Page 1

utas + osa

SPE CUL ATE HOBART CITY_CBD RAJA SYAZWINA RAJA SHUIB | 130502


table of contents 00. osa overview

glossary acknowledgements osa statement living cities competition group problem statements group dynamics

01. project overview

abstract motivations introduction problem statement

02. research methods

theoretical framework process/methodology

03. project process

mapping walking distance movement patterns visual limits legibility study serial vision staying places Gehl methodology : 12 KQC

04. proposition process

critical discoveries propositions recommendations conclusion references appendix


glossary

Legibility = “...the ease with which its parts may be recognized and can be organized into a coherent pattern.� (Lynch,1961) Way-finding =

spatial problem solving ;in which the navigator finds a satisfactory solution to a larger task through navigation (Arthur and Passini, 1992)


acknowledgements

Special thanks to our supervisors, Peter Poulet (the State Architect), Helen Norrie (UTAS) and Alysia Bennett (OSA).


peter poulet “ I am after a...” ... ‘source file’ of speculative ideas for the cities of Hobart and Launceston... drawing together information from existing reports... ... Booklets of analysis for specific sites in Tasmania that can inform future architectural speculations... “I believe Architects will be in a role to speculate more in the future as our cities grow older, establishing frameworks rather than master plans”

“analysis and data collection can be used to develop different kinds of briefs for the future”


The Tasmanian State Architect (Peter Poulet) is undertaking collaborative research with UTAS and working with Government agencies, industry bodies, and the community. This work will position Tasmania at the forefront of innovative, collaborative and sustainable design thinking and practice.

00_osa overview

osa statement

Mission and Vision To establish a built environment which helps Tasmania become a healthier, integrated and more vibrant community. To showcase new patterns of living within our clean environment. The design process should utilise the skilled and creative people that supplement the compact and historic cities and town centres.

Objectives To show design leadership in the built environment by utilising the creative skills in our community. To recognise that good design is a matter of public interest. To highlight how good design involves thinking and acting in an innovative manner, constantly questioning existing practices. To recognise the importance of establishing creative linkages between people that value design as a process. The integration of decision making with the design process maximise innovation and opportunity for new ideas, and should be an integral aspect of planning and development processes.


Over the summer, the Office of the State Architect in collaboration with UTAS prepared and compiled a competition entry for the Living Cities Design Competition, with the focus on the city of Hobart. The project title ‘Seeding De-Colonization’ emphasized the notion of developing a sustainable city with ‘many minor moves’ through collaboration with the 5 municipalities that make up the Greater Hobart area. Through such collaborations with both the public and private sectors in conjunction with the community, catalytic change has potential to inform future urban development; iterated in the project’s Five Catalysts of Change: Public Space, Public Edge, Function, Cultural and Transport. These Five Catalysts of Change have been at the foreground of the following thinking within the OSA ADR Selective projects, furthering the ideas ‘seeded’ within the competition.

00_osa overview

living cities competition


00_osa overview

problem statements How can a vacant site be progressively [de/re] colonized to provide a catalyst for development?

How can different site interpretations affect urban legibility and dissolve fragmentation of the city?

MACQUARIE POINT

HOBART CBD

SULLIVANS How can the everyday and experiential cultural narratives COVE HOBART inform the development of the future landscape?

How can an underdeveloped site be utilised as a catalyst for the interaction, social enterprise and identity, creating connections to the wider community?

GASP! GLENORCHY

How can a precinct act as a bridging network to break down urban disconnection?

NORTH ESK PRECINCT LAUNCESTON

figure 1: highlights how each osa question can be interchangeable and can be appropriated to another site.


group dynamics

HOBART CBD

The OSA group is a collection of pairs (and one

The reports are informed by personal experiences

individual group) that have developed a series of

of the cities of Hobart and Launceston.

common themes that have evolved out of an interest

generated from these unique experiences are

in people and place. A series of Tasmanian sites

providing different outcomes as some of the

that have been identified for future development

students have grown up in the city studied all

become the basis of the studies, and provide

their lives, whilst others have only been living in

a springboard to speculate on new research

Tasmania for a few years. The reports engage with

methodologies.

the UTAS School of Architectures design values and The Office of the State Architects vison.

