DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
LIVING WITH WATER How can public realm improvements and design interventions along London’s post industrial waterfront help in creating a better interaction between the water and the users, the places they inhabit as well as the water’s edge ?
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
1
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON FACULTY OF BUILT ENVIRONMENT BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING MAJOR PROJECT : “ How can public realm improvements and design
interventions along London’s post industrial waterfront help in creating a better interaction between the water and the users, the places they inhabit as well as the water’s edge ? “ by Debanil Pramanik , B . ARCH
Word count : 7798 Being a major project in Urban Design and City Planning submitted to the faculty of the built environment as part of the requirements for the award of Msc Urban Design and City Planning at University College London , I declare that this project is entirely my own work and that ideas , data , images and direct citations drawn from elsewhere are identified and referenced.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT I acknowledge and greatly appreciate the guidance and critical inputs provided by my supervisor David Syme throughout the process of the project. His patience and support have been invaluable towards the completion of this project. I would also like to thank the faculty especially Professor Juliana Martins for her constant support and discussions which helped me narrow down my research question to its present form. All suggestions and comments made by jurors during the various presentations were constructive and have been duly noted at stages of the project. Lastly I would like to thank my batch mates for creating an atmosphere of learning , creativity and helping exchange of ideas without which working on this project would not have been such an enriching experience.
Signature Date
DEBANIL PRAMANIK DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
2
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
ABSTRACT “Cities seek a waterfront that is a place of public enjoyment. They want a waterfront where there is ample visual and physical public access – all day, all year - to both the water and the land. Cities also want a waterfront that serves more than one purpose :they want it to be a place to work and to live, as well as a place to play. In other words, they want a place that contributes to the quality of life in all of its aspects – economic, social, and cultural”. Remaking the Urban Waterfront, the Urban Land Institute (Seattle Department of Planning and Design, 2012)
The role of water in our cities has changed dramatically over time. Once considered sacred and cherished, then networks for flourishing trade,commerce and industries, what we have today in many cities is an a system of post industrial waterfronts with reduced accessibility to water affecting chances of interaction between man and the natural element in the face of conflicting pressures of urban development. Amongst these challenges are opportunities to move away from capital intensive, mono-functional systems to a more holistic approach of relooking the way we interact with water specially along our waterfronts. The project explores ways of increasing interaction with water both at the edge and within the urban fabric in the post industrial context along rivers. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
3
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1A Problem to be addressed and justification of topic 1B Framing the research question 1C Objectives of the research question 1D Methodology
7 8 9 10
3. QUESTIONNAIRE 3A Survey sheets 3B Pie charts 3C Analysis of results
40 41 43
4. CASE STUDY 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2I 2J 2K 2L 2M 2N 2O 2P 2Q 2R
Structure of literature review Water as a planning element Waterfront regeneration Timeline of waterfront regeneration Types of waterfront regeneration Stages of successful waterfronrt regeneration Pitfalls of waterfront regeneration Realms of waterfront Types of waterfront edges (plan) Types of interaction Types of waterfront edges (section) Placemaking Water as a placemaking element Integration of water into urban realm Water sensitive urban design Evolution of waterfront regeneration in London Projects on the Thames Challenges with designing with water in the U.K.
14 15 16 17 18 20 21 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 34 37
4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F
Structure of case study analysis Kop van zuid , Rotterdam Rotterdam 2035 Hafencity , Hamburg Hammarby Sjostad , Stockholm London (Docklands and Southbank)
46 47 49 50 52 54
5. TOOLKIT 5A Objectives 5B Principles 5C Tools Detailed explanation of tools 5D Tools of interaction 5E Tools of integration
58 59 60 61 64
7. THE MASTERPLAN 7A 7B 7C 7D 7E 7F
Arriving towards the masterplan Multiscalar options on site Tools on site Masterplan with wider context Masterplan at Low tide Masterplan at high tide Detailed interventions 7G Intervention at Scale 1 : Enclosure 7H Interventions at Scale 2 : Urban fabric 7I Detailed sections 7J Interventions at Scale 3 : Waterfront
91 92 93 97 98 99 102 104 112 114
8. CONCLUSION 8A 8B 8C 8D 8E
New linkages Phasing Funding Evaluation Conclusion
127 128 129 130 132
Bibliography
134
6. THE SITE 6A 6B 6C 6D 6E 6G 6H 6I
Justification of choice of site Site context Historic evolution of site Recent planning applications Macro analysis Micro analysis : Conditions on site Micro analysis : Opportunities on site Strategies on site
68 70 72 74 76 82 84 88
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
4
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
S.NO
SUBJECT
PAGE
FIG 1 FIG 2 FIG 3 FIG 4 FIG 5 FIG 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 FIG 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 FIG 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 FIG 24 , 25 , 26 , 27, 28 , 29 FIG 30 FIG 31 , 32 , 33, 34 , 35 , 36 FIG 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 FIG 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 FIG 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 FIG 52 , 53, 54 , 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 FIG 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67 FIG 68 , 69, 70, 71, 72 FIG 73 , 74, 75, 76 FIG 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84 FIG 85 FIG 86, 87 FIG 88 , 89 , 90 , 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 FIG 96 , 97, 98, 99, 100 FIG 101 , 102, 103, 104 FIG 105, 106, 107, 108 FIG 109 , 110 , 111, 112, 113 FIG 114 , 115, 116, 117, 118 FIG 119, 120, 121, 122, 123 FIG 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128, 129, 130, 131, 132 FIG 133 , 134 , 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143 FIG 144 , 145 FIG 146 , 147 FIG 148 FIG 149 , 150, 151 FIG 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157 FIG 158, 159, 160, 161, 162 FIG 163 FIG 164
Post industrial decay along waterfront Standardized waterfront design approach Interaction with water Structure of the literature review Aim of understanding the role of water Effect of water as a planning element Design led and culture led regeneration Timeline Types of waterfront regeneration Realms of waterfront design Types of waterfront edge (Plan) Types of surface interaction Types of waterfront edges (section) Stages of successful waterfront regeneration Pitfalls of waterfront design Water as placemaking element Integrating water into urban fabric Evolution of London’s waterfront Projects on the Thames Questionnaire Images used for questionnaire Rotterdam case study Hafencity case study Hammarby Sjostad case study London case study Site Justification Historical evolution of site Conditions on site Opportunities on site Strategies on site Strategies on site 2 Strategies on site 3: Application of Toolkit The Masterplan in wider context Interventions Detailed sections Interventions continued New linkages Phasing
8 8 8 12 13 13 14 15 16 - 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 - 25 26-27 29 30-31 32 - 34 38 41 45 - 47 48 - 49 50 - 51 52 - 53 66 - 67 70 - 71 80 - 81 82 - 84 86 - 87 89 90 - 91 95 101 - 109 110 - 112 115 - 123 125 126 127
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Types of waterfront edge (Plan) 19 20 Types of surface interactions Types of waterfront edge (Section) 21 22 Stages of successful waterfront regeneration Table 5 Pitfall of waterfront regeneration 23 - 25 27 Table 6 Placemaking and water as placemaking element 59 - 63 Table 7 Detailed Toolkit 80 - 81 Table 8 Conditions on site 82 - 84 Table 9 Opportunities on site 86 - 87 Table 10 Strategies on site 128 -129 Table 11 Analysis of conclusions Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
5
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
6
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
1. INTRODUCTION 1A. PROBLEM TO BE ADDRESSED
THE LONDON CONTEXT LONDON CONTEXT : CULTURAL / OTHER
OTHER EUROPEAN EXAMPLES
EXISTING
UPCOMING
RICHMOND , LONDON OSLO
www.pps.org
www.almany.com www.telegraph.co.uk
www.west8.nl
LONDON CONTEXT : RESIDENTIAL WATERFRONT EXISTING
UPCOMING
HAMBURG
RICHMOND , LONDON
www.skift.com
“Waterfronts with continuous public access are much more desirable than those where the public space is interrupted. Even small stretches where the waterfront is unavailable to the public greatly diminish the experience” PROJECT FOR PUBLIC SPACES
The enquiry into the research question begins with my travel to other European cities and observing that their postindustrial waterfronts are far more animated as compared to the ones in London.In this context one of the key factor that binds all the other European waterfronts in question was their accessibility to water and also integration of water into the existing urban fabric in some cases
www.almany.com hidden-london.com
www.primeresi.com
While many of London’s postindustrial waterfronts have gone through dramatic transformation it is the existing as well as upcoming regeneration of post industrial land along the Thames into residential schemes which feel like much thought was not put in integrating them either with water or the urban fabric. This lack of imagination results in a very mundane user experience making it an opportunity lost. This is despite the fact that these are the places they inhabit and spend maximum time in apart from work.
Images like these from parts of London’s waterfront with better accessibility to the river show that given an opportunity people would probably interact with water in similar ways as observed in other European cities. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Taking into account all these aspects the major research project looks at how design interventions for increasing interaction with water and integrating it into the urban fabric along post industrial waterfronts can not only serve as place- making tools but also as technical solutions within the public realm, to overcome the social and practical barriers that prevent them from becoming common practice of just aesthetic / landscape upgradation. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
7
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
1. INTRODUCTION 1B . FRAMING THE RESEARCH QUESTION
FIG 1
FIG 2 www.pland.gov.hk
www.thspaces.com
WHY WATERFRONT ? With a major shift in the industrial uses of waterfronts away from the urban core a lot of disused and derelict land is opening up for redevelopment into alternative uses. Waterfront redevelopment raises issues concerning an extensive range of urban planning and management perspectives, extending from space design to economic, environmental, cultural ,tourism considerations as well as opportunities to integrate water into the urban fabric to bring users closer to water .
THE USUAL PROCESS
+
Due to their advantageous location at the interface between built environment and water, they provide highly exploitable urban spaces for new development. However, the role that the post industrial waterfronts can play and the solutions towards how this should be integrated in urban fabric have become standardized ,often unanimated & without opportunity of interaction with water. The water edges which have been able to move away from this monotony have often been deemed more successful than others
FIG 3 www.ou.org
THE CHALLENGE
=
How to avoid the risk of replicating spatial planning clichés along post industrial waterfronts? How to re connect users with water and water with the urban fabric? How to emphasize the presence of water and make it a part of user’s everyday life ?
RESEARCH QUESTION “ How can public realm improvements and design interventions along London’s post industrial waterfront help in creating a better interaction between the public , the water , the water’s edge and the places they inhabit ? “ DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
8
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
1. INTRODUCTION 1C. OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH
OBJECTIVE 2
OBJECTIVE 3
To make a comparative assessment of urban waterfront revitalization projects around the world and understand what makes some more successful than the others
To treat the project as more than just landscape upgradation and also look into the possibility of incorporating multiple functions
OBJECTIVE 4
OBJECTIVE 5
OBJECTIVE 6
To ensure that plans are flexible, adapt to preferences in the level of interaction , seasons , tides and other such variations
To look into the possibility of incorporating natural systems / landscape apart from other measures as connecting mediums between users , water and the water’s edge
To prevent standardization of the interventions. In short, models can often be unconnected with area under evaluation. Link to context
OBJECTIVE 1 To understand challenges designers face while working with waterfronts
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
9
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
1. INTRODUCTION 1D. METHODOLOGY
FORM CRITERIA FOR ANALYSIS OF CASE STUDY
BOOKS , JOURNALS AND RESEARCH PAPERS
STAGE 2
DESKTOP RESEARCH
STAGE 1
LITERATURE REVIEW
1
STUDY OF EXAMPLES
1
HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROCESS
2
EXAMPLES FROM THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT Kop Van Zuid ,Rotterdam Hammarby Sjostad , Stockholm Hafencity , Hamburg Southbank and Docklands , London
Study of varying interaction levels depending on treatment of water’s edge
2
INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER AND WATER’S EDGE
PROJECT ON THE THAMES
Understanding the various realms of waterfront design
Floating Village River Park Thames Bath
3
PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL WATERFRONT REGENERATION AND PITFALLS OF THE WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROCESS
4
INTEGRATING WATERFRONT / WATER WITH URBAN FABRIC
+
ANALYSIS OF CASE STUDIES Comparison of case studies based on parameters selected from the literature review
STAGE 3
3
BARRIERS IN DESIGNING WITH WATER IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
10
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
1. INTRODUCTION
STAGE 4
1D. METHODOLOGY
+
INTERVIEWS
This stage leads to the Toolkit PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS
STAGE 5 COMBINING ALL THE STAGES
This stage is crucial to get an idea about the mindset of the people and how they currently interact with the river in London and given an opportunity how they would like to change things.
STAGE 6 ARRIVING TOWARDS A TOOLKIT FOR TESTING ON SITE The analysis of available literature and relevant case studies points towards devising a toolkit.All the stages before broadly cover three important aspects INTERACTION : Between the water , user and water’s edge as well as water and the urban fabric INTEGRATION : Incorporating water into the urban fabric to connect it back to the water / river INVOLVEMENT : making the whole process of water integration a part of people’s everyday lives in order to sensitize them to the use of waterscapes as communal spaces and water as a valuable resource
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
11
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
12
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
LITERATURE REVIEW
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
13
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2A . STRUCTURE OF LITERATURE REVIEW WATER AS PLANNING BUILT ENVIRONMENT &
WATERFRONT Process History Type of regeneration Successful waterfront regeneration process Pitfalls of waterfront regeneration
Usage and interaction between user and the waterfront and waterfront with the built environment Study of various edge conditions at the interface of water and the built and understand varying levels of interaction and accessibility
Perception of the waterfront and experiencing it based on the quality of surrounding public realm / built environment
WATER
Relation between the built urban fabric , the element of water and ways to integrate the both
INTERACTION Realms of waterfront Types of waterfront edges
INTEGRATE WITH URBAN FABRIC
USERS Water as a Placemaking tool and people’s involvement with water
INTEGRATION + INVOLVEMENT
Incorporate water by making it a part of people’s everyday use
Water in placemaking Water sensitive urban design
Making people more sensitive / appreciative about the presence of water by integrating it into the urban fabric
WATERFRONT REGENERATION IN LONDON
FIG 5 : The role of water in urban system
FIG 4 : Structure of the literature review
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
14
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW WHY WATERFRONT ?
