Complex(C)ity. The Network Metropolis of Global London.

Page 1

Appendix B Appendice B


APPENDIX B

PROJECT SHEETS


APPENDICE B

TAVOLE DI PROGETTO

Project sheets

Tavole di progetto

00 ABSTRACT 01 URBANIZATION OF THE WORLD 02 MEGACITIES METABOLISM 03 EUROPE OF CITY REGIONS 04 SOUTH EAST ENGLAND DNA 05 KEY LONDON 06 SPATIAL FRAMEWORK 07 STRATEGIES 08 HYBRID CLUSTER: THE PLINTH 09 HYBRID CLUSTER: THE INTERFACE 10 HYBRID CLUSTER: THE GRAFT 11 VERTICAL LIVING 12 HYBRID FEELING


00 | ABSTRACT In the beginning was the city The Megacities phenomena is historically ascertain: The antic Greece’s polis were the Mega-cities of the Classicism, Rome was the first mega-city in the world history and if we look back through the cases like London and Paris, the population grew up remarkably with arrival of the industrial revolution, which can be compared with the Chinese system of megalopolis. The Megacities not only represent our past, but also our future. If the cities were in possession of a magnetic force on the territory, the Megacities instead are the melting pot of opportunities and challenges given by the high concentration of social, economical, political infrastructure and energetic potential. In fact, we are speaking about Global Cities, where the impact of the social process use to have a big influence on urban development, where the network is essential ingredient for a radical transformation up to come. The questions of local urbanism- immigration, job, social marginality,and sustainability - nowadays have global influence and they had to be studied by looking the Global Cities as complementary knot of the interconnected network. This case study is based to have an eye for the relationship between the visibly network (economic, society, governance) and invisibly one (territorial morphology and infrastructure) and how the first have the influence on the second considering multiplicity scale. This connection appears in the cities or part of them, that are physically separated but functionally connected, so that, they can make stronger connections between different Global Cities than within their very regional or interregional territories, which they belong.

If the existing network between society and urban structure can be visible on the regional scale, in the Europe it appears on the urban scale. The purpose is to demonstrate how these complex networks can be read in the case study of London 2012, the first Global City in Europe. It will investigate the central structure of Ilford, its socioeconomic set-up as public facilities distribution and population diversity, in order to understand the intrinsic potentials of this new London hub. The relation between spatial components and functional needs is the starting point for a strategic intervention in the opportunity area, in sight of the upcoming high-speed rail station. Through the elaboration of typological “working class” block and through spatial collective hybridization, the planning intervention attend to give birth to the new forms of urban quality able to conjugate global corridor together with local hierarchy in one urban catalyst.

Andrijana Sekulic Claudia M. M. Sinatra

1 2

5

1 2

5

1

1

2

2

5

5

1 2

1 2

1 2

5

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

5

5


1 2

5

1 2

5

1 2

5

425 1 2

5

1 2

5

1 2

5

1 2

5

Complex(C)ity

The Network Metropolis of Global London.

Observations and design suggestions for a multifunctional centrality in Ilford.

00 ABSTRACT 01 URBANIZATION OF THE WORLD 02 MEGACITIES METABOLISM 03 EUROPE OF CITY REGIONS 04 SOUTH EAST ENGLAND DNA 05 KEY LONDON 06 SPATIAL FRAMEWORK 07 STRATEGIES 08 HYBRID CLUSTER: THE PLINTH 09 HYBRID CLUSTER: THE INTERFACE 10 HYBRID CLUSTER: THE GRAFT 11 VERTICAL LIVING 12 HYBRID FEELING

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


01 | URBANIZATION OF THE WORLD human footprint less influenced

more influenced

london

Source: wildlife conservation (WSC) and Central for International Earth Science information network (CIESIN)

tokyo new york city

shanghai

national ecological footprint*

mumbai

mexico city

urbanization level

12

< 20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50-60% 60-70% 70-80% 80-90% >90%

10

8

6 johannesburg

são paulo

*global ha/person (2006)

4

sydney

2

0

HDI 0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

levels of urbanization related with the energy consumption challenge the earth’s capacity to sustain balanced and equitable growth. Source: the data had been compile by LSE cities

1.0

population (in milions) 1 5 10

regression index no recession

london

major recession | full recovery minor recession | full recovery major recession | partial recovery minor recession | partial recovery

london

new york city

partial recession full recession istanbul

new york city

tokyo

development index (2010)

shanghai

mexico city

developed country developing country underdeveloped country

mumbai

mexico city

no data

são paulo

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

johannesburg sydney

40% 44% 49% 55% 62% 67% 72% 75% 78%

60% 56% 51% 45% 38% 33% 28% 25% 22%

Source: rookings analysis of data from Oxford Economics, Mood’s Analyitics and U.S. Census Bureau Source: brookings analysis of data from Oxford Economics, Moody's Analytics, and U.S. Census Bureau

average annual growth rate in GVA +1.00 +5.00 +10.00

the Gross Value Added measures the domestic output of a wider region around the city

+2.2 london

+2.0

+1.2

vancouver

paris

+2.2

+3.4

+1.9

los angeles

+7.9

moscow

+11.4

bucharest

berlin

tianjin

+9.4

+1.8

+1.6

new york city

san jose

+7.8

-0.1

Source: e data have been compiled by the LSE cities where Urban Age is located for the Global Metro monitor research project

shanghai

istanbul

madrid

+2.8

+2.6

cairo

austin

+1.6

+9.7 -1.8 riyadh

+2.4 dubai +4.1

mumbai

mexico city

+7.2

+1.7

bangalore

bogotà

+0.5 tokyo

guangzhou

+4.6

calcutta

-1.2

bangkok

+3.0

singapore

+1.1

+4.5

jakarta

lima

+1.8

rio de janeiro

+3.2

santiago

+1.7

são paulo

+1.2

johannesburg

+1.0

cape town

+1.9 sydney

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

johannesburg são paulo


population (in milions) 1 5 10

growth (person per hour) +10

+30

-0.1

+50

st petersburg

+1

london

0

-0.4

+20

kharkiv

year

seul

beijing

1950

+3 dubai

-0.3

mexico city

2025 Source: Revision of World Urbanization Prospects, United Nations, 2009, http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup Source: The endless city, Urban Age LSE, 2011

