The shelter capacity of land combines with occupant activities to determine the economic stability and social potential of a city.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment