Abraham Halim - Major Research Project

Restoring the under performing: The case of a less lively square in the heart of busy area in an outer London ward.

Abraham Halim MSc Sustainable Urbanism The Bartlett School of Planning

Supervised by David Syme

Prepared for Major Research Projects. September 2016

i

Project Title

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING

MAJOR PROJECT: Restoring the Under Performing: The Case of a Less Lively Square in the Heart of Busy Area in an Outer London Ward.

Abraham Timothy HALIM, BA. Word count: 7985

Being a Major Project in Sustainable Urbanism submitted to the faculty of The Built Environment as part of the requirements for the award of the MSc Sustainable Urbanism at University College London, I declare that this project is entirely my own work and that ideas, data and images, as well as direct quotations, drawn from elsewhere are identified and referenced.

September 05, 2016

Acknowledgement

I owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the many people who have helped complete my research project. I am going to mention all by names, but verily the chance of pursuing a postgraduate education in the United Kingdom would not have come if it were not in the Triune God’s plan. For this, I owe the biggest gratitude to Him above.

I would like to thank first my supervisor, David Syme, for his critical suggestions, immense support both as a mentor and a friend, and his willingness to share his extensive knowledge of London with me. Without his help, this project would never have been realised.

I also would like to express my gratitude to The Bartlett’s Sustainable Urbanism programme director, Dr. Catalina Turcu. Our initial discussions on the project and her initial input during the workshops have greatly helped narrow down the project scope and focus.

Many thanks are also sent to Hugo Nowell and Elanor Warwick, my project’s external critics during the workshop sessions. With their help, the project’s focus and arguments became much stronger.

Without the input from Acton residents, I would not have gotten a clear understanding of how the square worked. I have dozens of people to thank for the information and stories they shared, especially Kim Rugg from Royal College of Art, Lucy Smith, Sadeep Mestry, Mark Bird, Dee Cook, Nancy Duin, and John Blackmore.

My journey in The Bartlett is also supported by the wonderful administrators, Andy Heath and Anthony Grout. Thank you for your help and assistance throughout the year.

I am also thankful to my colleagues, Cristobal Asenjo-Garcia, Juan Jo Jaramillo, and Apoorva Vita Khosti, for their suggestions and discussions during the making of this report.

Finally, to my parents, Andi Halim and Eunike Martini, I thank you for your never ending support, love, and prayers without which this adventure would not have happened. Also to my sisters, Esther and Rebecca, whose support is more valuable than they know. Lastly, to my girlfriend, Chrisanthy, words cannot express how much I appreciate your steadfast support, patience, and kindness during this wonderful year in London. Thank you for your every suggestions, editing, and so much more in the making of this research project.

ii

iii

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1.1 One outer London centre & square

1

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

Geographical Location (Left) Less lively squares (Above) Economic catalyst Valuable commodity for community Improve productivity Contact epicenter More outdoor activities Social magnet

4 5 6 6 6 7 7 7

Figure 3.1.1. Necessary activities Figure 3.1.2. Optional activities Figure 3.1.3 Social activities

10 10 10

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

4.1.1. Town centre mapping 4.1.2. Frame mapping 4.1.3. Final five 4.2.1. [BR] Location 4.2.2. [BR] Overview 4.2.3. [CE] Location 4.2.4. [CE] Overview 4.2.5. [BX] Location 4.2.6. [BX] Overview 4.2.7. [WS] Location 4.2.8. [WS] Overview 4.2.9. [WR] Location 4.2.10. [WR] Overview 4.2.11. [AC] Location 4.2.12. [AC] Overview 4.2.13. Assessment Comparison 4.2.14. Lesson Learnt Matrix 4.2.15. Size Comparison

Figure Figure Figure Figure

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

2.1.1.

2.1.2.

2.2.1.

2.2.2.

2.2.3.

2.2.4.

2.2.5.

2.2.6.

Toolkit overview Spatial Design Toolkit Programming Toolkit Urban Form Toolkit

Table 7.1.1 Performance Assessment Table 7.1.2 Breakdown Table 7.2.1 Performance Assessment Table 7.2.1 Breakdown

Figure 6.1.1. Geographical Context Figure 6.1.2. Morphology Figure 6.1.3. Figure Ground superimposed with Block Plan

30 31 31

14 15 16 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 21 21 21

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

6.2.1 Green Space 32 6.2.2 Vibrancy 32 6.2.3 Building Height 32 6.2.4. Landuse 32 6.2.5. Road Network 33 6.2.6. Traffic Analysis Weekdays 33 6.2.7. Traffic Analysis Weekend 33 6.2.8 Night Economy 34 6.2.9 Safety Perception 34 6.2.10 Amenities 34 6.2.11 Weekdays Movement (Day and Night) 35 6.2.12 Weekend Movement (Day and Night) 35 6.2.13 Sunlight Hours (Left) 36 6.2.14 Shadow Analysis (Below) 36 6.2.15 Wind Map (Left) 37 6.2.16 Wind Simulation (Below) 37 6.2.17 Square Composition 38 6.2.18 Square Configuration 38 6.2.19 People Activities 39 6.2.20 Noise Map 39 6.2.21 Serial View (SV) 2 to 1 40 6.2.22 Serial View (SV) 3 to VP 40 6.2.23 Serial View 3 to VPS 40 6.2.24 Parking Lots 40 6.2.25 View Point (VP) East-South 41 6.2.26. Small tree 41 6.2.27 View Point (VP) West-North 41 6.2.28 During Market time 41 6.2.29 Other open spaces 41

24 25 26 27

Figure Figure Figure Figure

6.3.1 6.4.1 6.4.2 6.4.3

Instagram on Acton Asset Map Positive Asset Negative Asset

42 44 44 44

iv

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

7.1.1 Scheme 1 overview 7.1.2. Intricacy (left) 7.1.3. Centering (right) 7.1.4. Sense of Enclosure (left) 7.1.5. Protected Realm (right) 7.1.6. Square as Eureka (right) 7.1.7 Scheme 1 Masterplan

7.1.8 Scheme 1 Masterplan breakdown 7.1.9 Scheme 1 sense of place

46 48 48 49 49 49 50 51 52-53

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

7.2.1 Toolkit Disposition 7.2.1. Intricacy (left) 7.2.2. Centering (right) 7.2.4. Sense of Enclosure (left) 7.2.5. Protected Realm (right) 7.2.6. Square as Eureka (right) 7.2.7 Scheme 2 Masterplan 7.2.8 Scheme 2 Masterplan breakdown 7.2.9 Scheme 2 sense of place

54 56 56 57 57 57 58 59 60-61

APPENDICES 63

Table of Contents

v

01

ABSTRACT

02

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING

04

06

CASE STUDIES

PROJECT ANALYSIS

07

PROJECT SCHEMES

2.1

Setting the Scene 4

4.1

Rationale 14

6.1

Re-Search 30

7.1

Scheme 1 46

2.2

Importance of the Project

4.2

Assessment 17

6.2

7.2

Scheme 2 54

2.3

Research Methodology 8

Me-Search 32 1. Neighborhood Level

03

6

05

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.

Macro Level

3.

Micro Level

6.3

We-Search 42

6.4

Summary 44

APPENDICES

THE TOOLKIT

63

3.1

Successful Square Principles

10

5.1

Toolkit Overview 24

A

Conceptual Design Proposition

64

3.2

Compulsory Strategies and Analysis

12

5.2

Spatial Design Toolkit

25

B

Case Studies Assessment

78

5.3

Programming Toolkit 26

C

Residents quotes on Acton Square

82

5.4

Urban Form Toolkit 27

Abstract

Outer London has become the champion for human habitat choice in London. Its positioning between central and inner London and rural fringes is highly attractive to those looking for a decent quality of life and an equally good accessibility to the city. Although 60% of the city’s population choose to live within outer London’s 403 wards, outer London does not simply function as a ‘home provider’ to support the activities of inner and central London. Instead, outer London is made up of a series of polycentric towns and villages, each with its own heart.

Therefore, ensuring the success of every area in outer London is crucial (Rasmussen, 1937).

One way of measuring the success of outer London is by looking at the vitality of its town centres. Many of them have a central public square that is “intended as an activity focus at the heart of … [an] area” (Lynch, 1981). However, nowadays there is a tendency for the square itself -which is supposedly an important place for social fabric and public services- to be less lively because people no longer go and spend their time there - in the words of Jane Jacobs (1992), “it is clear that people do not use this open space even though it exists.”

This research project investigates how a square works in a suburb, explores factors that contributes to the square’s current situation through literature review, case studies, and the Restorative Urbanism framework, and tests several propositions to transform this type of squares into a lively place and a platform for economic and social sustainability within its own area. This project will be of interest to those involved in the strategy making for redeveloping squares in outer London.

282 words Figure 1.1 One outer London centre & square

1

2

Project Understanding

2

Project Understanding

2.1

2.2

2.3

Setting the Scheme

Importance of the Project

Research Methodology

3

4

Project Understanding

Setting The Scene

Wood Street

Outer London

Acton Central

Inner and Central London

Project Understanding

Outer London

Squares in Outer London

Outer London plays an important part in ensuring the success of London (Mayor of London, 2016). It is an area that makes up about 90% of London in land mass, is the home of 60% Londoners, and is the place where new, major developments are happening. Outer London can be defined as all area outside zone one and two (central and inner London).

One of the reasons people prefer to live there is the combination of ease of travel to London and a high quality of life that is offered.

“[outer] London cannot grow without a better public realm.” (MDAG, 2016)

Although the majority of Londoners live there, these 403 wards within the 20 boroughs of outer London are not simply ‘dormitories’ to support the activities in central and inner London. London has never been designed as a city with a definite centre - its circumference is everywhere because outer London is rapidly growing (Acroyd, 2000), continuously forming a series of polycentric towns and villages (Rasmussen, 1988), each with its own centre, its own heart (London Assembly, 2007). These centers should be preserved and enhanced, especially considering that nowadays outer London seems to be neglected, and is facing many challenges such as deprivation of leisure, retail and commercial activity (Mayor of London, 2016).

One way of measuring the success of outer London is by looking at the vitality and attractiveness of its neighborhood/ town centres with their busy highstreets and active leisure uses. Most of them have a central public space (square) of which quality can be perceived as a barometer of a successful area. Many mayors of London understood the centrality of this issue and have proceeded to make regeneration of squares one of their most prioritised projects. Since 2002, hundreds of millions of pounds have been invested to implement strategies to improve squares’ conditions, such as the 100 Public Space, Great Spaces, Regeneration Fund, and London’s Great Outdoors.

Regardless of whether a square exists because of the evolving paradigm of the residents or was planned in conjunction with the city, a square is still supposedly a place for social fabric and public services. However, nowadays there seems to be a tendency for squares in outer London to be less lively because people no longer go and spend their time there. Tony Arbour (2007), the Chairman of the Planning and Spatial Development Committee says that “[outer London is] threatened by ... [a] decline in the quality of the environment and the public realm ... [and] there has been a

1. Setting the Scene

retreat from community provision to individual provision”. With this, Arbour suggests that people are not as eager to spend their time with the community in a public space as they were in the past.

This phenomenon is confirmed through my initial observation of some squares in wards such as Acton Central and Wood Street. Although these wards have sufficient population density, people generally go to the squares only to wait for the bus, pass by, or go to market; very rarely do people sit in the square to enjoy the weather. Primary research from residents’ interviews show that they are currently unsatisfied with the available public space. One resident says “[the square] doesn’t really attract locals .... It’s quite unpleasant and sometimes outright filthy, especially in the evenings.” Therefore, as Jane Jacobs (1961) says, “it is clear that people do not use this open space even though it exists”.

All in all, since a square is “intended as an activity focus at the heart of … [an] area” (Lynch, 1981), this issue is worth pondering over because it is an obstacle to achieving a successful outer London neighborhood.

5

6

Project Understanding

2. Importance of the Project

Importance of the projects “High quality … public space [is] an essential feature of successful neighbourhoods” (CABE, 2004).

Regardless of the efforts expended to regenerate public spaces, there are still some unsuccessful regeneration projects. This research project is significant because it gives insights on creating a successful regeneration project in outer London. Economic and social sustainability benefits is the most apparent for having a good public scapes

Benefits of economic sustainability (Gensler (2011), NLA (2015), Childs (2006)) When a square is able to draw people and become a platform for them to do their activities, it will in turn generate economic growth. A lively square can act as:

A local economic catalyst

An economic revitaliser

Public space can improve the attractiveness of an area. The physical environment, design and quality of experiences of a public space can attract businesses, customers and clients to an area, and become triggers for economic sustainability.

A good and high quality public space can boost the workforce, which in turn could improve the overall productivity of local businesses.

