This is not an architectural blog and I do not wish to impose views of taste, but in some cases the architecture of a development can be of such bad taste that it damages the quality of the surrounding environment to the extent of adversely affecting people's quality of life.
The new Westfield shopping centre in Stratford is one such building, the 'designer' (no architect could come up with this) has sought to blend the worst of both Birmingham New street station and the Manchester Arndale centre into one of the worst new buildings ever constructed (at least in the 1960s they hadnt made the mistakes before to know they were making mistakes).
The centre, will be the first welcome to 70% of visitors to the Olympic site, or all those who choose to arrive by public transport.
When the scheme was in planning a 'landmark tower' was promised instead we have a tower, housing a premier inn of the quality that you would expect of a student residence in Wolverhampton, (My apologies Victoria Hall).
On opening a metal roof tile fell and smashed on the floor, if anything was to give those present an indiction of the quality of this building, then perhaps that was it. This is a development where no expense has being spared, or indeed spent. From one of the worlds richest developers on such a landmark site, this is simply not good enough and I cant help but feel Newham Council have got this massively wrong by letting such an uninspiring and cheap design through a planning system in place to promote quality and prevent a developer free for all.
In some ways it makes me laugh, on one hand you have parish councils in the shires threatening to sabotage every development they are faced with, no matter how insignificant or small. On the other you have inner city councils, with arguably more resources and trained staff, letting major developments through in the quest of jobs and investment and in this case bragging rights of my shopping centre is bigger than yours. (*)
A mixed use development offering opportunities for local enterprise would have left a far greater legacy and brought much greater local economic re-investment.
Although jobs are always welcome, 8000 low paid retail positions wont have the long lasting economic benefits the council hopes nor will these people have much spending power themselves while the profits made in the shops and by Westfield will be banked and leave Newham indefinitely.
This review by Rowen Moore in the Observer, sums up many personal feelings and offers a fair assessment of the scheme.
With the recent opening of both Liverpool One and Cabot circus in Bristol, it was felt a new generation of mall had emerged and we had passed the stage of developing indoor and inward looking single use centres. Hopefully these examples will prove the rule rather than the exception.
To finish on a few positives, the development does make the most of public transport opportunities, with links to Stratford International and the DLR and Mainline stations, as well as also containing a large bus station. It is also apparently very nice inside.
Here are some pictures.
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
Tuesday, 13 September 2011
Monday, 29 August 2011
Why Good Public Transport Systems Matter
 |
| Model Train: About as far as Transport improvements outside of London go in the UK |
Following the short sighted decision in Edinburgh to substantially shorten the cities under construction Tram line:
Linking Social exclusion and public transport: Why good public systems matter
Transport is one of several barriers inhibiting access to employment…employers were not employing people from certain places because transport links were known to be inadequate’’ and unreliable’ (DOT 2000: 50)
It is generally assumed that everyone owns or has access to a car, the truth is somewhat different, according to Poverty.org.uk, in 2010, 25% of men and 40% of women either lacked a car in their household or do not having a driving license. This makes the provision of public transport essential for many people in enabling them to form social networks outside of the community in which they live, as well as providing access to education, retail, heath, employment and leisure facilities.
The design of our cities sadly makes life difficult for those without access to private transport, low density suburban development and a shift of shopping, leisure and offices to the edge of settlements has created dispersed cities. At the same time public transport networks have failed to adapt to modern land-use patterns, leading to declines in usage and in turn reduced frequencies.
It is now 10 yeas since PPG 13 was published, which was the first major policy document to specifically link social exclusion and pubic transport, stating...
A key planning objective is to ensure that jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services are accessible by public transport, walking, and cycling. This is important for all, but especially for those who do not have regular use of a car, and to promote social inclusion. (PPG13, 2001: 9)
Yet the issue is still rarely touched upon and large scale public transport investments outside of London have proved rare and in the case of the proposed light rail networks in Leeds and Liverpool axed. While cycling which has the potential to provide a low cost transport (and obesity) solution is still to be fully embraced, a result of a long term lack of any serious investment in cycle networks by local authorities.
