Issuu on Google+

JAN GEHL SHAPING OF URBAN DESIGN THROUGH A HUMANISTIC AND PEDESTRIAN PERSPECTIVE

(Source: www.gehlarchitects.com)

University of Melbourne:

ABPL90316 The Shaping of Urban Design

Urban Design ‘Classic’ Report:

Jan Gehl’s Life Between Buildings (1971 in Danish, 1987 in English)

Due Date:

02/11/12


CONTENTS 1

INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 The Work (Approach) ............................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Concepts, Principles and Forms (Solutions) ......................................................................... 4 1.3 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 6 2 INFLUENCES ........................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Influences on Gehl’s Work .................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Comparable Works ................................................................................................................ 9 3 GEHL’S CONTRIBUTION ....................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Urban Design Theory ............................................................................................................ 9 3.2 Built Form (Examples) ........................................................................................................ 10 3.3 Urban Design Practice ........................................................................................................ 11 4 ‘SUSTAINABILITY’ .............................................................................................................. 13 4.1 Ongoing Validity of Gehl’s Work ........................................................................................ 13 5 CONCLUSION (ITS ‘PLACE’)............................................................................................... 14 APPENDIX 1 – TIMELINE OF URBAN DESIGN FROM A HUMANISTIC PERSPECTIVE ...... 15 APPENDIX 2 – TABLE OF METHODOLOGIES AND APPROACHES SEEN TO INFLUENCE GEHL’S (1987) WORK ..................................................................................................................... 16 APPENDIX 3 – TABLE OF SOLUTIONS SEEN TO ALSO INFLUENCE GEHL’S (1987) WORK ........................................................................................................................................................... 18 APPENDIX 4 – TABLE OF METHODOLOGIES, APPROACHES AND SOLUTIONS COMPARABLE WITH GEHL’S (1987) WORK.............................................................................. 19 BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................................................................................. 21

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1: Gehl’s (1987) Life Between Buildings approach studying the use of space as opposed to ‘function’ (Source: www.gehlarchitects.com) .......................................................................................... 3 Figure 2: Gehl’s (1987) concept of necessary, optional and social activities (Source: Author).............. 4 Figure 3: Gehl’s analysis of physical properties that inhibit/facilitate contact (Source: Gehl 1987 in Sheldon 2012 Wk8 p.34) ........................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 4: Gehl’s (1987) concept of the ‘self-reinforcing’ process (Source: Author) ............................... 5 Figure 5: Gehl’s key ‘spatial components’ concepts (Source: Gehl 1987 pp.81-120) ............................. 5 Figure 6: Images of the times Gehl was reacting against (Source: Gehl 2011 pp.6-7) ........................... 6 Figure 7: Pedestrianisation of Strøget, Copenhagen 1960-1962 (Source: www.gehlarchitects.com) ..... 7 Figure 8: Appleyard and Lintell’s (1972) observational methodology (Source: Gehl 1987 p.37)........... 8 Figure 9: Illustration of the process of application of Gehl’s (1987) theory (Source: Author) ............. 10 Figure 10: Gehl’s (1987) principles physically manifested (Source: Author) ....................................... 11 Figure 11: Gehl’s (1987) theory translated in Copenhagen (Source: www.gehlarchitects.com) .......... 11 Figure 13: Spheres of planning and urban design theory (Source: Author) .......................................... 12 Figure 14: Examples of the use of Gehl’s (1987) methodology, approach and solutions as used in Practice (Source: Author) ...................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 15: The change in Strøget, Copenhagen demonstrating a more holistically sustainable outcome (Source: Gehl 2011 and www.gehlarchitects.com) ................................................................................ 13 Figure 16: An example of Lynch’s hand-drawn ‘mental’ map demonstrating his approach (Source: Lynch 1960 p.149) .................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 17: An example of Cullen’s (1961) analysis and ‘notation’ demonstrating his approach (Source: Sheldon 2012 Wk.6 p.13) ......................................................................................................... 17 Figure 18: Examples of Alexander’s (1977) solutions unacknowledged but correlating with Gehl’s (1987) ideas (Source: Alexander 1977 pp.167-183) .............................................................................. 18 Figure 19: Illustrative example of Alexander’s comparable solution for incremental growth (Source: Alexander 1987 p.38-39) ........................................................................................................................ 19 Figure 20: Examples of Cooper Marcus and Francis’ (1990) comparable methodology, approach and illustrated solutions (Source: Cooper Marcus and Francis 1990 pp. 21 and 32) .................................. 20

