URBAN DESIGN &
DEVELOPMENT
To be
able to understand design development, you must first understand design codes
as they are the dictator of all projects.
Beyond just guidelines, code are requirements that design professionals must
adhere too in order to make spaces safe for the users. The most common form of code that I’m sure we
are all somewhat familiar with already is ADA compliance. This a good example of a code requirement
that affects not only architectural design, but urban design as well. Designing in a manner that complies with
handicap accessibility is no easy feat. Yet
all must take it into consideration.
Another form of code that affects
both the built and natural environments are building and zoning codes. Zoning codes don’t necessarily affect the
physical features of a building, but they do determine where certain types of
building uses may be constructed, which ultimately determines how the space is
used. If mixed use building were not
allowed within a downtown area, the role of a city center that we are familiar
with today would not be the same.
Restaurants, offices, retail and possibly educational facilities would
not make up the heart of our cities. It
could possibly be industrial warehouses or residential neighborhoods. Neither of these are plausible options as in order
for a city to have a thriving downtown it must provide for the masses and build
its economy. But the point being that
code is what allows those various options of entertainment/services to reside
in certain areas, while expelling others.
A question I have for all of you
is, do you think building codes are only used to provide a universal standard
for all in the industry? Or is it more
of a moral code that we as designers are using to implement higher standards
for the wellbeing of all? For example,
walkable cities. These are typically created
through code requirements of block sizing, transportation options and centralizing
live/work/play spaces in one area.
But
do we actually design cities like this because that’s what creates stronger
economies, or because it creates a better way of life for the individuals
residing there? Designing spaces that
provide entertainment, meals, living spaces and jobs, reduces the need for
vehicles and promotes users to be in the natural environment more. “Natural” may still be within an urban
environment, but that’s why pocket parks and building setbacks were
created. To provide greenscape and
sunlight to areas that may otherwise be dominated by buildings or smog.
![]() |
| http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/transit-oriented- development-key-better-cities.html |
ADA, again, is used to aid those not able to
use spaces as easily as others.
Enhancing their way of life by accommodating their needs in a new and
more appropriate way, while still providing for the masses.
Although I do believe the general
reasoning behind code development is to set a universal standard for all built
design, I think it is fair to question whether there is more meaning behind its
need. As we have talked about in my
Professional Practice class, a career in architecture goes far beyond just
drawing and creating things. It requires
a certain “code of conduct” that requires morality in every aspect of your
project. Whether you are meeting with a
client, creating construction documents, or are already done with construction,
knowing the lives of the users within that spaces are in your hands and that it’s
your duty to provide them the safest, most well thought out design that you can
possibly create is key. Because even
though someone may not be looking, you should always be producing your highest
level of work. Which is how I think we
should be interpreting codes. It is not
just about the requirements or restrictions that are outlined, it’s about why
those requirements are needed and how they make our world better.

Building codes have been in place since ancient times with the main purpose of protecting public health, safety and welfare. I believe they are a standard that has developed both from physical attributes that we like to see (such as limiting building heights and allowing for visibility at corners) as well as arising from disasters that proved failure of past techniques (such as requiring fire resistant materials and necessitating taper-style high rise buildings). I think it is more in recent times that planners have used codes to intentionally affect quality of life. However, money is still the driving factor for most change in a nation. In order for change to be lasting, it must not only be economically sustainable, but economically profitable. This applies to buildings, blocks, cities and codes.
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that building codes are determined by money and the profit of a city? If so I'd have to disagree. No matter the budget of a project it must abide by code in order to be used after construction. Code doesn't reflect the profit of a design rather the human safety of the space. Unless you disagree?
DeleteI think money can allow the developer or designer to challenge the building codes. As long as the design is feasible and still has public safety in mind.
DeleteCodes and regulations are developed and enforced to protect the public good. They are cultural production based on situations and resolutions at the time that they were created. As a designer, we should be able to question all these rules and laws, why they are there and whether or not they are still applicable.
ReplyDeleteHow often do codes actually get updated and revised for modern needs? We've briefly talked about this in Pro. Practice, but do codes ever really change? Or is it typically only changed at the local government level? City by city rather than national/globally?
Delete