Kooge indra 131788 project assignment 1b analyses on the the human scale

Project Canada Phase 1B - Case study - The human scale in Calgary

Indra Kooge 131788

1

“In the suburb one might live and die without marring the image of an innocent world, except when some shadow of evil fell over a column in the newspaper. Thus the suburb served as an asylum for the preservation of illusion. Here domesticity could prosper, oblivious of the pervasive regimentation beyond. This was not merely a child-centered environment; it was based on a childish view of the world, in which reality was sacrificed to the pleasure principle.� - Lewis Mumford

PREFACE & INDEX To get a indepth grasp of the subject area analyses of the area is needed in different kinds of topics. This document researched the human scale in Marlborough, Calgary, Canada. For this, the document is split into three sections. The first section, background and theory from the HSO assignement, goes into the background and theory of the human scale and makes it clear how and why some things work and some things dont work. The second part of this document, the analyses, analyses Marlborough on a human scale and experience. The last section summerizes the all the previous information into a SWOT and Steep analyses and concludes my findings on Marlborough on a human scale.

Background & Theory

Analyses

SWOT

Endnotes

2 4 6 9

• • • •

History of human interaction in the city What is human scale?

Theory of human scale Why the human scale?

11 12 14 16 17 18 19

• • • • • • •

The layout of Marlborough Serial view - First impressions The city at eye level - An experience Main roads Streets Spaces Cul-de-sac

20 • Swot summery 22 • Steep & Conclusion 23

1

HISTORY OF HUMAN INTERACTION IN THE CITY To understand how cities work on a human level, we first need to understand how the modern cities came to be and how.

The phases of the modern human lifestyles can be divided into,the eotechnic (dark ages), paleotechnic (industrial revolution) and neotechnic (modern era) according to Lewis Mumford.1 All these phases had different kinds of ways of life. The eotechnic age was the age where the clock was developed. Mumford saw this as a important development of capitalism for human society because this made time fungible.

The paleotechnic age is “an up thrust into barbarism, aided by the very forces and interests which originally had been directed toward the conquest of the environment and the perfection of human nature.” Inventions of the paleotechnic tried to solve 2

specific problems rather than improving scientific principles; in fact, scientific learning is devalued by businessmen because they wanted to focus on profit. The invention of steam power that resulted in factories with capitalintensive machinery leads to a need fot unskilled machine labor. The last age, the age where we live in now is the neotechnic age is the age of electricity that changed the human way of life in a private and professional level, life became more efficient and communication improved, the world became smaller. 1 In the past rural areas, the eotechnic age consisted mostly of small villages. In these villages the values of it’s inhabitants were fairly

the same. The experienced the same life events, had the same religion and way of life. But on the other hand we have the cities, large area’s with high density.

The inhabitants of the cities came from all across and all had different backgrounds, each with their own values and ideas. Sennet stated that this boosted during the industrial revolution, where people moved from the rural area’s to the cities to find work in the factories. With this flow of people that came into the towns, the townscape changed.

Before this flow of people cities were a place for the bureaucracy, after this cities became a place for every part of human life. This event had the effect that these people,

all with different background, came together and started interacting with each other.2

“The goal of eotechnic civilization as a whole... was not more power alone but a greater intensification of life: color, perfume, images, music, sexual ecstasy, as well as daring exploits in arms and thought and exploration.”

Lewis Mumford 5

This new economical system that emerged in the cities during the Paleotechnic age, that drawn people from all over, had difficulties to settle these people. But only physical but also providing for their metal needs and values. Because of the coming of all these people, with different background, the city and it’s inhabitants had to set aside their differences in culture and values and work together. This resulted in a new social norm of interacting between one and other. A social normal where the other had the freedom to express their opinion, or have their believes. Where in the past the standard was that people with an other opinion, believe system or different values were outcasts with rural areas.1

Park stated that these new social norm had a positive effect on the people living within the cities, it developed the city culture. The coming together of all these new people, with different life views, resulted in a coming together of different ideas, ways of life, religions etc. people started to interact outside their old social group, values and ideas started to mix and people started to break free from cultural dogma’s, that ruled their life’s when they lived in rural communities and started to become free in their choices.

