LONDON: STRAND EAST
Paper - Final copy
2013.01.31 GROUP # 20 Karabay Gizem [Urban design & Landscape Architecture] Redealli Luca [Planning] Saloriani Stefano [Planning]
[pag. 1]
0. INTRODUCTION
[pag. 2]
[pag. 5]
O.1 Abstract
1. GENERAL INFO
1.1 Info about the project 1.2 Framework 1.3 Before and After
2. STORY OF THE PROJECT 2.1 Planning process
[pag. 6]
3. PHYSICAL CONFIGURATION
3.1 Transformation of the area 3.2 Visual perspective 3.3 Main structure 3.4 Block, grid, public space 3.5 The different parts
[pag. 11]
4. PART’S INTERPRETATION
4.1 Commercial part 4.2 “Urban heritage” part 4.3 Residential part 4.4 Residential & Riverside part 4.5 Riverside & The Hub part
[pag. 16]
5. CONCLUSIONS
[pag. 17]
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Index
1/
0.1
ABSTRACT
This work seeks to find and investigate the most relevant aspects about the urbanism project of STRAND EAST in London, emphasizing on those particular elements that define it. We will tackle this question starting from a more general standpoint of the project and delving into the recently developed district of Stratford, in which the new Olympic park has been founded. Firstly, we achieved to know and describe it; we can finally analyze the approach and ideas involved in its creation. Then, we tried to understand and interrogate from different scale and different point of view. We decided to describe the project in two steps: • The first step is the description of the general structure interpreting the general characteristics of blocks, grid and public space; • The second step is to describe more in deeply the configuration of the single elements composed the project. In the descriptions of the the general structure we saw how various elements is differences from other and how these differences create differences spaces, relationships and functions; so we divided the area in five quarters and interpreted the principal characteristics. We start up our work by searching books, magazines and websites related to the matter and elaborating an index (all the references used will thoroughly appear in the Bibliography). Then, we try to set which material needs to be elaborated or analyzed for each of the points in the index to have an idea on what to work. Since each of us has a different field of knowledge and studies, we can enrich ourselves by sharing the work, thus, we try to work together as much as possible.
0. Introduction
2/
1.1
INFO ABOUT THE PROJECT
London is the city
Newham is the district
14 ha
Dimension of site
Strand East is our case study
2012
Buildings Start-up
60.000 mq Built surface
Public space: 80.000 mq
1,1 mq/mq Area ratio
residential & recreational commercial
1000
New homes directional & tertiary Img. 1: Info about the project (source: Pictures, Stratford metropolitan Masterplan Executive Summary 2011; graphics, personal elaboration)
1. General info
3/
1.2
FRAMEWORK
Where in London Enfield
Barnet
Waltham Forest
Harrow
Redbridge
Haringey Havering Brent
Hackney
Islington Camden
Hillingdon Westminster
Ealing
Central London
Tower Hamlets
Canary Wharf
K&C H&F
Heathrow
Newham
STRAND EAST__
City Airport
Greenwich
Southwark
Hounslow
Bexley
Lambeth Richmond
Wandsworth
Lewisham
Merton Kingston
Bromley Sutton
OLYMPIC PARK
Barking & Dagenham
Croydon
Img. 2: General framwork (source: personal elaboration)
Strand east is a new project for the redevelopment of Stratford. The project contain a big area in Stratford where are localized another four project and the most important is the Olympic park for Olympic game 2012. The area is an ex industrial districts characterized for the presence of industrial heritage. The promoter of the project are Stratford district and the most important developer is IKEA group, would realize a new sustainable project in an area will be a new center in the urban region of London. The quarter is delimited at North from the High Street A 12, at East and South from Three Mills Wall river and at West from River Lee Navigation.
