Bishopsgate Goods Yard

Development Brief

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1

1.0_Introduction
1.1_Terms of Reference 1.2_Setting out the physical and socio-economic context 1.3_Summary of policy and planning framework

2.0_Area Analysis
2.1_Urban Design Characteristics 2.2_Constraints and Opportunities

3.0_Objectives, vision and design principles

3.1_Vision 3.2_Objectives 3.3_Design Principles

4.0_Detailed development strategy: Identification of development sites

4.0_Identification of Development Site 4.1_Urban Structure 4.2_Access 4.3_Public Realm

5.0_Phasing
5.1_Phasing Plan 5.2_Cost Analysis

6.0_Conclusions

01

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

1.0

Introduction

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

London has remnants and fragments of a rich historical past which has helped to build a grand megalopolis. Today London has its place as a global city. Mixing the old with new, London has a peculiar character where people from every part of the world, race, ethnicity and age group, find a place and identify themselves from it. This Development Brief has been formulated for the Bishopsgate Goods Yard (BGY) site which is within both boroughs of Tower Hamlets and Hackney and bordering the City of London. Bishopsgate Goods Yard was used as a logistics node until 1964 and has been lying disused awaiting the construction of the East London Line (ELL) extension. The linear form of the site along with the railway lines acts as a dividing line running east-west. Over the years, adjoining areas have turned their back on the goods yard leading to a number of derelict sites. London Olympics 2012 and the ELL has brought a much needed attention and connectivity to the area. In response to raising interest in the local areas within the real estate market, the council has developed the Bishopsgate Planning Guidance, which aggressively targets integrating the goods yard into the mainstream. This Brief positions itself as both a critical assessment of the Planning Guidance and an alternative vision. This Brief is informed by a previous stage of Urban Analysis dealing with aspects related to Accessibility, Building Typology, Urban Grain, Open Spaces, Density and the Socio-economic context. It also looked at the site within the broader context of London. The report is primarily divided into two sections. The first section builds on the previous stage work and outlines the vision, objectives and design principles of the Brief. The second section deals with guidelines for Urban Structure, Access and Public Realm, with a the Phasing Plan for each and concluding remarks.

04

1.1_Terms of Reference

1.2_Setting out the physical and socioeconomic context

The Terms of Reference of this Brief are defined as follows: 1. To draw upon the findings of the Urban Analysis stage to inform strategic objectives, vision and design principles for the site, simultaneously identifying areas of intervention and acupuncture. 2. To identify and prioritize characteristics within the site and study area with the theme of crime prevention as outlined by ODPM. 3. To develop guidelines based on the elements of Urban Structure, Access and Public Realm integrating the urban analysis and crime prevention characteristics. 4. To develop long-term strategies and short-term tactics for development based on the guidelines with key temporal considerations outlining a logical, responsive and dynamic transformation process. 5. To develop a phasing strategy that would address broader goals of the city and the site itself and provide a pragmatic framework that is responsive to new stimuli.

Bishopsgate Goods Yard is located on the cusp of a number of boroughs including the London Borough of Tower Hamets, LB of Hackney, LB of Islington and the City of London. Currently, the site is undergoing a transformation with the construction of the ELL and the opening of the Shoreditch High Street Station, opening up the area to increased transportation routes linking residential areas to the City. Public space in the area divided into hard and soft spaces with use varying not only from one day to the next, but also at different times throughout the day demonstrating the sites dynamic character. The socio-economic situation in the area is complex and reflects sharp contrasts in density, ethnicity, education and employment of its residents. While the BGY site has an extremely low population density, surrounding areas including Bethnal Green North and South, Spitalfields and Banglatown have the cities highest. The high population density of the surrounding area contrasted by the low built density for housing must be considered in the planning guidance and particularly with respect to adequate housing in the area. The ethnic diversity is much greater in the site area compared to London and has the largest Bangladeshi population in the UK. The diversity of the area creates a vibrant and culturally driven community. The proportion of young people of working age (26-45) in the area accounts for almost half of the population. The potential for job creation, education and training should be realised and exploited when developing the site.

05

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

1.3_Summary of policy and planning framework

Significant London and borough planning policies for the development of the site are indicated in the table below..

06

Headline policies that relate directly to the site include: London Plan The site falls within an Opportunity Area: the capitals major reservoir of brownfield land with significant capacity to accommodate new housing, commercial and other development linked to existing or potential improvements to public transport accessibility.(GLA, 2009) Hackneys South Shoreditch / City Fringe Area Action Plan Identifies the area as suitable for intensification of urban form and economic performance. The western portion of the site falls within the Tall Buildings Opportunity Area. Other keys aspects denoted in the document include conservation areas to the west of the site and the importance of retaining local character. As well as ighlights a local open space deficiency and the need for improved pedestrian connectivity. Hackney Tall Buildings Strategy Identifies the western portion of the site as a recommended area for a tall buildings cluster. Tower Hamlets City Fringe Area Action Plan Recommends retaining and intensifying the current mixed use and character of the Brick Lane area, restricting heights to 4-5 floors, restricting set-backs and maintaining fine grain, improving connectivity of and access to open space and providing new affordable homes, including family homes. Hackney and Tower Hamlets Housing Strategies Identify the need for more affordable housing, specifically for family homes (3 or more bedrooms) and see developments such as Bishopsgate

Goods Yard critical to securing this growth. Bishopsgate Goods Yard Planning Guidelines Situates the site in the context of constraints, surrounding conservation areas and listed structures on site. Contains recommendations for: a taller building cluster on the west of the site reducing in height to the east, opportunities to build above the East London Line, sustainable design, public space including new green open space above the viaduct, enhanced local connectivity, a site integrated with the surrounding character areas, re-use of historic structures, a mix of employment opportunities and housing types and tenure, healthcare and community facilities. It is proposed that the site could support approximately: 350,000 sq.m. of overall development; 1000-2000 new homes; 75,000 150,000 sq.m. of non residential floor space; 1.8 ha of publicly accessible open space.

07

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

2.0

Area Analysis

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

2.1_Urban Design Characteristics

The urban and spatial analysis of the local area surrounding the Bishopsgate Goods Yard site was undertaken by six different areas of analysis: Socio-economic profile Urban grain/block structure and use/ mix Open Space system Access Massing/Density Building typology, landmarks, significant buildings and view corridors. Throughout this section, we summarize the findings of these areas of analysis focussing on how they affect the particular urban characteristics (ie. block structure, access, public realm) which will inform the detailed development strategy.

