A Tale of Two Squares by Tom Hudson

A Ta l e o f t w o S q u a r e s O p t i o n a l

a c t i v i t y

i n

t w o

p u b l i c

s p a c e s ,

i n

t w o

l o c a l

c i t i e s

A c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s

With thanks to my tutor Mark Emms for his very useful and concise feedback, and my parents for their good advice and encouragement throughout the study.

“Where city life was once a necessity and ta k e n f o r g r a n t e d, t o d ay i t i s t o a h i g h d e g r e e o p t i o n a l . Fo r t h a t v e r y r e a s o n … q u a l i t y i s a c r u c i a l pa r a m e t e r .” 1 Jan Gehl

A b s t r a c t

This study investigates what makes an urban space attract optional activity. ‘Optional activities’ 2 - a term coined by Urban Designer and Architect, Jan Gehl - consists of pursuits that are products of an individual’s choice rather than an underlying necessity. Optional activities - such as sitting down to read the paper - ‘are especially dependent on exterior physical conditions’ 3 and so the quality of the design of the space is of paramount importance. Acknowledging the fact that good weather plays a key part in the exterior physical conditions of a space, I wanted to explore and understand what makes the physical design of public spaces successful. This study analyses two key urban spaces in the heart of two local cities - Sheffield’s Peace Gardens and Manchester ’s Piccadilly Gardens. These are two spaces that share several commonalities. Perhaps most importantly, both spaces were a product of the Urban Renaissance and so were targeted towards helping attract inner city public life back into their respective city centres. Each city however, naturally differed in their approach to the design, expounding their own priorities and agendas. Manchester ’s international outlook known as the ‘Capital of the North’ clashed with Sheffield’s more modest pride of place. World-renowned architect Tadao Ando formed part of Manchester ’s international design team contributing a concrete pavilion to the public space. In the last few years, Tadao Ando’s pavilion has been the subject of some local media scrutiny due to the general public’s apparent disapproval of the slightly controversial part of the Public Space. Sheffield’s Peace Gardens on the other hand follows the city ’s character through the use of local materials and designers, emphasising the city ’s value of locality. The Peace Gardens is received positively by the public and forms a venue for several key events in the city ’s calendar such as Tramlines music festival. This study attempts to unravel the successes and failures of the two spaces in inviting optional activities. Through the analysis of human occupation, perception and then the design, a rigorous understanding of how these spaces offer quality environments for people to stay and linger will help to contribute towards a conclusion on what makes the spaces work and fail in attracting optional public life.

c o n t e n t s

N OT E S O N M et h odo logy I ntroduction P u b l i c S pa c e s U r b a n S q ua r e s T h e H u m a n S c a l e Co n t e x t i n t h e C i t y A na ly sis Co n t e x t............................ R e l ations h ip to C it y History o f t h e S paces How were t h e y D esigned O p t i o n a l A c t i v i t i e s........ wa l k ing standing sitting C onc lusion W h at w o r k s i n s u p p o r t i n g p u b l i c l i f e T h e i m p o r ta n c e o f d e s i g n i n g at t h e h u m a n s c a l e

Jan G e h lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 12 Q ua l it y C riteria

M o d i f i e d C r i t e r i a - F i rs t I t e r at i o n

C riteria f or t h is stud y

wa l k i n g s ta n d i n g sitting

p r ot e c t i o n T r a f f i c C r i m e a n d v i o l e n c e u n p l e a s a n t s e n s e s c o m f o r t wa l k i n g s ta n d i n g s i t t i n g v i e w s ta l k i n g p l ay i n g e n j oy m e n t scale p o s s i b i l i t i e s... c l i m at e p o s i t i v e s e n s o r y

ta l k i n g p l ay i n g

n o t e s

o n

m e t h o d o l o g y

Originally born in Greater Manchester, and studying in Sheffield, the two spaces of analysis were picked for their locality as well as the similarity in their relevance to the context of their respective city.

B AC KG R O U N D I N F O R M AT I O N C O LL EC T I O N Much of the research for this study involved reading into key works surrounding urban design and public spaces throughout history writted by notable figures in the urban design field, including Camillo Sitte, Jan Gehl and William H. Whyte.

“ a n y g oo d a n a l y s i s o f a p u b l i c s pa c e m u s t b e g i n b y s p e n d i n g t i m e t h e r e , wat c h i n g h o w t h e p l a c e i s u s e d , a n d r e c o r d i n g h o w i t f e e l s .” 4 Stephen Carr et al

I contacted relevant people associated with the designs of the spaces in order to gain a true understanding of the motives and design intentions of the spaces. I arranged an informal interview with Simon Ogden, the City Development Manager at Sheffield City Council and the client for the Peace Gardens development and exchanged emails with Warren Osbourne, the Director of Landscape Architecture at AECOM and the Landscape Architect behind the Piccadilly Gardens scheme.

A N A LY S I S The method of analysis stems from a set of criteria outlined and used by Gehl Architects. The criteria rang true with my intentions to explore the design of a public space through the observation of public life. However, due to the specificity on optional and recreational public life, it seemed appropriate to redefine the criteria with a particular focus on human activity. Therefore, this study uses a modified list of criteria to explore the influence of the two designs on the encouragement of optional, recreational activity. The figure on the left page shows how Gehl’s criteria was narrowed down to a criteria weighted towards human activity. The five criteria that are activities themselves became the priority criteria, whilst the remainder became sub-criteria which were to be explored within the five activities. However, after a pilot study, it was clear that the activities ‘ Talking ’ and ‘Playing ’ were less tangible activities to analyse. Due to the time restrictions of the study, I decided to explore these activities within the more substantial activities, ‘Walking ’, ‘Standing ’ and ‘Sitting ’ (see right). The analysis is structured in a comparative format so an understanding of where the two spaces differ in addressing certain conditions is clear. I felt that it was important to understand the two designs in relationship to their city, historically and at the time of the design. An initial design appraisal at a holistic scale was undergone prior to the analysis of specific human activity. This was important because it enabled me to appreciate the design of the spaces at a, masterplanning scale, a landscape design scale, and a human scale. Different scales that are intrisically connected and so should have equal importance.

alking

anding

sit

ting

C riteria o f ana ly sis

P iccadi l ly G ardens

P eace G ardens

Layout o f A na ly sis

C omparati v e summary / ana ly sis

As the study explores what attracts people to use public spaces, the analysis is based around people and so is driven by observational techniques. Photography and drawing are then used as analytical and communicative tools. All photographs and illustrations included in the study are property of the author unless otherwise stated. Within each activity, three different types of analysis are used (highlighted in diagram on the right): 1. Occupation Analysis 2. Perception Analysis 3. Design Analysis Occupation analysis is used to understand and describe how the spaces were used by pedestrians. From this occupation analysis, a key area of focus is then identified, for example ‘the most popular place to sit ’ and this identified area is analysed further through perception analysis and design analysis. Perception analysis explores the experience of inhabiting this identified area and then design analysis is used to explain why people choose to sit there, see Figure 2.

T y pe o f A na ly sis

O ccupation A na ly sis

P erception A na ly sis

Where do people walk/stand/sit? What is the most popular route/place?

What is it like to experience this route/place to stay?

D esign A na ly sis How does this route/place invite people to stay?

STUDY PERIOD The analysis took place over two days (3 hours per day) per space. According to weather forecasts, suitable days were picked to ensure some consistency in the collection of results, more details are given in ‘Limitations and Considerations’.

L I M I TAT I O N S + C O N S I D E R AT I O N S Weather - Due to the nature of the open urban square, and optional use depending heavily on the quality of the physical conditions, the weather plays a key part in influencing the occupancy of a space. Due to the time restrictions of this study, the analysis took place in March. At this time of year the climate is balanced and relatively mild and so the occupancy of the spaces would not be too heavily swayed by the weather conditions. The fact that the weather was not at its best perhaps gives a fairer reflection on how the space performs throughout the year. As well as this, it could be argued that the average weather gives more emphasis on the physical design of the space. The analysis was carried out on days with similar weather conditions in order to increase comparability and reliability of results. Day of the week / Time of Day – The day of the week and time of day also plays a big factor in influencing public space use. Therefore this study focuses the analysis of daytime activities, specifically on weekdays between the hours of 11:00 and 14:00. This allowed me to understand the spaces outside of rush hour times as well as during the cities’ lunch breaks. Due to the school Easter holidays, children and young families were also present during the time of analysis, giving a better representation of how the spaces accommodate for a range of demographics. Necessary or Optional activities? - In the occupancy analysis of the spaces it comes down to personal judgement whether someone is there out of choice or due to some overriding motive. Observational Techniques - When observing public life it is important to be, ‘an invisible non-participant who takes in the big picture without taking part in the event’ 5 to ensure natural, reliable results. However, in some situations it is not always possible to remain inconspicuous. Fountains - Unfortunately during the period of the study, the fountains of Piccadilly were out of action due to a technical faults, despite some reports stating that they will be fixed by Spring 2016. This means that the public space is not being analysed under its full potential. However, perhaps this portrays a lack of functionality and a fault in the design.

i n t r o d u c t i o n

This study is inspired by two recent trips to Copenhagen. The vast amount of inner city public life there seemed remarkable. People were choosing to use their public spaces. Perhaps being naively drawn in by the city ’s popular branding as the “happiest city in the world” I believed the city was far ahead in terms of quality public realm than that of the cities back home such as Sheffield and Manchester. On reflection, whether this view was reliable or not is debatable seeing as I was only there for a few, sunny and recreational days where many of the public space users could have been tourists. Nevertheless, the experience got me started in my ambition to explore what makes the design of public spaces attractive enough for occupants to choose to dwell in. This study focuses on the design of two public spaces in two local cities: Manchester ’s Piccadilly Gardens and Sheffield’s Peace Gardens.

P ub l ic spaces The topic of Public Spaces lies beneath an umbrella of various disciplines including philosophy, sociology and urban design. Due to its multidisciplinary nature, this has led to ‘stimulation and cross-fertilization, on the one hand, and to confusion and difficulty in communication, on the other.’ 6 In her book, ‘Designs on the Public’, Kristine Miller approaches the topic of public space from a landscape architecture and sociology background, she defines public spaces as ‘constellations of ideas, actions, and environments’ rather than ‘static physical entities’ 7 . Conversely - with a background in urban design and social science – in his book, ‘Convivial Urban Spaces’, Henry Shaftoe does consider the practical design aspects of public space, alongside the political and theoretical. These contrasting approaches from two different academic backgrounds hint at the scope of discussion possible on this subject. Similarly to Shaftoe, this study focuses specifically on how the physical designs of public spaces allow not only necessary functions such as circulation to occur, but also how they create moments of pleasure that attract people to gather and linger voluntarily.

