Urban Design Issues by Tom Greenfield

GROUP 3 ISSUES REPORT

TOM GREENFIELD, CLAIRE HINDLE, VICTORIA SMALL, IRMA ISMAIL

Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction

Project Brief Definitions Methodology What makes a good sustainable urban neighbourhood Environmental Qualities

7 9 11 13 15

Chapter 2: Case Studies

Chapter 3: Creating the models

Chapter 4: Moving forward

Chapter 5: Appendix

False Creek,Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula, London Sunny Valley, Russia Havana, Cuba New Domino, New York Kampung Kebalen, Indonesia Summary

Statistical Information/Planning Policy Model Assumptions Medium Density Model High Density Model Super High Density Summary of Findings and models

Application considerations for the Olympic Site Report Conclusion

Bibliography

18 22 26 30 34 38 42

46 51 52 62 70 77

81 83

Chapter 1: Introduction Project Brief Definitions Environmental Qualities Methodology What makes a good sustainable urban neighbourhood

Project Brief

How do we safeguard and deliver high levels of environmental quality in the context of increasing intensification of land use? Each Issues I group will produce a set of generic, conceptual design models that address the problems of maintaining high environmental quality in the face of increasing use intensification. The design models will be constructed in relation to three levels of intensification and set out in briefs issued by the tutors (medium, high and very high).The conceptual design models will be developed from an examination of existing theory, research and international case studies.To ensure cross group comparability the models will be drawn to scale in plan and 3D, dimensioned where necessary and based on a standardised, measured neighbourhood unit. Each group will address their design models at the block, intermediate and neighbourhood scales as described by Barton et al (2003) in their Sustainable Neighbourhood model. (Taken from the Issues 1 and 2 handbook, 2012)

Project Definitions

Within the nominated issue question there are two key definitions to take into consideration: How do we safeguard and deliver high levels of environmental quality in the context of increasing intensification of land use? As a group we have defined what we believe are the definitions for each (below) these definitions have been carried with us throughout the document and concept model process.

Environmental Quality:

A dense high quality environment can be achieved by maintaining suitable density levels, using empty spaces as well as overlapping the functions of designated areas. In addition these qualities have to be accessible to the people who use them.

Urban Design Quality:

The over arching principles used to create a high quality urban neighbourhood, taking into consideration morphology, block sizes, connections and street widths.

Intensification of Land Use:

Increased range of uses in conjunction with increasing population per hectare. This could incorporate commercial, residential, retail and open space uses.

Methodology

To answer the problem set out in the brief the following methodology has been devised and implemented to enable a fully formed and comprehensive answer to the brief.

Problem: How do we safeguard and deliver high levels of environmental quality in the context of increasing intensification of land use?

Define: what environmental quality is

Refine

Produce: a matrix to rate case studies and models

Rate: each case study

Produce: models for 200, 500 and 800 models

Refine

Rate: each model

Refine: each model

Figure 1: Methodology Diagram 11

What makes a good Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood

Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood Definition: “Each element represents an important principle. Sustainable refers to the ability of the neighbourhood and wider urban area to be sustained and to minimise their environmental impact. Urban refers both to the location of the area and to its physical character whilst neighbourhood relates to the social and economic sustainability of the area, the community ties which hold it together and its relationship to surrounding areas. In simple terms our aim is to create urban areas which will endure” (Rudlin and Falk, 1999) Fig. 2 illustrates some of the environmental qualities/issues which require consideration when designing a Sustainable Urban Environment on a city scale. These are factors which this report has taken into consideration when assessing the environmental qualities on a neighbourhood scale.

Determining the size of a Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood: The work of David Lock into ‘Alternative Development Patterns: New Settlements, Department of the Environment’ in 1994 suggested three levels of sustainability for settlements: 750-1000 homes; supports a primary school but not jobs, public transport or other amenities. Such settlements would be heavily car dependent 3000-5000 homes; A place that would support a secondary school and some jobs and amenities but would not be large enough to serve its population or to be considered self sufficient. 10,000 homes: A settlement with a population of 25 -30,000 people was considered a threshold for sustainability.

So What: Estimating the population of 5000 homes using the average number of people per household (2.5pph London Standard) produces a population of 12,500 people on a neighbourhood scale. This neighbourhood population size is also referenced within Barton’s Shaping Neighbourhoods book as a suitable neighbourhood size as it is able to support amenities such as schools, health care facilities, commercial and retail sectors.

Figure 2: Sustainability on a City Scale, (Rudlin and Falk, 1999, p.150)

Using this research into the ideal Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood it has been decided that all the modelling throughout this report shall work to a figure of 12,800 people per neighbourhood unit.This number has been settled upon as it is within close proximity to the work of David Lock and Barton, on their neighbourhood population size modelling. It also achieves a neighbourhood density of 200 people per hectare within a 8ha site.

Environmental Qualities

Environmental Qualities play a significant role in the urban environments we inhabit, making the difference between a high quality and a low quality urban setting. Following initial research and personal experiences a list of seven key environmental qualities were determined to help provide a good indicator of the environmental quality within a given urban setting.The seven environmental qualities in order of hierarchy are: • • • • • • •

Cleanliness and Health Accessibility Social Inclusivity Daylight Sunlight Public Open Space Attractive Environment Environmental Sustainability

The importance of the environmental qualities vary when they are applied to different scenarios/case studies and density models this provides an overview of how each performs in terms of each individual environmental quality as well as within the overall set of indicators. Each environmental quality has a set of measures which have been determined to assess the value of each; they have been given a rating of 1-5 with 5 being the highest sore. Within the selected list of environmental qualities some are qualitative whilst others are quantitative. By producing a list of measures and giving each a score we are trying to quantify all the environmental qualities enabling them to be comparative across all case studies. However, it must be noted that this list offers a westernised perspective of what is a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ quality.

Figure 3: Public Open Space

1. Cleanliness and Health

For any neighbourhood setting to function in a sustainable manner it is important that the cleanliness and health of both the urban setting and its inhabitants are taken into consideration. This is an important environmental quality as it determines the wellbeing of the neighbourhood. Cleanliness and health will be measured through the following: Air Pollution – rating 1 – > 50ug/m3 , rating 5 - < 10ug/m3 (figures from Urban Outdoor Air Pollution Statistics,World Health Organisation, 2011) Noise Pollution – rating 1 – high levels of noise pollution from multiple sources eg. traffic, surrounding industry etc., rating 5 – low levels of noise pollution from few sources. Provision of Doctors – rating 1 – < 1 of doctor per 1000 people, rating 5 - > 4 doctors per 1000 people (statistics from the World Health Organisation) Life Expectancy – rating 1 – life expectancy < 60 years, rating 5 - life expectancy > 75 years (statistics from the World Health Organisation)

2. Accessibility

Within a neighbourhood setting accessibility is a vital environmental quality to ensure that all residents can access and move around the urban setting with ease. A clear and defined hierarchy of streets and roads along with the location of uses enables wayfinding throughout the neighbourhood. To assess this, the following five headings have been used to measure this environmental quality: Public Transport – rating 1 – no public transport system in place, rating 5 – high access to a variety of methods of public transport Parking – rating 1 - < 0.2 spaces per dwelling, rating 5 – 0.5-1 space per dwelling Street Hierarchy – rating 1 – no hierarchy of streets, rating 5 – clear and legible hierarchy of streets Proximity of uses – rating 1 – uses are located far apart making them inaccessible, rating 5 – uses are located together to enable easy access Connections/Grid – rating 1 – no use of a grid for street layout, rating 5 – use of a grid for street levels to enable high levels of access across the neighbourhood

Figure 4: Accessibility

Figure 5: Accessibility

3. Social Inclusively

For a neighbourhood to function in a sustainable way the demographic mix of people as well as uses must be considered to enable the social inclusion of all. It is important that the mix of residential, commercial, retail, schools and health is balanced to allow for residents to live in a sustainable manner within the urban setting. To assess this, the following five headings have been used to measure this environmental quality: Percentage of residential – rating 1 – < 10% residential within the urban setting, rating 5 – > 50% residential within the urban setting Percentage of commercial and retail – rating 1– < 5% commercial and retail within the urban setting, rating 5 – > 20% commercial and retail within the urban setting, to enable residents to work and shop within the neighbourhood Percentage of schools and health - rating 1 – no schools and health within the urban setting, rating 5 – Multiple schools and health facilities within the urban setting to support the surrounding neighbourhood Residential Mix – rating 1 – no mix of residential house types, rating 5 – mix of several residential house types Tenure – rating 1 – no mix of tenure type, rating 5 –residential accommodation to rent and > 50% affordable housing

Figure 6: Daylight Sunlight 14

Environmental Qualities

4. Daylight Sunlight

Access to daylight and sunlight within an urban setting is a vital attribute to the environmental quality of the place. This has an impact on the street and urban spaces between buildings as well as the amount of sunlight and shading within residencies. Daylight Sunlight will be measured through the: Street Width – rating 1 – Main streets are small & narrow < 5m wide, rating 5 –Wide spacious streets >20m wide (as recommended by the Urban Design Compendium, 2007) Block Depth – rating 1- > 25m block depth reducing sun penetration, rating 5 – < 18m block depth to allow for sun penetration Block Height –rating 1 – >100m high blocks, which reduce sun penetration to the street, rating 5 – 3-6m high blocks which allow for sun penetration to the street Orientation - rating 1 – Blocks are not designed to maximise orientation, overshadowing and little sun to these blocks, rating 5 – Blocks are designed to maximise orientation Street Ratios – rating 1 – < a 1:1 height to width ratio, rating 5 – > 1:3 height to width ratio (as recommended by the Manual For Streets, 2007)

5. Public Open Space

The provision of public open space within an urban setting can determine the environmental quality of a place, providing outside areas for residents, which are accessible and attractive aid the overall quality of the environment. Public open space will be measured through: Percentage of Open Space – rating 1- < 5% open space, rating 5 – > 20% open space Access – rating 1 – isolated location within the site, rating 5 – Accessible to all from all areas of the site Activities/type – rating 1 – single activity green field, rating 5 – variety of uses eg. play space, seating etc. Attractiveness – rating 1 – green field with little thought to layout and planning, rating 5 – well laid out space with features to entice people Figure 7: Material Pallets - Attractive Environments Location – rating 1- poor location for public access, rating 5 – well located for public access

6. Attractive Environment

The visual appearance and social setting of a neighbourhood setting is an important environmental quality when assessing the visual environment. It is important that a neighbourhood setting appeals to both the inhabitants and visitors to the site to create a dynamic and sustainable neighbourhood setting, whilst helping to aid legibility and wayfinding. Attractive environment will be measured through the following: Materials – rating 1 – low range and mix of material pallet, rating 5 – high range and mix of materials Culture – rating 1 – low cultural mix of people and cultural identity within the neighbourhood setting, rating 5 – high cultural mix of people and cultural identity within the neighbourhood setting Landmark Buildings – rating 1 – low or no landmark buildings, rating 5 – a good range or mix of landmark buildings Historic Context – rating 1 – little or no historical context to the neighbourhood setting, rating 5 – a good range or mix of historical context within the neighbourhood setting Street Types – rating 1 – low range of street types with little street activity and interest, rating 5 – diverse range of street types with a variety of street activities and on street interests

7. Environmental Sustainability

Within a neighbourhood setting and wider urban context the environmental sustainability is important to enhance the environment and enable the longevity of the urban setting as well as the planet. The measures here determine the quality of the environmental sustainability of a place, however other measures from the other environmental qualities also play a role. To assess this, the following three headings have been used to measure this environmental quality: Figure 8: Environmental Sustainability Renewable Sources – rating 1 – no/low levels of renewable sources used within neighbourhood, rating 5 – high levels of renewable sources used within neighbourhood Strategy within the area – rating 1 – low/no strategy for environmental sustainability implemented within the neighbourhood, rating 5 – a high level strategy for environmental sustainability implemented within the neighbourhood Parking – rating 1 – > 1 parking space per dwelling, rating 5 - < 1 parking space per dwelling, which help the sustainability of the neighbourhood and move away from the reliance on a car

Figure 9: Active Streets - Social Inclusivity 15

Chapter 2: Case Studies False Creek,Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula, London Sunny Valley, Russia Havana, Cuba New Domino, New York Kampung Kebalen, Indonesia Summary

The following case studies have been selected to show a holistic approach to how overall high levels of environmental and urban design qualities can be implemented on a neighbourhood scale of varying density.The case studies also provide best case scenarios of how each of the environmental qualities may be achieved at a variety of densities and scales. A variety of built and proposed case studies have been selected to show how the environmental qualities are currently being met as well as how different designers are implementing initiatives to improve the different environmental qualities within an urban setting.

Case Study: False Creek,Vancouver

False Creek is a residential development situated in Vancouver, Canada. The neighbourhood setting is part of a wider development along the water front, providing residential accommodation for the wider area, therefore commercial and retail facilities are located outside of our case study area.The case study area and figures encompasses the whole 56ha site and the break down information show a summary for its entirety.

Figure 11: False Creek Water Front

Figure 10: Location map of False Creek,Vancouver

DENSITY: 214 pph SITE AREA: 56ha RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 198 18

Figure 12: False Creek Plan

Case Study: False Creek,Vancouver

STATISTICS PER HECTARE False Creek ‐ Vancouver

Attractive Environment

Water Quality

Total Score Total Score

Tenure 4

Street Ratios

Connections/Grid

Life Expectancy Residential Mix 5

Orientation

Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors Percentage of Schools and Health 4

Block Height

Street Hierarchy

Noise Pollution Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Parking

Air Pollution Public Transport

Due to the location of False Creek within Canada there are high standards of cleanliness and health provisions provided on a national level however the provision of doctors per 1000 people within the country is low in comparison to other countries.

Accessibility - 23/25 23

Location

Total Score Total Score

False Creek scored highly in the accessibility analysis, the use of a grid and street hierarchy have been implemented to enable the free movement of residents throughout the site coupled with good public transport provision where a tram system has been implemented to increase accessibility, however due to the residential nature of the development and allocation of commercial and retail provision within the wider setting False Creek has not scored as highly in the proximity of uses measure. False Creek scores highly in social inclusivity due to the residential nature of the development, this also preludes to a high score in the residential mix and tenure as there is a higher percentage of residential than in other schemes. The provision of schools and day care facilities has also been taken into consideration with the creation of 1 school and several small day care facilities. The commercial and retail provisions within False Creek receive a low score due to the allocation of uses across the entire waterfront development.

Daylight Sunlight - 18/25 18

The daylight sunlight score has received a middle range score due to the narrow nature of the streets in comparison to the heights of the blocks therefore making the ratios fairly low street ratios.

Public Open Space - 23/25

Total Score 23

Total Score

False Creek has scored highly for the provision of open space as it provides a high proportion of accessible space with a variety of uses and activities located within for the residents of the neighbourhood setting. Within the development the open space is also used for farming and the production of food.

Attractive Environment - 20/25

Due to the subdivision of the uses along the waterfront the different neighbourhoods have been given distinctive characters helping to create different cultural areas. Heritage has been maintained throughout the development and within each neighbourhood. A variety of materials have been used to create the overall pallet of False Creek coupled with a variety of street types, activating the neighbourhood to create an attractive environment.

Environmental Sustainability - 12/15

Parking

Environmental Sustainability

Strategy within the area

Figure 14: False Creek Block Analysis

False Creek scores highly for environmental sustainability due to the inclusion of an overall heating and power strategy throughout the development, it also uses the land use for the production of food to help with the overall strategy. The provision of a good public transport system ensures that there is not a reliance on the car and therefore reduces its environmental impact and aids sustainability.

Total Score

100m

Cleanliness and Health - 21/25

Social Inclusivity - 20/25

Street Types

15m

Attractiveness

Public Open Space

Historic Context

60m

Activities/Type

20m

Landmark Buildings

Block Depth

Daylight Sunlight

Acces

Social Inclusivity

Culture

Figure 13: False Creek 1 Hectare Use Breakdown

Percentage of Residential

Retail / Commercial / Community Area 0.03%

Renewable Sources

Open Space 18%

Street Width

Accessibility

Percentage of Open Space

Cleanliness and Health

Materials

Residential Area 81.97%

The matrix on the left indicates the scores given for the environmental qualities being measured throughout this process, the matrix on the following page denotes the findings for each measure to enable the scores to be given.

