Winter 1999
UP 282: Urban Design: Theories, Paradigms, Applications

Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, Ph.D.
PPB Rm 5363, tel. 310-206-9679
email sideris@ucla.edu
Office hours: Tu 10:30-12:30 p.m., W 1:00-3:00 p.m.

Day & Time:  W 10:00-12:50 p.m.

Urban design deals with the form of possible urban environments. It is concerned with the arrangement and interrelation of spatial artifacts and human activities. Urban design is a complex activity because it simultaneously seeks the accommodation of a multitude of ends: the sheltering of human activities, the creation of a sense of place, the functionality of the built form, technological soundness, economic feasibility, environmental and cultural fit. Throughout the years a number of theories, models and ideologies have influenced the practice of urban design. This course will discuss the philosophical bases, ideologies and paradigms of urban design in the last century and will examine how they are reflected on the urban form and built environment of cities.

More specifically we will:

Review the models (rational, empirical, pragmatic) and methods of design.

Identify and compare the modernist and postmodernist approach to urban design.

Review the work of major design theorists of this century and the literature covering the underlying values, criteria, objectives and normative models of city design and urban form.

Examine the specific applications of different design paradigms on urban form , using case studies of urban design projects in the US and abroad.

To present, compare, and critically evaluate models and theories of urban design and environmental form.

To familiarize the students with prominent urban form types of the 20th century city as well as emerging new forms (e.g. gated, master planned suburbs, urban villages, edge cities, pedestrian pockets, etc.).

To present and analyze case studies of specific urban design projects and their socio-spatial impacts on communities.

To consider the practice of urban design in its larger socio-political, cultural and institutional contexts.

All class meetings will be conducted as seminars. Each student is required to contribute to seminar discussions. In order to do so, students will need to complete the related readings and come to class with thoughtful questions and ideas which they can contribute to the discussion.

At the end of the presentation of each design model (rational, empirical, pragmatic) there would be a seminar session devoted to the critical analysis and evaluation of this model. Students in the class will be divided into groups and each group will be responsible for leading the discussion for the evaluation of one design model. Depending on the number of students in the class there would be 3-4 student-led, one-hour seminars. Seminar leaders may exercise control over discussions and raise issues and questions for the whole class to consider. More information about this process will be given in class.

In addition to seminar presentation, each student will be required to prepare a paper and brief presentation of a case study of an urban design project in the Los Angeles area, elsewhere in the US or abroad. Presentations will take place during the last two sessions. The paper must be submitted by the last day of classes. Case studies should belong to one of the following categories:

New Town (e.g. Irvine, CA; Columbia, MD; Celebration, FL; Milton Keynes, England; Chandigarh, India; Brazilia, Brazil).

Downtown Planning/Redevelopment (e.g. Los Angeles Strategic Plan, San Francisco Downtown Plan, Urban Design Manhattan).

Commercial Center / Festival Market Places (e.g. Century City, Santa Monica Place in Los Angeles County; Newport Center in Orange County, Renaissance Center in Detroit; Horton Plaza in San Diego)

Large Mixed-Use Urban Projects (e.g. Playa del Ray in Los Angeles, Battery Park City in New York).

New Suburbs (e.g. Seaside, FL; Reston VA; Laguna West, CA).

Edge Cities (Santa Clara Valley, Moreno Valley).

Civic Center Design (e.g. Beverly Hills, Boston City Hall, Pompidou Center in Paris).

Conservation of Older Urban Areas or Structures (e.g. Bologna, Italy; Plaka, Athens; Ghirardelli Square, San Francisco; Faneuil Hall, Boston).

Recycling Waterfronts (e.g. London Docklands; South Street Seaport in New York; Inner Harbor in Baltimore, waterfront areas of Seattle, San Francisco, Boston; riverfront of San Antonio).

Design for Movement Systems (e.g. freeway networks, metro- and light rail systems in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Washington DC, San Diego, Toronto, Vancouver, etc.).

Design for Regional or Metropolitan Environments (e.g. San Francisco Bay Area Plan, California Coastal Plan).

Grades will be determined as follows:

Class participation 15%

Performance as Seminar Leader 25%

Term Paper (case study) 60%

Broadbent, G. (1996) Emerging Concepts in Urban Space Design.

Ellin, N. (1996) Postmodern Urbanism.

Reader

The reader includes parts of the following texts:

Alexander, C. (1964) Notes on the Synthesis of Form.

Alexander, C. et. al. (1977) Pattern Language

Banerjee, T. and Baer, M. (1984) Beyond the Neighborhood Unit.

Banerjee, T. and Southworth, M. (1990) City Sense and City Design.

Barnett, J. (1974) Urban Design as Public Policy.

Jones, C.J. (1969) Design Methods.

Kelbaugh, D. (1989) The Pedestrian Pocket Book.

Lang, J. (1994) Urban Design: The American Experience.

Lynch, K. (1960) The Image of the City.

Lynch, K. (1984) Theory of Good City Form

Lynch, K. and Hack, G. Site Planning.

McHarg, I. (1969) Design with Nature.

                    Alexander, C. (April-May 1965) "A City is Not a Tree," Architectural Forum.

Appleyard, D. (1979) "The Environment as A Social Symbol: Within a Theory of Environmental Action and Perception" JAPA.

Varkki George, R. (1997) "A Procedural Explanation for Contemporary Urban Design," Journal of Urban Design.

Barnett, J. (July 1987) "In the Public Interest: Design Guidelines" Architectural Record.

Boles, D. (May 1989) "Reordering the Suburbs," Progressive Architecture.

Garreau, J. (December 1995) "Edgier Cities," Wired.

Garrett, M. "Neotraditional Town Planning and the Postmodern" unpublished paper.

                    Holston, J. (Summer 1995) "Spaces of Insurgent Citizenship," Planning Theory.

                    Jacobs, A. and Appleyard, D. (1987) "Towards an Urban Design Manifesto," JAPA.

Krier, L. ( 1977) "Quartier versus Zone," A+U.

Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (1996) "Cracks in the City: Addressing the Constraints and Potentials of Urban Design," Journal of Urban Design.

                    Lyman, F. (1992) "Reinventing Suburbia," The Amicus Journal.

Muschamp, H. (6/2/1996) "Can New Urbanism Find Room for the Old?" New York Times.

Rapoport, A. (1987) "Pedestrian Street Use: Culture and Perception," in A. Vernez-Moudon (ed.) Public Streets for Public Use.

Rittel, H. and Webber, M. (1973) "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning," Policy Sciences.

Soja, E. (1992) "Inside Exopolis: Scenes from Orange County," in M. Sorkin (ed.) Variations on a Theme Park.

Southworth, M. amd B. Parthasarathy, (1996) "The Suburban Public Realm I: Its Emergence, Growth, and Transformation in the American Metropolis," Journal of Urban Design.

Vernez-Moudon, A. (May 1992) "A Catholic Approach to Organizing What Urban Designers Should Know," Journal of Planning Literature.

                    Zotti, E. (1987) "Eyes on Jane Jacobs" Planning.