2


1

INTRODUCTION

Urban Design has a long history of theory and practice. Cities have always been subject to urban design and ‘human intervention’ (Cuthbert 2007). However, the field of Urban Design and its associated terminology are relatively new; gaining momentum in the 1950’s with the widening of the scope of urban planning at the expense of ‘design’ (Matan 2011 and Sheldon 2012). In fact, urban design still lacks clear definition and has no distinct theory (Broadbent 1990 and Matan 2011). It is an integrated discipline; borrowing from, sharing with and contributing to other disciplines such as architecture, psychology, geography, landscape design and urban planning (Kallus 2001). This report investigates an example of ‘shared’ theory - Life Between Buildings by Danish Architect Jan Gehl. It explores the roots, influences, and ongoing validity of his work, in order to emphasise its significance in the evolution of urban design theory and practice. It concludes that Gehl’s (1987) work has made a significant contribution, particularly to the development of New Urbanism, and specifically through his observational methodology, ‘humanistic perspective’ approach, and universal solutions. Such analyses help us to better understand the forces that shaped the field of Urban Design, and subsequently the field itself.

1.1 The Work (Approach) Life Between Buildings is a book written by Jan Gehl in 1971 and translated into English in 1987. It investigated the social activities taking place in outdoor public spaces and their significance for urban planning. Gehl believed that planning should be primarily concerned with the everyday activities that happen in streets; “everyday life, ordinary situations, and space in which daily life is lived” (Gehl 1987 p.53). Gehl studied the relationship between patterns of space use (specifically outdoor activities) and the spatial properties of the physical environment. He asserted that building design was a means to an end, rather than the end itself. The design and building was simply a process, not the actual goal. The goal or end according to Gehl was the public life and the social activities that would take place in the space. Figure 1 is a good step-by-step illustration of his idea in Life Between Buildings. It starts with an investigation of human activities and attractions, then looks at how the spaces in the area support these activities, and finally demonstrates how this should influence building design.

Figure 1: Gehl’s (1987) Life Between Buildings approach studying the use of space as opposed to ‘function’ (Source: www.gehlarchitects.com)

3


1.2 Concepts, Principles and Forms (Solutions) Gehl structured his work under four headings, according to four important principles. Chapter 1 - Life Between Buildings - introduces the concept of necessary, optional and social activities (1987 p.9). That is, human activities in public space are deemed necessary, optional and social types of behaviours. This concept is summarised through the illustration in Figure 1 below.

Figure 2: Gehl’s (1987) concept of necessary, optional and social activities (Source: Author)

Each of these activities places very different demands on the physical environment. This concept becomes the backdrop for his analysis on the physical properties of an urban environment. Gehl then discusses the introduction of contemporary urban planning principles, arguing that 20th century design ideas (like functionalism) lacked ‘vitality’ in street life. Chapter 2 - Prerequisites for Planning - analyses the physical properties of human senses and social distances. Although the physical properties of the urban environment do not have a direct influence on the quality, content and level of social interaction planners can affect the possibilities for meeting people. An example of Gehl’s analysis is included as Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Gehl’s analysis of physical properties that inhibit/facilitate contact (Source: Gehl 1987 in Sheldon 2012 Wk8 p.34)

4


Gehl draws an interesting link between the dimension of a public space and a sense of place. Then he suggests that the concept of the ‘self-reinforcing’ processes, whereby individual events can stimulate others. This concept is summarised through the illustration in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4: Gehl’s (1987) concept of the ‘self-reinforcing’ process (Source: Author)

The 3rd chapter - To Assemble or Disperse - examines a series of spatial components that enhance/reduce pedestrian flows across and around the public space. Examples of these spatial components include orientation of entrances, multifunction areas, active frontages, visibility, density, and transport modes. These concepts he diagrams and examples are included in Figure 5. Below: To Assemble or Disperse

To Integrate or Segregate

To Invite or Repel

To Open Up or Close In

Figure 5: Gehl’s key ‘spatial components’ concepts (Source: Gehl 1987 pp.81-120)

Chapter 4 - Spaces for Walking, Places for Staying - suggests that for public spaces to be successful they need to have both moving and stationary activities. A successful public space has static activities (that is, human contact and social interaction) and the physical elements (like multi-functionality and a micro climate) that make people stop and linger (and interact with others), rather than just pass through. Gehl also identifies preferable sitting and standing spatial forms, the concept of the edge effect, and the principle that static occupation and levels of pedestrian movement are codependent. 5


1.3 Methodology Gehl’s book Life Between Buildings promotes a straightforward and modest approach to improving urban form. He uses observational methodology; studying ‘walkability’ and human-urban environment interactions by documenting the performance of urban spaces and analysing what factors influence their use (Matan 2011). His analysis centers on the ‘human dimension’; considering the urban environment through human senses, experienced at human scale and at the speed of walking. His analysis also quantifiably measures the success of the urban environment. That is, he measures levels of pedestrian flows, and the levels and length of stationary activity. The following section details the legacy of Gehl’s methodology, approach and solutions.