2B. EFFECTS OF WATER AS A PLANNING ELEMENT
Waterfront provides unique opportunity to study the impact of water as a planning element and its interaction with the urban realm Visual
Audial
AESTHETIC EFFECTS
FIG 6
FIG 8
WATER According to (Önen, 2007) Urban natural water elements play an important role in the establishment of balance in natural and social life in cities . Water is the most important planning element which brings about physical and psychological comfort. In addition it also brings a number of aesthetic and functional features Moretti (2008), the word “waterfront” means “the urban area in direct contact with water”. Yasin et al. (2010) indicated that waterfront is defined generally as the area of interaction between urban development and the water. Hou (2009), described the waterfront area as the conflux area of water and land.
+
WATERFRONT Tactual
Psychological FIG 7
FIG 9 Aesthetic effects of water
Climate control / Biodiversity
Recreational
Effects of water as planning element in an urban area
FIG 10
FIG 11
FUNCTIONAL EFFECTS
Circulation Source : (Önen, 2007)
Noise control FIG 12
Functional effects of water
15
FIG 13 DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2C. WATERFRONT REGENERATION
THE PROCESS
In the contemporary city, the success of the quality of life embodied in public spaces is increasingly accepted as a guarantee factor for an overall success. As such, cities have realized the importance of the role of water for a better quality of life in the city. Many cities around the world are creating ambitious waterfront projects, trying to solve their problems related to water and combining this with improved public spaces. WHY POST INDUSTRIAL WATERFRONT ? Water is a recurring theme through history. During the last decades, due to various reasons, harbour facilities moved away from urban centers in many parts of the world. This has left great amount of land close to city’s central areas free for intervention and development. In most of European capitals,waterfront was occupied by harbour facilities, and due to commercial expansion, these spaces were growing and became segregated from the urban space. This process did not allow the development of leisure areas on the waterfront. (Martire, 2008) Technical, political, social, and economical transformations in the cities provoked significant changes on the spatial configuration of the city in general and on their waterfronts in particular. Since the 1970s, the experience of urban rehabilitation, recycling the existing urban fabrics and their adaptability to new uses has opened up ways of proceeding for cities. The possibility of using former industrial areas and ports assured a qualitative and economical improvement for the city. New uses in these recycle areas are usually assigned to trigger the acceleration of the advance of the city and public spaces are predominantly allocated therein.
DESIGN LED : BALTIMORE
DESIGN LED REGENERATION Earliest known example : Baltimore , Barcelona : Different approach , positioned designers as artists , public spaces as sculptural elements FIG 14 www.baltimorewaterfront.com
DESIGN LED : BARCELONA
CULTURE LED REGENERATION London : 1980’s , 1990’s Investing public funds into locations of new cultural facilities eg.Southbank SOUTHBANK , LONDON
FIG 15 www.spaintravel.com
DESIGN LED : BARCELONA
FIG 17 www.theguardian.com
16
FIG 16 DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2D. TIMELINE OF WATERFRONT REGENERATION FIG 18
18Th Century
Rivers and waterfronts became important for trade;development of ports
40 year long trend begins to repurpose waterfronts as destinations with museums , cultural complexes , festivals
HAFENCITY ,HAMBURG www.e-architect.co.uk
CURRENT TREND Treating waterfronts as flexible zones where mitigation principles, new experiments in design of public spaces can be done
Residential mix introduced into the mix in waterfront development
Higher environmental standards corresponding to increase popularity of these areas as prime property / increase commercial value
19Th,20th Century
1970’s
FIG 22
Festival of Britain ; Southbank : Waterfront as destination
1951
1960’s to 1970’s
1980’s
1980’s
Late 1980’s
1981
THE LONDON CONTEXT
Containerization resulted in shifting of docks further away from urban core eg. Rotterdam (35 kms)
BALTIMORE WATERFRONT www.visitmaryland.com FIG 20
London becomes world’s busiest port
WEST INDIA DOCK , 1820 www.stgite.org.uk
THE WORLD CONTEXT
HAMBURG PORT , 1800’s de.wikipedia.org FIG 19
FIG 21
18Th Century
FESTIVAL OF BRITAIN ,1951 www.telegraph.co.uk FIG 23
Containerization ; Shifting of docks 30kms away from urban core WEST INDIA DOCK REDEVELOPED (CANARY www.canarywharf.com
All of London’s major docks closed
LDDC (London Dockland Development Corporation) Formed ; Major regeneration starts
CURRENT TREND Waterfronts are in a state of confusion with most of them not a s interactive as their European counterparts
?
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
17
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW NEW URBAN EXPANSION
This typology contains the waterfront areas which are built all over again in available areas; and reclaimed old industrial or port areas. Some examples of it can be found at Hafen City in Hamburg, and on Lake Spandau and the Bay of Rummelsburg, in Berlin
HA
2E . TYPES OF WATERFRONT REGENERATION
N FE
HA M TY, I C
BURG
LO N
CE BAR
FIG 24
N BO
FRONT TER A W
ap
ar
tm
(Aksoy, 2006; Moretti, 2008a).
LIS
www .
ba r c elo na
The waterfront regeneration implies innovative consequences along the banks and in the surrounding areas. It provides public uses along pedestrian paths. For example, Barcelonetta Beach and its environs which connects the port areas and river bank along the Thames in London with public uses like a jogging, walking and cycling etc.
A ET
H AC
t.co .uk
NEW URBAN WATERFRONT ITINERARIES
BE
www.e-archi tec
(Moretti, 2008a; Giovinazzi & Giovinazzi, 2008).
FIG 25
ts en
m .co
WATERFRONT AND GREAT EVENTS
et
18
.n es iti r-c
(Moretti, 2010).
w w w. riv e
This one is established as a consequence of important temporary events in the waterfront area such as the Expos in Seville(1992), Barcelona (1992, 2004), Genoa (1992 and 2004), Lisbon (1998), London(2000), Zaragoza (2008). Afterward, new urban areas are developed around these areas like residential and production area
FIG 26
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
KO
2E. TYPES OF WATERFRONT REGENERATION
P
N VA
ID ZU
, ROTTERDAM
REUSE OF PORT AREAS This typology includes waterfront areas which is regenerated former port areas. With re-use of these areas, the water is regained the heart of cities. For instance,Rotterdam
A
FLOOD DEFENCE
p0 10 .n l
NU BE
NN VIE , ND LA
DA
www .k o
IS
(Moretti, 2008a).
LO
RONT ERF T A W
ww w.i i i n sti tu t
O S
FIG 27
Some structures which is established for river flood defence can represent a new opportunity for city expansion and for the establishment of new urban uses. Three examples of this can be given. The first one is with green areas and recreational uses like an open air festival and sport activities etc. The Donauinsel (Danube Island) in Vienna,as a created barrier island (Moretti 2008a).
nl e. FIG 28
URBAN BEACHES
ww w . po r ta
ec th nd
wo ity.
e rdpr
FIG 29
They artificially created environment in an urban areas.Urban beaches are relatively unfixed due to temporary and mobile. Their locations and uses may be change. They may be a seasonal (especially the warmer months) installation over a roadway or a parking lot or a public park or a site cleared by demolition. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
19
ss.com
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2F. SUCCESSFUL WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROCESS STAGE 1
TABLE 4
VISIONING THE WATERFRONT
Visioning the waterfront environment as important public domain
FIG 48 : Visioning the waterfront
STAGE 2
Opening up the waterfront to existing urban fabric
STAGE 3
Creating physical , visual and psychological accessibility to water
CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE FIG 49 : Accessibility to water
STAGE 4
Planning mixed use and multi functional uses
STAGE 5
Responding to context consideration for historic and existing built context
STAGE 6
Provision of open spaces along water and the promenade
STAGE 7
Designing scale and form of built environment to enhance sense of place
SHAPING THE WATERFRONT’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT
FIG 50 : Use of iconic architecture to shape built environment
STAGE 8
Creating people , activity and event oriented spatial structure
STAGE 9
Long term piece meal step by step process
STAGE 1O
ANIMATING THE WATERFRONT
Programming of indoor and outdoor activities FIG 51 : Animation on the waterfront
(Yang,2002),(Falk,1992)
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
20
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2G . PITFALLS OF WATERFRONT REGENERATION
TABLE 5
ikim w.w
DIVORCED FROM LOCAL IDENTITY
While landmark buildings are sometimes insufficient to sustain a constant flow of visitors to a site, uninspired design will only hurt the potential draw of a waterfront.
A waterfront that erases local identity is one that will not only often fail to draw a crowd but will also alienate residents.
Great vision takes into account all of the factors on this list, from accessibility, to local identity, to balance of space, to land use.
A good waterfront highlights response to history and context , a bad one conceals it.
-cdn.tripadv isor .co m
edia.org
POOR DESIGN , LACK OF VISION
FIG 53 : Lack of response to context
e d ia w,m ww
uarespace.com w.sq ww
ww
FIG 52 : Monotonous waterfronts
FIG 54 : Lack of public access to parts of the
EXCLUVIST Public access is central to a thriving waterfront When waterfronts are predominantly owned and operated by private entities that block large segments of the people from reaching the water, that waterfront cannot be considered a success as it does very little for the urban area at all. Encouraging people to interact with the space as a natural part of their daily lives and keeps the waterfront from becoming exclusionary.
Source : www.thewaterfront.com DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
21
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2G. PITFALLS OF WATERFRONT REGENERATION TABLE
simone.com
.blogspot.com
ny w,to ww
.b p w.1 ww
aterfrontconferenceco w.w mp ww a ny . co
m
FIG 55 : Involvement of stakeholders in process
FIG 56 : Purely residential waterfront
FIG 57 : Waterfronts that run for miles
LACK OF POLITICAL AND PUBLIC SUPPORT
SINGLE USE DEVELOPMENTS
NOT COMPACT
A public development can go nowhere if local politicians and citizens oppose it as it leads to insurmountable hurdles. Support and input from those who will be most affected by a development is key for it to have any semblance of legitimacy
Singe use development places real limits on the versatility of a public space and can strangle the flow of potential visitors. Dedicating a waterfront to just businesses, or homes, or even parkland, brings in only people partaking in very specific activities and doesn’t encourage them to linger past the completion of that activity.
To say that a waterfront destination must be compact in nature is not to say that a multi-mile waterfront development is ineffective or wrong. Rather, destinations within a waterfront must be compact to be successful. A waterfront, like any urban space, must feature walkable centers. Diffuse attractions cannot draw the visitors that concentrated, well-connected areas can.
Source : www.thewaterfront.com DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
22
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2G . PITFALLS OF WATERFRONT REGENERATION TABLE
THE NEXT PART
Be it a flooding river or storm prone sea, one bad day can destroy millions in development and revenue.
While many people enjoy a drive along a river, they won’t linger unless there is way for them to interact with the blue space as pedestrians. This reflects back on the need for a waterfront to be open to the public.
enha n ci
Ecosystems are important assets in and of themselves and require protection.Waterfronts are both bountiful resources and changeable hazards.
A quick way to take a gorgeous waterfront and make sure no one ever accesses it is by making it a space for cars instead of people.
raction w inte it h
Perhaps the biggest gaffe a waterfront developer can make is failing to plan for the environment.
IN TE
m
AUTO CENTRIC WATERFRONT
r
heeseland.co
LACK OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
TION C RA
te a w
stinc w.lo
rthjersey.com w.no
FIG 59: Motorway flanking the river in Paris
The treatment of the interface between water and urban realm / land is important to the way the user perceives the waterfront and also affects the interaction level and pattern between water , user and the urban fabric.The next part of the literature review summarises these findings.
ng
ww
ww
FIG 58 : Biologically dead waterfront
From the previous part of the literature review especially the study of successful waterfront regeneration process increasing interaction and accessibility to water comes across as an extremely crucial factor.
