Urban Design

Contents
• What is urban design?
1. What is urban design?
2. The value of urban design
3. Issues in urban design
4. Approaches to urban design Collection of Ann Forsyth.

5. A history of urban design

6. Scales of urban design
7. Analysis, design and representation
techniques
8. Implementing urban design
©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.

1. What is Urban Design? 1. What is Urban Design

• Urban design is the making of better places for people.

Community
Development
• It is usually done at a scale larger than a building, and
Planning
usually with multiple groups involved. Transportation
Planning
(includes system
• It is an overlapping specialty within architecture, landscape Physical Planning optimization,
architecture, and planning. (includes land use, modeling, pricing,
general plans; scheduling)
some
• It tries to balance many considerations: physical form, environmental, Urban
functional needs, social issues, economic issues, neighborhood Design
community values, environmental sustainability. planning etc.

2. The Value of Urban Design 3. Urban Design Issues

Urban designers must consider a wide variety of
issues that affect the built environment

• Physical form
• Functional needs
• Human issues
• Social equity
©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape. • Community values
• In an era of crowded freeways, placeless development, and
environmental problems, urban design offers the possibility of creating
places that are more attractive, satisfying, efficient, and
environmentally sound.
All images ©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.

1
 All images ©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape. All images ©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.

Physical Form Physical Form

• The arrangement of physical elements in a place and their • The arrangement of physical elements in a place and their
aesthetic character (proportion, scale, surfaces, organization) are aesthetic character (proportion, scale, surfaces, organization) are
the most visible aspect of urban design. the most visible aspect of urban design.

These are both big streets—how are they different?

Physical Form
Perception
• Enclosure is about distance
and angle

• Other qualities of form are

also important
– How memorable it is
– How transparent the
enclosure is
– Human scale of
elements ©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.

– Surface qualities
– etc Functional Needs
Basic functions such as transportation, economic development, and
Spreiregen 1965—Urban ecology must be understood and incorporated in urban design.
Design (AIA)

Human Issues Social Equity

• Social vitality and equal

access to opportunities can
Urban design is be encouraged through
also concerned urban design.
with how the built
environment
supports its users,
such as its fit with
human needs,
sense of vitality,
meaning, and ©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.
history.
©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.

2
 3. Urban Design Issues
Urban designers must consider a wide variety of
issues that affect the built environment

• Physical form
• Functional needs
• Human issues
• Social equity
©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.
• Community values
Community Values
Urban design can help express shared priorities of the
community, such as efficiency, fairness, and respect for
nature.
All images ©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.

4. Approaches to Urban Design What urban design is not, or at least

There are different approaches to urban design, not often these days:
a single vision written into the land
which are often used in combination with each
other
1. Civic architecture—big or contextual projects
2. Urban restoration—(re)creating or filling in historical patterns
3. Participatory or community design
4. New town and land planning
5. Urban infrastructure e.g. streetscapes
6. Sustainable urban form from small to large scale (health
typically uses similar techniques)

More on urban design approaches Source: Hofstra University Archives, Used by permission

5. History of Urban Design, part 1 History of Urban Design, part 2

• Pre-industrial city: Traditional • 1950s and 1960s: Urban renewal,

design modernist architecture, and
• Industrial city: Aesthetic, suburbs all seem ugly and
housing, and transportation inhumane
problems as cities grow • c. 1960: Urban design emerges in
• 19th and Early 20th century: its contemporary form—key authors
Early attempts to beautify cities, include J.Jacobs, Lynch, Cullen.
rationalize transportation, • Educational programs develop in
create suburban alternatives architecture; landscape architects
• Early 20th century: Increasing do a lot in practice
gap between planners, housers, • 1990s-: Success of big
and designers doing “civic revitalization projects and new
design” rounds of criticisms of sprawl
increase urban design interest
among the public and in planning

3
 6. Scales
Urban design can be applied at a variety of scales

Areas Linear systems

• Site
• Street
• Block

• Center • Corridor

• District or
©2003 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Used with
Neighborhood Other
the permission of Design Center for American Urban Landscape.
Right images, collection of Ann Forsyth.
• Cities
1990s-2000s • Natural Systems
Success in redevelopment and growing dissatisfaction with sprawling
cities fueled new interest in urban design, including sustainable design,
new urbanism, ecological reclamation, and places for great coffee shops.
• Metropolis

What scales has the class dealt

6. Scales with to date? 7. Design Processes
Urban design can be applied at a variety of scales Aside on Design Process/Thinking

