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slowly consuming its source of life with an outdated definition of growth on a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
No comments:
Post a Comment