Ideas


00_osa overview

Hannah and Bek started in summer break, and visited the control tower on Hobarts waterfront and where overwhelmed by the shear scale of the unknown site, that they had both passed by so many times but never looked into. This new way of seeing the unknown site raised issues about scale, vacancy, barriers and separation from both the city and the waterfront (but also highlighted the potentials for establishing ‘something new’ for the city of Hobart).

Raja and Masako got lost in the city of Hobart during the summer break, with Alysia showing them the

locally known ins and outs of the city. Surprised that both of them concluded their walk with different memory/ interpretation of the city, they felt Hobart could potentially have a stronger character of connectivity between spaces at different levels and with nature. By looking at these other dimensions, they seek a register of urban markers that could improve urban legibility thus leading to a new way of seeing things.

Jenna , as in the meantime working on the Living Cities Design Competition in the OSA office during the summer period and all the while overlooking the previous groups workings and findings. The research within the competition and feedback from the adjunct professors lead to an accumulation of ideas relating to the layers of use and hidden cultural memories of the city of Hobart that have been distilled in the urban morphology of the landscape - demonstrating the potential of new ways of reading the familiar city that is not just an objective reading of place.

Adam and Zul’s project evolved from a request from Pippa from GASP, this then lead to an interest in

discovering how an under used site could be transformed into a vibrant hub of participation and engagement amongst the community. This new way of viewing a site not only for it’s potential development of architectural form, but as a means to develop a social framework that allows the activity and participation of people to improve a site, rather than just a new building was an engaging concept to explore. The investigations lead to community concept speculation which intended to inject life into the site without relying on a building, a new way of viewing a situation, but an invaluable lesson in bridging disconnection of both architectural and social development.

Richard and Hock’s project stemmed from Richard’s interest in using the C. H. Smith site as a catalytic node for community engagement, but also the City Councils’ priority to develop the entire North Esk precinct as an urban bridge. This then lead to an interest in discovering how disused and disengaging precincts could be progressively reactivated to enable greater conection between communities and urban zones. Exploration into issues including scale, economic viability, adaptive reuse, disengagement and recolonisation resulted in the speculation of an ongoing reactivation process that built upon the progressive Life-SpaceBuilding approach.


osa sites Launceston CBD

GASP

(Richard + Hock)

(Adam + Zul)

HOBART

LAUNCESTON

Hobart CBD

Macquarie Point Hobart

(Raja + Masako)

(Hannah + Bek)

Sullivans Cove Hobart (Jenna)


OSA groups

Theorists

Macquarie Point Hobart

Gehl Chilies Amidon Corner Latz + Partner Rogers Bell

(Hannah + Bek)

Hobart CBD (Raja + Masako)

Sullivans Cove Hobart (Jenna)

GASP

(Adam + Zul)

Gehl Lynch Igarashi Jackson Amidon

Hayden Boyer Borden

Gehl Stevens Krupa

Methodology

collating reports

vision statements master plan legislation heritage

mapping/ analysis

temporal changes urban fabric movement pattens scale urban morphology macro connections

precedents

post industrial interventions social enterprise landscape temporary installations

current comparison

urban fabric social enterprise economic development

speculations

Launceston CBD (Richard + Hock)

Attoe+Logan Boyer Gehl Stevens

montage mapping diagrams

00_osa overview

osa process Process

Strategies

research speculation montages puzzle pieces

Tactics

Outcomes

hypothetical montage puzzle pieces (new fit) de-colonising re-colonising colonising

people + need re-evaluation maps montages

spilling seeding life/ space/ buildings

collecting collating vision

hypothetical montage key ‘marker’ points mapping

character based narratives puzzle pieces

cracking enveloping injecting

provocations based on analysis + collation of data/narratives.

underpinning un/masking

collecting analysis testing social speculation

un/cloaking dissolving

social collaborations speculative montage seed idea promotion discussion generator

rejuvenation research speculation montages + proposition

sustainable process of precinct reactivation and reengagement within current urban fabric


