Leila Akbarishahabi

Examining the Relationship Between Enclosure Ratio of Street and Skyline’s Complexity

The urban design criteria significantly affect the visual quality of space. Enclosure and Complexity can be defined as two crucial urban design principles that affect the perceptibility and visual quality of space. This study aimed to offer an objective and perceptual evaluation method in assessing the street’s enclosure ratio. In the study, the street's enclosure ratio was evaluated via the street skyline's complexity. Design/Methodology/Approach According to the study's hypothesis, as the street's enclosure ratio increases, the street skyline's complexity level decreases. For testing this hypothesis, the street images were selected from the London and Chicago cities. Firstly, the skylines of the streets were determined on images, and then, the fractal dimensions of skylines were calculated. Then, the street’s enclosure ratio and the factors that affect street skyline's fractal dimension were measured with a defined measurement system. Subsequently, the relationship between the street’s enclosure ratio and calculated street skyline's fractal dimensions was examined by regression analysis. Findings As a result, it was determined that there is an inverse relationship between the street’s enclosure ratio and the street skyline’s fractal dimensions. As the enclosure ratio increases, the complexity of the skyline decreases. The decrease in the complexity level of the skyline weakens the visual quality and perceptibility of the street. Research Limitations In this study, the perceptual evaluation of the street’s enclosure ratio was examined with an objective method. This method can also be reinforced with a subjective evaluation and more precise results can be obtained. Social Implications The obtained results can provide important clues to increase the visual quality and perceptibility of the streets. In perceptible spaces with high visual quality, feelings such as liking, trust, belonging and comfort develop in people. Originality/Value The fractal approach as an objective method is used widely for perceptual evaluation of the complexity level in cities. However, it was determined that very few studies examined the street’s enclosure ratio with the perceptual and objective evaluation method. Perceptual evaluations of the enclosure were generally made with subjective methods. This study offered an objective and perceptual evaluation approach for examining the street’s enclosure ratio.

