DEFACTO
Chancery Lane. De facto.
Aditya Vinod, Besnik Murati, Yiqin Kong and Vendela Gambill
Objective
To analyse the Area Enhancement Strategy proposed for Chancery Lane Area through the evidence based design of Space Syntax methodology in three scales: Macro
Investigate Chancery Lane Area with surrounding areas
Meso
Investigate Chancery Lane Area within its network
Micro
Investigate specific nodes
Location Location
Greater London
City of London
Chancery Lane Area
Contents Location Introduction Methodology - tools and techniques
Limitations Macro - analysis and findings
Meso - analysis and findings
Micro - analysis and findings
Strategic Interventions
Introduction Location 1880
Now
Introduction Background Introduction Background Character of the Area
-
The City of London’s Chancery Lane Strategic Development Plan was developed for the Chancery Lane Association in July 2007
Problems
Imposing structure to the street with larger landmark buildings.
-
Finer grain buildings have been replaced by larger office blocks.
-
Wealth of architectural heritage.
-
Linear nature of the street offers long, narrow view punctuated with 4-6 floor high buildings.
- Pedestrian access and ease of street pattern tends to be poor.
Our Project
- Lighting and lack of active building frontages makes street feel less secure - Narrow pathways and many time-limited barriers.
- Heavy traffic along peripheries.
Research Theme
“City needs Chancery Lane to be ok. Chancery Lane doesn’t necessarily need the city to be ok.” – Good friend
Methodology Location
Location Limitations of the Research
Limitations on qualitative data: •
user surveys
•
land ownership
Limitations on quantitative data: •
observations restricted to certain days
•
building layout plans
Strategic Interventions
Macro
Macro Location
How has the urban morphology evolved over time in Chancery
Lane Area?
Learning from the Past
Macro
“Morphological arrangements contain social information� Hillier, B. et.al. 1976
1676
After The Great Fire of London
1870
Before Industrial Revolution
1910
Before WWI
1920
After WWI
Contemporary
1950
1990
After WWII
Post Modernist Period
Current
1.1 Historic Urban Morphology 1676
1870
v
Segment Integration R800m
Segment Integration R800m
Macro
1.1 Historic Urban Morphology Current
Segment Integration R800m
Macro
Macro
Network Integration of Chancery Lane Module decreased throughout history.
1.2 ‘Open spaces’ to Building Footprint Ratio 1676
1870
1910
1920
1950
1990
Macro
2017
Area (m2)
7000
6000 1676
1870
1910
1920
1950
1990
2017
1.2 ‘Open spaces’ to Building Footprint Ratio
Macro
Thousands
The historic evolution of Open spaces, footprint and green areas 100
90
80
70
Area (m²)
60
50
40
30
Open Space 20
Footprint 10
Green Area 0
1676
1870
1910
1920
1950
1990
2017
Macro
Plots and local streets emerged into buildings sites. Small scale disappeared. “Elements and modules on different scales do not depend on each other in a symmetric manner: a higher scale requires all lower scales, but not vice versa” Salingaros, Nikos (Principles of Urban Form)
Structural pattern of open spaces shifted. ‘Structures are formed by deeply constructed ‘relations’ and ‘patterns’ rather than those that can be found on the surface level of visual relations Karimi, Kayvan (A reflection on “Order and Structure in Urban Design”)
1.3 Accessibility to Main Streets
Macro
Plot, Streets and Cul-de-sacs 1676
1870
1910
2017
1.3 Accessibility to Main Streets
Macro Plots
Cul-De-Sacs 16
160
14
140
12
120 Chancery Lane
10
Chancery Lane
100
Fetter Lane
Fetter Lane
80
8
Fleet Str.
6
High Holborn
Fleet Str.
60
High Holborn
40
4
20 2 0 0
UNITS 35
Streets
30
25 Chancery Lane
20
Fetter Lane
15
Fleet Str. High Holborn
10
5 TIME
0
Macro
Functional and physical diversity on the boundary roads, decreased. ‘Diversity in urban uses can become a problem only when elements have a disproportionate size’ (Jacobs, ”Life and Death of Great American Cities”)
Permeability – physical and visual integration decreased. Open spaces transformed into private courtyards.
