I’m still continuing this investigation while on summer break. I’ve be harassing as many people as possible about this project, trying to glean whatever information I can and solicit whatever help I can utilize. So far I have been encouraged to take a different approach and borrowed precious literature (thanks David), I have had a most enthralling lunch with an engineer who had amazing insight and helped me to look at things differently (thanks John). I have also been given a most intriguing challenge that really has the creative juices flowing (thank-you Paul). The support I have been getting is overwhelming, it is appreciated and I am in awe.
I recently have purchased the book “Perfurbia” and it has really opened my eyes. The idea of making simple changes, no two houses should look into each other, and other uncomplicated modifications to urban design, is refreshing and thought provoking.
I have also requested the help of local Real Estate Agents to run my ideas by, after all one of my objectives is to revolutionize urban design but still to make it affordable and desirable. (Go big or go home) Who would know the market better than those who sell it (thanks Bev & Byron). Their knowledge and wisdom have been invaluable to me.
In a short amount of time, I will be posting further and more insightful information on Coving.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Saturday, April 19, 2008
This is my current Abstract that I have received back from the Instructor with changes. It needs polish it but I want to post it now to get feedback on to help with this process. Please feel free to offer any thoughts or opinions. Thanks
Look up the hill to the area above Hugh Allen Drive in Kamloops, B.C.,and see failure of urban design. Not only were there several problems with the civil engineering of the area resulting in the condemnation of several homes but also the land development is unattractive and not unique.
There is so much cookie-cutter land development. One subdivision looks like another. Where is the diversity? What sets one community apart from another? More and more people are demanding more functional and attractive places to live. People want to feel safe and secure. The community should grow and bring people together as opposed to pulling them apart.
Can Coving design bring diversity, sustainability and safety to the city of Kamloops, in such places like Pine Valley? This report will attempt to answer this question.
The name coving comes from coves of green spaces among the homes, which are made possible by winding roads and staggered setbacks. Urban designer Rick Harrison created it. His design intent was to ensure that no two houses look directly into each other’s windows.
This starting point is fundamentally different from the one used in conventional planning. Conventional planning starts with the presumption that there is some “ideal” form for a city, whether derived from planning theory or a collective local visioning process. It relies on abstract visions of what a community “should” look like, vague concepts of “good” urban planning, or idealized notions of the planning process. By contrast, there is the market oriented approach, which begins by recognizing that residents, both current and future, will determine whether a neighbourhood or community is desirable. The consumer-oriented focus of market-oriented planning is placed at the center of any discussion in the role of public policy in growth management.
A coved layout reduces construction costs by reducing roadway; thereby lowering paving and utility-line costs. The reduction in road surface adds usable land for lots and parks, and increases pedestrian safety due to less road and fewer intersections. Individual properties also gain aesthetic value from the separate meandering setback lines, sidewalks, and roadways.
Another method of land development that must be considered when looking at Coving is Clustering (also called Compact Development) which preserves open space and natural resources, while creating a unique sense of place. Clustering refers to land use patterns where related activities are located close together, usually within convenient walking distance. Clustering needs to take into account the location and mix of activities in an area. For example, simply increasing population densities in a residential-only area may not improve accessibility to clustered destinations such as schools and shops in the center of the development. Rural and suburban areas have low densities, and common destinations such as schools, shops and other public services can be clustered in villages and towns. This increases accessibility by making it easier to run several errands at the same time, it increases opportunities to interact with neighbours, and creates it transportation nodes (rideshare stops, bus stops, etc.). However clustering is close to the conventional ways of urban planning and does not incorporate the undulating patterns that coving does. It will be looked at as a comparison to coving.
The last option that will be looked at is Conventional planning (grid plan or gridiron plan) which is a type of city plan in which streets run at right angles to each other, forming a grid. The grid plan dates back from antiquity; some of the earliest planned cities were built using grids. Pedestrians have an easy time connecting to other parts of nearby neighbourhoods and commercial businesses. Obstacles such as cul-de-sacs and busy intersections with high speed traffic that hinder or discourage pedestrianism are rarely present. The grid also enhances pedestrian access to mass transit. Recent studies have found higher traffic fatality rates in outlying suburban areas than in central cities and inner suburbs with smaller blocks and more connected grid street patterns. One of the greatest difficulties with grid plans is their lack of specialization, with most of the important amenities being concentrated along a city's main arteries. Grid plans are often found in linear settlements with a main street connecting the perpendicular roads.
