I

Terr i tory Varies w i th Form

Territorial inclusion is remarkably consistent

throughout varied physical circumstances. En­

vironmental fo rm, i n all its richness and variety,

always interprets the same basic set o f territo­

rial principles, The fol lowing illustrations com­

pare two very different examples.

T e r r i t o r i a l S t r u c t u r e in

D i f f e r e n t E n v i r o n m e n t s

Row House Urban Tissue

The European bourgeois row house runs the

gamut f r o m thirteenth-century French bastide

towns, to Dutch seventeenth- and eighteenth-

century canal towns, to terraced residential dis­

tricts of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century

England. Basically, each individual house gives

onto a single, uninterrupted public space com­

prising all streets, squares, and canals. The ur­

ban territorial structure o f these environments

is simple.

The spatial hierarchy characterizing

street networks on the urban level is clearly dis­

tinct f r o m its remarkably flat territorial

structure. Urban space exhibits pronounced

hierarchy. In Amsterdam, there are the major

canals, major streets perpendicular to them,

and secondary streets runn ing alongside ca­

nals. It would seem reasonable to assume that,

paralleling hierarchy observed i n the order o f

f o r m , secondary streets constitute a lower terri­

torial level. Yet no evidence supports this.

On the other hand, clear street and neigh­

borhood territories that have no formal indi-

8.1 Paris, 1739—Detail from tlie "Turgot Map" by Louis

Bretez, showing buildings set tight along the streets. Their

deep lots feature extensive rear gardens (page 142)

cation are established throughout the built

environment: it is simply understood that cer­

tain blocks, neighborhoods, or even driveways

are not entered without express permission

f r o m inhabitants. In many large cities, there are

some quarters into which neither police, bui ld­

ing inspectors, nor tax collectors venture. There

are urban areas i n which shopkeepers must pay

scheduled "protection" fees to local gangsters

or be driven out. Local enforcement, fo rmal or

informal , establishes territorial depth wi th in

broader urban fabric.

Territorial interpretations o f house f o r m

vary greatly. Included territories created by acts

of dwelling do not correlate to any specific

house f o r m . The lower end o f the territorial

structure may be far more diverse than the

f o r m init ial ly suggests. I n the Dutch canal

house, for example, we commonly observe a

basement entrance; when not used by upstairs

inhabitants for warehousing or other commer­

cial activities, the basement frequently becomes

an independent shop or dwelling. The bui ld ing

then contains two or more noncommunicat ing

stacked territories, each directly related to the

street (figure 8.2).

The house, although bui l t as a single con­

figuration, lends itself to varied territorial use.

Thus bui l t f o r m is an accumulation o f acts o f

bui ld ing followed by acts o f inhabitation: the

making o f territory follows and interprets the

creation o f fo rm.

I n another Dutch variant, a rear house is

accessed via a small alley between the original

house and the lot line, as portrayed i n Ver-

8.2 Amsterdam—Canal house, showing three separate

entrances: to the main house, to an upstairs dwelling, and

to a basement dwelling.

> >

146

8.3 Varying territorial Interpretations of the row house:

(a) A single house Is a single territory.

(b) A single house Is not a single territory.

(c) The back house with access to the street exists 3t the

same territorial depth as the other houses.

(d) The back house comprises two territories with a com­

mon entry garden. The back house Is consequently at a

deeper territorial depth than houses on the street

meer's A Street in Delfi. There exist two territor­

ies on the same level, each maintaining direct

access to the street (figure 8.3c), However, the

narrow dead-end alley may access two back

houses on adjacent lots, i n which case territo­

r ia l depth increases: the alley now provides

public space for the two back houses. Since i t

can be shut o f f f r o m the street w i t h a door, the

alley itself is private space relative to the street

(figure 8.3d).

W i t h i n the house, we earlier noted a lack

of isomorphism i n the relationship between

buil t f o r m and fluid territory, the latter being

established by people and their furn i ture i n re­

lation to fireplace, window, alcove, and the like,

While we may generally categorize entrance

halls and stairs as m i n i m a l public space for in­

habitants, we also note that individual territo­

rial situations are i n fact quite variable. There

may be no obvious physical signs of a highly

complex reality.

Tradi t ional Midd le Eastern Tissue

I n comparison wi th European row house urban

tissue, spaces wi th in traditional Middle Eastern

urban environment display deeper territorial

structure. The historic quarter o f Tunis shows

dead-end streets w i t h their own gates. A num­

ber o f individual houses are reached via each

of these streets. I n this way, bi-level territory is

firmly established w i t h i n urban space.

O b s e r v i n g T e r r i t o r i a l S t r u c t u r e

147

8.4 Tunis Medina—Urban fabric with superimposed

house plans. The first territorial level Is Indicated, showing

hole-in-the-wall shops, houses entered directly from the

streets, and territories constituting a dead-end street

together with Those houses accessed from It. Note that

the house bounded by the rue de la Kasba and the rue

des Tamis connects to two impasses, Bou Machem and la

Paysanne. This is an example of territorial overlap. Base

map courtesy of the Association Sauvegarde de la

Medina, Tunis.

The houses themselves, like many court­

yard house types, are almost perfect territorial

forms i n plan (see also figure 17.4). The court­

yard is entered through a gate, f r o m a street or

dead-end alley. Individual rooms cluster around

i t . The courtyard reads as the public space o f

the house's territory. Each room comprises a

wide and shallow private space, w i t h three

niches large enough to hold a bed, couch, or

bench: one directly opposite the door is re­

cessed into a deeper zone that also offers stor­

age spaces; the other two are located to the r ight

and the le f t o f t h e door. These niches echo the

courtyard pattern: the relatively public center o f

the room is surrounded by privacies.

I n Tunisian urban space, shops give

directly onto streets, thus occupying the same

territorial level as dead-end streets. Courtyard

houses may also find themselves on this level

(see figure 8.4}. The same f o r m s — i n this case,

courtyard house or shop—generally recur on

very different terri torial levels. Again, there is

no r ig id i somorphism i n the relation between

f o r m and terri torial structure.

A cursory comparison o f Dutch and Tuni­

sian tissue demonstrates how differently terri­

torial structure and urban f o r m may relate.

W i t h i n a flat urban terri torial structure, historic

Amsterdam's canal house f o r m functions like

a well-articulated container. Because i t reflects

no predetermined terri torial model, i t easily ac­

commodates a range o f lower-level territorial

situations. Courtyard house environment, as

typif ied i n Tunisia, exhibits more depth i n the

urban spaces, while the houses are very territo­

r ia l i n f o r m . I t is hard to see how occupancy can

deviate very m u c h f r o m a predetermined terri­

torial interpretation.

The Tunisian example is, indeed, an al­

most immediate reflection o f the act o f inhab­

itation. Its lack o f overarching geometric f o r m

suggests bottom-up growth. DweUings come

first, leaving open public space to be formed as

density increases.'

I n general, the Middle Eastern f o r m is

more "territorial" throughout, while the Euro­

pean model seems more governed by geometry

and bui ld ing structure.

Party Walls and Terr i tor ia l Boundaries

Walls between neighbors are another aspect

worthy of comparison. I n the Middle East­

ern tradition, abutters frequently cooperate i n

shared party walls. Whoever builds first must

be prepared to accept and accommodate the

neighbor's beams i n what then becomes a com­

m o n wall.^ I n terms o f f o r m hierarchy, the total

configuration o f party walls w i t h i n the block

becomes a higher-level f o r m . Whereas i n

Olynthus a similar higher-level structure was

premeditated and bui l t i n one intervention, the

higher-level common courtyard wall structure

i n the Middle East typically arises out o f many

cumulative individual acts.

I n the western European row house tradi­

t ion, shared party walls are unknown. As early

as the medieval bastide towns, each house has

its own load-bearing walls just wi th in the terri­

torial lot line. Walls are thus doubled, perhaps

just a hand's wid th apart, to allow water collec­

t ion f r o m both roofs. This reflects a predeter­

mined territorial structure o f lot divisions,

I t allows live configurations to t ransform

freely wi th in their territorial boundaries. Each

bui ld ing may be independently erected or de­

molished. Interaction, interference, and negoti­

ation between neighbors are thus kept to a

m i n i m u m dur ing the bu i ld ing process.

Such different approaches to bmld ing

party waUs reflect profound differences i n con­

ceiving the environment. The western Euro­

pean model accommodates separate acts o f

setflement, u t ihz ing a geometric structure that

includes house lots. I t creates a predetermined

framework o f relatively shallow territorial

depth. The Middle Eastern model, devoid o f

predetermined geometry, recognizes only the

act o f settlement and produces over fime a rela-

fively deep territorial structure.

Externally, one is a f o r m containing setde­

ment; the other is settlement generafing f o r m .

Inside the houses, however, the reverse holds

true. There, the courtyard house f o r m lends

structure to minor acts o f settlement, while the

canal house leaves settlement to create its own

order.

1

Paris, 1736

U r b a n Fornn as

T e r r i t o r i a l F o r m

The Turgot map of Paris (figure 8.1) portrays an

environment i n which most buildings are about

five stories high, about as h igh as people could

cl imb every day. Continuous perimeter walls at

each street's edge define urban blocks. Public

space is min ima l : even the extensive Jardin de

Luxembourg is entirely removed f r o m view be­

h ind high buildings and walls, I t does not par­

ticipate i n the pubfic environment.

W i t h i n discrete blocks are found precur­

sors o f the Parisian communal courtyards. The

fabric is typical of a high-density urban environ­

ment. Streets are o f m i n i m a l width , even

though they must serve all o f the teeming terri­

tories behind the facades.

Such crowded, narrow streets may be de­

ceptive: toward the edge of the city, buildings

retain their height and remain situated r ight at

the street edge proper. But there we find m u c h

lower density, for the buildings have extensive

backyards—primarily for agriculture, some­

times fashioned as pleasure gardens.

Further into the outskirts, w i th in the fau­

bourgs, houses appear only intermittently. Yet

they still crowd the street, even when f ron t ing

expansive cultivated fields. Moreover, the fields

are walled i n . Even there, pubhc space is rigor­

ously separated f r o m private outside space.

Green space is always private.

Buildings on the Edge

Thus, buildings were developed wi th many sto­

ries, even when their large lots were sparsely

developed. This may signify that land was

slated for other purposes—for growing vegeta­

bles and frui ts ; for raising sufficient animals to

feed a large city, thereby mainta ining its auton­

omy. But buildings that always stand at the

street edge, jealously guarding open space be­

yond, clearly adopt an assertively territorial

stance toward pubhc space.

The m i n i m a l pubfic space of the streets

and squares was lively and crowded. Accord­

ingly, ground-floor space along street frontage

was predominantly earmarked for commercial

and work space. Domestic space was concen­

trated more inside and upstairs. Public space

was also dangerous, uncontrolled, and dark at

night, a place to separate f r o m the more peace­

f u l and regulated private realm i n which all

inhabitants were known and specifically

admitted.

Dutch Townscape

For mil lennia, jealously guarded private open

space behind buildings and walls, creating a

walled-off domain, was typical o f urban f o r m

throughout the world, regardless o f population

density.

I n historic Dutch cities, we find that al­

though the urban network o f public space, w i t h

its canals l ined w i t h trees, is more generous,

most open space remains invisible f r o m the

streets or canals. Despite sixteenth- or seven-

teenth-centitry Delft's unmistakably urban

character, population density may wefi have

been lower than that o f a modern Dutch suburb

or garden city.'