01_project overview

abstract

A map makes everything seem so accessible. Factors such as natural topography and building heights are not considered. This is where the Gehl methodology is to be questioned. Legibility is a very important element in order to avoid fragmentations within the city. However, the city is not viewed only on the ground level.Being able to identify which spaces offer quality staying is not sufficient if the space appears inaccessible, thus binding the notion of legibility to good staying spaces. Consideration of movement patterns of both the local and the out-of-towner opens up the possibility of determining the weak links within the city network. Establishing marker points at distances limited by the visual field would be able to improve the legibility. However, there is the need to understand that with different paths, comes different sets of drivers. Can a ‘toolkit’ which addresses various site-specific issues help while maintaing the city’s character?


image of Liverpool link area


motivations

Let’s take a walk……. Imagine yourself in a new town, being brought around by a local. First adhering strictly to the grid system, trying to gain some form of orientation. Not before long, you take a turn into a laneway. To where? As you walk on, you realize that it is not your typical drab laneway. The space opens up. Within it is this amazing place to stay and just be. Again you wonder if you would have made your way through the laneway had you not known of this little ‘surprise’? The walk continues. Through the arcades that framed the footprints of the Hobart Rivulet you go. Not only do you find the path interesting, but what comes after gives you an even bigger surprise. You’re taken to this vacant spot where instead of more historical blocks, you’re greeted by this exciting empty space, with patches of green scattered about. The local tells you of the quaint spot’s history. You again find yourself wondering if everyone else knew of places like this all around the little town. The (quality) spaces are there. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could all access the seemingly inaccessible?


introduction Hobart City_CBD

“We would never have explored the laneways if someone had not brought us there in the first place. It was a pleasant surprise.”

Interest in the project was sparked by the disconnections / fragmentations found between quality spaces and their links (or lack thereof) to the main grid system and laneways. Gehl (2010) attributes the lacking of a clear experience of the city centre in Hobart to the grid structure, albeit being a neutral and ultimately open organizing structure. This is made worse as it prioritizes vehicular circulation.This greatly influences wayfinding and affects different users of the city differently.

image source : google earth Hobart CBD and surrounding context

Seen as a sub-project of Gehl’s Hobart Public Space Public Life Report (2010), this research delves into new ways of understanding the city; by looking at the different paths and drivers that affect people’s way-finding decisions in the city. Legibility of a city’s composition contributes to its success as a place. What are the motivations/markers that would facilitate urban legibility for more than a specific user group? and how do they work at different scales? The study reveals a network of spaces which are potentially good staying spaces but are not utilized fully due to the lack of legibility in identifying the access points. The report aims to identify a possible ‘toolkit’ that could tackle this issue in line with the aims of undertaking catalytic projects and collaborative projects.

image source : state library The rivulet informs the built condition


problem statement Hobart City_CBD

How can different site interpretations affect urban legibility and dissolve fragmentation of the city?

Hobart City is a walkable city and has within it an abundance of quality staying spaces which are unfortunately very disconnected from each other. Only those who know of a particular place will use it. How can the network of spaces within the city be made legible?

1 Wellington Court

Temporary staying space

2

3

1

Existing staying space

2 Liverpool Link

Secluded staying space

Staying spaces within walking distance yet does not create a legible network

3 Mathers Lane


theoretical framework Gehl,J._”People gather where things are happening and spontaneously seek the presence of other people” Legibility is a key issue in the research. If the built environment provides no cues to the present location, we tend to then turn over to the presence of other people. This links the importance of staying spaces in a legible city. Lynch,K._”...sometimes you can’t decide which avenue you want to go in, because they’re more or less just the same; there’s nothing to differentiate them” Arthur (1992) states that people tend to feel disoriented when they cannot situate themselves within a spatial representation and when, at the same time, they do not have, or cannot develop a plan to reach their destination. A main reason for the difficulty in understanding labyrinths is their absence of spatial identity; the inability to form an overall image of the layout. Identifiers are needed to establish decision points in wayfinding. By prioritizing certain streets, and giving each of them distinct characters, the improved legibility would potentially dissolve fragmention of the city. Jackson, JB_”...the Stranger’s Path is, in most cities, easily recognizable, once a few of its landmarks are known...” What is boring to some might be interesting to others. It could be seen that the perception of the site is very subjective. The values of perception might change with time or the mindset that interpret the site (Andersen, 2007). This supports Lynch’s (1960) argument that legibility needs to be addressed at different levels of reference.


