SBL6313 Site Planning

Nur Hayati Hashim

Pensyarah Senibina Landskap
Jabatan Teknologi Maklumat
Fakulti Pengurusan & Teknologi Maklumat (FPTM)
Universiti Sultan Azlan Shah (USAS)
 WEEK 13

SITE ASSESMENT: STIMULATION

Steinitz’s Development Model
Description of The Model

❖ Carl Steinitz’ “Framework for Theory” was initially developed for use
in professional landscape architecture education at Harvard’s
Graduate School of Design (GSD).

❖ In the years since its 1990 publication, the framework has been
altered, re-defined, fleshed-out, and adapted for use in a number of
landscape architecture applications and related fields, most notably
providing the theoretical structure for geodesign (Huang & Zhou,
2016).

❖ The resulting framework was intended to link typical questions

associated with landscape change to discrete knowledge-related
models answering these questions, thus identifying “areas where
contributions of theory are needed” (Steinitz, 1990, p. 136).
Used of The Model

❖ To identify specific knowledge or theory gaps in the design, research, or practice process and direct
the user to search out new information.

❖ To guide the collaborating participants through the process of geodesign.

❖ To end up with a project that meet the design goals and design goals that connect back to the pattern
or process in need of change.

❖ It may be that the strongest future use of the framework is the most traditional – systematic
procession through the framework in the furtherance of an educational project, research question, or
design process.
Steps of The Model

❖ This framework includes 6 questions to ask at least 3 times during the course of any geodesign study.
❖ Answers to each question involve use of ‘Models’ which can be general, but data and model parameters are
local to the people, place, time of the study as are the geodesigner actions whose consequences are being
studied.

❖ Six questions of the framework:

1. How should the study area be described in content, space and time? (representative models)
2. How does the study area operate? (process models)
3. Is the current study area working well ( evaluation models)
4. How might the study area be altered? (change models)
5. What differences might the changes cause? (impact models)
6. How should the study area be changed?( decision models)

First iteration: treat as “WHY” questions

• Why is the study happening

• Past and present descriptions and representations of the region
• Understands problems, issues, opportunities, constraints, objectives, relevant content and
scales of possible change
Continued to next slide…
Steps of The Model
…Continued
Second iteration: ask questions in reverse order from 6 to 1, “HOW”

• Clearly define methods of the study

• Decision driven rather than data driven
• Requirements for study must be understood and ranked by importance
• Decide how to assess evaluations of existing conditions and investigate the structural and
functional processes of the study area, then specify appropriate models and their data needs

Third iteration: ask from 1 to 6 and address WHAT, WHERE,WHEN questions

• Carries out methodology designed by the geodesign team in the second iteration
• Data become a central concern
• Identify and gather the data necessary for the study, organize
• Design and simulate range of alternative future states of the study area, assess their impacts

❖ All 6 questions must be satisfied throughout all three iterations of the framework of a geodesign study to be
complete.
Steps of The Model

Geodesign Framework by Carl Steinitz

Limits of Acceptance Change
Description of The Model

❖ Developed in mid- 1980s to help decide what kind of resource and social conditions are acceptable in
recreational settings and to prescribe actions to protect or achieve those conditions.

❖ The philosophy of the Limits of acceptable change (LAC) is an inevitable consequence of resource
use, and that a framework is required to tackle resource management problems from the perspective
of the extent to which change is acceptable.

Used of The Model

❖ The LAC model was developed for managing protected landscapes by determining what
environmental impacts from ‘desirable’ social activities are acceptable, and then determining
management actions to ensure that the activities remain constrained with in the LAC.

❖ This shifts the focus from the ‘level of use and impact’ idea to the more proactive approach of
identifying desirable conditions for visitor activity to occur in the first place, followed by management
actions needed to protect or achieve the conditions (Clarke and Stankey 1979; Stankey et al. 1985).
Continued to next slide…
Used of The Model

…Continued

❖ This model emphasis the use of a series of different but integrated planning processes to determine
quantitative indicators that can assist in the formulation of an overall management plan. It concentrates
on establishing measurable limits to human-induced changes in the natural and social settings of
protected landscapes, and on identifying appropriate management strategies (Ceballos-Lascurain,
1996).

