Module 6

Module 6 material discussed the movements currently shaping urban design and posed the question, what does the future of urban design look like? The answer is found by reflecting upon our journey from hunter/gatherers to the most advanced species on Earth.

            Humans impact this world more than any other creature. In the developed world we use technology to build, communicate, travel, produce food, and almost every other facet of life. We find ourselves vastly removed from what human existence began as. Few people in the developed world harvest their own food. We have created a separation between what keeps us alive and what our daily lives consist of. Ancient humanity lived solely to achieve the simplest needs of food, shelter, and reproduction. Modern day humanity lives to go to work to earn money to pay for the necessities of life. Humanity has greatly strayed from natural order.

There is a very real danger involved in the lifestyle mentioned above. Many movements have begun to address issues such as the separation between the fields and our tables. But these movements can only achieve so much. There is one extreme, living off the land producing your own food, living solely to survive. The other extreme is living totally separate from the natural world and forgetting our dependence upon it. The altruistic approach of living off of the land is not feasible considering the current and ever growing world population. The dangers of living separate from nature are beginning to show themselves in society.

            Considering the above leads to the answer of what is next for urban design. By returning to our origins and assessing the evolution of human society we can find the root causes of the current problems plaguing the urban landscape. Humanity’s urbanization was the biggest step in our evolution. By leaving nomadic lifestyles and coming together in communities to share the burdens of survival humanity began its journey to current day society. The foundation of urbanism is community. The notion of people sharing the burden of survival to make the collective quality of life better is the answer to what the future of urban design should be. Human connection and interdependence is what has made us the apex species on the planet. It is what brought about the advent of art, science, and philosophy. We have community to thank for all of our advancements. If everyone spent their time farming no one would have the time to develop technology, pursue medicine, and understand the chemical and physical composition of our world. Community and its evolution has allowed us to thrive. Yet, community is also what has allowed humanity to create its current predicament of separation from nature. As such, we must realize the power we wield and always asses the way that we utilize it.

             Community is the answer. Urban design must progress into the future built upon an understanding and emphasis on creating and strengthening community. Creating space that creates healthy community must be the highest aspiration of urban planners. Beginning with community, and building up and out from that point, we can solve the problems we face and move forward to continually improve the quality of life. Community must begin at the smallest source. There must be diversity in the built environment. Communities are different and all for reasons crucial to their success. Each community must be built and improved with respect to its unique attributes. Urban design will continue to solve complex and vast problems and our solutions will be founded upon community. 

Module 5

The material covered in module 5 discussed the way codes and regulations are responsible for the creation of cities, and the most popular ways that design interacts with codes and regulations to create urban space. The regulatory hierarchies created by a society greatly affect the built environment. The act of building is influenced by the government all the way down to the end user. Designers have developed common ways of creating the spaces they design in accordance with the abundance of rules and regulations of a given location. The existence of codes and regulations is inherent in a society and has been for centuries. The crucial take-away is how to create space that does not just exist. The key is to create space that creates community and connection even though the administrative regulations tend to fracture development.

            Designing an entire city is one ideology that emerged in response to regulation. More commonly called total urban design, the goal is to design an entire city avoiding the fragmentation caused by zoning, and codes. Designers could create a cohesive zoning and code that functioned in accordance with the master city plan. Unfortunately the ability to design and create an entire city from nothing is very difficult to achieve. Cities grow over decades and even centuries. To build a new city entirely in the current built environment would require the plan to begin with a location that has all the requirements to begin expansion. The master plan would be the doctrine that guided the city in its growth. This avenue is not impossible, but it is very rare. Progressing forward in building future cities the total urban design approach would help create cohesive urban space.

            The total urban design ideology does not address current cities. The resources and approval required to implement a master plan over an existing city is not feasible or, arguably, possible. Instead, other approaches must be adopted for creating effectual urban space in existing cities.

            This is where I noticed a correlation in all the smaller urban design approaches, connections. A great majority of successful urban designs enhanced connections. At the beginning of the semester I stated that the inherent intent of urban design should be to create and enhance community. Connection, both geographically and socially fosters community.

            The United States began extensive expansion in the 1950’s with the creation of the freeway system. With that rapid expansion apparent in almost all American infrastructure it is now the urban designer’s responsibility to fill in the voids left in the social fabric. The Chicago Riverwalk is an example of creating density and community space around the river that served industrial functions but now serves as a connection.

          Urban design has successfully pulled sprawling city-scapes together via transportation. The use of rail lines connecting the city reduces dependence on vehicular traffic. This reduction then allows for the adaptation of once-busy streets to human scale areas. An example of this connection is Boston’s Big Dig. Re-purposing old infrastructure that once served as transportation on the machine scale to be used on the human scale. This pulls the surrounding areas together through a common spine of connection and fosters community.

