Morphological Investigation Cutting into the Substance of Urban Form KARL KROPF This paper presents a survey of recent applications of urban morphology in the practice of urban design, conservation and planning. The aim of the survey is to illustrate how the tools of urhan morphology, in particular the idea of urban tissue fas a key, coordinating point of reference, can provide an essential foundation for understunding the structure und complexity of the built environment us well as for creuting, transforming unl munuging it. Along the way, unulogies ure drawn with anatomy, surgery ared craftsmanship to highlight the fact that skill in practice depends on an articulated and comprehensive understanding of the material with which you are working. The paper ends by concluding that such analogies in themselves are not a substitute for the detailed knotwledge of the substance and structure of urban form prowided hy urhan morphology, particularly if our aim is to plan and design a hetter built environment. In a special issue of Architecture ‘loday, noted architect Sir Richard Rogers said: A major development in the last 20 years is a much greater consciousness of the morphology of cities — that buildings need to fit in, and even if they contrast, you have to be conscious of what they contrast with. (Rogers, 2009, p. 34) Vhis quotation is noteworthy, particularly coming from Richard Rogers, because of his unapologetic use of the phrase ‘morphology of cities’. Within the pragmatic and generally anti-intellectual world of anglophone archi- tectural and urban design practice, urban mor phology has been considered an interesting but ‘academic’ subject.’ laking, a closer look at recent activity in a number of areas does, however, suggest urban morphology is welcomed and used more widely than views might suggest. Even if people avoid explicit use of the termin- ology (or do not know it) there is a significant amount of work being done that applies and BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 extends the methods of urban morphology. One of the principal aims of this paper is tu give a brief survey of some of that work and provide a sense of where things are headed. What is striking is the diversity of the directions in which urban morphology is being taken: from historic conservation and urban charactorization to analysis of movement and environmental performance as well as development control and the craft of urban design. And while urban design is only one of the directions, to a large extent all the others are entwined with it. Each of the different directions is an investigation that can inform the practice of urban design, town planning and architecture. In parallel with the aim of providing a survey of recent urban morphological investigations, this paper takes the different applications as a prompt to explore the unrealized potential of urban morphology to fit more actively into the practice of urban 393URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN design. In this regard it is difficult not to pursue a number of analogies. Taking up a reference to the work of Walter Benjamin (2U08 [1936]) suggests the obvious comparisons with biological mor- phology and anatomy: culling open a town to see what it is made of and how it goes together as a necessary foundation for suc- cessful ‘interventions’. The idea is drawn out and extended to connect, by way of Kevin Lynch, with the idea of crafismanship as explored by Richard Sennett in his recent book The Craftsman (2009). Sennett’s reflections make one pause to ask whether urban design practice as it stands embodies the ideals of craftsmanship, not in the facile distinction between art and craft but in terms of command of a medium. Do we fully understand the intricacies and substance of urban form as a material to be shaped? Are we making the most of its characteristics? To begin to answer these questions the paper looks at a number of examples of urban morphological methods applied directly to planning and urban design practice. What is Urban Morphology Anyway? If urban morphology is currently operating under cover, as it were, how would you recognize it if you saw it? There are three main distinguishing features. The first is the understanding that form is the result of a process. Forms are nat given hut generated More specifically, the process of formation, which is to say, the sequence of more or less deliberate acts undertaken by groups and individual people, is fundamentally a social and cultural process. The second is the idea of type or con- figuration. The process of formation generates many examples of the same kind of thing, A street or building is a generic type of form defined by a common set of characteristics. The principal common characteristic that defines generic types is the relative position or ‘configuration’ of its parts. A strect is a route with buildings either side and a 304 building is an arrangement of rooms with external walls and a roof. A particular town has its own identity because it is made up of many examples of different specific types of street, plot and building. The third core idea is thal the generic types of form are related to each other in a hierarchy of levels of scale, which in simple form includes: street patterns * plot patterns * building patterns. Plot patterns nest within street patterns and building patterns nest within plot patterns. An individual street, taken as a whole, contains plots and plots contain buildings. The combination of these patterns is often referred