LAYOUT : A big urban project with many realities The two maps under this description show
Focus on masterplan area
LAYOUT : A big urban
the context of Stratford Masterplan and synthetize OLYMPIC the principal characteristic of the PARK many newwith development of Stratford divided into project realities each quarter. OLYMPIC PARK
Chobham Fa
» 1,200 new homes » New local park » Local retail » Improved walking connections
Chobham Farm
» 1,200 new homes » New local park Stratford Old » Local retail » 1,000 new homes » Improved walking»and cycling 200,000 sqm reta connections office, education, h Two-way working o and Great Eastern » and cycling connec
Chobham Farm
Stratford Old Town
» 1,000 new homes » 200,000 sqm retail,Greater leisure, Carp office, education, hotel » Two-way working ofNeighbourho Broadway » 1,900 homes and Great Eastern » New walking » 20,000 sqm comm and cycling connections » Communityhub » Upgraded connec local park
Stratford Old Town
Greater Carpenters Neighb.
Greater Carpenters Neighbourhood
» 1,900 homes » 20,000 sqm commercial » Communityhub » Upgraded connections and local park
STRAND EAST__ STRAND EAST__ Img. 3: Stratford Masterplan area (source: Google Earth and personal elaboration)
STRATFORD MASTERPLAN STRATFORD MASTERPLAN
Img. 4: Interpretation about the Stratford Masterplan (source: personal elaboration)
1. General info
4/
1.3
BEFORE AND AFTER
Img. 5: Images before and after the intevent (source: http://www.designboom.com; http://inhabitat.com)
1. General info
5/
2.1
PLANNING PROCESS
Olympic Legacy Supplementary Planning Guidance
London Plan
London Housing Design Guide
The Olympic Games is a big event for a State in particular for the host city; in this case London. The process starting from a project (masterplan) of the area is realizing the Olympic Park all in accordance with the London Plan. The London Borough of Newham exposes the guidelines and the principal strategy: Housing strategy, economic development strategy, property strategy, strategy of sustainable communities.
Housing Strategy
London Borough of Newham
Core Strategy
Economic Development Strategy
2012 Games Legacy Plan
Sustainable Communities Strategy
After this the master plan follows the guidelines and elaborates the projects. In this case there are few master plan revolve around the Stratford Metropolitan Masterplan. We focus on the Sugar house lane.
Property Strategy Landprop Real estate group of IKEA
Stratford Metropolitan Masterplan
Northern Olympic Fringe Masterplan
Sugar House Lane Land Use and Design Brief
Stratford City Masterplan
Landmark StrandEast tower realized by Wood Beton spa
Designed by ARC - ML
Img. 6: Planning assumptions and actors involved (source: personal elaboration)
2. Story of the project
6/
3.1
TRANSFORMATION OF THE AREA
Status of the area today According to our points of view, it is important to define how the characteristic of the old structure and the new one are related in order to understand the changes that the project brings in the area. At this point, a question can could be: “Does the project take some points from the old structure?”
Img. 7: Industrial presence today (source: Google Earth and personal elaboration)
Old grid
Img.8: Industrial presence grid (source: personal elaboration)
The old grid is characterized for simplicity: two streets to connect industrial fabric and highway. This structure can be acceptable for an industrial quarter were the connection with the context is insignificant. These are the principal elements: • • •
No relationship with the context; Regular grid; Access only from the high-street.
Img.11: Old grid interpretation (source: personal elaboration)
Status of the area tomorrow The new grid presents some different elements; from the old structure resumes only the two streets, modifying and create new access: • • • •
Irregular grid; Relationship with the context (three new bridge) Realized on the human dimension The space is characterized for more space to pedestrian
Img.9: StrandEast Masterplan (source: http://www.arc-ml.com)
New grid
Img.12: New grid interpretation (source: personal elaboration) Img.10: StrandEast grid (source: personal elaboration)
3. Physical configuration
7/
3.2
VISUAL PERSPECTIVE The urban space can be also experienced by our perception and cognition. As indicated in the “Public Places Urban Spaces”, we can explain the urban environment with the help of different level of difficulty in mentally grouping variety of elements from the visual interpretation into a general outlook. (170) Therefore, some components can be used in the reading of visual dimension of an urban space such as sense of patterns, appreciation of rhythm, recognition of balance and harmony. As a result, when analyzed the Strand East in terms of visual observation, we can examine some crucial a sequence of prevailing panoramic views to the project area at the first glance. The reason for this is to covered by the water element from three sides. Also, when considering the height of floors, the sense of rhythm can be observed, especially on the High Road.