B U S T L I N G P U B L I C L I F E o utsi d e o f t h e r o y a l D a nis h P l a y h o use , C o pen h a gen

U rban S quares The form of public space is also broad and amorphous. Public space can be seen to cover ‘anywhere that is universally accessible to citizens and could therefore include everything from national parks to town hall foyers.’ 8 Being drawn by what makes occupants choose to stay in a space, I naturally came to focus on the urban square. The purpose of the urban square is not only for necessary functions but is also designed to encourage optional activity such as recreation and relaxation within the hustle of the city centre. As Jan Gehl mentions in ‘Cities for People’, ‘psychologically the square signals staying… the square says: “stop and see what ’s happening here.”’ 9 In his book ‘City Planning according to Artistic Principles’, Camillo Sitte talk about the importance of urban squares/ plazas and – on reflecting on ancient cities – says, ‘[i]n those days the main plazas were of primary importance to the life of every city, because such a great deal of public life took place in them’ 10 . Initially published in 1889, Sitte approaches the topic prior to the modern movement and the introduction of the motor car, but his dialect expresses how urban squares bear a historical, symbolic civic importance. Nowadays, under capitalist influences, public urban space is often viewed in terms of its financial value and so urban spaces ‘where people can just loaf around is not seen as a financial priority’ 11 and so the planning dimension of human experience in many cases has been overshadowed by other planning dimensions such as traffic circulation or daylight levels in tall buildings. 12 As well as exploring what makes the chosen public spaces attract optional activity, this study aims to comment on the value of implementing the human scale as a key criteria in the design of urban space.

T h e Human S ca l e Jan Gehl described by Lord Richard Rogers as ‘the doyen of public space design’ 13 became an important point of reference in this study, partly through his connections to Copenhagen’s regeneration of inner city public life in the last half century, but mainly due to his prevalence within the field of urban design. His persuasive publications highlight the importance of designing at the ‘human scale’. This emphasis on the human scale stems from his belief that ‘[w]e definitely know more about good habitats for mountain gorillas, Siberian tigers, or panda bears than we do know about a good urban habitat for Homo sapiens’ 14 . However, Gehl’s publications tend to address the wider topic of city planning rather than the design of individual urban spaces. It is Gehl’s approach to the changing use of public urban spaces ‘from necessary uses to optional, recreational uses’ that interests me most. ‘ This changing role increases the need for appropriate, well-designed places in which people choose to spend time, and that provide a place for people to relax, socialise and be part of urban life.’ 15 It is this viewpoint that this study explores in the analysis of the two chosen urban spaces. How do the designs cater for this changing role for public spaces by inviting the pedestrian to linger, relax and spend recreational time there? C onte x t in t h e C it y As mentioned in the methodology, the analysis is based on a redefinition of Gehl’s 12 Quality criteria. The criteria used focused on human activity but considered Gehl’s wider criteria within these topics. As well as these human activity criteria, I wanted to explore the context in which the spaces had been designed. In Image of the City, urban planner Kevin Lynch said ‘Nothing is experienced by itself, but always in relation to its surroundings, the sequences of events leading up to it, the memory of past experiences.’ 16 Cities have their own identity, culture, economy and society. Like civic architecture, ‘Public spaces often come to symbolize the community and the larger society or culture in which it exists.’ 17 Urban spaces therefore, should represent the city ’s interests and contribute towards the city ’s identity. Furthermore, the analysis of the context was to be used to help understand key design decisions that ultimately informed the attractiveness of the spaces and their effectiveness in inviting optional activity. Despite being geographically close to one another, Manchester and Sheffield responded very differently in the design of their public spaces to objectives that were not too dissimilar. Both products of the urban renaissance, the two spaces were part of wider masterplans to encourage private investment and economic activity in the area, as well as stimulate public life within their city centres. With an understanding of how the spaces connect to the city and how they were designed, this study attempts to comprehend the successes and failures of the spaces in supporting optional and recreational public life.

REFERENCES

Jan Gehl, ‘Public spaces for a changing public life’, in Open Space People Space, ed. by Catherine Ward Thompson and Penny Travlou, (Oxon, Taylor and Francis, 2007) pp. 3.

Jan Gehl, Life between buildings, (Copenhagen: Arkitektens Forlag, 1996) pp. 11.

Ibid, pp. 11.

Stephen Carr et al, Public Space, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) pp. xii.

Jan Gehl & Birgitte Svarre, How to Study Public Life, (Washington, Island Press, 2013) pp. 5.

Stephen Carr et al, Public Space, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) pp. ix.

Jan Gehl & Anne Matan, ‘Two perspectives on public spaces’, Building Research and Information, 37:1, (2009), <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09613210802519293#.Vj_gUvnhCUk>, [accessed 6 September 2015]. 7

Henry Shaftoe, Convivial Urban Spaces, (London: Earthscan, 2008) pp. 75.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 38.

Camillo Sitte, City planning according to artistic principles, Rudolf Wittkower (New York: Random House, Inc. 1965) pp. 5.

Henry Shaftoe, Convivial Urban Spaces, (London: Earthscan, 2008) pp. 6.

Ibid, pp. 6.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. ix.

14 American Society of Landscape Architects, ‘Interview with Jan Gehl’, American Society of Landscape Architects, <https://www.asla.org/ContentDetail.aspx?id=31346> [accessed 12 March 2016] para 4. 15 Jan Gehl & Anne Matan, ‘Two perspectives on public spaces’, Building Research and Information, 37:1, (2009), <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09613210802519293#.Vj_gUvnhCUk>, [accessed 6 September 2015]. 16

Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City, (United States of America: Joint Center for Urban Studies, 1960) pp. 1.

Stephen Carr et al, Public Space, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) pp. 23.

P iccadi l ly G ardens

P eace G ardens

C omparati v e summary / ana ly sis

C o n t e x t

Co n n e c t i o n

P i c c a d i l l y

t o

G a r d e n s

c i t y

Lo c at i o n 10

Located at the centre of Manchester City Centre, the Piccadilly Gardens lies a 5 minute walk from Piccadilly Station and at the meeting point of several districts, including the Northern Quarter and the Retail Quarter.

7 9

r E TA I L q UA RT E R

N ort h ern Q uarter

8 5

M a n c h e s t e r at t h e t i m e Manchester ’s political attitudes had changed significantly changed in the 1980s, to entrepreneurial driven and commercial ‘chauvinism’ 17 . In the mid-1990’s, competition from the massive out-of-town shopping centre, the Trafford Centre was causing Manchester ’s inner city public life to dwindle. To make matters worse, in 1996, M a nche ste r ’s ci ty ce nt re suffered la rge a mounts of da m a ge fol l owi ng an I RA bom b atta c k. Fol l owi ng the ex pl osi o n, an internati ona l de si gn com peti ti on wa s hel d for the maste r p l a n p rop osa l for th e wh ol e o f the city ce ntre wh i ch i ncl ude d the re -de sig n of Piccadilly G a rde ns. EDAW (now AECOM) was the triumphant practice. Two key targets of the wider maste r p l a n we re to attra ct e conom i c activity and e n ha nce th e reta i l core . P i cca di l l y Gardens woul d for m a key p i e ce of the Masterplan p uzz l e . T he whol e re ge n e rati on o f the city wo u l d h ave b e e n sp u rre d o n by th e forthcomin g C o m m o nwe a l th Ga m e s th at wa s to be held the re i n 2002.

P iccadi l ly gardens B usiness D istrict

3 P iccadi l ly S tation 1

M a n c h e s t e r c i t y c e n t r e 1:25000 Taken from 2015 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:5000

0 N ort h ern quarter R etai l quarter

centra l business district

50M

F i g.1 - p i cc a d i l ly g a r d e n s 1:2000

100M

B us interc h ange

T ram S top

Tadao ando’s concrete pav i l ion

Ke y facts Project completion

2002

O ne P iccadi l ly

‘C atwa l k’

Fountains

Designer EDAW/ARUP/Tadao Ando

P iccadi l ly B ou l evard

Historic S tatue o f Q ueen Victoria

Area

‘B o s q u e’ - U r b a n e d g e

retai l

Client Manchester City Council

11,500 sq.m

Source: Digimap.co.uk

Cost Approx. £10 million Source: en.wikipedia.org

P iccadi l ly S tation

connecting piccadi l ly station to commerce

4 2

R e s p o n s e to t h e c i t y According to the Landscape Architect of the project Warren Osbourne, ‘Piccadilly Gardens formed an important part of the public realm network from the Arndale Centre to Piccadilly Station.’ 18 Adhering to the City ’s Political agenda based around entrepreneurialism, the gardens were to help drive economic activity. The gardens would form a key space in the city and would connect the various districts including Retail Quarter, Northern Quarter and the Business District as shown in the diagram on the right. Described ‘in the designers’ words as a “movement hub”’ 19 the design’s intentions immediately seem to preclude any significant importance to provide a quality place to stay.

Bot h spac es lie in t h e heart o f their cities and cont ribute towards a w id er masterplan to enco urage econ om ic ac t iv it y in t heir city centres. The fact that bot h spac es tap into key pedestrian ro utes within the c it ies t ies in w it h u rbanist William H Why te’s belief t hat ‘To dr aw t hem, (people) a space should tap a st r ong flow of t hem’ 2 4 The c ities start to differ m o re in their situatio n at the t im e. Wh ilst t hey were bo th battling against inner c it y dec line, t h e IRA b om b in Manchester required a m ore intense and u rgent respo nse than in Sheffield. Man c h ester ’s p olit ical agendas at the time meant t hat were driven by econo mic activity and having

P e a c e

C o n t e x t

G a r d e n s

Co n n e c t i o n

The site for Sheffield’s Peace Gardens is right in the heart of the City Centre, overlooked by Sheffield Town Hall and walking distance from the Crucible Theatre.

