URBAN DESIGN (ELECTIVE) CLASS NOTES

Prepared by: Dr. Subik Kumar Shrestha

Date of preparation: March 2023

PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING:

• DO NOTE re-circulate this file (it might create confusion among other readers who have not
attended the lectures)
• The notes provided in this document MUST be read and understood with reference to the
lecture slides. Where a substantial note has not been provided, information on the respective
lecture slides is given.
• Refer to the respective lecture slides for diagrams
• This file only contains Subik’s portion
• You do not have to cite the authors during the final exam

1
CONTENTS
CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................................2
UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION: COMPREHENDING URBAN DESIGN .................................................3
1.1 Introduction, Evolution and History ......................................................................................................3
1.2 The value and importance of urban design ..........................................................................................6
UNIT 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF URBAN DESIGN .................................................................................7
2.1 Essential urban design theories and principles ....................................................................................7
2.2 Responsiveness to context: sustainability, physical and social context ...................................... 11
2.3 Historic and contemporary trends in urban design theory and practice ................................... 12
UNIT 3: URBAN DESIGN ELEMENTS .................................................................................................... 17
3.1 Urban pattern and urban fabric ........................................................................................................... 17
3.4 Movement structures and systems ..................................................................................................... 20
3.5 Public open spaces: streets, squares, spaces between buildings, parks, landscapes ................. 23
UNIT 4: URBAN MORPHOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 30
4.1 Interpretation of settlement pattern: figure and ground, linkage, place theory ....................... 32
4.2 Major urban typologies, their evolution and interrelationships, their interpretation and
treatment in the contemporary city .......................................................................................................... 34
UNIT 5: SENSE OF PLACE, IMAGE OF A CITY AND PUBLIC ARCHITECTURE ...................... 36
5.1 Theories and practices of “Place Making” and Sense of Place ...................................................... 36
5.2 Public Realm, its qualities and roles .................................................................................................... 38
UNIT 6: THE URBAN DESIGN PROCESS ............................................................................................. 40
6.1 Contextual analysis and project mapping .......................................................................................... 40
6.3 Generation of alternatives and evaluation inclusive of community participation ..................... 43

2
UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION: COMPREHENDING URBAN DESIGN
1.1 Introduction, Evolution and History

The history of urban design can be comprehended through three “paths.” First, is the
precedents/historical developments that led to the need for a “designed environment” at the urban scale
(specifically after the industrial revolution and modernism). Second, is the history of the development of
“urban design” as an academic/practice-based discipline (in the mid-1950s). Third, is historical
environments/urban areas (specifically beginning the late-1800s/early-1900s) that were “designed” before
the formal establishment of the discipline of “urban design” and thus are valuable (discussed in unit 2.3).

Precedents/historical developments

The industrial revolution and the advent of modernism, which were important to the creation of
the designed environment at the urban scale, have their roots in the Renaissance (14th to 17th century)
and the Age of Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries.1 Among many things, the renaissance
marked the end of feudalism (5th to 12th century AD an economic system based on holding land in
exchange for labor2) and the beginning of capitalism.

Two developments were particularly important considering the industrial revolution and
modernism. First, is a historical shift that began around the seventeenth century marked by “new forms
of capitalist organizations, social relations, government, and technology, accompanied by the
development of a scientific, secular worldview.”3 Second, is the rise in the enlightenment marked by “a
discourse of rationalization, progress, and autonomy: the abolition of superstition and the mastery of
nature.”4

The European intellectual movement of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries helped
develop revolutionary developments in art, philosophy, and politics.5 This is also known as the “age of
reason” or “rationality” toward understanding the phenomenon of the universe. The key people of this
period included experimental scientists like Nicolaus Copernicus (Polish, 1473-1543), Francis Bacon
(English, 1561-1626), Galileo (Italy, 1564-1642), and philosophers/mathematicians like Rene Descartes
(French, 1596-1650), Isaac Newton (English, 1643-1727), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (German, 1646-
1716).

The industrial revolution, a term first popularized by the English economic historian Arnold
Toynbee in the mid-1800s began mostly in Britain in the 18th century.6 It was marked by
technological changes like the use of the iron and steel, energy sources like coal, steam engine,
new machines, the invention of the factory system and division of labor, and development in
transportation and communication.

Although “modernism” does not have a specific start date, considering it is an idea and not an
event, the developments brought by the industrial revolution helped create a “modern world.” In We
Have Never Been Modern, Bruno Latour argues the following regarding what it means to be modern7:

“Modernity comes in as many versions as there are thinkers or journalists, yet all its definitions
point, in one way or another, to the passage of time. The adjective 'modem' designates a new
regime, an acceleration, a rupture, a revolution in time. When the word 'modern',
'modernization', or 'modernity' appears, we are defining, by contrast, an archaic and stable past.

3
 Furthermore, the word is always being thrown into the middle of a fight, in a quarrel where there
are winners and losers, Ancients and Moderns. 'Modern' is thus doubly asymmetrical: it
designates a break in the regular passage of time, and it designates a combat in which there are
victors and vanquished.”

Formation of the Urban Design Discipline

The formation of urban design as an academic and practice-based discipline owes a lot to the
first urban design conference held at Harvard University in 1956. It was organized under the then Dean
of the Graduate School of Design (GSD, Harvard University), Jose Luis Sert. During the Conference and
the years before that, Sert and his contemporaries aimed to find solutions to the ills of the
contemporary (modern) city.8 At the 1956 conference, Sert had criticized the “window-dressing”
approach of the City Beautiful Movement and had asserted that “Urban design is that part of city
planning which deals with the physical form of the city… It now seems equally logical that the progress
in the different professions be brought closer together so that a synthesis can be achieved in terms of
urban design….. If we are going to coordinate all of our efforts toward these problems of making the
city a better place in which to live, and if we do not want to make the central city simply a place of
business or commerce or traffic movement, then we shall have to find in man and his needs and spiritual
aspirations, the measure and guide to our designs.”9

However, before the 1956 Conference, “Team 10” (a group of architects including Alison and
Peter Smithson, Aldo van Eyck, Ralph Erskine among others) had been formed during the 9th CIAM
conference in 1953, to challenge the modernists’ strict doctrines toward how a town should be
designed.10 CIAM (Congrès Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne or International Congresses of Modern
Architecture) was founded in 1928.

Thus, the beginnings of the urban design discipline in the mid-1950s can be attributed to people
like Luis Sert, who advocated the need for a field distinct from architecture and planning and the efforts
of groups like Team 10. Sert aimed to “continue developing a collaborative professional discipline
combining architecture, landscape architecture, and planning,”11 while Team 10 sought to “extend and
revitalize these (i.e., modern/CIAM) roots by introducing ideas of “human association,” which in some
cases involved a new cultural strategy of using the formal images of both commercial and traditional
vernaculars, including non- Western ones, to critique the preceding stages of Modernism” 12

History of the “(urban) designed environments”

This will be discussed in unit 2.3 (below).

References

1
Tim Armstrong, Modernism: A Cultural History (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2005).
2
https://www.britannica.com/topic/feudalism
3
Armstrong.
4
Armstrong.
5
https://www.britannica.com/event/Enlightenment-European-history
6
https://www.britannica.com/event/Industrial-Revolution
7
Bruno Latour, We Have Never Been Modern (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1993).
8
Richard Marshall, “The Elusiveness of Urban Design: The Perpetual Problem of Definition and Role,”
in Urban Design, ed. Alex Krieger and William S Saunders (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,
2009), 38–60.

4
9
“The First Urban Design Conference: Extracts,” in Urban Design (Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 2008), 3–14.
10
Eric Mumford, “The Emergence of Urban Design in the Breakup of CIAM,” in Urban Design, ed. Alex
Krieger and William S Saunders (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009), 15–37.
11
Mumford.
12
Mumford.

5
1.2 The value and importance of urban design
The value and importance of urban design can be divided into three headings (SEE LECTURE 1
SLIDES 36 TO 41 FOR DETAILS)

1. Economic value
2. Social value
3. Environmental value

According to the Commission for Architecture and Built Environment (CABE, UK), the
following groups benefit from a properly executed urban design1:

1. Investors: benefit through favorable returns on their investments and by satisfying their occupier
demand.
2. Developers: benefit by attracting investors, enhancing the company’s image, and getting good
returns on their investments.
3. Designers: benefit in terms of creating a meaningful impact on the society
4. Everyday users and society as a whole: benefit from the economic advantages of successful
regeneration, improved environmental quality, and enhanced range of public amenities.
5. Public authorities: benefit by meeting obligations to provide a well-designed urban environment.

Regarding the scope and role of urban designers, Alex Krieger argues that “the most frequently
offered response to what urban designers do is that they mediate between plans and projects. Their
role is to somehow translate the objectives of planning regarding space, settlement patterns, and even
the allocation of resources, into (mostly) physical strategies to guide the work of architects, developers,
and other implementers…. It is the urban designer’s presumed insights on a good or appropriate urban
form that are seen as crucial in the translation of policy or program objectives into architectural
concepts, or to recognize the urbanistic potential in an emerging architectural design and thus advocate
for its realization.”2

The role of urban design could consist of the followings:

1. Give a tangible result to the policies made by planners (e.g., zoning or form-based codes)
2. Implement public transportation corridors
3. Planning and design of bike lanes or pedestrian circulation routes at neighborhood/city scale
4. Neighborhood design
5. Open space design
6. Riverfront design
7. Street design

References

1
Commission for Architecture and Built Environment (CABE), “The Value of Urban Design,” 2001.
2
Alex Krieger, “Where and How Does Urban Design Happen?,” in Urban Design, ed. W S Saunders and
A Krieger (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2006), 113–30.

6
UNIT 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF URBAN DESIGN

2.1 Essential urban design theories and principles

The essential urban design principles consist of the following (only highlighted ones are covered)

1. Density, diversity and mix

2. Pedestrianization/Walkability and transit supportiveness

3. Visual qualities: character and identity, massing, composition (balance, proportion, rhythm,
emphasis, unity)

4. Spatial qualities: Legibility1, Permeability, Variety, Richness, Robustness, Safety

Diversity

In general terms, a diverse environment consists of a mix of residents by race/ethnicity or

income level, or wealth. We can think of diversity in terms of social, economic, and physical diversity.
For example, social refers to diversity in age group, gender, ethnicity/race, education, etc. Economic
refers to diversity in economic status, class, etc. Physical diversity could refer to the more tangible
aspects of the built environment like building types (old/new or tall/short), street condition (good/poor,
wide/narrow), etc. This could be extended to relate to diversity in housing availability or land-use
choices.

Diversity is important to achieve place vitality and social equity.2 In regard to place vitality, the
maximizing of “exchange possibilities” both economic and social, is a key factor of urban quality of life.
The idea of diversity is to produce something that is greater than the sum of its parts. Diversity is seen
as the primary generator of urban vitality because it increases interactions among multiple urban
components.