2

INFLUENCES

In discussing the roots of Gehl’s (1987) work Life Between Buildings, it is relevant to discuss his influences according to the time period prior and during his work being completed. Specific methodologies, approaches, and solutions of other theorists (from various fields of study) can both be seen to have influenced Gehl’s (1987) work and compare with his work. The following details the key influences on Gehl’s (1987) work and comparable work at the time of publication of Life Between Buildings by other theorists.

2.1 Influences on Gehl’s Work Matan (2011) discusses the history urban design from a humanistic perspective, summarising the major contributions into a timeline (refer APPENDIX 1 – TIMELINE OF URBAN DESIGN FROM A HUMANISTIC PERSPECTIVE on page 15 of this report). She argues that the study area of the relationships between people and the built environment has a long history (predominantly in sociology and psychology). Yet, the importance of the ‘human dimension’ in design only gained momentum in the 1960s. In this era, criticism of Modernist planning and architectural ideologies was at its peak (Matan 2011). However, when Gehl graduated as an architect from the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts in 1960, Modernism still ruled urban city planning. The year 1960 brought about two significant changes in urban planning – the notion of planning from above and from a distance (and with a focus on form) and the car invasion (Gehl 2011). These ideas are represented in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Images of the times Gehl was reacting against (Source: Gehl 2011 pp.6-7)

6


In the same year that Gehl graduated, research and urban theory hit a ‘watershed’ with the publication of Kevin Lynch’s (1960) The Image of the City, Gordon Cullen’s (1961) Townscape, and Jane Jacobs (1961) The death and Life of Great American Cities (Sheldon 2012). These works advocated a multitude of different ideas that were pro-street, heritage, learning from the past, local and place-based (Sheldon 2012). Suddenly city design became concerned with the elements of human experiences in the planning of urban environments (Broadbent 1990). In addition, 1962 saw the first ‘Pedestrianisation’ project in Gehl’s home city Strøget, Copenhagen (refer Figure 7), where he was practicing as an architect.

Figure 7: Pedestrianisation of Strøget, Copenhagen 1960-1962 (Source: www.gehlarchitects.com)

The period between 1960 and 1980 saw significant change in urban design theory and the concerns of urban planners and designers. These are clearly reflected in Gehl’s work; his interest in how people engage with their environment, and subsequent belief that this should be a big part of planning for urban environments. APPENDIX 2 – TABLE OF METHODOLOGIES AND APPROACHES SEEN TO INFLUENCE GEHL’S (1987) WORK on page 16 of this report examines these contributions and influences further, with work divided into categories of influence on methodology/approach and influence through solutions. There were many contributors to Gehl’s field of study, however only key influences have been included. Gehl was significantly influenced by Donald Appleyard’s study of livable streets in the late 1960s. This study compared the frequency of outdoor activities and contacts between friends and acquaintances in three parallel streets in San Francisco, with volumes of motorised traffic. It was later published in Appleyard and Lintell’s (1972) study The Environmental Quality of City Streets: The Residents’ Viewpoint. Gehl borrowed a methodology from Appleyard, one that later became a favourite of his. That was his observational methodology for walking (as seen in Figure 8). Interestly Appleyard’s (1981) further developed observational methodology for walkability in his book Liveable Streets continues to be replicated today (Matan 2011).

7


Figure 8: Appleyard and Lintell’s (1972) observational methodology (Source: Gehl 1987 p.37)

Gehl borrowed from Gordon Cullen’s (1961) Townscape the idea that a characteristic visual expression contributes to giving a sense of place and through this inspires people to be in a space (Gehl 1987 p.181). He borrowed idea of safety on the street from Jane Jacob’s (1961) The death and Life of Great American Cities (Gehl 1987 p.171). He borrowed ideas about ‘triangulation’ from William H. Whyte’s (1980) The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces and distance solutions from Kevin Lynch’s (1971) Site Planning (Gehl 1987 pp.169 and 163). He also borrowed findings from a study of comfort and micro-climatic conditions by Peter Bosselmann (Gehl 2011). APPENDIX 3 – TABLE OF SOLUTIONS SEEN TO ALSO INFLUENCE GEHL’S (1987) WORK on page 18 highlights solutions from other works that evidently also influenced Gehl’s (1987) theory. In summary, Gehl’s (1987) work was influenced by observational methodologies and the ‘humanistic perspective’ approach of the time. It is particularly interesting to see what ideas he grabbed from others, and what he did with them. Moreover, it is important to understand when trying to get a clear picture of the legacy of his work that Gehl did not exist in a bubble. In fact, he existed in constant dialogue with his contemporaries and was unafraid to engage with their work (right up until the publication of his book). 8


