Implications for Policy and Practice

Additionally, it is recommended that future research seeks to investigate the role of non-physical factors such as culture, history, and religion, in delivered buildings with facades that reflect and respond to the diverse needs and preferences of people. Other forms of assessment such as a Health Impact Assessment which is ‘a combination of procedures, methods, and tools by which a policy, programme or project may be judged as to its potential effects on the health of the population’ (WHO, 1999) (p.4), may aid in providing a more rigorous understanding on the impact of design proposals on specific populations. Other methodologies such as the use of Pineo’s (2020) THRIVES framework also proposes the investigation of the impact of façade design on health and wellbeing through multiple scales of contributing factor such as local, ecosystem, and planetary health and further recommends the adoption of a systems thinking approach.

Lastly, the study sought to investigate the impact of façade design on pedestrians through various building components and several affective responses, it is encouraged that further research investigates the matter with a directed focus towards building façade aspects of detailing, form, and use of materials as these components led to the most positive pedestrian encounters, and linked to the causes of negative experiences, and hence are liable to further psychological and physiological impacts that expand beyond individuals’ affect.

5.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE

The optimism surrounding new technologies and smart systems in finding solutions for a spectrum of architectural and urban challenges has undoubtfully shaped how policy and practice respond to those challenges. While challenges are ever emerging and extensively dynamic, it is crucial to note that as raised by Pineo (2022), to reframe ideas of healthy placemaking, shifting attention towards structural barriers to health need to be recognised. In discussion with industry members, it was revealed that sustainability and building performance are factors of upmost importance when it comes to façade design - and structural barriers encompassing pedestrians’ health and wellbeing remain unrecognised and hence not accounted for.

This study therefore calls on practice to be cognizant of the response they want their buildings to generate in pedestrians especially those regarding affect as research has raised them as most identifiable. Whether that may be comfort, excitement, or curiosity – industry is encouraged to seek the variation of responses that are certainly induced within viewers because of what they encounter of built facets.

On the other hand, policy is encouraged to investigate the methodologies carried out in design review to ensure aspects of regulation within development ‘that seeks to control the physical attributes and uses of new buildings, and the spaces between them, so as to ensure a rewarding sensuous experience for the public who use the environment thus created’ (Madanipour, 1996) (p. 162) are not unfair to pedestrians and their health and wellbeing.

6.0 CONCLUSION

The current study explored the impact of façade design on pedestrian affect through a London based case study investigation. The buildings that were used as basis of the investigated were: the Montcalm East hotel, the Blavatnik building of Tate Modern, the Rubens at the Palace hotel, and the Viacom International Media building. The buildings were scrutinized in terms of their urban environment through mapping, observations, environmental monitoring and Hillnhütter’s (2021) environment matrix to best account the influences of the surrounding environment on the pedestrian, and in terms of their façade design through a façade design configuration system that had been established in support of this study. The façade design configuration system expanded on deriving a simple ID through design parameters and classifications to describe the building’s form and façade feature as well as the façade’s; surface area, number of surface planes, number of integrated themes, number of materials used, and ratio of window to walls - to better account facets of its characteristics. These methods were complied with responses obtained from pedestrian questionnaires to shed insight into the pedestrian experience through affect, comfort, and perceptions and consequently what this means in terms of health and wellbeing implications. Additionally, interviews with practice members were conducted to build discussion around the agenda of façade design within the built environment industry and hence identify the extent of which pedestrians’ health and wellbeing is recognised within the roles of practice and policy in contemporary time.

The study found that, generally – pedestrians are indeed affected by buildings’ façade design when in urban spheres through mental or physical, elevation and/or deterioration. The investigation of such, highlighted that this is the case for the majority – where pedestrians have never been mentally or physically affected by a building façade, they form a minor percentage compared to those who have. Regarding the four case studies, the study investigated the variety of positive and negative affect the buildings’ façade induced in pedestrians if any, and what characteristics of the façade this was a result of. It was found that in context of the Montcalm East, admiration was the most common feeling resulting from detailing. In context of the Blavatnik, curiosity was the most common feeling resulting from the buildings’ form. In context of the Rubens and the Viacom, visual comfort was the most common feeling, and in both cases, this was a result of the use of materials. It is hence evident that façade design may contribute to wider links to health and wellbeing.

The study included limitations that question the extent of reliability and generalisability. This expanded on the investigation of pedestrians’ affect, response, and perceptions, solely through self-reported data rather that of physiological data or the addition of it. Moreover, sections of the carried-out methodologies, such as Hillnhütter’s (2021) environment matrix and the façade design configuration system required a subjective point of view from the assessor rather than an objective one. In terms of field work methodologies, the location and set-up of the author in each case study limited the degree to which urban and pedestrian observations could be made. Additionally, observations being made within the same period of 10:00 to 15:00 when pedestrian questionnaires were being conducted limit fairness between each case and a thorough investigation.

It is recommended that further research assessing the impact of built facets and particularly buildings on pedestrians affect, comfort, and perceptions, adopt methodologies that thoroughly account exposures. Tools such as the façade design configuration can be used to apply descriptive measures that expand beyond general aspects to account more thoroughly design characteristics that pedestrians encounter. Additionally, the inclusion of physiological measures would allow the examination of façade design on core biological systems that in turn have important implications on health and wellbeing.

7.0 REFERENCES

‘steps’ to wellbeing and health.

Gjerde, M. and Vale, B., 2022. An examination of people’s preferences for buildings and

VXGC7

SEPTEMBER 2022

between urban building façade visual elements and people’s preferences in the city of Gorgan,

VXGC7 SEPTEMBER 2022