For our purpose, Diversity refers to the Diversity of activities/land use in the urban
environment.

One of the most important works on urban diversity belongs to Jane Jacobs (1961). In her work,
Jacobs argues that the four necessary conditions to generate ‘exuberant’ diversity in a city’s streets and
districts are as follows (only the first point is relevant for now):

1. The district must serve more than one primary function, preferably more than two. These must
ensure the presence of people who go outdoors on different schedules and are in the place for
different purposes, but who are able to use many facilities in common
2. Most blocks must be short; that is, streets and opportunities to turn corners must be frequent
3. The district must mingle buildings that vary in age and condition, including a good proportion of
old ones so that they vary in the economic yield they must produce. This mingling must be fairly
close-grained.
4. There must be a sufficiently dense concentration of people, for whatever purposes they may be
there. This includes dense concentration in the case of people who are there because of
residence

7
 In regard to Jacobs’ first point, primary uses refer to residences; one’s place of work, schools,
i.e., places one visits regularly. It is important to note that residents and workers alone will not be able
to generate diversity since they do not necessarily populate the streets and they are not necessarily in
their area of residence at all times of the day. It is the diversity of secondary uses which grow with the
presence of primary uses, like shops, restaurants, etc. that help establish a constant flow of people
throughout the day. Positive interaction between primary and secondary activities is important as
primary activities act like magnets to attract people whereas secondary activities serve the pedestrians
between the primary activities. It can be seen in the diagram above that the big store acts as a magnet
for people. Many small shops are located between the parking and the store which act as a secondary
activity that has a role to play in maintaining a lively street environment.

Mixed-use

On the other hand, “mix” or “mixed-use developments” refers to the more tangible aspect of
mixing two or more uses in (usually) a single building complex or a street or neighborhood. While
diversity happens over time, mixed-use facilities are more conscious efforts on the part of the owner or
the planner. It also has a relationship with zoning, which, is a conscious process of organizing changes in
the built environment. Mixed-use development usually consists of at least two or three out of
residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, and entertainment uses into a single space.

In urban areas, the activities in outdoor places are strongly influenced by what goes on around
the building.3 What this means is that a building with mixed uses will have more users than a building
with single-use that does not attract a variety of users for example residential buildings that consist of
only the residents.

Pedestrianization (Walkability)

NOTE: For this course, the two terms can be used interchangeably. While pedestrianization is
the idea of making an urban environment suitable for pedestrians, walkability refers to the qualities that
make the urban environment “walkable” or “suitable for pedestrians.”

Pedestrianization refers to the ability of the streets to support a high volume of pedestrian
movement during the course of their everyday life. This does not mean only physically being able to
“withstand” the flow of people, but, as Jeff Speck (2012) argues (in regard to walkability), satisfy four
main conditions: it must be useful, safe, comfortable, and interesting.4 In other words, just providing
sidewalks does not necessarily promote pedestrianization or walkability. Furthermore, Speck (2012)
argues ten steps of walkability for American downtowns as follows5:

1. Step 1: Put cars in their place

2. Step 2: Mix the uses (proper balance of activities within walking distance of each other)
3. Step 3: Get the parking right
4. Step 4: Let transit work
5. Step 5: protect the pedestrian (from the cars, like block size, turning motions, direction of flow,
signalization, roadway geometry, etc.)
6. Step 6: Welcome bikes
7. Step 7: shape the spaces (provide enclosure through buildings, provide engaging edges)
8. Step 8: plant trees
9. Step 9: make friendly and unique faces (i.e., non-blank walls, buildings with details)
10. Step 10: pick your winners (cities should make a conscious choice about what they need)

8
Spatial qualities (Legibility6, Permeability, Variety, Richness, Robustness, Safety)

NOTE that this section is based on the 1985 book “Responsive Environments” by Bentley et al.7

Spatial quality refers to the qualities of the space that make them appropriate for use by its
occupants. These are the qualities that urban designers have to keep in mind while designing urban
spaces. Each refers to a variety of scales.

Permeability relates to the accessibility of places; the alternative routes people can follow or the
choices of paths in a city that refers to being more permeable. Alternate routes from one place to
another are important for the users to move from one place to another and it increases flexibility. The
idea of blocks, i.e., buildings within lands “entirely” surrounded by walkable public routes is rich with
responsiveness and permeability in this regard. Small blocks offer more choices of routes than large
blocks and are more preferable than long blocks. The visual permeability of such blocks needs to be
checked as well since this is the physical attribute of the place required for it to be permeable. There
are two types of permeability: visual permeability and physical permeability (see figure).

The idea for Variety includes creating a meaningful experience with varied forms, uses, and
meanings. Variety comes with different building types, varied people using them at different intervals of
time, and thus gives varied meanings. However, children, the elderly, and the differently-abled who can’t
move quickly do not take advantage of varied environments as others do. Variety should be present
even in a single district rather than being specialized in single-use since this kills the dynamics of place
and makes it less useful to the people. Since varied use is related to so many things, being specialized in
only limited use is not preferred. Additionally, creating variety within blocks and variety within a building
is also important.

Richness is a quality that is associated with increasing the variety of sensory experiences. It
includes smell, motion, touching, hearing, and sight. It focuses on the fact that buildings and places can be
designed for embodied experience, besides only visual richness. This characteristic considers the need
to move a step further from being pre-occupied with only “visual” concerns. In a “rich” environment,
there will exist a stronger connection between the design elements and its surroundings. One good
example of a “rich” environment is the Asan market in the heart of Kathmandu. Asan is made rich by
the presence of temple structures, surrounding buildings, its location at the intersection of several key
pathways, the presence of informal markets, and the ever-moving pedestrians.

Robustness refers to making their (individual buildings and outdoor spaces’) spatial and
constructional organization suitable for the widest possible range of likely activities and future uses, both
in the short and the long term. Robustness is a presence in the environments that offer many choices to
its users in a suitable setting. By many choices, we understand the mixed uses of activities that are
present around a neighborhood or a city. Public spaces designed for special uses present the problem of
being less robust. A presence of diverse activities like residential units retails, offices, cafes, and sources
of entertainment around the public spaces present the users with many choices to experience the built
environment. If a public space lacks such robustness then it is certain that it will lack vitality too.
Robustness can exist at large and small scales. A building with a large part of it being able to
accommodate change is large-scale robustness and a particular space of the building that supports a wide
range of uses and activities is termed as small-scale robustness. Large-scale robustness can be achieved if it
has the properties of being shallow in the plan, with many points of access and limited in height (four to
five stories). Active areas of the building are important since they are the parts of the building that can
make a connection with the outdoor public through their uses. For example, if a building contains
outdoor café seating, it is making more connection with the public in the sidewalks and promotes use.

9
Similar can be said about shops having displays that promote window shopping and makes a connection
with the outside.

Considering that the city is "full of strangers," the streets must have three main qualities to
foster Safety8:

1. clear demarcation between what is public and what is private.

2. there must be “eyes on the street,” who are "natural proprietors" of the streets, including
residents looking out from the window, shopkeepers, customers, etc. the buildings must face
the street, not turn their back on it.
3. sidewalks must have users on them fairly continuously and in sufficient numbers (closely related
to the second point).

According to Jane Jacobs, the basic requisite for surveillance is a substantial quantity of stores
and other public places along the sidewalks that are used even during the evenings up to the night.
Stores, bars, restaurants, etc. are chief examples, which help in four ways to ensure safety:9

1) they give concrete reasons for using the sidewalks.

2) they draw people past the area which has no attraction but get traveled on the way to other
destinations
3) storekeepers and small businesspeople are the major caretakers of the community and they
want peace themselves
4) these activities generated by people on the course of their everyday lives themselves create
attraction for people who are present to see the world go by.

References

1
Will be discussed later
2
Emily Talen, Design for Diversity: Exploring Socially Mixed Neighborhoods (Oxford: Architectural
Press, Elsevier, 2008).
3
I Bentley et al., Responsive Environments (London: Architectural Press, 1985).
4
Jeff Speck, Walkable City (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2012).
5
Speck.
6
Will be discussed later
7
Bentley et al., Responsive Environments.
8
Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York (New York: Vintage Books,
1961), https://doi.org/10.2307/794509.
9
Jacobs.

10
2.2 Responsiveness to context: sustainability, physical and social
context
Context: “the interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs; the parts of a
discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning.” [Merriam-Webster]

This section is divided into two parts:

1. The physical context of urban design; and

2. Contexts of sustainable urban design

1 Physical context of urban design

• Natural environment
o Vegetation
o Small birds, insects, etc.
o Protected areas (forests, wetlands, etc.)
• Built environment
o Relation to the street
o Relation to surrounding buildings
o Relation to the site (e.g., climate, topography, zoning)
o Materials

2 Contexts of sustainable urban design

REFER TO LECTURE 3 SLIDES 11 TO 28.

11
2.3 Historic and contemporary trends in urban design theory and
practice
Chronologically, some of the important historic and contemporary trends in urban design are as
follows (only highlighted ones covered):

1. Historic
a. City Beautiful
b. Garden City
c. Modernism
2. Contemporary
a. Post-war Suburbia
b. New Urbanism
c. Sustainable Urbanism

Garden City

The idea for a Garden City was proposed by Ebenezer Howard through his 1902 work “Garden
Cities of To-Morrow.” The idea starts with a realization that at the time (the late-1800s in London), it
was quite impossible for working people to live in the “country” and yet be engaged in pursuits other
than agricultural. Additionally, the "awful" state of London “town” in the minds of many was a
motivating point and the dire situation in which the agricultural laborers were living was another issue.
The central question in the author’s mind was “how to restore the people to the land?"

Howard proposed that the town and the county may, therefore, be regarded as two “magnets,”
each striving to draw the people to itself—a rivalry which a new form of life, partaking of the nature of
both, comes to take part in (see figures in LECTURE 3 SLIDES 36-37), the diagram of “The Three
Magnets,” in which the chief advantages of the Town and the Country are set forth with their
corresponding drawbacks, while the advantages of the Town-Country are seen to be free from the
disadvantages of either). The following table also summarizes the points on Town and Country.
Town (advantages) Town (disadvantages)
High wages, opportunities for employment High rents and prices
Social opportunities and recreation Distance from work
Country (advantage) Country (disadvantages)
Beautiful vistas Lack of society
Parks Lack of capital
Fresh air and nature
Low rents

Ebenezer Howard was well-aware that “neither the Town magnet nor the Country magnet
represents the full plan and purpose of nature. Human society and the beauty of nature are meant to be
enjoyed together.”