to as urban grain, One of the most recognizable expressions of the hierarchy is a series of plans illustrating an urban area at different levels of resolution corresponding to the main elements (figure 1). Such drawings are, however, only a means to an end in demonstrating the principle of the hierarchy. The main product of basic morphological analysis is the plan unit or urbun tissue, an area made up of a distinct combination of specific types of street, plot and building (figures 2 5). Characterization Another name used for a plan unit or tissue is character area, which points to one of the most common forms of morphological analysis, which is characterization, most often undertaken as part of conservation area appraisals. The general aim of characteriza- tion is to identify areas of distinct character within a settlement. Current guidance from English Heritage on Conservation Area Appraisals (2006) sets out a very general process of characterization and in fact explicitly uses the term ‘morphology’. The aim of the process is to set out in detail BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4MORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: CUTTING INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF URBAN FORM Urben tissuelsteets Plot serisibiocks Figure 1. Plan diagrams showing a selected area at different levels of resolution and a table setting out the hierarchy of elements. (Source: Base mapping Crown copyright Ordnance Survey. All rights reserved) The table highlights the different types af ‘spaces’, and their inlerrelationship with the other elements. the features and characteristics that define the special character of the area and determine if it has distinct parts with different characteristics. ‘A very good example of this work is the suite of appraisals done for Norwich City Council (2007). Identifying character areas provides a sound and objective basis for going on to make further judgements about the value and significance of the different areas. Together the characterization and evaluation serve as a foundation for conservation and development management. Rather than just an area ‘the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance’, characterization sets out in detail the particular characteristics of each area or sub-area - ils component parts, slructure, function and origins. This information then makes it possible to be more specific in judging what is most important to BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 the character and whether proposals for new development will preserve or enhance it The English Heritage guidance on con- servation area appraisals makes passing reference to the term ‘morphology’ and uses the general concepts and methods of urban morphology ‘There is, however, a wealth of research that has been undertaken in the UK and elsewhere over the last century that could be more actively used. A picture of that work can be found in a series of articles with the general title, ‘The study of urban form in [country] that has appeared over the last 12 years in the journal Urban Morphology (see also Whitehand, 1981). What is clear from looking at both historic and current work is that the roots and threads of the different approaches intertwine in many places. Characterization, for example, has roots in geography that extend back into the mid-nineteenth to early twentieth century 395URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN 4. Noreen Cty 5. Catheral Close Anal Savare 6 fmm 2 Kina Steet 3 tlethern Ruecide —— Maderent 8.5 Giles A. Colgate 2. Pince of ibs 10.51 Stephane with the work of yon Humbolt (1850), Schluter (1906) and Sauer (1925). More recently it has heen taken up within the field of landscape architecture in the form of landscape character assessment (Countryside Commission, 1991; Swanwick and Land Use Consultants, 2002) and historic landscape characterization (Homes and Communitics Agency and English Heritage, 2009). The latter overlaps with the field of archaeology and the historic environment where there has been significant recent activity by both archaeulogists and historic conservation officers. An increasing number of historic urban characterizations has been undertaken by archaeological units of local authorities in the 396 Figure 2. Character areas in Norwich city centre from the Norwich City Centre Conservation Area Appraisal. ‘The appraisal also includes plans of topography, open spaces, historical development, current and former land uses and landmarks. (Source: Base mapping Crown copyright mee Ordnance Survey, All rights reserved) UK. These can supplement characterizations done for conservation areas, providing more detailed research into the historical roots of the current character of towns. A fine ‘example of this type is the study of Hereford by Nigel Baker for the Herefordshire Archaeological Unit (Baker, 2009). In the case of both characterization for conservation arca appraisals and historic characterizations, a principal output of the studies is a map of character areas and written descriptions of the features and characteristics that define them. In most cases there is a more or less explicit reference to the hierarchy of elements, each area being defined broadly by a common, combined pattern of strects, plots and buildings. BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4MORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: CUTTING INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF URBAN FORM Figure 3. An initial morphological analysis of