Habraken_The Structure of the Ordinary_Place, the Territorial Order_Chapter 8+9

I

cation are

established

throughout the

built

environment: it is simply understood that certain blocks, neighborhoods, or even driveways

Territory Varies w i t h Form

are not entered w i t h o u t express permission f r o m inhabitants. I n many large cities, there are

Territorial inclusion is remarkably consistent

some quarters into w h i c h neither police, build-

throughout varied physical circumstances. En-

ing inspectors, nor tax collectors venture. There

v i r o n m e n t a l f o r m , i n all its richness and variety,

are urban areas i n w h i c h shopkeepers m u s t pay

always interprets the same basic set o f territo-

scheduled "protection" fees to local gangsters

rial principles, The f o l l o w i n g illustrations compare two very different examples.

or be driven out. Local enforcement, f o r m a l or i n f o r m a l , establishes territorial depth w i t h i n broader urban fabric. Territorial interpretations o f house f o r m

Row House Urban Tissue

vary greatly. Included territories created by acts The European bourgeois row house runs the gamut f r o m thirteenth-century French bastide towns, to Dutch seventeenth- and eighteenthcentury canal towns, to terraced residential districts of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century England. Basically, each individual house gives onto a single, u n i n t e r r u p t e d public space com-

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

Environments

prising all streets, squares, and canals. The urban territorial structure o f these environments

spatial

hierarchy

characterizing

street networks o n the urban level is clearly distinct

house f o r m . The lower end o f the territorial structure may be far more diverse t h a n the f o r m initially suggests. I n the Dutch canal house, f o r example, we c o m m o n l y observe a basement entrance; w h e n not used by upstairs inhabitants for warehousing or other commercial activities, the basement frequently becomes an independent shop or dwelling. The b u i l d i n g then contains two or more n o n c o m m u n i c a t i n g

is simple. The

o f dwelling do not correlate to any specific

from

its

remarkably

flat

structure. U r b a n space exhibits

stacked territories, each directly related to the street (figure 8.2). The house, although b u i l t as a single con-

territorial pronounced

hierarchy. I n Amsterdam, there are the m a j o r canals, m a j o r streets perpendicular to t h e m , and secondary streets r u n n i n g alongside ca-

figuration,

lends itself to varied territorial use.

Thus b u i l t f o r m is an accumulation o f acts o f b u i l d i n g followed by acts o f inhabitation: the m a k i n g o f territory follows and interprets the creation o f f o r m .

nals. It w o u l d seem reasonable to assume that, I n another D u t c h variant, a rear house is

paralleling hierarchy observed i n the order o f f o r m , secondary streets constitute a lower terri-

accessed via a small alley between the original house and the lot line, as portrayed i n Ver-

torial level. Yet no evidence supports this. On the other hand, clear street and neighborhood territories that have no f o r m a l indi-

8.2

Amsterdam—Canal

entrances:

to a basement 8.1

Paris, 1739—Detail

Bretez, showing deep lots feature

buildings extensive

from

tlie "Turgot

set tight along rear gardens

Map" by Louis the streets.

(page

142)

Their

house, showing

to the main house, dwelling.

three

to an upstairs

separate

dwelling,

and

Observing Territorial

>

Structure

>

8.3

Varying

territorial

Interpretations

(a) A single house Is a single

(c) The back house

as the other

(d) The back house comprises mon entry garden. deeper

territorial

territory.

with access to the street

depth

exists 3t

two territories

than houses

the

houses.

with a com-

The back house Is consequently depth

house:

territory.

(b) A single house Is not a single

same territorial

of the row

on the

at a

street

146

147

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

habitants, we also note that individual territo-

ies o n the same level, each m a i n t a i n i n g direct

rial situations are i n fact quite variable. There

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

may be no obvious physical signs o f a highly

narrow dead-end alley may access two back

complex reality.

houses on adjacent lots, i n w h i c h case territorial depth increases: the alley now

provides

public space for the two back houses. Since i t

T r a d i t i o n a l M i d d l e Eastern Tissue

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

I n comparison w i t h European row house urban

(figure 8.3d).

tissue, spaces w i t h i n traditional Middle Eastern

8.4

Tunis Medina—Urban

house plans.

fabric with

The first territorial

superimposed

level Is Indicated,

showing

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

urban environment display deeper territorial

o f i s o m o r p h i s m i n the relationship between

structure. The historic quarter o f T u n i s shows

built f o r m and fluid territory, the latter being

dead-end streets w i t h their own gates. A n u m -

together

established by people and their f u r n i t u r e i n re-

ber o f individual houses are reached via each

the house bounded

by the rue de la Kasba and the

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

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

des Tamis connects

to two impasses,

hole-in-the-wall streets,

and territories

Paysanne.