1.4 Plot analysis
Plot Units vs Plot Size
Units/Size [m2]
Macro
1000 866
900
814 800 809
783
700
714
600 593 500
448
400 300
247
327
200 169
180
1676
1870
100
181
187
205
1950
1990
2017
0 1910
1920
Plots Size
Plot Units
Plot changes of urban units
250 Units
200
150
100
50
0 U_01
U_02 1676
U_03 1870
U_04
U_05 1910
U_06 1920
U_07 1950
U_08
U_09
1990
U_10 2017
U_11
Macro
Plot size changed
Street-fronts became homogenous Similar elements do not couple. A critical diversity of different elements is needed because some will catalyze couplings between others. (Salingaros, N. “Principles of Urban Form�)
Street character altered upon changes to the market economy
1.5 Key Findings
Macro
1.5 Key Findings Geometrical coupling on all scales decreased The network of open spaces were compromised
Macro
Meso
Meso
Location Gardens
Sitting Areas Courtyards
Passageways
Meso Location How does the network of open spaces perform to enhance the site as a cultural destination for public use?
2.1 Public Accessibility
Meso
Current No public access
Time limited access (No access on weekends or after 7 pm on weekdays)
2.2 Segment Analysis
Meso
Current Always-closed gates
Working hours on weekdays
Segment Choice R800m
Time-limited-open gates
Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays
Segment Choice R800m
2.2 Segment Analysis
Meso
Current Always-closed gates
Working hours on weekdays
Segment Choice R800m
Time-limited-open gates
Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays
Segment Choice R800m
2.2 Segment Analysis
Meso
Current Always-closed gates
Working hours on weekdays
Segment Choice R400m
Time-limited-open gates
Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays
Segment Choice R400m
2.2 Segment Analysis
Meso
Current Always-closed gates
Working hours on weekdays
Segment Choice R400m
Time-limited-open gates
Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays
Segment Choice R400m
Meso
Limited public access has more negative impact on Weekends.
2.3 Cultural Heritage – Open Spaces
Meso
Current Chancery Lane area has a long history from 12th century and it was not touched by the Great Fire of London, so it has rich cultural heritage. Most of the heritage have close relationship with open spaces.
2.3 Cultural Heritage – Open Spaces Current Cultural heritage is lost within a segregated network of open spaces so it is difficult for the public to enjoy the historic cultural of the area. Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays
Segment Choice R800m
Meso
2.4 Land Use– Open Spaces
Meso
Current Land use around open spaces: most are offices, some are education, only few are retail/catering Land use along the streets: diversified, many retail and catering for public use Open spaces
Streets
2.5 Movement Patterns – Open Spaces
Meso
Current Many people move on High Holborn and Fleet Street, but much less people move inside the area, especially on weekend. Very few tourists go inside the area to visit the open spaces. Major type: suits
Weekday – Tuesday whole day
Weekend – Saturday whole day
2.6 Visibility Graph Analysis (VGA) Current Most open spaces are hidden in low visibility areas.
Meso
2.6 Visibility Graph Analysis (VGA) Current Only a few open spaces have relative high visibility.
Meso
2.7 Catchment Areas
Meso
Current All open spaces are located in 5 mins walk distance from the tube station or bus stops.
1
2
+
+
3
Tube station and bus stop 1
Catchment analysis R400m
Bus stop 2
Bus stop 3
2.8 Open Space Links
Meso
Future Potential Green dots are connected open spaces, while red dots are isolated based on barriers.
Connecting between open spaces
Key
Connected open spaces Isolated open spaces
Segment Choice R800m
2.8 Open Space Links
Meso
Future Potential Green dots are connected open spaces, while red dots are isolated based on barriers.
Key
Connected open spaces Isolated open spaces
Segment Choice R800m
Connecting between open spaces
Meso
Opening barriers would create improved network between open spaces and prevent them from being isolated.
2.9 Key Findings
Meso
2.9 Key Findings
Meso
Micro
3.1 Node Study
Micro
1
2
While angular segment analysis shows potential for integration in many nodes with Chancery Lane Areas, their visibility limitations were further investigated as node analysis through:
3
4 • Isovists Analysis
5
• Visibility Graph Analysis
6
• Historic Evolution of Nodes 7
8
9
Micro
Micro
How are Maughan’s Library Court, Breams Building Street and Chancery Lane functioning as activity areas?