2.2 Comparable Works In addition to the above influences on Gehl’s (1987) work, in the years that followed his book publication, other theorists and practitioners were deriving comparative solutions. Specifically they were also finding solutions for spatial organisation, elements, form, detail, and micro-climate, as well as dimension solutions. Key theorists whose work can be seen to compare with Gehl’s are detailed in APPENDIX 4 – TABLE OF METHODOLOGIES, APPROACHES AND SOLUTIONS COMPARABLE WITH GEHL’S (1987) WORK on page 19. As mentioned above, a lot of Gehl’s work was influenced by his contemporaries and much was a product of the times. This is, particularly his observational methodology for walkability and human-urban environment interactions, and his ‘humanistic perspective’ approach. However, a few of his ideas were certainly unique. They were his ideas about passive and active activities, and the relationship with urban quality.

3

GEHL’S CONTRIBUTION

3.1 Urban Design Theory Strong criticism of Gehl’s (1987) theory is limited. Yet, criticism does exist on the broader, current urban design norm of New Urbanism (which Gehl’s work is categories as) (Haas 2008). His work occurred before the New Urbanism movement gathered momentum, and many of his ideas and approaches were fundamental to it. New Urbanism is the idea that promotes walkable neighbourhoods and a mixture of housing types and tenants. It sees that neighbourhoods should be developed with an emphasis on population diversity, pedestrian access, accessible public spaces, and design that celebrates local history and people. It sees that spatial relationships (based on traditional urban design) can create community (Brain 2006). Critiques of New Urbanism, often center on the idea that it cannot be applied universally. Cuthbert argues that: “while much urban design theory has considerable integrity, in other cases, it is clear that claims to ‘theory’ are merely descriptions of common urban features or processes… and have no universal application” (2007 p.180). Cuthbert’s criticism continues: “New Urbanism does not constitute theory in any meaningful sense, and remains a methodologically based practice with some rather dubious assumptions about the growth of cities and the generation of urban form… a product of inductive reasoning; and is practice and methodologically based… a successful marketing strategy coupled with a conservative ideology… Overall it is a template for practice, not a theory” (2007 p.209). Cuthbert raises numerous criticisms, which are worthy of consideration. In particular however, Gehl’s work can be to address the points Cuthbert makes about New Urbanisation being simply a template for practice and not applicable in all cases. Through the use of Gehl’s theory for example by network theorist Nikos Salingaros (2006) in talking about a ‘low speed’ city encouraging urban life, it is clear that Gehl’s work cannot be criticised as merely a template for practice. Salingaros points out, “urbanists must extend their logic to multiple scales and work through a knowledge of urban adaptive processes” (2006 p.105). Gehl’s observational methodology requires a process over multiple levels (from human to city scale), and each iteration allows for adaptability. This is illustrated in Figure 9. 9


Figure 9: Illustration of the process of application of Gehl’s (1987) theory (Source: Author) (Images: www.gehlarchitects.com)

Life Between Buildings “began to demonstrate new theory of urban design the rediscovers it potency through an emphasis on walkability… a more encompassing urban design approach” (Matan 2011 p.5). Matan suggests that Gehl’s work identifies scope for: “urban design to move beyond its limitations and to work from a base of experiential knowledge about the city and its use that focuses on a reflective and experiential approach, building on solid practice-based theory and on planning for pedestrians” (2011 p.6). As the current urban design norm, New Urbanism has been criticised as not being a theory, rather a way of practice. It has also been criticised for being merely a description of common urban design features and processes, and not universally applicable. In the paragraphs that follow, Gehl’s ideas (those which helped define and shape New Urbanism) can be seen to meaningful and useful theory, applicable, able to manifest physically in society and actually work.

