Abstract
In Arabic cities, diversity can be seen in the development of the same underlying order. This assists to manage to qualify well-defined relationships with various levels of movement in the urban setting. The micro-morphological examination is used to emphasise further the spatial pattern at a micro-level within a macro-scale scope. Hence, micro-level studies are essential in evaluating the built environment with regard to private and public domain. Terminologically, the notion of the symbiosis of how the private and public domains interact with each other is needed. Also, there is a need for people to know their rights when using the street edge and the extent to which they (the owner/user) have the authority to modify the public space. The transition of the urban pattern from the traditional order (spontaneous pattern) to the modern model (pre-planned system) not only changes the spatial morphological structure entities but also transformed the association of the private and public domain.
Keywords
- street pattern
- private control
- public control
- traditional (spontaneous) order
- modern (pre-planned) system
- urban symbiotic relationship
1. Introduction
The pattern (Edge–Edge interface) is controlled by morphological parameters that manage the street network regarding the binary element: plots and blocks. The level of superposition between the two domains is evaluated by various indicators based on the specifications of the street pattern. According to Al-Saaidy [1] ‘the assets of Baghdad today belong to this historical period of the city with its significant monuments and organic street pattern. Otherwise, the urban areas that settled outside the historical zone were designed according to a modern scheme and a modernist ideology’ ([1], p. 6). Moreover, Marshall [2] confirms that ‘land use zones and roads, in a modernist urban structure, [are] represented separately as nodes and links, but in a traditional urban street network, the streets themselves are significant spatial entities’ ([2], p. 112). The mechanism in operating the street edge differs when it comes to comparison between two patterns: traditional and the modern network. The convergence between the individuals and their adjacent edges, which mostly relates to the street life and social interactions. The pattern (Edge–Edge interface) is also responsible for defining the boundary between two realms, private and public. The degree of overlap between the two territories is measured by different indices based on the characteristics of the street edge, such as porosity, transparency and permeability (Figure 1).
Using a fine-scale analysis by examining the street pattern seems to be a more effective means of understanding the urban characteristics of streets over large-scale classifications. There is a definite pattern of activity about the order process of compound parameters, which increases in an area or within set spatial dimensions. Conversely, large-scale order is influenced by minimum or single settings, and this due to the comprehensive analysis system of streets, which are expected to be unrelated in formulating distinguishing urban characteristics for the city [1, 3, 4, 5]. Morphologically, the leading characteristics of Baghdad Street pattern combine variety and difference between the pristine and new model. Both patterns, historical and modern, are managed by two distinct generative orders: spontaneous (bottom-up approach) and pre-planned (top-down procedure) [1].
Recently, the debate is not only between conventional and modern concepts in urban studies but also what can be understood between two domains: private and public in formulating street edge [6]. Micro-level explanations are essential in evaluating the adjacent edges of a street. The notion of a symbiotic relationship between private and public spaces, with the effectiveness of street life, plays an essential role in advancing the quality of social interaction. In this article, knowing the affiliation of the spatial attributes at a micro and macro scale needs an interpretation of how spatial ingredients in an urban environment are placed. There could be a range of expectations when the community uses the private and public realms. These two domains express individual action and group behaviour. The shared beliefs, norms, values, economics, politics and the natural and built environment, these considerations are the predominant aspects of living in a particular community [7, 8].
2. Responding to the urban edge
The manner in which a community, particularly in Iraq, manages public spaces could lead to a spectrum of opportunities that inform individual action and collective behaviour alike. Primarily, human behaviour tends to conform to the predominant dimensions of living in a particular community, for example, by embracing the common beliefs, norms, values, economics, politics and the natural/built environment. In this regard, Bianca [9] states that the physical environment represents, ‘… every genuine cultural tradition, architecture and urban form’ and that this ‘… can be seen as a natural expression of prevailing spiritual values and beliefs …. it is an outcome of tradition and daily practices which correspond to certain spiritual principles’ ([9], p. 22). These factors embed the interrelationship between space, time and culture. Moreover, the tripartite connections among these three social parameters (sociocultural, sociophysical and socioeconomic) are rooted in and formulate both the ecological pattern and different responses to the surrounding environment (Figure 2).
Even though there are different urban patterns, people who perceived the public spaces shared the same cultural patterns but not the same behavioural actions. The observation is based on the ethnographic method and quantifies the responses of people who use the street. This technique facilitated the documentation of people’s responses and interactions without any interference or effect on the subjects’ actions. In this regard, to a large extent, the historical and traditional area in Baghdad grants an opportunity for persons to share the public space and involve in such activities as walking, staying, sitting, standing, watching and chatting where the street edge works to interconnect the accommodation of such activities [10, 11].