This resulted in a new way of life, that can be called the city culture. In contract to the rural areas where a different way of life resulted in pushed out from the group and thus society, their was no fear for this in the city.

There was always a group that somewhat had the same way of thinking like you that you can join. This was not a possibility in rural areas.4 This new city culture demanded places for people to meet and interact. People started to come together in bars, living rooms and public spaces. This transformed again, like in the classical period of ancient Greece, the use of the public spaces from military parade grounds to meeting places. And this was the start that the squares in cities started to change into places for people. Terrace’s started to sprout, parks were

redeveloped and squares started to change in the late 19th and early 20th century.

The developments were all being done within the old city structure, naturally formed and where small and had a high density. The public space was owned by everybody.

But from the second half of the 20th century ( and also the Bauhaus period before experimented with this concepts) after world war two( the neotechnic age), that destroyed large parts of Europe, large developing plans were started. Most of these plans saw the destruction as a fresh start, out with the old and in with the new. They experimented with giving space to the city.

Large sky scrapers with high density surrounded by large and open public green.

A lot of this projects where realized all over Europe, from the outskirts of Paris to the Bijlmer in Amsterdam.

But in time it became clear this did not work on a human experience level. These areas were felt unsafe by people and not user friendly. The public space changed from being owned by everybody, to being owned by nobody.

And why did this happen? A lack of human scale. 5

3

WHAT IS HUMAN SCALE?

The human in the city, like a car, is guidable. But most spatial planners in the late 20th century have failed to this. Those spatial were thinking about the spacial quality of fast movemens, like cars and busses. The effect of this is that cities have become unpersonal, large and grey, a concrete jungle.

Cities are not about buildings but about culture, the human scale en the life between the buildings. The humans shape the city and the city shapes the humans within it, is the circle of life in the philosophy of Jan Gehl. Jan Gehl’s

1

Philosophy’s is about the natural human, his behaviour in it’s enviroment, how these influence eachother and human interaction. Jan Gehl has spent 40 years studying “The borderland between sociology, psychology, architecture and planning.

He sees the city as a meeting place for people, that interact with each other on different kind of levels.

The last 30 years Jan Gehl has researched how people act and can act in the city by spatial guidence, space, movement, activity, scale and senses.”7

Harshly critical of urban sprawl, Mumford argues that the structure of modern cities is partially responsible for many social problems seen in western society. Mumford argues that urban planning should emphasize an organic relationship between people and their living spaces. 8

“A city street equipped to handle strangers, and to make a safety asset, in itself, our of the presence of strangers, as the streets of successful city neighborhoods always do, must have three main qualities: First, there must be a clear demarcation between what is public space and what is private space. Public and private spaces cannot ooze into each other as they do typically in suburban settings or in projects.

Second, there must be eyes upon the street, eyes belonging to those we might call the

natural proprietors of the street. The buildings on a street equipped to handle strangers and to insure the safety of both residents and strangers, must be oriented to the street. They cannot turn their backs or blank sides on it and leave it blind.

And third, the sidewalk must have users on it fairly continuously, both to add to the number of effective eyes on the street and to induce the people in buildings along the street to watch the sidewalks in sufficient numbers. Nobody enjoys sitting on a stoop or looking out a window at an empty street. Almost nobody does such a thing.

Large numbers of people entertain themselves, off and on, by watching street activity.�

Jan Gehl5

5

THE THEORY OF THE HUMAN SCALE Jan Gehl has dissected the behaviour of the natural human and his senses. It is possible to design on a human scale with the information he researched.

The golden rules for designing on a human scale are; sizes, scale & distance, living has to be easy and the power of two.

So cities should be built in an organic way and on a human scale, not on a scale for roads, cars or buildings, but for people.

The idea is to get the urban fabric right so that people can walk or bike where they need to go. Build high-quality transit so it is the best option for longer trips.