This report will show how valuable the method of coving is as opposed to clustering and the grid method in urban design, not only for its uniqueness, but for the proven environmental benefits that can occur. Community is a huge part of daily life and this method gives the chance for a community to be more attractive and safe.
Look up the hill to the area above Hugh Allen Drive in Kamloops, B.C.,and see failure of urban design. Not only were there several problems with the civil engineering of the area resulting in the condemnation of several homes but also the land development is unattractive and not unique.
There is so much cookie-cutter land development. One subdivision looks like another. Where is the diversity? What sets one community apart from another? More and more people are demanding more functional and attractive places to live. People want to feel safe and secure. The community should grow and bring people together as opposed to pulling them apart.
Can Coving design bring diversity, sustainability and safety to the city of Kamloops, in such places like Pine Valley? This report will attempt to answer this question.
The name coving comes from coves of green spaces among the homes, which are made possible by winding roads and staggered setbacks. Urban designer Rick Harrison created it. His design intent was to ensure that no two houses look directly into each other’s windows.
This starting point is fundamentally different from the one used in conventional planning. Conventional planning starts with the presumption that there is some “ideal” form for a city, whether derived from planning theory or a collective local visioning process. It relies on abstract visions of what a community “should” look like, vague concepts of “good” urban planning, or idealized notions of the planning process. By contrast, there is the market oriented approach, which begins by recognizing that residents, both current and future, will determine whether a neighbourhood or community is desirable. The consumer-oriented focus of market-oriented planning is placed at the center of any discussion in the role of public policy in growth management.
A coved layout reduces construction costs by reducing roadway; thereby lowering paving and utility-line costs. The reduction in road surface adds usable land for lots and parks, and increases pedestrian safety due to less road and fewer intersections. Individual properties also gain aesthetic value from the separate meandering setback lines, sidewalks, and roadways.
Another method of land development that must be considered when looking at Coving is Clustering (also called Compact Development) which preserves open space and natural resources, while creating a unique sense of place. Clustering refers to land use patterns where related activities are located close together, usually within convenient walking distance. Clustering needs to take into account the location and mix of activities in an area. For example, simply increasing population densities in a residential-only area may not improve accessibility to clustered destinations such as schools and shops in the center of the development. Rural and suburban areas have low densities, and common destinations such as schools, shops and other public services can be clustered in villages and towns. This increases accessibility by making it easier to run several errands at the same time, it increases opportunities to interact with neighbours, and creates it transportation nodes (rideshare stops, bus stops, etc.). However clustering is close to the conventional ways of urban planning and does not incorporate the undulating patterns that coving does. It will be looked at as a comparison to coving.
The last option that will be looked at is Conventional planning (grid plan or gridiron plan) which is a type of city plan in which streets run at right angles to each other, forming a grid. The grid plan dates back from antiquity; some of the earliest planned cities were built using grids. Pedestrians have an easy time connecting to other parts of nearby neighbourhoods and commercial businesses. Obstacles such as cul-de-sacs and busy intersections with high speed traffic that hinder or discourage pedestrianism are rarely present. The grid also enhances pedestrian access to mass transit. Recent studies have found higher traffic fatality rates in outlying suburban areas than in central cities and inner suburbs with smaller blocks and more connected grid street patterns. One of the greatest difficulties with grid plans is their lack of specialization, with most of the important amenities being concentrated along a city's main arteries. Grid plans are often found in linear settlements with a main street connecting the perpendicular roads.
This report will show how valuable the method of coving is as opposed to clustering and the grid method in urban design, not only for its uniqueness, but for the proven environmental benefits that can occur. Community is a huge part of daily life and this method gives the chance for a community to be more attractive and safe.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Design Attempt #2
I was inspired by a picture from Rick Harrison Design Studio. It was easier done on AutoCAD rather than Sketch-up but still required a lot of thought and effort.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Design Attempt
Abstract Draft
This is my first rough draft. Any and all constructive criticism appreciated.
Coving
What makes coving cool? Why should we look at this type of planning? Just look at up the hill to the area above Hugh Allen Dr. Here we see failure of urban design not only were there several problems with the development of the area i.e. the condemnation of several homes due to the fact insufficient research of the land was done to determine the effect of water run off from the above development on areas further down but also its just plain ugly and not at all unique.