Source : www.thewaterfront.com DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
23
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2H.REALMS OF THE WATERFRONT Visual and psychological accessibility
Physical,visual, psychological accessibility
Physical, visual, psychological accessibility
Visual, psychological accessibility
Usage of floating objects(boats, marinas etc)
Adaptive reuse (renovation , refurbishment and preservation )
Coherent design vocabulary (material, façade, colour)
Continuous ,accessible promenade with landscape , activity nodes,public art
Sufficient open space, height, distance, mixed use, landmark architecture, water faced builtform
Coherent design vocabulary (material, façade, colour)
1
2
3
Relation to urban fabric
1. WATER SURFACE The surface of the water itself 2.WATER’S EDGE Boundary where water and land meet 3.FOREGROUND WATERFRONT A. FRONT : The place where people mentally and visually feel the presence of the waterscape A. FRONT : The place where people feel physical closeness to water B. BACK : Includes a major access path / road running parallel to the water’s edge 4.BACKGROUND WATERFRONT A. FRONT : The boundary where urban structure meets the foreground waterfront A. FRONT : Visually and physically still accessible to water but not as much as foreground waterfront B. BACK : Less accessible and visually interrupted
Sufficient open space, height, distance, mixed use
5.INLAND Unlikely to have a sense of waterfront
Connection between city and water
Visual and physical accessibility very limited
5
4
(Yang,2006)
The following pages explore the condition at the water’s edge and how treating it differently can impact the level of accessibility and interaction to water. FOREGROUND WATERFRONT WATER SURFACE
BACKGROUND WATERFRONT
INLAND
These conditions are studied both in plan and section to get a better understanding
WATER EDGE FIG 30 : The five realms of the waterfront
24
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2I. TYPES OF WATERFRONT EDGES (PLAN) NATURAL /SINUOUS
CONCAVE
CONVEX
EXTENSION
ENCLOSURE
ISLAND
EDGE PROFILE(PLAN)
STRAIGHT
TABLE
CHARACTERISTICS
INTERACTION LEVEL WITH
(Yang,2006)
Linear interaction Linear but dynamic between water and users This is often engineered
FIG 31
OSAKA (Yang,2006)
This is often natural
FIG 32
MEXICO CITY
Typical for docks , canals , harbors
Improved interaction water’s edge
Inward waterfront into cities
Extended to create more frontage
BRISTOL
FIG 33
(Yang,2006)
(Yang,2006)
25
Multidimensional interaction between water and edge Ship building
FIG 34
VANCOUVER (Yang,2006)
To protect against weather and wave
Great potential for use patterns
Shipbuilding waterfront
Natural or artificial island
FIG 35
BOSTON (Yang,2006)
FIG 36
BARCELONA (Yang,2006)
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2J. CLOSENESS OF WATERFRONT THREE SIDED
TWO SIDED
FOUR SIDED
WATER SURROUNDED
LAND SURROUNDED
EDGE PROFILE(PLAN)
ONE SIDED
TABLE 2
CHARACTERISTICS
INTERACTION LEVEL WITH
(Yang,2006)
One way visual interaction
Multidirectional visual interaction
Multidirectional visual interaction
Very multidirectional visual interaction
Less dynamic interaction with waterscape
Limited interaction of waterscape
Panoramic waterscape
Dynamic experience of waterscape
FIG 37
BATH (Yang,2006)
FIG 38
THE FALKS (Yang,2006)
FIG 39
BRISTOL
FIG 40
(Yang,2006)
Typical Island typology Less dynamic interaction like one sided
BALTIMORE
Multidirectional visual interaction More dynamic experience as compared to island
FIG 41
GRIMAUD
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
26
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2K. TYPES OF WATERFRONT EDGE DIAGONAL
LEVELLED BANK
STEPPED
PIER
SLOPE
INTERACTION LEVEL WITH
AVAILABILITY OF EDGE
SECTION
PERPENDICULAR
TABLE 3
Psychologically and visually accessible to water Physically not accessible
FIG 42
NEW YORK
Psychological and visual accessibility limited
Visually and psychologically accessible
Physically limited accessibility
Physically accessible
FIG 43
OSAKA
FIG 44
Psychologically and visually very accessible Physically accessible,creation of sociable space
YOKOHAMA
FIG 45
OSLO
Sense of freedom Great potential for water related activities
FIG 46
OSLO
Overcome boundary between land and water Can become dramatic activity node over water
FIG 47
BRIGHTON
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
27
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW PLACEMAKING CRITERIA
2L. PLACEMAKING AND WATER AS PLACEMAKING ELEMENT There are substantial spatial opportunities offered through application of social , technical and placemaking principles. The successful transition to water sensitive cities where water becomes a part of everyday life and is integrated into the urban fabric is dependent on “the ability to provide engaging and informative landscapes in the public realm” (Wong,2006). Character Character
The following criteria can be used in assessing integration of water into the urban fabric in terms of placemaking. (Gold,1980 ; Vernon & Tiwari , 2009 )
1
Activity Atmosphere Atmosphere Spatial arrangement Norbert Schultz (1980) suggests space as an organisation of physical elements that creates the atmosphere which together creates the character of place. Character Activity
Spatial arrangement
Function
FIG 60 : Water channel in urban www.watergovernance.eu
Variety of experiences “Sense of place”
AESTHETIC AMENITY Visual attractiveness added by intervention
2
Relph(2007) states that it is this amalgamation of qualities that provides a variety of experiences creating a sense of place. Atmosphere
Spatial arrangement
Function
Simonds (1983) suggests that functionality contributes to atmosphere through creation of activity and corresponding feelings
THE NEXT PART In this context water can be looked at as the function addition of which generates activity. The next part of the literature review deals with studying integration of water as a placemaking element
FIG 61: Interaction with water as a part of the urban architecturenow.co.nz
INTERACTION Introduce interface between water and people DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
28
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW TABLE
2M. PLACEMAKING AND WATER AS PLACEMAKING
3
5
7
FIG 62 : Accessible water in the urban realm bettercities.net
FIG 63 : Continual occupancy and passive surveillance www.1zoom.net
FIG 64 phys.org
ACCESSIBILITY Contribution of intervention to improve access
SECURITY Providing means of continual occupancy which also leads to passive surveillance
INTEGRATION Into context , responding to land uses , social functions , orientation
4
6
8
FIG 65: Bioswales in the urban context
FIG 66 : Maintenance of water features
parkingottawa.wordpress.com
www.1zoom.net
FIG 67 www.dailymail.co.uk
HEALTH AND SAFETY Using intervention to improve health and sanitation standards by means such as conserving surface runoff
MAINTENANCE Cost , liability , responsibility
IDENTITY / SENSE OF PLACE Distinct character in which the intervention plays a crucial role
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
29
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2N. INTEGRATING WATER INTO URBAN FABRIC
INTEGRATION OF WATER
Making water a part of everyday life
Collective Social Approach
Making the process of integrating water into the urban fabric more visible
Water appreciation
BEAUTIFUL PUBLIC REALM
INCREASED ACCESSIBILITY / INTERACTION WITH WATER
INTEGRATION OF WATER Of the many approaches of successfully integrating water into the urban fabric one of the most holistic approaches is WSUD (Water Sensitive Urban Design)
Good Placemaking techniques
It is the means of sustainable development which recognizes the ecological (Novotny & Novotny , 2009) ,functional and social value of surface water ; integrating the urban built with the urban water cycle (Wong , 2006)
Enhanced waterfronts / public realm interventions
The ideal scenario is the combination of several physical , functional and social processes to result in successful implementation of the same. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
30
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2O. INTEGRATING WATER INTO THE URBAN FABRIC (WATER SENSITIVE URBAN DESIGN) (Wong , 2006 ; Novtony and Novtony ,2012 ; De Graaf and Van der Ven , 2012)
1
2
3
FIG 68 : urban water harvesting pools bettercities.net
FIG 69 : Bioswales in urban system nacto.org
FIG 70 : Water traetment system as landscape element phys.org
HARVESTING Reducing demand through efficient use , conservation and use of alternative sources
INFILTRATION Distributing and localising water through slow conveyance and on site infiltration
4
TREATMENT Minimising generation of waste water , Reusing and recycling water for everyday use
5 THE NEXT PART OF LITERATURE REVIEW The next part of the Literature review deals with a deeper understanding of the London context : Evolution of waterfront regeneration in London and other projects on the River Thames , where they currently stand and what are the various challenges designers face while designing with or around water in London.
FIG 71: Retention pond in urban system www.loveyourlandscape.org
STORAGE Promoting creative and multifunctional storage of water in urban landscape , contributing ans visual and recreational amenity
FIG 72 :Water feature in the public realm www.pps.org
PUBLIC SPACE Restoring a healthier water system , integrating with urban fabric , encouraging biodiversity
It is important to look into this aspect of literature as the Research question deals with London’s post Industrial waterfronts and transforming them with the river playing a very important part of the design DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
31
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2P . EVOLUTION OF LONDON’S WATERFRONT
te nwa rba rfront.blogspot.co.u k/
gspot.co.uk/
rfront.blogspot.co .uk/
blo ront. terf
wate ban /ur
a nw
:/ tp ht
a rb //u p:
u :// tp ht
ht t
FIG 73 : Southbank transformation
FIG 75 :Tourist attractions along the river
FIG 74 : Roger’s vision for London’s waterfronts
BEGINNING OF THE TRANSFORMATION In 1951 the Festival of Britain redefined the post industrial Southbank area as a place for arts and entertainment. Thus began one of the first major waterfront regeneration attempts along the Thames.
QUICK TRANSFORMATION MID 1980’S ; RICHARD ROGERS VISION FOR THE THAMES Steel and glass dominated Rogers’ scheme. Futuristic trams and gracefully thin bridges spanned great distances to connect new islands in the Thames.
London’s waterfront was quickly transformed, but the effect was ultimately a mixed message. Perhaps the vision of Rogers (and those like him) was shortsighted. Perhaps the city was too eager to build first and ask questions later resulting in springing up of attractions like the O2 or the London Eye. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
32
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
“ Visiting the Tate’s waterfront plaza on the Thames is an exercise in frustration. Redeveloped and re-opened in 2000, the new design feels purposefully manipulative. One feature, a series of birch allées that form a path to nowhere, typifies the design mentality on display throughout the plaza. It is a place that limits visitor’s options, forcing them to use the space in prescribed ways. When people feel controlled by a space–when their freedom is restricted–they will not stay long, and they will rarely choose to return “ PROJECT FOR PUBLIC SPACES
/urb
erfront.blogs anwat po t . c o.u k/
THE CITY’S FRONT YARD Despite many miscalculations, London has managed one important step in transforming its river. The water is reinforced as the front yard of the city. It is the center of the action for iconic development keeping the waterfront firmly planted in the public realm
MOVING TOWARDS CRITICISM
p :/ htt
FIG 76 : Thames waterfront as a public
“interruption in the visual and stylistic continuity on the river” Parks, Promenades and Planning 2010 Rotch Traveling Scholarship
“lack of public access to water makes project almost parasitic with respect to urban context without contribution to the public realm” Fluid city
In this context it is essential to also learn about a few current proposals on the Thames , their current status and the hurdles they have faced along the way.
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
33
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2Q. PROJECTS ON THE THAMES
FLOATING VILLAGE , ROYAL DOCKS
PROJECT INFO Multi-million pound scheme in Royal Docks, east London, to be UK first floating village The scheme would turn the Royal Victoria Dock, which was an industrial powerhouse for more than a century, into an array of brightly-coloured houses, paths and restaurants on giant concrete ‘stilts’. Floating villages are a new idea for the UK, but already popular in Europe, especially in Holland
CURRENT STATUS Planning approval awaited from Newham Council FIG 77 : Masterplan for the floating village www.constructionglobal.com
CHALLENGES Environmental impact Businesses not interested in coming to area Lack of affordable housing , Newham council head feels it will cater to only affluent people
FIG 78 : Artist’s impression of the floating village www.dailymail.co.uk
FIG 79 : Architect’s vision of the floating village www.dailymail.co.uk
34
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2Q. PROJECTS ON THE THAMES
RIVER PARK , NORTHBANK
PROJECT INFO Enjoyed enthusiastic backing from London Mayor Boris Johnson and other key stakeholders The London River Park concept aims to enhance the city’s reputation as a preeminent world capital by opening a new walkable expanse along the Thames. By linking St Paul’s Cathedral to The Tower of London, Millennium Bridge, Tate Modern, and Thames Clipper services, the park offers an exciting addition to the city’s rapidly evolving riverfront.
CURRENT STATUS FIG 80 : Aerial concept showing the concept of the river park www.e-architect.co.uK
“No contact” has been made by the architects or developer, Singapore firm Venus, since 2011
CHALLENGES Navigational safety issues Noise Pollution Environmental clearances Rather than being a park, CABE said the structure appeared “more akin to a pier or walkway”
FIG 81 : Architect’s impression of the river park www.ianvisits.co.uk
35
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2Q. PROJECTS ON THE THAMES
THAMES BATH , TEMPLE
PROJECT INFO A utopian vision of swimming in the Thames involving floating pools of natural Thames water Current proposal is for a lido featuring two pools : a 25-metre lap pool , a training pool The design, which includes a pair of pools supported by a concrete slab and raised to the height of the high water mark on a series of steel columns. The pools would be replenished with fresh river water at high tides
CURRENT STATUS FIG 82 : Plan showing the Thames Bath proposal www.dezeen.com
Since September 2014, the Port of London Authority (PLA) has been involved on the technical design and specific locations for the Baths Kick starter campaign for funding April 2015 onwards has already $221,000
CHALLENGES Environmental impact , Pollution in Thames Heating / All weather functionality Overcrowding due to possibility of it becoming major tourist destination Ownership / Logistics FIG 84 : Architect’s vision www.dezeen.com
FIG 83 : Architect’s vision www.dezeen.com
36
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2R . CHALLENGES WHILE DESIGNING WITH WATER IN LONDON
CLIMATE Cities with limited sunny days , frequent showers pose a unique challenge for waterfront development City spaces should find ways to plan for all weathers including winter and maximizing available sun in the winter is key to creating people friendly spaces Urban fabric can provide protection with street patterns and structures that break up and block the wind Small destination or strategically placed comfort zones for people helps break up the impact of weather and encourages all weather use of waterfront
POLLUTION In 1957, the Natural History Museum declared the Thames biologically dead. News reports from that era describe it as a vast, foul-smelling drain Wartime bombings had destroyed some of the old Victorian sewers .Post-war Britain did not have the resources to fix the problem quickly The Cleaner Thames campaign was launched in September 2015 to combat plastic waste. Perception regarding pollution is changing fast and today surveys suggest people are open to the idea of returning to Thames
OWNERSHIP The waterfront is a patchwork of disjointed private and public spaces resulting in ‘permissive’ access tempered by locked gates and timing restrictions, the details of which have to be negotiated individually for each property A 2003 London Assembly report warned that to many people the riverside seemed to be mutating into a thin strip of affluence, characterised by a “sterile mono culture” – a world barricaded off from the rhythms of the metropolis that lay on its doorstep provide further relief. Construction is expected to start in 2016
Thames Tideway Tunnel, a major new sewer, will provide further relief. Construction is expected to start in 2016 DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
37
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2R . CHALLENGES WHILE DESIGNING WITH WATER IN LONDON
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
HERITAGE
TIDAL VARIATIONS
Environmental and site specific factors such as noise and traffic generation, the disposal of wastes, existing trees and other flora and fauna
Waterfront environment includes sites with statutory designations, such as Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas
Inconsistent water levels
Attitude of the local community is important in determining the level of priority attached to the redevelopment of an existing industrial site
It also includes the wider historic landscape and locally distinctive, valued and important buildings and features
Safety of users
Clarity in legislation
Designing waterfront sensitively also brings with itself constraints such as designing with an effort not to overshadow the existing heritage but to complement it.Other constraints include respecting surrounding scale , uses , vegetation
Sedimentation
There is an issue of contamination and making sites safe for development, given what the land may have been used for before
Soil erosion
Limited physical / visual access to water
Possible flooding Threat to natural habitat of flora and fauna
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
38
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
SURVEY
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
39
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
3. SURVEY 3A. THE QUESTIONNAIRE
PAGE 1
PAGE 2
PAGE 3
FIG 85
Printouts of these questions were used to ask respondents on the Southbank and the Northbank of the Thames (details have been discussed later ).Questions were broadly divided into PAGE 1 : Personal information ; PAGE 2 : Interaction and PAGE 3 : Integration with water. Responses from the survey have been shared on the next few pages and all results were mapped for analysis. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
40
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
AGE GROUPS Maximum respondents belonged to the 31 to 40 years age group
USER GROUPS Most respondents were from within U.K.with a huge number of international visitors too
PURPOSE OF VISIT A large chunk of the people surveyed were on the Thames Southbank for leisure / Sightseeing
MOST IMPRESSIVE WATERFRONT ELEMENT While most people spoke about the promenade itself , many also felt that architecture and open spaces are value additions
SENSE OF WATERFRONT Most people felt that open access to water with animation on its surface as well as edge can really uplift the sense of the waterfronts
WATER’S EDGE Maximum people showed preference towards fig 4 which shows steps leading to water while only 10% were happy the way things currently are (Fig 1) DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
41
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
HOME 40 %
MAXIMUM TIME OF DAY SPENT Most respondents said that they spent large part of the day at home after returning from work
YES 67 %
BEING CLOSE TO WATER IF NOT PREOCCUPIED Large number of people answered in the affirmative also saying that it calming , healthy option
YES 58 %
WATER BODIES NEAR RESIDENCE People mostly said yes to the idea of having water bodies / features near their residence .Some even said it would make for a better everyday experience
YES 54 %
IMPROVED INTERACTION WITH WATER 54 % people were open to the idea of improving interaction with water by increasing accessibility , functionality and removing physical / visual barriers
YES 52 %
WATER IN EVERYDAY LIFE Majority of the people welcomed the idea.However many could not make up their mind DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
42
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
3. SURVEY 3B. ANALYSING THE RESULTS LIMITATION OF THE SURVEY The survey was conducted primarily along the Southbank (National Theatre , Royal Festival hall and Southbank centre) as well as Northbank (The area around Monument and Somerset house). Due to logistical and time constraints responses have not been recorded on a larger section of London’s waterfronts.