A valuable commodity Up to 95% people believe that high quality public space adds value to commercial development, and they are willing to pay 3% more to be in close proximity to public spaces.

Project Understanding

2. Importance of the Project

Benefits of social sustainability (Gensler (2011), Gehl (2011), Whyte (1980), NLA (2015)) Outer London has attracted residents from London as well as outside of the UK, and this diversity should be touted as one of the riches of outer London. Public space can become a vital non-human actor in achieving this because it is “the ‘glue’ that holds society together” (CABE, 2004). A lively public space can function as:

A contact epicenter

A healthy lifestyle stimulus

A social magnet

Public space can be a platform that facilitates and prompts socialisation.

With the right design, visitors can be exposed to the possibility of making contact with others and developing friendships. As such, a person we often meet will gradually become a person we know, which will lead to a growing sense of community and belonging in that area.

A great public space can also improve the health and well-being of residents by encouraging them to spend more time outdoor to do fun physical exercises instead of just their routine activities. This could result in lower risks of diseases.

With the right design, public space can draw impressive number of visitors, lengthening their average time spent in the vicinity, and create a domino effect in which will attract many others into the area. These factors will bring greater social/cultural capital to the area.

Public space can also become a platform to fulfill human needs for comfort, leisure, social interaction and aesthetics.

7

8

Project Understanding

3. Research Methodology

Research Questions

Project Title

Objectives

Why does a square in a busy area in an outer London borough appear to have a lack of activity? What factors caused this?

Restoring the under performing: the case of a less lively square in the heart of busy area in an outer London ward.

Understand how the square works in the area (positioning, current function).

What interventions can be done to transform this type of squares into a platform for economic and social sustainability?

Analyse the factors that contributed to the current situation of the square (figure ground, accessibility, landuse, traffic, weather).

Explore the implication of the current square configuration (perception, activities, experience of the residents).

Create a strategy to draw people to come and dwell longer in outer London squares.

Significance Strategy/proposition for redeveloping squares in outer London wards.

Applying Restorative paradigm to liven up one area.

Methodology 01

Analyse current situation of one square

02

Explore factors determining the success/ failure of a square from literature review

03

Draw some lessons from selected case studies, and contexualise the literature review to outer London context

04

Visualise each toolkit in the specific context into conceptual propositions

05

Combine some propositions into two possible schemes and analyse them.

Literature Review

3

Literature Review

3.1

3.2

Successful Square Principles

Compulsory Strategy & Analysis

9

Literature Review

10

1. Successful Square Principles

Successful Square Small Square

Drawing platform for people activities

Platform for Diversity (Jacobs, 1992; Lennard, 2015; Crawford, 2009)

A square is generally defined as “the most recognizable and traditional civic form of public space” (Gaventa, 2006), that initially allows for civic celebrations and public demonstrations. Some also describe it as an area framed by buildings (Moughtin 2003), while others say it is the ‘gaps between buildings’ (Sorrell, 2006).

One square can be said a success if it can persuade many people to linger there. To accomplish this, many options have to be offered so that people’s activities can be matched to the square’s land uses. Jan Gehl (2011) further explains that a square is also successful if people go there not only to do their necessary activities, but also for optional activities. He then divided activities that people do in a square into 3 categories:

All of the activities above need to be translated to the physical environment. Therefore having a varied rim and enough spaces, are crucial to create one square that has a wide range of possible activities. Since a square naturally mirrors its surrounding, if various functions are installed in the square such as church, hospital, office, school, library, gallery, cafe, and pub, not only will the square be filled with a wide range of demographics at various times, but it will also have many options to attract visitors into staying longer in the square.

Outer London squares can generally be classified as small squares based on their sizes (Crawford, 2009). However, regardless of its classification all squares have the same purpose: create a gathering place that humanises people through mutual contact, provide a shelter against haphazard traffic, and free people from the tension of a busy street (Zucker, 1959).

These small squares are typically located in the heart of a ward and are covered by a commercial rim. Small square is usually a platform for smallmedium enterprises that serve local needs. Some squares also host some markets during the weekend that is important for the local economy and to draw people into the square. All these advantages should have made the square itself lively and popular among locals.

Necessary activities This is the routine, necessary activities done under all conditions, i.e. one passes through a square to go to his destination, or goes to a square to wait for the bus at the nearby bus stop.

Optional activities various functions

Optional activities are highly dependent upon the physical condition of the square. If it is bad, people would not linger in the square any longer than it is necessary, and only necessary activities will happen; however, if the square’s condition is good, people will be compelled to linger and do a wide range of activities. i.e. eating in the square or strolling.

Social activities Social activities is a result of the occurrence of the two activities above. If many people are in a square, there is a better possibility of social activities happening. The possibility to interact with others can be modulated through the square’s design.

Enough Spaces

Literature Review

1. Successful Square Principles

Technical perspective (Moughtin, 2003; Crawford, 2009; Lennard, 2015; Gehl, 2011) There are eight technical criteria of a successful square:

Enclosure

Welcoming and united architectural theme

Clear yet mysterious (intricacy)

It must have a good enclosure that is neither too exposed nor too constricting. There are three ways to keep the enclosure balance of a square:

A bad building (facade or design) can ruin the best of squares, therefore a good square needs:

Avoid having a clear and simple square because this will discourage people to return to the square. This can be done through:

1:4 scale building : square

18-27° from corner

look at the corner width

welcoming, open frontages and balconies

unity architectural theme

Size and population structure

Centering and shape of the space

The square size has to correspond with the surrounding density; if the size is too big or too small, the square can be dead. This is the general ‘rule’ for the population density and its space requirements:

Centering is important to:

5000-8000 ppl / 500 M2

0.65 - 46M2 / 1 person

Quality furnishing

Below are three positioning rules for a successful square.

Good furnishings can make a square feel comfortable and easy to navigate. These are some guidelines for good furnishings:

not much distraction

multiple access and swell entrances

facing a pleasant view

comfortable material

opening leading to various focal points

These are some criteria that can create a safe and welcoming square:

Size and positioning

not much open space competitior

groupings of trees

Secure and safe

tackle irregular space

make the visitor understand peak of the square

various levelings

service furnishing availability

calm, few traffic

plenty of greeneries

protected from weather

children and elders friendly

11

Literature Review

12

Compulsory Strategy & Analysis

London Plan for the Public Realm

Analysis Method (ATCM, 2013)

Based on London Plan (2016) section 7, London’s public spaces should be easy to navigate through the use of gateways, focal points, signposts or landmarks. It should be maintained, inclusive, secure, accessible, connected, and incorporate the best design, landscape, greeneries, outdoor furniture, surfaces, and, if possible, some high quality public art. Moreover, new developments should also enhance the area’s natural physical form that forms its character, or the positive elements (assets) that can in the future lend the area its character.

Case studies assessment

Main project assessment (Restorative Urbanism) (Ellin, 2012)

The assessment will use the key performance indicator (KPI) from Association of Town & City Management (ATCM) to monitor the performance of the squares. Since this KPI is usually used to assess town centres, some of the toolkits have been modified for the purpose and context of this research.

Restorative urbanism focuses on seeing and maximising available assets of an area instead of focusing on the negative points/problems of an area.

The main goal is to create a better, contextual development instead of an insensitive development that focuses on aesthetics without regards to its application or suitability in the specific context.

There are three big themes, each with its own sub-categories, in this KPI:

That objective will be addressed using the VIDA (Visioning, Inspiring, Demonstrating, Advocating) framework. This research project will focus on Visioning since the others pertain more to post-design production. The three methods in Visioning are:

People and footfall Assesses the number and diversity of the square’s visitors and their level of access to the square. easy to navigate

Vitality of place

inclusive space

Assesses the square’s structure in terms of retail/commercial/leisure offerings, assets, and safety measures.

Perception and business characteristics Assesses the square’s characteristics based on existing conditions (i.e. active frontage, night economy) and level of satisfaction of visitors. well thought design

enhance character of the place

more greeneries

Re-search Asseses the morphology of a project site

Me-search Analyses the current system from the point of view of the designer

We-search Perspective of the residents used as the backbone of the main project

Case Studies

4

Case Studies

4.1

4.2

Rationale

Assessment

13

14

Case Studies

Rationale

1

2

4

Town Centres Starting with the assumption that squares exist within the heart of a busy area in London, the first step in selecting case studies is identifying the town centres across London (2).

Acton Central is a District type of town centre; thus, the other types of town centres- Major, Metropolitan, and International town centres- that differ from and has no relation to Acton Central are excluded. This leaves the District type centres (3).

These remaining identified centres are then superimposed with the London zone map (4), and all centres within central and inner London are excluded from the selection.

3

5

Acton Central

At the end of this process, only District town centres in outer London are left in the selection pool (5).

Case Studies

Population Density (PopDen)

Rationale

15

1

2

1A

2A

3A

1B

2B

3B

Population is used as the attribute frame from which we determine which wards have similar sizes of population and area based on its density configuration.

The assumption used here is that the area of the square is directly proportional to the population density of an area (i.e. the denser a neighborhood is, the larger its square).

Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) PTAL is used to group wards of outer London that have similar levels of access to public transport and public space. PTAL is an important aspect in context framing; for example, comparing Acton square with Brixton (Windrush) square will be irrelevant because they have very different levels of access to public transport, and therefore have different amount of footfalls and demographical catchment.

Both of the map take 20% margin to find wards that have similarities with Acton (1A and B, and 2A and 2B).

Superimposed Map By superimposing those two attributes (PopDen and PTAL) and the related town centre, the map now shows the wards that have similar context in terms of town centre, population density, size of square, and accessibility level with Acton Central.

From this map we can see which areas have good prospects as case studies.

Acton Central

Case Studies

16

Rationale

Final Five Five squares in five different wards have been chosen as case studies, along with the Mount Square in Acton Central as the main project. The five squares are:

Market Place Square in Brentford Town Hall Green in Crouch End Wood Street Plaza in Wood Street Market Place Square in Bexleyheath Beresford Square in Woolwich Riverside.

The Woolwich square is a bit different in terms of its context, but it is still chosen as an example of a best practice of a regenerated public realm in outer London.

Even though they have relatively similar context, some are more successful than others. Each of these five case studies will be observed, assessed, noted for the lessons learned, and used to contextualize the literature review to help with the making of the design toolkits.

Figure 4.1.3. Final Five

District Town Centre Other Town Centre

Case Studies

4

Assessment

Case Studies

4.1

4.2

Rationale

Assessment

District Town Centre

Area (M2)

Other Town Centre Good Square

Perimeter (M)

[...]

See Case Studies

Not good Square

(see Appendix B for the complete performance assessment).

17

Case Studies

18

MARKET PLACE SQUARE [BR] Brentford, Hounslow

Assessment 1515

TOWN HALL SQUARE [CE]

195

m2

Crouch End, Haringey

m2

Location

2440

200

m2

m2

Location

0

100

250

500

0

100

BR 1

BR 2

Lesson Learnt

Good materials (timber seating and yorkstone floors) combined with good greeneries make the square attractive.

Avoid placing offices/estate agents at the rim of the square because this will make only specific people come to the square at specific hours

A steep level difference at the rim create a perception of a squeezed square and a disjunction between the square and the rim. Avoid this.

A stage can be an interesting object for some people (mothers and children) and could be used for events.

BR 1

BR 3

CE 1 CE 2

BR 4

CE 1

BR 3

A great feature of the square is a small park with trees near the high street, which is not only used for recreation, but also as a ‘defence’ from noise and wind from the high street. This results in a feeling of intricacy and intimacy inside the square.

The intimacy is also strengthened by the 1:3 ratio of the buildings in the rim and the square itself, which is better than the one recommended in the literature review. Additionally, The three big trees strengthen the enclosure.

The square has two focal points: a small park and a fountain, which are aptly located next to the arts centre. These two focal points serve to give a broader range of options for visitors.

The square does not only draw people through retail shops, but also through modifying the design and landscape (through a combination of positions of hardscape and softscape), and an understanding of assets exposure.

CE 1

BR 2

500

Figure 4.2.3. [CE] location

Figure 4.2.1. [BR] location

Lesson Learnt

250

CE 3

BR 4

CE 2

Figure 4.2.2. [BR] overview Figure 4.2.4. [CE] overview

CE 4

CE 3 CE 4

Case Studies MARKET PLACE SQUARE [BX] Bexleyheath, Bexley

3340

m2

WOOD STREET PLAZA [WS]

310

Wood Street, Walthamstow

m2

Assessment 3670

m2

19

310

m2

Location

Square

Square+

0

100

250

0

500

BX 1

BX 2 BX 3

250

500

Figure 4.2.7. [WS] location

Figure 4.2.5. [BX] location

Lesson Learnt

100

Lesson Learnt

Circular benches and a clock tower that correspond and reinforce each other form a great pair of assets for the square.

