-
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
CHARLIE HARRIS YEAR 5
UNIT
Y5 CH
DESTINATION DOCKLANDS
@unit14_ucl
CHARLIE HARRIS YEAR 5 Y5 CH
harriscwm@gmail.com @harriscwm charlie-harris.uk
D E S T I N AT I O N D O C K L A N D S Infrastructure for the 21st Century Royal Docks, London, UK
P
ioneering infrastructure projects such as the
All work produced by Unit 14 Cover design by Charlie Harris www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/architecture Copyright 2019 The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing from the publisher.
@unit14_ucl
Victorian rail termini and 20th Century road and aviation innovations used emerging technologies to respond to economic phenomena, facilitating rapid urban growth and societal change. The mono-functionality of these historic networks, however, has often left them as scars in urban landscapes, causing physical divisions and failing to integrate themselves into their context, whilst reliance on a single economic model has left these heroic structures frequently disused (such as the TWA terminal in JFK Airport and St Pancras station in the 1980’s / 1990’s). ‘Destination Docklands’ speculates a new ‘multiobjective’ approach to infrastructure for the 21st Century, providing a core infrastructural function, with locationally differentiated ancillary programme and contextual configurational integration (informed by syntax analysis). London’s Riverbus network was chosen as the primary transport network, a system with lower use rates, but wide urban connectivity and opportunities to re-invigorate London’s engagement with its waterways, which is introduced to the Royal Docks in the project. The area has huge potential for densification, currently having a low population density compared the rest of the borough; poorly connected and lacking any notable urban centre, whilst conversely hosting London City Airport, an unusually central international terminal.
and a number of instances of high street. The proposal intends to establish the docks as an urban centre for the area, housing high street functions within the existing dock walls and terraced public parks along the perimeter. The masterplan of crossings is informed by space syntax analysis of the existing street network and a drive to restore historic memory of lost piers and dock structures, configurationally integrated to the surrounding grid to provide greater connectivity, establishing primary thoroughfares and slow-moving, less trafficked, landscaped routes. To facilitate working at a variety of scales, a fractalised architectural language of discretised solids was developed, with the intention of transforming solid, water-based structures into filigree span structures, informing the logic of masterplan programme distribution down to architectural details at the scale of column connections.
The core project proposal is to lower the level of the 12m deep docks and introduce several inhabited north-south crossings, housing boat terminals and programme, with differentiated functions based on the adjacent context. This programme includes a new terminal for London City Airport, a new ‘North Bank’ cultural complex by the ExCel Centre
3
TOWARDS A NEW INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSING MULTI-OBJECTIVITY
EMPIRE TRADE
DOMESTIC TRADE
WORKFORCE MATERIALS
TAX REVENUE
IRON - South Yorkshire MEAT - Wales + South West COAL - Yorkshire + Wales
INVESTMENT
MATERIALS
BRICK - Midlands
THE SYSTEM OF LONDON GOODS
MANUFACTUTRED PRODUCTS
TECHNOLOGY
INDUSTRIALISATION
GROWTH
INFRASTRUCTURE
LONDON DEVELOPMENT KEY
VICTORIAN LONDON
Pre-Victorian
ESTABLISHING A GLOBAL CITY
Early - Mid Victorian
London’s growth during the Victorian period was un-paralleled. The economic benefits of a global empire supported a growing populatin, whilst improving ferrous technologies allowed structura innovation and infrastrure projects.
Mid - Late Victorian
Post Victorian - Present
4
5
EARLY VICTORIAN
DEMOLISHED
Cast / Wrought Iron Structures
SPAN 1836: LONDON BRIDGE
COMPARISON OF LONDONS TERMINI
William Cubitt
1843: BRICKLAYER’S ARMS Lewis Cubitt
MID VICTORIAN
Cast / Wrought Iron Structures
1852: KING’S CROSS Lewis Cubitt
01 - Glazed Rooflight 02 - Wrought Iron fabricated arch 03 - Arch spring point 04 - Glazed screen to South gable 05 - North Elevation of St Pancras Hotel 06 - Ticket hall entrance portico 07 - Concourse deck - provides arch cross-ties 08 - Cast-iron columns 09 - Storage area 10 - Masonry corbel foundations 11 - Reduced radius curvature at spring points
1854: PADDINGTON Isambard Kingdom Brunel
1860: VICTORIA Robert Hood
32m
1868: ST PANCRAS LATE VICTORIAN
32m
King’s Cross
William Henry Barlow
Steel Structures
1895: LIVERPOOL ST. Edward Wilson
27m
ARCH LANDING [SIDE ELEVATION]
01
27m
Paddington
ARCH LANDING [INTERNAL ELEVATION]
03
31m
A B C D E F G
04
Euston Bricklayer’s Arms King’s Cross Paddington Victoria St Pancras Liverpool St
72m
02
St Pancras
05
DETAIL STUDY PADDINGTON STATION
11
11
06
07
09
08
10
ST PANCRAS TRAIN SHED SECTION
STRUCTURAL LOGIC DIAGRAM INTERNAL ELEVATION
SYSTEM OF COMPONENTS FOR FILIGREE LATTICEWORK
Single Span roof structure
19TH CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE ST PANCRAS TRAIN SHED Ra velit, saero doloria veles eum es dis repersp elisquosanis moluptasimus moditiumque que cusanim iliquib usciiscidi nostibus sint laut minullabo. Enimo et harumquas velita quiam fuga. Um fuga. Issimperum quibusandit de doluptat.
6
Reduced radius curvature at spring points Concourse podium provides cross ties
19TH CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TERMIUS TYPOLOGY London’s termini were designed to welcome the railways into the city, providing a distraction from the noisy infrastructure they accommodated. The great ‘sheds’ were designed at the cutting edge of structural technologies, with huge spasn and innovative systems.
7
OXFORD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY
KÖLN-DEUTZ BRIDGE
THOMAS NEWENHAM DEANE AND BENJAMIN WOODWARD 1850
GERMANY, 1947 Steel box girder bridge, with masonry pillars.
130m
184m
130m
WROUGHT IRON TUBULAR ARCH BRACING
WROUGHT IRON ARCHED BEAMS
SCHWEDENBRÜCKE BRIDGE VIENNA, 1955
CAST IRON COLUMN CLUSTER
Triple concrete box girder bridge.
CONNECTION TO STONE FOOTING
110m
MOSELLE VALLEY BRIDGE ABOVE: MAIN GALLERY BAY
RIGHT: COLUMN FRAGMENT
GERMANY, 1972 Steel box girder bridge, with concrete pillars.
CHARLES DRIVER - ‘THE TRUE ARCHITECT’ 137m
Architect Charles Driver was involved in many significant Victorian infrastructure projects, designing numerous train stations and working with engineer Joseph Bazelgette on the London sewage network and its associated pump houses. he ocused heavily on the fusion of architecture and engineering, believing it to be the ‘truthful’ art of architecture.
218m
218m
218m
218m
218m
218m
NECKAR VALLEY BRIDGE GERMANY, 1977 ART
Steel box girder bridge, with concrete pillars and cable truss.
PROPORTION FITNESS UTILITY
135m
BEAUTY HARMONY
THE TRUE ARCHITECT
SUBLIMITY
UTILITY ECONOMY CONSTRUCTION GEOMETRY
263m
263m
MECHANICS SCIENCE
HELGELAND BRIDGE NORWAY, 1991 Cable-stayed bridge, with concrete pillars and steel deck.
‘THE TRUE ARCHITECT’ Charles Driver praised engineers for they ‘honest construction’, however ciriticised their inability to think artistically. Driver saw the solution to this to be application of the architectural ‘art’ to engineering projects. He speculated that the ‘truthful architect’ would emerge from the conflation of the disciplines of architecture and engineering, combining their relative competencies. The digram below is interpreted from Driver’s ‘The True Architect’ in Charles Driver, ‘Engineering and Art’, Transactions of the Civil and Mechanical Engineers Society (1879).