The overall score for False Creek,Vancouver is: 137/165

Total Score 137 Matrix 1: False Creek Environmental Quality Matrix

Case Study: False Creek,Vancouver

False Creek, Vancouver. Environmental Qualities Cleanliness Air Pollution (ug/m3)

Accessibility

Social Inclusivity

Daylight Sunlight

Public Open Space

Attractive Environment

Environmental Sustainability

Measures Noise Pollution

Provision of Doctors (per 1000 peope)

Life Expectancy

Buildings designed to resist impact

1.92

Public Transport

Parking

Street Hierarchy

Tram

Only for dropping off and visitor parking

A street hierarchy has been defined

Residential (%) 578 374m² (88%)

Commercial and Retail (%)

Proximity of Uses Uses are dispersed throughout wider development Residential Mix

Street Width 12 m (building to building) Open Space (%) 10.46 hectares slightly out of town but on river front

Materials Glass Steel Concrete

Renewable Sources Core system strategies such as heat pumps, green hydro-electric, hydraulic slab heating systems, thermal storage, and building mass

Commercial : 11, 461m² (11%) Retail : 11, 461m² (11%)

Schools and Health (%) 2 297 m + 2 244 The office uses in areas 1B, 2A, 2B, and 3C are to provide opportunities for health care

Water Quality (% using improved sources) 100 Connections / Grid Grid incorporated

Tenure

Accommodate all incomes, with family housing as a priority

Block Depth 55m

Block Height 13.5 – 50m

Orientation Facing river

Street Ratios 1 ; 4.5

Access

Activities / Types

Attractiveness

Location

Storm water Food production Potential energy applications active and passive recreation, environmental sustainability, and environmental learning

A series of well landscaped and designed spaces create an attractive enviromnent

Dispersed throughut the development enabling it to be accessed by all

Culture Distinct neighbourhoods

Strategy Within the Area Greenhouse gas neutral for neighbourhood

Landmarks Building 3, residential blocks

Historic Context Maintaining touchstones

Located throughout and interspersed with the blocks

Street A variety of street types create attractive and active streets with a variety of activities

Parking Low parking numbers encourage use of public transport

Matrix 2 : False Creek Environmental Quality Text Matrix 20

Case Study: False Creek,Vancouver

Summary False Creek Positive Aspects: • • •

Provision of child care facilities & schools Designed to maximise solar gain through orientation of grid & block sizes Encouraging on site food production

False Creek Negative Aspects: • • • •

Few retail facilities, to support residents Minimal public transport connections Poor range of social demographic Land use mix needs to be addressed on a neighbourhood scale to enable a sustainable neighbourhood

From False Creek it has become apparent that accessibility and public open space play an important role in the development of what makes a high quality environment, both in terms of urban qualities and environmental qualities. However researching False Creek has also highlighted the need for complete integration of uses, tenure and residential mix to enable the development to enable a high level of social inclusivity creating a sustainable urban neighbourhood.

Case Study: Greenwich Peninsula, London

Greenwich Peninsula is a mixed use scheme situated in London, UK. The peninsula encompasses a high proportion of commercial and residential uses as well as promoting five public parks.The case study area and figures encompasses the whole 77ha site and the break down information show a summary for its entirety.

Figure 16: Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan Model

Figure 17: Greenwich Peninsula Aerial

Figure 15: Location map of Greenwich Peninsula, London

DENSITY: 312 pph SITE AREA: 77ha RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 130

Figure 18: Greenwich Peninsula StreetVisual

Case Study: Greenwich Peninsula, London

Water Quality

Total Score

Cleanliness and Health - 20/25

Due to the location of Greenwich Peninsula within the UK there are high standards of cleanliness and health provisions provided on a national level. Total Score

Connections/Grid

Tenure

Life Expectancy Proximity of Uses

Residential Mix

Provision of Doctors

Street Hierarchy

Percentage of Schools and Health

Noise Pollution

Parking

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Social Inclusivity

Public Transport

Accessibility - 23/25 23

Greenwich Peninsula scored highly in the accessibility analysis, the use of a grid and street hierarchy have been implemented to enable the free movement of residents throughout the site coupled with good links to London’s public transport networks (underground, DLR and Bus).The mix of uses within Greenwich means that the proximity of each is closer together giving it a higher score than False Creek however the mix means that this development means there is a much higher emphasis on commercial due to its central locality.

Social Inclusivity - 21/25

Greenwich Peninsula scores highly in social inclusivity due to the overall mixed nature of the development however due to the high percentage of commercial space within the development the residential and schools and health provision scores have been reduced.

Total Score

Accessibility

Percentage of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Air Pollution

Greenwich Peninsula ‐ London

Daylight Sunlight - 19/25 Block Height

Orientation

Street Ratios

Total Score

Block Depth

Daylight Sunlight

Street Width

Figure 19: Greenwich Peninsula 1 Hectare Use Breakdown

The daylight sunlight score has been given a middle of the range score due to the street ratio, block height and orientation of the site. Although the streets throughout Greenwich Peninsula are wider than those in the other case studies the block heights are also higher, as a result the street ratios have been given a low score.

Public Open Space - 23/25

Culture

Landmark Buildings

Historic Context

Street Types

Strategy within the area

Parking

Figure 20: Greenwich Peninsula Block Analysis

Environmental Sustainability

The varying and mixed material pallet, high cultural dominance and the inclusion of the millennium dome within the area have meant that Greenwich Peninsula has been given a high score initially for an attractive environment however the lack of historical context within the development has resulted in a middle of the range score.

Environmental Sustainability - 12/15 19

Greenwich Peninsula has scored highly in the environmental sustainability as renewable energy sources and water recycling systems are used throughout the scheme. It was also London’s first low emissions zone implementing BREAM excellent and code for sustainable housing. The overall score for Greenwich Peninsula, London is: 137/165

Total Score

Attractive Environment

Materials

100m

Renewable Sources

20m

Total Score

Location

Attractive Environment - 19/25

Total Score

Attractiveness

20m

Activities/Type

Public Open Space

Acces

80m

Percentage of Open Space

15m

Greenwich Peninsula scores highly across all the public open space measures, this is due to the inclusion of five parks throughout the development, providing and fulfilling the needs of all.They have also used the location of the site along the River Thames to create diverse and interesting landscapes.

Total Score Peninsula Environmental 137 Matrix 3 : Greenwich Quality Matrix

Case Study: Greenwich Peninsula, London Greenwich Peninsula, London Environment al Qualities Cleanliness

Accessibility

Measures Air Pollution (ug/m3)

Noise Pollution

Provision of Doctors (per 1000 people)

Life Expectancy

O₂ monitored for noise pollution

2.73

Public Transport

Parking

Street Hierarchy

Underground every 2 mins 50 buses an hour High speed riverboat service Social Inclusivity

Residential (%)

Commercial and Retail (%)

8, 795m²

Commercial : 325,000m² (40.6%) Retail : 35,000m² (4.3%)

Daylight Sunlight

Street Width 20-30m

Public Open Space

Open Space (%) 18

Attractive Environment

Environment al Sustainability

Within blocks & on street 0.7 spaces per unit 20% electronic provision

Connections / Grid A grid has been incorporated

Schools and Health (%) Peninsula Parkside School 26,400m2 (3.3%) Nurseries and child care facilities

Residential Mix

Tenure

38% affordable

Mix of people inhabiting the development

Block Depth 15m

Block Height 14-75m

Orientation E - W, N - S

Street Ratios 1 to 2.4

Access

Activities / Types

Attractiveness

Location

Accressable by all as the open space has been intergrated throughout the development

Materials

Culture

Glass Steel

Greenwich & Docklands festival Television auditions Film premiers NBA basketball A museum planned

Renewable Sources Renewable energy technology

A street hierarchy has been defined

Proximity of Uses Uses intergrated throughout the site

Water Quality (% using improved sources) 100

Strategy Within the Area London's first Low Emission Zone BREEAM excellent 4-star rating under the Code for Sustainable Homes Grey water recycling and rainwater harvesting

Riverside Walk Leisure Cycling Play parks Landmarks Building Millennium dome

Parking High parking standards encourages use of private transport

Well ladscaped and designed openspaces by Fosters and other architectural and landscape firms Historic Context None that is promoted or incorporated

Central Park Riverside park & wildlife park, 20ha

Street A variety of street types create a variety of street activites and lively environmnets

Attractive Environment

Environment al Sustainability

Materials

Culture

Glass Steel

Greenwich & Docklands festival Television auditions Film premiers NBA basketball A museum planned

Renewable Sources Renewable energy technology

Strategy Within the Area London's first Low Emission Zone BREEAM excellent 4-star rating under the Code for Sustainable Homes Grey water recycling and rainwater harvesting

Landmarks Building Millennium dome

landscape firms Historic Context None that is promoted or incorporated

Street

Case Study: Greenwich Peninsula, London

A variety of street types create a variety of street activites and lively environmnets

Parking High parking standards encourages use of private transport

Matrix 4 : Greenwich Peninsula Environmental Quality Text Matrix

Summary Greenwich Peninsula Positive Aspects: • • • • •

Provision of health care facilities & schools On site employment Well connected to existing public transport Incorporates sustainable on site energy production Mix of housing sizes

Greenwich Peninsula Negative Aspects: • • •

Few retail facilities for residents Separation of functions across whole development Block height and street ratios could have been addressed to enable better daylight sunlight

From Greenwich Peninsula it has become apparent that both accessibility and public open space play an important role in the development of what makes a high quality environment on a medium density scale, both in terms of urban qualities and environmental qualities. However from researching the block structure within the development the importance of daylight sunlight as an environmental quality has been highlighted. Within Greenwich they have combated the low street width ratios and high building heights with locating commercial and retail at ground level with does not require the same daylight sunlight amounts of residential. This is a method that may be implemented at the modelling stage to enable taller buildings on a denser scale.

Case Study: Central Havana, Cuba

Central Havana is a residential neighbourhood located in the centre of Havana, Cuba. The development is predominantly a residential area with a large proportion of retail and commercial situated on the ground floor. The neighbourhood is designed as a high density area with large blocks ordered around a grid. The case study area and figures encompasses the whole 240ha site and the break down information show a summary for its entirety.

Figure 22 : Central Havana Aerial

Figure 21: Location map of Havana, Cuba

DENSITY: 490 pph SITE AREA: 240ha RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 204

Figure 23 : Central Havana Street Photograph

Figure 24 : Central Havana Narrow Streets and Proximity of Blocks

Case Study: Central Havana, Cuba

Water Quality

Total Score

Cleanliness and Health - 19/25

Due to the location of Central Havana within Cuba there are high standards of cleanliness and health provisions provided on a national level. Total Score

Connections/Grid

Tenure

Life Expectancy Proximity of Uses

Residential Mix

Provision of Doctors

Street Hierarchy

Percentage of Schools and Health

Noise Pollution

Parking

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Social Inclusivity

Public Transport

Accessibility - 20/25 20

Central Havana has been given a mid range score for social inclusivity due to the low provisions of schools and healthcare within the area coupled with the low residential mix and tenure throughout Cental Havana which is a key factor in creating sustainable urban neighbourhoods. 14

Environmental Sustainability

Total Score

Street Ratios

Location

Orientation

Attractiveness

Block Height

Activities/Type

Block Depth

Acces

The daylight sunlight score has been given a mid range score due to the nature and orientation of the blocks, Central Havana is designed on a strong grid system therefore consideration of orientation has not been included. The blocks themselves are high in comparison to the street widths, producing low street width ratios and narrow dark streets. The block depths vary throughout however predominantly cover the entire ground floor with small outside courtyard spaces on the first level.

Street Types

Total Score

Havana receives a high score for attractive environment due to the lack of inclusion of historical context and landmark buildings, however the cultural influences and diverse material pallet increase the score along with the busy streets creating a variety of street activating activities along their periphery.

Total Score

Historic Context

The public open space receives a low score overall as the open space provision within Havana can be found in a series of parks throughout the city located some distance from residences therefore access can vary across the city and is very low in some areas. The variety of activities, planning and overall layout of the public open space is not as well considered as some of the other case studies therefore receiving a lower score.

Attractive Environment - 17/25

Total Score

Environmental Sustainability - 11/15

Central Havana scores highly in environmental sustainability due to several invites set up throughout the city. More than 50% of the Havana’s fresh produce is grown within the city, this is done in parks, brown field sites and within window boxes etc. The low use/provision of cars within Havana has also meant that it has received a high score for environmental sustainability.

Total Score

Figure 26 : Central Havana Block Analysis

Landmark Buildings

22m

Daylight Sunlight - 14/25

Public Open Space - 8/25

Parking

Attractive Environment

Culture

100m

Strategy within the area

Public Open Space

Percentage of Open Space

58m

Materials

20m

Renewable Sources

Daylight Sunlight

Street Width

Figure 25 : Havana 1 Hectare Use Breakdown

Central Havana scored highly for accessibility due to the compact nature of the area and mix of uses throughout the ground floor of all the buildings. The grid system enables residents and visitors to negotiate central Havana with ease and creates a clear and well defined street hierarchy to aid legibility and wayfinding.

Social Inclusivity - 14/25 Total Score

Accessibility

Percentage of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Air Pollution

Havana ‐ Cuba

The overall score for Central Havana, Cuba is: 103/165

103

Matrix 5 : Central Havana Environmental Quality Matrix 27

Case Study: Central Havana, Cuba Central Havana, Cuba. Environment al Qualities Cleanliness

Accessibility

Social Inclusivity

Daylight Sunlight

Air Pollution (ug/m3)

Noise Pollution

Provision of Doctors (per 1000 people)

Life Expectancy

Buildings designed to resist impact

4.34

Public Transport

Parking

Street Hierarchy

Buses

Only for dropping off and visitor parking

A street hierarchy has been implimented into Havana

Residential (%)

Commercial and Retail (%)

45ha (75%)

Commercial : 7.5ha (12.5%) Retail : 7.5ha (12.5%)

Schools and Health (%) unknown Healthcare is provided through many pharmacies included within retail and larger hospitals located elsewhere in the city

Street Width 22 m (building to building) but have many minor narrow streets that give access to buildings not on road these can be about 3m wide

Proximity of Uses Uses mostly located within close proximity however not all Residential Mix

Water Quality (% using improved sources) 96 Connections / Grid A grid has been used to design Central Havana Tenure

high density family housing

No mix of tenure as the tenants are similar

Block Depth 28m

Block Height 6-15 (av. 12)

Orientation in exactly 1 ha blocks

Street Ratios 1 ; 1.2

Location

Public Open Space

Open Space (%) 1.3 ha the occasional public square

Access

Activities / Types

Attractiveness

Located within a central location therefore difficult to access

Park with baths and monument

Attractive Environment

Materials

Culture

old terracotta and stone often reclaimed

regularised blocks but social

Landmarks Building none

Open space is simply green space with planting Historic Context change of uses of many colonial buildings

Renewable Sources more than 50% of Havanaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fresh produce is grown within city limits using simple irrigation

Strategy Within the Area Solid waste to compost centres are being established

Environment al Sustainability

Measures

Parking Little or no parking promotes sustainable modes of transport

Located in central location and some interdispersed on blocks Street A variety of streeets encourace active street edges

Attractive Environment

Environment al Sustainability

public square

difficult to access

and monument

Materials

Culture

old terracotta and stone often reclaimed

regularised blocks but social

Landmarks Building none

Renewable Sources more than 50% of Havana’s fresh produce is grown within city limits using simple irrigation

Strategy Within the Area Solid waste to compost centres are being established

simply green space with planting Historic Context change of uses of many colonial buildings

location and some interdispersed on blocks Street

Case Study: Central Havana, Cuba

A variety of streeets encourace active street edges

Parking Little or no parking promotes sustainable modes of transport

Summary Central Havana Positive Aspects:

Matrix 6 : Central Havana Environmental Quality Text Matrix

• • •

Local retail provision Micro businesses helps intensification of land use Good provision of health care throughout Havana

Central Havana Negative Aspects: • • • •

Little open space on a block by block basis Dense block structure throughout city Lack of sunlight at street level Block structure creates uniformity throughout the whole of Central Havana

Once again Central Havana shows that both accessibility and public open space play an important role in the development of what makes a high quality environment this time on a high density scale, both in terms of urban qualities and environmental qualities. Although the use of a grid within the central area scores well from an accessibility aspect it reduces the scores for daylight sunlight and an attractive environment due to the creation of uniformity and dense narrow streets.This highlights the fact that a dense grid structure on a neighbourhood scale may not necessarily be the solution when designing the models.