Socio economic profile The population of the area surrounding BGY is predominantly young (Fig. 1) and is characterised by a diversity in terms of income, education (Fig. 2) and ethnicity and relatively high rates of unemployment (6%). The degree of socio-economic complexity in the area, in particular the amount of working age population and young people, should be taken into account in terms of proposed economic activities. A wider range of employment opportunities, training and education and improved services targeted towards the local population should be a priority in redevelopment schemes. The gap between levels of education and employment is great in the area with the majority of highly paid and highly skilled employment concentrated in the City of London. Improvement of green spaces including educational programmes could tackle issues of sustainability, crime, mental health and community cohesion. The incidence of robbery and theft related crime in the area could also be tackled by implementing CPTED principles in areas missing natural surveillance, active frontages, etc.
10

Urban grain/block structure and use/ mix The urban fabric of the area is typified by adaptable mixes of coarse and fine grain plots around the site supporting a variety of uses, with a flow of activity at different times. The encroachment of the coarse, mono-use City grain into these areas has been prevented by their designation as conservation areas despite enormous economic pressure. Exceptions to this typical form are the more homogenous areas to the south east (corporate commercial) and south west (social housing). The area involves a large and varied mixed use covering a wide range of activities which define certain areas of similar character (image districts) bordered by zones of transition (edges). The variety in these image districts and the adaptability of uses evident in some fine mix uses buildings (ie. Tea Building , old Truman Brewery) suggest a wide range of potential options for the site to adopt in relation to the mixture and adaptability between multiple grains and uses. (p.31) The built mass is shaping both internal and external spaces, and has mostly been adapted to suit function. The building use then determines pedestrian flows and access as well as influence the character of the public realm.

11

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

Open Space system The open space system of the area is characterized by its flexibility and transitory character; by a constantly changing atmosphere that varies from day to night and weekday to weekend. The diverse nature of open space is further categorized by public and private, hard and soft, temporary and permanent and high and low intensity among others. The built environment shapes the voids that create open spaces. Within the site, there is not a lack of open spaces per se but a lack of green spaces. The challenge for the planned framework is to make connections between green spaces, markets and other hardscapes in the area that are disrupted so that these spaces can be enjoyed by residents and visitors. The site serves as a backdrop for informal activities that nourish the temporal uses of its open space boundaries. The challenge is to encourage interaction within the open spaces around the site and to increase permeability without destroying the existing network. The activities proposed through temporary or long-term use might be adaptive and flexible to the continuous contextual changes.

Access The area is generally well served by public transport, and has a PTAL index 6b. Currently, the North-East part of the site area is less served by bus networks in comparison to the West. Opening of the Shoreditch Station will improve accessibility in the North-East area. The site is bound by networks of strategic routes, streets and cycle paths, which allows for sufficient access to surrounding Boroughs. The area provides several points for improvement of pedestrian movement. Conflicts of use between pedestrians, cyclists and drivers emerge in certain sites such as Brick Lane. Accessibility is also influenced by building density, as high-mass buildings in the area cut off alternative routes and decrease sense of security. Inappropriate use of street furniture occasionally diminishes the quality of pedestrian use and safety and disrupts flows of pedestrian movement. Design of pedestrian crossings should contribute to flow without delays.

12

Massing/Density Due to various factors such as plot size, family size, and building heights the inconsistency between population and physical density is ubiquitous. The disconnection between population and physical density is shown in the contrast between Shoreditch High Street and Brick Lane. While Brick Lane has a higher population then Shoreditch High Street, it has a drastically lower physical net density. The study area can be divided into clusters defined by trends in building mass. The design and formation of mass provides an identity for the area and also plays a role in vulnerability to crime. Building mass shapes the edges that create property demarcation, accessibility, and visibility, which form areas of safety or vulnerability to crime. In addition, changing week activities, such as weekend markets and business people from The City create an ebb and flow of population density on the street. Therefore, the areas redevelopment must be sensitive to the existing context by incorporating cluster identity into new developments, design mass to create spaces of perceived safety and decreased crime risk, and generate continuous activity to evade street voids.

Building typology, landmarks, significant buildings and view corridors. The built environment of the BGY has been undergoing urban change for years. The building uses in the area are quite diverse and range from creative industries to high finance. The image and reality of the site is defined by striking contrasts of vibrant areas and high rise buildings to areas of urban decay, and derelict infrastructure. The sense of insecurity in some areas is quite prominent, exasperated by the blighted built environment. Derelict buildings in the area lead to decreased sense of pedestrian safety. Lack of active frontages and natural surveillance such as Sclater Street also decrease pedestrian safety. Thus, redevelopment schemes in the site area must take into consideration the transformation of derelict buildings, while staying true to the existing urban fabric ad historical significance of the area.

13

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

2.2_Constrains and Opportunities

Strengths (to be defended and built on through the development) High levels of connectivity by public transport Transformation and adaptability of local building use allow for a constant evolution of neighbourhood identity Diversity and vibrancy of local economic activity Adaptable existing spaces and structures within the site Overall high population density of local areas as compared with the rest of London Site serves as a bridge from residential to more commercial areas and The City of London Diverse commercial spaces attract a range of uses and users at different times of the day / week Good lighting on major streets Markets attract people from surrounding areas and extend active frontages around the site on weekends Weaknesses (to be addressed through the development) Disconnection between built form and population density leading to overcrowding in some residential areas and significantly lower population densities in others. Coarse-grain/mono-use housing and commercial areas restrict adaptability and integration with other activities Derelict buildings and construction sites disrupt city fabric and increase fear of crime There is less than half of the recommended green space in Hackney and Tower Hamlets Limited and fragmented open space, with poorly demarcated public/private space Poor East/West public transport and pedestrian connections Street clutter prevents seamless pedestrian flow and creates confusing street intersections Lack of street furniture, especially benches and bicycle stands

Opportunities (to be maximised through the development) Build additional affordable family housing and reduce local overcrowding Connect the variety of community and structural identities surrounding the site Prioritise neighbourhoods needs through community uses / services and economic opportunities for young people Create a space that draws strengths from individual neighborhood characteristics New multi-use buildings unlock potential of coarse grain buildings to incorporate varied activities at different times. The same ideology can be used for mixed use open spaces. Encourage temporary uses that reflect local interests and needs from the site, and contribute to the development of uses and form over time. Use strong existing local community organizations and institutions to attract interest in temporary uses from the community Connect fragmented open space, improve pedestrian connectivity and provide additional green space. Bridge Goods Yard with Eastern Yards

Threats (to be mitigated through the development) Site will remain unused as development is reliant on economic climate Economic pressures will mandate what is built on and around the site and will lead to high mass commercial buildings that do not add significantly to housing need and generate a character in great contrast to local conservation areas Promotion of high-income housing and high-value uses leads to indirect exclusion of local populations from the site Risk of crime on streets of irregular activity Developers will disregard community identity and create a generic space Public Space on the Goods Yard site will de facto belong to those living on the site and will isolate the surrounding community Poorly designed open space can correlate to increased crime rates Redevelopment of the area can cause an increase in density thus making the affects of the additional housing provision in the area negligible

3.0

Objectives, vision and design principles

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

3.1_Vision

3.2_Objectives

The Bishopsgate Goods Yard has the potential to be an inclusive spatial node by harnessing the strengths of the surrounding area, both social and physical, and exploiting its opportunities. Its future development should respect local character and livelihoods, create non-fragmented open spaces and approach structural development in a way that compliments existing urban grains. Beyond the short-term temporary uses of the site, the long-term design parameters must answer to a comprehensive vision, where land-use, scale and social impact are coordinated under the umbrella of community building.

