Temporality: The meaning of time in queen elizabeth olympic park

Spatial Design: Architecture and Cities Principles of Analytical Design Group Project Term 1 2015-2016

QUEEN ELIZABETH PARK, THE LEGACY

TEMPORALITY: THE MEANING OF TIME IN THE PARK

Group 5: Putri Dwimirnani, Pedro Gil, Ye Lu, Ruoheng Pan, Sotiria Sarri Project Mentor: Dr Falli Palaiologou Professor: Dr Kayvan Karimi

1. INTRODUCTION

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Site Location

Source: London Legacy Development Corporation

Map of London London Legacy Development Corporation boundary 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Group 5

Wick Woodland

Lea Valley Velo Park

Marbley Grezen Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park

Chobham Manor

River Lea

Portland Lake

East village

Hackney Wick

RESEARCH AREA Fish Island ( north part )

Fish Land Stradford

Bow

Olympic Stadium

SITE AREA=924239㎡

1. Introduction

Aquatics Center

Pudding Mill 2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

The Legacy Plan - Local & Global Use - Temporality The Legacy Plan “To promote and deliver physical, social, economic and environmental regeneration in the Olympic Park and surrounding area, in particular by maximising the legacy of the Olympic and Paralympic Games(...)” (London Legacy Development Corporation, 2015)

Local and Global The strategy for the park considers two different types of uses for the Park: local for the North and global, for the South Park respectively.

Temporality The passage of time can change the form and function of a building or an urban area. The Legacy Plan is in charge of ensuring long-term success of the facilities.

On the left: LLDC boundary Source: ‘’A Walk around Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’’

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

History Strætforda (1067) : ‘ford on a Roman road'.

•Originally an agricultural community •A country retreat for wealthy merchants and financiers •Early 19th century: an important transport and manufacture centre •End of the 19th century: a site of danger, depravity and destitution

1880 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

History •The docks area and railway yards made East and West Ham prime targets for German Zeppelins in WW1 and German bombers in WW2 •West Ham was raided 194 times, losing 1207 dead and one third of its houses

1930 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

History •Redevelopment was slow

•In 1953 the River Thames flooded •Tower blocks started to appear

50’s Engine Repair Shop Source: wikipedia

1950 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

History •East and West Ham combined to form the Borough of Newham

•New freight terminal, new rail and bus station, new rail routes linking the East End with the City and the new Docklands development •Redevelopment of the 60s Mall and Theatre Royal, design of a new Arts Complex, Municipal Offices and General Hospital

1970 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

History •Heavy industries and infrastructure still on site •Recent economic history underpinned by a move away from railway works and heavy industry towards becoming a significant commercial and cultural centre

1990 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

History - Pre-2012 BEFORE

AFTER

Fridge-Mountain, 2006

Waterworks River, 2005 Source: Clack, D., 2013.

Stratford: then and now.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

History - Pre-2012 BEFORE

AFTER

The Greenway, 2002

Stratford Marsh, 2006 Source: Clack, D., 2013.

Stratford: then and now.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park The Legacy Master Plan

Source: London Legacy Development Corporation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park - The Legacy Context – Venues Sport Legacy Main Venues The Stadium Aquatics Centre Copper Box VeloPark Lee Valley Hockey Tennis Centre

Top Priority • long-term development and management • sports destinations • balance the high-performance sport and community use.

• preserve the Olympic and Paralympic Heritage.

Source: London Legacy Development Corporation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park - The Legacy Context - Neighbourhoods

Chobham Manor Chobham Manor East Wick

Aim New connections High intergration

icity Sweetwater

Plan • 5 new neighbourhoods • 7,000 new homes • 10,000 new jobs • Social infrastructure - 3 schools - Nurseries - Community space

Marshgate Wharf

Marshgate Wharf KEY CONNECTION ( ON - ROAD) KEY CONNECTION ( OFF - ROAD)

Pudding Mill

Source: London Legacy Development Corporation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Fish Island: Action Plan Tower Hamlets Area Action Plan Vision: • Creating a well connected area for East London.

• Optimising the four characters of Fish Island.

• Managing the use of former industrial land.