+26

shanghai

cairo

havana

+10

1990

tokyo

+49

new york city

+44

khartoum

mumbai

lagos

+22

das es salaam

+12

jakarta

lima

+3

johannesburg sĂŁo paulo

+3.2

santiago

sydney

population (in milions) 1 5 10

human development index

tokyo shanghai

mumbai

0.3 - 0.4 0.4 - 0.5 0.5 - 0.6 0.6 - 0.7 0.7 - 0.8 0.8 - 0.9 0.9 - 1.0 1.0

the Human Development Index is a composite measure to track educational attainment, life expectancy and economic development. Source: various United Nations Development Programme Human Develompent; Reports sources with local sources compiled by Urban Age

427 develop-ing vs -ed

0

economic performance ranking by world region

20

29 36

40

economic performance developing metro areas

43

48

economic performance developed metro areas

60 80

90

100

106

116

117

120

127 developing developed eastern asia-pacific asia-pacific europe and (n=18) (n=24) central asia (n=11)

latin america (n=12)

middle

east and

africa

(n=11)

north america (n=64)

developing

western europe

(n=42)

(n=60)

Source: brookings analysis of data from Oxford Economics, Mood’s Analytics and U.S.

developed (n=158)

foregin investments (in millions of USD) 200 000 40 000 16 000 4 000

year 1980 1988 2010 Source: world development indicators, World Bank, 2000, C.Rozenbalt, 2000 www.unctad.org/fdistatistics

city vs nation

1000

socioeconomic performance index

800

GDP - GVA income per capita

500

country - regional average

300

maximum average minumum

200

*value archieved by cities in a region. overline values indicates best than national performance.

150

100 75 50

25 europe

united states

brazil

india

china

south africa

289 cities above 50,000 GDP - PPP/person 34,741 US$

273 large cities

94 large cities

GDP - PPP/person 47,398 US$

GDP - PPP/person 10,512 US$

35 cities over 200,000 GDP - PPP/person 2,790 US$

40 cities over 700,000 GDP - PPP/person 5,990 US$

24 cities over 25,000 GDP - PPP/person 10,442 US$

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


02 | MEGACITIES METABOLISM

urban footprint

connecting density

city

rail underground

region built-up area

MUMBAI

SÃO PAOLO

ISTANBUL

NEW YORK

SHANGHAI

LONDON

MEXICO CITY

JOHANNESBURG

BERLIN

planned extension population density

MUMBAI

SÃO PAOLO

ISTANBUL

NEW YORK

SHANGHAI

LONDON

MEXICO CITY

JOHANNESBURG

BERLIN

major world airline routes city size world city major center secondary center

london

more frequently routes istanbul

new york city

tokyo

region airline routes

shanghai

Source: world develompent indicators, world bank,2000

mumbai

mexico city

são paulo

johannesburg sydney

social footprint

urban economy

administrative boundaries

<1

most disadvantaged average

4 1 18

tertiary sector

1

7

13

29

<1

15

primary and secondary sector

29 10

most privileged

non - market services

34

MUMBAI

SÃO PAOLO

ISTANBUL

Source: All maps are drawn with data gathered from local data source and generated froma ‘heat sensitive‘ GIS technology compiled by LSE cities

30

37

15

33

24

transport, hotels, restaurants energy and manufacturing construction

MUMBAI

ISTANBUL

SÃO PAOLO

Source: Urban Age reserach by LSE cities

<1 31

3 4

8 6

26 39

34

31

24 40

12

23

NEW YORK

SHANGHAI

27

17

NEW YORK

LONDON

SHANGHAI

LONDON

<1

<1 4 15

7 27

3

6 21

11

20 40 23

23

11 42 26

MEXICO CITY

JOHANNESBURG

BERLIN

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

MEXICO CITY

20

JOHANNESBURG

agriculture

BERLIN


%

MUMBAI

%

$

current population in the city

current population in the metropolitan region

central area density(people per kmҍ)

project growth 2010-2050

city as a prectenage of national GDP

city as a prectenage of national population

GDP per capita (US$)

percentage of the people under 20

11,710,100

19,280,100

45,021

44

2.9%

0.9

$1,871

36,3 2001

SÃO PAOLO

10,400,000

ISTANBUL

12,700,000

NEW YORK

8,090,000

SHANGHAI

15,460,000

15,460,000

LONDON

7,560,000

7,560,000

MEXICO CITY

8,580,000

JOHANNESBURG

3,230,000

BERLIN

3,330,000

19,220,000

11

10,376

11.9%

5.8

31.0

$12,021

2010

12,700,000

12

20,128

18,820,000

9

15,353

22.0%

17.8

$12,856

3.3%

2.8

$55,693

32,1 2009

25.7 2008

5.0%

26

23,227

1.0

16,0

$8,237

2005

19,240,000

3.4%

1

8,326

14.8%

10

12,880

12.4

8.4

$60,831

23.8

$18,321

32.9

2009

2005

3,890,000

3.4%

3

2,203

8.1

$9,229

34,6 2010

4,330,000

0

0

6,683

4.2

$34,017

16,5 2008

429 1 2

5

housing

income

wealth

travel

crime

average rent per month in US$

GDP per capita in US$

working time required in minutes to buy 1 kg of bread

average cost of public transport ticket in US$

murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants

anual electricity use (kWh per capita)

litres per capita per day

1,000

$1,871

14

0.2

3.0

579

90

SÃO PAOLO

570

$12,021

30

1.6

21.0

1.954

185

ISTANBUL

610

$12,856

14

1.0

3.0

2.267

155

NEW YORK

2,500

$55,693

16

2.3

6.3

6.603

607

SHANGHAI

360

$8,237

35

1.5

1.4

6.357

439

LONDON

2.390

$60,831

5

7.1

4.539

324

MEXICO CITY

810

$18,321

53

0.2

13.2

1.00

343

JOHANNESBURG

640

$9,299

12

1.2

15.7

3.388

378

BERLIN

750

$34,017

12

3.8

1.2

3.880

MUMBAI

2.2

electricity

water

171

Source: Urban Age reserach by LSE cities

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


03 | EUROPE OF CITIES globalization and world cities (GaWC)