Further inefficiencies can be leveled at the '1998 UK bus competition act' which prevents bus operators agreeing timetables and routes, arguably preventing fully connected transport networks and makes life difficult for people needing to change routes, creating the disintegrated networks many people see today.
Whether Edinburgh should have decided to invest in light rail is a issue many residents of the city have being asking for along time.
The main advantage of light rail over busses and heavy rail, is its ability to enable permanent new public transport routes through the middle of urban areas, with an ability to carry passengers faster, and more reliably than the pre-mentioned alternatives while allowing high frequency stops.
Th issue of permanence is particularly important, as the service cannot be cut at a moments notice, inspiring confidence in a location and presenting a forward thinking and modern city. Creating a favorable impression to visitors but also inspiring residents and it is inevitable new developments and businesses will be attracted alongside light rail lines.
At the same time, the initial outlay of light-rail is expensive and once built it is not cheap to run, monetary costs which are often passed onto the rider itself at social cost.
Edinburgh like other British cities needs a long term and targeted public transport plan that is supported by those in government. Light rail wasn't and It is particularly sad that the part of the route cut linked Leith one of Edinburgh's most deprived districts to the city centre and with further connections, beyond; which would have opened up a huge number of potential opportunities for residents.
The UK government is cutting back on many areas of expenditure, something that I support in principle. But this shouldn't come at the cost of developing social inclusion, something which can only lead to helping its primary aim of economic growth.
The recent riots seen across the UK were the result of a socially excluded element of our society, who felt dissatisfied with there communities enough to smash then up. Integrated transport systems can go some way to reconnecting these neighborhoods back into the city.
 |
| Construction of Underground rail in Rotterdam (Netherlands); here a longer term view is taken |
Friday, 26 August 2011
The end of the line
The Edinburgh tram project descended into further farce yesterday with spiraling construction costs, estimated at around £700 million leading Conservative and Labour councillors to vote to end the line at Haymarket, 11 stops short of its intended destination and 2 miles and 3 stops from the City centre and main transport interchange at Waverley Station.
The scheme was already deeply unpopular, especially amongst small business owners upset at a huge level of local disruption. The fact that areas which have now put up with delays, diversions and construction work for the past 2 years will now not even be able to experience the benefits of the project will only rile residents further.
Taking the line just the extra 2 miles would have given the scheme estimated profits of around 2 million per year, the revised scheme is now expected to lose 4 million during the same period.
Its is long term planning like this which makes me proud to be British.
 |
| The Revised route, in dark red, and where the route should have really ended, itself well short of the original plan. |
One tram line through one of the least dense areas of the city will contribute little to encouraging modal shift and seeing empty trams running around may only increase public anger and exacerbating the negative feeling towards future large scale transport improvements in the city which would be a great shame; in a period of increasing petrol costs and a growing awareness of the negative impact cars have in urban environments.
Sunday, 31 July 2011
Planning the Unknown
After much speculation the coalition governments long awaited draft national planning policy framework (NPPF) was released this week.
The document has come in for a wide range of criticism from many sources, notably that it will encourage reckless sprawl and a resurgence of out of town retail and office developments. While concerns also exist over vague wording which some experts warn could result in developers taking advantage of the system . This perhaps forgetting that this is only a draft document in a plan led system with local plans the starting point in the determination of any planning application.
The document through the core planning principles listed on page 5 expands upon the values of sustainable development engrained during the previous administration, although it is in parts vague this could be a blessing as local authorities (and planners) are given greater power to draw up the future of there own districts, with considerably less top-down restrictions.
The document is simple, but it also promotes many of the core planning values which have emerged over the last 10 years, notably creating mixed use communities, encouraging good design responding to local character and supporting a low carbon economy.
This document represents a major shift in UK planning policy replacing almost 1000 words of policy with just 50 and it will be at least another 5-10 years before any sound judgement upon the effects of this shift can be made.
Consultation of the document ends in October.