While we may generally categorize entrance halls and stairs as m i n i m a l public space for i n -

firmly

established w i t h i n urban space.

constituting

This is an example

from

Bou Machem overlap.

Sauvegarde

the

street

from It. Note

of territorial

of the Association

Tunis.

directly

a dead-end

with Those houses accessed

map courtesy Medina,

shops, houses entered

de la

that rue and la Base

The houses themselves, like many court-

suggests bottom-up growth. DweUings come

yard house types, are almost perfect territorial

first, leaving open public space to be f o r m e d as

f o r m s i n plan (see also figure 17.4). The court-

density increases.'

ceiving the environment. The western European model accommodates

separate acts o f

setflement, u t i h z i n g a geometric structure that

yard is entered t h r o u g h a gate, f r o m a street or

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

includes house lots. It creates a predetermined

dead-end alley. Individual rooms cluster around

more "territorial" throughout, while the Euro-

framework

it. The courtyard reads as the public space o f

pean m o d e l seems m o r e governed by geometry

depth. The Middle Eastern model, devoid o f

the house's territory. Each r o o m comprises a

and b u i l d i n g structure.

predetermined geometry, recognizes only the

wide and shallow private space, w i t h

three

shallow

territorial

act o f settlement and produces over fime a rela-

niches large enough to hold a bed, couch, or bench: one directly opposite the door is re-

o f relatively

fively deep territorial structure.

Party Walls and T e r r i t o r i a l Boundaries

cessed into a deeper zone that also offers stor-

Externally, one is a f o r m containing setdement; the other is settlement generafing f o r m .

age spaces; the other two are located to the right

Walls between neighbors are another aspect

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

worthy of comparison. I n the M i d d l e East-

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

courtyard pattern: the relatively public center o f

ern tradition, abutters frequently cooperate i n

structure to m i n o r acts o f settlement, w h i l e the

the r o o m is surrounded by privacies.

shared party walls. Whoever builds first m u s t

canal house leaves settlement to create its o w n

T u n i s i a n urban space, shops give

be prepared to accept and accommodate the

order.

directly onto streets, thus occupying the same

neighbor's beams i n what then becomes a com-

territorial level as dead-end streets. Courtyard

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

houses may also find themselves o n this level

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

In

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

becomes

courtyard house or shop—generally recur on

Olynthus a similar higher-level structure was

a higher-level f o r m .

Whereas

in

very d i f f e r e n t territorial levels. Again, there is

premeditated and b u i l t i n one intervention, the

no r i g i d i s o m o r p h i s m i n the relation between

higher-level c o m m o n courtyard wall structure

f o r m and territorial structure.

i n the Middle East typically arises out o f many

A cursory comparison o f Dutch and T u n i -

cumulative individual acts.

sian tissue demonstrates how differently terri-

I n the western European r o w house tradi-

torial structure and u r b a n f o r m may relate.

t i o n , shared party walls are u n k n o w n . As early

W i t h i n a flat urban territorial structure, historic

as the medieval bastide towns, each house has

Amsterdam's canal house f o r m functions like

its o w n load-bearing walls just w i t h i n the terri-

a well-articulated container. Because i t reflects

torial lot line. Walls are thus doubled, perhaps

no predetermined territorial model, i t easily ac-

just a hand's w i d t h apart, to allow water collec-

commodates a range o f lower-level territorial

tion f r o m both roofs. This reflects a predeter-

situations. Courtyard house environment, as

m i n e d territorial structure o f lot divisions,

typified i n Tunisia, exhibits more depth i n the

It

u r b a n spaces, while the houses are very territo-

freely w i t h i n their territorial boundaries. Each

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

b u i l d i n g may be independently erected or de-

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

molished. Interaction, interference, and negoti-

torial interpretation.

ation between neighbors are thus kept to a

The T u n i s i a n example is, indeed, an al-

allows live

configurations to t r a n s f o r m

m i n i m u m d u r i n g the b u i l d i n g process.

