Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Toward an
Integrative Theory
of Urban Design
Toward an Integrative
Theory of Urban Design
123
Hossein Bahrainy
Faculty of Fine Arts
University of Tehran
Tehran
Iran
Ameneh Bakhtiar
University of Arts
Isfahan
Iran
ISSN 2367-1092
ISSN 2367-1106 (electronic)
University of Tehran Science and Humanities Series
ISBN 978-3-319-32663-4
ISBN 978-3-319-32665-8 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-32665-8
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016937353
Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or
part of the material is concerned, specically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microlms or in any other physical way,
and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software,
or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specic statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in
this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor
the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material
contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature
The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland
Preface
A new eld of the study (or an agglomerate of the old ones) has been
emerging in the United States and in other countries since the turn of the last
century. This is the eld of urban design. Increasingly, however, questions
have been raised by academicians, theorists, and professionals concerning the
essence, legitimacy, knowledge base and content and methods of inquiry
of the eld. Lynch (1984), for example, considers city-design as an artistic
activity, and based on the way it was taught and practiced in early 1980s calls
it as immature arts. Sorkin (2007, 2009), in two controversial statements on
the status and fate of urban design states: Urban design has reached a dead
end. To justify his claim, he continues: Estranged both from substantial theoretical debate and from the living reality of the exponential and transformative growth of the worlds cities, it nds itself pinioned between nostalgia
and inevitabilism, increasingly unable to inventively confront the morphological, functional, and human needs of cities and citizens. While the task
grows insurgency and complexity, the disciplinary mainstreaming of urban
design has transformed it from a potentially broad and hopeful conceptual
category into an increasingly rigid, restrictive, and boring set of orthodoxies.
Cuthbert (2007) believes that traditional Urban Design theory is anarchistic
and insubstantial in the sense that there is no cement binding the pieces
together. This is, according to him, the situation, which has been ongoing for
the best part of 50 years, offering unprecedented opportunity for debate and
resurrection.
Cuthbert (2007) suggests that the discipline of urban design should not
seek to justify its existence through any of the normal channels adopted by
mainstream theory. It should avoid the vain attempt to generate an internally
coherent theory and instead reorient its efforts to making connections with
social science through the mechanism of political economy, a synthesis
discipline which already has a history of two and half centuries. Here in this
book, however, the synthesis discipline is language with a much longer
history and better qualications to represent knowledge and construct an
integrative theory.
vi
In many ways, however, the practice of urban design today may be more
widely recognized in the public and private sectors as a source of potential
solutions to urban problems than it has been over the past 50 years (Soja
2009; Schurch 1999). This is the case, where confusion as to the content,
purpose, knowledge base, and tools of urban design has influenced its adequacy and effectiveness. In this regard Madanipour (1997, 2004) claims that,
in spite of growing attention to the subject and the rising number of academics and professionals who are engaged in urban design and widespread
popularity, the term is still suffering from ambiguities. Dualities of scale
(macro vs. micro), subject emphases (visual vs. spatial and spatial vs. social),
process versus product, public versus private, objective-rational versus
expressive-subjective, and also discipline versus interdisciplinary activity are
of major concern to the members of the society and others.
Inam (2002), criticizing the contemporary urban design as a vague,
supercial, and product-oriented eld, because it is an ambiguous amalgam
of several disciplines, including architecture, landscape architecture, urban
planning, and civil engineering; obsessed with impressions and esthetics of
physical form and is practiced as an extension of architecture. He then
concludes that urban design lacks a clear denition (and hence, a useful
understanding) and a clear direction (and hence, a useful purpose). Lang
(2009), while believing that of all the design elds, urban design has the
greatest impact on the nature of cities and city life, regards the term urban
design as confusing.
The illusiveness of its denition raises signicant debate about exactly
what urban design is? From large-scale architecture to project-scale
design, to architecture and urban design are but a single profession. Design
is at the heart of these efforts, an extension of architecture, urban design is
not architecture. The function of urban design, its purpose and objective, is to
give form and order to the future. As with the master plan, urban design
provides a master program and master form for urban growth. It is primarily a
collaborative effort involving other professionals (Marshal 2009). Since the
late 1860s, urban design as a discipline has flourished, and in recent years the
ideal of the synthesis of architecture, landscape architecture, and planning in
the three-dimensional design of urban environments has returned as a key
organizing concept for many designers in the eld. A new interest has
emerged in the theoretical basis of this synthesis (Mumford 2009).
In recent years, the elds physical scope and content and the way it touches
the human experiences have expended and also the kind of people with whom
urban designer joins forces has grown signicantly (Brown et al. 2009).
Some 30 years ago Jonathan Barnett (1981) made this critical statement
that nothing is more frustrating than to watch the continuous misapplication
of huge sums of money that are spent in rebuilding of our cities and
developing the countryside. Thirty years later he rephrased his concern by
stating that the world is urbanizing faster than current city-design can keep
up; refer to three challenges of rapid urban change, climate change, and
natural and man-made disasters (Barnett 2011).
Preface
Preface
vii
Fig. 1 The interrelationship of the procedural and substantive elements of the language of
urban design
viii
Fig. 2 Integrated rules are applied to the disordered environment, manipulating its elements to establish order
Preface
Contents
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
....
....
....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
5
7
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
13
13
14
16
16
17
18
18
20
21
21
24
25
25
26
26
26
28
..
29
..
..
..
29
31
35
39
39
41
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ix
Contents
4.3
4.4
4.5
51
.............
51
.............
.............
54
55
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
87
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
89
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
103
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
109
44
46
47
Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
Fig. 1.4 World Columbian Exposition (1893). (Brown et al. 2009, p. 48)
of order to another and from one level of complexity to another, goes on constantly, but the
alteration is never from order to the absence of
order. The general purpose of urban design has
always been to establish order in the physical
environment.
Todays interpretation of order, however, has
changed drastically. This is because the urban
environment has gained unprecedented complexity; process has taken the place of product; public
interest, values, citizen participation, equity, and
environmental sustainability have become major
issues and concerns in design; implementation
tools and processes have become by far more
complicated than before; legal, political and
decision-making processes have become integral
parts of any design process, and nally allocation
of scarce resources for variety of increasing needs
is now a major determining factor and constraint in
the urban design process.
2.1
Political, technical, technological, as well as cultural and behavioral issues are also signicant
forces in urban design. As we saw the city, its
inhabitants and functions are extremely complicated phenomena whose problems interact in
complex ways. Now this constitutes the context
and the subject matter of todays urban design.
Addressing some of the problems in dening
urban design, Anne Vernez-Moudon describes
concentrations of inquiry in this eld, including
urban history studies, picturesque studies, image
studies, studies of environmental behavior, place,
material culture, topology-morphology and nature ecology, and provides a useful list of major
contributors in each area (Vernez-Moudon 1992,
pp. 33149).
Richard Marshal (in Krieger et al. 2009) suggests this denition for urban design in The
Elusiveness of Urban Design: Urban designis
a way of thinking. It is not about separation and
simplication but rather about synthesis. It
attemptsto deal with the full reality of the urban
situation, not the narrow slices seen through disciplinary lenses. In the same direction Douglas
Kelbaugh denes Urban Design as an art not a
science or an engineering discipline, but a social
and public artUnlike a painter or sculptor, in
every aspect of my work I am responsible not
only to myself, but to my fellow man and to future
generations (cited in Brown et al. 2009, p. 4).
These open-ended, nonhierarchical stances are
especially important for the new approach proposed in this book. Urban design may be regarded
as an art or technical practice involving the
physical organization of buildings and spaces,
towards a civic purpose (Marshall 2012).
2.2
Fig. 2.1 Florence, Piazza of the Signoria. The relationship between buildings, monuments and public squares
(from Sitte p. 9)
10
layout of larger buildings, construction and formation of centers. Heburther suggests that urban
design as process may be taken, in the economic
sense, as the response to the power of economic
forces shaping the structure of the city not as a
physical end but rather as part of a dynamic process. Alexander maintained that it was the process,
above all, which was responsible for wholeness,
not merely the form. This wholeness, Alexander
said, can be provided by the denition of a number
of geometric properties with a centering process.
Gosling (2003) reviews the historical development of the discipline and practice of urban
design in America during ve decades of 1950 to
2000. Other efforts in this respect are: Gosling and
Maintlands Concepts of urban design (1984),
Cullens The concise townscape (1971), Row and
Koetters Collage city (1978), Kriers Urban
space (1979) and Leon Krier: Architecture and
urban design 19671992 (1992), Aravots From
reading of forms to hierarchical architecture: An
approach to urban design, Broadbents Emerging
concepts in urban space design (1990), Tibbaldss
Making people-friendly towns (1992). Calthorpe
(1989) has suggested what he calls simple clusters
of housing, retail space and ofces within a quarter
mile radius of transit station. Lang (1994) makes
an attempt to unite architecture and city planning,
and also enhance urban designers graphic and
verbal communication skills. According to Lang
contextual design is the most important element in
urban design because without context, the city
becomes fragmented. Lang examines the social
and environmental issues within the context of
American urban history. Lang proposes four types
of urban design: The urban designer as a total
designer, all-of-a-piece urban design, urban
designer as the designer of infrastructure, ad urban
designer as designer of guidelines for design.
Barnett (2003) states that urban design requires a
different process from designing a landscape or
building (a process involving government, communities, investment and entrepreneurs).
According to Barnett urban designer should have
enough knowledge of the social sciences to be
able to make diagnoses about the social dynamics
of the community. Barnetts main idea is urban
design as public policy (1874 and 1982), he later
11
12
program that would establish a substantive foundation that would test and validate the movements ideas, ground it into actual processes of
city building and contribute to its long-term viability (Moudon 2000, p. 42).
Besides the designers, there have also been
experts and specialists from other areas and disciplines who have tried to develop methods and
theories for their own use and also for the use of
designers. Among these non-designers are
behavioral scientists such as Maslow (1957),
Mayo (1946) and sociologists such as, Sommer
(1969), Rosow (1974), Hall (1959) and Michelson (1970, 1975). Among these the efforts of
Michelson to develop a new approach for environmental design is especially valuable. Among
this group there is Amoss Rapoport, who is the
leader in his efforts to delineate the relationship
of man and environment. His major contributions
are Complexity and ambiguity in environmental
design (1967), Human aspects of urban form:
Towards a man-made environment approach to
urban form and design (1977), and The mutual
interaction of people and their built environment: A cross-cultural perspective (1976).
There are also behaviorists such as: Francis
Mapping downtown activities (1984), Hubbards
Environment-behavior researcha route to
good design (1992), and Whytes The social life
of small urban spaces (1980) who, by linking
behavior patterns to space, have tried to nd a
legitimate base for rational urban design.
A group of researchers at the University
College London have been working on space
syntax, which is best described as a research
program that investigates the relationship
between human societies and space from the
perspective of a general theory of the structure of
inhabited space in all its diverse forms: buildings,
settlements, cities, or even landscapes. The point
of departure for space syntax is that human
societies use space as a key and necessary
resource in organizing themselves. In doing so,
the space of inhabitation is congureda term
that space syntax recognizes as an act of turning
the continuous space into a connected set of
discrete units (Bafna 2003, p. 17).
