ANDREW WARDROPE History and Theory of Architecture and Urban Design A Critique Of Tudor Square In Relation To The Theories Of Jan Gehl
Contents
Site & Historical Context
3
The Human Scale
5
Places For Staying
9
The Outdoor Stage
13
Conclusion
15
References & Bibliography
17
2
Diagram A: View of Tudor Square looking South towards Winter Gardens.
The Crucible
Town Hall & Winter Gardens
Tudor Square
Park Hill
‘Gold Route’ Diagram B: Location of Tudor Square in relation to city centre.
Sheffield Train Station
3
Site & Historical Context Introduction:
Regeneration:
I have chosen to evaluate the success of Tudor Square, Sheffield, in relation to the theoretical approach of Jan Gehl. In accordance with his own methodical approach, I have primarily drawn my observations from the behaviour of people.
The redevelopment of the square in 2010 was the last stage of the ‘Heart of the City’ project that started in 1994.2 This phase of the project was focused on improving the public realm, to encourage the art facilities to spill out onto the street and facilitate the yearly events that the city hosts.
Although only recently converted from a city car park into a public space, Tudor Square has become the cultural heart of Sheffield. It sits centrally along the ‘Gold Route’, a key axis highlighted by Sheffield City Council, connecting the Train Station to the University of Sheffield (See diagram B). In addition to this, the square is within 100m of the Town Hall and is fronted on all 4 sides with prominent cultural buildings. Undervalued Central Space: Because of its strategic location it was designated as a public square in 1990 in preparation for the 1991 World Student Games.1 This initial public space was rather hastily assembled and primarily consisted of a raised oval shaped lawn floating in an empty square. The scheme was unsuccessful in its attempt to become the point of engagement between the arts and the citizens of Sheffield.
1
Sheffield City Council 2009, p.11
The current layout of the square is an expanse of hard granite paving upon which large Yorkstone ‘pebbles’ sit on the landscape along two rows, creating massive planters that also serve as stopping places. The arrangement gives the space a loose, yet defined, linear axis. At the northern end sits the Crucible Theatre, famous for hosting the World Snooker Championship every year since 1977. From the south end, people enter the square through the Sheffield Winter Gardens, one of the largest urban glasshouses in Europe. On the eastern edge of the square there are 2 more theatres - the Lyceum and the Library Theatre. Along with a few other smaller establishments, this makes the square the largest concentration of theatres in the UK outside of London. These rich cultural centres are supported by the western edge, which has an array of coffee shops, bars and restaurants. 2
Sheffield City Council 2009, p.2
4
Diagram C: Building scale fits within 5 storey height.
Diagram D: Larger buildings set back from the square.
Diagram E: Sketch from Gehl’s book showing relationship between floor heights and the street.
5
The Human Scale Measuring 40m x 80m, Tudor Square fits the ‘magical number’ that Gehl quotes as the average scale of successful public squares in old cities1 (See diagram F below). The popularity of this scale is explained by Gehl as the correlation between their dimensions with human interaction thresholds. In contrast, modern urban design is often based on the car and its amplified scale looses the full sensory engagement of humans.2
40
m
80 m
Crucible
Winter Gardens
Diagram F: Dimensions of Tudor Square in plan. 1 2
Gehl 2010, p.163 Gehl 2010, p.43,44
Like many of the successful public spaces identified by Gehl in medieval cities, Tudor Square naturally attracts attention due to, in part, its comfortable scale that relates well to human sensory perceptions. According to Gehl, appropriate dimensions are a fundamental ingredient that allows a square to become successful.3 The surrounding buildings also fit within the human scale, standing below a 5-storey limit4 (See diagrams C & E). This height allows for all floors of the buildings to relate to the square, giving a sense that these rooms ‘belong’ to the street below rather than the sky above. However, although the massing is appropriate, the lack of subdivision of some of the façades leads to them being perceived as oversized. The scale not only relates to human dimensions at the macro level but also at the micro level. The detail and materiality of the square is carefully considered to provide a rich sensory experience. The carved stone planters and hollows in the brass pebbles snugly accommodate the human frame for brief pauses (See diagrams G & H overleaf). These bespoke markings on the landscape indicate that the space belongs to humans, not vehicles. 3 4
Gehl 2010, p.162 Gehl 2011, p.98
6
Diagram G: Machine crafted stone pebbles have grooves hollowed out to form leaning and sitting areas.
Diagram H: Brass pebbles also have polished hollows that invite a moment to sit.
Diagram I: Various signs and street furniture considerably restrict the use of the vehicles on the site.
Diagram J: Delivery vehicle moved slowly and carefully through the pedestrianised zone.
The Human Scale They also provide details to appreciate close up. Whilst sitting on the pebbles there is a rich interaction with the materiality of the benches, the colourful planting, the detailed faรงades and people nearby. However, there is also the opportunity to keep an eye on the activity on the other side of the square. This duality of both overview and detail provides a rich sensory experience that Gehl identifies as key to successful public spaces because humans enjoy a range of sensory perceptions.1 The human-centric quality of the space is further emphasised by the materiality of the groundcover, granite paving that is texturally subdivided according to the landscaping zone, yet de-marks the whole space as primarily pedestrian. Vehicles are not allowed on the square between 10am and midnight except for delivery vehicles (See diagram I). Whilst observing some of these deliveries (as shown in diagram J) there was a clear sense of the vehicle interrupting a pedestrian zone and was therefore slow and careful through the space. This is advocated by Gehl as a way to maintain the functionality of urban spaces (i.e. deliveries, emergency access, etc.), whilst returning the perceived ownership of the city to the pedestrian, not the vehicle.2 1 2
Gehl 2010, p.44 Gehl, Svarre 2013, p.12
7
8
Diagram K: People inhabiting the protected space between buildings on the right and the pebbles of the left
Diagram L: Teenagers using the grassed area as a sunbathing platform whilst others sit for a coffee or to read.
Diagram M: The square acts as both a space to walk through and a place to stay.
9
Places For Staying In Chapter 4 of Life Between Buildings, Gehl discusses Spaces for Walking and Places for Staying. Of particular interest is the ‘edge effect’, identified by Derk de Jonge, suggesting that people naturally gravitate towards the protected edges of squares.1 To take advantage of this psychological predisposition, designers must pay close attention to the design of the edge (i.e. how the buildings interacts with the square). Irregular varied façades, defensible subdivided zoning and active frontages all come into play to create successful edges. Tudor Square correlates in part with Gehl’s criteria of successful edges. The key intervention that works well is the introduction of the planting ‘pebbles’ that fulfil various roles. Firstly they create an axis for the main walking promenade from the Winter Gardens down to the Crucible (See diagram N). These two rows, which are offset a few metres from the buildings, also diffuse the edges on the eastern and western sides, creating a gentle transition from public to private. People naturally gather between the buildings and the pebbles, either pausing on the rocks or in the ‘defensible space’ that the café/bar terraces have taken advantage of (See diagram K). Here people have an overview over the square yet have a more contained space to stop.
1
Gehl 2011, p.149
Diagram N: Planning drawing showing irregular rows of pebbles with inhabited spaces in between.
People have taken ownership over the ambiguous nature of these pebbles. Kids scrambled over them playing games, teenagers took over a whole pebble as their sunbathing platform and office workers leaned on them to pause for a phone call (See diagram L). The wide variety of use shows that the pebbles are successful in inviting people to gather, for short or long stays, thus enriching the edge condition of the square. Curiously, even during quiet periods when few people passed through the square, people still paused along these edges. It seemed that in the empty square the large masses created a sense of
10
Diagram O: Girl stopping to do some homework in the Sun whilst the square was quiet.
Diagram P: Man who stayed for around half an hour reading a book on is own.
Diagram Q: Some of the ground floor areas are solid and vacant of any interaction.
Diagram R: Theatre door around the side leaves large portions of the facade impenetrable and hostile
Places For Staying presence that compensated for the emptiness. This fits with Gehl’s explanation that people seek out objects to be next to so that they don’t feel alone.1 The massive organic pebbles create a sense of presence, familiarity and protection that simple benches wouldn’t provide (See diagrams O & P). Although the buffer zone between buildings and landscape works well, the façades themselves are not as successful. The café, bars and hotel on the western edge interact with the square and show a certain degree of use throughout the day. Unfortunately, the northern and eastern edges are less successful. Because they consist of theatres with sporadic high usage, mainly in the evenings, there are large portions of time of vacant closure (See diagrams Q & R). As previously mentioned, the theatre programme of the square means various façades are not subdivided with individual units, but rather consist of one large main entrance and then extensive, often blank, façades. This non-permeability, combined with the sporadic use just described, leads to a poor building edge condition.
1
Gehl 2010, p.137-139
11
“A good city is like a good party. Guests stay 12 because they are enjoying themselves.� 1 - Jan Gehl 1
Gehl 2010, p,142
Diagram S: Crows sitting/standing/leaning whilst watching the snooker on large screens set up in the square.
Diagram T: Group of school children using one of the pebbles for an informal outdoor class.
Diagram U: Mountain biking trials are held in the square each year.
Diagram V: At night light and mist fountains in the floor change the character of the space.