ABBEY MILLS PUMPING STATION CHARLES DRIVER AND JOSEPH BAZALGETTE
WROUGHT IRON
CAST IRON
Tensile Strength
Tensile Strength
Compressive Strength
Compressive Strength
Shear Strength
Shear Strength
Yeild Point
Yeild Point
WORKING PROPERTIES
WORKING PROPERTIES
Brittleness
Brittleness
Malleability
Malleability
IRON + <0.08% CARBON
PUBLIC [IRON]WORKS CATHEDRALS OF LIGHT Iron was the strcutural material of choice for most pioneering Victorian buildings, facilitating the construction of huge spans and large glazed public spaces.
8
425m
IRON + >2% CARBON
20TH CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITATING THE CAR - THE BRIDGES OF FRITZ LEONHARDT
9
INCORPORATING INFRASTRUCTURE
MANHATTAN’S MEGASTRUCTURES
THE PROBLEMS WITH MASS TRANSPORT
WORKING WITH INFRASTRUCTURE
FORCES DIAGRAM
Large scale road projects were common for most of the 20th century and seen as the future of mass transport. In late 1960’s Manhattan, architects were investigating how to better incorprate humans and cars together into town planning. This formed part of the ‘Megastructures’ movement of incorporating multiple functions into a single linear strucutre, along a piece of infrastructure. Many of the strategies of separating pedestrians from traffic gave precedence to the car and relegated the pedestrian to elevated ‘pedways’ and busy road crossings. Arterial roadways were disruptive to urban life, as a physical obstruction and a source of noise and air pollution. In response to this, a number of architects envisioned ways of incorporating architectural functions into these new forms of urban infrastructure.
Park Avenue Megastructure
Elevated Roadways
Buried Roadways
Elevated Pedestrians
Cross-Brooklyn Expressway
RESPONDING TO RUDOLPH NEW YORK’S CONCEPTUAL PROJECTS
City Corridor
TERMINAL ELEVATION
LINEAR CITY - MCMILAN, GRIFFIS & MILETO Brooklyn (1967) - Housing - Industry - Parking - Arts Centre
TWA TERMINAL - JFK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Public Podium
EERO SAARINEN (1956)
Cross-Brooklyn Expressway
LINEAR CITY - MCMILAN, GRIFFIS & MILETO Brooklyn (1967)
LOMEX AND CITY CORRIDOR - Housing -Offices - School Vault Enclosure Cross-Brooklyn Expressway
Saarinens terminal for TWA was designed to celebrate the jet age and possibilities of architectural strucutres. Developed entirely through diagrams iterative modelling, the terminal was designed to provide an optimum flow of passengers in a revolutionary structure. The clear span references Grand Central terminal in Manhattan and is formed out of a series of shells, influenced by Jorn Utzon.
City Corridor was proposed by Paul Rudolph as a response to Robert Moses’s grandest proposal, the Lower Manhattan Expressway (LOMEX). Rudolph prposed to mitigate the destruction of LOMEX, by enclosing it with a megastructure, containing houses, retail and offices. Moses hoped to improve the local environment by controlling noise and fumes and develop a central spine through the introduction of a monorail and pedestrial walkways. The scheme never went ahead, but inspired many future architects.
The structure of Saarinen’s TWA terminal relied on a ‘minimal surface’ technique of structural design, which typically used a hung cloth to similate optimum structural forms. The diagrams below show a series of digital mesh relaxations to arrive at the final form, which is translated to a series of shells.
‘...to design a building in which the architecture itself would express the drama and specialness and excitement of travel.’ LOMEX AND CITY CORRIDOR
SHELL STRUCTURAL DESIGN
PLAN OUTLINE
EERO SAARINEN
RELAXATION OF MESH
Ventilation
PAUL RUDOLPH + ROBERT MOSES (1967-72) Mixed-use building Monorail
PLAN DIAGRAM LOMEX Roadway
REFINING SUPPORT POINTS
CONNECTIONS TO AIRPLANES
INCREASING SHELL SIZE
REFINEMENT AND INCREASING RESOLUTION
10
20TH CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE
20TH CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE
60’S SPECULATIONS - RESPONSES TO VEHICULAR TRANSPORT
ARCHITECTURE OF THE JET AGE
PROJECTING FORM INTO SHELL SEGMENTS
11
19TH CENTURY
INDUSTRIALISATION AND MASS
MASS INFRASTRUCTURE
POPULATION GROWTH
CONSTRUCTION THE TRUE ARCHITECT
Charles Driver
IRON
Improving undustrial processes to make more reliable iron structures - enables larger spans
ARCHITECT
ENGINEER
TRUE ARCHITECT
THE TERMINUS
THE LOCOMOTIVE
Allows steam to escape
St Pancras
STEEL
Bessemer process improves ferrous metalurgy sufficnely to provide reliable, comercial steel. Steel replaces iron within construction within 20 years.
Clear Span
20TH CENTURY THE MOTOR CAR
PEDWAYS
Separating pedestrial and car
REINFORCED CONCRETE
?
Development of reinforce concrete as a structural material, with great formal possibilities.
ES AN PL
PLA N
ES
?
WORLD WAR I + II
Huge loss of life and economic impacts. Innovative technologies apeared during the wars. Post war reconstruction gave opportunity for new architectural approaches.
LINEAR CITIES
Enbracing + enclosing roadways
? ?
Waiting
Re ta
tail Re
il
MODERNIST MEGASTRUCTURES Corbusier’s Plan Obus Bag
rop gD
Ba
Dro p
? ?
PARKING THE AIR PLANE
THE TERMINAL
Eero Saarinen’s TWA Terminal
21ST CENTURY
12
20TH CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE
ARCHITECTURAL [INFRA]STRUCTURES
ARCHITECTURE OF THE JET AGE
CONCLUSIONS ON LEGACY STRUCTURES AND SPECULATIONS
13
INFORMING INFRASTRUCTURE
HISTORIC INFRASTRUCTURE
FACILITATING INFRASTRUCTURE
20TH CENTURY FAILURES PEOPLE
ARCHITECTURE TECHNOLOGY
INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION
PLACE
SYSTEMS
DESIGN
POLITICS / ECONOMICS
FLY-OVER SYSTEMS THEORY
SYNERGY FROM MULTI-OBJECTIVITY
INTEGRATING DEFENSIVE INFRASTRUCTURE
Density
People
MULTI-USE INRASTRUCTURE
Resiliency Infrastructure
USE FREQUENCY
Defensive infrastructure ise designed to prevent against extreme weather events (such as a 1/500 storm surge)BENCH - by their very nature, their usefulness day-to-day is extremely limited.
+
RESPONSE Combine local and global objectives
THE SYSTEM
Design oversights have resulted in legacy infrastructure scarring the landscape, whilst specialist defensive structures provide no day-today function, whilst only being operated
GLOBAL CLIMATE OBJECTIVES
WALL
HYBRID FUNCTIONS
OPPORTUNITY Identify opportunities for new local services
The 20th century saw spectacular experiments and dramatic failures. The realised grand Modernist projects of the previous century typically separated functions to provide usespecific infrastrucutre, which would, by its very nature, ignore people and be placeless.
CAPACITY
CASE STUDY - THE BIG U
INFRASTRUCTURE Identify capacity for intensification
Capacity utilisation + Responsiveness
INCREASE URBAN DENSIFICATION
More efficient utilisation of space, through hybridisation of uses and functions. Sustainable benefits of proximity of systems through reduced journeys.
SHOPOpportunities for people
PLANNED INFRASTRUCTURE Planned infrastructure projects can benefit from integrating the principles of multi-objectivity, including multiple funding avenues
SYSTEMS LONGEVITY
MONO-FUNCTION
Range of funding routes ensures maintennance of system
Mono-function infrastructure can be upgraded to accomodate additional functions and benefit from additional funding routes.
INTEGRATION / CONTEXTUALITY
LOW USE FREQUENCY
Responds to site and contextial specifics, to avoid infrastructure ‘scars’ and provide a locally integrated system.
Infrequently used infrastructure can be upgraded to accomodate additional functions and benefit from additional funding routes.