process / methodology The Research mainly involved a first hand observation to provide an independent perspective of Hobart City (through photographs and written journal)

Walking distance

Movement Patterns

The subsequent process was undertaken in the following order: Mapping

Visual Limit

Legibility study

Key (staying) spaces study

(1)

Mapping supplemented by data from the Hobart Public Space Public Life Report, involves mapping out the main paths taken by members of the team including the author and their primary destinations / staying spaces

(2) Legibility Study Identifying the weak links in way-finding around the city. (3) Key Spaces Study Evaluation of Key Staying Spaces using the Gehl Methodology. (4) Ideas / Propositions Hypothetical montages to highlight influence of increased legibility on the success of staying spaces. Research has been cyclical in nature, with the scope being re-evaluated at certain points in time, and propositions revamped to address the specific issues.

Hypothetical Montages

Ideas / Proposition


mapping 1.1

The Local / The Out-of-Towner

An attempt was made to uncover the paths taken by those of the local who either live or work in Hobart and the paths that would commonly be taken by the out-of-towner. The diagrams to the right reveals the path we took to reach our destinations while undertaking this research.

1.1.1

The Grid System

Our first instinct was to follow the grid, as it was the clearest and easiest path to navigate.

1.1.2 The Laneways and Arcades

Being brought around by a local, we started to go through all the laneways and arcades,

Issues raised : Jackson (1970) wrote that the stranger’s path is different for every individual. This is justified by the movement pattern found in just a small sample of study.


Your cycling link Your car driving link Parking place /car&bike

Your staying place

1.2

Movement Mapping

An indication of departure points and preferred staying spaces for research participants which feeds into the next stage of research develop ment.

Your walking link

the cycling path taken the driving route taken car park location Your staying place staying place preferred Your cycling link

Primary Destinations primary destination

Your car driving link

Possible staying spaces research identified staying places Raja and Masako’s target

Parking place /car&bike

Your w

Your walking link Your cycling link

Your cy

Your car driving link

Your ca

Parking place /car&bike

Parking

Your staying place

Your st

Primary Destinations

Possible staying spaces Raja and Masako’s target

The Local (living in Hobart)

Primary Destinations

Primary

Possible staying spaces Raja and Masako’s target

Possibl Raja an

The Out-Of-Towner

Your w

Your walking link Wapping Corner

Your cy

Your cycling link

Your ca

Your car driving link

Parking

Parking place /car&bike

Your st

Your staying place Vacant lot end lane

library post office

Franklin Square

Grass corner Lark

Primary Destinations

Possible staying spaces Raja and Masako’s target

The Local (resides just outside of Central Hobart)

The Local (works in CBD)

Primary

Possibl Raja an


Connections or Fragmentation? Staying Places

staying places

Departure Points : Bus Stops

100m visual limit

400m walking distance

bus stop/station 100m visual limit

Legibility influences the success of reaching a destination. The Social field of vision is an important strategy is ensuring users are able to identify their destinations. The disconnection between staying spaces are made more apparent due to the visual linkage limitation between them.

Although within walkable distance from bus stops, there is nothing visually linking the spaces to them. Without proper motivation, the spaces only get used by certain groups.


Backpackers / Hotels

backpackers / hotels

Multi-storey carparks

100m visual limit

Backpackers/ hotels serve as both destinations and departure points. However, the backpackers which are located nearest to the staying spaces have no direct link to them.

400m walking distance

multi-storey carpark

As a point of departure, the multi-storey car parks are well connected with the staying spaces. They even allow for visual range beyond that of the ground plane.

Issues raised : Maps do not provide building height information. Visual limi tations apply when wayfinding on the ground plane. Is there then a new way of seeing things in relation to landmarks?


legibility analysis

On Ground

where am i? Every street appears the same while following the main grid system in Hobart. We found it easy to get lost in the city without having set destinations beforehand.

where does this lead? Once in a while, we chanced upon small laneways but was not offered a clue to what lies beyond, making the choice to stick to the grid an even easier one.

