URBAN DESIGN

GROUP NO.- 1
2012EAL03||2012EAL06||2012EAL09||2012EAL16||2012EAL19|| 2012EAL34
Department of Architecture and Landscape Design

URBAN DESIGN AND HUMAN SCALE

Urban designers offer differing definitions of human

scale. Alexanderet al state that any buildings over four
storeys tall are out of human scale.
Lennard set the limit at six storeys.
Hans Blumenfeld sets it at three storeys. (FIG.-1)
In taller buildings, Roger Trancik says that lower floors
should spread out and upper floors step back before they
ascend, giving human-scale definition to streets and
plazas. (FIG.-2)
Several authors suggest that the width of buildings, not
just the height, defines human scale. For human scale,
building widths should not be out of proportion with
building heights, as are so many buildings in the suburbs.

FIG 1

FIG 2

URBAN DESIGN AND HUMAN SCALE

Street trees can moderate the scale of tall
buildings and wide streets. According to Henry
Arnold, where tall buildings or wide streets would
intimidate pedestrians, a canopy of leaves and
branches allows for a simultaneous experience of
the smaller space within the larger volume. He
posits that where streets are over 40 feet wide,
additional rows of trees are needed to achieve
human scale. Hedman recommends the use of
other small-scale elements such as clock towers to
moderate the scale of buildings and streets.

FIG 3

(FIG.-3)
Richard Hedman emphasizes the importance
of articulated architecture and belt courses and
cornices on large buildings to help moderate
scale. (FIG.-4)

FIG 3

FIG 4

URBAN DESIGN AND WALKABILITY

Streets set the stage for many dimensions of community life. Streets that are lined with trees, sidewalks, building
entries and windows make walking more attractive whether for errands or recreation. Well-designed streets also make
it easier to meet neighbors and partake in community life. Their character can also have a profound effect on the
image and identity of a city or neighbor hood

FIG 5

FIG 6

With segregated uses fig-5, walking is discouraged as trips tend to be more circuitous and often converge along heavily-traveled collector streets.
Complementary uses set with and interconnected street network fig.6 bring together essential aspects of community and minimizes reliance on the car.

URBAN DESIGN AND WALKABILITY

Street-Facing Architecture
Streets are more attractive and safe when they are lined with building entrances windows, rather than parking lots or
blank garage doors. By minimizing front setbacks, buildings contribute activity and informal surveillance to the
street, which encourages walking. Porches provide families with a protected place where they can engage in
neighborhood life. By reducing setbacks, buildings also establish a more intimate and village-like scale. Established
areas that lack pedestrian-supportive architecture can transform over time through infill, intensification, and
redevelopment.

FIG 7

FIG 8

Street-facing Architecture. Streets lined by blank walls and parking lots fig.-7can feel unsafe and uninviting and can discourage walking even when
local conveniences are nearby. Street-facing buildings line pedestrian routes with entrances and windows thereby contributing to neighborhood
activity, informal surveillance, and visual interest..

URBAN DESIGN AND WALKABILITY

Corridors-Boulevards
Aging strip commercial properties along Freedom Blvd., East Lake Avenue, Main Street (between Freedom and
Pennsylvania), and Walker Street represent opportunities for future infill and redevelopment. Change and
intensification of these areas can be shaped to create mixed-use boulevards, which can offer a range of shops and
services and encourage walking for many trips. Street trees and other enhancements can help beautify these
frequently traveled routes.

FIG 9

FIG 10

Transforming Major Corridors. Many General Plan policies encourage the transformation of existing strip commercial corridors into mixed-use
boulevards to bring conveniences closer to residents, deliver needed housing, and support transit.

URBAN DESIGN AND WALKABILITY

Street-Facing Buildings.
In residential, retail, office, or
mixed-use areas, zoning revisions
and design guidelines should
encourage buildings that abut
streets and trails in a fairly
continuous way.
Mitigating Parking.
Parking lots, garage doors, loading
zones, and mechanical equipment
should be set back away from
streets and trails. Along a street or
trail, parking can be set below
buildings but should not be
conspicuous.
FIG 11

Fig.-11Street-facing Architecture. In the Downtown and along

corridors, mixed-use buildings are encouraged to provide
needed housing and desirable retail conveniences.

