While researching place making principles, I came across this passage by Yvonne Rydin that I believe is worth sharing-
‘Designing a development to encourage walking and cycling through pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly measures is now considered part of good design, with car-led designs being viewed as poor and modernist design. However, this approach can be extended further than is usually standard practice. Walking and cycling routes could be the dominant influence on the pattern of development, rather than the road layout. In some design approaches this is linked to designing developments as ‘place’ where interaction between people is fostered. Research has shown repeatedly that the interactions between people on opposite sides of the street are inversely related to the amount of traffic on the street. ‘Woonerf’ is a Dutch idea for designing streets as places for play, where pedestrians have priority over cars (although cars are not necessarily completely banned) and where social oversight ensures that such play is safe for children (Ben-Joseph, 2995; Biddulph, 2001)
This is an example of social and environmental sustainability going hand in hand. Where cars do not lead design, then the scope for low carbon forms of travel is enhanced at the same time as social interactions between occupants of the area is encouraged. Effectively local social capital is being built through these design features and such social capital can contribute to other social benefits such as support of the more vulnerable, lower crime rates and a greater sense of well-being. There are other ways in which development sites can be planned to build social capital. Incorporating community facilities is an obvious example; this can extend from community centres to schools, faith centres, health centres, swimming pools, gyms and locally owned shops. Where a development includes or is located in proximity to a range of these facilities, then there is the potential for more social interaction and for building social capital.
If designing developments as ‘place’ in these terms, rather than just as a collection of new buildings, has value to the local community, the question is whether this is captured in economic value also. The goal of sustainable urban development at this scale would be to fit within a commercial model that captured the economic value of good design in delivering social and environmental sustainability (in the ways outlined above). That this can be achieved is demonstrated by a study commissioned by The Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment. This looked at three examples of ‘sustainable urbanism’, that is, new developments that follow many of the principles of sustainable urban development and found that the market value for land was higher than ‘standard’ urbanism in three cases (Savills plc, 2007). The challenge is to generalize this model to all urban development. ‘
Picking out one passage was difficult, so I would recommend everyone have a read over Rydin’s Governing for Sustainable Urban Development’ (2010).