Street signs are easily obscured

Landmark for spatial orientation The image on the left, a wayfinding element requires one to be upclose to be able to read the location. Being able to identify landmarks from a distance became a personal method of wayfinding in the city.

tall buildings; distinguishable landmarks.


ST RE ET

E N

R ST

EE

CA M

PB E

T EE

TH

ST

RE ET

M AR

AR G

YL

E

H W AN KL IN FR EE T

EE T

RE ET

RUNNYMEDE STREET

E ST ON ST AD

Staying place

ET

SOUTH STRE ET

Staying place

EL IER RE TR

AD

TP

RO

EA T

GL

N

Existing Network Proposed Network

Staying place

KELLY STRE

T

DE SP AR DS TR

ST RE ET AR IE U M AC Q

ST R DA VE Y

ES T

RE E

AR F

D AV

ST RE ET S LL IN

2

EE T

O AD

DE

R

FO

ST

AC E

E

1CA Criterion / Mathers Lane

AM AN

E TRE

AC E

T

PL

CASTRAY ESPLANAD

ND SA

E

Y AD

ST

ON

ES

AD

RUNNYMEDE STREET

O

TR

R

EE T

Y BA

SOUTH ST REET

ET

AD

KELLY ST RE

RO

PE LIE RR ET R

N

MO NT

DE

EA T

GL

HA MP

BATTERY SQUARE

CL

T

HA MP

R

DE S

AC Q

U

PL

BE RT S

CASTRAY ESPLANAD

MON

T

EE

TR

PA RD S

T

RE

AD

RO

AC E

S ON

EE

EE T

PL

RRIS MO

ST R

R

ET

PE CT

Y

ST

CA

O

ST

AC K

AM AN

R

ST RE E

LL E

Staying place Staying place

BA RR

REET N ST RRISO MO

O

Staying place

SA L

Y BA

AR IE

EE T

ST RE ET

Y

M

ST R

ST RE E

T

R

ND SA

M

PR OS

DA VE

EV AN S

E HU NT E

ST R

T EE

M

SA L

AC

CO

RE ET

RN

R

ST

LB U

ST

MU RR AY

RE

U

FR

LE

ST

ET

Photography was chosen as a medium of capturing key decision points in spatial orientation within the city. Entrances to the spaces (or the destinatio) were not apparent , thus highlighting the lack of legibility within the city. Many decision points were found along the way with no clue from the surrounding as to the significance of specific wayfinding decisions. Being able to distinguish various landmarks aid wayfinding in the city. VIL EL

W AT CH OR N

ST RE ET

1

TO N

G O

T

RE E

ST S LL IN

RE ET

RIN G

ANBRIS KLBANE IN STR W EET H AR F

Serial Vision (Methodology) ST

PL

EY

D AV

HA R

CO

MU RR AY

KE T

EE T

R

ST RE ET

ST

PO OL

LE

ENUE

ST RE ET

ER

VIL EL

M

EE T

EE T

ST RE ET

EL IZA BE

LL

LIV

R

ST R

ST RE E

T RS

T

E HU NT E

E

BR IS BA

ST RE ET K PA TR IC

AC

BROO KER AV

T

U TH BA

ST R

K IC W AR W

PL

EV AN S

ST R

YL

KE T

EY

AR G

ST RE ET

ST RE ET

T

M AR

LI VE RP OO L

RE ET

BATTERY SQUARE

A quiet staying space

2 Argyle Street CL

To Wellington Court


staying places Accessing the Inaccessible The famous sights in a city are generally widely accessible to the public, but there are also many places of interest that are known only to a few locals, or that are secured from the public or have been forgotten (Bedwell, 2009). Three (3) types of staying space, dealing with varied degrees of legibility issues have been identified for the purpose of this research using Gehl’s 12 Key Quality Criteria : 1.

Wellington Court An existing staying space used commonly by the locals. The out-of-towner would only learn of the place if guided by a local.

2.

Liverpool Link A temporary public space. Highly legible and invites staying throughout the day.

3.

Mathers Lane A secluded staying space. Only the city worker knows of the space’s existence.

1 Wellington Court

2 Liverpool Link

Issues raised : 1. Are the spaces identified quality spaces? 2. Would increased legibility aid the effectiveness of these staying spaces?

