Professional Documents
Culture Documents
THE SOCIAL
EXPERIENCE OF
URBAN SPACES
JEFF SAUSER
MEASURING THE SOCIAL EXPERIENCE OF URBAN SPACES
5
LITERATURE REVIEW
Decades of scholarly urban design research have yielded a number
of important treatises full of insights that can directly inform actual
urban design work. This literature review shall engage nine of the
most prominent works, parsing from their rich texts one key metric or
strategy to be measured and/or documented in the case studies. While
all of these authors potentially provide many such ideas, this paper
will attempt to distill but one readily measurable concept from each
– perhaps future work could engage additional metrics from these
authors as well as soliciting metrics from others.
The metrics are not consistent in scale or objectivity: some apply more
to the urban scale, some to the architectural, some to the personal or
bodily; some are highly quantifiable, some are directly documentable,
and some but subjectively conveyable. The authors are organized in
this literature review according to these traits, first by scale (urban,
architectural, and then personal) and then, within each scale group, by
objectivity (most objective to most subjective).
OBJECTIVE SUBJECTIVE
6
At the urban scale, Bill Hillier provides an entirely quantifiable measure
of integration to explain a site’s position and level of connection (both
infrastructural and symbolic) within the overall urban network.
Christopher Alexander informs a simple survey of surrounding
structures’ vintage to help enrich the perception of historical context.
Gordon Cullen offers a way to document the visual and spatial
experience of approaching and moving through an urban space to help
choreograph a dramatic procession.
7
INTEGRATION
Bill Hillier, The Social Logic of Space, 1984
8
9
ORGANICNESS
Christopher Alexander, A New Theory of Urban Design, 1987
10
11
SERIAL VISION
Gordon Cullen, The Concise Townscape, 1961
13
EYES ON THE STREET
Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, 1961
14
15
MEMORABILITY
Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City, 1960
PLACEHOLDER IMAGE
17
MAGIC
Allan Jacobs, Great Streets, 1993
20
21
SOFT EDGES
Jan Gehl, Life Between Buildings, 1980
22
23
MULTIPLICITY
Margaret Crawford, Everyday Urbanism, 1999
PLACEHOLDER IMAGE
25
CASE STUDIES
The literature review having digested the nine authors and translated their
work into singular concepts, three case studies will now test the resultant
metrics’ measurability and applicability to the design and evaluation of
existing urban sites.
The three sites are similar in many ways to maintain comparability but
different in enough ways to ensure different results for each. All three are
smaller than a block and immediately bordered on at least one side by building
facades. Located within a few blocks of Peachtree Street, they are all centrally
and importantly located with the potential heavy usage. The High Museum
plaza is unique in that it does not directly front a street and its surrounding
institutions largely determine its activity. Centergy Plaza exists at the mixed-
use threshold between Georgia Tech and the rest of the city but does not itself
contain any particularly important civic or cultural institutions or landmarks.
Woodruff Park sits in the city’s physical and symbolic heart, surrounded by
the region’s most significant skyscrapers and filled with representatives from
its top and bottom socioeconomic classes.
26
Like the literature review, the case studies’ metrics are organized by scale
(urban to personal) on the first order and objectivity (most to least) on the
second.
At the urban scale, integration is quantified by space syntax GIS software (red
lines indicate the most integrated streets and street segments, dark blue lines
are the least). Measuring organicness involves mapping the sites’ neighboring
buildings and coloring them according to their age (light grays indicate
younger buildings, darker grays indicate older). Serial vision is represented
by a series of views from a path mapped on the site plan.
The following case studies demonstrate how these metrics might be measured
and/or observed. This paper’s subsequent and final section considers how
this work might inform policy.
27
CASE STUDY 1
HIGH MUSEUM PIAZZA
28
URBAN 1
INTEGRATION: The plaza resides in a dense urban district of high integration (relative to the
rest of the city). The 1-mile metric reach of its bounding streets (left) is very high (33.8 miles)
but, like much of the city, directional reach (right) is low (2.25). Note: this plaza is blocked from
street view by museum buildings, potentially imparing actual integration values.