Program
TECTONIC STUDY MERGING PLATES Community
AIMS
HUMAN INTERACTION
?
The design of defensive infrastructure is often focused to one goal, ignoring any human interraction and the SEATING-SHELTER opportunity to add additional functions
Within complex cities, there are multiple inefficiencies within infrastructure systems than can be capitalised on with a multi-objective system.
SLIDE
Contextuality
New Technology
Multi Objectivity
Economy
INTERSTITIAL CONDITIONS
BIKE-POINT Legislation + Govermnent
OPPORTUNITY
SKATE
Multi-use
A New Infrastructure
IN
FL UE NC ES
DE SI G N
A NEW INFRASTRUCTURE
RE Q
UI RE M
OUTCOMES
PROVISION
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
EN TS
Placefulness
IPCC COMPLIANCE
GLOBAL
LOCAL FILL GAPS IN SERVICE PROVISION
Human Interraction
Inter-connectivity
Optimum Utilisation
“It’s a line in the sand and what it says to our species is that this is the moment and we must act now,”
House services within Local Development Framework
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL Local control of noise and air pollution
CONTEXTUAL INTEGRATION
Deborah Roberts, IPCC
14
TOWARDS A NEW INFRASTRUCTURE
TOWARDS A NEW INFRASTRUCTURE
THE CASE FOR MULTI-OBJECTIVITY IN THE ‘ANTHROPOCENE’ AGE + LEARNING FROM THE 19TH & 20TH CENTURIES
ASSESSING MULTI-OBJECTIVITY
15
CONNECTED LONDON CARTOGRAPHIC TRANSPORT NETWORK
16
17
CROSSRAIL 2 London Underground London Overground National Rail Tramlink Central CROSSRAIL 2 core of route Regional scheme – possible options Option for a future eastern branch London Underground London Overground Source: Transport for London National Rail
HIGH GROWTH AREAS Opportunity areas Ares for intensification
Tramlink 2 CROSSRAIL
Source: London Plan
Central core of route CROSSRAIL 2 Regional scheme – possible options London Option forUnderground a future eastern branch London Overground London Underground National Rail Source: Transport for London Tramlink London Overground National Rail Central core of route Tramlink Regional scheme – possible options of route Option for Central a futurecore eastern branch Regional scheme – possible options Option for a future eastern branch Source: Transport for London
NEW JOBS
Source: Transport for London
575,000 8,000 NEW HOMES 303,000 8,650
Waterloo Lambeth North
HIGH DENSITY RADIAL LINKS TO CENTRAL LONDON
Elephant & Castle Potential Crossrail extension Brighton Mainline capacity upgrade HS2 extension HS1 / HS2 Train lengthening / electrification schemes East-West Rail Lines relieved by Crossrail / Crossrail 2 Lines relieved by HS2 Green Belt / National Park / AONB Potential growth areas Major growth potential north of London Coastal areas with major growth potential but poorly served by current rail system
ER NG HA
HA
NG
ER
HI
LL
LI
N
HI
K
LL
LI
N
K
Source: Transport for London
Old Kent Road 2
Lambeth North
New Cross Gate
Camberwell Elephant & Castle Waterloo
BAKERLOO LINE EXTENSION
Lambeth North Waterloo
London Underground London Overground Docklands Light Railway National Rail BAKERLOO LINE EXTENSION Tramlink Existing Bakerloo line Core extension proposal London Underground Extension option 1a London Overground Extension option 1b Docklands Light Railway Extension option 2 BAKERLOO National LINE Rail EXTENSION Tramlink BAKERLOO LINE EXTENSION Existing Bakerloo line Source: Transport for London London Underground Core extension proposal London Overground Extension option 1a London Underground Docklands Light Railway Extension option 1b London National option Rail Extension 2 Overground Docklands Light Railway Tramlink National Rail Existing Bakerloo line Core extension proposal Source: Transport forTramlink London Existing Extension option 1aBakerloo line Core extension proposal Extension option 1b Extension Extension option 2 option 1a Extension option 1b Extension option 2 Source: Transport for London
Old Kent Road 1 Peckham Rye Old Kent Road 2
Lewisham
New Cross Gate Ladywell
Lambeth North
Camberwell Elephant & Castle
Old Kent Road 1 ElephantPeckham Catford Old Kent Road 1 Bridge & Castle Rye Old Kent Road 2
Lewisham
New Cross Gate Old Kent Road 2 Ladywell New Cross Gate Lower Sydenham Lewisham Camberwell Peckham Rye Catford Bridge Lewisham Peckham New Beckenham Beckenham Rye Junction Ladywell HIGH DENSITY RADIAL LINKS TO CENTRAL LONDON HIGH DENSITY RADIAL LINKS Lower Sydenham ClockLadywell House TO CENTRAL LONDON Catford Bridge Elmers End New Beckenham Potential Catford Bridge Crossrail extension Beckenham Eden Parkcapacity upgrade Junction Brighton Mainline Potential Crossrail extension HS2 extension Brighton Mainline capacity upgrade Lower Sydenham HS1 /House HS2 HS2 extension Clock Lower Sydenham Train lengthening / electrification Hayes schemes HS1 / HS2 West Wickham East-West Rail Elmers End Beckenham New Beckenham Train lengthening / electrification schemes Junctionby Crossrail / Crossrail 2 Lines relieved East-West Rail New Beckenham Eden ParkbyBeckenham Lines relieved HS2 Lines relieved by Crossrail / Crossrail 2 Junction Green Belt / National Park / AONB Lines relieved by HS2 Clock House Green Belt / National Park / AONB Potential growth areas Major growth potential north of London Clock House Hayes Potential growth areas West Wickham Elmers End Coastal areas with major growth potential Major growth potential north of London Elmers End by current rail system Eden Park but poorly served Coastal areas with major growth potential but poorly served by current rail system Eden Park Camberwell
Source: Transport for London Stansted
Luton
Old Kent Road 1
Waterloo
Source: Transport for London
West Wickham
Source: Transport for London
Southend City
Heathrow
ALL LONDON GREEN GRID DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
Hayes
West Wickham
Hayes
Thames Estuary
HIGH DENSITY RADIAL LINKS TO CENTRAL LONDON
HI ER NG
Strategic links
Potential Crossrail extension Brighton Mainline capacity upgrade HS2 extension HS1 / HS2 Train lengthening / electrification schemes East-West Rail Lines relieved by Crossrail / Crossrail 2 Lines relieved by HS2 Green Belt / National Park / AONB Potential growth areas Major growth potential north of London Coastal areas with major growth potential but poorly served by current rail system
HA
Strategic corridors
LL
LI
N
K
Gatwick
Strategic walking routes Strategic cycling routes Park opportunities
Stansted
Luton
Stansted
Luton
Regional parks Metropolitan parks District parks Local parks & open spaces
Southend
Other/private spaces
Southend
Source: Greater London Authority
Heathrow
The ‘All London Green Grid’ development framework plans for a network of sustainable infrastructure projects, including parks, road and rail infrastrucuture ‘corridors’, cycke and walking routes and flood defences.