Oslo

global

Moscow

Stockholm

sub-global national capitals

population (in milions) 1 Copenhagen

5 10

Dublin

Source: GaWC Reasearch Network

Hamburg

Warsaw

Rank cities score in terms of interconnectivity

Berlin

New York City

Amsterdam

London

Düsseldorf

Brussel

London Prague

6.22

Frankfurt

5.42

Randstad

Hong Kong

Budapest

Zurich Geneve Milan

Boston

7,100,000 4.14 650,420 amsterdam 589,955 rotterdam Chicago 3.94 581,810 the hague 295,335 utrecht Los Angeles 3.90 5,500,000 Flemish Diamond brussel Singapore 1,089,5383.45 483,505 antwerp 243,366 ghent Sydney 95,4633.44 leuven

Vienna

Munich

Venice

Istanbul

3.03

13,900,000 Vienna commuter belt 2.96

7,560,000 5.35

Paris Paris

Berlin

5.86 population Madrid 3.02 metro-urban in the blue banana

Tokyo London

SeoulEMRZ 3,800,000 3.40 Zurich Brussels

372,000

3.29

2.78

Frankfurt

2.78

Shanghai

2.78

Buenos Aires

2.73

Stockholm

2.71

Zurich

2.68

Moscow

2.61

Barcelona

2.57

11,316,000 3.26 Dubai 1,000,289 cologne 586,217 düsseldorf Washington, D.C.581,308 3.25 Rome dortmund 576,259 essen 491,931 duigsburg Toronto 3.13 Amsterdam 319,841 bonn

Rhein-Ruhr

San Francisco

Rome

Barcelona Madrid Lisbon

Athen

Beijing

3.12

Mexico City

2.56 2.56 2.54 2.41

Venice 3,500,000 metropolitan 309,000 venice-mestre region 215,000 padua "the world’s biggest, most interconnected cities help set global agendas, 107,000 vicenza weather transnational dangers, and serve as the hubs of global 84,000 treviso

integration. They are the engines of growth for their countries and the gateways to the resources their regions." Source: Eurostat;ofESPON (European Spatial Planning Observation Foreign Policy journal Network

Moscow

european population

foreign investments

metropolitan Regions with more than 5 million residents.

Less than 50 50 - 100

Source: Eurostat, United Nations

100 - 150 150 - 250 250 - 350 350 - 500

Berlin-Brandenburg South East England

Randstad

500 - 1000

Rhine-Ruhr

1000 - 1500

Rhine-Main Ile de France

1500 - 2500

Stuttgart

More than 2500

Munich Zurich

Lombardia

*Knowledge intensive FDI (excl. finance) Venice

Source: Eurostat, UnitedFDI Nations *Knowledge intensive (excl. finance) Istanbul

Barcelona Madrid

foreign population as a share of the total population 33.5%

foreign-born* %

42.5% 13.9%

16.4% 94.2%

non-nationals** %

57.6%

the main reason for migrating foreign-born persons aged 25–54 who mi- grated to the EU when they were aged 15 or over.

31.2% 8.8% %

*Foreign-born persons are those whose place of birth (or usual residence 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% of the motherat the time of the birth) is outside the country of his/her usual residence.

14.0% 43.2% 10.9%

10%

33.1% 11.0%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

46.7% 11.6% 56.1% 36% 73%

48%

73.1% 21.7%

foreign-born

international protection

non-EU-27-born

other

second-generation migrants aged 25–54 by type of background, 2008 0%

60.3% 15.2%

Germany 64.7%

liverpoo

study

90% 100%

47% 0.1%

50.5% 11.1%

gla

employment, job found before migration

employment, **56 % of the non-nationals living on the territory of the EU-27foreign-born Member States have European citizenship; no job40% found before migration 37 % are citizens of another EU Member State and 19% are citizens of a non-EU country. Around non-EU-27-born of the EU-27 foreigners come from countries outside Europe. family reasons

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

persons with a foreign background persons with a mixed background

Estonia

49.5%

Belgium

51.8%

Luxemburg Greece 90%

63.6% 0.1%

France

santiago de compostela

United Kingdom

oviedo bilbao

Littvania Portugal 49.1% 7.3%

porto

Netherlands

aveiro

Hungary

7.2% 71.4% 11.1%

52.1%

salamanca

madrid

Ireland cordoba seviglia

Slovakia càdiz

Espagna

ronda malaga

Italia Source: Eurostat, United Nations

za

toledo

lisbon

Czech Republic

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

valladoid

portugal

Poland Austria

46.4% 13.9%

dax

burgos

Slovenia

va granada

alican


european urban system strong relation increasing relation selective relation supporting relation underlying relation potential relation break break relevant integrated system consoldated integrated system blu banana strategic node policentric node

network structure development center

urban region

centrifugal mode - rhine ruhr

centripetal mode - london

incorporational mode - randstad

globalization and world cities (GaWC) metropoli globali primo livello metropoli globali secondo livello metropolitani polarizzati

european network structure

centri metropolitani puri metropoli comando metropoli europee complete direction cluster high skills cluster traditional cluster the “blue banana” Source: Global and World Cities Network, Geography Department at Loughborough University

RANDSTAD

RUHRGEBIET

FLEMISH DIAMOND (VLAAMSE RUIT)

