GIS-based Landscape Design Research: Exploring Aspects of Visibility in Landscape Architectonic Compositions

Chapter
Part of the GeoJournal Library book series (GEJL, volume 111)

Abstract

Landscape design research is important for cultivating spatial intelligence in landscape architecture. This chapter explores GIS as a tool for landscape design research—investigating landscape designs to understand them as architectonic compositions (architectonic plan analysis). Landscape architectonic compositions and their representations embody a great wealth of design knowledge as objects of our material culture and reflect the treatment of the ground, space, image and program into a characteristic coherence. By exploring landscape architectonic compositions with GIS we can acquire design knowledge that can be used in the creation/refinement of a new design. This chapter elaborates on GIS-based visibility analysis of landscape architectonic compositions and reveals the perceived spatial potential as a basis for performance and reception. Two examples of landscape design research showcase that GIS-based isovists and viewsheds have the potential of measuring visual phenomena which are often subject of intuitive and experimental design.

Keywords

Landscape architecture Visual landscape research Architectonic plan analysis Design knowledge Viewshed analysis Isovist analysis 

References

  1. Batty, M. (2001). Exploring isovist fields. Space and shape in architectonic and urban morphology. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28, 123–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, S. (1993). Elements of visual design in the landscape. London: E&FN Spon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benedikt, M. L. (1979). To take hold of space: Isovists and isovist fields. Environment and Planning, B, 6, 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benedikt, M. L., Burnham, C. A. (1981). Perceiving architectural space: from optic arrays to isovists. In W. H. Warren, R. E. Shaw, & N. J. Hillsdale, (Eds.). Persistence and Change (pp. 103–114). Lawrence Erlbaum: Connecticut.Google Scholar
  5. Bishop, I., Lange, E. (Eds.). (2005). Visualization in landscape and environmental planning. Technology and applications. New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  6. Blake, R., Sekuler, R. (2006). Perception. McGraw-Hill: New York.Google Scholar
  7. Colquhoun, A. (1991). Composition versus the project. In idem, Modernity and the Classical Tradition. Architectural Essays, 1980–87. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. London: Birkhauser.Google Scholar
  9. Dee, C. (2001). Form and fabric in landscape architecture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Ervin, S., Steinitz., C. (2003). Landscape visibility computation: Necessary, but not sufficient. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30(5), 757–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fischer, P. F. (1995). An exploration of probable viewsheds in landscape planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and design, 22, 527–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fisher, P. F. (1996). Extending the applicability of viewsheds in landscape planning. Programmetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 62(11), 1297–1302.Google Scholar
  13. Gaffney, V., Stančič, Z. (1991). GIS approaches to regional analysis. A case study of the island of Hvar. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana.Google Scholar
  14. Gardner, H. (1999). Multiple intelligences. The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  15. Grandell, G. (1993). Nature pictorialized. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Haken, H., Portugali, J. (2003). The face of the city is its information. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 385–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Higuchi, T. (1975). The visual and spatial structure of landscapes. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Horrigan, P. (1995). Visual books: Representing landscapes. Proceedings of the Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture, VII, 35–48.Google Scholar
  19. Hubbard, H. V., Kimball, T. (1935). An introduction to the study of landscape design. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Janson, A., Bürklin., T. (2002). Scenes. Interaction with Architectural Space: the Campi of Venice. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  21. Kemp, M. (1990). The science of art. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Li, Z., Zhu, C., Gold, C. (2005). Digital terrain modeling: Principles and methodology. Boca Raton: CRC press.Google Scholar
  23. Longley, P. A., & Batty, M. (Eds.). (2003) Advanced spatial analysis. The CASA book of GIS. Redlands: ESRI.Google Scholar
  24. Llobera, M. (2003). Extending GIS-based visual analysis: the concept of visualscapes. International Journal for Geographical Information Science, 17(1), 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lynch, K. (1976). Managing the sense of a region. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Magleby, M. A. (2009). Reviewing the mount of Diana: Henry Hoare’s Turkish tent at Stourhead. PhD-thesis, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  27. Moore, C. W., Mitchell, W. J., et al. (2000). The poetics of gardens. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Morresi, M. (1999). Piazza San Marco. Istituzioni, Poteri e Architettura a Venezia nel primo Cinquencento. Milano: Electa.Google Scholar
