is green always green eng

Desert Architecture and Urban Planning, Institute for Dryland Environmental Research, BGU Movement for Israeli Urbanism

Is Green Always Green?

Quantity, Activities and Quality of Urban Public Open Spaces (POS)

A case study from Israel

Dr. Yodan Rofè

Gabriela Feierstein

Inbal Zarchin

This research was funded by the Israel Science Foundation grant No. 546/07


BACKGROUND

In orthodox city planning, neighborhood open spaces are venerated in an amazingly uncritical fashion, much as savages venerate magical fetishes… Walk with a planner through a dispirited neighborhood and though it be already scabby with deserted parks and tired landscaping festooned with old kleenex, he will envision a future of More Open Space.

Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, pp. 96


The Best Cities in the World - Barcelona


The Best Cities in the World - Paris


The Best Cities in the World - Bologna


What do these cities have in common?

• They were built by human beings

• Historic cities (until the end of the 19th

century), but used by modern people

• Undergo continuous processes of renewal

• Extremely high land values (demand much exceeds supply)

• Built around streets and streets make most of their public open space

• High density, high land coverage, low to mid rise (3-6 floors)


Bologna – post WWII extensions


In the 20th century human kind “forgot” how to build cities

Fewer streets – greater distances between intersections

• And...

– Mid – low density

– High rise

– Low coverage

– Extensive open spaces

Are street standards the only problem?

• Or...

– Low density

– Low rise

– Medium coverage

– Extensive open spaces


The six destroyers of urbanism

• Prescriptive zoning and aversion to density

• The hierarchical classification of streets

• The neighborhood unit

• Street design and parking standards

• Parking standards

• Public open space standards


A LOOK AT PUBLIC OPEN SPACE (POS) STANDARDS AND WHAT THEY DO

Is it true that there aren’t enough POS?

Are people using the POS?

How do people feel when they are in the POS?

How do climate zones and settlement size differ?

Conclusions and lessons for practice


11

Established standards in Israel for POS Open Space Type Space Demands Characteristics of Use Location and Remarks

Characteristics

Urban park 3 m2 per person.>100 dunam.

Sport, playgrounds, sitting corners, shade areas, etc

Accessibility of pedestrians and bike riders.

Quarter park 2 m2 per person.10 - 50 dunam.

Playgrounds, sitting corners, shade areas, grass, etc

Up to 30000 residentsNext to community center.

Neighborhood park 3 m2 per person.5-10 dunam.

Like quarter park. Next to neighborhood.No need to cross main roads.

Inner playgrounds 2 m2 per person.2-5 dunam.

Playing facilities, sitting corners, fitting to all year climate conditions.

Part of the neighborhood.

Wide and Open Sitting Corners

Up to 1 dunam Flooring, gardening, planting.

Fitting the location.

Pedestrians and Bicycle paths

Path width of 5-8 meters.

Pavement. Combination of planting and gardening.

Connecting urban and neighborhood centers.


Source: www.adamteva.org.il

What the Environmentalists want?

In recent years, the Israel Union of Environmental Defense

(IUED), and the Ministry of the Environment advocate an

increase in urban open space standards and their

implementation and management.


The effect of the standards on gross and net density

10000 Units

3.1 Person/unit

90 sq.ft. per person open space

Gross

Density

Neede

d area Roads

Public

buildings POS

Total

Public

areas

%

public

areas

Residential

area

Net

Density

DU/acre Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres DU/acre

10 1,000 200 12.5 64.05 277 28% 723 13.82

20 500 113 12.5 64.05 189 38% 311 32.16

30 333 83 12.5 64.05 160 48% 173 57.65

40 250 75.0 12.5 64.05 152 61% 98 101.57

50 200 60.0 12.5 64.05 137 68% 63 157.60

60 167 50.0 12.5 64.05 127 76% 40 249.27

70 143 42.9 12.5 64.05 119 84% 23 426.43

80 125 37.5 12.5 64.05 114 91% 11 913.21


Gross Density, Net Density and Land Coverage

• Typical recent plan in Israel (Bialik on the Park, Fogeland Shoham)

• 247 Acres, 4,935 du

• 20 du/acre gross density

• 12,500 p/sq.km.

• Very high net density

• Very low land coverage


What are the consequences?

• Open space standards do not allow us to reach high densities with low and mid rise building

• They force either high rise or mid-low density

• These typologies and densities do not allow for a walkable, vibrant city

• Public transport is less viable

• Sprawl and automobile dependence are increased

• Harder to create mixed use areasExisting urban open space standards diminish the

sustainability of urban areas in Israel


THE QUANTITY AND ACCESSIBILITY OF POS

Research Questions:

Is it true that there aren’t enough POS?