the street and plot pattern of central Hereford (above), showing the distinct Anglo Saxon core to te south anid the Norman extension and (opposite) the character areas of contemporary central Hereford. (Source: Base mapping Crown copyright Ordnance Survey. All rights reserved) There is also a clear emphasis on the process of historical development. A common component of these studies is map regression or comparative chronological analysis, which is a fundamental tool in urban morphological analysis. The sequence of available historic maps and plans (ic. any plan older than the most current) is collected, reproduced BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 at the same scale and compared visually (or digitally processed), ideally with the aid of transparent overlays. The method facilitates identifying both the growth of the settlement (changes in extent) and internal transformations such as the modification of street or plot patterns and the extension, replacement or demolition of buildings. Map 3e7URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN regression also helps to identify character areas because each area of growth in its turn will have been designed according to the structures, types and styles of its time. kach period leaves its own distinct forms (Caniggia and Maffei, 2001, pp. 59-60; Conzen, 1969, p. 6), and, as clearly shown by architectural and urban history, styles and structures change progressively over time. The Problematics of the Historic The chronology of characteristic forms that has been established by the work of archaeologists and urban and architectural historians is thus a fundamental adjunct of urban morphological analysis. What the record shows is a history of near constant change. Once built, people are forever tinkering with their towns — or rebuilding them. Urban morphology sidesteps the apparent paradox of constant change by articulating the different levels of scale and putting the physical structure into the context of a cultural process. It helps us to see how the different elements work together and, perhaps most importantly, to see the emerging balance between continuity and change. Some parts change and others stay the same. It is that balance that is crucial to any notion of managing the built environment seen as a heritage asset. But there remains a conundrim when we seo the historic fabric of a town as the principal record of both accumulated knowledge and a process of changing fashions. The conundrum in the fact that the process progressively crases the record of itself. It is the equivalent of a painter only ever using one canvas or a writer one notebook. ‘The evidence we want to save is destroyed by the thing that produces the evidence. On an abstract, metaphorical level, settlements eat themselves to survive. For the planner and urban designer, the articulated view of urban morphology offers a way to see each step in the process ~ in 398 particular the step we are in now ~ not as a blunt confrontation between the past and the future. Rather, urban morphology should challenge the whole world view that sees any definitive break between past and future. The fabric of a town extends through lime and the designers, the agents of change, only select out a few of the strands and weave new strands into them, necessarily relying on the strength of the whole to support what is added As much as anything, this shows the limits. of a purely historical interpretation of urban structure. Clearly the built environment does not have value only as an historical record. First and foremost, itis our habitat. The built environment is an essential part of day-to-day life. It remains in constant use and is subject fo an ongoing process of modification to meet changing needs and changing design ideas. It has social and economic value, and it is social and economic needs that drive the creation and transformation of settlements in the first place. And it is the role of urban designers (all the built environment professions) to ensure that the built environment serves those needs. It is the designers who face most directly the competing values. Opening Out the Perspective The cultural critic Walter Benjamin grappled with this sort of issue using the example of painting and cinema Kor Benjamin, cinema offers a way out of the limitations and loss of meaning faced by painting in the wake of mass reproduction. To draw a distinction between cinema and painting, he makes an analogy with surgery and magic: ‘The magician and surgeon behave respectively like the painter and the operator, The painter keeps, in his work, a natural distance from what he is given, while the operator penetrates deeply into the texture of the data. (Walter Benjamin, ‘quoted Tafuri, 1976, p. 31) Seeing the built environment only in terms of its historical valuc, depicting. its character only on the picture plane of the BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4MORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: CUTTING INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF URBAN FORM past is to take the position of the painter. The result may have the effect of perspective but it is fundamentally limited in its ability to see other dimensions. It cannot penetrate into the issues driving people’s day-to-day lives and, more importantly, driving the organizations and institutions with the power and resources to carry out the changes to the built environment that will only later become part of the historical record.? An approach that acknowledges that