FIG 12

Fig.-12 Mitigating Parking. Building entrances, windows, and

activity can be placed closer to the street when parking is
placed behind or below buildings

URBAN DESIGN AND WALKABILITY

Housing in the Corridors.
The City should solicit the interest of mixed-use and residential developers who have demonstrated a commitment to
urban housing of a high quality. Promotional materials might describe each corridors unique advantages, the
demographics and buying power within its market area, and a proforma of generic development opportunities.
Additionally, clear design guidelines and a pattern book of preferred housing types should be developed.

FIG 13

FIG 14

Fig.-13 Transforming Major Corridors. Many General Plan policies encourage the transformation of existing strip commercial corridors into mixeduse boulevards to bring conveniences closer to residents, deliver needed housing, and support transit

SPACE PERCEPTION AND IMPLICATION.

DESIGN WITH PSYCHOLOGY :
The leap from the traditional environment to the modern world brought many changes with it. Behaviour, in
traditional environments, is just as constant as the environment itself; they actually reinforce each other: the
environment provides mnemonic cues about the expected behaviour, while a constant, routinized and habitual
behaviour reinforces the need for a traditional environment. This type of behaviour is almost automatic, since the
range of choices is greatly restricted in traditional cultures, thus the response tends to be more automatic, consistent
and uniform. [12] Modernist architecture was seen as a rupture in this context, from a historical and a traditional point
of view. It was a rupture which tried to erase everything and to restructure the world according to its own functionalist
rules. The space of modernist architecture was fundamentally utilitarian, a feature, which did not coincide with the
behaviour or what was expected traditionally from an architectural environment. Physical space was changing faster
than the customs, the behaviour and the coding system used by the vast majority. In order to illustrate this gap, we
will study two projects designed by Le Corbusier

SPACE PERCEPTION AND IMPLICATION.

Villa Bensus Ker-Ka-R in Vaucresson, France - was designed together with Pierre Jeaneret for
George Bensus in a Parisian suburb, in 1923. It is Le Corbusiers first attempt to put into
practice his purist ideas: he uses just surfaces - plain facades with ribbon windows, lines - a
flag pole, two poles sustaining the canopy above the entrance and a plain handrail with
horizontal bars on top of it, counterbalancing the volume of the bow-window; and points - a
patterned surface to the right of the entrance

SPACE PERCEPTION AND IMPLICATION.

Quartiers Modernes Frugs Assembly in Pessac, France [12, 17] - the fifty one units
assembly designed in 1924 at the request of Henri Frugs, a businessman with progressive
ideas who wished to offer his workers state-of-the-art dwellings. He assigned Le Corbusier
with this commission.

REFERENCES:
[1]. Book: URBAN DESIGN and HUMAN SCALE
[2]. Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability, Reid
Ewing & Susan Handy, ISSN: 1357-4809 (Print) 1469-9664 (Online) Journal homepage:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjud20
[3]. Thesis: understanding human scale and the importance of its relationship with
enclosure, Austin H.
Mackesy-Buckley, Submitted to the School of Architecture,
Victoria University of Wellington in July.
[4]. Scale in Civic Design, Blumenfeld, H. (1953),The Town Planning Review, 24(1), 3546.
[5]. A vision of Britain: a personal view of architecture (illustrated.), Doubleday, (Prince of
Wales), C. (1989).
[6]. Boffa Miskell, Wellington City Council, & Randles Straatviet Architects. (2011).
[7]. Wellington Towards 2040: Smart Capital. Wellington City Council. Canniffe, E. (2006).
[8]. Urban ethic: design in the contemporary city. Taylor & Francis. Carmona, M. (2003).
[9]. Public places, urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design. Architectural Press.
Clarke, D. M. (2005).
[10].Descartess Theory of Mind. Oxford University Press.