Areas Linear systems • Design processes—how people come up with ideas

• Site – Black box
• Street – Analysis/synthesis—rational design: set goals, collect
• Block and analyze data, synthesize design
– Precedents—learning from elsewhere, copying
• Center • Corridor
– Generative ideas e.g. analogies/metaphors, a parking
• District or lot is a park for cars
Neighborhood Other – Patterns—more abstract version of precedents, e.g.
• Cities “light from two sides of every room” (Alexander et al
• Natural Systems
1977)

• Metropolis

7. Design Processes 7. Common Proposals

Design Process/Thinking When proposing changes, urban designers
frequently use organizing strategies, and
• Design processes—how people come up with ideas descriptive terminology, such as:
– Black box
• Areas and districts: revitalized blocks, new urbanist
– Analysis/synthesis—rational design: set goals, collect neighborhoods, urban villages
and analyze data, synthesize design
• Corridors: green streets, waterfront promenades,
– Precedents—learning from elsewhere, copying greenways
– Generative ideas e.g. analogies/metaphors, a parking • Centers: town centers, activity nodes, transit-oriented
lot is a park for cars development, landmarks
– Patterns—more abstract version of precedents, e.g. • Gateways: gateway treatments, way-finding signage
“light from two sides of every room” (Alexander et al
1977)
Health can use analysis/synthesis but also
can use research to find best approaches
then precedents or patterns to achieve those

4
8. Implementing Urban Design
Ideas become reality through many means, from
actually building or planting through first raising
awareness
• Built projects (buildings,
infrastructure, art)
• Master plans
• Regulations and standards
• Policies, guidelines,
performance criteria
• Incentives and bonuses
• Commissions and reviews
• Education/awareness (books,
tours, talks)
Main Menu
Main shows
1 Urban Design (UD)
2 Neighborhood Character
3 Bump-outs, Add-ons, Pop-tops,
Up-and-outs and Tear-
downs/Fill-ins
4 Housing Intensification (HI)
5 Factory-built Housing
Reference Maps
8. Implementing Urban Design
Ideas become reality through many means, from
actually building or planting through first raising
awareness
• Built projects (buildings,
infrastructure, art)
• Master plans
• Regulations and standards
• Policies, guidelines,
performance criteria
• Incentives and bonuses
• Commissions and reviews
• Education/awareness (books,
tours, talks)
Where has the class focused to
date?
Supporting Shows Conclusion
UD: Approaches
UD: History
UD: Scales
UD: Techniques 1. What is urban design?
UD: Implementation 2. The value of urban design
Bump-out Examples 3. Considerations in urban design
Add-on Examples 4. Approaches to urban design
Pop-top Examples 5. A history of urban design
Up-and-out Examples
6. Scales of urban design
Tear-down/Fill-in Examples
7. Analysis and representation techniques in urban design
HI Density 8. Implementation strategies for urban design
HI Design Issues
HI Housing Types
HI Land Use Features
5
 Ann Forsyth
Cornell University

Almere new town,

Netherlands

Urban Design and Public Health

• What is urban design?
• Walking, urban design, and public health
• Other health issues—the Design for Health project

Urban Design and Health

1. Civic architecture—big or Accessibility
contextual projects Air quality
2. Urban restoration—(re)creating Climate change
or filling in historical patterns Environment + housing
3. Participatory or community quality
design Food
4. New town and land planning Healthcare access
5. Urban infrastructure e.g. Mental health
streetscapes Noise
6. Sustainable urban form from Physical activity
small to large scale Safety
Social capital
Water quality
Ultimately does health add Also special populations,
something new or is it just a planning process, finance
variation on existing approaches?

1
 Urban Form and Public Health

1. Why walking?
2. How environment affects walking
3. Twin Cities Walking Study
4. Moving to Design for Health

Urban Form +
Public Health
Ann Forsyth, Metropolitan Design Center, University of Minnesota Home Home

1. Why Walking? 1.Built Environment

Unanswered Questions from Reforming Suburbia Start of Recent Interest
Popular interest in obesity
Finished a study of large-scale planned alternatives to Weight = food minus activity
sprawl, evaluated in terms of 40+/- issues related to: Early (2002/3) studies at county level found
• Aesthetics, sense of place exercise did not vary by environment but
• Social issues weight did
Explanations:
• Efficiency and cost
Research design
• Environmental issues
Food intake
• Benefits of sprawl Social and cultural factors
Non-leisure physical activity
• All well liked by residents; did better than sprawl on all Travel research had found commute walking
dimensions varies with environment
• Biggest disappointments: affordable housing and Education not working
alternatives to the car Hope to increase overall activity through
utilitarian physical activity (PA)
Home Home

