From the earliest attempts to structure and organize human settlements in the image of divine, cosmic, or an ideal social order, the notion of urban design has deep historical roots. Down the ages, the design of cities has reflected edicts prescribed by the highest authorities, including priests, rulers, philosophers, and visionary thinkers. Many dynasties sought glory and fame in the design of their cities and—even in modern times—new cities have been designed and built as icons of independence and as symbols of progress. Thus, city design has played a crucial role in the construction of new capitals like Brasilia, Chandigarh, and Islamabad, and—more recently—in the dizzying new urban developments of Dubai and Shanghai.
In common parlance, urban design means the appearance, layout, and organization of the built form of large-scale urban environments. Urban design also implies a deliberate process to create functional, efficient, just, and aesthetically appealing urban spaces. Accordingly, as the editor of this new Routledge collection explains, ‘design’ is used simultaneously as both noun and verb, and the literature on urban design reflects this parallel possibility. As a noun, urban design is an object of historical, critical, comparative commentaries on the circumstances, values, and processes that lead to a particular urban design outcome and its human consequences. Scholarship here is critical and reflective of the past outcomes, and normative about future possibilities. The other literature that focuses on design as a process tends to emphasize the practice, methods, and the institutional frameworks that guide urban design and influence its outcome. While the former includes writings from social sciences and the humanities, the latter are drawn primarily from the disciplines of architecture, landscape architecture, and urban planning.
In the realm of practice, these three professions—architecture, landscape architecture, and urban planning—claim expertise and authority over the scope of urban design. While architects tend to focus on the design of the collective architectural forms of the built environment, landscape architects are apt to emphasize the form and processes of the natural environment, and nature more generally, in the design of large-scale built environments. Urban planners typically consider themselves responsible for defining the social, economic, and political imperatives of city design.
Although the professional identity of urban design by and large remains a shared enterprise, there is a growing sense that urban design has established an autonomous identity as body of knowledge. The scholarship pertaining to the appearance and design of cities, and the human consequences of the built environment has proliferated in recent years, not only within the professions but also in the disciplines of the social sciences, the humanities, and the environmental science and health fields. This scholarly enterprise includes critical, interpretive, and reflective work on the one hand, but also empirical findings about the nature of practice and human consequences of the built environment, on the other.
This new collection from Routledge’s Critical Concepts in Urban Studies series answers the urgent need for an authoritative reference work to help researchers and students navigate and make sense of this huge, rapidly growing, and complex corpus of literature. Moreover, the compilation reflects the many and varied sources of knowledge and influence: these expertly compiled major works chart, organize, and order not only the best output of academics and practitioners of urban design, but also include key writings on cities and urbanism from thinkers across the social sciences and humanities, and from other allied disciplinary traditions.
With a full index, together with a comprehensive introduction, newly written by the editor, which places the collected material in its historical and intellectual context, Urban Design is an essential work of reference. The collection will be particularly useful as an essential database allowing scattered and often fugitive material to be easily located. It will also facilitate rapid access to less familiar—and sometimes overlooked—texts. For researchers, students, practitioners, and policy-makers, it is an indispensable one-stop research and pedagogic resource.
Volume I: The Idea of Urban Design
Introduction to Volume I.
Part 1: The Visionary-Romantic Tradition
1. Ebenezer Howard, ‘Town-Country Magnet’, Garden Cities of Tomorrow (London: S. Sonnenschein & Co. Ltd., 1902), pp. 20–7.
2. Le Corbusier, ‘A Contemporary City’, City of Tomorrow and Its Planning (New York: Payson and Clark, 1929), pp. 163–78.
3. Jose Luis Sert, ‘Man and the City’, Can Our Cities Survive? (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1942), pp. 227–39.
4. Yi-Fu Tuan, ‘The Ideal City and Symbols of Transcendence’, Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perceptions, Attitudes, and Value (Englewoods Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 150–72.
5. Fred Koetter and Colin Rowe, ‘Utopia: Decline and Fall?’, Collage City (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1984), pp. 9–31.
6. Werner Hegemann, and Elbert Peets, ‘The Modern Revival Of Civic Art’, The American Vitruvius: An Architects’ Handbook of Civic Art (New York: Princeton University Press, 1988), pp. 7–28.
Part 2: Principles and Paradigms
7. Camillo Sitte, ‘Open Centers in Public Spaces’ and ‘The Enclosed Character of the Public Square’, The Art of Building Cities: City Building According to Its Artistic Fundamentals (New York: Reinhold, 1945), pp. 13–24.
8. Hans Blumenfeld, ‘Scale in Civic Design’, Town Planning Review, 1953, 24,1, 35–46.
9. Clarence Stein, ‘Radburn’, Toward New Towns in America (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1957), pp. 37–57, 67–73.
