Jan Gehl: Good Cities Should Feel Like One Big Hug

Why Is It Important to Plan Cities the Way You Do?

»Because it makes us feel better. Quite simply. If you start by understanding people – how we move, sense and interact – we’ll feel better in our cities. The principles I use aren’t new or unique. You can find them in all traditional cities built by people for people.«

How Did This Way of Working With Urban Planning Begin?

»In 1965 my wife, Ingrid, who is a psychologist, and I began observing how people use urban spaces. We spent six months in Italy, where we systematically recorded how people moved, where they sat down, what they avoided, and where the wind blew. It was clear that some places attracted people, while others stayed empty. And then the question arises: Why do people like to gather here – and not there?

From those observations we could formulate a set of quality criteria for good public space, which are still used today. It all sounds logical and simple, but at the time it was completely new knowledge. In 1965 there was no research on how people use city spaces. That research began here in Denmark.«

What Should We Make Room For When We Develop the City?

»It’s about creating space for both planned and unplanned activities in everyday life. The planned ones are things like going to work, going to school or shopping. The unplanned are the spontaneous – when, on your way through the city, you discover something fun or interesting that makes you linger somewhere or take another route.

Children’s play is a good example of the spontaneous. When a few children start playing, it quickly draws attention from others who see it, and suddenly they also want to join in. What began as two kids playing can quickly become eight. We adults function much the same way. We stop when something exciting happens – and move on when it doesn’t. It’s instinctive, a basic way of being together, and it shapes much of our behavior.

It’s also about making city spaces inviting and comfortable – there should be places to sit, look around and relax. If you make room for cars, more cars will come. But if you expand the areas for pedestrians and seating, more people will come.«

How Do You See the Significance of Your Work Today Compared to When You Started?

»I published my book Life Between Buildings in 1971 – and many of my colleagues said: ‘Life? That’s not what you should be dealing with as an architect – focus on form instead.’ Studies of life in the city were seen as a waste of time. But in the 2000s and 2010s, people-oriented urban planning really took off, and today the interest in city life is strong.

Looking back, it’s clear that at the School of Architecture in Copenhagen we were among the very first to work systematically with life in the city. Copenhagen also became the first city in the world to collect data on city life, not just on traffic. Most cities have extensive data on cars and roads, with large traffic departments and annual counts, but no city had a department for pedestrians and city life. We started to change that in Copenhagen – and today many other cities have followed. They’ve realized that understanding how life unfolds in the city is essential for improving urban quality. That’s standard now, but when we started, it was completely unknown.«

Are There Mistakes in Urban Development That We Still Repeat?

»We still see urban spaces being built far too large for the number of people who use them. People try to accommodate many functions, but forget that big empty spaces aren’t inviting. A good city should feel like one big hug – and that requires understanding scale and the senses.

Scale is about the relationship between people and their surroundings – buildings, squares, windows, stairs and details. Our body and our senses determine how we experience the city. If the scale is too large, the city feels cold and unwelcoming.

Modernism introduced a new, large scale with greater distances between buildings, and the same happened with car-oriented planning, where the car’s scale became the starting point – long distances and empty surfaces where the small human scale is lost. Ørestad and Aarhus Ø are, in my view, examples of late-modernist urban areas that have been built too large and too insensitively – the buildings are too tall, the squares too vast and the facades too hard and uninviting.

We know from older cities that a good square should be no longer than 100 meters – that’s about as far as the human eye can see if we’re to notice what’s happening – and from numerous studies we know that tall buildings create problems for our senses. If you live on the first five floors, you’re part of the city; you can see and hear what’s happening. If you live higher than the fifth floor, you can follow the weather and air traffic, but not the life of the city.

So there are still major issues with understanding and interpreting the human scale. There are many reasons. One is a lack of professional understanding of human senses and behavior. Another is the sheer size of new buildings and projects, which makes it difficult to include the smaller scale that appeals to people’s behavior and needs.«

How Do You See Urban Development Evolving in the Future?

»There’s no doubt that our behavior and ways of meeting have changed over time. In the past, it was essential to get down to the street to talk and see what was happening in the world. Today we have many digital ways of keeping in touch, which changes the role of public space. We move faster and spend more time in front of screens, but it’s still important to remember to go out, walk, move and meet one another at eye level. That has always been an important role for city spaces – and it remains a human right.«