Space is used differently i n contemporary

urban environment. The proportion of public

space is larger, no doubt because o f the car. I n

addition, private exterior space is displayed

publicly. Historically, there was no point to set­

t ing back a building: f ron t yards were, for all

practical purposes, useless.

O b s e r v i n g T e r r i t o r ia I S t r u c t u r e

When Terr i tory Precedes Form

The eighteenth-century Complete Map of tht

Capital City during the Qianlong Era reveals an

urban structure i n Beij ing based on walled-in

compounds that are accessed through clearly

articulated gates (see also figure 5.8). The waU,

8.5 Beijing, ca. 1750—Detail of the Complete Map oi

the Capi ta l City dur ing the Qian long Era, showing main

street and residential streets. Most of the latter have

gates. Ceremonial gates are seen at the crossing of two

main streets. Houses typically exhibit an en trance court fol­

lowed by one or more courts, each having pavilions at

three sides. Reproduced courtesy of the Harvard-Yenchlng

I ihrary

a pr imar i ly terri torial demarcation, stands on

its own, ini t ia l ly def ining the compound w i t h i n

which pavilions, under separate roofs, are then

arranged to f o r m a sequence of courtyards.

Whereas i n the Tunisian fabric (figure 8.4), i t

remains ambiguous whether territory or f o r m

was there first, i n Beij ing territorial demarca­

tion preceded the buildings.

Large-scale environmental creation in

which territory precedes f o r m is universal and

sti l l very m u c h alive. We find walled territory

i n urban compounds i n the i n fo rma l sectors o f

Latin American cities (see figure 5.9). There,

too, settlers first bu i ld walls around their terri­

tory, wi th a gate to the street,•> In warm and dry

climates like those o f Mexico and Peru, i t suf­

fices for a fami ly to live inside the waUs w i t h

just a pr imit ive shack to sleep in . Gradually, a

large two-story house w i t h several courtyards

152 emerges.

Comparing the maps of Tunis and

Beij ing reveals another difference i n the rela­

tionship o f terri torial structure to hierarchy o f

f o r m . W i t h i n the Tunisian fabric, territorial

depth is f o u n d i n the street system as well :

dead-end streets shared by a handful o f houses

w i l l have their own gates giving onto the net­

work; secondary streets may have gates toward

major streets. Whether individual houses have

a single courtyard or many, territorial depth is

found only between a courtyard and its sur­

rounding rooms.

I n the Chinese model, territorial depth

w i t h i n the compound can be extensive: court­

yard after courtyard after courtyard may be ar­

ranged hierarchically, sometimes connected by

alleys. I n the street network, territorial depth is

impl ied by the existence o f gates at the en­

trances o f the aUeys and at some intersections

of the streets,5

O b s e r v i n g T e r r i t o r i a l S t r u c t u r e

3 H o u s e a n d T e r r i t o r y

Overlap of Form and Terr i tory

House types do not necessarily represent any

specific social entity. They therefore cannot be

equated wi th any specific terri torial interpreta­

t ion. Thus, the Dutch canal house demon­

strates how the row house, although typically a

single-family bourgeois dwelling, can accom­

modate different occupation. Nor does this di­

versity necessarily result f r o m change o f use

over t ime: some seventeenth-century duplex ca­

nal houses have two original fa(;ade doors, one

of which leads to an upstairs dwelling.

Such variation is not l imi ted to residen­

tial uses. Wi th in one bu i ld ing type we find

shops, bakeries, and many other residential-

scale commercial activities. These patterns o f

variable use and occupancy may occur any­

where and are not l imi ted to a particular house

type. The Pompeiian courtyard house, although

oriented inward, for commercial purposes con­

sistently opened rooms onto busy streets (see

figure 15,2). While the suburban house type and

fabric do not typically support pedestrian store­

f ron t service retail activity, a bui ld ing sug­

gesting single-family use may i n fact hold two

or more households, or, more commonly, a

business office at home.

There exists no strict parallel between the

social uni t o f a certain culture and any one

house f o r m , although some relationship clearly

exists. The first purpose of the Chinese court­

yard compound, so susceptible to expansion by

erecting additional pavilions, is to shelter an ex­

tended family. The first purpose o f the western

European row house is to enable dwelHng by a

single family.

Variations of terri torial and functional

interpretation wi th in such general themes sug­

gest that house fo rm results above all f r o m con­

ventional acts o f bui ld ing repeated i n thematic

variation, out o f w h i c h urban fabric is also wo­

ven. Such themafic variation is related, not sur­

prisingly, to the social structure that brings it

for th . Building types commonly associated w i t h

housing do not so m u c h represent dwellings as

forms created to accommodate common pat­

terns o f occupancy, wi th which given social

groups specifically identify.

Dwelling, as already argued, is a territo­

rial act o f occupation. I t may involve a space

smaller than a house: the boarder's dwelling is

a room. House bui lding, on the other hand, is a

form-making act w i th in acquired terri tory The

resulting house f o r m always remains open to

territorial interpretation.

Extreme changes i n social organization

fol lowing in i t ia l occupancy may trigger un­

foreseen variations. In a detailed study o f

nineteenth-century courtyard houses i n San­

tiago de Chile, Fernando Domeyko records

deliberate reordering to establish clear new

territorial demarcation, permit t ing higher den­

sity. The house, init ial ly bui l t for a prosperous

extended family, has now become a small v i l ­

lage, occupied by a number o f working-class

nuclear family households. The territorial or­

ganization so clearly suggested by the courtyard

f o r m is scrupulously retained. But private

rooms around the courtyard are now clustered

i n twos and threes by small f ron t patios carved

out o f the larger courtyard. Public space re­

maining i n the courtyard is reduced to an alley.

8.6 Santiago de Chile—Partial view of a turn-of-the-

century house with two successive courtyards The house

Is shown as presently occupied by several families. Inhabi­

tants have fenced off parts ofthe courtyards to make pri­

vate yards, leaving a narrow public alley In the central

axis. The house is thus transformed into a little village,

known as the "CItè Knossos." After Domeyko.

