The Shelter Capacity of Land

The shelter capacity of land combines with occupant activities to determine the economic stability and social potential of a city.

Shelter capacity is gross building area per buildable acre. Shelter capacity and revenue per square foot of occupant activity combine to produce estimated revenue per buildable acre. The urban design of shelter capacity, intensity, and activity within a limited jurisdiction makes financial stability and quality of life a realistic objective. It is a function of the correlated urban design decisions involved. Their mathematical correlation has been missing, however; and the substitute has been annexation searching for economic stability with sprawl. Stability, however, has had little definition beyond a balanced annual budget that has often been cut to meet the objective.

Stability depends on a mix of shelter capacity, physical inte
nsity, and occupant activity adequately distributed on land within a city’s boundaries. I’ve written about the building design categories, forecast models and design specification decisions associated with gross building area prediction and shelter capacity calculation in many essays and several books. These specification topic decisions are primary urban design decisions that shape the ensuing physical form and space, social activity, and economic stability of cities. Fortunately, they have a mathematical foundation that can be used to correlate these decisions and form a leadership language for city design. I’ve written about this mathematical format, knowledge formation, and leadership potential in four books and over 200 essays. I’ll refer to these sources for those who wish to learn more.

A building may be occupied by any activity. The collection of building heights and areas in a city is referred to as urban form, fabric, composition, and so on. The entire collection of buildings is part of the Shelter Division of a Built Domain that is served by its Movement, Open Space, and Life Support Divisions.

The shelter capacity represented by a building introduces levels of intensity, intrusion, and dominance to the surrounding area based on the floor quantity and design specifications chosen. This building is occupied by activity that increases its value as a public revenue asset. The building, however, consumes a portion of a city’s land that is its investment portfolio. The yield from this portfolio depends on the mix of shelter capacity, physical intensity, and occupant activity occupying each parcel of the city’s land area. It is not just about land use compatibility therefore. It is about the correlation of land use activity with shelter capacity and intensity decisions on every parcel in order to yield the total average revenue per buildable acre required to equal a city’s total expense per acre.

The creation of urban space, building mass and physical intensity has been a preoccupation of architecture, landscape architecture, and urban design. Compatible land use activity has been a preoccupation of city planning, zoning, and real estate law. However, the two are inextricably linked. Shelter capacity produces levels of intensity, intrusion, and dominance based on the floor quantity and design specifications chosen. When it is occupied by activity, it produces revenue per square foot of activity and per acre of buildable land occupied. Excessive intensity is produced by the quantity of shelter capacity introduced per buildable acre when enhanced revenue is the objective. The level of intensity produced and resulting revenue benefit has been a matter of argument and opinion, but it can all be mathematically measured, evaluated, and predicted to improve future leadership direction.

In other words, economic stability and a desirable quality of life are functions of the balance planned for shelter capacity, activity, and intensity on every parcel in a city’s inventory. These parcels represent a city’s investment portfolio. The relationship of shelter capacity, activity, and intensity permitted or encouraged on every parcel within its boundaries yields revenue that determines the quality of life it can provide.

I am aware of no city that has the data, equipment, and personnel needed to continuously evaluate the balance of shelter capacity, activity, and intensity it needs to financially maintain the quality of life it desires within sustainable limits on every parcel within its boundaries. I admit, however, that I am no scholar with comprehensive knowledge of the resources being applied.

The accurate compilation of gross building area per buildable acre for every parcel in a government jurisdiction is a pivotal scientific measurement. It can be the foundation for urban design research and progress toward economic stability and a desirable quality of life.

Shelter capacity can be predicted as well as measured. The result can be converted to the level of intensity introduced to the site and surrounding area by the buildings, parking, pavement, and unpaved open space planned. The fact that it can be predicted introduces the opportunity to mathematically plan the three-dimensional form of shelter capacity within a city to accommodate the mix and scope of activity needed for the revenue required. This also offers the opportunity to produce spatial arrangements of building mass, parking, pavement, and unpaved open space that improve the places created and quality of life encouraged within the Shelter Division of the Built Domain.

A home on five acres has a shelter capacity measurement. A 50 story office high rise on a one acre parcel has a shelter capacity measurement. Both measurements reside within a mathematical spectrum of shelter capacity options. Their location in the spectrum is a function of the building design category chosen, the design specification values entered in the category’s template, and the floor quantity option under consideration. The result is an urban design definition with three-dimensional implications that can be used to conserve land, evaluate potential, and lead the space and form of cities toward shelter compositions that serve the many activities of growing populations. The intent is to find a leadership language that can lead everyone to protect our quality and source of life. It will involve shelter design decisions applied within limited geographic areas defined by science to protect our source of life.

The shelter capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance implications of mathematical urban design decisions have physical, social, psychological, environmental, and economic implications. These implications can be measured with shelter capacity evaluation, and definitions will make it possible to consistently lead shelter capacity, intensity, and activity toward physical, social, and economic objectives on every parcel within a city.

Shelter capacity occupied by taxable activity produces revenue per gross building square foot and per buildable acre occupied.

Unfortunately, we do not have a research library of revenue ranges per square foot of activity option and have not been able to accurately predict the shelter capacity of land. These are two of the tactical problems that must be solved to avoid consuming the Natural Domain with a Built Domain that is an unrecognized threat.

Cities have not been able to accurately, consistently, and expeditiously multiply the shelter capacity of their buildable acres times the revenue potential of optional occupant activities. This has obstructed their ability to correlate shelter capacity and activity at the parcel level, which is the building block of its physical, social, and economic security. The wrong combination within a city’s master plan and zoning plan can easily lead to budget deficits, annexation, sprawl, and eventual decline; or excessive intensity, congestion, and the misery this implies.

Shelter capacity can be multiplied by estimated revenue per gross square foot of activity. The result can be divided by the buildable acres occupied to determine the project’s contribution to a city’s total average annual expense per buildable acre. Some land will produce less and some more than the city average required. The total average revenue from all taxable acres occupied, however, must equal the city’s total annual expense per acre to operate. This may explain why the relationship of shelter capacity and intensity on every acre within an urban composition is so important to a city’s economic stability.

Annexation is not the answer.

A city may resort to the annexation of land for activity that produces new revenue when its total current revenue does not meet its total annual expense. The totals may balance and solve an immediate problem, but the total is no guarantee of financial security over time. The public expense of the annexed area per acre may eventually overtake the new money produced by the activity introduced. The result is continuing annexation for new revenue from land whose contribution to the annual budget may decline as age increases its annual maintenance expense. In this case, annexation decisions solve current problems but cannot monitor future performance with the data management required to correlate urban design decisions with their financial implications. It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to overcome the desire to annex new land for the wrong capacity, intensity, and activity choices as long as political decisions lack the comprehensive information and evaluation required to correlate urban design decisions with their financial implications.