City
City
Heathrow
ALL LONDON GREEN GRID DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
ALL LONDON GREEN GRID DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
Thames Estuary
Thames Estuary Source: Transport for London
Gatwick Gatwick
Strategic corridors Strategic corridors
18
INFRASTRUCTURE OPPORTUNITIES
Strategic links
LONDON DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS AND OPPORTUNITY AREAS
Strategic cycling routes
Strategic links Strategic walking routes
Strategic walking routes
Strategic cycling routes Park opportunities
Park opportunities
Regional parks
Regional parks
Metropolitan parks
Metropolitan parks
District parks
District parks
Local parks & open spaces
Local parks & open spaces
Other/private spaces
Other/private spaces Source: Greater London Authority
Luton
Stansted
19
FLOOD SOURCES
TIDAL - NORTH SEA STROM SURGE
FLUVIAL - UPSTREAM
k
a Pe
People affected by flooding per km2 (UK)
ed tain Re
el lev od Flo
ter Wa igh nH
el lev
a Me
LONDON’S FLOOD SYSTEMS
d Be er Riv ns tio da un Fo of e as
B
OPERATION
CHANNEL NAVIGATION
SCHEME OVERVIEW
Open
32m
61m
61m
61m
61m
32m
Closed
Flood Defence
Underspill
Water Body
Flood Risk Zone Source: [Enviroment Agency Data]
USAGE + LIFESPAN
40
Life spa
n
e ag Us
20
THAMES BARRIER
DEPTFORD CREEK
SOUTHBANK
VICTORIA EMBANKMENT
ALBERT EMBANKMENT
CHELSEA EMBANKMENT
PUTNEY EMBANKMENT
10
TREND
0 1983
RESILIENCE LONDON’S FLOOD DEFENSE INFRASTRUCTURE
THAMES ESTUARY FLOOD RISK
350km2 Land
Commercial / Industrial
16
Hospitals
167km Railway
£200bn
8
300km
500k
400
1000
51
Homes
20
40k
1.25m Residents
Closures
30
Property value
Schools
Power Stations
Substations
2018
LONDON’S RESILIENCE INFRASTRUCTURE THE THAMES BARRIER
Roads
Rail Stations
21
TIDAL CONTROLS - MODERATING EXTREMES
TIDE TABLES
1.75m
LOW TIDE
DANGER ZONE
7m
SAFE ZONE
1.75m
New Barrier + upgraded flood walls
DANGER ZONE
OPTION 01
6 Hours
6 Hours
Source: Met Office
OPTION 02
Lower Thames surge storage HIGH TIDE
EQUILIBRIUM
OPTION 03
New lower Thames barrier
OPTION 04
New lower Thames barrier with locks
LONDONâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S RIVER TRANSPORT NETWORK
Embankment
Blackfriars
Tower
St. Katharine
Westminster Millbank
Cadogan Chelsea Harbour
St. George Wharf Battersea Power Station
Bankside
London Bridge City
Doubletree Docklands Nelson Dock
Canary Wharf North Greenwich
Greenland
Woolwich Ferry North Terminal
London Eye
Masthouse Terrace
Kew
Hampton Court
Greenwich
Woolwich Royal Arsenal
Richmond Landing Stage
Plantation Wharf Wandsworth Riverside Quarter
Woolwich Ferry South Terminal
Putney Richmond St. Helena
Kingston Turks Kingston Town End
New Barrier
THAMES ESTUARY 2100
Existing Barrier Mantained
THAMES TAXIS
ACTION PLAN OPTIONS
Flood Storage
THE RIVER AS A MASS TRANSPORT NETWORK
Upgraded Flood Defence
22
23
TIDAL MANAGEMENT
EMBANKMENT
THE TIDAL THAMES
RICHMOND
Tidal ranges in the Richmond section of the Thames meant that it was un-navigble to larger vessels at low tide. To combat this, tidal controls were introduced at Richmond Lock, which maintain a minimum water level to keep the section navigable. The managed secriton of the Thames ends at Teddington Lock, wher the river is no lonegr tidal. Tidal River
1
Richmond Lock
Tidal Management
2
Teddington Lock
LONDON’S FORMER DOCKLANDS 7.0m
7.7m
7.6m
6.9m
7.4m
5.1m
Surge Tide Mean High Tide
Barometric High Tide Spring High Tide Neap High Tide
5m
Low Tide
s nt ge l Re ana C
Fluvial River Spring Low Tide Neap Low Tide
Victoria
Tower Bridge
North Woolwich
Westminster
Source: Port of London Authority
Tilbury
Margate
0m
1
3
2
Surrey Canal
Existing Waterway / Dock Former Waterway / Dock Connection to Waterway
m kha Pec nal Ca
Rail Connection
THAMES BARRIER
TILBURY DOCKS TEDDINGTON LOCK
SURREY COMMERCIAL DOCKS
WEST INDIA DOCKS
EAST INDIA DOCKS
VICTORIA & ALBERT DOCKS
WESTMINSTER BRIDGE
KEY PLAN
SPRING HIGH TIDE
TAMING THE THAMES
24
NEAP LOW TIDE
te King Canu
- The first
e Tamers of the Tid
DOCKLANDS
MANAGING A TIDAL CITY
LONDONS INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION LEGACY
The principle factor to regulate river levels in the Central London tidal section of the Thames is stopping the ingress of upstream tidal surges. This crates a problem, however; dealing with the (much slower) fluvial discharge. Currently, the solution involves closing the Thames barrier at low tide, effectively creating a large reservoir to store incoming fluvial water, which can be released at the next low tide, however, this strategy creates non-navigable sections of the river.
Disused from the 1970’s, Londons former docklands show a picture of the industrial landscape prior to containerised shipping being relocated downstream to TIlbuty. The former docks have now largely been rebuilt, however the largest and furthest east of the docks, the Royal Victoria and Albert Docks, are still largely unchanged and offer opportunity for intensification.
25
THE ROYAL DOCKS OPPORTUNITIES FOR REGENERATION
ROYAL DOCKS CULTURAL HERITAGE + ORGANISED COMPLEXITY
26
27
CONNECTIVITY
USE INTENSITY Victoria and Albert Docks are extremely under-densified by comarison to most of central and East London.
Stansted
Luton
Historically low-density areas such as Greenwich Peninsula and Stratford (now the Olympic Park) are being intensified and having their uses diversified.
1 3
C D
B
5
A
This reveals the opportunity of the Victoria and Albert docks area for future development and intensification.
2
4
E
Heathrow London City
KEY SITES Figure Ground
Planned Development
Gatwick
Industrial Areas
DOCK AREAS
A
London City Airport
1
Royal Victoria
B
University of East London
2
West Silvertown
C
ExCel
3
Royal Albert
D
The Crystal
4
North Woolwich
E
Tate & Lyle
5
Royal Albert Basin
Parks
Tu b DL e St atio R S Ov erg tatio n Ra n il S roun Cr dS t a t os tat sra ion ion il S tat ion
DENSITY
22 persons per hectare
Docks Area Newham
27 persons per hectare
City of London Camden
To Stratford
Islington Hackney
98 persons per hectare 115 persons per hectare 160 persons per hectare 148 persons per hectare
96 persons per hectare 125 persons per hectare 118 persons per hectare
Haringey Lambeth Westminster
CITY AIRPORT EVALUATION O2 Arena
harf
m2
Function
City Airport
Safeguarding Zone
HEATHROW
Safeguarding Zone
32 mins
40 mins
Tate + Lyle Factory
rd fo pt el De unn T
28 mins
LONDON CITY
Albert Dock Victoria Dock
LIVERPOOL STREET
Residents
CANARY WAHRF
To
500,000 ZERO ONE
ExCel Centre
ry W
a Can
25 mins
HEATHROW
Destinations
Barrier Thames
184 LONDON CITY
Destinations
46
To Greenwich / Deptford
nal To Woolwich Arse
AIRPORT SURPLUS CAPACITY HEATHROW
18m
GATWICK
5m
DOCKS SCALE 17m
STANSTED
VICTORIA & ALBERT DOCKS
LUTON
LONDONS INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION LEGACY Disused from the 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, Londons former docklands show a picture of the industrial landscape prior to containerised shipping being relocated downstream to TIlbuty. The former docks have now largely been rebuilt, however the largest and furthest east of the docks, the Royal Victoria and Albert Docks, are still largely unchanged and offer opportunity for intensification.
28
2m
LONDON CITY TOTAL FLIGHTS 4KM X 35
3m
29
CROSSRAIL ROUTE & CONNECTIVITY
Stansted Airport
Shenfield
Missing Links
CENTRAL LONDON
Stratford
Whitechapel
Liverpool Street
Farringdon
Tottenham Court Road
DLR Network Crossrail
CENTRAL LONDON
Bond Street
Tube Network
Emirates Air Line
Heathrow Airport
Paddington
Maidenhead
DOCKS CONNECTIVITY DIAGRAM
Luton Airport
Reading
CENTRAL LONDON
Canary Wharf
Gatwick Airport
Custom House
Heathrow Airport
CITY AIRPORT DESTINATIONS
WATERWAYS INTEGRATING NETWORKS
INTEGRATING NETWORKS WITH WATERWAYS CENTRAL LONDON CENTRAL LONDON
CENTRAL LONDON CENTRAL LONDON
NETWORKED DOCKS SYSTEMS AND RE-USE LOGIC
Draining Docks
The Royal docks occupy a huge area of land, with an extremely low use intensity, with no use at all for freight and passenger transport. As the parcels of land adjacent to to the docks are intensively redeveloped, the case for draining the docks to introduce ancillary and additional programme is strengthened. This would, however, negate the opportunity of the docks to provide the missing transport connections in the area and connect with the very much under-used London river transport network.