FIG 86 : Bio swales in the urban environment www.inhabitat.com
Considering Southbank has an industrial past and has been successfully transformed its setting as one of the venues for the questionnaire survey to answer the research question is relevant. Responses were recorded on a weekday and it might vary it terms of various parameters on a weekend. Some of the response values have been rounded off to get a clearer picture and form the graphs / charts for analysis. Responses were recorded on a sunny day and it might vary with changing weather conditions.
FIG 87 : Retention ponds in the urban environment www.inhabitat.com
While the survey gives a basic / general idea about the research question , more time and manpower in terms of conducting the survey can yield better and more detailed results.
These images were used / shown to respondents when they were asked the questions on the Page 3 specifically that were related to integration of water in their immediate surroundings and facilitating better interaction between and water
KEY FINDINGS FROM THE SURVEY
54 %
felt that they would not hesitate to interact (touch , play with ) the water in Thames and wanted avenues for improved interaction with water.Many campaigns to clean the river water as well as the upcoming Thames Tideway might have been responsible in the change of people’s perception
42 %
people said this could be achieved by creating avenues for openness to water.They were open to the idea of steps , slopes , piers as an extension to the current waterfront for better interaction with water.
35 %
felt that connection / openness to water was one of the most crucial factors in determining a sense of place for the waterfront Most respondents who spent a large part of their day at home were open to the idea of integrating water into the urban fabric in their immediate surroundings.
58 %
people answered they would prefer water to become a part of their everyday lives using such methods.
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
43
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
44
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
CASE STUDIES
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
45
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4A. STRUCTURE FOR ANALYSING THE CASE STUDIES PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION From the literature review the success of a waterfront regeneration can be judged based on four prominent categories : STAGE A : VISIONING THE WATERFRONT STAGE B : CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE
STAGE B : CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE
Evaluating the water’s edge ; Physical , visual , psychological accessibility to water
STAGE C: SHAPING THE WATERFRONT’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Strategies to open up the waterfront to water , facilitating interaction between water , water’s edge and water , user
STAGE D: ANIMATING THE WATERFRONT
Interaction / integration with existing urban fabric
(Yang,2002),(Falk,1992) These further become the principles which I have used to evaluate the case studies in this section
1 SCOPE / TYPE STAGE A : VISIONING THE WATERFRONT Basic information about the project Type of regeneration : Port regeneration , Design led , Culture led , Mixed use
3 EVALUATION
2 INTERACTION
STAGE C : SHAPING THE WATERFRONT’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT
1
2
3
4
5
Unsatisfactory Bad Moderate Good Excellent
4 TRANSFER First step towards extrapolation Approaching the toolkit
Provision of open spaces along the water and on the promenade Quality of public realm design
STAGE D : ANIMATING THE WATERFRONT Create people , activity and event oriented spatial structures Programming / opportunities for activities to occur
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
46
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4B. KOP VAN ZUID , ROTTERDAM The harbour areas on the south bank of River Maas facing the present center have lost their earlier function with the westwards expansion of the port in the 1960s and 1970s, leaving the area abandoned. Being the former harbour area at the top of Rotterdam-south, Kop van Zuid area has been transformed into a new part of the modern city center of Rotterdam. The plan aimed a leap of the city center across the river Maas and connecting the north and south shores of the Maas (with the strong contribution of the new bridge) assigning it the heart of the city again. For urban planner Schrijnen (Schrijnen, 2008) in Rotterdam, when the harbour was there, the city itself was not positioned on the river, instead the harbour was. When this part of the harbour shifted away to the west, Kop van Zuid or new parts of it are only now touching the river as new urban settlements. As a big change, the city turned from a city on the harbour into a city on the river.
SCORE 12 / 20 EVALUATION ON NEXT PAGE
KOP VAN ZUID :
47
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4B. KOP VAN ZUID , ROTTERDAM
2 INTERACTION
Integration of water with the urban fabric. Not much effort witnessed in making water an integral part of the built
STAGE B : CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE Lively waterfront and sloping landscaped areas which lead to the waterfront
STAGE D : ANIMATING THE WATERFRONT People seem to enjoy spending time there though when weather permits , high quality design not involved.
FIG 88 : Aerial view www.roeldijkstra.nl
1 SCOPE / TYPE STAGE A : VISIONING THE WATERFRONT The plan used Rotterdam’s water as a vast, binding, collective factor, for fragments of the project and the city.
FIG 89 : Sloping landscape leading to the river www.rotterdam.nl
STAGE C : SHAPING THE WATERFRONT’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Use of public art elements to shape built environment
An area of 45 000 m2 was left for recreational activities.
www.cityrotterdam.com
4 TRANSFER
The essential aspect of connectivity with the city center on the north was provided by; the Erasmus Bridge A hotel, a restaurant, a museum, passenger terminal and other urban functions were planned on the Wilhelminapier
FIG 91 : Overview of part of waterfront design
Treatment of the water’s edge and use of public art in enhancing quality of public realm
FIG 90 : Art installation in the urban realm www.youropi.com DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
48
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4C. WATER SQUARES AND ROTTERDAM
2 INTERACTION STAGE B : CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE Steps and ramps lead to the water square making it accessible to the general public
Integration of water with the urban fabric. This approach makes water a part of people’s everyday life
STAGE D : ANIMATION
Innovative and multifunctional water squares allow various kinds of animation / uses based on weather conditions with great flexibility
FIG 92 : Water square in Rotterdam www.dutchwatersector.com
1 SCOPE / TYPE ROTTERDAM 2035 WATER STRATEGY Living in Rotterdam will become water related in residential communities on the water Water will be more actively used for public transport in the city
FIG 93 : Submerged water square www.urbanisten.nl
STAGE C: SHAPING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Water squares are open spaces that temporarily store water when it rains. When it is not raining, they can be used for various activities, such as leisure activities.
FIG 95 : Multi functionality of the water square www.theneweconomy.com
4 TRANSFER
Rain will become a recurrent festival instead of an inconvenience The river banks will become more of places for private initiatives and urban activities
The idea of incorporating water into the urban fabric and make it a part of everyday life Element of multifunctionality FIG 94 : Water square as a public space www.urbanisten.nl DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
49
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4D. HAFENCITY , HAMBURG In Hafencity area, port function continued until the end of 80s and the area remained as brownfield until 1997. Time span of the transformation extends until 2017 when a total integration is achieved. Situated directly between the historic Speicherstadt warehouse district and the River Elbe, there will be a new city with a cosmopolitan mix of apartments, service businesses, culture, leisure, tourism , and Hafencity Project, will expand downtown Hamburg by 40 % in about 20 years.
SCORE 16 / 20 EVALUATION ON NEXT PAGE
HAFENCITY :
FIG 96 www.Hafencity.com
50
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4D. HAFENCITY , HAMBURG
2 INTERACTION STAGE B : CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE Cascading landscaped terraces which lead to the water
FIG 97: Aerial overview www.Hafencity.com
1 SCOPE / TYPE
STAGE A : VISIONING THE WATERFRONT
Integration of water with the urban fabric. This approach makes water a part of people’s everyday life
STAGE D : ANIMATION
Cultural highlights of the project range from the striking landmark Elbphilarmonie Concert Hall (Herzog & de Meuron) to International Maritime Museum of Hamburg and the new urban plazas being used for smaller events.
FIG 98 : Cascading green www.Hafencity.com
STAGE C: SHAPING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Vibrant and high quality open spaces , Flood protection combined with public- private spaces
FIG 100 : Multi functionality of public spaces www.Hafencity.com
The port area renewal project includes approximately 10 km of quayside promenades. .As a solution for the accessibility of water at all tides in the very high quays was designed a descending ‘landscape’ of surfaces ,
Design of water’s edge and public realm to facilitate interaction between user and water
Elevated footpaths, waterproof parking basements and the accessible waterfronts have provided a successful combination of safety and spatial quality of urban spaces
Design of other vibrant new open spaces by and on the water are characterized by parks, plazas and promenades, quays with floating pontoons.
4 TRANSFER
FIG 99 : Quality of public spaces www.Hafencity.com
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
51
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4E. HAMMARBY SJOSTAD , STOCKHOLM Hammarby Sjostad is a district in Stockholm, Sweden adjacent to the downtown, which is a brownfield site that is being developed as a sustainable neighborhood. Previously an industrial waterfront, planning for the redevelopment of the site began in 1996. The 2004 Olympic bid was incorporated into the site’s redevelopment, however after Sweden did not receive the bid, the city shifted its development focus to building a sustainable community that is twice as efficient as a typical one. The 200 hectare district houses approximately 20,000 people in 9000 housing units. Hammarby also provides 200,000 square meters of commercial space providing jobs for 10,000 people (CABE 2007). The district also provides for a wide range of educational, cultural and recreational programs (Dastur 2005).
SCORE 16.5 / 20 EVALUATION ON NEXT PAGE
HAMMARBY SJOSTAD , STOCKHOLM
52
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
4. CASE STUDIES 4E. HAMMARBY SJOSTAD , STOCKHOLM
2 INTERACTION STAGE B : CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE Waterfront / water readily accessible using landscaped terraces , slopes , boardwalks
FIG 101 : Aerial overview www.skyscrapercity.com
1 SCOPE / TYPE
STAGE A : VISIONING THE WATERFRONT
A network of varied parks, green spaces and walkways runs through the district to provide a counterbalance to the dense urban landscape. Green surfaces and trees that have been planted help to collect rain water locally instead of having it drain into the sewage system. The natural landscape, where possible, has been preserved and has provided inspiration for the development. The original reeds and rushes remain along the waterfront, where built secluded walkways extend out into the water (CABE, 2007)
Integration of water with the urban fabric. This approach makes water a part of people’s everyday life
STAGE D : ANIMATION
Water has been used to successfully animate spaces along the waterfront as well public squares and gardens
FIG 102 : Boardwalk along waterfront www.solaripedia.com
STAGE C: SHAPING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Promenades and plazas with public art , furniture and vegetation.Innovative use of green + blue infrastructure
FIG 104 : Animation on the waterfront www.symbiocity.org
4 TRANSFER The idea of incorporating water into the urban fabric and make it a part of everyday life
FIG 103 : Water within the urban fabric www.solaripedia.com
The rainwater from surrounding houses and gardens is led by an open drain system that drains out to the attractive channel. The water then runs into a series of basins, known as an equalizer, where the water is purified and filtered through sand filters or in the artificially established wetlands of the area. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
53
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK 4F. SOUTHBANK , LONDON DOCKLANDS
LONDON’S WATERFRONT
SCORE 10.5 / 20 EVALUATION ON NEXT PAGE
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
54
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
CASE STUDIES 4F. SOUTHBANK , LONDON DOCKLANDS
2 INTERACTION STAGE B : CREATING ACCESSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE Not a lot of opportunities for closer interaction with the river.Mostly high embankments
Integration of water with the urban fabric. This approach makes water a part of people’s everyday life
STAGE D : ANIMATION
Seasonal programming and events add an element of vibrancy to the London promenades. Public art as source of animation on waterfront has scope for improvement
FIG 106 : Embankments along the riverfront www.west8.nl FIG 105 : Aerial overview edition.cnn.com
1 SCOPE / TYPE
STAGE C: SHAPING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Promenades and plazas with public art , furniture and vegetation.Not much innovation in design, conventional elements
4 TRANSFER
STAGE A : VISIONING THE WATERFRONT
When in 1980’s most of London’s post industrial landscape was derelict the national government started one of the first brownfield developments in Europe. But most of this regeneration were only commercially motivated without much attention to the quality of public realm it was creating
FIG 107 : Public realm along the Southbank en.wikipedia.org
FIG 108 : Barren patches of the waterfront
Learning from the various other examples of waterfronts in European cities it is clear that London has a lot of scope to improve as far as improving interaction between the user and Thames , developing its waterfronts as successful public spaces as well as integrating water into its urban fabric is concerned
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
55
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
56
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
TOOLKIT
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
57
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK 5A. DESIGN OBJECTIVES 1
Literature
Case studies
+
+
+
+
Comparison
Personal observations
The category of INVOLVEMENT overlaps with interaction and integration and is directly or indirectly associated with all the tools
Re engage the user with water and make him appreciate the presence of water.