A combination of a diverse market that supplies food, household products, and other specialties at the middle of the square, and retail shops at the rim of the square create a massive footfall.

A domestic square results from a modified car lanes that is now only accessible by buses, and from having outdoor furnishing and dining area.

Floor plan is a great way to expose an asset and make pedestrian feel prioritised i.e. a square floor plan that indicates a place to relax; a radial plan that provokes people into focus on an object.

BX 4

WS 1

BX 5 WS 2

Sense of enclosure is an important missing part of the square. It feels too open and exposed (1:9) because the buildings are not tall enough, and the square lacks some greeneries/“green roofs�.

An appropriate and ergonomic seating design is important. People tend to avoid the uniquely shaped-benches.

The square is popular among children and their mothers because of the small playground. Apart from this the square is an empty space.

The square suffers from spatial design issues: (enclosure, furnishing, and focal point) and lack of programming (80% of the shops/retails on the rim are vacant) which results in few visitors.

Figure 4.2.6. [BX] overview Figure 4.2.8. [WS] overview

WS 3 WS 4

WS 5

Case Studies

20

WOOLWICH SQUARES

Woolwich Riverside, Greenwich

Assessment 11000

m2

THE MOUNT SQUARE [AC]

700

Acton Central, Ealing

m2

Square Square+

Location

2900

m2

345

m2

Square Location

Beresford Square General Gordon Square

0

100

250

0

500

Figure 4.2.9. [WR] location

Lesson Learnt WR 1

WR 1

WR 2 WR 4

Bended paths can create different vistas with every step (intricacy), and when people see a conveniently located screen, they will be compelled to stay longer at the square.

Crowd at beresford square mainly came for the farmer’s market at the rim.

The map shows that there is a high accessibility between the open spaces, and this emphasises the role of each space as an epicenter to attract crowd.

Figure 4.2.10. [WR] overview

250

500

Figure 4.2.11. [AC] location

Initial Survey

This square has a good sense of enclosure even though the floor level is not flat. The high buildings, that were constructed in the highest spot of the square, maintain the enclosure balance.

Combining hardscape with softscape can create a sense of relief or a refreshing atmosphere. Front greeneries also help reduce noise from the street.

100

WR 5

AC 1

AC 2

WR 6

AC 3

At first glance, the square seems too exposed with no protection for the visitors from noise, wind, and pollution

Single use from Morrissons causes people to go to the square only to shop there or pass through to their houses in the east.

The uniquely shaped furnitures also made people uncomfortable.

Because the square does not have its own appeal, markets are hosted there over the course of four days to help draw in visitors. But the market makes the square’s atmosphere even worse because it becomes a parking lot for the market tenants.

The square is weak in terms of its positioning: too many gaps between structures and a bland design makes the square unappealing.

Figure 4.2.12. [AC] overview

AC 3

AC 4 AC 5

Case Studies

Brentford

Crouch End

Assessment

Bexleyheath

People and Footfall Summary After compiling the assessments (see appendix B) it is apparent that there is one definite condition: if a square has a high level of attractiveness, it always has a vibrant neighborhood and good position, that always result in a high footfall. However not all area that has a high footfall has a high level of attractiveness (i.e. Acton Central and Wood Street).

Each square has its own unique way to make themselves attractive, whether it be through retail and commercial offer (Bexleyheath), leisure offer (Woolwich), or its own design and square composition/assets (Crouch End).

Lessons Learnt Matrix This graph shows that the majority of the attractive squares are those with these three components: spatial design (asset, square composition and design that has a domino impact to safety), programming (retail, commercial, and leisure offer), and urban form (square positioning). Spatial design is also the theme from which most lessons can be derived from.

Wood Street

Woolwich Riverside

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

Business Perception and Characteristics Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Acton Central

Figure 4.2.13. Performance assessment comparison

Acton already has a good footfall and geographical catchment (a good indicator of a relatively good urban form), which is a good starting point to make this square attractive.

Unfortunately, it is weak in its programming and design: being too exposed, and having few assets and options and low safety perception make this square unattractive.

BR 1

CE 1

BX 1

WS 1

WR 1

BX 2

WS 2

WR 1

WS 3

WR 2

BX 4

WS 4

WR 4

BX 5

WS 5

WR 5

CE 2

BR 2 BX 3 CE 1 BR 3

CE 3 BR 4

CE 4

WR 6

0

100

Acton Central

250

500

21

22

The Toolkit

5

23

The Toolkit

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

Toolkit Overview

Spatial Design Toolkit

Programming Toolkit

Urban Form Toolkit

Toolkit Overview

24 The Toolkit

Based on the literature review and case studies, the key to a successful outer London square can be formulated into three toolkit themes: Spatial Design, Programming, and Urban Form.

Each themes has several toolkits to help the design intervention: Spatial Design has five toolkits, Programing has four toolkits, and Urban Form has three toolkits.

All of these toolkits also has several sub-categories (SC), that will be explained in the next page.

The toolkits will be used to create interventions for the main project, the Acton square in Acton Central.

Figure 5.1 Toolkit overview

The Toolkit

Spatial Design

Source

Figure 5.2 Spatial Design Toolkit

25

The Toolkit

26

Programming

Source

Figure 5.3 Programming Toolkit

The Toolkit

Urban Form

Figure 5.4 Urban Form Toolkit

Source

27

28

Project Analysis

6

29

Project Analysis

6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

Re-Search

Me-Search

We-Search

Summary

Project Analysis

30

Re-Search

Geographical Context

The Square Other Nodes Major Intersection Main Traffic Secondary Traffic

0

100

250

500

Figure 6.1.1. Geographical context

Project Analysis

Re-Search

Morphological Dimension

The Square

0

100

250

500

Figure 6.1.3. Figure Ground superimposed with Block Plan

History (Knights, 2016) Unlike many squares that had been planned before, Acton Square was initially a housing and small business complex in the 18th century.

By 1890 Acton had transformed from a village into a town, and the town council began to demolish those old houses and much of King Street to accomodate the ever-growing population. The resulting triangle ‘square’ became a public space.

Figure 6.1.2. Morphology

Overtime the square also changes. In 1890 it was an underground toilet with a garden on the top. In the 1980’s these public toilets were closed, and the whole area was paved over with cycle paths and tree-lined gardens. Even though this looked reasonably good, as the plants grew, the area started to attract undesirable people and drunkards. This made people avoid the area.

Current condition In 2005, some of the greeneries were removed to improve the legibility of the square, and the square’s redevelopment peaked in 2006, when a £1.2M proposal for the square was submitted.

East Architect says that their design aims to renew the functions of the square so that it could accomodate markets and street performance, and to retain an uncluttered feel by keeping trees, walls, bollards and planters to a minimum. This design persists until today.

Acton Square is actually named Mount Square; however, in this research project it will be referred to as Acton Square.

Nowadays, it is surrounded by Morrisons and a post office (north), St Mary’s Church (east), and few small shops in the west and south.

Morrisons seems to create an unpermeable area in the north of the square, and from the positioning and block plan, Acton square does not look special due to many gaps between structures around the square.

In terms of its design, many residents are ashamed of the dreary and boring square, and they want a more designed landscape with more greeneries.

31

Project Analysis

32

Me-Search

Neighborhood Level

The Square Private

Figure 6.2.1 Green Space

0

100

250

500

Public

0

100

250

500

Residential

Offices

Social

Workshop/ Warehouse

Commercial Mixeduse

Commercial

Governmental building

Transportation

Figure 6.2.4. Landuse

Green Space Map

Land-use Map

Based on this map Acton might not need any additional softscape; however, many of those spaces are not accessible. Some of the spaces are graveyards, private, and do not have good access points.

Although the landuse looks quite diverse, there are some elements that distract the vitality of the square i.e. big box Morrisons, ‘specialities’ shops such as beauty salon, and post office are not ideal programming of the rim.

The Square Most Vibrant Medium Vibrant Less Vibrant

Figure 6.2.2 Vibrancy

0

100

250

500

Vibrancy Map Jane Jacobs (1992) said that every square that sits on a busy high street will naturally be vibrant; since this does not happen, there might be a fault in the square’s configuration.

Building Height Map

The Square 8+ Storey 5-7 Storey

Figure 6.2.3 Building Height

3-4 Storey 0

100

250

500

1-2 Storey

Acton Square has enough population density: within a radius of 500 meters, there is roughly 7000 residents.

Based on this observation, the emptiness of the square is not caused by a lack of density; in fact, it is possible that the square is not big enough to accommodate such large population.

Project Analysis

Me-Search

Neighborhood Level

33

Day

Steyne

Rd n

Horn L

d

field R

Church

ge Rd

Uxbrid

King st t

High S

Night

t

S Crown

0

100

250

500

The Square

Fast

Main Road Secondary Road

Figure 6.2.5. Road Network

Figure 6.2.6. Traffic Analysis Weekdays

Road Network

Traffic Analysis

There are five important roads around the square: High St (south), Uxbridge Rd (west), Steyne Rd (north), Horn Lane (east), and Churchfield Rd (east). The square itself was originally a street named ‘Kings st’; until today it connects Crown St. and Churchfield St.

High street, Uxbridge, and Steyne Rd are busy, main roads that connect the area to Shepherd’s Bush, North Circular Rd, Ealing Broadway, A40 and Willesden Junction. These roads have moderate-heavy traffic throughout the day. In contrast, Horn Lane and Churchfield Rd are relatively less busy compared to those three.

Intervention of the square might affect the 3 roads that surround the square: High St, Steyne Rd, and Horn Ln.

Slow

Traffic analysis is done to find which roads are busiest and impart the most negative effect to the square, and how to solve this issue.

As mentioned earlier, since Horn Lane is relatively less busy, it can readily accept the added traffic that might result from some interventions.

The south part of the square suffers from noise pollution from the High Street; in contrast, the west part of the square is generally relatively quiet.

Figure 6.2.7. Traffic Analysis Weekend

34

Project Analysis

Me-Search

Macro Level

0

Figure 6.2.8 Night Economy

0

100

250

350

100

250

Active

Convenience Store

Bank/ Provider

Gallery

Vacant Building

Inactive

Cafe/ Resto/ Bar

Betting/ Casino

Fashion

Clinic

Broker/ Services

Specialities

Charity Shop

Fast Food

Figure 6.2.10 Amenities

Night Economy Map

Amenities Map

From here, it is clear why this square is unpopular and is considered unsafe at night by some residents (see appendix C): the only active areas are Morisson’s and 2-3 small shops nearby.

This shows a detailed breakdown of the type of retail shops that was identified in the Landuse map. This map shows that the rim of the square is not diverse enough. This might have caused the square to function and be perceived more as Morrisons’ or the church’s courtyard. Therefore, people might linger around the square after shopping or church services, but never for long.

The square’s lack of activities at night is believed to be part of the reason many young adults and professionals are not interested in living in Acton.

Safety Perception Map Overall there is a low safety perception due to a combination of lack of activities, few programming options, and poor design that creates an uninviting, eerie atmosphere.

Figure 6.2.9 Safety Perception

0

100

250

350

Safe Unsafe

Project Analysis

Me-Search

Macro Level

uare

The Sq

‘Tail’

Movement Analysis For easier reference, the triangle part of the square will be called the ‘head’, while the linear part will be called the ‘tail’.

There are similar patterns during weekdays and weekends: in the morning more movements are detected at the square’s ‘tail’, while at night more are detected at the square’s ‘head’.

‘Head’

Therefore there are two clear movements: 1. from traffic light to the ‘tail’, and 2. from the bus stop to the ‘tail’.

One unique observation here is that people tend to avoid the middle part of the square. This further reinforces the idea that the square has not been planned well enough.

Traffic Light Bus Stop

0

100

250

350

Figure 6.2.11 Weekdays Movement (Day and Night)

0

100

250

350

Figure 6.2.12 Weekend Movement (Day and Night)

35

36

Project Analysis

Me-Search

Macro Level

spring equinox

summer solstice

Sunlight Hours Analysis Based on this analysis, the area in the center of the square is a “prime� area because it receives most sunlight throughout the year. However, this area still proves to be unpopular.

A similar problem affects the west side of Morrisons.

During winter that area receives most sunlight; however, it is underutilised with an inactive frontage.

Shadow Analysis Based on Shadow Analysis below, placing buildings on the south side of the square is not recommended because it could overshadow the square, especially during spring, autumn, and winter.

autumn equinox

winter solstice

Figure 6.2.13 Sunlight Hours (left) Figure 6.2.14 Shadow Analysis (below)

spring equinox

summer solstice

autumn equinox

winter solstice

Project Analysis

Me-Search

Macro Level

Wind Simulation The Wind Maps show that chilly, strong wind in the square comes from the south-west through 2 gates, High st and Crown St. Furthermore, the Wind Simulation shows that although the square is exposed to enough sunlight, it might still be unpopular because it faces a very strong wind.