In the contemporary neighbourhoods, the lost knowledge of public and semi-public or semi-private spaces can be experienced in various ways. Moreover, in modern areas, the human scale, enclosure and definition, and the authority of its public space are missing (Figure 3). As the public space can be distinguished according to the activity pattern of the adjacent context, it is possible to recognise different types of more common street edges, such as residential, commercial and mixed (Figure 4).
These edges are entirely responsible for shaping people’s responses, particularly within residential areas where people react spontaneously to the private, semi-private and even semi-public realms (Figure 4). Inhabitants in these areas tend to change the characteristics of the semi-public and sometimes public spaces. These changes manifest differently, such as through soft treatments or hard borders when a resident illegally occupies the adjacent realm (Figure 5). However, the residential edges are likely to be used by their inhabitants even if these edges face the public space or link directly to the street. Moreover, some proprietors cut off the adjacent part of the street in order to change the primary land use from residential to commercial. Unfortunately, this transformation of purpose, and any misunderstanding of the rights to do so, leads to uncharted changes in land use. Hence, the residential edge is then be used for walking through rather than as a place to stop. According to Alexander [12] and Hillier et al. [13], a street is generally designed for staying in, or movement-to rather than movement-through.
On the commercial and mixed edges, lively interactions between the people and street spaces are experienced. Although these edges, particularly in the historical area, are still lacking in maintenance, they represent an attractive spine for the neighbourhood (Figure 6). People who benefit from this type of edge show different responses based on the particular activity of each unit along with the adjacent edge. Those who use public space can be classified according to their two primary activities: walkers and stayers. The aims of these two classes are varied in terms of their exchange purpose and/or movement-to/movement-through [6, 14]. The expression of public space and its investments differ considerably between the traditional area and the more modern design. Whether in the traditional or modern area, the quantity of the public spaces is generally required, except in the areas offered by the adjoining edges.
Therefore, there is a need to not only examine the traditional part of a city as an isolated pattern but also to understand the comparison with other, new neighbourhoods in terms of the different perspectives afforded, particularly via the urban form and urban life. The traditional urban fabric arose in response to indigenous cultures and traditions; thus, Remali [15] explains that the ‘traditional urban form is the result of [the] “selectionism” of an evolutionary process, whereby a built environment gradually become[s] congruent with activity systems, lifestyles, meaning and values by applying rules, which are often unwritten, as in most cultural landscapes’ ([15], p. 57). Moreover, there is also a need for individuals to understand their rights when using the street space and the extent to which they (the owner/user) have the authority to alter the public space. Commonly, individuals tend to extend their territoriality, even in temporary activities. This includes peddlers and the owners of adjacent units (shops) who tend to extend the commercial edge by elongating the boundary of their activities. These expansions differ entirely from one individual to another, and from one street to another. One of the main reasons for such territorial extensions is to attract customers by making the adjacent spaces particularly enticing; nevertheless, a critical issue remains concerning the authority for these expansions.
3. Edge: Edge Interface
3.1 Interfacing between street and private-public edges
The main question is ‘to what extent individualistic lifestyles can interfere with street life and vice versa’ ([16], p. 2). The relationship between private and public would exist within a micro-spatial configuration. Van Nes and López [16] state that the main street network in the urban context is a factor that influences the microscale spatial variables. Spaces that mediate between buildings and streets create social interactions, which help to form human behaviour. These spaces could be part of a buildings’ interior that causally link with the public space, such as courtyards and balconies or through spaces in front of buildings, such as sidewalks. They encourage a social encounter and promote street life at different levels, whether in terms of culture, norms and religion or the physical conditions of the built environment [17, 18] (Figure 7). According to Jacobs ([19], p. 59), a relationship between the private and public realms requires ‘a good city street neighbourhood [that] achieves a marvel of balance between its people’s determination to have essential privacy and their simultaneous wishes for differing degree of contact, enjoyment or help from the people around’. According to Marshall [20], the relationship between private and public is neither only determined through physical expression, nor a volumetric enclosure that regulates the public-private border, but rather functions as a social filter.
