Theory of City Form 201 Literature referred to in Tuesday Feb2amp class

KLynch The Image of the City MIT Press 1960 KLynch Theory of Good City Form MIT Press 1981 Reconsidering The Image of the City Grounds for Utopia and Temporary Parltdise (San Diego) in TBanerjee and M Southworth City Sense and City Design MIT Press 1990

C Alexander A New Theory of Urban Design Oxford U Press 1988 C Alexander The Nature of Order Vol 1-4 Center for Environmental Structure Berkeley 2002-2005

JHabraken Transformation of the Site Atwater 1988 JHabraken The Grunsveld Variations MIT Dept of Architecture1981 JHabraken The Control of Complexity Places Vol4 No2

LMartin and LMarch Urban Space and Structures Cambridge U Press 1972 LMarch and PSteadman The Geometry of Environment MIT Press 1974 P Steadman Architectural Morphology Pion 1983

PCowan Studies in the Growth Change and Ageing of Buildings Transactions of the Bartlett Society Vol 1 P Cowan and J Nicholson Growth and Change in Hospitals Vol 3 JWeeks Indeterminate Architecture Vol 2 G Aylward Towards a Theory for Describing and Designing Adaptability in the Built Environment Vol 7

M Zafeiradou In the Quest of an Adaptable Built Form Studying Transformations in the MIT Campus MIT SMArchS Thesis 2003

W Hillier and JHanson The Social Logic of Space Cambridge UPress 1984 W Hillier Space Is the Machine Cambridge U Press 1996

M Batty and P Longley Fractal Cities A Geometry of Form and Function Academic Press 1994 Anas A R Arnott et al (1998) Urban Spatial Structure Journal of Economic Literature XXXVI (September 1998) pp 1426-1464 Crucitti P V Latora et al (2006) Centrality in Networks of Urban Streets Chaos 16(1) Xie F and D Levinson (2007) Measuring the structure of road networks Geographical Analysis July 2007

1

11330 THEORY OF crTY FORM Spring 1978

SOME ~lOnS ON ADAPTABILITY

General definition the future cost discounted to the present of adaptshy1ngthe spatial system to possible new future functions In the general form it is an 1mpossi~le measure since we hsve not specified CC3tS to whom nor what functions nor when nor to whlt level of perfor-lance

More li~ted definitions

1 bull Ada~tab1lity is a =easure of the costs to so~oue at some specific fushyture date discuntedto the present reqtlired to adapt a site to some defined ch=ge at some level of perfor=ce such as adjusting it to a cnrked incr~ase or decre~$e in th~ intensity of its present use or converting it to th~ moet l~~ely reploc~~e~t activity ~nere the costs or the actors o~ the ch~ges are multi-~enbior~l there wll be multishyple 1ndices riices might be eighteci or rgtke into aCCOVl the proshyabillt of the futun cunse or the degree ot benefit gained bi the adaptation Tl~s ~e3S~re relies on gocd pr~dicticn

2 A more restricted llleiSure is mllitulabilit1 in wllich ~e con~iier cllly those changes in the 8pati~1 system which can be achiev~d by individuale or scalI groups 4t low ~ost in ~ short tica wih little polii~al lever~ge Givt=n sF-ec~ed lcits of this 1cillc the measur~s woulmiddotj be the degree of change that could b~ achieved under tnose lillits ie the nUCIber of new fUlcions that could or could not be ecco=ciated the increase in intensity th~t eould be accepted etc

3 Another measure i~ re~-sbiltj or the cost of reurning the sitElt to lame previous condition (Istural or uroccupied preampur-aly) Where it could be held in rcsc-ve middotor czveloped in a new way The uatural condition gust be carefully defined to ensur~ that it will itself bG highly ~daptable

If Still ana the mcasure is resilience in whih a middot specified ileyere disshyruption is igposed on the spatial system (earthquake fire attack plag~e ab~ndonm~nt ~nd rc-cccupation etc) and the Measure i~ the speed with which fuction can be re-cstablihed at previoUl levels of perforace without exceeding a given rate of C03t or vice versa

middotthe coat of restoration witinn a certOlin t~ Soial middot resomiddotlrcel ~y b~ more critical here than spatial ones