He proposed the following:

“Garden city, which is to be built near the center of the 6,000 acres, covers an area of 1,000
acres, or a sixth part of the 6,000 acres, and might be of circular form, 1,240 yards (or nearly three-
quarters of a mile) from center to circumference.”1 See figure for a ground plan of the whole municipal

12
area, showing the town in the center. Additionally “Six magnificent boulevards—each 120 feet wide—
would traverse the city from center to circumference, dividing it into six equal parts or wards. In the
center is a circular space containing about five and a half acres, laid out as a beautiful and well-watered
garden, and surrounding this garden, each standing in its ample ground, are the larger public buildings—
town hall, principal concert, and lecture hall, theatre, library, museum, picture-gallery, and hospital. The
rest of the large space encircled by the “Crystal Palace” is a public park, containing 145 acres, which
includes ample recreation grounds within very easy access of all the people.”2

Modernism

The modern approach to urbanism was popularized by Le Corbusier in the 1920s, most notably
through his 1929 publication “The City of To-Morrow.” Corbusier intended to arrive at the fundamental
principles of modern planning3 and provide new solutions to the problems that cities around the world
were facing. He had a disdain for older cities, e.g., Paris, its pollution, unhealthy living conditions, narrow
streets, lack of open spaces near residential areas, lack of light in buildings, etc. He proposed “A
Contemporary City of Three Million Inhabitants,” with a primary argument that “we must increase the
open spaces and diminish the distances to be covered. Therefore, the center of the city must be
constructed vertically.” He planned the buildings using the “cellular principle”

Streets were a major component of the plan. The new wider streets (opposed to the corridors)
would facilitate heavy goods, lighter goods, and fast traffic. The basic principles followed in his plan were
as follows4

1. We must de-congest the centers of our cities

2. We must augment their density
3. We must increase the means for getting about
4. We must increase parks and open spaces

The major components of the “city for three million” were (1) business towers (twenty-four sky
scrapers each housing 10,000 to 50,000 employees for a total of 400,000 to 600,000 inhabitants), (2)
two types of residential blocks (ordinary and deluxe) for 600,000 inhabitants, and (3) garden cities for
two million inhabitants.5 In regard to density, he planned to accommodate 1200 inhabitants per acre for
sky scrapers and 120 inhabitants per acre for the residential blocks (compared to the “overcrowded”
quarters of Paris which had 213 inhabitants per acre). Additionally, he planned for the base of the
skyscrapers to have open space sized 2400 yards by 1500 yards, to be occupied by gardens, parks, and
avenues. The ground level of the buildings would have restaurants and cafes, luxury shops, theatres,
halls, etc. Around the city center would be a protected zone of woods and green fields. Further beyond
would be garden cities.

One of Le-Corbusier’s “notorious” ideas was the Voisin Scheme for the center of Paris, through
which he intended to demolish districts of the old city (leaving only a few historical monuments).6

Post-war Suburbia

Post-war suburbia refers to the growth of suburban development in the cities of the United
Cities after the second world war (that ended in 1945). While suburbia existed well before this time,
the extent of growth and omnipresence of such developments and the decline of the central cities in
their wake in the post-war period is of primary importance.

13
 Immediately after the war, efforts like Levittown in New York (by William Levitt), specifically
designed for returning world war 2 veterans, marked an “innovative” way of housing people in single-
family homes at mass scale (a single development could have a population of 50,000). Later in the 1950s,
developments like the Interstate Highway Act of 1956) and the growth of the suburban shopping
centers/strip malls (early/mid-1950s) motivated a large number of people to move to the suburbs.

The following characteristics are key to suburban developments:

• A density of 4 to 8 du/acre (or 10 to 20 du/hectare) vs. 100 du/acre in dense cities

• Street pattern—curvilinear street with cul-de-sac
• Very low pedestrian accessibility
• Car dependent (Automobile-oriented)
• Primarily residential
• Not a place to go to “work”
• Mixed-use developments are entirely ignored
• Dependent on Large shopping center(s) located close to highway intersections/strip
development
• Narrow or missing sidewalks
• Monotony in terms of buildings
• Detached buildings
• Larger setbacks and large open space in each plot
• Parks and greens instead of plazas and squares

New Urbanism

New Urbanism is an urban design movement that gained momentum in the 1980s and formally
began after the formation of the Congress for the New Urbanism in Alexandria, Virginia, USA in 1993.
New Urbanism reflects “an ideal that mixes different land uses and buildings of different architectural
types” and is an example of the fact that “good design can have a measurably positive effect on the sense
of place and community, which it holds are essential to a healthy, sustainable society.” In this regard, the
physical model it proposes is a compact, walkable city with a hierarchy of private and public architecture
and spaces.7 New Urbanism started as a reaction to the impact of post-war suburban development and a
need to “repair” underutilized buildings and building types (e.g., shopping malls and parking lots). In turn,
it focuses on human-scaled urban design. Some earliest examples of new urbanist projects are Seaside
(1980), Mashpee Commons (1986), and Kentlands (1988).

In short, New Urbanism can be characterized by the following urban design qualities:

• A new vision to combat suburban sprawl

• Promote walkable mixed-use neighborhoods consisting of residences, retail stores, community
centers, public open spaces, green spaces, playgrounds
• Promote hierarchy of walkable streets that are suitable for vehicles and pedestrians
• Support the design of smaller plots/parcels
• Use of on-street parking (and not large parking lots)
• A return to the “age-old” principles of urbanism: diversity, street life, and architecture of human
scale
• Advocate for low-income and mixed-use housing opportunities in urban neighborhoods
• A promotion of incremental development and “form-based codes” against single-use zoning
• Design of environments that discourage the need for driving

14
 • Respect for regional history and ecology

In the late-1990s, CNU released their Charter, and in their preamble, stressed the following
points:

“We stand for the restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan
regions, the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and
diverse districts, the conservation of natural environments, and the preservation of our built
legacy.”8

“We advocate the restructuring of public policy and development practices to support the
following principles: neighborhoods should be diverse in use and population; communities should
be designed for the pedestrian and transit as well as the car; cities and towns should be shaped
by physically defined and universally accessible public spaces and community institutions; urban
places should be framed by architecture and landscape design that celebrates local history,
climate, ecology, and building practice.”9

The Charter consisted of twenty-seven points based on three main scales:

1. Region: Metropolis, City and Town,

2. Neighborhood, District, and Corridor
3. Block, Street, and Building

Some of the selected points within each of the headings are as follows (refer to the Charter of
the New Urbanism document for full consisting of a list of twenty-seven points):

Region: Metropolis, City, and Town

1. Metropolitan regions are finite places with geographic boundaries derived from topography,
watersheds, coastlines, farmlands, regional parks, and river basins. The metropolis is made of
multiple centers that are cities, towns, and villages, each with its own identifiable center and
edges.

Neighborhood, District, and Corridor

1 The neighborhood, the district, and the corridor are the essential elements of development and
redevelopment in the metropolis.
2 Neighborhoods should be compact, pedestrian-friendly, and mixed-use
3 Within neighborhoods, a broad range of housing types and price levels can bring people of
diverse ages, races, and incomes into daily interaction, strengthening the personal and civic
bonds essential to an authentic community.

Block, Street, and Building

1 A primary task of all urban architecture and landscape design is the physical definition of streets
and public spaces as places of shared use
2 In the contemporary metropolis, development must adequately accommodate automobiles. It
should do so in ways that respect the pedestrian and the form of public space
3 Civic buildings and public gathering places require important sites to reinforce community
identity

15
 4 Preservation and renewal of historic buildings, districts, and landscapes affirm the continuity and
evolution of urban society.

Sustainable Urbanism

The idea of “Sustainable Urbanism” as a part of the urban design discipline began taking shape in
the late-1990s/early-2000s; Douglas Farr’s “Sustainable Urbanism” (2008) was an important publication
and so did the rise of New Urbanism (discussed earlier).

According to Farr, sustainable urbanism is “walkable and transit-served urbanism integrated with
high-performance buildings and high-performance infrastructure. Compactness (density) and biophilia
(human access to nature) are core values of sustainable urbanism... Sustainable urbanism emphasizes that
the personal appeal and societal benefits of neighborhood living— meeting daily needs on foot— are
greatest in neighborhoods that integrate five attributes: definition, compactness, completeness,
connectedness, and biophilia.”10

BIOPHILIA bio (life/nature) and philia (fondness) refer to the fondness for nature. In turn,
Biophilic cities are about bringing nature to the cities through ecological diversity (plants and animals).
Since the start of the 21st century, several designed neighborhoods have strictly adhered to the
principles of sustainable urbanism, especially with respect to bringing the “ecological” perspective to the
scale of the city. Some notable examples are Vastra Hamnen in Malmo, Sweden, Vauban in Freiburg,
Germany, etc.

References

1
Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-Morrow (London: Swan Sonnenschein, 1902).
2
Howard.
3
Le Corbusier, The City of To-Morrow (London: The Architectural Press, 1929).
4
Corbusier.
5
Corbusier.
6
Corbusier.
7
Douglas Kelbaugh, Repairing the American Metropolis: Common Place Revisited (Seattle: University
of Washington Press, 2002).
8
Congress for the New Urbanism, Charter of the New Urbanism (Mcgraw Hill, 1999).
9
Congress for the New Urbanism.
10
Douglas Farr, Sustainable Urbanism: Urban Design with Nature (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley {\&} Sons,
2008).

16
UNIT 3: URBAN DESIGN ELEMENTS
3.1 Urban pattern and urban fabric
Pattern
The regular and repeated way in which something happens or is done (M-W, Oxford)
A natural or chance configuration (e.g., for textiles) (M-W)
A design, set of instructions or shape to cut around that you use in order to make
something (Oxford)
Fabric
[Merriam-Webster]
underlying structure : framework
the fabric of society
Texture, Quality (used chiefly of textiles)
the arrangement of physical components in relation to each other
a material that resembles cloth

The urban pattern can be thought of as “the bringing together of many components of urban
form in a composite totality.”1 Additionally, the urban pattern reflects the of part-to-whole relationships
and the hierarchy of the components of the urban structure (e.g., the entire city, streets, public space
system, and the blocks).

Like in textiles or cloths, urban fabric is associated with the bringing together of many
components of urban form in a composite totality. The urban fabric not so much about the shape but
rather the integration of its major components in the form of streets, public spaces, and blocks, and
buildings. The strength of the urban fabric does not lie in the quality of the individual components but
the quality of the part-to-whole relationship among them. The concepts of urban tissue and urban grain
(see unit 4, urban morphology, below) is closely associated with urban fabric.