Examine the interface between water and the built environment and redesign it if need be to facilitate objective 1
INTERACTION
=
To help achieve the objectives the principles enlisted on the next page can be applied in a variety pf permutation and combinations. These can be broadly grouped under three broad categories : INTERACTION , INTEGRATION and INVOLVEMENT.
OBJECTIVE 2
=
On careful examination of relevant literature , case studies and personal observations made the following are objectives to be achieved to answer the research question.
OBJECTIVE 1
INTEGRATION
2
OBJECTIVE 3
OBJECTIVE 4
OBJECTIVE 5
Use water as a placemaking tool to redefine the public realm and improve interaction between water + water’s edge and water + user.
Integrate water into the urban fabric to make it a part of people’s everyday life
Getting the community involved for continual engagement with water and help in the process of better interaction between water and the built environment DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
58
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK 5B. SUPPORTING PRINCIPLES INTERACTION
3
Multisensory interaction The design intervention should allow the user to connect physically , visually and
Appropriate functionality Incorporate multiple functionality as part of the intervention to make it user friendly
Accessibility Make the design freely accessible to everyone
Continual occupancy Provide options for continuous occupancy which also helps in passive surveillance
Designing for tidal variation and mitigating impact of flood in unlikely situation
INVOLVEMENT
The principles of interaction and integration combine to make people more sensitive to the presence of water in and around their urban fabric by making water a part of their everyday life and ensuring continuous engagement with water
INTEGRATION
Overlap of communal space with waterscape The design should facilitate the use of waterscape as communal space
Infiltration Design should allow water to integrate with the built by allowing it to percolate
Conveyance Design should allow easy circulation of water which could also be used as an element of landscape design
Treatment Design should allow possible treatment of water so that it can be reused
R Harvest and storage Use design to help in storing and harvesting water within the urban fabric
Retrofit Most of these principles can be retrofitted to existing urban fabric DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
59
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK 5C. TOOLS TO BE USED 4
Combination of these various principles result in the evolution of tools which will be tested on site for the final part of the project.Each of the tools and their underlying principles have been discussed further on the next few pages SLOPED ACCESS
SURGE POOL
BIO SWALES
TIERED SLOPE ACCESS
BOARDWALK
PERMEABLE PAVING / SURFACE
STEPPED ACCESS
RAIN GARDEN
WATER BASINS
URBAN BEACH
FLOATING WETLAND
WATER CHANNELS
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
60
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK : DESCRIPTION
5D. TOOLS FOR INTERACTION
PRINCIPLES
1 Water surface 3
Sloping extension (Slope 1:12 ,
2 comfortable for walking /wheelchair
Multisensory interaction
Accessible
3 Existing waterfront 2
As per literature on the table on pg.27 incorporating slopes with the waterfront gives a sense of freedom and great potential for water related activities 1
SLOPED ACCESS
Such sloped extensions increase the physical , visual , tactual and psychological accessibility to water facilitating better interaction between water , water’s edge and the user.
Appropriate functionality
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Waterscape
1 Water surface 2 5
Sloping extension (Slope 1:12 , comfortable for walking /wheelchair wheelchairs ; accessible during low tide
Accessible
Multisensory interaction
3 Walkway
4
4 Sloping extension (Slope 1:12 ,
comfortable for walking /wheelchair wheelchairs ; accessible during high tide
3
5 Existing waterfront
2 1
This kind of a tiered approach gives the user the flexibility of using spaces depending on tidal conditions
Appropriate functionality
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Waterscape
Tidal Variation TABLE
TIERED SLOPE ACCESS
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
61
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK : TABLE 5D. TOOLS FOR INTERACTION
DESCRIPTION
PRINCIPLES
1 Water surface 2 Stepped access to the water surface 3
3 Existing waterfront
Multisensory interaction
Accessible
Existing waterfront connected to water surface using steps creates visual , psychological and tactual interaction between user and water.
2
1
This also gives rise to the potential of creating sociable spaces.Ensuring continual occupancy also enables passive surveillance
Appropriate functionality
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Waterscape
STEPPED ACCESS
1 Water surface 2 Urban beach 3 Access ramp
4
Accessible
Multisensory interaction
4 Existing waterfront 3
2
1
Urban beaches simulates a public beachfront, through the use of sand, beach umbrellas, and seating elements. The very point of the urban beach is to surprise and delight city residents, workers, and visitors by inserting a beach atmosphere into an otherwise typical urban area
Appropriate functionality
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Waterscape URBAN BEACH
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
62
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK : TABLE
DESCRIPTION
5D. TOOLS FOR INTERACTION
PRINCIPLES
1 Water surface 2 Lower basin (to be filled when upper basin
3
5
is full with excessive rain and water is let out using the water gate.Till then the lower basin can be used as an urban element for recreational or communal activities
4
Accessible
Multisensory interaction
3 Watergate 4 Upper basin (Can be used as a communal
2
1
SURGE POOL
space or for recreational activities when dry.Fills up in the event of a flood when excessive water from lower basin is let to the upper basin,also used for flood mitigation) 5 Existing waterfront
Appropriate functionality
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Tidal Variation
Waterscape
Flood mitigation
1 Water surface 2 Boardwalk along water surface to
increase interaction.Boardwalks can also used as elements of circulation / connection to various zones of the waterfront design
3
Accessible
Multisensory interaction
3 Existing waterfront
Appropriate functionality
2
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
1
Waterscape
BOARDWALK
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
63
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK : DESCRIPTION
5E. TOOLS FOR INTEGRATION
1 Paving blocks
R
2 Sediment laying course 3 Sub base (ground) 2
1
TABLE
PRINCIPLES
Infiltration Conveyance
Retrofit
Application along shared spaces / paved areas to allow water to infiltrate to the ground.It also improves the relation between water and the built environment
3
Water channels as connecting elements between various water integration features in the built environment
PERMEABLE PAVING 1 Upper basin : Allows storage of water
during rains and can be transfered into a lower basin in the event of it filling up using a watergate.When dry is used as a communal space
4
5 3
2
Harvest
2 Sloped extension / green space to
allow infiltration during transfer to lower basin
3 Lower basin to be used as recreational
1
Infiltration Conveyance Treatment
/ open space when dry.Structure makes mater a visible entity within the urban fabric and makes it a part of the user’s everyday life
Storage
Appropriate functionality
4 Water basin 5 Sloped extension
Overlap of communal space and waterscape
WATER BASINS DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
64
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
5. TOOLKIT FRAMEWORK : TABLE
DESCRIPTION
5E. TOOLS FOR INTEGRATION
PRINCIPLES
1 Max 1:3 slope ; Min 5ft wide , Max 12
3
ft wide depression for slowing and capturing runoff horizontally in the urban fabric
Infiltration Conveyance Treatment
2 12 “ growing medium 1
R
3 Permeable filter fabric
Application in forecourts , street spaces , kerbs with frequent runoff.In this context it usually refers to a waterharvesting ditch.It is looked at as a good way of integrating water into the built environment
2
Overlap of communal space
Multisensory interaction
Retrofit Everyday use
Biodiversity
BIO SWALE 1 Ponding zone (low area) 2 Garden (slope)
Infiltration Conveyance Treatment 2
3 Prepared soil mix 3
1
4
4 4” gravel reservoir
Can be applied in large open spaces , acts as calmers , landscaped zones of interaction.Can be planted with relevant vegetation to make these zones rich in biodiversity.
Overlap of communal space and waterscape
R Multisensory interaction
Retrofit
Everyday use
Biodiversity RAIN GARDEN DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
65
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
66
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
THE SITE
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
67
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
1. WHY PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENTS ? LACK OF WELL DESIGNED PUBLIC REALM
2. WHY POSTINDUSTRIAL WATERFRONT ? BEFORE
3. WHY RESIDENTIAL WATERFRONT ? CULTURAL / MIXED USE WATERFRONT
AFTER
FIG 109 : The current scenario www.urban75.org
FIG 111 : Olympicopolis waterfront
RESIDENTIAL WATERFRONT econgeogblog.blogspot.com
The survey conducted on Pg. 40 points towards lack of complete satisfaction with the quality of the public realm. The study of successful waterfront projects from other parts of Europe show that an enhanced public realm can make the place more attractive , generate footfall, create opportunities for retail and recreation and improve people’s interaction with the water.
FIG 110 : Canary Wharf now and
With more and more derelict industrial land going in for regeneration in London and around the world specially along riverfronts , it is important to relook at the way we design our waterfronts. The present site allows application of different scales of design interventions to help create a community which has a positive relationship with the element of water that surrounds them
FIG 112: London’s residential waterfront worldarchitecture.org
The survey also shows people spend a lot of time at their home after work.While other waterfronts are being enhanced using creative solutions it is the waterfronts along residential areas where they inhabit that remain monotonous and lack animation.
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
68
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 3. WHY NEW DEVELOPMENT ? CHELSEA WATERFRONT REDEVELOPMENT
“ How can public
realm improvements and design interventions1 along London’s post industrial waterfront2
FIG 113: Upcoming riverfront developments , Thames (Chelsea) search.knightfrank.co.uk
CURRENT PRACTICE : With a lot of new development schemes all over London along the Thames having received planning permission it is important to treat them as opportunities of reworking on practices that have been going on in the past and enhance the quality of solutions.
6A. SITE JUSTIFICATION
help in creating a better interaction between the public , the water, the waters edge and the places
inhabit3 ? “
In most of these developments increased interaction between the river and the user and river and the urban fabric are lost in the clutches of standardized waterfront designs.
they
The current site helps in answering most parts of the research question.It is post industrial with a new residential development coming up where people will be inhabiting.
OPPORTUNITY Since the current site has just received planning permissions and construction has not started interventions for improving the quality of its waterfront remain a possibility
This scheme has received planning permission with a vast scope of improvement on the waterfront and connecting it to the River Thames on one side and river Lea on the other while integrating water into the proposed urban fabric and making water a part of user’s everyday life DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
69
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6B. SITE LOCATION AND CONTEXT
THE SITE AND ITS LOCATION The Leamouth region of Tower Hamlets is rapidly changing - once an area of intense industrial activity, the closure of the docks and decline in manufacturing resulted in numerous vacant and underused brownfield sites. More recently, the employment opportunities of Canary Wharf and its improved transport links into the City have created an emerging satellite town in the docklands,bringing positive opportunities for rapidly growing and high density residential populations in surrounding areas such as Leamouth.
TOWER HAMLETS IN LONDON CONTEXT
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
70
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6B. SITE LOCATION AND CONTEXT
ING
LOWER LEA CROSS
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
LEA
THE SITE
RIVER
THAM
ES
THE SITE
SITE WITHIN TOWER HAMLETS
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
71
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6C. HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF THE SITE
an
www.to werh am lets . go v.u k/ ... /p l
ng ni pp _a
lica
s tion
EARLY 1700’S
MID 1800’S
From the middle ages and right up to the late 18th century, Orchard Place was green and rural.
The Orchard House estate was first built on Leamouth South in the late fifteenth century, although rebuilt several times, it occupied the Site for over 300 years until eventually demolished in 1870.
Earliest records show the Leamouth peninsulas were divided into two freehold estates including Orchard House estate on the southern peninsula.
ww
FIG 115 : East India Dock
a
ing_applications.
cations _appli
/plann
ing ann /p l
/... v.uk .go
/...
s let am rh
The Brunswick Dock was one of the first docks to be built in East London and was constructed in 1789.
we rh
k v.u go ts. le
we .to
THE DOCK : EARLY1800’S
w. to
m
ww w
The Brunswick Dock was converted to the East India Export Dock in 1803 and from that time the area took on another scale of ship building and trading
FIG 116 : Orchard house
FIG 114 : The
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
72
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6C. HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF THE SITE www .t o w erh a
ml et s.g
DR Y DOCK : EXAMPLE
o
n lan /p .. . k/ v.u
MID 1900’S : DECLINE
plica _ap ing
tions.
8/31/2016
By the 20th Century, large-scale shipbuilding was in decline due to steam power and larger ships outgrowing the space on the peninsula. By the 1950s most of the trade had left East India Docks with the area falling into dereliction. Republic
Republic - Google Maps
cs.finescale.
THE SITE TODAY
FIG 117 : Trinity Buoy
LATER 1800’S Trinity Buoy Wharf and many of its original Victorian buildings remain on Leamouth South today. The experimental lighthouse was used to test maritime lighting equipment and train lighthouse keepers.
GOOGLE EARTH
FIG 118
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
73 Imagery ©2016 Google, Map data ©2016 Google
50 m
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6D . RECENT PLANNING APPLICATIONS
1 The applicant has owned the Site for several years and submitted a previous planning application designed by SOM architects in 2005. The application was recommended for refusal and so withdrawn prior to a decision.The current scheme by Allies and Morrison has planning consent
2 Trinity Buoy Wharf gained planning permission for a cycle and pedestrian bridge link in the north west corner of the Site in 2010 and is currently pursuing funding to build the bridge.