ORGANICNESS: Though surrounded by a single institution (or family of institutions), the plaza
enjoys moderate organicness by virtue of the institutions’ relatively longstanding history in
this place. Over the years, buildings, often of architectural notoriety, have been added to the
campus in an increasingly varied assembly of structures and styles.
SERIAL VISION: Especially when entering via the narrow, ivy-lined stair corridor, this plaza’s
serial experience is very spatially dynamic. The stair’s space is constricted but ends facing the
glassy cafe and opens into the exposed plaza. From there, the space extends across grass, along
the Meier wing’s blocky facade, and past diverse sculptures, terminating at Peachtree Street.
29
ARCHITECTURAL 1
EYES ON THE STREET: Though hardly visible from the street (especially because of intervening
topography not captured by the map on the right), once inside the plaza itself, visibility levels are
moderately high. With the exception of some corners and corridors, the plaza is geometrically
quite rectilinear and without significant blind spots.
MAGIC: The plaza’s most poignant sense of magic comes from the new museum’s almost totally
transparent first floor along the plaza’s west and north edges. The effect is masked by reflective
glare from the plaza’s center, creating a feeling of containment. But approaching the facade reveals
uncannily clear views across the museum floor and to the city beyond, juxtaposing art and skyline.
30
PERSONAL 1
SITTABILITY: All seats in the plaza are chairs around tables (4 chairs around each table).
The cafe tables are set with silverware and roped off from the rest of the plaza - they are for
restaurant patrons only. The plaza tables are grouped under trees but can be rearranged more
freely. The plaza’s adjacent lawn provides the only other potential sitting option.
88 total seats
38,900 ft2
442 ft2/seat
2 seat types
13 cafe tables 9 plaza tables
4 chairs/table 4 chairs/table
52 seats 36 seats
SOFT EDGES: If not for its generously glazed groundfloor walls and externally visible internal
exhibits (plus the western view through the building to the city beyond), the plaza’s edges
would be quite hard. The only other softening elements include seating areas, entry queues,
and spare, covered walkways.
Cafe seating
Covered walkway Queue
Walkway Storefront
Storefront Entry
Storefront 1 layer
2 layers 2 layers
3 layers
MULTIPLICITY: School groups appropriate an otherwise relatively unused lawn; the plaza
often hosts temporary art installations and outdoor events; clearly visible from the plaza,
activity in the museum lobby is only varies from normal docility when exhibits first open or
during private events. Overall, the plaza does not foster much usage multiplicity.
31
CASE STUDY 2
CENTERGY PLAZA
32
URBAN 2
INTEGRATION: Located amidst midtown Atlanta’s street grid, Centergy plaza is very integrated
into the urban fabric infrastructurally. While its 1-mile metric reach is high (44.5), its directional
reach is exceptionally high relative to the rest of the city (an effect of the grid). If 5th Street did
not dead end at West Peachtree Street two blocks to the east, this value would be even higher.
ORGANICNESS: Built all at once, Tech Square is highly inorganic. The buildings around the
plaza share the same style and materials, though there is some scalar variation. Because the
plaza is entirely surrounded by structures of a common vintage, it is unlikely this place will
accrue organicness (unless part of the block is replaced or drastically changed in the future.)
SERIAL VISION: Varied shading conditions promote a diverse visual palette as one passes from
covered arcade to tree-lined bench rows to bright open plaza center. Moving to the northwest
corner, a constricting view down a staircase toward the parking deck affords a narrow vista of
Midtown towers and vacant lots - a sharp contrast to Tech Square’s mid-rise built-out persona.
33
ARCHITECTURAL 2
EYES ON THE STREET: Highly open to the street and geometrically uncomplicated, the plaza
contains no blind spots except along the northern stairs leading down to the rear driveway. If a
wider view-shed penetrated the office building along the plaza’s northern edge, the space would
become much redder relative to nearby intersections and corridors (see area map at right).