3.2 Built Form (Examples) Practical examples of Gehl’s work that demonstrate his contributions to city form include his influential involvement in the modern urban planning of Copenhagen, Denmark, which transformed from a traffic-clogged city to café/leisure exemplar. In addition to Life Between Buildings, Gehl used the pedestrianisation of Strøget, Copenhagen, and the city itself for further research, writing scientific papers and articles on what happened and how people reacted (Matan 2011). Furthermore, as Copenhagen became more pedestrianised Gehl undertook further studies and published Public Spaces, Public Life where he described the effects on city use and how it was conceived. Importantly, the improvements in Copenhagen did not result from a single master plan. Rather, they were largely achieved through multiple, incremental changes, of which many were small in scale – aided by Gehl’s somewhat experiential approach. The physical manifestation of his work (such as through his Public Spaces Public Life 10


surveys) proved through more walkable urban design cities could be revitalised (Matan 2011). His work has translated into sidewalk widenings, tree plantings, burgeoning café culture, various types of car restrictions, and flourishing public space and art (Eckerson 2008). Figure 11 shows examples of his principles physically manifested in Strøget, Copenhagen.

Figure 10: Gehl’s (1987) principles physically manifested (Source: Author)

Figure 11 shows the effect of Gehl’s (1987) theory translated through multiple incremental changes in Copenhagen from 1960 to today.

Figure 11: Gehl’s (1987) theory translated in Copenhagen (Source: www.gehlarchitects.com)

Gehl’s (1987) theory (methodology, approach and solutions) and practical groundwork has been implemented by many cities including Melbourne, New York, Barcelona, Edinburgh, Oslo and Strasbourg among others with outstanding results. The most successful implementation has been in Melbourne and New York as recommendations from the his survey reports were integrated into the city plans and therefore embedded in localise political systems (Kielgast 2012).

3.3 Urban Design Practice Gehl’s work provides urban professionals with terminology and concrete methodology. His is a real approach to walkable urban planning and design, and his numerous successful implemented case studies (as seen through interviews and media coverage around the world) support his (1987) theory. His contribution to urban design practice has been a significant contribution to pedestrian-based planning and urban design, rather than popular New Urbanist public transport-based urban planning (such as implemented in Curitiba, Brazil) or Modernist car-based urban planning and design (refer Figure 13).

11


Pedestrianbased planning and urban design

Public Transportbased planning and urban design

Car-based planning and urban design

Figure 13: Spheres of planning and urban design theory (Source: Author)

Figure 14 below compares current examples of practitioners work with Gehl’s (1987) “low-tech” methodology (Matan 2011 p.330), his ‘humanistic perspective’ approach, and solutions for pedestrian-based planning and urban design. Gehl (1987) Resultant Practice 1. Observational Methodologies

Gehl (1987) Resultant Practice 5.Networks for Pedestrian Spaces

2.Desire Lines

6.Footpath Dimensions and Standards

3.Pedestrian Comfort and Perception

7. Accessibility and Spatial Organisation

4.Footpath Material and Form

Figure 14: Examples of the use of Gehl’s (1987) methodology, approach and solutions as used in Practice (Source: Author) (Images: 3. www.thehighline.org, 4 and 6. www.melbourne.vic.gov.au, 5 and 7. www.gehlarchitects.com)

Gehl’s greatest influence “lies in the progression and substantiation of quantitative methods to study human interactions with the built environment and in enabling these people-focused studies to be politically recognised as a necessity in city design and planning” (Matan 2011 p.328). Life Between Buildings has undoubtedly played a role in this.

12


4

‘SUSTAINABILITY’

4.1 Ongoing Validity of Gehl’s Work Gehl’s (1987) observational methodology for walkability and human-urban environment interactions are ‘low-tech’. That is, his methodology is replicable in any city with people able to conduct surveys. As such Gehl’s methodology facilitates locally specific and contextually relevant solutions. In addition, his ‘humanistic perspective’ approach ultimately facilitates cities and urban design to be about people, the ‘stakeholders’ of cities. As Matan suggests: “Gehl’s approach has ultimately shown its endurance: his surveys have been adaptable, integrating new ideas on the use of cities, new survey techniques but underneath they are probing the same material – how do you make public space more pedestrian friendly?” (2011 p.329). The case study of Strøget in Copenhagen demonstrates that over 100 years of taking a humanistic and pedestrian perspective approach activities have transitioned from necessary to optional. In addition, Gehl’s theory is proving to have more environmentally, economically and socially sustainable outcomes than most cities around the world (refer Figure 15 below). 2011

Figure 15: The change in Strøget, Copenhagen demonstrating a more holistically sustainable outcome (Source: Gehl 2011 and www.gehlarchitects.com)

Furthermore, in Life Between Buildings – In Current Social Situations sub-chapter, Gehl (2011 revisited ed.) offers solutions on how his theory should be perceived in current day. He identifies new ways of interacting, as a result of technology, and that these might substitute meetings in urban spaces. He also acknowledges social change due to the car and the changing work environment, and that social needs will be increasingly facilitated by the residential areas in the city. Therefore, Gehl’s (1987) methodology, approach and solutions in Life Between Buildings has the capacity to endure through changing times due to its deep humancentered focus. Even today it continues to have a growing impact on cities worldwide (Matan 2011).

