Evaluation of middle scale urban form in accordance with transect as a theory and approach

Subject Areas : architecture

Mehran Alalhesabi ¹ , Mostafa Behzadfar ² , Elnaz Amirhodaei ³

1 - Assistant professor, Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Science and Technology.
2 - Professor, Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Science and Technology.
3 - دانشجوی دکتری شهرسازی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران، تهران، ایران

Received: 2017-12-23 Accepted : 2017-12-23 Published : 2017-11-22

Keywords: Urban Form Evaluation, New Urbanism, Transect, Principle of Ecology, Urban Character (Urban Intensi,

Abstract :

In different periods, urban form as substantial dimension of urban design has been core issue involving all urban designers with different approaches. The literature reviewing indicates that urban form can be treated with various approaches under positive or normative point of view. According to the issues involved in urban measurement, different point of views lead to explore three interrelated aspects of urban s tudy- the Measurement, Evaluation, and Representation of urban form. In addition there is a need to adopt a strategic approach in dealing with urban issues. Therefore, the paper considering with normative point of view put emphasis on urban form evaluation.In recent years, mos t recent innovation of new urbanism so called “transect” has been a very common theory and approach in urban design and planning specifically in America and Europe, although it is being used in a limited way in the Middle East. The transect approach described in this paper is based on a publication known as the Lexicon, a multi-authored compendium of New Urbanis t definitions and codes. Urban design and planning seek to create an immersive environment. This type of environment can be created by specifying and arranging the elements which comprise that environment in a way that is true to locational character which seems to be intrinsic to the place. To be immersive in urban environments is identified with their level and intensity of urban character. There is no scrutiny of how urban form has been created in accordance with transect theory and transect approach is characterized while much more research has been done on transect theoretical framework. Therefore the paper presents an overview of transect as theory and approach, exploring how urban form can be evaluated in accordance with transect.In this regard, transect indices are identified by using three-s teps research methodology that is characterized in determination of “dimensions”, “components” and “indices”. Principles of transect are categorized in “substantial” and “procedural” dimensions. This research uses “ecology” as a basic discipline for interpretation of “components”. In other words, “ecology” has been a reliable criterion to extract indices. In this regard, basic concepts of ecology conceptualizing transect are recognized—“ecosys tem”, “community”, “diversity”, “succession”, and “coevolution”. Afterwards, critical issues and concepts that have to be redefined in order to interpret of “components” and “indices” are determined by comparative comparison between transect and ecology as basic discipline. In addition, it’s done to redefine basic concepts in macro level – scale and context – in transect in according to what they are meaning in ecology. Therefore, transect indices are extracted from these basic concepts as “components”. They are as follows: “juxtaposition”, “locational sequence”, “suitability between urban elements types and urban character of environment” that has been defined by “number of types been found” and “population of elements with specific type”, “suitability between urban elements compared to each other”, “diversity of transect zone types”, “diversity of urban elements types”, “climax”, “transition”, and “coevolution of urban elements”. Eventually the paper present a framework in order to quantify these indices according to relative abundance formula.Keywords: Urban Form Evaluation, New Urbanism, Transect, Principle of Ecology, Urban Character (Urban Intensity)

References:

1. ارد‌کانی، محمد‌رضا. (1393). اکولوژی. چاپ شانزد‌ه. تهران: انتشارات د‌انشگاه تهران.
2.‌ الکساند‌ر، کریستوفر. (1384). یاد‌د‌اشت‌هایی بر ترکیب فرم. تهران: انتشارات روزنه.
3. غفاری، غلامرضا. (1388). منطق پژوهش تطبیقی. مطالعات اجتماعی ایران 3 (4)، 76-92.
4. کیوی، ریمون؛ و کامپنهود، لوک وان. (1391). روش تحقیق د‌ر علوم اجتماعی. ( عبد‌الحسین نیک گهر، مترجم). تهران: نشر توتیا.
5. گلکار، کورش. (1393). آمارزد‌گی؛ نقد‌ی بر افسون زد‌گی کمیت باورانه د‌ر پژوهش. مسکن و محیط روستا. 45، 17-28.
6. لینچ، کوین. (1381). تئوری شکل شهر. (حسین بحرینی، مترجم).
تهران: انتشارات د‌انشگاه تهران.
7. مراد‌ی، سلمان؛ و امیرهد‌ائی، الناز. (1389). تبیین مفهوم کد‌های فرم‌بنیاد و جایگاه آن د‌ر جنبش نوشهرسازی. آباد‌ی 68، 70-81.