BASEL-ZURICH-BERN

VENICE METROPOLITAN REGION

EU high-speed railways (2010)

stockholm

sokttan

LONDON

completed category I category II category III

not completed category I category II category III

planed category I category II category III

ports and harbor airports kobenhagen

asgow

Corridoi paneuropei Helsinki, Tallinn, Riga, Kaunas, Klaipėda, Varsavia, Danzica bremen

ol leeds birmingham

berlin

hamburg

Berlino, Poznań, Varsavia, Brěst, Minsk, Smolensk, Mosca, Nizhny Novgorod

warszawa

Bruxelles, Aquisgrana, Colonia, Dresda, Breslavia, Katowice, Cracovia, Leopoli, Kiev

amsterdam london antwerp

Danzica, Katowice, Žilina frankfurt

Danubio

nurnberg wien

karlsruhe stuttgart

metz nancy

tours

Venezia, Trieste, Lubiana, Maribor, Budapest, Uzhhorod, Leopoli, Kiev

wroclaw

erfurt

brussel

paris

Dresda, Norimberga, Praga, Vienna, Bratislava, Győr, Budapest, Arad, Bucarest, Constanţa, Craiova, Sofia, Salonicco, Filippopoli, Istanbul

halle

rotterdam

Durazzo, Tirana, Skopje, Bitola, Sofia, Dimitrovgrad, Burgas, Varna Helsinki, Vyborg, San Pietroburgo, Pskov, Mosca, Kaliningrad, Kiev, Chişinău, Bucarest, Dimitrovgrad, Alessandropoli

munich

Salisburgo, Lubiana, Zagabria, Belgrado, Niš, Skopje, Veles, Salonicco

basel

Source: Trans-European Transport Network, TEN-T lyon

limoges

ljubljana turin

bordeaux

milan genova

toulouse

verona venice bologna istanbul

montpellier marseille

perpignan figures

rom

aragoza barcelona athen

alencia

nte

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD

431


04 | SOUTH EAST ENGLAN DNA

birmingham and the west midlands milton Keynes

south east england spatial strategy

air-water hubs

regional spoke

port airport

international gateway

highways intercity rail regional rail

regional hub cambridge

transport hub aylesbury

luton

motorway

Source: UK Department for Transport; UK Ordnance Survey; Natural England, Defra (UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

ipswich

milton keynes

trunk road

oxford

channel tunnel railway

luton

airport

Swindon

slough

port

reading Bristol/Bath

London

oxford

staines camberley farnborough

Basingstoke

rochester ebbstleet

woking

aldershot

relgace gulldford

salisbury / exeter

ramsgate chatham

canterbury

maidstone tonbridge

redhill

reading

dover

ashford

gatwick

southend-on-sea

London

swindon

chatham & gillingham

crawley highspeed rail link to Belgium and France bournemouth / pool

Southampton

havant chichester

worthing hove

hastings eastbourne

brighton

portsmouth bognor regis ryde

little cheyne court southampton

isle of wight

brighton

portsmouth bournemouth

London 17,325 pp/km2

more dense less dense

Oxford milton keynes 6,602 pp/km2

bloomsbury, london population per km²

luton town centre

Source: ONS (UK Office of National Statistics)

> 10,000 5,000 - 10,000 1,000 - 5,000 < 1,000

east ham, london

luton oxford town centre

oxford

mixed-use

> 1,000 1,000 - 5,000 5,000 - 10,000 < 10,000

luton 7,988 pp/km2

predominantly residential

monocentric density

milton Keynes 5,519 pp/km2

predominantly commercial workplaces per km²

Source: ONS (UK Office of National Statistics) southend-on-sea town centre

southend-on-sea

London

swindon

canary wharf

reading town centre

Southend-on-Sea 8,663 pp/km2

reading

east gillingham

chatham & gillingham

Reading 8,175 pp/km2

heathrow airport

croydon

ashford stansted

little cheyne court Southampton 6,462 pp/km2

orpington

southampton brighton

portsmouth

brighton town centre

portsmouth town centre

southhampton town centre

bournemouth

Brighton 13,443 pp/km2

Portsmouth 12,902 pp/km2

buissnes climate

GDP per capita university rank

6 5 4

R&D public

more than 15,000 10,000 to 15,000

milton keynes

Source: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

population density

3

commuters in one direction

top ten performing regions south east england inner london outer london kent

GDP weighted

5,000 to 10,000

Work-related commuter flows between local authorities

luton

2 oxford

1 unemployment

0

business

southend-on-sea

London

swindon

-1 -2

starting in greater london

reading

chatham & gillingham

elsewhere 6

competition

patents

94 within greater london

access by air

human capital

little cheyne court starting outer greater London

southampton brighton

portsmouth

elsewhere

access by road

specialisation HMH

17

bournemouth

specialisation KIS

83 within greater london

e economic activity

type of workers 7

self-employed

4

14

part-time time 79

usual method to travel

temporary employees

workers with second jobs

unemployed

1

25 full time 65

private motorised

walking and cycling

motobike cycle 14 4

13

26

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

7

cars

people work-hyperconcentretion

61-80 min >80 min 41-60 min 13 10

bus rail 11

public transport 73

60

employed

time taken to travel to work

usual method to travel to work

other

6

foot

21-40 min

24 62

up to 20 min

london brighton oxford luton reading portsmouth southampton milton keynes

4,976

7,854 8,835

12,173 13,813 11,530 12,086


energy production annual power generation in Mega Watt (MW)

100

14 milton keynes

Source: LDA (London Development Agency); RenewableUK: Natural England, Defra (UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

luton 108 65 oxford gunfleet sands I & II

London

swindon

southend-on-sea 90

reading

chatham & gillingham

300

kentish flats

CO2 emmission thanet

agriculture (0.3%)s

domestic use of fuels

21 56

23 transport little cheyne court

60

energy

southampton

renewables

brighton

portsmouth

industry, energy, commercial gas generation

nuclear heat

bournemouth

9 3 14 38

solid fuel

36

natural gas petroleums

land use built up land built-up land within 500 m from open non-agricultural land

milton keynes

open non-agricultural land (> 2ha) luton

central urban areas

Source: Natural England, Defra (UK Department for East Environment, *38% of South England’sFood and Rural Affairs) population lies with in 500 meters of non-agricultural open land

oxford

London

swindon reading

southend-on-sea

chatham & gillingham

+ urban areas

433

little cheyne court southampton brighton

portsmouth bournemouth

+ suburban areas

break monocentricity crossrail travel network

milton keynes

luton

oxford

London

swindon reading

southend-on-sea

chatham & gillingham

little cheyne court

transport CO2 emissions

southampton portsmouth

brighton

bournemouth

ground based taxi rail underground 4 4 aviation 11 bus 5 4 23 road freight

49 car and motorcycle

distance travelled per person

cars rail taxi bus cycle walk

1,150 364 275 72 300 *number data in km per year

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


05 | KEY LONDON

1834

1846

1847

poor law amendament act

nuisance removal act

town public health improvement act act

reformes the country's poverty relief system, including the building of workhouses.