there are multiple aspects and values and considers a given value in the context of the others would at least provide a better tool for the designer, even if it might not avoid difficult choices altogether. This is essentially the approach taken by Kevin Lynch, writing from the perspective of the designer, in Good City Form where he defines ‘urban form’ as: The spatial arrangement of persons doing things, the resulting spatial flows of persons, goods and information, and the physical features which modify space in some way significant to those actions, including enclosures, surfaces, channels, ambiences and objects. Further, the descriptions must include the cyclical and secular changes in those spatial distributions, the control of space, and the perception of it. (Lynch, 1981, p. 48) This quotation points to one of the roots of wiban uturpliulugy in the Chicagy Scwol and the work of Burgess (Park et al., 1925) and Hoyt (1939) on urban sociology, which itself has precursors in the likes of Engels’s study of Manchester. To summarize, Lynch’s definition identities a number of ditterent aspects to urban form: Topography, natural features Built form Uses, activities and movement Control oe eo oe Perceptual/qualitative aspects * Tlows of energy and materials ¢ Development and evolution BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 The Social Dimension Recent studies used in the preparation of local development frameworks in the UK pick up on this wider range and directly associate it with urban tissue/character areas. An example is the Urban Character Study for Brighton and Hove by Eline Hansen and Gill Thompson (2009) (figure 4). The land use Figure 4. Diagrams of the Hanover Elm Grove neighbourhood in Brighton showing land use and character arcas.URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN study starts with the identification of areas as neighbourhoods defined on the basis of residents’ perceptions of how they use the parts of the town in which they live, amongst other factors. The ‘neighbourhoods’ are effectively defined by both the aclivilies and the physical characteristics of the place. The study makes the combination of physical and social aspects more explicit by correlating consus data with each of the physical areas. The benefit of combining different kinds of information is that it provides greater insights into what kinds of interventions might be most appropriate to deal with social issues. Using urban tissue as a basis for the judgements provides a common frame of reference for dealing with different areas. Environmental Performance A similar approach that takes urban tissue as a point of reference is the work of Paul Osmond (2010). Under the broad heading of sustainability, Osmond uses urban tissue or what he terms the urban structural unit (USU) as a basis for assessing the environ- mental performance of different types of urban form (figure 5). ‘There are three im- portant underlying premises to the work. One is that different types of urban form are likely to perform differently. The second is that if an area is consistent in form, one part of the area is likely to perform in the same way as other parts (justifying sampling — taking into account larger scale effects such as topography or proximity to bodies of water). The third is that urban tissue or the USU provides an explicit: definition of the area, Osmond looks at a number of different factors that can be used to assess the performance of an Urban Structural Unit as a measure of sustainability: * Material stocks and flows Microclimate Ecosystem services ee Configurational analysis Figure 5. Drawings of the University of New South Wales Kensington Campus Urban Structural Unit showing (above) the principal components and (helow) an analysis of the Predicted Mean Vote, a measure of thermal comfort BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4MORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: CUTTING INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF URBAN FORM A number of these are calculated or ssed using software that has a graphic output that can be overlain on a plan of the USU. As in the case of the Brighton and Hove study, physical form serves as a reference aspect for coordinaling, a wider range of information, Combining the ‘rectified’ data gives us a richer and more accurate under- standing of the characteristics of the form and, more importantly, its characteristics in use. The combined information in turn provides a sound basis for targeting inter- ventions more accurately and making judge- ments about which forms will be most appropriate in particular circumstances. Morphology and Movement The aspect of movement included by Osmond (2010) is itself a focus of morphological investigation. Bill Hillier has for many years taken a morphological view of street patterns Figure 6. Ronte structure analysis of Leighton Linslade, Bedfordshire. Light/cased: primary strategic routes connecting sottiomonts; medium/cased: secondary strategic routes, connecting primary routes; dark/uncased: thoroughfares connecting, strategic or local routes; medium/uneased. loops, medium/dark: multi-headed cuils-de-sac; light/uncased: culs- de-sac. (Source: Base mapping Crown copyright Ordnance Survey. All rights reserved) BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 as abstract configurations in order to under- stand their inherent properties and their effects on movement. Hillier’s (1996) approach is distinctly morphological because it takes as a starting point the relative