MEMORABILITY: A visually generic and uninspiring physical environment, the place must
provide a map to position itself within the city - little memorarbly stands out here. Part of an
arbitrarily detailed urban system, the map’s “you are here” marker orients the passerthrough
in relation to a prescribed collection of civic and corporate landmarks in place of a personal set.
MAGIC: Though not particularly powerful, the extensive tree plantings inspire a somewhat
magical ambience, especially on a sunny day when the open plaza is oppressively exposed
and vacant but the shady grove is pleasantly cool and well-populated. People seem unusually
pleasant and happy in this generously shrouded condition.
34
PERSONAL 2
SITTABILITY: Benches line the plaza’s interior and a cafes and fastfood eateries line its front
corners with tables and chairs. Overall, there is a good variety of seats, especially among the
benches, which provide various shade conditions and are thus used heavily. Office workers
mingle during cigarette breaks and students congregate while eating or waiting for the Trolley.
SOFT EDGES: The edges around Centergy Plaza are very thick and complex. The central
plaza is rung with benches, landscaping, arcades, and storefronts. Bike parking and cafes also
intersperse at places. At midday, the trees within the landscape layer generate a shade gradient
from bright at plaza center to dark along the storefronts, emphasizing the edges’ deep softness.
MULTIPLICITY: The wine bar hosts live jazz outdoors occassionally, along with periodic events
of other sorts; landscaping also educates the passerby and improves the owning corporation’s
image; a multi-modal, mixed-use tableau ensures activity variety. While the plaza often
bustles with diverse activities and uses, they are very controlled and rarely sponteneous.
35
CASE STUDY 3
WOODRUFF PARK
36
URBAN 3
INTEGRATION: Centrally located within the city’s most integrated district, Woodruff Park
achieves a very high 1-mile metric reach value (57.5). Its directional reach (19.3) probably
registers lower than it should: the westerly blocks’ apparent angularity on these maps suggests
the GIS data used for the analysis was inaccurate (blocks are much more square in reality).
ORGANICNESS: Located at the city’s center, the plaza is surrounded by some of the region’s
most significant urban edifaces, from the 19th century Flatiron Building to the modernist
Equitable Building to contemporary Georgia State additions. This might be one of Atlanta’s
most architecturally rich and organic environments.
SERIAL VISION: Set in the city’s heart, every view from this section of Woodruff Park includes
a different part of Atlanta’s diverse skyline. Each vista, however, cannot avoid including the
plaza’s primary feature, a long waterfall wall. Starting from the southeast corner, move along
the water’s edge in the open sun until the shady gridded grove where diverse people rest.
37
ARCHITECTURAL 3
EYES ON THE STREET: Geometrically simple, almost totally flat, and without tall visual
obstructions, the plaza can be completely observed from almost every vantage except around
its northern and southern corners. The tree grove might be the only section potentially
containing blind spots.
MEMORABILITY: Easily the plaza’s defining feature, the long waterfall along the back edge
frames and characterizes the entire space. The sparkling, roaring wall foregrounds the city’s
impressive skyline, provides a unique backdrop to passing figures, and creates a memorable
atmosphere in which to pause and socialize.
MAGIC: Dominated by the waterfall’s roar, the plaza is both isolating and democratizing
in magical simultaneity. Because of its wide openness, one can always see almost everyone
occupying the plaza but can never hear anyone unless very near them. Thus, a diverse
population can “silently” share the same, cool space in peace and relaxation.
38
PERSONAL 3
SITTABILITY: The only seat type in this section of Woodruff Park is the well-dimensioned
linear bench system that runs along the waterfall and amongst the trees. Wide enough to sit,
eat, or sleep on, the seating accommodates enough different sorts of activities to transcend its
formal homogeneity.