13
The Outdoor Stage Because the square houses such a high concentration of theatres, it seems appropriate that the public space itself has been designed to be an ‘outdoor stage’, letting the activity spill out into the public realm. In the original design documentation the square was commissioned to be a “quality public space hosting activity as diverse as the World Snooker Championships, dance and theatrical events, small music festivals… markets and film and literary festivals”. 1 Due to its easy access, flexible open space, safe pedestrianised zones and interactive ‘edges’, the design has lived up to its expectations and is used throughout the year for a wide variety of activities (See diagrams S & U). In combination with the Winter Gardens it also hosts the broadcasting of Snooker commentary every year. This ‘staging’ of activities is key to its success as it draws passers-by to engage with the square. Gehl notes that because people are immensely curious about observing others they will stop to watch an event, which in turn can be a catalyst for further interactions. 2 This effect can become cumulative as ‘people come where people are’3. However, activities do not need to be on such a large ‘event’ 1 2 3
Sheffield City Council 2008, p.6 Gehl 2011, p.169 Gehl 2010, p.65
scale as the previous examples. Spontaneous daily activities can combine in a single space to form Gehl’s ‘living room effect’4, where multiple activities occur individually yet are integrated into the whole. This was particularly noticeable during lunchtime when a range of activities were observed at the same time, such as: workers eating a quick lunch, school groups sitting together, students working on a café terrace and people stopping for a phone call (See diagram T). Whilst the staging of large events ensures quantity of people who gather, the rich mix of daily activities ensures the quality and sustainability throughout the day. Periods of rich interplay can be sporadic however. The square is very active at lunchtime and weekends when there are people enjoying the bars, cafés and daytime shows. It’s equally successful during the evening, when the atmosphere is transformed with lights and mist machines ensuring activity before and after the shows (See diagram V). Gehl commends design that adjusts the quality of the space to encourage continued use into the night time.5 Unfortunately, during the early morning and late afternoon Tudor Square can become very quiet. This is partly due to a narrow range of uses (theatre and café/bars) that lacks any shops, offices or residences. 4 5
Gehl 2011, p.107 Gehl 2010, p.180,181
Conclusion As mentioned previously, my primary method of analysing the space was through observing how people interacted with the square over the course of a 4/5 hour period. This ‘user focused’ approach allowed me to test Gehl’s ethos and ensured a grounding in reality rather than just theoretical conjecture. I found this to be a satisfying approach as it fits my own values when it comes to judging the success of a space. However, as with any testing of a sample, the validity of the observations are only as trustworthy as the quantity and quality of the sample. I was observing for a brief period, on a specific day, at a certain time of the year. Added to this, and unknown to me at the time, the Queen was visiting the adjacent Town Hall during the same period that I was making my observations. This meant there were large crowds who had gathered to see her brief appearance and then scattered into the surrounding areas. This anomaly, plus the short time period, means that my conclusions of the success of the square may not be representative of its use throughout the year. Of course, Gehl Architects work as consultants on large scale projects for major cities and therefore have the facilities to carry out extensive reliable data recording and analysis. However, when applying the same approach on a smaller scale its reliability must be considered.
15
Having lived in Sheffield for 6 years I am aware of the success of the square all year round and during winter months it is certainly much quieter, with people retreating into the protected glass Winter Gardens. A common criticism of Gehl’s endorsing of outdoor social space is that, unlike many of the Mediterranean plazas that he refers to, northern European cities haven’t got a suitable winter climate for continued outdoor use. This is where I believe the recent inner city development is most successful, creating both quality indoor and outdoor public spaces that ensure yearly use. People can enjoy the Winter Gardens when it’s more temperate, or the ‘life between the buildings’ in Tudor Square during the warmer months.
16
17
References: Gehl, J. 2011. Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. Washington DC, Island Press. Gehl, J. 2010. Cities For People. Washington DC, Island Press. Gehl, J. and Svarre, B. 2013. How To Study Public Life. Washington DC, Island Press. Sheffield City Council, 2008. Tudor Square Design and Access Statement. Online publication, retrieved from: http://publicaccess.sheffield.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetailsdo?activeTab=documents&keyVal =K587MXNY08Q00 (Accessed 05/04/15)
Bibliography: Harman, R and Minnis, J. 2004. Pevsner Architectural Guides: Sheffield. London, Yale University Press Sheffield City Council, 2009. The Gold Route. Online publication, retrieved from: https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/ planning-and-city-development/regeneration (Accessed 05/04/15) Sheffield City Council, 2004. Sheffield Urban Design Compendium. Online publication, retrieved from: http://sccplugins. sheffield.gov.uk/urban_design/ (Accessed 05/04/15) Sheffield One, 2007. Sheffield One Evaluation: Final Report. Online publication, retrieved from: http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/ EIUA/EIUA_Docs/Sheffield_One_Final_Report.pdf (Accessed 05/04/15)
18
19
Diagram References: Front cover image: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Inside cover image: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram A: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram B: Bing Maps. Sheffield City Centre. Available from http://binged.it/1bG5wBS (accessed 15/03/15) Note: text and diagrams overlaid by author. Diagram C: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram D: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram E: Gehl, J. 2010. High rise and social interactions. Available from Gehl, 2010. p.42 Diagram F: Diagram by author Diagram G: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram H: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram I: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram J: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram K: Photo by author taken on 25/04/15 Diagram L: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram M: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram N: Sheffield City Council. 2008. Proposed Plans. Available from http://publicaccess.sheffield.gov.uk/onlineapplications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=K587MXNY08Q00 (accessed 06/04/15) Diagram O: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram P: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram Q: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram R: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram S: Photo by author taken on 25/04/15 Diagram T: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15 Diagram U: Rambhai, J. 2014. Bike Trial. Available from http://www.jusnews.net/en/36/sport/1326/Sheffield-hostsBike-Trial-for-first-time.htm (accessed 27/04/15) Diagram V: Lux Magazine. 2014. Tudor Square. Available from http://archive.luxmagazine.co.uk/2011/11/luxawardswinners-2011/ (accessed 27/04/15) Conclusion cover image: Photo by author taken on 02/04/15