S h e f f ie l d Ha l l am U ni v ersit y

U ni v ersit y o f S h e f f ie l d

S h e f f i e l d at t h e t i m e peace gardens s h e f f ie l d mid l and station

2 7 moor f oot

S h e f f i e l d c i t y c e n t r e 1:25000

F i g. 2 - p e ac e g a r d e n s 1:2000

Ke y facts

50M

Town Ha l l 1 O ne way road 2

1998+2002 (2 part)

S t. Pau l’s Hote l 3

Client Sheffield City Council

winter gardens 4

Designer Sheffield City Council Area Approx. 5600 sq.m

Source: Digimap.co.uk

Cost/Value Approx. £7.5 million

Source: ‘ The Gold Route’ Leaflet, see Bibliography

t he reputation as ‘the ca pi ta l of the nor th’ the c i t y possessed an inte r nati ona l outl ook . T hi s wo ul d o nly have be have be e n spur re d on by th e oncom i ng Commonwealth Ga me s. T h i s gl oba l pe rsona cl as he s w i th Sheff ield’s e m ph a si s on l oca l i ty. T he ch o s e n desig n teams reflect th i s di ffe re nce i n atti tude s at t he t ime with Manche ste r ’s i nte r n ati ona l col l a borat i o n between EDAW, A r up a n d Ta da o A n do a s op po s e d to the City Counci l de si gn te a m i n S heff i e l d. A further noticable di ffe re nce wa s that M a nch e ste r ’s masterplanning incl ude d a l a rge a m ount of publ i c t ransport inf rastructure that i mme di atl ey sur rounde d Pi ccadilly Gardens , a s oppose d to the si ngl e one - way road bordering the we st si de of Pe a ce G a rd e ns.

cast l egate

100M

During the early nineties recession, a City Centre Masterplan was drawn up in 1994 by Allies and Morrison ‘forming the basis of a bid to the Millenium Lottery fund for ‘Heart of the City ’’. 20 The ‘Heart of the City ’ was an identified area of importance, including the Town Hall, City Hall and the Crucible Theatre. Sheffield’s Heart of the City was suffering too attract public life, partly due to competition from Meadowhall Shopping Centre taking a lot of retail trade away from the centre, but also because the road network was strangling out pedestrian activity and the centre was losing footfall. Allies and Morrison were initially the team picked to masterplan the development of the heart of the city but it was later rejected over the public’s disapproval of the proposal to turn the Peace Gardens into a simple hard paved square in the continental style. The aims of the master plan were to attract economic activity and create a sense of place. 21

Taken from 2015 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:5000

Project completion

c i t y

Lo c at i o n

C ast l egate

t o

R e s p o n s e to t h e c i t y r e ta i l a x i s ‘Steel route’

R aised l awns 5 Fountains 6 U rban t h res h o l d space 7 retai l 8

University axis ‘gold route’ U ni v ersit y of s h e f f ie l d

S h e f f ie l d Ha l l am U ni v ersit y

A focal point from which to build out from

Foca l point o f pedestrian a x is

In a bid to try and counter the inner city deprivation, the council began by identifying two pedestrian axis across the city, the retail axis between Castlegate and Moorfoot (later named the Steel Route), and the university axis between the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University (later named the Gold Route). 22 Where these pedestrian axis cross over is the location of Peace Gardens (see diagram on the left). Peace Gardens was to became a focal point, from which two strong pedestrianised routes would be connected. The council identified this core as the beginning of the regneration of the city. From this core the council could build outwards, regenerating the ‘Heart of the City ’. 23

moor f oot

C o n t e x t

P i c c a d i l l y

H i s t o r y

o f

P i c c a d i l l y

G a r d e n s

g a r d e n s

A ndo ’s concrete pav i l ion a l so h e l ps c lose down t h e space at ground l ev e l

1 9 6 0

one P iccadi l ly

Taken from 1900 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:1250

1 8 9 0

Taken from 1890 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:250

1 9 5 4

Taken from 1960 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:1000

1 9 6 0

Taken from 1960 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:750

Taken from 2015 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:500

2 0 0 2

n o w

M a n c h e s t e r R Oya l i n f i r m a r y

sunken island surrounded by traffic

P i c c a d i l ly g a r d e n s n o w

An old civic building.

The gardens that replaced the old infirmary were sunken below street level, presumably to articulate the old footprint of the former Infirmary and create a sense of enclosure within the gardens. However, by the 1960s, cars and trams surrounded the gardens creating quite an isolated and uninviting space.

To help fund the project, One Piccadilly had to be incorporated into the scheme. The building is made up predominantly of offices with cafes and restaurants at ground level. The building was to express the commitment of the city to the area, to attract private investment. 25

This painting by Lowry depicts a pleasant inner city space where people can walk their dogs, stop and chat and sit and rest in the city. Painted in 1954 this would have been prior to roads dominated by traffic that came later, creating an isolated island.

F i g. 3 - p i cc a d i l ly g a r d e n s, l.s lo w ry, 1954

The inclusion of One Piccadilly changes the perception of the space considerably in comparison with its predecessor. When considering the built edge of the previous design shown by the diagram above the building closes down the sense of openness in the space. At ground level Tadao Ando’s concrete pavilion also helps in reducing the space.

Bo t h d e s i g n s b r e a k away f r o m t h e i r p r e d e c e s s o r s It is interest in g t hat bot h urban spac es lie in the fo o tprint o f an o ld bu ilding w it h t he follow ing iterat ions of each space clearly relating to t he form er foot print . However, at t h e t urn o f the millenium, the two desig ns b roke away from t heir p redec esso rs in fo rm. Perhaps a sense of a fresh start is broug ht about by t he t ime perio d. In Manchester ’s case it is likely t he c it y was also looking to show it was po sitively m ov in g for ward after t h e dam age t h at the IRA bo mb caused. This m akes sense w hen considering t he slic k, co ntempo rar y fo rm o f the new Pic cadilly Garden s p lan over it s predecesso r. P i c c a d i l ly G a r d e n ’ s c l o s e s d o w n i t s o p e n s pa c e , P e a c e Garden’s increases it

Source: see end of chapter

T he inc lusion of O n e Pic cadilly sh ut s down the physical o pen space in Man c h ester, w hilst t he dem olit ion of the ‘Eg g Box ’ o pens up a pedest rian corridor in Sheffield.

P e a c e

C o n t e x t

G a r d e n s

H i s t o r y

o f

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

1 9 7 0 S h e f f ie l d Town Ha l l

S t. Pau l’s C h urc h

I ncreased P edestrianised networ k as part o f ‘G o l d R oute’

Taken from 1890 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:500

1 9 0 0

Taken from 1960 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:750

1 9 6 0

Taken from 2015 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:500

Taken from 1960 OS Digimap, downloaded at 1:750

1 9 7 0

2 0 0 2

n o w

S t. P a u l ’ s c h u r c h

Temporary Gardens

E g g Bo x , 1 9 7 7

English Garden motif

I n t h e 1 9 3 0 ’s p l a n s w e r e m a d e t o e x t e n d t h e t o w n h a l l a n d s o S t . P a u l ’s C h u r c h was demolished. H o w e v e r, with the a p p r o a c h o f w a r, t h e To w n H a l l e x t e n s i o n w a s c a n c e l l e d . 26

A temporary garden was laid in the site. The new space became known as the ‘Peace Gardens’ after the Munich A g r e e m e n t i n 1 9 3 8 . 27 T h e d e s i g n s e e m s t o r e fe r e n c e i t s p r e d e c e s s o r ’s p a t h s which do not seem to acknowledge any pedestrian desire lines.

T h e ‘ E g g b o x ’, a m o d e r n e x t e n s i o n o f t h e To w n H a l l w a s c o n s t r u c t e d i n 1 9 7 7 . The bold design replaced several roads, increasing the pedestrianised network. Due to the old church wall on the west of the site, the space became quite antis o c i a l a n d h o s t i l e . 28

After the drawing up of the masterplan in 1994, the Egg Box was planned to be vacated by and demolished by the council which opened up a large area of the site to be offered up to the market.

Bo t h d e s i g n s c h oo s e t o r e ta i n g a r d e n s f o r m at Despite the two obvi ous cha n ge s i n for m , both ci t i e s re j e c te d a m o re European plaza sty l e of squa re but opte d to reta i n t he ‘garde ns ’ format of their pre d e ce ssors. T he for m a l def i ni t i o n o f garde ns i s ‘o rnamental gr oun ds l ai d o ut fo r publ i c e njoy m e nt a n d r e c r e a t i o n ’ 3 0 . Landscaping within both spa ce s i n cor porate s zone s o f g ras s , a go o d decision according to W i l l i a m H W hy te who sa l ute d g ra s s fo r be i ng ‘so adaptable; f in e fo r si tti ng, nappi ng, sunbath i n g … i t p r ov i d e s a limitless c hoice of arrange m e nts.’ 3 1

After a number of public consultations in t h e f o r m o f e x h i b i t i o n s i n a l o c a l g a l l e r y, an english garden motif was decided upon f o r t h e s p a c e . 29 P e r h a p s t h e s e l e c t i o n o f the traditional garden form is connected to the unpopularity of the recently d e m o l i s h e d m o d e r n - s t y l e ‘ E g g B o x ’.

This postcard shows the former Peace Gardens in front of the Town Hall and its new Extension, the ‘Egg Box ’. One of the main issues with the design of the previous gardens was the lack built in desire lines. The paths did not respond to where people wanted to walk.

Bo t h s pa c e s b e c o m e l e s s s u r r o u n d e d b y C a r s Pi ccadilly Gardens l i e s r i ght by a l a rge tra nspo r t i nte rc hange s o althoug h there is n o l on ge r roa ds e n ci rcl i ng the garde ns , t raff i c borders much of t h e publ i c spa ce . Pe a ce G a rde ns o n t he o t he r hand o pens up to pede str i a ns fol l owi ng the de mol i ti o n o f t he ‘ E g g B ox ’ resulting in a sing l e one way roa d to th e We st of t he S pa c e .

Former P eace G ardens wit h ‘E gg box’, postcard

Source: see end of chapter

C o n t e x t

P i c c a d i l l y

G a r d e n s

Ke y p h y sica l considerations I n i t i a l

d e s i g n

a p p r a i s a l Form The form of the landscape is comprised of a geometric language which appears to be directly informed by striking paths that carve through the landscape. The slickness of this finish portrays an intent of the city to move away from its Industrial heritage.

S o f t L a n d s c a p e - 87% H a r d L a n d s c a p e - 13%

165m Longest span

S ca l e and E dge The scale of the Piccadilly Gardens is not immediatley identifiable. Tadao Ando’s concrete pavilion and One Piccadilly create distinct active edges at ground level but the other edge conditions are not so clear. This is a likely response to the overly defined edges of the predecessor - sunken and bordered by railings - that resulted in ‘a very antisocial space’ 32 that was too enclosed. Therefore, this design encourages openness, blurring the boundary between the surrounding streets and the space. The diagrams on the right show key edge conditions within the space. Interestingly, the size of the landscaped area of Piccadilly Gardens is a relatively small proportion of the outdoor space bounded by buildings. This is most likely due to the amount of tranport infrastructure encircling the space.

B u i l d i n g E d ge / ‘O u t d oo r r oom’

B ui l ding o v er one store y h ig h

Ac t i v e e d ges d i r ec t ly o n to t h e spac e

topograp h y

C a f e / R estaurant

R etai l and C ommerce

The topographical moves also work to reduce any potential areas of isolation with the design flattening itself out. M ateria l it y a n d d e t a i l i n g

S ee S ection B e low

It seems that due to other physical aspects of the design that aim to improve the space’s accessibility and openness, the contrasting materiality used seemed to be the tool to help draw people in and create a sense of place.