1. Development of the Bishopsgate Goods Yard is well integrated with the surrounding areas, taking into consideration the unique character of the site; 2. Foster local diversity and interaction by supporting a community driven development in order to achieve a strong social cohesion and to reduce crime. 3. Improve the permeability of the site, by supporting a development strategy that not only improves north-south/east-west connectivity but that addresses the needs of pedestrians and cyclists; 4. Improve the existing and fragmented open spaces in and around to the site to allow greater accessibility of these areas by residents and visitors; 5. Ensure that any new building developments in the BGY site are sensitive to the historical and cultural fabric of the existing area, taking into consideration conservation areas, listed and locally listed buildings; 6. Promote multi-use buildings to unlock the potential of coarse grain buildings in the area and to incorporate varied activities at different times

16

3.3_Design principles

The following design principles have been shaped and influenced by the previous urban analysis and act as a guide to the forthcoming development proposals for the Goods Yard. 1. Improve the permeability to the site at different levels (ground and upper) in the east-west and north-south directions. 2. Create a clear hierarchy of movement which puts pedestrians at the top: pedestrian paths and cycling routes should be clearly divided in the site; as well, pedestrian paths, cycling and vehicle routes, should be clearly divided outside the site. 3. Create recognizable and flexible paths inside the site. 4. Improve cycle and public transport networks and their interaction with the pedestrian one (bus stops, bike racks etc.). 5. Improve nodes and signage through traditional tools and through use of art. 6. Network already existing columns of activity into an integrated public realm fabric. 7. Develop a strategy to create a public realm language that flows fluently between the three councils around the site. 8. Establish a balanced public-private partnership with council leadership to ensure equal access to public realm benefits. 9. Foster landmark spaces from public to private, from open to enclosed. 10. Balance the private requirements of land use with the existing local needs regarding health issues and space pressures.

11. Utilize existing viaduct and archways as a connecting element from east to west, an opportunity for temporary uses and as a boulevard for permanent use. 12. Respond to the existing urban grains to the north of the site, allow for north-south permeability through the site, both at multiple levels and also connecting multiple levels. 13. Integrating existing and new structures through advanced structural engineering. 14. High-rise buildings should provide public and semi public facilities for temporary densities (work time densities, residential and weekends activities) - that ensure a constant use of the of ground floors and upper floor levels. the where use is not a linear purely an extrusion vertically, from public-transitional-private. 15. Enhance visual connection across the site while maintaining clear security boundaries.

17

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.0

Detailed development strategy: Identification of development sites

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.0_Identification of development sites

The BGY site is situated in a dynamic context of urban development and transition. Because of its strategic position linking the north/south axes of activity and movement of Shoreditch High Street and Brick Lane, and proximity to the expanding City, any development of the site must take into account impact on and influences from development opportunities and pressures in the surrounding urban fabric. The image below illustrates some of the most significant of these potentialities and their relationship to the BGY site. While this development brief fo-

cuses predominately on the BGY itself, it is developed in the context of the urban analysis of the wider area and expected to contribute a catalytic role on the integrated development of the indicated areas.

Transitional area around Redchurch St can be supported and enhanced through increased N-S connectivity on BGY site G+ 25 development approved Potential for Eastern Yards development following ELL completion Pedley Street development site Brick Lane activity corridor can be enhanced through increased W-E connectivity on BGY site, intensified node at eastern end of BGY connecting to Allen Gardens

Fragmented mixed use area, identity can be consolidated to complement and enhance activity and connectivity on BGY site
20

G+50 development proposed

BGY site and focus of development brief Future development site identified by Hackney LDF

Fragmented transitional area mostly residential, permeability and activity in area can be enhanced responding to increased N-S connectivity on BGY site

Reference sites for high density, tall building clusters setting precedents in proximity to BGY

4.1

Urban Structure

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

3.1.1_Vision

3.1.2_Objectives

Development of the urban structure of Bishopsgate Goods Yard must be integrated with public realm and access developments under a holistic approach that responds to the complexity of site and surrounding context as revealed through the urban analysis phase. Guidelines are structured to allow multiple proposal options which recognise and are conscious of the trade-offs between the sites economic potential, the needs of the surrounding communities and the context of the local urban fabric. Responses should promote a phased and incremental development of the site allowing emergent uses and transitions between temporary and permanent activities.

1. Address neighbourhoods needs through uses, facilities and services (including affordable family housing, green space and a health facility) that meet identified local need and provide economic opportunities for young people. 2. Include diverse commercial spaces of varied grain to attract a range of uses and users at different times of the day / week. 3. Create a legible built form that is not an amalgamation and blending of identities, but draws strengths from individual neighbourhood characteristics. 4. Implement an approach to massing and density that is sensitive to the character of and impact on surrounding conservation areas. 5. Implement an approach to permeability and movement in the urban structure that reflects the complexity of the vertical and horizontal layering of the site. 6. Encourage temporary uses that reflect local interests and needs from the site, engage local people and institutions and contribute to the development of uses and form over time. 7. Retain existing structures (full length of the viaduct, remaining perimeter wall, weavers cottages etc) for adaptive use wherever possible.

22

3.1.3_Design Principles

3.1.3_Long Term Framework

1. Utilize existing viaduct and archways as a connecting element from east to west, an opportunity for temporary uses and as a boulevard for permanent use 2. Respond to the existing urban grains to the north of the site, allow for north-south permeability through the site, both at multiple levels and also connecting multiple levels 3. Integrating existing and new structures through advanced structural engineering. 4. High-rise buildings should provide public and semi public facilities for temporary densities (work time densities, residential and weekends activities) - that ensure a constant use of the of ground floors and upper floor levels. the where use is not a linear purely an extrusion vertically, from publictransitional-private 5. Enhance visual connection across the site while maintaining clear security boundaries.