DESTINATION DOCKLANDS ROYAL DOCKS CONNECTIVITY AND OPPORTUNITY FOR RE-DEVELOPMENT
CONNECTION WITH CANAL NETWORK
+
These benefits can be combined with a multiobjective system of canals that connect critical nodes and integrate additional built-fabric that responds to the varying contextual conditions adjacent to the docks. Addition of programme
30
31
EXISTING DOCKS
Docklands Campus
Client:
Lendlease [Australia]
Full depth 9.0-12.0m The Dock
UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON
SILVERTOWN QUAYS
Pontoon Dock Mouth
To maximise the use of the existing docks, a series of ponds at different levels are proposed. This allows additional ecology and releases the space below the dock for construction.
Scheme Architects:
Residential
Commercial (making spaces) Depth: 1.5-1.8 m
FACULTIES:
Fletcher Priest Architects [Masterplan] Allford Hall Monaghan Morris [Millennium Mills] Stanton Williams [Bridge]
Depth: 1.8-3.0 m
Commercial (public)
Residential
Commercial (office)
ROYAL ALBERT WHARF
School of Law and Social Sciences
Client:
Nottinng Hill Genesis
School of Arts and Digital Industries
Architect:
Architect:
Royal Docks Business School
Farrells
Allford Hall Monaghan Morris Allies and Morrison Eric Parry Architects Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios Fletcher Priest Architects PLP Architecture Stanton Williams West 8
CROSSRAIL
School of Architecture, Computing and Engineering
Client:
ABP [China]
Residential Design:
Lily Pond
ROYAL ALBERT DOCK
Fielden Clegg Bradley
Combined Honours
Commercial (public)
Customs House
2m 2m
EXCEL CENTRE
Conference and events centre. Hosted London 2012 Olympic table tennis contests. Plays regular host to London boat show and large events such as military weapons shows and expo’s.
Ppg Sta
Outfall
Univ 4m
Mast
ROYAL ALBERT DOCK TAKE-OFF &
CLIMB SUR FACE TAKE-OFF
ROYAL VICTORIA DOCK PUBLIC SAFETY ZONE
Ppg Sta
FACE & CLIMB SUR
Gallions Point Marina
LONDON CITY AIRPORT
Jetty
PUBLIC SAFETY ZONE
Pontoons
Thames Wharf TAKE-OFF &
Blackwall Point
6m
ACE CLIMB SURF
Jetty
Coll
ROYAL GEORGE DOCK
Pontoon
TAKE-OFF &
CLIMB SUR FACE
Depot Sch Ca
r
Sch
ble Ca
Pontoon
Amb
2m
F Sta
3m
Jetty
Locks Mast
PO
2m
Sta
Custom House
Warehouse
4m
Wharf London Underground Station
Moveable Flood Barrier
[Pontoon Docks]
Works
4m
Ind Est
North Greenwich Pier
Acad
Thameside Industrial Estate Thames Barrier Park
DLR Station
Coun Offs
1m
PO
2m
PW
Cable Car [Emirates Air Line]
Manhattan Wharf Works
(Oil Depot)
Park
Complex
Crescent Wharf
2m
2m
Pol Sta
Pavs
Royal Victoria
Standard Industrial Estate
Mus
Gardens
Ppg Sta
Sluice
Slipways
Jetty
Wharf Jetty
Jetty Travelling Crane
Indicative New Boat Route
North Woolwich Pier Iron Pier
Jetty Tidal Shore
LL WA CK BLA
Figure Ground of Building
rry ee Fe h Fr lwic r) Woo icula (veh
RIER THAMES BAR
Jetty
Body of Water
WOOLWICH REACH
Slipway
Landing Stage
Spot Datum
BUGSBY’S REACH
Trinity Wharf
Jetty
Peartree Wharf
Jetty
Jetty
Slipway Mast Pond Wharf
Jetty FB
r veyo Con
CH REA
XXm
Thameside Industrial Estate
Deanston
Airport
2m
1m
Thames Road Industrial Estate
Conveyor
Conveyors
Business
RE AC H
Thames Barrier Park
Kierbeck Lyle
GA LL IO NS
2m
Riverbus Stop
Conveyor
Crossrail Station
Slipway Jetty
Jetty
Pontoon
Pontoon
Jetties
ROAD TRANSPORT NETWORKS AIRPORT SAFEGUARDING ZONES A406
Inner Horizon Surface
A11 A12
OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS
Inner Transitional Surface Public Safety Zone
Runway Inner Transitional Surface
Public Safety Zone
Takeoff and Climb Surface
ROYAL DOCKS
Takeoff and Climb Surface
SAFEGUARDING ZONES [DETAILED] +54.95 AOD
TRANSITIONAL SURFACE - SECTIONAL IMPACTS Existing Crossing
+49.95 AOD
NOISE PROFILE
+26.80 AOD
4 Lane Highway
3m Clearance Zone
Takeoff and
ace
Climb Surf
Inner Tra nsitional Surfa
63dB
+24.95 AOD ce
Inner Horizontal Surface
+4.95 AOD +49.95 AOD
Inner Horizontal Surface
Note: Mapped on plan above
57dB
A2016
2 Lane Highway
Source: Civil Aviation Authority
A102
+00.00 AOD Albert Dock
Flight Protection Surface
A13
A13
Proposed Crossing
+49.95 AOD
Public Safety Zone Runway
A13
A205
Runway CL
A2
Source: Civil Aviation Authority
Source: Transport for London
A207 15
A20
24
14 14
26
56
5
A2
1
146 148
8
57 dB
A205
A20
63 dB
45
1 km
32
33
ALBERT DOCK
GEORGE DOCK
DESIGN SECTION
1:500 Source: Port of London Authority - Albert Dock Tender Information
PONTOON DOCK
VICTORIA DOCK
EXCEL CENTRE
DOCKS AS EXISTING
1:1250 Source: Authour and Newham Planing Portal
SITE + CONTEXT SITE DEVELOPMENT 34
35
ZONE 01: CONTEXTUAL SCALING
RUNWAY AREA
Level 09
Level 08
Level 07
Level 06
Level 05
Level 04
>54dB NOISE
Level 03
Level 02
Level 01
3m Level 00
EXISTING WATER LEVEL Level -1
10m Level -2
+/- 00 AOD Level -3
ZONE 02: TAKEOFF AND LANDING ZONE
150 - 250m
VICTORIA DOCKS - SCALE INVESTIGATION
>54dB NOISE
The scale of the Royal Docks is so large that is it hard to evaluate as a whole. The diagrams below insert fragments of known areas of London into the corner of Victoria Docks opposite, in order to provide a relatable comparison of scale.
