Code, Urban Design, Place-making, and You

Code is part of everything, a code went into the program i am writing this blog with, there was a code that regulated the way the computer, chair, desk, and even apartment was made. There is a code that regulated how we are made a code in our DNA. Code can rule and regulate parts and pieces but mainly dictates how things relate to each other, context, and its surrounding. A general theme of this blog has been place, placelessness, and place-making because of my personal liking of Edward Relph's work. I see many parts of modern code come into place-making but one common debate topic i find even more interestingly integrated into this topic as both sides as well as its hybrid version all have Pro's and Con's to how they deal with the creation of place.

I am speaking of Form Based Codes Vs. Traditional Zoning, i have singled out specific topics under this discussion that i will single out and discuss on its stance to place and/or placelessness.

• De-emphasizing use zoning VS. Use-based zoning:
• De-emphasizing use zoning basically speaks about allowing land to be what it wants to be in the sense that it can create its own place. Which in turn can be terrific for an environment because it can create its own sense of place without restriction which can be very special. But here it runs the risk of quickly becoming placeless, a place without feeling, meaning, or belonging.
• Use-based zoning is basically exactly what it sounds like land is previously singled out to house a specific set of buildings which if done correctly could be the best thing and give a space a great opportunity to become a place and gives that place a sense of belonging from the get go. This also however runs the risk of being generic and again becoming placeless, this time not feeling as if it doest belong but as if it has no identity of its own, no meaning.
• Building fits to use VS. Building fits to lot:
• Building fits to use basically means that the building should take its form as needed this means not taking the boundary of the site as a concern (however this mostly does not mean going over the site boundary), this also means not taking facade constraints as a concern. This is usually a great thing for place making for it allows the building to truly interact with the context and its surrounding as well as externally react to its internal programatic functions which often evokes at least a notion of being a focal point or interest. This could lead to placelessness if the design goes too far and alienates the users.
• Building fits to lot means that the building fits the site to what it is zoned for down to the setbacks and build percentages. This often also means it has to adhere to certain facade constraints. This can have a very negative effect on place as the issue of generic comes back, it once again gets no identity.
• Neighborhoods VS. Districts: (here we are talking about the broader sense of place/placelessness)
• Neighborhoods are identified more as free based residential areas with a few commercial places intertwined, most homes are individuals. This gives the homes themselves the obvious sense of place but the neighborhood as well, residences will always give a place off belonging but neighborhoods create slightly more place through character. 
• Districts are identified as residential areas zoned in one area and commercial in another, sometimes the homes are individuals and sometimes they are cookie-cutter. As i said before residential areas are great spaces for place because they make you feel like an insider as if you belong however districts have slightly less identity and are more rigid and can fall quite quickly into the generic placelessness rabbit hole.

Though many would argue form based codes are the more popular over the two i would have to argue that though the codes allow for more freedom and place to openly form ideas in the urban landscape without some traditional zoning your run the risk of creating an unorganized wasteland where eventually nothing would hang together and we would all feel as outsiders in it. This is why codes are so adaptable and the codes have created hybrids, not to necessarily address the idea of place but to address core issues to do with place such as compatibility of uses and diversity of open spaces.

Hybrid codes coming from debates like the ones discussed above inspired typologies like plug-in design which just speaks to the sustainability and adaptability of urban design and place. An excellent example of this is The New York High Line Project. This project done by Diller Scofidio and Renfro is a beautiful example of a project on a site that is its polar opposite yet so perfectly belongs there. In their own words DS+R said: 

"Inspired by the melancholic, unruly beauty of this postindustrial ruin, where nature has reclaimed a once vital piece of urban infrastructure, the new park interprets its inheritance."

The project's many bio types exemplifies nature and its diversity something that is far from the downtown of New York City. But how do urban codes and place fit in with the High Line? Modern urban codes made this very project possible. Hybrid codes allowing plug-in design, de-emphasizing use zoning and allowing modifying to districts allowed this project to be formed. But restrictions were still in place and thats what gave this path its many breaks, lifts, slopes and indents that give it its particular characteristics. These are all part of the characteristics that give it place. Though this is a vast open space it is very unique and through it stark contrast it feels as if it belongs because the city needs it, they have become one.

Through analysis of examples and synthesizing typologies, codes, and theory we can tell that everything is connected. Everything in urban design comes back to a sense of place and yet everything comes back to the being no matter how large the project. Looking at all of these topics and the large projects that come along with them i can't help but notice that we must take the time to look in and focus on the one as well as the many at all times in order to get the full understanding.

~Hanna