Urban Analysis
To analyse something properly, a certain amount of data is needed so you can draw reasonably useful conclusions or recommendations. For urban analysis, mapping data supplies this quantity of data and the development of satellite imaging has expanded this field immensely, therefore, supplying massive amounts of data for this type of analysis.
I can see where this subject fits in with architecture as no building exists in isolation, it can’t. There will always be something around it, even if it is space.
Buildings exist in relationship to the other buildings, streets and spaces around it and this relationship is one that is everywhere and has existed in time as well.
The three schools of thought, French, English and Italian have developed in an attempt to create a framework around which we can further analyse cities and their development. To some extent they have been successful.
BUT, from further research, I found that there are further “schools of thought”, in particular, the Chicago School,[1] and the LA School,[2] about urban analysis, so it makes me think that there is no one “best” way to analyse our urban areas, it most likely depends on what you want to prove, like statistics; you can make the numbers say anything you want to.
I know that is a negative point of view, but urban analysis is a dynamic, evolving field and has a long way to go, but it is going to be an interesting ride.
No comments:
Post a Comment