S A final ~easure is actually quite different innov~tiveness or the Ability of a spati~land institutional syste~ to s~nerOlte test rud facilitate new cnvi~on=ntu nnci beh1vicral possibilities This is Much vaguar pehapa gore i~port~t and nct further considered her~

CorllCCeiml to othe V~ prasu=bly aditility is valuble for sushyvival for cn~~l for mantaiD~n3 f~tue choice 0 reduci~~ fu~~r~ cost end aloo for lnccasn6 ~rele~ choi~ A manipulable plae CDn b~ conciucve to parc~~ton amp1d develc=nt It UGuclly conshyflict) with efficenc cpound procition end per1ps at ti~s ~th fit

2

11330 THEORY OF crTY FORM Spring 1978

SOME ~lOnS ON ADAPTABILITY

General definition the future cost discounted to the present of adaptshy1ngthe spatial system to possible new future functions In the general form it is an 1mpossi~le measure since we hsve not specified CC3tS to whom nor what functions nor when nor to whlt level of perfor-lance

More li~ted definitions

1 bull Ada~tab1lity is a =easure of the costs to so~oue at some specific fushyture date discuntedto the present reqtlired to adapt a site to some defined ch=ge at some level of perfor=ce such as adjusting it to a cnrked incr~ase or decre~$e in th~ intensity of its present use or converting it to th~ moet l~~ely reploc~~e~t activity ~nere the costs or the actors o~ the ch~ges are multi-~enbior~l there wll be multishyple 1ndices riices might be eighteci or rgtke into aCCOVl the proshyabillt of the futun cunse or the degree ot benefit gained bi the adaptation Tl~s ~e3S~re relies on gocd pr~dicticn

2 A more restricted llleiSure is mllitulabilit1 in wllich ~e con~iier cllly those changes in the 8pati~1 system which can be achiev~d by individuale or scalI groups 4t low ~ost in ~ short tica wih little polii~al lever~ge Givt=n sF-ec~ed lcits of this 1cillc the measur~s woulmiddotj be the degree of change that could b~ achieved under tnose lillits ie the nUCIber of new fUlcions that could or could not be ecco=ciated the increase in intensity th~t eould be accepted etc

3 Another measure i~ re~-sbiltj or the cost of reurning the sitElt to lame previous condition (Istural or uroccupied preampur-aly) Where it could be held in rcsc-ve middotor czveloped in a new way The uatural condition gust be carefully defined to ensur~ that it will itself bG highly ~daptable

If Still ana the mcasure is resilience in whih a middot specified ileyere disshyruption is igposed on the spatial system (earthquake fire attack plag~e ab~ndonm~nt ~nd rc-cccupation etc) and the Measure i~ the speed with which fuction can be re-cstablihed at previoUl levels of perforace without exceeding a given rate of C03t or vice versa

middotthe coat of restoration witinn a certOlin t~ Soial middot resomiddotlrcel ~y b~ more critical here than spatial ones

S A final ~easure is actually quite different innov~tiveness or the Ability of a spati~land institutional syste~ to s~nerOlte test rud facilitate new cnvi~on=ntu nnci beh1vicral possibilities This is Much vaguar pehapa gore i~port~t and nct further considered her~

CorllCCeiml to othe V~ prasu=bly aditility is valuble for sushyvival for cn~~l for mantaiD~n3 f~tue choice 0 reduci~~ fu~~r~ cost end aloo for lnccasn6 ~rele~ choi~ A manipulable plae CDn b~ conciucve to parc~~ton amp1d develc=nt It UGuclly conshyflict) with efficenc cpound procition end per1ps at ti~s ~th fit