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
2.3
2.3.1
13
Fig. 2.3 Central Park in Manhattan, the rst real experience of the park movement, by Olmsted
Park Movement
2.3.2
Fig. 2.2 Central Paris as one of the greatest scheme of the city beautiful movement (Brown et al. 2009, p. 6)
14
2.3.3
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
15
existing cities. The second principle was decentralization. At the micro scale Howard believed
in two principles of unity and symmetry.
Although Howards Garden City did not succeed
in application, it had signicant influence on the
future movements of city planning and urban
design, including new town movement, urban
village, etc (Figs. 2.10 and 2.11).
16
2.3.5
Fig. 2.11 Welwyn Garden City, diagram of general
town plan (Neal 2003)
2.3.4
Modernism
Megastructuralism
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
17
2.3.6
Fig. 2.15 Mega form, Moshe Safdi: habitat. A community of 25,000 (from Banz 1970, p. 108)
Team X
18
2.3.7
The main ideas behind this movement are: Historical continuity of sign, uniqueness, spatial dominance, containing unique activity, containing
Fig. 2.18 Ciudad Lineal, a linear city capable of extension across land. By: Arturo Soria Marta (1892)
secondary features, sequence of signs, scale, location, context, preventing redundancy (Fig. 2.26).
2.3.8
Behaviorism
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
19
Fig. 2.20 Shahestan Pahlavi as a mega structure developed for a new diplomatic centre of the city of Tehran, in
1970s (Source Barnett 1982)
20
Fig. 2.26 Symbolism in urban space. Anon, Deschwandens Shoe Repairs, Bakerseld, California (from Jencks
1979, p. 77)
2.3.9
Traditionalism
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
21
Fig. 2.28 Michael Graves landmark building in Portland, Oregon (Photo by: authors)
2.3.10
Postmodernism
and Contextualism
2.3.11
Practice Movement
22
2.3.11.1
New Urbanism
The last few decades have seen what must be one
of the most dramatic reversals in urban design
theory from modern urban order in the decades
following the Second World War, to a neotraditional urbanism, which can be described as
the philosophy and practice of recreating the best
of traditional urbanism for today. This was perhaps the most signicant movement in urban
planning and design in recent decades, because it
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
23
2.3.11.2
Transit-Oriented
Development (TOD)
Transit-oriented development, emphasis on city
centre, regional development, historical preservation, green buildings, safe streets, redevelopment of
browneld lands, self-sufcient neighborhoods,
neighborhood centers. Variety of building types,
mixed uses, intermingling of housing for different
income groups, and a strong privileging of the
public realm. The basic unit of planning is the
neighborhood, which is limited in physical size, has
a well-dened edge, and has a focused center
(Figs. 2.33 and 2.34).
2.3.11.3
Urban Village
The urban village is another model of
neo-traditional development that appeared rst in
24
2.3.11.4
Traditional Neighborhood
Development (TND)
Traditional Neighborhood development movement is counter-revolution and against suburban
sprawl. It uses morphology and typology and
focuses on spatial order, as well as diversity, by
using traditional concepts of urban design. The
design base unit is neighborhood, which is
dened, limited and has specic center. Unique
identity of each place is emphasized (architectural style is derived from local history, culture,
geography and climate), and the sense of neighborhood is promoted.
A subset of urban villages comprises traditional neighborhood developments. Typically
new construction, often built on greeneld sites,
TNDs are more compact than the usual subdivision, favor walking over driving, mix uses
where possible, and provide narrower roads, few
or no cul-de-sacs, and common greens and
squares (Fig. 2.36).
2.3.12
Critical Theory
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
25
2.3.13
Just City
In the coming years, designers, as well as planners will face decisions about where they stand
on protecting the green city, promoting the economically growing city, and advocating social
justice.
Just City concerns the development of an
urban vision that also involves material
well-being but that relies on a more pluralistic,
cooperative, and decentralized form of welfare
provision than the state-centered model of the
bureaucratic welfare state.
2.3.14
26
etc. Procedural ethical theory is a level above substantive theory (Harper and Stein 1992).
2.3.15
Smart Growth
2.3.16
2.3.17
2.3 Contemporary Urban Design Movements and Their Rules and Principles
27
Fig. 2.37 The evolutionary trend of sustainability concept (Source Daniel 2009)
28
2.3.18
Brown et al. (2009, 102111) suggest ve general urban design principles for what they call
urban century, each of which is broken down
into more specic guidelines:
Build community in an increasingly diverse
society
i. Create places that draw people together
ii. Support social equity
iii. Emphasize the public realm
iv. Forge strongest connections
Advance sustainability at every level
v. Forster smarter growth
vi. Address the economic, social and cultural
underpinnings of sustainability
Expand individual choices
3.1
Proposed Integrative
Knowledge Base of Urban
Design
are the language of urban design. Both epistemological concepts deal with the very foundation
of a eld.
It is not surprising that some thirty years ago
Pittas (1980) stated that most of the now disciplines came into being through the establishment
of a set of governing paradigms which formed
the theoretical underpinnings of discipline based
knowledge. These paradigms, developed through
the consensus of practitioners, are constantly
tested and retested so that the theoretical underpinnings can and do change over time. He further
believes that the rst great leap into establishing
a consensus among practitioners, researchers and
educators of urban design has emerged and we
can expect that a truly coherent discipline may
evolve in the future.
Sommer (2009) poses a very critical question:
Isnt the value of a professional or academic disciplineand urban design can be no exception
that it advances and curates a critical body of ideas
and distills them into an array of methods and
techniques that challenges entrenched assumptions and transform practices? For urban design to
endure as a serious practice, it must claim, critically reassess and renew a discrete set of concepts
that have evolved since the eld rst emerged as a
discipline in the mid-twentieth century.
The universal need for order in the physical
environment has established certain communal
goals and desires within each society. An aggregate of these societal goals, desires and aspirations can be used as the overall purpose of urban
29
30
3.2
31
example of scientic theory. Some would maintain that the theories in physics are scientic, but
those in sociology are not.
The job of a theory, according to Suppe, is to
specify the expected patterns of behavior and to
explain deviations from them. Theory presents an
ideal of natural ordera principle.
It is characteristic of scientic theories that
they systematize a body of empirical knowledge
by means of a system of interrelated concepts
(Suppe 1977, p. 64). Suppe regards theories as
the vehicle of scientic knowledge (Suppe 1977,
p. 3). The function of science, Suppe writes, is to
build up systems of explanatory techniques; a
variety of representational devices, including
models, diagrams, and theories is employed to
describe and reason about phenomena. According to Suppe, theories consist of ideals of natural
order (which provide ways of looking at or representing phenomena), laws, and hypothesis
which are stratied nondeductively via meaning
relationships (p. 670). Theoretical realms maintains that the function of theories is systematic
description and explanation and that to be
adequate, all aspects of a theorys descriptions
must be correct. Reductionism further requires
that nonobservable content be reduced to the
observable or some other empirical basis. Instrumentalism construes the function of theories to
be prediction of directly observable phenomena
and requires only adequate description of directly
observable aspects (Suppe in Encyclopedia of
Philosophy 1996, p. 521). But as Gale (1979)
suggests generalization is another main function
of theories. It is generally believed that one of the
chief function of scientic research is to discover
new truth about the physical universe and then to
state these truths in the form of generalization.
Generalization of this nature are often called
scientic laws or laws of nature, (Gale 1979,
p. 42).
As for the structure of theories, Suppe states
that, theories utilize specialized concepts and are
expressed in technical language, and often
invoke mathematical structures. Different philosophical analysis (operationalism, syntactic
analyses, semantic conceptions, and structuralist
approach) give each feature priority (Suppe in
32
Contribution
1. Concept names
Description and
classication
2. Verbal statements
Analysis
3. Theoretical denitions
Meaning
4. Operational denitions
Measurement
Theoretical linkages
plausibility
Operational linkages
testability
Elimination of
tautology
Elimination of
inconsistency
33
34
never quite there: pieces, isolated theoretical concepts, isolated pairs of pieces, and nally larger
combinations: Theories (Ibid, p. 181). Theories, it is
said, are best seen as approximation to knowledge
(p. 183). Theories are models of reality, not reality
itself. Knowledge is a limit towards which theories
move.
The role and function of theory in arts, however, are essentially different. In Schopenhauers
theory, our modes of knowledge and understanding, as well as the activities in which we
normally engage, are regarded as being determined by the will (The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 7, p. 329).
Traditionally, the denition of art has been
the focal point of theorizing about art and has
functioned as a kind of summary of a theory of
art. Ideally, such a denition is supposed to
specify the necessary and sufcient conditions
for being a work of art. This leads us to the
3.3
35
36
37
38
4.1
Language Definition
and Requirements
39
40
of the language used? In other words, how private can a language be and still be called a language? What factors should be considered in
delineating the size of an interpreter family? Is
the size of such a group controllable by the
members of the family or by somebody or
something else? Can anyone learn the language
and become a part of the family?
Since a language represents an area of
knowledge, it will contain all the characteristics
and attributes of the knowledge it represents.
Questions concerning the size of the interpreterfamily (all those who can understand the language), its degree of plurality, and so on, all
depend on the nature and characteristics of the
particular knowledge area involved. What is
important here is the formation of the two minimum requirements of the language on the basis
of a careful realization of their requirements.
On the basis of what was discussed above, the
following guidelines may be used in formulating
the language of urban design:
Language is used here in its broad sense
which goes far beyond the denition of language as a linguistic tool.
Language is regarded as the medium and the
key to knowledge.
Language as an instrument can be used to
express thoughts, communicate ideas and
develop new areas of knowledge.
The general denition of language given by
Morris will be adopted for the purpose of this
study. This denition is: Language is a set of
plurisituational comsigns restricted in the
ways in which they may be combined.
A language requires at least two basic elements: A vocabulary (sings) and a grammar
(syntax).
The signs of a language should satisfy ve
requirements which are also the requirements
for a language: A plurality of signs, a commonality of signication, comsigns, plurisituational signs and interconnected signs which
are combinable in some ways but not in
others.
Language has the same characteristics as the
knowledge that it represents, and vice versa
(Figs. 4.1 and 4.2).
41
Fig. 4.2 The three-level hierarchy of word, sentence, paragraph and text
4.2
Language as a Tool
for Knowledge
Representational
42
elementary and characteristic forms, such as columns, pilasters, entablatures and moldings; composition is its grammar. Both the details and the
composition carry a meaning. Different styles are
different languages, often as hard to understand for
a modern spectator as a foreign language (Park
1968). Park nds three concepts in architecture:
place, space, and structure. Then he suggests:
proportion, size, angularity, regularity, and plasticity as the main attributes of form. Structure has
two main characteristics: Homogeneity and continuity. Spatial compositions consist of position
(location and connection) and similarity (Park
1968). Park, however, does not put these elements
together in order to construct a language, which
has its vocabulary and grammar.
The semilogist Umberto Eco (Guillerme 1977)
has seen architectural language as an authentic
linguistic system obeying the same rules that
govern the articulation of natural languages.
Following Eco, A. Silipo has applied a conventional denition of grammar to architecture, in his
words: considering architecture activity to be a
set of operations designed to establish cognitive
relationships by means of spatial realities, and
(considering) the architectonic organism as a
structure, an instrument of communication and of
knowledge, grammatical analysis becomes the
principal critical instrument at the disposal of
whoever seeks not only to grasp the entire range
of signication of a particular spatial structure,
but also to historicize it by going back to the
methodological matrices that have been determined this structure, and by grasping the relationships that exist among the gurative,
technological and functional elements that make
up the structure and the more general historical,
social and economic, and artistic context to which
it refers (Guillerme 1977, p. 21).
Spirn (1998, p. 4) believes that language of
landscape is the principal language in which I
think and act; my conviction that there is such a
language arises rst from that fact. It is also the
language used skillfully by designers. To Spirn,
language of landscape is our native language.
Landscape was the original dwelling; human
evolved among plants and animals, under the
sky, upon the earth, near water. Everyone carries
43
44
4.3
Language, Thought
and Knowledge
45
Fig. 4.3 The relationship between reality, thought and language (after Morris 1955)
46
developed its own technical language. The fundamental elements of this technical language
have been borrowed from modern formal logic
(Gale 1979, p. 25).
Carruthers (1996) considers whether natural
language is merely a tool for communication
between individuals or whether it is also, within
the individual, a medium for thought. Carruthers
adopts a version of the latter hypothesis: he argues
that human thinking consists in sequences of natural language sentences: and that sentences do not
merely encode thought, they constitute them.
4.4
their roots in semiotics, the theory of the relationships of signs in language (Gosling 2003,
pp. 21819). One of the fundamental concepts of
modern architectural theory, Lavin maintains, is
the idea that architecture is a form of language
(Lavin 1992). Lavin believes that Quatremere de
Quinsy used language to provide architecture
with a conventional rather than natural model, a
conceptual transformation that led him to equate
architectures capacity for progressive development with its sociality (see also: Collins 1965;
Saisselin 1975; Guillerme 1977; Stafford 1979).
What is the relationship of an area of knowledge and its language? Language, it is said, is the
medium and key to knowledge. Knowledge of
any nature is formulated and conveyed in a languagei.e., in a medium of signs and symbols.
Without the language of a particular eld, one
can neither possess the knowledge of that eld
nor effectively communicate with the members
of the knowledge community.
Language functions like an instrument. To
form a language means to invent an instrument for
a particular purpose on the basis of certain laws
and requirements. The purpose of this instrument
is to express thought, to communicate ideas and to
develop and add new knowledge to the already
existing body of knowledge. To understand a
language, therefore, means to be the master of the
techniques or to use the instrument properly.
Any knowledge is, by nature, unstructured,
diversied and sporadic. This is, of course, much
more true in the case of the knowledge of urban
design which is still young, undeveloped and
unformed when compared to the knowledge of
more established disciplines. Development in
each area of urban design is taking place independently of developments in other areas of the
eld. This situation makes it impossible for the
practicing urban designer to possess and apply
the unstructured knowledge of urban design.
Developing a language, therefore, will be of
critical help. This language will be a tool or
instrument which will represent the knowledge
of urban design, facilitate communication in the
eld and provide guidelines for the practice of
urban design.
4.5
47
Fig. 4.4 The role of culture on urban activity patterns, urban form and space. Local-global language (Bull et al. 2007,
pp. 228229)
48
Fig. 4.5 General urban design language (global/universal) (Kuhn 1977, p. 476)
Fig. 4.6 Three specic urban design languages (local/culture specic) (Kuhn 1976, p. 476)
Fig. 4.7 Substantive and procedural elements of the integrative language of urban design
49
5.1
51
52
Fig. 5.1 The interrelationship of the procedural and substantive elements of the language of urban design
Fig. 5.2 Hierarchical relationship of the substantive elements in three areas of environmental design
53
54
5.2
55
theories, etc., and (2) from the eld or the practice of urban design. (3) From both 1 and two.
Third, the principles should not be seen as
independent and complete in and of themselves.
They are interrelated and interdependent members of the family of the language of urban
design. This language represents the integrated
knowledge base of urban design (Figs. 5.6
and 5.7).
Fourth, based on what was suggested before,
the activities of urban design may be divided in
two levels: global and local. In many cases,
however, due to some common characteristics
such as religious, socio-economic, and climatic
featuresin certain regions, on the one hand,
and signicant differences due to micro climatic
conditions and other factors, on the other,
another level may be recognized as regional. The
local level is in fact the culture specic ones and
best ts the unique characteristics of each settlement or a group of settlements. The following
rules and principles are presented in two categories: global and local. For local we used the
5.2.1
Integrative Rules
and Principles
5.2.1.1
Patternization
An orderly repetition of a form, event or state is
pattern and an orderly repetition of pattern is
patternization. This general and broad denition
covers many different kinds of patterns which are
all of basic signicance in the activities of man
and hence, in the eld of urban design (Figs. 5.8
and 5.9)
Patterns and patternization are essential to the
functioning of all the human senses and to the
human intellect. They are the basis of human
senses and human perception, knowing and
understanding: seeing, hearing, and perceiving. It
is the mother principle in a way that all other
principles are, in one way or another, related to this
56
5.2.1.2
Quantization
Quantization is based on the Quantum Theory
(Max Plank 1900) and is one aspect of patternzation. It deals with continuity/discontinuity
concepts. Its application can be seen in all
areas to explain, measure, and control change
57
58
Fig. 5.10 a An orderly repetition of a form, event or state is pattern and an orderly repetition of pattern is patternization.
b Patterns and patternization are essential to the functioning of all the human senses and to the human intellect
variation. The bundles of these waves are combined in the total structure to produce organic
complexes that are more than the sum of their
component parts. The physical environment provides patterns, which follow the quantization
rules. These rules will provide new insights into
the correlation of ideas and concepts in urban
design. Quantization in urban form deals with the
visual quality of the built environment and with
peoples perceptions, preferences and tastes. The
quantization principle makes it possible to quantify measure, explain, predict and control the
rhythmic changes of the visual quality of the
environment. It is the form, size and frequency of
59
5.2.1.3
Centrality
Centrality is a very common form of patternization, which can be applied to almost any subject
including that of urban design. Many examples of
such an application may be found in environmental design for the urban core, central business
district, nodes, commercial centers, inner city,
town centers, etc.
60
5.2.1.4
Boundaries
Related to both quantization and patternization is
the presence of boundaries of one kind or
another. The undelimited eld emphasizes continuity while boundaries emphasize discontinuity. Consequently, systems, which have been
described as, bounded regions in space-time with
an interchange of energy among their parts,
possess boundaries, which may be simple and
61
Fig. 5.12 a Centrality is a very common form of patternization. b Centrality in urban design may be said to originate
from many sources such as religious impulse, economic forces and cultural and symbolic factors
environment. Boundaries, either spatial or temporal, make the environment live and dynamic,
since they are the source of change and movement.
Boundaries in urban form may appear in the form
of edges, surfaces, lines, etc. which differentiate
two or more different but adjacent urban forms.
These differences in urban form can be in density,
height, topography, intensity, style, color, materials, relationships or any combination of these and
other elements. In the case of perceptual processes,
there could be boundaries that might not be tangible or sensible to some observers but which
could be sensible and identiable to others.
62
5.2.1.5
Territories
Territories are also part of the principle of
boundaries. They deal with the division of the
environment into spatial or temporal regions,
symbolically controlled by various individuals or
groups, within which certain types of behavior
are expected. A simple and familiar example is
the division of the environment into private and
public spaces.
63
Fig. 5.13 Related to both quantization and patternization is the presence of boundaries of one kind or another
64
5.2.1.6
Binary
The binary principle deals with either/or
judgments and choices of an extreme nature.
Binary oppositions may be temporal, spatial
or both. The principle of binary opposition divides
the world into two contradictory parts such as
inside/outside, good/bad, big/small, round/square,
open/closed, simple/complex, symmetrical/
asymmetrical,
public/private,
dispersed/
condensed, void/full and tall/short.
There is also another binary form which
rejects the either/or condition and suggests the
both/and form. The basis of this binary form is
hierarchy, which yields several levels of meaning
among elements with varying values. Some
Fig. 5.14 a Territories are also part of the principle of boundaries. b Territories deal with the division of the
environment into spatial or temporal regions
65
5.2.1.7
Hierarchy
Both/and binary forms are the basis of hierarchy.
The notion of hierarchy lies in the nature of very
complex and evolving systems. Hierarchical
organizations can be usefully applied to the
understanding, design and control of complex
systems such as the physical environment. In the
case of the physical environment the theory of
hierarchies is an open one which can continuously grow and evolve to form new levels.
Hierarchical order is the most natural way for
ordering dynamic phenomena.
It means movement and change, diversity,
choice.
66
Fig. 5.15 Binary principle deals with either/or judgments and choices of an extreme nature
67
Fig. 5.16 a The notion of hierarchy lies in the nature of very complex and evolving systems. b Hierarchical order is
the most natural way for ordering dynamic phenomena
5.2.1.8
Equilibrium
This principle deals with all the dynamic and
organic systems in the environment. The relationship of man to his environment is subject to
continual and restless change from generation to
generation, from year to year, and from instant to
68
Both negative and positive forms of equilibrium are always at work in the environment.
Knowledge of the way in which they function in
the decay and growth of metropolitan complexes
is vital for urban designers.
The equilibration process governs the relation
of man to his environment. Inorganic and
Organic phenomena alike exist simultaneously in
time and space and indeed with in a fused Time
space continuum. In progressively organizing
and controlling his environment, Man has,
therefore, involved himself with the continuous
interplay of phenomena on the temporal and
spatial dimensions. When human functions relate
primarily to the spatial dimension, man Conceptualized models and fabricates tools essentially to attain environmental control by using
techniques for the organization of space.
Techniques to attain environmental control
deal with the relationship of Man-to-environment
and Man-to-Man. Hence, these techniques are
related to temporal as well as to biological factors. The social techniques comprise the tools or
methods by which a community seeks to organize and retain environmental equilibrium.
Examples of these are religious and philosophical concepts, legal codes, administrative systems,
caste
systems, ecclesiastical
hierarchies,
69
Fig. 5.17 a Equilibrium deals with all the dynamic and organic systems in the environment. b The equilibration
process governs the relation of man to his environment
70
5.2.1.9
Cybernetics
or Environmental
Feedback
Cybernetics or the science of feedback and control
has tremendous potential for application in the
urban design of the future. This is so because it is
based on the ability to rapidly process an enormous
amount of information and thus facilitate the
making of appropriate decisions. It further conforms to the principle of self-correction. Such a
device compares a current state offunctioning with
desired goals and adjusts performance on the basis
of the observed differences.
5.2.1.10
Unity/Multiplicity or Order/
Disorder
Unity-multiplicity and order-disorder are binary
sets which, in this form, are not contradictory but
rather, complementary.
Unity implies order, rule, discipline, continuity, cohesion, certainty, and stability. While
plurality means disorder, change, diversity,
freedom, choice, flexibility, and discontinuity.
What is important is an optimum combination of
these two principles to make a balance between
the two. The dominance of any one over the
other would lead either chaos or imposed order,
neither, which are desirable. What is desirable is
bounded change, which means accepting change
in limited boundary. Without one, the other is
meaningless. The Greeks who used the word
polis for city, used the same word for a dice- and
-board game that, rather like backgammon,
depends upon interplay chance and rule (Joseph
Rykwert, the Seduction of place).
