Accepting the Complexities of Designing Streets.
The concept for the Gherkin building in London was developed by a team of architects before a team of structural engineers worked-out how to make it a reality. Similarly, the Apple ipad was initially developed by a team of designers before a team of electrical engineers worked out how to turn the idea into a viable consumer product. However, when it comes to our streets it is common practice to assume that a highway engineer has sufficient breadth of training to not only ensure that the carriageway is capable of handling the necessary loading, that the signal timings will efficiently manage the traffic flows, that the drainage will prevent flooding and that the lighting will provide sufficient illumination at night, but also that the street will be designed to work as a whole.
When we end up with streets that are far from elegant in their execution we are quick to blame the highway engineer. But I have yet to meet one who actively seeks to achieve this. Rather I would suggest that they are ill-equipped on their own (as any single profession would be) to produce a street of true greatness.
If we consider the wider definition of engineering as ‘the practical application of the sciences for the betterment of mankind’ then I think that we start to see why our streets have ended up in their current condition. This is not to say that highway engineers are of little value, far from it – they must be an integral part of a streets design. But while they are necessary, they are far from sufficient if we want to create great streets.
The problem of poor street design has now been recognised for some time. Documents such as the DfT’s ‘Manual for Streets’ now provide highway engineers with all of the necessary terminology to speak eloquently on the subject of better streets and many have taken to this with great relish. But what seems to be beyond the comprehension of the profession is the imperative need for design as a core skill in creating great streets and the suitability of the highway engineering profession to deliver this.
The majority of engineers that I have met start from the premise of trying to solve a problem. In many cases this isn’t just something that has been taught to them, it is the way that their brains ‘work’. They start by listing constraints and then set about resolving them as efficiently as possible. In many ways this is the essence of good engineering and shouldn’t be undervalued.
However, if we now contrast this with the definition of a landscape architect we start to realise why highway engineers can only ever be necessary and not sufficient to the creation of great streets. A landscape architect is concerned with ‘the art and practice of designing the outdoor environment’. There is both an important shift in emphasis and the type of thinking involved.
We have been blinded by the symptoms of poor street design to the obscurity of the cause. The focus should not be on trying to turn highway engineers into ‘super-professionals’. This belittles their current role as well as the huge complexities of streets. Rather, we must accept that truly great streets will only ever come from the collaborative working of those professions that cover the full range of skills necessary.
When we end up with streets that are far from elegant in their execution we are quick to blame the highway engineer. But I have yet to meet one who actively seeks to achieve this. Rather I would suggest that they are ill-equipped on their own (as any single profession would be) to produce a street of true greatness.
If we consider the wider definition of engineering as ‘the practical application of the sciences for the betterment of mankind’ then I think that we start to see why our streets have ended up in their current condition. This is not to say that highway engineers are of little value, far from it – they must be an integral part of a streets design. But while they are necessary, they are far from sufficient if we want to create great streets.
The problem of poor street design has now been recognised for some time. Documents such as the DfT’s ‘Manual for Streets’ now provide highway engineers with all of the necessary terminology to speak eloquently on the subject of better streets and many have taken to this with great relish. But what seems to be beyond the comprehension of the profession is the imperative need for design as a core skill in creating great streets and the suitability of the highway engineering profession to deliver this.
The majority of engineers that I have met start from the premise of trying to solve a problem. In many cases this isn’t just something that has been taught to them, it is the way that their brains ‘work’. They start by listing constraints and then set about resolving them as efficiently as possible. In many ways this is the essence of good engineering and shouldn’t be undervalued.
However, if we now contrast this with the definition of a landscape architect we start to realise why highway engineers can only ever be necessary and not sufficient to the creation of great streets. A landscape architect is concerned with ‘the art and practice of designing the outdoor environment’. There is both an important shift in emphasis and the type of thinking involved.
We have been blinded by the symptoms of poor street design to the obscurity of the cause. The focus should not be on trying to turn highway engineers into ‘super-professionals’. This belittles their current role as well as the huge complexities of streets. Rather, we must accept that truly great streets will only ever come from the collaborative working of those professions that cover the full range of skills necessary.