The urban pattern can be divided into two categories:

1. Category 1
a. The linear pattern has a single spine and only one principal direction of growth from the
ends of the spine while other sub-areas develop at right angles away from the spine.
b. The radial pattern depends on the establishment of a strong central core. The
secondary elements connect directly with the core while the farther end projects into
the landscape and detaches slightly from the core.
c. Grid patterns are rectangular and uniform in nature. Contrary to what one might
imagine, a grid pattern can develop a town center and a periphery.
d. Curvilinear patterns are represented by curved streets with a cul-de-sac at the end.
Usually, through-movement is not possible, and they are more suitable for automobile
use. American suburbs are a popular example of this type.

17
 2. Category 2
a. Regular patterns are characterized by uniform geometric order, clear permeability,
clearly defined blocks, and a lack of clear hierarchy in the street system. They usually
occur in planned developments.
b. Irregular or deformed patterns represent a non-uniform/irregular geometric order
usually found in older parts of the town or areas that developed organically. They can be
permeable but it is not straightforward (think of older Newa: towns in the Kathmandu
valley). Because of the irregular nature of the street system, the blocks are not clearly
defined or geometric.

References

1
Based in Lozano (1990, p. 37) as cited in Tolga Unlu, “Planning Practice and the Shaping of the Urban
Pattern,” in Teaching Urban Morphology, ed. Vitor Oliveira (Springer, 2018), 31–49.

18
19
3.4 Movement structures and systems

Movement (urban) structures

Structure: something that is

built by putting parts together and that
usually stands on its own (Merriam-
Webster); the way in which the parts of
something are connected, arranged or
organized (M-W, Oxford)

The concept of an urban

structure needs to be understood first
to get an idea of movement structure;
the former provides the basis for
urban movement (the latter). While
urban structure constitutes the
hierarchy of roads, public space
systems, and blocks, the movement
structure is concerned only with the
hierarchy of roads and the public space
system. In turn, the roads themselves
are hierarchically divided into
vehicular, bike, and pedestrian streets.
So in totality, the movement structure
consists of those parts of the urban
structure which includes the structure
of the vehicular, bike, and pedestrian Figure 1 Urban Structure Elements, (City of Victoria,
streets and the network of public Canada) Downtown Core Area Plan, 2011, p. 14. According
spaces. to this plan, the urban structure is comprised of three
elements: Space (underlying topography/natural elements),
According to Allan Jacobs, “city movement (system of circulation), and building form [this
streets and block patterns give order portion was not included in the lecture but could be helpful]
and structure to a city, district or
neighborhood. The urban structure provides an orientation to the users and dictates the movement
patterns…. Ordering and city structure seem partly a matter of regular patterns of arrangement,
methodological organization and succession of parts, and of contrast (how the experience of one area
becomes different than the other because of urban structure).1

Movement systems

The urban movement network is the interconnected system of streets, roads, and paths that
accommodates pedestrians and cyclists, on-road public transport, emergency, and private vehicles.2 The
movement network connects places and activities and allows people and goods to reach their intended
destinations and access private land.

The urban movement system can be understood by dividing it into two topics, (1) classification
and (2) medium.

1. By classification (i.e., urban components that provide a basis for movement)

20
 a. Highways: they accommodate high-speed automobiles and connect two cities or extend
across the whole nation.
b. Major roads/Arterials: Major roads accommodate high volumes of motor vehicle traffic
including public transport and freight, and have higher design speeds (40–100 km/h).
Major roads can have two or more traffic lanes in each direction and may provide for
on-street car parking, bus lanes or tram tracks, bicycle lanes, as well as verge space for
pedestrian paths, infrastructure, and landscaping.
c. Minor arterials are less-intense compared to major roads and are more suitable for
bikes, pedestrians, and smaller private vehicles (cars).
d. Local streets: or “gallis” are neighborhood streets that are more suitable for pedestrians
and bikes. They are important in terms of supporting local commerce.
2. By medium

NOTE: Some of the description provided here, also fit the descriptions for Transit-Oriented
Developments (TODs)

• Public transportation: Public transportation “refers to shared passenger transport services

that are available to the general public and which are provided for the public good. It may
include cars, buses, trolleys, trams, trains, subways, and ferries that are shared by strangers
without prior arrangement.”3 Some of the important characteristics of the public
transportation system are that they move a large number of people efficiently, they are
economical, sustainable, inclusive (access for all), and favor higher density.

The two main types of public transport use the road network: (1) the fixed tram/train/rail
network, which is usually located on major roads and streets; and (2) the bus network,
which operates within standard traffic lanes or in bus priority lanes. The rail network can be
(1) light rail or (2) heavy rail. Light rail transit (LRT) is an electric rail-borne form of
transport that can be developed in stages from a tramway to a rapid transit system operated
partially on its own right-of-way.4 The general term ‘light transit’ covers those systems
whose role and performance lie between a conventional bus service running on the highway
at one extreme and an urban heavy rail or underground metropolitan railway at the other.
Light rail systems are thus flexible and expandable.5 Heavy rail (also called rapid transit or
metro rail) carries a much higher volume of traffic and covers more distance (at the scale of
large metropolitan areas like New York City, Tokyo, London, Chicago, etc.). By one
account, heavy rail needs a population of three to five million people to operate.6 Tokyo
Metro, for example, is one of the busiest metro systems with 3.16 billion annual passenger
rides in 2010.7 The subway train is a form of a heavy rail system, which is below ground, can
travel unimpeded and very rapidly underground, and does not take up valuable real estate or
room above the surface.

The bus network can be divided into two types: (1) the conventional bus system (e.g., Sajha
Yatayat) and (2) Bus Rapid Transit or BRT. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a high-quality bus-
based transit system that delivers fast, comfortable, and cost-effective services at metro-
level capacities.8 It does this through the provision of dedicated lanes, with busways and
iconic stations typically aligned to the center of the road, off-board fare collection, and fast
and frequent operations. BRT is much more reliable, convenient, and faster than regular bus
services. Some characteristics of BRT are as follows9:

1. Dedicated Bus lanes: i.e., BRT buses are kept separate from general traffic for
efficient movement

21
 2. Traffic signal priority at intersections: e.g., receiving longer green light if running late
3. On-time service: BRT is run along dedicated bus stops which arrive on time because
of the dedicated lanes in which they travel
4. Off-board fare collection: passengers will pay the fare at the station instead of on
the bus, which will eliminate wait time
5. Specialized vehicles: BRT buses can be made larger than conventional buses
• Bikes and pedestrians: A city must provide access to bikes by establishing a route for bikes,
providing crossings, and prioritizing paths for them (for example, allowing them to overtake
other vehicles at the traffic stops as seen in the figure).
• On-street parking: refers to the convenient, short-term parking in the street next to major
destinations. They may be parallel, indented, or angled. An important aspect of parallel
parking is to avoid creating more traffic congestion.

References

1
Allan Jacobs, Great Streets (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1993).
2
Based on “Urban Design Guidelines” for the State of Victoria, Australia. https://www.urban-design-
guidelines.planning.vic.gov.au/home
3
UN Habitat’s “Module 2: Public Transport System,” p. 8. https://data.unhabitat.org/documents/GUO-
UN-Habitat::indicator-11-2-1-training-module-public-transportation-april-2019/explore
4
https://web.archive.org/web/20081013161641/http://www.uitp.org/Public-Transport/light-rail/index.cfm
5
https://web.archive.org/web/20081013161641/http://www.uitp.org/Public-Transport/light-rail/index.cfm
6
https://policy.tti.tamu.edu/strategy/heavy-rail/
7
https://www.railway-technology.com/projects/tokyo-metro-kanto-japan/
8
https://www.itdp.org/library/standards-and-guides/the-bus-rapid-transit-standard/what-is-brt/
9
https://raleighnc.gov/services/transit-streets-and-sidewalks/what-bus-rapid-transit-brt

22
3.5 Public open spaces: streets, squares, spaces between buildings, parks,
landscapes

Carr and Francis define public space as “the stage upon which the drama of communal life
unfolds...”1 In this definition, the authors give high importance to urban streets, squares, and parks which
support valuable human behaviors. These authors especially emphasize the presence of large numbers of
people using a public space informally, by which they mean unplanned, spontaneous open-space use.
Carr and Francis also point out that open spaces are “built to provide for relaxation at lunch and social
relief from isolating office work…”2

Carr and Francis contend that public spaces should be responsive; in other words, public spaces
should provide comfort, relaxation, and active and passive engagement.3 These qualities afford casual
encounters in the course of daily life and work and bind people together. Furthermore, the authors
claim that public spaces should reinforce personal and group life. They suggest that the user perspective
has been neglected in both public space design and management. Often, the result is public spaces that
are often unattractive and unused.

The important types of public open spaces are as follows:

1. Historic squares
2. (Contemporary) plazas
3. Space between buildings
4. Streets
5. Urban parks

Historic squares

The historic squares can be understood by referring to three examples from Western European
history: (1) Greek Agora and Acropolis; (2) Roman Forum; and (3) Medieval and Renaissance Squares.

The Greek Agora was a public open space used for assemblies and markets and existed from at
least the 5th century BCE. The famous Acropolis (High City) in Athens contained chief municipal and
religious buildings and was used for religious ceremonies, political activities (debates, meetings, etc.), as a
marketplace (?).

Forum, in Roman cities in antiquity, multipurpose, centrally located open area that was
surrounded by public buildings and colonnades and that served as a public gathering place.4 It was an
orderly spatial adaptation of the Greek agora, or marketplace, and acropolis. The Roman Forum, known
as Forum Romanum in Latin, was a site located at the center of the ancient city of Rome and the location
of important religious, political, and social activities.5 Events taking place in the Forum included elections,
public speeches, criminal trials, gladiator matches (before the Colosseum was built), social gatherings,
business dealings, public meetings, religious ceremonies, educational events, and buying, selling, and
trading of items.

An important characteristic of the historic squares (Middle Ages and Renaissance period) was
that they existed in close relationship with the buildings and monuments, i.e., they formed an entirety
with the buildings which enclosed them.6

23
(Contemporary) plazas

Notable scholars have defined plazas in the following ways:

J.B. Jackson (1985): “a plaza is an urban form that draws people together for passive
enjoyment.”7

Kevin Lynch: “the plaza is intended as an activity focus, at the heart of some intensive urban
area. Typically it will be paved, enclosed by high density structures, and surrounded by streets, or in
contact with them. It contains features meant to attract groups of people and to facilitate meanings.”8

Clare Cooper Marcus and Carolyn Francis: “a hard surfaced outdoor public space from which
cars are excluded.”9 They argue that the main function of a plaza is to provide a setting for informal
activities like strolling, sitting, eating, and observing. These activities satisfy the major aim of a well-
designed plaza, which is to promote sociability.”

[EXTRA NOTES] Three major types of plazas can be related to the urban areas of Nepal10:

1) Street plaza
2) Plaza as an Oasis
3) Plaza as a grand public place

Streets can function as a plaza if they provide a place for people to sit, eat, and watch the
activities. Street plaza has been precisely defined as “a small portion of public open space immediately
adjacent to the sidewalk and closely connected to the street”. In most cases, it contains a seating edge
where people sit and watch other people pass by since they are so close to sidewalks.