3.2 Visibility Graph Analysis of Nodes Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric
Does not exist
Does not exist
Micro
3.2 Visibility Graph Analysis of Nodes Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric
Does not exist
Does not exist
Micro
3.2 Potential Areas
Micro Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric
Does not exist
Does not exist
3.2 Potential Areas
Micro Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric
Does not exist
Does not exist
Micro
This investigation suggests: Maughan’s Library Area: Shows visibility have decreased over time New Fetter Lane Piazza: Shows visibility increased over time Breams Building St. and Chancery Lane: Shows visibility decreased over time
3.3 Gate LocationCount Gate Count Weekday
Total number of passerbys for 8hr period
Micro Gate Count Weekend
Micro
Less people visit Maughan’s Library area, Bream’s Building street and Chancery Lane as compared to peripheral high streets - High Holborn and Fleet Street.
1. Maughan’s Library Location
Rolls Building
Micro
3.1.1Location Snapshots
Micro
Weekday
Evening
Afternoon
Morning
Weekday
3.1.1Location Snapshots
Micro
Weekend
Evening
Afternoon
Morning
Weekend
3.1.2 Accessibility
Micro
Maughan’s Library
• Maughan’s Library is enclosed and isolated from its surroundings through multiple barriers in its Maughan’s Library
boundary. • These barriers play a crucial role in the movement of people between New Fetter Lane, Chancery
Lane, Fleet Street.
3.1.3Location Visibility Graph Analysis Maughan’s Library
Rolls Building
Maughan’s Library
Open Space Private Bldg
Service Bldg
Bldg
Maughan’s Library VGA of 2017 map
Micro
3.1.4 Isovist Analysis Maughan’s Library
Micro
3.1.5 Frontages Maughan’s Library Location
Micro
Micro
Maughan’s Library biggest issue is barriers, its historical library and green open space are limited-accessible to the public.
2. Chancery Lane Location
Micro: Observation
3.2.1 Visibility Graph Analysis
Micro
Chancery Lane
VGA
Fewest Axial Lines
3.2.2 Isovist Analysis North to South Visual Integration
Micro East to West Visual Integration
3.2.3 Frontages Chancery Lane Location
Micro
Micro
The segment between Cursitor and Bream’s Building street is the only visual integration point between North and South of Chancery Lane.
3. Piazza Locationon New Fetter Lane
Rolls Building
Micro
3.3.1Location Snapshots
Micro
Evening
Afternoon
Morning
Weekday
3.3.1Location Snapshots
Micro
Evening
Afternoon
Morning
Weekend
3.3.2 Visibility Graph Analysis Piazza on New Fetter Lane
Rolls Building
Maughan’s Library
Micro
3.3.3 Isovist Analysis Piazza on New Fetter Lane
Micro
3.3.4 Frontages Piazza New Fetter Lane
Micro
Micro
Visual integration is high but the piazza is not being used by people.
3.4.1Location Landuse
Micro
Refer Meso Landuse
3.4.2 Spatial Layout of *RRR Chancery Lane
Micro
(*Residential, Restaurant and Retail)
Fetter Lane Junction
Breams Building
Type
Total
Monday to SaturdayFriday Sunday
Type
Total
Monday to SaturdayFriday Sunday
Type
Total
Monday to SaturdayFriday Sunday
Retail
7
7
4
Retail
0
0
0
Retail
0
0
0
Restaurant
10
10
1
Restaurant
4
4
0
Restaurant
0
0
0
Residential
0
NA
NA
Residential
0
NA
NA
Residential
0
NA
NA
Source: Google Maps
3.4.3 RRR Comparison with High Street Fleet Street Retail and Restaurant Opening Location
Source: Jordan et al 2017, “Fleet Street Rediscovered�
Micro
Chancery Lane Retail and Restaurant Opening Times
3.5 Key Findings
Micro
3.5 Key Findings
Micro
Proposed Design Strategies
4.2 Findings Summary
Strategic Interventions
Macro Strategies The complex socio-spatial relationship of the Chancery Lane area is deeply hidden within its structural pattern of open spaces.
Meso Strategies The network of open spaces is not connecting well and is segregating the area.