The average revenue per buildable acre in a city must equal a city’s total annual expense per acre. This reconciliation does not mean that the city is providing a desirable quality of life, however. The financial balance represented by the collection of activities and shelter capacities permitted in its zoning plan is not frequently and efficiently monitored at the parcel, block, tract, of zoning district level and may not be producing the total revenue needed to meet its objectives. The knee jerk response is a political debate over essential and non-essential public services that can be eliminated to reduce public expense. This can be true for any city with, or without, annexation possibilities.

In most if not all cases a city has not gathered and correlated the data needed to evaluate the quantities of activity required for the revenue needed to provide and sustain the quality of life it desires over time. This occurs because it does not understand the shelter capacity of its buildable acres and cannot correlate this square foot shelter capacity with activity that can provide the revenue needed per square foot to sustain its annual budget. In addition, it cannot monitor these relationships over time because it does not have the commitment, agency cooperation, department cooperation, personnel, and digital tools required to pursue the effort.

Prerequisite

It is a simple concept obstructed by the need to accurately, quickly, and credibly calculate the shelter capacity of buildable land area given many floor quantity options, and the revenue potential per square foot of optional occupant activities. Without this information, it will be impossible to tell if a shelter project proposal will provide the revenue needed per acre to contribute to a city’s average expense per acre over time; or if it must be subsidized by other contributions. It will also be impossible to diagnose a city’s current economic health and consider optional remedies that may affect how it plans for the future use of land within its boundaries. This is not simply about the compatibility of adjacent activity in a two-dimensional plan. The land represents a city’s investment portfolio. The way it is allocated with three-dimensional urban design decisions will determine its economic and social performance within limited geographic areas.

The city design challenge is complicated by the data complexity associated with every parcel in a city. We have undertaken to forecast the weather, however. Forecasting shelter capacity and its implications on a planet with limited land will involve a reduced level of research and information management, but involve decisions that are within our power to make.

CONCLUSION

If you agree with the discussion above, you may agree that the problem begins at the parcel level of township, village, city, county, and region formation. At this level, relational databases, geographic information systems, three-dimensional massing, economic performance, social impact, and spatial composition enter an urban design universe that cannot succeed without improved correlation among many currently isolated professions. It is a simple proposition. We must lead the distribution of shelter capacity, activity, and intensity for growing populations toward financial and social stability within limited geographic areas that protect our quality and source of life.

Walter M. Hosack: December, 2023

ZONING POTENTIAL for URBAN DESIGN LEADERSHIP

 A Note to Michael Ytterburg, Architect

You have touched on a potential urban design leadership language, but it is in the hands of those who do not understand the comprehensive mathematical correlation required to avoid contradictory physical design direction. Without adequate leadership, project design decisions and direction can arbitrarily consume the land while producing either random sprawl or excessive intensity. This is particularly true when annexation opportunities are available. When they aren’t, excessive intensity on limited land area becomes a very real possibility.

Land-locked cities have not had annexation alternatives. This has often forced them to struggle with decline, limited economic development, eminent domain, and excessive physical intensity in an effort to meet their current expenses and debt obligations. It has been very difficult to define the scope of economic development required to comprehensively correct a deficit; but shelter capacity evaluation as part of a digital master planning effort beginning at the parcel level of our presence can be translated into an economic development strategy embedded in a zoning ordinance for any city.

Zoning is a concept without an adequate mathematical language, tools, and information; but it has the potential to lead us toward a desirable quality of life within limited geographic areas defined to protect our source of life. It will not evolve, however, without a complete overhaul by those familiar with the physical design vocabulary and correlated mathematics needed to consistently lead others toward desirable shelter capacity decisions based on measurable research and evaluation.

Zoning was a hard fought legal battle to define two types of freedom - individual freedom to pursue initiative and collective freedom to oppose individual oppression. It began as an attempt to reduce the suffering of vulnerable populations crowded into shelter symbolized by excessive physical intensity, pollution, disease, and decay. It was eventually recognized that this threatened everyone’s health, safety, and welfare. We are now beginning to recognize that the ambiguous term “welfare” includes our physical, social, psychological, environmental, and economic quality of life at the very least - while we continue to argue over the line separating individual from collective freedom.

BUILDINGS

A building can shelter any activity. The combination has been called a “land use”. Building mass combines with floor quantity, parking quantity, pavement, and unpaved open space to produce project shelter capacity and physical intensity to shelter activity within a mathematical spectrum of options that has sprawl at one end of the scale and excessive intensity at the other. The terms “land use” and “density” may have confused the fact that physical design is used to shelter social and economic activity. It symbolizes the leadership decisions taken with its silent presence, but they remain undocumented and uncorrelated by an adequate mathematical leadership language. The result has been random sprawl as a reaction to the excessive intensity of the past and more excessive intensity and sprawl pursuing the goal of profit at any price by exploiting the weaknesses of uncorrelated zoning ordinance leadership.

The concept of citizen participation may have assumed that sprawl and excessive intensity are defined and regulated by the dimensional stipulations scattered throughout a zoning ordinance. In addition, the assumption may have been that annexation could solve all inadequate zoning definitions of city planning intent by consuming additional land area, but we are becoming aware that our inability to accurately predict the shelter capacity of land for growing populations is consuming land that is our source of life. I believe that most recognize, at least intuitively at this time, that land is not a consumable commodity and unlimited resource.

Populations produce density. Buildings produce shelter capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance based on the design specification values chosen to define a project strategy. Density has confused the physical design issue. It is only related to residential activity. A residential building may be designed to shelter many optional densities depending on the average dwelling unit area planned and the related design specification values under consideration. From a physical design perspective, project building mass, height, parking, pavement, and unpaved open space combine to determine one shelter capacity implication expressed as gross building area per buildable acre. This measures the impact of strategic shelter design decisions in a project and their impact on the surrounding area. The physical relationships become obvious when occupant activity is recognized as a separate topic limited by the shelter capacity available.

Projects combine to form urban design areas, districts, cities, regions, and conurbations. We are not even close to correlating the design specification decisions involved based on measurement and evaluation that can produce strategic shelter design knowledge and consistent leadership decisions. The design specification topics involved have not even been comprehensively listed unless you have read about shelter capacity evaluation. The shelter goal is to lead these strategic decisions toward urban design results that can shelter the activities of growing populations within geographic limits that protect their quality and source of life – the Natural Domain.

