PHD PROPOSAL – JORGE GIL
10.09.2008
A MODEL FOR SUSTAINABLE URBAN DESIGN EVALUATION: TOWARDS AN INTERACTIVE DESIGN
SUPPORT TOOL INTEGRATING SPATIAL ANALYSIS
ABSTRACT
Urban planning has a considerable impact on the economic performance of cities and regions and on the quality of life of the population. Efficiency at this level largely depends on the capacity to identify community needs and to recognize the potential of the territory to satisfy them, and then to plan the built space to maximize the satisfaction of such needs using the least resources in a sustainable strategy. However, such capacity is currently hampered by the lack of integrated instruments for analysing and evaluating urban plans. The study will be targeted at the development of an urban design evaluation system departing from Hillier’s space syntax theory and extending it to incorporate socio-economic, environmental and mobility aspects. The project will aim at sketching the prototype of an interactive computer system for exploring urban design solutions, which will facilitate the transparent integration of analytic methodologies based on a GIS (Geographic Information System) in the creative stages of the urban design process.
STATE OF THE ART
Since the late 90’s the urban growth and contraction, climate change and scarcity of natural resources have set the political agenda on sustainable urban development and urban regeneration (Girardet 1999, Urban Task Force 2005). Furthermore, the topic of new towns is current not only in the fast growing Asian countries like China or the Arabic peninsula (Basar 2008), but also in European countries like the Netherlands or the United Kingdom, with the Eco-Towns programme (TCPA 2007). Considering a sustainable urban development approach the stress is on establishing a dialogue among the stakeholders to keep the process transparent, with mechanisms to ensure that a strategic development vision is defined, an adequate urban programme is laid out, and a matching outcome is reached that can be both quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated (LaGro 2008). In 1984, in ‘The Social Logic of Space’, Hillier and Hanson set out a new theory of space as an aspect of social life, called space syntax. This theory proposed a series of parameters to characterize buildings and urban environments linking them to aspects of social behaviour. The theory developed into an extensive research programme into the spatial nature and functioning of buildings and cities, culminating in the publication of ‘Space is the Machine' by Hillier in 1996. More recently, Ratti (2004) pointed out some inconsistencies in the original theory criticising its inability to take into account other features that are relevant for urban description, including the geometry of streets, building height and land use. The theory has since evolved to incorporate the geometry of designs (Iida and Hillier 2005), and with its integration into a GIS (Geographic Information System) framework space syntax is now applied in academia and practice as one of the analytical layers that compose a comprehensive spatial evaluation methodology (Gil 2007, Chiaradia 2008). Other urban analysis techniques, specifically addressing environmental parameters (Morello 2007) can be incorporated into such a GIS keeping in mind the pitfalls of highly complex urban simulations (Wu 2002).
The lack of urban design specific tools has led in recent years to the emergence of systems like CityZoom (Grazziottin 2004) and CityCAD (2008) which combine analytic and design features, from a GIS or CAD background. The integration of CAD and GIS has been extensively researched (Maguire 2003) to address the advantages offered by each of the systems: an interactive platform amenable to design and a knowledge platform amenable to analysis. Although the technical aspects begin to be resolved with the emergence of CAD systems with geo-database support, like AutoCAD Map, the interaction between the two models is still limited. A model of interaction between architectural design and analytic knowledge was developed by Penn et al in 1995, and more recent studies addressing the complexity specific to the urban design process are found in Penn 2005 and deVries 2007. Finally, the interaction models of video games have been explored in relation to urban design and planning to facilitate acquisition of knowledge and learning about complex phenomena (Beckett 2004, Borries 2007, Maas 2007).
OBJECTIVES
The present PhD proposal is part of a research project already approved by the FCT called “City Induction”, which will yield: • A model for formulating urban design problems, that is, a flexible system for producing, based on community and site features, the specifications of urban plans that set sustainable development targets. A model for generating flexible urban plans, that is, a system for producing design solutions that are adapted to variations in the design context. A model for evaluating urban plans, that is, a system for analysing, comparing and rating urban plans considering socio-economic, environmental and mobility requirements. This model is the focus of the current PhD proposal.