  29. Newton, N. T. (1971). Design on the land. The development of landscape architecture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Nijhuis, S. (2011). Visual research in landscape architecture. Research in Urbanism Series, 2, 103–145.Google Scholar
  31. Nijhuis, S. (2013). New tools. Digital media in landscape architecture. In J. Vlug, et al. (Eds.), The need for design. Exploring Dutch landscape architecture (pp. 86–97). Velp: Van Hall Larenstein, University of Applied Sciences.Google Scholar
  32. Nijhuis, S. (2015). GIS-based landscape design research. Stourhead landscape garden as a case study. Delft: Delft University of Technology (in preparation).Google Scholar
  33. Nijhuis, S., & Bobbink, I. (2012). Design-related research in landscape architecture. Journal of Design Research, 10(4), 239–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nijhuis, S., Lammeren, R. van, & Hoeven, F. D., van der. (Eds.). (2011). Exploring the visual landscape. Advances in physiognomic landscape research in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  35. Psarra, S. (2009). Architecture and narrative. The formation of space and cultural space. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Rana, S. (2002). Isovist analyst extension. Version 1.1. Computer software program produced by the author at the Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London.Google Scholar
  37. Reh, W. (1995). Arcadia en metropolis. Het landschapsexperiment van de verlichting. Delft: Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar
  38. Samonà, G. (1970). Caratteri morfologici del sistema architettonico di Piazza San Marco. In G. Samonà, et al. (Eds.), Piazza San Marco. L’architettura la storia le funzioni (pp. 9–42). Padova: Marsilio Editori.Google Scholar
  39. Samonà, G. et al. (Eds.). (1970). Piazza San Marco. L’architettura la storia le funzioni. Padova: Marsilio Editori.Google Scholar
  40. Schubert, O. (1965). Optik in Architektur und Städtebau. Berlin: Verlag Gebr. Mann.Google Scholar
  41. Schulz, J. (1991). Urbanism in Medieval Venice. In Molho, A., Raaflaub, K., & Emlen, J. (Eds.), City–states in classical antiquity and Medieval Italy. Athens, Rome, Florence and Venice (pp. 419–445). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
  42. Snowden, R., Thompson, P., & Troscianko, T. (2006). Basic vision. An introduction to visual perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Steenbergen, C. M., Meeks, S., & Nijhuis, S. (2008). Composing landscapes. Analysis, typology and experiments for design. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  44. Steenbergen, C. M., Mihl, H., & Reh, W. (2002). Introduction; design research, research by design. In Steenbergen, C. M., et al. (Eds), Architectural design and composition (pp. 12–25). Bussum: Thoth.Google Scholar
  45. Steenbergen, C. M., Reh, W. (2003). Architecture and landscape. The Design experiment of the Great European gardens and landscapes. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  46. Tandy, C. R. (1967). The isovist method of landscape survey. In C. R. Murray (Ed), Methods of landscape analysis (pp. 9–10). London: Landscape Research Group.Google Scholar
  47. Turner, A., Doxa, M., O’Sullivan, D., & Penn, A. (2001). From isovists to visibility graphs: A methodology for the analysis of architectural space. Environment and Planning B: Planning and design, 28, 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tzortzi, K. (2004). Building and exhibition layout. Sainsbury wing compared with castelvecchio. Architectural Research Quaterly, 8(2), 128–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Van der, Ham, R. J. M., & Iding, JA. (1971). De landschapstypologie naar visuele kenmerken. Methodiek en gebruik. Wageningen: Wageningen University.Google Scholar
  50. Van, Lammeren, R. (2011). Geomatics in physiognomic landscape research—A dutch view. Research in Urbanism Series, 2, 73–97.Google Scholar
  51. Von, Meiss, P. (1991). Elements of Architecture. London: E&FN Spon.Google Scholar
  52. Ware, C. (2004). Information visualization. Perception for design. Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  53. Watkin, D. (1982). The English vision. The picturesque in architecture, landscape, and garden design. Londen: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  54. Weitkamp, G. (2010). Capturing the view. A GIS based procedure to assess perceived landscape openness. Wageningen: Wageningen University.Google Scholar
  55. Wheatley, D. (1995). Cumulative viewshed analysis: A GIS-based method for investigating intervisibility, and its archaeological application. In G. Lock & Z. Stančič (Eds.), Archaeology and GIS: A European perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Woodbridge, K. (1970). Landscape and antiquity. Aspects of English culture at Stourhead 1718–1838. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  57. Woodbridge, K. (1976). The planting of ornamental schrubs at Stourhead. A history, 1746–1946. Garden History, 4(1), 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Woodbridge, K. (1996). The Stourhead landscape. The National Trust (Reprint edition 2002).Google Scholar
  59. Zube, E., Simcox, D., & Law, C. (1987). Perceptual landscape simulations: History and prospect. Landscape Journal, 6(1), 62–80.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Architecture and the Built EnvironmentDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations