Contextualism in architecture: A comparative study of environmental perception.

Abstract

The problem of ensuring compatibility between new buildings and their older surroundings has become a particularly important concern to both design decision makers and the general public. An underlying assumption of this study is that responsive design requires an understanding of possible differences and commonalities between professionals and the lay public in their evaluations of contextual fit. This study provides a comparison between the two groups with respect to their perception of architectural compatibility as well as various aspects of new development in the city. A survey of two random samples of design professionals and the lay public was conducted in the city of Ann Arbor. The photo-questionnaire portion of the study included 22 scenes of new and old buildings or additions in Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids, MI, to explore the effect of people's familiarity with the buildings on their evaluation of the contextual relationship. Respondents in both groups were consistent in their preference for contextual relationships in which the new infill building replicated the design features of its neighbors. While facade design features were strong predictors of compatibility ratings for both groups, massing and site organization elements were more salient for the designers than the lay public. Differences were also found between the two groups in the relative importance attributed to specific design features in contextual relationships. Both groups of respondents supported preservation of the community's visual character, professionals more than the lay public favored the addition of new buildings to the urban fabric of the city. Both groups agreed on the need for moderate degrees of variety in the built environment. They also agreed that city planners should play an important role in the design review process. The lay public, however, was far more strongly inclined to permit nondesign professionals in such efforts as well. The implications of the study are discussed with reference to the possibility of the public's input in the design of new buildings. While public participation cannot assure sensitivity to contextual compatibility, it increases the likelihood that the different perceptions of design professionals and the lay public are incorporated in proposed developments.