10. Ajay Garde, ‘Innovations in Urban Design and Urban Form: The Making of Paradigms and the Implications for Public Policy’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2008, 28, 1, 61–72.
11. Eugenie Birch, ‘From CIAM to CNU’, in T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.), Companion to Urban Design (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 9–29.
12. Robert Fishman, ‘The Open and the Enclosed: Shifting Paradigms in Modern Urban Design’, in T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.), Companion to Urban Design (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 30–40.
Part 3: The Normative Tradition
13. David A. Crane, ‘The City Symbolic’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1960, 26, 4, 280–92.
14. Stephen Carr and Kevin Lynch, ‘Where Learning Happens’, Daedalus, 1968, 97, 4, 1277–91.
15. Allan Jacobs and Donald Appleyard, ‘Toward an Urban Design Manifesto’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 1987, 53, 1, 112–20.
16. Henri Lefebvre, ‘The Right to the City’, Writings on Cities (trans. E. Kofman and E. Lebas) (Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1996), pp. 147–59.
17. Congress for the New Urbanism, ‘Charter of the New Urbanism’.
18. David Harvey, ‘The New Urbanism and the Communitarian Trap’, Harvard Design Magazine, 1997, Winter/Spring, 68–9.
19. Alex Krieger, ‘Whose Urbanism?, Architecture, 1998, 87, 11, 73–6.
20. Andreas Duany, ‘Our Urbanism’, Architecture, 1998, 87, 12, 37–40.
21. Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, ‘Addressing the Challenges of Urban Landscapes: Normative Goals for Urban Design’, Journal of Urban Design, 2012, 17, 4, 467–84.
Part 4: Theory
22. Christopher Alexander, ‘A City is Not a Tree’, Architectural Forum, 1965, 122, 1, 58–62.
23. Koichi Mera, ‘Consumer Sovereignty in Urban Design’, Town Planning Review, 1967, 37, 4, 305–12.
24. Denise Scott Brown ‘Team 10, Perspecta 10, and the Present State of Architectural Theory’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1967, 33, 1, 42–50.
25. Kevin Lynch, ‘Three Normative Theories’, Good City Form (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1984), pp. 73–98.
26. Ernest Sternberg, ‘An Integrative Theory of Urban Design’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 2000, 66, 3, 265–78.
27. Chris Webster, ‘Property Rights, Public Space and Urban Design’, Town Planning Review, 2007, 78, 1, 81–101.
28. Niraj Verma, ‘Urban Design: An incompletely Theorized Project’, in T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.), Companion to Urban Design (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 57–69.
29. Alexander Cuthbert, ‘Urban Design and Spatial Political Economy’, in T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.), Companion to Urban Design (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 84–96.
Part 5: Pedagogy and Perspectives
30. Ann Vernez-Moudon, ‘A Catholic Approach to Organizing What Urban Designers Should Know’, Journal of Planning Literature, 1992, 6, 4, 331–49.
31. Jonathan Lang, ‘The Nature Of Urban Design Today’, Urban Design: The American Experience (New York: Von Nostrand Reinhold, 1994), pp. 68–100.
32. Ali Madanipour, ‘Ambiguities of Urban Design’, Town Planning Review, 1997, 68, 3, 363–83.
33. Michael Southworth and Balaji Parthasarathy, ‘The Suburban Public Realm II: Eurourbanism, New Urbanism and the Implications for Urban Design in the American Metropolis’, Journal of Urban Design, 1997, 2, 1, 9–34.
34. Aseem Inam, ‘Meaningful Urban Design: Teleological/Catalytic/Relevant’, Journal of Urban Design, 2010, 7, 1, 35–58.
35. Michael Gunder, ‘Commentary: Is Urban Design Still Urban Planning?, An Exploration and Response’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2011, 31, 2, 184–95.
36. Tridib Banerjee, ‘Commentary: Whither Urban Design: Inside or Outside Planning?’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2011, 31, 2, 208–10.
37. Frederick Steiner, ‘Commentary: Planning and Design—Oil and Water or Bacon and Eggs?’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2011, 31, 2, 213–16.
38. Emily Talen, ‘Commentary: Is Urban Design Still Urban Planning?’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2011, 31, 2, 211–12.
Volume II: Urban Form and Urbanism
Introduction to Volume II.
Part 6: Documentary-Archetypal Inquiries
39. Kevin Lynch, ‘The Pattern of the Metropolis’, Daedalus, 1961, 90, 1, 79–98.
40. Rob Krier, ‘Typological and Morphological Elements of the Concept of Urban Space’, Urban Space (New York: Rizzoli, 1979), pp. 15–62.
41. Johann F. Geist, ‘A Typology of the Arcade’, Arcades, The History of a Building Type (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1983), pp. 91–120.