ZONE 02: PUBLIC SAFETY AREA THE BARBICAN
CANARY WHARF
MASSING VOXEL
VICTORIA DOCS SCALE COMPARISON
IDENTIFYING MASSING CONSTRAINTS
Maximum Height
Voxels
10m
10 m
CITY AIRPORT
3m
ASSESSING SCALE
Voxel Base Unit
36
37
10 + 50.34 09 + 46.43 08 + 42.12 07 + 37.57 06 + 32.99 05 + 28.43 04 + 23.85 03 + 19.45 02 + 14.97 01 + 10.57
SITE + CONTEXT MILLENNIUM MILLS 38
39
13
9
10
14
7
6
8
5
5
15
1 3 2
4
DLR Approach
Concourse Approach
DESTINATION DOCKLANDS CONCEPT DESIGN + EVOLUTION
20
18
18
18
1
Main Concourse
2
Bag Drop
3
Baggage Handling
4
Customer Services
5
F+B & Retail
6
Staff Search
7
Customs Screening
8
Customs Interrogation
9
International Arrivals Hall
10
Domestic Arrivals Hall
11
19
18
18
16
Good Screening
12
Customs Admin
13
Immigration
14
Goods In
15
Retail
16
Security Lobby
17
Security Screening
18
F+B & Retail
19
Security Office
20
Administration
20
17
20
18
CITY AIRPORT EXISTING TERMINAL 1:200 Grid at 10m centres
40
41
ROYAL ALBERT DOCK
CONNECTIONS TO CITY NETWORKS
ROYAL VICTORIA DOCK LONDON CITY AIRPORT
ROYAL GEORGE DOCK
LOCATING THE TERMINAL CENTRAL LONDON
ROYAL ALBERT DOCK
CENTRAL LONDON
ROYAL VICTORIA DOCK
CENTRAL LONDON
LONDON CITY AIRPORT
ROYAL GEORGE DOCK
DESIRED CONNECTIONS
+ LOCAL CONNECTIONS DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS CENTRAL LONDON CENTRAL LONDON
KEY BUILDING CATEGORY
CENTRAL LONDON
Proposed Development Residential / Mixed Use Commercial / Industrial Municipal
PROPOSED LOCATION
Public - Amenities Public - Education
LAND USE Green Space Water Body
The diagram above shows the distribution of different types of building and land-use in the Royal Docks area. It reveals the emergence of distinctly different zones throught out the site, with varying uses and levels of general connectivity. As well as providing missing connections, the multi-objective network also needs to differentiate and integrate itself differently depending on these conditions.
01:
ESTABLISH ROUTE AND CONNECTION NODES
NETWORKS
SIZE COMPARISONS
Connections to wider city.
AN
PONTOON DOCKS
02:
INTEGRATED
37,000 m2
INTRODUCTION OF MARINAS AND WATER SPORTS AREAS
NETWORK
Farringdon
MOORING A
Mooring spaces for visitations and houseboats.
LONDONâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S TERMINI
DIFFERENTIATED
NETWORK
03:
LANDSCAPING IN PUBLIC SAFTEY AREA
Waterloo
SPORTS
Euston
Kings Cross + St Pancras
Paddington
Providing sports and recreational areas.
CONTEXT
Accomodating complimentray functions as required by adjacent programme.
04:
ZONING OF ADJACENT AREAS
CENTRAL LONDON
LEISURE
CENTRAL LONDON
Providing park and leisure spaces.
Events Marina at ExCel
CENTRAL LONDON
ECOLOGY
Shallower zones supporting a range of ecologies.
Acoustic landscaping in Public Safety Zone
NETWORKS
Providing missing links within existing transport networks.
42
Watersports & general marina
Main Terminal
A MULTI-OBJECTIVE NETWORK
A MULTI-OBJECTIVE NETWORK
CONNECTED ZONES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTEGRATION
ESTABLISHING A NETWORK LOGIC
43
CHECK IN
Ticketing Hall
Baggage handling
CONCOURSE
PLATFORM 1-2
Customer Services
PLATFORM 3-4
PLATFORM
DIFFERENTIATING PROGRAMME
DIFFERENTIATING PROGRAMME
UN-CONSTRAINED AREAS
RESPONDING TO HEIGHT CONSTRAINTS
WC
5-6
F&B + RETAIL
In te rc ha ng e
to
So ut h
Te rm
in al
Security Lobby
SECURITY
Security Office
ENCLOSED STATION
TERRACED PROGRAMME AND ‘CANYON’
Security Interview
LEGEND
Customs Interview
Uncontrolled Public Space
Controlled Public Space
Controlled Private Space
WC Onward Route
Customs
Staff search
Admin Directional Route
BAG CLAIM (domestic)
DEVELOPING INTO PARK LAND
WC
(international)
BAG CLAIM
Bi-directional Route
DEPARTURE LOUNGE [F&B + Retail]
WC
Admin + Management Immigration
CANAL WITHIN LARGER BUILDING VOLUME
LARGER VOLUMES SET BACK FROM RESTRICTED ZONE
GATES
FUNCTIONAL HIERACHIES
A MULTI-OBJECTIVE NETWORK
A MULTI-OBJECTIVE TERMINAL
EXPLORING THE ELEVATED CANAL
A new terminal to support the expansion of London City Airport to provide greater connectivity to the Riverbus network and Crossrail. The terminal combines the functions of airport and boat terminal to form a new, integrated, typology which shared un-controlled public space. TERRACED PROGRAMME TO RESPOND TO NOISE LEVELS
44
45
DEVELOPING CANAL INTO LANDSCAPE
REFINEMENT INTO VOLUMES
SEPARATION INTO STRUTS AND PEDWAYS
AN ELEVATED NETWORK -
The following studies attempt to establish an elevated canal network in a corner of the docks, incorporating the principles already established. The route logic was based on a hierachy of primary route and local connections, woven into the surrounding street grid. This revealed the issues of successfully integrating the network into the surrounding urban fabric and the lack of remaining context to form architectural dialogue with.
INTRODUCTION OF INTERSTITIAL CANYONS
INCREAING RESOLUTION OF FRAGMENTATION
PERIMETER LOOP AND INGRESS POINTS
PRIMARY ROUTE
NETWORK ESTABLISHED
SECONDARY CONNECTIONS
GEOMETRIC RATIONALISATION
500m X 500m
TERRACING TOWARDS CENTRE
DEVELOPMENT INTO DFFERENT LEVELS
CREATION OF ENCLOSURE
FRAGMENT STUDY Development of structure into walkways and beams
Perimeter integration into context
Landscaping in response to flght restriction areas
Perimeter programme stems to stay below the rim of the docks
System develops into surface + strut
DESIGN STUDIES THE ELEVATED CANAL
46
Opportunities for circulation in spaces below waterways
Network of walkways connects veins of programme
Introduction of waterways at multiple levels
Opportunity for roads / services to be beneath canal
AREA STUDY THE ELEVATED CANAL
47
2 4
2 1
3
1890
1930 DOCKLANDS, 1945 1
Finger docks / pontoons
2
Dry docks / incursions into land
3
‘Dolphin’ docks
4
Tidal basin system
2 1
3
1
2
The 1940’s are considered the hayday of the docks, with their decline beginning with the introduction of containerisation and subsequent moving of freight to Tilbury (in the Thames Estuary). The image above was taken in 1945 and shows the distribution of programme and freight traffic, with a complex rail network connecting the various piers and wharfs.
1970 EXISTING URBAN GRID The existing urban grid was mostly established after the docklands stopped recieving commercial traffic. The grid suffers from the lack of coordination from the various developer-built schemes that followed the docks closure and the several holes in the urban fabric where re-development is yet to commence.
ESTABLISHING CONTEXTUAL DIALOGUE -
The objectives of the multi-objective network are to differentiate itself as the context changes, to integrate itself into its location. The contemporary layout of the urban grid and morphology bears very little resemblence to the former docks and is largely very poorly integrated, with no clear network logic.
1990
The historic fabric, however, followed a stong organisational logic and itself integrated the area sucessfully. To restore some memory of this lost fabric, the historic street and dock layouts have been interpreted ans inform the proposed langauge of dock crossings. The indicative layout for new crossings will follow analysis of local and city-wide requirements for connectivity to establish nodes to be connected. The nature of the crossings network is informed by the lost fabric of the docks, balanced with these requirements for connectivity and determined connection points.
HISTORIC STREET GRID The historic urban grid grew organically, aligned with the same objecting of servicing the docks as the grew. It largely has the same logic, with primary routes runing parallel to the docks and secondary spurs running perpendicular. The routes both feature strong connectivity to Central London and within the site, with North-South routes provided by the Connaught Tunnel.