Shelter capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance are mathematical implications produced by mathematically correlated design decisions entered in a shelter capacity template. The implications measured or predicted are the foundation for all ensuing levels of design decision associated with site planning, architectural form, function, and appearance. The values entered in a template represent a strategy that is refined with more detailed design decisions, tactics, and tasks that combine to define the construction needed to produce a final product. The product symbolizes the knowledge of a culture and expresses it in a silent message to the future.

ZONING

The zoning code is a planning document with an inadequate design leadership language. A building code is a document that leads the tactical construction decisions required to reach the design strategy and objectives established. It is not a strategic document from a planning perspective. I originally struggled with this issue because I found the zoning ordinances I read a hopeless tangle of procedure and activity regulations with contradictory physical design specifications scattered throughout. I wished for an ordinance that would separate its design standards for ease of reference and leadership direction, and eventually realized that the text could be separated into the following sections:

1)      Management

a.      Purpose

b.      Operations

2)      Definitions

3)      Land Use

a.      Area regulations

b.      Activity regulations

c.      Existing conditions

d.      Nuisance regulations

4)      Design

a.      Context regulations

b.      Object regulations

5)      Enforcement

I wrote “The Disorganized Zoning Ordinance” in 2010 for my blog at www.wmhosack.blogspot.com to suggest the steps required to reorganize and adopt this rearrangement. My intent was to improve the transfer of information among those the ordinance was attempting to lead. A more detailed explanation was included in Chapter 20 of my book, “Land Development Calculations”, 2010. I did not attempt to reconcile the contradictions I found among zoning ordinance design specifications, however. My focus was on content reorganization. For instance, most experienced designers are familiar with the contradictions among permitted density, building height, and parking regulations in most, if not all, zoning ordinances. They often require reconciliation with contested variance requests fought over the concept of consistent legal application, but the consistent application of a contradiction has made everyone ignore the mathematical problem. I knew the problem could be solved with equation derivation, algorithms, and forecast templates created to correlate the specifications involved and reduce measurement, prediction, and implication evaluation to a simple entry of design value decisions. The template decision topics and values could then be used to predict options and measure existing conditions to define their capacity and intensity implications for comparison and evaluation. I’ve called the effort Shelter Capacity Evaluation. It is intended to introduce consistent measurement, evaluation, correlation, prediction, and communication to all leadership efforts concerned with shelter capacity and urban design for social and economic activity on limited land areas.

The intent is to improve the knowledge and leadership provided based on information that only research can provide and mathematics can document with the credibility required to balance the debate between individual and collective freedom that will determine our response to the universal Law of Limits we face.

I have written about shelter capacity evaluation templates on many occasions and mention them again because they collectively represent a language that can be introduced to the design section of zoning ordinance reorganization. Keep in mind that a zoning ordinance is not simply about compatibility among neighboring activities. It attempts to lead the strategic decisions of shelter design that determine a shelter project’s place within the physical sprawl/excessive intensity spectrum. At the present time it does this with an incomplete understanding of the scope, building design category, and design topic relationships that must be correlated before leadership decisions can make a difference.

Our goal is survival. Our strategy will involve food, water, fire, air, shelter, land, and population objectives that prompt skepticism and argument at least and aggression at worst. The last three can be quantitatively addressed with shelter capacity evaluation. Two are new to the list. The first four involve environmental preservation. The campaign will require new awareness, trait modification, and commitment to the search for knowledge and wisdom in a world of emotion that accompanies the gift we have been given.

POSTSCRIPT

Think of a city’s Movement, Open Space, and Life Support Divisions as arteries serving a Shelter Division within a Built Domain that must serve increasing shelter capacity demand from growing populations. Unfortunately, we have been too short-sighted to see open space as a necessary artery in the Built Domain or as the growth medium of our Natural Domain. We have also avoided seeing unpaved open space quantities as critical ingredients within every project site plan in the Built Domain. It has always been an avoidable expense or an expedient form of currency taken from a planet that is not a helpless victim.

Walter M. Hosack: December, 2023

CORRELATION of SHELTER DESIGN DECISIONS

Shelter Ideals, Goals, Strategies, Objectives, Tactics, and Tasks

Goals are correlated to achieve an ideal rarely, if ever, achieved. Strategies are abstract concepts designed to achieve a goal through the achievement of
sequential objectives. Objectives are defined, correlated and accumulated to reach strategic success based on tactical plans and activity. Tasks are individual actions correlated to form a tactic. For instance, Normandy was an objective and part of a strategy in WWII. The goal was to win the war. The ideal behind the goal was freedom. The WWII objectives took the names of locations. The tactics were correlated tasks or actions designed to overcome the opposition.

A tactical substitute for a strategic objective produces a preoccupation with observation until a concept emerges to unify the glimpses. For instance, the Black Plague was a threat without a strategic answer. The objective was to find a cure but tactical treatment awaited a concept that could address more than the appearance of its symptoms. A concept, or strategy, was needed to guide a series of experimental, objective efforts. In the interval, treatment became a guessing game. A strategy eventually evolved around what was then the abstract concept of germ theory. The theory required the evolution of language, tools, materials, sciences, and arts required to pursue a search demanding a correlation of effort. The goal stretched beyond the disease. The intent was to advance the knowledge of medicine. The ideal remains the elimination of all disease.

Correlation among professions introduces another level of complexity. Medicine has developed specialties within its umbrella, but the correlation between anatomy and chemistry is a better example of correlation among the independent efforts I have in mind. We now realize, I think, that we live on a planet that depends on a spider web of correlated relationships that we barely understand and often blindly address at the project level. We are beginning to realize that an isolated project cannot help but damage the web given our level of knowledge and information. Projects are tactical in nature. The best contribute to an objective that is part of a larger strategy designed to achieve a goal that may never reach its ideal conclusion.

RELEVANCE of DECISION HIERARCHY

Our survival depends, at least, on fire, water, food, air, and shelter. Our goals have been fire safety, water purity, air quality, food sufficiency, and adequate shelter supply; but the shelter goal now faces a fundamental contradiction. Shelter sprawl that increases supply to protect the activities of increasing populations consumes land that is a foundation of life and a primary source of food sufficiency. Excessive shelter intensity that conserves land while increasing shelter supply compromises our physical, social, psychological, environmental, and economic quality of life. We have not been able to define either term with accurate measurement, prediction, and evaluation that can led to consistent leadership decisions.