Coving is the answer. The name comes from coves of green spaces among the homes which are made possible by winding roads and staggered setbacks. It was originated by urban designer Rick Harrison. His design intent was that no two houses look directly into each others windows.
This starting point is fundamentally different from the one used in conventional planning. Which starts with the presumption there is some “ideal” form of the city, whether derived from planning theory or a collective, local visioning process. By contrast, the market oriented approach —rather than relying on abstract visions of what a community should “look like,” vague concepts of “good” urban planning, or idealized notions of the planning process—begins by recognizing that residents, both current and future, will determine whether a neighborhood or community is desirable. The consumer-oriented focus of market-oriented planning is placed at the center of any discussion of the role of public policy in growth management.
A coved layout reduces construction costs by reducing roadway, thereby lowering paving and utility-line costs. The reduction in road surface adds usable land for lots and parks. Other benefits are increased pedestrian safety due to less road and fewer intersections. Individual properties also gain aesthetic value from the separate meandering setback lines, sidewalks, and roadways.
When designed incorrectly, coving has been cited as having several disadvantages: greater set-back from the street, larger lots, reduced usability for mixed application, decreased walk ability, decreased street and pedestrian connectivity of a tract to its surroundings, increased suburban sprawl, leaving little or no public open space, and allowing more soil runoff and less communal open space than alternate development types such as urban cluster and new urbanism.
Designing coved developments is technically difficult. Specialized software is used and designers need several years of experience to become proficient. The design isn't feasible for skinny tracts of land, and house footprints need to be less than 85% of the lot size.
Clustering
Cluster development preserves open space and natural resources, while creating a unique sense of place. However clustering is close to conventional ways of urban planning and doesn’t incorporate the undulating patterns that coving does. It will be looked at as a comparison to use as opposed to coving.
Clustering (also called Compact Development) refers to Land Use patterns in which related activities are located close together, usually within convenient walking distance. Clustering improves accessibility by reducing travel distances and improving transportation options. It is an important part of land use management strategies including Access Management, Location Efficient Development, New Urbanism, Smart Growth and Transit Oriented Development.
Clustering to the location and mix of activities in an area. For example, simply increasing population densities in a residential-only area may do less to improve accessibility clustering destinations such as schools and shops in the center of the development. Rural and suburban areas have low densities, but common destinations such as schools, shops and other public services can be clustered in villages and towns. This increases accessibility by making it easier to run several errands at the same time, increases opportunities to interact with neighbours, and creates transportation nodes (rideshare stops, bus stops, etc.).
Conventional
The convention or grid plan (or gridiron plan) is a type of city plan in which streets run at right angles to each other, forming a grid. The grid plan dates from antiquity; some of the earliest planned cities were built using grids. Grid street patterns are generally considered to be less expensive than a street hierarchy plan because road miles are needed to serve the same population. Pedestrians have an easier time connecting to other parts of neighboring neighborhoods and commercial businesses. Obstacles such as cul-de-sacs and busy intersections with high speed traffic that hinder or discourage pedestrianism are rarely present. The grid also enhances pedestrian access to mass transit. Recent studies have found higher traffic fatality rates in outlying suburban areas than in central cities and inner suburbs with smaller blocks and more-connected street patterns. One of the greatest difficulties with grid plans is their lack of specialization, most of the important amenities being concentrated along the city's main arteries. Often grid plans are found in linear settlements, with a main street connecting between the perpendicular roads. House numbering can be tailored to the grid.
Questions
Infrastructure needs to be sustainable.
Which one of these methods will work best in Kamloops?
Will they even work here?
Why do we even need to look at different methods?
Coving
What makes coving cool? Why should we look at this type of planning? Just look at up the hill to the area above Hugh Allen Dr. Here we see failure of urban design not only were there several problems with the development of the area i.e. the condemnation of several homes due to the fact insufficient research of the land was done to determine the effect of water run off from the above development on areas further down but also its just plain ugly and not at all unique.
Coving is the answer. The name comes from coves of green spaces among the homes which are made possible by winding roads and staggered setbacks. It was originated by urban designer Rick Harrison. His design intent was that no two houses look directly into each others windows.