KEY

T r a n spo rt Ne t w o r k s

pedestrian desire l ines

E dges t h at de f ine space Ve h icu l ar circu l ation

Ke y di f f erences between t h e two spaces

T ram circu l ation

G rass

P iccadi l ly gardens design appraisa l

H a r d s u r fac e - u r b a n e d g e

1. Mo v e m e n t h u b v s T r a d i t i o n a l E n l i g s h G a r d e n There is a clear difference in the two designs’ ambitions. In a bid to perform as a ‘movement hub’ the design of Piccadilly Gardens emphasises circulation routes by heavily articulating paths as they slice through the space and dictate the rest of the landscape. The design of Peace Gardens on the other hand emphasises the creation two distinctive environments, with the generous, urban hard surfaced area protecting a sunken, traditional garden space where paths subtley manouvre around the defined grass areas. 2. L egi b ilit y These two approaches to the form of the design create two different levels of legibility. According to Kevin Lynch, ‘a distinctive and legible environment not only offers security but also heightens the potential depth and intensity of human experience.’ 35 Due to the overlapping geometric forms of Piccadilly gardens, contrasting with the symmetry of the traditional ‘English Garden’ Lynch’s works would suggest that there would be a difference in human experience. Piccadilly ’s geometric forms are clear enough in plan view, but as the next section reveals, at ground level, these paths were not so comprehendible. The legibility of the space also relates to materiality used. Peace Gardens’ clear palette of materials ties the space to its immediate surroundings, whereas Piccadilly ’s choice of materials contrast to the surrounding streets, with defined paths jutting out into the city marking the space’s territory.

12 S andstone p l ant beds

P e a c e

C o n t e x t

G a r d e n s Ke y p h y sica l considerations I n i t i a l

Form

S o f t L a n d s c a p e - 68% H a r d L a n d s c a p e - 32%

95m longest span

d e s i g n

a p p r a i s a l

The form of the gardens is inspired by the traditional ‘English Garden’. The soft landscape possesses a legible symmetry that creates a clear focal point in the fountains which is orientated away from traffic. The hard urban landscape then wraps itself around the edge of the gardens acting acting as a generous threshold from the traffic. The form of the overall space appears to physically turn its back on the road, celebrating the pedestrian environment. S ca l e and E dge

B u i l d i n g E d ge / ‘O u t d oo r r oom’

The scale of the space is defined by the buildings around it and the road to the West. The size of the soft gardens takes up around two thirds of the design, balanced out by more urban hard landscaping. The result is two distinctive environments balancing themselves within one whole space. The form of the hard landscape wrapping itself around the gardens space reduces the scale of the gardens and heightens the sense of enclosure. The urban landscape also allows active edges in surrounding buildings to spill out into the space. Jan Gehl credits soft edges for having ‘significant influence on activity patterns and the attractiveness of city space.’ 33

Ac t i v e e d ges d i r ec t ly o n to t h e spac e C a f e / R estaurant

R etai l and C ommerce

Topograp h y Responding to the natural topography of the site, the design uses the step down in height to articulate the boundary of the soft garden landscape. Along with the hard landscaping, this step down helps to heighten a sense of enclosure within the gardens. S ee S ection B e low

materia l it y and D etai l ing

T r a n spo rt Ne t w o r k s

The materiality was sensitively picked, with the ground paving matching the surrounding pedestrian network, stitching the project into the site. The sandstone used throughout is sourced locally from Stoke Hall.The water features that are inspired by Sheffield’s steel heritage run from the top of the steps down the grass banks towards the main fountain. 34

KEY pedestrian desire l ines

Ve h icu l ar circu l ation

G rass

3. E nc lo sure v S O p enness - Pr ot ec t i o n + E nj oymen t Edge conditions naturally influence the sense of scale and enclosure within the space. According to Urban design theorists, the scale of a space is highly important with guidelines suggesting 100m spans for large squares. 36 In Piccadilly Gardens, despite the inclusion of One Piccadilly and Ando’s Pavilion closing down the space, the building edge bounding the space is far greater, almost double than the open space in Peace Gardens. Interestingly, both predecessors to the designs became places of hostility and anti-social behaviour. Piccadilly Gardens attempted to correct this previous ‘anti-social’ space by leveling out the topography and opening the space up to its surroundings, articulating its edges more subtley through materiality and form. Peace Gardens on the other hand evidently aimed to retain a sense of enclosure within its garden space through defining it topographically and spatially - alongside the hard surfaced landscape. To try and prevent issues of isolation, the garden edge is perforated by paths towards the fountains. Noting the significantly larger amount of transport infrastructure included around the Piccadilly Gardens scheme it immediately appears that the edges of the space should be defined enough to reduce audible and visual pollution. P r i o r to t h e a n a ly s i s, t h e s e k e y d i f f e r e n c e s a r e u s e d to h e l p e x p l a i n t h e pat t e r n s o f p e d e s t r i a n o c c u pat i o n o f t h e t w o s pa c e s.

P eace gardens design appraisa l

H a r d s u r fac e - u r b a n e d g e

Water Feature

Water Fountain

REFERENCES

Gwyndaf Williams, ‘Rebuilding the entrepreneurial city: the master planning response to the bombing of Manchester City Centre’, Planning and Design, 27, (2000) <http://epb.sagepub.com.eresources.shef.ac.uk/ content/27/4/485.full.pdf+html> [30 November 2015] pp. 488

Warren Osbourne (personal communication, 28 October, 2015).

Rowland Byass, ‘From public garden to corporate plaza: Piccadilly Gardens and the new civic landscape’, Journal of Landscape Architecture, 5, (2010), pp. 78. 19

Simon Ogden (personal communication, 14 October, 2015).

Ibid (14 October, 2015).

IL l u s t r a t i o n s

n o t

o w n e d

b y

t h e

a u t h o r

F i g. 1 - P i cc a d i l ly G a r d e n s, <https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Piccadilly+Gardens,+Manchester+M60+1AY/@53.480912,2.239108,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x487bb1bf73100639:0x67a100e10acc5a25> [accessed 28 October, 2015] F i g. 2 - P e ac e G a r d e n s, <https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Peace+Gardens/@53.3799395,-1.4719797,650m/data=!3m2!1e3 !4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x4879828226cded91:0xea49b45a2bfa74c9> F i g. 3 - p i cc a d i l ly g a r d e n s, l.s lo w ry, 1954 <http://www.artfund.org/assets/art-news/2016/lowry-works/piccadilly-gardens-1956-lowry.jpg> Fig. 4 - Former P eace G ardens wit h ‘E gg box’, postcard < https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/563442603352744031/>

25 Rowland Byass, ‘From public garden to corporate plaza: Piccadilly Gardens and the new civic landscape’, Journal of Landscape Architecture, 5, (2010), pp. 77. 26

Simon Ogden (personal communication, 14 October, 2015).

Ibid (14 October, 2015).

30 Oxford Dictionaries, ‘garden’, Oxford Dictionaries, <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ english/garden> [accessed 13 February 2016]. 31

William H. Whyte, City (New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1988), pp. 123.

Warren Osbourne (personal communication, 28 October, 2015).

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010), pp. 81.

Simon Ogden (personal communication, 14 October, 2015).

Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City, (United States of America: Joint Center for Urban Studies, 1960), pp. 5

Henry Shaftoe, Convivial Urban Spaces, (London: Earthscan, 2008) pp. 74.

f o r m a t

o f

A n a l y s i s

Human Scale

S ta n d i n g

Wa l k i n g

Ta l k i n g

lki

n g a n d P l ay i

Sitting

Ta l k i n g

‘M o v ement Hub’ v s E ng l is h G arden

Legibi l it y

E nc losure

dif ey

feren

ces in the s pa

‘M ov eme n t H u b’ v s E n g l i s h G a r d e n E m p h a s i s o n d e f i n i n g pat h s Emphasis on defining place

S t r at e g i c / M a s t e r p l a n s c a l e

Leg i b i l i t y Views Fo r m M at e r i a l i t y a n d D e ta i l i n g

Landscape design scale

E n c los u r e

Scale To p o g r a p h y C l im at e (P o si t ive a nd neg at ive) Traffic Crime and Violence pleasant and UnPleasant Senses

A n a l y s i s

Wa l k i n g

D e f i n i t i o n o f wa l k i n g With observing the activity of walking, I found it difficult to decipher the motive behind the pedestrianâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s walk as an optional or necessary activity. Due to the time-frame of the study, I decided to record all walking activity on the map over the three hour period over each day in order to decipher a primary walking route in each space. This key route was then used for further analysis in exploring how it succeeds or fails to attract people to stay.

Wa l k ing in P iccadi l ly

B oundary o f A na ly sis

A n a l y s i s

‘Regardless of the purpose, a walk in a city space is a “forum” for the social activities that take place along the way as an integral part of pedestrian activities.... Walking is a form of transport, but is also a potential beginning or an occasion for many other activities.’ 37 Jan Gehl

B oundary o f A na ly sis

Wa l k inng in P eace G ardens

P i c c a d i l l y

W a l k i n g

O c c u p a t i o n a l

G a r d e n s

A n a l y s i s

L e g i b i l i t y - D e f i n i n g s pac e s f o r m o v i n g a n d s pac e s f o r s tay i n g

N ort h ern Q uarter

From abo v e, routes t h roug h t h e space are c l ear and l egib l e

At ground l ev e l, t h is l egibi l it y is ev ident ly lost w h ere t h e edges are unde f ined wit h areas o f t h e grass l awns worn away

W h ere t h e edges step up to ma k e secondary seating, t h e grass is in better condition s h owing t h e importance o f t h e edge condition

T ransport interc h ange

KEY Wa l k ing Wa l k i n g w i t h c o mpa n y (Ta l k i n g)

Given the importance of the space functioning as a ‘movement hub’, it was interesting that the heavily articulated paths were not always followed by pedestrians. There were several instances where people took their own desire lines across the grass areas. The patterns of people walking with company or walking on the phone tended to subtely differ to those walking on their own. Pedestrians that walked whilst talking to others tended to walk at a slower pace and seemed to meander around the space a more than individuals. The fact that they were drawn to walk through the space shows that despite the surrounding of transport infrastructure, the space provdes some respite from the sound pollution.

O ccupation P l an f or Wa l k ing Note the results focus only on routes through the public space

‘C atwa l k’

The two spaces provide safe routes to walk, away from the dangers of traffic. Both of the most popular routes cut directly through the heart of the respective gardens space by the fountains. The main point of comparison was surrounding the fact that the paths of Piccadilly were not being followed as rigorously as in Peace Gardens, which meant that the grass areas were in much worse condition. This comes down to legibility of the path edges and legibility of the materiality. When it came to people walking and talking, in both spaces, the pedestrians that walked whilst talking seemed to happily do so without too much restriction. L egi b ilit y of Edg e s

Most commonly used route

From above, Piccadilly Gardens’ paths evidently inform the landscape but this legibility is lost at ground level. Whilst most pedestrians stuck to the paths, it was not uncommon for people to make their own paths over the grass suggesting that the built prescribed paths do not fully represent the pedestrian desire lines. It also shows an issue with the definition of the edge of the grass. Where the grass met the paths at the same level the grass was eroded away showing that the edge is not defined enough. Peace Gardens on the other hand raises its grass lawns up to seat level, protecting them from flows of walking, bordering them with the same

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

W a l k i n g

O c c u p a t i o n a l

A n a l y s i s

U p towards C it y Ha l l and dev ens h ire green

R aised grass l awns wit h c h un k y stone borders h eav i ly de f ine t h e edge and protect t h e stay ing area f rom t h e mo v ement area

From abo v e, t h e stay ing areas o f grass are c l ear ly articu l ated o v er t h e mo v ement areas

N etwor k o f pedestrianised spaces ending at t h e train station

T h e B o l d de f ined edges a l so k nit in to f urnis h ings t h roug h out t h e space, creating a co h esi v e en v ironment

KEY O ccupation P l an f or Wa l k ing Note the results focus only on routes through the public space

Wa l k ing Wa l k i n g w i t h C o mpa n y (Ta l k i n g)

chunky sandstone used throughout the design. Whilst acknowledging that the quality of grass is also heavily influenced by maintenance, this difference in edge conditions seems to have a noticeable impact.