On one hand we believe that growth is good and that we should be fruitful and multiply. Many repeat on a weekly basis that this is a world without end. It has to be if unlimited growth across the face of a limited planet is good – but it isn’t. Any shelter goal written to respect the planet’s fundamental Law of Limits and Survival faces this fundamental contradiction. It must be reconciled before we can move on. If you agree, then every tactical shelter project for growing populations must be designed and correlated to advance on a strategic path toward a survival goal within geographic limits that protects their quality and source of life. It is an overwhelming concept based on an abstract, intuitive awareness of our place in the ecosystem of the planet. In the light provided by medical history, it requires new language, theory, and tools to address the threat with the measurement, prediction, evaluation, and decisions needed to pursue diagnosis and treatment. In this context we are the microbes under the microscope and we are growing without limit in the petri dish we call a planet.

I should add that environmental protection is now recognized by many as an essential prerequisite for the survival goals just mentioned. It is now an ideal given our current level of awareness and comprehension.

It should be obvious that the conflict between realistic shelter supplies for growing populations on limited land areas requires reconciliation. I have just mentioned that it can only begin with correlation based on a new language of definitions, explanations, derivations, and mathematical forecast models that permit measurement, evaluation, prediction, decision, and consistent leadership direction of shelter capacity decisions by public and private investors for every buildable acre within scientifically limited geographic areas. I originally referred to this language as development capacity evaluation and presented the digital forecast models involved in my first two books. They are now eclipsed by a new effort. I now refer to the improved forecast models as shelter capacity evaluation software and have discussed portions over a number of years in my blog essays and Linked-In postings.

The bottom line is that land has a mathematically predictable spectrum of shelter capacity options per buildable acre. They produce measureable, definable lifestyle alternatives ranging from sprawl to excessive intensity at each end of the spectrum.

There is a sustainable shelter capacity limit we must anticipate to define a symbiotic future. Our goal has always been survival. The ideal may become quality of life for all. At one time the goal required unlimited growth to establish and defend our place on the planet, but the contradiction involved can never permit us to reach the ideal. The goal will require correlation of research and knowledge among a vast array of professions to define sustainable growth on limited land areas from the perspective of a planet that enforces limits we must anticipate with more than emotion.

There are two worlds on this planet. The Built Domain is composed of Urban and Rural Phyla. Each phylum contains Movement, Open Space, and Life Support Divisions that serve a Shelter Division. The catalyst for growth is a microbe we have yet to recognize as a parasite needing symbiotic leadership. The Natural Domain is its source of life in a Built Domain that is subject to the planet’s Law of Limits. Both must be preserved and protected in the way we have always begun – by defining territory. It is a definition that will require the correlation of all related and emerging scientific efforts pursuing the best of intentions.

In other words, growth is subject to the planet’s Law of Limits. Our survival depends, in part, on the sustainable, symbiotic shelter solutions and growth definitions we provide to protect the activities of populations within these geographic limits. The physical design of shelter at the project, district, city, and regional levels must now define and symbolize the scientific leadership correlation required to protect our quality and source of life on a planet in a universe that does not compromise with ignorance that we have been given the gift to overcome.

Walter M. Hosack: December, 2023

NEW AWARENESS: Choices, Decisions and Direction

Thank you for the introduction to the Krier brothers, Michael. Nice presentation as well. The absence of cars is an obvious plus. Mobility has been an advantage that has led us to this point in history. Its problems have been compounded by population growth. Many sol
utions have been discussed but they don't begin with the obvious any more than the Black Plague was solved by observing visible symptoms of disease. It's time for an attitude readjustment and a new perspective.

Examining alternatives is one of our fundamental strengths. We are the only species that can consciously adjust our traits in a single lifetime with language. All others have either had their traits adapted over extended periods of time without their knowledge or become extinct. We are the chosen few given a choice, but the few have been fighting over who has been chosen to lead since they have had a voice. There is only one sustainable, symbiotic direction. The strategic decisions required will be symbolized by the tactical results that send a silent message to the future. Some of these strategic decisions will be expressed by the architecture, urban design, landscape architecture, city planning, engineering, and science created to shelter the many activities of an enlightened population. It will not be a Renaissance. It will represent New Awareness.

It’s always been about options, opinions, and choice. Decisions can't be avoided. The remainder is history in our hands with stewardship in the balance.

Architecture & the Language of Physical Design: Response to Raschid Majbour, MSc

 I couldn't agree more with your comments regarding the relationship of civil engineering to architecture. My only regret is that you relegate architecture to the appearance created. Appearance simply symbolizes the many questions that must be asked and decisions (hundreds if not thousands) that must be taken to lead from an inquiring client and a blank piece of paper.

I cannot blame the audience. Architecture has focused on style rather than the substance of improving knowledge contribution for a very long time. They have not had a language that would permit them to measure, evaluate, and forecast the implications of shelter capacity decisions. These are the decisions that can address sprawl and excessive physical intensity. The deficit symbolizes our inability to speak in an architectural language that can correlate what we sense, evaluate what we see, and convince those we address. 

PS: I have discussed the new quantitative language and forecast models of Shelter Capacity Evaluation on many occasions in my essays on Linked-In and my blog at www.wmhosack.blogspot.com. It applies to all physical design disciplines concerned with the design, development, and evaluation of shelter in the Built Domain - and to those who govern, invest in, sell, advocate, and judge the product.

RESPONSE TO OANA BOGDAN: “THE CRISIS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL PROFESSION (PART 5)”

Historically, architects were immediate advisors to kings, pharaohs, popes, and other political decision-makers because their advice had an influence on their patrons governing ability. This advice no longer seems to be a political priority. It has been significantly weakened by an emphasis on fine art that is an ambiguous symbol and not a solution.

Examine the structure and mission of architecture, landscape architecture, urban design, and city planning. Consider the knowledge it can accumulate and the correlation it can provide among all concerned with symbiotic survival on a planet that is no longer a world without end. It can lead to reorganization with a new emphasis on a governing hierarchy that benefits from its knowledge accumulation, evaluation of alternative decisions, and potential public contribution to a goal that can no longer be ignored. Talent scores points. Strategy wins games.

In other words, the language of Shelter Capacity Evaluation is needed to formulate concepts, measure conditions, evaluate options, express conclusions, build knowledge, and argue for physical, social, political, and economic leadership decisions in credible, convincing terms that can provide shelter for the activities of growing populations within geographic limits that will protect their quality and source of life.

The Shelter Decisions We Face

 

Growth, freedom and the choices involved.

There are now two worlds on a single planet – the Built Domain and Natural Domains of Earth. The Built Domain is currently a parasite slowly consuming its source of life with an outdated definition of growth on a planet that is no longer a world without end.