Img.13: Panoramic Views of the site from its environment (source: personal elaboration)
nt
a to G
rfro
s View
te Wa
As indicated above, on the account of the surrounding three sides by natural elements creates main vistas without any visual barrier. The axe in the middle of project enables the orientation with the help of using grouped elements/buildings through parallelism. In addition to this, some important buildings outside of the area, for example, The Gasholders can be on the High Street across the Bow Back River and are a further reminder of London’s growth in the nineteenth century. (Sugar House Lane Masterplanning Assessment, 23)
a
s lder
ram
sho
o pan
Img.14: Main Vista - Views of Natural Qualities (source: personal elaboration)
Images: Sugar House Lane Masterplan Heritage Assessment, (pg. 20-34)
Views to the Abbey Mill Station
There is another approach to create controlled panoramas into the project area in order to provide the detection of surrounding buildings. When considering the existing industrial plan of the site, there were three chimneys which have a role as landmarks. The project commonly preserved their spaces by opening these spaces as squares and this leads to a clear vision. Moreover, the Three Mills complex can be observed from southwards along Sugar House Lane.
Views to Three Mills Img. 15: Views from inside (source: personal elaboration)
Views to the Landmark
The most perceivable element is the landmark of the project. It is immediately obvious and become apparent from every aspect of the site. Also, façade rhythms can be readily conceived when walking though the environment of the river path. Therefore, it reflects the variety of sensations contained within it because the balance of them change according the feature of the space.
Img.16: Views into the area (source: personal elaboration)
3. Physical configuration
8/
3.3
MAIN STRUCTURE
General point of view
Element composed the project Blocks Strand East is composed by three types of blocks: court, tower and linear. These are characterized for the relationship with the open space and for their functions. Residential buildings are composed by two courts on up to four floors and one up to three floors. The tower has up to six from sixteen floors and the linear blocks have up to five-six floors. Courtyard The space included by court is characterized from different connection and open space. Residential blocks create open space (three floors) and a continuous visual perspective; where there are four floors create a semi-private space for the inhabitants; the last space is private space characterized the commercial area where there are all work and service for the commercial space.
Img. 17: StrandEast project area (source: Amended Plan 2012 and personal elaboration)
River
Building
Streets
Build reconvertited
Green area building Building Background
Streets They are not much developed because the principal scope of project is to realize a quarter without car so the street is only for the public transport. The unique entrance (for the transport) is localized at north where there is the High Street A 12 and for the rest is all composed of sustainable transport systems like pedestrian and bicycle.
Public space Green area
Project perimetre
Strand east shows how a sustainable project can be done because it is developed by a great organization of transport, open space. The area is totally viable by foot. The quarter is composed by three different type of building; the differences between them concern about their position and the function taking in place. The project reinterpreted the present layout (industrial district).
Public space Almost 80.000 mq are for the public space. In the quarter it assumes different characteristic about the relations create with building, we can divided it in: square, interaction space and transit space.
The most part of Strand East is occupied by residential area. Here we can find the most vital part of “interaction” space because the structure is composed by open court in which the street are open and the buildings floor are lowest.
Green In the project there isn’t a lot of green area. The most important is localized on the river West where the linear blocks are setback to create a front on the river. The green on the East side is private for the residential. Img. 18: Layers in the project (source: Amended Plan 2012 and personal elaboration)
3. Physical configuration
9/
3.4
BLOCKS
BLOCK, GRID, PUBLIC SPACES FUNCTIONALLY
Strand East is characterized by few elements related to each other: block, grid, and public space. These elements are distinguished to each other for the function of the space (residential, commercial, and tertiary). Grid
Block The space is characterized by different types of buildings (court, linear blocks). This type has a relation with the sourrounding space in different way on the account of the fact that it depends on its form.
The residential court create a semi-private space: “under the control of residence. The tower create a visual point of orientation. In the south the three public tower create a big square in connection with the two new pedestrian an cycle connection.