most immediate reflection o f the act o f inhab-

Such different approaches to b m l d i n g

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

party waUs reflect p r o f o u n d differences i n con-

Inside the houses, however, the reverse holds

1

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

feed a large city, thereby m a i n t a i n i n g its auton-

Paris, 1736

W h e n Territory Precedes Form

omy. But buildings that always stand at the The Turgot map of Paris (figure 8.1) portrays an

street edge, jealously guarding open space be-

environment i n w h i c h most buildings are about

yond, clearly adopt

five stories h i g h , about as h i g h as people could

stance toward pubhc space.

an assertively

territorial

The eighteenth-century

Capital City during the Qianlong

Era reveals an

u r b a n structure i n Beijing based on walled-in

The m i n i m a l pubfic space o f the streets

compounds that are accessed through clearly

each street's edge define u r b a n blocks. Public

and squares was lively and crowded. Accord-

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

space is m i n i m a l : even the extensive Jardin de

ingly, ground-floor space along street frontage

Luxembourg is entirely removed f r o m view be-

was predominantly earmarked for commercial

h i n d h i g h buildings and walls, I t does not par-

and work space. Domestic space was concen-

t h e C a p i t a l City d u r i n g t h e Q i a n l o n g Era, showing

ticipate i n the pubfic environment.

trated more inside and upstairs. Public space

street and residential

was also dangerous, uncontrolled, and dark at

gates.

sors o f the Parisian c o m m u n a l courtyards. The

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

8.5

Beijing,

fabric is typical of a high-density urban environ-

f u l and regulated private realm i n w h i c h all

ment.

inhabitants

Streets are

of minimal

width,

even

t h o u g h they must serve all o f the teeming terri-

were

known

and

specifically

admitted.

tories behind the facades. Such crowded, narrow streets may be deceptive: toward the edge o f the city, buildings

Dutch Townscape

retain their height and r e m a i n situated right at the street edge proper. But there we find m u c h

For m i l l e n n i a , jealously guarded private open

lower density, for the buildings have extensive

space behind buildings and walls, creating a

backyards—primarily f o r agriculture, some-

walled-off domain, was typical o f u r b a n f o r m

times fashioned as pleasure gardens.

throughout the world, regardless o f population

Further into the outskirts, w i t h i n the fau-

density.

bourgs, houses appear only intermittently. Yet

I n historic Dutch cities, we find that al-

they still crowd the street, even w h e n f r o n t i n g

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

expansive cultivated fields. Moreover, the fields

its canals lined w i t h trees, is more generous,

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

most open space remains invisible f r o m the

ously separated f r o m private outside

streets or canals. Despite sixteenth- or seven-

space.

Green space is always private.

teenth-centitry

Delft's

unmistakably

urban

character, population density may wefi have been lower than that o f a m o d e r n Dutch suburb

Buildings on t h e Edge

or garden city.' Space is used differently i n contemporary

Thus, buildings were developed w i t h many sto-

urban environment. The proportion of public

ries, even w h e n their large lots were sparsely

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

developed. This may signify that land was

addition, private exterior space is displayed

slated f o r other purposes—for growing vegeta-

publicly. Historically, there was no point to set-

bles and fruits; for raising sufficient animals to

ting back a building: f r o n t yards were, f o r all practical purposes, useless.

ca. 1750—Detail

Ceremonial

main streets. lowed

Territorial Form

Map of tht

climb every day. Continuous perimeter walls at

W i t h i n discrete blocks are f o u n d precur-

U r b a n Fornn as

Complete

streets.

Most of the latter

gates are seen at the crossing

Houses typically

by one or more courts,

three sides. Reproduced I ihrary

of the Complete

exhibit

main have of two

an en trance court

each having

courtesy

Map oi

of the

pavilions

fol-

at

Harvard-Yenchlng

a p r i m a r i l y territorial demarcation, stands on its own, i n i t i a l l y d e f i n i n g the compound w i t h i n w h i c h pavilions, u n d e r separate roofs, are then arranged to f o r m a sequence o f courtyards. Whereas i n the T u n i s i a n fabric (figure 8.4), i t remains ambiguous whether territory or f o r m was there first, i n Beijing territorial demarcation preceded the buildings. Large-scale

