Chancery Lane: Defacto

DEFACTO

Chancery Lane.

De facto.

Aditya Vinod, Besnik Murati, Yiqin Kong and Vendela Gambill

Objective

To analyse the Area Enhancement Strategy proposed for Chancery Lane Area through the evidence based design of Space Syntax methodology in three scales: Macro

Investigate Chancery Lane Area with surrounding areas

Meso

Investigate Chancery Lane Area within its network

Micro

Investigate specific nodes

Location Location

Greater London

City of London

Chancery Lane Area

Contents Location Introduction Methodology - tools and techniques

Limitations Macro - analysis and findings

Meso - analysis and findings

Micro - analysis and findings

Strategic Interventions

Introduction Location 1880

Now

Introduction Background Introduction Background Character of the Area

-

The City of London’s Chancery Lane Strategic Development Plan was developed for the Chancery Lane Association in July 2007

Problems

Imposing structure to the street with larger landmark buildings.

-

Finer grain buildings have been replaced by larger office blocks.

-

Wealth of architectural heritage.

-

Linear nature of the street offers long, narrow view punctuated with 4-6 floor high buildings.

- Pedestrian access and ease of street pattern tends to be poor.

Our Project

- Lighting and lack of active building frontages makes street feel less secure - Narrow pathways and many time-limited barriers.

- Heavy traffic along peripheries.

Research Theme

“City needs Chancery Lane to be ok. Chancery Lane doesn’t necessarily need the city to be ok.”

– Good friend

Methodology Location

Location Limitations of the Research

Limitations on qualitative data: •

user surveys

•

land ownership

Limitations on quantitative data: •

observations restricted to certain days

•

building layout plans

Strategic Interventions

Macro

Macro Location

How has the urban morphology evolved over time in Chancery

Lane Area?

Learning from the Past

Macro

“Morphological arrangements contain social information�

Hillier, B. et.al. 1976

1676

After The Great Fire of London

1870

Before Industrial Revolution

1910

Before WWI

1920

After WWI

Contemporary

1950

1990

After WWII

Post Modernist Period

Current

1.1 Historic Urban Morphology 1676

1870

v

Segment Integration R800m

Segment Integration R800m

Macro

1.1 Historic Urban Morphology Current

Segment Integration R800m

Macro

Macro

Network Integration of Chancery Lane Module decreased throughout history.

1.2 ‘Open spaces’ to Building Footprint Ratio 1676

1870

1910

1920

1950

1990

Macro

2017

Area (m2)

7000

6000 1676

1870

1910

1920

1950

1990

2017

1.2 ‘Open spaces’ to Building Footprint Ratio

Macro

Thousands

The historic evolution of Open spaces, footprint and green areas 100

90

80

70

Area (m²)

60

50

40

30

Open Space 20

Footprint 10

Green Area 0

1676

1870

1910

1920

1950

1990

2017

Macro

Plots and local streets emerged into buildings sites.

Small scale disappeared.

“Elements and modules on different scales do not depend on each other in a symmetric manner: a higher scale requires all lower scales, but not vice versa” Salingaros, Nikos (Principles of Urban Form)

Structural pattern of open spaces shifted.

‘Structures are formed by deeply constructed ‘relations’ and ‘patterns’ rather than those that can be found on the surface level of visual relations Karimi, Kayvan (A reflection on “Order and Structure in Urban Design”)

1.3 Accessibility to Main Streets

Macro

Plot, Streets and Cul-de-sacs 1676

1870

1910

2017

1.3 Accessibility to Main Streets

Macro Plots

Cul-De-Sacs 16

160

14

140

12

120 Chancery Lane

10

Chancery Lane

100

Fetter Lane

Fetter Lane

80

8

Fleet Str.

6

High Holborn

Fleet Str.

60

High Holborn

40

4

20 2 0 0

UNITS 35

Streets

30

25 Chancery Lane

20

Fetter Lane

15

Fleet Str. High Holborn

10

5 TIME

0

Macro

Functional and physical diversity on the boundary roads, decreased.

‘Diversity in urban uses can become a problem only when elements have a disproportionate size’ (Jacobs, ”Life and Death of Great American Cities”)

Permeability – physical and visual integration decreased.

Open spaces transformed into private courtyards.