1. Why Walking? 1. Why Walking?

Why People Die Underlying Preventable Causes in US, 2000

US (CDC) World (WHO) Tobacco 18.10%

1.Heart Disease 28.5% 12.4% (#1) Poor diet and physical inactivity 16.60%
2.Cancer 22.8% 2.2% (#10, lung) Alcohol consumption 3.50%
3.Stroke 6.7% 9.2% (#2)
4.Emphysema, chronic bronchitis 5.1% 4.5% (#5)
5.Accidents 4.4% 2.3% (#9, road)*
6.Diabetes 3.0%
7.Flu & pneumonia 2.7% 6.9% (#3)
8.Alzheimer's/senility 2.4%
9.Kidney disease 1.7%
10.Septicemia/systemic infection 1.4%
Other top 10 in the world: HIV/AIDS 5.3% (#4), perinatal (#6),
diarrhoea (#7), tuberculosis (#8) All data for 2002
Home Home
Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000. A. Mokdad; J. Marks; D. Stroup; J. Gerberding, JAMA. 2004;291:1238-1245.

1
1. Why Walking? 1. Why Walking
How Much Activity is Needed for Adults to The Idea of Active Living
Avoid Health Problems?
“A way of life that integrates
Moderate-intensity physical activities for at physical activity into daily
least 30 minutes on 5 or more days of the routines. The goal is to
week. accumulate at least 30
- CDC/American College of Sports Medicine minutes of activity each
i.e. walking briskly, mowing the lawn, day.”
dancing, swimming, or bicycling on level Active Living by Design
terrain
It is not strolling to the coffee shop Walking key to active living as
almost everyone walks
OR Vigorous-intensity physical activity 3 or already, every day
more days per week for 20 or more minutes
per occasion
– Healthy People 2010
Home Home

1. Why Walking? 1. Why Walking

How Active are People Now? What Researchers Did and Didn’t Know about
Environment 5 years ago
• Have only recently
been finding out • Knew differences in density, street pattern, mixed use, and
• People are active pedestrian infrastructure seem to affect walking
in different parts • But so did income and personal preference, etc.
of their lives • Did NOT know:
– How much the environment mattered and who was most
• Work affected
• Exercise and leisure – Was the perceived vs. the real environment most important
– We didn’t know which aspects were key—e.g. residential or
• Care/chores/errands
employment density, sidewalks or crosswalks
• Commuting to work – $ Millions in research later we know something
• Maybe parks matter for kids and (lack of) parking for
• Up to the early 2000s data collected only for some types of adults…
activity
Home Home

2. How Environment Affects Walking 2. Environment

Three Perspectives on Reasons for Walking Reasons for Physical Activity: Transportation
• Demand for travel derived from demand to move between
• Transportation destinations
• Urban/landscape design (physical planning, architecture, • People maximize personal benefits and minimize costs--time
landscape architecture) and money
• Physical activity research • Benefits of travel (e.g. exercise, time out) not well accounted for
• Various camps, particularly
car group vs. transit group—
all mechanized,
economics-oriented

Home Home

2
2. Environment 2. Environment
Reasons for Physical Activity: Urban/Landscape Reasons for Physical Activity: Physical Activity
Design Research
• Walking increases with supportive physical features • Physical activity occurs in some environment that influences
behavior
• Several schools: e.g. New urbanists; trails and park proponents
• Focus on barriers to exercise
• Propose that walking increases with complex, varied
environments, with physical dimensions and movement speeds • Until recently environment meant the social environment, the
scaled to the human body; and with activity (critical mass) food environment…. Physical activity researchers are often
very active people
• Study people already in spaces
• Overall those in architecture, landscape architecture, physical
planning focus on cultivating sensitivity to place; not data driven

Home Home

Different Views of the Same Place
• Transportation: Disincentives to driving
• Urban design: Dynamic, complex environment (Jane Jacobs)
• Physical activity: Social/physical supports and constraints
• Why this matters…because of different solutions
Different Views of the Same Place
• Transportation: What would transportation planners think?
• Urban design: What would urban designers think?
• Physical activity: What about exercise people?
Home Home

2. Built Environment
Confusion over Terms Related to Perspective
Walkable = close (relative to costs of alternatives) Transportation
Walkable = barrier-free
Walkable = safe (perceived crime or perceived traffic)
Walkable = interesting Urban Design
Walkable = full of pedestrian infrastructure Journalism
Walkable = upscale, ethnic, leafy, or cosmopolitan

