Metrics are typically heard of in economics -- they are a way of measuring the health of the economy. Well, I propose in these blog I develop a metric (or even a few). I am not quite sure what that metric really is exactly, but I think I can start to chisel it down. For instance, when speaking on the human condition in the city, the first should be centered on the human, unabated, in the world. So no car or anything that serves as a condition other than the permanent existing fabric around a person. Le Corbusier has an interesting illustration that I like to think about whenever I go about the design of a space in a building. 'The Modular Man,' is just his illustration the concept of modular space creation based on the human form. This makes a lot of sense, but it is not typically what we do. The example I always think about is just a difference in units...why is three feet and not two feet 11 inches and a fraction? Well, if you were to argue that this slightly shorter distance is more humanistic, the argument usually loses to the ease of construction. In Britain, handles can be a meter above the grade. In the US, a yard. Why does this difference exist? Frankly, it is only because of the arbitrary setting of a unit of national measure. But looking at the typical human proportion can inform design with a lot more precision, as it is based on the conditions of people all around the world. Looking at proportions is nothing new of course, but the notion of making it an organic system based on the human seemed refreshing. I believe the span of a human's stride and what stature a person is walking with in a city is beneficial for a metric.
A Bone to Pick with Oversimplification of Maps
On a more urban scale, this humanistic metric can also tie in the infamous
designers '5 minute walk/10 minute walk' circles. Since cities must be occupied by individuals who not have always have access to mass transit (be it unavailable of unaffordable) it is most be a city that keeps the walker in mind. Usually we do it solely by looking at the circles on maps for .5 mile radii. That satisfies the lot, but not me. I instead would look at the quality of the space in the circle. I don't view it as clean cut. For instance (show drawing) let's say we start in the middle of Popkinapolis' Main Street and Osada Avenues. Well, if you were to go North or South along the avenue, sure, the .5 mile mark is pretty accurate. If you were to go East or West, again, sure, using the main axes will prove the walk to be efficient. But going on the diagonals, the other points will be somewhat tougher. To some this is splitting hairs, but try to cross the lake...that will cut the circle short. But this example is very simple...what about real cities? We all know that not all cities can be like Manhattan, with a strict grid, with almost guaranteed means of crossing any road at any time. The terrain is also relatively flat in New York. But try drawing a 10 minute map in Pittsburgh. That would be funny to someone in Architecture school who is just quickly plotting out diagrams. But the river, and then the other river, the limited access to the roads cars have access too, and of course, the precipitous inclines. All these prove to somehow throw a wrench into the 10 minute walk theory. It would be wholly inaccurate for someone to stand at the Point where the rivers converge and simply plot a circle. It would in turn be much more nebulous.
This more nebulous form that would be plotted would provide a lot more insight to the way it works on foot. And then I would propose a similar way of looking at vehicular traffic. If you were to look at the .5 mile/10 minute radius for people, with an average speed limit of 30mph in city centers, I would propose a blob to show the 1 minute circle of cars, looking into the traffic patterns and stoppages speed limits and all. The results in Pitt would probably be very interesting. Of course this would require much more in depth research.
Why is this important?
Because if you can see the variations in the shape, it will help you see the things that humans pick up invariably when living in the city. Things that come through conversations like "no, let's not go that way, because crossing walnut will take forever...the light never changes!" or "that's got a steep hill, let's go this way." While the grading would only have a slight impact on the 10 minute nebulous formation, which I will call the '10-minute cloud' from now on.
(300 series will be on discussions related to or about metrics of Urbanism)
No comments:
Post a Comment