Unity in societal actions and environmental
forms means order and discipline; multiplicity,
which is disorder, implies diversity, choice,
freedom and openness. Unity stands for consistency and continuity and multiplicity stands for
change, discontinuity and inconsistency. The
essence of this principle is ordered change or
change within certain bounds. These two entities,
unity-multiplicity and order-disorder, may exist
together in a complementary form of unity in
multiplicity or order in disorder. Order and unity,
in this sense, are dynamic and flexible, rather
than static and xed. Such an order achieves its
form through fluctuation and multiplicity.
While order is a principle which controls and
sustains all the parts of a system, disorder highlights the existence of order through contrast. If
there were no disorder, order would not be
71
72
5.2.1.11
Man-Environment
Relationship
This relationship is characterized by the interaction between observers and observed. Man
relates to his environment through his sensory
experiences. To the elements of sensory experience belong the visual, aural and tactile elements.
These experiences are transmitted to the mind by
the nervous system through diverse receptor
organs. These organs receive stimuli which are
Fig. 5.18 a Unity-multiplicity and order-disorder are binary sets which, in this form, are not contradictory but rather,
complementary. b Unity implies order, while plurality means disorder
73
5.2.1.12
Semantics, Metaphor
and Analogy
Semantics (semio-logy) is the theory of signs and
their meanings. The fundamental idea of semiology and meaning in urban design is that any
form in the environment or design in the language, is motivated or is capable of being motivated. Any form, even if it were initially arbitrary
and non-motivated, becomes motivating because
of its subsequent use. If a person is motivated by
a form it means that the form conveys meaning
and, therefore, fullls a function. Urban semiology helps to ease the communication between
man and his environment through signs, symbols, and their connotations.
Metaphors and analogies are similar. They
both help to understand the world through
interpreting certain regularities in imagination
and creative thought.
Metaphor is, fundamentally, a bringing together of images that have certain features in
common and which are yet different, and more
usually than not, drawn from different contexts,
so that the juxtaposition of images per se and the
signicance of this juxtaposition stands out in
74
5.2.1.13
General Systems Theory
The principle of the general systems theory is to
facilitate the analysis and synthesis by way of
reason and intellect. The idea of systems in urban
design allows the analyst to study the context
analytically as well as rationally. It helps him
locate the problem and the appropriate solution
to the problem. There are two valuable characteristics the signicance of which is extremely
helpful vis a vis our understanding of the environment and the problems that are associated
with it. These characteristics are, the idea of
holism and the idea of rationality.
According to the idea or concept of holism, a
system and the sub-systems and elements that
constitute it are held together in such an integral
5.2.1.14
Organization of Human
Ecology
This principle deals with the behavior of people in
the social context. The relationship of man to man
within the physical, social, economic and spiritual
systems is the subject of this principle. It considers the systems that are important in the lives
of people. Peoples spiritual spaces, interests and
ambitions, values, needs and priorities, hopes,
expectations, myths and responsibilities are some
of the issues to be addressed by this principle.
Human ecology attempts to explain mans
organized and collective relationship to his
environment. It intends to explain social networks which depend on peoples various means
of physical mobility in getting to work, shopping, attending school, and their various degrees
of economic mobility, depending on age, education, race, and income.
5.2.1.15
Gestalt
Gestalt phenomenon (or organized structures) are
based on the claim that the meaning of the whole
is greater than the sum of its components, or
stated differently, that whole is greater than the
sum of its parts. Gestalt theory argues against the
validity of a systems approach because it holds
that a system is not completely decomposable
into its elements. Intuition, according to this
principle, is the only approach that is capable of
dealing with complex systems because it protects
the meaning and integrity of the whole.
This principle has a signicant application to
urban design activities, especially with regard to
the perceptual, visual and semantic aspects of the
environment.
The Gestalt principle aids the understanding
of problems by applying insight, which is a
specic phase of productive thinking. It indicates
that seeing into a problematic situation reveals its
intrinsic structure.
75
Fig. 5.19 a The fundamental idea of semiology in urban design is that any form in the environment is motivated or is
capable of being motivated. b Semantics, metaphor and analogy help to understand the world through interpreting
certain regularities in imagination and creative thought
5.2.1.16
76
77
Fig. 5.20 Gestalt principle is based on the claim that the meaning of the whole is greater than the sum of its
components, or stated differently, that whole is greater than the sum of its parts
78
5.2.1.17
Sustainability
Sustainable urban design is vital for this century,
our health, welfare and future depends on it. We
will need to develop flexible ways to shape
and design our future cities. Sustainable urban
design is about balancein uses, density,
Fig. 5.21 Application of principle in a specic environment requires that great effort to modify them for a particular
environment
79
5.2.1.18
Economics
Today the city is more than ever shaped by
economic forces (Frey 1999, p. 1). Todays city
80
Fig. 5.22 Sustainable urban design is vital for this century. Our health, welfare and future depends on it
81
exurban, rural and offshore areas. Telecommuting is working as a substitute for commuting
trips. Workers substitute some or all of their
working day a remote location (almost always
home) for time usually spent at the ofce
(Wheeler et al. 2000). Firms will reduce ofce
space costs, whereas telecommuters will have
more freedom of choice in residential location.
Depending on the density and frequency of
ofce-trip substitution, telecommuting can contribute to the lowering of trafc congestion and
ultimately to fewer carbon emissions.
Among the information and telecommunication tools the Internet has had the greatest, far
reaching, and most permanent impact on the
world economy and the transformation of society.
As Castells puts it: our historic time is dened by
the transformation of our geographic space.
Within cities, cyberspace contributes to a
substantial reconstruction of urban space, creating a social environment in which being digital
is increasingly critical to knowledge, wealth,
status, and power.
Castells (2000) has introduced a particular
model of spatial organization, which, according
to him, is characteristic of the Information Age,
as the space of flows. He denes space of flows
as the material arrangements that allow for
simultaneity of social practices without territorial
contiguity. It is made up of: (1) technological
infrastructure of information systems, telecommunications, and transportation lines; (2) nodes
and hubs; (3) habitats for the social actors who
operate the network; (4) comprises electronic
spaces such as Web sites, spaces of interaction,
as well as spaces of one-directional communication. The growing use of telecommunications
systems is doing far more than influence where
people work and live, but is actually changing
the character of activities that occur in the home,
workplace, automobile, and the street. Telecommunications has made the fundamental elements
of urban lifehousing, transportation, work and
leisurefar more complex logistically, spatially,
and temporally (Moss, and Townsend 2000).
It seems, therefore, quite essential to consider
IT and Telecommunications as an integral part of
any urban design decision, and take their
82
5.2.1.19
Globalization
The essence of globalization could be dened as
the unrestricted movements of money, people,
information, and culture. These agencies will
have their effects on the components of urban
formurbanism, image and identity, spatial
organization and structure, social ecology, public
realm, scale and pace of development, and architectural vernacular. This process is especially
signicant in the case of the third world countries,
where the conventional model of city becomes
obsolete and cities are beginning to look more and
more like that in the West (Pizarro et al. 2003).
Capital flows across the globe have markedly
increased; a vast array of cultural products from
different countries have become available in one
place; and the nation-state is no longer the only
entity that affects peoples political life and ideas.
Economy, culture, and polity are being transformed, reshaped and reworked to produce a
more global world and a heightened global
consciousness. Globalization takes place in cities
and cities embody and reflect globalization.
Global processes lead to changes in the city and
cities rework and situate globalization. Contemporary urban dynamics are the spatial expressions of globalization, while urban changes
reshape and reform the processes of globalization
(Short and Kim 1999).
5.2.1.20
Process
Design is inherently a procedural entity, or a
process. The concept of a process is widely
present in various literature and design manuals,
which attempt to produce a denition for design
in general or urban design in particular. Intact,
the concept of process is the core element of all
these denitions. A process, which is normally
considered as a continuous action, operation or
series of changes that take place in a continuous
manner, seems to be very relevant to any design
activity. What is important is that design is a
purposeful process that starts with some sort of
objectives, and ends up with an outcome that
responds to them.
5.2.1.21
Participatory
and Collaborative
As there is a move toward equitable distribution
of resources and opportunities, there is a move
toward a broader consensus on the control and
distribution processes. This ultimately leads to
the user, or citizen, and can take the form of
participatory planning and design (Smith 1973).
There is a clear trend not just towards public
consultation in design matters, but towards the
public dening the principles of control and
contributing to the administration of the control
83
process itself. Such ventures provide a mechanism for managing disputes, and for giving the
community far greater ownership of the control
mechanism (Punter 1999, p. 503). Community
involvement in the process of urban design is
increasingly promoted as a means of overcoming
or at least reducingthe professionallayperson, powerful powerless and designeruser gaps. Participation takes many different
forms, broadly conceptualized as top-down or
bottom-up approaches (Carmona et al. 2003,
p. 485, see also Bahrainy and Aminzadeh 2007,
p. 241270)
Participation makes dialogue, as the free flow
of meaning between communicating parties,
possible. There are some who emphasize the
creative nature of dialogue as a process of
revealing and then melting together the rigid
constructions of implicit cultural knowledge.
Forester (1989, 119133) has addressed the issue
of participation with the concept of designing as
making sense together. With the concept he
refers to the notion of designing as a shared
interpretive sense-making process between participants engaged in practical conversation in
their institutional and historical settings.
According to Forester, such design work is
both instrumentally productive and socially
reproductive. Participants, however, may share a
concern, but arrive at it through different cultural,
societal and personal experiences. They belong
84
5.2.1.22
Methods of Inquiry
Qualitative, Artistic
and intuitive methods
The last two principles have a two-fold function
in the urban design language. One is the role they
play a specic tools of analysis and synthesis.
More important, however, is the role they play as
the modes of thinking, the ideological framework
of urban design process, decision and action.
Intuition, as both a method of analysis and
synthesis, plays a critical role in urban design. As
a method of analysis and synthesis, it can be best
applied to those areas of urban design, which are,
by their nature, subjective, qualitative and subject
to personal interpretation, modication and attitude. The perceptual, visual and aesthetic aspects
of urban form, and these processes which govern
the relationship between man and environment
are in the realm of intuitive analysis and
judgment.
As a way of thinking, intuition plays a still
more critical role in urban design. It attempts to
integrate and unify all the various scientic and
non-scientic methods into an integrated and
unied language of urban design. Intuition in this
regard, provides a holistic and gestalt perspective
of the subject (urban form and urban activity
systems), i.e., it considers all its parts and links
simultaneously. It is thus a model of analysis and
synthesis which stands against reductionism and,
therefore, properly represents the reality and
complexity of urban life. Intuition weaves the
diversied methods and processes of urban
design together as integrative tools and makes
them more effective in their application.