In Peace Gardens where staying appeared to take priority over movement, there is less visual emphasis on the circulation. In Peace Gardens, there was a much clearer sense of a which route was favoured. The path forms part of the Gold Route which takes people from the train station in the East up through to Devonshire Green in the West of the Centre.

D ominant wa l kway

L egi b ilit y of mat e rialit y In ‘ Townscape’ Gordon Cullen said, ‘[o]ne of the most powerful agents for unifying and joining the town is the floor’ 38 . Matching the pedestrian pavements around Sheffield’s city centre, Peace Gardens’ paths follow the same stone paving. This cohesive strategy to materiality then emphasises the grass as the priority as well as creating a very legible environment. Piccadilly Gardens on the other hand uses materiality to articulate its paths over its open grass lawns. The Catwalk for instance is made up of Blue Welsh slate, contrasting with the pavement on the North of the site as well as other paths inside the gardens. This highlights the two designs’ differences in design priorities. The differences highlighted come down to strategic design priorities. Piccadilly emphasises its paths through form and materiality, whilst Peace Gardens emphasises its grass lawns through defined edges and a consistent material palette on the ground.

Most commonly used route

P i c c a d i l l y

W a l k i n g

P e r c e p t i o n

A n a l y s i s

C l ear T h res h o l d M ar k er

E x p e ri e nc e of t h e p e d e strian

G a r d e n s

C it y tower

Loud noise from buses and pedestrians crossing the road drown any incentive to talk creating a feeling of exposure. The slate path of the ‘Catwalk’ juts out towards the Northern Quarter, directing the line of vision forward, into the space.

The view of the Gardens starts to open up slightly. Railings ahead define the edges of the path as pedestrians seem to be funnelled through the space.

C it y tower

At the point where the path seemingly slices through the fountains Piccadilly Gardens fully opens up, offering little enclosure. At this point the surrounding trees do not do enough to confine the space and so the eye is drawn to distant views increasing the perception of the scale of the space. The railing bordering the path forces the pedestrian forward and the diminishes the opportunity to change direction.

1 2 3 4

Towards the end the path loses the railings, and the pedestrian feels like they are finally in the space. Music blasts out from a busker playing the keyboard. Ahead several paths awkwardly intersect and the ‘Catwalk’ aims straight for Ando’s shaded concrete pavilion where a cafe lies.

The perception analysis of walking through the key route of each space enabled me to understand how the spaces invite people in, and how the experience of the routes change as the pedestrian moves along it. ‘A good space beckons people in, and the progression from street to interior is critical in this respect.’ 39 E d g e s - H o w d o t he s pa c e s b ec ko n p eo p l e i n? According to Jan Gehl, ‘site lines are important. If people do not see a space, they will not use it.’ 40 Bearing this in mind, Henry Shaftoe says, ‘we like to be intrigued by the possibility that there is more to a space than initially meets the eye’. 41 So according to these two conditions, the space should be visible but not in its entirety to successfully attract and invite the pedestrian.

pedestrian desire l ines Ve h icu l ar circu l ation Ke y P edestrian R oute

As previously mentioned, Piccadilly Gardens defines its edges through using contrasting ground materials to the surrounding environment. The linear path of the Catwalk uses Blue Welsh Slate to do this as it juts out towards the Northern Quarter. Standing at the start of the path, I found that this articulated route works in drawing the eye towards the space. However, whilst some of the space is visible due to a parting in raised planters, the planar landscaping and the long distance to the one storey concrete pavilion, do not do much in attracting the eye and so the view passes straight through the space towards the overlooking City Tower. It is important to note here that perhaps if the fountains were in working order, they could potentially have an impact on the visibility of the space. In Sheffield, the Peace Garden’s main entrance to the space is defined by two large water features. Due to the topographical moves of the design, with

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

W a l k i n g

P e r c e p t i o n

C l ear T h res h o l d M ar k er

E x p e ri e nc e of t h e p e d e strian

S teps increase T h res h o l d de f ining t h e new space

at t h e f oca l point o f t h e space, t h e pat h opens up

Off the pavement, clear threshold markers in the water features visually emphasise the entrance into the space as well as audibly. The sound of falling water battles against that of the buses behind. With their back to the road the pedestrian feels slightly exposed with people bustling down the retail axis towards Moorgate.

A n a l y s i s

S o f t E dges

At the top of the steps, the route down through the space is clear with the raised grass lawns defining the boundaries of where to walk. Sounds of gushing water drown out the buses behind here as the garden space reveals itself. The level change creates a real sense of enclosure.

Within the space, the route opens up to a clearing, there is no feeling of a prescribed route anymore and the pedestrian is given the choice of staying or changing direction. The fountain shoots jets out from the same ground surface as the route through. At this point, traffic is blocked visually through the surrounding trees and topography, and audibly through sounds from children playing and water from the fountains. This permeable edge manages to create a feeling of openess and exposure to the climate, as well as a sense of enclosure from the traffic.

At the other edge of the space, the route connects itself to the pedestrianised ‘Gold Route’ as it reveals itself, with the Winter Gardens coming into view for the first time. The active edges at ground level to the building on the right provide visual stimulation for the pedestrian. Contrasting to the previous clearing the buildings pinch together to create a winding pedestrian path leading to the Winter Gardens.

the garden landscape sunken, I was easily able to see into the space and see what it has to offer. The tree-lined curved form of the garden space also meant that the design does not reveal its whole self initially, satisfying Shaftoe’s idea of the view intruiging the pedestrian. From location 2 I was able to see the whole space and its legibility was apparent. E x p e r i e n c e o f t he R o u t e - A r e t he r o u t e s i n t e r e s t i n g? In Gordon Cullen’s ‘ Townscape’, he explores the sequence of revelations in his serial drawings that show how a ‘series of sudden contrasts’ 42 create a more intense and interesting journey for the pedestrian. Gehl backs this idea up with the term the ‘Tiring length Perspective’, a ‘Situation in which the pedestrian can see the whole route at a glance before even starting out’. 43 This means that there is minimal progression or variation in view as the pedestrian walks along the route. I found that after walking through both spaces, the experience of walking through the key route of Peace Gardens better achieved these desired conditions, with new things being revealed along the route. This is partly due to the form and topography experienced along the walk - the stepping down and the experience of subtely turning corners revealed new spaces. Piccadilly Gardens’ ‘Catwalk’ experience does not quite match up to it, regardless of the broken fountains, the views of the buildings towering over the concrete pavilion dictate the view due to the openness of the design. As well as the view, this openness naturally affected the sense of enclosure, which changed throughout both routes. Piccadilly Gardens felt much more open and exposed to both the climate and surrounding traffic noise.

1 2 3

pedestrian desire l ines Ve h icu l ar circu l ation Ke y P edestrian R oute

P i c c a d i l l y

W a l k i n g

D esign

An a l ysis

W h a t

m a k es

t he

s p a ces

G a r d e n s

w o r k / F a i l ? 2

Variations in E nc losure at a site sca l e

S urrounding bui l dings (o v e r o n e s to r e y)

1 Form wit h in t h e Landscape

Funne l A pinc h point at t h e start o f t h e pat h accentuates t h e openness o f t h e outdoor space a long t h e route

T h e l andscaping does attempt to c lose down t h e sense o f space but due to t h e time o f y ear D eciduous v egetation does not create a signi f icant boundary

N ort h ern Q uarter

4.5m

N arrow widt h c h anne l s peop l e f orward

Ho w d o t h e s e r o u t e s fa i l/s u c c e e d i n at t r a c t i n g o p t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s? F unne l l ing vs. C h o ice Prescribed vs O p en (f o rm)

T ransport interc h ange

A key difference in the two key routes was identified at the landscape scale, it was the offering of opportunity along the route. In celebrating the benefits of movable chairs in public spaces, William H Whyte acknowledges the satisfaction that the pedestrian gets from subtley adjusting the chair ’s position before sitting in it. The pedestrian is not moving the chair significantly, but they are exercising their free will, ‘The possibility of choice is as important as the exercise of it.’ 44 The notion of choice in terms of direction and opportunities to stay is treated very differently in both routes. In the ‘Catwalk’ the railing acts as a funnel (see diagram 1 ), restricting the direction of movement down one fixed route. The railing heavily prescribes the route as it transfers pedestrians from one edge of the space through the centre and to the other edge efficiently in its linear form which according to Gehl, increases the speeds of walking. 45 Contrastingly, in Peace Gardens, the main route opens up in the clearing by the fountains and the pedestrian is given the option of changing direction (see diagram ( 1 ). The routes also differ in how they invite pedestrians to stay in the space. Interestingly, I later discovered that the railing that has the effect of funneling the pedestrian did also prove a good place to lean. However, in comparison to Peace Gardens that borders the route with primary and secondary seating opportunities, the opportunities given to stay were minimal, especially due to the fact that standing is a much more short term activity.

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

W a l k i n g

D e s i g n Variations in E nc losure at a site sca l e

A n a l y s i s

S urrounding bui l dings

Form wit h in t h e Landscape Form wit h in t h e Landscape 1

C h oice T wo pinc h points in surrounding bui l dings create variations in t h e sense o f enc losure a long t h e route

T h e l andscaping seems to respond to t h is, pinc h ing and opening, but at a sma l l er sca l e

N etwor k o f pedestrianised spaces ending at t h e train station R oom to stro l l 8m

Exposure

3 U p towards C it y Ha l l and dev ens h ire green

In Piccadilly Gardens, the garden space feels much more exposed to the climate due to the openness of the built edge. Given the name ‘Catwalk’ there is a clear intent for this path to become a spectacle for others. However, the feeling of exposure a catwalk model might feel from photographers could be linked in with the exposure to the climate felt by the pedestrian here. Looking at diagram 2 above, the built edge creates a very large, open space. The landscaping and Ando’s pavilion attempts to try and close the scale of the space down but due to the height of the surrounding buildings it has little affect. In Peace Gardens, the surrounding building edges naturally create variations in the sense of enclosure which is then emulated by the landscaping. The result is a route of contrasting senses of enclosure which play off and complement one another heightening the sense of place. At the personal walking scale, the dimensions of the paths differ with Peace Gardens’ path almost twice as wide as the ‘Catwalk’. According to Gehl, ‘An important prerequisite for a comfortable and pleasurable walk is room to walk relatively freely and unhampered, without having to weave in and out and without being pushed and shoved by others’. 46 I personally found that the wider path in Peace Gardens also helped reduce the pressure to walk in a certain direction and more of an incentive to slow down and stroll. 25

P i c c a d i l l y

G a r d e n s

S ta n d i n g

T y p e s o f s ta n d i n g Standing is more easy than walking in interpreting the motive as optional or necessary. Within the defined areas of analysis, I decided to split the observe three types of standing: solitary standing, standing for leisure (playing) and standing with others (talking) - highlighted below.

B oundary o f A na ly sis

so l itary standing

standing f or l eisure (p l ay i n g)

standing wit h ot h ers (ta l k i n g)

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

B oundary o f A na ly sis

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Standing is typically a short-term activity. There are limits to how long a person can stand comfortably, and quality requirements for the site are correspondingly minimal.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; 47 Jan Gehl

P i c c a d i l l y

S t a n d i n g

O c c u p a t i o n a l

G a r d e n s

T y pes o f S tanding around t h e S pace

A n a l y s i s

1 M an standing S tood on edge o f

2 M an l eaning against a bo l l ard,

3 T wo men ta l k ing around t h e

4 Young fami ly f eeding pigeons

5 T h ree men ta l k at a coincidenta l

6 T wo men f inding directions

t h e ‘catwa l k’, enjoy ing t h e music o f t h e bus k er w h i l st ta l k ing on t h e p h one

eating a yog h urt pot w h i l st watc h ing peop l e wa l k past

rai l ing o f t h e ‘C atwa l k’

2 5

KEY S tanding S tanding + Ta l k ing

O ccupation P l an f or S tanding Note the results focus only on people standing within the defined area of observation

meeting a long a pat h

under a tree

S tanding + P l ay ing Wa l k ing R outes

Initially, there was no clear pattern as to where people stood along Piccadilly Gardens. Pigeons formed a significant attraction in standing activity, but people tended not to locate themselves in a specific location to carry out the activity of feeding them. A few people ran into someone they knew and stopped for a quick chat. However, after a while it was revealed that along the railing lining the ‘Catwalk’ there formed a relatively popular spot to stand.

Against t h e rai l ing o f t h e ‘C atwa l k’

M ost common p l ace to stand

The occupancy analysis of both spaces show some commonalities. It was more common for people to be standing and talking with others or standing in the midst of an activity than for people to stand alone. Both of the most popular locations to stand tie in with the most popular routes through the space, but for different reasons. Piccadilly Gardens attracted people to stand most by the railing as a place to prop themselves against. Whereas in the Peace Gardens, the most popular place to stand is where activity takes place, by the fountains. In both spaces, the central garden space proved more popular in attracting people to engage in stationary activities P l a c e s to L e a n Other than the railing along the ‘Catwalk’ other places to lean included the bollards lining one of the paths. The ‘bollard effect ’, an occurence where people tend to stand around a bollard ‘as catalysts for conversations.’ 48 This effect was not evident in my study with only one man leaning against a bollard at one point (location 2 ). In Peace Gardens there were only two noted pedestrians that used the environment for leaning, as they leaned . Perhaps iiiii

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

S t a n d i n g

T y pes o f S tanding around t h e space

1 C oup l e standing f or a p h oto wit h t h e bac k drop o f t h e f ountains and town h a l l

O c c u p a t i o n a l

A n a l y s i s

2 G ir l l eaning against t h e

appropriate ly dimensioned and curv ed l edge

5 2

3 T wo men ta l k ing around t h e edge o f t h e f ountains c l earing

1 3

4 M an f eeding pigeons wit h in t h e U rban Hard l andscape

6 4

5 Fami ly enjoy ing t h e f ountain

6 G roup gat h er to c h at around t h e edge o f t h e space

KEY O ccupation P l an f or S tanding Note the results focus only on people standing within the defined area of observation

S tanding S tanding + Ta l k ing S tanding + P l ay ing Wa l k k ing routes

against the curved detailing of the stone ledge around the entrance to the space the space (location 2 ). Perhaps this was due to the abundant places to sit which will be discussed later. S ta nding f o r l eisure (P l aying) Piccadilly Gardens hosts lots of pigeons that attract a fair amount of lesiurely standing activity, however, this seemed to happen in random palces dotted around the space. Pigeons also found themselves as an attraction in the Peace Gardens, but the the main attraction for standing was clearly the fountains. On the route of the main path, many people would stop in the clearing of the fountain and take a picture, or stand and watch as their children play in the fountains. Both of the most popular locations in each space lie off the main pedestrian routes but offer different lures for the pedestrian. Piccadilly Gardens offers a railing to lean against whilst Peace Gardens draws people to stand around the fountains as a leisurely activity. Perhaps if the fountains at Piccadilly were working, the railing would prove a perfect place to stand, with a place to lean on and a spectacle to watch.

In the Peace Gardens, there was a clear correlation between where people stood and where people walked. The majority of people that came to stand in the space did so out of leisure by the fountains. The results also show that people who were stood talking tended to locate themselves towards the edge of the space. Not many people stood on their own. Pigeons also attracted people to leisurely stand and feed them. Noticably, there was little standing happening out of option outside of the garden area where there is little enclosure and noise from the traffic.

by t h e f ountains

M ost common p l ace to stand

P i c c a d i l l y

P e r c e p t i v e

G a r d e n s

A n a l y s i s

O penness o f v iew

Leaning up against the railing, the sense of exposure within the space is revealed. Directly in front is the fountains, littered with pigeon droppings where a young family feed pigeons. This activity provides a pleasant view but One Piccadilly looms in the distance, reminding the pedestrian of how overlooked the space is. Distant sounds of buses are heard rumbling through the deciduous trees to the left increase the sense of openess. People bustle past as they walk down the relatively narrow ‘Catwalk’.

D esign

An a l ysis

W h a t

m a k es

t he

s p a ces

Experiencing the railing up close revealed a lack of design detailing with chipped paint lessening the quality of the visual and physical interaction.

Location P l an

w o r k / F a i l ?

Lots o f peop l e wa l k ing be h ind t h e pedestrian

Q uite a narrow space f or someone to stand w h i l st peop l e wa l k past a long busiest route t h roug h out t h e period o f observation

Ho w d o t h e s e i d e n t i f i e d lo c at i o n s fa i l/ s u c c e e d i n at t r a c t i n g p eo p l p e to s ta n d?

P rev ious ly identi f ied rai l ing t h at f unne l s catwa l k, pro v ides a com f ortab l e p l ace to l ean

E n c lo s u r e

B ac k drop o f O ne P iccadi l ly to o fa r away o v er 80m

once again the sense of enclosure in the two spaces affected my experience when I inhabited the spaces. In the instance of standing however, as opposed to walking, the scale of the openess affected the view in terms of detail and intensity rather than variation. Intensity of Views

A young fami ly f eed pigeons

4.5

G e h l’s 25m v iewing radius 1:500

Fountains up c lose and persona l in f oreground

The detail and intensity differed in each space due to the distance of the views. In Piccadilly, whilst the close distanced view of people feeding pigeons is welcomed by the pedestrian, the 85m view to One Piccadilly offers little in terms of detail. Conversely, the details of the Neo-Gothic styled Town Hall by Peace Gardens stood approximately 30m away which made the building much easier to appreciate. However, according to Jan Gehl this is still ouside of the optimum viewing distance as ‘very little happens at distances between 100m and 25m’ Within 25m however, there is a ‘richness of detail and [visual] communication’. 49 Despite the fact that I agree that One Piccadilly is too far to

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

S t a n d i n g

P e r c e p t i o n

A n a l y s i s

Standing in front of the fountains which rise out of the stone paving, the sounds of the water immediately dominate the space. Within almost touching distance, the Town Hall stands behind the water feature, creating an intense and detailed backdrop to the main attraction. The concentric pattern in the paving emphasises the orientation and focus on the fountains. The proximity of the buildings in view limit the feeling of exposure.

Location P l an

D esign

benefit the view at 85m, I found that the detailed facade of Sheffieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Town Hall by Peace Gardens positively contributed to the view. Highlighted in diagrams 1 and 1 , the optimum 25m viewing distance is highlighted in the two locations. These images show the difference in the scales of the two designs with Peace Gardens having a lot more to see within this range than in Piccadilly Gardens due to the better-dimensioned landscape.

no p h y sica l support w h en standing, h owev er benc h es are located just be h ind

An a l ysis

W h a t

m a k es

t he

s p a ces

w o r k / F a i l ?

Lots o f pedestrian acti v it y

C o mf o r t - Physic a l a nd S o ci a l Physical comfort and social comfort do not always go hand in hand. Whenever more than one person walked past behind me, I was aware that my back was exposed. The narrowness of the path increased this feeling of unease. Regardless of this and despite the lack of design detailing in the chipped paint, the ergonomic dimensions of the railing worked in providing a physically comfortable place to lean. This suggests that the physical attraction of leaning against something is more of a pull for pedestrians than the view itself in Piccadilly. Whereas in the Peace Gardens, people are drawn to stand because of the spectacle of the fountains and the pedestrian activity surrounding it.

B ac k drop o f Town h a l l 30m away T h e 25m radius stretc h es to t h e edge o f t h e garden space, s h owing h ow we l l sca l ed t h e space is 8m G e h lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 25m v iewing radius 1:500

P i c c a d i l l y

G a r d e n s

Sitting

Definition of Sitting Seating is arguably the most common optional activity as it is usually much easier to sit down rather than stand. Unlike other stationary activities such as standing, sitting down can be done for a long period of time without too much discomfort - depending on the conditions. For this reason, I wanted to identify two areas of sitting, the most popular seat for solitary sitting and the most popular seat for talking.

S itting in P iccadi l ly

B oundary o f A na ly sis

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Sitting locations are chosen far more carefully than are locations for standingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; 50 Jan Gehl

B oundary o f A na ly sis

P i c c a d i l l y

S i t t i n g

O c c u p a t i o n a l

G a r d e n s

“ W h at at t r a c t s p e o p l e m o s t i s o t h e r p e o p l e . ” P p. 9

A n a l y s i s

S eating in t h e S o f t garden l andscape

1 D o u b l e-s i d e d b e n ch e s i n f r o n t o f

2 B enc h es wit h bac k to raised p l ant

3 S teps up to raised grass area

4 R aised l edge surrounding t h e

A n d o Pav i l i o n (P r i m a ry S e at i n g)

b e d s (P r i m a ry S e at i n g)

5 2

(S ec o n da ry S e at i n g)

4 1

f o u n ta i n s (S e c o n da ry S e at i n g)

S eating in t h e h ard urban l andscape 3 7

D o u b l e-s i d e d b e n ch e s i n h a r d l andscaped area to W est

B enc h es o v er loo k ing P iccadi l ly B ou l evard

Acti v e edge in t h e C oncrete Pav i l ion

KEY S itting S itting wit h compan y / Ta l k ing

O ccupation P l an f or S itting Note the results focus only on people sitting within the defined area of observation

Ot h er stationary acti v it y Wa l k ing R outes

There were clear correlations in where people tended to sit in Piccadilly Gardens. Whilst the centre of the garden space invited walking, pedestrians tended to prefer to locate themselves around the edges of the space. The most popular seat in the gardens was where a busy path passes very close to the bench, creating an intimate first row seat in people watching. Interestingly, the hard surfaced public space is used here much more for sitting in than other observed optional activities. Here, most solitary seaters located themselves.

Most common places to sit down

M ost popu l ar p l ace to sit on one’s own

M ost popu l ar p l ace to sit wit h ot h ers

Primary seating was much more heavily used within the two garden spaces than secondary seating. In much of the secondary seating of both spaces, the backs of the pedestrian were exposed to open space. Whilst they were not heavily used it was good that both spaces created so many opportunities to sit down because as William H Whyte discovered, ‘people tend to sit most where there are places to sit’. 51 The overarching pattern over the two spaces was that people tended to sit most where seating opportunity was close to key paths or routes. Urban Edge vs Garden

Interestingly, seating was much more popular in the urban landscape of Piccadilly than in that of Peace Gardens. Reviewing the patterns of walking

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

S i t t i n g

O c c u p a t i o n a l

S eating in t h e so f t â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;G ardenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; l andscape

1 B enc h es set wit h in grass ban k by

2 B enc h es wit h bac k to raised p l ant

3 C urv ed Ledge o f t h e raised grass

4 R a i s e d g r a s s l aw n s (S ec o n da ry

t h e f o u n ta i n s(P r i m a ry S e at i n g)

a r e a (S e c o n da ry S e at i n g)

A n a l y s i s

b e d s (P r i m a ry S e at i n g)

s e at i n g)

S eating in t h e h ard urban l andscape 3 5

7 6

benc h es surrounding t h e outside o f t h e S o f t G arden space

6 B enc h es o v er loo k ing T h e Hard Landscaped area

KEY O ccupation P l an f or S itting Note the results focus only on people sitting within the defined area of observation

S itting S itting wit h compan y / Ta l k ing Ot h er stationary acti v ities Wa l kl k ing routes Wa R outes

Acti v e edge at ground l ev e l in t h e on loo k ing bui l ding

M ost popu l ar p l ace to sit wit h ot h ers

M ost popu l ar p l ace to sit on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own

Similarly to standing, the majority of seating took place around the fountains, showing a clear relationship between where people walk and where they sit. The cafe on the South-East corner of the site helped contribute to the amount of people sat down. People who sat on their own seemed to sit around the edge of the garden space whereas people in groups of talking sat chose positions closer to the action around the fountains.

reveals that this is due to the amount of pedestrian activity. The urban landscape at Peace Gardens however invites little seating in comparison to the garden landscape. This has to be to do with the pedestrian traffic passing by the area. So l i ta r y s i t t i n g a n d s i t t i n g w i t h ot h e r s In Piccadilly Gardens, the most popular spot for solitary sitting was in the urban hard landscape (see location 6 ) whereas in Sheffield, the most popular spot was around the edge of the garden space ( 2 ). There was a commonality in the location of the most popular spot to sit with others however, with both locations along key routes was along one of the primary walking routes within the gardens (see location 1 and 1 ).

Most common place to sit down

P i c c a d i l l y

P e r c e p t i v e

A n a l y s i s S ense o f enc losure broug h t about by t h e canop y abo v e

M ost popu l ar seat f or groups o f peop l e +/ ta l k ing

People walk along the path just a couple of metres in front of the pedestrian giving them front row seats to a display of public life. Whilst the buildings in the backdrop are over 80m away, the intensity of this interaction with people closes the view down significantly. As the bench is double-sided it is possible to feel and hear people sat down behind but also those walking on the less populated path further behind. As the sound of a tram driving past seeps into the space it becomes muffled the concrete pavilion. Whilst the space feels very open, knowing the concrete wall is not far behind gives relative comfort. Over the sound of people talking, the smell of marujuana being smoked wafts is brought over in the breeze.

Location P l an

M ost popu l ar seat f or t h e indi v idua l

Right up at the edge of the walkway, the pedestrian is able to sit back against the stone plant beds and - due to the relatively short viewing distances - enjoy a sense of enclosure within the city. Here trees break up the sense of space and create canopies above which make the space feel more sheltered from the climate. Similarly in this location, people pass by right in front of the pedestrian and as they pass by thet seem to drown out the noise of transport, or perhaps the sound of transport has less impact because the pedestrian cannot see it.

G a r d e n s

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

S i t t i n g

P e r c e p t i o n

A n a l y s i s

S pray f rom t h e f ountains wit h a gust o f wind

P l easant bac k drop o f t h e Town Ha l l

Views of the grass bank dominate the foreground and act as a threshold between the busy walking route and the popular fountains. With vegetation behind it feels as though from this vantage point the pedestrian can see everything in front of them. Water features loudly splash water down the stepped entrances drowning out any traffic noise from further back. Also, when the wind picks up, the pedestrian may feel flecks of water spraying off the fountain. The effect of this water turbulence makes the air feel fresher. The general sense of enclosure is high, mostly due to dwelling on the very edge of the garden space.

The sound of the water splattering against the stone paving is the dominant sound followed by talking of surrounding people. In the foreground of the view, people walk past along the busiest route in the space, the middle ground is then the fountains that will attract activity every now and then, before the backdrop of the Town Hall that rises above the water, reminding the pedestrian of the city they are in. The clearing in the foreground makes gives a clear sign that the pedestrian is in the heart of the space and at the front row for all activity. M ost popu l ar seat f or t h e indi v idua l

M ost popu l ar seat f or groups o f peop l e +/ ta l k ing

I found that in both spaces, the locations of the seats most occupied by groups ( 1 and 1 ) are in spaces that feel more exposed and open, but are spaces that have views of an activity. Conversely, the locations of people who were sat on their own tended to be much more enclosed and protected - at least from behind. The fact that in seat 1 where someone was taking recreational drugs around midday may suggest that the space is not overlooked enough. Bearing in mind the previous observations in the analysis of this space however, what is more likely is that it shows the scale of the space is too big, so people feel like thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s enough space around them to do do what they want.

Location P l an

P i c c a d i l l y

D esign

An a l ysis

W h a t

m a k es

t he

s p a ces

w o r k / F a i l ?

S l ig h t s lope in wa l l to pro v ide p h y sica l com f ort f or peop l e l eaning bac k D oub l e sided benc h es e x posing t h e pedestrians bac k

G a r d e n s

S l ig h t s lope in wa l l to pro v ide p h y sica l com f ort f or peop l e l eaning bac k

so f t edges o f A ndo’s pav i l ion

C anop y gi v es f ee l ings o f s h e lter f rom t h e c l imate

B ui l dings in t h e distance o v er 80m away

T ree trun k s brea k up t h e space D ead facade

D ead facade Here t h e materia l it y matc h es t h e surroundings

4.5

1 M ost popu l ar seat f or groups o f peop l e +/ ta l k ing

6 M ost popu l ar seat f or t h e indi v idua l

Ho w d o t h e s e i d e n t i f i e d lo c at i o n s fa i l/s u c c e e d i n at t r a c t i n g p eo p l p e to s ta n d? What is common amongst all types of the identified seats is the presence of other people. The fact that each seat lies closely to other types of pedestrian activity back up Gehl’s point that ‘the view of city life and people has special status as main attraction’. 52 P eo p l e s i t t i n g o n t h e i r o w n

P eop l e on t h eir own tend to pre f er sma l l er sca l ed en v ironment

The two locations identified as the most popular spots for people to sit on their own are both spots where the pedestrians back is on the peripheries of the immediate space with their backs covered. This occurence is described by Gehl as the ‘edge effect’. ‘Edge placement provides a number of important benefits: the space in front to watch everything, your back covered so that no surprises will come from behind, and often good physical and psychological support’. 53 In

P e a c e

G a r d e n s

D e s i g n

S ounds o f water drown out tra f f ic noise

Front row seat f or peop l e watc h ing

A n a l y s i s

B enc h es set into a rec luse wit h in t h e grass l awn

C anop y gi v es f ee l ings o f s h e lter f rom t h e c l imate

Views towards f ountains and town h a l l Views o f f ountains and town h a l l

W ooden benc h bac k s into E rgonomic curv ed l edge C onsistent M ateria l it y uni f ies space

M ost popu l ar seat f or t h e indi v idua l 2

M ost popu l ar seat f or groups o f peop l e +/ ta l k ing

2 1

both cases, the location of the seats felt like the most enclosed location within each space. Whilst they are enclosed however, they are not isolated due to the amount of people in the immediate area. In Piccadilly Gardens, this enclosed area was found where the scale of the environment is much smaller (see diagram on the left). P eo p l e s i t t i n g w i t h ot h e r s A weakness in the Piccadilly Gardens seating area was that the bench was doublesided. However, with the space acting as a movement hub - through funneling people along its paths - the location of the seats along the a key path provides plenty of opportunity for ‘stayers’ to watch the ‘movers’. The double-sided nature of the bench did not seem to impact people with company where the sense of enclosure did not seem to matter so much. In Peace Gardens, the most popular spot for sitting with company was right in the heart of the space, where most of the majority of pedestrian activity took place.

B ot h e x perience same sense o f enc losure

REFERENCES

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 120.

Gordon Cullen, The Concise Townscape, (London: Architectural Press, 1971) pp. 53.

William H. Whyte, City (New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1988), pp. 130.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 129.

Henry Shaftoe, Convivial Urban Spaces, (London: Earthscan, 2008) pp. 55.

Gordon Cullen, The Concise Townscape, (London: Architectural Press, 1971) pp. 17.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 127.

William H. Whyte, City, (New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1988), pp. 119.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 120.

Ibid, pp. 121.

Ibid, pp. 135.

Mark C. Childs, SQUARES: A Public Place Design Guide for Urbanists, (New Mexico: University of New Mexico Press, 2004) pp. 158.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 35.

Jan Gehl, Life between buildings, (Copenhagen: Arkitektens Forlag, 1996) pp. 155.

William H. Whyte, City (New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1988), pp. 110.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 141.

Ibid, pp. 137.