Urban oasis contains greenery and is far from street activity. They can be inside, outside, or on
roofs of buildings. Following the definition, they are present to give people a break from city life which
might go against the true reasons for the existence of plazas.

Plazas as a “grand public place” are located at the center of the city bounded by streets on all
four sides and not necessarily buildings. Following the definitions, we see that urban plazas can be of
various kinds depending on the scale of use. But the common theme is that they all need people’s
activities for survival.

William Whyte, a sociologist, whose work on plazas has been important to the field, argued that
a plaza should draw a large number of people together informally, i.e., without them realizing it. The
major value of public space in this sense lies in the fact that people can see and meet other people,
interact, and engage in plaza life and activities as these events happen. According to Whyte, the
following design features are very important for a successful plaza11:

1. Location
2. Street-plaza relationship
3. Seating

People are not attracted to a plaza if it is not located properly. In other words, a successful
sociable plaza is almost always located near large pools of potential users. A plaza should be located near
high-density areas supported by mixed uses, especially employment and housing, such that there is a
presence of many potential users. A mixture of activities like shopping, entertainment, and stores also

24
contribute to a good plaza location. Whyte contends that a plaza well placed in a city, for example along
bustling streets or street corners, has a chance of being more used and thus more sociable.

Another key design factor facilitating a sociable plaza is the relation of a plaza with the street.
The front row of the plaza facing the street is a prime area in that one can watch the activities happening
in the street sitting there: “the front ledge faces one of the best of urban scenes,” he argues.12 A plaza
should be designed as an extension of the street such that “it’s hard to tell where one ends and the
other begins.”13 Importantly, the features that facilitate the use of the plaza by passers-by are: (1) clear
sightlines; (2) beckoning devices; and (3) uses that draw people.

Seating is the third important element in a plaza. The front portion of any plaza which faces the
major street should contain opportunities for people to sit and those design elements cannot induce
people to come if there is no place to sit. More specifically, people tend to sit where there are places to
sit.14 However, seating has to be (1) physically and (2) socially comfortable. To be physically
comfortable, seating must not be too high, too low, or too narrow. The major requirement is that one
linear foot of seating must be provided for every thirty square feet of plaza space. Seating should be at
least twelve inches high and deep enough for people to be able to sit; an optimum depth is sixteen
inches for one-sided; and thirty inches if both sides of the seating are usable. Additionally, movable
chairs are more flexible than fixed benches in terms of seating.15 The main advantage of such movable
chairs is the mobility and freedom for users in being able to choose a sitting place.

Additionally, William Whyte suggests that the following design features are also important (but
secondary) for a successful plaza:

1. Sun
2. Wind
3. Trees
4. Water
5. Food

Space between buildings

The idea behind “space between buildings” has been made popular by Jan Gehl through his 1987
book “Life Between Buildings.”16

As Gehl puts it, “Life between buildings is not merely pedestrian traffic or recreational or social
activities. It comprises the entire spectrum of activities, which combine to make communal spaces in
cities and residential areas meaningful and attractive.”17 Creating “life between buildings” is a complex
process in which the people taking part are key actors. People are responsible to create the event for
themselves through different forms of contact. They can be a mere spectator in public space (passive
engagement) or be directly engaged (active engagement). The activities of the users of the space form
the major basis for life between buildings. In this regard, three types of outdoor activities as he describes
are necessary activities, optional activities, and social activities.

Necessary activities like going to school or work, shopping, waiting for a bus will take place
throughout the year, independent of the exterior environment. Optional activities like walking and
enjoying outside depend on exterior physical conditions and occur only under favorable conditions. As
this increases, social activities rise even more substantially. Social activities depend on the presence of
others in a public space. It includes children at play, communal activities, passive engagement that is
simply seeing and hearing other people.

25
 In regard to contacts, passive contacts are the prerequisites for other, more complex
interactions. People need to be present for whatever reason it is. Meeting and talking with unknown
people increase contact. It offers an opportunity to be with others in a relaxed and undemanding way.
One is not necessarily with anyone but is still in presence of others. As an example, looking out of the
window and having something to look at or sitting on the plinth of a structure is a form of passive
contact.

In regard to generating “life between buildings,” the edge spaces of buildings are most popular
because it provides opportunities for surveying areas in front. Conclusively, good cities for staying out
have irregular facades and a variety of supporters in their outdoor spaces. Soft edges are comfortable
resting areas placed on the public side of buildings and with direct connection to them, which influence
life between buildings. So soft edges are about being able to stay next to the buildings or merely being
able to come and go. A good example of a carefully designed edge zone can be a small terrace, a tiny
garden, a bench by the door, and a screen between neighboring units. Soft edges should establish good
connections between indoors and outdoors combined with good resting places in front of the buildings
which help to keep people outside in public.

Streets

Peter Jukes (1990) defines a street as “a central metropolitan thoroughfare, an arena where
strangers encounter one another, come face to face with the size and heterogeneity of urban life.”18
According to Vikas Mehta, streets are “perceived as a place of utility to support their everyday needs,
and as a place to gather” and depending on their background, the users have “different expectations
from the street.”19 Streets play a major role in structuring the form of settlements, particularly urban
settlements, and support “cultural, economic, political, and social activities” beyond our “private and
parochial realms.”

Allan Jacobs, another important urbanist, has made the following observations about the role of
streets in urban life20:

• Communication remains a major purpose of streets, along with unfettered public access to the
property.
• Streets moderate the form and structure and comfort of urban communities.
• Their sizes and arrangements afford or deny light and shade
• In a very elemental way, streets allow people to be outside
• Streets are places of social and commercial encounters and exchange.
• The street is movement: to watch, to pass, movement especially of people: of fleeting faces and
forms, changing postures and dress.
• Everyone can use the street.
• As well as to see, the street is a place to be seen.
• At the same time, the street is a place to be alone, to be private

Additionally, the author’s criteria for great streets are as follows:

• Accessible
• Offer the ability to see other people and meet them
• Physically comfortable
• Safe
• Encourages participation
• Offers positive impressions/memories

26
 • Dictates a ‘type’ in itself
• Help make community: facilitate interaction people achieve what they might not alone

A seminal study of street life in San Francisco was conducted by Donald Appleyard (1981). He
studied three streets: Franklin, Gough, and Octavia in San Francisco. Predominantly, Appleyard
categorized the streets as being Heavy Street (around 16000 vehicles per day), Medium Streets (around
8000 vehicles per day), and Light Street (around 2000 vehicles per day). It is obvious from this
classification that traffic flow on the roads was the determining factor for the presence or absence of
activities on the sidewalks. The interviews conducted with the residents demonstrated light streets as
safe, medium streets as neither safe nor unsafe and heavy streets as unsafe. The research also found that
Light streets’ inhabitants had three times more local friends and twice as many acquaintances as
compared to those in the heavy streets. One of the prominent factors for this occurrence according to
the author might be the ubiquitous presence of children and longer length of resident stays in the light
streets; which have been highlighted by the author as the most important phenomenon occurring to
support life in the streets. Through this study, the San Francisco Department of Planning promulgated
urban design laws for protected residential areas throughout the city.

Urban parks

Urban parks are a form of public open space to bring nature to human-made spaces (or cities).
They can also be termed “Green urban spaces” because of the presence of elements like trees, grassy
lawns, etc. One of their major aims is to provide a respite from city life. Urban parks are usually larger
in scale compared to plazas (excluding a few large central public spaces in large cities). Parks can have
“designed elements” that facilitate specific activities at designated places, offering Playgrounds, Gardens,
Hiking/Walking, Running, etc. Some examples of urban parks in the Kathmandu valley are Garden of
Dreams, Narayan Chaur, Shankhapul riverfront park. The greater Tundikhel master plan, if completed,
hopes to add huge interconnected green spaces to the heart of the capital. Internationally, some of the
popular urban parks are Bryant Park in New York City, St. James’s Park in London, etc.

Landscape design

According to the California chapter of the Association of Professional Landscape Designers, a

professional landscape designer21:

1. Analyzes the property from an architectural, environmental, horticultural, and artistic viewpoint
and uses these findings to create a Master Plan that is customized for the site.
2. Provides an artistic eye and gives the outdoor space a form and a sense of style that will be the
heart of the design.
3. Helps choose the most appropriate design elements, materials, and plants for the site.

According to Norman Booth (2012), “one principal objective of landscape architectural site
design is to impart a spatial organization for human use and enrichment by orchestrating a broad palette
of elements in an inspiring and coordinated manner.” 22

Landscape Design Elements and Principles

NOTE: This section is based largely on the works authored by Dewayne L. Ingram23, Gail
Hansen,24 and Ellen Vincent.25

27
 Landscape elements refer to the interacting parts in the system whereas landscape principles are
the ideas that guide the interaction. An initial purpose of landscape design is to blend the built into the
natural surroundings.

The elements of design are the visual qualities, which bring up different aesthetic experiences
among the observers. The elements of Landscape Design include color, line, form, texture, scale.

1. Colors can be used to visually change distance perspective. Warm colors like red, orange,
yellow, and white advance an object or area toward the observer. Cool colors like blue, green,
and black recede and can be used to make the house appear farther from the street. Color can
also be used to direct attention to the landscape. Three basic color schemes are:
monochromatic, analogous, and complementary. It is possible to have varying color schemes in
one area of the landscape as the seasons change.
2. In the landscape, Line is inferred by the bed arrangement and the way beds fit or flow together.
The line is also created by changes in plant heights. Furthermore, lines can be straight (forceful
and stable) or curved (free-flowing and smooth). The line is created by the edge between two
materials in the Landscape. Lines are used to creating patterns, develop spaces, create forms,
create movement, establish dominance, and create a cohesive theme in a landscape.
3. Form refers to the shape or structure of the plants either individually or in the arrangement
within the landscape. Some of the popular forms are upright, oval, spread, broad, and weeping.
The role of form is to spatially organize the landscape and give it a style. They can be formal
(rectangular, circular, square) or informal/natural (meandering, fragmented). The void created by
the form is also a formal component of the landscape.
4. Texture describes the surface quality of an object. Textures can be fine, medium, or coarse.
5. Scale refers to the size of an object in relation to its surroundings. Usually, the scale in landscape
design is considered with respect to the size of the humans.

The principles of Landscape Design include unity, balance, transition, focalization, proportion,
rhythm, and simplicity.