3 Orchard Wharf is a safeguarded wharf. A planning application was submitted for a aggregates batching plant on Orchard Wharf in 2011. The application was refused by LBTH due to design quality and massing. Map showing recent planning permission on site
4 Trinity Buoy Wharf were granted planning permission in 1998 for a 5 storey building made from recycled shipping containers located directly adjacent to Trinity Buoy Lighthouse.
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
74
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6E . APPROVED PLANNING APPLICATION
The standardized design for the waterfront as proposed in the current proposal which has planning consent.
MY APPROACH Ideally one would work towards relooking and dealing with the inefficiencies of the residential masterplan. However having already received planning permission , a better approach might be to use interventions as an overlay that add value to the proposal as it stands. There will be limitations to this approach but they can demonstrate the applicability of the interventions on ongoing projects.
Source : Allies and Morrison architects
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
75
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6F. MACRO ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT : FIGURE GROUND As can be seen from the figure ground the site and its immediate surroundings have a fairly good balance of built vs unbuilt.Visually the percentage of green / open spaces exceeds the built and this factor should be taken into consideration while designing such that the balance is not hampered. G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
Except the East India Dock basin which acts as an enclosure of water there are not much avenues for integrating water into the urban fabric
LEA
ORCHARD PLACE
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
RIVER THAMES
1 : 6000
WITHOUT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
After the proposed development the percentage of open space within the site boundary highlighted in red reduces and it is important to look into interventions which can help reintegrate green as well as water into the new urban fabric. G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
LEA
ORCHARD PLACE
Built
RIVER THAMES
Unbuilt
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
Water 1 : 6000
WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
76
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6F. MACRO ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT : OPEN + GREEN This map shows all the green / open spaces in and around the site.The biodiversity rich East India dock Basin is an important part within the site boundary. The open spaces have a higher percentage but many new developments have recently received planning permissions in the region. How long the scenario would stay similar to this map is yet to be seen
G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
LEA
ORCHARD PLACE
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
RIVER THAMES
1 : 6000
WITHOUT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
This map shows the context with the proposed residential scheme in place.The East India Dock basin could be crucial in inspiring green strategies for the new urban fabric as a result of the upcoming residential development at Orchard place The design solution has to look at mitigating the impact of construction on an otherwise open site.
G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
LEA
Potential to become green space
ORCHARD PLACE
Green space Built
RIVER THAMES
Open space
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
Water 1 : 6000
WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
77
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6F . MACRO ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT : BUILDING The older urban fabric comprises primary of low rise built upto 5 floors.Most of the recent construction in the area and upcoming developments are going to drastically change the built landscape with many high rises above the 15 floor height mark G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
LEA
ORCHARD PLACE
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
RIVER THAMES
1 : 6000
WITHOUT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The new development has a mixture of predominantly 11 - 20 floors as well as 21 floors and above
G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
LEA
1 - 5 floors
ORCHARD PLACE
6 - 10 11 - 20 floors RIVER THAMES
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
21 floors and above 1 : 6000
WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
78
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6F. MACRO ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT : ROUTES
T
EAS
IA IND
This map analyses the ways to access the site as well as the road network surrounding the site.As of now their are existing pedestrian linkages and access to the nearby East India DLR Station.
CK
DO
UPCOMING NEW DEVELOPMENT
DL
RC
ON
NE
CT
ION
Extension of the Thames path can greatly benefit the site and form a continuous stretch of public infrastructure.
G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
LEA
ORCHARD PLACE
TH S PA
Primary routes
ME THA
RIVER THAMES
Secondary routes
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
Tertiary routes
1 : 5500
WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
79
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6F. MACRO ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT : PROPOSED
It was important to make an assessment of the proposed and existing land uses on site to generate more informed design interventions and take decisions regarding where to place them on site so that they could have some correspondence to the land uses.
G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
RIV
ER
LEA
Since the buildings have now received planning permission the source of this land use data is the application made to the Borough of Tower Hamlets by the developer
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
ORCHARD PLACE
RIVER THAMES
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
GROUND FLOOR LAND USES
1 : 3600
Recreational
G
LOWER LEA CROSSIN
Retail RIV
ER
Community LEA
Circulation / common areas
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
Commercial + office Cultural ORCHARD PLACE
Education Restaurant / cafe Residential
RIVER THAMES FIRST FLOOR AND ABOVE LAND USES
Roof garden TRINITY BUOY WHARF
1 : 3600 DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
80
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE 6F. MACRO ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT : WATER FLOW ON SITE AND FLOOD
The site is within an Environment Agency designated Flood Zone 3 - land assessed as having a 1 in 100 or greater annual probability of river flooding
(>1%), or a 1 in 200 or greater annual probability of flooding from the sea (>0.5%) in any year, ignoring the presence of defenses.
All proposals are broadly acceptable in principle in respect of London Plan policy 5.12 but should be updated at the detailed stage to improve the development resilience in the unlikely event of a flood. 1 : 5500
PLANNING APPLICATION , TOWER HAMLETS
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
81
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2G. MICRO ANALYSIS : CONDITIONS ON SITE HERITAGE
6. THE SITE CONDITION OF RIVER WALL
RIV
ER
PARKING DOMINATED
TABLE
WA LL
DRY DOCK
RIV
CAISSON
ER
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
FIG 118 : Trinity Buoy Wharf
Highlighted in the graphic above the heritage elements on site : The Trinity Buoy Wharf , the now covered dry dock and the caisson along the river wall.Though designing around heritage elements can be tricky it can be used to the advantage of developing a concept for the intervention.
WA LL
FIG 119 : River wall
The condition of the river wall along the site is questionable along many points and might prove to be a threat later.The design proposal must take this into account and work towards strengthening it using design interventions
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
FIG 120 : Parking
The site currently is a huge expanse of impermeable surface which reduces chances of establishing a positive connection between the site and water. The area near the Trinity buoy wharf is also parking dominated which makes matters worse
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
82
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2G. MICRO ANALYSIS : CONDITIONS ON SITE LACK OF GREEN SPACES
RIVER
6. THE SITE
TABLE
PROBABILITY OF FLOOD
NO / LIMITED ACCESS TO THE RIVER
LEA
FLOOD ZONE III
RIVER
THAM
ES
FIG 121 : No visual connection with water
The site with its current configuration of buildings doesn’t leave any scope for through and through visual axis preventing a sense of contact between the user and the rivers on both sides of the site
FIG
The site lies in flood zone 3 which means the probability of it getting affected by a flood is very low but this aspect should be considered in further design proposals
FIG 123 : No access to the river
Though the site is surrounded by water on three sides it has no accessibility to the river hindering any form of physical and psychological interaction between user and water.
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
83
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2H. MICRO ANALYSIS : OPPORTUNITIES ON SITE BIODIVERSITY RICH ZONE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE WETLAND
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
6. THE SITE TABLE 9
IMPROVEMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
FIG 125 : No access to
FIG 126
Currently the user can feel disconnected physically to the biodiversity in the wetlands of the East India dock basin.It could be interesting to give them the option of going closer to the flora and fauna
Infrastructure in the East India dock basin such as this bridge is in need of repair , upgradation and upkeep to encourage users into this area.The basin offers dramatic views of the Thames with O2 as the backdrop
FIG 124 : East India Dock Basin
The ecologically diverse East India dock basin lies within the site boundary which can provide clues for incorporating water within the urban fabric using natural processes.
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
84
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2H. MICRO ANALYSIS : OPPORTUNITIES ON SITE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE RIVER TAKE ADVANTAGE OF VISUAL AXIS
6. THE SITE CONNECTING WATER & URBAN FABRIC
NEW DEVELOPMENT (UNDER
NEW DEVELOPMENT (PLANNING PERMISSION)
FIG 127 : Lack of accessibility to water
All along the site there is lack of accessibility to the rivers which can be changed to establish a more positive relationship between water and the users of the upcoming residential towers on site
FIG 128 : Upcoming new development in the
The site can be connected to upcoming (under construction) developments in the vicinity to possibly generate long stretches of continuous and shared green / open spaces between the two residential developments.
FIG 129 : Taking water inland (East India Dock Basin)
The site is surrounded by water on three sides and in its present form could be used to integrate water into its built fabric to connect it better with its surroundings
This in in context to a proposal for a new bridge which has already received planning permission DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
85
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
2H. MICRO ANALYSIS : OPPORTUNITIES ON SITE SILT ACCUMULATION
6. THE SITE TABLE 9
CULTURAL QUARTER THE STEP FORWARD : STRATEGIES
For indicating the strategies on site the footprint of the proposed residential scheme is also considered because my final proposal has to be looked at as a holistic design which integrates with the residential proposal. Learnings from identifying the present conditions and opportunities on site are combined with the residential proposal by Allies and Morrison to come to a consolidated concept for the masterplan. Ideally one would work towards relooking and dealing with the inefficiencies of the residential masterplan. However having already received planning permission , a better approach might be to use interventions as an overlay that add value to the proposal as it stands. There will be limitations to this approach but they can demonstrate the applicability of the interventions on ongoing projects.
FIG 130 : Silt accumulation
As can be seen in the image silt accumulates at specific locations along the site and can be made accessible during low tides to bring users closer to water
FIG 131 : Trinity Buoy wharf
Having a cultural element within the site boundary could prove to be a huge positive influence and give clues towards design of the public realm on site.
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
86
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE ARRIVING TOWARDS SITE STRATEGY OBSERVATIONS ON SITE
CONSTRAINTS
+ SITE ANALYSIS
STRATEGIES
OPPORTUNITIES
+
TOOLKIT
EXPLAINING INTERVENTIONS IN DETAIL
ARRIVING AT THE CONCEPTUAL MASTERPLAN
APPLICATION OF TOOLS ON THE VARIOUS LOCATIONS OF THE SITE BASED ON THE STRATEGY
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
87
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE
6I. TOWARDS PROPOSAL : STRATEGIES ON SITE
TABLE 10
ACCESSIBILITY TO THE BASIN
CONNECT SITE TO BIODIVERSITY ZONE
FIG
Extend accessibility to the basin , taking visitors closer to experience the biodiversity.Also create floating wetlands along the new access to enhance the experience
PARK IMPROVEMENT + INFRASTRUCTURE
FIG
Connect the ecological park to the site by forming corridors within the urban fabric with green + Blue infrastructure and make water a part of people’s everyday lives
THAMES PATH EXTENSION
FIG
Design a visitor / interpretation centre for the ecological park (East India Dock basin) and improve design/landscape of the park
BUFFER ZONE
FIG
Create suitable buffer zone to help mitigate impact of the development on the ecologically sensitive East India Dock Basin
INTRODUCE WATER INTO URBAN FABRIC
FIG
Connect the proposal to the Thames Path and develop a continuous waterfront
FIG
Create avenues for incorporating / extending the experience of blue (water) into the urban fabric DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
88
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
6. THE SITE
6I. TOWARDS PROPOSAL : STRATEGIES ON SITE EXTEND URBAN REALM INTO WATER
CREATE AN URBAN BEACH
FIG
FIG
Create avenues for incorporating / extending the experience of green (land) into water as an extension of the existing urban realm
EMPHASIZE AXIS
HIGHLIGHT HERITAGE
Silt accumulation zone. Potential for creation of an urban beach as extension of the existing urban realm
STAGGERING PROPOSAL
FIG
FIG
Incorporate cultural characteristic of the Trinity Buoy wharf into this part of the waterfront
FIG
Resurface the heritage elements and incorporate them into the overall design strategy.
CULTURAL QUARTER
Utilize through and through visual and physical linkages through site for connecting both the waterfronts and also users on site to the element of water
TABLE 10
FIG
Stagger design to facilitate easy movement of boats to pier DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
89
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
APPLICATION OF TOOLS ON SITE
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
90
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL Putting all the strategies in place with the proposed residential scheme to arrive at the next stage of programming the proposal.
FIG
BL INFR UE+GR EE AST RUC N TUR E ROO F GA BLU RDE INFR E+GR N EE AST RUC N TUR E ROO F GA RDE N BL INFR UE+GR EE AST RUC N TUR E
WET
LAN
INFR
AST
RUC T
URE
IC
FIG
E
ID
T GH
HI
OL
O EP
RG
SU
H HIG
E
OW
L E+
TID
PLA Y
DS PICN
Diagram showing the location of various programs on site for the interventions as consolidated from the strategies map above
TID
UR
B
AN
C W ULT AT UR ER A FR L O N
CH
A
BE
T DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
91
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL 7B. THE SITE DIVIDED INTO THREE DISTINCT PARTS DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER AND SCALE OF POSSIBLE INTERVENTIONS
SCALE 1 : (SMALL) ENCLOSURE
FIG
Mostly retrofitting
Mostly retrofitting + minor construction
SCALE 3 : (LARGE )WATERFRONT Involves construction
PROGRESSING SCALE OF INTERVENTIONS 92
SCALE 3 : (LARGE ) WATERFRONT
SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC
SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC
SCALE 1 : (SMALL) ENCLOSURE
Mostly retrofitting
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
SLOPE
RAIN GARDEN
ROOF GARDEN TIERED SLOPE
RAIN GARDEN
7C. APPLICATION OF THE TOOLS ON SITE AS PER THE THREE DIFFERENT SCALE OF INTERVENTIONS ROOF GARDEN
BOARDWALK
BOARDWALK
SURGE POOL
STEPS
FIG 147
FLOATING WETLAND
SLOPE
TIERED SLOPE
URBAN BEACH
TIERED SLOPE
STEPS DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
93
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
SCALE 1 : (SMALL) ENCLOSURE Mostly retrofitting
SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC
Mostly retrofitting + minor construction
PROGRESSING SCALE OF INTERVENTIONS
7C. APPLICATIONS OF THE TOOLS ON SITE AS PER THE THREE DIFFERENT SCALE OF INTERVENTIONS
BOARDWALK
SCALE 1 : ENCLOSURE
FLOATING WETLANDS SCALE 2 : URBAN FABRIC
SLOPE
ROOF GARDEN
TIERED SLOPE
RAIN GARDEN
BOARDWALK
SCALE 3 :WATERFRONT
STEPS
TIERED SLOPE
URBAN BEACH
SLOPE
SURGE POOL
SCALE 3 : (LARGE )WATERFRONT Involves construction
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
94
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
THE PROPOSAL
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
95
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
96
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL 7D. MASTERPLAN THE WIDER CONTEXT
The tools , strategies and programs are combined to arrive at the conceptual masterplan which have been discussed further at the macro and micro scales.