1.4 Plot analysis

Plot Units vs Plot Size

Units/Size [m2]

Macro

1000 866

900

814 800 809

783

700

714

600 593 500

448

400 300

247

327

200 169

180

1676

1870

100

181

187

205

1950

1990

2017

0 1910

1920

Plots Size

Plot Units

Plot changes of urban units

250 Units

200

150

100

50

0 U_01

U_02 1676

U_03 1870

U_04

U_05 1910

U_06 1920

U_07 1950

U_08

U_09

1990

U_10 2017

U_11

Macro

Plot size changed

Street-fronts became homogenous Similar elements do not couple. A critical diversity of different elements is needed because some will catalyze couplings between others.

(Salingaros, N. “Principles of Urban Form�)

Street character altered upon changes to the market economy

1.5 Key Findings

Macro

1.5 Key Findings Geometrical coupling on all scales decreased The network of open spaces were compromised

Macro

Meso

Meso

Location Gardens

Sitting Areas Courtyards

Passageways

Meso Location How does the network of open spaces perform to enhance the site as a cultural destination for public use?

2.1 Public Accessibility

Meso

Current No public access

Time limited access (No access on weekends or after 7 pm on weekdays)

2.2 Segment Analysis

Meso

Current Always-closed gates

Working hours on weekdays

Segment Choice R800m

Time-limited-open gates

Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays

Segment Choice R800m

2.2 Segment Analysis

Meso

Current Always-closed gates

Working hours on weekdays

Segment Choice R800m

Time-limited-open gates

Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays

Segment Choice R800m

2.2 Segment Analysis

Meso

Current Always-closed gates

Working hours on weekdays

Segment Choice R400m

Time-limited-open gates

Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays

Segment Choice R400m

2.2 Segment Analysis

Meso

Current Always-closed gates

Working hours on weekdays

Segment Choice R400m

Time-limited-open gates

Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays

Segment Choice R400m

Meso

Limited public access has more negative impact on Weekends.

2.3 Cultural Heritage – Open Spaces

Meso

Current Chancery Lane area has a long history from 12th century and it was not touched by the Great Fire of London, so it has rich cultural heritage. Most of the heritage have close relationship with open spaces.

2.3 Cultural Heritage – Open Spaces Current Cultural heritage is lost within a segregated network of open spaces so it is difficult for the public to enjoy the historic cultural of the area.

Weekends and after 7 pm on weekdays

Segment Choice R800m

Meso

2.4 Land Use– Open Spaces

Meso

Current Land use around open spaces: most are offices, some are education, only few are retail/catering Land use along the streets: diversified, many retail and catering for public use Open spaces

Streets

2.5 Movement Patterns – Open Spaces

Meso

Current Many people move on High Holborn and Fleet Street, but much less people move inside the area, especially on weekend. Very few tourists go inside the area to visit the open spaces.

Major type: suits

Weekday – Tuesday whole day

Weekend – Saturday whole day

2.6 Visibility Graph Analysis (VGA) Current Most open spaces are hidden in low visibility areas.

Meso

2.6 Visibility Graph Analysis (VGA) Current Only a few open spaces have relative high visibility.

Meso

2.7 Catchment Areas

Meso

Current All open spaces are located in 5 mins walk distance from the tube station or bus stops.

1

2

+

+

3

Tube station and bus stop 1

Catchment analysis R400m

Bus stop 2

Bus stop 3

2.8 Open Space Links

Meso

Future Potential Green dots are connected open spaces, while red dots are isolated based on barriers.

Connecting between open spaces

Key

Connected open spaces Isolated open spaces

Segment Choice R800m

2.8 Open Space Links

Meso

Future Potential Green dots are connected open spaces, while red dots are isolated based on barriers.

Key

Connected open spaces Isolated open spaces

Segment Choice R800m

Connecting between open spaces

Meso

Opening barriers would create improved network between open spaces and prevent them from being isolated.

2.9 Key Findings

Meso

2.9 Key Findings

Meso

Micro

3.1 Node Study

Micro

1

2

While angular segment analysis shows potential for integration in many nodes with Chancery Lane Areas, their visibility limitations were further investigated as node analysis through:

3

4 • Isovists Analysis

5

• Visibility Graph Analysis

6

• Historic Evolution of Nodes 7

8

9

Micro

Micro

How are Maughan’s Library Court, Breams Building Street and Chancery Lane functioning as activity areas?

