The Interconnection Of Urban Design To Human Health And Condition
Fig 1. Urban Spaces
Urban design is important for mental health, but it is often overlooked in comparison to its impact on physical wellbeing. Cities have an impact on our mental health, and mental health issues can have a significant impact on Urban areas. This starts a vicious cycle. However, Urban design has the potential to improve the population of mental health. While more research is needed, existing evidence shows how thoughtful urban planning can promote positive mental health, prevent mental illness, and assist those dealing with mental health issues.
The US population is experiencing an increase in illness due to various factors, including centralized healthcare and regulatory action. Chronic ailments like asthma, allergies, obesity, heart disease, diabetes and depression are on the rise, along with forest fragmentation, stream degradation, wetlands destruction, and the loss of native species. The impact of Urban design on human health and wellbeing, focusing on three spatial scales: physical and mental health, social and cultural vibrancy, ecological effects. It suggests that Urban design can be a powerful tool for improving human condition. At the parcel scale, greenery and access to it are the principal keys to health. High-density neighborhood designs should incorporate these elements into high-density designs, including public buildings, open space, mixed land use, and pedestrian walkways. Neighborhood should also be embedded in existing urban infrastructure to provide larger cultural and business opportunities and reduce reliance on the automobile.
Fig 2. Urban Design and Well-Being
Human and cultural integration into the natural environment is recognized in modern society, emphasizing the complex link between human health and environmental wellbeing. It is worthwhile to investigate the potential negative effects on human settlement and landscape modification on both human and environmental health. In contrast to the extensive literature on the environmental consequences of urban land use in fields such as landscape ecology and landscape architecture.
The current population in US faces health challenges that were not previously significant public health threats. Asthma, allergies, animal-transmitted diseases, obesity, diabetes, depression, suicide, mental illness, and heart disease are all current epidemics. While scientific progress has reduced morbidity & mortality from infectious diseases and injuries, historical efforts in regulating public sanitation, emissions, workplace safety, and centralized activities have mitigated industrial and municipal health risks, benefiting both human and environmental conditions. Despite these safeguards, the natural environment is still under significant stress, with habitat loss, fragmentation, invasion of aggressive exotic competitors, and ongoing pollution. At the same time, the human population exhibits signs of distress, illness and even death as a result of seemingly dispersed and synergistic ambient causes.
Fig 3. Neighborhood Design Features effect on Healthy Well-Being
Although the structure of living areas and associated activities is increasingly acknowledged as a public health problem, current urban design is not mainly motivated by health concerns. The initial motive for city planning in the nineteenth century was health concerns. Despite changes in prevalent health hazards such as sanitation and industry pollutants, urban architecture in the United States continues to reflect obsolete planning approaches. Several writers urge for a more modern approach, asking designers, planners and health practitioners to address contemporary health challenges such as car emissions, physical inactivity, social isolation, and economic disparities. Collaboration across professions such as Urban Design, planning, public health, environmental health and veterinary medicine is seen as critical for preventative healthcare.
Citizens are urged to actively participate in defining their living environment, since studies show that inhabitants who participate in planning and design have better health and happiness. Rather than following a single template for a “healthy” living environment, the emphasis should be on urban design that provides essential services such as public buildings and parks, as well as connectivity, while allowing citizens the flexibility to shape their homes and neighborhoods based on their individual needs and preferences. When compared to isolated neotraditional districts, redevelopment of existing metropolitan areas is viewed as more beneficial in reducing car use. Building high-density buildings in exurban areas may only meet transportation goals if they are linked to mass transit, which necessitates regional planning and a variety of incentives. Designers and planners believe that immediate solutions at the scale of particular towns, existing neighborhoods, and plots are more feasible and achievable.