. Mowla points out these differences by comparing the American, European and South-East Asian perception of public space according to their historical, philosophical and socio-political differences (13). The fragmented civic space in the American cities are often symbolized by the heterogeneity of American population and their uncomfortable attitude towards being in a public space. On the other hand, the European and most developing countries have an organic and gradual pattern of urban growth that calls for a deep-rooted pull towards the traditional way of civic life (13). Additionally, developing countries having a long-lost yet faint connection with their European

colonization periods, still look up to Euro-Urbanism while designing their public spaces. But simply keeping the vibrant European city centers in the wish list doesn’t grant the successful execution of them in developing countries, as there exists innate socio-cultural differences between them. The recent global trend in urban design turns towards neo-traditionalism or new urbanism that seeks return to communal way of life of a pre-industrial and pre-motorized era (13). One of the Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) ordinance objectives is “by walking in defined public space, citizens come to know each other, and to watch over their collective security” (13). While the developed countries struggle for this change in direction, the developing countries are at an advantage as they have departed from this era not so long ago, thus making it easier to go back. It is important to understand the difference between these two significantly different contexts in order to recognize the fact that they require different process of public participation as well.

Having argued the need for identifying tailored public participation process for different settings, the paper now looks deeper into two case studies with two different backgrounds.

2.2.1 Case Study 1: Revitalization of Noordschippersdok Park, Antwerp, Belgium

The first case study discusses a relatively ignored neighborhood in Belgium undergoing an urban transformation because of the shut-down of the main income generating slaughterhouse business. The underused park in the neighborhood was brought to attention as a way to gain momentum and involve more people in the process. The idea was to integrate more immigrants, children and senior citizens through public participation as user groups in the park. In Belgium, the planning process is always lengthy and cautious. This particular project involved not only the city, but also numerous stakeholders such as the owner of the slaughterhouse, representative groups of the neighborhood residents, an urban design firm as the facilitator and a master class studio to assist with the participation. As a studio member, the author was involved in working on preliminary analysis, mapping and interviewing local people, designing and preparing base map, meeting with neighborhood representatives to go over the design decisions. Finally



Cha

pter

04

• Se

ssio

n D

1 •

Parti

cipa

tory

Des

ign

and

Col

labo

ratio

n00

349

a temporary intervention with natural resources was created to show the residents how this park could significantly change the recreational ambiance of the neighborhood. But most importantly, the process cleared the longstanding mistrust between the residents and the city. With the help of design tools and enthusiastic participation of students with the residents, the scenario visualizations of the future neighborhood were made easier to communicate with. During the participation, by spending most of the time in setting up the framework rather than focusing on the intervention itself, it was aimed for the future of Noordschippersdok not to be too dependent on the studio or the facilitator.

2.2.2 Case Study 2: Participation in Public Spaces of Village Development Community, Eastern Tarai, Nepal

The second case study explores the ethnographic study of participation of individuals of an economically, culturally and politically diverse and separated society in donor-supported Community Organisations (COs) in Nepal (14). After experiencing the widening of public spaces in 1990, Nepal had taken the endeavor to use its foreign aids for a wider and more intense citizen participation. Dhakal shows how these public spaces were important as a part of citizen engagement in the COs, being “social space, historically constructed and politically contested”. But it was observed that the benefits were not equally shared among the participants, as different individuals participated at different levels for different reasons (14). Membership according to ethnicity, overrepresentation of certain groups, lack of female influence, literacy status, occupations, political resentment, sceptic perceptions of the villagers were the reasons identified as crucial elements in the participation process. Eventually, the public spaces in Nepal have greatly contributed to the alteration of power distributions and capacity building of the villagers.

By critically comparing these two case studies, it can be inferred that the level and scale of citizen involvement varies with different site-specific contexts, confronted with various issues and resolved with distinct resources available. The risks associated with the application of a “one size fits all” need to be recognized before starting the participation process (15).