Moreover, the concave areas near Morrisons cause small whirlwinds that are very uncomfortable for visitors. This effect is also present to a lesser degree near the bus stop.

Closely built buildings in the north and south of the square prevent wind from exiting in multiple directions. This causes a very strong wind to form towards Churchfield rd.

Figure 6.2.15 Wind Map (left) Figure 6.2.16 Wind Simulation (below) South-West Churchfield Rd.

High St.

Crown St.

37

Project Analysis

38

Me-Search

Micro Level/ Current Design

Square ‘tail’

+ 0.60 + 2.00

m

m

Morrisons

Small Shops

Post Office and Offices

45 m Square ‘head’

- 0.80

m

1:4.8

King’s Head Pub St Mary’s Church 1:4.3

+ 0.00

m ABI College Barclays Bank

1:7 Lighting

0

Figure 6.2.17 Square Composition

5

10

Furniture

CCTV

Bus Stop

Trees

20

30

HSBC Bank and Small Shops 50

Active Frontage

Floor Pattern

Inactive Frontage

Floor Elevation Proportion

1:4.6

Figure 6.2.18 Square Configuration

0

5

10

20

30

50

Square Composition

Bus Stop

Square Configuration

Shape and Floor Plan

The ratio between hardscape and softscape is 2900m2:885m2. In other words, 30% of the square is a softscape, which should have been a good percentage considering the softscape in Crouch End square is 30% and that in Woolwich square is 31%.

Having a bus stop at the square can bring traffic to the streets due to its busy schedule; however, it also brings in crowd, which is very advantageous.

This square is surrounded by Morrisons and a post office in the north, HSBC and small shops in the south, St Mary’s church, Barclays, and ABI college in the east, and a pub and a salon in the west.

To tackle this triangular-shaped square, a floor pattern was applied to give the visitors a focal point; however, this has minimal effect because people seldom notice and use the floor plan.

However, this softscapes is owned privately by the church and cannot be enjoyed by the public. Essentially this means the square has no softscape, and instead consists of 100% hardscape.

The square’s vista is also interrupted by many poles (i.e. CCTV poles and lamp posts) that are scattered across the square. The haphazard placement disrupts the vista and makes it seems as if the design was not planned well enough.

Based on observations, this square’s frontage is pretty weak because it has less than 40% active frontages and over 60% inactive frontages. Therefore, it is important to see how to utilize and maximise the potential of these frontages.

Furthermore, the square’s 5° floor elevation is currently only made into a ramp. This made the square uninteresting, when it could have been transformed into steps or leveling variations to make the square more attractive.

Furnishing Although the placement of two long benches in the center helps with centering, the unique shape of the bench and their material made them very uncomfortable and discourage visitors from sitting there.

Poles

Square Proportion One side of the square (north-east) has a bad enclosure, with a ratio of 1:7 between building and square. The other sides are acceptable.

Project Analysis

Me-Search

Micro Level/ Current Design

39

70.0-74.9 dB(A)

Figure 6.2.19 People Activities

0

5

10

20

30

Movement

65.0-69.9 dB(A)

55.0-59.9 dB(A)

Stay

60.0-64.9 dB(A)

00.0-54.9 dB(A)

50

Figure 6.2.20 Noise Map

People Movement

Farmers Market

Noise Map

This map combines people’s typical movement paths and spots where they often linger.

The market is placed exactly along the people’s typical movement path (King’s St.). Since this market is tightly identified with the square, it is an important asset to be considered.

From this noise map, it is apparent that the square has a high noise level, especially at the center of the square and near the High St (70-74Db(A)). This might be part of the reason why the center tends to be avoided by people.

The spots where people meet, or their sense of belonging, also mostly occur around the bus stop or to the west or north side of the Church, and very rarely in the center.

On the other hand, the ‘tail’ of the square is relatively calm (55-59 Db(A)).

0

5

10

20

30

50

Project Analysis

40

Me-Search

Micro Level

Serial Views Busy and Crowded High Street

s

on Morris

1

2 Highest Point +2.00

Lowest Point -0.80

+0.00

hool

r Sc ntwate e w r e D

ens

ld Gard

fie Spring 3

Figure 6.2.21 Serial View (SV) 2 to 1

1:7 Proportion between Building and Square

ffice Post O Figure 6.2.24 Parking Lots

4

SV3

Figure 6.2.22 Serial View (SV) 3 to VP SV1 Morrisons

VP

SV2

<Morrisons 1

g Lot Parkin ns iso >Morr

g Lot Parkin ns iso <Morr

3

uare

The Sq

ardens

2

Figure 6.2.23 Serial View 3 to VPS

nds G Woodla >Morrisons

0

100

250

350

Project Analysis

Me-Search

Micro Level

Figure 6.2.25 View Point (VP) East-South

Dead space next to Morrisons

Unopopular centre area

Figure 6.2.26. Small tree

Inactive frontages

Figure 6.2.27 View Point (VP) West-North

Figure 6.2.28 During Market time

Figure 6.2.29 Other open spaces

41

42

Project Analysis

We-Search

General Information

Data Information

Residents perception and comment on Square

Data gathering is done through asking a series of questions via online interviews to Acton Central residents and Make Acton Consultation.

After compiling the data, it was found that 48% of residents believe the square lacks a good design, while 32% believe that the square and rim’s faulty programming is the cause of the less lively square.

These questions focuses on finding out the assets as perceived by the residents. Some of the questions that were used during the data gathering process are:

Therefore, based on these insights, this research project will focus on the design and landscape.

• How do you perceive Acton square?

• What can be improved from the square?

• How often do you go to the square?

Spatial Design 48% Urban Form 20%

Instagram Is used to find out what visitors and residents like about the square The images below were found from searching #ActonMarket and #ActonHighStreet. No images were found from searching #ActonSquare or #TheMountSquare, which shows that the name of the square itself is unfamiliar.

Spatial Design Urban Form Programming

The images show that St Mary’s Church is the most popular scene, followed by activities during the market. Other parts of the square are rarely explored, which might be due to the square’s low complexity and minimal attractions.

Programming 32%

Quotes on Square The mount square has a bad reputation among the locals. Most of them are ashamed of and refuse to use it (see quotes in appendix C).

Figure 6.3.1 Instagram on Acton

We-Search

Project Analysis

Majority of residents feel that the square has a bad selection of programming, while others thinks it often hosts low-quality events and has too many inactive frontages.

PROBLEMS

Flexibility 10%

No Comm Spirit 3%

In Spatial Design, most visitors selected two main problems: bad square design and lack of greeneries.

Pedestrian 12%

Inactive Frontage 15%

Low Events 21%

Problems and Opportunities

56% of residents say they encounter difficulties in finding parking spots to visit the square. However, once they arrived in the square, 33% wishes pedestrians are prioritised.

Cyclist 11% Greenaries 29%

Bad Design 25%

Pedestrian 33%

Bad Programming

Greenaries/ Open Space

Low Quality Events/ Market

Bad Design

Inactive Frontage

Bad Furnishing and Lighting

Car Park

Flexibility

Bad Pavement

Pedestrian Prioritised

No Community Spirit

Pedestrian Prioiritisation

Bad Programming 51%

Pavement 17%

Programming Hot Desk The charts here show retail 12% shops and events that residents prefer in the square. Most prefer Individual Shops, Home Art Gallery 24% Cooking, Outdoor Dining and Live Music.

Furnishing 17%

Cyclist Prioiritised

Car Park 56%

Spatial Design Lighting 16%

Individual Shops 39%

43

Urban Form Landscaping 26%

Pedestrian Prioritised 36%

Morrisons Site 18%

Furnishing 22% Landscaping/ Greenaries

OPPORTUNITIES

Better Signings Individual/ Home Cooking/ Outdoor Dining

Pavement

New Development (Waitrose, Curzon Cinema)

Renovatate Shop Front

Art Gallery

Furnishing (Benches, Focal Point)

Hot Desk

Lighting

New Dev 24% Children, Garden 9%

Live Music 33%

Live Music, Performance, Film Culinary Market Art and Book Fair

Children, Garden, Etc

Signs 14% Store Front 8%

Seasonal Market 16%

Seasonal Market

Rebuilt Morrisons Site

Art Fair 21% Culinary 21%

Pavement 14%

Majority imagined the square with a more designed landcape and greeneries around the squares with better furnishing and focal points such as a fountain or a statue.

More Parking Lot

Parking Lot 27%

Better Connection for Pedestrian and Cyclist Pedestrian Prioritised Over Vehicle

Connection 18%

In terms of urban form, 36% residents would like to have a pedestrianonly area, while 27% requested a better parking lot since the current Morrisons car park has time limits.

Project Analysis

44

Summary

Summary The map below shows the Assets (things valued by the residents) of the square. The positive and negative assets maps are concluded from the ReSearch, Me-Search, and We-Search

2 2

4

1

1

4

3

3

Positive Asset Positive Asset 0

Figure 6.4.1 Asset Map

100

250

350

Positive Asset

0

100

250

350

Positive Asset

Figure 6.4.2 Positive Asset

1

St Mary’s Church is a highly positive asset as preceived by the visitors. This church’s potential has to be maximised to help the square draw more visitors. It has to be visible from as many viewpoints as possible. Furthermore, its location at the highest point of the square can enhance its asset status.

1

From weather analysis, the front of the church (middle part of the square) is a prime area because it receives most sunlight throughout the year. Therefore this area’s potential has to be maximised so that it can attract visitors.

2 3

2 4

The square has a relatively good position, as it is flanked by two retails corridors at Churchfield Rd and High St. However the square’s configuration might be faulty because it is still empty regardless of being located next to a vibrant high street.

Residents like the feeling of villages, independent shops, greeneries, great and historical buildings in and around the square.

0

100

250

350

Negative Asset

Figure 6.4.3 Negative Asset

1

Almost 50% of the residents believe that design is a missing element of the square. They feel the square is dull, unattractive, lacks greeneries, and overall is a wasted opportunity instead of being a place they could be proud of.

1

The square does not offer many options for visitors: low quality markets and 60% inactive frontage affords little attractions; Big Box Morrisons makes the square surrounded only by single use activity.

Furthermore, Morrisons and the nearby two car parks weaken the permeability and security in the north.

2

2 3 4 1

The square suffers from weak links with its neighboring open spaces, such as The Woodlands. However, if these three nodes (the Oaks, Square, and Woodlands) were connected to each other, they could form a valued, recogniseable joint public realm.

Currently the openness of the square leads to strong wind and noise pollution from the busy High St. Few and haphazardly placed greeneries worsen this condition and make the square (especially the centre area) very uncomfortable.

Project Schemes

7

Project Schemes

7.1

7.2

Scheme 1

Scheme 2

45

46

Project Scheme

Scheme 1

Overview PROPOSAL 1

Spatial Design Programming Urban Form

This is a retrofitting proposal, which means this proposal tests a combination of every proposition that neither requires hard modification of major structural changes, form or orientation of the square, nor create additional access or buildings. Therefore, from each of the three toolkit themes, the simplest propositions are chosen.

Consequently, the Urban Form toolkit, that involves many structural changes, will not play a big role in this proposal.

In spite of this minimalistic intervention, residents views and their perceptions on the assets of the square will be prioritised in this proposal. Their complaints of the square being boring, dreary, and too exposed with no focal points will be addessed. Meanwhile, the assets they favor, such as the Church, will be improved and their potential maximised.

Figure 7.1.1 Scheme 1 overview

Project Schemes

Scheme 1

Toolkit Review

PROGRAMMING

URBAN FORM

DIVERSE AND WELCOMING RIM

WELL CONNECTED

Sliced Intervention is used to create layering in the square

Transformation of Morrisson inactive frontage (west) into three new individual shops.

Proposition not used in this scheme

CENTERING

FLEXIBLE SPACE

ACCESSIBLE TO ALL

Fountain, as a Central ‘Statue’, is the new focal point of the square.

Flexible space for outdoor dining, farmers market and events at the square’s ‘tail’.

Accommodates children, elders and disabled people.

SENSE OF ENCLOSURE

POPULATION STRUCTURE

WIDER STREET TO SQUARE

Usage of Green Canopies to maximise the greeneries around the square and improve the sense of enclosure.

Proposition not used in this scheme

Proposition not used in this scheme

PROTECTED REALM

INSPIRING EVENTS

SPATIAL DESIGN INTRICACY

BP

TN

CF

SB

AM

SI

FP

CS

GS

ND

GC

AC

FP

CS

WB

CA

MC

RL

Wind Barriers, Comfortable Area, and Material Change are used.

SQUARE AS EUREKA

EB

Enhancing Barriers is used.