3 Mathers Lane


Dark = Desirable

Protection

Gehl’s 12 Key Quality Criteria (Methodology) Protection against traffic and accidents feeling safe • Protection for pedestrians • Eliminating fear of traffic

Comfort

Opportunities to walk • Room for walking • Interesting facades • No obstacles • Good surfaces • Accessibiility for everyone

Opportunities to see

Enjoyment

• Reasonable viewing distances • Unhindered views • Interesting views • Lighting (when dark)

Scale • Buildings and spaces designed to human scale

Medium = Satisfactory Light = Undesirable

Protection against crime and violence • Lively Public Realm • Eyes on the street • Overlapping functions day and night • Good lighting

Opportunities to stand / stay •Edge effect / attractive zones for standing / staying • Supports for standing • Facades with good details that invite staying

Protection against unpleasant sensory experiences • Wind • Rain / snow • Cold / Heat • Pollution • Dust / Noise / Glare

Opportunities to sit • Zones for sitting • Utilizing advantages : view, sun, people • Good places to sit • Benches for eating

Opportunities to talk and listen

Opportunities for play and exercise

• Low noise levels • Street furniture that provides ‘talkscapes’

• Physical activity, exercise • Play and street entertainment • By day and night • In summer and winter

Opportunities to enjoy the positive aspects of climate • Sun / shade • Heat / coolness • Shelter from wind / breeze

Positive sensory experience • Good design and detailing • Good materials • Fine views • Trees, plants, water


The Forgotten Dimension ?

Above Ground

We noted how the structure of the buildings on the ground plane kept us from looking around corners, and how these buildings and blocklayouts determined our paths, keeping us from wandering. Gehl’s methodology is a good measure of studying a city, but is inadequate in that it does not include the vertical dimension. The quantity/ quality of our own sensory intake is determined by the buildings that rise stories above our head.

400m walking distance

multi-storey carpark

As far as the eyes can see. Only taller blocks obstruct views.


The view from above It is from the multi-storey carparks that webegan to grasp the layers of the city in terms of its morphology in relation to the land, built, and water. The height from which we stood was as de Certeau (1984) articulated,“transforms(ed) the bewitching world by which one was possessed into a line of text that lies before one’s eye. It allows one to read it, to be a solar Eye, looking down like a god.” The visual field is no longer obstructed by city walls. The roofscape then becomes untapped opportunities, offering a new way of experiencing the city.


critical discoveries

Connections are good to achieve but the lack of it can sometimes be appreciated. Different people own different priorities and are engaged with the city’s legibility differently.

A mastery of places through sight.To be able to see (far into the distance) is also to be able to predict, to run ahead of time, in space. Power is bound by its very visibility (de Certeau,1984) Legibility is not restricted to the ground plane.

Streets are perceived as a series of visual segments. Put together, these segments form sequences (Southampton City

...that space has a distinctive character and that important streets can be distinguished from less important ones (Gehl, 2010)

These segments can also behave like catalytic points

Being able to tell where one’s at is key to the city’s legibility

Council, Development Guide)

...only with a differentiated understanding of group and individual images and their interrelations can an environment be constructed that will be satisfying to all (Lynch,1960). The Gehl report could benefit by including other ‘priorities’

?

Various methods can be employed to improve the urban legibility. A mix of nature and artificial perhaps?


ideas / propositions Enhancing the legibility of a place will include the identification and incorporation of , amongst others : • Natural landmarks and focal points • Views and view corridors • Works of art and craft • Signage and way-markers Gehl (2010) states that the aim should be to create points of activity and allow public life to concentrate along corridors of pedestrian movement. When things happen, interaction can be facilitated. The proposition then identifies the locations of possible markers that could enhance the city’s legibility. These markers behave as catalysts which would slowly increase the visual fields between spaces within the city.

Street art to play the uniting role.

Corner markers / edge

100m visual limit

Additional markers

100m visual limit (new)

As neglected spaces, laneways form a perfect series of potential canvases for the display of art.; an attraction open to the public, both to create and to enjoy.


To transform the dominant carparks as landmarks, to aid in wayfinding and making the city more legible for both locals and out-of-towners.