3. An Overview of Public Space in the Context of Dhaka

Dhaka, being one of the most densely populated and fast growing cities in the world, is in need of breathing space more than ever. The rapid transformation ‘from a small trading settlement to a sprawling metropolis’ has given Dhaka a hard time in accommodating its green open spaces (16). In the inner core of old Dhaka only 5% and in new Dhaka 12% of land is green and open (6). The RDP survey in 2013 reveals that only 1142.42 acres (0.30%) of the urban use lands is used for recreational activities, ‘which is significantly low (0.07 acre/1000 population) as compared to other major cities and falls far behind DMDP (0.16 acre/1000 population) or DAP (0.96 acre/1000 population) standards’ (17). Even these numbers are not entirely reliable due to the complex system of managing Dhaka’s open spaces by different agencies (17). As for Dhaka’s wetlands and water bodies, about half of present Dhaka was once low laying flood plain and wetlands in the forties but many of them were gradually filled to make room for the so-called development, thus losing the opportunities of turning them into blue and green open public spaces (18). Historically, the tradition of Dhaka has trained its residents to socialize in outdoor places, be it in public squares, streets or roadside tea stalls (7).

4. Planning vs. Reality

Starting from the preparation of budget to laying out the master plan, the projected visions of an urban design often get entangled within the political and systemic complications in Bangladesh. On numerous occasions, the multifaceted stakes in a project are considered to be too high to cater for inclusiveness in the design. The voices of people from different walks of life is every so often the last thing to be taken into account, eventually fading away from the process. In Dhaka’s Structure Plan for 2035, the goal of “enhancing livability through promotion of open space and heritage” has been stated. But nowhere in the objectives and policies is the public participation included in the plan. This disregard of including citizens reflects the general lack of understanding about the importance of community inclusion in the planning and design of public spaces. Although not contracted by the people, the architects, landscape architects and planners are still bound to the needs of the users as



hapt

er 0

4 •

Sess

ion

D1

• Pa

rtici

pato

ry D

esig

n an

d C

olla

bora

tion

0035

0

they are the ultimate clients of a public space (8). If the users are left unheard, the public space can never be a

successful place for recreation or interaction.

Fig 2. The existing Public Spaces of Dhaka (9)

4.1 Case Study: Hatir Jheel as a Desiring-machine for Public Space

Dhaka having a rich history of interconnected and navigable water bodies all over the city in the past, has been struggling to reestablish the missing water links encroached by illegal settlers, uncontrolled urbanization and prioritized attitude towards to a car-based society. The Hatirjheel-Begunbari canal project was initiated in 2007 and completed on late June 2010 (19). Today as a major water channel, it carries flush flood to the city center. But the invaders’ waste dumping and direct connection of sewage from surrounding settlements to its water made it impossible to use Hatir Jheel as a proper waterfront. With the main objective of turning the backyard water into the front, this $235 million project on 300-acre land embodies the transformation and positive energy Dhaka has been aiming to build up. The key issues identified in the study phase included the need for a) different land use, b) encourage sustainable transportation, bus route & cycling track, c) identify the quality of lake

shore drive, d) walkways which will celebrate cultural and natural heritage, and e) adjacent green spaces for public use. A new, 60-foot wide ring road encircling the water body is constructed to protect the water from further infringement. Inaugurated in December 2012, not all the goals envisioned in the project have been yet accomplished. Mostly lying in the mid-density and mid-income area, Hatir Jheel qualifies for being a landscape urbanism project where water could act as the organizer of space as well as reconfigure the existing urban fabric by creating ‘interplays between infrastructure, landscape and urbanism’ (20). Although it started with four visions, the economic aspect of it have been more stressed than the two other aspects, the ecological and social aspects getting lost in the translation. Comparing this project to a desiring-machine unveils the ‘possibilities of connections what people might have, an environment might become, or an environment-people relation might emerge’ (21). But the absence of an authorized plan for public inspection is only one of the many instances where public participation was overlooked in the design