3.2 Visibility Graph Analysis of Nodes Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric

Does not exist

Does not exist

Micro

3.2 Visibility Graph Analysis of Nodes Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric

Does not exist

Does not exist

Micro

3.2 Potential Areas

Micro Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric

Does not exist

Does not exist

3.2 Potential Areas

Micro Visibility Graph Analysis of Historic Fabric

Does not exist

Does not exist

Micro

This investigation suggests: Maughan’s Library Area: Shows visibility have decreased over time New Fetter Lane Piazza: Shows visibility increased over time Breams Building St. and Chancery Lane: Shows visibility decreased over time

3.3 Gate LocationCount Gate Count Weekday

Total number of passerbys for 8hr period

Micro Gate Count Weekend

Micro

Less people visit Maughan’s Library area, Bream’s Building street and Chancery Lane as compared to peripheral high streets - High Holborn and Fleet Street.

1. Maughan’s Library Location

Rolls Building

Micro

3.1.1Location Snapshots

Micro

Weekday

Evening

Afternoon

Morning

Weekday

3.1.1Location Snapshots

Micro

Weekend

Evening

Afternoon

Morning

Weekend

3.1.2 Accessibility

Micro

Maughan’s Library

• Maughan’s Library is enclosed and isolated from its surroundings through multiple barriers in its Maughan’s Library

boundary.

• These barriers play a crucial role in the movement of people between New Fetter Lane, Chancery

Lane, Fleet Street.

3.1.3Location Visibility Graph Analysis Maughan’s Library

Rolls Building

Maughan’s Library

Open Space Private Bldg

Service Bldg

Bldg

Maughan’s Library VGA of 2017 map

Micro

3.1.4 Isovist Analysis Maughan’s Library

Micro

3.1.5 Frontages Maughan’s Library Location

Micro

Micro

Maughan’s Library biggest issue is barriers, its historical library and green open space are limited-accessible to the public.

2. Chancery Lane Location

Micro: Observation

3.2.1 Visibility Graph Analysis

Micro

Chancery Lane

VGA

Fewest Axial Lines

3.2.2 Isovist Analysis North to South Visual Integration

Micro East to West Visual Integration

3.2.3 Frontages Chancery Lane Location

Micro

Micro

The segment between Cursitor and Bream’s Building street is the only visual integration point between North and South of Chancery Lane.

3. Piazza Locationon New Fetter Lane

Rolls Building

Micro

3.3.1Location Snapshots

Micro

Evening

Afternoon

Morning

Weekday

3.3.1Location Snapshots

Micro

Evening

Afternoon

Morning

Weekend

3.3.2 Visibility Graph Analysis Piazza on New Fetter Lane

Rolls Building

Maughan’s Library

Micro

3.3.3 Isovist Analysis Piazza on New Fetter Lane

Micro

3.3.4 Frontages Piazza New Fetter Lane

Micro

Micro

Visual integration is high but the piazza is not being used by people.

3.4.1Location Landuse

Micro

Refer Meso Landuse

3.4.2 Spatial Layout of *RRR Chancery Lane

Micro

(*Residential, Restaurant and Retail)

Fetter Lane Junction

Breams Building

Type

Total

Monday to SaturdayFriday Sunday

Type

Total

Monday to SaturdayFriday Sunday

Type

Total

Monday to SaturdayFriday Sunday

Retail

7

7

4

Retail

0

0

0

Retail

0

0

0

Restaurant

10

10

1

Restaurant

4

4

0

Restaurant

0

0

0

Residential

0

NA

NA

Residential

0

NA

NA

Residential

0

NA

NA

Source: Google Maps

3.4.3 RRR Comparison with High Street Fleet Street Retail and Restaurant Opening Location

Source: Jordan et al 2017, “Fleet Street Rediscovered�

Micro

Chancery Lane Retail and Restaurant Opening Times

3.5 Key Findings

Micro

3.5 Key Findings

Micro

Proposed Design Strategies

4.2 Findings Summary

Strategic Interventions

Macro Strategies The complex socio-spatial relationship of the Chancery Lane area is deeply hidden within its structural pattern of open spaces.

Meso Strategies The network of open spaces is not connecting well and is segregating the area.