Include parks and public spaces to create a higher quality of life, even in densely populated urban areas.2

The Principles 1. Walk.

Develop neighborhoods that promote walking.

2. Connect.

Create dense networks of streets and paths for nonmotorized transit.

3. Transit.

Build extensive, high-quality transit. Make connections easy.

4. Cycle.

Prioritize bicycle networks that offer protected lanes.

5. Mix. Zone for mixed-use neighborhoods.

“Under the seeming disorder of the old city, wherever the old city is working successfully, is a marvelous order for maintaining the safety of the streets and the freedom of the city. It is a complex order. Its essence is intricacy of sidewalk use, bringing with it a constant succession of eyes. This order is all composed of movement and change, and although it is life, not art, we may fancifully call it the art form of the city and liken it to the dance — not to a simple-minded precision dance with everyone kicking up at the same time, twirling in unison and bowing off en masse, but to an intricate ballet in which the individual dancers and ensembles all have distinctive parts which miraculously reinforce each other and compose an orderly whole.

The ballet of the good city sidewalk never repeats itself from place to place, and in any once place is always replete with new improvisations.� Jane Jacobs1

6

6. Densify.

Actively encourage greater density around major transit hubs.

7. Compact.

Set growth boundaries and plan for compact regions with short commutes.

8. Shift.

Increase mobility by regulating parking and road use.10

SIZES, SCALE AND DISTANCE more personal the contact between humans becomes.

So the maximum size for a public space is best kept to a maximal distance of 25 meters.9

Distances and line of sight are essential in urban design, these trigger the human senses. In a range of 100 meters the shape of a human is recognized, but you cannot distinct his future’s so it becomes anonymous.

Between a range of 25 meters and 100 meters is the range without contact between humans, besides sight. But between a distance of 0 till 25 meters human contact is possible. You start to recognize distinct futures, what the person is wearing, his hair etc and vocal contact becomes a possibility. This is hardly possible beyond 25 meters.

But between 7 meters and 25 meters human contact becomes possible. Within a

distance of 7 meters there is real human contact like talking, reading emotions, seeing details. When people get closer to each other, the contact becomes more intimate.

Between 3.7 meters and 7 meters the contact can be seen as formal, between 1.2 and 3.7 is the space for friends. But when people get closer the human bond becomes more personal.

Good friends and family members tend to be between 0.5 meters and 1.2 meters from each other. And the lovers? They are only separated between 0 meters and 0.5 meters.

The skyline of a city can tell a lot about its history and values. The skyline tells us what is important for that city.

In the past these were mostly churches. But in the modern era these are the business districts, government buildings and sporting arenas. Most people don’t dislike big buildings, but can dislike what they represent.

People in the past could connect with the values of what the church represented and could identify with them.

But in the modern day the idols have become something not everybody can relate to.

This is a direct effect from who owns the ground and who decides what is being build and it has become a competition between these people. Not focused on the city but focused on their own footprint on a city. In an ideal city buildings would not be higher then 5 stories, or 15 meters high. When buildings become higher then 15 meters humans tend to feel small and uncomfortable. Instead of 1 tower of 15 stories, you can build 3 buildings of 5 stories on the same space that create a more intimate experience.

So the golden rule is; the smaller the space is, the 7

THE POWER OF TWO & LIVING HAS TO BE EASY The power of two “Traffic congestion is caused by vehicles, not by people in themselves.”5 Gehl adds to this theory that people will use what is offered to them. So when city planners focus on improving and expanding the roads for cars, because the roads are congested, people will use the roads for cars more. But this will create a vicious circle.

Expanding roads to reduce traffic congestion will lead to more roads and a higher car use. Because people see a possibility for using the car and it will become a norm for them.

So city planning should not focus on cars but on slow moving traffic, if they want to reduce car use. When they do not focus on car use but on other modes of transport, people tend to shift to a other mode of transportation.

Because the other mode of transport is more efficient, it could be faster or cheaper then the other mode of transportation.