2

11 330 Theory of City Form Adaptability -- 3

Costs

Adaptability usually entails substantial economic costs which may in part by circumvented byus~ng cheap excess capacity (unserviced open space for exaple or reservoirs of waste) or features which are useful for other reasons (good cOlllllunications for eXaIlple) But recycling growth room mobile and temporary facilities and good info~tion planning and control all impose present costs The discount rate is crucial to the evaluation of adaptability (although planners should have a professional bias toward a low discount rate) Effective adaptability depends on good prediction (of what i8 likely to change or of what is likely to be valuable in the future for example) and on good disseoination of inforcation so that decisionshymakers can take advantage of the adaptability that in fact exists Ie the perception of adaptability is in itself important (and perceived adaptshyability may have psychological value even if never used) Prediction and dissemination both entail cost of their o~m On the other hand there are distinct benefits in adapting or costs in not doing 60 The costs and beneshyfitswill accrue to differe~t people of course

There may also be social political and psychological coots apparent waste disorientation uncertainty a characterless or unstimulating environment An extremely adaptable or responsive environ=nt would prably be intolerable The stability of the large physical environment ~~y be one of its assets Design stratcgies may reduce SOCl of the political IILd psychological costs of adaptability (the location of pe=ncnt sY-bolic landarks in a shifting IBldscape for elcaICplc) In sce c~es it =y be an objectie to reduce acaptability ie to icpose arbitrary c~rtainty by increasing the cost of future adaptation (lOforevtr wild lO ) or to reduce future choices to a few manageable possibilities

Systematic m2asu=cs of adapr~bility could be useful in programming in de9ign in cost-benepoundit evaluation in managecent in mskin decisione tlteasurcs are likcl 0 i~ used Ll an incremental 01 (which alternative has the more adaptability) or in satisficing (the ccst of adaptation must never be higher than SOlre arbit-ary figure or a certain degree of indishyvidual manipulation must always ~e possible) Pcgrams might state the maximum allowable cost for adapting to some likely succcssor use or for restoring the site to its previcus condition Or there might be more speshycific physical rules ie to every unit of 1000 square feet of floor apace it must be possible to ~ake a 50~ addition without disruting any other area Random perturbations might be used to test simulated proposals

Kevin Lynch May 1976

3

4

1V-o ~Y~~ hi) 1 o~02)V-~jv-POY~ (1 (r ) -t~ U i

I I L=tlr7k1r~~ A~V-1

~iJ J li12p7J rr~t-sect-t7J em (lYl fn I

PI 7rr~rrZO 117(671 1 h)lO

-imp r -w -Jr7l~ v UJ-~) Cr~ Af) -n ~- ~ (if 0 f I t 1

7 rrJ-t Y Uv ni) tYZrlvi)-vI~qV- r)dt 12 ofl7 i~1K~ l

7ff VJrvYeJTfJ) Vrgt--mtry

7Y~JJrf a77iJCrJ ~ 7JJ ~m --rcnt) vy-c -I l U f U ftf (I

--~ cf-TfYu em ~Jf~rr1~oj)l rmpo J-Y-P7J1 7gt~7P~VJI Wf Hy- r~fi-C~ i ry ln~tT+ -1J~n7J nG ()rl ~~t~~r VIY~A-1T~ )

~gtyV1 vi

~Yt ~i)V ~ -1 t~YJ7rrV(J ~~ fir) Y0ffj-19 7p~~nrOJ Pi7p~ raquo111 ---gtfjf ffY I ~~UO0)

~~YY0r f ~POr1n ~+7rr CY)I (CO t J ~l~v 1-1J1ircl p-~1

~-G~~~rr 7Jl-r~P-x~ r--~~ -Vi)A )

( v~i) (J

5

[L

-~~-l-yy J) j-3~yrG7J r JPP Yu V ~1 Tr~~J--~

r~~cYyenllJl 1) ttfm ( W~ bull v --f4(J f ~ -JJ~ I_~

rJ~ -flfrd71 79O o~ rd-~7~ 7 rY

-llJl5t 0rzPYT )( (rt--VJVlh -n I V1~py f~-ryn(I- -J[ r-l~o 1- I ~-1-IYlJ

r~Y1rv-r gtYJ) -(f--~~1PJ r~pm (J ~cr1euro-r pdgt)3~7i Jrf-0YVgt7J1 ~ rG~ lr-o57~ r3)~v AIArc ~lJolJ-