• •
These partial models will be assembled into one general system encoding guidelines to follow in the formulation, evaluation, and generation of urban plans. These models will be amenable to computer implementation, and the project will aim at sketching the prototypes of such computer implementations. The main objective of the evaluation model is to integrate selected analysis methodologies into urban design tools for evaluating the performance of alternative design solutions. Some of the questions that need to be addressed derive from: • • • • CAD Tools ≠ Urban Design tools; Analysis Tools ≠ Urban Design tools; Design Models ≠ Analytical Models; Analysis ≠ Evaluation;
The evaluation model needs to define a unified urban planning ontology for both analysis and design, with a set of new components and parameters specific to urban design, in a model adequate for urban simulation, with interactive features necessary for design and supporting data and visual features for evaluation of designs. The general implementation will allow the exploration of design solutions, facilitate the dialogue among stakeholders in the urban development process, and promote the creation of more sustainable urban environments.
DRAFT WORK PLAN
The ‘City Induction’ project, already approved by the FCT, has started in September 2007 and it foresees the development of a model for formulating, evaluating, and generating urban space and it includes the development of three partial models, one for each function. This PhD research concerns the development of the evaluation model. General Procedure: Work begins by gathering the necessary information on each theme: - Survey and critic of urban design regulations and guidelines, as well as Alexander’s pattern language, foreseeing the formulation of urban design briefs (formulation). - Study and learning of optimization techniques and survey of generative systems foreseeing the generation of urban design solutions according to a previous formulated design brief (generation). - Survey and critic of existing urban analysis and evaluation systems including space syntax foreseeing the evaluation of urban design contexts and solutions (evaluation). The collected information will be structured into an integrated system, seeking future compatibility of the formulation, generation, and evaluation processes and will set the basis for the development of the three partial models. To facilitate the interoperability of these partial models and the development of the general system, the three studies foresee the study and learning of specific common technical knowledge, namely, on GIS, advanced computer programming, space syntax, shape grammars, and ontology. The development of an Urban Evaluation system will evolve independently from the other two models, although there will be a permanent effort for coordination with: - the formulation model, concerning the indicators and evaluation parameters; - the generation model, concerning the development of design descriptors and evaluation parameters. Specific Tasks: The development of an Urban Evaluation model for sustainable development will consist of six different phases including two study phases, one focusing on theory (1.) and another on practice (2.), a specification phase (3.) to develop the theoretical model, an implementation phase (4.) to prototype and test the model, an integration phase (5.) to merge this with the other two modules of the general system, and finally a writing up phase (6.) to produce the PhD thesis. 1. Surveying Theory The aim is to identify existing principles, standards, methodologies, tools, requirements and parameters relevant to sustainable urban design and development. The study task (A.) is followed by a selection task (B.) to filter the key principles A. Literature review of the state of the art on the following topics to identify standards, principles and validated procedures: 1. Sustainable urban design policy and philosophy; 2. Sustainable urban design practice and examples; 3. Urban evaluation criteria from design guidance; 4. Urban analysis techniques with a focus on socio-economic, environmental and mobility aspects;
B.
5. GIS and CAD interoperability; 6. Spatial data interaction and visualisation models. Selection of analysis techniques that fulfil sustainable development requirements, with space syntax being a key one.
2. Surveying Practice The survey of theory is followed by a study of practice to understand how the analysis and design sides operate. The aim is to identify common and best practice in terms of models, tools and outputs, but also different objectives, ambitions and qualities leading to limitations or barriers. The study task (C.) is followed by a revision task (D.) to assess how theory is applied in practice. C. Study of the urban design process in practice from the consultant’s and the designer’s perspectives: 1. Select a core case study; 2. Identify the inputs required from the design team; 3. Study the design preparation for the consultant team; 4. Identify the analysis quality assessment standards; 5. Study the presentation techniques to communicate with the design team; 6. Identify the outputs required from the consultant team; 7. Study the evaluation and decision processes within design; 8. Discuss any ethical concerns from the mixing of the two domains. D. Revision of the previously selected analysis techniques (task B.) in light of practice.
3. Developing the theoretical model The survey phases (1. and 2.) on theory, practice, principles and tools, are the essential material for defining the scope of the urban evaluation module (E.). This is followed by an appraisal of existing urban design tools (F.) to identify to what extent they fulfil these requirements and to identify a suitable development platform. E. Development of the evaluation model description: 1. Unified urban ontology; 2. Interactive simulation requirements; 3. Data visualisation requirements; 4. Functional specification for implementation. F. Appraisal of existing urban design tools in light of the identified requirements: 1. Test a selection of tools with the consultancy and design case studies; 2. Assess the analytic offering and GIS support; 3. Assess the design offering and CAD support; 4. Assess the evaluation and visualisation features.