Cha

pter

04

• Se

ssio

n D

1 •

Parti

cipa

tory

Des

ign

and

Col

labo

ratio

n00

351

Fig 3. Hotspots identified in Hatir Jheel, adapted from (19)

process (21). 4.1.1 Activities in Hatir Jheel Field observation shows an average of 3000 people visiting this lake area on daily basis (19). From the field survey and resource mapping, six major hotspots have been identified (Fig 3). The general observation reveals the fact that the southern part of the lake is more utilized than the northern part (19). The reasons behind choosing particular spot by the visitors are: proximity to their home (43%), aesthetic quality of the lake (23%) and the ambiance they experience in

the lake (20%). The study also shows that the majority of people visit this place daily and a large number visit monthly. But it is the recreational purpose that attracts almost all the visitors towards this place (Field survey, 2015). Walking, sitting, chatting, dating, physical exercise are the common scenarios of the visitors while the hawkers try selling peanuts and candy floss to them. But unlike the previous urban waterfront project in Dhanmondi Lake, Hatir Jheel falls short in accommodating cultural activities like performance arts, open air movie, roller skating rings etc. in its premises.

4.1.2 Scope of Integrating Hatir Jheel in Dhaka’s Social Fabric

As an urban renewal project, Hatir Jheel stated the goal to encourage diversity of year-round recreational activities with celebration of cultural and natural heritage (21). In a green-starved city like Dhaka, this project naturally opened up the option for people to come and take a stroll. In that sense, the design of accessibility to lake bank area, foot over bridge,

viewing platform, pontoon, deck, stepped ghat is a success whereas the development of the lake bank as garden, park, children play area, walkways for morning & evening walkers, cycling tracks, installing street & park furniture, incorporating bus stand, water taxi deck, car & rickshaw parking, public toilet, information center, souvenir & flower shop as stated in the project brief have not seen the light yet. Although talking with the users reveals the fact that they identify the project as a landmark to be proud of, but the lack of universal



hapt

er 0

4 •

Sess

ion

D1

• Pa

rtici

pato

ry D

esig

n an

d C

olla

bora

tion

0035

2

accessibility, safety issues and proper maintenance become obvious (19). In a society where the majority of its citizens lack civic sense or hygiene, a proper and participatory integration process is thus equally contingent. The infrastructural and technical parts of a project usually leaves little space for community participation as they cater for set and non-negotiable

issues, but the small-scale placemaking aspects of a project can involve the people (8). In Hatir Jheel, although the bigger framework of the project has already been constructed and it is functioning to some extent, there’s yet room to improve in small and do-able scale to bring immediate impacts.

Fig 4. Activities in Hatir Jheel (22)

5. Recommended Mechanism of Public Participation in Bangladesh

Through collaborative platform, a public space project becomes able to train democracy, create accountability and larger consensus among the citizens. In addition to that, the combined efforts of people, profit-making and non-profit agencies, public administrators and planners spare the experts from sole decision-taking. Unlike many countries, the law doesn’t require citizen

involvement as a part of the planning process in Bangladesh. Acknowledging public participation as a mandatory part of designing public place and including it in the comprehensive plans of the cities can be the first step. Starting this practice late, Bangladesh can take advantage of learning from other countries’ mistakes. Nevertheless, it’s important to keep in mind about the context-specific requirements of citizen engagement.



Cha

pter

04

• Se

ssio

n D

1 •

Parti

cipa

tory

Des

ign

and

Col

labo

ratio

n00

353

Fig 5. Framework to assess resources and readiness of a participatory design of public open space, adapted from (3)

5.1 The Role of Planner as an Advocate

Paul Davidoff ’s concept of Advocacy Planning has placed the planner as a mediator and an advocate for people’s desires. This role of advocacy is more than ever essential in a country like Bangladesh where the literacy rate is only a little more than half of the total population (59.7% according to the World Bank, 2013). From general observation, it’s seen that most users of the public place in Bangladesh fall under the range of middle and low-income people, whereas the affluent ones indulge themselves in restaurants, coffee shops or other indoor activities. It is understood that in Bangladesh, there is a reciprocal relationship between the facts that most public places are infested with undesirables which results into a general rejection of the place by a certain social class. People with little or no money to spend on recreational activities are often the ardent users of public places in Bangladesh. They take pleasure in carrying out the activity that Whyte had identified in his Street Life Project, ‘watching other people’ (11). Furthermore, the common political practice in Bangladesh frequently prioritizes one group over another and there are chances of manipulation of the public space by political elites. The level of participation might be defined by the status and power relations among the groups resulting into overrepresentation of a group. Given this socio-demographic tendency in Bangladesh, it becomes apparent that the role of the planner is as much a facilitator as a practitioner. The planner, in similar settings of developing countries, thus has to bear a larger responsibility of bridging the gap between common people’s desires and socio-political