Marshall ([2], p. 13) states that ‘the movement space constituted by streets forms the essential connective tissue of urban public space – from the micro scale of circulation within building to the macro scale of whole cities’. Therefore, ‘street space forms the basic core of all urban public space – and by extension, all public space – forming a continuous network or continuum by which everything is linked to everything else. This continuum is punctured by plots of private land. The plots of private land surrounded by public streets are like an archipelago of islands set in a sea of public space’ ([2], p. 13). Thwaites et al. [21] address different aspects of urban spaces as a betweenness milieu, which mediates between private and public. Also, they sought to highlight the role of the community in making the urban decisions in order to draw at least the local scale or micro scale of their neighbourhoods. This contribution has been defined as the
According to Thwaites et al. ([21], p. 85), ‘a public to private gradient that works in a continuum from private to public and vice versa… [it is] a smooth and complex gradient of subtle changes where a greater range of spaces allows greater diversity of intimacy and social interaction’. Jacobs identifies three main qualities required to successfully encourage people into the street: (1) the situation requires visible demarcation between private and public areas; (2) a particular level of surveillance regarding eyes upon the street and (3) users who exploit the street reasonably, continuously and as effective eyes, in turn, induce others in adjacent buildings into the street to watch not the sidewalk but the pedestrians [19].
Marshall [20] states that there are several subtle complications when understanding privacy; it is not only a single modest linear movement between public and private. Private (exclusive space) means operating the action, giving control of space to reserve a specific area for specific individuals or even a group, contributes to raising the overall supervision and shapes the pattern of difference between public and private. The public (inclusive space) infers to an area where people are able to move, meet, mix and interact [20](Figure 8).
3.1.1 Street edge characteristics
The street is the artery of a city regardless of its classification; for example, the street form (straight, irregular or zigzag), street function (residential, commercial, mixed-use), street dimensions (its length and width), street class (main, secondary, connected street) and street type (open-ended, cul-de-sacs). One of the main aims of the street network is to enable people to access and move to/through the street network towards their destinations. The street is much more than an urban spatial element; it has a crucial space that is to manage the entire movement and people influx. Besides, the street can be ‘regarded as a fundamental building- block of urban structure, where, the public street system forms the principal part of the urban transport system’ ([2] a, p. 14–15). Hillier [22] states that good spaces are utilised spaces; in this respect, an urban area is utilised by the movement to and/or the through movement. Furthermore, the street proffers routes from everywhere to everywhere else, and its influence on movement is a fundamental source of the multifunctionality that promotes vitality in the city.
Marshall ([2], p. 15) states that ‘the challenge is to address the street as an urban place as well as a movement channel, and how to make this connection of the street work – not just as an isolated architectural set piece, but as a contribution to wider urban structure – otherwise, streets are for people’. Thwaites et al. [21] refer to ten themes that characterise the street edge and provide valuable insight into the socio-spatial properties relevant to transitional edges. The ten themes are: ‘social activity, social interaction, public-private gradient, hide and reveal, spatial expansion, enclosure, permeability, transparency, territoriality and looseness’ ([21], p. 78–79). Hillier et al. [13] denote that the integration of core maps covers the main streets and shopping areas.
Shopping streets tend to become viable when they have a high level of retail that is integrated with the global network and local pedestrian movement. Less integration tends to occur in monofunctional areas, such as residential areas [13, 23]. The proportional place of the street and its integration within the entire network system play a crucial role in shaping the street edge characteristics. The configurational properties of the urban fabric are the primary influence on shaping two types of movement; through-movement and to-movement [13] (Figure 9). Movement and multiplier effects are significant prerequisites to promote the quality of street life. The multiplier effect attracts new development, new buildings and uses [22, 24].
According to Jacobs ([19], p. 380)
3.1.2 Private edge characteristics
Alexander [12] offers 253 patterns that are divided into 36 categories. One of these patterns is path shape, which is a crucial component in the built environment and contributes to other patterns in drawing the whole context of a city. Alexander([12], p. 590) advocates that the ‘street should be for staying in, and not just for moving through, the way they are today’. Alexander ([12], p. 593) opposes the concept of setbacks, stating that ‘buildings’ setbacks from the street, originally invented to protect the public welfare by giving every building light and air, have actually helped to destroy the street as a social space … the setbacks do nothing valuable and almost always destroy the value of the open areas between the buildings’ (Figures 12 and 13).
Marshall ([20], p. 105-112) states that the ‘… private plots and buildings… [where]… buildings and cities are different kinds of social container, reflecting their differences in social structure. A city is not a big building, but is articulated into different buildings, mediated by a social fabric of public streets’. Additionally, one side of the street edge is subjected to private demands where the plots and buildings are located; this means that the facades are designed for private benefits [27, 28]. The expression of privacy ranges from soft control, like colour, texture and level, to hard control, such as fence and/or wall.
Furthermore, moveable and invariable can also classify the nature of privacy. Kostof [29] refers to the authority of using private space within the space of the street. He states that the buildings’ edges need not be completely subjected to owners’ desires, as there are public authority regulations that organise the street edge in such a way to increase the variety of building façades from block to block. The diversity works to impart the beauty of the block and street edge to the city; it incites attraction and surprise in people, whether inhabitants or visitors.