NC

CS

NG

All residents preferred events takes place at the square’s ‘tail’

47

48

Project Schemes

Scheme 1

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

INTRICACY

BP

TN

SB

SI

Besides functioning as the church’s “green carpet” and accentuating the asset status of the church, Sliced intervention also creates a barrier to block noise pollution and wind from the south of the square, and becomes a visual barrier to intrigue people into coming into the square.

• Not too difficult to execute; can use synthetic material for the floor for easier maintenance • Less wind and noise pollution can trigger the area to the west of Morrisons into having more active frontages • Since the floor material is different, people might be attracted to visit the area and sit under the provided “green canopies”/trees.

Since many residents believe that this square suffers from a poor design, Spatial Design will be prioritised in this research.

The following pages show a breakdown of the Spatial Design toolkit that becomes the backbone of this square redevelopment.

Base intervention

Proposition with square shape

Overall

CENTERING

CF

AM

CS

FP

Placing a statue, fountain, pool, or other objects at the middle of the square will attract and let visitors know that this is the center of the square where they can rest. Flooring also can help attract visitors and alter the overall feel of the square.

• Simple proposition that can attract visitors • Activities will naturally gravitate there • Coherent intervention

Project Schemes

SENSE OF ENCLOSURE

AC

GC

ND

Based on lessons learned from case study [BR1], trees with wide canopies or greeneries without wide canopies placed on top of buildings can form a “natural roof”, and increase the buildings’ heights and a sense of enclosure.

• Addition of natural objects and greeneries that are favored by residents.

• As added incentive, rooftop space can be converted to a rooftop cafe for Morrisons.

PROTECTED REALM

Scheme 1

GS

FP

CS

WB

CA

MC

RL

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

SQUARE AS EUREKA

EB

NC

CS

NG

Trees are placed as Wind Barriers(WB), and in conjuction with (SI), benches and trees are put in the ‘prime’ area to create a Comfortable Area(CA) to maximise the experience.

Material Change(MC) is also used for the High St. as a traffic calmer.

This proposition transforms all inactive frontages into active frontages by placing seating area next to the inactive wall, removing metal fences and changing it to a natural fence made of small plants (i.e. Stipa Tenuissima & Mischantus Sinesis), and creating a pond for a natural barrier between each spaces.

• Domesticate the square through scattered furnishing

• Help Centering toolkit stronger by placing the seating at

the centre of the square

• Addition of greeneries that is favored by residents

• Vehicle will be know when they enter the pedestrian-zone

• Improve visitors satisfaction • Strengthen the role of the square as a relaxing place

49

Project Schemes

50

Scheme 1

The Masterplan

The Masterplan In doing this retrofitting scheme, variation in levelings, doubling the assets, good placement of greeneries and ‘natural’ roof, good flooring and furnishing material, change of road material, and transformation of some inactive frontages of Morrisons into new individual shops are the insights of the applied toolkits.

Thus, residents will have a place to relax and enjoy their square, while the market can continue as usual, making the square lively and perform better.

The new shops are better placed around cafes/restaurants/hot desks to improve optional uses and increase the geographical and demographic catchment of the square.

2

1 3

Figure 7.1.7 Scheme 1 Masterplan 1

King’s Head Pub

2

Morrisons

3

St. Mary’s Church

0

15

50

100

Project Schemes

Scheme 1

Performance Assessment

Performance Assessment Although at this point it is difficult to measure the actual result, through injecting some of the toolkits the square is expected to be more lively than the current situation. Improving the frontages, installing new assets, creating more intricacy, centering, and forming a protected realm through a new dedicated place to relax will improve the overall condition and increase the visitorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; satisfaction of the square.

Outdoor Dining Old Crossing

Greenaries

New Crossing

Accessibility

Furnishing and Greenaries

Street Market/ Events

new shops

Retail Offer

People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

Floor Plan

Business Perception and Characteristics

Flexible Spaces Relax Outdoor Dining

Asset Figure 7.1.8 Scheme 1 Masterplan breakdown

Table 7.2.2 Breakdown

Zoning Plan

Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Table 7.2.1 Performance

51

52

Project Schemes

Scheme 1

Sense of Place

Morrisons

VP2 VP1

VP1 Shows the greens to block wind but keep the vista to the church

Green Canopies New Shops

Morrisons

Flexible Space for market

VP2 Greeneries at Morrisons rooftop increase the enclosure

Fountain

Project Schemes

Scheme 1

Trees as rail camouflage

Green Canopies

Sense of Place

EB

GC

Street Market St. Mary’s Church Morrisons

Activate the inactive: New Shops with Outdoor Dining

Bus Stop

King’s Head Pub

Sliced Intervention

SI

D

New Fountain as Central Statue

CS

Figure 7.1.9 Scheme 1 sense of place

53

54

Project Schemes

Scheme 2

Overview SCHEME 2

Spatial Design Programming Urban Form

Figure 7.2.1 Toolkit Disposition

This second proposal is more thorough compared to the first proposal in that it tests and simulate the design performance that results from maximising the potential of all available toolkits.

Although all toolkits are activated, the design still preserves and takes into consideration the assets valued by residents such the Church, Morrisons, the street market, and the general position of the square.

Project Schemes

Scheme 2

Toolkit Review

PROGRAMMING

URBAN FORM

DIVERSE AND WELCOMING RIM

WELL CONNECTED

Two Nodes will be used to double square’s activities and create depth at the square.

Utilisation of most of Morrisson sides and addition of new individual shops.

New connection to the other open spaces in the south and north.

CENTRING

FLEXIBLE SPACE

ACCESSIBLE TO ALL

Each nodes (at the front and back) will be the Central Statues on its own.

New flexible space in the north of the church (where post office building is)

Accommodate children, elders and disabled people.

SENSE OF ENCLOSURE

POPULATION STRUCTURE

WIDER STREET TO SQUARE

New Development used to improve enclosure, increase the density and retail/commercial offers at the square.

Additional 390 people from 7625m2 new buildings’ GFA.

There will be two new entrances using this toolkit: 1. From Churchfield St. using the new pond 2. Through the new entrances in the west

PROTECTED REALM

INSPIRING EVENTS

SPATIAL DESIGN INTRICACY

BP

TN

CF

SB

AM

SI

FP

CS

GS

ND

GC

AC

FP

CS

WB

CA

MC

RL

Front Park, Comfortable area, and Reduce Lane will be used.

SQUARE AS EUREKA

EB

NC

CS

NG

Enhancing Barriers and New Gates will be used alongside Circular Square that forms the backbone for the Two Nodes.

All residents preferred events will take place at the square’s ‘tail’

55

56

Project Schemes

Scheme 2

INTRICACY

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

BP

TN

SB

SI

CENTERING

This intervention adds a small garden and an adjoining fountain/ pond (zone 1) along with a multifunction node (zone 2) behind them to pique pedestrians’ interests. Both zones must be designed to have their own unique characteristics to prevent redundancy.

• The fountain/pond, garden & church unite to form a

cluster of assets.

• Two zones with different characteristics offer more

options for visitors.

• The multifunction node can be used for various activities/events

• The transformation of the inactive area into individual

shops can also benefit Morrisons.

zone 2

zone 1

CF

AM

CS

FP

The Two nodes Intricacy will each works as a ‘Central Statue’ which means they have their own focal point within the area. So the square will have two centering, one at the front, and another one at the back.

• Can greatly attract visitors • Activities will naturally gravitate there

Project Schemes

SENSE OF ENCLOSURE

AC

GC

ND

Adding more building structures at the higher points to increase the sense of enclosure is a lesson learned from [WR1].

• Density intensification.

• Additional square access point from the north.

• Could be favored by the council because it allows for Public Private Partnership (PPP) in the square regeneration (S106 of the Town & Country Planning Act), therefore more economically sustainable.

• Morrisons will get a new entrance at the east side, which is nearer to the residents in the north and east.

PROTECTED REALM

Scheme 2

GS

FP

CS

WB

CA

MC

RL

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

SQUARE AS EUREKA

EB

NC

CS

NG

Front Park (FP) is the new proposition introduced in this scheme.

It places a park near the High St. that act as a barrier to its negative effects. Comfortable Area (CA) and Reduce Lane (RL), that exchanges lanes for vehicle with sidewalks, are also used.

Enhancing Barriers (EB) and New Gates (NG) will strengthen and ease the connections between open spaces. These interventions are crucial to make all open spaces work as epicentres to draw people.

• Additional greeneries and softscapes give visitors a

place to relax

• Helps block the area inside the square from the high street

• Reduce the strength of wind in the middle of the square

• Pedestrians will feel strongly prioritised

• Reduces a vast number of passing vehicles

• • • • •

Improve visitors satisfaction Strengthen the role of the square as a relaxing place Improve the legibility and permeability of the square Increase the amount of footfall Strengthen connection and role of each square

57

Project Schemes

58

Scheme 2

The Masterplan

The Masterplan In this masterplan, the square will get new nodes that correspond with the current assets, new developments with commercial and residential uses, refurbishment of the current anchor retail (Morrisons) that leads to more rimâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s diversity, more connection to the surrounding nodes, and better vistas from new openings. This will result in a more protected, pleasing and comfortable epicentre that offers many options to visitors, and attracts them to pause, stay, and enjoy the square.

With this, the square becomes a place that â&#x20AC;&#x153;enrich[es] the lives of those who use itâ&#x20AC;? (Gaventa, 2006).

3

2

1 4

1 2 3 4

0

15

50

100

Project Schemes

Scheme 2

Performance Assessment

Performance Assessment The square is expected to have a better performance after the intervention. Application of all 12 toolkits will enliven the square, making it a good performing public realm in enhancing economic and social sustainability of the area.

Outdoor Dining

Access

However, Morrisons and post office will have to do major adjustments and some public hearing before executing the changes; but, if the council can ensure the incentives, this can become a beneficial project for all actors.

Greenaries

Accessibility

Furnishing and Greenaries

Street Market

People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

New Retails

Floor Configuration

Retail Offer

Business Perception and Characteristics

Flexible Space

The Assets

Relax Outdoor Dining

Asset Figure 7.2.8 Scheme 2 Masterplan breakdown

Table 7.2.2 Breakdown

Function Plan

Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Table 7.2.1 Performance

59

60

Project Schemes

Scheme 2

VP3 VP2

VP1 VP1

VP2 New Access from west connecting the Woodlands (other open space) to the square.

VP3 Small garden and individual shops

Sense of Place

Project Schemes

Scheme 2

Sense of Place

Buildings to increase the enclosure

Flexible Space for Market Place

St. Maryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Church

Outdoor Dining

Bus Stop

D

Figure 7.2.9 Scheme 2 sense of place Fountain

Small Garden

61

62

Conclusion

The two schemes depict the testing, possibility, and application of the toolkits. Each of them have different ‘setbacks’, and advantages and disadvantages in the context.

However the final product of this research project showcases not only the possiblity of new masterplans that could enliven the current situation, but also the process towards them, that involves extracting and understanding how the 12 toolkits work to enliven an outer London square, and examining how to balance out the ‘tug-ofwar’ between each toolkit.

One example of this “tug-of-war” is ‘Centering’ and ‘Diverse and Welcoming Rim’, in which the former tries to draw people to the centre of the square, while the latter concentrates on the ring of the square and makes people focus on it.

Another example is ‘Square as Eureka’ that tries to make the square more exclusive compared to other open spaces, while its seeming counterpart, ‘Well Connected’, tries to provide connectivity between those open spaces in the area.

However, through the Restorative Urbanism paradigm, I understand that the most important balancing parameter is the assets as perceived by the residents. How residents see the square, and their outlook on its opportunities and challenges, is essential. Since there is no exact rule on how an outer London square should exist, whether a diverse rim should be more important than centering, or vice versa, the main issue is how these toolkits respond to the assets valued by the residents.

So understanding the residents is vital for a successful development, and the residents themselves are the key, decisive assets since the success of a development is in the hands of those living around the project area (Kirkman et al, 2012).

Appendices

63

Appendices

A

B

C

Conceptual Spatial Design Propositions

Case Studies Assessment

Residents Quotes on Square

Appendix

64

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition Bended Path

BP

Traffic Light

INTRICACY

B

02 SC A

Source Literature Review

Case Studies Usual Movement Desired Movement Required Intervention

01 Create a series of vista for the visitors within the square. Avoid a very clear square that can be understood in a glance

Less Required

02 Create a complex and interesting plan with multiple levels, steps, grouping of trees, and ‘gates’ for another vista.

Bus Stop

Key note problem: B

• People walk to the square just as pass through • The square is to simple to understand

Figure A.1.2 Bended Path

Directed Movement and Required Vistas Movement 1 and 2 After knowing people’s typical movement in the square from point A to B (black arrows), the main objective here is to change their movement pattern, as well as create complexity at the square yet still clear and safe. In order to do this, it is necessary to bended their path (orange arrow) via physical instrument. Thus, the orange line at the perimeter here is the implication of required good vistas due to this bending.

