What makes a place attractive comes from the human perception and interaction with a place. Jan Gehl has come up with quality of life indicators which reflect what people find attractive in a place.

Protection

• traffic accidents – feeling safe – protection for pedestrians eliminating traffic fear

• crime and violence – feeling secure – lively public realm, eyes on the street, functions day and night and good lighting

• unpleasant sensory experience – wind, rain/snow, pollution, dust/noise/glare

Comfort

• opportunities to walk – room for walking, no obstacles, good surfaces, access for everyone and interesting facades

• opportunities to stand and stay – edge effect /attractive zones for standing and staying, supports for standing

• opportunities to sit – zones for sitting, utilising advantages view, sun, people, good places to site, benches for resting

• opportunities to see – reasonable viewing distances, unhindered sightlines, interesting views, lighting

• opportunities to listen – low noise level, street furniture for talk scapes

• opportunities for play and exercise – invitations for creativity, physical activity exercise and play, by day and night, in summer and winter

Delight

• scale – buildings and spaces designed to human scale

• opportunities to enjoy the positive aspects of climate – sun/shade, heat/coolness and breeze

• positive sensory experiences – good design and detail, good materials, fine views, trees plants and water

Humans perceive density in different ways some find it positive to be in an urban environment and others do not enjoy it. Often this is the interpretation of the same space but built on different belief systems. However there is something in the fact that the higher the density the greater opportunity there is for people to annoy one another. Spatial elements such as height, openness, spacing, number of people and intricacies can lead to conflict. Provided that the aesthetics and functional working of a place are of a high quality often residents do not perceive themselves to live in high density areas.

 

It is more than design and not necessarily the ratio of people per unit area that leads to a perception of density. Perceived density is defined as an individual’s perception and estimation of the number of people in a given area. The higher the density the greater the likelihood of people annoying one another. Spatial elements such as height, spacing, openness, complexity, number of people street furniture as well as environmental qualities of enclosure, intricacy of spaces and high activity levels can influence perception. Arranging spaces to create a feeling of privacy and somewhere to retreat both inside and outside is important. Quality facilities and transport is significant as is the provision of open space and contact with nature. Vandalism and crime should be designed out to minimise impact (Lawson, 2010). 

 

High density and inner city living have negative connotations. Problems with socio-economically polarised urban area and retaining key workers in cities with housing stress and suburban sprawl are significant. A study focussed on urban locations of brownfield site developments in areas of high housing costs, mixed tenure, and high density new builds. They found that affordability and chance to get on the property ladder were key to choosing to live there. This overrode location. Design was key as was parking, crime and safety. The schemes facilitated community through neighbourliness but sometimes community events were lacking, however provided there was neighbourliness the scheme was tolerable by residents. The urban location of the developments was attractive to occupiers however the tenure mix and living environment influenced people to move. People aspire to have a garden or space of their own for their children to play (Bretherton & Pleace, 2008). Overall the occupants did not percieve that they lived in high density environments provided the design and management of the area was overall good.