A city should be considered as a mouldable built fabric, constantly in transformation, adapting to actual needs. Whatever kind of urban settlement has to progress in time, otherwise it is condemned to disappear.
The morphological composition of a city is quite simple: there are buildings that define the urban voids and there are open spaces that are complementary to the inside spaces, it depends from where you look at the city fabric. What is more important: the built or the void?
We have to understand the importance of the not built space to generate comfort for the citizens: air ventilation, public functions, circulation, green areas, privacy, leisure, etc. Like in every ecological system in balance, you have to take into account the mutual interaction between the different parts. Also in a city, there should be a balance between the built and the void, and the interaction between both defines urban quality.
The ecological deficit of our cities can not simply be solved with a technological approach to the problem. It is not only a question of more efficient cooling systems, or the optimization of traffic flows. There is a basic problem to be solved of form and functional organization of the city.
The morphology of a city is not an instrument of making it more beautiful, but rather of creating opportunities. The height of a building and its orientation determines the form of its closed environment. An open square or a playground for children generates the need of public functions nearby. The presence of trees and dense green areas provide the city with fresh air and makes it possible to improve the living conditions.
There is a direct link between the morphological composition of a city and grade of comfort: accessibility, energy demand, functional complexity, air quality, social variety, and biodiversity. CS is convinced of the fact that the form of a city can guide and influence the management of a city.
<< return to research