13


5

CONCLUSION (ITS ‘PLACE’)

Jan Gehl’s (1987) work Life Between Buildings aims to revitalise cities through more walkable urban design. Gehl (1987) brings a significant contribution to urban design theory and practice through his observational methodology, ‘humanistic perspective’ approach and universal solutions. His emphasis on walkability, resultant from his study on people and human-urban environment interactions, has contributed terminology and methodology particularly to theory and practice of pedestrian-based planning and urban design. His theory is therefore not distinctly urban design; however Gehl’s translation of theory into practice and realised projects has given urban design a clearer definition. This report focused on Gehl’s own influences and the time from which they came for a few reasons. Firstly, it is interesting to trace where these significant ideas came from and the political/socio-economic climate of the time. Secondly, it is important to realise Gehl was not alone in his research, and was often sharing and borrowing work from his contemporaries as urban designers do today. Together, Gehl and his contemporaries formed methodologies, approaches and solutions that stood the test of time and became significant in urban design. So much so, that they continue to shape current theory and practice.

14


APPENDIX 1 – TIMELINE OF URBAN DESIGN FROM A HUMANISTIC PERSPECTIVE

(Source: Matan 2011 p.43)

15


APPENDIX 2 – TABLE OF METHODOLOGIES AND APPROACHES SEEN TO INFLUENCE GEHL’S (1987) WORK Work

Influence

1. Carmello Sitte’s (1889) City Planning According to Artistic Principles

Sitte (1889) was extremely influential to environmental-behavioural studies. His work was revived in the 1960s as his ideas provided those looking for alternatives to Modernism with another way to plan and design cities and streets for people (Matan 2011). Sitte’s theory was that designers should experience, observe and record established cities with enclosed spaces and harmonious building relationships to recognise compositional principles for civic design (Sheldon 2012). Gehl spent five years (1966-1971) living in Italy (the land of art) experiencing, observing and recording public squares and streets (Matan 2011).

2. Kevin Lynch’s (1960) The Image of the City

Lynch’s (1960) approach looked at the way people see and understand cities. He studied and documented how they perceive, use and interact with the spatial arrangement of their city – its ‘legibility’. He examined the way people make mental maps of the city, and importantly documented visual experiences from walking through cities (refer Figure 16).

Figure 16: An example of Lynch’s hand-drawn ‘mental’ map demonstrating his approach (Source: Lynch 1960 p.149) There is no doubt that the attention drawn towards the social and psychological attributes of the urban environment enriched Gehl’s understanding (Kallus 2001 p.134). 3. Gordon Cullen’s (1961) Townscape

Cullen’s (1961) approach to design, survey and analysis was the ‘humanistic perspective’, and as observed by the pedestrian: “if… we design our towns from the point of view of the moving person (pedestrian or car-borne) it is easy to see how the whole city becomes a plastic experience, a journey through pressures and vacuums, a sequence of exposures and enclosures, of constraint and relief” (Cullen 1961 p.10). His concepts that correlate with Gehl’s (1987) included a network of linked space, enticing movement and stopping, offering a sense of locality and place, and content among others (Sheldon 2012). His analysis (e.g. visual survey) were taken from the humanistic perspective (refer Figure 17).

16


Figure 17: An example of Cullen’s (1961) analysis and ‘notation’ demonstrating his approach (Source: Sheldon 2012 Wk.6 p.13) 4. Jane Jacobs (1961) The death and Life of Great American Cities

Jacobs (1961) studied the life on her street through observation. As a writer and neighbourhood activist she stressed the importance of the street in representing the city and therefore re-introduced environmental-behaviour studies to urban professions (Matan 2011). Jacobs advocated for: • A range of people whose lives are lived to different schedules; • Short street blocks (with many corner sites, passing and congregation points); • A mix of building types, conditions and ages; and • High concentrations of people who live, work and own locally, and identify with the place (Sheldon 2012). She was undoubtedly Gehl’s greatest influence in terms of approach, but lacked specific urban information such as dimensions, spatial organisation, elements, form, and urban detail (Matan 2011 and Sheldon 2012).