42. Bill Hillier, ‘The Architecture of the Urban Object’, Ekistics, 1989, 334, 5–21.
43. Spiro Kostof, ‘Public Places’, The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1991), pp. 123–64.
Part 7: Experiential-Behavioural Observations
44. Kevin Lynch, ‘City Form’, The Image of the City (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1960), pp. 91–117.
45. Kevin Lynch, ‘The City as Environment’, Scientific American, 1965, 213, 3, 209–19.
46. Amos Rapoport and Robert E. Kantor, ‘Complexity and Ambiguity in Environmental Design’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1967, 33, 4, 210–21.
47. Stanley Milgram, ‘The Experience of Living in Cities’, Science, 1970, 167, 3924, 1461–8.
Part 8: Political Economic Perspectives
48. Henri Lefebvre, ‘Plan of the Present Work’, The Production of Space (London: Blackwell, 1991), pp. 30–3, 36–46.
49. Sharon Zukin, ‘Market, Place, and Landscape’, Landscapes of Power: From Detroit to Disney World (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1991), pp. 3–23.
50. David Harvey, ‘The Spaces of Utopia’, Spaces of Hope (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000), pp. 133–73, 179–81.
Part 9: Notions of Place
51. Harvey Cox, ‘Restoration of a Sense of Place: A Theological Reflection on the Visual Environment’, Ekistics, 1968, 25, 422–4.
52. Edward Relph, ‘On the Identity of Places’, Place and Placelessness (London: Pion, 1976), pp. 44–62.
53. Ray Oldenburg, ‘The Character of Third Places’, Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community (New York: Paragon House, 1989), pp. 20–42.
Part 10: Critiques and Reflections
54. Martin Krieger, ‘What’s Wrong with Plastic Trees?’, Science, 1973, 179, 4072, 446–55.
55. Robert Venturi and Denise Scott-Brown, ‘A Significance for A & P Parking Lots, or Learning from Las Vegas’, Learning from Las Vegas (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1977), pp. 3–35.
56. James Holston, ‘The Death of Street’, The Modernist City: An Anthropological Critique of Brasilia (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1989), pp. 101–44.
57. Michael Sorkin, ‘Introduction’, in Sorkin (ed.), Variations on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space (New York: Hill and Wang, 1992), pp. xi–xv.
58. James C. Scott, ‘The High Modernist City: An Experiment and a Critique’, Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998), pp. 103–32.
Volume III: Scope and Scale of Urban Design
Introduction to Volume III.
Part 11: The Visual Tradition
59. Gordon Cullen, ‘General Studies’, Townscape (New York: Reinhold, 1961), pp. 97–154.
60. Philip Thiel, ‘A Sequence-Experience Notation for Architectural and Urban Spaces’, Town Planning Review, 1961, 32, 1, 33–52.
61. Kevin Lynch, Donald Appleyard, and John Myer, ‘Methods of Design’, A View from the Road (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1964), pp. 38–57.
Part 12: Representation and Simulation
62. Lisa Peattie, ‘Representation’, Planning: Rethinking Ciudad Guyana (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1987), pp. 111–37.
63. Jean Baudrillard, ‘Simulacra and Simulation’, in M. Poster (ed.), Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988), pp. 166–84.
64. Klaus Kunzmann, ‘Venice, Venice, and Venice: Three Realities of the European cities’, in M. Koll-Schretzenmayr, M. Keiner, and M. Nussbaumer (eds.), The Real and Virtual Worlds of Spatial Planning (Berlin: Springer, 2004), pp. 31–41.
Part 13: Regional and Metropolitan Design
65. Ian McHarg, ‘The River Basin’, Design with Nature (Garden City, NY: Doubleday/Natural History Press, 1971), pp. 127–51.
66. Michael Hough, ‘Principles for Regional Design’, Out of Place: Restoring Identity to the Regional Landscape (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), pp. 179–211.
Part 14: City Design
67. Gordon Cullen, ‘The Ninth Delhi’, Architectural Review, 1960, 128, 110–17.
68. Jonathan Barnett, ‘Designing Cities Without Designing Buildings’, Urban Design as Public Policy: Practical Methods For Improving Cities (New York: Architectural Record Books, 1974), pp. 29–67.
69. Michael Southworth, ‘Theory and Practice of Contemporary Urban Design: A Review of Urban Design Plans in The United States’, Town Planning Review, 1989, 60, 4, 369–402.
Part 15: District/Neighbourhood Design
70. Clarence Perry, ‘Why a Neighborhood Plan and the Neighborhood Unit’, Neighborhood and Community Plan. Regional Survey, Vol. VII: The Neighborhood Unit (New York: Regional Plan Association, 1929), pp. 25–44.
71. American Public Health Association, Committee on the Hygiene of Housing, ‘Basic Requirements for Site Selection’, Planning the Neighborhood (Chicago: Public Administration Service, 1948), pp. 1–11.
