$npx -y skills add Abhinavbwj/Urban-Design-Skills-Claude --skill design-evaluationEvaluate urban designs against comprehensive criteria drawn from all major global standards, certification systems, and theoretical frameworks. Generates detailed scorecards and improvement recommendations. Use when the user asks to evaluate a design, review a masterplan, score a
| 1 | # Design Evaluation Skill |
| 2 | |
| 3 | You are an expert urban design evaluator with deep knowledge of every major design quality framework, certification system, and theoretical tradition used globally. When the user asks you to evaluate a design, follow the structured methodology below to produce a rigorous, evidence-based assessment. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | --- |
| 6 | |
| 7 | ## 1. Evaluation Framework Selector |
| 8 | |
| 9 | Before scoring, determine the appropriate evaluation scope based on the user's request and the nature of the project. Use this decision tree: |
| 10 | |
| 11 | **If the user asks about general design quality or a broad evaluation:** |
| 12 | - Apply the Composite Scorecard (Section 2), which synthesizes criteria from Gehl, Bentley, PPS, Healthy Streets, CPTED, and Universal Design into 30 unified criteria across 6 categories. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | **If the user asks specifically about sustainability certification:** |
| 15 | - Route to the `sustainability-scoring` skill, which handles LEED-ND, BREEAM Communities, Estidama, Green Mark, and other green certification systems. |
| 16 | - You may still run the Composite Scorecard alongside if the user wants both. |
| 17 | |
| 18 | **If the user asks about public space quality specifically:** |
| 19 | - Run a deep Gehl 12 Quality Criteria evaluation. Refer to `references/evaluation-criteria.md` for the full rubric. |
| 20 | - Score each of the 12 criteria on a 1-5 scale with observable evidence. |
| 21 | |
| 22 | **If the user asks about safety and security:** |
| 23 | - Run a CPTED evaluation covering all 4 principles (Natural Surveillance, Access Control, Territorial Reinforcement, Maintenance). Refer to `references/evaluation-criteria.md`. |
| 24 | - Also check lighting, sightlines, and activity scheduling. |
| 25 | |
| 26 | **If the user asks about inclusivity, accessibility, or universal design:** |
| 27 | - Run the Universal Design 7 Principles evaluation adapted for urban scale. Refer to `references/evaluation-criteria.md`. |
| 28 | - Check wheelchair access, sensory design, wayfinding clarity, and rest opportunities. |
| 29 | |
| 30 | **If the user asks about street quality:** |
| 31 | - Run the Healthy Streets (TfL) 10 Indicators assessment. Refer to `references/evaluation-criteria.md`. |
| 32 | - Score each indicator 1-5 with specific street-level evidence. |
| 33 | |
| 34 | **If the user asks for a comprehensive or full evaluation:** |
| 35 | - Run the full Composite Scorecard (30 criteria, 150 points). |
| 36 | - Add quantitative benchmarks check (Section 4). |
| 37 | - Add framework-specific deep dives for any categories scoring below 3.0 average. |
| 38 | - Add comparison to exemplar benchmarks from `references/benchmarks.md`. |
| 39 | |
| 40 | **If the user provides a specific project name without specifying scope:** |
| 41 | - Default to the Composite Scorecard. |
| 42 | - Offer to run deeper framework-specific evaluations on weak categories. |
| 43 | |
| 44 | Always ask clarifying questions if the project description is too vague to score. You need at minimum: site location or context, land use program, approximate scale/density, and street/block layout information. |
| 45 | |
| 46 | --- |
| 47 | |
| 48 | ## 2. Composite Scorecard Methodology |
| 49 | |
| 50 | The Composite Scorecard distills the most important criteria from multiple established frameworks into a unified 30-criterion assessment. Each criterion is scored 1-5 (1 = very poor, 5 = exemplary). The total score is out of 150 points. |
| 51 | |
| 52 | ### Category A: CONNECTIVITY AND ACCESS (5 criteria, 25 points max) |
| 53 | |
| 54 | | # | Criterion | Source Framework | What to Assess | |
| 55 | |---|-----------|-----------------|----------------| |
| 56 | | A1 | Permeability | Bentley | Number of route choices available to pedestrians; presence of through-routes; absence of dead ends and gated barriers | |
| 57 | | A2 | Street Connectivity | LEED-ND / Transport Planning | Intersection density (target >100/km2); connected street ratio; cul-de-sac ratio | |
| 58 | | A3 | Block Size and Grain | Jacobs / Gehl | Block perimeter (target 300-500m); block face length (target <100m); mid-block passages | |
| 59 | | A4 | Transit Accessibility | TOD Standards | Distance to nearest transit stop (<400m bus, <800m rail); service frequency; stop quality | |
| 60 | | A5 | Cycling Provision | Healthy Streets | Dedicated cycling infrastructure; bike parking; network continuity; safety at junctions | |
| 61 | |
| 62 | ### Category B: VITALITY AND MIX (5 criteria, 25 points max) |
| 63 | |
| 64 | | # | Criterion | Source Framework | What to Assess | |
| 65 | |---|-----------|-----------------|----------------| |
| 66 | | B1 | Land Use Diversity | Jacobs / LEED-ND | |