| |
In our research, the concept of density is used to construct a bridge between formal and quantitative properties of urban areas. Many of the established uses of density lack spatial precision and are unsatisfactorily for describing and prescribing urban form. Only when density is seen as a composite of aspects, such as intensity, compactness, height, and spaciousness can it be satisfactorily used to differentiate between urban fabrics, understand their characteristics, and design guidelines for future developments.
We choose to define density as a multi-variable phenomenon. The variables used are FSI, GSI, N, OSR and L. These express respectively built intensity, land coverage, network density, pressure on the non-built ground (or spaciousness) and the average building height of an area. These variables are closely related to each other and can therefore be integrated into one diagram, the Spacemate.
Empirical research has shown that a series of typology clusters – e.g. building allocation, urban intensity and typologies of open space - can be defined with the use of the Spacemate. In addition to describing fundamental properties of built space, Spacemate can also be used to investigate and describe the “behaviour”, or the performance, of urban areas with different density conditions. Examples of such performance indicators are parking, daylight access, privacy, and water management. Every performance indicator can be viewed as a descriptive layer that, when combined with the others, can be used to clarify different qualitative aspects of urban environments, as well as identifying conflicting programs. The urban practice could benefit from an instrument where main spatial qualities can be defined without fixing the program or the architectural image of a plan. At the same time, morphology as an academic discipline can profit from the spatial information produced by quantitative studies.
|