The effect of cycling on a human level is that interaction between people and traffic will become more personal. When riding a bike you will see faces and body language of other people. Unconsciously people need and love to be among other people and will have a positive effect on their mental health.

Besides the interaction side, the mobility of all the different groups inside a city will improve. When a city has a lot of cycle paths, groups that

8

were not mobile before like elderly and children, become mobile. This improves the total wellbeing inside a city, on a social, economical and personal health.11 Living has to be easy Things have to be easy, otherwise people won’t use it and will pick something different that may hurt the city.

“Nothing in the world is more simple and more cheap,” Gehl has said, “than making cities that provide better for people.”

He says it’s possible to achieve this goal by building good public space, developing good quality public transportation, creating more excitement for the senses and planting lots of vegetation to keep the air clean and cool. To Gehl, Bogata, Colombia—with its bus lanes, strong bike culture, generous green spaces and streets

regularly closed to cars—is an excellent example of smart, people-friendly city living that helps the poor majority get around.10 Conclusion When you implement these rules all together you get a people- friendly city. A compact city with good public spaces. The infrastructure lets people choice what mode of transport they want to use, but slow traffic transport infrastructure must be of high quality all over the city, so people tend to use them with all the positive effects they have.

But not only the infrastructure it self needs to be good, also the experience that you have when using this infrastructure.

Think of public green, that has a positive effect on mental and physical health, the air and help cool down the city.12

WHY HUMAN SCALE “A city street equipped to handle strangers, and to make a safety asset, in itself, our of the presence of strangers, as the streets of successful city neighborhoods always do, must have three main qualities: First, there must be a clear demarcation between what is public space and what is private space. Public and private spaces cannot ooze into each other as they do typically in suburban settings or in projects.

Second, there must be eyes upon the street, eyes belonging to those we might call the natural proprietors of the street. The buildings on a street equipped to handle strangers and to insure the safety of both residents and strangers, must be oriented to the street. They cannot turn their backs or blank sides on it and leave it blind.

And third, the sidewalk must have users on it fairly continuously, both to add to the number of effective eyes on the street and to induce the people in buildings along the street to watch the sidewalks in sufficient numbers. Nobody enjoys sitting on a stoop or looking out a window at an empty street. Almost nobody does such a thing. Large numbers of people entertain themselves, off and on, by watching street activity.�5

In cities that are build for people, people walk and bike more, use the car less and spend more time in social activities with friends and family. This is because people within those cities have a choice, weather they do one thing or an other. When they use their bike or when they use their car, because the city layout is not focused only on the car.

Research within neighborhoods and cities all over the world that focused on the human scale stated that humans become happier, healthier, more productive and innovative. In these studies they found very interesting

things. Like adding 23 minutes to a commute had the similar effect as a 19 percent income reduction, because people like spending time with friends or family instead of driving. But it does not only effect mental health but also fysical health.

Researches in Shanghai found out that people who commute by foot or bicycle decrease their change on different kinds of cancer. Because of this there is a slow mindset shift going on, where not only governments but also private investors start to invest into human scaled urban design, for a higher quality of life.13

9

Analyses On the human scale in Marlborough Calgary

1

THE LAYOUT OF MARLBOROUGH

The layout of marlborough is set up in a grid structure and is divided up in four different secotrs by three main roads (marked in purple). Within each sector its devided up again in a gridlike structure.

These streets (marked in lavander) often go in a such a way that it is only for local traffic. You would not drive there if you don’t have to be there. Within these secors

there are a lot of dead ends that are designed as cul-desac’s (marked in blue).

Within Marborough there is a large percentage of public green. This public green is not devided evenly over the neighborhood but is clustered in big chunks, mainly in the middle and south secotr of the neighborhood. While the neighborhood has a big

percentage of public green, the experience of public green in the neighborhood is low, because of the way it is implemented.

In the coming pages the analyses of Marlborough is done on eye level. In this way the human experience is best researched.