Different Views of the Same Place

Transportation: What would transportation planners think?
Urban design: What would urban designers think?
Physical activity: What about exercise people? Home Home

3
 2. Environment 3. Twin Cities Walking Study
Interesting New Analysis Methods Big Ideas/Hypotheses

1. Density, street pattern, mixed use, pedestrian

infrastructure and amenities affect utilitarian walking
Results to date: generally true
2. But so do socio-economic factors, perceptions, and
individual tastes affect walking
Results to date: confirmed
3. Assumed leisure physical activity (PA) similar most
places so if travel/utilitarian physical activity is
increased, overall physical activity will increase
Results to date: we were wrong
4. We were not sure which environmental factors mattered
the most (sidewalks, crosswalks)
Grid Looped Home
Results: for Total PA it’s perceived parking Home

3. Twin Cities Walking Study

Ann Forsyth, Kathryn Schmitz, J. Michael Oakes Example Study Area, Area 30:
High Gross Density—15.8 persons/acre, 39/ha
36 805*805 meter areas in corridor Small Median Block—3.7 acre, 1.5 ha
from St. Paul to Blaine
Urban • Vary by combinations of high/low
edge gross density + median block
size
• 9 big blocks/high density, 9 big
blocks/low density, etc.
Downtown
Downtown
Minneapolis
St. Paul 718 participants: surveys, travel
diaries, motion detectors,
measured height and weight
50+ environmental variables
8 km measured at multiple geographies
around each participant

Home Home

3. Twin Cities Walking Study

Example Study Area, Area 3: Data Collection
Low Gross Density—4.7 persons/acre, 11.6/ha
Large Median Block—11.1 acres, 4.5ha • Individual Residents (N=718, over Environment
25, healthy etc) • Irvine Minnesota
• 7-day travel diaries Inventory
• 7-day accelerometer records • Orthophoto
• Measured height and weight interpretation of
• Participant-drawn maps of self- street trees,
defined neighborhood lamps, sidewalks
• Telephone interview
International Physical Activity • Plus existing GIS
Questionnaire (IPAQ) data: census,
Quality of life, perceptions, business/employ-
demographics ment, parcel
Dog ownership
Home
Bicycle ownership/use/safety Home

4
 200m
400m
800m

Context
area

Focus
Area

Home Home

IPAQ Walking Activity

3. Twin Cities Walking Study by Neighborhood Density & Type

Mean Met Minutes/Week

Sample and Analysis 400
367
319 Low Density
300 Leisure < 5/ac or
Study design maximized exchangeability such similar people lived 243 12.4/ha
Walking
in different places
200 183 High Density
Tried different models and they get the same picture; considered
> 10/ac or
errors in models
Travel 24.7/ha
Using both more complex models (lots of assumptions) and simpler 100
gross
analyses Walking
density
Accounted for clustering by focus area 0

Adjusted for age, sex, race, college-degree, marital status, home Low Density Area High Density Area
ownership, home tenure length, and overall health
• Leisure walking and travel walking are significantly
different by density (p<0.001)
• Holds after adjusting for age and income of
respondent
• Neither total Physical Activity (PA) nor Body Mass
Home Index (BMI) nor total walking differ by density Home

IPAQ Walking Activity

by Neighborhood Block Size & Type Total Physical Activity vs. Density
400
Mean Met Minutes/Week

300 309 Small Blocks

300 273 < 5 ac or
231 2 ha
p

200 Leisure
Big Blocks
Walking > 8 ac or
100 Travel 3.2 ha
Walking
0
S ll Bl k L Bl k Total Walking vs. Density
Small Block Large Block

• Leisure walking and travel walking are not significantly

different by block size
• Holds after adjusting for age and income of respondent
• Neither total PA nor BMI nor total walking statistically
differ by block size
Home Home

5
 3. Twin Cities Walking Study
Subpopulation Analysis
• Examined ethnicity, education, sex, self reported health, work
status, presence of children in the household, car ownership, and
obesity
• Less healthy walk more in higher density areas (OR=2.26, 95%
CI 1.10-4.61) (diary)
• • Whites and the non-obese were less physically active overall in Odds Ratios for Density Above and Block Size Below
high density areas (ORs = 0.66 [0.45-0.98] and 0.63 [0.41-0.99])
(IPAQ)
• Unemployed and retirees walk more in large block areas
(OR=2.28, 95% CI 1.12-4.66).
• Men were less physically active in large block areas (OR=0.53
[0.31-0.91])