The Bishopsgate Goods Yard is the site of many overlapping, interdependent and interconnecting influences. These influences come from all aspects, primarily the commercial forces in the City to the south-west, the contextual characteristics of the Brick Lane and Banglatown communities to the south-east and residential areas to the north of the site, and the aspirations and obligations of the local authority and city which are to be provided for its citizens. Surrounding Influences Each of these key influences bring with them strong and complex characteristics, which need to be considered within the development principles in order for future permanent development to reach the sites full potential and to support the needs of the surrounding communities; primarily with respect to housing, local and city economy, open space, and transport and movement, while maintaining an integrated urban fabric within the city as a whole. Surrounding influences are not a snapshot in time, but need to capture the historic character, respond to the current conditions, as well as acknowledge the anticipated development plans for the future. When responding to the City it will be imperative to understand the planned future development of the city fringe, while on the contrary when responding to the residential areas to the north, the development needs to pay respect to the existing conservation areas, in particular considering their building typologies, densities, heights etc. The character and atmosphere of Brick Lane and the surrounding market areas are a unique phenomenon, which will require very sensitive considerations in order to support and nurture those conditions into the future. Part of the local authoritys responsibilities is to ensure sufficient social provisions such as educational facilities, affordable housing, public open space, transportation etc which will be carried out through new development within the local area including the Bishopsgate Goods Yard site.

23

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

Site Complexity In addition to the surrounding influences the Bishopsgate Goods Yard site itself is far from being a blank canvas brownfield site. On the contrary the remnants of layering of past life and activity of the sites history, in conjunction with the current developments on site, namely the new East London Line railway, provide a rich and changing starting point for future development. The main physical elements for consideration include the following: The 260m long Grade II listed Braithwaite Viaduct, with respect to historical and structural value, and also the internal and external spaces it creates at both ground and upper levels The other unlisted arches connecting to the Braithwaite Viaduct, which together create the covered pedestrian boulevard along London Road The listed forecourt wall and gates, which create a frontage to Shoreditch High Street at ground level only The elevated box of the new East London Line railway, which in the next few months will not only provide a transport connection to other parts of the city, but will create a node and intersection for transfer between vertical and horizontal movement around the site The lower ground level barrier to north-south circulation, which is the mainline rail network to and from Liverpool Street Station The other non-visible below ground infrastructure such as the BT telecommunications and central line tunnels Framework for Development of the Urban Structure The common approach to development relating to Urban Structure is to create development principles along the lines of discreet topics; where the most widely used topics include Form, Typology, Grain, Height, Use Mix, Density, and Environmental Impact. On straightforward brownfield development sites it is possible to assess development
24

potential using each of these topics in isolation, but on complicated sites such as the Bishopsgate Goods Yard site this approach could be considered an over-simplification of the development opportunities and parameters. The itemized approach also misses the opportunity to understand the nuances which are only apparent when assessing the site in a collective manner; it is imperative that the development outcomes amount to more than the sum of the parts. Our approach to the long-term development of the Bishopsgate Goods Yard is two-fold. Firstly, we establish a set of overarching development principles which are intended to guide or steer the development priorities and act as a tool for achieving successful and sustainable development on the site. The following are the key development principles: 1. Existing Viaduct and Archways as a connecting element from east to west opportunity for temporary uses boulevard for permanent use 2. Footprint at ground and upper levels built form to explore extrusions other than purely vertical extrusions in particular, respond to the existing urban grains to the north of the site allow for north-south permeability through the site, both at multiple levels and also connecting multiple levels 3. Integrating Existing and New through advanced structural engineering provide solutions on the south-west corner of the site which integrate the existing and new structures for a collective benefit 4. Interconnected and overlapping uses where use is not a purely related to verticality, from public-transitional-private high-rise buildings should provide public and semi public facilities for temporary densities (work time densities, residential and weekends activities) - that ensure a constant use of the of

ground floors and upper floor level 5. Visual connection across the site while maintaining clear security boundaries imaginative proposals for separating elements between public and private ie. through the use of changes in levels, water elements where there is no ambiguity of ownership of accessible spaces Secondly, we establish Parameters for Negotiation. The underlying intention with this conceptual approach is to identify the key parameters of each of the above topics (Form, Typology, Grain, Height, Use Mix, Density, and Environmental Impact), based on the surrounding influences (commercial drivers, existing built context, and the lo-

cal authority / citys aspirations and obligations), which then in an applied way, can be tested on the site within the existing conditions. This approach will allow for multiple proposal options, whereby trade-offs between the topics will create different benefits and compromises, and ultimately can be fine-tuned to reach an optimal balance. Below is a Matrix of the Parameters for Negotiation, capturing the key parameters as we understand them at this point in time. Each cell represents a single perspective on a single topic, which in many cases will contradict other cells.

*Existing Planning Guidance Overall development Population Density Household Built 350,000 sq.m. 425-851 person/ha 213-426 household/ ha 74468 sq.m./ha

Commercial Drivers

*Context West side 1.88-83.44 person/ha 1-36.39 household/ha 6-3097 sq.m./ha East side 131.31-150.04 person/ha 45.86-60.45 household/ha 2641.034140.63 sq.m./ ha

Height New house:1000-2000 Non-residential: 7500-15000 sq.m. Mix of tall and low buildings Respect to the historic environment; Accommodate latest developments in environmentally sustainable technology

Tallest building: 225 m, 50 floors Up to 15000 sq.m. for commercial use Tall buildings Office building and commercial use Mix of tall and low buildings Mix of retail and residential use 2-4 storey buildings

Use Mix

Form/Typology

Environmental impact

25

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

It is not envisioned that each cell can be achieved in its entirety, but through negotiation and a holistic assessment an optimum development proposal can be achieved. This matrix is intended to be viewed as a live document, which can be updated and built upon throughout the duration of the development of the site. This will allow development proposals to continually respond to the current state of affairs and prevailing priorities. This approach is the antithesis of a prescriptive development brief, and is intended to stimulate truly creative and appropriate approaches to development, which are viewed and reviewed in a holistic manner.

Indicative Illustration for Inspiration The following 7 illustrations are intended to indicate how the above parameters can be applied and tested across the site.

North-South Section 1 (eastern edge) Related to the built environment and connectivity within the site, the graphic shows the recommendation that buildings in the eastern edge have similar heights to those of Brick Lane, as an aim to maintain the urban fabric of the area. The lower heights are also important for preserving views and allowing sunlight into the site. The graph further illustrates the connections between the north and south that make the open space more accessible for resident and visitor use.

26

North-South Section 2 (middle of development site) Moving westward along the site, heights of buildings will increase to around 30 floors, reflecting the urban grain transformation from low rise building in Brick Land to the high rise buildings in the city. These higher buildings may block sunlight from penetrating the north side of the site, therefore it is recommended that buildings are separated to let the sunlight go through. Furthermore the spaces between the towers can be used for open space, adding to the connectivity of the proposed park and archways.