Sim by Th th th Su an
The most part of the project is open/public space. Connection East/West between the block; Noth/South into the block (are open and create interaction space)
Gree block block The v creat The p at no there
OPEN SPAC
Elements of the project
+
The area presents a tower block in each quarters as a “landmark”
Img. 19: Block pattern (source: personal elaboration)
Img. 21: Grid structure (source: personal elaboration)
Court, linear blocks
Project perimeter
Towers Project perimeter
Public space It is explained before the project and is identified by different relationship among public space, buildings and their form.
The project is characterized for the present of only two streets and the other space is composed by pedestrian ways. The sketch of grid presents the characteristic of European grid, irregular not welldefined by regular blocks.
On the side, we can see how the buildings are arranged to create public space.
(source: personal elaboration)
Buildings Public space Project perimeter
+
FUNCTIONALLY
BLOCKS
The residential court create a semi-private space: “under the control of residence. The tower create a visual point of orientation. In the south the three public tower create a big square in connection with the two new pedestrian an cycle connection.
Simple structure, caraterized by court, tower, liner block. The high building is localized at the edge co create a front with the context. Sustainable project but with an high area ratio 1,1 mq/mq
The most part of the project is open/public space. Connection East/West between the block; Noth/South into the block (are open and create interaction space)
Green space doesn’t enter in the block but stops when arrive at the blocks base. The visual space doesn’t stops but create a continuom. The principal square is localized at north and south in the center there is only “transit space”
OPEN SPACE Img. 22: Characteristic of general structure (source: personal elaboration)
3. Physical configuration
COMMENT/CRITIQUE
Img. 20: Relationship between buildings and public space
In the northern part (commercial area) the high building are overlooking the street and create a corridor inside the project; the riverside quarter on West create a green area between its and the river and a barrier in direction of the street. The riverside quarter on East create a waterfront on Three Mills River and an interaction space between the linear block and the court. The center quarter create a semi-public space between the building with three floors and a continuum from the north and the south. The southern building creates a square among the tower.
To interpret the general pattern
10 /
3.5
THE DIFFERENT PARTS
Five spaces Seeing more in detail the general plan we can see how the project is divided in five quarters. What are the differences between in these quarters? 1. The North East Quarter of the site is subject to a detailed planning application which will create first phase of this development already has planning permission, with Dane’s Yard to be bought forward as the location for a new 40m high illuminated sculpture set within a landscaped public square and a new destination restaurant to be operated by Graysons; 2. A Commercial Quarter would sit along the northern part of the site, adjoining the high street, northern and western boundaries of the site. 3. A Residential Quarter sits at the heart of Strand East which will be characterized by low level mews housing, with shared internal garden courtyards and semi-private spaces;
Img. 23: Different parts (source: Amended Plan 2012 personal elaboration)
Commercial space Urban Heritage
4. A Riverside Quarter east and west, will sit at the water side edges of Strand East with housing arranged in a linear fashion along the waterfront. In some instances buildings may be placed immediately on the water’s edge, in other locations it would be set back to create public space adjacent to the water. 5. The Hub is the quarter at the south end of the site, with a community building at its heart, surrounded by cafes, bars and small shops that will look out onto a public square and the water.
Residential space Riverside space The Hub
The spaces are composed by a few typologies of buildings: courtyard (open/closed). The form of buildings are characterized for different function (residential, commercial and directionally). Also, we can see a different type of space where the buildings are related to the space.
Different typology sh/pull pu
stretch
slice
Different function Residential
+ sh/pull pu
hole
Commercial STRAND EAST____
+ stretch
Tertiary / directionaly
Different spaces Block base
Tower
+
+
+
Imgs. 24-25:Elements compose the project StrandEast (source: personal elaboration)
3. Physical configuration
11 /
4.1
COMMERCIAL PART Which part?
The part along the highway Highway A12
This part is the only one in which the building type is a series of “closed court” that define internal and private spaces.