SOFT EDGES: The plaza’s edges are characterized by water on one side, landscaping flanked by
sidewalk on the other, and a continuous bench/ledge all around. Located at a key intersection
downtown, the entire plaza could be considered a large-scale urban edge, layered as follows:
street, sidewalk, landscaping, benches, trees, open, benches, water.
MULTIPLICITY: The water’s edge accomodates small scale meetings and snacks; the southern
expanse hosts civic gatherings, including the monthly Critical Mass bike ride starting line; and
the heavily shaded, well-benched interior accommodates congenial homeless congregations.
Centrally located and accommodatingly designed, this plaza enables much multiplicity.
39
CASE STUDY SUMMARY
The three preceding case studies demonstrate how the literature review’s
metrics apply and result in real places. By connecting perceived social and
experiential phenomena with the physical space that produces, enables,
inhibits, or otherwise accommodates it, the urban designer learns in trans-
ferrable detail how design decisions affect the life of a space.
One word of caution: though similarly studied, these sites are not neces-
sarily directly comparable nor should one be deemed better than another
simply because it scored more favorably according to a particular metric.
The case studies are meant to help elucidate the sites on their own terms,
not in relation to each other. Furthermore, the same score for a metric might
prove favorable for one site but not for another. Each metric’s measurement
depends on so many variously contingent factors that a comparison based
on these metrics alone – especially a judgmental comparison – would hardly
be tenable.
Instead, the metrics should be used to clarify current conditions or gauge the
effects of potential changes to the current given condition. A designer could
run the analysis, make (or propose) a change, and then re-run the analysis
to see how the change affects the social and experiential nature of the site.
This utilization method informs the study’s potential policy implications as
outlined in the following pages.
40
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This study has potentially powerful policy implications: if the mapping and
analysis process demonstrated by these three case studies was required of
all designers and developers at the outset of their project’s planning phase, it
is likely their projects would consequentially incur more favorable social and
experiential characteristics. The Environmental Impact Statement process
mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) operates in this
way: by forcing designers to engage with certain issues at the design’s first
phase ensures the final design will satisfactorily respond to the issues after
implementation.
The urban design field needs a similar regulatory evaluation system to ensure
designers adequately accommodate the city’s social and experiential needs
and wants – call it an Experiential Impact Statement. If, at the beginning of a
development project (or maybe, more aptly, at the beginning of a redevelopment
project), a designer was required to consider and document the metrics
described here (and more), s/he would more than likely incorporate what
that process illuminated about the site’s social and experiential conditions
and potentials into subsequent design phases and into the final, built product.
At a project’s planning outset, the EPA requires that the lead development
party prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. Preparing this document
requires the developers to outline the project’s environmental consequences
and confront these realities well before the project is built or even very
extensively planned (to move forward with the planning process, a project’s
early-stage Environmental Impact Statement must be meticulously assembled,
publicly vetted, and federally approved). Having outlined and evaluated their
project’s environmental impact early in the design process, the developer
becomes compelled to adjust their later design concepts to avoid potential
negative impacts uncovered by the Environmental Impact Statement process.
Had the developers been spared this process, environmental consequences
might never have crossed their minds and the project might have ended up an
ecological blight.
41
But who regulates urban design? More specifically, who regulates the social
experience of urban design projects?
Zoning controls land uses, setbacks, buildable area, and other general
development aspects, but while zoning is one of the first limiters checked
during the early design phase, conforming to zoning does not require engaging
with the project’s potential experiential or social impact.
Form based codes and other building codes more formal than basic zoning
laws come closer to governing a project’s experience and influencing its design
accordingly at early concept development stages, but again, all the designer
must do is follow the code to comply – s/he is never compelled to actively
engage with the project’s impact on the social and experiential phenomena,
even if the code was written to protect or promote a certain experience or
social agenda.
Just as developers of large enough projects are required by the EPA to complete
an Environmental Impact Statement early in the design process, urban
designers could be required to complete an Experiential Impact Statement at
or near the beginning of their schematic design stage. The procedure would
involve mapping and analyzing the project’s site and its surroundings with
various quantitative and qualitative methods to ensure the designers are
cognizant of the myriad social and experiential consequences of their work.