1848

1872

1875

1885

1889

public health act

public health act

artisans' and labourers' dwellings act

london county council (LCC)

establishes a coherent administrative machinery to deal locally with issues of health and sanitation.

conditions considered habitation in living accommodation

housing of the working class act

1894

1898

1905

london building act

local government act

royal commission on congestion

1909

1845

1887

1898

1900

1902

1903

parliament authorizes more than 600 acts for new improvement schemes in british towns

In The Condition of the Working Class in England, F. Engels write about London “A town, such as London, where a man may wander for hours together without reaching the beginning of the end, without meeting the slightest hint which could lead to the inference that there is open country within reach, is a strange thing. This colossal centralisation, this heaping together of two and a half millions of human beings at one point, has multiplied the power of this two and a half millions a hundredfold; has raised London to the commercial capital of the world, created the giant docks and assembled the thousand vessels that continually cover the Thames.”

charles booth’s poverty map reveals that more than 30% of urban population live under an inacceptable standard

e. howard publishes “to-morrow: a peaceful path to real reform” introducing the idea of garden city

the county of london covers the city of london and 28 boroughs for an area of 303.12 km²

A revisioned version of Howard’s book is published under the name of “Garden Cities of to-morrow”

work begins on letchworth, britain's

a. blanqui used the term “industrial revolution” describing the contemporary era; it is a turning point for the creation of a modern city

1976

1963

1980

draft greater london local government, development plan planning and lad act (urban renewal)

greater london council (GLC)

1979

1965

1981

local government act

Urban Development Corporations (UDC) and Enterprise Zones (EZ) are introduced to regenerate Urban Development Areas (UDA).

the GLC is abolished and Its functions were devolved to the corporation and the london boroughs

prime minister thatcher incourages social rent by the “right to buy”. social housing is no more responsibility of local authorities

the greater london covers the city of london and 32 boroughs for an area of 1,572 km²

1982

EZ are established in London, among them the isle of dogs.

compels local authorities to tackle substandard housing; new housing developments encouraged on 'garden city' principles and geddes’ surveys

1999

1998

1986

local government act

housing and town planning act

extends the 1875 artisans' act by offering greatly increased loans to local authorities

1840 1837

the top-tier local government administrative body for greater london replaces the earlier LCC, covering a biggerer area

1890

Public referendum about regional authority

2001

Greater London Authority Act It creates the Greater London Authority, London Assembly and the directly elected Mayor of London responsible for transport

1986

1988

1992

the motorway M25 or london orbital is completed

the london planning authority commitee

exodus by rem koolhaas

rescue, development and strategic planning

Regional Planning

1999

the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs such as SEEDA, South East of England Development Agency, or EEDA, East of England Development Agency) are responsible for economic development and strategic spatial planning in their respective regions

2000

the lower administrative level consists of two-tier local authorities: counties and districts. london is an exception.

planning results like the report “towards an urban reinassance” and the foundation of CABE agency

Kensington & Chelsea Hammersmith & Fulham

Enfield Barnet

Harrow

Waltham Forest

Haringey

Hilingdon

Camden

Brent

Redbridge Havering

Hackney Tower

Ealing

Newham

Barking

Richmond

Wandsworth

Lambeth

36-54%

west

18-36%

north east south Central Activity Zone Inner London

0-18% -1- 0%

Outer London

Bexley Lewisham

international centre metropolitan centre major centre

Merton

Kingston

growth 2006 to 2031

centre

london’s town centre network

Greenwich

Hounslow

greater london

Croydon

Sutton

district centre

Bromley

central activites zone (CAZ)

london’s potential centre network

employment growth 2007-2031

international centre

25-47% 15-25%

metropolitan centre

King’s Cross

major centre

10-15% 5-10%

district centre

2 - 5%

12

1

11

2

central activites zone (CAZ)

Stratford

Bromley by Bow Canary Warf North Greenwicvh Vauxhall Crossharbour Woolwich Battersea Canada Water Elephant & Castel Walworth road

metropolitan centre

3

10

major centre district centre

4

CAZ frontage

9

5 8 7

6

Hackerbridge

4

38 31

22 24 12

41

27

5

station

preferred industrial location (PIL) industrial business park (IBP)

crossrail line 100 - 150 £m 50 - 100 £m

opportunity area*

13 35 20 16 10 36 21 26 39 3 23 3018 14 34 11 2 33 29 9 8 7 28 40 17 42

6

25 - 50 £m 10 - 25 £m

area for intensification**

43

15

Total benefits (transport and earning)

20% most deprived LOAPs

PIL/IBP

37

32

strategic regeneration areas

19 25 1

*Opportunity Areas 1 Bexley Riverside 2 Charlton Riverside 3 City Fringe 4 Colindale/Burnt Oak 5 Cricklewood/Brent Cross 6 Croydon 7 Deptford Creek/Greenwich Riverside 8 Earls Court & West Kensington 9 Elephant & Castle 10 Euston 11 Greenwich Peninsula 12 Heathrow 13 Ilford 14 Isle of Dogs 15 Kensal Canalside 16 King’s Cross 17 Lewisham, Catford & New Cross 18 London Bridge & Bankside 19 London Riverside 20 Lower Lee Valley (including Stratford) 21 Paddington 22 Park Royal/Willesden Junction 23 Royal Docks and Beckton Waterfront 24 Southall 25 Thamesmead & Abbey Wood 26 Tottenham Court Road 27 Upper Lee Valley (including Tottenham Hale)