positions of the parts within the network as a whole, making assumptions about the behaviour of the ‘agents’ who use the system. Marshall (2005) has also developed methods of route structure analysis that deal with the network as a whole as an abstracted pattern but takes into account a wider range of perceptual aspects and the full range of functions expected of streets within the context of contemporary urban design. A more basic method (Kropf, 2008) starts with the simple classification of routes essen- tially into culs-de-sac, loops and thorough- fares and extends to include centres and the connections between them as a part of the system (figure 6). The result is a broad distinction between strategic and local 401URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN routes but still in terms of the position of routes within the network. Importantly, the method feeds straight into the identification of urban tissue and thus helps to show more clearly the connection between the network pattern of routes and the patchwork pattern of tissues. One of the benefits of this narrower mor- phological method of route structure analysis is that it allows inferences to be made about both movement and the character of areas Iraditional trattic modelling, tends to start with the behaviour of the agents and focuses on the effects of different quantities of agents using the system. The obvious benefit of morphological investigation of routes to the planner and designer is that it can highlight the role of a place within a wider context. It starts to provide a picture of how well places work and what affect changes in movement patterns may have on attributes such as vitality, viability and safety. The Brighton and Hove study, Osmonds investigation of environmental performance and route analysis in their different ways start to go beyond the painterly represen- tation of urban form and investigate forms ‘in use’, But what should be clear is that it is the combination of a consistent definition of physical form — urban tissue ~ and the other aspects: the social dimension, environmental performance and movement, that gets us trily into the data and provides the depth perception. It is understanding the characteristics of the form in use that makes the morphological investigation a useful tool for the designer or planner. Combining, aspects turns what otherwise might be scen as merely a museum of forms into a vast repository of experimental data and a living design resource. Comprehensive Application in Planning Practice An example of the explicit and open use of urban morphology in planning practice 402 is the Plan Local d’Urbanisme (PLU) for the city of Rennes in Brittany (Rennes, nd). Within the PLU, urban tissue is used as an operative planning tool. A morphological analysis identifies a range of different types of issue which are then used to define zones. The characteristics of the tissues: expressed in terms of component elements (street space, plots, buildings... relationships, dimensions...) aro used as the basis for the reglement or regulations for the respective zones (tigure 7). An overriding aim is to maintain the character and workings of the city as a whole and its individual areas. The approach recognizes that different types of form serve different purposes and the diversity of forms is important to the vitality of the city, At the same time, explicit use of tissue makes it possible to target interventions in a much more precise way with a better understanding of what is affected. There is sufficient flexibility to relax or generalize the réglement to allow for innovation and change in the zones that need to be changed or improved. The use of urban tissue as a basis for a code is a kind of ‘reverse engineering’ from the existing structure of the settlement, an approach piloted on a much smaller scale in Asnigres-sur-Oise (Kropf, 2011). Within the UK, this ‘character-based approach’ was taken in producing the Stratford-on-Avon District Design Guide (Kropf, 2001). The structure of the LK planning system is not readily amenable to the explicit definition of zones and regulation of development by codes. Nor, as mentioned previously, is it sympathetic to overt morphological terminology. The Stratford Guide therefore sought to translate the specialist language into more common terms and integrate the understanding of settlements with landscape character assessment, which uses the same basic method of analysis (Countryside Commission, 1991; Swanwick and Land Use Consultants, 2002). The morphological origins of the guide are evident in the structure, based on levels of scale, the explicit use of BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4MORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: CUTTING INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF URBAN FORM Les dispositions rége Figure 7. The main zoning plan for the Rennes Plan Local d'Urbanism. The zones are effectively different types of urban tissue identified Perane ers vee through morphological oer analysis. urban tissue as a basis for understanding character and a focus on the relative position of elements as a basis for variations in design (for example, in relation to street hierarchies, positions within a block, plot or building). Developmental Regularities With its focus on process, urban morphology also brings insights through understanding developmental regularities. The regularities, or ‘habitual’, generic processes, have been identified by examining and comparing many examples. Probably