Case Study: Sunny Valley, Russia

Sunny Valley is a mixed use scheme situated near Moscow, Russia. The new development encompasses a high proportion of commercial and residential uses to promote its eco credentials reducing its residenceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reliance on the car, as well as promoting a high percentage of public parks. The case study area and figures encompasses the whole 220ha site and the break down information show a summary for its entirety.

Figure 28 : Sunny Valley Aerial

Figure 27: Location map of Sunny Valley, Russia

DENSITY: 500 pph SITE AREA: 220ha RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 208 Figure 29 : Sunny Valley Central District Perspective 30

Case Study: Sunny Valley, Russia

STATISTICS PER HECTARE Total Score

Cleanliness and Health - 20/25

Due to the location of Sunny Valley within Russia the standards of cleanliness and health provisions provided on a national level are not as high as those from within other developed countries.

Total Score

Water Quality Connections/Grid

Tenure

Life Expectancy Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors

Residential Mix

Noise Pollution

Street Hierarchy

Social Inclusivity

Percentage of Schools and Health

Block Height

Orientation

Street Ratios

The daylight sunlight score has been given a mid range score due to the nature and orientation of the blocks. The blocks are high in comparison to the street widths, producing low street width ratios and narrow dark streets. The block depths vary throughout some as deep as 30m which does not allow for daylight penetration and orientation has not been considered to optimise the daylight sunlight qualities to residents.

Total Score

Location

The public open space receives high score overall this is due to the high percentage throughout the development.This means that is it located evenly throughout the development making it accessible to all residents and visitors however the activity types and attractiveness have not been defined clearly due to the early stage of the development proposal. This has resulted in the score being reduced. 21

Total Score

Attractiveness

Street Types

Activities/Type

Historic Context

Acces

Landmark Buildings

Attractive Environment

Sunny Valley has received a mid range score for social inclusivity due to its low provision of school and healthcare facilities. It also does not provide a high mix of tenure and residential mix which are vital to support a sustainable neighbourhood therefore resulting in a low score.

Public Open Space - 21/25

100m 45m

Sunny Valley has received a high score for accessibility due to the inclusion of a variety of forms of public transport including a new tram and bus system within the development. There are also a high number of parking spaces for all residents and the development is formed on a grid system improving its connectivity, with a defined street hierarchy and close proximity of uses.

Daylight Sunlight - 16/25

Total Score

Block Depth

Culture

Attractive Environment - 15/25

Sunny Valley receives a mid range score for attractive environment as it proposes a mixed pallet of materials and includes a variety of streets which will encourage street activity and provide vibrancy to the development. However due to the new nature of the site it has little or no cultural or historical context to take into consideration therefore reducing the overall score.

Environmental Sustainability - 15/15 Strategy within the area

Parking

Environmental Sustainability

The highest score has been given to Sunny Valley due to the sustainable aspirations of the development, a variety of renewable sources and strategies have been implemented along with the inclusion of sustainable methods of transport to reduce the reliance on the car.

Renewable Sources

Figure 31 : Central Havana Block Analysis

Total Score

20m

Percentage of Open Space Public Open Space

Materials

Daylight Sunlight

Street Width

Figure 30 : Sunny Valley 1 Hectare Use Breakdown

Accessibility - 22/25

Social Inclusivity - 16/25 Total Score

Open Space 35%

Parking

Commercial / Retail Area 15%

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Accessibility

Public Transport

Cleanliness and Health

Percentage of Residential

Residential Area 50%

Air Pollution

Sunny Valley ‐ Russia

The overall score for Sunny Valley, Russia is: 125/165 15

Total Score 125 Matrix 7: Sunny Valley Environmental Quality Matrix

Case Study: Sunny Valley, Russia Sunny Valley, Russia. Environment al Qualities Cleanliness

Measures Air Pollution (ug/m3) 19

Accessibility

Public Transport A two-way linear tram system has stops every 300m near pedestrian crossings.

Noise Pollution Increased reliance on public transport and remote setting reduce noise pollution Parking Within blocks & on street

Provision of Doctors (per 1000 people)

Life Expectancy

4.34

Street Hierarchy A street hierarchy has been implimented

Proximity of Uses Uses have been located within a close proximity to each other

Water Quality (% using improved sources) 98 Connections / Grid A grid of sorts (not traditional) has been implimented

A bus service will penetrate the depth of development with stops every 150-200m.

Social Inclusivity

Daylight Sunlight Public Open Space

Attractive Environment 32

Residential (%) 13, 520 m² (50 %)

Commercial and Retail (%)

Street Width 22 m (building to building)

Block Depth 30m

Block Height 30m (10 storey)

Access

Activities / Types

Open Space (%) Wetlands Park Public square

Materials high quality, mixed-use, durable, flexible and adaptable buildings, using materials which minimise

1, 498 m² ( 15 %)

Open to all

Culture No cultural aspects within the development

Schools and Health (%) Local Centre Nursery School Primary School (sometimes a secondary School as well) District Centre Secondary Schools Town Centre Tertiary Education Facilities Healthcare is provided through local and district centre, major hospitals located elsewhere in the town centre All of the facilities are located within a 500m/5min walking catchment

user-friendly public and green spaces with facilities for people of all ages facilities to encourage safe local walking and cycling Landmarks Building none

Residential Mix

Tenure

Compact and Cluster Reduce the ecological footprint of the development Cluster essential daily services within a 5-minute walking distance from where people will live to reduce car journeys and engender community spirit Compact development will also reduce the need for extensive and costly infrastructure high density family housing

Low mixed tenure throughout

Orientation Taken into consideration through design Attractiveness

Street Ratios 1:3

Some landscaping has been used to create attractive open public space Historic Context No historical context within the development

Location Through out the development

Street A variety of streets create activity at street level

Sunlight Public Open Space

Attractive Environment

Environment al Sustainability

22 m (building to building) Open Space (%) Wetlands Park Public square

Materials high quality, mixed-use, durable, flexible and adaptable buildings, using materials which minimise negative environmental impacts Renewable Sources Local combined heat and power generation (up to 70% of energy is lost in long-distance transmission) Renewable ecological fuel (tree-based) integrated into the landscape Wind turbines as ‘standard equipment’ Geothermal heat generation Composting heat generation Solar heat collection Indoor urban park and regional greens Heat and power harvesting with thermo-collectors

30m

30m (10 storey)

Access

Activities / Types

Open to all

Culture No cultural aspects within the development

user-friendly public and green spaces with facilities for people of all ages facilities to encourage safe local walking and cycling Landmarks Building none

Taken into consideration through design Attractiveness Some landscaping has been used to create attractive open public space Historic Context No historical context within the development

1:3 Location

Case Study: Sunny Valley, Russia

Through out the development

Street A variety of streets create activity at street level

Summary Sunny Valley Positive Aspects:

Strategy Within the Area CHPs (Combined Heat and Power Plants) will be used to provide energy for power and gas in reducing the huge amount of energy lost in transmission. Buildings will be designed to be energy-efficient to create more sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

Parking Reduced parking numbers for redidents encorages use of public transport

• • •

Large amount of open space provision Provision of community facilities On site employment

Sunny Valley Negative Aspects: • • •

Greenfield development Car-orientated planning No provision for less wealthy

From researching Sunny Valley it has become apparent that creating a seasonably driven, high density new development still requires the basic urban design principles to be met to create a high environmental quality development, as these factors determine the residents impressions of the environmental quality of a place. Sunny Valley uses an alternative grid which shows that the traditional square grid does not always have to be implemented therefore this is something that could be incorporated in the model development stages, as could the increased amount of public transport provision to help reduce the numbers of Matrix 8 : Sunny Valley Environmental Quality Matrix parking spaces required and reliance on private transportation. It has also become apparent that the public open space within new developments needs to be considered from the out set to improve its intensification of uses and create an attractive environment.

Case Study: New Domino, New York

New Domino is a mixed use scheme located in New York, USA, on the former Domino Sugar Mill Factory site. It promotes a high proportion of residential living accommodation split into a variety of mixes and tenures as well as commercial and retail. The creation of a waterfront park and large amount of public open space enhances the development which is super high density. The case study area and figures encompasses the whole 4.5ha site and the break down information show a summary for its entirety.

Figure 33: New Domino Aerial Perspective

Figure 34: New Domino Waterfront Park

Figure 35 : New Domino Public Open Space

Figure 32: Location map of The New Domino, New York

DENSITY: 1165 pph SITE AREA: 4.5ha RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 485 34

Figure 36 : New Domino Development Plan

Case Study: New Domino, New York

Water Quality

Total Score

Cleanliness and Health - 18/25

Due to the location of New Domino within New York there are high standards of cleanliness and health provisions provided on a national level. Total Score

Connections/Grid

Tenure

Life Expectancy Proximity of Uses

Residential Mix

Provision of Doctors

Street Hierarchy

Percentage of Schools and Health

Noise Pollution

Parking

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Social Inclusivity

Public Transport

Accessibility - 20/25 20

Landmark Buildings

Historic Context

Street Types

Total Score

The high sore for New Domino reflects its inclusion of a mixed pallet of materials and the inclusion of the existing Domino Sugar Mill into the development providing a landmark building and historical context to the area.

Total Score

Culture

Attractive Environment

80m

The overall score for New Domino, New York is: 123/165

Total Score

Parking

Environmental Sustainability

Environmental Sustainability - 5/15

The New Domino development has received a very low score for environmental sustainability due to the lack of information regarding the overall strategy for the scheme.

Strategy within the area

Figure 38 : New Domino Block Analysis

The New Domino development scores 25/25 the highest out of any of the case studies for public open space, as it provides a high percentage of open space at ground level to serve its residents. This open space located along the riverfront is accessible from all areas of the site and has been landscaped and designed to incorporate a variety of uses and create an attractive environment resulting in the highest score.

Attractive Environment - 20/25

Materials

60m

The New Domino development scores highly for daylight sunlight due to the block depths and the wide street widths which enables optimum sun penetration into the buildings. However due to the building heights needed to enable the developments super high density the street ratios have received a low score, New Domino has also scored a low number for orientation as consideration has not been fully given.

Public Open Space - 25/25

20m

New Domino receives a high score for social inclusivity due to the mix of residential, commercial and retail provisions throughout the development, however it scores low for school and health provision as this is provided within the wider context. The development provides a good residential mix and tenure types providing housing for all including provisions for the affordable and senior market.

Daylight Sunlight - 16/25

Total Score

Street Ratios

Location

Orientation

Attractiveness

Block Height

Activities/Type

Block Depth

Acces

Renewable Sources

100m

Percentage of Open Space Public Open Space

Street Width

Figure 37 : New Domino 1 Hectare Use Breakdown

Daylight Sunlight

The high score for New Domino is a result of the use of a grid throughout the scheme, which enables residents and visitors to access the whole development and integrate into the wider context. There is however a lack of associated public transport within the development considering the high number of residents expected to inhabit the area, reflecting the low public transport rating.

Social Inclusivity - 19/25 Total Score

Accessibility

Percentage of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Air Pollution

New Domino ‐ New York

Total Score

123

Matrix 9 : New Domino Environmental Quality Matrix 35

Case Study: New Domino, New York The New Domino, New York. Environmental Qualities Cleanliness

Measures Noise Pollution Air Pollution (ug/m3) 21

Accessibility

Social Inclusivity

Public Transport Bus system Residential (%) 24, 250mÂ˛ (68.31%)

High levels due to the nature of the state and reliance on the car Parking 1700 spaces or 375/ha Commercial and Retail (%) Commercial : 5.7 % Retail : 15.85 %

Provision of Doctors (per 1000 people) 2.63

Life Expectancy

Street Hierarchy A street hierarchy has been implimented

Proximity of Uses Uses located within close proximity to each other

Schools and Health (%) None mentioned

Residential Mix

Water Quality (% using improved sources) 100% Connections / Grid A grid has been used to design the development Tenure

Economically integrated mix of apartments 30% (660) affordable, senior housing provision

Mix of tenure incorporated

Daylight Sunlight

Street Width 20m

Block Depth 15-18m

Block Height 9-34 storeys (approx 27 102m), pop-ups on waterfront, matches scale of existing neighbourhood

Orientation NE - SW, overshadowing due to block height

Street Ratios 1 to 0.5 1 to 5 (1 to 1.5)

Public Open Space

Open Space (%) 36 % Riverside

Access

Activities / Types

Attractiveness

Location

Accessible by all from all areas within the development

Located along the waterfront

Attractive Environment

Materials Glass Steel Metal

Culture Some culture from surrounding and Domino Sugar Mill

Landmarks Building Tall, waterfront buildings form landmark development Domino Sugar Mill

Landscaping and design implimented to create an attractive open space Historic Context Historic factory building forms focus of development & name

Sustainability Environmental

No strategy Renewable Sources Mentioned

No strategy Strategy WithinMentioned the Area

High proportions Parking or parking and low levels of public transport cause reliance on the car

Outdoor seating/ landscaping

Street Variety of active streets create activitiy along their edges

Matrix 10 : New Domino Environmental Quality Text Matrix

Case Study: New Domino, New York

Summary New Domino Positive Aspects: • • • • •

Large area of public open space High proportion of retail provision Creation of new jobs on site Incorporates regeneration of historic landmark (Domino Sugar Mill) 30% affordable housing

New Domino Negative Aspects: • • •

Provision of large numbers of parking spaces encourages use of private transport No new public transport provision Does not encourage families - few large apartments & no education facilities

From studying the New Domino development it has shown how a super high density model includes provisions such as public open space, accessibility and creating attractive environments. By grouping the provision of open space along the waterfront a high percentage of public open space has been achieved, using a similar method of grouping the open space could be implemented whilst design the models as a solution to providing the quantum needed. The New Domino has also shown that increasing the height of blocks has a detrimental effect on the overall daylight sunlight and should be avoided where possible when modelling, however where it is needed the use of pop ups helps to distribute height and achieve a higher density.

Case Study: Kampung Kebalen, Java, Indonesia

Kampung Kebalen is a residential development located in Java, Indonesia. The development comprises of low storey family housing, each house being residence to 6-8 people. There is a small amount of retail, commercial and healthcare provision located around the overall development. The case study area and figures encompasses the whole 32ha site and the break down information show a summary for its entirety.

Figure 41 : Kampung Kebalen on Street Green Space

Figure 39 : Location map of Kampung Kebalen, Indonesia

DENSITY: 800 pph SITE AREA: 32ha RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 93 Figure 40 : Kampung Kebalen Aerial 38

Figure 42 : Kampung Kebalen Streetscape Creates Activity

Case Study: Kampung Kebalen, Java, Indonesia

Life Expectancy

Water Quality

Total Score

Proximity of Uses

Connections/Grid

Cleanliness and Health - 10/25

Total Score

Provision of Doctors

Street Hierarchy

Accessibility

Noise Pollution

Cleanliness and Health

Parking

Residential Area 66.5%

Air Pollution

STATISTICS PER HECTARE

Public Transport

Kampung Kebalen ‐ Indonesia

Due to the location of Kampung Kebalen within Java, Indonesia the water, air and noise pollution levels along with the provision of doctors have received a low score. 16

Accessibility - 16/25

Figure 44 : Kampung Kebalen Block Analysis

Environmental Sustainability

Total Score 15

Kampung Kebalen has received a low score for social inclusivity due to the low levels of commercial and retail provisions within the development. Also due to the low residential mix and tenure, as the whole development is created from the same family housing throughout it’s entirety.