North-South Section 3 (western edge) In the western edge of the site, building heights reach their peak with the tallest buildings reaching 60 floors. This is strategy to maintain the urban grain represented in the western part of the City. As a goal to maintain the archways, we recommend to build a structure, no more than 12 floors, above the arches. By maintaining the unlisted arches it can connect the station square in the north and the public square in the south as well as maintain the urban characteristics in the east.
27

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

East-West Section 2 (at Overground Rail Station) The unique condition of the elevated box creates distinct conditions below the box and above, allowing for changes in use. At the principle location for vertical connection between the ground level and the platform level, there is opportunity to allow people permeate and occupy the upper level, creating a pedestrian street with retail and restaurant potential. East-West Section 1 (northern edge) In the northern edge of the site, building heights respond to the heights and residential use on Bethnal Green Road and Sclater Street. The heights are not uniform in height from east to west, but build in height from the more protected area adjoining Brick Lane, through a transitional zone to the tall buildings on the western edge along Shoreditch High Street. The building footprints and gaps between maintain a similar grain and plot size to the blocks to the north. East-West Section 3 (southern edge) The section through the southern edge of the site illustrates the existing viaduct, and the internal and external spaces it creates. The south-west corner of the site will be the ideal location for the tallest building on the site, for commercial use. The illustration shows the commercial uses raised above the viaduct level, freeing the ground and first floor levels for more public uses, and allowing for connections to the highline park.

East-West Section 1
28

East-West Section 2

East-West Section 3
29

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

3.1.4_Temporary Use

[U]rban Spaces lie fallow from time to time during the transition from one use to another, a process of ostensible disuse in fact possess strategic significance (Schwarz and Rugare, 2009) As Schwarz and Rugare emphasise, whereas a vacant space is often seen as a failure of urban planners and developers, its potential temporary use during its fallow period should never be underestimated. Bishopsgate Goods Yard site, now vacant since its brief revival between 1998-2001, offers an ideal resource for housing temporary uses until the current economic downturn subsides. The urban structure of the Bishopsgate Goods Yard site lends itself to two forms of temporary use: Those that remain on site for a given period and are removed when permanent development works begin; and Those that could potentially integrate into the long-term proposals for the site. The latter being community oriented facilities, such as a library or sports facility, that require greater public investment. These uses would occupy the listed structures of the site while the former, uses requiring little structural investment such as workshops and offices, would occupy spaces that may be removed or redeveloped in the future, although we recommend preserving all historical structures of the site listed or unlisted - given that the sites heritage creates a unique sense of place. The phasing aspects required for the permanent development works need to be mindful of considering temporary uses. While one zone of the site is partitioned and undergoing works for permanent use, the other areas need to operate independently. Relying on Brick Lane as a spine in the first period of the arches development until an identity of the arches is established and at the same time reopening Wheeler Street to provide
30

accessibility to Shoreditch High Street station. Both forms of temporary use should ensure round-the-clock activity in the area, acting as a natural form of surveillance and consequent crime deterrent.

progressive renewal

mixed activities

Moreover, uses should complement the neighbouring activities (i.e. Brick Lane and Spitalfields), while also forming networks with cultural and community facilities in the wider area (see next page). This will both distinguish the sites individual character from neighbouring uses and enhance the connectivity of the site forming a node of cultural and community facilities in an area that lacks a satisfactory number of these. The study of the existing facilities in the three councils where the site is located demonstrates that there is not a lack of community facilities such as schools or libraries. In fact, there is a reasonably strong presence of community centres servicing the area. There is, however, a lack of cultural venues - such as museums, art galleries, cinemas,

educational facilities

libraries

community centres

museums/exhibitions spaces

other recreational activities

theatres, and sport facilities. When observing the physical location of these community services, there is a striking disengagement of the Bishopsgate Goods Yard site and its immediate area with the community network. Currently, the BGY site is essentially an obstacle to these networks natural flows. In this context, we recommend seizing the Bishopsgate Goods Yard development as an opportunity to rethink these networks and possibly even utilise the site as a central node of these activities - on the one hand complementing the existent community dynamics and, on the other, providing where community services currently lack. The temporary strategy adopted might prove a perfect opportunity to test the viability of some of these community enhancement options to be incorporated into the permanent proposal.
31

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

Finally, the temporary uses should enhance the permeability of the site accentuating the west east connection from Shoreditch High Street to Brick Lane as well as north south creating a more direct link between Bethnal Green Road and the Bishopsgate transport node.

Precedents From an international perspective there are a myriad of examples that relate to the Bishopsgate Goods Yard potential as a site of temporary use. The case of the LX Factory in Lisbon (Portugal) proves that the use of a dormant urban site might serve as a catalyst for regeneration of an area much bigger than the site itself. Privately owned and awaiting planning permission from the Lisbon city council, the 2.3 hectare site of this former textiles and graphics factory are being used for a multitude of activities. The success of LX Factory is visible in its occupancy rates, the media attention and its round-the-clock activity with initiatives that appeal to very different sectors of society. As a consequence of the current economic downturn, development sites that have stalled and lie vacant are now a familiar feature of the urban landscape. There are interesting precedents, however, where a vacant site has been used temporarily while developers wait for grass shoot signs of recovery in the economy. For example, a stalled development site on Oxford Street, London, earmarked for a mixed use development to be completed in 2012, has recently been used to exhibit 24 life size dinosaurs and attracted up to three thousand visitors a day during school holidays. Moreover, ostensibly permanent uses rely on temporary structures to integrate with, and preserve, an existing urban structure similar to the arches of Bishopsgate Goods Yard. Borough Market in London, for example, successfully combines a number of permanent use (restaurants and bars) alongside the more temporal uses of the market stalls that cluster underneath the Victorian railway arches.

enhancing permeability phase 1

enhancing permeability phase 2

32

On the right Examples of temporary use as exhibition venue and bookshop

On the left Examples of more permanent use as shops and caf, mixed also with unconstrained uses as a daily fruit market
33

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.2

Access

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.2.0_Introduction: from general principles towards an access improvement

Between the general principles mentioned in chapter 3.3.3., the ones related to the improvement of the accessibility towards and inside the site are: 1. to improve the permeability to the site at different levels (ground and upper) in the east-west and north-south directions; 2. to create a clear hierarchy of movement which puts pedestrians at the top: pedestrian paths and cycling routes should be clearly divided in the site; as well, pedestrian paths, cycling and vehicle routes, should be clearly divided outside the site; 3. to create recognizable and flexible paths inside the site; 4. to improve cycle and public transport networks and their interaction with the pedestrian one (bus stops, bike racks etc.) 5. to improve nodes and signage through traditional tools and through use of art. Guided by those principles, the development should address the issues identified in section 4.2.2., working in the theoretical framework stated in section 4.2.1: the strategy (4.2.3) to implement the accessibility should be developed under the same framework.

Above: movement of people on the study area; flows channeled toward the Yard.
36

4.2.1_Access: theoretical components

Permeability Permeability is a perceived quality and represents the degree to which an urban area allows movement and provides a choice of routes through an area (Bentley et Al, 1985). Beyond the availability of choice, its important that there is also an awareness of route choices so that the permeability is utilised. With respect to crime prevention, permeability can be viewed both negatively and positively. In some cases, a high degree of permeability is considered undesirable as it provides a choice of escape routes for criminals (Cowan, 2005). On the other hand, non-permeable street networks, can create crime hotspots, such as dead-end streets. The desired degree of permeability has to be balanced by an assessment of the crime hotspots in the area so that permeability doesnt contribute to an increase in the crime in the area.