Did negative binomial regression and ordinal logistic regression—

the latter are reported
Home Home

Comparing Vancouver to Ithaca 3. Twin Cities Walking Study

This is True So Far for Other Variables

• West End Vancouver: dwellings/ha = 133 • Few significant relationships of over 150 environmental variables
(32.7% walk to work, 3.5% bike, pop. with total physical activity; small magnitudes
41,000)* • Strongest effect with total PA so far is perceived parking difficulty
(OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.37, pooling data with UNC study)
• Ithaca City: dwellings/ha 6.8 (41.2% walk to • Similar findings by others—can increase travel walking but had to
work, 2.2% “other means”, pop. 29,000) increase total physical activity (reducing parking may work; youth
may be more sensitive to recreation e.g. parks….)
• West End is approx 3 times the density of
the densest census tract in Ithaca—
approximately college town—across a much
larger area But walking is not the only connection between health and planning

• Ithaca has terrific walk commute figures:

why?

http://www.rockymountaineer.com/images/vacations/destinations/gallery/vancouver_1-full.jpg Home Home

6
 Health and Urban
Planning Tools
• What does having good health mean to you?
1. Design for Health Project – How is it defined?
Overview
– What are its features?
2. Linking Planning and Health
– What does it feel like?
3. Tool Overview (DFH and
other)
• Field Inventories and
Checklists
• Plan Checklists
• Participatory Processes
(Image centered left to right, 2.5 up from bottom, 2.0 from top)
• Technical Impact
Assessments

1. DFH Project Overview 1. DFH Project Overview

Defining Health • Project initiated out of interest in
connections between built
• “Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well- environment and health
being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity,” as
• Takes advantage of 2008 legislative
defined by the Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health
Organization (WHO 1948). deadline for metropolitan area
• “Health is the reduction in mortality, morbidity, and disability due to comprehensive plans
detectable disease or disorder, and an increase in the perceived • Built on work by Design Center/Active
level of health,” WHO Regional Office for Europe in “HEALTH21: Communities Transportation (ACT)
The Health for All Policy Framework for the WHO European Region”
Research Group examining active
(WHO Regional 1999).
living and food environments—adds a
• “Health is the capacity of people to adapt to, respond to, or control
life’s challenges and changes,” in Health Impact Assessment as a range of other issues
Tool for Population Health Promotion and Public Policy (Frankish et • Started July 2006
al. 1996).
• Separate grants given to technical
assistance provider and to 19
cities/counties

Design for Health: Partner Communities Evidence-Based Practice – The DFH Angle
1. DFH Project Overview
Evidence-based Practice Lessons for Urban
Planning and Design
• New trend in medicine: “conscientious, explicit and judicious use of
current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual
patients/clients” Sackett, D.L. et al. (1996) Evidence based medicine:
what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 312 (7023), 71-72
• Expanded beyond the individual e.g. business
• Needs careful assessment of research as there are often:
– Few studies on a topic
– Studies looking at only part of the picture
– Studies that define key variables differently
– Limitations to data and analysis
– Publications bias—studies that find effects are more likely to be
published than those that find no/inconclusive effects

1
 1. Project Overview Design for Health
Evidence-based Practice Project Staff
• Consider the challenge of EPB in planning: • Research Faculty
– Medline is one of the major journal databases – Ann Forsyth, Cornell
– Kevin Krizek, U. Colorado
– Type “urban” into Medline topics > 84,351 journal
articles – Carissa Schively Slotterback, U. Minnesota
• Coordinators
– Type “city” and get 59,689
– Amanda Johnson, Research Fellow, U. Pennsylvania
– Type “rural” and get 77,862
– Aly Pennucci, Research Assistant/Coordinator, U. Minnesota
– Type “urban planning” and get 181, some quite
• Research support
specialized e.g. “From nightlife conventions to daytime
– Karen Roof, PhD Student, U. Colorado
hidden agendas: dynamics of urban sexual territories in
the South of France” (Journal of Sex Research 2005) – Ashley Miller, Sutee Anantsuksomsri, Research Assistants, Cornell
– Joanne Richardson, Web

Design for Health www.designforhealth.net 2. Linking Planning and Health

• Topics covered in research
summaries and planning
information sheets
– Accessibility
– Air quality
– Climate change
– Environment + housing quality
– Food
– Healthcare access
– Mental health
– Noise
– Physical activity
– Safety
– Social capital
– Water quality
– Also special populations,
planning process, finance

Connections Between
2. DFH Connecting Planning and Health
Access

Hous.g

Mental

Health Topics and Plan

Safety

Social

Water
Food
Env.