8. Adler, Frederick R., & Tanner, C. J. (2013). Urban Ecosystems; Ecological Principles for the Built Environment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. Alexander, Christopher, Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, Sh. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Azimi, Nooreddin, Faroughi, M., & Tajbakhsh, M. (2014). Analysis of Physical Development and Activity Pattern along the Main Entrances in Rasht. International Journal of Architectural Engineering & Urban Planning 24 (2), 111–20.
11. Ben-Joseph, E. (2005a). CHAPTER 1; On Standards. In E. Ben-Joseph & T. S. Szold (Ed.), Regulating Place; Standards and the Shaping of Urban America, (pp. 1–16). New York: Routledge.
12. Ben-Joseph, E. (2005b). The Code of The City; Standards and The Hidden Language of Place Making. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Bohl, Ch. C., & Plater-Zyberk, E. (2006). Building Community across the Rural-to-Urban Transect. Places 18 (1), 4–17.
14. Cain, M. L., Bowman W. D., & Hacker, S. D. (2014). Ecology. (3th ed). Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.
15. Carmona, M., Marshall, S., & Stevens, Q. (2006). Design Codes: Their Use and Potential. Progress in Planning 65, 209–289.
16. Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S., Heath, T., & Oc, T. (2010). Public Places, Urban Spaces; T
he Dimensions of Urban Design. (2th ed). Oxford: Elsevier.
17. Clifton, K., Ewing, R., Knaap, G., & Song, Y. (2008). Quantitative Analysis of Urban Form: A Multidisciplinary Review. Journal of Urbanism:
International Research on Placemaking and Urban
Sustainability 1 (1), 17–45.
18. Duany, A. (1999). The Lexicon of The New Urbanism. Miami: Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company.
19. Duany, A. (2013). A General Theory of Landscape Urbanism. In A. Duany & E. Talen (Ed.), Landscape Urbanism and Its Discontents: Dissimulating the Sustainable City, (pp. 115–24). Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.
20. Duany, A., & Brain, D. (2005). Regulating as If Humans Matter: The Transect and Post- Suburban Planning. In E. Ben-Joseph & T. S. Szold (Ed.), Regulating Place; Standards and the Shaping of Urban America, (pp. 293–332). New York: Routledge.
21. Duany, A., & Talen, E. (2002). Transect Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 68, 245–66.
22. Duany, A., Wright, W., & Sorlien, S. (2009). SmartCode Version 9.2. Ithaca: New Urban News Publications.
23. Grant, B. (2012). Grand Reductions: 10 Diagrams That Changed City Planning. The Urbanist 518.
24. Haase, D., & Nuissl, H. (2010). The Urban-to-Rural Gradient of Land Use Change and Impervious Cover: A Long-Term Trajectory for the City of Leipzig. Journal of Land Use Science 5 (2), 123–141.
25. Ibes, D. (2013). Advancing Sustainable Urbanism through Civic Space Planning & Design. Unpublished phd’s thesis, Arizona State University.
26. Ives, A. R. (2007). Diversity and Stability in Ecological Communities. In Robert M. May &
Angela R. McLean (Ed.), Theoretical Ecology; Principles and Applications, (pp. 98–110). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. Kelbaugh, D. (2013). Landscape Urbanism, New Urbanism and the Environmental Paradox of Cities. In A. Duany & E. Talen (Ed.), Landscape Urbanism and Its Discontents: Dissimulating the
Sustainable City, (pp. 57–86). Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.
28. Marcantonio, D. (2007). The Classicism of the Transect. The Classicist 7, 18–23.
29. McGrath, B., & Pickett, S. T. A. (2011). The Metacity: A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Ecology and Urban Design. Challenges 2 (4), 55–72.
30. McPhearson, T., Pickett, S. T. A., Grimm, N. B., Niemelä, J., Alberti, M., Elmqvist, Th., Weber,
Ch., Haase, D., Breuste, J., & Qureshi, S. (2016). Advancing Urban Ecology toward a Science of Cities. BioScience 66 (3), 198–212.
31. Odum, E., & Barrett, G. W. (2005). Fundamentals of Ecology. (5th ed). Belmont: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
32. Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., Childers, D. L., McDonnell, M. J., & Zhou, W. (2016). Evolution and Future of Urban Ecological Science:
Ecology in , of , and for the City. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability 2 (7), 1–16.
33. Pickett, S. T. A., Kolasa, J., & Jones C. G. (2007). Ecological Understanding: The Nature of Theory and the Theory of Nature. (2th Ed). Burlington: Academic Press.
34. Rahnama, M. R., Roshani, P., Hassani, A., & Hossienpour, S. A. (2012). Use Principles
of New Urbanism Approach in Designing
Sustainable Urban Spaces. International Journal of Applied Science and Technology 2 (7), 195–203.
35. Richards, P. (2008). A Transect of Urban Settlement Types; The Transect, Smartcode And Urban Steucture. Queensland.
36. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
37. Steiner, F. (2016). Human Ecology; How Nature and Culture Shape Our World. Island Press.
38. Talen, E. (2002). Help for Urban Planning: The Transect Strategy. Journal of Urban Design 7 (3), 293–312.
39. Talen, E. (2003). Measuring Urbanism: Issues in Smart Growth Research. Journal of Urban Design 8 (3), 195–215.
40. Talen, E. (2008). Beyond the Front Porch: Regionalist Ideals in the New Urbanist Movement. Journal Of Planning History 7 (1), 20–47.
41. Talen, E. (2009). Urban Design Reclaimed:
Tools, Techniques, and Strategies for Planners. Chicago: APA Planners Press.
42. Townsend, C. R., Begon, M., & Harper, J. L. (2008). Essentials of Ecology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
43. Vernez-Moudon, A. (1994). Getting to Know the Built Landscape: Typomorphology. In Karen A Franck and Lynda H Schneekloth (ed). Ordering Space: Types in Architecture
and Design, (pp. 289–311). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
44. Walters, D. (2007). Designning Community; Charrettes, Master Plans and Form-Based Codes. Oxford: Architectural Press.