The resultant document would resemble something like an extended version
42
of one of this paper’s case studies and would help guide the designers as they
develop their project, ensuring they keep social and experiential issues at
their attentions’ fore.
INTEGRATION
ORGANICNESS
With an idea how their project’s vicinity has developed over time, designers
would become equipped to engage their surrounding historical context. Having
researched the origins and histories of neighboring sites and structures, they
might feel more compelled to engage that built heritage (whereas they might
have otherwise ignored it). They might see their project as another piece of
the longstanding urban puzzle instead of a discrete investment manifestation
in a vacuum. This would contribute to the overall urban experience by
encouraging symbolic relationships between structures old and new about
the city.
43
SERIAL VISION
Required to run the Depth Map isovist analysis on their sites and proposals as
demonstrated in this paper’s case studies, designers may quickly quantify and
visualize the visual range from all points and ascertain where people might or
might not feel exposed or secluded, safe or vulnerable. This tool makes it easy
to see exactly where troublesome corners might exist and it helps the city
specifically recommend where design adjustments should be made.
MEMORABILITY
On one hand, if, while preliminarily surveying and scouting their site,
designers were required to acknowledge and document the particularly
memorable and distinctive aspects in and surrounding it, they might be more
inclined to preserve existing points of heritage. On the other hand, if asked
to report exactly how they plan to memorably mark their project before too
many plans are drawn, stakeholders and citizens can more directly vet their
attention-grabbing strategy to be sure it contributes to the city’s overall
system of landmarks and icons. Perhaps the designer would even be asked to
place their site and their proposal within that system to prove it participates
appropriately in the monumental dialogue.
MAGIC
44
to reflect in a statement about the potential for magic around the site and
comment on how they might work to enhance (or at least not detract from) it.
It is unreasonable to require every building to create magic (or memorability
for that matter), but the designers should at least be made aware of its
presence and/or possibility.
SITTABILITY
SOFT EDGES
MULTIPLICITY
45
Realistically, however, after running the analytical gamut, it might become clear
that few sites and/or designers can positively deliver on all fronts. Perhaps, in
a particular case, excelling according to one metric directly entails floundering
according to another. For example, certain labyrinthine site conditions might
promote “serial vision” but inhibit “eyes on the street”. It is not this study’s
purpose to make sure all sites pass all tests. Instead, the study and its metrics
simply hope to expand the ways and means by which designers analyze their
site and anticipate their proposals’ effects.
The spectrum of urban design project types runs from minimal redevelopment
within mature urban fabric (such as revising a downtown plaza) to entirely
new developments separate from existing urban structure (such as a new city
or district built from scratch). In the former case, this study should be used to
evaluate preexisting social and experiential conditions and then measure how
proposed redevelopments will influence and interact with what surrounds
and came before them. In the latter case, this study should be used to expand
the design imagination and help ensure the new project fosters social and
experiential richness.
46
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander, Christopher. A New Theory of Urban Design. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1987.
Cullen, Gordon. The Concise Townscape. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold
Co., 1971.
Gehl, Jan. Life Between Buildings. Denmark: Bianco Lunos Bogtrykkeri, 1980.
Hillier, Bill, and Julienne Hanson. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random
House, 1961.
Lynch, Kevin. The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: Technology Press, 1960.
Whyte, William. The Social Life of Small Public Spaces. Washington DC:
Conservation Foundation, 1980.
47
IMAGE CREDITS
All images on pages 9-25 scanned from associated texts except the following:
Page 9
Top and bottom: courtesy of Dr. John Peponis, Georgia Tech
Page 15
Top: http://www.flickr.com/photos/christianmontone/3843460642/
Bottom: http://www.peripheralfocus.net/images/Eindhoven_Syntax_Map.jpg
Page 17:
Top: http://www.flickr.com/photos/8511649@N03/3084877212/
48