5. William H. Whyte’s (1969) Street Life Project

William H. Whyte use observational methodology for the study and recording of the use of spaces, behaviour and form in urban settings. He described urban public life objectively and in a measurable way. Street Life Project was an ongoing study of pedestrian behavior and city dynamics, and was eventually published in The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980). His ‘Street Life’ surveys observed and mapped people in public places to discover what were effective design elements. Gehl acknowledges Whyte’s methodology informed his own in Life Between Buildings (Gehl 2011).

17


APPENDIX 3 – TABLE OF SOLUTIONS SEEN TO ALSO INFLUENCE GEHL’S (1987) WORK Work

Influence

6. Christopher Alexander’s (1977) A Pattern Language

Gehl used Alexander’s (1977) solutions about the experiences regarding the edge effect and edge zones in public spaces (Gehl 1987 p.150). Additional solutions that Gehl (1987) does not acknowledge but evidently correlate with Alexander’s same (1977) work include solutions for continuous pedestrian networks, walkable distances, walk times, pedestrian density and safety (and activity for safety). Illustrations of these solutions are included as Figure 18 below.

Figure 18: Examples of Alexander’s (1977) solutions unacknowledged but correlating with Gehl’s (1987) ideas (Source: Alexander 1977 pp.167-183) 7. Projects for Public Spaces (1975) Improvement Projects

Project for Public Spaces (PPS) is an organisation founded by an ex-research assistant on Whyte’s (1969) Street Life Project. Gehl (1987 pp.34-36) acknowledges using some of PPS’ solutions for outdoor activities and quality improvements from improvement projects executed in New York and other cities. It is unclear however, if there were further ideas or solutions Gehl derived from PPS’ projects. Gehl (1987) examining the spatial properties of traditional medieval public spaces (such as dimensions and detailed design) in order to compare and contrast contemporary examples, but does allude to other examples that he learnt from. Union Square Park and Greenmarket, New York, is one example of a transformation project realised by PPS at the time.

18


APPENDIX 4 – TABLE OF METHODOLOGIES, APPROACHES AND SOLUTIONS COMPARABLE WITH GEHL’S (1987) WORK Work

Comparisons

8. Amos Rapoport’s (1977) Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a ManEnvironment Approach to Urban Form and Design

Rapoport (1977) developed environmental psychology research applicable to the built environment. He suggested pedestrian-oriented design was universal and successful throughout history, noting: “consistent design principles were present in pre-industrial, pedestriandependent environments across a variety of cultures and through a variety of points in history” demonstrating “ideal, universal characteristics of pedestrian-oriented design” (Rapoport 1977 in Isaacs 2000 p.152).

9. Rob Krier’s (1979) Urban Space

Krier believed historical understanding of urban space was missing in cities. Similarly to Gehl (1987), the first two chapters of his book Urban Space explained the conflict between traditional, shaped urban space and the leftover space created by Modernism. Krier looked at the relationship between the streets and the open spaces physical form through sections and elevations. Unlike Gehl however, he gave volumetric and 3D solutions to the city.

Christopher Alexander’s (1987) A New Theory of Urban Design

Alexander (1987) derived solutions including piecemeal/incremental growth, that every building should create coherent well-shaped adjacent public space, and that entrances and spatial structure of buildings should be coherent and consistent with their positions in the street and neighbourhood (Sheldon 2012 Wk6. P.41). Figure 19 shows Alexander’s illustration of the San Francisco waterfront site after 50 increments, demonstrating his idea of piecemeal/incremental growth. This compares with Gehl’s (1987) ideas for developing a network for pedestrian spaces (refer Figure 14).

Rapoport’s (1977) approach recommended a four-step process: first, an environment is sensed through perception; second, there is the encoding process of cognition; third, evaluations (assessments) of the environment are made; and fourth, action is taken (Isaacs 2000). This framework can be seen in Gehl’s (1987) methodology, and also his translation of his theory into practice or action.