the most fundamental generic pracese is the formation at ranites and the occupation of the land made accessible on. either side of the route (Caniggia and Maffei, 2001, pp. 124-138; Marshall, 2005). A further step in the process is the extension outward and progressive connection of further routes and occupation of land to create the com- plementary pattern of a contiguous route network and isolated street blacks (Caniggia and Maffei, 2001, p. 133). Caniggia and Maffei's codification of the process led them to consider the block ‘equivocal’ as a fundamental element of urban form. The progressive formation of a block, street by street, over time tends to BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 Pepe ee e Jead to a differentiation in the structure of the different sides of the blucks, the more basic unit being the street with plots either side (Kropf, 2006; figure 8), each contributing one of its plot series to the block. It is a mark of the extent to which Caniggia and Maffei, and Saverio Muratori (1910-1973) before them, were ahead of their time that they recognized that developmental regularities or generic processes at one level of scale give rise to emergent forms at another level that can be recognized and formulated into conscious design ideas. In their view, the urban grid as a unified design concept was suggested by observing the emergent formation of blocks from connecting up built routes. They recognized the interplay between the emergent and the planned and codified it into the typological process (Kropf, 2003). An cxample of an cffort to apply that sensitivity to both finer structure and process in practice is the South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide (studio | REAL, 2011). ‘The guide promotes the street (route with plots either side) as the basic unit of development and the formation of blocks by combining the plot series contributed from each of the surrounding streets (figure 8). The resulting block has a ‘bias’ or inflection directly related 403URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN Figure 8. Diagrams from the South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide illustrating the street as a unit of development and the reciprocal relationship between the street and block resulting ina block form with a bias or inflection. 404 to the hierarchy of surrounding streets and thus much more convincingly fits into and reflects its particular position within the street network. Similarly, as noted by both Caniggia and Maffei (2001, p. 138) and Slater (1997), there isa tendency for finer sub-division of plots at corners of blocks in order to take full advantage of street frontage. This tendency is the basis for promoting the use of smaller building types in corner zones in the South Yorkshire Guide (figure 9). The Substance and Material of Urban Design The examples of the PLU for Rennes, the Stratford-on-Avon District. Design Guide and the South Yorkshire Design Guide all cut into the substance of urban form to get a better understanding of the ways in which it is articulated, where the seams and lines of separation are, and how elements work together as a whole. Taking, things apart, naming the parts and examining those parts in use gets us into the data in the way that Benjamin suggested the surgeon does. It also gets us closer to a position advocated by Richard Sennett in his book The Craftsmun (2009), In a broader examination of the idea of craftsmanship, Sennett argues that a heightened understanding of the working ‘material is an essential foundation for quality in the act of creation He makes a general statement about craftsmanship that seems particularly apt for dealing with the design of urban form: Three basic abilities are the foundation of craftsmanship. These are the ability to localize, to question and to open up. The first involves making a matter concrete, the second reflecting on ils qualities, the third expanding its sense. ‘The carpenter establishes the peculiar grain of, a single piece of woud, looking for detail; Warns the wood over and over, pondering how the pattern on the surface might reflect structure hidden underneath; decides that the grain can be brought out if he or she uses a metal solvent rather than standard wood varnish. To deploy BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4MORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: CUTTING INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF URBAN FORM Figure 9. Diagram from the South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide showing different zones within the block including corners, where plots might be more finely divided to take advantage of the corner frontage. these capabilities the brain needs to process in parallel visual, aural, tactile, and language- symbol information. (Sennett, 2009) Sennett’s thoughts on craftsmanship sug- gest an interpretation of urban grain with much more depth and substance than its current meaning. Urban fabric is the material that urban designers must learn to master, not just as a formal exercise but to serve human purposes ~ to serve life. To be good at it and develop skill, we need hands-on experience, cutting, shaping and putting together the parts. We need to understand urban fabric the way a joiner understands wood, how it behaves in use and under stress, its strengths, weaknesses and fracture lines and how its internal structure affects the way it can be put together. Benjamin's analogy of the surgeon also holds, up to a point. Without falling into the