The document has come in for a wide range of criticism from many sources, notably that it will encourage reckless sprawl and a resurgence of out of town retail and office developments. While concerns also exist over vague wording which some experts warn could result in developers taking advantage of the system . This perhaps forgetting that this is only a draft document in a plan led system with local plans the starting point in the determination of any planning application.
The document through the core planning principles listed on page 5 expands upon the values of sustainable development engrained during the previous administration, although it is in parts vague this could be a blessing as local authorities (and planners) are given greater power to draw up the future of there own districts, with considerably less top-down restrictions.
The document is simple, but it also promotes many of the core planning values which have emerged over the last 10 years, notably creating mixed use communities, encouraging good design responding to local character and supporting a low carbon economy.
This document represents a major shift in UK planning policy replacing almost 1000 words of policy with just 50 and it will be at least another 5-10 years before any sound judgement upon the effects of this shift can be made.
Consultation of the document ends in October.
Tuesday, 5 July 2011
Ensuring a Sustainable Future?
It was revealed last week that the UK population grew at its fastest rate for over half a century.
Between june 2009 and 2010 the countries population grew by 470,000 people, roughly the same number of people who live in Liverpool. Yet unless I have missed it, a new city hasn't risen out of the ground. So where are these people living?
Just over half of the 470,000 rise can be attributed to natural change, (The difference between births and deaths). This figure was 134,000 higher than the figure 10 years ago. Just under half of this rise were immigrants, leaving around 200,000 extra people needing accommodation in a country where over the last 10 years house completions have continually decreased and where in many communities there is a strong resistance to any new development.
The increase in immigrants can also be partly used to explain the natural rise with 200,000 extra women of child baring age residing in the UK compared to 10 years ago.
At the other end of the scale the amount of people over the age of 85 has doubled from 600,000 in 1981 to 1.4 million today. Bringing its own problems of housing and care provision.
The result of this is record house prices, increasing number of people in their late 20s early 30s are now opting to rent and there is a council house waiting list of 1.75 million people. (The Times)
The coalition governments Draft national planning policy framework which is set to be released later this month aims to change the balance in favour of developers. Although this will give housebuilding a kickstart the policy could result in a increase in greenfield and greenbelt development, while current sustainability guidelines ensuring new developments have access to public transport or walking and cycling routes to shops or places of work, will be ignored. Acording to the Times 'Councils will be unable to reject developments unless they can prove that the impacts would be so severe that they would outweigh the urgent need for new homes' (1).
90% (2) of the UK is currently open space, a fact perhaps forgotten in the overcrowded south east. While the density of Northern Cities such as Sheffield (3,942 people per Km2) and (Scottish) Glasgow (3,171) is very low when compared to Greater London at 5,099 people per sq km,and there is a good supply of brownfield land in many of these places ready and waiting to be developed.
In 20 years the children born today will be wanting to fly there own nest; it is crucial that for there sake at least the country has a proactive planning system and a ready supply of homes available and perhaps the new policy will result in a more sustainable long-term future.
(1)Webster B (1/7/2011) Planning rules pave way for greenbelt bonaza, The Times, London
(2)Pennington M (2/7/2011) Loosen your Greenbelt become a BIMBY, The Times, London
Between june 2009 and 2010 the countries population grew by 470,000 people, roughly the same number of people who live in Liverpool. Yet unless I have missed it, a new city hasn't risen out of the ground. So where are these people living?
Just over half of the 470,000 rise can be attributed to natural change, (The difference between births and deaths). This figure was 134,000 higher than the figure 10 years ago. Just under half of this rise were immigrants, leaving around 200,000 extra people needing accommodation in a country where over the last 10 years house completions have continually decreased and where in many communities there is a strong resistance to any new development.
The increase in immigrants can also be partly used to explain the natural rise with 200,000 extra women of child baring age residing in the UK compared to 10 years ago.
At the other end of the scale the amount of people over the age of 85 has doubled from 600,000 in 1981 to 1.4 million today. Bringing its own problems of housing and care provision.