There are very few, if any, facts in this life. We have survived based on observation, instinct, insight, awareness, assumption, measurement, comparison, evaluation, inspiration, and opinion that can be revised or reversed at any moment in time with increasing knowledge, influence, and/or political power.

The first paragraph is simply my opinion. If you agree at this point in time, then the statement implies a law of limits for Earth that many of us already anticipate. If our goal is survival, then a symbiotic strategy is the only alternative; but the challenge is to define where to begin - and on how many fronts.

In our case the threat to survival is again microscopic. We are back to recognizing symptoms of sprawling disease and excessive intensity with inadequate tools for diagnosis. We are the microscopic problem - and have been consuming everything in our path as if unlimited growth is good.

I have already implied a symbiotic goal. My strategy in this brief essay is to indicate that the threat not only involves global contamination of air and water, fire and flood, earthquake and eruption. The microscopic portion of this threat involves us when viewed from space. Its symptoms appear as the sprawling shelter and excessive intensity we build to protect growing activity by consuming and contaminating land that is our source of life.

Anatomy of the Built Domain

The Built Domain contains Urban and Rural Phyla primarily distinguished by the quantities of land and activities related to the shelter provided. Both phyla contain Movement, Open Space, and Life Support Divisions designed to serve as arteries for their Shelter Divisions. (Open space arteries are more of a dream than reality at the present time but can provide new blood to a failing anatomy.) Urban growth with annexation has been relatively unrestrained based on a concept of unlimited freedom to consume agriculture and the Natural Domain.

The Shelter Division contains six building design categories. We have been distracted from their presence by the appearance of architectural form, function, and style. This blizzard of fashion has concealed a classification system and mathematical foundation that makes the measurement and prediction of land consumption for shelter capacity, population growth, and lifestyle alternatives feasible. It is the design leadership language needed to address land consumption for shelter; measure results; and build knowledge as a foundation for a quality of life that can be symbolized by the best in form, function, and appearance.

Keep in mind that gross building area may be used to shelter any occupant activity. Shelter capacity is the gross building area introduced per buildable acre of related land area. The separate measurements of density for residential activity and floor area ratio values for non-residential activity have confused shelter capacity with social activity for decades. There is only one effective capacity measurement capable of consistently successful leadership. It is produced by the design specification values adopted for a building design category project and may be occupied by an activity. These specifications determine the capacity and physical intensity introduced to a project area.

Intensity is calculated from the shelter capacity introduced. Intrusion is calculated and combined with intensity to measure the dominance implied by the design specification values and floor quantities under consideration. These values have quality of life implications symbolized by the amounts of building mass, parking, pavement, and unpaved open space that emerge. They have yet to be measured and evaluated within the spectrum of physical possibilities they occupy, but will be similar to the first blood pressure readings introduced to assist with medical diagnosis and leadership.

Building Design Categories

Design specification templates are related to six building design categories that are used to shelter most human activity on the planet. Their limited number makes gross building area, shelter capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance measurement, prediction, and leadership feasible within a limited Built Domain. I won’t expand on this topic for the sake of brevity since I have covered its potential on numerous occasions. My objective here is to present as simple an overview of the concept as possible. Anyone wishing to go further can find complete information in my book, The Equations of Urban Design available on Amazon.com.

Two prediction templates are related to a building design category. The first is applicable when gross land area is given to find the gross building area, shelter capacity and intensity implications of a chosen set of design specification values. The second is applicable when a gross building area objective is given, buildable land area options are to be found, and intensity implications are to be calculated. These categories are: (G1) - All buildings with surface parking around, but not under, the building or buildings on the same premise; (G2) - All buildings with surface parking around and under the building(s) on the same premise; (S1) - All buildings served with adjacent parking structures on the same premise; (S2) - All buildings served with underground parking structures on the same premise; (S3) - All buildings with parking structures partially or completely above grade under the building on the same premise; and (NP) - All buildings with no parking required.

The shelter capacity evaluation objective is to determine the capacity of land to provide shelter for human activity without excessive land consumption or physical intensity that compromises the surrounding quality of life and occupant experience. If this approach gains momentum, opinion may begin to recognize through mathematical evaluation that shelter capacity and quality of life calculations have growth implications that contradict the belief in a world without end.

The Wars of Opinion

Wars begin with irreconcilable argument searching for resolution. We are currently at war with the capacity of a planet that does not compromise with ignorance, but have been too close to see the scope of conflict.

We have not been able accurately predict the shelter capacity of land to accommodate growth by accurately defining the intensity, intrusion, and dominance of what we have ambiguously called “over-development” and “sprawl”. We have been wandering across the planet as if it were our own like so many other species that have multiplied and failed to adapt with intuition and anticipation. Symbiotic survival demands these attributes. I have simply attempted to contribute a few new tools that can help with the effort to accurately measure, forecast, and define the spectrum of options available in my essays and books.

Summary

At this point in our evolution I would like to make the point that opinion should not be misunderstood as fact even though it may represent belief. We are a species that depends on observation, instinct, awareness, assumption, measurement, comparision, evaluation, knowledge, inspiration, influence, and/or political power to make decisions. We are fallible. We all know this format has not produced a perfect record of success.

In my opinion the definition of “growth” and “freedom” are two of the great issues before us that demand further refinement. No other species has had the power and intelligence to evaluate these definitions. They have had no choice but to grow until they couldn’t with the advantages they were given. We have been given the ability to choose our definitions. We would insult whatever power we accept if we follow the path of those who have become extinct through no choice of their own.

I have chosen shelter capacity evaluation to illustrate the choices that face us, and have provided new tools to illustrate these choices with the most convincing language we have created – mathematics. It defines a spectrum of choices ranging from physical sprawl and consumption of our source of life to excessive intensity at the other that can make the tenements of England and Hell’s Kitchen in Manhattan look like planned communities. I have provided the tools needed to define these choices within the spectrum and have had the temerity to predict that they could become the language of a new science. (Ignore the book I wrote entitled, The Science of Urban Design. Its classification is outdated and has been replaced by the explanations in The Equations of Urban Design. I wish I could have re-used the earlier title.)

The choices will always be yours. It is the gift you have been given and often abused. Study hard. Do your homework. Build the data needed for the many fronts involved in this war, and choose wisely based on the knowledge you accumulate.