trap of a literal organic metaphor, urban tissue is living to the extent that it accom- modates living, moving people and to the extent that the structure and character of the tissue can affect the way that people live and move about. For a graft or repair to be successful, it has to be connected up in the right way and to do so you need to know how all the parts work. It is this ‘living’ aspect BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 of urban form and the inclusion of people as part of the process that prompted Jane Jacubs (1961) to identify the city asa problem of organized complexity. In addition to the mechanics, activity and information play an essential part in the workings of urban form. Another analogy that resonates is the landscape architect. Successtul urban design results in a place that flourishes, changes and grows richer with time. The initial design only sets things off for the subsequent action of many individuals to inhabit and adapt just as the landscape architect only establishes an initial state of a proposal that relies on the growth and change of individual plants tn he fully realized. To be successful, the landscape architect needs to ensure that when he or she selects and locates plants they are in the right place for them to survive and flourish on their ‘own (Marshall, 2009, uses this analogy in his exploration of cities, design and evolution). In the end, no one analogy fits exactly, which only serves to emphasize that the craftsman of urban form can only really learn the craft by working with and understanding urban form. The analogies may help but they can never substitute for an intimate under- standing of the material that is the substance of urban design. In all cases, to be successful, 405URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN the skilled craftsman must know his or her materials. And cach kind of material has its own characteristics. The essence of the morphological method is to examine the different aspects at differ- ent levels of scale and bring them together as a kind of mental synthesis. The aim i to identify the patterns that emerge when examining the physical forms and their associations with the other aspects, for example between plots and patterns of use or ownership, and feed the interplay between the ideal and the actual. Localize, Question and Open Up Urban tissue is the emblem of urban morphology. It is underpinned by the core concepts of the formative process, generic structure of levels of scale and specific configurations or types of form. As a physical entity, it is an embodiment of cultural habits and serves as a reference for coordinating the full range of aspects that constitute urban form. As an element in the hierarchy of scale, urban tissue lies at the mid-point. It is the element that is combined to form the larger scale structure of whole settlements and is composed of the smaller scale elements that create places and local identity (figure 10). Urban morphology, with its acknowledge- ment of the basic forces at play and its sensitivity to nuance, is a tool that allows the urban designer to address urban form as a craft in the terms set out by Richard Sennett. We can ‘localize’ by dislinguishing the different aspects of urban form and the levels of scale, by focusing on the relative position of parts and associations of elements and by observing developmental regularities and generic processes. This effort is exemplified by the projects illustrated in this article. From the base layers of characterization such as the Norwich Conservation Area Appraisal (figure 2) and Ilereford study (figure 5) to the addition of the social dimension with the Brighton and Hove study (figure 4), environmental performance at the University of New South Wales (figure 5), as well as the various methods of route structure analysis (figure 6) It is really only then that we can ‘question’ ina meaningful way and judge which aspects and elements are successful at a given time and which are not. The task of questioning is illustrated by the examples of the Plan Local d’Urbanism for Rennes (figure 7) and South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide (figures 8 and 9). It is at this stage that it is necessary to exercise judgement and try to determine Figure 10. The patchwork of different kinds of urban tissue making up the centze of Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire. (Source: Base mapping Crown copyright Ordnance Survey. All rights reserved) BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4MORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: CUTTING INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF URBAN FORM which forms will fit with contemporary activities. Having questioned, we can then ‘open up’ to the range of possibilities rather than accepting or rejecting the whole. We should be open to ideas coming from anywhere. The advantage of working from the basis of urban morphology is that it provides the tools to localize and question that allow us to see and open up to new ideas. Urban morphology helps to reveal the order within the apparent complexity of urban form and understand how the complexity emerges. The picture of physical form provided by urban tissue is the most effective way to bring together and coordinate information on the full range of other aspects that constitute urban form. The various analogies of anatomy, surgery and joinery help but if our aim is to advance and improve the practice of urban design, the must effective way tu do so is tu cut more deeply into, and investigate, the substance of urban form, the way it is used and the ways it develops. Urban morphology provides the best tool for the job. NOTES 1, Dy contrast, urban morphology is a common part of architectural education in countries such as Spain, France and Italy. In the UK, the term urban morphology seems to have a relatively broad, if Jow level currency, used as a general reference to ‘more detailed study of urban areas’, in particular dealing with the relative location of uses. There is, of course, a vein of American architectural discourse that might he called over-intellectual in ils tendency to construct elaborate arguments, in conceptually complex and analogically technical language, that are almost deliberately obfuscatory. 