5 - 10 £m 0 - 5 £m Ilford opportunity area

28 Vauxhall, Nine Elms & Battersea 29 Victoria 30 Waterloo 31 Wembley 32 White City 33 Woolwich **Areas for Intensification 34 Canada Water 35 Dalston 37 Haringey Heartlands/Wood Green 38 Harrow & Wealdstone 39 Holborn 40 Kidbrooke 41 Mill Hill East 42 South Wimbledon/Colliers Wood 43 West Hampstead Interchange

Source: Department for Communities and Local Government ONS Lower Super Output Area Boundaries, 2007*

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

S Brentw

Goodmayes Liverpool Street Seven Kings Gidea Park Romford Tottenham Manor Park Haro Forest Gate Court Rd Ealing Broadway Chadwell Heath Bond Street Maryland West Ealing Acton Ilford Stratford Taplow Burnham West Main Line Whitechapel Custom Hayes & Drayton Slough Iver House Harlington Maidenhead Paddington Farringdon Hanwell Canary Langley Southall Wharf Woolwich Abbey Wood

*Total benefits are spread to boroughs not on the Crossrail routeand widely to outer London. The above maps shows transport benefits and earnings distributed according to where public transport users live, which is why the City receives a low value, due to its small population.

Heathrow Airport


1918

1924

1930

1938

1943

addison's housing act

housing act

greenwood act housing act

the green belt (london and home counties) act

county of london plan

1919

1927

1933

1940

1942

town planning schemes become obbligatory for cities with 20.000 inhabitants

greater london planning committee reports london’s urban expansion

athen chart, published after the fourth CIAM conference, introduces relevant observations under the titles: living, working, recreation and circulation

barlow commission

scott commission

1944

1946

greater london plan

new towns act

often referred to as the abercrombie plan, intended to control and halt london’s expansion. establishment the "green belt", creation of new towns and expansion of existing towns

1947

greater london council (GLC)

establishes procedures to control the growth of towns and cities

the top-tier local government administrative body for greater london replaces the earlier LCC, covering a biggerer area

1952

1960s

golden lane housing competition

the london ringways, a series of four ring roads, are planned to circle congestion on the city's road system

London - Luton - Bedford Corridor

the localism bill it devolves partially spatial planning responsibilities, previously held by the RDAs, to local authorities, which have the power to draft their own neighbourhood plans. despite the informal collaboration on a regional scale, some of central government’s responsibilities are reinforced

1965 the greater london covers the city of london and 32 boroughs for an area of 1,572 km²

1979

1981 local government act Urban Development Corporations (UDC) and Enterprise Zones (EZ) are introduced to regenerate Urban Development Areas (UDA).

prime minister thatcher incourages social rent by the “right to buy”. social housing is no more responsibility of local authorities

CAZ inner london

London - Stansted - Cambridge - Peterborough Corridor

metropolitan centre opportunity area area for intensification regeneration area strategic development centre (outer london) sustainable communities growth area regional coordination corridors olympic site green belt and metropolitan open land regional park opportunities regional park crossrail 1

Wood Green Harrow

Romford Ilford

Uxbridge Western Wedge Ealing

main airports

Shepherd Bosh

public transport schemes crossrail 1 crossrail 2 thameslink rail programme

crossrail 2 thameslink east london line orbital rail network

Thames Gateway

Source: GLA Economics (all maps extracted from The London Plan 2011 are Copyright of Greater London Authority and Crown)

Hounslow

overground Kingston

Bromley Croydon Sutton

Wabdle Valley

435

slow mobility schemes Thames Path Lea Valley Jubilee Walk Jubilee Greenway Strategic Walking Routes Capital Ring London Outer Orbital path (LOOP) Green Chain cycle superhighways

?

Crossrail is a new railway that will go under the middle of London from the West to the East.

Crossrail will cost about £15 billion.

2

planned cycle routes*

key information about Crossrail project

1

old Wood

1980

draft greater london local government, development plan planning and lad act (urban renewal)

strategic key diagramm

2010

Shenfield wood

1976

1963

town and country planning act

5

project timeline

Design

2005

Rolling stock

first proposal

the Crossrail Bill 2005

* indicative routes subject to consultation 1 Tottenham to City (before 2015) 2 Ilford to Aldgate (summer 2011) 3 Barking to Tower Gateway (open 2010) 4 Woolwich to London Bridge (before 2015) 5 Lewisham to Victoria (before 2015) 6 Penge to City (before 2015) 7 Merton to City (open 2010) 8 Wandsworth to Westminster (summer 2011) 9 Hounslow to Hyde Park Corner (before 2015) 10 Park Royal to Hyde Park Corner (before 2015) 11 West Hendon to Marble Arch (before 2015) 12 Hornsey to City (before 2015)

crossrail regional map

Crossrail will help people travel across London more quickly and in less crowded trains. It will mean less cars and pollution. It will be better for tourists and visitors. It will help businesses stay in London.

Surface line Tunnel Portal (tunnel entrance and exit) regeneration area opportunity area

10 new station

60 trains 24 trains per hour up to 1.500 passengers

2009

construction started at Canary Wharf station

East depot Ilford

2012

West depot Old Oak Common

begin digging tunnels

It will mean more accessible travel across London. There will be chances for Londoners to get local jobs.

Existing station New station

design and service facts

2001

It will help businesses and new home building in London.

Some East London politicians saw as an expensive west-to-east commuter.