Micro Strategies Open spaces have limited access which is restricting diversity of use.
4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Existing
Strategic Interventions
4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Area Enhancement Strategy
Area Enhancement Strategy City of London
Strategic Interventions
4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Our Proposal Location
Proposed Areas of Intervention Group 05
Strategic Interventions
4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Our Proposal Location
Area Enhancement Strategy City of London Proposed Areas of Intervention Group 05
Strategic Interventions
4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Our Proposal Location
Pedestrianised Areas Shared Spaces Vehicular Access Pedestrian Paths
Strategic Interventions
4.4 Proposed Strategies
Strategic Interventions
1. Wayfinding Strategy
2. Improve Accessibility to Open Spaces
3. Diversify Open Spaces
4.5.1 Wayfinding Strategy
Strategic Interventions
A clear wayfinding strategy that
encourages people to engage and connect with the space.
4.5.1Location Wayfinding Strategy 1. Lighting Lighting would encourage a feeling of safety and belonging in their locations as they are able to identify their location.
2. Signage Signage would reduce errors found in isovist analysis and enable people to direct themselves to open spaces more easily.
Strategic Interventions 3. Paving Changing the paving would encourage navigation ability for pedestrians within this shared space.
4. Digital Digital interactions would allow a more interactive and immersive experience with the space, particularly interesting when combined with cultural highlights.
4.6.1 Improve Accessibility in Open Spaces
Strategic Interventions
Greater accessibility, through longer opening times for the
public, enhances permeability within the open spaces network.
4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Existing
Strategic Interventions
4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Proposed
Strategic Interventions
4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Existing
Strategic Interventions
4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Proposed
Strategic Interventions
4.7.1 Diversify Open Spaces
Strategic Interventions
Create distinct characters for
each open space to encourage wider variety of uses on the
site.
Existing
Proposed
Existing
Proposed
4.7.3 Piazza on New Fetter Lane Existing
Strategic Interventions
4.7.3 Piazza on New Fetter Lane Proposed
Strategic Interventions
4.7.4 Nodes off Chancery Lane
Existing
Strategic Interventions
4.7.4 Nodes off Chancery Lane
Proposed
Strategic Interventions
Strategic Interventions
Existing
Proposed
4.8 Comparison
Strategic Interventions
Current
Weekdays
Segment Choice R800m
Proposal
Weekends After 7 am in weekdays
Location
“Co-present people are not a community but they are part of the raw material for community, which may in due course become activated, and can be activated if it becomes necessary… Even without conversion into interaction, patterns of co-presence are a psychological resource, precisely because co-presence is the primitive form of our awareness of others.”
”Space is fundamentally configurational and parts are put together to form a whole and are more important than any part taken in isolation.” (“Space is the Machine”, B. Hillier, 1996)
Thank you!
References Location Hillier, B. (2002). A theory of the city as object: or, how spatial laws mediate the social construction of urban space. Urban Design International, 7(3-4), pp.153-179. Hillier, B., Leaman, A., Stansall, P. and Bedford, M. (1976). Space syntax. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 3(2), pp.147-185.
Karimi, K. (2012) A reflection on ‘Order and structure in urban design’. Journal of Space Syntax. UCL Press, volume 3 (1). Pp.38-48 Porta, S. and Romice, O. (2010) Plot-Based Urbanism: Toward Time-Consciousness in Place-Making, UDSU - Urban Design Studies Unit, University of Strathclyde. http://www.udsu-strath.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Plot-Based-Urbanism_10_OR-SP-FINAL_low-res.pdf Levy, A. Urban Morphology (1999) 3(2), 79-85. 79. Urban morphology and the problem of the modern urban fabric: some questions for research. CNRS http://urbanform.org/online_unlimited/um199902_79-85.pdf Salingaros, Nikos A. (2006) Principles of urban structure. Techne Press, Amsterdam. Burns + Nice. (2009). Chancery Lane Area Enhancement Strategy. [online] Available at: https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-planning/city-public-realm/Documents/strategies/chancery-laneenhancement-strategy-analysis.pdf [Accessed 4 Oct, 2017]. Boorman, F. (2013) The political space of Chancery Lane, c. 1760-1815. PhD Institute of Historical Research, School of Advanced Study, University of London.