PDF

___

Akdağ, S. G., & Bostancı, S. H. (2013). The Impacts of Prestıge Projects on The Skyline of Istanbul. International Journal of Architectural Research, Archnet-IJAR, 7(2), 269–281. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.26687/ARCHNET-IJAR.V7I2.170
Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction a Pattern Language. Oxford University Press.
Altaban, Ö. (2013). From Town Planning to Urban Design Work-The Dimensions to be Considered. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture, 1(1), 2–21.
Aslan, F., & Atik, A. (2015). Perceptions About Commercial advertising Signs on Street Landscape and shopping Preferences: The sample of Kisla Street, Malatya- Turkey. American Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, 2(4), 129–140.
Barratt, K. (1980). Logic and Design, Revised: In Art, Science, and Mathematics. The Pitman Press.
Batty, M., & Longley, P. (1994). Labratories for Visualizing Urban Form. In Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (pp. 130–163). Academic Press Limited.
Berlyne, D. E. (1970). Novelty, Complexity, and Hedonic Value. Perception & Psychophysics, 8(5), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212593
Blizek, W., & Berlyne, D. E. (1973). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 31(4), 553. https://doi.org/10.2307/429334
Bostancı, S. H., & Ocakçi, M. (2011). Innovative Approach to Aesthetic Evaluation Based on Entropy. European Planning Studies, 19(4), 705–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2011.548473
Bostancı, S. H., & Oral, M. (2017). Experimental Approach on the Cognitive Perception of Historical Urban Skyline. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture & Planning Received, 5, 45–59. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2017.25-E-ISSN
Burden, E. (1994). Elements of Architectural Design: A Visual Resource. Wiley.
Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2003). Public Places- Urban Spaces; The Dimensions of Urban Design. Architectural Press.
Chalup, S. K., Henderson, N., Ostwald, M. J., & Wiklendt, L. (2009). Architectural Science Review a Computational Approach to Fractal Analysis of a Cityscape’s Skyline. Taylor & Francis, 52(2), 126–134. https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2009.0015
Ching, F. D. K. (2014). Architecture: Form, Space, & Order. Wiley.
Cooper, J. (2003). Fractal Assessment of Street-Level Skylines a Possible Means of Assessing and Comparing Character. Urban Morphology, 7(2), 73–82.
Cooper, J., & Oskrochi, R. (2008). Fractal Analysis of Street Vistas: A Potential Tool for Assessing Levels of Visual Variety in Everyday Street Scenes. Environment and Planning B Planning and Design, 35(2), 349–363. https://doi.org/10.1068/b33081
Cutting, J. E., & Garvin, J. J. (1987). Fractal Curves and Complexity. Perception & Psychophysics, 42(4), 365–370. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203093
Denis, M., & Fernandez, G. (2014). The Processing of Landmarks in Route Directions. In Representing space in cognition: interrelations of behavior, language, and formal models (pp. 42–55). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679911.003.0004
Ewing, R., & Handy, S. (2009). Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability. Journal of Urban Design, 14(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800802451155
Ewing, R., King, M. R., Raudenbush, S., & Clemente, O. J. (2005). Turning Highways into Main Streets: Two Innovations in Planning Methodology. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(3), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360508976698
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for People. Island Press.
Gehl, J., Kaefer, L. J., & Reigstad, S. (2006). Close encounters with buildings. Urban Design International, 11(1), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.udi.9000162
Groat, L. (1982). Meaning in Post-Modern Architecture: An Examination Using the Multiple Sorting Task. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(82)80002-9
Gunawardena, G. M. W. L., Kubota, Y., & Fukahori, K. (2015). Visual Complexity Analysis Using Taxonomic Diagrams of Figures and Backgrounds in Japanese Residential Streetscapes. Urban Studies Research, 2015, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/173862
Hagerhall, C. M., Purcell, T., & Taylor, R. (2004). Fractal Dimension of Landscape Silhouette Outlines as a Predictor of Landscape Preference. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(2), 247–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2003.12.004
Hall, P. (2014). Cities of Tomorrow: an Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design Since 1880. Wiley-Blackwell.
Heath, T., Smith, S. G., & Bill, L. (2000). Tall Buildings and the Urban Skyline, the Effect of Visual Complexity on Preferences. Environment and Behavior, 32(4), 541–556. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160021972658
Jacobs, A. (1993). Great Streets. MIT Press.
Jacobs, A., & Appleyard, D. (1987). Toward an Urban Design Manifesto. Journal of the American Planning Association, 53(1), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944368708976642
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage Books.
Jiang, S., & Liu, D. (2013). Box-Counting Dimension of Fractal Urban Form. International Journal of Artificial Life Research, 3(3), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.4018/jalr.2012070104
Kahraman, E. Duygu, & Cubukcu, E. (2017). Developing The Standards For Sense of Enclosure: An Experimental Study in Virtual Environments. CPUD 17 International City Planning and Urban Design Conference.
Kalın, A., & Yılmaz, D. (2012). A Study on Visibility Analysis of Urban Landmarks: The Case of Hagia Sophia (Ayasofya) in Trabzon. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 29(1), 241–271. https://doi.org/10.4305/METU.JFA.2012.1.14
Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., & Ryan, R. (1998). With People in Mind: Design And Management Of Everyday Nature. Island Press.
Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., & Wendt, J. S. (1972). Rated Preference and Complexity for Natural and Urban Visual Material. Perception & Psychophysics, 12(4), 354–356. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207221
Katz, P., Bressi, T. W., & Scully, V. (1996). The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. McGraw-Hill.
Li, J ., D u, Q ., & S un, C . ( 2009). A n Improved B ox-Counting Method for Image Fractal Dimension Estimation. Pattern Recognition, 42(11), 2460– 2469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2009.03.001
Lynch, K. (1981). A Theory of Good City Form. MIT Press. Mandelbrot, B. B. (1982). The Fractal Geometry of Nature. W.H. Freeman and Company.
Mesev, T. V., Longley, P. A., Batty, M., & Xie, Y. (1995). Morphology From Imagery: Detecting and Measuring the Density of Urban Land Use. Environment & Planning A, 27(5), 759–780.
Montgomery, J. (1998). Making a City: Urbanity, Vitality and Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design, 3(1), 93–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809808724418
Nasar, J. L. (1984). Visual Preferences in Urban Street Scenes: A Cross- Cultural Comparison Japon and United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15(1), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002184015001005
Nasar, J. L. (1994). Urban Design Aesthetics: The Evaluative Qualities of Building Exteriors. Environment and Behavior, 26(3), 377–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659402600305
Nasar, J. L., & Terzano, K. (2010). The Desirability of Views of City Skylines After Dark. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(2), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.11.007
Oostendorp, A., & Berlyne, D. E. (1978). Dimensions in The Perception of Architecture: Identification And Interpretation of Dimensions of Similarity. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 19(1), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.1978.tb00305.x
Peitgen, H.-O., Jürgens, H., & Saupe, D. (1993). Chaos and Fractals, New Frontiers of Science. Springer-Verlag Press.
Pendola, R., & Gen, S. (2008). Does “Main Street” Promote Sense of Community? A Comparison of San Francisco Neighborhoods. Environment and Behavior, 40(4), 545–574. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916507301399
Portella, A. A. (2007). Evaluating Commercial Signs in Historic Streetscapes: The Effects of the Control of Advertising and Signage on User’s Sense of Environmental Quality. In Doctoral thesis. Oxford Brookes University.
Rapoport, A. (1977). Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a Man Environment Approach to Urban Form and Design. Pergamon Press.
Rapoport, A. (1990). The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal Communication Approach. University of Arizona press.
Salingaros, N. A. (1999). Urban Space and Its Information Field. Journal of Urban Design, 4(1), 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809908724437
Salingaros, N. A. (2000). Complexity and Urban Coherence. Journal of Urban Design, 5(3), 291–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/713683969
Salingaros, N. A. (2010). Twelve Lectures on Architecture: Algorithmic Sustainable Design. Sustasis Press.
Shen, G. (2002). International Journal of Geographical Information Science Fractal dimension and fractal growth of urbanized areas. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 16(5), 419– 437. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810210137013
Spencer, D. (2009). Cities and Complexity: Understanding Cities with Cellular Automata, Agent-Based Models, and Fractals. The Journal of Architecture, 14(3), 446–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602360903028044
Stamps, A. E. (2000). Psychology and the Aesthetics of the Built Environment. Kluwer Academic Publishers Group. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-6326-3
Stamps, A. E. (2002). Fractals, Skylines, Nature and beauty. Landscape and Urban Planning, 60(3), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169- 2046(02)00054-3
Stamps, A. E. (2003). Advances in Visual Diversity and Entropy. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30(3), 449–463. https://doi.org/10.1068/b12986
Stamps, A. E. (2004). Mystery, Complexity, Legibility and Coherence: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00023-9
Sussman, A., & Hollander, J. B. (2015). Cognitive Architecture: Designing for How We respond to the Built Environment. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Taylor, R. P. (2006). Reduction of Physiological Stress Using Fractal Art and Architecture. Leonardo, 39(3), 245–251.
Trancik, R. (1986). Finding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Tveit, M., Ode, A. ˚, & Fry, G. (2007). Key Concepts in a Framework for Analyzing Visual Landscape Character. Landscape Research, 31(3), 229– 255. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390600783269
Val, G., Atauri, J. A., & Lucio, J. V. (2006). Relationship Between Landscape Visual Attributes and Spatial Pattern Indices: A Test Study in Mediterranean Climate. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(4), 393–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.05.003
Venturi, R. (1977). Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture. Princeton University Press.
Xavier, S., & Portella, A. (2012). Complexity and Order in Commercial Streetscapes: How to Maintain User´s Satisfaction with Visual Quality in Contemporary Cities. In O. Romice, E. Edgerton, & K. Thwaites (Eds.), Human Experience in the Natural and Built Environment: Implications for Research, Policy and Practice. University of Strathclyde.
Ye, Y., Li, D., & Liu, X. (2018). How Block Density and Typology Affect Urban Vitality: An Exploratory Analysis in Shenzhen, China. Urban Geography, 39(4), 631–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2017.1381536
Zacharias, J. (2001). Path Choice and Visual Stimuli: Signs of Human Activity And Architecture. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(4), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0225
Zmeškal, O., Veselý, M., Nežádal, M., & Buchníček, M. (2001). Fractal Analysis of Image Structures. HarFA-Harmonic and Fractal Image Analysis, 1(1), 3–5.