turbulence. The planner has to first interpret the project to the people and finally construe people’s input into the physical project as a deliverable output. Between these two interpretations, a greater interplay of socio-cultural and political dynamics take place throughout the process and the planner facilitates the development of the project with ‘trust, defining public’s role, openness, access to the process, respect for communities, advocacy, commitment and support of the practice’ as ethical guidelines (4).

5.2 Proposed Toolkit

5.2.1 Steps 1. Define the GoalBoth the product goal and process goal need to be defined before the project begins.

2. Inform the peopleThe project brief needs to be shared with the people.

3. Choose the Level of ParticipationThe motivation and level of participation of people should be defined along with the structural frame, human resources frame, political frame and symbolic frame of the project.

4. Invite ParticipationThe participatory process can be carried out with the applications of observing the use of a public space, printed materials, local television and radio, questionnaires, surveys and interviews in various groups of citizens, interactive exhibits, performance arts, internet applications, mapping public spaces by



hapt

er 0

4 •

Sess

ion

D1

• Pa

rtici

pato

ry D

esig

n an

d C

olla

bora

tion

0035

4

designers and citizens as well, public meetings and consultations with key actors, and finally, managing the vision of the city’s future (Meyer).

5. Train and Orient ParticipantsIn order to engage the public, an orientation regarding their expected roles and training to build up the skill set are needed.

6. Create the DesignThe design of public space should be done with people’s input, e.g. the locations they like the most, the kind of seating arrangements and trees, strategies to turn an undesirable place into a desirable one etc.

7. Evaluate and Document ResultsThe inputs of people need to be well evaluated for integrating into the design and documented for a better understanding in the future.

5.2.2 Participation Criteria

During the participation, these criteria need to be included to ensure a comprehensive inclusiveness: a) environmental aspect, b) gender aspect, c) security and social cohesion aspect, d) accessibility aspect and e) urban design/architecture aspect.

5.2.3 Limitations and Barriers

The willingness and capacity to participate might vary with access to resources, conflict in interests of different stakeholders, conflict in schedule for participation, perceptions and needs of the public and pressure of capitalism and market forces. In any case, the limitations are an integral part of the process and overcoming them signifies a greater success.

6. Concluding Remarks

‘Public spaces are practically ideal projects for participatory processes’ (1). Having a delineation and used on a daily basis, they house for numerous issues relating to recreation, ecology, safety, social cohesion etc. that make them perfect places to start participation from. In developing countries like Bangladesh, this presents a greater opportunity for a collaborative problem-solving method. By learning from the mistakes of other participation practices executed around the world, developing countries can

strive towards more innovative and context-specific participation process. Only this way, the public spaces will become truly for the people and by the people.