How does the amount of POS differ in different size settlements and neighborhoods?


Beer

Sheva

Lehavim

Arad

Bat Yam

Shoham

Ashdod

Case studies chosen from two climate zones


NEIGHBORHOOD TYPES

Coastal plain Northern Negev

Major city Ashdod Beer Sheva

Old center (1950-1970)

Yud neighb. (1990-2000)

Tet neighb. (1970-1985)

Neve Zeev (1990-2000)

Medium city

Bat Yam Arad

Center (before 1948)

Ramat HaNassi(1960-1975)

Center (1960-1975)

Gevim (1990-2000)

Community settlement

Shoham Lehavim

Center Center


Neighborhood Open SpaceAny unbuilt land within the boundary of the neighborhood, or immediately adjacent

to it, which provides, or has the potential to provide, environmental, social

and/or economic benefits to the community, whether direct or indirect

Green Space

• vegetated land

• water or geological

feature within urban

areas

Civic Space

• urban squares

• market places

• other paved areas or hard

landscaped areas

Grey Space

• areas used for non

pedestrian movement

and other functional uses

• Parks and Gardens

• Amenity Greenspace

• Children's play areas

• Sports facilities

• Green corridors

• Natural/semi-natural greenspace

• Civic squares

• Market places

• Pedestrian streets

• Promenades and sea

fronts

• Streets

• Parking areas

• Utility areas

• Previously developed

abandoned sites

Neighborhood open spaces - definitions

Adapted from Williams and Green (2001)


20

Description and classification of POSVariation to the initial classification of POS:

Green

Grey Undefined

Civic

- Others: buildings, private open space.

- Streets


Quantity of POSAs a % of total neighborhood area

City NeighborhoodStudy areaGreen POS Civic POS Grey POS Undefined POSTotal POS Streets Others

Center 100 9.16 2.66 3.58 0.00 15.39 22.06 62.55

Yud 100 8.13 2.73 5.79 3.15 19.81 33.78 46.41

Tet 100 6.67 1.84 5.90 12.17 26.57 17.48 55.95

Neve Zeev 100 6.43 0.98 0.30 9.31 17.01 31.07 51.92

R. Hanassi 100 12.52 1.27 9.63 1.05 24.47 20.04 55.49

Center 100 7.60 0.68 0.81 1.01 10.10 22.28 67.63

Center 100 3.44 8.09 14.11 0.76 26.41 22.25 51.35

Gevim 100 16.65 0.43 0.00 10.43 27.51 23.33 49.16

Shoham Center 100 13.96 2.14 4.79 2.45 23.33 16.95 59.71

Lehavim Center 100 10.46 1.66 1.26 17.39 30.77 21.80 47.44

Mean 9.50 2.25 4.62 5.77 22.14 23.10 54.76

Mean Desert 8.73 2.60 4.31 10.01 25.65 24.13 51.16

Mean Non-Desert 10.27 1.89 4.92 1.53 18.62 23.02 58.36

Ashdod

B. Sheva

Bat Yam

Arad

Similar amount of land is invested in POS as in streets


POS accessibility

Yud Neighborhood, Ashdod Neve Zeev, Beer Sheva


R² = 0.779

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000

Am

ou

nt

of

PO

S p

er

pe

rso

n (

sq

m/p

ers

on

)

Population density (Ppl/sqm)

Relation between population density and amount of POS

Arad Gevim

Lehavim

ShohamBat Yam R. HaNassi

Beer Sheva Tet

Arad center Bat Yam centerBeer Sheva

Neve Zeev

Ashdod centerAshdod

Yud

Population density and Green POS per person


Green POS per person

Amount of green POS per person by neighborhood

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Arad

Gev

im

Leha

vim

Shoh

amBa

t Yam

R. H

aNas

siBe

er S

heva

Tet

Ashd

od Y

ud

Bat Y

am c

ente

r

Ashd

od c

ente

r

Arad

cen

ter

Beer

She

va N

. Zee

v

Neighborhood case studies

Sq

.m/p

erso

n

Neighborhoods satisfy existing standards, but only low rise neighborhoods and “Corbusian” high rise neighborhood satisfy the proposed “environmental” standard

Low rise sf homes

Public housing block neighborhood


On Quantity and size of POS

• In most neighborhoods there is too much POS, many areas are not cared for or used – this is particularly true in desert settlements

• Many POS are hardly used, they seem to have only an aesthetic value for residents

• Accessibility to POS is ubiquitous. Most homes are less than 150 m. away, almost all less than 300 m. Away