155

This example, while extreme, is by no

means an exception. Once f o r m is present, l i fe

makes use o f it , adjusting it and adjusting to i t ,

o f fe r ing ever-changing territorial interpreta­

tions w i t h i n its relative constancy.

Similarly drastic changes are observed i n

affluent residential neighborhoods o f Cam­

bridge, Massachusetts, as grand Victorian man­

sions set i n substantial gardens are converted

into condominiums. They sti l l accommodate

only those who can af ford to dweh comfortably

near the center o f the city; new entrances are

created at sides and rear to provide private ac­

cess. These houses are subdivided vertically and

horizontally, o f fe r ing stacked dweUings f ron t

and back as well as one or two beneath the

eaves. The backyard is now a communal park­

ing area that provides access to mult iple dwell­

ings i n the house, increasing terri torial depth.

type its name and developed its characteristic

architecture o f wooden columns and banisters,

sometimes elaborately carved.

Mansion conversions like those i n Cam­

bridge have more recently provided an image

for new construction. Large "houses" recalling

single-family mansions are now designed to

contain a number of smaller dwellings f r o m the

start. In Europe i n the rgzos and 1930s,

there similarly emerged "two-under-one-roof"

houses. Such duplexes share a party wall and a

single roof, w i t h entrances and garages at oppo­

site ends, recalhng the fami l ia r single-family

house f o r m . This fur ther supports the not ion

that house f o r m is one convention, occupation

another.

Terr i tor ia l Conversion

Territorial interpretation o f a given f o r m may

lead, i n tu rn , to new forms: fol lowing a massive

inf lux o f workers into nineteenth-century A m ­

sterdam, its fabric was extended (see figure

4.4c). The new neighborhoods contained bui ld­

ings that retained the width and height of the

canal house. But each floor became a separate

dwelling, connected to the street via a commu­

nal staircase. Al though the architecture was re­

ductive and the technical quality was poor, this

variant could be understood as the final trans­

format ion of a historic bui lding type.

The Bostonian single-family gabled ur­

ban house w i t h porch, set on a narrow lot, was

transformed into the "triple-decker" type stiU i n

evidence throughout surrounding cities. Here

too, each floor became a separate apartment

w i t h its own porch. Stacked porches gave the

Use vs. Control of Space

A l iv ing room may be under the f i r m control o f

a single family member, or i t may be controlled

more impl ic iüy by communal consensus. !n ei­

ther case, it follows that those who use the

space—children, friends, and guests—need

not be i n control of it.

Public space is, by dehnit ion, space used

by those who do not individually control i t . Us­

ers of public space may come f r o m either in ­

cluded or higher-level territory. Entering the

public realm f r o m private space is a fundamen­

tal right: the door to public space is always

open, and there must always be a public space

we can move out to. I n doing so, one is st i l l on

"home turf" : public space is communally

shared among those f r o m similarly included

territories. Household members access and

P u b l i c S p a c e share the l iving room. Residents i n a develop­

ment may share clubhouse privileges. Further

up the territorial hierarchy, that sense of propri­

etorship fades. Yet interstate highways i n the

Uni ted States, as well as the Mal l i n Washing­

ton, D.C., are spaces held i n common by all

American citizens.

Public space is also used, wi thout exer­

cise o f control, by those admitted f r o m outside,

who have a different attitude than those enter­

ing f r o m included territory. The outsider enters

f r o m another (higher-level) public space as a

guest. There always remains some possibihty

that entry wi l l be barred to the neighbor, the

out-of-towner, or the foreigner. Use f r o m out­

side is specifically granted, and temporary i n

nature.

Use of Space and Contents

Once entered into public space, by right or by

admittance, one is free to walk i n pubhc parks,

enter public museums, drive public roads, sit

on public benches, and use, for a fee, pubhc

phones. In addition to using space, we also use

things. To a certain extent, we can actuaUy ma­

nipulate configurations we do not control, just

as we can enter a space we do not control. But

there are clear l imitations. The house guest is

invited to sit in a chair, perhaps to pick up a

magazine, but is not expected to rearrange or

remove furni ture . Wi th respect to actual physi­

cal transformations, the visitor is given little

leeway.

Control o f things is an immediate, hands-

on affair. I n the Parisian Jardin des Tuileries,

visitors may sit i n i ron garden chairs arranged

around the pond. But a fee is exacted for this

privilege, by a matron who continually restores

the arrangement as each visitor departs. The

park constitutes a large public space, but the

circle o f chairs is the matron's configuration, as

she w i l l pointedly i n f o r m you.

We move "upward" to use spaces o f in­

creasingly "public" character i n the order o f

place. But to use and manipulate things, we

move downward into the territory of the person

i n direct control: a person who is actually there.

The unhappy fate o f uncontrolled telephone

booths and public toilets offers proof that this

territorial reality cannot easily be denied.

8.7 Cambridge, Massachusetts—Triple-decker house.

Claiming Terr i tory t h rough

Use of Space

The use of things occurs at the scale of the body.

I t inevitably impHes occupancy of sufficient

space—an instant territory, however temporary

and transparent—^to exercise this use.

Configurations do not fioat freely i n

space; and control implies territory. Thus con­

trol o f a configuration simultaneously implies a

terri torial claim. The subway musician stands

against a pillar and places a hat i n f ron t o f her.

People respect the claim and maintain a dis­

tance, entering her space sporadically to toss a

coin. The hawker admitted into the fiea market

must be granted a corner to display his wares.

The traditional market exhibits instant territo­

rial arrangements i n town squares throughout

the world . Many temporary territories are in ­

cluded for only a few hours, a cyclical increase

and decrease o f territorial depth that i n some

towns has gone on for centuries. In the l iv ing

room, we see the same phenomenon: when

books or toys are brought to occupy a corner or

a couch, some depth is added to the territorial

situation o f a communal space.

