ABSTRACT
Capturing the space of the city is inherently complex because many different objects work together to define it and not all of these objects are stationary. Buildings help frame urban space, but sidewalks, trees, and even the movement of people shape urban identity. It is what author Steven Johnson describes as driven by “micromotives” that “combine to form macrobehavior, a higher order that exists on the level of the city itself.” 1 A complicated amalgam of bottom-up forces (individuals) and top-down forces (planners) give a city its individual character and its fabric. Because it is constantly a fusion of shifting parts, it can be difficult to rigidly define “Paris,” “New York City,” or “Rome,” for instance. The borders change, the buildings change, the occupants change—it is almost easier to imagine that the city is reborn anew each day because the circumstances of every day would define it differently. While it might be a natural human predilection to categorize things, most people know a city through literature and images, or by living in or traveling through it, and they can probably tell you some defining characteristics. These defining characteristics would be very difficult to pick apart and pin down, but it is precisely the process of analyzing through comparison that is essential to designing for any urban context.
