Portfolio 2022 | Anjali Maniar | Urban Design + Planning

MANIAR

This portfolio is a culmination of select urban design and planning projects between the period 2021-2022 at the Bartlett School of Planning, UCL. All graphics and images are produced by the author, unless referenced to source

To view detailed work, please click: Issuu - Anjali Maniar

CONTENTS

01 CONFORMING TO UNPLEASANTNESS: VISIBILITY AND PERCEPTIONS TOWARD HOSTILE URBAN DESIGN

A PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY OF URBAN FURNITURE IN PEDESTRIAN PUBLIC SPACES DISSERTATION IN PLANNING + QUALITATIVE RESEARCH (2022) 03-06

02 A SECOND LIFE?

ESTABLISHING CYCLIC RE-USE OF ORGANIC WASTE IN THE WANDLE VALLEY

URBAN DESIGN + SUSTAINABILITY CONCEPT (2022) 07 -10

03 FROM THE “LONDON ISLAND” TO THE “EAST END GATEWAY”

2050 VISION FOR SOUTH CRESS, NEWHAM

URBAN REGENERATION + MASTERPLAN + PLACEMAKING (2021) 11 -14

04 INTEGRATING ISLINGTON

DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL FOR THE HOLLOWAY PRISON SITE PLANNING PROPOSAL + URBAN DESIGN (2021) 15 -19

05 BEYOND ACADEMIA

URBAN DESIGN RESEARCH SEMINAR +EXHIBITION 2022

DEFENSIVE URBAN DESIGN

PUBLISHING + SOCIAL MEDIA BLOG 20 -21

Location : City of London, London, UK Level : Academic - Individual

Type : Master’s Dissertation, UCL

CONFORMING TO UNPLEASANTNESS: VISIBILITY AND PERCEPTIONS

TOWARD HOSTILE URBAN DESIGN

A phenomenological study of urban furniture in pedestrian public spaces

This dissertation evaluates people’s perceptions towards hostile urban design in pedestrian public spaces through a participatory study involving a convenience sample of 12 individuals living in London, UK. An interpretative phenomenological form of inquiry is utilized to analyze the qualitative data obtained through observations, semi-structured interviews and questionnaires.

It builds on the concept of social engineering applied to the built environment as a form of passive control over activity, attitudes, and behaviour from its users. This control is most prevalent through physical forms, ie urban furniture. The issue of exclusions in the public realm as a result of this control alienates non-target members of the society from accessing public spacesie. Children, young adults, the elderly, people in care, etc.

Figure 1: Flowchart summarizing the link between social engineering and its “exclusionary” role in the built environment.

While design to deter terrorism, crime and amoral public displays are some positive outcomes of restrictive design, it has also contributed to a plethora of unchecked control measures, inconveniencing non-target members of the population. In deterring “unwanted behaviour” these public spaces create hostile environments that excludes individuals not fitting the propagated social orders in these spaces. The more people abide by these directive measures, the greater the danger of them being established as the norm, thereby unwittingly propagating an exclusionary practice further that presently masquerades as features of “safety”, “art”, and “regulation” in the public realm. The objective of this study is to comment on the state of visibility towards “hostility” in urban environments through the examination of urban furniture, capturing the public’s current attitudes towards restriction in the public spaces, and exclusions caused through such design measures.

The methodology consists of a single case study, allowing a phenomenological means of inquiry to a convenience sample of 12 participants to determine their attitudes towards urban furniture. Further, a semi-structured interviews with the participants after the experience revealed their perceptions over control and exclusions in the public domain.

The obtained results show several common narratives concerning preferences, use, and curiosity towards the urban furniture, as well as a mixture of attitudes towards conformity, resistance, and indifference towards the existing social order experienced. A majority of the participants utilized the methodological approach to re-form their perceptions regarding public space, permissible activity, and diversity in the public, reinstating the need for “diverse functionality and useability” in these pedestrian public spaces. Applying the methodological framework confirms the need for individualistic accounts of experiences in urban research to develop participatory models, in turn producing equitable public spaces, inclusive of multiple social orders, running parallelly in our cities.

RESEARCH DESIGN

KEY WORDS: Perceptions, restricted activity, exclusions, hostile urban design, pedestrian spaces.

To obtain comparable data from user experiences, this research utilizes a single-case study to obtain a common ground for the interpretation of the data gathered (Crowe et al., 2011; Hersen, 1990). Using this case study allows the in-depth investigation into personal accounts of the furniture as experienced by the participants in real-time, through the same set of pedestrian spaces.