The human body implies terri torial pres­

ence. Therefore, being i n a pubhc space is

partaking i n a game o f instant territorial recon­

figuration, shif t ing as people use things: sitting

on benches, wait ing for buses, parking cars, en­

tering telephone booths, standing by the side­

walk. A game of fleeting spatial claims and

terri torial inclusions follows the flow of use

w i t h i n the contextual setting o f a given public

space.

8.8 Jogjakarta, Indonesia—Sidewalk barber.

r

Territory and Buildin

T e r r i t o r y a n d B u i l d i n g s

S t r e e t a n d H o u s e

The Suburban Yard

The mansion standing free i n its own estate

may offer some visual connection w i t h the pub­

hc road. But the space between is open land.

Even when landscaped, h is not shaped to ex­

tend either house or street. The entry gate

marks the territory, not the house: the terri torial

claim is quite separate f r o m the bui lding.

Sometimes there is only a post or a stone to in ­

dicate a boundary.

The suburban house (figure 9.2a) bears

witness to a somewhat more spatial, architec­

tural engagement. Street and house keep their

distance, but stand i n close enough proximity

to provide a certain tension between the bui l t

f o r m inside a larger territory and the public

space outside that territory. The suburban f ront

yard is the mediating space i n between: the

property o f the inhabitant but open to the

street, contr ibuting to the public realm. Houses

are separated just enough to be perceived as in­

dividual forms, and set back just enough to cre­

ate a sense of independence,

"Suburban" aptly describes this arrange­

ment. I n a fu l ly urban environment, bu i ld ing

and street are closely married: the fa(;:ade forms

part o f a street wah, at the edge of domestic ter­

ritory. I n the suburb, that street wah is dis­

solved and a f ron t yard mediates between house

and territorial boundary. A n architectural com­

plement to the dignity o f the pubHc realm is

sometimes preserved i n the way the entryway

or facade addresses the street. But bungalows

and ranch houses typically seek to deny the

closeness o f the street, appropriating imag-

Tl o

ery to suggest a freestanding cottage i n the

wilderness.

The Urban Yard

As we move f r o m the suburb toward the city

(figures 9.2b and 9.4a), the distance between

bui lding and street decreases, u n t i l the d imin ­

ished f ron t yard requires architectural rein­

forcement to sustain itself as a strip o f nature

between house and street. Victorian houses o f

Boston's Back Bay, for instance, have f ron t yard

depths o f at most fifteen feet—just large

enough to plant a tree and mainta in a few feet

o f lawn between shrubs at the foundations and

those along the street. Assertion o f the ter-

165

9.2 The relation of territorial boundary to building (verti­

cal lines extending beyond the square indicate the

territorial boundary):

(a) The suburban house in its garden.

(b) Urban houses fronted by narrow gardens, forming a

street wall.

(c) The British terraced house with an "area" between side­

walk and building.

(d) The Dutch canal house with a zone for stoops

between pavement and building.

(e) Perfect coincidence of territorial boundary and build­

ing fa<;ade.

(f) Northern Italian arcades, such as those In Bologna,

with the territorial boundary located behind the line of

the facade.

I

9.3 Kampong near Jogjakarta, Indonesia-House in sub­

urban setting in a kampong with fence between public

and private space

i 6 6

ntor ia l boundary now becomes necessary: the

street is too close and the small strip o f yard too

vulnerable. Hence, i n the Back Bay, low walls

wi th i ron railings, together about knee-high,

are found along the sidewalk. They f o r m a mod­

est but essential architectural element.

Because these fences are similar i n com­

position and u n i f o r m i n height, they f o r m a

continuous element, de-emphasizing the indi­

viduality o f the houses, jo in ing them i n re­

sponse to the street. Jointly, the fences define

the sidewalk as much as they demarcate indi­

vidual yards.

I n this configuration, house fagades be­

gin to merge into a street waU. The Back Bay

street wall is particularly successful i n that i t is

formed wi th bay windows. While their widths

may vary, their projecfion beyond the facade

and into the yards is always the same, such that

they too are perfectiy aligned i n plan.' I n this

way, the street wall, standing behind the shal­

low f ron t yards w i t h their greenery, undulates

but remains anchored to urban geometry.

The Six-Foot Yard

The urban f ront yard (figure 9.4b) o f l imi ted di­

mension is found in endless variation i n the

nineteenth- and twenfieth-century city. Some

five or six feet o f separation between garden

gate and house door are sufficient to evoke the

presence of a garden. Demarcation o f t h e terri­

torial boundary becomes essential to preserve

the garden's integrity. Boundary forms vary

f r o m slender three-foot i ron fences to elaborate

combinafions o f masonry wall and railing. In

Hol land, ciHzens commonly keep boundary

forms low, to preserve a view of the street f r o m

the hving roora.

T e r r i t o r y a n d B u i l d i n

9.4 Distances between public space and building in an urban setting:

(^) Boston Back Bay, nineteenth century-Narrow front

y^rds with buildings aligned ,n a continuous waif

(c) iondon^The "area" of an English terraced house

showing the bridge from the sidewalk to the main floor

and steps down to basement floor.

(d) Amsterdam-Canal house stoops.

(Ö) Apeldoorn, the Netherlands-Minimal front yard with

low iron fence and freestanding house.

The Georgian Terrace

Urban infrastructure i n Georgian terraced

housing (figures g.2c and 9.4c) elevates the

street w i t h f i l l cut f r o m house lots. The f ront

sidewalk is a f ew steps below the main floor;

the rear garden is roughly at basement level. In

f ron t o f the house is the "area": several yards

of space between house and sidewalk, through

which hght and narrow steps descend to the

basement. A bridge over the area connects

main entry to street, l i n k i n g territorial edge to

bui l t space.