On the right: example of the concept of permeability in nature; present impermeability of the Yard; different degrees of permeability on the study area related to the urban grain.
37

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

Connectivity Connectivity refers to the directness of links and density of connections in a transport network (Cowan, 2005). Generally, a well-connected urban area reduces travel distances and facilitates movement both within an area as well as from within to external areas. With respect to crime issues, one way to help increase the sense of community strength which can help to combat crime is to aim for the creation of one connected neighborhood rather than a collection of disconnected areas. This can lead to a sense of community responsibility and care of the area as a whole (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Home Office, 2004).

On the right: example of the concept of connectivity in nature; intersection of several paths near Spitalfield Market; different components related to Connectivity on the study area.
38

Legibility Legibility of an urban area signifies the degree to which people are able to read their surrounding environment and understand how to navigate themselves in a place using signs, built form, landmarks and marked routes. Legibility is the language of the city that helps people to feel either welcomed and well-oriented or uncomfortable and lost in the space. A gradual, phased strategy to the development of the site area, as is proposed in this development brief, can contribute to legibility as it enables residents and visitors to gradually become familiar with the changes and accept them over time. Legibility is particularly important for bringing about a feeling of safety in an area prone to crime. Clear wayfinding and signage enable visitors and vulnerable populations to easily and comfortably either wander through an area or get to a particular destination.

On the right: example of legible environment (Piazza dei Miracoli in Pisa); landmark as space (outside Spitalfield Market); landmark as building (the Gherkin); landmark as event (Brick Lane Market).
39

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.2.2_Issues to be addressed

Wayfinding and clarity of movement Our analysis indicated that the wayfinding and signage in the area surrounding the site is reasonably good due to visual landmarks created by dominant built forms, particularly in the Western end of the site. The main exception to ease of wayfinding is in the Brick Lane/Fournier Street area, where there is an opportunity to increase the amount of strategically placed non-commercial signage.

40

Cycling network gaps While existing paths and signage for cycling are relatively strong in the area, given the heavy reliance on cycling as a mode of transport and the weakness of transport links in the area, it is critical that the cycling network be even more robust to promote broader connectivity with the rest of London. The diagram below indicates the primary gaps in current cycling provision.

Public transport deficiency Even with the opening of the Shoreditch High Street Overground station, there is still a deficit in terms of public transportation access in the sites surrounding area. The area would be well served by an Underground (Tube) station to further enhance its connectivity. In terms of the bus network, the northern and north-eastern vicinities around the site are in need of greater bus service.

Above: current cycle network and gaps in provision; current cycle network and gaps in provision overlaid with key routes.

Above: current bus network and gaps in provision; current bus network and gaps in provision overlaid with key traffic routes.
41

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

Ambiguous and conflicting uses Areas such as Shoreditch High Street, Sclater Street, Brick Lane and Norton Falgate reveals how there are unclear and often conflicting signals with respect to the use of spaces. For example, while Shoreditch High Street is proposed as an official cycle route yet it has no dedicated or designated cycle lane.

Contribution of area permeability The street network around the site demonstrates an high level of permeability, with the obvious exception of the immediate site itself, which currently serves as a blockade to easy north-south and east-west passage. Re-development of the Bishopsgate Goods Yard should consider how the site can fit seamlessly into the permeability network of the area and avoid abrupt passage transitions.

42

4.2.3.0_Confronting the planning guidelines: general approach

Generally, we are in agreement with the design principles set out in the Planning Guidelines in terms of creating equitable and safe access for visitors and residents to the area. The proposed streets, paths and spaces identified for development achieve a well-connected and permeable network contributing to an integration into wider London. That said, we believe that the guidelines are narrow in their focus on the primarily technical and physical meaning of access. In this sense, the guidelines are disregarding the human element of the site and how it connects to the surrounding community. The guidelines acknowledge the strong local character of the area, however they do not specifically address how this character can be incorporated into the issue of access. The way we perceive access is not only a matter of mechanical movement from point A to point B but it is the cultural, environmental and emotional experience that accompanies this movement. Therefore, defining a legible space as something able to produce vividly identified images of the built environment (Lynch, 1960), the space itself should become a landmark, along with the events it could host: markets, celebrations or whatever. To achieve this, our recommendation is to maintain the character of extreme flexibility visible in some derelict areas around the Yard or in the spaces that usually host the market (which have a great potentiality in terms of informal and temporary uses). Moreover, our recommendation is to see the site as a potential catalyst of flows, a sponge able to attract and absorb the density of people walking in the surroundings.The flows should not be seen simply as disappearing traces on a dull open space, but as something able to shape the space itself. Therefore, the system of accesses, paths and open areas should derive directly from the interpretation of those flows.

Above: a legible environment depicted in a De Chirico painting; a suggestion of the possibility to host events on the Yard; disappearing traces in a nomadic space: the Yard itself should be seen as nomadic, but at the same time able to interpret and incorporate those traces.

43

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.2.3.1_Strategy: changing the context through the theoretical components

PERMEABILITY In the short, medium and long term, several interventions will lead to a general improvement of the Permeability, Connectivity and Legibility of the study area. In terms of Permeability, the site should be increasingly treated as a sponge, cutting its impermeable fabric with several paths. Both the NorthSouth and the East-West connections should be improved. The final image suggests really permeable grain. In terms of Connectivity, an incremental opening of paths inside the site (the red ones in the schemes) and some improvements of public transport and cycle network (see section 4.2.3.4) should be implemented in order to enhance a higher freedom to move within and towards the site. In the schemes, the black routes are the ones actually involved in the improvement of Connectivity around the site: moving from the short of the long term this involvement will interest a higher amount of routes. In terms of Legibility, the images show in black Landmark Buildings and in grey Landmark Spaces. Several interventions (the construction of the built evironment itself, the use of art see section 4.2.3.3 and the improvement of wayfinding signage) should lead to a general increase of recognisable elements.

44

Long term

Medium term

Short term

Present

CONNECTIVITY

LEGIBILITY

Present

Short term

Long term

Medium term

Long term

Medium term

Short term

Present

45

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.2.3.2_Strategy: an incremental development at different scales. Design guidelines.

LARGE SCALE In the short term, along with the general improvement of several nodes around the site, the opening of two new routes in the site itself should improve the connectivity in the North-South direction. The forecasted opening of the rehabilitated arches will make possible to host some activities on the site: the route beside these spaces will be a public passage that could host part of the Brick Lane Market on Sunday. On the upper level, the construction of a park could partially fill the lack of green spaces inside the study area.