Public spaces
Private Courtyard Zone
Here we can see that the street, unlike the rest of the “neighborhood”, gives form at the part composing the blocks and transforming it in a sort of “linear building”. Here we try to show, as also in the other pages, how the block works. Imgs. 26-27: Which & How (source: personal elaboration)
Which building?
The blocks are break by street and by public spaces Many “factors” that can break the block
Imgs. 28:Building’s typology (source: personal elaboration)
One of the most important fact is the difference of the public space from one side to the other of this part of the project. This is visible in the section and also we can understand that, probably, is due to the presence of the street which “bound” the public space, then in the other part, it is “protected” between the block.
Imgs. 29: What breaks? (source: personal elaboration)
Imgs. 30: The section (source: personal elaboration)
The street
P.S.
Block
Private court
Block
Public space
4. Part’s interpretation
Block
12 /
4.2
A SORT OF INTERNAL SATELLITE BASED ON
“URBAN HERITAGE” PART
Which part?
A sort of internal satellite based on pre-existin buildings The second part is that we have defined “urban heritage” because here the aim of the project is try to maintain some existing building and to add some others that resemble the old structure. Now is possibly to understand why this part is so different from the others.
High buildings
Main internal axis
Public spaces
For us, also, here the design has tried to make more recognizable this part with the idea to put here the two highest landmarks. (Ones is the wood’sON tower) A SORT OF INTERNAL SATELLITE BASED PRE-EXISTING FORM OF SPACE AND BUILDINGS Imgs. 32: The inside (source: elaboration) Imgs. 31: Which part elaboration) A (source: SORTpersonal OF INTERNAL SATELLITE BASED ON PRE-EXISTING FORM OF part SPACE ANDpersonal BUILDINGS Which building?
Factors that can the block A SORT OF INTERNAL SATELLITE BASED ON PRE-EXISTING FORM OF break SPACE AND BUILDINGS A SORT OF INTERNAL SATELLITE BASED ON PRE-EXISTING FORM OF SPACE AND BUILDINGS
High buildings High buildings
Main internal axis Main internal axis Imgs. 33: Which building (source: personal elaboration)
These parts, as we can see, are similar at two island; both for the building and for the general structure (as already said). High buildings
In this case however the part isn’t High buildings crossed by the road but only by the public spaces that, with the Main internal axis ex-industrial framework, modify Main internal axis the block. Public spaces
Public spaces Public spaces
Public spaces
Blocks are broken Blocks are broken A kind of two closeA kind of two close Blocks are broken by the public spac Blocks by the public spaceare broken separate dimension kind of two close A kind of two close Aand by the public space by the public space and separate dimension and separate dimension and separate dimension
e la griglia regolare e se la griglia fosse regolare e Comefosse potrebbe essere progetto. disegnasse totalmente il progetto.
A reflection “among the parts”
Com’è in realtà con lo spazio pubblico centro Com’è inal realtà conche lo spazio pu Imgs. 34: What breaks (source: personal elaboration) diventa “crocevia” diventa “crocevia”
Non solo uno spazio pubblicoNon di risulata, solo uno maspazio uno pubblico di risulata, ma uno spazio che diventa colonna sul quale si spazio che diventa colonna vertebrale, sul quale si Now, we know that in thisvertebrale, part (but is true incardinano addirittura tre parti del progetto. incardinano addirittura tre parti del progetto.
also for the residential part) that the public is important in the definition Unovery spazio pubblico modifica tuttoof Uno spazio pubblicospace che distrugge, modifica tutto che distrugge, l’organismo progettuale. l’organismo progettuale. the block. With these images we have tried to Uno spazio pubblico Uno spazio pubblico che riflette (come uno spec- che riflette (come uno specthat the space transchio) e cheepublic definisce, la griglia, i blocchi e le centrachio) e che definisce,show la griglia, i blocchi le centralità progettuali. lità progettuali. form also the grid and the blocks that could be (on the left) something different from what they will be in the realty. Imgs. 35-36: Interpretation of the public space (source: personal elaboration)
4. Part’s Interpretation
13 /
4.3
RESIDENTIAL PART
THE CORE OF THE PROJECT: THE RESIDENTIA The core of the project: besdential block
Which part?