A DI IN AD T O S EA CK R DO
GAS HOLDERS
UPCOMING RIVER ISLAND LIMMO
DLR
RIV
ER
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
NEWPORT AVENUE
MES
THA
LEA
ORCHARD PLACE
PATH
RIVER
DOCKLAND WASTE
THAME
S
1 : 5500
FIG 148 : Masterplan with wider context
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
97
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL 7E. MASTERPLAN AT LOW TIDE : (RIVER WATER AT +2.59 M FROM 0 LVL LOWER LEA 24
1
3
RIVER
23
25
LEA
22 20
2
21
7 20 20 4
ORCHARD PLACE
6
17
18
8
12
20 26
9
5
ATH ES P
M THA
EAST INDIA DOCK
19 10
WATERFRONT
RIVE
R TH
Urban beach
1
Observation decks
7
Vegetated Buffer
13
2
Floating wetlands
8
Picnic area
14 Existing pier
20 Roof gardens
3
21 Boardwalks
9
Sloped extension
15 Floating deck
22 23 Lea
4
Interpretation centre
10 Surge pool
5
Gardens
11 Tiered slope extension 17 18 Linear Park
6
Improved bridge
12 Kid’s play area
16
URBAN FABRIC
Cultural quarter
19 Swale along
TRINITY BUOY
11
16
13
AM
ES 14
Slope extending to River
11 15
24 Proposed new bridge 25 Bridge plaza 26 Resurfaced drydock
Approved residential scheme (designed by Allies and Morrison architects) DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
98
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL 7F. MASTERPLAN AT HIGH TIDE : (RIVER AT +3.76 M FROM LOWER LEA 24
1
3
RIVER
23
25
LEA
22 2
20
EAST INDIA DOCK
21
7 20 20
4
ORCHARD PLACE
6
17
18
8
12
20 26
ME THA
EAST INDIA DOCK
9
5
TH S PA
19 10
TRINITY BUOY
11
WATERFRONT
RIVE
R TH
Observation decks
7
Vegetated Buffer
2
Floating wetlands
8
Picnic area
14 Existing pier
20 Roof gardens
3
21 Boardwalks
9
Sloped extension
15 Floating deck
22 23 Lea
4
Interpretation centre
10 Surge pool
16 Cultural quarter
24 Proposed new bridge
5
Gardens
11
Tiered slope extension 17 18
6
Improved bridge
12
Kid’s play area
19
Linear Park
Swale along routes
URBAN FABRIC
16
13
AM
1
13 Urban beach
ES 14
Slope extending to River
11 15
25 Bridge plaza 26 Resurfaced drydock
Approved residential scheme (designed by Allies and Morrison architects) DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
99
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
100
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
INTERVENTIONS FOR INTEGRATION
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
101
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
7G . SCALE 1 : (SMALL) ENCLOSURE THE EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN 6
RIV
ER
RIV
ER
4 5
TH
LEA
AM
ES
N
4
LOCATION TOOLS USED
+
4 7
BOARDWALK
FLOATING WETLANDS PRINCIPLES
3
4 1 Anchor points 2 Floating unit 3 Floating boardwalks
2
Accessible
Multisensory interaction
R
4 Floating Wetlands 1 1
5 East India Dock Basin 6 Existing peripheral walkway 7 Urban furniture
Appropriate functionality
Infiltration
Treatment
Retrofit
Biodiversity DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
102
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
FIG 149 : Taking users closer to experience the biodiversity using boardwalks and floating wetlands as mediums of enhancing DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
103
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
7H . SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC,
RIV
ER
LEA
TIERED SLOPE RIV
ER
TH
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
TIERED SLOPE LEADING TO RIVER LEA
+
Accessible
Multisensory interaction Waterscape
Appropriate functionality
Infiltration Conveyance Treatment
BOARDWALK
AM
ES
N LOCATION
BIOSWALE
RAIN GARDEN
Tidal Variation
Overlap of communal Everyday use space and waterscape
DETAIL II
8
DETAIL I 6
HIGH TIDE 5
4
3 2
1
The sloped terrace gives options to maintain level of interaction with the river as per personal preference and tidal conditions.The terrace helps the urban fabric lead / connect to the river. Towards the end three levels are interaction are possible (Promenade , garden , Boardwalk)
: +3.76
1
Bio swale
6 Promenade walk
2
Walkways and urban furniture
7 Boardwalk
3
Sloped rain garden (Tier 1)
8
4
Flat surface
5
Sloped rain garden (Tier 2)
7
River Lea
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
104
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL DETAIL I
The tiered nature of the slope
DETAIL II
Three levels of interaction : Bordwalk(High), Slope leading to river lea (Mid), Promenade (Low)
FIG 150 : View looking from tiered landscaped slope towards River Lea DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
105
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7H . SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC,
TIERED SLOPE WITH PLAY AREAS LEADING TO RIV
ER
LEA
SLOPE RIV
ER
TH
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
+
Accessible
Multisensory interaction Waterscape
Appropriate functionality
Infiltration Conveyance Treatment
BOARDWALK
AM
ES
N LOCATION
BIOSWALE
RAIN GARDEN
Tidal Variation
Overlap of communal Everyday use space and waterscape
The sloped terrace unlike the previous one is not tiered.It also gives options to maintain level of interaction with the river as per personal preference and tidal conditions. The terrace helps the urban fabric lead / connect to the river.This intervention is a variation of the previous option and incorporates dedicated play areas. 7
Also this is a single sloped design feature which is surrounded by bio swales that act as a landscaped feature as well as help in percolation of run off water
5 3
2
1
6
HIGH TIDE
4
1 Bio swale
5
2 Sports / play area 1
6 Boardwalk
3 Sports / play area 2
7
: + 3.76 M
Promenade
River Lea
4 Sloped Rain garden (Tier 1) DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
106
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
FIG 151 : View showing sloped landscape area with play zones leading to the River Lea DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
107
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7H . SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC,
RIV
ER
RIV
ER
TH
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
TYPICAL ROOF GARDEN FOR AREA
Appropriate functionality
LEA
Infiltration
AM
ES
Multisensory interaction
Everyday use
Overlap of communal space and waterscape
Treatment
R
N LOCATION
ROOF GARDEN
Retrofit
Harvest
6
1 2
4
5 1 Dry landscaping
3
2 Roof garden 3 Walkway 4 Boardwalk 5 Promenade with rain
garden and permeable paving 6 River Lea DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
108
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
Biodiversity
7H . SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC,
RIV
ER
+
LEA
ER
TH
Appropriate functionality
Multisensory interaction
Everyday use
PERMEABLE PAVING
BIO SWALE
RIV
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
LINEAR PARK DESIGN
AM
Infiltration
ES
N
RAIN GARDEN
LOCATION
Treatment
R
Biodiversity Overlap of communal space and waterscape
Conveyance
Retrofit
6 4
5
3 1 2
Bio swale
2 Rain Garden 3 Urban art installation
1
4 Promenade with permeable paving 5 Boardwalk 6
River Lea DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
109
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7H . SCALE 2 : (MID) URBAN FABRIC,
RIV
ER
Accessible
LEA
+
WATER BASINS RIV
ER
TH
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
THE HISTORIC DRY DOCK RESURFACED AND
Multisensory interaction
PERMEABLE PAVING Passive surveillance and continual
AM
ES
N LOCATION
DETAIL II
BIOSWALE
RAIN GARDEN
Everyday use
4 7
3
5
3
1
2
5
8
7
Infiltration Treatment
Overlap of communal space Storage Biodiversity and waterscape
DETAIL I
4
Appropriate functionality
6
BASIN I (LOWER)
2
BASIN II (UPPER)
1 Bio swale
5 Urban furniture
2 Peripheral water channel
6 Connecting bridge
leading to water storage pond
The resurfaced drydock as a public space to integrate green + blue infrastructure into the urban fabric making water a part of people’s everyday lives.The feature is flanked by bioswales on all sides.Water from the upper basin is let into the lower basin using a Watergate .Both basins are used as work + play areas bringing people closer to water 110
1
3 Wooden deck 4 Landscaped steps
7 Water retention
feature
8 Water gate DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL ZOOMED PERSPECTIVE SECTION DETAIL I
The Watergate between the Upper and lower DETAIL II
The swale and water channels feeding water into the retention ponds streams
FIG 151 : The resurfaced drydock as a feature to integrate green + blue infrastructure into the urban fabric.THe area is treated as a communal public space for work and play. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
111
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
7I. SECTIONAL DETAILS RAIN GARDEN ON PROMENADE 1
Perforated pipe connecting to basin / outlet
2
WATER BASIN (DRY DOCK AREA) Rain garden / native plants
1 Waterfront surface
6
Prepared soil mixture
2 Kerb
7 Water Channel for taking runoff water to
3
Gravel drainage layer
3 Prepared soil mixture
4
Sand transition layer
4 Sand transition layer
5
Waterfront surface
5 Gravel drainage layer
6
Rain garden 6
5
1
2
FIG
FIG 156 : Section through site
1
6
6
2
3
4
3
4
3
8 Water retention pond / water feature
7
6 4
8
5
5
FIG
; SCALE 1: 9000
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
112
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL SWALE ALONG ROAD
PERMEABLE PAVING TO ALLOW INFILTRATION
1
Perforated pipe connecting to basin / outlet
1
2
Prepared soil mixture
2
Paver blocks
6 Bedding course
3
Road surface
3
Building
7 Geotextile on sub base
4
Kerb
4
Foundation
8 Sub base
5
Rain garden / Bioswale
5
9 Perforated pipe connecting to basin
/ outlet
3
2 3
1
5
5 6 7
4
2
Gaps with vegetation
4
8
1
FIG
FIG
FIG 156 : Section through site ; SCALE : 1:9000
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
113
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
7I. SECTION SHOWING INTEGRATION OF WATER INTO THE URBAN FABRIC
River Lea
Roof garden
Upper water basin with landscape Bioswale Lower water basin with landscape
Permeable paving
Runoff collection Storm water filter To storm water drain High water pump Storage volume
Irrigation pump FIG 157 : Detailed section showing flow of water Water basin pump DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
114
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
INTERVENTIONS FOR INTERACTION
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
115
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
7J . SCALE 3 : (LARGE) WATERFRONT, SLOPED EXTENSION
RIV
ER
RIV
5
ER
1
TH
LEA
AM
ES
N LOCATION
2
TOOLS USED
3 4
+
6
DE H TI
HIG
LOW
76 M
.
:+3
.59
TID
2 E:+
SLOPED TERRACE
M
This part of the waterfront has been extended as a combination of steps and sloped landscape to increase interaction between the existing embankment and the river Thames.Populating the slope with urban furniture and vegetation (both conventional and intertidal) helps create potential zones of social gathering.The design caters to the high tide in the river as has been indicated in the diagram.The stepped access gives another format of positively influencing interaction between the user and water.
STEPS PRINCIPLES
1 Existing waterfront / embankment remodeled as
per concept
Accessible
Multisensory interaction
2 Sloped extension 3 Urban furniture
Appropriate functionality
4 Boardwalk
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Waterscape
5 Stepped access 6 River Thames DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
116
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
FIG 158 : View looking towards promenade showing various zones of interaction on the sloped extension of the waterfront DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
117
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7J . SCALE 3 : (LARGE) WATERFRONT , TIERED SLOPE EXTENSION
RIV
ER
RIV
ER
1 2 5
TH
AM
ES
N
3
4
LEA
LOCATION TOOLS USED
7
6
8
IDE HIGH T
6 : +3.7
M
+
.59 M
E:+2
TID LOW
TIERED SLOPE
BOARDWALK PRINCIPLES
This part of the waterfront has been extended as a tiered slopes which can be used as per the tidal conditions.These terraces are populated with potential areas for setting up temporary kiosks , urban furniture and vegetation to allow continual occupancy.They have not been over programmed are options on how to use it are left to the user.This approach again increases visual , tactual and psychological access to the river.
1 Existing waterfront / embankment remodeled as
per concept
Accessible
Multisensory interaction
2 Sloped extension (Accessible during high tide) 3 Potential location of Kiosk 4
7 Boardwalk
5 Sloped extension (Accessible during low tide) 6 Urban furniture
8 River Thames
Appropriate functionality
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Waterscape
Tidal Variation DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
118
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
FIG 159 : View looking towards promenade showing various zones of interaction on the tiered slope extension of the waterfront DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
119
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7J . SCALE 3 : (LARGE) WATERFRONT, RIV
ER
RIV
ER
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
SURGE POOL
+
LEA
Accessible
SURGE POOL
TH
STEPS
AM
ES
Appropriate functionality
Multisensory interaction
Passive surveillance and Waterscape continual occupancy
Tidal Variation
N
Flood mitigation
RAIN GARDEN
LOCATION
9
5
8
1O 4
6 3
1
Lower basin (to be filled when upper basin is full with excessive rain and water is let out using the water gate.Till then the lower basin can be used as an urban element for recreational activities
2
Stepped access
4
5 Boardwalk
6 Watergate
8 Recreational garden 9 Picnic area
7 1
2
IDE : HIGH T L
IDE OW T
+ 3.76
M
59 M
: + 2.