I ron railings protect pedestrians f r o m the

private depth below, adding to the unique elabo­

ration o f the marg in between house and public

space. This pattern sets the house only a few

paces f r o m the sidewalk. The entry door, at the

end o f the bridge, is often f ramed by a ped-

168 iment and columns. The whole exhibits a

certain f r iendly detachment but remains un­

mistakably urban.

A Four-Foot Masonry Margin

The essence of urban architecture is how i t ne­

gotiates the narrow margin available between

terri torial boundary and bui ld ing facade. In the

Amsterdam canal house {figures 9.2d and

9.4d), the main floor is raised four or five feet

above street level. Thus the entry is approached

via a half-f l ight o f stairs. (The water table is only

a few feet below the pavement.) When the base­

ment is used for warehousing goods, these are

brought i n via a steep half-f l ight o f steps hidden

under bulkheads, at street level.

A l l o f these elements occupy a four-foot

margin between facade and street. This margin

clearly forms part o f the domestic territory. I t

was sometimes used to extend basement space.

a venerable tradition sti l l occasionally i n evi­

dence today. The area i n question would be

paved by the home owner, frequently i n costly

stone, contrasting wi th the brick paving i n the

public street. The territorial boundary was often

asserted by small granite columns, sometimes

connected w i t h i ron chains, placed four feet

f r o m the facade.^

The Min imal Yard

Six to eight feet is probably a reasonable l i m i t

for retaining the identity o f t h e garden between

house and street. Yet i n Japan, a small tree and

some shrubs may be wedged between a territo­

rial wall and the house two or three feet behind

i t , to hide ground-floor windows. The symboli­

cally not-quite-urban house alludes to affluence

and freedom. W i t h such a strong configura-

tional meaning, dimensions become second­

ary: as long as the proper elements are there,

i n the proper relationship, the image and the

message are conveyed.

The Courtyard House

When territorial boundary and house wall do

coincide (figure 9.2e), a certain tension is lost.

The streets of Roman Pompeii and Greek Delos

give us examples o f such isomorphism. Middle

Eastern townscapes such as Tunis are similarly

walled i n . The street becomes an enclosed

space devoid o f civic expression beyond occa­

sional recessed house gates, w i t h perhaps a

small sculpted seat near the doorway. There are

no architectural facades, just unadorned walls.

Windows are few, appearing at the second floor.

Such walled-in streets suit the introverted

nature o f the courtyard house, which requires

no l ight f r o m the pubhc space. Pedestrians

move inside a long continuous fo rm, rather

than past individual buildings. The street

comes alive only where shops and work places

open toward it , where sounds and goods spiU

out into the sunny public space f r o m dark holes

i n the wall,

Lines Crossing: The Arcade

The convergence of bui l t f o r m and terri torial

boundaries aUows fur ther variety i n relations

between the two. The porticoes o f medieval and

Renaissance cities Hke Bologna and Padua re­

veal a pattern i n which houses are bui l t above

the sidewalk, supported by columns and vaults

(figure 9,2f; see also figure 14.4). Together, they

f o r m a shaded walkway sandwiched between a

bright public street and bright gated courtyard,

LLere, the lines actually cross, locating the ter­

ritorial boundary behind the building's upper-

level facade and aUowing public space to

penetrate the bui ld ing on the ground floor,

where gates inside the arcades open onto do­

mestic courtyards.

Varying Form w i t h i n Fixed Terr i tory

Form is interpreted i n different ways, and dif­

ferent occupation and terri torial boundaries re­

sult. As a rule, f o r m is generally more stable

than its territorial interpretation. However,

given a fixed terri torial structure, different

forms can be placed i n i t . Accordingly, all dia­

grams i n figure 9.5 represent identical territo­

rial organization: w i t h i n a territory A, two

lesser territories B are included.

I n examples (b) and (c), bui ld ing forms

lie w i t h i n the territory B and constitute part o f

i t . This is the most common f o r m of either the

freestanding house (c) or the townhouse wi th

its own party walls (b).

In (d), the house is owned by an absentee

landlord and therefore lies outside the control

o f the inhabit ing territorial power B .

Q .2 i T e r r i t o r y a n d B u i l d i n g Example (e) has a shared party wall . Nei­

ther B I nor B2 can control that wall indepen­

dently; hence a th i rd power constituted by Bi

9.5 A single territorial diagram representing varied build­

ings and uses:

(a) Initial terntory diagram without buildings.

(b) Abutting houses with blind walls.

(c) Freestanding houses in gardens.

(d) House as In (c) above, when rented by occupant

(e) Houses with a common party wall.

(f) Houses as In (e) above, when rented by occupants.

(g) A single building within which apartments are rented.

T e r r i t o r y a n d B u i l d i n g s

and B2 together is i n control o f i t . Other than

that, the two B powers control their own

houses.

I n ( f ) , the whole duplex house is under

control o f an absentee landlord. Territorial pow­

ers B do not control any part o f i t .

Finally, (g) represents a housing estate i n

which both the bui ld ing and the surrounding

landscape are controlled by a housing authority,

A. Renters B merely control space w i t h i n the

bui lding.

In (d) and ( f ) , the property owner is not

an agent i n the given terri torial context. There­

fore, we have three terri torial powers—A, Bi,

and B2—as well as another new agent control­

l ing the f o r m .

Thus, the environmental game is played

i n a variety o f ways. Various bui l t forms and

variable control distributions may go w i t h the

same territorial structure. The bui ld ing can op­

erate i n either terri torial depth (A or B) but also

can be controlled by outside agents.

Varying Terr i tor ia l Structure

The common organization o f city blocks places

buildings that r ing the street perimeter shoul­

der to shoulder. They thus f o r m a continuous

street wall and an internal open space invisible

f r o m the street. The arrangement o f this inter­

nal open space and its connecdon to the street

network merits scrutiny: to a large extent, they

determine the character o f urban fabric.