environmental

creation

in

w h i c h territory precedes f o r m is universal and still very m u c h alive. We find walled territory i n urban compounds i n the i n f o r m a l sectors o f Latin A m e r i c a n cities (see figure 5.9). There, too, settlers first b u i l d walls around their territory, w i t h a gate to the street,•> I n w a r m and dry climates like those o f Mexico and Peru, i t suffices f o r a f a m i l y to live inside the waUs w i t h just a p r i m i t i v e shack to sleep i n . Gradually, a large two-story house w i t h several courtyards 152

emerges. Comparing

the

maps

o f Tunis

and

Beijing reveals another difference i n the relationship o f territorial structure to hierarchy o f f o r m . W i t h i n the T u n i s i a n fabric, territorial depth is f o u n d i n the street system as well: dead-end streets shared by a h a n d f u l o f houses w i l l have their o w n gates giving onto the network; secondary streets may have gates toward m a j o r streets. Whether i n d i v i d u a l houses have a single courtyard or many, territorial depth is f o u n d only between a courtyard and its surr o u n d i n g rooms. I n the Chinese model, territorial depth w i t h i n the c o m p o u n d can be extensive: courtyard after courtyard after courtyard may be arranged hierarchically, sometimes connected by alleys. I n the street network, territorial depth is i m p l i e d by the existence o f gates at the entrances o f the aUeys and at some intersections o f the streets,5

Observing Territorial

Overlap of Form a n d Territory

Structure

variation, out o f w h i c h urban fabric is also woven. Such themafic variation is related, not sur-

House types do not necessarily represent any

prisingly, to the social structure that brings it

specific social entity. They therefore cannot be

f o r t h . Building types c o m m o n l y associated w i t h

equated w i t h any specific territorial interpreta-

h o u s i n g do not so m u c h represent dwellings as

tion. Thus, the Dutch canal house demon-

f o r m s created to accommodate c o m m o n pat-

strates how the row house, although typically a

terns o f occupancy, w i t h w h i c h given social

single-family bourgeois dwelling, can accom-

groups specifically identify.

modate d i f f e r e n t occupation. Nor does this di-

Dwelling, as already argued, is a territo-

versity necessarily result f r o m change o f use

rial act o f occupation. It may involve a space

over t i m e : some seventeenth-century duplex ca-

smaller than a house: the boarder's dwelling is

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

a r o o m . House building, on the other hand, is a

o f w h i c h leads to an upstairs dwelling.

f o r m - m a k i n g act w i t h i n acquired territory The

Such variation is not l i m i t e d to residential uses. W i t h i n one b u i l d i n g type we

find

resulting house f o r m always remains open to territorial interpretation.

shops, bakeries, and many other residential-

3

House a n d Territory

Extreme changes i n social organization

scale commercial activities. These patterns o f

f o l l o w i n g i n i t i a l occupancy may trigger un-

variable use and occupancy may occur any-

foreseen

where and are not l i m i t e d to a particular house

nineteenth-century courtyard houses i n San-

type. The Pompeiian courtyard house, although

tiago

oriented inward, for commercial purposes con-

deliberate reordering to establish clear new

sistently opened rooms onto busy streets (see

territorial demarcation, p e r m i t t i n g higher den-

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

sity. The house, initially b u i l t f o r a prosperous

fabric do not typically support pedestrian store-

extended family, has now become a small vil-

f r o n t service retail activity, a b u i l d i n g

lage, occupied by a n u m b e r o f working-class

sug-

variations. I n a detailed study o f

de Chile,

Fernando

Domeyko records

gesting single-family use may i n fact hold two

nuclear f a m i l y households. The territorial or-

or more households, or, more commonly, a

ganization so clearly suggested by the courtyard

business office at home.

form

is scrupulously retained.