5.2.1.23
Methods of Inquiry
Quantitative, Scientific
and Objective Method
According to Fecht (2012) urban designers traditionally have doubted the role that science can
5.2.1.24
Integrative Methods of
Inquiry
It should be pointed out that according to Habermas it is a combination of three cognitive areas in
which human interest generates knowledge that
could lead to better understanding (analysis) and
design (synthesis). They are: (1) work knowledge
which refers to the way one controls and manipulates environment. This is commonly known as
instrumental actionknowledge is based upon
empirical investigation and governed by technical
rules. The criterion of effective control of reality
direct what is or is not appropriate action. The
empirical-analytic
sciences
using
hypothetical-deductive theories characterize this
domain. Much of what we consider scientic
research domainse.g. physics, chemistry and
biology are classied by Habermas as belonging
to the domain of work. (2) Practical knowledge:
the practical domain identies human social
interaction or communicative action. Social
knowledge is governed by binding consensual
norms, which dene reciprocal expectations about
behavior between individuals. Social norms can
be related to empirical or analytical propositions,
but their validity is grounded only in the intersubjectivity of the mutual understanding of
intentions. The criterion of clarication of conditions for communication and intersubjectivity
(the understanding of meaning rather than
causality) is used to determine what is appropriate
action. Much of the historical-hermeneutic
85
Kind of
knowledge
Research methods
Technical
(prediction)
Instrumental
(causal
explanation
Positivistic sciences
(empirical-analytical
methods)
Practical
(interpretation
and
understanding
Practical
(understanding)
Interpretive research
(hermeneutic
methods)
Emancipatory
(criticism and
liberation)
Emancipation
(reflection)
Critical social
sciences (critical
theory methods)
Conclusion
87
88
6 Conclusion
Appendix
these waves are combined in the total structure to produce organic complexes that are
more than the sum of the component parts
(Gestalt). We will see that the physical environment provides patterns which follow the
quantization rules. These rules will provide
new insights into the correlation of ideas and
concepts in urban design. Patterns and patternization are essential to all human senses
and intellect. The ear becomes quasi-deaf to a
continuous tone. Also, scanning is necessary
to have any sensation of vision at all. The
brain also demands patterns.
Neither a steady flux nor an unpatterned random flux can be organized into experience. Non
patterned experience would most likely stall
mans perspective and intellective processes.
For the purpose of this book, Quantization
deals with the perceptual and visual aspects of the
environment. Since some of the principles of
information theory and communication theory
will be used in this part, a brief description of the
basic denitions and concepts of these two theories seem necessary. The fundamental idea in the
information theory is that of stochastic process.
A stochastic process is any system which gives
rise to a sequence of symbols to which probability
laws apply. A stochastic process is characterized
by some degree of redundancy between 0 and
100 %. At the zero-redundancy extreme, all the
symbols generated have equal probability of
occurrence, and nothing that we may know about
the history of the sequence makes the next symbol any more predictable. At the opposite
extreme, at 100 % redundancy, symbols are
89
90
Appendix
Appendix
91
92
selected symbols contain. As the average uncertainty or entropy of the symbols decreases,
redundancy increases, and the sequence (or
sequences) begin to make sense!
Perception is an open-ended process. A thing
presents itself as real to the extent to which its
features include indications for future perception,
and those indications continue to be fullled by
actual subsequent perceptions. If they are not
fullled or if they are fullled in a wholly unexpected way, the meaning of the whole process of
perceiving this object is transmitted: it becomes
an illusion or a perception of a different object.
The existence of a world is the correlate of
certain experiencespatterns marked out by
certain essential formation. The existence of each
real thing and of the world as the totality of
object that can be known through experience is
thus presumptive or contingent in the sense that
no complete fulllment of the system of implicit
references is possible. If none of the potential
aspects of current experience (aspects which
constitute the meaning of the perceptual object)
were fullled from moment to moment, the
worldthe regular unrolling of ordered patterns
would exist no longer.
Appendix
Fig. A.4 Two extreme eld of colors: color constancy and regular pattern. Neither of which is efcient in conveying
Appendix
93
Fig. A.6 Information. Uncertainty removed per second in order to reduce that information and make communication
more efcient
94
Appendix
Fig. A.7 Two undesirable situations of information frequency in the environment (1 and 2), and a desirable one (3)
Fig. A.8 The undesirable and desirable situations in the environment based on three different forms of information
frequencies (a, b and c)
Appendix
95
Fig. A.9 Two different layouts (a, up and b, down) in a neighborhood, based on two different levels of information
created
96
Appendix
Appendix
97
Fig. A.11 The three-level hierarchy of word, sentence paragraph (and text)
meaning, although the whole is relatively independent of each individual member. The block is
not a xed, static and dead structure. It evolves,
grows, and decays in time. Peoples values in each
house changes in time and so do what they representsymbols. This is a two-way relationship. Each member of the block contributes to the
evolution of the block, but is also affected by such
an evolutionary trend. The changes in the block are
usually not very drastic. The block has its relative
stability, continuity and consistency.
Sentences make the paragraph. Each sentence,
it may be also said, bears meaning relatively
independent of the paragraph. Each sentence,
through the meaning it conveys, contributes to
the construction of the general meaning of the
paragraph, which again is greater than the sum of
the meanings of all the individual sentences.
A meaningful relationship between the sentences
is again a prerequisite for the construction of a
meaningful paragraph. Such a relationship
should be based on certain commonly accepted
rules and principles.
In the same way blocks construct a neighborhood (Figs. A.12 and A.13). The meaning
(message) a neighborhood conveys is greater
than the block. This meaning8 is also more
complete than the meaning of the block, individually and collectively. This hierarchical system moves toward perfection and selfsufciency. They cumulate upward, and the
emergence of qualities marks the degree of
complexity of the conditions prevailing at a
given level, as well as giving to that level its
relative autonomy. The higher the level, the
greater its variety of characteristics. A higher
level cannot be reduced to the lower. According
98
Appendix
Appendix
or paragraph which conveys most of the information in the environment: a landmark, a mosque or a church, a neighborhood shop, a single
tree, a square, etc. Deep structure holds relationship with all or most of the members of the
block or neighborhood, and therefore, it is the
focal point and the point of identity, unity, continuity, and order for a neighborhood. Each
member of the neighborhood has minimum, but
continuous and frequent relationship with the
main structure, which will make it more powerful
and meaningful than any other single unit.
The concept of deep structure has been
applied as the main structure in urban design by
several theorists (see for example: Maki 1964;
Bacon 1967). From what was said before, we
might now conclude that the idea of deep or main
structure has a very signicant implication in the
practice of urban design, because we can actually
create such a structure in a neighborhood deliberately to establish some sense of unity, identity,
stability, cohesiveness, diversity, complexity,
legibility, and order. This may be done by recognizing the common values, needs and desires
of the members of a neighborhood. These are
that part of the values, needs, or any other
characteristics of the individuals which will be
expressed and reflected outside the house. These
common values and characteristics may be
accumulated and reflected in a structure of any
nature, as the main structure of the neighborhood. To form a deep structure, therefore, (a) the
shared and common characteristics (religious,
social, cultural, economic, etc.) must exist; and
99
Fig. A.14 a Formation of one single main structurecentralization. b Formation of the three elements of the main
structurePoli centers
100
Appendix
Note
Appendix
101
References
103
104
Baron, J. 1931. Elements of epistemology. New York: The
McMillan Co.
Batty, M. 2012. Building a science of cities. Cities 29
(Supplement 1): S9S16.
Bell, E.J. 1975. Stochastic analysis of urban development.
Environment and Planning.
Berg, P., and R. Dasmann. 1977. Rein habiting California. The Ecologist 7(10): 399401.
Berke, P., and M. Manta-Conroy. 2000. Are we planning
for sustainable development? An evaluation of 30
comprehensive plans. Journal of the American Planning Association 66(1): 2133.
Berry, B., and L.S. Bourne (eds). 1971. General features
of urban commercial structure. In International structure of the city. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bogdanovic, B. 1975. Symbols in the city and the city as
symbol. Ekistics 232, 140147.
Broadbent, G. 1990. Emerging concepts in urban space
design. London: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Brown, J.L., D. Dixon, and O. Gillham. 2009. Urban
Design for an urban century, place making for people.
New Jersey: Wiley.
Bull, C., et al. 2007. Cross-cultural urban design: Global
or local practice?. New York: Routledge.
Calthorpe, P. 1989. The pedestrian pocket book: A new
urban strategy. New York: Princeton Architectural
Press.
Carlyle, T. 1939. The best of Carlyle selected essays and
passages, ed. Herbert Le Sou. New York: T. Nelson
and Sons
Carmona, et al. 2003. The communication process. In The
urban design reader. Urban Reader Series, ed Larice,
M. and E. Macdonald (2007). New York: Routledge,
pp. 479489.
Carruthers, P. 1996. Language, thought and consciousness: an essay in philosophical psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cassirer, E. 1950. Problems of knowledge. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Castells, M. 2000. Grassrooting the space of flows. In
Cities and telecommunications ageThe fracturing of
geographies, ed. Wheeler, J.O. New York: Routledge,
pp. 1827.
Choay, F. 1969. The modern city: Planning in the 19th
century. Translated by Marguenrie Hogo and
George R. Collins. New York: George Brazil.
Choay, F. 1975. Urbanism and semiology. Ekistics 232.
Chomsky, N. 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature,
origin and use. Westport, CT
Collin, P. 1965. Changing ideals in modern architecture,
17501950. Montreal.
Colman, J. 1988. Urban design: A eld of broad
educational innovation. Ekistics 55(328330).
Congress for the New Urbanism. 2000. Charter of the
new urbanism. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Cooke, D. 1957. The language of music. London: Oxford
University Press.
Coseriu, E. 1981. Lecciones De Lienguistica General.
Madrid: Greedos.
Crane, D. 1960. The city symbolic. JAIP 26: 280292.
References
Crookston, M. 1996. Urban design and urban economics:
just good friends? Built Environment 22(4): 300305.
Cullen, G. 1971. The concise townscape. New York: Van
Nostrand.
Cuthberth, A.R. 2007. Urban design: requiem for an era
review and critique of the last 50 years. Urban
Design International 12: 177223.
Daniel, L.T. 2009. A trail across time: American
environmental planning from city beautiful to sustainability. JAPA 75(2).
Davidoff, P. 1968. The urban experience: A peopleenvironment perspective.
Davidoff, P., and S. Anderson, eds. 1968. Normative
planning. In Planning for diversity and choice.
Cambridge: MIT Press
Davidson, D. 1975. Thought and talk. In Mind and
Language, ed. Gutternplan, S. Oxford.
Davis, S. 1991. Pragmatics: A reader. Oxford.
Day, K. 2003. New urbanism and the challenges of
designing for diversity. Journal of Planning Education and Research 23: 8395.
DeChiara, J., and L. Koppelman. 1982. Urban planning
and design criteria, 3rd ed. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company.
Dickie, G. 1971. Aesthetics. New York.
Dobbins, M. 2009. Cited in Brown, L. J. et al. 2009.
Urban design for an urban century, placemaking for
people. New Jersey: Wiley.
Eco-Village Foundation. 1994. Proposal prepared by the
Gaia Trust, May 1994.
Eisenman, P. 1986. Moving arrows, eros and other
errors: An architecture absence. London: The Architectural Association.
Ellin, N. 1996. Postmodern urbanism. Oxford: Blackwell.
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1996. D. M. Borchert,
Editor in chief, McMillan Reference, New York: Vol 7.