Owing to the subjective nature of the data gathered, “interpretivism” provides a sound theoretical perspective in understanding the outcomes, while “constructivist” principles are the most suitable epistemological base for discussion. Therefore, an interpretative phenomenological form of inquiry is employed to analyze the empirical data throughout the methodological process.

CASE STUDY: ST. PAUL’S TO THE THAMES PATH

This study selects 5 purpose-built public spaces (or “civic spaces”) in the City of London, an active tourist and corporate location, where a walking route from Z1 to Z5 (see figure below) takes users through different types of pedestrian spaces in a 5minute walk, where they encounter 20 different pieces of urban furniture.

Figure 1.4: Area of Study: Pedestrian Zones from Z1 to Z5 (Source: Author, 2022; Base map: Digimap® retrieved 23.06.22)

Zone 1: Festival Gardens

Zone 5: Paul’s Walk (Thames Path)

Figure 1.5: Area of Study: (top) Pedestrian Zones from Z1 and Z5, (bottom) appropriation of spaces as a form of resistance to spatial restrictions and use.

“...maybe because of the height of the bridge... they do not want people to go close to the bridge and plus I think the bridge moves, the bridge shakes. So if someone goes very close to it, he might hurt himself”

– P06, justifying the presence of spikes

“There’s no other use to it actually ... just aesthetic purposes. That’s it.” – P04, about Metal sphere.

“... it’s like asking how I feel about having a government? I think it’s very important for us to respect everybody’s wishes and to keep it (the space) in maintenance. Because otherwise, if everybody was doing whatever they want to do then it would be a very messy place, and no one would be able to enjoy it.”

– P01, on needing regulations.

“…with skateboarders ..they go in many different directions, and you’re always worried that they’re going to hit you somehow… ..they use different blocks, different furniture, to skateboard, to do tricks, and that sometimes scares you…”

– P09, on avoiding bodily harm .

Summary of Research findings as 7 governing themes answering all 3 research questions - with supporting quotes from participants.

Location : Wandle Valley, London, UK Level : Academic Individual work Type : Sustainability proposal Concept

A SECOND LIFE

Establishing the cyclic re-use of organic waste in the Wandle valley

EXISTING MARSHLAND CONDITIONS

BROWNFIELD LAND

NATURAL SLOPE TO MANAGE FLOOD RISKS

PROPOSED BIO-DOMES

INTENSIVE FARMING GREEN-HOUSE ACCESSIBLE PRODUCTIVE LANDSCAPES

This proposal aims to establish a large-scale organic waste recycling programme in the Wandle Valley to produce energy through bio-gas, and reduce the impact of organic waste decomposition in landfills. Additionally, by developing the land at Beddington farmlands as functional landscapes this concept can further increase food security in the region and involve the community in sustainable waste management.

Fig 3.1: Hand-sketch of concept proposed for project on Beddington Farmlands, at the southernmost part of the Wandle Valley (part of competition entry - NUDC 2022/23)

MARSHES

PROPOSED PRODUCTIVE LANDSCAPES

BEDDINGTON WATER TREATMENT WORKS

EXISTING WALK PATHS ENHANCED PROPOSED WOODED REGION - ORCHARDS

BEDDINGTON PARK

OBJECTIVES

Every year the UK produces 7 million tonnes of household food and drink waste, out of which 20% accounts for food waste from London alone.

As per a 2015 study by the Environmental committee1 only two-thirds of this waste was collected by local authorities (in 2012) with most being categorized under “residual” or “general waste” that ends up in landfills.

• How can we manage waste to sustain this current life of mass consumption?

• What scale of waste management within the urban environment would allow the shift to a moderately conscious and sustainable lifestyle?

BEDDINGTON FARMLANDS

PROPOSAL

Organic waste produces a large amount of methane and carbon-dioxide while decomposing, that globally add an estimated 3.3 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere from landfills alone.

While reducing the amount of organic waste in landfills is a priority, it becomes crucial to harvest waste as a resource, and extend the life of this matter for nutrients and energy to sustain a more conscious lifestyle.

This proposal utilizes presently underused land to produce renewable energy, manage organic waste, enhace biodiversity through intensive ecological regeneration, and delivers community value through making this ecosystem accessible to the public.

BEDDINGTON WATER TREATMENT WORKS

BEDDINGTON PARK ALLOTMENTS

Waste is imminent; optimizing the recycling of these “resources” brings us a step closer to sustaining a more conscious lifestyle.