11

SERIAL VIEW 1

2

3

12

1 - The road to Marlborough

2 - Entrance to Marlborough

3 - The main roads

Marlborough is boxed in by mayor roads that house only cars. There are no bikelines nor sidewalks, the only mode of transportation is by bar.

From the roads there is no clear view on Marlborough and is turned inside itself.

There is no clear way to tell when you enter Marlborough, it is just another road. When you would drive by the entrence of Marlborough, you would not even notice it. It is not very inviting to say the least.

The main roads are very wide and car focust. There are no bike lines, but there is a sidewalk. The sidewalks are not user friendly. They are narrow and go in straight lines for miles, so there is no positive pedestrian experience.

FIRST IMPRESSIONS 4

5

6

4 - The “streets�

5 - Family squares

6 - The catwalks

The streets in Mrlborough have as main function to transport cars, not humans. This makes them roads not streets. They are designed in such a way that the driving efficient as possible, woide roads and long arches and lines

There are several cul-desac squares in Marlborough.

These are being used as parking spaces and nothing else. Places like this have a high potential to develop an interessting place.

Are streets with a good dimension but are not designed very well. The interaction between public and private is lacking because everything is fenced up. Besides this the catwalks are neglected and dirty.

13

THE CITY AT EYE LEVEL Biking When you want to travel on bike in Marlborough, you will have a hard time. Going from A to B will give you a lot of obsticals. This is because there are no bikelines in the

Connection There are two completely different worlds in Marlborough. The public space, predominatly owned by cars and the private space. These are seperated in a hard line, the green areas in front of the houses. This causes that private en public do not have any connection what so ever with each other.

Houses are places around 6 meters from the public space.

This makes the public space unlively and creates a feeling of anonymity. This is the reason people do not know their neighbours, because they do not have any casual contact with each other. This is the reason why people feel unsave in the public space, because the distance creates a lower social controlle.

14

area, so you have to use the roads that are ment for cars.

The cars are going much faster than bikes on these roads and the drivers are not yet used to bikers. So this can cause a lot of accidents.

So what do people do when

something is hard? Making it easier on them selves.

This translates to that bikers use the sidewalks as bike lanes, what can cause other dangerous situations. This is not a fault of the bikers but mistakes in urban design.

AN EXPERIENCE The walking experience The first thing that comes to mind when looking at the bottum picture is: “ Is his car broken?�

It says a lot about the state of sidewalks in Marlborough because the experience you have as a pedestrian is not plessant. The pavement is neglected and narrow in size.

Besides this there are not interesting or routes to walk, everything is monotonous and straight. The human senses are not triggerend not you can go exploring. It is designed in a robotoical functional way, going from A to Z, but forgetting there are 24 letters inbetween.

15

MAINROADS

Here we see one of the main roads that runs through Marlborough. The first thing that is noticable is the sheer with of the roads. (marked yellow) The with is around 15 meters in some cases and is focust on a smooth transit for cars.

While you can have a smooth driving experience in Marlborough thanks to the roads themselves, the rest is

• • • • • •

16

slacking. There are no bikelines what so ever, what would make it a very dangerous and scary experience for people on a bike.

This also has an effect on how people think unconsiously. Now there are no bike lines, so it is not normal to use a bike. Thus people tend to not even think about riding on a bike. People use what is given to them. They are not given bikelines so they won’t use a bike.

Roads are too wide Missing bike lines There is no connection between parking and sidewalk Non positve experience pedestrian Houses don’t have a connection with the public space A lot of green is surrounding the road

There may be sidewalks but like in the rest of Marlborough these are lacking a positive experience for pedestrians.(marked orange) The narrow sidewalks go in straight lines and there is nothing to do or experience for the pedestrian.

Besides this the placement of the houses are far away from the road and sidewalk (marked pink), what decreases the connection with the neighbourhood, social controlle and interaction.

STREETS

Most of the streets inside Marlborough look completly the same. Wide roads (marked yellow) for cars, without bike lines with parking on the sides. This makes for a plessant driving experience when you want to go from A to B, but nothing interessting happens when you go through the area. Every street looks the same.