1. Unity refers to the ability of the design to represent consistent style between the elements such
that they “fit” together.
2. Balance refers to visual equilibrium and can be symmetrical or asymmetrical.
3. Transition refers to a gradual change in color, texture, form, or size of landscape components.
4. Focalization involves pointing attention to a feature within the landscape.
5. Proportion refers to the sizing of parts in relation to each other and the design as a whole. It is
important to include landscape components that are in proportion with the respective building.
6. Rhythm is created through the repetition of elements in a structured way.
7. Simplicity is achieved by eliminating unnecessary detail so that the design is clear and devoid of
confusion.

References

1
Stephen Carr et al., Public Space (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
2
Carr et al.
3
Carr et al.
4
https://www.britannica.com/technology/court-architecture
5
https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-rome/roman-forum
6
Camillo Sitte, The Art of Building Cities (New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1945).

28
7
Clare Cooper Marcus and Carolyn Francis, People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Space
(John Wiley {\&} Sons, 1997).
8
Kevin Lynch, Good City Form (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1981).
9
Marcus and Francis, People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Space.
10
Based on: Marcus and Francis.
11
William H Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (Washington, D.C.: The Conservation
Foundation, 1980).
12
Whyte.
13
Whyte.
14
Whyte.
15
Whyte.
16
Jan Gehl, Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1987).
17
Gehl.
18
Peter Jukes, A Shout in the Street: An Excursion into the Modern City (Berkeley CA: University of
California Press, 1990).
19
Vikas Mehta, The Street: A Quintessential Social Public Space (New York, NY: Routledge, 2013).
20
Jacobs, Great Streets.
21
http://apldca.org/what-is-landscape-design/professional-designers/
22
Norman K Booth, Foundations of Landscape Architecture: Integrating Form and Space Using the
Language of Site Design (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley {\&} Sons, 2012).
23
https://plantsciences.montana.edu/horticulture/ASHS_Teaching_MethodsWG/Landscape-
Design/Vendrame_Basic%20Principles%20of%20Landscape%20Design.pdf [last accessed March 15,
2022]
24
Brief report: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdf/MG/MG08600.pdf [last accessed March 15, 2022]
Presentation: https://www.doc-developpement-durable.org/file/Culture/paysagisme/design/Landscape-
Design-Elements-and-Principles.pdf [last accessed March 15, 2022]
25
https://www.clemson.edu/cafls/vincent/powerpoints/principles-of-landscape-design.pdf [last accessed
March 15, 2022]

29
UNIT 4: URBAN MORPHOLOGY
Several scholars have forwarded a definition of urban morphology, which suggests that it refers
to studying the form and structure of human settlements and the process of their formation and transformation.

Anne Vernez Moudon: “urban morphology is the study of the city as human habitat, considering
the city not as an artifact but as an organism where the physical world is inseparable from the processes
of change to which it is subjected.”1

Peter Larkham: “urban morphology extends beyond the narrow conception of urban form and
includes the individuals, organizations, and processes shaping that form.”2

Karl Kropf: “urban morphology is broadly concerned with identifying and classifying the objects
of study concerning their shape, form, and internal structure, as well as seeking to understand how and
why the objects take the form they do.”3

Broadly, two essential elements make up urban form, (1) physical form (tangible and persistent
representation of the built environment or the manifestation of the spatial relations of physical objects)
and (2) land use or function (interrelations between humans and some physical form).4 In response to
this “popular” view of urban morphology, the field’s attachment to rigid systems of historical forms,
Vitor Oliviera (2016) has contended that it also deals with the changes in the already existing system and
the new areas of the town that, for example, begin with new streets.5 According to Jeremy Whitehand,
“in the case of urban morphology, the actual outcome of decisions in the landscape, though it is an
imperfect record, is an immensely detailed testimony to past events and may well be a more reliable
guide to process than ostensibly more direct records of the decisions involved…. Urban forms are, after
all, a direct outcome of processes and in a real sense, the embodiment of the attitudes pertaining at the
time and in the place of their creation.”6

Two essential concepts that are closely linked to the idea of urban morphology are “urban
tissue” and “urban grain.”

Urban tissue

According to Karl Kropf (1996), “from the viewpoint of the hierarchy, urban tissue is, in effect, a
synthesis of all the components. It is an organic whole that can be seen at distinct levels of resolution.
The different levels correspond to the different primary elements: the higher the resolution, the more
detail is shown. A low level includes only streets and blocks and a high level includes building
materials….. to illustrate: at the most general level, a tissue can be described as an arrangement of
streets and blocks…. A plot, for example, can be described as an arrangement of a house (one), a
garden (one) and a boundary wall (one, in three segments), all in the relative positions shown in the
figure…. Tissues are themselves identified as types, being area with a similar set and arrangement of
constituent elements from all the lower levels.”7

Urban Grain

Kevin Lynch argues that “the grain of a settlement is another fundamental feature of its
texture….”8 Furthermore, grain is “the way in which the various different elements of a settlement are
mixed together in space. These elements maybe activities, building types, persons, or other features.
The grain of a mix is fine when like elements, or small clusters of them, are widely dispersed among

30
unlike elements, and coarse when extensive areas of one thing are separated from extensive areas of
another thing…. Fineness is the fundamental characteristic of grain, but sharpness is another, if less
crucial, characteristic. A grain is sharp when the transition from a cluster of like elements to its unlike
neighbors is abrupt, and blurred if the transition is gradual….. Coarse grain decreases the access to
other kinds of people and other ways of life. Inequities of access to resources, and facilities are also
likely to increase with spatial segregation…. There should also be zones of transition (“blurs”), within
which status is more ambiguous, so that people may “cross over” if they choose.”9

According to the website ‘essexdesignguide,’ “the urban grain is likely to be (and needs to be)
finest near the centre of a town or neighbourhood. This is where the greatest intensity of movement
occurs and where the richest pattern of uses can usually be found. Away from the commercial heart of
the town or neighbourhood the grain can be coarser, which reflects the less intense demands on
movement and agglomeration.”10

See the table comparing coarse and fine grain in LECTURE 7 SLIDE 14.

References

1
Anne Vernez Moudon, “Urban Morphology as an Emerging Interdisciplinary Field,” Urban
Morphology 1, no. 1 (1997): 3–10, https://doi.org/1027-4278. Moudon also argues that form (buildings
and their related open spaces, plots or lots, and streets), resolutions (building/lot, street/block, city, and
the region), and time (historic-transformations and replacement) constitute the three fundamental
components of urban morphological research.
2
Peter J Larkham, “The Study of Urban Form in Great Britain,” Urban Morphology, 2006, 117–41; Karl
Kropf, “Aspects of Urban Form,” Urban Morphology 13, no. 2 (2009): 105–20. One of Karl Kropf's
central questions in his work on “Aspects of urban form” is the relation between local processes and
global structure. The scope (scale) of urban morphology lies in studying the two essential elements for an
entire city its parts (e.g., the downtown).
3
Karl Kropf, The Handbook of Urban Morphology (West Sussex, UK: John Wiley {\&} Sons, 2017).
4
Moudon, “Urban Morphology as an Emerging Interdisciplinary Field”; Kropf, “Aspects of Urban
Form”; Kropf, The Handbook of Urban Morphology.
5
Vitor Manuel Oliveira, Urban Morphology: An Introduction to the Study of the Physical Form of Cities
(Switzerland: Springer, 2016).
6
J W R Whitehand, “The Basis for an Historico-Geographical Theory of Urban Form,” Transactions of
the Institute of British Geographers 2, no. 3 (1977): 400–416, https://doi.org/10.2307/621839.
7
Karl Kropf, “Urban Tissue and the Character of Towns,” Urban Design International, no. 3 (1996):
247–63.
8
Lynch, Good City Form.
9
Lynch.
10
https://www.essexdesignguide.co.uk/design-details/layout-details/urban-grain/

31
 4.1 Interpretation of settlement pattern: figure and ground, linkage, place
theory

According to Trancik (1986), a settlement pattern can be interpreted through three urban
design theories: (1) figure-ground theory (2) linkage theory, and (3) place theory.

Figure and Ground

According to Trancik (1986), it is “founded on the study of the relative land coverage of
buildings as solid mass (“figure”) to open voids (“ground”).1 The figure-ground drawing is a graphic tool
for illustrating mass-void relationships; a two-dimensional abstraction in plan view that clarifies the
structure and order of urban spaces.

See Giambattista Nolli’s Map of Rome of 1748 (LECTURE 7 SLIDE 30).

Trancik argues that “certain definite types of positive voids should be created within the building
mass of the city. Public spaces give symbolic content and meaning to the city by providing a gathering
place, paths, transition between public and private domains and arenas for discourse and interaction…”2
[Furthermore,] “Space is the medium of the urban experience, providing the sequence between public,
semi-public, and private domains. For these sequences to work, circulation barriers and gaps in
continuity must be minimized or eliminated. Spatial orientation is defined by the configuration of urban
blocks that collectively form districts and neighborhoods. It is the articulation and the differentiation of
solids and voids that make up the fabric of the city and establish the physical sequences and visual
orientation between places….. larger composite patterns of street space form districts, where the
ensemble of spaces creates an urban character that dominates and unites individual, isolated spaces.”3

To understand the actual implication of the figure-ground maps, it is important to understand

the fundamental difference between a modern and a traditional city. According to Daniel Solomon, the
“main difference between traditional urbanism and modernist urbanism…. Have to do first with the
relationship between buildings and streets and second with the question of segregation versus
integration of the constituent elements of the city…. (in the modernist plans)…. Buildings and streets
each had their own separate imperatives, and the geometries and alignments of one should have nothing
to do with the geometries and alignments of the other.”4

Linkage Theory

According to Fumihko Maki, Linkage is “simply the glue of the city… the act by which we unite
all the layers of activity and resulting physical form in the city.”5 According to Trancik (1986), linkage
theory is “derived from ‘lines’ connecting one element to another. These lines are formed by streets,
pedestrian ways, linear open spaces, or other linking elements that physically connect the parts of the
city. The designer applying the linkage theory tries to organize a system of connections or networks,
that establishes a structure for ordering spaces. Emphasis is placed on the circulation diagram rather
than the spatial diagram of the figure-ground theory.”6

Place theory

According to Trancik (1986), place theory “adds the components of human needs and cultural,
historical, and natural context… (this) response to context often includes history and the element of
time and attempts to enhance the fit between new design and existing conditions. In place theory social

32
and cultural values, visual perceptions, of users and an individual’s control over the immediate public
environments are as important as principles of lateral enclosure and linkage.”7

Furthermore, “the essence of place theory in spatial design lies in understanding the cultural and
human characteristics of physical space. If in an abstract, physical term, space is a bounded or purposeful
void within the potential of physically linking things, it only becomes place when it is given a contextual
meaning derived from cultural or regional context.”8 Also, “for designers to create truly contextual
places, they must more than superficially explore the local history, the feelings and needs of the
populace, the traditions of craftsmanship and indigenous materials, and the political and economic
realities of the community.”9

In his seminal book “Place and Placelessness,” Edward Relph (1976) has tried to define a place by
saying that a place is based on experience.10 He also says that it is different for different people and is
based on what the place means to the people. He raises a question: what is the main motive of place? In
trying to answer this question, the author gives his central and most prolific argument that meaningful
places are the ones that give form and structure to our experiences of the world.