This page then explores some possibilities of doing this.

A

Usual Movement Desired Movement Required Intervention Less Required

Figure A.1.1 Movement Analysis

Movement 1 Those who walks from and/or to traffic light Movement 2 Those who walk from and/or to bus stop

Based on some lessons learned from the Woolwich square [WR1], this intervention aims to bend visitor’s path between the bus station and Churhfield road by placing a small park with steps that looks as if it is an extension of the church’s green space.

+

• Block of greeneries in one zone will create a perception of a high-quality area.

• The steps that corresponded with the square’s topography can be used as an additional seating area that faces the empty space be sides Morrisons. A screen or a stage can be installed into this empty space to create a more interesting view.

• The square can look smaller as shown in the Brentford case study [BR2]

• If the garden is designed poorly, a dead space might

form in the area marked by the black circle in the image above

because people tend to avoid unnecessary movements i.e.

those coming from the high street might instead choose the side

road on the right, while those coming from the bus stop might

choose the path to the left of the bus stop, thereby rendering the

aforementioned area dead.

-

Appendix Two Nodes

TN

Scattered Blocks

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

SB

Sliced Intervention

SI

Zone 2

Zone 1

Figure A.1.3 Two Nodes

Figure A.1.4. Scattered Blocks

Based on the Crouch End [CE1] case study, this intervention adds a small garden and an adjoining fountain/pond (zone 1) along with a multifunction node (zone 2) behind them to pique pedestrians’ interests. Both zones must be designed to have their own unique characteristics to prevent redundancy. An inactive area beside Morrisons (coloured in yellow) is also filled with individual shops.

Better square intricacy can be achieved by dividing the square into small rectangles and placing them arbitrarily. The 2 orange arrows above show 2 meandering visitors’s paths instead of the usual, straight paths. Trees that are placed arbitrarily can also add a level of complexity to the square.

• The fountain/pond, garden & church unite to form a cluster of assets.

• Two zones with different characteristics offer more options for visitors.

• The multifunction node can be used for various activities/events

• The transformation of the inactive area into individual shops can

also benefit Morrisons.

+

-

• The post office area (coloured red above) needs to be renovated.

• Morrisons needs to convert the inactive area.

+

• Transform the square from a void into a playful, interesting area • Fulfill resident’s wishes by providing more greeneries

-

• Markets can no longer be hosted in the square • Problems could arise if trees aren’t properly maintained: square can become dark, scary and invite unwanted visitors

Figure A.1.5. Sliced Intervention

This intervention places a kind of reflection of the church building that is projected unto the floor plan. Besides functioning as the church’s “green carpet” and accentuating the asset status of the church, this intervention also creates a barrier to block noise pollution and wind from the south of the square, and becomes a visual barrier to intrigue people into coming into the square.

+ -

- Not too difficult to execute; can use synthetic material for the floor for easier maintenance - Less wind and noise pollution can trigger the area to the west of Morrisons into having more active frontages - Since the floor material is different, people might be attracted to visit the area and sit under the provided “green canopies”/trees.

- Reduced flexible space

65

Appendix

66

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition Chruch Frontyard

CF

CENTERING

02 SC Source Literature Review

Case Studies High Sense of Belonging Low Sense of Belonging

01 Centering could be one way to prevent ‘die-stamped’ functions along the square This is used to make visitors understand the climax of the square.

02 Centering can tackle the problem of a nonexistent focal point caused by irregular square shape, through modifying the pattern or shape of the pavement or putting a statue in the centre of the square.

Majority Movement Least Movement

Figure A.2.1 Centering Analysis

Centering Analysis

Key Note Problem

The current configuration of the square is plain, there is sort of a ‘diestamped’ blandness over the square. Thus the centre area just seems to be another blandness and it is apparent that this area avoided by the visitors while it is an area where it is supposedly become the ‘peak’ of the square, it is important to create something different that can draw people to the centre.

• Visitors tend to avoid the centre of the square.

• Bad area: north-east, centre, south.

Some of the propositions also correspond with the current asset: the church to create unity and cohesion.

Figure A.2.2 Church Frontyard

This proposition strengthens the status of the church as an asset by creating an extension to the church’s reception hall and adding on some trees and and pond. Stairs will be built on the rim of the extension such that visitors can sit facing the square.

+

• Elevates church’s asset status

• differences in levels due to the stairs can engage visitors’ interests

-

• The rim area can be too narrow if the elevation is too steep • The inactive area besides morrissons needs to be renovated to attract people and prevent it from turning into a dead space

Appendix Amphlitheatre

AM

Central Statue

Figure A.2.3 Amphitheatre

This intervention allows the proliferation of many shows/events, such as outdoor theatre shows and live music, in the square. The “stage” or circular seating area will pull visitors’s focus to the center of the square.

+ -

• Many shows that require a stage can be accomodated • The inactive area besides Morrisons can be used for public screenings by placing a screen there • Quite difficult to execute because the overall square’s elevation needs to be changed • No direct access to the church from the traffic light; visitors must circle the amphiteater (see black arrows above)

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

CS

Floor Pattern

Figure A.2.4 Central Statue

Placing a statue, fountain, pool, or other objects at the middle of the square would be the simplest intervention. this simple element will attract and let visitors know that this is the center of the square where they can rest.

+

• Simple proposition that can attract visitors • Activities will naturally gravitate there • Depends on the proposition. Pools/fountain might has the most complex system.

FP

Figure A.2.5 Floor Pattern

In the case of Acton, flooring is an important element to rectify the square’s irregular shape. Flooring can help other elements attract visitors and alter the overall feel of the square.

+

• If done alongside other interventions such as Centering, the interventions can be more coherent

• If done alone, the intervention could be useless since the square

will still be a void

• The markets might need to be rearranged due to the floor pattern.

-

67

Appendix

68

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

A’

SENSE OF ENCLOSURE

05 SC

Source Literature Review

Case Studies

01 1:4 scale ratio between buildings at the rim and the square is a common scale that is designed to not be too constricting nor too exposed.

VP2

02 Height of buildings at the rim is between 27° (max) and 18° (min) as seen from the edge of the square.

VP1

Strongest Enclosure Lowest Enclosure

03 Size of square is directly proportional to the size of the neighborhood: 0.65m2 - 46m2/people.

High Overshadowing Low Overshadowing

04 Less enclosed square can be tackled by installing arches at the corners of the square.

05 Trees can form a natural roof (Green Canopies).

A Figure A.3.1 Enclosure Analysis

Keynote Problem • Building : Square = 1:7, far from the recommendation (1:4) • The angular is 9° instead of 18°-27° recommendation

Square Proportion

18°

Section A-A’ Viewpoint 1

VP1

Morrisons

Square

9°

Road

Sidewalks

HSBC

Road

Sidewalks

HSBC

The square lack of enclosure will tried be tackled by exploring some propositions that also consider the impact of overshadowing to the square.

From the map, it is apparent that the lightest green (inner circle) is the least enclosed side with 1:7, while the other sides are relatively acceptable within 1:4.3-4.8.

18°

Section A-A’ Viewpoint 2

VP2

Morrisons

Square

12°

Appendix Arched Corner

AC

Green Canopies

Figure A.3.2 Arched Corner

These arches reduce the size of the entrance to the square, making it look like an enclosed, fenced area.

+

- Easiest to install, with no changes to existing elements.

- If well designed, it could be a nice, new installation for the square.

-

- Metal poles and ornaments built in the square could break the architectural theme already provided by the old church.

- Since this is concentrated at the gates of the square, it may not solve the issue of visitors not lingering in the square.

GC

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

BR 1

New Development

Figure A.3.3 Green Canopies

Based on lessons learned from case study [BR1], trees with wide canopies can increase a sense of enclosure. Therefore, greeneries with or without wide canopies placed on top of buildings can form a “natural roof”, and increase the buildings’ heights, and a sense of enclosure.

+

- No hard intervention necessary, just some minor adjustments.

- Addition of natural objects and greeneries that are favored by residents.

- As added incentive, rooftop space can be converted to a rooftop

cafe for Morrisons.

-

- Roof renovation needs to be done

ND

WR 1

Figure A.3.4 New Development

Adding more building structures at the higher points is a lesson learned from [WR1]. The area marked above is currently a parking lot, and might possibly be used for new developments.

- Density intensification.

- Additional square access point from the north.

- More openings for wind circulation.

- Could be favored by the council because it allows for Public

Private Partnership (PPP) in the square regeneration (S106 of the

Town & Country Planning Act), therefore more economically sustainable.

- Morrisons will get a new entrance at the east side, which is

nearer to the residents in the north and east.

+

-

- Adjustment of loading bay - Need to do public hearing

69

Appendix

70

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition Comfortable Area

CA

PROTECTED REALM

04 SC Source Literature Review

Case Studies Most Desireable Seating Area Least Desireable Seating Area

01 Comfortable, calm and safe enough for people, including elders and children, to linger in.

02 Good and comfortable furnishings (i.e. benches, signages, bins,and focal points) with appropriate material (i.e. no stone or metal benches).

Most Needed Greeneries Least Needed Greeneries

Figure A.4.1 Seating and Greeneries Position

Seating and Greeneries Position

03 Sufficient greeneries.

The map above shows the perimeter location of where should the seating and greeneries take place. The new benches should scatter across the square and using good materials.

Key note problem:

The greeneries are suggested mostly at the corner of the square to tackle the wind problem, although it is also needed at the centre to balance the sun and shade.

• Bad furnishing shape and material • Lack of greeneries

Figure A.4.2 Comfortable Area

Placing sufficient trees and seating area in the centre of the square.

+

• Help domesticate the square through scattered furnishing • Help Centering toolkit stronger in placing the seating at the cen tre of the square • Seating can be configured so that visitor can admire the asset of the square • Trees will help balance shade and sunshine throughout the day

-

• There is quite a distance between seating location with bus stop to evade the negative aspects from High St.

Appendix Reduce Lane

RL

Material Change

Figure A.4.3 Reduce Lane

With this intervention, pedestrians will feel more comfortable and less exposed because the width of the adjoining road is adjusted according to the size of the square - i.e. the smaller the square, the narrower the road should be. This intervention is more complex than the next intervention (Material Change).

+

-

• Pedestrians will feel strongly prioritised • Reduces a vast number of passing vehicles because the 3 lanes are cut into only 1 lane • There must be a traffic intervention, that diverts and change some traffic routes nearby the square: High St, Steyne Rd, and Horn Ln.

MC

Figure A.4.4 Material Change

This intervention is part of traffic calming to reduce noise pollution and make pedestrians feel prioritised over vehicles. Changing the material of the road allows pedestrians to move from the square to the rim in the south, and notifies drivers that they are in a pedestrian zone.

+

-

• Not as extreme as the Reduced Lanes intervention, but is quite effective in notifying drivers of the pedestrian zone • Traffic calming can worsen traffic because High St. connects Ealing Broadway and Shepherd’s Bush.

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

71

Appendix

72

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition Green Strip

GS

PROTECTED REALM

04 SC Source Literature Review

Case Studies

High Noise Level Low Noise Level Strong Wind

04 Protected from weather elements, has a good mix of sun and shade; the square must be able to shield its visitors from wind.

Gentle Wind

Figure A.4.5 Wind and Noise

Wind Movement Need Attention

Wind and Noise Key note problem: • Strong wind and no shield in the square • Noisy High St. create uncomfortable atmosphere • There is almost non shading elements in the centre leaving the centre too exposed

In the square, the wind mainly come from the south-west blowing up the centre of the square and compressed at the square ‘tail’, to the way out. While, noise pollution also come from the High St. at the south of the square.

Some of the intervention besides try to block those two problems.

Figure A.4.6 Green Strip

Based on lessons learned from Woolwich square [WR 4], Putting strip of greenaries is a simple way to tackle noise and improve the overall condition of the square

+

-

+ cheapest and easiest to be done + adds greeneries

- residents might perceive this only as ornaments/decorations and might not engage much with this minimal intervention

Appendix Front Park

FP

Court Square

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

CS

WB

Wind Barrier

B

A

Figure A.4.7 Front Park

Based on lessons learned from Brentford square [BR1], the presence of a front park has a huge impact on the overall condition of the square: it can reduce negative effects from the high street and create a peaceful atmosphere in the square.

+ -

+ additional greeneries and softscapes give visitors a place to relax + helps block the area inside the square from the high street - if not maintained well enough, this park could instead be dirty, full of rubbish, invite unwanted visitors (i.e. homeless or drunk people), and be avoided by people in general

Figure A.4.8 Court Square

Figure A.4.9 Wind Barrier

This is build upon the hypothesis that the square is not alive due to various negative effects caused by the high street (i.e. overly exposed square, noise pollution). Therefore the solution is to continue the high street retail strip in the square by installing new buildings. With this intervention, the square functions more like a courtyard.

This intervention tries to address the issue of strong wind in the middle of the square by placing trees in the south-west (see A) to reduce the intensity of wind entering the square, and by placing another group of trees in a certain configuration that allows wind to escape through the gaps between the trees (see B).

+ additional retail shops lend continuity to the high street’s retail strip + square is protected from wind and noise pollution

+

- Square can suffer from offer shadowing if the new buildings are

more than 3 storeys.

- As a consequences, part of Morrions (shown in red) needs to be demolished

-

+ -

• Reduce the strength of wind in the middle of the square • Addition of greeneries that is favored by residents • Adds square’s intricacy - reduced area for the market at the “tail” of the square

73

Appendix

74

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition Enhancing Barriers

EB

SQUARE AS A EUREKA

03SC Source Literature Review

Case Studies Weak Assets

01 Identity of the square. Open space must be become a protagonist actor in the area and must have different identity from its surrounding and nearby open space.

Strong Assets

Figure A.5.1 Assets

02 Authenticity of the square comes from leveraging the assets.

Assets

03 Once a square recognised its assets/identity, other non human actors (furniture and architectural theme) will change and conform to that idenity.

The hurting asset in the area is mostly located at the north which are Morrisons and post office that have a lot of inactive frontages.

Key note problem: • No difference between High St. and the square • Lots of hidden potential asset in the square

While the middle part has hidden potential to transform into a good public realm from its floor elevation, strong assets such as the church, and the pub at the west. These assets try to be exposed as well as utlising the weak asset in this propositions.

Figure A.5.2 Enhancing Barriers

This proposition transforms all inactive frontages into more pleasing frontages by placing seating area next to the inactive wall; removing metal fences and changing it to a natural fence made of small plants (i.e. Stipa Tenuissima & Mischantus Sinesis); creating a pond for a natural barrier between each spaces.

+

• Improve visitors satisfaction • Strengthen the role of the square as a relaxing place • Quite expensive for doing such ‘small’ intervention

Appendix New Circus

NC

Figure A.5.3 New Circus

This intervention tries to maximise the square’s two main assets, the church & the King’s head buildings (red), through providing a binding medium in the middle. This gives the visitors a chance to enjoy the architecture in the square.

+

• Improve the condition of the area; square will be more appreciated and recognised

• Although there will be a diversity in the rim, it is clear from the

design that the square is just a place to admire the architectural design.

• Square seems to be separated from the ‘tail’

-

Conceptual Spatial Design Proposition

Circular Square

CS

New Gates

Figure A.5.4 Circular Square

This proposition is the initial idea behind the Two Nodes at Intricacy. The rationale behind this is to maximise the assets (similar to New Circus); but, rather than filling the gap with new building/structure, landscaping is used to strengthen the node in front of the square. (see Two Nodes for pro and cons)

NG

Figure A.5.5 New Gates

This is related to Well Connected from the Urban Form theme. This intervention strengthens and eases the connections between open spaces. All This intervention is crucial to make all open spaces work as epicentres to draw people.

+

-

• Improve the legibility and permeability of the square • Increase the amount of footfall into the square • Strengthen connection and role of each square • Need to do some hard construction, dismatle some existing structure and construct new infrastructure

75

Appendix

76

B. Case Studies

MARKET PLACE SQUARE Brentford, Hounslow Project Info

Location

1515 M2

Location Complete Architect Value

: : : :

195 M

Brentford High Street, Hounslow, TW8 September 2014 Lynn Kinnear Architect ÂŁ1.4m

This beautiful square is mainly used to accomodate regular markets and events whilst also providing a space for people across generations to meet and play.

BR 1

Square

Before regenerated, this square was initially a car park that symbolises the driving pattern in the area.

Therefore the removal of the car park enabled the presence of a multi-purpose space that could bring back the market stalls that originally began in 1306, and dawn a new beginning for a pedestrian-prioritised pattern.

Performance Assessment People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

BR 2 0

100

250

500

Business Perception and Characteristics Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Excellent Good Average Bad

Lesson Learnt BR 1

BR 1

Good materials (timber seating and yorkstone floors) combined with good greeneries make the square a desirable place to visit.

BR 2

A steep level differences at the rim create a perception of a squeezed square and a disjunction between the square and the rim. Avoid this.

BR 3

Avoid placing offices/estate agents at the rim of the square because this will make only specific people come to the square at specific hours

BR 3

A stage can be an interesting object for some people (mothers and children) and could be used for events.

BR 4

Spatial Design Programming Urban Form

BR 4

Appendix

B. Case Studies

TOWN HALL GREEN Crouch End, Haringey Project Info

Location

CE 1

2440 M2

Location Complete Architect Value

: : : :

200 M

Brentford High Street, Hounslow, TW8 September 2014 Gustafson Porter £6.6m

Built in 1930s, thissquare is well positioned at the intersection of four roads from the north and the south. Composed of a combination of softscapes and hardscapes, the square seems to be loved by its visitors -workers, young adults, mothers, babies and toddlers- who frequent the square throughout the day.

Square

The ability of the square to give different experiences to visitors around and inside the square through the use of noise reduction and a fountain makes this square a valuable asset for local residents.

CE 2

Performance Assessment People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

0

100

250

500

Perception and Business Characteristics Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Excellent Good Average Bad

Lesson Learnt CE 1 CE 2

CE 1

A great feature of the square is a small park with trees near the high street, which is not only used for recreation, but also as a ‘defence’ from noise and wind from the high street. This results in a feeling of intricacy and intimacy inside the square.

The intimacy is also strengthened by the 1:3 ratio of the buildings in the rim of the square to the square itself which is better than the one recommended in the literature review.

Additionally, the presence of the town hall tower and the three big trees strengthen the enclosure.

CE 3

The square has two focal points: the small park and the fountain which are aptly located next to the arts centre. These two focal points serve to give a broader range of options for the visitors.

CE 3 CE 4

The square does not only draw people through retail shops, but also through modifying the design and landscape [through a combination of positions of hardscape and softscape], and an understanding of assets exposure.

Spatial Design Programming Urban Form

CE 4

77

Appendix

78

Case Studies

MARKET PLACE SQUARE Bexleyheath, Bexley Project Info

Location

3340 M2

Location Complete Architect Value

: : : :

310 M

Market Pl, Bexley, DA6 September 2014 Gustafson Porter £6.6m

This square was built in 1830 and was destroyed by fire in 1989. It used to be called Market Place, and usually sold everyday products and services.

Square Square+

Today it remains an open space that benefits from a retail strip corridor in the east and a commercial area in the west. Its positioning as an epicentre between two nodes is important in making this square alive and full of people, from teenagers to elders. Moreover there is minimal distraction from vehicles as only buses pass through the street.

Overview Assessment People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

BX 2

0

100

250

BX 2 BX 3

BX 4

Circle benches and a clock tower that correspond and reinforce each other well form a great pair of assets for the square. ‘Meet me under the clock’ seems to be a common phrase here.

A domestic square results from the modified car lanes that is only accessible by buses, and from having outdoor furnishing and dining area.

A combination of a diverse market that supplies food, household products, and other specialties at the middle of the square, and retail shops at the

BX 3

500

Business Perception and Characteristics Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Excellent Good Average Bad

BX 4

Lesson Learnt BX 1

BX 1

rim of the square create a massive footfall.

Floor plan is a great way to expose an asset and make pedestrian feel prioritised i.e. a square floor plan that indicates a place to relax; a radial plan that provokes people into give their focus to an object.

BX 5

Spatial Design Programming Urban Form

BX 5

Appendix

Case Studies

WOOD STREET PLAZA Wood Street, Waltham Forest Project Info

Location

3570 M2

Location Complete Architect Value

: : : :

310 M

Wood St, Walthampstow, E17 September 2011 East £1.8m

The square is located 140M from the Wood Street Overground Station, surrounded by residential area and situated next to the high street. This square tries to draw people with activities spots, i.e. football and basketball courts, and playground. However even though the square is relatively new, it is not very popular except in some spots and only during specific times [WS4]. One of the residents summarizes her concerns as “It lacks green space. When the sun’s shining on the surface it hurts your eyes. Views of the community have been ignored”. This shows that although the architect have a good design, residents views is everything since they are the user.

Overview Assessment People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

Square

0

100

250

WS 2

500

WS 2

WS 3 WS 4

Sense of enclosure is an important missing part of the square. It feels too open and exposed (1:9), not only because the buildings are not tall enough, but also because it lacks some greeneries or a “green roof”.

The square is popular among children and their mothers because of the small playground. Apart from this the square is an empty space.

An appropriate and ergonomic seating design is important. No one likes to sit on the uniquely

WS 3

Business Perception and Characteristics Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Excellent Good Average Bad

WS 4

Lesson Learnt WS 1

WS 1

shaped-benches at the square. they prefer to sit on the conventional benches at the back The square suffers from spatial design issues: enclosure, furnishing, and focal point. Additionally, it also suffers from a lack of programming: 80% of the shops/retails on the rim are vacant, leaving no options which results in a small number of visitors.

WS 5

Spatial Design Programming

WS 5

79

Appendix

80

Case Studies

BERESFORD SQUARE & GENERAL GORDON SQUARE Woolwich Riverside, Greenwich Project Info

Location

11000 M2

Location Complete Architect Value

: : : :

WR 1

700 M

, Greenwich, SE18 2011 Gustafson Porter ÂŁ6.6m

The squares here are like a network of oases with features that are not present in the adjoining high street, such as water, a mixture of hardscape and softscapes, variation of levelings, stairs, screen, and old buildings.

Square Square+

Each public space here has its own role and characteristics and is well connected with each other. This creates a good mutualistic symbioses that could attract a broad range of demographics and encourage a variety of activities from young people shopping, workers eating their lunch, and mothers strolling with their babies. Therefore, the design of the square itself is its asset.

Overview Assessment People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

WR 2

0

100

250

500

Business Perception and Characteristics Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Excellent Good Average Bad

WR 4

Lesson Learnt WR 1

WR 1

WR 2 WR 4

This square has a good sense of enclosure even though the floor level is not flat. The high buildings, that were constructed in the highest spot of the square, maintain the enclosure balance.

Crowd at beresford square came mainly for the farmerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s market at the rim.

Combining hardscape with softscape can create a sense of relief or a refreshing atmosphere for the visitors to do their activities. Front greeneries also help to reduce the noise from the street.

WR 3

Even though the ends of the square are visible, bended paths can create different vistas with every step (intricacy), and when people see a conveniently located screen, they will be compelled to stay longer at the square.

WR 5

From the map, it can be seen that there is a high WR 6 accessibility between the open spaces, and this emphasises the role of each space as an epicenter to attract crowd.

Design & Landscape Programming Urban Form

WR 5

Appendix

Case Studies

THE MOUNT SQUARE (THE MAIN PROJECT) Acton Central, Ealing Project Info

Location

2900 M2

Location Complete Architect Value

: : : :

AC 1

345 M

High Street, Ealing, W3 January 2007 East ÂŁ1.2m

This square is located beside a busy high street, which might have made the square alive as well; however, the square is neither alive nor popular among the residents. Visually, the square looks dull, and too easy to understand, with no centre points of interest. St Maryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Church is the only strong element at the square.

Square

It has been over nine years since the square was last reconfigured, and it might be worth investigating why the square in this busy area is still not popular.

Performance Assessment People and Footfall

Footfall Geographical Catchment Accessibility Parking

Vitality of Place Retail Offer Commercial Offer Culture & Leisure Offer Events Safety (Reported) Markets Assets

AC 2

0

100

250

500

Business Perception and Characteristics Business Confidence Active Frontage Charity Shops Evening/Night Economy Attractiveness Visitor Satisfaction (S) Visitor Satisfaction (E) Crime & Safety Perception

Excellent Good Average Bad

Innitial Survey AC 1

AC 2

AC 3

AC 3

At first glance, the square seems too exposed with no protection for the visitors from noise, wind, and pollution The uniquely shaped furnitures also made people uncomfortable. the square is weak in terms of its positioning: too many gaps between structures and a bland design makes the square unappealing.

Single use from Morrissons causes people to go to

AC 3

the square only to shop there or pass through to their houses in the east.

Because the square does not have its own appeal, markets are hosted there over the course of four days to help draw in visitors. But the market makes the square atmosphere even worse because it becomes a parking lot for the market tenants.