• • • • • •

For the pedestrial there are narrow sidewalks (marked orange). These sidewalks are always going street along the long roads and make for an unpleasant walking experience. You would not go for a walk, because nothing interresting happens, you can not explore in these area’s.

And again the houses are places far from the streets and have a front yard marked pink). These front yards are hardly used by the inhabitants and thus make the streets very open and wide. The streets become anonymous because of this. Are these really streets or just roads in disguise?

Monotonous streets Missing bike lines Front gardens are unused Non positve experience pedestrian Houses don’t have a connection with the public space Roads are too wide.

17

SPACES

There are a couple of green area’s placed in Marlborough.

These are fairly large in size but lack a proper (multifunctional) function. There is a baseball field placed in one, but the others dont have any function whatsoever. An interressting finding during the analyses is that the “parks” or green areas are missing entrences and paths.

The idea behind this could

• No entrences • Missing bike lines and paths • No functions.

18

be you can enter from every side, but this won’t work.

When there are no paths and entrences places in green area’s, most people will think the grounds are off limit and won’t use the area.

While there are several green areas in Marlborough, non qualifies as a park. There is nothing to do there, because there are no functions nor

paths. So the sollution this this could be to redesin these areas into real parks for people to come together.

Paths that lead throuht them and guide you along several different areas with different functions.

CUL-DE-SAC

There are several dead ends in Marlborough that are designed as a cul-desac (marked orange). While these areas can be seen as little squares, the design for them are not like that. They are designed completly open and are being used as parking spaces (marked blue). while the cul-de-sac’s could be very interessting public spaces when designed correctly, they

• • • • •

are not interessting now. But instead of having a proper function that triggers human interaction, all the open areas are filled with grass (marked yellow). Additionally, the houses, with their big front gardens that are not being used, are placed far away from the public space. So the cul-de-sac’s become anonymous and empty again.

A solution to this in a designer view point, could be to make the front gardens smaller and make the cul-de-sac itself bigger, so the houses are more connected to the public space.

Used as parking space No function Front gardens are unused and big A lot of green is surrounding the cul-de-sac Houses don’t have a connection with the public space

19

SWOT Summery In the human scaled analasys of Marlborough it came forth that the public space is not human centered. The area is very car friendly but also very human unfriendly. The streets are lled with cars and side walks are way to small. It is not a very inviting area to cycle in because as a cyslist you would not feel safe to cycle here. Besides this the area lakes places. There are hardly any spaces for people to recreate, move or meet. The spaces that are located for this are neglected, too large, not very aesthetical and not functional desig- ned very well. The effects of the large scale roads is that the public space has become anonymous and no one cares for it. The public space is now owned by no one instead of owned by everybody.

Strenghts • Green around roads Besides this, at this point in time there is not a single thing in Marlborough that has the human scale in mind. The area is designed for two things, people living on their own estate and sowly using the public space for fast moving traf c.

Weaknesses • Size - The streets are way to large, they can not even been seen as streets but more as roads.

The do not severe the humans but the car.

• Experience – The experience in the public space is dull. The only thing you experience are cars and empty streets. This is not very inviting.

• Neglected – The public space is neglected and no one feels responsible nor af liated with the public space. Because of this improvement and development in urban spaces will be cheered by inhabitants of Marlborough Oppertunities • Space – There is a lot of space to develope in the public space for more human scaled spaces.

• Cul de sac’s – The cul de sac’s are could be strong points for people to come together, when these are redeveloped into human friendly spaces.

• Green areas – There are several green area’s in Marlborough. Most are hardly used and lack a function. By redesigning the green area’s and give them functions people will use them again and that will improve health, social cohesian and interaction.

Threats • No Af liation with public space– people arent af liated by public space. Because of this they won’t care for the public space themselves and the state of the public space will deteriate.