HISTORIC DOCKS GRID The earliest dock layout featured a series of ‘Finger’ docks, slender docks against which large ships could be unloaded. These aligned with the street grid and were later removed to allow for larger vessels. A series of ‘Dry Docks’ were formed from incursions into the land and were angled to allow for easier entry of vessels.
2015
HISTORIC MEMORY REVEALING THE DOCKS LEGACY The diagrams above analyse historic mapping information to illustrate the history and development of the docks. Developments since the 1890s have seen the continual expansion of the docks, with the original Victoria Docks ‘Finger Quays’ being removed to allow for larger ships. Following the docks decline in the 1980’s, existing buildings were continuously demolished, leaving very little of the existing urban fabric behind. Transport connections were significantly reduced, with the Beckton branch of the DLR not introduced until 1994 and the Silvertown branch (connecting City Airport) not opened until 2005 and North-South rail connections lost entirely through the closure of the Connaught Tunnel.
48
Figure Ground Docks Boundary Docks Boundary [Historic] Key Transport Networks
DOCKS MORPHOLOGY INTERPRETING LOST URBAN FABRIC
A NEW DOCK GRID: RESTORING URBAN MEMORY The indicative proposal for new crossings looks back to the lost language of finger docks and dry docks, to bring back a reference to the historic fabric. The new crossings follow locations of the existing grid, requirements for new connections and the logic of the historic pontoons.
Legacy Structures / Networks
49
CHOICE
INTEGRATION
INTEGRATION
More Chosen
More Integrated
More Integrated
CHOICE
INTEGRATION
INTEGRATION
More Chosen
More Integrated
More Integrated
CHOICE
INTEGRATION
INTEGRATION
More Chosen
More Integrated
More Integrated
1200m [most chosen isolated]
1200m / 15mins walking radius
800m / 10mins walking radius
Integration analysis of the surrounding area reveals the general lack of integration of the Royal Docks area, with two integrated â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;spinesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, running NorthSouth and stopping before reaching the docks.
EXISTING CONTEXT INTEGRATION 1200m [most integrated isolated] More Integrated
The Royal docks and surrounding areas are typically very poorly connected (particularly North-South) and the areas bordering the river are poorly integrated at both the 10min and 15min walking radii.
1200m [most chosen isolated]
1200m / 15mins walking radius
800m / 10mins walking radius
Royal Docks Area
EMERGING CONTEXT Both the proposed Silvertown and Albert Docks schemes are reasonably well integrated into the existing networks, with the silvertown scheme significantly improving the integration of the Thames Barrier Park area.
1200m [most chosen isolated]
1200m / 15mins walking radius
800m / 10mins walking radius
ADDITION OF NETWORK The analysis above clearly demonstrated that the addition of North-South connections within the docks would improve the general integration of the area and would be most likely to be chosen as a pedestrian route.
Choice analysis of the surrounding area reveals Connaught Bridge as the only strongly chosen route in the docks area, with the integrated spines (shown on the last page) chosen as well.
CHOICE 2000m [most chosen isolated] More Chosen
Royal Docks Area
NEWHAM + WOOLWICH LOCAL INTEGRATION
The diagram opposite shows the level of integration for the Newham / Greenwich Peninsula area, with the more integrated streets isolated. The general area is very poorly integrated, with many isolated areas and spurs. Notably, the areas adjacent to the Royal Docks are particularly isolated.
SITE INTEGRATION SPACE SYNTAX ANALYSIS
More Chosen
50
51
ROUTE DESIGN STRATEGY
CONCEPT CROSSINGS Concept network of dock crossings, feeding into local grid and providing riverboat terminals. Areas around crossings provide opportunities for additional programme. 01: ESTABLISHING CONNECTIONS TO CENTRAL LONDON Connection of Royal Docks area and London City Airport to the wider River Boat network.
Iterations Key
02: STRATEGICALLY CONNECTING LOCAL NODES Providing inter-connection between existing transport nodes. Current networks are fragmented and divided by the existing docks, the new network will provide connections to allow more efficient use of networks.
Existing Site
Introduction of crossings and emerging context
03: PROVIDING NORTH-SOUTH PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS THROUGH THE DOCKS The docks divide the local street grid and highly restrict the flow between North and South. Additional crossings will provide greater integration between these areas and connect the emerging developments to the street grid.
Iteration 01 5000m
Splayed landing conditions Iteration 02 5000m
Refinements to local grid Iteration 03 5000m
6
1
10
7
4 11 12
8
2 3
13
9
5
Iteration 04 5000m
52
1
Becton branch DLR to Riverboat network
10
Albert Docks to Riverboat Network
2
Residential areas to Riverboat network + North Docks
11
Galleons Reach to Silvertown + Riverboat Network
ROUTE ORGANISATION
3
South DLR Branch to Customs House Crossrail
12
DLR Woolwich branch to Becton branch
4
Silvertown to Customs House
13
George Dock to Galleons Reach
CONNECTION OBJECTIVES AND HIERACHIES
5
Silvertown to Riverboat network
6
ExCel Centre to Riverboat Network
7
Silvertown to DLR Becton Branch + North Docks
8
Silvertown to Riverboat Network
9
City Airport to Becton Branch DLR + Riverboat Network
DESIGN EVALUATION ROYAL DOCKS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
5000m
53
‘SOLID’ TO ‘STICK’ - 01
EXOSKELETON
‘SOLID’ TO ‘STICK’ - 02 SKELETON
‘SOLID’ TO ‘STICK’ - 03
‘STICK’ ON ‘SOLID’
54
STICK SURFACE SOLID
STICK SURFACE SOLID
EXPERIMENTS IN MATERIAL DISTRIBUTION
EXPERIMENTS IN MATERIAL DISTRIBUTION
55
INTERACTIONS WITH EXISTING WALL
BOUNCING OFF WALL
FOLLOWING WALL
DISPERSING ALONG WALL
DIFFUSING INTO CONTEXT
HYBRID: FOLLOW + DIFFUSE
HYBRID: DISPERSE + DIFFUSE
DOCK WALLS TAXONOMY
STRUCTURE LANDING POINTS TECTONIC STUDIES
The studies below formed experiments into landing of bridge structures against the existing dock walls. They attempt to work with the existing walls and explore the development of form from solid mass to discrete architectural elements. The findings of these studies informed that there was a need to further explore the development of form and integration of programme with existing walls separately.
INWARD SLOPING CORBEL Royal George Dock
ARCHED BAYS
Royal Albert and Royal Victoria (sections)
56
DESIGN FRAGMENTS
SITE INTEGRATION
DISCRETISED SOLIDS
LANDING STUDIES AT THE EXISTING DOCK WALLS
BUTRESSED BAY
Royal Albert and Royal Victoria Docks
57
HEIGHT CONSTRAINTS
NETWORK LOGIC
GENERAL MASSING
NEW PIERS STUDY
58
SITE INTEGRATION
AREA STUDY
INTERPRETING HISTORIC PIERS
PROGRAMME + NETWORK - GALLERY DISTRICT
59
60
AREA STUDY
AREA STUDY
PROGRAMME + NETWORK - GALLERY DISTRICT
PROGRAMME + NETWORK - GALLERY DISTRICT
61
CONNECTIVITY
CONNECTIVITY
More Integrated
More Integrated
1
2
2
2 4
3
1 4
1 3
1 1
500
POINT SECOND MOMENT
POINT SECOND MOMENT
More Integrated
More Integrated
POINT FIRST MOMENT
POINT FIRST MOMENT
More Integrated
More Integrated
500m
62
CHOICE 1200m
INTEGRATION 1200m
More Chosen
More Integrated
CHOICE 1200m More Chosen
DESIGN EVALUATION
DESIGN ITERATION
SILVERTOWN VISIBILITY GRAPH ANALYSIS
SILVERTOWN COMBINED ANALYSIS
INTEGRATION 1200m More Integrated
63
BASIC PRINCIPES
1
64
2
1
Buttressing towards span
2
Cantilevered back span
3
Set back to allow light penetration
4
Terracing for views and access
3
4
SPATIAL STUDIES
SPATIAL STUDIES
NORTHBANK SECTIONAL DIAGRAMS
NORTHBANK SECTIONAL DIAGRAMS
65
66
SPATIAL STUDIES
SPATIAL STUDIES
CONCEPT SECTIONS
NORTHBANK PERSPECTIVE SECTIONS
67
1
2
3
4
1
6
4
2
5
3
68
5
6
DESIGN STUDIES
TERMINAL
MERGING STREAMS
PROGRAMME DISTRIBUTION STUDIES
69
TERMINAL CONFIGURATIONAL STUDIES
70
71
PROGRAMME CONFIGURATION OPTIONS
TERMINAL CONCEPT DIAGRAM
72
73
DESTINATION DOCKLANDS DESIGN PROPOSAL
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT TERMINAL BRIDGE JUNCTION
74
75
ROYAL DOCKS CONCEPT AXONOMETRIC 76
77
Perspectival site plan showing scope of interventions within and surrounding the Royal Victoria and Albert docks. A series of inhabited crossings unite the fragmented streetscapes of the surrounding areas, improving the integration and connectivity of the area, whilst introducing a central â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;high-streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; for the area.