About the distinction between space and place, Relph says that space provides the context for
places and derives meaning from a particular place. Thus, it can be concluded that space, in itself, is not a
definable entity until we add experience and meanings.

To Geographer Yi-Fu Tuan, ‘place’ is whatever stable object catches our attention.11 One of
Tuan’s important arguments is that many places that hold profound significance to particular individuals
and groups have little visual prominence because places are not necessarily experienced through the eye
but instead “viscerally.”12 Tuan further explains the idea of place through an example of a house. He
claims, “a house is a relatively simple building. It is a place, however, for many reasons. It provides
shelter; its hierarchy of spaces answers social needs; it is a field of care, a repository of memory“s and
dreams."13

To Christian Norberg-Schulz (1971), a place can be understood as a “focus where we

experience the meaningful events of our existence.” In regard to place, Schulz argues that “…. We mean
something more than abstract location. We mean a totality made up of concrete things, having material
substance, texture and color. Together these things determine an “environmental character,” which is
the essence of a place. In general, place is given as such a character or “atmosphere.” A place is,
therefore, a qualitative, “total” phenomenon, which we cannot reduce to any of its properties, such as
spatial relationships, without losing its concrete nature out of sight. Everyday experience moreover tells
us that different actions need different environments to take place in a satisfactory way.”14

Bringing the three theories together

Trancik argues that all three theories must be considered together since “for instance, if an
urban complex is designed around the linkage theory alone, it falls short because the product becomes
nonspatial and therefore nonexperiential. If place theory is applied without regard to linkage and figure-
ground, important connections outside the design area and new spatial opportunities within may be lost.
Conversely, if the figure-ground theory is exclusively used, the results often become totally spatial and
possibly unrealistic in terms of user needs and implementation.”15

33
 4.2 Major urban typologies, their evolution and interrelationships, their
interpretation and treatment in the contemporary city

Typology: a classification according to general type, especially in archaeology, psychology, or the social
sciences (Oxford Languages via Google).

Urban typologies refer to the various types of settlements and neighborhoods that exist within
an urban system or metropolitan area. A recent study on Valencia, Spain found out that there existed at
least eight types of urban typologies in the city at present.16 Primarily, urban typologies are based on
location from the city center, timeline of development, street network, block pattern, building
footprints, building height, etc. Considering these factors, the Kathmandu valley consists of at least nine
major urban typologies: 1. Historic core: Kathmandu, Patan, etc., 2. Central Business
District/Downtowns: New Road (?), 3. Peri urban area: Shankhamul (in the 2000s), 4. Industrial area:
Balaju Industrial Estate, Patan IE, Bhaktapur IE, 5. Gated (residential) communities: Housing (e.g., Civil
Homes), 6. Planned developments: Landpooling areas (e.g., Gongabu, Nayabazaar), 7. Suburban area:
Bhaisepati (?), 8. Residential areas, and 9. Informal settlements.

See LECTURE 9 SLIDES 3 to 33 and TABLE BELOW for more detailed information.

34
References

1
Roger Trancik, Finding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold,
1986).
2
Trancik.
3
Trancik.
4
Daniel Solomon, Global City Blues (Washington: Island Press, 2003).
5
Trancik, Finding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design.
6
Trancik.
7
Trancik.
8
Trancik.
9
Trancik.
10
Edward Relph, Place and Placelessness (London: Pion, 1976).
11
Yi-Fu Tuan, Space and Place (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977).
12
Tuan.
13
Tuan.
14
Christian Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci: Toward a Phenomenology of Architecture (New York: Rizzoli,
1976).
15
Trancik, Finding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design.
16
Txomin Hermosilla et al., “Using Street Based Metrics to Characterize Urban Typologies,” Computers,
Environment and Urban Systems 44, no. 68–79 (2014).

35
UNIT 5: SENSE OF PLACE, IMAGE OF A CITY AND PUBLIC
ARCHITECTURE
5.1 Theories and practices of “Place Making” and Sense of Place

Only the topic “Sense of Place” is covered.

The following descriptions by renowned scholars help understand the concept of “Sense of
Place.”

David Seamon (2022): “Sense of Place is a “largely unself-conscious facility of human beings to
recognize, feel, and sense the uniqueness of a particular landscape or environment.”

Anne Buttimer1: “It appears that people’s sense of both personal and cultural identity is
intimately bound up with place identity.... People have not only intellectual, imaginary, and symbolic
conceptions of place but also personal and social associations with place-based networks of interaction
and affiliation.”

Christian Norberg-Schulz2: “Man dwells when he can orient himself within and identify himself
with an environment, or, in short, when he experiences the environment as meaningful. Dwelling,
therefore, implies something more than ‘shelter.’ It implies that the spaces where life occurs are places,
in the true sense of the word. A place is a space which has a distinct character….. By Place, we mean
something more than abstract location. We mean a totality made up of concrete things having material
substance, shape, texture and color. Together these things determine an environmental character which
is the essence of place….. whereas ‘space’ denotes the three dimensional organization of the elements
which make up a place, “character” denotes the general ‘atmosphere’ which is the most comprehensive
property of any place.”

Edward Relph3: In terms of its significance for human life, place can be defined as any
environmental locus that, in time and space, draws together individual or group actions, experiences,
intentions, and meanings…. The most meagre meaning of ‘sense of place’ is the ability to recognize
different places and different identities of a place.

J.B. Jackson4: It is my own belief that a sense of place is something that we ourselves create in
the course of time. It is the result of habit or custom... The sense of place is reinforced by what might be
called a sense of recuring events.5

David Hummon6: “By sense of place, I mean people’s subjective perceptions of their
environments and their more or less conscious feelings about those environments (based on Fritz
Steele’s 1981 work “The Sense of Place”). Sense of place is inevitably dual in nature, involving both an
interpretive perspective on the environment and an emotional reaction to the environment... On the
one hand, sense of place implies a multidimensional understanding of community sentiment, one
simultaneously sensitive to community satisfaction, attachment, and identity. On the other hand, sense
of place suggests that community sentiment is intimately related to people’s perspectives on place-the
ways people routinely think about the nature and qualities of the community in which they live.”

References

36
1
Anne Buttimer, “Home, Reach, and the Sense of Place,” in THe Human Experience of Sense and Place,
ed. David Seamon and Anne Buttimer (New York: Routledge, 2015), 166–87.
2
Christian Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture (New York: Rizzoli,
1979).
3
Relph, Place and Placelessness.
4
John Brinckerhoff Jackson, A Sense of Place a Sense of Time (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,
1994).
5
Jackson.
6
David M Hummon, “Community Attachment: Local Sentiment and Sense of Place,” in Place
Attachment, ed. Irwin Altman and Setha M Low (New York: Plenum Press, 1992), 253–77.

37
 5.2 Public Realm, its qualities and roles

According to Richard Sennett, “the public realm can be simply defined as a place where
strangers meet. The difference between public and private lies in the amount of knowledge one person
or group has about others: in the private realm, as in a family, one knows others well and close up,
whereas in a public realm one does not; incomplete knowledge joins to anonymity in the public realm.
The public realm is, moreover, a place. Traditionally, this place could be defined in terms of physical
ground, which is why discussions of the public realm have been, again traditionally, linked to cities; the
public realm could be identified by the squares, major streets, theaters, cafés, lecture halls, government
assemblies, or stock exchanges where strangers would be likely to meet.”1

Fleming et al. (1985) [cited in Emily Talen’s 2000 work] argue that “…. Public realm is defined
here in a physical sense, that is, the spaces in an environment that are open and physically accessible to
residents, and which provide, at least in principle, opportunity for contact, proximity to others, and
appropriate space to interact.2

In a seminal book on the public realm, Lyn H. Lofland explains the following:3

“The public realm is constituted of those areas of urban settlements in which individuals in
copresence tend to be personally unknown or only categorically known to one another. Put differently,
the public realm is made up of those spaces in a city which tend to be inhabited by persons who are
strangers to one another or who “know” one another only in terms of occupational or other
nonpersonal identity categories (for example, bus driver-customer)….. In the city, when one leaves
private space, one moves into a world of many unknown or only categorically known others
(biographical strangers), many of whom may not share one’s values, history, or perspective (cultural
strangers). In short, the public realm is a form of social space distinct from the private realm and its full-
blown existence is what makes the city different from other settlement types. The public realm, as my
subtitle indicates, is the city’s quintessential social territory…”4

Furthermore, “…. Following Albert Hunter (1985), I will define the private realm (order, in his
terms) as characterized by ties of intimacy among primary groups members who are located within
households and personal networks, and the parochial realm (or order) as characterized by a sense of
commonality among acquaintances and neighbors who are involved in interpersonal networks that are
located within “communities…. To oversimplify a bit, the private realm is the world of the household
and friend and kin networks; the parochial realm is the world of the neighborhood, workplace, or
acquaintance networks; and the public realm is the world of strangers and the “street."5

Lofland further notes a list of six “uses” or “functions” performed by the public realm (i.e.,
qualities and roles):6

1. A rich environment for learning: to see the world and learn how the real world works; also a
learning environment for children
2. Needed respites and refreshments: for example, in places like cafes, coffee shops, community
centers, parks, etc.
3. Center of communication: especially communication among diverse individuals and groups
4. “Practice” of politics: people can act together without the compulsion to be the same... or
“citizenship schooling”
5. Enactment of social arrangements and social conflict: to provide a stage for political actions (e.g.,
rallies, protests)

38
 6. Creation of cosmopolitans: diverse people living together, positive tolerance, and civility

References

1
Richard Sennett, “The Public Realm,” in The SAGE Handbook of the 21st Century City, ed. Suzanne
Hall and Ricy Burdett (London, n.d.), 585–601.
2
Emily Talen, “Measuring the Public Realm: A Preliminary Assessment of the Link between Public
Space and Sense of Community,” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 17, no. 4 (2000): 344–
60.
3
Lyn H Lofland, The Public Realm: Exploring the City’s Quintessential Social Territory (New York:
Aldine De Gruyter, 1998).
4
Lofland.
5
Lofland.
6
Lofland.