            Even though the existing regulations and codes seem like obstructions, urban designers have been able to work through and with these channels to create community space. The key in current urban design in large cities is to create connections. Creating connections creates community.

             

               

Module 4

           I chose three projects, one which addresses public space, another which focuses on the private living space, and finally a project that incorporates both public and private space to create a “complete” urban environment.  

Chicago Riverwalk

The Riverwalk in Chicago is a public urban space. The space is located along the Chicago River. The river existed as a natural river but was engineered as Chicago developed industrially. The Riverwalk project has helped to reclaim the river for recreational engagement. The project was a joint effort including the Chicago Department of Transportation, and several architectural and design firms. The project spans five blocks along the river. The image below details the layout of the Riverwalk.[1]

Using the design constraints that accompanied the sight and project the design team produced the plan for 5 separate functions or spaces. Each space is denoted by the existing infrastructure. Each block became a unique program. This was a highly effective answer to the design problem faced. The East most block of the Riverwalk is the marina plaza which is home to restaurants and river seating. The next section of the river serves as an access to the river for recreational purposes and is named the Cove. The next block is called the river theater and is a sculptural plaza comprised of zig-zagging stairs leading down to the water’s edge. Another plaza lies in the next block. The final space is the jetty, which is comprised of floating piers with botanical gardens for educational purposes.  

The project is effective because it effectively engages with the city that surrounds it. Instead of ignoring the destructive infrastructure imposed upon the river during the industrial period, the project uses the infrastructure as a platform for creating an engaging urban space. By dividing the spaces along the Riverwalk the space becomes far more diverse and effective in its function. The project includes retail and restaurants which provide a reason to visit the Riverwalk. Recreation exposes and encourages the community to commit to the environmental well-being of the river. Public plazas encourage pubic interaction, furthering the creation of community.

This project is an example in designing using a city’s aesthetic and history to create a space for the community that is engaging and inclusive. This space is an example of adaptive problem solving in a complex urban space with the end-result of a public space that makes the city a more cohesive and engaged community.

Roam

            Roam is an urban housing development in Bali, Indonesia. Much like the Chicago Riverwalk this development made use of existing infrastructure. Designed by Alexis Dornier, this space’s purpose is to create community by being a model of a micro-society. Constructed by remodeling and building upon three existing apartment buildings that were run-down, the finished project is a space that is an example of successful living space that fosters communal living.[2]  

            Roam is designed to provide living space, the most private space. The project succeeds in creating private space for habitants but it also provides the residents opportunity for communal interaction due to its density, layout, and accommodations. The three buildings create a courtyard which each residence looks in upon. This creates an intimate space but the intimate space is shared by all inhabitants which makes all of the residents feel connected via the shared intimate space. The roof top also creates connection with a patio, restaurant, bar, lounge, and café. The two rooftops are connected with a bridge spanning the courtyard. Another component that encourages creation of community is a kitchen that is used by all of the residents.  

            The project is very effective. It offers private living space within a dense, yet small complex that also offers exceptional opportunity to connect with neighbors. In essence the space creates a deeper sense of community by allowing the residents to share and interact in their safe and intimate space.

            This project should serve as precedence for the creation and deepening of community in an urban space by designing housing that furthers the advent of communal interaction. This model, used in an overall urban space within a city would greatly help the society of that city to feel included and connected as a collective whole.

Atlantic Station

            This is yet another example of a project that began by using an existing infrastructure left behind by an aging city. In the case of Atlantic Station in Atlanta, Georgia, the designers began with a site that was home to the Atlantic Steel Mill. The design of this project began in the 90’s and reached completion in 2005. Developed by Jim Jacoby, the urban space of Atlantic Station incorporates business, retail, living, recreation, and transit within the confines of this project to create a cohesive urban space that people live, work, and socialize within. The goals of this project are to reduce urban sprawl, focus on public transit, reduce pollution from daily transit, and create opportunity for people to live and work within close proximity.[3]

            This is an example of a project that has well laid plans and would be arguably successful if it was designed with more attention to the human scale. The concept and layout of the plan create a successful urban space. By creating a dense space that provides inhabitants access to retail, food, their work, their homes, and their recreation the end result is the creation of human interaction, the creation community. The main retail area, known as the District, is an outdoor style mall with opportunities for retail, food, and entertainment. The design is successful at the human scale in this area. It becomes unsuccessful in its housing. The housing is primarily condominium style living which falls short of creating the community and inclusion seen in the Roam projects previously mentioned. The social and entertainment venues are the retail and food as well as a movie theater. The project falls short of creating the successful public space seen in the Chicago Riverwalk project.