Source: LDF Tower Hamlets Fish Area Action Plan (2012)

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Fish Island Fish Island East • Currently empty, to be developed as new residential area • New connections to The Hub • Development on waterways Fish Island Mid • Conservation area • Change into creative industries and small businesses • Access to The Greenway, Lea Valley Walk, and Wick Lane

Source: LDF Tower Hamlets Fish Area Action Plan (2012)

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park - The Legacy Sub-Area NORTH PARK leisure

SWEETWATER mix use ( residential, employement, retail and community floorspace

INTERNATIONAL QUARTER commencial, residential

MARSHGATE WHARF

commencial, residential ( cultural, retail, education, leisure or community function)

SOUTH PARK leisure, big events

FISH ISLAND mix use(residential, creative, culture)

Source: London Legacy Development Corporation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Hyde Park Comparison QUEEN ELIZABETH OLYMPIC PARK

HYDE PARK

Hyde Park is a successful example as an urban park by well-linking the surrounding neighborhoods and bring people together.

The Olympic park, in contrast, is lacking the links to surrounding neighborhoods. Instead of bring them together, it tears them apart.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

General Research Questions

Local/Global Does the park function as an integrated part of the city, locally by bringing the surrounding communities together and globally as an attractor to boost economic and business development?

How is this achieved spatially?

Temporality Do people perceive the park as a temporal passage to reach other areas?

Do the facilities currently in place promote transience and what is the aim of the proposed ones?

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Summary of methodology of all scales

MACRO

MESO

MICRO

MAPPING

SPATIAL ANALYSIS

OBSERVATION

East London Economy Transport Network Global Attractors Green Networks

Integration Rn-R800 Choice R5000,R2400,R1600,R800 Patchwork: Choice + Mean Metric Depth

N/A

Figure-Ground Map Land Use Severance Map Accessibility Footprint size

NA Integration R5000 NA Choice R5000 Combined NACH and NAIN

Tracing People Gateways

Day and night time accessibility

NA Integration R800 NA Choice R800 Scatter Plot

Gate Counting Snapshots Lighting (day and night) Statistical comparisons

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

2. MACRO SCALE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Macro Scale – Research Question The park and the city Global Analysis Is the Olympic Park a global attractor in terms of the street network How is the area connected with other global venues in terms of the street network?

To which extent does it act as a centre? Or not?

Methodology Mapping East London Economy Transport Network Global Attractors Green Networks Spatial Analysis Integration Rn-R800 Choice R5000,R2400,R1600,R800 Patchwork: Choice + Mean Metric Depth 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

East London Economy Deprivation and Household income •Newham borough: on the top twenty most deprived •Tower Hamlets: highest levels of children living in income deprivation in England, followed by Hackney, Newham and Islington Indices of Deprivation Source: London Data Store

'Money needs to be invested in the Stratford Centre, not just the Olympic Park. It doesn't impact locals if not. How are we meant to compete?’

Stratford

Shopkeeper Uday Patel

Mean Household Income Source: London Data Store

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

East London Economy Well-being •Average values on: Health, Economic Security, Safety (Crime rate and Fire), Education, Access, Environment, Happiness, Children and Families •Newham ward: Low well-being value compared with the rest of London’s wards •Hackney Wick Value: -10.56 •Stratford and New Town Value: -6.34 •West Ham Value: -4.75 Aggregate well-being charts Source: London Data Store

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Transport Network •

9 tube and National Rail lines

•

London Overground connections at Hackney Wick and Stratford

•

Cross rail due to open in 2018

The area is located in a well-connected place strategically.

Source: London Legacy Development Corporation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Change of Zoning Three Stratford stations (Stratford, Stratford International and Stratford High Street) from zone 3 to zone 2/3 effective from January 2016.

The move will benefit commuters and visitors travelling to the stations at a lower cost, boosting the commercial attractiveness of the area.

The changing of zoning will maximize the unique potential of the Olympicopolis initiative and wider strategic plans for regeneration and growth at Stratford,

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Global Attractors The area is an aggregation of many global venues.

Velodrome ICITY

It is designed to be a new destination point, gathering people together.