Afterword

Shelter capacity measurement and evaluation is a powerful leadership language for the many disciplines related to city planning and urban design decisions. It is able to define our places on the planet in credible terms capable of political, social, and economic persuasion; and can accurately express instinctive reactions to current shelter patterns of behavior that we sense are self-destructive. Anticipation has been one of our primary survival attributes. It leads to opinion that remains with many and is converted to knowledge by a few. It is time to give these few a new voice that can lead us on the path that only we have been given the gift to choose – adaptation based on abstract perception.

Walter M. Hosack: October, 2023

Our Challenge

It’s time to re-evaluate the structure and staffing for democratic decision-making in our country. Businesses call it reorganization. They don’t throw out the business. It takes the right structure with the right people in the right places to make the right decisions. We are arguing over issues that we can’t bring to a vote because we are entangled in rules we have created to fill the gaps in Hamilton’s Federalist Papers, at the very least. Five hundred and thirty-five senators and congressmen/women can no longer compromise. Their rules defeat the concept. Gerrymandering with computer assistance from special interest is making the concept of majority rule a mirage.

At this point we need questions, homework, and evaluation far more than opinion based on emotion and assumption. I recognize that this approach does not currently attract votes, and that all facts are opinions supported by various levels of measurement, evaluation, and conclusion. They can, and some have, changed over time. Opinions have led us into a tangle we must wait four years to address with half-hearted platform promises. They are then shelved after the election. Distraction, dissent, and obstruction abound.

We need a better way to bring individual issues to the table promptly for a decision, and a better way to fill and re-fill the seats of leadership with those who will be counted. Hiding opinion in a bundle of legislative issues and hoping it will ride on the coattails of more essential topics is not compromise. It is deception in its finest legislative form. Reorganization does not mean we change the business of democracy. It means we intend to improve its performance to match the written ideals we have yet to reach.

The Planet's Law of Limits

Resolving growth within limits will challenge our ability to adapt.

I reposted the message below from the UN with some comments. I don't think I made my point and would like to revise these comments by first dissecting the message as noted below.

UN – Habitat:  

United Nations Human Settlement Programme 

“FORECAST: By 2050, 7 billion people will live in cities. 

FORECAST: That means that for the next 30 YEARS, we have to accommodate 2 million people moving in cities. Every. Week.

ARGUMENT 1): We cannot carry on with business as usual. The planet can't take it.

FACT: Construction uses 30% of all the resources globally, and produces 40% of GHG emissions.

ARGUMENT 2): We have to follow a truly circular economy model and follow the "6 R’s":

POLICY 1) - REDUCE: Implementing strategies to reduce waste and minimize resource consumption during construction and maintenance processes.

TACTIC - REUSE: Promoting the reuse of materials, components, and buildings to extend their lifespan and reduce the need for new construction.

TACTIC - RECYCLE: Establishing robust recycling systems for construction and demolition waste.

TACTIC - RECOVER: Exploring opportunities to recover energy and resources from waste materials.

TACTIC - REPURPOSE: Repurposing materials and buildings to give them a new life and purpose.

POLICY 2) - RETHINK: Changing mindsets and adopting innovative approaches to urban planning, design, and construction.”

I couldn’t agree more with the arguments presented, but they fall into the category of opinion that depends on Policy 2 for leadership success. Policy 1 is the topic that struck me since it is titled “Reduce” but avoids the issue implied by Argument 1 - population growth. I have also avoided it, but have attempted to imply the problem by deriving equations for the shelter capacity of land. I have argued that reasonable shelter capacity can be exceeded with excessive massing, parking, and pavement intensity that compromises our quality of life and have provided the mathematical means to calculate these implications. I have also argued that land can be consumed by sprawl that consumes our source of life. Both can be mathematically predicted and their implications can be measured and evaluated. In other words, shelter capacity implies a limit to population growth if our source and quality of life is to be protected and preserved. Growth without correlation and balance is a recipe for excessive consumption, decline, and extinction on a planet with limited resources.

Leadership requires a goal. I would like to suggest one: We must learn to shelter growing populations within a geographically limited Built Domain designed to protect their quality and source of life, the Natural Domain.

We live on a planet with limited resources that is not a land without end. There is a law of limits that we must accept to survive and it contradicts our concept of unlimited growth as beneficial. Policy 1 will be incomplete until we learn how to correlate, balance, and reconcile population growth and quality of life with the capacity of the planet to both sustain and survive.

The adjustment required to mentally step from parasite to planning and preservation is a challenge that many have questioned our ability to achieve -- given our tendency to argue and diverge over the slightest difference of opinion.

Walter M. Hosack: October 1, 2023

PS: The tactics mentioned fall into various objective categories. Thinking about these categories reveals the true scope of the task ahead, since the tactics mentioned are a random collection of the large number associated with each of the many objectives implied.

SPRAWL

 

Sprawl is the pattern of a parasite without a symbiotic future -- until we have the data, knowledge, and commitment needed to defend the argument that a Built Domain must shelter growing populations within geographic limits that protect its quality and source of life, the Natural Domain. (See my essay, “The Least a City Should Know”, at www.wmhosack.blogspot.com)

Photo by Chixoy

The Principles of Shelter Capacity Evaluation for Urban Design and Economic Development

 

Before I get to the title of this essay I would like to mention an essay I remembered after reading an article about data dependent planning and urban design. The essay is entitled, “The Least a City Should Know”. It is located on my blog at www.wmhosack.blogspot.com. I am not attaching it for the sake of brevity since it is longer than I normally write and contains 7 tables. It is about the correlation of currently independent database sources that must agree to form a common resource before we can begin to correlate the information needed to build knowledge and make informed city planning and urban design decisions.

We cannot predict, plan, and lead shelter capacity decisions toward the efficient and economically stable use of limited land areas without improved database correlation. We do not need to leave these decisions to a marketplace that believes in land without end and private profitability without concern for public revenue potential and financial stability per acre of municipal land area.

In other words, we cannot correlate design of the physical city with its social and economic characteristics until we are able to assemble the relational databases required to understand the correlation of decisions involved.

Forecast Models for Shelter Capacity Measurement and Evaluation

I have written about the urban design classification system, building design categories, forecast models, design specification templates, architectural algorithms, master equations, and definitional equations that determine shelter capacity and intensity at the cellular level of city formation on many occasions; and have referred to the software package of measurement and forecasting models as both Shelter Capacity Evaluation and Development Capacity Evaluation.

I continue to vacillate between the terms “shelter capacity” and “development capacity”. Shelter has a residential tone but conveys the life-saving nature of the topic. Development is all-inclusive but has a less imperative, more diluted and commercial tone. When I use either of these terms, they are meant to encompass the building design categories, gross building areas, and shelter capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance implications that can be mathematically predicted from design specification values entered in a building design category template. These predictions can be used for either residential or non-residential occupancy. They predict the shelter capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance implications of contemplated design specification options, but the values chosen can be improved with a focused strategy of data accumulation, correlation, and evaluation.