The result of this is record house prices, increasing number of people in their late 20s early 30s are now opting to rent and there is a council house waiting list of 1.75 million people. (The Times)
The coalition governments Draft national planning policy framework which is set to be released later this month aims to change the balance in favour of developers. Although this will give housebuilding a kickstart the policy could result in a increase in greenfield and greenbelt development, while current sustainability guidelines ensuring new developments have access to public transport or walking and cycling routes to shops or places of work, will be ignored. Acording to the Times 'Councils will be unable to reject developments unless they can prove that the impacts would be so severe that they would outweigh the urgent need for new homes' (1).
90% (2) of the UK is currently open space, a fact perhaps forgotten in the overcrowded south east. While the density of Northern Cities such as Sheffield (3,942 people per Km2) and (Scottish) Glasgow (3,171) is very low when compared to Greater London at 5,099 people per sq km,and there is a good supply of brownfield land in many of these places ready and waiting to be developed.
In 20 years the children born today will be wanting to fly there own nest; it is crucial that for there sake at least the country has a proactive planning system and a ready supply of homes available and perhaps the new policy will result in a more sustainable long-term future.
(1)Webster B (1/7/2011) Planning rules pave way for greenbelt bonaza, The Times, London
(2)Pennington M (2/7/2011) Loosen your Greenbelt become a BIMBY, The Times, London
Thursday, 30 June 2011
Engineering Connections
When it comes to mammoth engineering projects, China has once again shown nothing is a bridge too far with the opining of the Jiaozhou road bridge, at an astonishing 24 miles; this 3 way sea crossing between the eastern cities of Haung Dao, Quingdao and Quingdao Airport is the longest water crossing in the world.
The bridge cost more than 10 billion yaun (nearly £1 billion) in a build lasting 4 years. I post this in the same week the debate over a new high speed rail line in the UK intensified with campaign groups in the North of England revealing the slogan 'Their lawns for our jobs' in reference to the unsettling NIMBY culture in the South of the country which threatens to delay the project beyond its projected 2033 opening. By then I suspect the Chinese will be commuting to the Moon.
To rub greater salt into our increasing wounds, China this week also opened a Shanghai to Beijing High speed link, at 820 miles the scheme also took just 4 years to build and will cut journey times to around 4 hours and 48 minutes, with questions now being asked whether the Chinese could build our own High Speed line 2, a unthinkable proposition just 20 years ago but a deep indication of a changing global environment and one the UK increasingly risks being left back at the station.
China is currently investing in what will eventually become the worlds largest high speed rail network with 10.500 miles of track now completed or under construction. The Beijing to Shanghai line cost £24.5 billion and the Chinese government is investing £19 billion in high speed rail this year alone. Current estimates for the planned British line currently suggest a cost of £32 billion .
The UK has a rich engineering heritage that is increasingly compromised by a long winded and complicated planning system as well as an uncomfortable inability to manage costs. The decision by the current coalition government to scrap the IPC (1) doesn't help in this regard, nor does the lack of a national planning framework for England which could help promote greater long term and integrated thinking and perhaps prevent the North / South arguments we are seeing.
1, This article from the Daily Mail, ( the most popular news website in the UK and the 2nd best selling daily) perhaps highlights more than ever the attitude that exists amongst households towards development, a notable quote from the article ''They (Ministers) made clear that local people who do not want expensive infrastructure projects blighting there communities will have greater power to object''
Perhaps there lies the problem
 |
| The Jiazhou Road Bridge (Google Earth) |
To rub greater salt into our increasing wounds, China this week also opened a Shanghai to Beijing High speed link, at 820 miles the scheme also took just 4 years to build and will cut journey times to around 4 hours and 48 minutes, with questions now being asked whether the Chinese could build our own High Speed line 2, a unthinkable proposition just 20 years ago but a deep indication of a changing global environment and one the UK increasingly risks being left back at the station.
China is currently investing in what will eventually become the worlds largest high speed rail network with 10.500 miles of track now completed or under construction. The Beijing to Shanghai line cost £24.5 billion and the Chinese government is investing £19 billion in high speed rail this year alone. Current estimates for the planned British line currently suggest a cost of £32 billion .