39
UNIT 6: THE URBAN DESIGN PROCESS
NOTE: while the urban design project can encompass a much broader scope (SEE LECTURE 10
SLIDES, 6 TO 9), our course deals with the followings (only the highlighted ones are discussed
here):

1. Contextual Analysis and mapping

2. Rational conceptualizing within zoning, building regulations and urban design guidelines
3. Generation of alternatives and evaluation inclusive of community participation
4. Design decision, implementation mechanism, follow up and evaluation

6.1 Contextual analysis and project mapping

This step consists of:

1. Creating a team (including defining stakeholders)

2. Developing project goals
3. SWOT analysis
4. Feasibility study
5. Context Mapping

1 Creating a team (including defining stakeholders)

An urban design project team could consist of Steering Committee (including Authority,
Experts, Senior Stakeholders, etc.), Project Manager/Coordinator, Clients (Government, Private group),
Community Leaders, Key Stakeholders, a multidisciplinary Project Team (including Urban Designer,
Architect, Planner, Lawyer, Business Analyst, Landscape Architect, Developer, etc.), and Other Interest
Groups (e.g., NGOs).

According to Elrahman and Asaad (2019), “stakeholders can be defined as all the parties of
groups or individuals who can affect or be affected by achieving the objectives of a given strategy,
organization, project, or in that notion the urban design and development process.”1

According to Watt (2014), “stakeholders are individuals who either care about or have a vested
interest in your project. They are the people who are actively involved with the work of the project or
have something to either gain or lose as a result of the project. When you manage a project to add lanes
to a highway, motorists are stakeholders who are positively affected. However, you negatively affect
residents who live near the highway during your project (with construction noise) and after your project
with far-reaching implications (increased traffic noise and pollution)….. if your key stakeholders aren’t
happy, nobody’s happy…. In a project, there are both internal and external stakeholders. Internal
stakeholders may include top management, project team members, project manager, peers, resource
managers, and internal customers. External stakeholders may include external customers, government,
contractors and subcontractors, and suppliers.”2

2 Developing project goals

This step needs to be as specific as possible as it guides the entire project. It defines the scope
of the project as well. Think about what your project goals were for the final project on Gongabu area
neighborhood design.

40
3 SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis has its origins in business management where strengths and weaknesses refer to
the internal workings of the organization while opportunities and threats are external to it.3 In their
study of Lace Market in Nottingham, UK, Moughtin et al. (1999) present a helpful SWOT example.4 Lace
Market was a center of a large nineteenth-century lace industry. They present the description of the
late-1990s scenario. The following SWOT list resulted from brainstorming sessions with members of
the public. The authors note that a SWOT analysis should take into account the current function, the
state of the social-economic-physical environment, recent developments, and commitment to new
administrative structures.

Strength Weakness

1. Lace Market Heritage Trust (to marshal
public and private finance)
2. Major private-sector investment
3. A growing list of refurbished properties of
distinction
4. New tourism industry and media industry
5. Location close to city center (real estate)
6. Prospect of linking to other parts of the city
by railway/bus
1. The area’s appearance of dilapidation and
isolation in some places
2. There is little movement of people in the area
at most times of day (bad reputation)
3. Little connection between Lace Market and
city center
4. Service access into the area for industry
5. Few activities in center that attract
pedestrians
6. Only a few visitor attractions
7. No inviting public squares
8. Pedestrian safety lacking

Opportunities Threats

1. Vacant/underused warehouse buildings and 1. Increase in land values

sites 2. Uneconomic costs of refurbishment
2. Better pedestrian links to the city center 3. Constraints on local authority spending
3. Light Rapid Transit 4. Increased rents may displace independent
4. Improved traffic management shops
5. Creating a mixed-use place 5. Single and fragmented ownership
6. Environmental improvement 6. Investment limited to a certain part
7. Possible relocation of English Heritage to 7. Loss of traditional crafts in the building
Lace Market industry
8. Development of industrial tourism
9. Possible development of national/international
lace center
10. Pedestrian tourist trail from castle
11. Specialty/Independent retailing
12. Factory shops
13. Improve car parking
14. Craft Festival market

41
4 Feasibility analysis

According to Bandusena and Sandanayake (2013), seven criteria are required for a feasibility
assessment of urban development projects: market analysis, technical analysis, financial analysis,
environmental analysis, social analysis, physical analysis, institutional analysis. See LECTURE 10 SLIDES
27 TO 30 for further details.

References

1
Ahmed S Abd Elrahman and Moureen Asaad, “Defining the Urban Design Process: A Theoretical
Perspective,” Journal of Urban Research 34 (2019).
2
Adrienne Watt, Project Management (Victoria, B.C., 2014), https://opentextbc.ca/projectmanagement/.
3
Cliff Moughtin et al., Urban Design: Method and Techniques (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 1999).
4
Moughtin et al.

42
6.3 Generation of alternatives and evaluation inclusive of community
participation

Community Participation

According to Rezaei (2021)1 “Participatory design is an approach that tries to involve citizens
and users in the design process…. Participation in this view is defined as the client’s direct engagement
in the design process and in reaching the final plan, a point in the requirements and possibilities of which
has always been controversial. A group of critics have ruled out the requirement of public participation,
considering only the specialist’s view or the view of a designer as the criterion of work, while another
group has enumerated the complete participation of public groups in design as the cause of success….
Even if people are not specialists in urban planning, when they are assisted by an urban planner as their
advocate, they will be able to hold onto their values. Participation will diminish their sense of anonymity
and will boost their sense of trust (cites Davidoff 1965).”2

43
 The following has been taken directly from “The ‘Designing with Communities’ Framework”
(Webb et al. 2019)1 based on ‘Imaginative Community Woodquay’ project in Galway City, Ireland.
Three topics are important to consider: (1) Time Frame, (2) Actors, and (3) Methods and Techniques.

The Time Frame

The Designing with Communities framework is conceived as a meaningful medium to long-

term (9–18 months) intervention as part of a continuous, cyclic engagement process. Based on our
experience, targeted community engagement weeks lasting 3–5 days should occur 4–6 times per year,
while tactical urbanism interventions should be in place for 3 months to 1 year. Feedback should be
collected, analysed and changes implemented continuously during this time.

The Actors
• The ‘network weaver’: the process has to be led by urban design leadership (a person, an
organisation, an academic research group) with good connections with and authority within
the local institutions, connected with businesses and local communities; the network weaver
has to be there for an extended period of time, so that he/she/they can gain the trust of the
community.
• Local authority official engagement to develop and coordinate licensing/permitting approvals
processes if required.
• Local community groups working together (Tidy Towns, heritage preservation groups,
environmental protection groups, community gardeners, etc.).
• Education institutions—universities, technical institutes, schools, primary and secondary.
• Communities of interest, interested in DIY (such as Fab Labs, maker spaces, Men’s sheds), arts
and performance (socially engaged artists, radical empathy groups, etc.), special interest groups
(Access for All, Smart Aging Groups, Friends of the local Park, etc.).
• Professionals (possibly as a pro-bono exercise, or as continuing professional development).
• Urban innovators (from local industry or local small and medium enterprise companies, start-
ups, etc.) (Fig. 4).
The Methods and Techniques
• During Community Engagement Weeks, we found the following formats to be working well.
• Learning Days—using formats like PechaKucha style lighting talks from local actors, civic
conversations with presentations and panel discussions with ‘experts’ and strategic and
operational policy makers.
• Field days and tours—led by local interest groups and officials. • Community mapping and
auditing events—crowdsourcing local and less known information, visions, aspirations, things
that people treasure and things that they dislike.
• Community design workshops—exploring specific proposals, ideally with diverse and
intergenerational groups (hands-on and interactive, ideally involving physical and digital
modelling, drawing and narrative development). These could work with proposals for the area
or specific proposals for interventions.
• Open design critique sessions—bringing together analysis of information collected about what
exists currently and making proposals for tactical urbanism interventions about what could
exist, to address the needed change to the built and/or natural environment in the area.

44
Design charrette

The word “charrette” is derived from the French word for “cart.” Art students were made to
load their (time-limited) art and design works in a cart during deadline day.

According to the National Charette Institute (NCI), design charrette is “a collaborative design
and planning workshop that occurs over four to seven consecutive days, is held on-site and includes all
affected stakeholders at critical decision-making points”3

According to Condon (2008), it is “a time-limited, multiparty design event organized to generate

a collaborative produced plan for a sustainable community” 4

Rogemma defines the design charrette is defined as “Two or more day intensive design
workshops in which a mixed group of participants work collaboratively towards designing future visions
for a certain area.”5

A design charrette:

1. Integrates rational and intuitive knowledge

2. Set up to allow creative and collaborative atmosphere among stakeholders
3. Alternates between plenary (entire group) discussions and small mixed design teams
4. Eliminates outdated individual frameworks and beliefs
5. Makes use of maps and other visual tools

The four basic rules involve the following:

1. Design with everyone

2. Start with a blank sheet (over the site map)
3. Provide just enough information
4. The drawing is a contract (i.e., produced from the consensus of the charette team)

Types of participants include:

1. Citizens
2. Scientists/Academicians
3. Designers
4. Experts and Specialists
5. Students
6. Government officials
7. Developers, Investors
8. Children

According to Girling et al. (2006), “…. these ‘hands-on’ workshops are characterized by a lively
and open exchange of the ideas, aspirations and agendas of citizens, landowners, developers,
professionals and public officials. Among the strengths of these processes is the higher probability of
local ‘fit’ and investment in a negotiated outcome. Among the weaknesses is the rigor of the methods
used to generate and evaluate alternatives…. Most charrettes follow a similar sequence. Information
about goals and planning issues is gathered, cross-referenced and shared. Alternative arrangements of
land and land use are discussed. Potential plans are proposed, compared and evolved through iteration,
typically involving public consultation. Eventually a preferred alternative emerges and is refined until it
can be approved and implemented. Supporting tools and techniques are typically ‘lowtech’ and include

45
survey techniques for assessing preferences, needs and goals; brainstorming techniques for generating
issues and concepts; design and design gaming techniques for generating alternatives; drawing, mapping
and physical modeling techniques for visualizing alternatives….”6

Furthermore, “in a design process, which is by its nature iterative, it is very desirable to evaluate
different alternatives as they arise, before they are accepted or rejected as part of a more complex
solution…. (More complex issues needed evaluation could be)…. proposed land uses, traffic analyses,
market analyses or cost analyses… (which)…. can take several weeks to complete.”7

References

1
Mahmud Rezaei, Reviewing Design Process Theories: Discourses in Architecture, Urban Design and
Planning Theories (Springer, 2021).
2
Rezaei.
3
Rob Roggema, The Design Charrette: Ways to Envision Sustainable Futures (Springer, 2014).
4
Roggema.
5
Roggema.
6
Cynthia Girling, Ronald Kellett, and Shana Johnstone, “Informing Design Charrettes: Tools for
Participation in Neighbourhood-Scale Planning,” The Integrated Assessment Journal Bridging Sciences
{\&} Policy 6, no. 4 (2006): 109–30.
7
Girling, Kellett, and Johnstone.

46