Public spaces
The center of the project is this residential part around which will’ do a lot of reasoning. For example we analyzed that also in this part the street is important beacause breaks in the middle the block. There is also the visual perspective that divide the block in a longitudinally way and open it for internal square (and so for the THE CORE OF THE PROJECT: THE RESIDENTIAL BLOCK public space).
Semi-Private Courtyard
Semi-Public Courtyard
Imgs. 37-38: Which & How (source: personal elaboration)
Public spaces
Which building
Many “factors” that break thethe block Many “factors” that can break block
Semi-Private Courtyard
Semi-Public Courtyard Imgs. 39: Which building (source: personal elaboration)
The quarter is composed by courtyard buildings. This buildings create a different space in each part: Semi-public and semi-private. The block is composed by different levels: a perimetral building (six floors) and an internal building (three floors).
Block
Imgs. 40:What breaks (source: personal elaboration)
Semi-priv. garden Block Semi-public Block Semi-priv garspace den
This section is useful for us to understand the importance of the internal corridor that create a public space, breaking an area that would have been deprived.
Block
Imgs. 41: The section (source: personal elaboration)
4. Part’s Interpretation
14 /
4.4
How does public space “work”?
RESIDENTIAL & RIVERSIDE PART How does How does public space “work”?
How does public space “work”?
public space “work”? Hierarchical type & series of spaces A hierarchical type of spaces
A hierarchical type of spaces
A “step by step” spaces
A hierarchical type of spaces
A “step by step” space A “step by step” spaces
Imgs. 42-43-44-45: Understanding public spaces (source: personal elaboration)
As we said the public space is very important; here to underline this fact we have tried to show the strictly connections with the block. For example in the first scheme is possible to see that the public space pass into the block from “north to south”, but not from “west to east” (and that is visible also in the blocks. Then in the second and in the third scheme we can see the “sequence” of the spaces and which are more important than others. Which part?
A sort of part that protect the internal public space
Public green
Public spaces
Private green
Private Courtyard Zone
Imgs. 46-47: Which & How (source: personal elaboration)
Canal
Which building?
These two parts are very similar, on the other hand, we will understand that are also so different between each other. They are both faced on the river but will create a very different space, one has open-green and the other one is public, but closed with the buildings.
Imgs. 48: Which building (source: personal elaboration)
4. Part’s interpretation
15 /
4.5
RIVERSIDE AND THE HUB PART These parts of the river, as we said, are similar. One of these similarities is that both have a “C shape” due to the public space that retreat the plot and create a square (green or built).
l)
As we can see in the sections the width of these two spaces is different and so also the practices that will be possible. Another important fact is that the buildings seems to protect the public space against the street and the (for the east part) river.
Imgs. 49: Public space & block (source: personal elab.)
Which part?
Imgs.50: The sections (source: personal elaboration)
A sort of enclave around public space
Then for the last part is useful to say that this commercial “enclave” is a sort of another island but is different from the “heritage” one.
Public space
Public green
Firstly, this part is completely new; secondly the spaces are more big and green.
Imgs. 51-52: Which & How (source: personal elaboration)
Also, in this part the buildings are a quite high tower that create a huge square. Public space
Which building?
Public space
Public
green Imgs. 53: Which building (source: personal elaboration)
Canal
Many “factors” that can break the block
In conclusion, we can say that also the public space modifies the block and rePublic treats the plots. green Both are close (by road Being totally devoted and the canal) on the to theback commercial function and have stong can be risky to the be a “ghost relations into core of Canal . place” in the evening itself Imgs. 54: What breaks (source: personal elaboration)
4. Part’s Interpretation Canal
Both are clo and the can back and ha relations int itself
ma uno quale si tto.
fica tutto
o specle centra-
16 /
5.
CONCLUSIONS
This is one of the most complex part of our work because is quite easy to be banal saying what is beautiful or ugly. We tried to avoid this point of view in order to find a general “backbones”. Com’è in realtà con lo spazio pubblico al centro che diventa “crocevia”
For us the first step is to underline that one of the “bones” is for sure the public space. We listed many times its importance inside each part of the project and also among them. In this scheme we already said that the public space generates both the form of the grid and the form of the blocks; however, as we know it is not the only factor that can to do this.