Daylight Sunlight - 17/25

Total Score

Tenure

Location

Street Ratios

Residential Mix

Attractiveness

Orientation

Percentage of Schools and Health

Activities/Type

Block Height

Percentage of Commercial and Retail Block Depth

Percentage of Residential

Social Inclusivity - 15/25

Kampung Kebalen receives a high score for daylight sunlight due to the low nature of the residential development. The buildings are slim and rectangular in plan and predominantly one or two storey therefore allowing for natural sunlight to penetrate the buildings. However due to the quick formation of the development orientation has not been taken into consideration therefore reducing the overall score.

Kampung Kebalen has received a low score due to the low percentage of public open space within the area, it’s accessibility and the activities located within this open space. The vast proportion of the space located between houses is taken over by roads creating a grey and unattractive provision of space. Planting has been implemented throughout the neighbourhood at a street level to try to improve the overall attractiveness and provision of green within the development however this has not necessarily been successful when referring to public open space.

Attractive Environment - 17/25

Total Score

Public Open Space - 10/25

The limited pallet of materials, lack of historical and landmark buildings have resulted in a mid range score. However there is a distinctive inclusion of the Javanese culture throughout the neighbourhood setting, this is also evident on the street level where residences and small shops front the streets to create to create lively and active edges.

Environmental Sustainability - 9/15

Within Kampung Kebalen there is no sustainability strategy or the use of renewable sources therefore it has received a low sore overall.

Total Score

Attractive Environment

Street Types

130m

Historic Context

Landmark Buildings

Public Open Space

Parking

13m

60m

Acces

Culture

Strategy within the area

Daylight Sunlight

Street Width

Figure 43 : Kampung Kebalen 1 Hectare Use Breakdown

Percentage of Open Space

Social Inclusivity

Materials

Open Space 10%

Renewable Sources

Retail / Community Area 3.5%

Roads 20%

Kampung Kebalen has received a mid range score due to the use of a grid and street hierarchy which enable the free movement of residents and visitors throughout the development, however the lack of public transport and segregation of uses throughout the development have led to a lower score as residents have to travel further to access everything.

Total Score

The overall score for Kampung Kebalen, Indonesia is: 93/165

Matrix 11: Kampung Kebalen Environmental Quality Matrix 39

Case Study: Kampung Kebalen, Java, Indonesia Environmental Qualities Cleanliness

Accessibility Social Inclusivity

Measures Air Pollution (ug/m3)

Noise Pollution

High levels of noise from traffic and cramped conditions, buildings have little protection from noise Parking No parking available

Public Transport On foot (most of the area covered by foot path) Residential (%) 6, 045m² (66.5%) 20,000 nos

Daylight Sunlight

Street Width Footpath – 2m Street wide between school and mosque – 1.5m

Public Open Space

Open Space (%) 1, 024m² (10%) Exterior spaces of the house which open to the footpath

Attractive Environment

Environmental Sustainability

Materials Residential Wooden or composite / wooden masonry constructions with sloping roofs covered with reddish tiles (reflects traditional indigenous Indonesian house) Mosque / schools / residential Cheap material and locally produced due to the poor economic condition Timber (predominant), bamboo, brick, stones, concrete, clay tiles, glass, metal and plastic pipes. Renewable Sources None

Commercial and Retail (%) 361m² (3.5%) Street market (temporary structure)

Provision of Doctors (per 1000 people) 0.02

Life Expectancy

Street Hierarchy A street hierarchy has been established Schools and Health (%) 5 Schools 2 Health centres 4 Mosques (religious centre) Block Height Residential – 3m (1 storey) Multifamily house – 6.7m (2 storey)

Proximity of Uses Uses are dispersed

Residential Mix

Water Quality (% using improved sources) 89 Connections / Grid A grid has been used to define the area Tenure

Averaging two families of five members per single dwelling

Low tenure as all residences are the same

Orientation Not taken into consideration

Street Ratios High street ratios due to low nature of residence

Activities / Types

Attractiveness

Location

Little access for all residents

As meeting ground and communal gathering

Poor - Plants and shrubs along road side and green strips

Main open space is far away from residences

Culture traditional Javanese house types and culture within the area

Landmarks Building None

Historic Context None

Street Houses and small shops onto streets create interest

Strategy Within the Area By restoring their houses, the inhabitants have enhanced the natural lighting and ventilation.

Parking No parking so high levels of sustainability

Block Depth Residential – 5 x 13m Multifamily house – 9 x 15.4m Mosque A – 6 x 11m mosque B – 18 x 9.20m School – 4 x 15m Access

Matrix 12 : Kampung Kebalen Environmental Quality Text Matrix

Case Study: Kampung Kebalen, Java, Indonesia

Summary Kampung Kebalen Positive Aspects: • • • • •

Large amount of community facilities Family housing Strong sense of community On site employment Intensification & improvement of existing residential area

Kampung Kebalen Negative Aspects: • • •

Minimal open space Small dwellings with a high number of people per dwelling High proportion of space is taken over by road

From studying Kampung Kebalen it has become evident that creating a super high density family residential development does not necessarily produce a high quality environment. The land take that this requires does not make best use of the land and allow for other vital provisions such as public open space to be accommodated. When designing the super high models it will be important to use height to increase intensification of the land and enable all the environmental qualities to be met.

Greenwich New Domino Peninsula -‐ -‐ New York London Kampung Kebalen -‐ -‐ Sunny Valley Indonesia Russia Havana -‐ Cuba

Matrix 14 : Environmental Quality - Accessibility 42

New Domino -‐ New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ Indonesia

5 2

3 2

5 2

23 10

Matrix 15 : Environmental Quality - Social Inclusivity 1

4 2

5 5

3 3

5 5

20 18

3 5

4 5

4 3

5 3

Daylight Sunlight False Creek -‐ Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula -‐ London

20 19

1 4

4 4

4 3

3 3

4 2

16 16

A:rac5ve Environment

Total Score

Loca5on

A:rac5veness

Ac5vi5es/Type

23 15

Acces

5 3

Percentage of Open Space

5 2

Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Cuba False Creek -‐ Vancouver New Domino Greenwich -‐ New York Peninsula Kampung -‐ London Kebalen -‐ Indonesia Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Cuba

New Domino -‐ New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ Indonesia

Total Score

4 4

Matrix 17 : Environmental Quality - Public Open Space

Total Score

Daylight Sunlight

Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ -‐ False Creek Cuba Vancouver

5 1

Matrix 16 : Environmental Quality - Daylight Sunlight

16 14

Matrix 18 : Environmental Quality - Attractive Environment

Peninsula -‐ London

4 5

New Domino -‐ New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ Indonesia

Street Ra5os

23 19

Street Types

5 4

Orienta5on

5 5

Historic Context

Total Score

Connec5ons/Grid

5 1

Block Height

Accessibility

New Domino -‐ New York Kampung False Creek -‐ Kebalen -‐ Vancouver Indonesia Greenwich

5 5

Landmark Buildings

3 4

Block Depth

Culture

New Domino -‐ New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ Indonesia

within the area

Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Cuba

Proximity of Uses

False Creek -‐ Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula -‐ London

Street Hierarchy

Accessibility

Matrix 13 : Environmental Quality - Cleanliness and Health

Parking

New Domino -‐ New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ Indonesia

Street Width

Materials

Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Cuba

Public Open Space

le Sources

Total Score

Havana -‐ Cuba

Tenure

10 16

Loca5on

Connec5ons/Grid

Street Ra5os

Residen5al Mix

A:rac5veness

Proximity of Uses

18 21

False Creek -‐ Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula -‐ London

Orienta5on

Percentage of Schools and Health

Ac5vi5es/Type

Street Hierarchy

Block Height

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

19 20

Greenwich New Domino Peninsula -‐ -‐ London New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ -‐ Sunny Valley Indonesia Russia

Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Public Open Space Cuba False Creek -‐ Vancouver New Domino Greenwich -‐ New York Peninsula Kampung -‐ London Kebalen -‐ Indonesia Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Cuba

Acces

Parking

Block Depth

Percentage of Residen5al

Total Score

Percentage of Open Space

Tenure

False Creek -‐ Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula -‐ London

Public Transport

Social Inclusivity

Street Width

Total Score

Water Quality

Life Expectancy

Residen5al Mix

Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ -‐ False Creek Cuba Vancouver

Public Transport

Social Inclusivity

Percentage of Schools and Provision Health of Doctors

False Creek -‐ Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula -‐ London

Percentage of Commercial Noise and Retail Pollu5on

Cleanliness and Health

Percentage of Residen5al Air Pollu5on

Case Study: Summary

False Creek -‐ Vancouver Greenwich Peninsula -‐ London Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Cuba New Domino -‐ New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ Indonesia

Case Study: Summary

Summary Researching the case studies has provided a good opportunity to critically analyse and confirm our assumptions on what makes a high quality environment at different densities. It has highlighted the importance of both the environmental and urban qualities which both needed to be implemented when moving forward into the models.

Total Score

Environmental Sustainability

Parking

New Domino -‐ New York Kampung Kebalen -‐ Indonesia

Strategy within the area

Sunny Valley -‐ Russia Havana -‐ Cuba

Renewable Sources

Peninsula -‐ London

By assessing each case study using a quantitative approach it has become apparent which are good and bad models for implementing environmental qualities, these can then be used as best case examples to take into consideration when designing the different density models. However whilst rating each case study there have been some discrepancies, this has mostly been through lack of information on the developments, where this has been the case a subjective analysis of the information provided has been taken. Finally the ratings and analysis of each case study have been done from a UK perspective, therefore this may reduce or affect some of the rating due to preconceptions the group have on what makes a high quality environment. Having said this the exercise will provide an invaluable source of knowledge for the next stage of the process.

Matrix 19 : Environmental Quality - Environmental Sustainability

Case Study Ratings in order:

1 - False Creek,Vancouver (137) 1 - Greenwich Peninsula, London (137) 3 - Sunny Valley, Russia (103) 4 - New Domino, New York (123) 5 - Central Havana, Cuba (103) 6 - Kampung Kebalen, Indonesia (93)

Chapter 3: Creating the models Statistical Information/Planning Policy Research Model Assumptions Medium Density Model High Density Model Super High Density

Statistical Information / Planning Policy

Planning Policy To enable the density models to be grounded within statistical information the London Planning Policies were looked at. These standards gave an indication of the requirements needed for all aspects of a neighbourhood setting.To find all the statistical data the following documents were looked at: • • • • • • • •

Residential Policies: Residential Unit Mix:

Supplementary Planning Guidance, 2005

32% one bedroom

London Policy London Supplementary Planning Guidance CABE best practice guidance Urban Design Compendium Manual for Streets Metric Hand Book Local Authority websites National Playing Fields

38% two/three bedroom

The information required to generate the models and therefore researched and found fell into the following headings: •

•

• • • •

Residential Policies: Residential Unit Mix Residential Floor Areas Car Parking Standards Floor to ceiling heights

Open Space: • Public Open Space • Private Amenity Space • Children’s Play Provision • • • •

Schools and Healthcare: Early Years Provision Primary School Provision Secondary School Provision Healthcare Provision

• •

Commercial and Retail: Commercial Provision Retail Provision

30% four bedroom

Residential Areas:

Minimum space standards for new development, Supplementary Planning Guidance, 2011

50m² GIA One Bedroom Flat

61m² GIA Two Bedroom Flat

90m² GIA Four Bedroom Flat

Car Parking Standards:

Minimum space standards for new development, Supplementary Planning Guidance, 2011 4+ bedroom dwellings: 1.5 - 2 spaces per dwelling maximum; 3 bedroom dwellings: 1 - 1.5 spaces per dwelling maximum; 1 - 2 bedroom dwellings: Less than 1 per dwelling maximum.

Floor to Ceiling Standards:

Figure 45 : Planning Policy and Statistical Information Documents Minimum space standards for new development, Supplementary Planning Guidance, 2011 The minimum floor to ceiling height in habitable rooms should be 2.5m between finished floor level and finished ceiling level. 46

Statistical Information / Planning Policy

OPEN SPACE PROVISION Open Space Policies:

Schools and Healthcare:

Commercial and Retail:

Public Open Space 86 %

Space Required

General assumptions have been made based on researching the case studies reviewing further examples of commercial and retail breakdowns.

Commercial and Retail Provision: 20% of the floor area of the development

Number of Children

Private Space 13 %

Play Space 1 %

Early Years:

Metric Handbook,Third Edition, 2007 Early Years (0-4) - 2.76sqm per child

Primary School Provision: Figure 46 : Open Space requirements illustration - percentages based on 12,800 population

Metric Handbook,Third Edition, 2007

Primary School (5-10), Net area: 2000+32N, Total Area: 110% of Net Area

Public Open Space:

Secondary School Provision:

A minimum of 16m² per person of accessible public open space should be provided.

Secondary School (11-15), Net Area: 13,000 + 47N, Total Area: 110% of Net Area

Private Open Space:

Child Yield

National Playing Fields Association guidance, 2011

Metric Handbook,Third Edition, 2007

1 bedroom

Minimum space standards for new development, Supplementary Planning Guidance, 2011 A minimum of 5sqm of private outdoor space should be provided for 1-2 person dwellings and an extra 1sqm should be provided for each additional occupant.

0yrs - 4yrs 5yrs - 10yrs 11yrs - 15yrs Totals

72 18 0 90

2 bedroom 4 bedroom Totals 171 388 171 590 128 472 470 1,450 Total Children

PTAL rating of 6

631 779 600

2,010

Table 1: Child Yield for a Neighbourhood Population of 12,800

Healthcare:

Matrix Presentation, A.Burns, 2011 A health centre requires a population of 12,000 people to support it, with an approximate area of 2,500m².

Statistical Information / Planning Policy

OVERALL SITE PROVISION Public Open Space 23%

ResidenFal 42%

Commercial and Retail 20%

Play Provision 0.01% Private Open Space Car Parking 0.03% 13% School Healthcare 0.7% 1%

Figure 47 :Total Floor Area Requirements for a Neighbourhood Population of 12,800 People 48

Statistical Information / Planning Policy Medium Density Neighbourhood Development Model - 200 people per Hetre People Per Hectre

200 1 bedroom

Neighbourhood Population Residential Units

5,620 1,798 2,136 1,686

One bedroom (32%) Two Bedroom (38%) Four Bedroom (30%) Total Units Residential Areas (GIA)

One bedroom (50sqm) Two Bedroom (61sqm) Four Bedroom (90sqm)

2,360 2,529 4,889

Total Area

one - two person dwellings (5sqm) Thee person plus (add an additional 1sqm per person)

117,346

19,670 11,802 Total Area

Play Provision

31,472

Door Step Playable Space (min 400sqm for 0-5) Off Site playspace (min 400sqm for 5-11) On site youth space ( min 800sqm for 12+)

400 400 800 Total Area

Public Open Space

local parks and open space (2ha open space within a 400m walk) 16sqm per person

1,600

204,800 Total Area

School Provision

204,800

Early Years (0-4) - 2.76sqm per child

1,740

Primary School (5-10) Net area:2000+32N Total Area 110% of Net Area

26,926

Secondary School (11-15) Net Area: 13,000 + 47N Total Area: 110% of Net Area

41,210

29,618

32,580 Total School Area

Commercial and Retail

20% of floor area within development

63,939

87,174 Total Area

Healthcare Provision

These figures shall bePTAL usedrating to begin of to 6 generate the different density models.

371,932

Total Spaces

Open Space Private Open Space

12,814

89,920 130,272 151,740

one - two bedroom dwelling (0.6 per dwelling) four bedroom dwelling (1.5 per dwelling)

Car Parking Area (24sqm per space)

11yrs - 15yrs 0 1,798 Totals 90 The image on the adjacent page (Fig. 47) illustrates the break down of all the land use 4,271 classifications and percentages needed for a 12,800 person neighbourhood. 6,744 5,620

Total Area Car Parking Numbers

Based on the previous research done into Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods the planning Child Yield 0yrs - 4yrs 72 policies have been inputted into a spread sheet to calculate the total land take for a 5yrs - 10yrs 18 neighbourhood population of 12,800 people, Table 2 on the left shows this.