            The most important lesson derived from the urban space at Atlantic Station is to invest great time and care in the design and development of the human scale components necessary for successful community. The idea of combining work, living, and recreation all in one area that is easily accessible is a good idea. The flaw is that, simply designing on that pretense leads to department store style developments. The plans are nearly homogenous and the retailers simply buy spots in the development. Condominiums are built and humans live closer but do not necessarily interact and bond into a community when urban space is created in this manner.

Synopsis

            Successful Urban Space is created when the overall plan does not neglect the human scale. The project must be contextually bound to the city as seen in the Chicago Riverwalk. The living spaces must provide opportunity for growing as neighbors and friends as seen in the Roam project in Indonesia. If the concepts that made the Riverwalk and Roam successful were implemented in the design of an overall Urban Space like Atlantic City then the result would be the creation of community.

---

[1] "Chicago Riverwalk / Chicago Department of Transportation" 14 Jan 2016. ArchDaily. Accessed 26 Oct 2016. <http://www.archdaily.com/780307/chicago-riverwalk-chicago-department-of-transportation-plus-ross-barney-architects-plus-sasaki-associates-plus-jacobs-ryan-associates-plus-alfred-benesch-and-company/>

[2] "Roam / Alexis Dornier" 25 May 2016. ArchDaily. Accessed 26 Oct 2016. <http://www.archdaily.com/787696/roam-alexis-dornier/>

[3] Atlantic Station Redevelopment. Retrieved October 26, 2016, from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/pha/AtlanticStation080904HC-GA/AtlanticStation080904HC-GA.pdf

Module 3

The material in our third module focused on a select list of prominent urban design theorists. The ideas and philosophies of many offered insight and new perspective. One particular theorist caught my attention more than the others. I was very interested in the ideas surrounding place and placelessness presented by Edward Relph.

Edward Relph is a Canadian geographer who is well known for his writing on place and placelessness. His work addresses how spaces are experienced and how they change over time. Relph was a professor and chair of Social Sciences at the University of Toronto from 1991-2010. The following quote is what made me decide to focus my writing on his ideologies.

Referring to place Relph says, “It has to evolve, to be allowed to happen, to grow and change from the direct efforts of those who live and work in places and care about them...No matter how sophisticated technical knowledge may be, the understanding of others' lives and problems will always be partial. Just as outsiders cannot feel their pain, so they cannot experience their sense of place. I believe, therefore, that it is impossible to make complete places in which other people can live.”[1]

This quote was very profound to me. The point that place is often designed and built by outsiders is a direct cause of the flawed urban system. The outsider (designer, planner, government agency, etc…) cannot truly understand the intricacies of a specific society inhabiting an urban space. This theory aligns with some aspects of formal theory of urban design. Formal theory maintains that the overall aesthetic and cohesiveness of the city should be emphasized and is directly correlated with a focus on the human scale. Place must be unique and reflect the society that resides within it. The success or failure of urban community depends entirely on the efforts of the society which inhabits that space. I believe this is one of the reasons that Jane Jacobs was successful in her fight for urban space. Community cannot be created from the outside. Architects, planners, and engineers cannot create effectual space by transplanting strategies from outside factors.

For example, the idea of the three main theories of urban design, discussed in my second blog, can be a flawed strategy for design. My first blog addressed the inability to successfully design in a linear method. Classifying urban theory into three distinct categories is linear design. The theories can lend insight but can also cause an inherent inability to create complete spaces. This inability is manifested if the design addresses the problem from the outside with a predetermined theory in mind. When the designer associates his/her self with one of the three prevailing theories and then progresses into designing through that “lens” the end result will be placelessness rather than a cohesive, identifiable community. Place is created from within, by the members of that place for the members of that place. Community is built from within, by the members of that space for the members of that space.

Edward Relph states that the notion of creating successful urban space is somewhat of a misnomer. Place is constantly evolving based on internal influences of those who work and live within the space. The definition of successful place making is creating a living space that allows constant evolution and adaptation due to direct input from its inhabitants.

---

[1] Edward Relph

Module 2 Response

The material for this module was focused on the prevailing theories and philosophies of Urban Design. There is not one right way to design effective urban space as mentioned in my previous blog. This being said, there is great value in studying and understanding the theories surrounding urban design.

Societal Theory maintains that the city is an expression of society. Social re-organization must accompany special re-organization in this theory. Formal Theory suggests that the form of an urban space is what defines the society that inhabits it. The attention is given to form rather than function since the built environment will likely exist to experience a variety of uses. Environmental Theory presents that idea that urban space is a living environment that must suit its inhabitants. This theory places great value in the human scale rather than focusing on the city scale.

Societal theory includes Le Corbusier’s Contemporary City. Corbusier suggested that the city exists as a machine. Different parts of the city serve different functions all of which come together to create a functioning city, a functioning society. It is beneficial to pay attention to the city scale when designing as Corbusier did. Understanding how the city functions from the perspective of a machine lends valuable insight and should be considered in design. His ideas, and the ideas of societal theory, neglect the importance of the human scale and creating a sense of place and belonging.