This starting point is fundamentally different from the one used in conventional planning. Which starts with the presumption there is some “ideal” form of the city, whether derived from planning theory or a collective, local visioning process. By contrast, the market oriented approach —rather than relying on abstract visions of what a community should “look like,” vague concepts of “good” urban planning, or idealized notions of the planning process—begins by recognizing that residents, both current and future, will determine whether a neighborhood or community is desirable. The consumer-oriented focus of market-oriented planning is placed at the center of any discussion of the role of public policy in growth management.
A coved layout reduces construction costs by reducing roadway, thereby lowering paving and utility-line costs. The reduction in road surface adds usable land for lots and parks. Other benefits are increased pedestrian safety due to less road and fewer intersections. Individual properties also gain aesthetic value from the separate meandering setback lines, sidewalks, and roadways.
When designed incorrectly, coving has been cited as having several disadvantages: greater set-back from the street, larger lots, reduced usability for mixed application, decreased walk ability, decreased street and pedestrian connectivity of a tract to its surroundings, increased suburban sprawl, leaving little or no public open space, and allowing more soil runoff and less communal open space than alternate development types such as urban cluster and new urbanism.
Designing coved developments is technically difficult. Specialized software is used and designers need several years of experience to become proficient. The design isn't feasible for skinny tracts of land, and house footprints need to be less than 85% of the lot size.
Clustering
Cluster development preserves open space and natural resources, while creating a unique sense of place. However clustering is close to conventional ways of urban planning and doesn’t incorporate the undulating patterns that coving does. It will be looked at as a comparison to use as opposed to coving.
Clustering (also called Compact Development) refers to Land Use patterns in which related activities are located close together, usually within convenient walking distance. Clustering improves accessibility by reducing travel distances and improving transportation options. It is an important part of land use management strategies including Access Management, Location Efficient Development, New Urbanism, Smart Growth and Transit Oriented Development.
Clustering to the location and mix of activities in an area. For example, simply increasing population densities in a residential-only area may do less to improve accessibility clustering destinations such as schools and shops in the center of the development. Rural and suburban areas have low densities, but common destinations such as schools, shops and other public services can be clustered in villages and towns. This increases accessibility by making it easier to run several errands at the same time, increases opportunities to interact with neighbours, and creates transportation nodes (rideshare stops, bus stops, etc.).
Conventional
The convention or grid plan (or gridiron plan) is a type of city plan in which streets run at right angles to each other, forming a grid. The grid plan dates from antiquity; some of the earliest planned cities were built using grids. Grid street patterns are generally considered to be less expensive than a street hierarchy plan because road miles are needed to serve the same population. Pedestrians have an easier time connecting to other parts of neighboring neighborhoods and commercial businesses. Obstacles such as cul-de-sacs and busy intersections with high speed traffic that hinder or discourage pedestrianism are rarely present. The grid also enhances pedestrian access to mass transit. Recent studies have found higher traffic fatality rates in outlying suburban areas than in central cities and inner suburbs with smaller blocks and more-connected street patterns. One of the greatest difficulties with grid plans is their lack of specialization, most of the important amenities being concentrated along the city's main arteries. Often grid plans are found in linear settlements, with a main street connecting between the perpendicular roads. House numbering can be tailored to the grid.
Questions
Infrastructure needs to be sustainable.
Which one of these methods will work best in Kamloops?
Will they even work here?
Why do we even need to look at different methods?
Progress
I've been talking to people in industry, changing pictures and following up all the helpful material in the comments. Thank-you everyone for all the help.
I'm thinking I want to focus more closely on coving for that is where my true interest lies. I want to look at how coving can be beneficial to Kamloops.
I'm thinking I want to focus more closely on coving for that is where my true interest lies. I want to look at how coving can be beneficial to Kamloops.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Coving: A New Way
Coving is a technique of urban planning used in residential subdivisions. The name comes from coves of green spaces interwoven throughout the area among the homes. It is distinguished by non-uniform lot shapes and home positioning. When blended with meandering roads, lot area is enlarged and road area condensed. Coving is used as an alternative to conventional "grid" subdivision layout in order to reduce costs, such as road surfacing, while improving aesthetics, and effectively utilizing the land.
Coving was pioneered by Rick Harrison, a Minneapolis based Neighborhood Planner
Coving was pioneered by Rick Harrison, a Minneapolis based Neighborhood Planner
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Before Coving
This image is from Rick Harrison Site Design Studio 2006 Newsletter
After Coving
This image is from Rick Harrison Site Design Studio 2006 Newsletter