Figure 19: Illustrative example of Alexander’s comparable solution for incremental growth (Source: Alexander 1987 p.38-39)

19


Allan B. Jacob’s (1985) Looking at cities

Jacobs (1985) identified and discussed visual clues and their various meanings in different environments. He advocated for planners to use observational methodology as the critical tool for analysis. Similar to Gehl he used photographs, drawings and maps to present ways to read the environment. Also similarly to Gehl, he believed pedestrian-based observation was the most effective tool, noting also the speed of travel and human senses; "It is more than a personal value or preference that leads me to the conclusion that walking is by far the best way to look at cities. There are other acceptable modes of observation, which can be appropriate, depending on the size and type of the area, and the purpose of looking. But nothing replaces looking while on foot. The speed of the other modes makes it difficult to see and explore details… Walking allows the observer to be in the environment with no barriers between the eyes and what is seen. The sensual experience -- noises, smells, even the feel of things -- is a real part of walking. There is more than you can take in: sights, sounds, smells, wondering what it might be like to live there, what it used to be like, and much more." (1985 pp.12-13)

Clare Cooper Marcus and Carolyn Francis’ (1990) People places: design guidelines for urban open space

Cooper Marcus and Francis (1990) made observations about pedestrian behaviour and quantified their findings. They were particularly interested in people’s emotional reactions to built form in urban open spaces. Similarly to Gehl (1987) Cooper Marcus and Francis also give spatial configuration solutions for pedestrian planning and health, as well as seating in outdoor public places. Figure 20 shows examples of their work comparable to observations and quantification methods of Gehl (1987).

Figure 20: Examples of Cooper Marcus and Francis’ (1990) comparable methodology, approach and illustrated solutions (Source: Cooper Marcus and Francis 1990 pp. 21 and 32)

20


BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Alexander, C. (1977). A Pattern Language. New York: Oxford University Press. 2. Alexander, C. (1987). A New Theory of Urban Design. NewYork: Oxford University Press. 3. Appleyard, D. (1981). Livable Streets. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 4. Appleyard, D. and Lintell, M. (1972). The Environmental Quality of City Streets: The Residents’ Viewpoint, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 38(2): 84-101. 5. Brain, D. (2006). Democracy and urban renewal, Places, 18(1): 18-23. 6. Broadbent, G. (1990). Emerging Concepts in Urban Space Design. London: Van Nostrand Reinhold (International). 7. Cooper Marcus, C. and Francis, C. (1990). People places: design guidelines for urban open space. New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold. 8. Cullen, G. (1961). Townscape. London: The Architectural Press. 9. Cuthbert, A.R. (2007). Urban design: requiem for an era – review and critique of the last 50 years, Urban Design International, 12: 177-223. 10. Eckerson, C. (2008). Melbourne: A Pedestrian Paradise. Available: http://www.streetfilms.org/melbourne/. Last accessed 29 October 2012. 11. Gehl, J. (1987, 2011 revisited ed.). Life Between Buildings - Using Public Space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 12. Gehl, J. (2011). Cities for people presentation. Available: http://issuu.com/alabarga/docs/jan-gehl---cities-for-people. Last accessed 29 October 2012. 13. Haas, T. (2008). New Urbanism and Beyond: Designing Cities for the Future. New York: Rizzoli. 14. Isaacs, R. (2000). The urban picturesque: an aesthetic experience of urban pedestrian places, The Journal of Urban Design, 5(2): 145–180. 15. Jacobs, A. B. (1985). Looking at cities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 16. Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House. 17. Kallus, R. (2001). From the Abstract to the Concrete: Subjective Reading of Urban Space, Journal of Urban Design, 6(2): 129- 150(22). 18. Krier, R. (1979). Urban Space. New York: Rizzoli. 19. Kielgast, L. (2012). The cities of the future are people-friendly cities. Available: http://denmark.dk/en/green-living/bicycle-culture/the-cities-of-thefuture-are-people-friendly-cities/. Last accessed 29 October 2012. 20. Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 21. Lynch, K. (1971). Site Planning. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 22. Matan, A. (2011). Rediscovering Urban Design through Walkability: An Assessment of the Contribution of Jan Gehl. Thesis presented for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Curtin University, Curtin University Sustainability Policy (CUSP) Institute. Available at: http://espace.library.curtin.edu.au/R/?func=dbin-jumpfull&object_id=170342&local_base=GEN01-ERA02 23. Rapoport, A. (1977). Human Aspects of Urban form, Towards a ManEnvironment Approach to Urban Form and Design. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

21


24. Salingaros, N. A. (2006). ‘Compact city replaces sprawl’, in A. Graafland and D. Hauptmann (eds), Crossover: Architecture, Urbanism, Technology, Rotterdam, The Netherlands: 010 Publishers, pp. 100-115. 25. Sheldon, B. (2012). ABPL90316 The Shaping of Urban Design Lecture Series. Melbourne School of Design, Melbourne University. 26. Sitte, C. (orig. 1889, 1965). City Planning According to Artistic Principles. New York: Random House. 27. Whyte, W. H. (1980). The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Washington D.C.: Conservation Foundation.

22


Jan Gehl - Shaping of Urban Design Through a Humanistic and Pedestrian Perspective