The
3.1.3 Public edge characteristics
The sense of public space is one of the main concerns and dialogue in generating social interaction and improvements in street life. The public edge embeds a broad spectrum of events, activities and social assemblage. It is a place where people should feel free to express their aspirations and desires. It ‘host[s] structured or communal activities—festivals, riots, celebrations, public executions—and because of that, such places will bear the designed evidence of our shared record of accomplishment and our ritual behavior’ ([29], p. 124). Accordingly, ‘the main public places of a city are its most vital organs [thereby] if a city’s streets look interesting, the city looks interesting; if they look dull, the city looks dull’ ([19], p. 29). Banerjee ([31], p. 14) suggests that ‘the sense of loss associated with the perceived decline of public space assumes that effective public life is linked to a viable public realm. This is because the concept of public life is inseparable from the idea of a public sphere’.
The public edge forms the third domain for social interaction, and investment in the function of the street edge encourages people to collect. The variety in the function of the public edge promotes street life and maximises social interaction [32]. It is necessary for the humanisation of public urban space such that the activities taking place contribute to the continuous surveillance of the space [33]. Oldenburg [34] adopts ‘
The highest value of the third place lies in its potential to encourage the meeting of people from diverse classes, age groups and with varied interests. It is important for the third place to be accessible, easy to reach and comfortable both for regular frequenters and newcomers. Furthermore,
Hall [35] refers to two types of spaces;
A public character is a person who frequently maintains contact with those who also use the same edge. Prosperous public places, according to Carmona et al. [27], are characterised by the frequent attendance of people in self-reinforcing ways. The public space is an optional and available environment, that people can choose whether to visit. Hillier [22] states that the street as a space for movement shapes the primary activity for those who prefer to stay or go.
4. Three edges’ characteristics in referring to Baghdad City
According to Hillier [22], in Arabic cities, diversity can be found in the development of the same underlying law. This tends to enable well-defined relationships between different levels of movement in the urban context. The old urban fabric seems quite complex in its street network, particularly within traditional Arabic cities; however, three domains play a crucial role in formulating the character of the street edge in such cities, namely street, private and public. Islamic cities are associated with what is called pre-Islamic regions, which inevitably have their own entities and identity regarding urban patterns, building typologies and construction techniques, besides, the natural and physical environment [44]. The ancient Mesopotamian model of clustered courtyard buildings, which date back to the 2500 B.C., provide evidence of the traditional settlement areas in other surrounding regions. Ur city is an ancient town situated to the south of Mesopotamia where its construction pattern matches the Islamic traditional cities that emerged later (Figure 16) [44, 45].
Three factors, identified by Hakim [44], affected the nature of Islamic traditional settlements regarding their building patterns and planning. These are: (1) Pre-Islamic urban models and their people, culture and civilisations in territories that converted to Islam, where the norms and customs have continued their influences on the Islamic culture hitherto. (2) A transport pattern was made by the two-primitive means (camel and horse), which affected the street network patterns and the urban fabric of traditional cities between the fourth and sixth centuries A.D. (3) The surrounding natural environment embraced most Islamic regions located between latitudes 10 and 40. Thus, the microclimate was shared with the same analogical conditions.
The emergence of the Arabic/Islamic city was based on three processes. Firstly, it renewed an existing city founded in old colonial areas to meet the prerequisite for a social life among those people at that time. Secondly, they were pre-planned or planned cities, which were designed and pre-planned in accordance with Islamic rules and authorities. Historical resources and archaeologists confirm that the first primary planned city in the Islamic era was the round city of Baghdad, which was situated to the east of the Islamic region [48, 49] (Figure 17). Thirdly, as a spontaneous model, it can be identified as ‘the most enduring and pervasive, and today most of the older areas of capitals and major towns in Muslim world evolved out of this model’ ([44], p. 88).
However, Hakim ([50], p. 84) states that ‘an important observation is that when colonialism ended, it left a gap between past and present and also left technology which did not evolve out of the past and has affected architecture considerably and in many ways, colonialism turned into cultural and technological dependency’. Consequently, serious negligence occurred with the introduction of new regulations for city planning. These new demands considerably affected the whole system of the old urban fabric; it was designed on a human scale and their needs aside from the large-scale urban spaces.