❖ It offers a far more modern approach to planning in protected areas as it allows for public participation.
Steps of The Model

❖ There are four components of LAC process:

The speciation of acceptable and Identification of management

achievable social and resource actions which will assist in
conditions achieving these conditions

An understanding of the relationship A monitoring and evaluation of

between existing conditions and effectiveness programme
those judged acceptable (Stankey et. al., 1985)
Steps of The Model

❖ There are nine steps devised to facilitate the LAC process. They are:

1. Identify issues concerns

2. Describe opportunity classes
3. Select indicators of resource and social conditions
4. Inventory existing conditions
5. Specify standards for resource and social conditions
6. Identify opportunity classes
7. Identify management actions
8. Select preferred opportunity classes
9. Implement actions and monitor conditions
AIDA- Analysis for Inter-connected
Decision Areas
Description of The Model

❖ AIDA originated from a study of building history design undertaken as part of research at the Institute
for Operational Research (Harary et al., 1965). It was later extended from the field of architecture to
cover projects involving engineering design and city planning (Luckman, 1966) after it was found that
decisions could be taken more swiftly and meaningfully if the interrelations between the decisions were
described early in the decision making process (Rusholme,1966).

❖ Soon after, Friend and Jessop (1969) formally described the AIDA process for the purposes of city
planning and introduced the concepts of time-dependent and time-delayed choices.

❖ Friend, Power, and Yewlett (1974) later created a theory for the evaluation of alternatives under
uncertainty.

❖ Finally, many researches have called for the AIDA technique to be fully modeled and implemented by
computers as a means of facilitate creative design within design teams (Luckman,1966; Hickling,
1978; Jones, 1980; Friend & Hickling, 1987;Bryant, 1989).
Used of The Model

❖ Traditionally, the method is used to understand how one decision affects the options available to
other decisions in a large- scale project.

❖ The method is to be used interactively with designers participating in a brainstorming session so

that ideas are added to AIDA and immediately combined with other compatible ideas.

❖ Specifically, AIDA can be used to aid in defining the problem, creating a sample of applicable design
solutions and evaluating these solutions against defined metrics.
Steps of The Model

❖ The process of design has been characterized

Task Confrontation
as a systematic process, using analytical
(problem)
techniques, to determine a solution to a given
problem. Information

Unsatisfactory Result
❖ The general process links the initial
Definition
understanding of the problem to the final artifact
through various activities.(Figure 1)
Creation
❖ Each activity is linked to its successive activity
through the condition that one should not pass
Evaluation
to the next activity until the initial one is fully
completed.
Solution Decision

Figure 1 The general process for

finding solutions (Pahl & Bietz, 1996)
Steps of The Model

1. In every design process, the first step is to confront the problem, examining the situation to determine its
true nature. The intensity of this analysis depends on the level of under-standing of the issues and the
experience the designers have with the problem.

2. Then, designers gather information on the problem at hand, including the requirements and constraints that
the solution should meet.

3. After which, a detailed problem definition can be made. This problem definition ensures that designers do
not needlessly pursue a solution to something that is not, in fact, the true issue.

4. Next, designers will use various techniques to create a solution and evaluate a solution.

5. Finally, they will decide whether to implement the solution based on the specifications gathered during the
information stage. Designers must repeat the process in each successive phase of the design process until
the designers arrive at a solution that they deem appropriate.
Steps of The Model

❖ Given this understanding of the design process, one can

further examine a generalized flow of work, as described
by Pahl and Beitz (1996), to understand how various
design techniques relate to one another (Figure 2).

❖ As the figure shows, most design methods are applicable

to one specific stage of the design process. One great
advantage to using the AIDA approach is that it can be
carried out in tandem or instead of several other
techniques throughout the general process of design.

Figure 2 The steps of the planning and

design process (Pahl & Bietz, 1996)
Thanks