THE QUALITY OF POS

Measured by:

Intensity of optional and social use (Gehl)

Survey of residents on use and evaluation

Feeling maps in select POS


Intensity of use by POS type, climate and season

Optional activity by season and climate area

96.1

165.5

99.4

198.79.7

23.9

9.4

9.7

19.9

31.6

8

31.9

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

win

ter

sum

mer

win

ter

sum

mer

Non desert area Desert area

Climate areas by season

Pp

l/h

ou

r p

er

du

nam

Green w ide

Green linear

Civic

Difference between seasons is stronger in Desert Areas


Movement and Optional Activity - Summer

SUMMER

R2 = 0.5018

R2 = 0.2125

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 50 100 150 200 250

Pedestrian movement (Ppl/20')

Op

tio

na

l a

cti

vit

y in

PO

S (

Pp

l/2

0')

Non Desert area

Desert area

Linear (Desert area)

Linear (Non Desert area)

Use of POS intentional not casual


Most successful – POS combining civic and green space


Survey Results:Preference for outside activities

People prefer private open space and walking along neighborhood streets to neighborhood commercial centers and sitting in neighborhood parks

Activity in open spacesvalue

from 1-5

1 Sitting in the private open spaces of their houses 4

2 Walking along the neighborhood streets 3.4

3 Spending time in open spaces out of the neighborhood 3.2

4 Spending time in the neighborhood commercial center 3

5 Spending time in the neighborhood park 2.7


Ranking of Satisfaction with POS

City Neighborhood Grade M2/pp

Shoham Center 4.4 14.50

Lehavim Center 4.3 28.95

Arad Gevim 3.9 37.82

Bat Yam R. HaNassi 3.5 13.82

Ashdod Yud 3.5 5.39

Bat Yam Center 3.3 5.34

Ashdod Center 3.2 5.33

Arad Center 3.1 3.36

Beer Sheva Neve Zeev 2.9 3.19

Beer Sheva Tet 2.7 7.29


FEELINGS IN POS


Context Site

No. of people & activities

LocationWeather Physical features

Individual characteristics

Urban design qualities

Feelings

Factors that influence the perceived qualities of POS


Survey of feelings in POS


Feelings in POS by season

-2

-1

1

4

7

8

6

7

14

9

15

14

16

18

-8

10

8

15

13

13

16

16

14

20

19

23

24

23

-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Civic

Unused

Used N

Civic

Civic

Unused

Civic

Used

Used S

Unused E

Unused W

Used

Unused

Used

AR

AR

AS

BY

BS

BS

AS

BS

AS

BY

BY

AR

AS

BY

Sum of Mean Feeling Evaluation

summer winter


Feelings by climatic zones

Mean feeling

coastal plain

Mean feeling

northern Negevp-value

All POS 0.55 0.36 0.06

Civic POS 0.41 0.1 0.12

Used green POS 0.52 0.68 0.

Unused green POS 0.68 0.29


Influencing factors

Most repeated positive influence

All POS Vegetation Aesthetics and

the design

Northern

Negev

The

surrounding

environment

Coastal

plain

Cleanliness

and

maintenance


Influencing factor questionnaire

Most repeated negative influence

All POS Lack of

vegetation

Lack of

cleanliness and

maintenance

Northern

Negev

The

surrounding

environment


The physical quality of POS and Feelings

Successful POS Unsuccessful POS

Aesthetic and harmonious

Shaded play equipment

Lush Green

Vast, unmaintained grassy areas

Unshaded sitting places


On People’s preferences and feelings

• People prefer private open space to all kinds of POS

• People prefer walking on neighborhood streets to Green POS

• Even though they do not use them much people value the presence of POS and think they are not good enough

• Maintenance is key to good feelings in POS

• Despite less use – people feel better in used green POS than in civic POS

• POS do not succeed in ameliorating difficult summer conditions


• Importance of Civic areas – most used but not well liked. Currently not standard

• Green is appreciated but people prefer to walk on streets - Green streets – increasing green, but where people actually prefer to walk

• As much as possible connect green space to civic space: town squares, boulevards

• Green POS are not attractive per se – they need a qualitative reason for being – a functional and ecological program

• Relate POS to the amount of private open space so as to achieve the right balance

• Do we even need quantitative standards today?


THANK YOU!!


The importance of civic areas


Green Streets


Connect green space to civic space

Boulevards English squares


Green spaces need a program

Urban nature Water retention

Hammarby-SjöstadStockholm, Sweden

Images: Kristina Hill


Green spaces need a program

Agriculture Heat island mitigation

Image: Lutz KatschnerImage: Jeremey Nemeth

is green always green eng

Design