4.1 Street Edge’s characteristics
The three street space components (street, private and public) integrate with the other components to provide one entity. The essential urban components that constitute the main character of the old urban fabric are the clustered courtyard buildings, street networks and the hanging elements. Two predominant types of street networks are embedded within the old urban fabric. The first is the open-ended street, through which pedestrians publicly flow, and the second one the cul-de-sac, which is governed by inhabitants, is a private zone, and thus not normally permissible for other people to enter or to use this type of street [40, 50, 51] (Figure 18).
The old part of Baghdad is characterised by a maze of narrow streets continued, designed to meet the needs of pedestrians (Figure 19). The traditional pattern forms a more preferable sense of community, which appears serene and shadowed for the most significant part of
The hanging element is a ‘
In traditional Islamic cities, a street refers to the central market. The street market on both sides is several repetitive small chambers that are opposite to each other and separated by about 10–20 feet. To enable pedestrian flow, the street is mostly covered by vaults that include skylights, which allow sunlight to pass through and protect the customers from undesirable climate conditions. Mostly, each street market is connected by the organic network of the narrow lanes or by other street markets. The other public facilities, such as mosques, baths, hotels or Khans are located close to shopping streets and thus, as an access network are maximally utilised ([44], p. 101, [55]). The traditional
4.2 Private edge characteristics
In Islamic cities, privacy is a central factor in determining the use of space; this includes direct visuals, particularly in residential areas. The cooperation between people and other institutions in formulating a generative system worked to maintain the rhythm and hierarchy between the private and public domains [56, 57]. Furthermore, the Muslim community tends to be more concerned with preserving privacy, not only from physical connections but also in terms of visual contact. The privacy factor significantly affects the morphology of the urban form in Islamic/Arabic cities and gives a distinct shape to the city. For example, the external street edge contains the main dogleg entrance that leads to the courtyard house [58] (Figure 21). The dogleg technique gives a high level of privacy for inhabitants where there is no direct access to the private space from the public realm. Despite the fact that entrances are on opposite sides and directly adjacent to the street, no entry directly faces another.
In the residential area of the old part of Baghdad, the lower level of the external wall that is adjacent to the street is almost blind and as solid as a windowless wall to the outside. To attract lighting and ventilation in the courtyard house, all rooms are oriented inwards to the courtyard. Therefore, the external façade lacks apertures except, occasionally, small niches beside the upper level that are designed with
Moreover, to avoid straight visual connections, people in traditional cities tend to adopt the overlooking technique in setting doors, windows, openings and heights, where ‘in Islamic culture, protection from visual intrusion into the private realm of houses was the paramount consideration. Views were appreciated when available, but they took second place to the blocking of visual corridors into the private realm’ ([59], p. 29). It allows for inhabitants to observe outdoor activities and pedestrian movement, but those who use the street were not able to see inside properties. This technique used the concept of
The concept of
A street provides a distinction between the private and public space in the traditional area of Baghdad; it is very controlled and restricted regarding the degree of permeability, transparency, accessibility and connectivity. The street is almost solid on the ground floor and semi-closed or closed by
The characteristic of the private edge in the modern pattern of the street network has different criteria and considerations. This leads to different interpretations of the private edge and the extent to which inhabitants have the authority to claim the juxtaposing space located in front of their property. It also influences the boundary of the street width, and to what extent it is for public use. The absence of a clear definition for the private, public and street edges, particularly in commercial streets which broke through the traditional area, has resulted in complicated situations and difficulties in how to manage this critical area of Baghdad (Figure 26).
4.3 Public edge characteristics
The public edge formulates the vitality of the street, where it enables people to interact either with the street edge or with other people. Tolerance depends on different criteria and rules, besides the norms of society (values and
The idea of
Furthermore, the concept of the ‘
According to Hall [35], the in-between space shapes the microcultural theme, where it attracts the people to share the same territorial area. This notion, to a large extent, is rooted in the old part of cities. Hall [35] distinguishes three types of proximate behaviours that manifest in a space –
Can and Heath [17] use the term
Kostof [29] states that public spaces are defined by residual, interstitial spaces located between neighbourhoods’ cells, such as bazaars or
A
Functional proximity is often one of the important criteria for the closeness of the
Proximity, in this regard, is based on human demands, regarding accessibility and connectivity. This considers ‘
5. Conclusion
Defining the street edge was the primary aim of this paper in order to highlight the different interpretations and meanings of the three fundamental elements that function together to formulate the street. These elements are the street, the private edge and the public edge. The transformation in the urban structure from the traditional pattern to the modern model not only changes the morphological dimension but also influenced the relationship between the private and public realm. The manipulation of private and public relations could be the primary condition to figure out the street life and how people interact with each other. Hence, different variables could be employed to measure the relationship between the private realm and the street space at a micro-level. These factors are experienced by those who use a street when dealing with the street scope within a specific segment. The permeability, inter-visibility, connectivity and accessibility are different between the traditional area and the modern parts.