Principles of Shelter Capacity Evaluation

While writing this I thought back to my creation of Shelter Capacity Evaluation software and would like to mention the points that have come to influence my opinions and approach. The number of variable decisions exposed by this exercise gave me a new appreciation for the mental correlation performed by architects, landscape architects, city planners, urban designers, and so on over centuries. They have had to perform this correlation with the leadership instinct, intuition, awareness, experience, and rules of thumb that we have called talent. It has been applied for centuries when population growth was encouraged and land was plentiful. We now need to support talent with a foundation of data accumulation, mathematical evaluation, and increasing knowledge that will help it consistently provide shelter for the activities of increasing populations within geographic limits defined to protect their quality and source of life. It will never replace talent, but it will give it more credible support for the decisions it recommends. The following opinions have led me to the formation of this mathematical foundation.

(1)              There are two worlds on a single planet – the Built Domain and the Natural Domain.

(2)              The Built Domain continues to consume agriculture and the Natural Domain with sprawl and annexation.

(3)              Human survival depends on shelter within the Built Domain.

(4)              The activities of growing populations depend on an increasing shelter supply.

(5)              Shelter is served within the Urban and Rural Phyla of the Built Domain by its Movement, Open Space, and Life Support Divisions.

(6)              Shelter is provided by 6 building design categories that can be mathematically defined.

(7)              Land consumption by a building design category is a function of the design specification values entered in its forecast model.

(8)              Building floor quantity options can be mathematically correlated with site plan design specifications to forecast gross building area alternatives for a given land area.

(9)              Gross building area divided by the buildable acres involved equals the shelter capacity per acre planned or present.

(10)            Shelter capacity times the impervious cover percentage planned or present on a given buildable land area divided by 10,000 equals the intensity present.

(11)            Intensity measurements and predictions can indicate excessive urban design alternatives.

(12)            Excessive intensity remains to be defined with case study measurements of existing building design category specifications.

(13)            Shelter capacity for activity has private financial and public economic development implications.

(14)            A city’s total expense per acre can be compared with the revenue it receives per census block, tract, or zoning district acre to determine financial stability and future urban design strategies.

(15)            Urban design strategies for shelter capacity, intensity, activity, and location can improve the revenue produced from areas within a city’s municipal area.

(16)            Shelter capacity forecasting combined with activity allocation in an urban design plan has economic implications that affect a city’s quality of life.

(17)            Existing building design specifications can be measured and evaluated using the topics listed in its related building category forecast model.

(18)            The composition and appearance of building mass, parking, pavement, and unpaved open space in a project area begins with the site planning and floor quantity specification values adopted as the urban design foundation for all ensuing design decisions.

(19)            Shelter project areas are cells with various amounts of shelter capacity, intensity, and activity that combine to form the Shelter Division of an urban anatomy.

(20)            The design specification measurements of an existing building are like the first blood pressure measurements in medicine. They require collection, correlation and evaluation to build knowledge of the capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance impact represented.

(21)        Sprawl is the pattern of a parasite withut a symbiotic future.

Observation

We have not, or have refused to recognize population growth as a threat to the preservation of agriculture and our source of life, the Natural Domain, even though we refer to this growth as “sprawl”. Sprawl is also a term associated in the minds of many with housing. It is actually unlimited land consumption for gross building area, often called annexation that can be used to shelter any activity. It is unlimited land consumption driven by population growth, deteriorating urban areas, shifting opinions, and use of inadequate forecasting tools that make it a threat to our source of life.

The need for shelter will continue to drive sprawl until we can correlate increasing demand within geographic areas limited to protect the natural domain without excessive shelter intensity. It has been an impossible goal because the shelter capacity of land and the intensity implications of optional, qualitative design decisions have resisted accurate mathematical definition and prediction. This has left population growth and sprawl as a debate without a frame of reference beyond conflicting opinion. I have created the measurement and prediction software of Shelter Capacity Evaluation to offer an alternative.

A Transition from Zoning to Urban Design

 

The word “balance” in city planning, urban design, landscape architecture, architectural design, and so on has been a goal without a definition and a criticism without adequate explanation. Zoning law attempted the first definition in an effort to protect the public, health, safety, and welfare. Its original intent was the separation of incompatible activity. It also recognized at the time that shelter intensity, intrusion, and dominance could combine to produce inadequate light, air, and ventilation that also threatened the public health, safety, and welfare. It was relatively easy to list activities permitted in a zone to avoid incompatibility. It has been impossible to consistently avoid excessive shelter intensity, intrusion, dominance and sprawl. The ingredients of intensity have never been comprehensively understood and their interaction has never been mathematically correlated. As a result, the laws produced without correlation have not been able to restrain excessive shelter intensity at one end of the spectrum, sprawl at the other, and annexation of agriculture and the Natural Domain for both.

The problem began with a failure to distinguish between zoning regulations that are independent and those that require mathematical correlation to achieve a common objective. Independent regulations do not depend on each other. As an example, you may not park an RV in your driveway for more than 24 hours and you may not erect a fence in your front yard. These are independent, cumulative requirements. The list goes on and continues to accumulate.

It has been a mistake to consider building height and parking quantity requirements as independent. In fact, it has been a mistake to consider any of the topics identified by a shaded cell in Table 1 as independent for the G1 Building Design Category. They must be mathematically correlated to define the gross building area potential of a given land area and the intensity produced. At the present time, we simply do ot understand what the intensity measurements in Col. G imply because we have not measured existing conditions. The failure to do so has wasted land and accounted for innumerable variance requests, public hearings, and contentious results seeking to reconcile the independent contradictions encountered. The result has often been excessive intensity, sprawl, and unlimited annexation of agriculture and the natural domain.

BACKGROUND

The items identified with a shaded cell in Table 1 are keystone urban design topics. Their values combine to determine the intensity, or “balance”, present or proposed. They do not lend themselves to independent regulation without first determining their mathematical correlation.

This is the first time I have stressed the word “correlation”, but I have discussed the building design categories, forecast models, architectural algorithms, and master equations that make it possible on many occasions. I’ll attempt to briefly summarize for any new readers by borrowing excerpts from previous essays and referring to Table 1.