12,800

87,174

2,500 505

requires 12,000 people to sustain Total Area

2,500 505

Table 2 : Spread Sheet of Neighbourhood Population 49

Model Assumptions

Model Assumptions We have decided to model 200, 500 and 800 densities but keeping a constant population size of 12, 800, for the mid-size model therefore changing the size of the area in question; this has already been explained near the start of the report. For the large size models, we chose the 256 ha area as we wanted to look at the impact our schemes would have on a macro level. We have kept some factors the same from model to model, these are as follows: Street widths: 20m minimum for major streets, 12-18m secondary streets Blocks: 20m back to back, 10m depth (from Urban Design Compendium) Perimeter block layout Hierarchy of streets Legibility (from Shaping Neighbourhoods) All other decisions were based on case-study research and planning requirements from the London Plan. Contents:

200 PPH

1 ha 64 ha type A 64 ha type B 256 ha type A 256 ha type B

500 PPH

1 ha 25 ha type A 25 ha type B 256 ha

800 PPH 1 ha 16 ha 256 ha

Medium Density Model

BEST PRACTICE CASE STUDY FOR MODEL MODEL DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY INDICATORS BASED ON NEIGHBOURHOOD MODELS A & B

Both the Greenwich Peninsula, London and False Creek, Vancouver were used to inform the development of the medium density model.The best practice factors we used to inform the design of our model were; open space location and use location.

Cleanliness and Health Air Pollution: N/A Noise pollution: N/A

Open space: Although the Greenwich master plan it did not provide the required amount of open space per person, it provided a high percentage of private amenity spaces within the residential blocks.We replicated this in our 200 density model and in addition were able to provided the required percentage of open space. The Greenwich master plan locates public open space in a variety of locations across the development site. These spaces are highly accessible for all residents and have a variety of uses, dependant on their location. In contrast, False Creekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s public space is located separately from the built development. Two models were produced at both the 64 ha and the 256 ha scale, in order to test the environmental quality implications of these two spatial arrangements.

Accessibility Public Transport: Bus Parking: 0.6 - 1.5 spaces per dwelling

Figure 48 : Greenwich Master Plan

Use location: The Greenwich master plan has a central core in which the economic uses of commercial and retail are located.The residential and leisure uses radiate towards this core, we replicated this relationship in our own models in order to ensure a high accessibility rating, whilst adding residential units at upper floor levels to ensure greater integration of uses and accessibility.

Figure 49 : False Creek Master Plan Retail & Commercial Core & Dispersed Open Space RELATIONSHIP WITH MODEL

Social inclusivity (percentages calculated from ground floor areas) % Resi:68% % office: 9% % school: 13% % health: 4% % retail: 9% Daylight/Sunlight Max residential building height: Model A & B 5 floors - 26m Max non-residential building height: Model A: 3 floors - 9m / Model B: 2 floors- 6m Block depth: 40m Orientation: Residential rectangular buildings N-S orientation to maximise sunlight Major street width:20m Minor street width: 12m Built environment ground floor footprint GFA: Model A: 127,384sqm/ Model B: 142,612m3 Street Ratios: 1:0.5 - 1:1.3 Public open space Location: Model A: Outside development area/ Model B: Integrated Access: Walking routes, roads Activities/type: Leisure & play space Private open space Location: Within block Access: From interior Activities/type: Amenity activities Attractive Environment Street Types: Hierarchy, local and major

Figure 50 : Dispersed Open Space & Private Amenity within Block

Environmental sustainability Renewable sources: N/A Strategy within area: Well connected and integrated public transport systems

1ha Model Massing raised at corners in order to improve legibility, orientation & create an area with character

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Family sized units at ground level with access to rear private gardens, improving social inclusivity

Retail at ground floor in central retail area of model, for accessibility. Parking & servicing at rear under podium.

Figure 51 : 200 density 1ha Model Perspective View

9AM

100m

Private amenity space provided through private and community gardens within block, & on podium in central retail area.

12PM 100m

One bed

Retail

Two beds

Private Space

Parking provision achieved through on street parking throughout model & under podium in retail area.

4PM

Two+ beds Figure 52 : 200 density 1ha Model Plan View

Figure 53 : 200 density 1ha Model Sun Studies

Medium Density Model: Neighbourhood 64ha Model A (option 1) DENSITY :200 POPULATION : 12,80 OPTION 1: Open space location based on False Creek case study

Public open space separated from development area, as per False Creek case study

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Education & health facilities located at highly accessible locations

4 storey residential units, raising to 6 in central area

9AM

Figure 54 : 200 Density 64ha Model A Perspective

800m

Retail & education uses located around open space. Requirements for educational open space over lap with public

12PM

800m High street, tallest buildings located at around cross roads for high accessibility

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Education

Private Space

4PM Figure 55 : 200 Density 64ha Model A Plan

Figure 56 : 200 Density 64ha Model A Sun Studies

Medium Density Model: Neighbourhood 64ha Model A (option 1)

Environmental Quality Assessment

Street Hierarchy

Proximity of Uses

Connections/Grid

Total Score

Parking 5

Daylight Sunlight

Environmental Sustainability

Activities/Type

Attractiveness

Location 4

N/A

Total Score

Acces

N/A

Total Score

Percentage of Open Space

Total Score

N/A

Total Score

104

Matrix 20 : 200 Density 64ha Model A Matrix

55 re

al Mix

e of Schools and Health

e of Commercial and Retail

e of Residential

Accessibility

Public Transport

Social Inclusivity

Total Score

Street Types

Total Score

N/A

Historic Context

Water Quality

Landmark Buildings

Life Expectancy

Attractive Environment

Parking

Provision of Doctors

N/A

Public Open Space

Culture

Noise Pollution

N/A

Although both models achieve their quota of car parking spaces this high level of parking provision encourages excessive personal transport use. In order to improve environmental sustainability car usage should be discouraged and a public transport system provided.

Strategy within the area

Air Pollution Cleanliness and Health

Environmental Sustainability

Total Score

200 Model 8x8 A

Total Score

Tenure

Street Ratios

Residential Mix

Orientation

Percentage of Schools and Health

The models each exhibit a diverse variety of street types and uses which will activate the streets life and enable social interaction. Key buildings with greater heights are located at the neighbourhood core to improve legibility and orientation.

Materials

Total Score 10

Attractive environment

Renewable Sources

Water Quality N/A

Connections/Grid

Life Expectancy 5

Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors 5

Street Hierarchy

Noise Pollution

N/A

Block Height

Accessibility

N/A

Parking

Cleanliness and Health

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Although each residential block would house a mix of tenures and unit sizes in order to minimise social segregation, there remains a poor range of housing types. Residential accommodation is limited to multi-storey apartment blocks.

200 Model 8x8 A Public open space is provided out with the development area based on the False Creek case study . The open space is within 10mins walk from all points of developments. Education and health functions are located adjacent to the public spaces in order to overlap spacial requirements.

Block Depth

Social Inclusivity

Public Open Space

Air Pollution

Access to all public amenities is evenly distributed throughout the model and are within 10 minutes walking distance. The model has a PTAL rating of 6 which illustrates that density is high enough to support a public transport system.

Wide streets and low building heights (max 6 storeys) ensure minimum overshadowing occurs between the blocks. Private amenity space is located in the centre of the blocks along with parking where gardens on the north side receive relatively little sunlight.

Public Transport

Accessibility

Daylight/Sunlight

Percentage of Residential

Spatial requirements for healthcare facilities have been provided. Encouraging walkable neighbourhoods, reduces car dependence & therefore air pollution and fitness levels.

Street Width

Cleanliness & health

Medium Density Model: Neighbourhood 64ha Model B (option 2) DENSITY :200 POPULATION : 12,800 OPTION 2: Open space location based on Greenwich Case Study

Core retail & commercial area with residential at upper level

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Open areas more evenly dispersed as based on Greenwich case study to increase accessibility

9AM

Figure 57 : 200 Density 64ha Model B Perspective

800m

12PM Central retail area

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Education

Private Space

4PM Figure 58 : 200 Density 64ha Model B Plan

Figure 59 : 200 Density 64ha Model B Sun Studies

Medium Density Model: Neighbourhood 64ha Model B (option 2)

Total Score 23

Environmental Sustainability

N/A

Total Score

N/A

Total Score

Street Types

reduced over shadowing

Historic Context

Public Open Space

Attractive Environment

Landmark Buildings

Parking

Culture

As per Model A Environmental Sustainability As per Model A

Strategy within the area

Attractive environment

Materials

This model disperses open space throughout the development area, based on the Greenwich case study which also achieved a high rating in the matrix. By providing smaller open spaces within the 800m x 800m neighbourhood there is greater focus for social interaction between residential blocks and even greater accessibility; no block is further than 100m from a public space.

Total Score

Public Open Space

Total Score

Connections/Grid Tenure 4 Street Ratios

Proximity of Uses Residential Mix 4 Orientation

Street Hierarchy Percentage of Schools and Health 5 Block Height

Parking Percentage of Commercial and Retail 5

Location

Attractiveness

Activities/Type

Block Depth

Total Score Total Score

Percentage of Open Space

Water Quality

Total Score

106

ore

Matrix 21 :200 Density 64ha Model B Matrix

tial Mix

age of Schools and Health

Connections/Grid

Life Expectancy

Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors

N/A

Street Hierarchy

Noise Pollution

Parking

age of Commercial and Retail

Air Pollution

N/A

Public Transport Accessibility

N/A

age of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Daylight Sunlight

Acces

Social Inclusivity

200 Model 8x8 B

Percentage of Residential

Accessibility

Public Transport

of overshadowing.

Street Width

As per Model A

Total Score

Daylight/Sunlight

Water Quality

The greater distribution ofN/A open space in lower 10 levels N/Aacross the 5 model5 resultsN/A Cleanliness and Health

Life Expectancy

Accessibility

As per Model A

Noise Pollution

Cleanliness & health

As per model A, each block would house a mix of tenures and unit sizes in order to minimise social segregation. In addition Model B can accommodate a mixture of housing types to suit differing lifestyles and needs, with lower 2 & 3 storey blocks situated at the boundary of the site.

Renewable Sources

Social Inclusivity

Air Pollution

Model B is derived from Model A, as such the environmental quality assessment remains mostly the same.

Provision of Doctors

200 Model 8x8 B

Environmental Quality Assessment

Medium Density Model: 256ha Model A (option 1) DENSITY :200 POPULATION : 51,200

Green network is visible and separates individual neighbourhoods

Figure 60 : 200 Density 256ha Model A Perspective

9AM

High street and shared health and education facilities retained from previous model

800m

Separate neighbourhood centres, no central core retail/commercial area

12PM 800m Higher reliance on car transportation as neighbourhoods are separated by green space

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Education

Private Space

4PM Figure 61 : 200 Density 256ha Model A Plan

Figure 62 : 200 Density 256ha Model A Sun Studies

Medium Density Model: 256ha Model A (option 1)

Environmental Quality Assessment Cleanliness & health

200 Model 16x16 B Social Inclusivity

Accessibility

Daylight/Sunlight

Noise Pollution

Provision of Doctors

Life Expectancy

Water Quality

Total Score

N/A

Total Score

Cleanliness and Health

At the larger scale their is the potential for individual neighbourhoods to gain separate identities based on the cultures of those whose live there.

Environmental Sustainability

Discouragement of personal car usage and a strong public transport system requires implementation to increase environmental sustainability.

Total Score 23

N/A

Total Score

reduced accessibility

Total Score

N/A

Total Score

Street Types

Historic Context

Environmental Sustainability

Landmark Buildings

Attractive Environment 18

Parking

Culture

Strategy within the area

Materials

Renewable Sources

21 Total Score

Total Score

Connections/Grid

Street Ratios

Tenure

Proximity of Uses Residential Mix

Street Hierarchy Percentage of Schools and Health

Parking Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Public Transport

Location

Public Open Space

Orientation

Attractiveness

Block Height

Activities/Type

Block Depth

Total Score Total Score

Acces

Water Quality

100

ore

Matrix 22 : 200 Density 256ha Model A Matrix

tial Mix

age of Schools and Health

Connections/Grid

Life Expectancy

Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors

N/A

Street Hierarchy

Noise Pollution

Parking

age of Commercial and Retail

Air Pollution

N/A

Public Transport Accessibility

N/A

Daylight Sunlight

Percentage of Residential Social Inclusivity

age of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Attractive environment

The separation of the public open space from the neighbourhood development area produces several compact neighbourhood areas with distinct centres and defined edges.

Accessibility

200 Model 16x16 B

Air Pollution

Public Open Space N/A

All daylight/sunlight issues remain the same at the larger scale.

Street Width

At the 1600m x1600m scale Model A becomes highly car dependant due to the dispersed nature of its centres. However, the density could support a public transport system (PTAL 6) which would be required to discourage private transport usage.

The dispersed nature of the neighbourhoods potentially segregates people, by their mobility.

Percentage of Open Space

At the larger scale the individual neighbourhoods become disconnected and walk ability is reduced, potentially increasing vehicle dependance and air pollution.

Medium Density Model: 256ha Model B (option 2) DENSITY :200 POPULATION : 51,200

Interwoven grid network increases connectivity within neighbourhood

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

A larger population demands a greater range & scale of facilities, for example health centres and further education colleges

9AM

Figure 63 : 200 Density 256ha Model B Perspective 1600m As neighbourhoods merge two high streets are created around which retail & commercial uses gather, for accessibility

12PM 1600m Car parking provision has been reduced along the main transport corridors which have greatest accessibility, to aid reduction in air pollution

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Education

Private Space

4PM Figure 64 : 200 Density 256ha Model B Plan

Figure 65 : 200 Density 256ha Model B Sun Studies

Medium Density Model: 256ha Model A (option 1)

Environmental Quality Assessment

Noise Pollution

Provision of Doctors

Life Expectancy

Water Quality

Total Score

N/A

Environmental Sustainability

N/A

Parking

N/A

Culture

Attractive Environment

Strategy within the area

Total Score

Materials

Public Open Space

Renewable Sources

Street Ratios

Total Score

Location

Connections/Grid

Orientation

Proximity of Uses

Attractiveness

Street Hierarchy

Block Height

Parking

Activities/Type

Total Score 10

Block Depth

Water Quality N/A

Acces

Life Expectancy 5

Street Width

Provision of Doctors 5

Daylight Sunlight

Percentage of Open Space

Noise Pollution N/A

N/A

improved accessibility Total Score

109

ore

Matrix 23 : 200 Density 256ha Model B Matrix

tial Mix

age of Schools and Health

age of Commercial and Retail

Air Pollution Accessibility

N/A

age of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Public Transport

200 Model 16x16 B

Total Score

Within the blocks located along the main transport arteries car parking has given way to communal green space. This measure discourages excessive car usage, which in this location would create congestion problems.

Street Types

The permeation of public open space is retained in model B with larger open areas forming defined edges between neighbourhoods

Historic Context

Attractive environment

Landmark Buildings

Connections/Grid

The permeation of public open space is retained in model B with larger open areas forming defined edges between neighbourhoods

Environmental Sustainability

Total Score

Proximity of Uses

Tenure

Street Hierarchy

Residential Mix

Social Inclusivity

Percentage of Schools and Health

Accessibility

Parking

All daylight/sunlight issues remain the same at the larger scale.

Public Open Space

Total Score

Cleanliness and Health

Daylight/Sunlight

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

At the 1600m x 1600m scale the four neighbourhoods become interwoven. The strong grid layout ensures high accessibility. By connecting the neighbourhoods and providing shared facilities (around which some of the retail/ commercial is relocated) model B remains a walkable city. As such some of the car parking has provision has been removed along the main transport corridors.

Air Pollution

Accessibility

At the larger scale the tenure within the blocks remains the same, however blocks along the main axial roads are taller in height in order to accommodate the new amenities. A potential threat could be posed by heightened property prices along transport corridor which could marginalise the poor. However, the model provides residential accommodation further from the main roads which retain strong connections and walkability with potentially lower property prices.