The notion of the private-public was examined to investigate the street’s edges. Each realm was addressed in detail by emphasising the basic morphological process based on the edge’s characteristics. The critical interrelationship between two edges: private and public represents the micro-level of a street segment that is used to evaluate the interrelationship and how could affect street life and social interactions along the street edge. Across the traditional pattern and modern model of the neighbourhood, there was a significant disparity between the private and public edge.
People have a set of expectations when they determine their interactions with individual action or collective behaviour in a particular street edge. Classifying the street space into three edges is an essential method in order to understand human behaviour thoroughly and how could people respond to each other and the three edges: street, private and public. Fine-scale is another aspect to address the physical environment at the street scale; also, the micro-level could be one of the strategies to deal with the street parameters in terms of the ability of the different edges in managing human behaviour. Indeed, there is a need to distinguish between two patterns; the first one is based on the bottom-up approach as a spontaneous pattern, and the second is the up-down method as a pre-planned model. Once understand the differentiation of traditional area (spontaneous) and new neighbourhood (pre-planned), it would be there a thoughtful procedure to deal with the private and public edge.
There is a lack of required building legislation and maintenance monitor programs for planning and urban design, including a lack of commitment to restrict initiatives to assure they conform to traditional patterns. Therefore, addressing the central gap means verifying the most critical indicators of the street edge problem, both in traditional and modern patterns, which necessitates the detection of related studies that try to link the urban form with active-ties and human behaviour alike. The traditional region emerged spontaneously apart from the notion of land use or zoning diagram. This characteristic is a crucial point within urban development schemes. The street pattern and paradigm of the buildings in the area are intricate; accordingly, there is a need to develop particular standards and regulations to preserve the identity of old Baghdad and understand the contemporary objectives of the new pattern. In this regard, proffering more further consideration to the centre of Baghdad is required, meaning that the control of this traditional region ought to be studied and systematic to advanced quality of life and to improve urban sustainability.
Terminologically, urban symbiosis could be aligned with sustainability, but this term can cover what is related to human behaviour and street activity. The main aim of symbiosis is to create a high interaction productive relationship between creatures. The notion of symbiosis holds three kinds: Commensalism, Parasitism and Mutualism. To comprehend the fundamental system in the traditional pattern of Baghdad city, understanding the micro-level of activity and fine-scale of the urban fabric is required to form a symbiotic platform. Including the processing of the morphology and the relationship between the plot, block and street network, also the symbiotic relationship between the public and private domains. European experiences in dealing with outdoor activities and how people respond to the street edge have been highlighted thoroughly by different scholars and significant studies. People effectively experience this urban knowledge and urban life at the micro-level of the street edge in participating in the fine characteristics of such edge. In this respect, Jan Gehl’s school could be one of the more significant experiences in dealing with street life.
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my gratitude for the thoughtful guidance from my supervisor Professor Sergio Porta, from the Urban Design and Director of UDSU at the Urban Design Studies Unit, Department of Architecture, University of Strathclyde, sergio.porta@strath.ac.uk
References
- 1.
Al-Saaidy HJE. Lessons from Baghdad City Conformation and Essence. In: Almusaed A, Almusaed A, Truong-Hong L, editors. Sustainability in Urban Planning and Design. London, UK: IntechOpen; 2020. pp. 387-417. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.88599 - 2.
Marshall S. Streets and Patterns. New York: Spon; 2005 - 3.
Al-Akkam AJ. Urban characteristics: The classification of commercial street in Baghdad City. Emirates Journal for Engineering Research. 2011; 16 :49-65 - 4.
Al-Saaidy HJE. Urban Form Elements and Urban Potentiality (Literature Review). Journal of Engineering. 2020; 26 :65-82. DOI: 10.31026/j.eng.2020.09.05 - 5.
Al-Saaidy HJE. Urban Morphological Studies (Concepts, Techniques, and Methods). Journal of Engineering. 2020; 26 :100-111. DOI: 10.31026/j.eng.2020.08.08 - 6.
Al-Saaidy HJE. Measuring Urban form and Urban Life: Four Case Studies in Baghdad, Iraq,” Doctor of Philosophy. United Kingdom: Architecture, University of Strathclyde, Department of Architecture; 2019 - 7.
Al-Saaidy HJE, Alobaydi D. Studying street centrality and human density in different urban forms in Baghdad, Iraq. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2021; 12 :1111-1121. DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2020.06.008 - 8.