Ellin, N. (1999). Postmodern Urbanism (rev edn).
Oxford: Black wells.
Fainstein, S.S. 2000. New directions in planning theory.
Urban Affairs Review 35(4): 451478.
Fecht, S. 2012. Urban legend: Can city planning shed its
pseudoscientic stigma? Scientic American.
Folley, D.D. 1964. An approach to metropolitan spatial
structure. In Explorations into the urban structure, ed.
Melvin, M. Webber. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Forester, J. 1989. Planning in the face of power.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Forester, J. 1993. Critical theory, public policy and
planning practice. Albany: State University of New
York press.
Forty, A. 2000. Words and buildings: A vocabulary of
modern architecture. London: Thames and Hudson.
Francis, M. 1984. Mapping downtown activities. Journal
of Architectural and Planning Research 1: 2135.
Gale, G. 1979. Theory of science: An introduction to the
history, logic, and philosophy of science. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Gale, J. 1979. Techniques and problems of theory
construction in sociology. New York: Wiley.
References
Garreau, J. 1991. Edge city: Life on the new frontier. New
York: Doubleday.
Gibbs, J.P. 1972. Sociological theory construction
(Chap. 3). Oak Brook: The Dryden Press, Inc.
Goodey, B. 1988. Making places: Urban design in
Britain. In The design profession and the built
environment, ed. P.L. Knox. New York: Nichols.
Goodman, N. 1976. Languages of Art. 2nd ed. India polis.
Gosling, D. 1984a. Denitions of urban design. London:
St. Martins Press.
Gosling, D. 1984b. Denitions of urban design. Architectural Design 54(12): 3137.
Gosling, D. 2003. The evolution of American urban
design: Archeological Anthology. New York:
Wiley-Academy.
Gosling, D., and B. Maitland. 1984. Concepts of urban
design. London: Academy Editions/St. Martins Press.
Guillerme, J. 1977. The idea of architectural language: A
critical inquiry. Oppositions 2126.
Gruen, V. 1964. The heart of our cities. The urban crisis:
Diagnosis and cure. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Hage, J. 1972. Techniques and problems of theory
construction in sociology. London: Wiley.
Hall, E. 1959. The silent language. Garden City:
Doubleday.
Hall, P. 1997. Modeling the post-industrial city. Futures
29(4/5): 311322.
Halprin, L. 1969. Creative process in the
human-environment: The RSVP cycles. New York:
George Braziller, Inc.
Hamlyn, D.W. 1970. The theory of knowledge.
Double-day and Co. Inc.
Hanson, N.R. 1977. The meaning of Waltanschauungen
views. In The Search for philosophic understanding of
scientic theories, ed. Suppe, F. Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, pp. 64635.
Harper, T.L., and Stanley M. Stein. 1992. The centrality
of normative ethical theory to contemporary planning
theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research
11: 105116.
Harris, N. 2002. Collaborative planning, from theoretical
foundations to practice forms. In Planning futures:
New directions in Planning theory, ed. Allmendinger,
P., and Tewdwr-Jones, M. London: Taylor and
Francis.
Harvey, D. 1972. Social processes. Spatial form and the
redistribution of real income in an urban system. In
The city: Problems of planning, ed. Murray Stewart.
Hardmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Healey, P. 1992. Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning
Review 63: 143162.
Healey, P. 1996. The communicative turn in planning
theory and its implications for spatial strategy formation. Environment and Planning B: Planning and
Design 23: 217234.
Healey, P. 1997. Collaborative planning: Shaping places
in fragmented societies. Planning, environment and
cities series. Houndmills: Macmillan.
105
Heath, J. 2001. Communicative action and rational
choice, Cambridge. Mass: The MIT Press.
Hedman, R., and A. Jaszewski. 1984. Fundamentals of
urban design. Washington D.C.: Planners Press.
Hertzberger, H. 1991. Lessons for students in architecture. Rotterdam: Vitgeverij.
Hill, E. 1966. The language of drawin. Englewood Cliffs:
Printice-Hall, Inc.
Hoch, C. 2007. Pragmatic communicative action theory.
Journal of Planning Education and Research 26:
272283.
Hoskin, F.P. 1968. The language of cities. New York:
Mc- Millan.
Hubbard, P.J. 1992. Environment-behavior researchA
route to good design? Urban Design Quarterly 42: 2
3.
Inam,
A.
2002.
Meaningful
urban
design:
Teleological/catalytic/relevant. Journal of Urban
Design 7(1). Philosophical Psychology 13(3): 325
353.
Kostoff, S. 1991. The city shaped: Urban patterns and
meaning throughout history, vol. 6. Boston: Little
Brown, pp. 6471.
Kreditor, A. 1990. The neglect of urban design in the
American academic succession. Journal of Planning
Education and Research 9: 155163.
Krieger, A. 2009. Where and how does urban design
happen? In Urban design, ed. Krieger, A. et al.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 113
130.
Krier, R. 1979. Urban space. New York: Rizzoli.
Krier, L. 1992. Leon Krier: Architecture and urban
design 19671992. New York: St. Martins Press.
Kuhn, D., et al. 1988. The development of scientic
thinking skills. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
Kuhn, T.S. 1962. The structure of scientic revolutions.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. 1977. Second thoughts on paradigms, in
Suppe, F. 1977, The Structure of scientic theories,
2nd ed. Urbana
Kunsttler, J.H. 1996. Home form nowhere. New York:
Simon and Schuster.
Lang, J. 1980. The nature of theory for architecture and
urban design. Journal of Urban Design 1(2).
Lang, J. 1987. Creating architectural theory: The role of
the behavioral sciences in environmental design. New
York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Lang, J. (ed.). 1974. Designing for human behavior:
Architectural and the behavioral science. Stroudsburg: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross.
Lang, J. 1994. Urban design: The American experience,
3558. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Ishizuki, M., and R. Yanagida. 1995. Digital urban
design. Space Design 8(371): 7788.
Jacobs, A.B. 1982. Observing and interpreting the urban
environment. Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California.
Jacobs, A.B. 1985. Looking at cities. Cambridge: MIT
Press.
106
Jacobs, J. 1961. The death and life of great American
cities. New York: Vintage.
Jencks, C.A. 1977. The language of post-modern architecture. New York: Rizzoli.
Johnson, K. and H. Johnson, eds. 1998. Encyclopedic
dictionary of applied linguistics. A handbook for
language teaching, 3738. UK: Blackwell publishers.
Kahn, L. 1969. Silence and light: Louis I. Kahn in Heinz
Ronner, et al.: complete work 193574, Institute for
the history and theory of architecture. The Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, 1977,
pp. 447449.
Katz, P. (ed.). 1994. The new urbanism: Toward an
architecture of community. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kelbaugh, D. 2009. Cited in Brown, L. G. et al. (2009).
Urban design for an urban century: Place making for
people, 4. New Jersey: Wiley.
Kepes, G. 1944. The language of vision. Chicago:
P. Theobold.
Kepes, G. 1961. Notes on expression and communication
in the cityscape. Winter: Deadalus.
Kindsvatter, D., and G. VonGrossmann. 1994. Beyond
the design process: What is urban design? Urban
design Quarterly 1994: 11.
Knight, T.W. 1981. Languages of designs: From known
to new. Environment and Planning B 8: 213238.
Knowels, J. 2000. Knowledge of grammar as
propositional
Knowels, J. 2005. Urban design: A typology of procedures and products, illustrated with over 50 case
studies. New York: Architectural Press.
Lang, J., and W. Moleski. 2011. Functionalism revisited:
Architectural theory and practice and the behavioral
sciences. Ashgate.
Langer, S. 1957. Philosophy in a new key: A study in the
symbolism of reason, rite, and art. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Lavin, S. 1992. Quatremere de Quncy and the invention
of a modern language of architecture. Cambridge:
The MIT Press.
Levy, J.M. 1988. Contemporary urban planning. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Lewis, D.N. (ed.). 1971. The growth of cities. London:
Elek Books.
Lewis, D. 1983. How to dene theoretical terms.
Philosophical Papers, vol. 1. New York.
Lynch, K. 1960. The image of the city. Cambridge: MIT
Press.
Lynch, K. 1962. Site planning. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Lynch, K. 1980. City design: What it is and how it might
be taught. Urban Design International 1(2).
Lynch, K. 1981. A theory of good city form. Cambridge
Mass: MIT Press.
Lynch, K. 1984. The immature arts of city design. Places
1(3): 1021.
Lynch, K., and L. Rodwin. 1958. A theory of urban form.
JAIP 24(4): 201214.
Mackay, D. 1990. Redesigning urban design. Architects
Journal 192(2): 4249.
References
Marcuse, P. 2009. From critical urban theory to the right
to the city. City 13(23).
Marshal, R. 2006. The elusiveness of urban design.
Harvard Design Magazine, 24: 25.
Marshal, R. 2009. Shaping the city of tomorrow: Jose
Luis Serts urban design legacy. In Joseph L. Sert, E.
Mumford and H. Sarkis, eds.
Marshal, R. 2009. The elusiveness of urban design: The
perceptual problem of denition and role. In Urban
design, ed. Krieger, A. University of Minnesota Press,
Minneapolis, pp. 3957.
Marshall, S. 2009. Cities, design and elevation. New
York: Routledge.
Marshall, S. 2012. Science, pseudo-science and urban
design. Urban Design International 17: 257271.
Madanipour, A. 1997. Ambiguities of urban design. TPR
68(3).
Madanipour, A. 2004. Viewpoint: Why urban design?
TPR 75(2).
Madanipour, A. 2007. Designing the city of reason:
Foundations and frameworks. New York: Rutledge.
Mantysalo, R. (2002). Dilemmas in critical planning
theory. Town Planning Review, 73(4).
Mc Ginnis, M.V. (ed.). 1999. Bioregionalism. London:
Routledge.
Michelson, W. 1970. Man and his urban environment.
Reading, Ma.: Addison-Wesley.
Michelson, W. (ed.). 1975. Behavioral research methods
in environmental design. Stroudburg: Dowden,
Hutchinson and Ross.
Morgenbesser, S. 1967. Philosophy of science today. New
York: Basic Books.
Markus, T. 1993. Buildings and power. London:
Routledge.
Maslow, P. 1957. Intuition versus intellect. Valley
Stream: Life Science Press.
Mayo, E. 1946. The human aspects of industrial civilization. Boston: Harvard University.
McCarthy, T. 1978. The critical theory of Jurgen
Habemas, Cambridge, MA.
Michelson, W.M. 1970. Man and his urban environment:
A sociological approach. Reading: Addisson-Wesley
Publication Co.
Mitropoulos, E.G. 1975. Space network: Toward
hodological space design for urban Man. Ekistics
232: 199207.
Morris, A.E.J. 1974. History of urban form: Prehistory to
the Renaissance. New York: Wiley.
Morris, A.E.J. 1979. History of urbanism: Before the
Industrial Revolution, 2nd ed. London: George Goodman Limited.
Morris, A.E.J. 1979. History of urban form, before the
Industrial Revolution. New York: Wiley.
Morris, C. 1946. Signs, language and behavior. New
York: Princeton Hall Inc.