The recycling of organic matter can be performed at several scales, including composting for bio-gas at the individual level in our homes.

Utilizing waste for retrieving nutrients (from waste food and sewage), as well as producing a clean source of energy (bio-gas), allows the flow of multiple functions through a singular system, thereby maximizing productivity of the proposal, ultimately creating self sustaining local environments.

BEDDINGTON PARK

“WASTE AS A RESOURCE”

BEDDINGTON AGRI - WORKS

ACCESSIBLE ECOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES

Developed predominantly as a high quality ecological reserve, The Beddington Agri-Works also host bio-digesters, productive landscapes (through orchards & foraging

as parks,fiels,and nature trails, and education

NATURAL SLOPED MARSHLANDS

NATURE TRAILS AND FORAGING COMMUNITY SPACES

community

in aquaponics geodesic-domes.

AQUAPONICS GEODESIC-DOMES

BIO-DIGESTERS INTEGRATED WITH NATURAL LANDSCAPES

EXISTING MARSHLANDS ON BEDDINGTON FARMS

Fig 3.4: Vision for “Beddington Agriworks” explored over existing landscape

BIODIGESTERS INTEGRATED INTO INTERACTIVE LANDSCAPES - SPACES FOR PLAY AND LEISURE

PRODUCTIVE LANDSCAPES: FORAGING LAND, NATURE TRAILS, ORCHARDS, AND FIELDS AIDING FOOD SECURITY & BIODIVERSITY

“ FUELLING CONSUMPTION ”

The cyclic transfer of matter from direct human wastes (food, sewage), animal husbandry, and farming, to recycling the waste from water treatment, back to “fuel” our food production and energy requirements helps society stabilize food security and reduces the burden on the planet to discard waste resulting from human consumption.

With the integration of waste management within our cities, it is essential to host spaces for enhacing knowledge and experience associated with a newer way of consumption and re-use. Education and community centres on site aid local bodies with campaigns centred around organic waste recycling, food production, energy, and biodiversity.

MODEL RECYCLING EDUCATION CENTERS GENERATING LOCAL AWARENESS

CRITICAL REFLECTIONS & LIMITATIONS:

• Though the inflow of organic waste may remain largely consistent from households in the region and the Beddington waste water treatment plant, there exist unmeasured capacity of seasonal farm waste. Hence the production of bio-gas may be inconsistent through the year.

• The initial funding for this project may rely on private means for the collection of waste, as the by-products (biogas, compost) are distributed at a fee back for consumption by the local population.

• Additionally, the regulation of flow of material may require additional time and capital, before energy production reaches significant monetary marks.

• Education centres require local aid and policy measures encouraging involvement, to function at maximum capacity.

• The ecological densification of this area may pose challenges that are presently unmeasured in the proposal.

Year : 2021

Location : Cody Dock region, London, UK

Level : Academic Group work (4 members)

Type : Development proposal & Masterplan

FROM THE “LONDON ISLAND” TO THE “EAST END GATEWAY”

2050 Vision for the South Cress site, LB Newham

This urban design framework proposes the “East End Gateway” for the site over the next 30 years. It develops urban design strategies for the built environment, transport and connectivity, and bluegreen infrastructure to produce a well connected locality with a high quality public realm and diverse ecological belt in the lower Lea Valley.

Lying on the Lower Lea Valley, to the South of Stratford and North-West of the Royal Docks, the “London Island” remains in an interlude between a change in time from the industrial to the contemporary age. It is a complex assemblage of riverside route, industrial warehouses and logistics, gasholders, a few residential communities, and the community-led organisation, Cody Dock.

Despite the strategic location of the area today, it indicates urban fragmentations, with disconnected neighbourhoods and underused spaces lacking a clear sense of legibility on its grounds.

EXISTING SITE

Figure 2.1: Existing and proposed masterplan for the South Cress Site

EAST END GATEWAY MASTERPLAN 2050

(i) Figureground + Road network: Existing conditions

Existing built space with large undivided mass, fewer pedestrian and vehicular connections

(ii) Figureground + Road network: Proposed

Proposed built footprint with enhanced connectivity, smaller built mass, and usable open spaces.

EAST END GATEWAY: VISION 2050

Based on a comprehensive evaluation of the site’s contexts, a vision of East End Gateway is proposed for the next 30 years. The locality will transform from the “London Island” into a strategic “Gateway” defined from the perspectives of CONNECTIVITY, TRANSITION and UNIQUENESS.