Al-Saaidy HJE, Alobaydi D. Measuring geometric properties of urban blocks in Baghdad: A comparative approach. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2021; 12 :3285-3295. DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2021.04.020 - 9.
Bianca S. Urban form in the Arab World: Past and present. Vol. 46. USA: vdf Hochschulverlag AG; 2000 - 10.
Chen H, Jia B, Lau B. Sustainable urban form for Chinese compact cities: Challenges of a rapid urbanized economy. 2008; 32 :28-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2007.06.005 - 11.
Gehl J, Svarre B. How to Study Public Life. USA: Island Press; 2013. DOI: 10.5822/978-1-61091-525-0 - 12.
Alexander C. A Pattern Language : Towns, Buildings, Construction. New York: Oxford University Press; 1977 - 13.
Hillier B, Penn A, Hanson J, Grajewski T, Xu J. Natural movement-or, configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement. Environment and Planning B-Planning & Design. 1993; 20 :29-66. DOI: 10.1068/b200029 - 14.
Engwicht D. Street Reclaiming: Creating livable Streets and Vibrant Communities. British Columbia: New Society Publishers; 1999 - 15.
Remali AM. Capturing the Essence of the Capital City: Urban form and Urban Life in the City Centre of Tripoli, Libya. Department of, Architecture, University of Strathclyde; 2014 - 16.
Van Nes A, López MJ. Micro scale spatial relationships in urban studies: the relationship between private and public space and its impact on street life. In: Proceedings of the 6th Space Syntax Symposium (6SSS), Istanbul, Turkiye, June 12-15, 2007. Istanbul, Turkiye; 2007 - 17.
Can I, Heath T. In-between spaces and social interaction: a morphological analysis of Izmir using space syntax. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. 2016; 31 :31-49. DOI: 10.1007/s10901-015-9442-9 - 18.
Nooraddin H. Al-fina’, in-between spaces as an urban design concept: making public and private places along streets in Islamic cities of the Middle East. Urban Design International. 1998; 3 :65-77. DOI: 10.1080/135753198350532 - 19.
Jacobs J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House; 1961. DOI: 10.4324/9781912282661 - 20.
Marshall S. Cities Design and Evolution. New York, NY: Routledge; 2007 - 21.
Thwaites K, Mathers A, Simkins I. Socially Restorative Urbanism: The Theory, Process and Practice of Experiemics. UK: Routledge; 2013 - 22.
Hillier B. Cities as movement economies. Urban Design International. 1996; 1 (1):41-60. DOI: 10.1057/udi.1996.5 - 23.
Penn A, Hillier B, Banister D, Xu J. Configurational modelling of urban movement networks. Environment and Planning B-Planning & Design. 1998; 25 :59-84. DOI: 10.1068/b250059 - 24.
Hillier B. Space is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture. Cambridge; New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press; 1996a - 25.
Buchanan P. Facing up to facades: a report from the front. Architects’ Journal, UK. 1988; 188 :21-56 - 26.
Segall MH, Campbell DT, Herskovits MJ. The Influence of Culture On Visual Perception. USA: Bobbs-merrill; 1966 - 27.
Carmona M, Tiesdell S, Tim H, Oc T. Public Places, Urban Spaces: The Dimensions of Urban Design. Amsterdam; Boston: Architectural Press/Elsevier; 2010 - 28.
Carmona M. The existential crisis of traditional shopping streets: the sun model and the place attraction paradigm. Journal of Urban Design . 2021:1-35 - 29.
Kostof S. The City Assembled: The Elements of Urban form Through History. London: Thames and Hudson; 1992 - 30.
Canter DV. Environmental Interaction: Psychological Approaches to our Physical Surroundings. London, UK: London: Surrey University Press: Distributed by International Textbook Co.; 1975 - 31.
Banerjee T. The future of public space: Beyond invented streets and reinvented places. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2001; 67 :9-24. DOI: 10.1080/01944360108976352 - 32.
Carmona M. The “public-isation” of private space–towards a charter of public space rights and responsibilities. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability. 2021; 19 :1-32. DOI: 10.1080/17549175.2021.1887324 - 33.
Moirongo BO. Urban public space patterns: human distribution and the design of sustainable city centres with reference to Nairobi CBD. Urban Design International. 2002; 7 :205-216. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.udi.9000083 - 34.
Oldenburg R. The Great Good Place: Café, Coffee Shops, Community Centers, Beauty Parlors, General Stores, Bars, Hangouts, and How They Get You Through The Day. New York, USA: Paragon House Publishers; 1989 - 35.
Hall ET. The Hidden Dimension. New York, USA: Doubleday; 1966 - 36.