ROYAL DOCKS CONCEPT PLAN
78
79
SCOPE OF INTERVENTION
DLR - Prince Regent DLR + Crossrail - Customs House
7
PRIMARY AXES
11
DLR - Royal Albert 5
10
D 6
9 8
Rail Line Axis
ROYAL ALBERT DOCK
2
BOAT ROUTE AND INTERFACES
1
B
ROYAL VICTORIA DOCK
Docks Terminal
A
3 C
E
4
PONTOON DOCK
1
‘Northbank’ Complex
2
Bankside Arena
3
Parkland Piers
4
Masterplan for Silvertown
5
Masterplan for Connaught Bridge
6
Connaught Bridge
7
ExCel Centre
8
Boathouse
9
City Airport Terminal 2
10
Newham Council Offices
11
Farrells Masterplan
A
DLR Woolwich Branch to Crossrail / Beckton Branch
B
Silvertown to Crossrail / DLR Beckton Branch
C
Silvertown to DLR Beckton Branch + ‘Northbank’ Complex
D
DLR Beckton Branch to City Airport Terminal 2
E
City Airport Terminal 1 / 2 interchange
London City Airport
DLR - West Silvertown
DLR - Pontoon Dock
SITE PLAN CONNECTIVITY AND SITE STRATEGIES
80
81
ROYAL DOCKS SCOPE OF INTERVENTION
82
83
NORTH BANK SECTION
84
85
AN INTEGRATED TERMINAL 86 DOCKS PERSPECTIVE
87
TERMINAL SECTION
88
89
ARCH DETAIL BUILDING BEHIND THE EXISTING ARCHES An extension to the dockâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing arches is required to construct the new high street below ground. The design starts with the structural form of the existing arch, starting in concrete and developing to become a series of panels where structural performance is no longer required, incorporating services and lighting. Existing brick within the arch is broken-out and lined with steel panels.
90
91
HIGH STREET FRAGMENT 01 THE COVERED HIGH STREET
92
93
KEY DIAGRAM
+ 10 +6
HIGH STREET FRAGMENT 02
+/-00
THE ELEVATED HIGH STREET The image above shows the new ‘boathouse’ in the Royal Albert Dock. Here the high street is elevated above the water, allowing a covred boathouse to be introuced, with circulation behind the existing dock walls.
94
Proposed Existing
95
KEY DIAGRAM
+ 10
+4
HIGH STREET FRAGMENT 03
+/-00
THE LINEAR PARK The split-level high street is comprised of terraced structures with higher-trafficked and less landscaped routes on the upper levels and less trafficed, landscaped, areas by the waters side.
96
Proposed Existing
97
HIGH STREET FRAGMENT 04 98 THE WATER-SIDE HIGH STREET
99
1
6 5
7
Plane Stand 2
42.5m
ROYAL ALBERT DOCK 3
8
4
Runway Centreline
1:1000
0
100
40m
1
DLR Station (Beckton Branch)
2
Boathouse
3
City Airport Terminal 2
4
Light-wells to high street
5
Sunken Courtyard
6
Newham Council Offices
7
Terraced landscape and high street
8
Acoustic Screen
al 1 min Ter To
TERMINAL ROOF PLAN
101
Runway Centreline
Taxiway
10m
l Surface Transitiona
Plane Stand
+ 14
+ 10 +6 +4 +/- 0
3
11
12
4
5
8 5
1
71
6
2
9
13
Runway Centreline
SECTION AA
10m
Taxiway
10
l Surface
Transitiona
Plane Stand
+ 14 + 10 +6
+5
+/- 0
SECTION BB
3
11
12
16
18 17
8
11
7
15
14
19
10
AA
TERMINAL GENERAL SECTIONS 1:500 0
102
20m
1
Terminal Atrium / Concourse
9
High Street (Type 02)
17
Arrivals
2
Bank-side Landscaping
10
DLR (Beckton Branch)
18
Baggage Collection
3
High Street (Type 01)
11
Access / Servicing
19
Boathouse
4
Riverboat Terminal
12
Bridge, providing plane deck structure
5
Bag Drop
13
Submerged courtyard
6
F&B / Retail Terrace
14
Terraced Landscaping
7
Departure Lounge
15
Public viewing gallery
8
Boarding Gates
16
F&B / Retail
BB
103
All work produced by Unit 14 Unit book design by Charlie Harris www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/architecture Copyright 2019 The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL All rights reserved. -
UNIT
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmited in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retreival system without permission in writing from the publisher.
@unit14_ucl
104
105
M O D E R N C O U R A G E
2019
A
t the center of Unit 14’s academic exploration lies Buckminster Fuller’s ideal of the ‘The Comprehensive Designer’, a master-builder that follows Renaissance principles and a holistic approach. Fuller referred to this ideal of the designer as somebody who is capable of comprehending the ‘integrateable significance’ of specialised findings and is able to realise and coordinate the commonwealth potentials of these discoveries while not disappearing into a career of expertise. Like Fuller, we are opportunists in search of new ideas and their benefits via architectural synthesis. As such Unit 14 is a test bed for exploration and innovation, examining the role of the architect in an environment of continuous change. We are in search of the new, leveraging technologies, workflows and modes of production seen in disciplines outside our own. We test ideas systematically by means of digital as well as physical drawings, models and prototypes. Our work evolves around technological speculation with a research-driven core, generating momentum through astute synthesis. Our propositions are ultimately made through the design of buildings and through the in-depth consideration of structural formation and tectonic constituents. This, coupled with a strong research ethos, will generate new and unprecedented, viable and spectacular proposals. They will be beautiful because of their intelligence - extraordinary findings and the artful integration of those into architecture. Inspired by the audacity of the modernist mind the unit’s work aspires to reinstate the designer’s engagement with all aspects of our profession. Observation and re-examination of every aspect of current civilizatory development enables to project near future scenarios and positions the work as avant garde in the process of designing a comprehensive vision for the future. Societical, technological, cultural, economic as well as political developments propel the investigations with a deep understanding of how they interlink to shape strategies and astute synthesis to determine a design approach. We believe in the multi-objectivity of our design process, where the negotiation of the different objectives becomes a great source of architectural novelty and authorship. We will fight charlatanism with the aid of practical experimentation, scientific knowledge and technology. We find out about how human endeavour, deep desire and visionary thought interrelate as well as advance cultural and technological means while driving civilisation as a highly developed organisation. The underlying principle and observation of our investigations will be that futurist speculation inspires and ultimately brings about significant change. Supported by competent research the work is the search for modernist courage aiming to amplify found nuclei into imaginative tales with architectural visions fuelled by speculation. Thanks to: RSHP, Zaha Hadid Architects, DKFS Architects, Heatherwick Studio, Amanda Levete Architects, Seth Stein Architects, Cundal Engineering, DaeWha Kang Design, Uni Stuttgart ITKE
UNIT 14 @unit14_ucl
All work produced by Unit 14 Unit book design by Charlie Harris www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/architecture Copyright 2019 The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmited in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retreival system without permission in writing from the publisher.