 BUILDING DESIGN CATEGORIES

I’ve written about the six building design categories in the Shelter Division of the Urban and Rural Phyla of the Built Domain many times, and repeat them here simply as a reminder. They are: (1) G1 buildings with grade parking around, but not under, the building on the same premise; (2) G2 buildings with grade parking around and under the building; (3) S1 buildings with adjacent parking structure on the same premise; (4) S2 buildings served by underground parking structures; (5) S3 buildings with parking structures above grade under the building; (6) NP buildings with no parking required. I have also included a set of shelter capacity and property demand forecast models for independent parking garages (PG) in a book I will mention at the end of this essay, even though I don’t consider them buildings for human habitation unless dictated by an emergency.

DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS

I have included Table 1 in many essays and am repeating it here as an example of a complete, correlated set of design specification topics and values for the G1 Building Design Category.

There are 26 shaded cells in Table 1 for the G1.L1 forecast model. Each shaded value entered in a cell is correlated by an algorithm to produce the values needed by the master equation in cell J47. This equation produces the gross building area options in cells B44-B53. I mention this to make the point that regulating each shaded value independently is a hopeless exercise. The isolated values chosen will often conflict unless served by the mathematical correlation provided by the algorithm and master equation.

The shaded cells in Table 1 are not intended to replace an entire zoning ordinance. They identify the design specification topics that require correlation to lead G1 shelter capacity toward its intended intensity, activity, and economic development goals. (Keep in mind that the gross building area capacity of land may be occupied by any activity.)

Shelter intensity has been a term without adequate definition ever since its presence was recognized with instinct, intuition, awareness, and observation. Density and the Floor Area Ratio have been easy to measure but they have missed many of the controlling topics that must be correlated to provide shelter massing and intensity leadership. Every designer intuitively understands the principle of correlation. It is what he/she does. Unfortunately, the process can be too easily disrupted by independent zoning regulations that do not recognize the correlation required to consistently produce a balanced shelter pattern and composition to support a desired quality of life.

FORECAST PANEL

Gross building area prediction in cells B44-B52 is the first objective in the Forecast Panel of Table 1. They area keystone values that set the stage for all ensuing design decisions; and are the basis for shelter capacity calculation in cells F44-F53. (Shelter capacity equals gross building area divided by the buildable acres calculated from cell G10.) The other predictions in the forecast panel add essential design detail to the forecast.

IMPLICATIONS MODULE

The Implications Module measures the consequences of the values entered in the Design Specification Template of Table 1. The final intensity and dominance columns in the panel measure the results produced by the correlated values entered in the shaded cells of Table 1. These values make measurement, evaluation and knowledge accumulation feasible.

The shelter capacity, intensity, intrusion, and dominance impact of the gross building area options in cells B44-B53 is calculated with the equations on line 43 of the Implications Module. I am not providing an evaluation of these impact measurements since this is a hypothetical example; but measurement, evaluation, and accumulated knowledge is the leadership promise offered by this system of building classification, design specification, planning prediction, and implication measurement.

CONCLUSION

A zoning ordinance is a collection of laws governing permitted site plan, building height and occupant activity on land within a zoning district of a government jurisdiction. Its original intent was the separation of incompatible project activity that threatened the public health, safety, and welfare. It was also recognized at the time that shelter intensity, intrusion, and dominance could combine to produce inadequate light, air, and ventilation that also threatened the public health, safety, and welfare. It was relatively easy to list the activities permitted in a zone. It has been impossible to avoid excessive shelter intensity, intrusion, dominance and sprawl with our current measures of density and the floor area ratio.

The ingredients of intensity, intrusion, and dominance have never been comprehensively understood and the interaction of these ingredients has never been mathematically correlated. Table 1 was introduced to give you a glimpse of the topics and correlation involved for one building design category. The independent, incomplete zoning laws written without correlation have simply produced contradictions, variance requests, and excessive intensity at one end of the spectrum with sprawl at the other; and annexation of agriculture and the Natural Domain for both. These regulations are not correlated to lead project design decisions toward cumulative project compositions of building mass, parking, pavement, and unpaved open space that combine to produce economic stability and a balanced quality of life within geographic limits.

Architectural Awareness

I began as an architect and city planner believing that architectural appearance could trump the excessive intensity often permitted by local zoning ordinances since I was either: (1) stuck with the land a client owned and asked to make it work; or (2) asked to predict the development capacity of potential land areas that needed to work. I slowly realized that urban design leadership and economic development was not the goal. The comprehensive mathematical correlation required was not understood by the framers of these legal requirements. Zoning was still attempting to separate incompatible land uses and provide adequate light, air, and ventilation with incomplete, independent, and often conflicting design regulations. They were not a leadership guide with clear massing objectives linked to economic development goals with forecasting models that could predict alternatives and the intensity implied with a few keystrokes.

Unfortunately, urban design topics are not isolated but some are independent zoning topics. They all require mathematical correlation, however. This correlation will directly affect the activity and intensity we encourage as well as the financial stability we produce. We cannot lead the Shelter Division of our Built Domain toward any strategic objectives that preclude consumption of agriculture and the Natural Domain until we can predict the correlated implications of our shelter design decisions.

Zoning Laws

Zoning laws are independent and cumulative but not correlated at the present time. It is like a language limited by intransitive verbs. The design specifications and architectural algorithms of development capacity forecasting models are the transitive values needed to create an urban design language that can step from monosyllables to leadership and knowledge. For instance, building height regulations are not coordinated with parking requirements. Each is an ingredient. The conflict often generates time-consuming variance requests. Zoning laws simply do not recognize the mathematical correlation required to provide an adequate leadership foundation. The result has too often been excessive intensity, sprawl, and unlimited annexation of agriculture and the natural domain for more of the same.

Master Plans

A master plan is a two-dimensional plan created to separate incompatible land use activities. Zoning regulations amplify the intent of the plan. This includes three-dimensional requirements intended to provide adequate light, air, and ventilation to the street. The problem has been a lack of mathematical correlation that could lead to the physical, social, psychological, environment, and economic relationships implied by our historic reference to Built Domain “balance”.

Summary

“I have contributed the conceptual framework and technical information needed to continue this discussion in my book, “The Equations of Urban Design”. It is available on Amazon.com but the title may have been an unfortunate choice since the book is not consumed with equations. They are simply the foundation on which the conceptual, predictive, measurement, and evaluation format of an urban design language is based. I have also published over 200 essays regarding this topic at my blog www.wmhosack.blogspot.com. It has been visited by over 38,000 readers.

There is a lot of work to be done to reach the only goal that matters. Our habitat must cease to be a threat to ourselves and its source of life – the Natural Domain.”

Walter M. Hosack: September, 2023