4. Implementing and testing the evaluation model The ultimate goal of this project is the development of prototype design support tools that transfer analytical practice into design practice in a creative and transparent fashion. G. Selection of existing interaction techniques from the fields of urban simulation, complex data visualisation, serious games, and strategy games, to include in the computer implementation. H. Development of prototype tools that demonstrate the implementation of the evaluation model I. Testing of the prototype with the original or a similar case study (task C.), ideally with the same participants to allow comparison of the process with and without the new design support tools.
5. Assembling the three partial models into a complete system At this point it is aimed to sketch a computer implementation of the complete system to formulate, evaluate and generate urban plans through an assemblage of the three partial model implementations through a CAD/GIS system. The functional interoperability of the GIS system shall be verified by developing a series of tests. The effectiveness of the ontological approach will be verified and corrected if eventual inconsistencies occur. 6. Writing the thesis From an independent PhD research perspective, in the eventual absence of the other models, the evaluation model will be tested without the formulation and generative models within the previously defined case study. Finally the writing up of the PhD thesis will conclude the work.
REFERENCES
1. 2. 3. 4. Basar, S. (2007) Cities From Zero, Architectural Association, London Beckett, K. and Shaffer, D. W. (2005), Augmented by reality: The Pedagogical Praxis of Urban Planning as a pathway to ecological thinking, in Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(1), pp. 31-52. Borries, F. von, Walz, S. and Boettger, M (2007) Space Time Play -Computer games, architecture and urbanism: the next level, Birkhaeuser Verlag, Basel Chiaradia, A., Schwander, C., Gil, J., Friedrich, E. and Gosset, A. (2008) Mapping the intangible value of urban layout (i-VALUL): Developing a tool kit for the socio-economic valuation of urban areas, for designers and decision makers. In Timmermans, H. and deVries, B. (eds) 9th International Conference on Design & Decision Support Systems in Architecture and Urban Planning, Eindhoven University of Technology Gil, J., Stutz, C. and Chiaradia, A. (2007) Confeego: Tool set for spatial configuration studies. In Turner, A. (ed.), New Developments in Space Syntax Software, Istanbul Technical University, pp. 15-22. Girardet, H. (1999) Creating Sustainable Cities, Schumacher Briefings 2, Green Books Ltd, UK Grazziotin, P., Turkienicz, B. and Sclovsky, L.: 2004, Cityzoom: A Tool for the visualization of the impact of urban regulations, SIGRADI 2004. Hillier, B. and Hanson, J. (1984), The Social Logic of Space, Cambridge University Press. Hillier, B. (1996), Space is the machine - a configurational theory of architecture, Cambridge University Press, UK. Hillier, B. & Iida, S. (2005) Network and psychological effects in urban movement”. In Cohn, A.G. and Mark, D.M. (eds), Proceedings of Spatial Information Theory: International Conference, COSIT 2005, New York, USA LaGro, J. A. (2008) Site analysis: A contextual approach to sustainable land planning and site design, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey Maas, W., Graafland, A., Batstra, B. , Bilsen, A. van, Pinilla, C. (eds.)(2007) Space Fighter, The evolutionary city (Game:), Actar, New York Maguire, D. (2003) Improving CAD-GIS interoperability (Available on-line, http://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/winter0203articles/improving-cad.html: accessed August 2008) Morello E., Ratti C. (2007) Raster Cities: Image Processing Techniques for Environmental Urban Analysis. In Porta S., Thwaites K., Romice O. (eds), Urban sustainability through environmental design, Taylor and Francis. Penn, A., Conroy Dalton, R., Dalton, N., Dekker, L., Mottram, C. and Turner, A. (1995), Intelligent Architecture: User Interface Design to Elicit Knowledge Models, in Applications and Innovations in Expert Systems III. SGES Publications, Oxford, pp. 335-348 Ratti, C. (2004) Space Syntax: some inconsistencies, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2004, volume 31, 487-499. Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) and Lock, D. (2007), Eco-towns: scoping report, helping to deliver a step change in the quality and availability of homes for the people of England, TCPA, UK
5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
11. 12. 13. 14.
15.
16. 17.
18. Urban Task Force (2005) Towards a Strong Urban Renaissance, ( Available on-line, http://www.urbantaskforce.org/UTF_final_report.pdf: accessed August 2008) 19. deVries, B., Tabak, V. and Achten, H. (2005), Interactive urban design using integrated planning requirements control, Automation in Construction, (14), pp. 207–213. 20. Wu, F. (2002), Complexity and Urban Simulation: Towards a Computational Laboratory, in Geography Research Forum (22), pp. 22-40.