72. Oscar Newman, ‘Defensible Space’, Defensible Space (New York: Macmillan, 1972), pp. 1–21.
73. Allan Jacobs, ‘Making Great Streets’, Great Streets (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1993), pp. 269–92.
Part 16: The Public Space
74. Michael Walzer, ‘Pleasures and Costs of Urbanity’, Dissent, 1986, 33, 4, 470–5.
75. William H Whyte, ‘The Design of Spaces’, City: Rediscovering the Center (New York: Doubleday, 1988), pp. 103–31.
76. Trevor Broddy, ‘Underground and Overhead: Building the Analogous City’, in M. Sorkin (ed.), Variations on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space (New York: Hill and Wang, 1992), pp. 123–53.
77. Setha Low, ‘Spatializing Culture: Social Production and Social Construction of Public Space’, On The Plaza: The Politics of Public Space and Culture (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2000), pp. 127–53.
78. Tridib Banerjee, ‘The Future of Public Space: Beyond Invented Streets and Reinvented Places’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 2001, 67, 1, 9–24.
79. Margaret Kohn, ‘The Public Forum Doctrine’, Brave New Neighborhoods: The Privatization of Public Space (New York: Routledge, 2004), pp. 47–67.
80. Matthew Carmona, ‘Contemporary Public Space: Critique and Classification’, Journal of Urban Design, 2010, 15, 1, 123–48.
Volume IV: Challenges and New Directions
Introduction to Volume IV.
Part 17: Design Implementation and Guidance
81. Kevin Lynch and Gary Hack, ‘The User’, Site Planning, 3rd edn. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1984), pp. 67–105.
82. Matthew Carmona, ‘Decoding Design Guidance’, in T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.), Companion to Urban Design (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 288–303.
83. John Punter, ‘Developing Urban Design as Public Policy: Best Practice Principles for Design Review and Development’, Journal of Urban Design, 2007, 12, 2, 167–202.
Part 18: Sustainability
84. Anne Spirn, ‘Designing the Urban Ecosystem’, The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human Design (New York: Basic Books, 1984), pp. 242–62.
85. Andreas Duany and Emily Talen, ‘Transect Planning’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 2002, 68, 3, 245–66.
86. Cliff Ellis, ‘The New Urbanism: Critiques and Rebuttals’, Journal of Urban Design, 2002, 7, 3, 261–91.
87. Yosef Rafeq Jabareen, ‘Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models, and Concepts’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2006, 26, 1, 38–52.
88. Mohsen Mostafavi, ‘Why Ecological Urbanism? Why Now?’, Harvard Design Magazine, 2010, Spring/Summer, 32, 124–35.
Part 19: Historic Preservation
89. Kevin Lynch, ‘Presence of the Past’, What Time Is This Place? (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1974), pp. 29–64.
90. Dolores Hayden, ‘Urban Landscape History: The Sense of Place and the Politics of Space’, The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1996) pp. 14–43.
91. Klaus Hartung, ‘The Hidden Whole: On Figure-Ground Plan, Urban Demolition, and Urban Reconstruction’, in H. Stimmann (ed.), The City in Black: The Physiognomy of Central Berlin in Figure-Ground Plan and Plan (Berlin: Nicolai, 2002), pp. 49–69.
92. Michael Hebbert, ‘Street as a Locus of Collective Memory’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 2004, 23, 4, 581–96.
Part 20: Multiculturalism
93. Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, ‘Urban Form and Social Context: Cultural Differentiation in the Uses of Urban Parks’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 1995, 14, 2, 89–102.
94. Leone Sandercock, ‘When Strangers Become Neighbors: Managing Cities of Difference’, Planning Theory and Practice, 2000, 1, 13–30.
95. Ash Amin, ‘The Good City’, Urban Studies, 2006, 43, 5/6, 1009–23.
Part 21: Healthy Cities
96. Reid Ewing, Susan Handy, Ross C. Brownson, Otto Clemente, and Emily Watson, ‘Identifying and Measuring Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability’, Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 2006, 3, S223–39.
97. Daniel A. Rodriguez, Asad J. Khattack, and Kelly R. Evenson, ‘Can New Urbanism Encourage Physical Activity?’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 2006, 72, 1, 43–54.
98. Lawrence D. Frank, James F. Sallis, Terry L. Conway, James E. Chapman, Brian E. Saelens, and William Bachman, ‘Many Pathways from Land Use to Health: Associations Between Neighborhood Walkability and Active Transportation, Body Mass Index, and Air Quality’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 2006, 72, 1, 75–87.
99. Kristen Day, Marlon Boarnet, Marcial Alfonzo, and Ann Forsyth, ‘The Irvine-Minnesota Inventory to Measure Built Environments’, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2006, 30, 2, 144–52.