Merriam-Webster defines intensity as: “the magnitude of a quantity (such as force or energy) per unit (as of area, charge, mass, or time)”.
When this definition is applied to shelter, “magnitude”
means the quantities of gross building area (GBA), parking, and miscellaneous
pavement present, planned, or predicted in square feet on a given property. The
unpaved open space that remains is an offsetting influence. The building
footprint, parking, and miscellaneous pavement area is referred to as the project’s
“impervious area”. When considering
shelter, the “unit” in Webster’s
definition of intensity is the buildable land area in acres (BLAC) devoted to
the project, including all remaining unpaved open space, except for future
expansion area (EXP).
INT
= SFAC * IMP% / 10,000
Since shelter capacity (SFAC) is equal to (GBA/BLAC), the
shelter intensity equation is significantly influenced by the square feet of
building mass present on a given buildable land area. It is easy enough to
measure gross building area (GBA) on existing property and to measure the
shelter capacity (SFAC) of a given buildable land area (BLAC). When the
impervious cover percentage (IMP%) is also measured, the intensity present can
be calculated.
It is another matter to predict the capacity of land to
accommodate gross building area. There are six building design category choices
available and each involves a separate design specification template. It is now
possible to calculate these predictions, but it remains impossible to ensure that
the shelter capacity and intensity levels predicted will not produce excessive
intensity. There has simply been no measurable and predictive format for
research, knowledge accumulation, and leadership direction regarding shelter
capacity, intensity, activity, and economic potential for every present and
future parcel in a city’s anatomy.
Most cities will continue to struggle with planning and
economic development until they have a clear understanding of the productivity
of land and activity in their jurisdiction at the parcel, block, or zone level.
At this point, they will be able to respond with informed urban design plans that
can produce physical context and economic stability reflecting improved measurement,
prediction, evaluation, and leadership direction.
Shelter capacity forecast models can predict the full range
of gross building area options available for a given land area, but many are excessively
intense and undesirable. This consideration will be at the heart of urban
design evaluation and knowledge accumulation. Improvement will depend on the
ability to make informed choices based on the implications predicted; the
ability to correlate shelter capacity with the economic potential of occupant
activity options; and the ability to assemble these choices into a complete,
corelated plan that can be adjusted with continuing information sharing, data
management, mapping evaluation, and urban design prediction.
For instance, I have mentioned in more than one essay that
the average revenue per buildable acre of taxable activity is a function of its
shelter capacity, intensity, and activity. The average revenue from all such acres should be equal to or greater
than a city’s total expense per taxable acre. If it isn’t, budget reductions
enter the picture.
I doubt that any city can assess the relationship of shelter
capacity and intensity to financial stability at the parcel level of its
anatomy with any degree of accuracy. It does not have the information sharing
agreements, data management systems, and mapping format needed to understand, let
alone evaluate and plan for the future of available land that will contribute to
the revenue per buildable acre it needs over time.
At the heart of all this is a city’s mathematical
understanding of its current physical plan and its ability to improve the
economic productivity of this land. Understanding the adjacency relationships
addressed by zoning is not enough. A city’s productivity improvement will
depend on the relationships of shelter capacity, intensity, activity, and
location on every parcel within its boundaries. The challenge is to understand
these mathematical relationships so that they can be managed to achieve
financial stability without excessive intensity on the land it governs.
In other words, the
allocation of municipal land for capacity, intensity, and activity determines
the total average revenue received by local government from the context created.
A city’s ability to balance this equation at the parcel level of planning and
urban design will determine its success in learning to live within financially
stable, sustainable, and beneficial geographic limits.
If “parcel level” threatens
your concept of privacy, then substitute the words, block, tract, or zone.
These are the cellular levels of urban anatomy that must be mathematically understood
before they can be organized to perform and produce a financially stable and sustainable
anatomy that offers a desirable quality of life.
The scope is too great to
cover in an essay. I’m including a revised Table of Contents for my book, “The
Equations of Urban Design”, to outline the leadership language suggested for
shelter capacity evaluation and direction toward financial stability and a
desirable quality of life. The first eight chapters classify the building
design categories involved. The master equations derived and associated with
each chapter predict the gross building area potential of a given buildable
land area based on the values entered in its design specification template, and
the floor quantity chosen for evaluation.
The objective of a chapter
is explained by the “Given” and “To Find” statement listed. The chapter must be
read to understand the relationship of forecast models, design specification templates,
and value entry options to the implications predicted.
Chapter 9-17 address the building
design categories in Chapters 2-6 when they are occupied by various forms of
residential activity. The combination of a building design category and
activity topic is referred to as an activity group. In this case the building
design categories and residential activities in Chapters 9-17 are collectively
referred to as the Residential Activity Group. The objective of a master
equation in these chapters remains listed in the “Given” and “To Find”
statements associated with each chapter.
The point in these chapters
is that a gross building area prediction for a given buildable land area and
design specification is constant, but its occupant capacity is affected by the
unique requirements of the activity involved.
Generic gross building area
options, predictions, and implications represent strategic urban design
decisions with economic implications influenced by their occupant activity.
They require urban arrangement like pieces on a chessboard. These are the
choices that establish the foundation of decisions on which cities are built.
Mathematical urban design recommendations
that address shelter capacity, intensity, and activity decisions throughout a
city can add desirable context among buildings to the scope of their potential
contributions to its financial welfare and quality of life. It is a
mathematical opportunity and potential leadership language at the present time.
If you believe that we must learn to live within sustainable geographic limits
that protect our source of life, you may agree that shelter capacity and
intensity evaluation, or Tegimenics, is a topic that should be pursued.
Walter M. Hosack, December
2025
No comments:
Post a Comment