In contrast, environmental theories are focused on the human scale. It is important to consider the individual living environment created in a city. Comparing the city to a machine removes the human aspect. The city must feel like home to create successful community. Focusing on issues like livable streets rather than highways improve the quality of life. Worrying only about the human scale neglects many of the large scale, big picture connections that create successful cities. Both need the other. To exist and function the city needs humans who enjoy and belong to the space they inhabit. To live in the city humans must contribute to the overall society that is made possible by the “machine” aspects of the city.

The built environment drastically influences its habitants. The form of the city from each individual building to the overall infrastructure has great effect on the society as a whole. Formal theories believe in the cohesive aesthetic of a city. The city is considered as deteriorated from a more complete historical state. The city is a total architecture rather than individual buildings. This is valuable in that it creates a desire to remain connected to whatever makes the city unique and special. To create a sense of place and identity it is important to have an overarching aesthetic. This form of thought and design can lead to homogeneity. A city that is comprised of entirely similar buildings loses its ability to fulfill the unique and individual needs of each area and use.

In all, there are many useful processes for addressing the design problem at hand. The theories mentioned within the discipline of Urban Design are not good answers on their own. The ideals of each become much more effective when combined and used in accordance with given design problem.                   

Module 1 Response

Many of the initial lessons in Arch 585 have discussed the process of designing successful urban spaces. As I took notes on the PowerPoints and read the assigned readings I remembered a paper I wrote freshman year of college regarding successful design. I stopped the powerpoint and re-read that paper. It fit with the ideas I had begun to formulate for writing this post. I fixed my interest upon what creates successful design. Designing is no small task. Designing an urban environment is the pinnacle of all design problems in complexity as well as impact. So I asked myself what is “good” design?

Good design is not linear. Good design is case specific. Good design is unique. There is not a set, correct linear progression within effective design. The process of design is unique for each problem, for every rendition, for every designer. The world is, “comprised of and largely shaped by unpredictable forces, flows, interactions, collisions, and transformations.”[1] The world is naturally disordered. The problems we strive to solve are far too intricate, too complex to be bounded by a set of design rules, a “how to design” step by step manual. Bruce Mau proposes that successful design should, “Capture accidents. The wrong answer is the right answer in search of a different question. Collect wrong answers as part of the process. Ask different questions.”[2] The key to successful design begins with the acceptance of the disorder presented by the world’s problems and the recognition that there is no one right answer but that there is always a better answer.

An example of mankind’s linear tendencies is the way in which lumber is produced. It used to be that a person in need of lumber would seek out a tree that fit their needs. Now human technology has allowed for all trees to be cut down and processed into homogenous building blocks, rather than unique fits for unique problems.

We seek out answers like the one proposed in Le Corbusier’s Dom-ino house, an open plan, mass produced residential structure. Corbusier hoped to manufacture the structures much like the Ford assembly line. The structures would be erected side by side for massive housing developments. This solution disregards all context of existing communities. Rather it is a linear solution to a far more intricate and vast problem.     

Design should be approached differently for each project. There cannot be a set in stone process that outlines the steps to design. Instead, each problem is as unique in its answer as it is unique in its complexity. When form is created by a designer to truly create something that is effectual, the designer must be, “in tune”, with the medium in which he or she is operating. “When you want to give something presence, you have to consult its nature. And there is where design comes in.”[3] To design well we must begin with the basics of necessity and carefully asses the best avenues for meeting the given needs. Care must be taken to avoid falling into linear thinking which presents standardized answers rather than answers that are tailored to the distinct problem. Answers must be pertinent to the factors that define the problem. Why does the problem exist and which “tree” is the best fit for creating the best solution. Only through careful investigation and case specific solutions can more effective solutions be found.

  

---

[1] Randall Teal, Preparing the Ground: Discovering the Everyday Practices of Design (Kendall Hunt Publishing Company, 2012), page 42

[2] Bruce Mau, Incomplete Manifesto for Growth. 2011. http://www.brucemaudesign.com/4817/112450/work/incomplete-manifesto-for-growth 

[3] Louis Kahn.

About Me

My name is Austin and I am studying Architecture at the University of Idaho. I enjoy building what I design, and as such would like to pursue a career in designing and building custom houses.

I believe that the most basic intent of Urban Design is/should be the creation of community. Community is the force that drives our world. Children are molded by the communities they grow up within, whether positive or negative. The foundation of any human driven change must begin with the creation of positive community. Architecture has defined cultures since humans first created community. Architects concern themselves with the ways which the built environment affects its users. By building thoughtful, well-designed structures for human use we directly influence our communities and world as a whole.  

This is the lens through which I will be writing this semester as I learn more about Urban Theory.