Sennett R. The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity & City Life. London: London: Faber; 1996 - 37.
Zukin S. Naked City: The Death and Life of Authentic Urban Places. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010 - 38.
Hall ET. The Silent Language. New York, USA: Doubleday; 1959 - 39.
Cullen G. The Concise Townscape. London; Boston: Butterworth Heinemann; 1961 - 40.
Hillier B, Hanson J. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge Cambridgeshire; New York: Cambridge University Press; 1984. DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511597237.004 - 41.
Jacobs AB. Great Streets. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1993 - 42.
Ellin N. Integral Urbanism. New York, USA: Taylor & Francis; 2006 - 43.
Gehl J. Cities for People. Washington: Island Press; 2010a - 44.
B. S. Hakim, “Islamic architecture and urbanism “ in Encyclopedia of Architecture: Design, Engineering & Construction. vol. 3, T. P. Robert and A. W. Joseph, Eds., ed: New York: Wiley, 1989, pp. 86-103. - 45.
Woolley LS. Ur: the First Phases. London: Penguin Books, New York; 1946 - 46.
Lynch K. Good City Form. Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press; 1984 - 47.
Hakim BS. The” Urf” and its role in diversifying the architecture of traditional Islamic cities. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research. 1994; 11 :108-127 - 48.
Hakim BS. Arab - Islamic urban structure. The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering. 1982; 7 :69-79 - 49.
Kostof S. The City Shaped : Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History. London: Thames & Hudson; 1999 - 50.
Hakim BS. The Islamic city and its architecture: a review essay. In: Third World Planning Review. Vol. 12. Liverpool University Press; 1990. pp. 75-89. DOI: 10.3828/twpr.12.1.8t5440243m754365 - 51.
R.S.GIS.U. The Georeferencing Aerial Imagery. Baghdad, The official letter, No.: 1578, Date: 01/11/2017: Remote Sensing and GIS Unit, Building and Construction Engineering Department, University of Technology; 2017 - 52.
G.I.S.Department. The Traditional Area of Baghdad based on Polservice, Geokart, Poland, Rectified by Dep. of GIS. Department of Geographic Information System GIS, Mayoralty of Baghdad, ed: The official letter, No.: O.P.U 420, Date: 24/10/2016 issued by University of Technology, Office of the President. 2016 - 53.
Al-Ashab KH. The Urban Geography of Baghdad. UK: University of Newcastle Upon Tyne; 1974 - 54.
Fethi I. Urban Conservation in Iraq: The Case for Protecting the Culteral Heritage of Iraq with Special Reference to Baghdad Including a Comprehensive Inventory of its Areas and Buildings of Historic or Architectural Interest. UK: University of Sheffield; 1977 - 55.
Makiya M. Baghdad. London, UK: Alwarrak; 2005 - 56.
Hakim B. Generative processes for revitalizing historic towns or heritage districts. Urban Design International. 2007; 12 :87-99. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.udi.9000194 - 57.
Hakim BS, Rowe PG. The representation of values in traditional and contemporary Islamic cities. Journal of Architectural Education. 1983; 36 :22-28. DOI: 10.1080/10464883.1983.10758321 - 58.
Reuther O. Das Wohnhaus in Bagdad und Anderen Stadten Des Iraq (Arabic: The Iraqi House In Baghdad and Other Iraqi Cities). London, UK: Alwarrak (Arabic), Verlag Von Emst Wasmuth - AG Berlin; 2006. p. 1910 - 59.
Hakim BS. Mediterranean urban and building codes: origins, content, impact, and lessons. Urban Design International. 2008a; 13 :21-40. DOI: 10.1057/udi.2008.4 - 60.
Hakim BS. Arabic - Islamic Cities: Building and Planning Principles. UK: Marston Gate; 2008b - 61.
Morris AEJ. History of Urban Form: Before the Industrial Revolutions. 3rd ed. Harlow, Essex, England: New York: Longman Scientific & Technical: New York: Wiley; 1994 - 62.
Oliveira V. Urban Morphology: An Introduction to the Study of the Physical Form of Cities. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-32083-0 - 63.
Al-Azzawi SHA. A Descriptive, Analytical and Comparative Study of Traditional Courtyard Houses and Modern Non-Courtyard Houses in Baghdad. UK: University College, University of London; 1984 - 64.
Al-Hasani MK. Urban space transformation in old city of Baghdad – Integration and management. Megaron. 2012; 7 :79-90 - 65.
Mohareb NI. Land use as a sustainability indicator for Arab cities. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Urban Design and Planning. 2010; 163 :105-116. DOI: 10.1680/udap.2010.163.3.105