But private

There exists no strict parallel between the

rooms around the courtyard are now clustered

social u n i t o f a certain culture and any one

i n twos and threes by small f r o n t patios carved

house f o r m , although some relationship clearly exists. The first purpose of the Chinese court-

out o f the larger courtyard. Public space rem a i n i n g i n the courtyard is reduced to an alley.

yard compound, so susceptible to expansion by erecting additional pavilions, is to shelter an extended family. The first purpose o f the western Santiago

European row house is to enable dwelHng by a

8.6

single family.

century Is shown

Variations of territorial

and functional

de Chile—Partial

house with

view of a

two successive

as presently

occupied

by several

tants have fenced

off parts ofthe

interpretation w i t h i n such general themes sug-

vate yards, leaving

a narrow

gest that house f o r m results above all f r o m con-

axis. The house is thus transformed

ventional acts o f b u i l d i n g repeated i n thematic

known

as the "CItè Knossos."

public

After

turn-of-the-

courtyards

The house

families.

courtyards

Inhabi-

to make

alley In the

central

into a little

village,

Domeyko.

pri-

155

This example, while extreme, is by no

type its name and developed its characteristic

means an exception. Once f o r m is present, life

architecture o f wooden columns and banisters,

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

sometimes elaborately carved.

o f f e r i n g ever-changing

territorial

Mansion conversions like those i n Cam-

interpreta-

bridge have m o r e recently provided an image

tions w i t h i n its relative constancy. Similarly drastic changes are observed i n

for new construction. Large "houses" recalling

o f Cam-

single-family mansions are now designed to

bridge, Massachusetts, as grand Victorian man-

contain a number of smaller dwellings f r o m the

sions set i n substantial gardens are converted

start.

i n t o c o n d o m i n i u m s . They still

there similarly emerged

affluent residential neighborhoods

accommodate

I n Europe i n the

rgzos

and

1930s,

"two-under-one-roof"

only those who can a f f o r d to dweh comfortably

houses. Such duplexes share a party wall and a

near the center o f the city; new entrances are

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

created at sides and rear to provide private ac-

site ends, recalhng the f a m i l i a r single-family

cess. These houses are subdivided vertically and

house f o r m . This f u r t h e r supports the n o t i o n

horizontally, o f f e r i n g stacked dweUings f r o n t

that house f o r m is one convention, occupation

and back as well as one or two beneath the

another.

eaves. The backyard is now a c o m m u n a l parki n g area that provides access to m u l t i p l e dwellings i n the house, increasing territorial depth.

T e r r i t o r i a l Conversion Territorial interpretation o f a given f o r m may lead, i n t u r n , to new f o r m s : f o l l o w i n g a massive influx o f workers into nineteenth-century A m sterdam, its fabric was extended (see

figure

4.4c). The new neighborhoods contained buildings that retained the w i d t h and height of the canal house. But each floor became a separate dwelling, connected to the street via a c o m m u nal staircase. A l t h o u g h the architecture was reductive and the technical quality was poor, this variant could be understood as the final transf o r m a t i o n of a historic b u i l d i n g type. The Bostonian single-family gabled urban house w i t h porch, set on a narrow lot, was transformed i n t o the "triple-decker" type stiU i n evidence throughout s u r r o u n d i n g cities. Here too, each floor became a separate apartment w i t h its o w n porch. Stacked porches gave the

Use o f Space and Contents Once entered into public space, by right or by

Use vs. Control of Space

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

A l i v i n g r o o m may be under the f i r m control o f a single family member, or i t may be controlled more i m p l i c i ü y by c o m m u n a l consensus. !n either 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 dehnition, space used by those who do not individually control i t . Users of public space may come f r o m either i n cluded or higher-level territory. Entering the public realm f r o m private space is a f u n d a m e n tal right: the door to public space is always

enter public museums, drive public roads, sit on public benches, and use, f o r a fee, pubhc phones. I n addition to using space, we also use things. To a certain extent, we can actuaUy manipulate configurations we do not control, just as we can enter a space we do not control. But there are clear limitations. The house guest is invited to sit i n a chair, perhaps to pick up a magazine, but is not expected to rearrange or remove f u r n i t u r e . W i t h respect to actual physical transformations, the visitor is given little leeway. Control of things is an immediate, hands-

open, and there m u s t always be a public space we can move out to. I n doing so, one is still on "home

t u r f " : public space is communally

shared among those f r o m similarly included territories. Household members Public Space

access and

share the living r o o m . Residents i n a development may share clubhouse privileges. Further u p the territorial hierarchy, that sense o f proprietorship fades. Yet interstate highways i n the

on affair. I n the Parisian Jardin des Tuileries, visitors may sit i n i r o n garden chairs arranged around the pond. But a fee is exacted f o r this privilege, by a m a t r o n 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 i n -

U n i t e d States, as well as the M a l l i n Washington,

D.C., are spaces held i n c o m m o n by all

American citizens. Public space is also used, w i t h o u t exercise o f control, by those admitted f r o m outside, who have a different attitude than those entering f r o m included territory. The outsider enters f r o m another (higher-level) public space as a

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 p r o o f that this territorial reality cannot easily be denied.

guest. There always remains some possibihty that entry will be barred to the neighbor, the out-of-towner, or the foreigner. Use f r o m outside is specifically granted, and temporary i n nature.