Public Transport

At the 1600m x1600m scale the increase in population allows the model to sustain larger health facilities, which have been incorporated at the points where the neighbourhoods overlap.

200 Model 16x16 B Social Inclusivity

Percentage of Residential

Cleanliness & health

High Density Model

BEST PRACTICE CASE STUDY FOR MODEL MODEL DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY INDICATORS BASED ON NEIGHBOURHOOD MODEL B

The Greenwich Peninsula case study was used to inform the design of the 500 density model. The best practice factors derived from these case studies included open space location and location of uses.

Cleanliness and Health Air Pollution: N/A Noise pollution: N/A

Open space: The Greenwich master plan was selected once again as the best practice case study for locating open space.The concept of the central park around which development is orientated was taken from this case study and was implemented for the high density model.

Accessibility Public Transport: Bus Parking: 0.5 spaces per dwelling

Location of uses: The initial models looked to the Greenwich master plan in order to assess the best location of uses. This case study separated the use functions, placing, retail & commercial separately to residential uses.This was deemed suitable as it would enable areas of distinctive identity to develop. Open space activity:Whilst developing the models it was discovered that it was not possible to locate open space requirements at ground floor alone. At this point precedents for creative design of public open space were sought. These ranged from the built to the proposed. What they had in common was the incorporation of open space onto rooftops, accessible from ground level. These green rooftop spaces aid reduction in rain water runoff and air pollution thereby increasing environmental sustainability along with open space provision and environmental attractiveness.

Figure 66 : Greenwich Peninsula, development orientated around open space

Social inclusivity (percentages calculated from ground floor areas) % Resi: 71% % office: 9% % school: 7% % health: 4% % retail: 9% Daylight/Sunlight Max residential building height:18 floors - 54m Max non-residential building height: 5 floors - 15m Block depth: 40m Orientation: Residential rectangular buildings N-S orientation to maximise sunlight Major street width:20m Minor street width: 18m Built environment ground floor footprint GFA: 65,040sqm Street Ratios: 1:0.8 - 1:2.7

Figures 67 & 68 : Creative Open space designs RELATIONSHIP WITH MODEL

Public open space Location: Central large space & on rooftops Access: Walking routes, roads, ramps & steps Activities/type: Leisure & play space Private open space Location: Balconies & rooftops Access: From interior Activities/type: Amenity activities Attractive Environment Street Types: Hierarchy, local and major

Figure 69 : Development orientated around open space & rooftop open space

Environmental sustainability Renewable sources: N/A Strategy within area: Well connected and integrated public transport systems along with green, accessible roofs.

1ha Model

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS

Private amenity spaces provided by balconies & at roof level.

STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Multiple tenancies & flat types incorporated into residential blocks,

Public space, accessible from ground level, provided on rooftops of public buildings

9AM

Figure 70 : 500 density 1ha Model Perspective View 100m Parking provided on street and underground

Public space provided in centre of residential block in order to increase open space provision

12PM

100m

One bed

Retail

Two beds

Private Space

Wide streets to minimise overshadowing

4PM

Two+ beds Figure 71 : 500 density 1ha Model Plan View

Figure 72 : 500 density 1ha Model Sun Studies

High Density Model: Neighbourhood 25ha, Model A (initial model) DENSITY :500 POPULATION : 12,800 Initial model : Open space location based on Greenwich Case Study

Public open space does not meet requirements for area

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Building heights range from 6-12 storeys. Overshadowing is a major issue

9AM Figure 73 : 500 Density 25ha Model A Perspective 500m

12PM Commercial, retail, education & healthcare amenities organised around open space

500m

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Education

Private Space

4PM Figure 74 : 500 Density 25ha Model A Plan

Figure 75 : 500 Density 25ha Model A Sun Study

High Density Model: Neighbourhood 25ha, Model A (initial model)

500 Model 5x5 A

Provision of Doctors

Life Expectancy

Water Quality

Total Score

N/A

Attractive Environment

Environmental Sustainability

N/A

Total Score

N/A

Total Score 2

poor rating Matrix 24 : 500 Density 25ha Model A Matrix

Total Score

N/A

Total Score

N/A

Total Score

Location

Total Score

Location

Public Open Space

Street Types

Total Score 23

Attractiveness

Connections/Grid 5

Historic Context

Proximity of Uses 4

Activities/Type

Street Hierarchy 4

Landmark Buildings

Parking 5

Acces

Public Transport 5

needs improvement

Culture

Total Score 10

Percentage of Open Space

Water Quality N/A

Street Types

Attractiveness

Historic Context

Street Ratios

Activities/Type

Orientation

Landmark Buildings

Block Height

Daylight Sunlight

Parking

Acces

Tenure

Public Open Space

Culture

Residential Mix

Strategy within the area

Percentage of Schools and Health

The model places most parking underground with some on street parking placed around the main facilities. Building parking underground does alleviate space at ground level but is neither cost nor energy efficient.

Percentage of Open Space

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Environmental Sustainability

Materials

The public open spaces defines the character of the model, as it is the feature around which all development is focuses. Separation of functions allows each use zone to take on its own individual character.

Renewable Sources

Connections/Grid

Attractive environment

Total Score

Proximity of Uses

Total Score

Street Hierarchy

Total Score

Parking

Accessibility

Materials

Life Expectancy 5

al Mix

Provision of Doctors 5

ge of Schools and Health

Noise Pollution N/A

ge of Commercial and Retail

Air Pollution N/A

ge of Residential

Accessibility

N/A

Social Inclusivity

500 Model 5x5 A

Cleanliness and Health

N/A

It was not possible to achieve the open space requirements at ground floor level once the areas require by the other uses had been included.

Social Inclusivity

Blocks are a mix of tenures and many house a range of uses, however all residential units are apartments. In order to improve social inclusivity there should be greater variation in residential type across the site to cater for differing lifestyle and needs.

Noise Pollution

Cleanliness and Health

Public Open Space

Block Depth

Although the uses have been separated they are all within walking distance. The model has a PTAL rating of 6 which means that is has the potential to support a public transport network.

There is a lot of overshadowing in the residential area due to the height and orientation of the blocks, however the public space remains in sunlight throughout the day.

Public Transport

Accessibility

Daylight/Sunlight

Percentage of Residential

The model provides the required area of health facilities. The separation of uses could potentially encourage car use and therefore effect air pollution levels.

Street Width

Cleanliness & health

Air Pollution

Environmental Quality Assessment

High Density Model: Neighbourhood 25ha, Model B (revised model) DENSITY :500 POPULATION : 12,800 Revised model: Seeking creative methods of open space provision

Residential buildings raked to improve access to daylight

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Wide roads to minimise overshadowing

9AM Figure 76 : 500 Density 25ha Model B Perspective 500m Publicly accessible open space provided at roof level of public buildings

Increased are of public open space from previous model. However, public space requirements not met

12PM 500m Area shown in 1 ha model (Figure 71)

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Education

Private Space

4PM Figure 77 : 500 Density 25ha Model B Plan

Figure 78 : 500 Density 25ha Model B Sun Study

High Density Model: Neighbourhood 25ha, Model A (revised model)

Environmental Quality Assessment Provision of Doctors

Life Expectancy

Water Quality

Total Score

Street Hierarchy

Proximity of Uses

Connections/Grid

Total Score

greater open space

Environmental Sustainability

N/A

Total Score

Total Score Total Score 21

N/A

Total Score

Street Types

improved daylight

Historic Context

Attractive Environment

Landmark Buildings

Parking

Culture

Increasing the green space reduces air pollution and rain water run-off. Improving access to daylight allows passive solar gain to be utilised for heat and light.

Strategy within the area

Environmental Sustainability

Total Score

Tenure Street Ratios

Residential Mix

Orientation

Percentage of Schools and Health

Block Height

Utilising the rooftops of public buildings as public open spaces changes the character of the area and creates a unique neighbourhood.

Materials

Public Open Space

Attractive environment

Renewable Sources

Location

Attractiveness

Activities/Type

Daylight Sunlight

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Total Score Total Score

Block Depth

Water Quality Connections/Grid

Life Expectancy Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors

Total Score

103

Matrix 25 : 500 Density 25ha Model B Matrix

67 re

ial Mix

ge of Schools and Health

Street Hierarchy

Noise Pollution

Parking

N/A

ge of Commercial and Retail

Air Pollution

Public Transport

ge of Residential

Accessibility

N/A

Acces

Social Inclusivity

N/A

Percentage of Residential

Accessibility

Street Width

No change from model A.

Cleanliness and Health

Further public spaces have been achieved utilising the roof levels of each public N/A N/A N/A 10 Cleanliness and Health block yet the public space requirement has not 5been met.5

Social Inclusivity

500 Model 5x5 B

The residential blocks are stepped in height in order to attempt to alleviate some of the overshadowing.The public open space remains in sunlight due to the stepped nature of the green roof blocks.

Percentage of Open Space

This model separates the use functions. The residential area remains in walking distance from the amenities; however a public transport network would be required to discourage car use for those less mobile.

Noise Pollution

Public Open Space

Parking

Accessibility

Cleanliness & health issues remain the same from Model A, however increasing the access to green space potentially improves health & fitness along with alleviating air pollution.

Air Pollution

Daylight/Sunlight

Public Transport

500 Model 5x5 B

Cleanliness & health

High Density Model: 256 ha DENSITY :500 POPULATION : 115,200 Revised model: Further improvement to open space provision & overshadowing Building height kept to a minimum to minimise overshadowing

Health & education facilities relocated in neighbourhood centres

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Area shown to right

9AM

Figure 79 : 500 Density 256ha Model Perspective

Figure 80 : 500 Density 256ha Model Perspective in detail

Each residential block has a single high element. These blocks are orientated to maximise daylight.

1600m

Commercial & retail strip created through the amalgamation of neighbourhoods

12PM

1600m Residential blocks rearranged to allow room for further public open space

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Affordable

Private Space

Education

Private amenity space provided rooftop level & by balconies

Figure 81 : 500 Density 256ha Model Plan

4PM Figure 82 : 500 Density 256ha Model Sun Study

Water Quality

Total Score

N/A

Total Score

Restructuring of the residential blocks has allowed for a significant reduction in overshadowing. Throughout the model block heights are lowered, only a single vertical element of the residential blocks dictates their orientation.

Connections/Grid

Percentage of Schools and Health

Residential Mix

Tenure

Restructuring the model has provided a greater range of flat types and locations to suit differing needs. Retail is incorporated into the lower levels of the residential units, as demonstrated at several of the case study sites allowing greater accessibility for all users.

Social Inclusivity 500 Model 16x16

Environmental Sustainability

N/A

Parking

N/A

Culture

N/A

Strategy within the area

Attractive Environment

Materials

Total Score

Renewable Sources

Public Open Space

Street Ratios

Location

Total Score

Orientation

Connections/Grid

Attractiveness

Proximity of Uses

Block Height

Street Hierarchy

Activities/Type

Total Score

Parking

Block Depth

Water Quality

Acces

Life Expectancy

N/A

Street Width

Provision of Doctors

Daylight Sunlight

Percentage of Open Space

Noise Pollution

N/A

increased open space Total Score

110

ore

Matrix 26 : 500 Density 256ha Model Matrix

tial Mix

ge of Schools and Health

ge of Commercial and Retail

Air Pollution

N/A

Public Transport Accessibility

improved mix

N/A

ge of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Total Score

Proximity of Uses

Total Score

Street Hierarchy

The model exhibits a large expanse of public open space. The case studies of Havana and False Creek utilise their open spaces for food production. This could be incorporated into the model. In addition roof spaces which could be harnessed for food production, decreasing food miles and increasing biodiversity.

Total Score

Parking

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Accessibility

Public Transport

Social Inclusivity

Percentage of Residential

In order to free up land for the inclusion of new uses, several retail blocks have been redistributed across the site and located at the base of residential blocks.This improves their accessibility. Commercial and leisure facilities have been clustered along access corridors and remain in within walking distance of the residential blocks.

Environmental Sustainability

Street Types

Cleanliness and Health

The increase in scale allows for shared public open spaces between neighbourhoods allowing the expansion of the residential blocks, which incorporate public open space as the ground level and private amenity space at roof level and through the introduction of balconies.

The greening of the roof tops within the model helps to create a place of individual quality with its own ‘green’ culture, therefore it can be assumed that this will increase the attractiveness of the neighbourhood.

Historic Context

Public Open Space

Accessibility

Attractive Environment

Landmark Buildings

Daylight/Sunlight

At the 1,600m x1,600m scale the increase in population allows the model to sustain larger health facilities. Movement of the retail to the residential area allows for the incorporation of local leisure facilities, potentially improving the fitness of residents.

Life Expectancy

Cleanliness & health

Provision of Doctors

500 Model 16x16

Noise Pollution

Environmental Quality Assessment

Air Pollution

High Density Model: 256 ha

Super-High Density Model

MODEL DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY INDICATORS Figure 83 : Open space provision

BEST PRACTICE CASE STUDY FOR MODEL New Domino development in New York was most appropriate for this super-high density, largely because the developmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s density was larger than our 800 pph aim.

Cleanliness and Health Air Pollution: N/A Noise pollution: N/A

The more detailed factors we used to inform the design of our model were; open space provisions, massing, development mix and character.

Accessibility Public Transport: Bus and underground (also potentially train) Parking: Underground

Open space: New Domino provided the open space by locating it very close to the tower blocks, this allowed for the residents to have easy access to some, however, it did not achieve the amount of space required for that density. We have tried to copy this in our model by putting public space surrounding building envelopes, although this may be shaded at certain times of the day, this would be a benefit in the summer, and there would also be hard surfacing to provide year-round usable space.

Social inclusivity (percentages calculated from ground floor areas) % Resi: 77 % commercial: 7.7 % school: 8 % health: 0.15 % retail: 6.9

Massing: The block heights and building widths were used to set our own blocks in the model. At first we thought that 20 storeys would be sufficient, but quickly realised we needed to the blocks to increase in height if we were to achieve the other uses within the site (commercial, retail and open space). After looking at how New Domino has proposed 40 storeys, we decided to make some blocks this height, and others slightly lower to give more legibility and aesthetic variety.

Figure 84 : Building heights achieve the density & give character RELATIONSHIP WITH MODEL

Development mix: Like New Domino, we have proposed a 50% affordable provision within each block, it is likely that the affordable units would be clustered together with low spec finishes to make them affordable. Character: At first glance, New Domino is distinctive in its character due to the sheer height of itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s blocks. On a pedestrian level it has kept the more romantic industrial style from the old sugar factory. Our model has imitated this naturally with the high blocks, at a generic level touchstones and themes cannot be designed around, but we would hope that once the model is placed in a site, alterations to the design could be made to celebrate some existing features or history.