Elements
PA
Air

MN Metropolitan Council Land Use Plan

Requirements Future land use Land Use Plan
Housing plan Future land use x x x x x x x x x
2008
Resource Protection Housing plan x
Topics x x x x x x x
Transportation
• Accessibility Resource protection x x x
Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) Allocation
• Air quality Transportation
Highway & roads plan
• Climate Change TAZ allocation
Bike & pedestrian plan x x x x
• Environmental and
Special traffic situations Highway & roads x x x x
Housing quality
Transit plan for facilities & service Bike & pedestrian x x x x x x x
• Food
Aviation Plan Special traffic
• Healthcare access x x x x x x
Water Resources
• Mental health Transit plan
Wastewater & sewer plan x x x x x x
• Noise
Surface water management plan Aviation Plan x x x x
• Physical activity
Water supply plan Water Resources
• Social capital
Parks & Open Space Wastewater & sewer
• Safety (crime & traffic) x x x
Regional parks and open space
• Water quality Surface water x x x
Optional Elements
Water supply plan x x
Reg. Parks and O.S. x x x x x

O l l

2
Design forTools
3. DFH Health Air Quality
3. DFH Tools
Design for Health Activities and Tools Things for Certain (or semi-certain) About Air
• Events—talks, feedback sessions,
Quality
boot camps
• Research summaries (key questions) • Motor vehicles primary source of
most fine and ultra fine particles
• Information sheets—model planning
and ordinance language/cases • Many pollutants decrease with
distance from roadways
• Case studies of existing plans
• Vehicle-related air pollution
• Health impact assessments— associated with higher levels of
three planning-oriented tools certain diseases
• Image resources and PPTs • Living above dry cleaners increases
• Plan review checklists exposure to perchloroethylene

Carissa Schively Slotterback

• One-on-one technical assistance • Living near factories can increase

Metropolitan Design Center

risk of preterm birth, respiratory and
• Web site other diseases
• Certain sub-groups are more
vulnerable
• Full review at
www.designforhealth.net
Lagos

3. DFH Tools 3. DFH Tools

Things Up In the Air About Air Quality Similar Issues for Other Variables
• Concentration of some • Different definitions of social capital
pollutants does not decrease
– Homeownership is associated with higher social capital in some
much with distance—but how
studies
much under what conditions
• In others living at high densities and in larger apartments
• Geographic scale of pollutants
increase social capital—likely due to different definitions
• Establishing a recommended
– Williamsom (2004) in a study of 30,000 people in the US found
buffer distance is difficult
more trust in low density areas and more political participation in
• Extent growing trees as buffers high density areas
can mitigate pollution
Metropolitan Design Center

• Self selection may well be at work

– Example: Podobnik (2002) found higher levels of perceived
friendliness in a New Urbanist neighborhood, based on a survey
of 1,180 people in three neighborhoods in Portland, Oregon.
However, many people living there selected the neighborhood
because they preferred a higher density and more socially active
environment

Health and Urban

Planning Tools
• Important to use more than one study and
1. Design for Health Project
read them carefully Overview
2. Linking Planning and Health
3. Tool Overview (DFH and
other)
• Field Inventories and
Checklists
• Plan Checklists
• Participatory Processes
(Image centered left to right, 2.5 up from bottom, 2.0 from top)
• Technical Impact
Assessments

3
3. Tool Overview
1. Field Inventories and Checklists
– Urban Design Audit (Ewing et al)—measures main street • What are the potential impacts on health, positive and
features negative, arising from the implementation of your plan?
– Irvine Minnesota Inventory—new short validated tool actually
measures features associated with walking
2. Plan Checklists
– Design for Health Comprehensive Planning Checklist
– Design for Health Preliminary HIA checklist
3. Participatory Processes
– Rapid Health Impact Assessment
– Corridor Housing Initiative (not really about health)
4. Technical Impact Assessments
– LEED-ND
– San Francisco Healthy Development Measurement Tool
– DFH Threshold Health Impact Assessment Workbook

Liberty on the Lake, Stillwater Is this a healthy environment?