9. It is possible to take a painterly approach to ‘data’ as demonstrated by some recent architectural practice which uses the proliferation of ‘information’ generated by a range of scientific and quantitative analysis but uses it analogically, as an arbitrary source ot order — arbitrary in the sense that the data do not relate to the intended use of the building but merely provide a source of novel forms. BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4 REFERENCES. Baker, N. (2009) A Characterisation of the Historie Townscape of Central Hereford, Herefordshire Archaeology Report no. 266. Hereford: Here- fordshire Council and English Heritage. Benjamin, W. (2008 [1936]) The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (translated by J.A. Underwood). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Caniggia, G. and Maffei, G.L. (2001 [1979]) Archi- tecliral Composition and Building Typology: 1 Interpreting Basic Buildings. Florence: Alinea Editrice. Conzen, MR. (1969) Alnoick, Northumberland: A Study in Town Plan Analysis, 2nd ed. London: Institute of British Geographers. Countryside Commission (1991) Assessment unit Conservation of Landscape Character: The War- ‘wickshire Landscapes Project, CCP 332. Chelten- ham: Countryside Commission. English Heritage (2006) Guidance on Conservation ‘Area Appratsals. London: English Heritage and the Planning Advisory Service. Hansen, E. and Thompson, G. (2009) Brighton und Hove Urban Characterisation Study. Brighton: Brighton and Hove City Council. Hillier, B. (1996) Space is the Machine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Homes and Communities Agency and English Heritage (2009) Capitalising on the Inherited Land- seape: An Introduction to [listoric Characterisation for Masterplanning. Milton Keynes: Homes and ‘Couunuttities Agency. Hoyt, H. (1939) The Structure unl Growth of Resi- dential Neighbourhoods in Anterican Cities. Wash- ington DC: Federal Housing Administration. Humboldt, A. (1850) Aspects of Nature in Different Lands and Different Climates. Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Blanchard. Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House. Kropf, K. (2001) Stratford-on-Avon District Design Cuide, Stratford-upon-Avon: Stratford-on-Avon District Council Kropt, K. (20032) Between the intentional and the emergent, in Petruccioli, A,, Stella, M. and Strappa, G., (eds.) The Planned City? Volume 1, Bari, Unionographica Coricelli Editrice, pp. 291-298. Kropf, K. (20086) Diagnosis and cure. Urban Design Quarterly, 87, pp. 13-14. Kropf, K. (2006) Against the perimeter block. Urban Design, 97, pp. 12 13.URBAN MORPHOLOGY AND DESIGN Kropf, K. (2008) Route structure analysis. Urban Design, 105, pp. 10-11. Kropf, K. (2011) Coding in the French planning system: from building line to morphological zoning, in Marshall, S. (ed.) Urban Coding and Planning. London; Routledge. Lynch, K. (1981) Good City Torm. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Marshall, S. (2005) Streets and Patterns. London: Spon Press, Marshall, 5. (2009) Cities, Design and Evolution. London: Routledge. Norwich City Council (2007) Norwich City Centre Conservation Area Appraisal, Norwich: Norwich City Council. Osmond, P. (2010) The urban structural unit: towards a descriptive framework to support urban analysis and planning, Urbun Morphology, 14(1), pp. 5-20. Park, R., Burgess, E.W. and McKenzie, R.D. (1925) The City. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press Rennes (nd) Plan Local d’Urbanisme. Available at http:/wwwssite.rennes.tt/plu/. Accessed 3 Oct- ber 2010. Rennes: Direction de fe Aménagement et de l'Urbanisme. Rogers, K. (2008) Interview. Architecture loday, 200, p34, Sauer, C.O. (1925) The morphology of landscape. University of California Publications in Geography. 22, pp. 19-53. Schluter, O. (1906) Die Zicle der Geographic des ‘Menschen, Munich: Antrittsrede. Sennett, K. (2009) The Craftsman, London: Penguin. Slater, ‘LR. (1997) Domesday village to medieval town: the topography of medieval Stratford- upon-Avon, in Bearman, R. (ed.) The History of an English Borough: Stratford-upon-Avon 1196— 1996, Stroud: Sutton. studio | REAL (2011) South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide. Sheffield: ‘Iransorm South Yorkshire. Swanwick, C. and Land Use Consultants (2002) Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland. Cheltenham: Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage. Tafuri, M. (1976) Theories and History of Architecture. New York: Harper Row. Whitehand, J, W.R. (1981) Background to the urban morphogenetic tradition, in Whitehand, J.W.R. (ed.) The Urban Landscape: Historical Development and Management. London: Academic Press, pp. 14. BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 37 NO 4