Main Content
Highlights
Why the look of cities is a hot issue
By Emma Rooksby
WHAT makes cities attractive? What for example makes eighteenth and nineteenth century factories once condemned as "dark satanic mills" now seem desirable urban residences?
How is it that even graffiti can be seen by many as a serious visual blot, yet is viewed by some as "art" and even valued as a "contemporary cultural practice"? (See below) The answers are not simple, but today's urban and transport planners are increasingly turning to the study of visual amenity to gain a greater understanding of what makes a town or city "attractive".
As one author described it, visual amenity can be defined as "the collective impact of the visual components which make a site or an area pleasant to be in." In a globally competitive world it is also an element of vital importance. Attractive streetscapes, natural features and local character can and does draw people towards one neighbourhood or city - and away from others. But as the scan shows, visual amenity can quickly turn into a hot issue and even those who may fight graffiti can find themselves losing their case.
The scan showed:
Transport and visual amenity
Attempts to improve visual amenity need not be limited to enhancing the visual appearance of buildings or natural features. A new study from the American Institute of Architects and the University of Minnesota demonstrates that well-planned transportation projects, even small ones, can make a significant difference to the amenity of an area, including its visual amenity. The study identified and measured three key ways in which transportation projects can contribute to making a community into a great place: "by building a sense of community identity, improving appearance and scenic quality, and adding cultural value." As the report notes, these three characteristics are all "difficult to measure, more difficult to quantify and even more difficult to cast in terms of monetary costs and benefits." To tackle these difficulties, the researchers worked with six different amenity assessment tools and applied all of them to three places already known for their amenity. The assessment tools were able to identify key beneficial transportation features, though the report cautions against any one-size-fits-all approach. Key principles identified using the six assessment tools together include:
- The need for transportation projects to program spaces for a variety of uses and users, rather than focusing on a single primary use;
- The importance of maintenance programs for paths, trails and other pedestrian and biking facilities, to keep streetscapes looking attractive and well cared-for;
- The need for connection between places.
"Buildings and transportation facilities that fail to connect to the outdoors and sidewalks create confusion or a lack of a sense of place, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists," it says. The report also noted the strengths and weaknesses of the six assessment tools, in terms of evaluating the contribution of transportation projects to designing great places.
Tackling graffiti
Graffiti is a serious challenge to the visual amenity of many urban areas. Despite numerous attempts to tackle it by communities and lawmakers, graffiti is still an eyesore in Australian cities. A new strategy in the fight against graffiti in Victoria is the Government's new Graffiti Prevention Act, passed in November 2007. The Act makes it an offence to sell aerosol spray paint to minors. The approach was pioneered by Victoria's Casey Council: in 2003 the council introduced local laws restricting the sale of spray cans and requiring all shops selling spray cans to keep them out of reach of the public. Together with anti-graffiti programs in schools and a graffiti hotline, the local laws are said have dramatically reduced graffiti in Casey.
Local approach
More locally, Myra Taylor, a researcher at the University of Western Australian, is running a research project called "Risk, reputation and graffiti: developing a new model and interventions for reducing graffiti." Ms Taylor says graffiti removal from property is known to cost Western Australia more than $25 million per year. She also notes, "For the adolescent perpetrators graffiti is known to form an entry-level aspect of juvenile crime." The aim of her project is to bring about a significant reduction in graffiti by devising a school-based prevention program for children at-risk of engaging in graffiti and an intervention program for recidivist offenders.
Graffiti as art?
Despite the concerns about graffiti as vandalism, at least some types of graffiti are now being prized as works of art. In fact, 2007 marked the publication of Australia's first coffee-table book about graffiti, in Christine Dew's Uncommissioned Art: An A-Z of Australia Graffiti. Graffiti expert Alison Young, from the Australian Institute of Criminology, writes "a book such as this may well increase the general public's appreciation of the diversity and complexity of types of graffiti, and of their importance as a contemporary cultural practice."
Can it get worse?
Sometimes attempts to reduce unsightly graffiti may themselves be seen as a threat to visual amenity, as a London property developer recently found out. A planning decision went against the developer after the company tried to stop graffiti attacks by setting up closed-circuit television cameras and rotary spikes on gates to the site where two houses were being built. An enforcement notice against the items was upheld following a ruling that the anti-graffiti measures harmed the area's visual amenity.
Amenity versus sustainability
There are also challenges to be met in balancing visual amenity with environmental values. A proposal to replace a heritage-listed building in Orange, NSW with a new more environmentally friendly office block has received eight objections to date. The objections relate to the new building's impact on visual amenity, and not to its environmental credentials. (The design includes provision for natural ventilation, rainwater harvesting, greywater recycling and electricity reduction).
Inner conflict
Other conflict between visual amenity and environmental values has emerged as Australian cities introduce higher-density urban development around mass-transit nodes. A case in point can be found in inner Melbourne. A team of researchers from the University of Melbourne, led by Professor Kim Dovey, together with state and local governments, are investigating "a series of activity centres in the Melbourne metropolitan area where both the protection of existing character and the creation of new forms of place-identity are key issues." Case studies include Fitzroy and Brunswick districts. The team hopes to identify the particular challenges and opportunities opened up by urban intensification, to assist government in planning for successful intensification projects.
Ban billboards?
Are billboards so unsightly that they should they be banned, or are they part of the local colour of urban areas? On January 1 2007 the Brazilian capital, Sao Paulo, introduced a complete ban on billboards in the city. Auckland in New Zealand nearly did the same thing in November 2007, but decided at the eleventh hour that some use of billboards was acceptable. There is no consensus on the impact of billboards on visual amenity, but a recent paper by lawyer David Burnett seeks to give an overview of the situation in the US. He notes that most US local councils have restrictions on the appearance, size and location of outdoor advertising. Around 1000 US cities (a small proportion of the total) have either tough restrictions or total bans on billboards. Interestingly, Burnett notes that US courts and judges have generally agreed with the general public that billboards are aesthetically unattractive, although their judgements also take into account advertisers' rights to free speech.
Digital billboards and safety
Digital billboards are new, very expensive and still quite uncommon. But they are already generating controversy. Debate is raging in the US over whether the regularly alternating and brightly lit advertisements on the billboards are suspected of causing higher rates of road crashes. Some States have even had them outlawed. The US Federal Highway Administration has said digital billboards don't violate any US laws. And two reports commissioned by the Outdoor Advertising Association of America found that they are not associated with an elevated rate of road accidents. However, a peer review of the two reports, commissioned by Maryland State Highway Administration has shed doubt on their findings, claiming that the methodology is flawed and the reports biased. The state of Maryland will not introduce digital billboards until further research has shown them to be safe. The Transportation Research Group, a division of the National Research Council will be looking more closely at the safety of digital billboards in 2008. Meanwhile in Minnesota, state authorities have literally unplugged a digital billboard adjacent to a freeway, after determining that it had not been approved.