The UK has a rich engineering heritage that is increasingly compromised by a long winded and complicated planning system as well as an uncomfortable inability to manage costs. The decision by the current coalition government to scrap the IPC (1) doesn't help in this regard, nor does the lack of a national planning framework for England which could help promote greater long term and integrated thinking and perhaps prevent the North / South arguments we are seeing.
1, This article from the Daily Mail, ( the most popular news website in the UK and the 2nd best selling daily) perhaps highlights more than ever the attitude that exists amongst households towards development, a notable quote from the article ''They (Ministers) made clear that local people who do not want expensive infrastructure projects blighting there communities will have greater power to object''
Perhaps there lies the problem
Tuesday, 31 May 2011
The Endless City
A new series on BBC 1 begins this week, entitled 'Andrew Marr's Mega Cities' in which the presenter will look at 5 of the worlds largest and most intense urban environments. The series will explore Dhaka, London, Tokyo, Shanghai and Mexico City. With more people now living in Cities and predictions that if present trends continue 75% of the planet will be urbanised by the end of the century, this should be a really interesting program.
On a personal note I am fascinated by the Mega-City, especially at the speed at which many in the Eastern hemisphere are growing almost undetected by the West. In a previous article I explored Chongqing in China, a City of 31 Million people and one of the fastest growing places in the world.
The Pearl River Delta in China's Southern Guangdong province is another such Mega-City region, comprising a area about twice the size of Wales this is one of the most populated places on Earth, with 10 Cities with populations of over 1.5 million, of which two Shenzhen and Guangzhou have populations of around 10 million. The total population of the region is estimated to be around 100 million .
The main areas of concern are undoubtably the pollution and landscape and ecosystem damage that such dense urban sprawl will produce, and the impact that this will have on the its residents. The Pearl delta is one of the most polluted water systems on earth, according to a 2009 Green-peace report which attributes it on increased indultrialisation within the region and the pumping of toxic waste into the delta. While increasing car ownership and relaxation of the Hukou registration system which can limit movement within the region, especially for rural migrants, will all bring further pressure.
On a footnote the drive for growth has brought some bizarre developments notably the New South China Mall, the worlds largest Shopping Mall with 2350 units of which 6 years since it fully opened only 47 are occupied, a result perhaps of a misunderstanding of Chinese demographics on the developers behalf, its location in a peripheral area of Dongguan alongside a toll road, a highly industrialized and one of the least wealthy cities within the region.
Whether the South China Mall will prosper over time remains to be seen, but it certainly could be argued it was simply ahead of its time, increased economic development and movement within the region will certainly not harm its chances, especially as the region looks towards encouraging less polluting and better paid high-tech industries.
On a personal note I am fascinated by the Mega-City, especially at the speed at which many in the Eastern hemisphere are growing almost undetected by the West. In a previous article I explored Chongqing in China, a City of 31 Million people and one of the fastest growing places in the world.
The Pearl River Delta in China's Southern Guangdong province is another such Mega-City region, comprising a area about twice the size of Wales this is one of the most populated places on Earth, with 10 Cities with populations of over 1.5 million, of which two Shenzhen and Guangzhou have populations of around 10 million. The total population of the region is estimated to be around 100 million .
The main areas of concern are undoubtably the pollution and landscape and ecosystem damage that such dense urban sprawl will produce, and the impact that this will have on the its residents. The Pearl delta is one of the most polluted water systems on earth, according to a 2009 Green-peace report which attributes it on increased indultrialisation within the region and the pumping of toxic waste into the delta. While increasing car ownership and relaxation of the Hukou registration system which can limit movement within the region, especially for rural migrants, will all bring further pressure.
On a footnote the drive for growth has brought some bizarre developments notably the New South China Mall, the worlds largest Shopping Mall with 2350 units of which 6 years since it fully opened only 47 are occupied, a result perhaps of a misunderstanding of Chinese demographics on the developers behalf, its location in a peripheral area of Dongguan alongside a toll road, a highly industrialized and one of the least wealthy cities within the region.
 |
| The South China Mall: Build it and they will come.. maybe not (google) |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)