Moss, M.L., and A.M. Townsend. 2000. How telecommunications systems are transforming urban spaces. In
Cities in the telecommunications agethe fracturing
of geographies, ed. Wheeler, J.O., et al., pp. 3141.
New York: Routledge.
References
Moudon, A.Vernez. 1992. A catholic approach to organizing what urban designers should know. Journal of
Planning Literature 64(4): 331349.
Moudon, A.Vernez. 2000. Proof of goodness: A substantive basis for New Urbanism? Places 13(1): 3843.
Moughtin, C. 1996. Urban design: Green dimensions.
Butterworth Architecture: Oxford.
Moughtin, C. 1999. Urban design: Street and square, 2nd
ed. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Muller, M. 1965. Lectures on the science of language.
Monshi Ram Manohar Lal: Delhi.
Mumford, L. 1950. The city history. New York: Penguin
Books.
Mumford, E. 2009. Dening urban design: CIAM architects and the formation of a discipline, 193769. Yale.
Norberg-Schulz, C. 1963. Intentions in architecture.
Allen and Unwin: University Press.
Ozgood, C.E., et al. 1957. The measurement of meaning.
University of Illinois Press
Ozgood, C.E., and O. Tzeng, eds. 1990. Language,
meaning, and culture. The selected papers of C.E.
Ozgood. Praeger Publishers.
Park, N.L. 1968. The language of architecture, a
contribution to architectural theory. Paris:
Mouton-The Hgue.
Peckam, M. 1976. Mans rage for chaos: Biology,
behavior, and the arts. New York: Schocken Books.
Penn, A. 2003. Space syntax and spatial cognition or why
the axial line? Environment and Behavior 35(1): 3065.
Pittas, M.J. 1980. Dening urban design. Journal of
Urban Design 1(2).
Pizarro, R.E., L. Wei, and T. Banerjee. 2003. Agencies of
globalization and third world urban form: A review.
Journal of Planning Literature 18(2).
Pojman, L.P. 1994. The theory of knowledge. New York:
Wadsworth Pub. Co.
Punter, J. 1996. Urban design theory in planning practice:
The British perspective. Built Environment 22(4):
263277.
Punter, J. 1999. Design guidelines in American cities:
Conclusion. In The urban design reader, ed. Larice,
M., and E. Macdonald (2007). New York: Urban
Reader Series.
Random House Dictionary of the English Language.
1988. By Jess Stein, editor in chief and Laurence
Urdang, Managing Editor, Random House.
Rapoport, A. (ed.). 1976. The mutual interaction of
people and built environment: A cross-cultural perspective. Chicago: Muton.
Rapoport, A. (ed.). 1977. Human aspects of urban form:
Towards a man-made environment approach to urban
form and design. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press.
Rapoport, A., and Robert E. Knater. 1967. Complexity
and ambiguity in environmental design. Journal of the
American Institute of Planners 33(4): 210221.
Rapoport, A., and Ron Hawkes. 1970. The perception of
urban complexity. Journal of American Institute of
Planners 36: 106111.
Relf, E. 1987. Place and placeness. London: Pion.
107
Roderick, R. 1986. Habermas and the foundation of
critical theory. N.Y.: St. Martins.
Rosow, I. 1974. Socialization to old age. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Rowe, C., and F. Kotter. 1978. Collage city. Cambridge:
MIT Press.
Royal Institute of British Architects, Board of Education.
1970. Report of the urban design diploma working
group.
Rudi, K. 1994. On language change: The invisible hand
in Language. London: Routtedge.
Rudlin, D., and N. Falk. 2009. Sustainable urban
neighborhood, building the 21st century home.
Oxford: Architectural Press.
Saarinen, E. 1943. The city: Its decay, its future. New
York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.
Sasselin, R.G. 1975. Architecture and language: The
sensationalism of Le Camus de Mezieres. The British
Journal of Aesthetics 15(1975): 239254.
Scargill, D.I. 1979. The form of cities. London: Bell and
Hayman.
Schroyer, T. 1973. The critique of domination: The origin
and development of critical theory. Boston: Beacon
Press.
Schurch, T.W. 1999. Reconsidering urban design:
Thoughts about its denition and status as a eld or
profession. Journal of Urban design 4(1) (Science,
pseudo-science and urban design).
Scott-Brown, D. 1990. Urban concepts. London, New
York: Academy Editions, St. Martins Press.
Sennet, R. 1970. The uses of disorder: Personal identity
and city life. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Xu, Shi. 2000. Linguistics as metaphor: Analyzing the
discursive ontology of the object of linguistic inquiry.
Language Sciences 22(4): 423446.
Sibley, F. 1965. Aesthetic and nonaesthetic. Philosophical Review 74.
Sitte, C. 1945. The art of building cities; or city building
according to its artistic principles. Translated by
Charles, T. Stewart. New York: Reinhold Publishing
Co.
Smith, R.W. 1973. A theoretical basis for participatory
planning. Public Sciences 4: 275295.
Smithson, A. (1974). Team 10 Primer. MIT Press.
Soja, E.W. 2009. Designing the postmetropolis. In Urban
design, ed. Krieger A., et al., pp. 255269. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Sommer, R. 1969. Personal space: The behavioral basis
of design. Englewood Cliff: Prentice-Hall.
Sommer, R. 2009. Beyond centers, fabrics, and cultures
of congestion: Urban design as a metropolitan enterprise. In Urban design, ed. Krieger, A. et al., pp. 135
152. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Sorkin, M. 2007. The end(s) of urban design. Harvard
Design Magazine 25: 17.
Sorkin, M. 2009. The end(s) of urban design. In Urban
design, ed. Krieger, A., pp. 155182. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Spirn, A.W. 1998. The language of landscape. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
108
Stafford, B.M. 1979. Symbols and myth: Humbert de
supervilles essay on absolute signs in art. Cranbury.
N.J: University of Delaware.
Stein, S.M., and Thomas L. Harper. 2012. Creativity and
innovation: Divergence and convergence in pragmatic
dialogical planning. Journal of Planning Education
and Re- search 32(1): 517.
Steinitz, C. 1968. Meaning and congruence of urban form
and activity. JAIP 34(4): 233248.
Steinitz, C. 1979. Defensible processes for regional
landscape design. LATIS 2(1).
Sternberg, E. 2000. An integrative theory of urban design.
APA Journal 66(3): 265278.
Stohr, A. 1996. In The Encyclopedia of philosophy, ed.
Edwards, P., vol. 8, p. 18. New York: The McMillan
Co. & The Free Press.
Stroud, B. 2000. Understanding human knowledge.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Summers, D. 1981. Michelangelo and the language of
art. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Suppe, F. 1977. The search for philosophic understanding of scientic theories. Urbana: University of Illinois
Press.
Szostok, Rick. 2003. A schema for unifying human
science. Interdisciplinary perspectives on culture,
294. Cranbury: Rosemont Publishing and Printing
Corp.
Tarski, A. 1994. Introduction to logic and to the
methodology of the deductive sciences, 4th ed.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taschen. 2003. Architectural theory: From renaissance to
the present. London: Taschen.
Taylor, M.C. 1989. Deadlines approaching architecture.
In Restructuring architectural theory, ed. Diiani, M.,
and C. Ingraham, pp. 1825.
Taylor, N. 1999. The elements of townscape and the art of
urban design. Journal of Urban Design 4(2).
Thiel, P. 1961. A sequence-experience notation for
architectural and urban spaces. Town Planning Review
32(1): 3352.
Thiel, P. 1997. People, paths, and purposes: Notations
for a participatory envirotecture. Seattle: University
of Washington Press.
Thomas, R. (ed.). 2003. Sustainable urban design: An
environmental approach. New York: Spon Presss.
Tibbalds, F. 1984. Urban designWho needs it? Places 1
(3): 2225.
References
Tibbalds, F. 1988. Urban design: Tibbalds offers the
Prince his ten commandments. The Planner 74(12): 1.
Tibbalds, F. 1992. Making people-friendly towns:
Improving the public environment in towns and cities.
London: Harlow.
Toon, J. 1988. Urban planning and urban design. Ekistics
55(328330): 95110.
Trancik, R. 1986. Finding lost space: Theories of urban
design. New York: Van Norstrand Rehinhold Co.
Tugnutt, A., and M. Robertson. 1987. A Making townscape contextual approach to building in an urban
setting. London: Batsford.
Turza, G., and S. Sober. 1999. On the essence of
language. Moenia 5: 3368. (SPA).
Van der Ryn, S., and S. Cowan. 1996. Ecological design.
Washington D.C.: Island Press.
Van Zanten, D. 1996. Quatremere de Quincy and the
invention of a modern language of architecture.
Journal of the Society of Architectural Historian 55
(1): 99100.
Venturi, R. 1966. Complexity and contradiction in
architecture. New York: Museum of Modern Art.
Venturi, R., et al. 1972. Learning from Las Vegas.
Cambridge: MIT Press.
Vitrivius. 1960. The ten books of architecture (Book 1,
Chap. 2). New York: Dover Publication.
Watson, V. 2002. Do we learn from planning practice?
The contribution of the practice movement to planning
theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research
22: 178187.
Webber, Max, et al. 1964. Explorations into urban
structure. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.
Webber, M., et al. (eds.). 1974. Permissive planning in
the future of cities. London: Hutchison Educational
and open Univ. Press.
Whittick, A. 1960. Symbols, signs and their meaning,
368. London: Leornarld Hill Limited.
Whyte, W.H. 1980. The social life of small urban spaces.
New York: The Conservation Foundation.
Whyte, W.H. 1988. City: Rediscovering the center. New
York: Doubleday.
Zevi, B. 1957. Architecture as space. Translated by
Gendel, M. New York: Horizon Press.
Zevi, B. 1978. The modern language of architecture.
Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Index
A
Abaza, H., 80
Abercrombie, P., 2
Aberley, D., 79
Abrams, C., 35, 46
Ackerman, J.S., 1
Alexander, C., 9, 10, 26, 35, 36, 46
Ambiguity, 36, 58
Anderson, S., 35
Appleyard, D., 8, 37
Aravot, I., 10
Architecture, 16, 17, 21, 26, 36, 37, 42, 46
Arnheim, R., 93
Art, 9
civic design as, 2
denition of, 34
urban design as, 5, 7, 14
Artistic principles, 2, 9
Atkinson, A., 79
B
Bacon, E., 9, 36, 71
Bafna, S., 12
Bahrainy, H., 28, 46, 54, 82, 83
Banham, R., 6
Bannerjee, T., 8
Baranzini, A., 80
Barnett, J., 5, 7, 10, 11, 37, 82
Barron, J., 13, 100
Behavior, 19, 44, 62
circuit, 8
patterns, 12, 56, 76
Behaviorists, 12
Bell, E.J., 101
Berg, P., 79
Berke, P., 27
Berry, B., 35
Binary principle, 64
Bogdonovic, B., 9
Boundaries, 61, 62
Broadbent, G., 10, 52
Brown, J.L., 5, 28, 37, 83
Bull, C., 77
C
Calthorpe, P., 10
Carlyle, T., 41
Carmona, et al., 83
Carruthers, P., 46
Cassirer, E., 100
Castells, M., 81
Centrality, 59
Choay, F., 9
Chomsky, N., 43, 44
City
appearance, 8
building, 2, 5, 12
design, 6, 8, 11, 13, 67
form, 6, 8, 11, 76, 81
sense, 8
shaped, 8
symbolic, 9
Civic design, 13, 87
Cognitive, 4244, 85
Collage city, 10
Collin, P., 42, 46
Colman, J., 5
Communication, 8, 10, 17, 25, 30, 33, 35, 41, 46, 47, 51,
81, 83, 87
Complexity, 2, 12, 51, 52, 54, 62, 76, 84
Conceptual, 31, 83
Conceptual framework, 8, 11, 22, 27, 42, 63, 68
Concise townscape, 10
Conclusion, 87
Conguration, 1
Congress for the New Urbanism, 12
109
110
Congruence, 9
Consistency, 5, 71
Cooke, D., 46, 48
Coseriu, E., 44
Cowan, S., 37
Crane, D., 9
Criteriology, 100
Crookston, M., 81
Cullen, G., 10, 37
Cuthbert, A.R., 5, 35, 47, 48, 54
Cybernetics, 70
D
Davidoff, P., 35, 37
Davidson, D., 45
Davis, S., 35, 45
Day, K., 11, 12
DeChiara, 82
Decomposition, 30
Deep structure, 98, 99, 101
Dickie, G., 35
Disciplinary matrix, 32, 47
Discipline, 7, 11, 26, 29, 36, 38, 45, 46, 54, 71, 81, 85
Disorder, 20, 71
Diversity, 12, 18, 21, 24, 54, 58, 62, 65, 71, 79
Dobbins, M., 83
E
Economics, 79
Eco-Village Foundation, 79
Eisenman, P., 37, 46
Ellin, N., 11, 37
Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 31, 32, 34
Environment, 1, 3, 8, 15, 26, 29, 30, 37, 51, 52, 58, 63,
67, 70, 71, 84
Environmental design, 12, 59
Environmental feedback, 70
Epistemology, 5, 7, 49
Equilibrium, 67, 69, 71
Ethics, 21, 25, 78
F
Fainstein, S.S., 35
Falk, N., 79
Foley, D.D., 7, 8
Forester, J., 83
Forty, A., 10
Francis, M., 12
Freedom, 56, 61, 71, 72
G
Gale, G., 45
Gale, J., 31
Garreau, J., 37
General system theory, 74
Index
Gestalt/Gestaltists, 36, 74, 84
Gibbs, J.P., 31
Globalization, 82
Goodey, B., 5
Goodman, N., 37, 43
Gosling, D., 5, 6, 10, 11, 36, 46
Grammar, 39, 40, 42, 43, 45, 51, 88
Guillerme, J., 42, 46
H
Hage, J., 33, 37
Hall, E., 12
Hall, P., 81
Halprin, L., 8, 82
Hanson, N.R., 31
Harmony, 28, 36, 56, 69, 74
Harper, T.L., 26, 44, 47
Harris, N., 25
Harvey, D., 35, 37
Healey, P., 83
Heath, J., 44
Hedman, R., 11
Hertzberger, H., 9, 10
Hierarchy, 65, 66, 68, 71
Hill, E., 41
Hoch, C., 22
Homogeneity, 42, 56
Hubbard, P.J., 12
I
Image, 7, 41, 63, 73
Inam, A., vi
Imagibility, 64
Information, 81, 82
Information and telecommunications technologies (IT),
81
Integrative methods of inquiry, 85
Intuition, 54, 74, 84, 88
Intuitive process, 30, 51, 54, 82, 84, 87, 88
Ishizuki, M., 46
J
Jacobs, A.B, 37
Jacobs, J., 35
Jaszewski, A., 11
Jencks, C.A., 11, 37, 40, 46
K
Kahn, L., 36, 85
Katz, P., 8, 11, 37
Kelbaugh, D., 7, 11, 37
Kepes, G., 37, 46
Kindsvatter, D., 35
Knight, T.W., 41, 42
Knowels, J., 45
Index
Koetter, F., 10
Koppelman, L., 82
Kostoff, S., 5, 8
Kreditor, A., 5
Krieger, A., 7, 26
Krieger, Martin, 21
Krier, R., 10, 36, 37, 52
Krier, L., 10
Kuhn, D., 85
Kuhn, T.S., 37, 47
Kunsttler, J.H., 36
L
Lang, J., 5, 10, 19, 29, 3538, 82
Langer, S., 39
Language, 10
denition, 39
requirements, 39
tool for knowledge representation, 41
Lavin, S., 42, 46
Levy, J.M., 5
Lewis, D.N., 45
Linguistic competence, 4345
Linguistic formulation, 32
Lynch, K., 2, 5, 8, 11, 29, 35, 37, 76
M
Mackay, D., 5
Madanipour, A., 5
Main structure, 17, 18
Man-environment relationship, 72
Mantysalo, R., 25
Markovian, 92, 96, 101
Markus, T., 10
Maslow, P., 12
Mayo, E., 12
McCarthy, T., 33
Mc Ginnis, M.V., 79
Methods of inquiry, 84, 85
Michelson, W.M., 12
Mitropoulos, E.G., 9
Morgenbesser, S., 33
Morris, A.E.J., 1
Morris, C., 39, 40
Moss, M.L., 81
Moudon, A. Vernez, 7, 9, 11, 12, 36, 49, 84
Moughtin, C., 5, 6, 26, 36
Muller, M., 43
Multiplicity, 71
Mumford, E., 5
Mumford, L., 9, 37, 41
N
Neighborhood, 24
New Urbanism, 7, 8, 11, 12, 22, 35, 36
Norberg-Schulz, C., 37, 46
111
Normative Ethical Theory, 25
Normative principles, 25
Normative theory, 36
O
Order, 71
Organic growth, 1
Organization of human ecology, 74
Ozgood, C.E., 75
P
Park, N.L., 42
Patternization, 30, 55, 59, 60
Pattern language, 9, 36
Peckam, M., 101
Perceptual process, 8, 61
Pittas, M.J., 5, 29
Pizarro, R.E., 82
Planning, 35, 49
Pojman, L.P., 33
Practical knowledge, 85
Practice Movement, 21
Procedural areas, 30
Procedural rules, 51, 54
Process, 10, 44
Profession, 31
Punter, J., 29, 83
Q
Quantization, 56
R
Random House Dictionary of the English Language, 31
Rapoport, A., 12
Redundancy, 18
References, 92
Regularity, 31
Relf, E., 5, 37
Robertson, M., 9
Roderick, R., 85
Rodwin, L., 8
Rosow, I., 12
Rowe, C., 37
Royal Institute of British Architects, 6
Rudlin, D., 79
S
Saarinen, E., 2
Saisselin, R.G., 42, 46
Scargill, D.I., 7
Schroyer, T., 85
Schurch, T.W., 5
Scientic methods, 30, 54, 84, 87, 88
Scott-Brown, D., 5
112
Semantics, metaphor, signs, symbols, and analogy, 73
Sennet, R., 11, 35
Settlement
design, 1
pattern, 1, 56
Shape, 8, 25, 41, 43, 78
Shi-Xu, 44
Sibley, F., 35
Sign, 18, 20, 33, 39, 43
Simplicity, 56
Sitte, C., 1, 2, 9, 13, 36
Smith, R.W., 26, 44, 82
Sobre, S., 44
Soja, E.W., v
Sommer, R., 12, 29
Sorkin, M., v
Space score, 8
Space Syntax, 12
Spatial structure, 8
Spirn, A.W., 42
Stability, 56, 71
Stafford, B.M., 42, 46
Stein, S.M., 26, 44, 47
Steinitz, C., 9, 82
Sternberg, E., 7, 9, 11
Stohr, A., 45
Stochastic, 89, 91, 92, 96
Stroud, B., 31, 32
Substantive elements, 51, 54, 85, 87, 88
Summers, D., 1
Suppe, F., 31, 32
Sustainability, 3, 11, 23, 28, 54, 78, 80
Symbol, 20, 41, 43, 71, 77
Symmetry, 15, 33, 36, 56, 71
Syntax, 12, 39, 40, 88
Szostok, Rick, 1
T
Tarski, A., 32
Taschen, 17, 21
Taylor, M.C., 35
Taylor, N., 35
Technology, 8, 16, 80, 81
Territories, 19, 62
Theory, 712, 2126, 28, 3138, 4349, 55, 59, 66, 73,
74, 78, 90, 100
Thiel, P., 8
Thomas, R., 79
Thought, 21, 41, 4345, 75
Tibbalds, F., 5, 10
Town design, 2
Townsend, A.M., 81
Trancik, R., 37
Transmission, 71
Tugnutt, A., 9
Turza, G., 44
Index
U
Undifferentiated, 93
Unity, 11, 13, 15, 18, 35, 36, 51, 71
Urban Activities, 30, 47, 51, 52, 87, 88
Urban century, 28
Urban Design
culture-specic, 77, 88
Denition, 57, 10, 11, 30
global knowledge, 1, 5, 7, 10, 25, 29, 30, 38, 88
integrative knowledge base of, 29, 88
integrative principles of
binary, 64, 65, 71
boundaries, 60, 63
centrality, 59
collaboration, 24, 25, 82, 83
communication technology, 8, 81
cybernetics, 70, 71
disorder, 20, 71
economics, 79, 81
environmental feedback, 70
equilibrium, 67, 69
general systems theory, 74
gestalt, 36, 74
globalization, 82
hierarchy, 65, 66
IT, 81
man-environment-relationship, 6, 20
multiplicity, 20, 71
order, 22, 31, 36, 71
organization of human ecology, 74
participation, 8, 21, 24, 25, 83
patternization, 20, 55
process, 6, 12, 18
quantization, 56, 60
semantics, metaphor, signs, symbols and analogy,
73
sustainability, 78
territories, 62
unity, 71
knowledge Base, 1, 7, 11, 29, 30, 33, 51, 54, 87, 88
language, 9, 22, 39, 40, 42, 45, 51, 54, 55, 88
local language of, 47, 88
movements
behaviorism, 18, 37
city beautiful, 1315
Garden City & New Town, 14, 15, 37
Megastructuralism, 16
metabolism, mega form & collective form, 16, 17
modernism, 7, 16, 21, 37
new urban design, 26, 47
normative ethical, 25, 54
park, 13, 14
postmodernism, 21, 37
practical movements
collaborative communicative, 24
critical theory, 24
new urbanism, 22, 23
Index
urban village, 23
sustainability, 79
Symbolism and Semiology, 18
Team X, 17, 20
Traditionalism, 20
rules and principles, 2, 3, 5, 13, 51, 54, 56, 75, 85, 88
theory, 12, 22, 26, 35, 36, 47, 88
universal, 48, 88
Urban space, 10, 12, 18, 20, 26, 37, 47, 5254, 81, 85, 88
V
Van der Ryan, S., 37
Van Zanten, D., 46
Venturi, R., 9, 11, 22, 37
113
Vitrivius, 36
Vocabulary, 9, 10, 25, 3942, 51, 52, 83, 88
W
Watson, V., 22
Webber, Max, 8, 35, 48
Wei, L., 82
Whittick, A, 41
Whyte, W.H., 12, 37
Word, 32, 36, 39, 41, 43, 51, 71, 74
Z
Zevi, B., 36, 46