1O River Thames
Upper basin (Can be used as a communal space or for recreational activities when dry.Fills up in the event of a flood when excessive water from lower basin is let to the upperbasin,also used for flood mitigation) DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
120
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
The flooded lower basin
FIG 160 : Shows the use of the surge pools as a part of the waterfront DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
121
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7J . SCALE 3 : (LARGE) WATERFRONT ,
RIV
ER
RIV
ER
TH
+
LEA
Accessible
BOARDWALK
URBAN BEACH
AM
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
URBAN BEACH
ES
N
Multisensory interaction
Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Appropriate functionality
Waterscape
Tidal Variation LOCATION
4 3 5 1 Urban beaches simulating a constructed
public beachfront(zone of silt accumulation on site), through the use of sand, beach umbrellas, and seating elements.
2
Urban art
3
Access ramp to urban beach
4
Existing waterfront redesigned as per new concept
5
Rain gardens / landscaped area
2 6
1
6M : + 3.7 E D I T HIGH 2.59 M IDE : + T W LO
6 Boardwalk DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
122
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
FIG 161 : The proposed urban beach in the zone of silt accumulation DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
123
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7J . SCALE 3 : (LARGE) WATERFRONT,
RIV
ER
+
LEA
Accessible
URBAN BEACH RIV
ER
TH
PRINCIPLES
TOOLS USED
CULTURAL QUARTER + STEPPED EXTENSION
Multisensory interaction
BOARDWALK Passive surveillance and continual occupancy
Appropriate functionality
AM
ES
N
RAIN GARDEN
LOCATION
Waterscape
Tidal Variation
TRINITY BUOY WHARF
5
4
RIVER THAMES 2
3 1
1 Floating deck / stage 2 Access ramp to stage 3 Rain garden / landscaped area (fills
76 M E : +3..59 M ID T H HIG IDE : +2 LOW T
up during high tide
4 Stepped access / amphitheater
(when dry) 5 Proposed cultural quarter of waterfront
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
124
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
7. THE PROPOSAL
FIG 161 : View looking towards proposed residential scheme showing the floating deck DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
125
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
TCONCLUSION
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
126
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
8. CONCLUSION 8A. LINKAGES CREATED AS A RESULT OF THE DESIGN INTERVENTIONS
Application of the interventions also result in creating new linkages and enhancing already existing ones.The diagram shows these linkages and their relation to the proposed intervention. LIMITATION Creation of these linkages is based on application of tools which were a product of theoretical study and personal observations. Ultimately how they are used depends on the stakeholders concerned.It is therefore essential to involve the community in all stages of decision making to provide optimal design solutions.
New linkages / extension of linkages Incorporating green (swales) along routes Existing pedestrian linkage Enhanced accessibility to the river Enhanced linkage through site to river Connectivity to site using waterways Existing connectivity using DLR FIG 163 :Existing and new linkages created as a result of the interventions
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
127
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
8. CONCLUSION 8B. PHASING OF THE PROJECT
RIV
LEA
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
ER
Improvements to the East India Dock Basin
RIV
ER
TH
AM
Improvements to the existing promenade
ES
Integrating green infrastructure into promenade Establishing the cultural quarter , extension of promenade into River ; to progress with construction of residential project Establishing the urban beach as an added attraction to the waterfront Introducing green + blue infrastructure into urban fabric ; to follow progress of residential scheme construction
FIG
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
128
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
8. CONCLUSION 8C. FUNDING OF THE PROJECT RESIDENT’S INVESTMENT Proportion of sale price for flats in the residential scheme bought before construction reserved for implementation of green + blue corridors within the residential scheme
THE EAST END ENERGY FIT TEAM Providing grants for implementation of green + blue infrastructure and creating a sustainable community
TOWER HAMLETS COUNCIL
CULTURAL QUARTER GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE : RESIDENTIAL SCHEME
Subsidizing cost of public realm improvements and enhancement of the waterfront
PROMENADE FIG
RIVER THAMES SOCIETY
GREEN SPACES
Support the local improvement scheme ; Enable crowd sourcing for improving connection with London’s rivers
URBAN BEACH PROMENADE EXTENSION
LONDON NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY + LEE VALLEY REGIONAL PARK Funding for restoring ecosystem
EAST INDIA DOCK BASIN
The funding for the project is crucial and should ideally be acquired in collaboration with the developer of the residential scheme for a holistic design intervention which enhances the overall quality of the public realm . The diagram locates parts of the design intervention which will require funding and probable funding agencies. My design proposal doesn’t deal with the builtform of the residential scheme but with the non built spaces around and within the scheme. DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
129
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
8. CONCLUSION EXISTING
PROPOSED
EVALUATION
TABLE 11
The interventions injects green + blue corridors into the proposed residential scheme (urban fabric) in order to connect the users with water as part of their daily lives as well visually connect them to the rivers by through and through axis.
The success of this intervention would depend largely on people’s response and support from the developer
Existing one sided visual connection to river
CREATE GREEN + BLUE CORRIDORS The intervention converts the zone of silt accumulation into an urban beach with a boardwalk segregating the beach area from the river.This gives the user a variety in formats they use to interact with the river
LIMITATIONS London’s predominantly cloudy weather , environmental clearances , can be used only during low tides
THE URBAN BEACH
Silt accumulation zone
Throughout the design proposal accessibility to the river has been increased by connecting the existing waterfront to the river.This can successfully change the way users interact with the river LIMITATIONS Clearances from the environmental agencies ; design based on assumption from theoretical framework, early integration into phase of construction of residential
INCREASE ACCESSIBILITY TO RIVER
No access to water
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
130
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
8. CONCLUSION EXISTING
PROPOSED
EVALUATION
TABLE 11
The proposal enhances the cultural quality of the area around trinity buoy wharf and spreads it onto the part of the waterfront where it is located LIMITATIONS Agreement with others users apart from the Trinity Buoy wharf is crucial to successfully transform this zone into a cultural quarter.The change cannot adversely affect their everyday functioning. The deck has to be made functional for tidal variation
DEVELOP THE CULTURAL QUARTER
Trinity Buoy Wharf
The proposal enhances the experience of being in a bio diversity rich ecological zone by taking user closer to the flora and fauna as compared to the distant experience currently on this part of the site. LIMITATIONS Environmental clearances would be required. Any new construction has to be carried out without adversely affecting the widlife in this zone. Support from various environmental groups is crucial
ENHANCE EAST INDIA DOCK
East India Dock Basin
This is a tiered concept and can be used at different levels depending on tidal condition.The success of such schemes would depend heavily on behaviour patterns of user groups and more detailed analysis over a longer period of time can help improving the design
MOVE AWAY FROM STANDARDIZED DESIGN
Artist’s impression of the residential waterfront
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
131
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
BACK TO THE RESEARCH QUESTION As a response to increasing number of waterfronts falling prey to commercially motivated mono functional entities my research question “ How can public
realm improvements and design interventions along London’s post industrial waterfront help in creating a better interaction between the public , the water , the water’s edge and the places they inhabit ? “ tries to address the changing role of water in our urban systems with the aim of restoring a healthier relationship between people and water both natural and well in the urban fabric.
The literature review highlights key features of successful waterfront interventions as well as interventions to integrate water into the urban fabric. Three overlapping themes are developed from these : Interaction , Integration and Involvement.Through the lens of these themes tools are developed and their suitability tested by application on the chosen project site. However one key limitation remains that a lot of the tools are based on theoretical assumptions from the literature and would benefit from consultation with the community , developers , members of the Borough council as well as any other stakeholders.
8. CONCLUSION
THE PROPOSAL
In a scenario similar to this where the residential scheme has already received planning consent and would start construction soon , participation , improved interaction between user and water as well as water and urban fabric , can be considered to be post construction as means of creating a sense of ownership and increased involvement. In general the solutions shown in the project are of varying types and scales and a lot of them are low maintenance and have the capability of being retrofitted. The wider perspective of the proposal allows to look into creation of public spaces that are water sensitive , contextual and that rediscover the elemental relationship between user and water. The process is then evaluated and its limitations have been highlighted.
TRANSFERABILITY
+
+ TOOLS
PERMUTATION & COMBINATIONS
SITE
The proposals are demonstrative of a direct application of the framework to public spaces , adapting the principles and techniques to produce a network of interventions reflecting the unique spatial qualities of the site. However the modular quality of most of these tools and principles can be combined to suit distinct site conditions and other parameters to produce a variety of results on any other waterfront
CONTRIBUTION TO PRACTICE Firstly the frameworks of application contribute to an integrated approach and are demonstrative of the place making capabilities of increasing accessibility between users and water surrounding them when applied thoughtfully. Applying them on a residential scheme like the one at Lea mouth which is representative of many such upcoming projects around the world demonstrates the use of technical solutions to create vibrant public spaces by adding the filter of experiential engagement and involvement. Consequently interventions like runoff infiltration along streets , using green + blue infrastructure to clearly define public spaces and creating an active ecosystem facilitates a reciprocal relationship between resource and everyday lives of users. The concept of long term behaviour change is addressed directly through creating diverse avenues of interaction between people and water which provides an educational as well as recreational interface for people to understand their connection with water. This creates a greater understanding of water as a source and facilitates collective experiences that can generate greater social responses to water through increased interaction DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
132
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
8. CONCLUSION
This major research project exhibits the potential that exists in the unification of technical , spatial and social approaches in providing a holistic design solution towards improved interaction between man , his built environment and water as well as to address broader environmental and social concerns towards creating a better water sensitive community of citizens for the future
THE END
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
133
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
BIBLIOGRAPHY Akköse, A. C. (2007). The Analysis of Istinye Shipyard Area Within The Context of Redevelopment of Urban Waterfront Areas.
Jones, A. (2008). Issues in Waterfront Regeneration: More Soberin Thoughts-A UK : Perspective, Planning Practice & Research, Vol. 13
Brownill, S. (1990), Developing London’s Docklands: another great planning disaster, London, Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Al Ansari, F. (2009). Public Open Space on the Transforming Urban Waterfronts of Bahrain –The Case of Manama
Morena, M. (2011). Morphological, Technological and Functional Characteristics of Infrastructures as a Vital Sector for The Competitiveness of a Country System.
Transformıng: The Dark River Irwell. Available from: http://www.merseybasin.org.uk/archive/assets/60/ original/60_APEM_River_Irwell_report_EA.pdf
Moretti, M. (2010). Valorisation of Waterfronts and Waterways for Sustainable Development.International ScientificConference about Poltva River.Available from: http://www.urbanproject.lviv.ua/php_uploads/data articles/ArticleFiles_84_Moretti_en.pdf
CABE (2001), The value of urban design: a research project commissioned by CABE and DETR to examine the value added by good design, London, Thomas Telford
Anonymous. (2013a). Baltimore Inner Harbour. Available from: http://www.wrtdesign.com/projects/ detail/Baltimore-Inner-Harbor/157 Anonymous. Barceloneta, Barcelona, Spain. Available from: http://www.earth.google.com Anonymous. (2013c). Artificial Island. Available from: https://www.ead.ae/Tacsoft/File Manager/Quarterly/ Artificial%20Islands/Artificial%20Is lands%20of%20 the%20World%20FINAL.pdf Anonymous.(2013e).Urban Beach.,Available from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_beach Anonymous. (2013i). Waterfront Green Space in Urban Ecological Planning and Design of the Contents and Methods. Available from:http://www.docstoc.com/ docs/52295113/Waterfront-Green-Space-in-UrbanEcological-Planning Dong, L. (2004). Waterfront Development: A Case Study of Dalian Erkök, F. (2009). Waterfronts: Potentials for Improving the Quality of Urban Life Giovinazzi, O. & Giovinazzi, S. (2008).Waterfront
Önen, M. (2007). Examination Rivers’ Recreational Potential As An Urban Coastal Space: Case Study
Bellinger, E., Saul, A., Symes, M. & Hendry, K. (1993) Urban Waterside Regeneration: problems and prospects, London, Ellis Horwood, pp.43-49 Marshall, R.(ed) (2001) Waterfronts in Post-Industrial Cities, London
Pekin, U. (2008). Urban Waterfronts Regeneration: A Model of Porsuk Stream in Eskişehir.
De Klerk, L. & Vijgen, J (1992), ‘Inner Cites as a Cultural and Public Arena: Plans and people in Amsterdam and Rotterdam’
Yassin, A. B., Bond, S., McDonagh, J. (2012). Principles for Sustainable Riverfront Development for Malaysia. Journal of Techno-Social Vol.4
Falk, N. (1992), ‘Turning the tide: British experience in regeneration urban docklands’ in Holye, B. & Pinder (1992)
Zhang, L. (2002). An Evaluation of an Urban Riverfront Park Riverfront Park, Spokane, Washington Experiences and Lessons for Designers.
Holye, B. (1995), ‘A Shared Space: contrasted perspectives on urban waterfront redevelopment in Canada’, Town Planning Review
Yang, D (2006)WATERFRONTS : Spatial composition and cultural use Banerjee, T. & Southworth, M. (eds)(1990), City Sense and City Design, London, The MIT Press Breen, A. & Rigby, D. (1994), Waterfronts: Cities Reclaim Their Edge, N ew York, McGraw-Hill Inc Breen, A. & Rigby, D. (1996), The New Waterfront: A world wide urban success story, London, Thames and Hudson
Ikeda, T. (1993), ‘R redesigning the urban waterfront in Yokohama a’ from Bruttomesso, R.(ed) (1993) Waterfronts: a new frontier for cities on the water, Venice, Cities on Water Kriken, J. (1993), ‘Creating a framework: waterfront development ent as urban placemaking’ from Bruttomesso, R.(ed) (1993), Waterfronts: a new frontier for cities on the water, Venice, Cities on Water, pp327329 DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
134
DESIGNING FOR BETTER INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER , WATER’S EDGE AND URBAN FABRIC
DEBANIL PRAMANIK , BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING
135