8.7

Cambridge,

Massachusetts—Triple-decker

house.

Claiming Territory t h r o u g h

the w o r l d . Many temporary territories are i n -

Use of Space

cluded f o r only a few hours, a cyclical increase

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

towns has gone on f o r centuries. I n the l i v i n g

and decrease o f territorial depth that i n some

It inevitably impHes occupancy o f sufficient

room, we see the same phenomenon:

space—an instant territory, however temporary

books or toys are brought to occupy a corner or

and transparent—^to exercise this use.

a couch, some depth is added to the territorial

Configurations do not

fioat

freely i n

when

situation o f a c o m m u n a l space.

space; and control implies territory. Thus con-

The h u m a n body implies territorial pres-

trol o f a configuration simultaneously implies a

ence. Therefore, being i n a pubhc space is

territorial claim. The subway musician stands

partaking i n a game o f instant territorial recon-

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

figuration,

s h i f t i n g as people use things: sitting

People respect the claim and m a i n t a i n a dis-

on benches, waiting f o r buses, parking cars, en-

tance, entering her space sporadically to toss a

tering telephone booths, standing by the side-

coin. The hawker admitted i n t o the fiea market

walk. A game of fleeting spatial claims and

m u s t be granted a corner to display his wares.

territorial inclusions follows the flow o f use

The traditional market exhibits instant territo-

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

rial arrangements i n t o w n squares throughout

space.

8.8

Jogjakarta,

Indonesia—Sidewalk

barber.

r

Territory and Buildin

Territory and Buildings

The Suburban Yard

Tl

The mansion standing free i n its o w n estate may o f f e r some visual connection w i t h the pubhc road. But the space between is open land. Even when landscaped, h is not shaped to extend either house or street. The entry gate

o

marks the territory, not the house: the territorial claim

is quite separate f r o m the

building.

Sometimes there is only a post or a stone to i n dicate a boundary. The suburban house (figure 9.2a) bears witness to a somewhat more spatial, architectural engagement. Street and house keep their distance, but stand i n close enough proximity to provide a certain tension between the b u i l t f o r m inside a larger territory and the public space outside that territory. The suburban f r o n t yard is the mediating space i n between: the

Street a n d House

property o f the inhabitant b u t open to the

165

street, contributing to the public realm. Houses are separated just enough to be perceived as i n dividual f o r m s , and set back just enough to create a sense o f independence, "Suburban" aptly describes this arrange-

ery to suggest a freestanding cottage i n the

9.2

wilderness.

cal lines extending

ment. I n a f u l l y u r b a n environment, b u i l d i n g

The relation

territorial

of territorial beyond

boundary

to building

the square indicate

(verti-

the

boundary):

and street are closely married: the fa(;:ade f o r m s part o f a street wah, at the edge o f domestic ter-

(a) The suburban

house in its

(b) Urban houses

fronted

garden.

The Urban Yard

ritory. I n the suburb, that street wah is dissolved and a f r o n t yard mediates between house and territorial boundary. A n architectural complement to the dignity o f the pubHc r e a l m 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-

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

street

by narrow

gardens,

forming

a

wall.

(figures 9.2b and 9.4a), the distance between building and street decreases, u n t i l the d i m i n -

(c) The British terraced walk and

house with an "area" between

side-

building.

ished f r o n t yard requires architectural reinforcement to sustain itself as a strip o f nature

(d) The Dutch

between house and street. Victorian houses o f

between

canal house with a zone

pavement

and

for

stoops

building.

Boston's Back Bay, f o r instance, have f r o n t yard depths

o f at most

fifteen

f e e t — j u s t large

enough to plant a tree and m a i n t a i n a f e w feet o f lawn between shrubs at the foundations and those along the street. Assertion o f the ter-

(e) Perfect ing

coincidence

of territorial

boundary

and

build-

fa