Building Heights

Cody Dock

Figure-ground: concept and proposal

Most building development in this proposal are at mid-rise, with some high rise buildings along the high street. 2 Warehouses are retained to modify them as workspaces for the creative community.

Building Use

Apart from diversity in built form, the buildings are built alongside the streets in consistent build lines to help define the street and addresses the issues of unplanned building pattern.

BLUE-GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE : PROPOSAL

OBJECTIVES

1. To revive the lost ecology of the Lea river marshes, thereby purifying the Lea waters and enhancing biodiversity in the region.

2. To develop the East End Gateway as a valuable location for preserved river ecological systems growing through time and enhancing user experiences of the spaces over the years.

(A) Lea walk belt

(B) Gasholders woodlands

(C) East end ecological park

(D) Other public parks

3. To provide multifunctional green spaces that serve the community as a space for interaction, play, and healthier lifestyle.

4. Creating a self sustained network of natural systems through BGI as a long-term and low cost solution to enhancing biodiversity and mitigating climate change.

(A) LEA WALK BELT: Restored edge of Lea river complete with separated walk and cycling path, made as a continuous stretch along the length of the site

(B) Gasholders Woodlands: Tree-belt on th edeg of site densified. Pedestrain pathway intertwined with the Lea walk and vehicular crossing across site.

(D) Road at the North-East entry of the site modified from 2 lane to 4 lane with additional bike paths. Dense tree-belt added along railway tracks- space modified as public parks

Ecological Restoration of the Lea River front

• Barrier between River edge and water stabilized with rock bunds to enhance the development of wetland ecosystems over time.

• Major walk and bike route along the river to connect the North and South wetland developments along the Lea River.

• Ecological parks surrounding the walk path as resource and refuge for varied species.

• Unhindered access to a variety of ecosystems, over phases, to promote sensitivity towards local ecology

Restoration and Development of Existing Green Infrastructure

• Development of the Twelve trees park to integrate it with the gas holders and memorial gardens forming the new Bromley Gasholders cultural district.

•

Network of Smaller parks and tree ‘corridors’ along the edge of the railway lines and along the streets, to help dissipate noise and air pollution from the main roads, and to allow a wider connect of the green infrastructure across the site.

Planning for Walkable streets

• Grid layout of streets, allowing clear visual access across the length of the streets.

• Break out spaces Parks, Semi public green spaces, at short intervals to minimize the visual fatigue of the dense built developments.

• Connecting pedestrian and bike access across the river through a continued “Lea Walk” bridge leading onto future proposed parks on the west side of the Lea river.

• The 26mile Lea river through the Lea Walk creates a linear connection along the length of the River, and is designed to be an active pedestrian and bicycle route.

Storm water management

• A system of Permeable pavements and Bio-swales across major roads, parking areas and crowd gathering points.

• Rain gardens integrated with the Lea Walk pathway to facilitate natural drainage of storm water.

• Utilizing the large roof space available, Green roofs and Rain-water harvesting systems can be retrofitted on larger office and community buildings, as flexibility permits

(C) Layers of wetland ecosystem restored in the “East End Ecological Park” intertwined with exploratory pathways

2021

Location : Finsbury Park, London, UK

Level : Academic Group work (5 members)

Type : Development proposal & Masterplan

INTEGRATING ISLINGTON

Development proposal for the ‘Hollow Prison’ Site

This proposal delivers 1000 housing units (60% affordable dwellings) on a 10 acre site, previously the Holloway Women’s Prison. The development is mid-rise made with mixed-use buildings to the south entrance of the site complete with a public square, women’s center, and other community facilities.

Fig 4.1: Green infrastructure in and around the site.

Fig 4.2: Site context and climatological considerations

Limiting vehicular routes with Site

Enhancing pedestrian movement

Breaking Mass Housing Breaking Mass Public spaces

Reconfiguring land-useMASTERPLAN

4.4:Masterplan - proposal in context

Reconfiguring movement and massing on site

VISION

The proposal has 1000 residential units, with 1 to 4 bedroom flats.

The distribution of flat types is based on the demographics and needs in St. George’s ward - As the majority of households in the ward, accounting for 29.5% (Local Insight profile, OCSI, 2018), are currently one-person households, 70% of the flats here are 1-Bed and 2-Bed Units.