AC 4 AC 5

Design & Landscape

Programming Urban Form

AC 4

AC 5

81

Appendix

82

Residents Quote on the Square

The residents perception, quote and comments here is gathered from personal interview, locals forum and Make Acton Online Consulation by Ealing Council (2016).

Residents like about Acton

Residents Quotes on the Square

The answers to a survey done on what residents like from Acton greatly vary, and there isn’t a clear consensus on what residents favor the most.

Some residents (28%) like the independent shops on Churchfield Rd, others (20%) like the social diversity in Acton, few (17%) like the feel of the village and its buildings, and very few people (15%) like the transport link and Acton Park.

“It has to be the coldest, most lifeless design for a town square ever built. Made me so angry when I was setting up the market to know how much money was spent on it and how the architects arrogantly celebrated their design regardless of the fact that it’s not fit for purpose.” - Alex Watson

Building 12%

Independent Shops 28%

Transport Link 15% Independent Shops Social Diversity Village Feel Great Building Green Space Transport Link

Green Space 15% Village Feel 5%

Social Diversity 20%

“The mount for me is merely a place to walk through, the hard surfaces and the limited amount of greenery make it a functional thoroughfare ... I do not find it a pleasant place to stroll. It is a very exposed space, open on many sides and there are no intimate quiet spaces. If I happen to have arranged to meet someone I feel very exposed. There is no vegetation to hide the the traffic or shield people from the noise of traffic. The hard surfaces of the architecture are uninviting and harsh ... The surrounding buildings are uninspiring apart from St Mary’s Church, The other sides are pretty grim.

In my opinion it needs the harsh Granite to be stripped out and replaced with rows of trees all sides excepts the church side, meandering gravel paths, a fountain and some park benches. It could be a nice place for people who work nearby to sit and have their lunch or bring a coffee and do some people watching.”

- Kim Rugg “For me the square is a wasted opportunity. It could be so much more attractive and purposeful. It seems like a space that isn’t well thought about. Apparently Morrisons owns the space infront of the supermarket but has no plans to develop it or think creatively about the space ... It should be a place the community can enjoy and feel proud of. There is a long way to go. But I’m not sure the businesses or council care that much. A few trees to do not a community square make!”

- Mark Bird “I don’t go to the square very often. I live on Churchfield Road (parallel to the high street) and mostly use the shops on this road. I go to the square on voting day, when I go to the post office and when I need to walk beyond that point (i.e. to Ealing or to the restaurants North China or Ping Pong Thai) ... if I’m passing through the square I may see if the Greek stall is there and have some delicious homemade cake. [But], most of the other stalls sell rubbish so I wouldn’t plan to go to the market. It’s probably in keeping with what the locals buy, whereas we have a food market at Derwentwater School where they sell better quality bits. I do plan to go to this one, it’s on every Saturday.” - Lucy Smith “The Mount is our Town Square. It’s a bland, grey and dirty. The market is unappealing both visually and in terms of the products on offer. For a lot of people it’s used as a cut through not as a centre piece for the community. Improve The Mount - trees, planting, suitable seating ... cafe, new market stalls, better range of stalls, help stall holders with displays, improve lighting, add statue or artistic point of interest.” - Ann Brennan

“I think the mount is a wasted opportunity. It’s quite central to the small high street that Acton has got however it’s not really maintained and doesn’t really attract locals. As the previous response says, it attracts only drunks and homeless people. It’s quite unpleasant and sometimes outright filthy, especially in the evenings.. However, I do visit Acton market on the mount occasionally just to see what’s on for sale. In the past, I bought a nice quality rug, couple of tees and the recent addition of fish stall is great.. I also like the takeaway options there.

I’d also like council and Morrisons to spend some thoughts (and money) to make it a nicer, safer and kid-friendly place.” - Sandeep Mestry “Improve the public realm....lighting, facades, control of signage and frontages, improved paving and street furniture, better removal of rubbish, control of deliveries...make it look like someone really cares, and the community will respond” - David Tooth “[the square] is a dirty soulless place. Only go there when going to Church on Sunday.” - Baryl Bashford “the Mount... It’s not an attractive place to go ...” Peter Truesdale “the Mount is filthy and the majority of the other traders (not all) seem to be selling cheap rip off tat which I’m surprised hasn’t been confiscated.” - Anne Brown Some of the other residents quotes are (name prefer to be undisclosed): “Plant more trees to soften the urban atmosphere and make it seem like a nice place to linger. Especially where the market is.”

“Compared to other towns, Acton has very few open spaces, not built up with small sub-standard accommodation. Converting Morrison’s car park into an open space, would benefit everyone. They can build up the car park underground. Or, perhaps, with Waitrose, we will not need Morrison’s at all!”

“1. More high quality cafes and restaurants 2. Better landscaping and presentation of the Town Centre - on Churchfield Road, The Market, Crown Street and the High Street.

3. A high quality, well-managed market.”

83

84

Bibliography

Ackroyd, P. (2001) London: The Biography. New York, Doubleday.

Arbour, T. (2007) Foreword. In: London Assembly, Semi-Detached: Reconnecting London’s Suburbs, 1st ed. London, Greater London Authority, p.5. Available from: http://www.rudi.net/files/paper/optional_file/semi-detached.pdf [Accessed 25 Jul. 2016].

ATCM (2013) Successful Town Centres – Developing Effective Strategies. Available from: http://thegreatbritishhighstreet.co.uk/pdf/ Successful-Town-Centres.pdf?2 [Accessed 20 Jul. 2016] CABE (2004) Manifesto for Better Public Spaces. Available from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/ www.cabe.org.uk/files/manifesto-for-better-public-spaces.pdf [Accessed 20 Aug. 2016].

Childs, M. (2004) Squares: A Public Place Design Guide for Urbanist. Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press.

Crawford, J. (2009) Carfree Design Manual. Utrecht, International Books.

Ealing Council (2016) Make Acton Online Consultation. Available from: https://acton.stickyworld.com/room/presentation?roomid=2#page/about [Accessed 15 Jul. 2016] Ellin, N. (2012). Restorative Urbanism: From Sustainability to Prosperity. In: T. Haas, ed., Sustainable Urbanism and Beyond: Rethinking Cities for the Future, 1st ed. New York, Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., pp.276-281.

Gaventa, S. (2006) New Public Spaces. London, Mitchell Beazley.

Gehl, J. (2011) Life between Buildings. Washington D.C., Island Press.

Gensler (2011) Open Space: An Asset Without a Champion?. Available from: http://www.gensler.com/uploads/documents/Open_ Space_03_08_2011.pdf [Accessed 10 Jul. 2016].

Halim, A. (2016) Acton Town Square Research [forum discussion]. Available from: http://www.actonw3.com/default.asp?section=community&link=http://appasp.actonw3.com/server/app/forum/ShowMessage.asp?ID=1146362&site=4 [Accessed 21 Jul. 2016] Jacobs, J. (1992) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York, Vintages Books.

Kirkman, R., Noonan, D. S., & Dunn, S. K. (2012) Urban transformation and individual responsibility: The Atlanta BeltLine. Planning Theory, 11(4), 418–434.

Knights, D. & Knights, A. (2012) Acton through time. Stroud, Amberley.

Lennard, S. H. C. (2015) Principles for Designing Successful Neighborhood Squares. Available from: http://www.livablecities.org/blog/ principles-designing-successful-neighborhood-squares [Accessed 1 Jul. 2016] London Assembly (2007) Semi-Detached: Reconnecting London’s Suburbs, 1st ed. London, Greater London Authority. Available from: http://www.rudi.net/files/paper/optional_file/semi-detached.pdf [Accessed 25 Jul. 2016].

Lynch, K. (1981) A theory of good city form. Cambridge, MIT Press.

Mayor of London (2016) The London Plan. London, Greater London Authority. Available from: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/the_london_plan_malp_final_for_web_0606_0.pdf [Accessed 1 Aug. 2016].

MDAG (2016) Public London: Creating the best public realm. London, Mayor of London. Available from: http://www.newlondonarchitecture.org/docs/public_london_interactive.pdf [Accessed 15 Aug. 2016] Moughtin, C. (2003) Urban Design: Street and Square. 3rd ed. Oxford, Architectural Press.

NLA (2015) Public London: Ten Years of Transforming Spaces. London, New London Architecture.

Rasmussen, S. (1967) London, the Unique City. Cambridge, M.I.T. Press.

Sorrell, J. (2006). Foreword. In: S. Gaventa, New Public Spaces. London: Mitchell Beazley.

Whyte, W. H. (1980) The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Washington D.C., Conservation Foundation.

Images References

Figure 2.2.1. Economic catalyst Kingston council (2014) https://www.flickr.com/photos/kingston-govuk/12991136264/in/album-72157636433423664/

6

Figure 2.2.2. Valuable commodity for community 6 Fortbendstar (2011) http://www.fortbendstar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/ Redhot.jpg

London gov (2016) https://www.flickr.com/photos/greaterlondonauthority/26648041796/ London gov (2014) https://www.flickr.com/photos/greaterlondonauthority/12207153794/

Figure 2.2.3. Improve productivity 6 Moeys Photography Flickr (2012) https://www.flickr.com/photos/therealmoeysphotography/6819719654/

Figure 5.4 Urban Form Toolkit 27 wendy dobing (2014) https://www.flickr.com/photos/dobingdesign/13287191043/ in/pool-gallery-kingston-gov-uk/

Figure 2.2.4. Contact epicenter 7 Hornsey town hall appreciation society (2015) https://www.facebook.com/photo. php?fbid=193780894287427&set=g.664411550355887&type=1&theater

Joe Skade(2014) https://www.flickr.com/photos/50481212@N02/14450894513/in/pool-londoners_street/

Figure 2.2.5. More outdoor activities 7 London gov (2016) https://www.flickr.com/photos/greaterlondonauthority/26068552154/

APPENDICES 63

Figure 2.2.6. Social magnet 7 Hornsey town hall appreciation society (2015) https://www.facebook.com/photo. php?fbid=186342251697958&set=g.664411550355887&type=1&theater Figure 5.2 Spatial Design Toolkit Andrew parsons (2012) https://www.flickr.com/photos/36014070@ N04/6849008551/

25

London gov (2010) https://www.flickr.com/photos/greaterlondonauthority/6794668236/in/photolist-6ft3Aj-9wdkg2-a7fbug-9vyoyR-nNHvGY-5NgRqH6zPumV-dz1AQJ-o6cNNg-9w2Zzh-mF5Yri-9y4FKt-9zXxaA-dWRWCA-6ZpZzU9wdcRx-9w2UR9-cswsUA-nNHuPq-9wgu5q-77c9yw-azKGmh-bmqs9m-mycqXrkkZ52n-21MDhb-9yfDYd-dWRWps-a7hFKs-dWRWnq-dyAEA7-9wgfQY-dRvAiadWLhnR-9wgoCy-9w2KZj-7W8wEt-9wgn3L-bo5qK-a4kRD2-9y7DEw-9wdkxc9wgd6S-6jiG78-74gFjV-fqvDiv-qsD8N4-bBkQT8-9C7DHx-omjPGB Figure 5.3 Programming Toolkit 26 vertical response (2014) http://blog.verticalresponse.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/storefront_marketing.jpg London Gov (2014) https://www.flickr.com/photos/greaterlondonauthority/19322266404/in/photostream/

Intricacy alex ulam (2014) http://archpaper.com/2014/09/stemming-the-tide/ penda architect (nd) https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/347621664971013196/ Centering Our French inspired home (nd) https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/96405248252467184/ Pbase (2011) http://www.pbase.com/belvedere/image/133987951 platformaarquitectura (nd) https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/315181673896167662/ atlasmountain (nd) http://atlasmountain.tumblr.com/post/31391952441 Enclosure Ronstan (1999) http://www.ronstantensilearch.com/southbank-arbour-greening-system/#prettyPhoto dezeen (2014) http://www.dezeen.com/2014/06/19/house-for-trees-vietnam-votrong-nghia-architects/

Protected Comas-Pont Arquitectes (2015) http://www.shapedscape.com/projects/ square-historical-center-ripoll-designed-comas-pont-arquitectes-spain Rachel Juarez-Carr (2012) https://blog.mrandmrssmith.com/2012/01/inside-copenhagen-shopping-design-hotels-denmark/ Torben Petersen, SLA (2015) http://www.landezine.com/index.php/2015/04/nature-park-corporate-garden-sla-landscape-architecture/novo_nordisk_nature_parksla_architects-02/ Eureka Evening standard http://static.standard.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2014/04/24/15/7%20dials.jpg London gov (2013) https://www.flickr.com/photos/greaterlondonauthority/12291550056/ http://landscapefocused.tumblr.com/post/74026477186/garden-beauty-from-jenny-and-jesper-liske-more-on London gov (2013) https://www.flickr.com/photos/greaterlondonauthority/12291550056/

85