Copper Box Arena

Olympic Stadium

London Aquatic Center Arcelor Mittal Orbit Tower

Source: London Legacy Development Corporation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Green Networks

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis INTEGRATION Rn Globally the area is on the extension of the center of London.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis INTEGRATION R5000 Some segments the The area is still from out of boundary the area are center inofR5000 embedded into the centre.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis INTEGRATION R2000 The area is at the periphery of the center in R2000.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis INTEGRATION R800 The north park starts to act as a center at R800.

It is a local center rather than a global one, and its irradiation effect is quite limited.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis Choice R5000

In R5000, the choice analysis only picks up the important highways :A11 and A12 around the area.

The park itself does not have much movement in global sense.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis Choice R2400

In R2400, the north park starts to have higher choice value, while the south park still not.

The analysis in R2400 picks up the path from Olympic village and the bridge between north and south park.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis Choice R1600

In R1600, the analysis picks up the main entrance into the south park from Stratford and the north park has shown a good pattern of local use.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis Choice R800

In R800, the north park starts to have a good amount of throughmovement.

The analysis picks up the three main path supports the most throughmovement.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Patchwork: Foreground Background In the background map, there is gap around the area. It is not well-linked with the background network.

There is strong foreground network around the area, but not much is passing through it.

Foreground: Angular Choice Rn Background: Mean Metric Depth R3000

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Analysis conclusion

In terms of street network, the area can hardly be called as a global center, even though it has been designed with wellconnected transport and global venues. It is only a local center in small radius.

The area is in a “bridge� position between the more integrated central London and more segregated East London.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Macro Scale - Conclusions Is the Olympic Park a global attractor in terms of the street network?

Strategically, the Olympic Park is well connected with transport system and also has many global venues as attractors. It has the potential to act as the bridge between central London and East London, so as to boost the economy of East London.

However, the area is not integrated in terms of street network. It has failed to become a global centre to bring people together.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

3. MESO SCALE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Meso Scale – Research Question The park and its neighbourhoods Global and Local Analysis Is there a synergy between local and global activities happening in the park?

Does the park encourage local activities and also people passing through on their way to longerdistance trips?

Is there an overlap of to-movement and throughmovement?

Methodology Mapping Figure-Ground Land Use/Severance Map Accessibility

Spatial Analysis NA Integration R800 NA Choice R800 Combined NACH and NAIN Observation Tracing People Gateways 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Figure - Ground Map The area is a “whole� in relation to its neighbourhoods.

The park represent a big open space for the surroundings.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Figure - Ground Map The area concentrate big size buildings in relation to its neighbourhood.

Big size buildings

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Building Footprint Size Building footprint sizes become bigger when they locate closer to the park.

They are a barrier

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Land-Use Analysis The land uses show that the southwest side of the park is dominated by industries, while the south east part is characterized by retail and the north park with residential uses.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Land-Use Analysis RESIDENTIAL CLUSTERS High rise residential: East Village Fish Island Pudding Mill

East Village Hackney Wick West Ham

Low rise residential: West Ham Hackney Wick Hackney Wick

Fish Island East Village Pudding Mill

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Land-Use Analysis The south side of the park concentrate big areas of Industrial Clusters.

East Village Hackney Wick West Ham

Fish Island

Fish Island

Pudding Mill

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Route Connectivity Map Boundary between the park and neighborhood Entrances not connected to the neighborhoods.

No south access

Fish Island segregated two canal No events - South park inaccessible

Only one connection North and South park

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Severance Analysis ROADS ARE STRONG BOUNDARIES

RAILS STRONG BOUNDARIES

RESIDENTIAL

NORTH SIDE

The southwest side of the park work as industrial cluster and the north side as residential.

Roads and rail lines are boundary between the park surroundings.

Spatially and functionally there is a clear division between the north and south side.

ROADS ARE STRONG BOUNDARIES

1. Introduction

INDUSTRIAL

SOUTH SIDE

RAILS STRONG BOUNDARIES

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Gateways Observation Data – Week Day

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Gateways Observation Data – Week Day Most of the movement is on the west and east side of the park.

On the other hand there is a lack of movement in the south west and north side.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Gateways Observation Data – Week End

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Gateways Observation Data – Week End The use of the South park increase significantly on the weekend.