Daylight/Sunlight Max residential building height: 39 floors - 117m Max non-residential building height: 18 floors - 54m Orientation: Residential rectangular buildings N-S orientation to maximise sunlight Major street width: 36m Minor street width: 18m (not including public space surrounding building) Built environment footprint GFA: 787,994 Public open space Location: Surrounding building envelopes, largely within or adjacent to commercial blocks Access: Walking routes and roads Activities/type: Walking, spill out from cafes, riverside, cycling, sports in larger parks

Figure 85 : Model shows the open space surrounding the building envelope

Private open space Location: Balconies Access: From interior Activities/type: Amenity activities Attractive Environment Materials: N/A Environmental sustainability Renewable sources: Could have PV on the roofs of the blocks Strategy within area: Well connected and integrated public transport systems

Figure 86 : Building heights are very similar in model to those in New Domino 70

Super-High Density Model 1ha DENSITY : 800

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

1ha model shows mix of tenure within the blocks

Parking must go under the blocks to meet the requirements for this density

9AM

Figure 87 : 800 Density 1ha Model Perspective Private amenity space both inside the block and balcony is visible in this model

12PM 100m

100m

Healthcare

Open Space

2 Bed

Retail

1 Bed

Offices

The relationship between the commercial streets and residential streets is shown with the public space mixed within

4PM

2+ Bed

Figure 88 : 800 Density 1ha Model Plan

Figure 89 : 800 Density 1ha Model Sun Study

Super-High Density Model 16ha DENSITY : 800 POPULATION : 12800

private space GFA: 114,000m2 public space GFA: 47,000m2 (at 8ha model)

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

Main commercial street shows how the retail and office units are laid-out; the offices above the retail units

Commercial floor also visible on ground floor of every block

9AM

Figure 90 : 800 Density 16ha Model Perspective 400m Larger, more retail orientated streets act as boulevards thus increasing the street hierarchy

12PM

400m

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Affordable

Private Space

Education

Offices

The relationship between the commercial streets and residential streets is shown with the public space mixed within

Figure 91 : 800 Density 16ha Model Plan

4PM Figure 92 : 800 Density 16ha Model Sun Study

Super-High Density Model 16ha

Environmental Quality Assessment

N/A

Environmental Sustainability

Attractiveness

Location 4

N/A

Total Score

Activities/Type

N/A

Total Score

Acces

Total Score Total Score

N/A

Total Score

N/A

Attractive Environment

Street Types

N/A

Historic Context

N/A

Landmark Buildings

Parking

Culture

Strategy within the area

Public transport is shown at this scale through a central bus route, due to the high density, there would be more bus routes than shown. As previously mentioned, local amenities such as schools and doctors surgeries and also offices and retail have been placed at regular intervals to reduce the need for car transport. The entire ground floor of each residential block is taken by retail or office facilities to increase this locality factor, there would be enough population to make shops and offices here viable.

Materials

Environmental sustainability

Total Score

Car parking provisions have been placed underground and on street level, with open space on top of the car parks, trees have been placed along large boulevards to reduce the impact of pollution and aid the attractiveness of wide expanses of street.

Public Open Space

Total Score

Connections/Grid Tenure

Location

Street Types

Street Ratios

Proximity of Uses Residential Mix Orientation

Street Hierarchy Percentage of Schools and Health Block Height

Parking Percentage of Commercial and Retail 4

Attractiveness

Attractive Environment

Attractive environment

Percentage of Open Space

Total Score

Water Quality

Life Expectancy

Noise Pollution

Air Pollution

Total Score

Matrix 27 : 800 Density 16ha Model Matrix Total Score

Public Open Space

Historic Context

Activities/Type

Landmark Buildings

Block Depth

Total Score Total Score

Daylight Sunlight

Acces

Water Quality

f Schools and Health

Connections/Grid

Life Expectancy

Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors

N/A

Street Hierarchy

Noise Pollution

Parking

f Commercial and Retail

Air Pollution

N/A

Public Transport Accessibility

N/A

f Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Social Inclusivity

Culture

800 Model

Public Transport

Each block has 50% affordable housing contained, realistically this would be less as they buildings would not make enough profit for the developer.

This is in the form of two large parks with education and church facilities sharing the space. The rest of the space, although not achieving the target of 200,000m² is provided very frequently, in fact all pavements abut onto some sort of public space, whether it is a small roadside strip, or a park. The retail and commercial facilities in the centre of the model also share this the open space for spill out space etc. Accessibility 5 5 4 5 5 24

Percentage of Residential

Social Inclusivity

Public Open space

Street Width

The services in the city are well spread out, schools are along easy routes in the grid-iron formation, local doctors surgeries have been favoured at this scale over large hospitals as locality is an important factor to reduce usage of the car and make it more affordable for poorer residents. Bus routes have also been incorporated within this model.

Percentage of Open Space

Accessibility

The block have been orientated to allow for the lowest mass of shadow, they are rectangular with the long edge running north-south. We have prioritised the lighting in the park/retail areas as these are going to be used more and therefore be more economically prosperous for the city. The street widths have been made as large as possible given the high public space requirements, that is partly why the public space boarders the street N/A edges. N/A 5 5 N/A 10 Cleanliness and Health

Renewable Sources

Daylight/sunlight

This model achieves the required provision of health facilities.

Materials

Cleanliness and health

Provision of Doctors

800 Model

Super-High Density Model 256ha

public space GFA: 47,000m2 (at 8ha model)

DENSITY : 800 POPULATION : 204,800

Private space GFA: 114,000m2

SUNPATH DIAGRAMS

PARK

Parking must go under the blocks to meet the requirements for this density

Major streets

STRATFORD - LONDON - JULY

9AM

Minor streets

Figure 93 : 800 Density 256ha Model Perspective 1600m

Overshadowing on adjacent blocks, but more open space is in sunlight Retail and commercial street

12PM

1600m Educational and recreational street

Healthcare

Open Space

Residential

Retail

Affordable

Private Space

Education

Offices

Leisure amens.

At larger neighbourhood, additional large facilities are available; churches, hospitals, universities and leisure centres are shown

Figure 94 : 800 Density 256ha Model Plan

4PM Figure 95 : 800 Density 256ha Model Sun Study

Super-High Density Model 256ha

Environmental Quality Assessment

Provision of Doctors

Life Expectancy

Water Quality

Total Score

N/A

Street Hierarchy

Proximity of Uses

Connections/Grid

Total Score

Percentage of Schools and Health

Residential Mix

Tenure

Block Depth

We felt that at neighbourhood level, the wider streets necessary for the correct street ratios would benefit from a boulevard style arrangement, this would not only contribute to the environmental sustainability indicator, but also breaks down large expanses of road and cars. The large public park is also shown on the perspective image of where city dwellers could go for larger public space.

Environmental sustainability

A neighbourhood as large as this would necessitate more than just a bus network, although not shown a underground train link would be appropriate, and the neighbourhood has a large enough density to support such a network.

Environmental Sustainability

N/A

Parking

Total Score

Culture

Street Ratios

N/A

Strategy within the area

Orientation

Total Score

Block Height

N/A

Materials

Public Open Space

Attractive Environment

Renewable Sources

N/A

reduced daylight

Location

Attractiveness

Activities/Type

Acces

Total Score Total Score

Daylight Sunlight

Percentage of Open Space

Water Quality

Total Score

ore

Matrix 28 : 800 Density 256ha Model Matrix

tial Mix

age of Schools and Health

Connections/Grid

Life Expectancy

Proximity of Uses

Provision of Doctors

N/A

Street Hierarchy

Noise Pollution

Parking

age of Commercial and Retail

N/A

Public Transport Accessibility

N/A

age of Residential

Cleanliness and Health

Air Pollution

800 Model

Total Score

Percentage of Commercial and Retail

Attractive environment

Total Score

Percentage of Residential Social Inclusivity

Street Width

As with the 4x4 model, the streets are loaded with residential on two adjacent blocks with one commercial and open space block to the north. This was to create more sunlight in areas where more people would spend more of the daytime. Accessibility 5 5 4 5 5 24

Off the map we would anticipate some special, large park areas, but these have not been shown in the model as we wanted to make as generic-a-model as possible.

Total Score

Daylight/sunlight

Public Open space

Street Types

N/A

At this large scale, hospitals, universities and leisure centres have been provided, they are as near to the centre as possible to provide easy accessibility to many of the large population in the locale.

All the units in the blocks are flats; this isn’t the best for social inclusivity as there is no/little chance for having family housing. The density was achieved overall because there unit sizes were very small and contained and this left little room to offer different types of tenure. The commercial density was also achieved in a similar way as seen in earlier images.

Historic Context

Cleanliness and Health

A neighbourhood hospital has been proposed near the centre, this is because at this scale an A&E and more specialist wards are required and doctors surgeries do not have these. A stadium and generic leisure building has also been proposed, to adhere to area action plan scale requirements.

Landmark Buildings

Accessibility

Parking

Social Inclusivity

Air Pollution

N/A

Cleanliness and health

Public Transport

Noise Pollution

800 Model

Model Summary

Good street ratios were achieved to counteract the effects of high-rise buildings, this was done cleverly through the use of open space provisions surrounding the building envelopes. The downside of this is that the area lacks large parks like Hyde or Central Park, but the upside is that open space is accessible for every citizen very easily. The one overriding negative point is the failure to achieve the open space requirement.

The 256 ha scale proved a true test of the robustness of the neighbourhood model when multiplied over a larger area, in a realistic city scenario. At the 200 density it drew attention to the spatial organisation and accessibility of the neighbourhood model when placed in a wider context. At the 500 density a creative approach to open space provision allowed the large model to achieve a high level of environmental quality. However, the intense green aesthetic of the model provides a visual graphic to demonstrate the public open space standard requirement and leads to question of whether this standard is feasible at high density. The 800 model was unable to achieve the public space requirement due to the area required for other uses. but made up for this by providing more than 3.5x the required area of private amenity space required.

800

Open space requirements cannot be achieved at ground level alone, so creative options were sought. Open space was placed on rooftops of public buildings, meaning building heights had to be kept down which had the added effect of limiting overshadowing. However, this creative option would be unlikely to be feasible as the open space would require large amounts of investment to achieve.

110

500

109

200

At the neighbourhood scale (25ha) the implementation of the spatial requirements for all amenities and open space was easily achieved, this correlates to the high quality indicator score. At this scale the key factor which determined difference between the two models was overshadowing. Testing both models at the larger scale highlighted issues in their spatial organisation at which point separation of the open space from the development acted as an accessibility barrier.

Figure 96, provides a summary of the highest environmental quality score for each of the models at the large 256 ha scale. It highlights the correlation between high density and environmental quality which was shown to deteriorate as density increased. Across the densities many of the environmental qualities were incorporated through design work. This included the provision of adequate healthcare to ensure cleanliness & health, a mixture of tenures and the necessary requirement of commercial & retail to achieve social inclusively. However, as the density increases factors which are substantially effected are daylight, as building heights increase, and public open space provision decreases. In addition, at higher densities parking becomes an environmental issue. In order to accommodate parking basements must be provided, which is environmentally unsustainable due to the energy and material required. The benefit of high density is that public transport systems can be implemented, reducing the need for private car usage. The 500 density model achieved the highest score because it addressed the daylight/sunlight and provision of public open space issues that the 800 model was not able to.

Figure 96 : Model Summary

Chapter 4: Moving forward Application considerations for the Olympic Site Report Conclusion

Application considerations for the Olympic Site

Site Choice: Within the Olympic Park Site we have looked into the initial steps that would be required to insert one of the high density models. As a team it was decided that the Chobham Manor site would be best suited for inputting a high density model for several reasons: •

•

NEW SPITALFIELDS MARKET

Chobham Manor is the first phase of the Queen Elizabeth Park, enabling a high density model to be implemented in the early stages would enable further high density models to be implemented as the development progresses and build out it completed.

ETON MANOR SPORTS CENTRE

Chobham Manor covers a 9.3ha site, which is larger than some of our case study sites. In these examples 200, 500 and 800 people per ha have been successfully designed into smaller sites therefore the land take available will enable a high quality high density environment. The location of Chobham Manor next to the Olympic Athletes Village provides the opportunity for higher buildings than the current proposal.Within the Olympic Athletes Village the buildings are 8 – 9 storeys high providing an opportunity to achieve similar heights within Chobham Mannor as opposed to the current 2 and 3 storey buildings. Chobham Manor’s current proposed provision of schools, shops, healthcare etc match similar levels to that of a high density model therefore many aspects of the model would not need to be altered before it is applied.

CHOBHAM ACADEMY

Chobham Manor VELOPARK

LANDSCAPED PARKLANDS

PRESS CENTRE

THE INTERNATIONAL QUARTER

The implementation of a high density model within the Chobham Manor site could be possible given the correct investment. After initial reviews of the site we feel that the 500 people per hectare model would be appropriate to place within Chobham Manor as the site would be able to support a higher density of people than currently proposed. To input the 500 people per hectare model into the site there are two separate lists of issues that need to be identified and addressed. These are; Anticipated issues with the current model and Issues to be over come/address in order to apply the model to the site. The following lists aim at the initial identification and addressing of these issues:

Anticipated issues with current model: 1. Underground parking not feasible if sustainability issue is to be addressed. However looking into the transport strategy for the Oueen Elizabeth Park it has been noted that they want a reduction in the reliance on cars by improving public transport throughout the site. This would therefore reduce the number of car parking spaces necessary to provide within the site. 2. No houses or larger family accommodation available.The Queen Elizabeth Park strategy states that 70% family housing (Olympic Park Legacy Company) is to be provided, however the 500 people per hectare model is currently built solely of flats therefore an alteration into the unit types and mix would need to be considered. 3. High-rise buildings reduce the village-style character areas the Olympic park is trying to create. Currently the Olympic Park Legacy Company is trying to promote a low rise village perspective (information taken from visuals within the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park Brochure) however the location of Chobham Manor next to the Athletes Village provides an opportunity to argue that higher buildings could be implemented along the southern edge of the site.

BROADCAST CENTRE

MULTI-USE ARENA THE INTERNATIONAL QUARTER

SOUTH PLAZA

STRATFORD REGIONAL AND BUS STATION

AQUATICS CENTRE

ARCELORMITTAL ORBIT

THE STADIUM

5 3 MILLS STUDIOS

Figure 97 : Olympic Park Site Map 80

Application considerations for the Olympic Site

Issues to be overcome/address in order to apply the model to the site: 1. Topographical, the modelling has been based on a flat test site and would therefore require some alteration when applied. 2. Existing Context/Neighbourhood 3. Surrounding Water Network 4. Existing Character of the area 5. Proposed Land Uses, what the Olympic Park Legacy Company have currently proposed for the site and how this would be implemented into the model. 6. Planning Policy Alterations (mixâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and splits) the model is currently based on the London Policy 2011, however certain mixes and splits have been altered for the planning application submitted for the Queen Elizabeth Park therefore these would need to be address when applying any model. 7. Transport and Road Networks 8. Height Restrictions 9. Environmental Issues From identifying and beginning to address the lists of issues above we feel that it would be possible to apply a high density model to the Chobham Manor site, to intensify the land use of the Olympic Park whilst providing a high quality environment.

Figure 98 : Perspective view of Cobham Manor

Report Conclusion

The generic models produced in response to the brief have addressed the issues of maintaining high environmental quality in the face of increasing use intensification, with varying degrees of success. Creating a list of essential environmental qualities, both qualitative and quantitative, allowed a framework to be established, through which all case studies and models could be objectively evaluated. However, it must be noted that the method applied was rated from a westernised perspective. This was due to the need to subjectively quantify measures which were inherently qualitative, such as the attractiveness of a particular place. Furthermore, the measures presented in the matrices have been decided upon by a small group of people. In order to strengthen the validity of the list it would be necessary to question a large sample of people from a variety of cultures and social demographics to form a rounded perspective of what qualities constitute a high quality environment. Nevertheless, the quantification of all case studies and models has been useful to enable the extraction of the key rules and findings in order to design what we deem to be a high quality environment. Reference to literature such as Shaping Neighbourhoods (Barton et al, 2003) and the London Plan (Greater London Authority, 2011) further embeds the model within a UK setting. Through the design and evaluation of the generic models several key findings were deduced. Firstly we can propose the hypothesis: as use intensification increases, environmental quality will decrease unless creative strategies are employed to overcoming generic issues. Secondly, the models highlighted that the extremely high requirement for public open space per person is not a realistic target if use intensification is to increase. In order for future development to adhere to the standard, it should be revised with regard to high and superhigh density development. Finally, it was noted that although urban design has the potential to enable high quality environments to be achieved, basic infrastructure, such as access to clean water and health facilities, must be in place to ensure basic needs are fulfilled. This cannot be achieved by design alone. Lastly, the consideration of the models in relation to the Chobham Manor site, highlights the complexity involved in applying a generic model to a realistic situation. However, the task has allowed us gain a greater understanding the constraints of large scale planning and ways in which urban design can be used to evaluate and resolve complex issues in order to create a more efficient and high quality urban environment.

Chapter 5: Appendix Bibliography

Bibliography

Figures :

Figure 1 : Group 3, 2012. Methodology Diagram.