• Private ownership – More and more houses are being bought up by foreign investors that dont 20

SWOT

Strengths

Weaknessess

• Green around roads

• Size • Experience • Neglected

Opportunities

Threats

• No affiliation with public space • Private ownership

• Space • Cul de sac • Green areas

Creating places

Turn roads into streets

By creating places in the spaces human interest in public space will be triggered.

People will start to use the public spaces and start to care for them. When people start using public space social interaction and cohesian will grow. People will get to know each other and will feel af liated to each other.

By redesigning the roads into more human scaled spaces, people will feel and act different in these places.

Not only will they start to use the public space, also their mental and physical health will improve, they will start to interact with one an other and will use different kinds of transportation.

21

STEEP & CONCLUSION Social • The streets are designed in a way that hinders social interaction and is anonymous. They are not designed as an actractive mode of transportation, thus people don’t use them as they could be used.

• The cul de sac’s lacks a social function, it only servers as an area to store a car or travel by car.

This could be used as a social area like a square is used.

• The public space is not owned by anyone instead of everyone. Because the public space is only designed and used for fast moving traf c, nobody feels connected or responsible for the public space.

• Front gardens are not being used by their owners. They are a extra devider to the pu- blic space and distance the people from each other.

Technological • Because of lack of technological innovation and degredation of the public space, development could be well received by the inhabitants of Marlborough.

• The way the main roads are layed out, coming and going from or to Marlborough is very easy and it is well connected to the main roads of the city.

• The public space is not designed in a way that improves human wellbeing, but for easy car mobility.

Economical • Because of the lack of places instead of spaces in Marlborough it is not attractive for businesses to open. By improving public space, making places instead spaces it could become very intressting to open up a business in Marlborough and it would improve the livelines of the public space.

Enviromental • Because of the lack of urban green implemantations and a lot of concrete water and snow can become a problem.

• People mostly travel by car, not becasue of distance but the lack of good bikelanes and sidewalks.

People use what they get overed, when they get overed good bike lanes and sidewalks they tend to use those.

Political • The city of Calgary wants to improve slow tra c in Calgary. They focus on the city center but forget about the sub urban neighborhoods. Because of this people in the suburban area’s tend to have a different mindset towards slow tra c then people in the city center. The mindset of people can be shifted when improving the slow traf c infrastructe.

• The city of Calgary is working together with the inhabitants of Marlborough by letting them have a say in the way the new garbage bins will look like. By doing this they are giving back the public space back to the people and as a result they can start caring for it again.

Conclusion Because Marlborough was designed in a time where a different mindset was dominant in urban development. The American dream was dominant in this era, every family get’s his own house and garden where they can retreat from the rest of society. With this mind- set the public space only got a role as car transportation instead of a multi-purpose area where people not only use it for different transportation like walking or cycling, social in- teraction, sports and other kinds of uses. This has caused that nobody uses or cares about the public space and social interaction between citizens has come to a halt in these area’s. This is mainly caused by the anonymous public spaces and not different life sty- les compared to europeans. The proof can be found in Calgary city center, where they transformed the car friendly public space into a more human focust way.

22

ENDNOTES 1- Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilization, New York 1934.

2 - Richard Sennet, Classic essays on the culture of cities an introduction, New Jersey 1969.
 3 - Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilization, New York 1934.

4 - Robert E. Park, The city, Chicago 1925.

5 - Sjoert Soeters, Lecture ideale straat, Amsterdam 2016.

6 - Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York 1961.

7 - Jan Gehl, Cities for people, Copenhagen 2010.

8 - Lewis mumford, The City in History, New York 1961.

9 - Jan Gehl, Cities for people, Copenhagen 2010.

10 - Jacquie Moore, five facts about the human scale, Calgary herald, 2013.

11 - Louise Kielgast, the cities of the future are people-friendly cities, The Architect’s Newspaper, 2008 12 - Jan Gehl, Making healthy cities, DAC & cities, 2014 13 - CC Huang and Hal Harvey, The Eight Principles for Building People-Friendly Cities, Caixin 2015.

23

Indra Kooge

Urban Design