Hackney Wick

Pudding Mill 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Movement Tracing South Park 60% access from Fish Island is directing to South Park.

NORTH PARK 50% passers from South Park go to Olympic Village.

Main route connecting Hackney Wick and Olympic Village.

Pattern Concentrated movement in the heart of the park Few movement on the extremes.

Gates 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis NACH R5000 LEYTON

The highest value of choice is in West-East. (through movement)

There is a strong connection with Victoria Park.

EAST VILLAGE

HACKNEY WICK

WEST HAM

There are low levels of choice in the south side of the park.

FISH ISLAND

LOW LEVELS CHOICE SOUTHNORTH

STRATFORD

BOW

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis NAIN R5000 LEYTON

The core of the park is not integrated with its neighbours. (to- movement)

HACKNEY WICK

WEST HAM SEGREGATED CORE

STRATFORD LOCAL CENTRE BOW

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis Combined NAIN and NACH RN

LEYTON

Both extremes the north and south park show a low combination of choice and integration.

HACKNEY WICK

WEST HAM

The connections with the neighbourhoods occur in the centre of the park, following a west-east direction. (through movement) + (to movement)

STRATFORD BOW

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Meso Scale - Conclusions Does the park encourage local activities and also people passing through on their way to longerdistance trips?

PHYSICALLY FIGURE GROUND

The park is a “whole” for its neighbourhoods.

FOOTPRINT

Is a barrier for its neighbourhoods.

LAND USES

Residential areas Industrial areas

-north park -south park - lack of daily

SPATIALLY

Station and centre Park’s extremes

- High movement - little use.

THROUGH MOVEMENT AND TO MOVEMENT

Low integration High choice

-it’s not a destination -it’s a strategic location (especially bridge)

COMBINED CHOICE AND INTEGRETAION

Park’s extremes Movement

-segregated and less choice.

-west-east in the centre.

GATE COUNT AND TRACING PEOPLE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

4. MICRO SCALE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Micro Scale – Research Question The north and the south side of the park Local Analysis What is the relation between the north and south use of the park, when considering temporality?

Do the north park and south park promote specific group uses respectively?

Methodology Observation Gate Counting Snapshots Lighting (day and night) Statistical comparisons Spatial Analysis NA Integration R800 NA Choice R800

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Gateways Observation Temporality The south park has a peak amount of people when there’s an event and the main entrance from Stratford takes 90% of it.

On the other hand the north park remained stable during the day and also between weekday and weekend.

NORTH PARK SOUTH PARK

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Gateways Observation Temporality

WEEK END

1. Introduction

The count of the three periods are basically even in each gate.

Morning use is higher in weekend and lunchtime higher in weekday.

WEEK DAY

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Scatter plot: correlation between NAIN and Log Choice The correlation between Choice and Integration is higher in North Park than that in South Park. It suggests that the north park has more copresence of to-movement and throughmovement.

North Park R2=0.34

South Park R2=0.27

Scatter plot: NAIN VS Log Choice

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

(R1200)

5. Proposals

Snapshots-North and South Park

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

NORTH PARK

PLAYGROUND

SOUTH PARK

AQUATICS

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Snapshots: Playground

Walkers centred here Mix use Strongly used

Hightly used Communication happens strongly

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Snapshots: Playground

paths for walkers stop moving walkers mainly and less people would stop moving.

No place to sit Less communication

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Playground Conclusion

Highly use Family-based use strongly local

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Snapshots: London Aquatic

Hightly used for passing in bridge Access for the auditorium of aquatic center

A clear boundary between passing and the access area of aquatic Mainly for passing Less communication 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Aquatics Conclusion

Events-fully used No events-empty Most of the people use the bridge.

No special treatment for the access of the building.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Segment Analysis NACH R1200

I City a barrier to the west

Bridge the linking between both sides.

Linking Bridge

Backside of the Stadium

Backside of the Stadium 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

North Park: Main Route Potential routes to connect neighbourhoods

Main Route to Velodrome is not well illuminated

Main access for surrounding neighbourhood is no longer used due to limited visibility

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Day

Night Time Accessibility

Night

South Park area has no distinct problem in night time accessibility.