References

1. Nawrath, Martin et al. “Urban spaces – enhancing the attractiveness and quality of the urban environment”, WP3 Joint Strategy, Activity 3.2 Criteria and Principles, Sub-activity 3.2.2 Public participation criteria (2010).2. Madanipour, Ali. “Social Exclusion and Space”, The City reader (New York, Routledge, 2007), 186-211.3. Meyer, Julie. “Participation in the planning and design of public open space”, Master’s Project submitted to the Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning of the University of Massachusetts for Master of Landscape Architecture (2011).4. “Public Participation Pillars”, International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), accessed Nov 22, 2015, http://iap2canada.ca/Resources/Documents/IAP2%20Federation%20-%20P2%20Pillars.pdf5. Project for Public Spaces (PPS), accessed Nov 22, 2015, http://www.pps.org/6. Nilufar, Farida.”Urban life and use of Public Space: Study of responsive public open spaces for supporting urban lifein Dhaka City’, Unpublished research report submitted to The Asiatic Society of Bangladesh (2000).7. Mishu, M.R. et al. “The changing nature of urban public places in Dhaka City”, published in Urbanism. Arhitectură. Construcţii (2014): Vol. 5, No.4.8. Kocan, Tamara. “Participative processes as tools for designing public spaces”, Master’s Project submitted to Université de Lausanne - Mémoire for Master of advanced studies in sustainable urban planning (2013).9. Habib, Kishwar. “The Post Colonial Public Spaces and its Cultural Diversity: The Case of National-Cultural Representative Public Spaces of Dhaka”, conducted as part of research assignment of Research Group “OSA -Urbanism and Architecture” of “Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad” fund in ASRO, KULeuven (2010)..10. “Gezi park protests brutal denial of the right to peaceful assembly in Turkey”, Amnesty International, accessed on Dec 4 2015, http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/gezi-park-protests-brutal-denial-of-the-right-to-peaceful-assembly-in-turkey11. Whyte, William H. “The Design of Spaces, From City: Rediscovering the Center”, The City reader



Cha

pter

04

• Se

ssio

n D

1 •

Parti

cipa

tory

Des

ign

and

Col

labo

ratio

n00

355

(New York, Routledge, 2007), 510-517.12. Arnstein, Sherry. “A ladder of citizen participation”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners (1969): Vol. 35 Issue: 4. 13. Mowla, Qazi A., “New Urbanism concept and housing: An agenda for third millennium”, The Jahangirnagar Review, Part II (2002): Vol. XXV-XXVI, 195-206.14. Dhakal, Suresh. “Participation in Public Spaces in a Diverse Society: A Case Study of Community Organization in a VDC from Eastern Tarai of Nepal” (2010), accessed Nov 22 2015, http://www.cmi.no/file/?1001.15. Bond, Sophie and Thompson-Fawcett, Michelle. “Public Participation and New Urbanism: A Conflicting Agenda?”, Planning Theory & Practice (2007), 8:4, 449-472.16. Mowla, Qazi A., “Crisis in the built environment of Dhaka: An overview”, Proceedings of the Conference on Engineering Research, Innovation and Education, Sylhet, Bangladesh (2011).17. “Dhaka Structure Plan: 2016-2035”, Rajdhani Unnayan Kartripakkha [Rajuk], Government of the People’s Republic Of Bangladesh, Ministry Of Housing And Public Works and Regional Development Planning (RDP), accessed Dec 4 2015, http://www.rehab-bd.org/download/Dhaka%20Structure%20Plan%20(2016-2035).pdf18. Mowla, Qazi A., “Dwindling Urban Water-bodies of Dhaka and the City Fabric: A Post-mortem”, Dhaka Metropolitan Development Area and its Planning Problems, Issues and Policies (Dhaka, BIP Publications, Dhaka 2013).19. Huq, F.F. et al. “Assessing the Impacts of Recreational Activities on the Quality of Water at Hatir Jheel Area”, International Conference on Recent Innovation in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Development (IICSD-2015).20. Peeters, Sanne and Shannon, Kelly, “Readdressing Dhaka’s Public Water Bodies: A Design Research”, History in Desogn: Writing Asian Modernities (2011): Vol. 7. 21. Ghafur, Shayer, “Prospects of Hatirjheel as a desiring-machine”, (2013) accessed Nov 22, 2015, http://www.newagebd.com/detail.php?date=2013-12-02&nid=75140#.UqGZxCen5Ld22. In Figure 4, Image 1: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5RzAHecPULE/Vh_BDJD UaI/AAAAAAAAAqM/zVIZ6dGTxnw/s1600/9051765412_0a5f7d9fe6_b.jpg, accessed on Nov 22 2015.

Image 2: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rzdNavTvfpo/U6xPImbG39I/AAAAAAAAARM/_Ma-BGhdGog/s1600/Hatirjheel+project+.jpg, accessed on Nov 22 2015.Image 3 and 4: Islam, Tazrin.