“Walkability”
• Density
• Street pattern
• What are the potential impacts on health, positive and • Mixed use
negative, arising from the implementation of your plan? • Pedestrian amenities

Health Topics
• What changes could be made to the proposal to: • Accessibility
– Enhance the positive impacts on health? • Air quality
• Climate change
– Prevent, minimize or moderate the negative impacts • Environmental and
on health? housing quality
• Food
• Healthcare access
• Mental health
• Noise
• Physical activity
• Social capital
• Safety (crime & traffic)
• Water quality

“Walkability”
• Density
• Street pattern
• Mixed use
• Pedestrian amenities

Health Topics
• Accessibility
• Air quality
• Climate change
• Environmental and
housing quality
• Food
• Healthcare access
• Mental health
• Noise
• Physical activity
• Social capital
• Safety (crime & traffic)
• Water quality

Is this a healthy environment?

4
 Health and Urban
Planning Tools

1. Design for Health Project

Overview
2. Linking Planning and Health
3. Tool Overview (DFH and
other)
• Field Inventories and
Checklists
• Plan Checklists
• Participatory Processes
(Image centered left to right, 2.5 up from bottom, 2.0 from top)
• Technical Impact
Assessments

5
 3. Tool Overview 3. Tool Overview
How Assessment Methods Vary
1. Field Inventories and Checklists
– Urban Design Audit (Ewing et al)—measures main street •Level of detail and complexity:
features –Checklists
– Irvine Minnesota Inventory—new short validated tool actually –Rating scales (scores), and
measures features associated with walking
–Holistic assessments such as workshops
2. Plan Checklists
•Who does the rating
– Design for Health Comprehensive Planning Checklist
•Levels of assessment or evaluation
– Design for Health Preliminary HIA checklist
–Identifying
3. Participatory Processes
–Measuring
– Rapid Health Impact Assessment
–Evaluating
– Corridor Housing Initiative (not really about health)
•Time—before or after an environment is created
4. Technical Impact Assessments
•Issue focus
– LEED-ND
•Whether they measure health or something thought to
– San Francisco Healthy Development Measurement Tool
be associated with health
– DFH Threshold Health Impact Assessment Workbook

3. Tool Overview
Field: Urban Design Audit

• Developed by Ewing et al. using group of urban design experts

• One-page paper sheet
• Weighted scores for: imageability, enclosure, human scale,
transparency, and complexity
• Focus is on commercial streets
• Strengths:
– Scores make comparison easy
– Make sense to expert observers
• Challenges:
– Time consuming (e.g. counting sight lines)
– Vary with time/weather
– Scores may be overly precise

Ewing, R., O. Clemente, S. Handy, R. Brownson, and E. Winston. 2005b. Measuring Urban Design Qualities Related to
Walkability. Final report prepared for Active Living Research, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
http://www.activelivingresearch.org/index.php/Urban_Design_Quantities_Related_to_Walkability/357.

3. Tool Overview 3. Tool Overview

Field: Urban Design Audit Field: Irvine Minnesota Inventory
• Dimensions measured in field include: •Developed by University of California Irvine team + University of
• number of long sight lines Minnesota
• proportion windows at street level Fruitvale high human •Approximately 160 questions
• average building heights scale score area •Many urban design items (next slide)
• number of small planters •Strengths:
• number of pieces of street furniture –Easy to learn
and other street items –Useful in many kinds of environments
• Fruitvale had sections with very high (top) –Can be shortened to create specific indicators
and very low (bottom) measures of human •Challenges:
scale –Long
• Odd bundle of items but scoring makes Fruitvale low human –Lacks some items (parking lots)
sense scale score area
–Provides counts not evaluations
Day, K., M. Boarnet, M. Alfonzo, and A. Forsyth. 2006. The Irvine Minnesota Inventory to measure built environments:
Development. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 30, 2: 144-52.
Day, K., M. Boarnet, M. Alfonzo, and A. Forsyth. 2005b. Irvine Minnesota Inventory. Print version.
https://webfiles.uci.edu/kday/public/index.html.

1
3. Tool Overview 3. Tool Overview
Field: Irvine Minnesota Inventory Field: Irvine Minnesota Inventory

• barriers Total Walking Scale

• parking The items
• bicycle lanes • Curb cuts
• safety found to be
• buildings • Traffic/pedestrian signal(s)/system(s)
• sidewalks—presence actually
• dogs and amenities • Banners associated
• driveways • steepness • vehicle lanes for cars? with more
• freeways • street characteristics • Strip mall/row of shops walking
• land uses • street crossing Current work is • Coffee shops (leisure walk association)
• lighting finalizing shorter 4- Will be
• street trees • Sidewalks
• maintenance 12 item inventories published in
• traffic features of features that • Buffer
• neighborhood • views predict leisure • garage doors (-) the next year
identification
• windows walking, travel • driveways (-)
• olfactory character walking, and total • posted speed limit (-)
walking
• Angled/ On-street parking