Ilford opportunity area

It could primarily benefit City and Docklands businesses and bring much disruption to East London. It would use up much of the remaining rail capacity within the London area. The redevelopment of the area forced the closure of a number of historic music venues In February 2010, Crossrail was accused of bullying residents whose property lay on the Crossrail route into selling for less than the market value

2018

(first 2017) Crossrail services start.

impact on exemples journey time

32 mins intead 55

Slough to Tottenham Court Rd Heathrow to Leeverpool Street

25 mins intead 35 Ilford to Bond Street

18 mins

Ticket

integreted with TfL, National Rail, Oyster card

enviromental facts

Carbon

1.7 million tonnes of CO2 (construction) 70,000 to 225,000 tonnes of CO2 saving (operational)

Material

at least 15% of total material value derives from reused and recycled content and will aim for 20%

intead 40

City | Liverpool Street to Abbey Wood

16 mins intead 30

Waste

5.6 million m² of clean excavated material will be beneficially reused

Paddington to Canary Wharf

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


06 | SPATIAL FRAMEWORK

M25

M11

east london identity

Woodford Broadway Snakes Lane

A406

Manford w

Woodford Bridge

South Woodford

Barkingside

Walthamstow Gants Hill

Wanstead

Newbury Park Goodmayes

Seven Kings Ilford

Olympic site

Shoreditch

Barking Stratford East Ham

Brick Lane

London City airport

Canary Wharf

Greenwich peninsula

Times Gateway bridge (proposed)

5,6520 ha total size within Redbridge borough

40% green space and 27% domestic gardens

238,635 people live in Redbrige

main driveway

public buildings

6% of them live in Ilford

71,100 young people are aged 0-19

120,695 people

have a minority ethnic background

crossrail connection

urban service

public transports

local service

800 jobs 5,000 homes area capacity

ilford size by land use

130,000 m2

domestic garden 36.2%

crossrail worksite

road

21.7%

domestic building

15.6%

non domestic building

9.6%

14,150 inhabitants 17,950 in 2031

430,000 m2 regeneration area

ilford population by ethnic group

asian

54.1%

indian

25.6%

white paki

28.5% 19%

slow mobility

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

residence


metropolitan open land

east london framework plan

green belt regional park

station crossrail line

district park linear park

mainline railway central line distict line

way

A12 A118

strategic open space project small open space ward

DLR major road motorway cycle way metropolitan centre major centre district centre

The leafy borough 1/3 land is green belt and parks

local centre major watercourse green belt and metropolitan open land deprived area | brownfield

Romford

existing community place

Chadwell Heath young people (0-19) 26 - 28% 22 - 26% 18 - 22% 14 - 18% ward

The young borough 26.6% population under the age of 19

BME population 58 - 72% 46 - 58% 34 - 46% 22 - 34% 10 - 22% ward

The diverse borough

48.1% Black and Minority Ethnic population

Source: ONS (UK Office of National Statistics)

intensification retail

ilford

redbrige

london

population structure 13 intensification housing

7 2

11

1

54

2

white mixed

12 29

3

25

64

asian

3

72

black other

3

the youngest 0-19 26

27

74

73

38

19+

62

land

brownfield

green land 40

43

57

60

36

64

other

Source: ONS (UK Office of National Statistics)

green corridor

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD

437


the mall

city hall

urban centre

07 | STRATEGIES

footprint 2012

urban relevance and centrality 2012

olympics as a global catalyst

strategy

puncture intervent

action

colonization

reaction

temporary centrality

status

ilford as a future centrality

strategy

disperse intervent

action

polarization

reaction

hybrid cluster

strategy

empting intervent

action

reconnection

reaction

complex density

parking as a colonized space

urban centre

ilford gateway centre

temorary parasite

P

footprint 2025

crossrail effects

The areas interes a gradual functio settlements poss down as in the p difference amon is cutted out. The gets mixed up w density and impr

crossrail arrival

P

the mall as an opportunity

status

post olympics

the mall

crossrail work in progress

The urban footprint shows the differences between terrace houses and the latest urban structure characterizing the centre of Ilford. While the first is spread all around the area, the second is longitudinally oriented by a thick row of buildings which marks the commercial street from south to north. The grain of the remaining blocks lacks in homogeneity, so even if the vertical and horizontal axis look solid, the inner side is made up of a soulless alternate of full sand empty spaces.

station

olympics influence

city hall

status

urban relevance and centrality 2025

garden as a necessity

Ilford’s centre changes its air. The proposal is to level off the existing part in order to uniform the horizontal city without obstructing the further development. The same level of density is enhanced all along the commercial streets and a lighter one on the fairest sides to preserve the slow rhythm of the residential zones. In the urban centre the typical spatial hierarchy is completed upset and the open blocks become more suitable for a vertical city based on the high quality services.

urban space as a collector

hybrid cluster transport as a magnet

vertical living as a preference

1. city hall area

2. cineworld cinemas area

2870,00 m2

4132,90 m2

3. central library & museum area

2619,90 m2

4. keeneth more theatre area

1640,25 m2

all area

56200,00 m2

area

3

n. floor:

93% coverd space open space

use

2670,00 m2

coverd space

7%

open space

200,00 m2

collective

propriety

use

n. floor:

coverd space

8%

open space

313,60 m2

collective

use

n. floor:

coverd space

38%

open space

collective

use

1074,60 m2

35%

570,00 m2

collective

coverd space open space

use

propriety public

active time:

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

public

active time:

510000 m2

3

3

65%

1619,90 m2 1000,00 m2

propriety private

active time:

3

62%

3819,50 m2

propriety public

active time:

4

92%

area

4915,00 m2 n. floor:

n. floor:

6. valentine park

5. the exchange mall & vertical parking

96%

54000 m2

4%

2200m2

collective

propriety

coverd space open space

use

coverd space

0%

open space

0 m2

0 m2

8500m2

collective

public

private

active time:

0%

100%

function collective

propriety private

active time:

100%

4915,00 m2

active time:


the mall

station

city hall

urban centre

footprint 2018

urban relevance and centrality 2018

sted by the urban growth will experience onal emptying to let the spread of new sible. in the OA some building are torn purpose of Ilford strategic plan. The ng the horizontal city and the vertical one e horizontal one is massive present and it with the vertical part, creating a complex roving interactions.