~t31 ()ojYVn7~ 1 a Y(1 -vr m-l)9i] tY-- t7) YYV fJ )(7 -0 v t U U -to U

()~~ 72t~rf 2A~ )r~fltV- (0 ry) vYgty [JI~ - l rrll ~ -[I fJ~ -rxl0 P P vyiJ) A-ylc)-J 0r n o)rygt-t----VJi

J ~ (I f -(f-u u ~ U 0-r

P-F7rJ)-u)~-o~W Jt-wW]f) nA (sshyt2ift

7 r r ~1l~)f-t)[I rrP~7 gt70 31J tf(f)

~P7V Y 7JrrO PJyr-n-f) ~ vYOct) CJ-middott i 1 -J6

- l ~ A TI ( amp u 1 r-r---rr-r ( ~JfJ-rnt 5hUo1m+v~rl71c rG1 r ~YP~0 i ~

)--(~07 c-~77~ oir) frvj(P 14YY ()11 ( ~) () ver ~ C1i U I ~ P (J v k~ - J ~ l~DJ-J ~I -) afl~ YVJ ~ Y1iI7R -t bull r)yn If U

r

1

I I

-t

I

I

1

r

I

I

lt

The Grunsfeld Variations

Site Plan o 200 shy

Image courtesy of the MIT Dept of Architecture 6~~~I ffi

100 600 1000 North

MIT OpenCourseWarehttpocwmitedu

4241J 11330J Theory of City FormSpring 2013

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use visit httpocwmiteduterms

4

1V-o ~Y~~ hi) 1 o~02)V-~jv-POY~ (1 (r ) -t~ U i

I I L=tlr7k1r~~ A~V-1

~iJ J li12p7J rr~t-sect-t7J em (lYl fn I

PI 7rr~rrZO 117(671 1 h)lO

-imp r -w -Jr7l~ v UJ-~) Cr~ Af) -n ~- ~ (if 0 f I t 1

7 rrJ-t Y Uv ni) tYZrlvi)-vI~qV- r)dt 12 ofl7 i~1K~ l

7ff VJrvYeJTfJ) Vrgt--mtry

7Y~JJrf a77iJCrJ ~ 7JJ ~m --rcnt) vy-c -I l U f U ftf (I

--~ cf-TfYu em ~Jf~rr1~oj)l rmpo J-Y-P7J1 7gt~7P~VJI Wf Hy- r~fi-C~ i ry ln~tT+ -1J~n7J nG ()rl ~~t~~r VIY~A-1T~ )

~gtyV1 vi

~Yt ~i)V ~ -1 t~YJ7rrV(J ~~ fir) Y0ffj-19 7p~~nrOJ Pi7p~ raquo111 ---gtfjf ffY I ~~UO0)

~~YY0r f ~POr1n ~+7rr CY)I (CO t J ~l~v 1-1J1ircl p-~1

~-G~~~rr 7Jl-r~P-x~ r--~~ -Vi)A )

( v~i) (J

5

[L

-~~-l-yy J) j-3~yrG7J r JPP Yu V ~1 Tr~~J--~

r~~cYyenllJl 1) ttfm ( W~ bull v --f4(J f ~ -JJ~ I_~

rJ~ -flfrd71 79O o~ rd-~7~ 7 rY

-llJl5t 0rzPYT )( (rt--VJVlh -n I V1~py f~-ryn(I- -J[ r-l~o 1- I ~-1-IYlJ

r~Y1rv-r gtYJ) -(f--~~1PJ r~pm (J ~cr1euro-r pdgt)3~7i Jrf-0YVgt7J1 ~ rG~ lr-o57~ r3)~v AIArc ~lJolJ-

~t31 ()ojYVn7~ 1 a Y(1 -vr m-l)9i] tY-- t7) YYV fJ )(7 -0 v t U U -to U

()~~ 72t~rf 2A~ )r~fltV- (0 ry) vYgty [JI~ - l rrll ~ -[I fJ~ -rxl0 P P vyiJ) A-ylc)-J 0r n o)rygt-t----VJi