To incorporate a marker which strengthens the connection between the CBD and the waterfront. A water element feature would become the transitionary space linking the two areas.


Elizabeth Street Mall to Wellington Court

3350

2700 1

3450

980

Two ways of entering Wellington Court from Elizabeth St Mall, but only one entrance, the Wellington Walk is legible and has direct visual linkage.

Issues raised : The best way to create landmarks, though, is to create a great place in general--somewhere that people will want to spend time socializing, shop with no particular aim in mind, walk, bike, and see what’s new.


Entrance via Soundy’s Lane obscured from view by the tourist information centre. Legibility can be increased by minimal interventions;e.g. colour of pavement.


Legibility = Staying (Potential) Inner City revitalization would get a boost by diversifying use. Lynch, K.(1960) states that “...nodes...should be recognizable under diverse conditions...” By inserting elements not currently existing on site, or encouraging what is already on-site for the public to stay longer at different times would make way for a potential staying place. Incorporating ‘corner markers’ that would enhance the site’s legibility would thus guide movement to the site. Lot off Wellington Court Proposing a new way of seeing things


A New Way of Seeing Things This research has informed my Professional Project in seeking the potential of the roofscapes of Hobart. “Something happens because something happens...�(Gehl,2010) Being able to see things from afar would bring more people to a space.

Reduced Visual Barrier = Greater Legibility = Better Staying Potential


The Toolbox Frontages Exciting ground floor facades / edge treatment would provide the ‘marker’ point for people to orientate themselves and make their walk more interesting.

Wellington Walk , Active facade

Precedent, Interactive facade

Water Elements Hobart is a waterfront city and by including water elements as landmarks, the link to the larger context would be made more apparent.

Precedent , Water feature park

Precedent , Ground fountain

Art Infrastructural laneway improvements , temporary and permanent art projects are ways of merging the functional and aesthetic qualities in a landmark. Potential in interrogating the future of art in improving the city’s legibility.

Greenery There can be a stronger character of connectivity with nature. Nature has also become one of the forgotten dimensions of the urban realm. Urban legibility could be improved by undertaking greening strategies.

Precedent , Creative Arch

Use Green

Precedent , Laneway Gallery

Shade Under Green

Precedent , Natural + Artificial images from Sydney Council

Sit on Green images of Greening Strategies, Masako Morita


conclusion Besides being powerful attractions for the out-of-towner, spaces and places within the city should be exploited in the context of a reference point (or as what Lynch terms as “landmarks”. As different individuals have different priorities that drive the routes they take navigating through the city, a ‘toolbox’ of potential landmark elements would then be able to improve urban legibility. In the Sydney Public Space Public Life report, Gehl (2007) introduced four (4) categories which overlaps with the priorities of this research. The list can of course be expanded. It is revealed that these elements are interchangeable, and are able to act as catalysts to further city development in the aspects of legibility and way-finding. However, linking the notion of legibility to the success of a staying place, the existing character of the spaces must also be taken into account. As one of Hobart’s main vision is to be a cultural hub, the implementation of catalytic creative landmarks would not only help improve urban legibility but promote community growth and help dissolve fragmentation in the city.


references Arthur,P. and Passini,R. 1992. Wayfinding - People, Signs and Architecture, McGraw-Hill, New York Bacon, E. N 1967,Design of Cities, Thames and Hudson, London. De Certeau, M. 1984. The practice of everyday life, University of California Press, Berkeley. Gehl, J 2006, New City Life, The Danish Architecture, Copenhagen. Gehl, J 2010, Cities for People, Island, Washington. Jackson, J.B. 1970, Landscapes, The University of Massachusetts, Massachusetts. Lynch, K 1960, The image of the city, The M.I.T, London. Office of the State Architect 2010, Draft Sullivans Cove Master Plan: Demonstration, Hobart. Office of the State Architect 2010, Draft Sullivans Cove Master Plan, Hobart. Office of the State Architect 2010, Draft Sullivans Cove Master Plan: Appendix, Hobart.

Images: *All images, unless otherwise stated, were taken by the author

Speculate : Hobart CBD 2011  

Advanced Design Research Individual Final Report

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you