In the medium term, the pedestrian network will be extended toward Allen Gardens that should be connected to the park on the upper level (the park itself should be expanded on the space upon the overground). Looking at the site the development of the NorthEastern area should follow a fine grain pattern to allow the opening of several paths to better connect the site to the Bethnal Green Road area. A pedestrian space between the arches and the overground footprint should encompass the features we have suggested at section 4.2.3.0.

In the long term the improvements in the pedestrian and cycle networks will reach its apex, highly enriching the connectivity on the area. The development of the Eastern area will give the opportunity to complete the East-West connection. Furthermore the North-South connection should be definitively strengthened with some interventions, aimed to enhance a higher legibility of that public space.

46

SMALL SCALE: GROUND LEVEL

SMALL SCALE: UPPER LEVEL

47

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.2.3.3_Strategy: use of art as a tool to improve legibility

Local creativity and artistic talent can be harnessed for the purpose of making streets more legible in particular in the areas north and northeast of the site. For example, an artistic take on signage, zebra crossings and street art could help to distinguish the area from other parts of London and create a memorable and unique feeling for the neighbourhood. Beyond the functional purpose of helping people navigate their way through the streets, this will also create a greater sense of community ownership and connection to the changes occurring if people can see that local stakeholders have participated in its improvements. The following initiatives could be implemented to utilise local artistic talent to improve legibility: Hold a mural competition for area schools in the Boroughs of Tower Hamlets and Hackney to add their community vision to a new blank wall that results from site development. Work with local building owners and street/graffiti artists to identify locations that lack legibility to add unique works of graffiti on the sides of existing buildings to create more orienting features in the neighbourhood.

48

4.2.3.4_Strategy: improving cycling and bus network

Cycle network strategy Over the long-term, the placement of bus stops should be rationalised to serve the new Shoreditch High Street station and to create an increase the number of pedestrians and public transport users with access to the station. In the short and medium term, the gaps in the bus network (noted in yellow in the diagram) should be noted so that alternative less capital-intensive transport solutions, such as cycling and walking, can be considered and integrated into the development strategy.

Public transportation strategy Around the Bishopsgate Goods Yard site, gaps or deficiencies in the cycle network are located on the main roads and intersections. To establish a cohesive and safe system of bicycle routes, the designated roads for cycling should be enhanced with special cycle lanes, advanced stop lines, cycle signage and cycle parking along the primary routes used. Additionally, bike racks should be added with local area information for cyclists abundantly available. Furthermore, the London Cycle Hire Scheme represents a great opportunity to integrate the site into a London-wide scheme while tapping into the areas existing interest in cycling. Key areas of deficiency around the site are indicated in yellow.

Above: recommended improvements to cycle network; recommended improvements to bus network.

49

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.3

Public Realm

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.3.1_Definitions

Defining Public Realm Public realm is the space that links communities beyond buildings. Streets, sidewalks, parks and squares constitute the elements through which, by diverse means of design, people interact and circulate. As stated by Carmona (2003), public realm is a common ground for social interaction, intermingling, and communication; and a stage for social learning, personal development, and information exchange. Furthermore, public realm and open space in particular- is intrinsically linked to social conditions, transcending its physical nature into a fundamental component of livelihoods quality: Comprehensive planning policies for open space are fundamental to social inclusion, community cohesion, health and wellbeing (Open Spaces Strategies: best practice guidance, 2009). Importance of Social Well-being When approaching design principles, social trends and information should be identified to

create a comprehensive understanding of the areas context. Both the Hackney and Tower Hamlets councils suffer considerable levels of socio-economic disadvantages, unemployment, homelessness, neighbourhood violence and crime. Statistics show how these elements have contributed to high levels of health concerns amongst all community groups, with high number of mental illnesses, depression and suicide. The emphasis on sustainable development for new projects can aid the abatement of mental illness through the provision of green and open spaces, highlighting the importance in the relationship of social, economic and environmental spheres. By means of design parameters, the upgrading of the public realm and the natural environment can provide a rapid reduction in stress. This serves a purpose for both the residents of the area and the transitory users from the office workers that circulate the area during the week. Some benefits of a rich public realm include the improvement of personal relations with the environment, an appreciation of local urban character and the reinforcement of outside community interaction.

52

4.3.2_SWOT Analysis

SWOT Analysis Defining the site The Bishopsgate Goods Yard (BGY) site is under heavy scrutiny for its ongoing development plan. Its transformation for the near future is sure to have a lasting effect on the surrounding communities, as well as a makeshift of the public realm environment. In this sense, the design guidelines that now

exist should account for the contextual effects this project has; its impact will definitely reach a larger dimension than the sites perimeter. In terms of the public realm, focalized development still needs an integrated approach, and the BGY is no exception. Under these spatial definitions, a series of considerations can be understood in the following SWOT analysis.

Strengths
Transformation of building use allow for a constant evolution of neighbourhood identity Diversity and vibrancy form strong economic activity Adaptable spaces Serves as a bridge from residential areas to The City of London Commercial spaces target a range of socio-economic groups Good lighting on major streets Markets attract people from surrounding areas Marquee project for the East London Green Grid (ELGG)

Weaknesses
Derelict buildings and construction disrupts city fabric Irregular public use can create weekday voids in activity There is less then half of the recommended amount of green space in Hackney and Tower Hamlets Poor East/West connections Poorly demarcated Public/Private space Street clutter prevents seamless pedestrian flow and confusing street intersections Lack of street furniture, especially benches and bicycle stands Guidelines for pedestrian and vehicle traffic are not strictly followed which can lead to accidents

Opportunities
Incorporation of a variety of community and structural identities Areas of heightened new construction can prioritise neighbourhoods needs Create a space that is not an amalgamation and blending of identities, but instead representative of individual neighborhood characteristics New multi-use buildings unlock potential of course grain buildings. The same ideology can be used for mixed-use open spaces. Use local community organizations to attract interest in the temporary site from the community Bridge Goods Yard with Eastern Yards Make connection between Goods Yard, Allan Gardens, and markets

Threats
Site will remain unused as it is reliant on economic climate Wishes of developers with money and power will mandate what is built on and around the site and will build high mass commercial buildings that do not add to population density Gentrification Risk of crime on streets of irregular activity Developers will disregard community identity and create a generic space Public Space on the Goods Yard site will de facto belong to those living on the site and will isolate the surrounding community Poorly designed open space can correlate to increased crime rates Redevelopment of the area can cause an increase in density thus making the affects of the additional housing provision in the area negligible

53

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.3.3_Design Principles

STRENGTHS

WEAKNESSES

OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

The supporting design principles are: SWOT mapping These maps spatially locate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to the Bishopsgate goods yard. The strengths of the site are centered around the major paths and nodes around the site. In contrast, weaknesses are concentrated on smaller, less penetrable spaces. Temporary and long term development has the opportunity to connect public spaces to one another and represent individual community identities on the site. The threats of the creation of generic and exclusive space is focused on how the surrounding area will eventually affect the site. Design principles The driving principle for the BGY intervention should be the creation of an integrated, plural public realm that reflects community livelihoods.
54

1. Strengthen already existing columns of activity into an integrated public realm fabric. 2. Develop a strategy to create a public realm language that flows fluently between the three councils around the site. 3. Establish an evenhanded publicprivate partnership with council leadership to ensure equal access to public realm benefits. 4. Foster the development of landmark spaces from public to private, from open to enclosed. 5. Balance the private requirements of land use with the existing local needs regarding health issues and space pressures.