71% of North Park area cannot be accessed at night time due to limited visibility.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

DAY

Day & Night Time Comparison NACH R800

NIGHT

NORTH PARK

North Park area is losing connectivity at night.

South Park area performs well both day and night.

NORTH PARK

OLYMPIC VILLAGE

OLYMPIC VILLAGE

STRATFORD WESTFIELD

FISH ISLAND

STRATFORD WESTFIELD

FISH ISLAND SOUTH PARK

SOUTH PARK

PUDDING MILL LANE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

PUDDING MILL LANE 3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Micro Scale - Conclusions What is the relation between the north and south use of the park, when considering temporality?

Do the north park and south park promote specific group uses respectively?

TEMPORALITY LOCAL & GLOBAL

Distinct difference of uses at South Park.

The two parks serves different functions.

North Park South Park

-serves daily use -events related

iCITY Backside of Stadium

- Barrier to North Park - Barrier to South Park

Limited visibility Low connectivity

-no illumination -access are blocked

BARRIERS

iCITY AND OLYMPIC STADIUM

NIGHT USE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

5. PROPOSALS 5 guidelines toward a design proposal

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

UNIFY THE WHOLE Join together the fragmented north and south side of the park, strengthening its role as a centre and improving circulation

BENEFIT FROM THE SURROUNDINGS Relate to the surrounding uses and networks that attract various social groups at different times

PROVIDE MULTI-LEVEL LINKS Create linkages from the park to its surroundings and provide viewing platforms that enhance visibility, connectivity and accessibility

EXTEND THE LANDSCAPE Extend vertically the network of green spaces, as part of the Thames Gateway Parklands Vision, so that surrounding communities can have access to it

ADD LIGHTING Light up underutilised, dark areas to enable various path options during the night

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Main Intensions Park of Social Reproduction

Park of Social Production

Stratford International

Pudding Mill Lane

Hillier, B., 1989. The Architecture of the Urban Object. Ekistics, 56(334/33), pp. 5-21.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

North Park - iCITY A digital and creative district:

•enabling links with Hackney Wick’s creative industries •the building will act as a mediator Above: Hackney Wick Murals Below: LLDC iCITY vision – link with Hackney Wick proposal

•facilitate local network development

Source: Phil Askew LLDC Bartlett Presentation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

London Legacy and Proposal Comparison Choice R2000

LLDC Proposal

Current Situation

Group Proposal NEW CONNECTION

CH: 0,96

1. Introduction

CH: 1,27

CH: 1,03

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

+25%

5. Proposals

Park Bridge – A new Market Place Choice R2000

Group Proposal CH: 1,38 HIGHETS CHOICE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

BEFORE

Park Bridge – A new Market Place •create a mix of temporary and permanent activities •increase vertical connectivity by reinforcing the northsouth link •enhance north-south through-movement

South Park Proposed Activities Source: Phil Askew LLDC Bartlett presentation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

BEFORE AFTER

Park Bridge – A new Market Place •create a mix of temporary and permanent activities •increase vertical connectivity by reinforcing the northsouth link •enhance north-south through-movement

South Park Proposed Activities Source: Phil Askew LLDC Bartlett presentation

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Multi-level Viewing Platform • facilitate east –west movement •link at the same level with west bridge •create a continuous elevated walking path •bring visitors and inhabitants together along the platform •enable more views across the green landscape corridor •enable multi-level activities: movie projections, open-theatre and music events, temporary markets

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Multi-level Viewing Platform • facilitate east –west movement •link at the same level with west bridge •create a continuous elevated walking path •bring visitors and inhabitants together along the platform •enable more views across the green landscape corridor •enable multi-level activities: movie projections, open-theatre and music events, temporary markets

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

London Legacy and Proposal Comparison Choice R2000

Current Situation

||

CH: 1,23

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

LLDC Proposal

Group Proposal

||

||

CH: 1,32

CH: 1,34

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Fish Island: Create a hub •creative industries and small business •enable connections between Hackney Wick Over ground Station and Pudding Mill Lane •opening access through the A12 highway will enable connectivity with Victoria Park and the deprived area of Tower Hamlets Key:

Fish Island area Exiting buildings Existing roads Proposed roads/paths

New connections New bridges

Fish Island proposal 1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

London Legacy and Proposal Comparison Choice R2000

LLDC Proposal

Current Situation

Group Proposal

NEW CONNECTION

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Extend the landscape •Facilitate connection from Pudding Mill Lane station to the park

1. installation points

2. skate park area

•Extend the landscape and pathways across the river •Provide a platform for installations and a skate park area to be used both by visitors and potential UCL East students Key: future development area proposed routes

potential car park

new links sports/various activities area

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. light up subway entrance

4. protect from railway 3. Meso Scale noise 4. Micro Scale

Pudding mill lane station Image sources: 1.https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/5304396623379 69069/ 2. http://www.dac.dk/en/dac-life/danisharchitecture-guide/copenhagen/charlotteammundsens-plads/ 3.https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/3531104270067 94120/ 4.http://www.archdaily.com/286223/superkilen -topotek-1-big-architects-superflex

5. Proposals

London Legacy and Proposal Comparison Choice R2000

LLDC Proposal

Current Situation

Group Proposal

NEW CONNECTION

CH: 1,24

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

BEFORE

North Park Illumination Proposal: NACH R800

AFTER

Providing illumination at night will increase visibility.

NORTH PARK

NORTH PARK

OLYMPIC VILLAGE

OLYMPIC VILLAGE

STRATFORD WESTFIELD

STRATFORD WESTFIELD

FISH ISLAND

Potential routes which are being used at day can also be accessed at night.

FISH ISLAND SOUTH PARK

SOUTH PARK

PUDDING MILL LANE

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

PUDDING MILL LANE

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

North Park Illumination Before and After

AFTER

BEFORE

By providing illuminations at certain points, it will open more access within local neighbourhoods.

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

North Park - Illumination Proposal

VELODROME

HOMERTON COBHAM MANOR

iCITY OLYMPIC VILLAGE

PRIMARY ROUTE HACKNEY WICK

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

SOUTH PARK 3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

SECONDARY ROUTE

5. Proposals

LLDC and Proposal Plan NACH R2000

London Legacy Proposed Plan Plan

Improve the ´heart´ of the park as a destination Increasing movement in north and south extremes of the park Enhance local and global networks Transform the park from a ‘temporalevents’ area to an integrated everyday life one

1. Introduction

2. Macro Scale

3. Meso Scale

4. Micro Scale

5. Proposals

Bibliography Arthur, M., 10 December 2015. UCL East – next steps. [online]. Available from: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/staff/staffnews/1215/12152015/?utm_source=UCL%20%28Internal%20Communications%29&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=6540191_The %20Week%40UCL%20-%20Issue%20227 [Accessed 12 December 2015].

Clack, D., 22 July 2013. Stratford: then and now. [online]. Available from: http://www.timeout.com/london/things-to-do/stratford-thenand-now [Accessed 10 November 2015].

Hillier, B., 1989. The Architecture of the Urban Object. Ekistics, 56(334/33), pp. 5-21.

Hillier, B., 1996. Space is the Machine: A configurational theory. Space Syntax 2007 ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hillier, B., 2009. Spatial Sustainability in Cities. Organic Patterns and Sustainable Forms. 7th International Space Syntax Symposium.

Hillier, B. & Hanson, J., 1984. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hillier, B. & Vaughan, L., 2007. The City as One Thing. Progress in Planning, 67(3), pp. 205-230.

London Legacy Development Corporation, 2015. Local Plan, London: s.n.

Martin, L., 2000. The grid as generator. Architectural Research Quarterly, 4(04), pp. 309-322.

Piggott, G., 01 October 2015. English Indices of Deprivation 2015. [online]. Available from: http://data.london.gov.uk/reports/englishindices-of-deprivation-2015/ [Accessed 15 November 2015].

Preece, R., 18 July 2002. Shops boarded, buildings gutted and streets in a mess: The sorry side of Stratford that Olympic chiefs don't want you to see. [online]. Available from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175316/London-2012-Olympics-Sorry-Stratford-Gameschiefs-dont-want-see.html [Accessed 15 November 2015].