horizontality as local facilities verticality as global services

complex density working class as wide spread

sinergy as polar intervention

439

strategic masterplan vision

7. sainsbury supermarket area

7110,00 m2 n. floor:

coverd space open space

use

area

1

54%

3810,00 m2

46%

3300,00 m2

collective

propriety

8. parking space

n. floor:

coverd space open space

use

active time:

area

1

0% 0 m2

100%

8550,00 m2

collective

propriety private

9. ilford train station

8550,00 m2

n. floor:

coverd space open space

use

area

69% 31%

190,00 m2

collective

10. block house type

1

430,00 m2

propriety active time:

9500,00 m2 n. floor:

3-4

42%

covered space (single house)

100,00 m2

open space (private yard)

135,00 m2

use

57%

individual

propriety public

private

active time:

620,00 m2

private

active time:

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


08 | HYBRID CLUSTER: THE PLINTH hybrid cluster

y block

the graft

the plinth

site plan | 1:1000 The new urban block wants to connect the horizontal city and the vertical one, creating cohesion by the interface, which becomes public and semi public space. Some public services don’t stop on the ground floor but climb up to the housing blocks. In this way the urban block become the real hybrid cluster with the different range of formal and informal realities creating spontaneous environment made by temporary and permanent users. public reverse

urban centre

c block users

use

score

housing 6 office 5 informal market 3 temporary

commercial 4

7

pubblic space and green areas museum

i blocks a-a section

1 restaurant

start up 3 permanent

consulting management 1

start up shop

fitness

coworking newspaper library

food experience

housing

4

4 b-b section

accomodation mixed

3 event space 4 performance space

co-working

terrace

start up shop

2

coworking newspaper library

food experience

garden

4

student space 3

f-f section

e-e sec

financial 1 administration

housing

multicultural space

foyer

4

functional hybrid UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

start up shop

shop

food experience

housi

2

ja th fra ita tu ch ta


441

ground floor plan | 1:500 e

c block* congress center work

d

luxury store

d

service

e

restourant beauty beauty

roomsr congress restourant relax&lounge

food experience

e

ooms congress

shop f

shop

f

a b

semipublic space private space

a-a section

ff

c

b-b section

screening workshop cafè

screening events cocktail/exhibition events

dd

e

a

a

d-d section

start up bank

post

e-e section

start up

multipurpose space work

b

c-c section

i blocks*

b

c

workshop bar

health health bank

f-f section hall

housing c

c

hall

a b

pharmacy

local services shop public space

health health pharmacy

* informal dominance

*commuters dominance a-a section

c-c section

b

c

y block*

d

housing

aa

ction

foyer y

terrace

ooms relax&lounge

shop

foyer

hotel room wellness hall

multifunctional sports camp gym sport bar

kitchen

shop semipublic space private space * young dominance

d-d section

c-c section

d-d section

housing

ing

apan hai ance terrace aly urkey africa india hina ake away

student house work

start up consulting shop

hall

c

d

hotel rooms wellness beauty

common rooms

rooms

playground

gardentmultifunctional gym

sports camp

gym sport bar

b-b section

housing

roomsr rooms beauty

b

housing

py playground g

housing

rooms

common room study room common room

study rooms

eracce

common rooms

teracce

kitchen

laundry

start up

hall

shop shop

consulting shop

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


09 | HYBRID CLUSTER: THE INTERFACE

trasversal section | 1:500 UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA


443

interface floor plan | 1:500

longitudinal section | 1:500 COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


10 | HYBRID CLUSTER: THE GRAFT

c* block

3 to 11 floor plan | 1:500 UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA


y* block

445

0 to 2 floor plan | 1:500

3 to 11 floor plan | 1:500

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


11 | VERTICAL LIVING

block houses

typology 2 bed. apartment code 062b dimension 74 sq.m users

thin houses

typology 2 bed. apartment code 062b dimension 78 sq.m users

typology 1 bed.apartment code 062b dimension 70 sq.m users

typology 1 bed | 1 office apartment code 062b dimension 78 sq.m users

typology 1 bed. | 1 office appartment code 062b dimension 78 sq.m users

typology 2 bed. duplex | 1 terrace code 042t dimension 65 + 35 sq.m users

penthouses

typology 2 bed. appartment code 082b dimension 95 sq.m users

typology 3 bed. appartment code 083b dimension 100 sq.m users

typology 2 bed. appartment code 092b dimension 108 sq.m users

typology 2 bed | 1 office appartment code 093b dimension 112 sq.m users

typology 1 bed bed | 1 office appartment code 082b dimension 100 sq.m users

typology 2 bed | 1 office appartment code 083b dimension 100 sq.m users

typology 3 bed. appartment code 093b dimension 112 sq.m users

typology 2 bed. maisonette code 002d dimension 68 + 50 sq.m users

block houses

edge houses

edge houses

typology 3 bed. appartment code 012e dimension 130 sq.m users

typology 2 bed. | 1 office appartment code 112e dimension 125 sq.m users

UNIVERSITĂ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTĂ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA

typology 2 bed. | 1 office appartment code 112e dimension 130 sq.m users


typology 1 bed. duplex code 041t dimension 50 + 35 sq.m users

typology 2 bed. duplex code 061t dimension 70 + 50 sq.m users

typology 3 bed. | 1 terrace maisonette code 003d dimension 60 + 50 + 35 sq.m users

typologies solutions | 1:200

code 17

062b

code

pure living

living+ working

10

code

083b

22

042t

2

pure living

30 living+ working

code

pure living 062t

447

2

70 code

100

2

24 76 code

041t

thin houses

094b pure living

40 living+ working 60

code 10

012e pure living

40 living+ working code

002e

60 100

6 code 7

003e

pure living

penthouses

elevations | 1:500 COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD


12 | HYBRID FEELING

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA | FACOLTÁ DI ARCHITETTURA | RELATORE NICOLA MARZOT | CANDIDATI ANDRIJANA SEKULIC CLAUDIA M. M. SINATRA


449

COMPLEX(C)ITY | THE NETWORK METROPOLIS OF GLOBAL LONDON | OBSERVATIONS AND DESIGN SUGGESTIONS FOR A MULTIFUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY IN ILFORD



Block model

Plastico dell’isolato






Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.