3. Tool Overview
Checklist: DFH Comprehensive Planning

http://www.designforhealth.net/techassistance/checklists.html

3. Tool Overview
3. Tool Overview Checklist: DFH HIA Preliminary Checklist
Checklist: DFH HIA Preliminary Checklist
Part I: Is it significant enough to assess?
• Format: Actual checklist + very detailed 1. Geographic extent
description of how to find data for plans or 2. Reversibility
projects
3. Population or
workforce increase
4. Cumulative impact
Carissa Schively Slotterback

5. People affected
6. Land use change
7. Institutional capacity
(Image centered left to right, 2.5 up from bottom, 2.0 from top)
• http://www.designforhealth.net/techassistance/healthimp
act.html

2
Preliminary Checklist
Key Questions No Uncertain Yes 3. Tool Overview
Geographical extent: Does it apply to a
Checklist: DFH HIA Preliminary Checklist
geographic area of a full city block or 0 1 2
Part 2: Does the plan/policy/project meet thresholds?
larger?2
Cumulative impact: Is it occurring in a 1. Accessibility
place where specific local health problems
have been identified (e.g. traffic safety, air 0 1 2 2. Physical activity
quality, lack of healthy foods, contaminated
brownfield)? 3. Social capital
People affected: Does the project or plan
4. Air quality
affect vulnerable groups (e.g. children, older 0 1 2
people, and people with low incomes)? 5. Water quality

Carissa Schively Slotterback

Total + + =
6. Food
If total score is 11 or greater, HIA may be needed, move to Part 2.
If total score is 7-10, a HIA is potentially needed, moving to Part 2 7. Safety
(Image centered left to right, 2.5 up from bottom, 2.0 from top)
recommended.
If total score is 6 or less, no HIA is required. You may wish to do a HIA on
a targeted area or problem.

3. Tool Overview 3. Tool Overview

Participation: Rapid Health Impact Assessment
1. Field Inventories and Checklists
– Urban Design Audit (Ewing et al)—measures main street • Rapid HIA includes a
features workshop bringing together
– Irvine Minnesota Inventory—new short validated tool actually stakeholders to identify and
measures features associated with walking
assess health impacts
2. Plan Checklists
– Design for Health Comprehensive Planning Checklist • Very common in Europe
– Design for Health Preliminary HIA checklist – Participation is relatively
3. Participatory Processes new for health field so
– Rapid Health Impact Assessment manuals are extensive
– Corridor Housing Initiative (not really about health)
4. Technical Impact Assessments
– LEED-ND
http://www.designforhealth.net/techa
– San Francisco Healthy Development Measurement Tool ssistance/hiarapidassessment.html
– DFH Threshold Health Impact Assessment Workbook

Design for Health: Health Impact Assessment

1: Complete HIA Preliminary Checklist Several Types of Results
2: Find people: An organizer: technical staff; • [EXAMPLES OF REPORTS]
steering committee; informants; workshop
participants
3: Plan work
Getting Information Together for a Rapid HIA
4: Inventory of existing plans and policies
5: Profile of the area
6: Talking with people (affected, interested,
experts)
7: Predict impacts
8: Develop alternatives
9: Materials for workshop participants
10: Develop the agenda + activities
11: Run workshop
Writing the Results and Moving Forward
12: Write up the results
Training workshop for Rapid Assessment
13: Implement
14: Evaluate

3
 Technical Health Impact Assessments
Tool Distinguishing characteristics
-114 indicators
-Healthy Development Tool -Originally Yes/No; added scales
(San Francisco) -Very comprehensive
-Based on select studies
-Point based
-LEED - ND -50 issues
-Environmental focus but used
report on health
-Design for Health -9 topics with 16 thresholds or
Threshold indicators
-Carefully digests available research
http://www.designforhealth.net/techassistance/hiathres -Focuses on dimensions directly
holdanalysis.html
relevant to planning

3. Tool Overview
1. Field Inventories and Checklists
– Urban Design Audit (Ewing et al)—measures main street
features
– Irvine Minnesota Inventory—new short validated tool actually
measures features associated with walking
2. Plan Checklists
– Design for Health Comprehensive Planning Checklist
– Design for Health Preliminary HIA checklist
3. Participatory Processes
– Rapid Health Impact Assessment
4. Technical Impact Assessments
– LEED-ND
– San Francisco Healthy Development Measurement Tool
23.6 % are within 400 m of an active park (35.2 % w/in 600 m)
– DFH Threshold Health Impact Assessment Workbook