The pictograms i n figure 9.6 represent a

m i n i m a l arrangement o f this f o r m : for pur­

poses o f diagramming, four territories coincide

wi th four houses. (In reality, many more houses

compose a block.) Differences observed aU have

to do w i t h the way space inside the block is

treated. Together, the series o f emblematic pic­

tograms allows for discussion o f numerous ge­

neric situafions i n territorial structure.

C i t y B l o c k i n the most common version o f (c), we

find aUeys several feet wide connecting to back­

yards. The alley is handy for br ing ing bicycles

into a back shed; and it provides a much-

appreciated way for children to visit f r o m back­

yard to backyard. Unless the alley is gated (d),

it is territorially part o f the general public space.

9.6 Territorial variations on the urban block—Picto­

grams diagramming houses around a block. All have

access to the surrounding streets that form the block. Vari­

ations on the space internal to a dty block can result In

territorial differences

(a) Territorial diagram applicable to cases (b), (c), (g), and

(h).

(b) Internal open space Is subdivided Into private gardens.

(c) Private gardens have access to a back alley, which Is

part of the public street network.

T e r r i t o r y a n d B u i l d i n g s

.1

O

4 -

(d) The back alley when gated, becomes a public space

for the surrounding houses.

(g) Private gardens are merged in a single ungated com­

munal yard.

(e) Terntorlal diagram applicable to (d) and (f)—provided

that depth Is traced through the backyard—and to (j).

(h) Houses are rented from a party who controls both the

buildings and their communal yard.

(f) Private gardens are merged in a single gated commu­

nal yard.

(j) The communal yard forms a courtyard between house

and street.

on a par w i t h the streets. There exists only one

territorial depth (a), while i n terms o f f o r m we

f i n d perhaps three levels—street, secondary

street, and aUey.

Dual Or ien ta t ion

I n (c) and (d), house territory manifests dual

orientation. Public space may be entered by two

gates: one at the street, another at the aUey. Be­

cause alley and street are so different i n charac­

ter, a potentially ambiguous environmental

structure remains clear and thus disorientation

is avoided, As a result, the scheme is eminently

workable. Dual orientation o f house territory

need not be confined to the narrow aUey More

elaborate and sophisticated examples can be

noted,

174 I n Bri t ish terraced housing, the mews was

specifically designed to provide access to car­

riage houses bu i l t i n back o f private yards,'

From the outset, servants' quarters were also

found i n buildings at the mews, adjacent to or

on top o f the stables. As society changed, out­

buildings were commonly converted into or re­

placed by independent residential buildings,

These fo rmed their own territories back-to-back

wi th that o f the main house, thereby terminat­

ing the dual exposure o f the latter. In this way,

the mews became a modest and int imate resi­

dential street, i n contrast to the more formal

streets o f the block proper.

I n the Venetian urban fabric (see figure

7.2), dual orientation is more sophisticated.

Houses connect to the network o f canals on one

side and a network of narrow streets, alleys, and

squares on the other. Visitors are received w i t h

appropriate dignity on a gated landing at the

ground-floor gondola mooring. Ar r iv ing f r o m

the canal, one passes under the house and up a

(frequendy elaborate) staircase i n the middle o f

the house, to reach a large central, ma in floor

space once again facing the waterway. A second

stair at the back o f the house connects the main

floor to a courtyard. This courtyard has a gate.

9.7 Bath—Section showing the mews, a secondary

street behind the main street- What used to be stables

and servant guarters, accessed from the back street, have

now become private houses. (After hiamdi and Edgerly).

See also the partial reproduction of Edinburgh New Town,

T e r r i t o r y a n d B u i l d i n

which also provides a service entry, opening

onto the pedestrian street.

The two networks i n the Venetian urban

fabric are separate worlds, engaged w i t h great

freedom and improvisation. Pedestrians occa­

sionally arrive at a purely urban environment of

streets and squares, wi th no waterway in sight.

Conversely, crossing a canal, or walking along­

side it , may lead to a square at water's edge.

There are no urban blocks whatsoever here. But

the street network remains, behind and be­

tween buildings, hidden f r o m major water­

ways. Houses span between the two. Only along

secondary canals do water, buildings, and

pedestrian space become more intimately

intertwined.

In Suzhou and other cities of the Yangtze

River delta, houses also mediate between water­

way and street. But major streets are wide and

often l ined w i t h trees. They are laid out i n

a more geometric pattern, accommodating

horses and carts as well as pedestrians. There­

fore the two realms-—waterways and street net­

work—are almost equally balanced i n practical

importance and i n physical size. I t is the street

side on which the houses f ron t formally; but at

the water side, l i fe may be equally intense.

As the case o f Radburn—a modern, but

less convincing model o f dual orientation—

seems to indicate, success i n dual orientation

requires differentiation between the two realms

to which the house relates. In Radburn, single-

family dwellings situated w i t h i n their gardens

f ron t on one street w i t h another secondary

street i n back. The latter, clearly intended by the

urban designers as a communal space, con­

nects to parking. It is no longer clear precisely

which side o f the house is the front .

The ambiguity seems as much related to

f o r m as to use. The same dual funct ional re­

lation is found i n traditional back alleys such

9.8 Suzhou, China—Diagrammatic map showing the

relationship between two Interwoven networks, streets

and waterways. Estates and houses usually span between

the two.

1 7 6

9.9 Suzhou, China—Waterfront. A large compound of

several houses belonging to an extended family. Each

house Is composed around a sequence of courtyards—

there are six such stdngs of courtyards in all—and spans

between street and waterway. The triangle on the left

marks the entrance to the main house; that on the right

marks the gate of a narrow lane leading to the Zhuo

Zheng or "Humble Administrator's" Garden (figure 10.1).

On the other side of the street, modest shops also span

street and water networks.

as i n Bostons Back Bay. But there, the physical

distinction between the two sides is quite

clearly articulated, and the f ron t facades face a

busy street. I n the garden city o f Radburn, any

such distinctions remain min ima l .