Micro Strategies Open spaces have limited access which is restricting diversity of use.

4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Existing

Strategic Interventions

4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Area Enhancement Strategy

Area Enhancement Strategy City of London

Strategic Interventions

4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Our Proposal Location

Proposed Areas of Intervention Group 05

Strategic Interventions

4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Our Proposal Location

Area Enhancement Strategy City of London Proposed Areas of Intervention Group 05

Strategic Interventions

4.3 Location The Area Action Plan Our Proposal Location

Pedestrianised Areas Shared Spaces Vehicular Access Pedestrian Paths

Strategic Interventions

4.4 Proposed Strategies

Strategic Interventions

1. Wayfinding Strategy

2. Improve Accessibility to Open Spaces

3. Diversify Open Spaces

4.5.1 Wayfinding Strategy

Strategic Interventions

A clear wayfinding strategy that

encourages people to engage and connect with the space.

4.5.1Location Wayfinding Strategy 1. Lighting Lighting would encourage a feeling of safety and belonging in their locations as they are able to identify their location.

2. Signage Signage would reduce errors found in isovist analysis and enable people to direct themselves to open spaces more easily.

Strategic Interventions 3. Paving Changing the paving would encourage navigation ability for pedestrians within this shared space.

4. Digital Digital interactions would allow a more interactive and immersive experience with the space, particularly interesting when combined with cultural highlights.

4.6.1 Improve Accessibility in Open Spaces

Strategic Interventions

Greater accessibility, through longer opening times for the

public, enhances permeability within the open spaces network.

4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Existing

Strategic Interventions

4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Proposed

Strategic Interventions

4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Existing

Strategic Interventions

4.6.2 Maughan’s Library Proposed

Strategic Interventions

4.7.1 Diversify Open Spaces

Strategic Interventions

Create distinct characters for

each open space to encourage wider variety of uses on the

site.

Existing

Proposed

Existing

Proposed

4.7.3 Piazza on New Fetter Lane Existing

Strategic Interventions

4.7.3 Piazza on New Fetter Lane Proposed

Strategic Interventions

4.7.4 Nodes off Chancery Lane

Existing

Strategic Interventions

4.7.4 Nodes off Chancery Lane

Proposed

Strategic Interventions

Strategic Interventions

Existing

Proposed

4.8 Comparison

Strategic Interventions

Current

Weekdays

Segment Choice R800m

Proposal

Weekends After 7 am in weekdays

Location

“Co-present people are not a community but they are part of the raw material for community, which may in due course become activated, and can be activated if it becomes necessary… Even without conversion into interaction, patterns of co-presence are a psychological resource, precisely because co-presence is the primitive form of our awareness of others.”

”Space is fundamentally configurational and parts are put together to form a whole and are more important than any part taken in isolation.” (“Space is the Machine”, B. Hillier, 1996)

Thank you!

References Location Hillier, B. (2002). A theory of the city as object: or, how spatial laws mediate the social construction of urban space. Urban Design International, 7(3-4), pp.153-179.

Hillier, B., Leaman, A., Stansall, P. and Bedford, M. (1976). Space syntax. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 3(2), pp.147-185.

Karimi, K. (2012) A reflection on ‘Order and structure in urban design’. Journal of Space Syntax. UCL Press, volume 3 (1). Pp.38-48 Porta, S. and Romice, O. (2010) Plot-Based Urbanism: Toward Time-Consciousness in Place-Making, UDSU - Urban Design Studies Unit, University of Strathclyde. http://www.udsu-strath.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Plot-Based-Urbanism_10_OR-SP-FINAL_low-res.pdf Levy, A. Urban Morphology (1999) 3(2), 79-85. 79. Urban morphology and the problem of the modern urban fabric: some questions for research. CNRS http://urbanform.org/online_unlimited/um199902_79-85.pdf Salingaros, Nikos A. (2006) Principles of urban structure. Techne Press, Amsterdam.

Burns + Nice. (2009). Chancery Lane Area Enhancement Strategy. [online] Available at: https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-planning/city-public-realm/Documents/strategies/chancery-laneenhancement-strategy-analysis.pdf [Accessed 4 Oct, 2017].

Boorman, F. (2013) The political space of Chancery Lane, c. 1760-1815. PhD Institute of Historical Research, School of Advanced Study, University of London.