S u m m a r y o f a n a ly s i s o f s p e c i f i c pa r t s o f t h e s pa c e s

P i c c a d i l ly G a r d e n s Optional Activity

WA l k i n g

Successes

• •

(Inviting People in + Experience of route)

Articulated materiality of the ‘Catwalk’ outside of the space works in drawing the eye into the space Railing bordering path provides opportunity to stand

Fa i lu r es

•

• • •

• S ta n d i n g

•

(Physical Support +/ Pedestrian Activity)

• So l i t a r y S i t t i n g

(Sense of Enclosure and views of other people)

• • • •

Sitting with Co m p a n y

(Sense of Enclosure and views of other people)

• •

Railing provides a physically comortable place to lean Offers good views of fountains (if working)

The opportunity to sit and watch pedestrian traffic Sense of enclosure from trees - canopy above, trunks ahead Back is covered on the edges of a smaller-scaled environment Sounds of pedestrians over the distant buses Good views of people walking past Close to fairly busy cafe Sounds of traffic protected by concrete pavillion enable talking to happen

Peace Gardens

• •

Relatively skinny and straight form of the path encourages people to walk through the space rather than offering the space as a destination Railing along path prohibits choice of direction Large open space = Lack of sequential view Path meets other parts of the landscape awkwardly at ground level

Large open space = Lack of intense views Socially uncomfortable as people file past along the path

Successes

• • • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

Recreational drugs hint at low safety levels Buildings in front are over 80m away - not an intense view Backs are exposed due to double-sided bench

• • •

Fa i lu r es

Clear articulation of entrance Sunken garden allows views in without revealing the whole space Variations in the sense of enclosure, line of route, and topography create an interesting sequential route Lots of opportunities to stop Generously proportioned path gives more of an incentive to stroll Intense views of the fountains with the close backdrop of the Town Hall Lots of human activity to watch Opportunities to sit down

Edge of the garden space so the back is covered Views over the rest of the garden space Fresh air from fountains No noise of traffic behind

•

Water spray with gusts of wind - good/bad depending on weather

Spectacle of people, water fountain and Town Hall = Strong View Easily connects to path Benches back into recluse of grass edge give sense of protection

Co n c l u s i o n

This study has revealed to me the complexities of designing a successful, urban public space that encourages optional and recreational activities. One particular factor that stood out as particularly challenging was the appreciation of different scales of design. In cities such as Manchester and Sheffield, the scale of strategic masterplanning views the provision of public space alongside other major considerations, such as transport infrastructure and economic activity. This is the top end of the scale, where the space is juggled amongst other dimensions of inner-city development. The next scale down seems to be a at a landscape scale. At this scale key physical factors of the public space are addressed, covering form, scale and topography. The smallest end of the scale is the human scale. At this scale, the design may incorporate details, such as a curve on the edge of a wall to allow people to sit comfortably. These three scales are intrinsically connected. Through focusing the analysis on public life, I naturally came to explore the human-scaled elements of the two designs. However, the initial section covering context, gave me the opportunity to understand the design at the human scale in relation to the larger scales. The comparative analysis enabled me to identify Peace Gardens as a much more successful space in inviting optional activities. I was also able to pick out key differences in each design at each scale and begin to understand what affected the success or failure of the spaces in supporting optional activities. S t r at e g i c Sc a l e - ‘M o v e m e n t h u b’ v s. T r a d i t i o n a l E n g l i s h g a r d e n The situation of both cities during the procurement of the designs shared similarities with both fighting inner city decline and aiming to stimulate economic activity in their centres. However, under the circumstances Manchester was experiencing at the time, their recovery would have been a lot more intense. This would have partly been down to the destruction caused by the IRA bomb, but also because of the fact the city possessed an international outlook, and with the forthcoming Commonwealth Games, they would have most likely been looking to showcase the city to the global audience. Interestingly, however, both public spaces decided to retain their title of urban ‘gardens’. Considering the formal definition of gardens however, being a place ‘for public enjoyment and recreation’, it seems that the title was not taken too literally in Manchester. With a core strategic objective to act as a ‘movement hub’, the space immediately contradicts itself as an urban garden. Whilst some movement can be deemed as ‘optional activity ’, the term ‘movement hub’ suggests something function driven, with the priority of ‘necessary activity ’. Peace Gardens on the other hand took the traditional English garden motif as a key driver in the form of their space, after the public heavily disapproved of the proposed continental style square initially suggested by Allies and Morrison. L a n d s c a p e Sc a l e - F o r m a n d s c a l e These core strategic goals naturally influenced the form of the designs. Piccadilly Gardens’ geometric design appeared to be made by first defining the movement spaces and secondly defining the staying spaces. This appears obvious when looking at an aerial photo, with the materiality of the paths overlapping one another, slicing through the grass lawns. Conversely, Peace Gardens seemed to reverse this order and define the form of its places for staying before then building in desire lines. Whilst the form of the space did have an impact on the space in terms of its legibility - or lack of - at ground level, I found that the more influential factor was the scale of the environment in attracting people to stay. The treatment of scale massively differed in the two spaces. Scale not only affected the intensity of views and the sensory experience, but also affected the sense of enclosure. Camillo Sitte merits enclosure in his book, ‘City planning according to artistic principles’, saying ‘the main requirement for a plaza, as for a room is the enclosed character of its space’. 54 Through clearly defining its edges and portioning the space up appropriately, the design of Peace Gardens was able to create a strong sense of enclosure at an appropriate scale. The fact that the vast majority of pedestrian activity happened within the soft garden space shows the value of enclosure. Piccadilly Gardens on the other hand chose not to enclose the vast scale of the open space bounded by the surrounding buildings. Portraying the importance of scale and enclosure, the most relaxing place to sit was outside of the garden space on the urban edge, where people could sit with their backs covered, in much smaller scaled environment with bustling public life of Piccadilly Boulevard in front of them.

Human S ca l e A less tangible scale, the human scale explores the designs from eye level. Through studying public life, I was able to see how things had been designed to fit the human dimension, such as the railing along the ‘Catwalk’ serving as the perfect height to lean against. I was also able to understand more personal, sensory experiences through the perception analysis. Once again, Peace Gardens triumphed over Piccadilly Gardens in creating a stimulating environment at the human scale. With water fountains drowning out the sounds of traffic, intense views within the well-dimensioned garden space and ergonomic stone work in the furnishings providing a comfortable spot to sit down, there was a clear sense that the human scale had been heavily considered throughout. I believe that this apparent increase in consideration in the human scale comes down to the initial objective of being a traditional English garden. On the flip side, the legibility and evident evocativeness of Manchester ’s Piccadilly Gardens in plan view compared to the visual aesthetic at ground level suggests an imbalance in the consideration of the three scales with less weight given towards the human scale. Jan Gehl calls this method of planning ‘The Brasilia Syndrome’. 55 In conclusion I believe that whilst my analysis sheds light on how specific parts of the two designs worked in attracting optional activities, I am aware that due to the limitations of this study, the highlighted points are certainly not exhaustive. The study has enabled me to understand the importance of the balance of consideration of the three highlighted scales, with particular emphasis on the importance of the human scale.

Sitte, Camillo, City planning according to artistic principles, Rudolf Wittkower (New York: Random House, Inc. 1965) pp.32.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) pp. 195.

B i b l i o g r a p h y

American Society of Landscape Architects, ‘Interview with Jan Gehl’, American Society of Landscape Architects, <https://www.asla.org/ContentDetail.aspx?id=31346> [accessed 12 March 2016] Byass, Rowland, ‘From public garden to corporate plaza: Piccadilly Gardens and the new civic landscape’, Journal of Landscape Architecture, 5, (2010) CABE, ‘Piccadilly Gardens’, CABE, <http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. uk/20110118095356/http://www.cabe.org.uk/case-studies/piccadilly-gardens> [accessed 11 October 2015] Carr, Stephen, Francis, Mark, Rivlin, Leanne G., Stone, Andrew M., Public Space, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) Childs, Mark C., SQUARES: A Public Place Design Guide for Urbanists, (New Mexico: University of New Mexico Press, 2004) Cullen, Gordon, The Concise Townscape, (London: Architectural Press, 1971) Gehl, Jan, ‘Public spaces for a changing public life’, in Open Space People Space, ed. By Catherine Ward Thompson and Penny Travlou, (Oxon, Taylor and Francis, 2007) Gehl, Jan, Cities for People, (Washington: Island Press, 2010) Jan Gehl & Birgitte Svarre, How to Study Public Life, (Washington, Island Press, 2013) pp. 5. Gehl, Jan, Life between buildings, (Copenhagen: Arkitektens Forlag, 1996) Gehl, Jan, Matan, Anne, ‘Two perspectives on public spaces’, Building Research and Information, 37:1, (2009), <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ abs/10.1080/09613210802519293#.Vj_gUvnhCUk>, [accessed 6 September 2015] HMSO, Manchester: 50 Years of Change: Post-War planning in Manchester, (London: HMSO, 1995) Lynch, Kevin, The Image of the City, (United States of America: Joint Center for Urban Studies, 1960) Ogden, Simon, (personal communication, 14 October, 2015) Osbourne, Warren, (personal communication, 28 October, 2015) Oxford Dictionaries, ‘garden’, Oxford Dictionaries, <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/ definition/english/garden> [accessed 13 February 2016] Rogers, Richard, ‘If I ruled the world: Richard Rogers’, Prospect Magazine, <http://www. prospectmagazine.co.uk/regulars/if-i-ruled-the-world-richard-rogers-2>, [accessed 5 May 2015] rudi.net, ‘Manchester city centre regeneration (EDAW), rudi.net, <http://www.rudi.net/ pages/17636>, [accessed 11 October 2015] Shaftoe, Henry, Convivial Urban Spaces, (London: Earthscan, 2008) Sheffield City Council, ‘The Gold Route’, (Leaflet), Sheffield City Council, <https://www. sheffield.gov.uk/planning-and-city-development/regeneration/regeneration-projects.html> [accessed 4 September 2015] Sitte, Camillo, City planning according to artistic principles, Rudolf Wittkower (New York: Random House, Inc. 1965)

Urban Task Force, Towards an urban renaissance, (London: Spon, 1999) Whyte, William H, City (New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1988) Williams, Gwyndaf, ‘Rebuilding the entrepreneurial city: the master planning response to the bombing of Manchester City Centre’, Planning and Design, 27, pp. 485-505, (2000) <http:// epb.sagepub.com.eresources.shef.ac.uk/content/27/4/485.full.pdf+html> [30 November 2015] Williams, Gwyndaf, ‘Rebuilding the entrepreneurial city: the master planning response to the bombing of Manchester City Centre’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2000, 27 (2000), <http://epb.sagepub.com.eresources.shef.ac.uk/content/27/4/485>, [accessed 30 November 2015] Williams, Katie, ‘Urban Form and Infrastructure: a morphological review’, Foresight, Future of Cities Project, Government Office for Science, (June 2014), <https://www.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/324161/14-808-urban-formand-infrastructure-1.pdf>, [accessed 9 September 2015]