J ~ (I f -(f-u u ~ U 0-r

P-F7rJ)-u)~-o~W Jt-wW]f) nA (sshyt2ift

7 r r ~1l~)f-t)[I rrP~7 gt70 31J tf(f)

~P7V Y 7JrrO PJyr-n-f) ~ vYOct) CJ-middott i 1 -J6

- l ~ A TI ( amp u 1 r-r---rr-r ( ~JfJ-rnt 5hUo1m+v~rl71c rG1 r ~YP~0 i ~

)--(~07 c-~77~ oir) frvj(P 14YY ()11 ( ~) () ver ~ C1i U I ~ P (J v k~ - J ~ l~DJ-J ~I -) afl~ YVJ ~ Y1iI7R -t bull r)yn If U

r

1

I I

-t

I

I

1

r

I

I

lt

The Grunsfeld Variations

Site Plan o 200 shy

Image courtesy of the MIT Dept of Architecture 6~~~I ffi

100 600 1000 North

MIT OpenCourseWarehttpocwmitedu

4241J 11330J Theory of City FormSpring 2013

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use visit httpocwmiteduterms

( v~i) (J

5

[L

-~~-l-yy J) j-3~yrG7J r JPP Yu V ~1 Tr~~J--~

r~~cYyenllJl 1) ttfm ( W~ bull v --f4(J f ~ -JJ~ I_~

rJ~ -flfrd71 79O o~ rd-~7~ 7 rY

-llJl5t 0rzPYT )( (rt--VJVlh -n I V1~py f~-ryn(I- -J[ r-l~o 1- I ~-1-IYlJ

r~Y1rv-r gtYJ) -(f--~~1PJ r~pm (J ~cr1euro-r pdgt)3~7i Jrf-0YVgt7J1 ~ rG~ lr-o57~ r3)~v AIArc ~lJolJ-

~t31 ()ojYVn7~ 1 a Y(1 -vr m-l)9i] tY-- t7) YYV fJ )(7 -0 v t U U -to U

()~~ 72t~rf 2A~ )r~fltV- (0 ry) vYgty [JI~ - l rrll ~ -[I fJ~ -rxl0 P P vyiJ) A-ylc)-J 0r n o)rygt-t----VJi

J ~ (I f -(f-u u ~ U 0-r

P-F7rJ)-u)~-o~W Jt-wW]f) nA (sshyt2ift

7 r r ~1l~)f-t)[I rrP~7 gt70 31J tf(f)

~P7V Y 7JrrO PJyr-n-f) ~ vYOct) CJ-middott i 1 -J6

- l ~ A TI ( amp u 1 r-r---rr-r ( ~JfJ-rnt 5hUo1m+v~rl71c rG1 r ~YP~0 i ~

)--(~07 c-~77~ oir) frvj(P 14YY ()11 ( ~) () ver ~ C1i U I ~ P (J v k~ - J ~ l~DJ-J ~I -) afl~ YVJ ~ Y1iI7R -t bull r)yn If U

r

1

I I

-t

I

I

1

r

I

I

lt

The Grunsfeld Variations

Site Plan o 200 shy

Image courtesy of the MIT Dept of Architecture 6~~~I ffi

100 600 1000 North

MIT OpenCourseWarehttpocwmitedu

4241J 11330J Theory of City FormSpring 2013

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use visit httpocwmiteduterms

r

1

I I

-t

I

I

1

r

I

I

lt

The Grunsfeld Variations

Site Plan o 200 shy

Image courtesy of the MIT Dept of Architecture 6~~~I ffi

100 600 1000 North

MIT OpenCourseWarehttpocwmitedu

4241J 11330J Theory of City FormSpring 2013

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use visit httpocwmiteduterms

MIT OpenCourseWarehttpocwmitedu

4241J 11330J Theory of City FormSpring 2013

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use visit httpocwmiteduterms