1. ACTIVE STREETS

Orientating buildings towards the street, creating useful public spaces that encourage mixing and ownership

2. PHYSICAL AND VISUAL CONTINUITY

Removing boundaries to create an open and welcoming environment that improves local connectivity.

3. SENSITIVITY TO EXISTING SURROUNDINGS

Retaining the existing cultural significance of the site whilst ensuring sensitivity to surrounding developments.

PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL TYPOLOGIES

Cover

of

Typical Plan for Units in Blocks A, B & C

One service core for 2, 3, or 4 Units on each floor

Unit A1 - 7.5*8m = 60sqm

Essential GEA for1b2p type units

Unit B1 15*8m = 120sqm

Essential GEA for 2b4p, 3b6p and 4b6p type units

Typical Plan for Units in Blocks D & E

One service core for 6, 7, or 8 Units on each floor.

Blocks A, B, C are Mid-rise residential terrace developments.

Blocks D, E are residential courtyard blocks.

Blocks F, G are mixed-use with commercial and residential units.

Flat Type Flat Area GEA (sqm)

(%) No. of Flats (Units) Total area (sqm) Total Affordable

1b2p 60 30% 300 200 (66.7%) 18,000 2b4p 84 40% 400 300 (75%) 33,600 3b6p 114 20% 200 150 (75%) 22,800 4b6p 118.8 10% 100 50 (50%) 11,880

1000 700 (70%) 86,280

Affordability of these housing units determined by:

• Location of unit - storey level, view from the house etc.

• BUA of the units - along with room numbers

• Private green space - area in the front and back gardens

• Proximity to amenities - parks, public square, shops etc.

Pedestrian Access & Movement

Key Plan: Pedestrain connectivity

Expanding Existing Pavement to flow into Open Space

Existing Play Area Modified 1a

New Play Area with adjoining residential estate (Trecastle Way)

NEIGHBOURHOOD CONNECT

Combining the shared spaces with the Neighbouring housing estates adds to the potential development of usable green spaces, benefiting the community as a whole.

Spaces are designed to encourage gathering, play, and legible pedestrian movement through the corners of the site.

1b

Maintaining Continuity in Material along the Pathway

Grouped Seating to accommodate small gatherings

Typical Section at 1A and 1BEntry to the residential zone

Typical View at 1A and 1B - Entry to the residential zone

• Front Private Garden - buffer between the pavement and ground floor residences.

• Private Back Gardens buffer between shared courtyard and ground floor housing.

• Extended balconies for flats above - all flats gaining access to “open space” within their private property.

• Large Service Core + Staircase on edge to allow ample light into space.

• Units B1 as a convertible unit for 2,3 and 4-Bed Flats- maximizing the opportunity to create a varied range of affordable homes within the same block.

• Designed with the same fabric as the local neighbourhood (eg: Archibald Road, Tabley Road) in terms of Typology, Architectural style, Building heights,etc. to merge with the surrounding quality of space.

Spaces beyond the site

Elements closer to human scale (ie. trees, street lights, benches) make the open space more comfortable when in proximity to larger imposing structures.

Unimposing green barrier to protect privacy of ground floor residences

2a 2b

Fence for Private Garden at a lower height to allow larger visual range on the footpath

View at 2A - Parkhurst road

Typical Section at 2A, 2B

Aerial View: Proposal in context

Location :

Level : Beyond Academia

Type : Publishing, Social Media blog

URBAN DESIGN RESEARCH SEMINAR + EXHIBITION 2022

UDCP PROGRAM CATALOGUE 2021-22

Volunteered to prepare the Urban Design and City Planning catalogue 2021-22 by the Bartlett School of Planning, containing students’ academic work and research projects.

This catalogue (released on 29.09.22) was accompanied by an exhibition at the Bartlett School of Planning, UCL along with the annual “Urban research seminar 2022”.

Screen-captures of published catalogue - pages showing (author’s) selected course work.

Defensive Urban Design

PUBLIC SPACE RESEARCH + BLOG

What started out as social media research and dissertation photo record, has now turned into an awareness platform for defensive urban practices and hostile architecture in London.

This blog has introduced me to several professionals in the field researching this very phenomena, along with other active pages advocating people friendly spaces in the US, Netherlands, Canada, and Sweden.

View the blog here: Defensive Urban Design

Screen-captures of photo-blog (top), and blog posts (left)

To explore more related works, please refer to my issuu platform through the following link: Issuu - Anjali Maniar

anjalimaniar@gmail.com

LinkedIn - Anjali Maniar