The Sectors of the Transect

This paper develops a quantitative method for classifying neighbourhood types and applies the characterization method to the neighbourhoods of new single-family homes in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area. The study first measures a set of 21 urban form attributes in neighbourhoods that contain newly constructed single-family homes. Factor analysis is then used to identify a small set of dimensions that capture essential differences in urban form. Finally, these factor scores are used as input to a cluster analysis to identify distinct neighbourhood types. The results demonstrate that most new single-family homes in Portland are built in new suburban neighbourhoods, but a substantial portion of single-family construction is occurring in traditional and neo-traditional urban neighbourhoods.

Section: Caveats and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative Classification of Neighbourhoods: The Neighbourhoods of New Single-family Homes in the Portland Metropolitan Area

Song¹,

Knaap²

2007

“…Of special interest here are the physical characteristics of urban residential façades and how they affect whether or not a person finds a residential street appealing (Rapoport, 1990;Imamoglu, 2000;Stamps, 2003). Research has indicated that both physical and social features are important, representing significant differences that affect choice of residence (Brower, 2002). Thus, although urban designers perceive the city mainly as a morphological phenomenon and are primarily concerned with the sensory, in particular the visual, qualities of the urban space, the fundamental relationship between space and socio-cultural processes is now more widely accepted (Carr et al, 1992;Low, 2000).…”

Section: Housing Extensions and The Urban Spacementioning

confidence: 97%

Effects of User-initiated Extensions in Government-built Housing on the Urban Space: The Case of the Rambam Neighbourhood in Tirat Carmel, Israel

Kallus

Dychtwald

2010

This paper considers the impact of user-initiated housing extensions on the use, function and appearance of the urban space. Interested in the urban tissue, rather than in single buildings, the paper, based on post-factum evaluation, examines the communal effect of user-initiated extensions, rather than the individual benefits to the household. It seeks to understand the dichotomy between the freedom of owners to transform their dwellings and the negative impact such freedom might have on the quality of the immediate residential environment and on the public domain. The findings indicate that had the residents understood the implications of their actions they would have readily chosen the more burdensome route of design control. This suggests the need to pre-plan and coordinate housing extensions to moderate the negative effects of individual extensions on the public space. Toward this, it is important to include residents in planning processes by involving them in decision-making, informing them about opportunities and drawbacks, while assessing their potential to absorb change.

“…They use this technique during charrettes to identify a local community's preferred vision and to integrate this vision in their master plan as well as in their individual building designs. Other New Urbanist designers have promoted similar architectural and neighbourhood design elements through graphic design codes and planning strategies, including the 'Transect', that are becoming popular in the development community (Duany & Plater-Zyberk, 1991;Brower, 2002;Duany, 2002;Duany & Talen, 2002). Features of New Urbanist architectural design, and materials used in the construction of individual buildings that give advantage to housing in these projects, often add to their construction cost, which is a concern among designers and developers.…”

Section: Community and Building Design Techniques Of New Urbanist Promentioning

confidence: 97%

Designing and Developing New Urbanist Projects in the United States: Insights and Implications

Garde¹

2006

New Urbanism has gained considerable popularity. This paper evaluates the significance of designing and developing New Urbanist projects, within the contemporary circumstances of urban and suburban development in the United States, using survey research method. It investigates why designers and developers promote New Urbanist projects despite not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) opposition to higher-density developments and despite continued strong preference for single-family homes in standard sub-divisions. Are there any perceived benefits of undertaking such projects? Where do designers, developers and planners concur (or differ) in their assessment of the advantages associated with such projects? The study reveals a considerable agreement among respondents that these projects offer better design, better compatibility with growth management regulations, minimize deterioration of environmental quality, and minimize NIMBY opposition; however, they are restricted by existing land-use regulations, and resistance among the established development community. Implications for the diffusion of New Urbanism are discussed.