Here we can see the street and how it is able to modify deeply the form of the blocks and the spaces. We can see clearly that all buildings along the street are linear and they are not open (excluding the basic way to circulate by foot and by bicycle). This scheme is useful, one more time, to understand better the importance of public space. We can see on the right how it is the first fact of the form of the block. We can observe that when two or three main public axis join it to create a sort of square or a place with a different building’s characteristics (more or less higher than the rest).
As a conclusion, it can be underlined that this project is quite interesting mainly for the fact that is small but very full of conceptual topic. It may be thought well by the designers but it is more significant. To sum up, when considering the importance of the project, it can be pointed out that the project try to combine a lot of topics in terms of urban design sphere.
5. Conclusions
17 /
6.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S., Health, T., Oc, T. (2010/2nd. Ed.). Public Places Urban Spaces The Dimensions of Urban Design. Oxford: Elsevier Publications. (pp. 40-74). Chevin, Denise. (2012, March). New Urban Living: The making of East Village. (pp. 1-25). The Smith Institute. London. Cliff Moughtin. (1992). Urban desing. Street and square. (pp. 1-190). Butterworth Architecture. Oxford (UK). Crozier S. (2011, Winter). East, bright future. The schemes lighting up east London. London’s Hotspot: East London Issue II (2/12/39/47). Retrieved from http://www.sinclairclark.co.uk/downloads/east.pdf Frey, H. (1999). Designing the City Towards a more sustainable urban form. New York: Spon Press. (pp. 39-51). Hanafi, N., & Groom, J. (2012). Landprop submit plans for Strand East: creating a new waterside neighbourhood for East London. London: London communications agency on behalf of LandProp, part of the Inter IKEA Group. Retried on http://strandeast.com/#press John R. Gold, Margaret M. Gold. (2010). Olympic cities: City agendas, Planning and World’s Games. (986-2016). Routledge: New York. Kasprisin R. (2011). Urban design: the composition of complexity. Routledge. New York London Thames Gateway. (2008). Sugar House Lane Master planning Exercise Assessment of proposed conservation area. London: Urban Practitioners. (1-34). Retrieved from http://www.newham.gov.uk/nr/rdonlyres/ecd62139-cc4f-4e9d-bd23- 2ba14ff52e7a/0/sugarhouselaneheritageassessment290408_lowres.pdf Malcolm M., & Rowland J.. (2006). Urban design futures. Routledge. New York Newham London (2011). Stratford Metropolitan Master Plan. Supporting document: Sustainability Appraisal. London: Urban Initiatives. (1-210). Retrieved from http://www.newham.gov.uk/NR/ rdonlyres/57D2D0F6-16A6-4646-8859- E44658C874A8/0/SMMSustainabilityAppraisalLowRes. pdf Newham London (2010, December). Stratford Metropolitan Master Plan. Supporting document: Transport Report. London: Urban Initiatives. (1-244). Halcrow Group Limited. Retrieved from www.newham.gov.uk/stratfordmetropolitan
6. Bibliography
18 /
Panerai P., Castex J., Depaule J.-C., & Samuels I. S. (2004). Urban forms: death and life of the urban block Porta, S. (2002). Dancing streets. Scena pubblica urbana e vita sociale. Milano: Edizioni Unicopli. Roberts, M., Greed, C. (2001), pp. 23-24-29-32 . Approaching urban design: The design process. Harlow:Longman Vescovi F. (2011). Il rinascimento urbano in Inghilerra. Lezioni di strategia progettuale tra la sostenibilitĂ e lo sviluppo economico. Maggioli. Santarcangelo di Romangna (RN) Wall, E., & Waterman, T. (2010), pp.112-135. Urban design. Lausanne, Ava publishing. Whetstone M. (2012). Welcome to IKEA - Land: Furniture giant begins urban planning project. The Globe and Mail (1-3). Retrieved from http://strandeast.com/#press
6. Bibliography