Key Map
The Urban Structure Zooming in to the focus area, there are three things to be noticed as the assessment of the original design (Figure 50). 1. Apart from the golf course villas long border of wall on the eastern side of the city centre, the long interface to the waterfront on the western side also needed to be considered. Along the more than 1.2 km side of the waterfront park, there is only one anchor which is on the top-north part of the park. Although the placement on the original design is logical because of the planned density on the northern of the city centre, if the intention is to make the whole focus area as one vital city centre, the waterfront park needs to have more activating uses. 2. The 100 m main thoroughfare road reserve is planned to be downgraded in hierarchy. This is necessary reflecting to the original design to have a road fly-over structure in the middle of the area and pedestrian bridges to cross the wide roads. As learnt from the case of Hanoi City Centre (Rn, Keangnam Tower area), this type of structure will disrupt the vitality of the place. Hence, it is necessary to rethink the design of this road. 3. Based on the accessibility analysis (Choice Aspect, R=800 m), the tendency for people to walk towards the city centre from both the northern and southern side of area will not reach the whole length of the city centre. This is intriguing since the intention of the original design is to make this road to be the main pedestrian street, connecting sport facility in the southern side to the transport hub on the northern side. Hence, based on the analysis, there will be a missing link area that people will not tend to walk which will eventually lose its vitality.
Figure 50.  Original design urban structure asessment
0
100
200
400 m
AR3U100 Graduation LAB: Cities for People -of Tomorrow
105