Terr i tor ia l Overlap

The back alley or service street o f figure 9.6c

is a straightforward extension o f public space

already formed by the streets. I n terms o f fo rm,

there exists, therefore, a tri-level street network

organization: major residential street, side

street, and back alley. But wi th respect to territo­

r ia l structure, there is just one public space,

w i t h no evidence o f gates or other means o f

closing o f f alleys f r o m secondary streets or the

latter f r o m major residential streets. For that

reason, at the point where back alley reaches

street space, no gate is indicated. There are now

two gates f r o m each territory o f depth B into the

public space: one f r o m the f ron t and one f r o m

the back, But these two gates are equivalent, as

territory goes. The terri torial diagram itself

does not change vnth the introduction o f the

alley.

Sometimes, we do f i n d gates at the end

of the alley (d), for which only inhabitants o f

abutting houses have a key. This usually hap­

pens where alleys are very narrow, clearly

intended to help the inhabitants reach their

baclcyards and not at all for general access. I n

this case, the alley serves as another pubhc

space for the territories already included i n A,

adding another terri torial level. Territory B is

T e r r i t o r y a n d B u i l d i n g s

now connected to two distinct public spaces

(pubhc relative to B). When B is entered via the

back alley, it is two gates removed f r o m A,

whereas entering via A requires only one gate.

Relative to A, territory B may be one or two lev­

els deep, depending on the route we choose to

reach It.

We may say that two terri torial situations,

those i n diagrams (a) and (e), overlap i n B.

From one perspective (e), B lies i n C. The alley

is Cs public space. From another perspective

[a), territory B lies i n A,

Similar overlap is f o u n d when a corner

house fronts a major and a minor street. I f t h e

latter exists behind a gate (as i n historic

Beijing), i t constitutes private space relative to

the major street. Yet because there are en­

trances on both streets, a similar terri torial

overlap occurs. I n general, such cases o f overlap

are exceptions or involve physical situations

of lesser significance, such as minor service

alleys. ( In the Middle Eastern fabric, cases o f

houses connecting to two different gated dead­

end streets are somewhat more frequent, al­

though by no means the rule; see figure 8,4.)

Communal Backyard Space

Pictograms ( f ) , (g), and (h) diagram backyards

merged into larger communal space, i n order

to create shared space for communal activities

i n a more protected, less pubhc setting than is

offered by the street network. This shared space

i n (g) would be accessible to others coming i n

f r o m the larger pubhc domain, a situation that

is clearly not as desirable as ( f ) . Though this

f o r m suggests a raore private space, its imple­

mentation i n practice is rather arabiguous. I n

(h), communal space is actually contiolled by

an outside agent: a public housing authority or

municipality. Here, the houses are presumably

rented, wi th all real estate controlled and main­

tained by the authority.

The outcorae o f such quasi-coramunity

space is seldom positive, for reasons that be­

come readily apparent: i n (g) and (h), the com­

mi tmen t o f inhabitants l iv ing adjacent to the

space can only be min ima l . Successful commu­

nal space is communally controlled and main­

tained. Here, adjacent inhabitants are not i n

communal control.

I n ( f ) , the space is controlled by inhabit­

ants who can close the gates. The design and

actual use o f the space may be determined col­

lectively by inhabitants or delegates. I f they are

t ru ly i n control, they w i l l have the option o f

carving pubhc space up into private outdoor

spaces, thus returning to model (d). Experience

indicates that, given the choice, people often

prefer subdivision. Either way, the scheme w i l l

work.

In all cases, the communal backyards o f

( f ) , (g), and (h) create ambiguous dual orienta­

tion and concomitant disorientation. The more

pronounced the communal backyard space, the

more unclear i t becomes which side is more

fo rma l and important. The distinction between

a fo rma l f ron t and a more protected and infor­

mal back is very much ingrained i n terri torial

consciousness. Large communal space at the

back weakens that distinction.

Courtyard organization, as represented i n

schematic (j), is an ancient f o r m , providing

more communal space between the domestic

and the truly public. Both territorially and ar­

chitecturally, i t is unambiguous. But It rep­

resents a totally different urban type than the

terraced house model that is the essence o f ex­

amples (b) through (h). The courtyard turns it­

self away f r o m the street. I t is, generally

speaking, an urban model, highly suitable for

high-dens ity, low-rise l iv ing. Yet territorially

similar situations are also found i n Indonesia

and Afr ica i n i n fo rma l residential neighbor­

hoods. I n those cases, groups o f families Hve i n

compounds behind a single gate, maintaining

their own lit t le gardens but also a communal

open space. Whi le these are not urban situa­

tions, their terri torial disposition is equivalent

to the one i n (j).^

Cont inu i ty of Terr i tor ia l Depth

The final pictogram, figure 9 . 1 0 , represents a

shared, communal space totally separated f r o m

the street network. It occurs when the back­

yards o f figure 9.6b become unif ied communal

space. I t is a purely theoretical design, unob­

served i n real l i fe . (By its very nature, its exis­

tence would be known only to inhabitants

sharing a space.) But as a rule, there is l i t t le rea­

son for inhabitants l iv ing on four different

streets to share space wi th in a block.

O f more importance, this final scheme is

anomalous because i t suggests discontinuous

territorial depth: its backyard public space is no­

where connected to a more public space. Com­

ing out o f t h e house into the shared communal

space, one can only go back, but not to a more

general territory. This violates territorial struc­

ture. Environmental order, regardless o f its par­

ticular f o r m , is always a continuous chain o f

public spaces o f increasing territorial size.'^ We

either go continuously up i n the territorial

chain, or we go continuously down. A l l environ­

mental space, i n fact, is one.

,1,

9.70 An anomalous territorial variation on ttie urban

block—A communal backyard not connecting to any

larger public space. This form Is purely theoretical.