Figure 2 : Rudlin, D., and Falk, N., 1999. Sustainability on a City Scale. [image] Building the 21st Century Home : The Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood. Great Britain : Architectural Press.

Figure 3 : [Public Open Space] 2004. [image online] Available at : <http://www.propertymall.com/press/article/11350> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

Figure 4 : [Accessibility] 2011. [image online] Available at : <http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/nottingham/nottingham1.html> [Accessed on 2 March 2012].

Figure 5 : [Accessibility] 2011. [image online] Available at : <http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24022330-bus-drivers-demand-pound-500-bonus-for-olympics.do> [Accessed on 2 March 2012].

Figure 6 : [Daylight Sunlight] 2011. [image online] Available at : <http://www.wharf.co.uk/2012/01/next-phase-of-greenwich-penins.html> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

Figure 7 : [Material Pallets - Attractive Environment] n.d. [image online] Available at <http://www.123rf.com/photo_3089508_skyscraper-in-london--ultramodern-steel-and-glass-building.html> [Accessed on 2 March 2012].

Figure 8 : [Environmental Sustainability] n.d. [image online] Available at : <http://chicagoregen.com/resources/renewable-energy/> [Accessed on 2 March 2012].

Figure 9 : [Attractive Streets - Social Inclusivity] 2011. Available at : <http://deptforddame.blogspot.com/2011/11/richard-rogers-in-deptford.html> [Accessed on 2 March 2012].

10.

Figure 10 : Group 3, 2012. Location map of False Creek,Vancouver.

11.

Figure 11 : [False Creek Water Front] 2010. [image online] Available at : <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vancouver_-_False_Creek_pano_02.jpg> [Accessed on 8 February 2012].

12.

Figure 12 : [False Creek Plan] 2010. [image online] Available at : <http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/southeast/public/06apr29+may1/index.htm> [Accessed on 8 February 2012].

13.

Figure 13 : Group 3, 2012. False Creek 1 Hectare Use Breakdown.

14.

Figure 14 : Group 3, 2012. False Creek Block Analysis.

15.

Figure 15 : Group 3, 2012. Location map of Greenwich Peninsula, London.

16.

Figure 16 : Meridian Delta Limited , 2004. Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan Model. [image online] Available at : <http://www.propertymall.com/press/article/11350> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

17.

Figure 17 : Meridian Delta Limited, January 2012. Greenwich Peninsula Aerial. [image online] Available at : <http://www.wharf.co.uk/2012/01/next-phase-of-greenwich-penins.html> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

18.

Figure 18 : Meridian Delta Limited ,2012. Greenwich Peninsula StreetVisual. [image onine] Available at : <http://www.rudi.net/node/19723> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

19.

Figure 19 : Group 3, 2012. Greenwich Peninsula 1 Hectare Use Breakdown.

20.

FIgure 20 : Group 3, 2012. Greenwich Peninsula Block Analysis.

21.

Figure 21 : Group 3, 2012. Location map of Central Havana, Cuba.

22.

Figure 22 : [Central Havana Aerial ] 2011. [photograph] Available at : <http://www.littlevanthatcould.com/2011/06/cuba/> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

23.

Figure 23 : [Central Havana Street Photograph] 2011. [photograph] Available at : <http://www.littlevanthatcould.com/2011/06/cuba/> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

24.

Figure 24 : [Central Havana Narrow Streets and Proximity of Blocks] 2011. [photograph] Available at : <http://www.littlevanthatcould.com/2011/06/cuba/> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

25.

Figure 25 : Group 3, 2012. Havana 1 Hectare Use Breakdown.

26.

Figure 26 : Group 3, 2012. Central Havana Block Analysis.

27.

Figure 27 : Group 3, 2012. Location map of Sunny Valley, Russia.

Bibliography

28.

Figure 28 : [Sunny Valley Aerial] 2006. [image online] Available at : <http://www.renovasg.com/projects/complex/sunny/> [Accessed on 8 February 2012].

29.

Figure 29 : [Sunny Valley Central District Perspective] 2006. [image online] Available at : <http://www.renovasg.com/projects/complex/sunny/> [Accesed on 8 February 2012].

30.

Figure 30 : Group 3, 2012. Sunny Valley 1 Hectare Use Breakdown.

31.

Figure 31 : Group 3, 2012. Central Havana Block Analysis.

32.

Figure 32 : Group 3, 2012. Location map of The New Domino,New York.

33.

Figure 33 : The Refinery LLC, 2010. New Domino Aerial Perspective. [image online] Available at : <http://abduzeedo.com/new-domino-new-brooklyn> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

34.

Figure 34 : The Refinery LLC, 2010. New Domino Waterfront Park. [image online] Available at : <http://www.thenewdomino.com/index.php?section=planning> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

35.

Figure 35 : The Refinery LLC, 2010. New Domino Public Open Space. [image online] Available at : <http://www.thenewdomino.com/index.php?section=planning> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

36.

Figure 36 : The Refinery LLC, 2009. New Domino Development Plan. [image online] Available at : < http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2009/05/new-domino-site/> [ Accessed on 9 February 2012].

37.

Figure 37 : Group 3, 2012. New Domino 1 Hectare Use Breakdown.

38.

Figure 38 : Group 3, 2012. New Domino Block Analysis.

39.

Figure 39 : Group 3, 2012. Location map of Kampung Kebalen, Indonesia.

40.

Figure 40 : Surabaya Municipal Government, 2007. Kampung Kebalen Aerial. [photograph] Available at : <http://www.akdn.org/architecture/project.asp?id=443> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

41.

Figure 41 : Surabaya Municipal Government, 1986. Kampung Kebalen on Street Green Space. [photograph] Available at : <http://www.akdn.org/architecture/pdf/0443_Ind.pdf> [Accessed on 2 February 2012].

42.

Figure 42 : Surabaya Municipal Government, 1986. Kampung Kebalen Streetscape Creates Activity. [photograph] Available at : <http://www.akdn.org/architecture/pdf/0443_Ind.pdf> [Accessed on 2 February 2012].

43.

Figure 43 : Group 3, 2012. Kampung Kebalen 1 Hectare Use Breakdown.

44.

Figure 44 : Group 3, 2012. Kampung Kebalen Block Analysis.

45.

Figure 45 : [Planning Policy and Statistical Information Documents] n.d. Available online. [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

46.

Figure 46 : Group 3, 2012. Open Space requirements illustration - percentages based on 12,800 population.

47.

Figure 47 : Group 3, 2012. Floor Area Requirements for a Neighbourhood Population of 12,800 People.

48.

Figure 48 : DTZ, 2008. Greenwich Master Plan. [pdf] Available at : <http://www.greenwichpeninsula.co.uk/en/Work%20here/~/media/B9838C7722B543A1B8801A7AC50BA312.ashx> [Accessed on 2 February 2012].

49.

Figure 49 : [False Creek Master Plan Retail & Commercial Core & Dispersed Open Space] 2010. [image online] Available at : <http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/southeast/public/06apr29+may1/index.htm> [Accessed on 8 February 2012].

50.

Figure 50 : Group 3, 2012. Dispersed Open Space & Private Amenity within Block.

51.

Figure 51 : Group 3, 2012. 200 density 1ha Model Perspective View.

52.

Figure 52 : Group 3, 2012. 200 density 1ha Model Plan View.

53.

Figure 53 : Group 3, 2012. 200 density 1ha Model Sun Studies.

54.

Figure 54 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 64ha Model A Perspective.

55.

Figure 55 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 64ha Model A Plan.

56.

Figure 56 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 64ha Model A Sun Studies.

57.

Figure 57 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 64ha Model B Perspective.

58.

Figure 58 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 64ha Model B Plan.

59.

Figure 59 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 64ha Model B Sun Studies.

60.

Figure 60 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 256ha Model A Perspective.

61.

Figure 61 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 256ha Model A Plan.

62.

Figure 62 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 256ha Model A Sun Studies.

63.

Figure 63 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 256ha Model B Perspective.

64.

Figure 64 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 256ha Model B Plan.

65.

Figure 65 : Group 3, 2012. 200 Density 256ha Model B Sun Studies.

66.

Figure 66 : DTZ, 2008. Greenwich Peninsula, development orientated around open space. [pdf] Available at : <http://www.greenwichpeninsula.co.uk/en/Work%20here/~/media/B9838C7722B543A1B8801A7AC50BA312.ashx> [Accessed on 2 February 2012].

67.

Figure 67 : [Creative Open space designs] 2010. [image online] Available at : <http://newurbandesigner.com/2010/12/new-heden-the-city-made-of-green-roofs/> [Accessed on 12 February 2012].

68.

Figure 68 : [Creative Open space designs] 2012. [image online] Available at : <http://www.architecture-view.com/2010/10/11/amazing-namba-park-with-roof-garden/namba-park-green-roof-view/> [Accessed on 12 February 2012].

69.

Figure 69 : Group 3, 2012. Development orientated around open space & rooftop open space.

70.

Figure 70 : Group 3, 2012. 500 density 1ha Model Perspective View.

71.

FIgure 71 : Group 3, 2012. 500 density 1ha Model Plan View.

72.

Figure 72 : Group 3, 2012. 500 density 1ha Model Sun Studies.

73.

Figure 73 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 25ha Model A Perspective.

74.

Figure 74 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 25ha Model A Plan.

75.

Figure 75 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 25ha Model A Sun Study.

76.

FIgure 76 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 25ha Model B Perspective.

77.

Figure 77 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 25ha Model B Plan.

78.

Figure 78 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 25ha Model B Sun Study.

79.

Figure 70 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 256ha Model Perspective.

80.

Figure 80 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 256ha Model Perspective in detail.

81.

Figure 81 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 256ha Model Plan.

82.

Figure 82 : Group 3, 2012. 500 Density 256ha Model Sun Study.

83.

Figure 83 : The Refinery LLC, 2010. Open space provision. [image online] Available at : <http://www.thenewdomino.com/index.php?section=planning> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

84.

Figure 84 : The Refinery LLC, 2010. Building heights achieve the density & give character. [image online] Available at : <http://abduzeedo.com/new-domino-new-brooklyn> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

85.

Figure 85 : Group 3, 2012. Model shows the open space surrounding the building envelope.

86.

Figure 86 : Group 3, 2012. Building heights are very similar in model to those in New Domino.

87.

Figure 87 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 1ha Model Perspective.

88.

Figure 88 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 1ha Model Plan.

89.

Figure 89 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 1ha Model Sun Study.

90.

Figure 90 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 16ha Model Perspective.

91.

Figure 91 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 16ha Model Plan.

92,

Figure 92 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 16ha Model Sun Study.

93.

Figure 93 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 256ha Model Perspective.

94.

Figure 94 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 256ha Model Plan.

95,

Figure 95 : Group 3, 2012. 800 Density 256ha Model Sun Study.

96.

Figure 96 : Group 3, 2012. Model Summary.

97.

Figure 97 : Legacy Company, 2012. Olympic Park Site Map. [pdf] Available at :<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6135065/Legacy%20Company%20website/Chobham%20Manor%20brochure%20%28for%20Scribd%29.pdf> [Accessed on 20 February 2012].

98.

Figure 98 : Legacy Company, 2012. Perspective view of Cobham Manor. [pdf] Available at :<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6135065/Legacy%20Company%20website/Chobham%20Manor%20brochure%20%28for%20Scribd%29.pdf> [Accessed on 20 February 2012].

Matrix and Tables : 1.

Table 1 : Group 3, 2012. Child Yield for a Neighbourhood Population of 12,800.

Table 2 : Group 3, 2012. Spread Sheet of Neighbourhood Population.

Matrix 1 : Group 3, 2012. False Creek Environmental Quality Matrix.

Matrix 2 : Group 3, 2012. False Creek Environmental Quality Text Matrix.

Matrix 3 : Group 3, 2012. Greenwich Peninsula Environmental Quality Matrix.

Matrix 4 : Group 3, 2012. Greenwich Peninsula Environmental Quality Text Matrix.

Matrix 5 : Group 3, 2012. Central Havana Environmental Quality Matrix.

Matrix 6 : Group 3, 2012. Central Havana Environmental Quality Text Matrix.

Matrix 7 : Group 3, 2012. Sunny Valley Environmental Quality Matrix.

10.

Matrix 8 : Group 3, 2012. Sunny Valley Environmental Quality Matrix.

11.

Matrix 9 : Group 3, 2012. New Domino Environmental Quality Matrix.

12.

Matrix 10 : Group 3, 2012. New Domino Environmental Quality Text Matrix.

13.

Matrix 11 : Group 3, 2012. Kampung Kebalen Environmental Quality Matrix.

14.

Matrix 12 : Group 3, 2012. Kampung Kebalen Environmental Quality Text Matrix.

15.

Matrix 13 : Group 3, 2012. Environmental Quality - Cleanliness and Health.

16.

Matrix 14 : Group 3, 2012. Environmental Quality - Accessibility.

17.

Matrix 15 : Group 3, 2012. Environmental Quality - Social Inclusivity.

18.

Matrix 16 : Group 3, 2012. Environmental Quality - Daylight Sunlight.

Policy and Guidelines : 1.

Greater London Authority, 2011. Housing – Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance ; December 2011 – London Plan, 2011, Implementation Framework [pdf]. Available at : <http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/spg-housing-draft.pdf> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

Mayor of London, 2009. Open space strategies : Best practice guidance by CABE [pdf]. Available at : <http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/Documents/Documents/Publications/CABE/open-space-strategies.pdf> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

Greater London Authority, September 2008. Open Space Strategies : Best Practice Guidance : A Joint Consultation Draft by the Mayor of London and CABE Space [pdf]. Available at : < http://legacy.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/sds/open_space/oss-draft-sept08.pdf> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

Greater London Authority, August 2005. Data Management and Analysis Group : Child Yield [pdf]. Available at : <http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/7520/1/dmag-briefing-2005-25.pdf> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

Mayor Of London, July 2011. The London Plan : Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London [pdf]. Available at : <http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/The%20London%20Plan%202011.pdf> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2011. Draft National Planning Policy Framework: Consultation [pdf]. Available at : <http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/1951747.pdf> [Accessed on 9 February 2012].

City of Vancouver, October 2008. False Creek North Official Development Plan [pdf]. Available at : <http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/bylaws/odp/fcn.pdf> [Accessed on 6 February 2012].

BC Stats, December 2008. British Columbia Provincial Electoral District Profile for Vancouver-False Creek : Based on the 2006 Census [pdf]. Available at : <http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/StatisticsBySubject/Census/2006Census/ProvincialElectoralDistricts.aspx> [Accessed on 7 February 2012].

Case studies :

The Refinery LLC, 2010. Welcome to The New Domino!, [online] Available at : <http://www.thenewdomino.com/index.php?section=index.html> [Accessed on 1 February 2012].

Surabaya Municipal Government, 1986. Kampung Kebalen Improvement : Surabaya, Indonesia [pdf]. Available at : <http://www.akdn.org/architecture/pdf/0443_Ind.pdf> [Accessed on 2 February 2012].

Sergey Lancov, 2006. Sunny Valley, [online] Available at : <http://www.renovasg.com/projects/complex/sunny/> [Accessed on 2 February 2012].

[Southeast False Creek Planning] 2011. [online] Available at : <http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/southeast/index.htm> [Accessed on 6 February 2012].

Meridian Delta Limited, 2008. Greenwich Peninsula, [online] Available at : <http://www.greenwichpeninsula.co.uk/> [Accessed on 5 February 2012].

Coyula, M., and Hamberg, J., n.d. The case of Havana, Cuba [pdf]. Available at : <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/Global_Report/pdfs/Havana.pdf> [Accessed on 7 February 2012].

Books : 1.

Barton, H., Grant, M., and Guise, R., 2010. Shaping Neighbourhoods : For Local Health and Global Sustainability, 2nd ed. London and New York : Routlegde.

Littlefield, D., 2008. Metric Handbook : Planning and Design Data. Amsterdam : Architectural Press.

Rudlin, D. and Falk, N., 1999. Building the 21st Century Home :The Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood. Great Britain : Architectural Press.

Telford, T., 2007. Manual For Streets. Great Britain : Department for Transport.