4.3.4_Planning Guidelines

Challenging the Planning Guidelines Under the current planning guidelines, the Bishopsgate Goods Yard is set to have an important intervention in terms of public realm design and conception. Reinforcing the elements of accessibility and urban structure that now shape the site, the new proposal introduces two main areas of public realm: I. A junction of two squares, namely Public Square and Station Square along the re-opened Wheeler Street on the north-south corridor. II. A second-level park that lies over the arches structure on the southeastern side of the site. These interventions are sustained by a series of additional street openings that would increase the squares accessibility and its relation with the arches compound. Furthermore, the guidelines state the importance of extending the sites open space links with areas beyond its limits, as well as the necessity of addressing crime prevention and maintaining local character. The public realm, as stated before, is constituted by multilayered factors that crosscut typical design principles. It should not only answer to design requirements but to social needs. Recommendations Some of the main aspects that the planning guidelines should take into consideration are the following: 1. Integrate the public realm proposals and interventions with a wider approach towards a local improvement of the urban fabric, well beyond the site and not limited to the new developments immediate space. 2. Study the character of the area in order to avoid generic public spaces that comply with design standards but that speak to a very specific set of aesthetic values.

3. Consider the impact that a higher densification of the area may bring to the public realm. As stated before, public realm should answer to current social needs including health benefits, social deprivations and, in general, livelihoods. In this respect, the planning guidelines should consider the following aspects: a. The sites vicinity is already in need of quality urban spaces that can be partially addressed with the interventions on the site. However, the new massive densification will again create new pressures due to an increased population and demand. b. The proximity of new development to the sites public realm interventions should carefully avoid creating a contested or exclusive space, where the park and the squares operate as backyards of the proposed high-rises. c. The abrupt change of scale in the proposed buildings will impact the presence of shadows and canyon-like streets (due to short distance between the building frontages). This affects the general quality of the space, introduces elements of discomfort (e.g. wind currents) and calls for added, and costlier, measures of design intervention (e.g. furniture, lighting) to maintain a continued sense of security. 4. Strengthen links to the eastern side open space network, to balance the polarisation of renewal only on the western side of the site. This ensures an integral approach to public realm, a wider inclusion of communities and fortifies the network of green spaces that exist to the east. Public realm can be more efficient the less fragmented it appears to be.

55

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.3.5_Macro Level

Network analysis The comprehension of the network and hierarchy of open spaces are essential to understand how the system should relate within the site proposal. Open spaces should not be conceived as isolated places but as spaces of articulation within the built environment. As previously concluded from analysis; the area does not present a lack of public space but a lack of green spaces. East vs. West: Use and Access Differences in land use and access to public transport in the Northern and Eastern site translate in different pedestrian flows and access to public space. The Western side is characterised by commercial use (night and day) transforming into office use further west, and it is served by public transport. Moreover, pedestrian flows increase during weekdays and evenings. Due to high concentration of shops and restaurants in the areas of Spitalfields, Brick Lane and the main roads surPermeability / Network conections to improve

rounding, the areas prove to be quite vibrant in context. Commercial activities including outdoor markets and informal uses in the Eastern side close to the site result in greater pedestrian flows and concentration over the weekends. Commercial activity in the surrounding of the site translates into high density of active frontages, contributing to increased safety. Street markets contribute to successful public space, as they provide high opportunity for local transactions. Accessibility in terms of accommodating needs of pedestrians is at some points problematic in areas of increased pedestrian concentration in the Eastern Side. Uninterrupted pedestrian movement and accommodation of temporary concentration of visitors (stop, sit), logically following from the nature of land use, is restricted by conflicts of use, lack of legibility and seating. The North Eastern area is less served by public transport and is qualitatively different in use of public realm, as it is predominantly residential. Streets accommodating markets serve as social sites, whereas the streets in residential areas mainly serve the purpose of movement.

56

4.3.5_Macro Level

Improving Networks and Adaptive Spaces It is essential to understand the concepts of temporary and permanent use of open spaces, as well as, the distinction between the intensity of use of these spaces into weekdays and weekends. Such concepts are crucial; for improvements of disrupted networks, understanding where and when these disruptions occur, while taking into account the notion of space and time. Moreover, one must consider to whom the future development planning is for and why, whether residents as appropriate community spaces? Workers that utilize the eastern side area during lunch time of weekdays? Or external visitors prevalent during street market activities? The challenge is to create a flexible environment taking into account the multiplicity of public space uses. Since the richness of use of open space in the area is informed by its flexibility and adaptability, the idea is to plan for an inclusive, multidimensional, and adaptative space that can accommodate the various dimensions of use. Stregnthening links Greater inclusivity should be achieved not only in terms of use of public space, but also by providing better connectivity taking into consideration the networks disruptions in order to provide coherence and continuity to the existing public realm system. Strengthen links between the east and west side of the wider area and creating public space that by its use mediates between the two sides, is essential. Improving west-east connectivity concerns the site, in addition to the wider area. On the other hand, creating connectivity between the north and south on the Bishopsgate Goods Yard as stated in the planning guidance, which is critical for increased permeability of the area. Simultaneously, the increased flow of people across the site resulting from the improved permeability will enhance the safety and natural surveillance in the area. A collection of strategies proposed to intervene in the public realm network accommodating these needs are set out as guidelines in the following sections.
57

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.3.6_Mesa Level

Sector analysis The future BGY will be the link between two major flow corridors at the west and at the east, namely Shoreditch High Street and Brick Lane. In both cases, several conditions have constrained the public realm and its quality (see below).

The void generated between these two corridors can be partly attributed to the irregular language in the public realm, with contrasting sites such as the Bishops Square sector and its empty adjacent streets. This fragmentation reinforces physical and social barriers; at the same time though, it positions the BGY site as a common ground that could serve as a node in itself and as an intermediary catalyst for the public realm of the area.
58

4.3.6_Strategies

General strategies Under the stresses indicated above, the public realm network can begin its upgrading by including a series of design strategies that can have a significant impact on the context of the BGY site. The main strategies considered for the upgrading of the public realm are the following: 1. Pedestrian policies a. Introduce pedestrian priority: widen footways, pedestrian priority streets b. Improve crossings, pedestrian rights of way, design a sustained pavement and lighting system. 2. Walking routes and obstacles a. Widen sidewalks when possible, introducing street furniture and vegetation lanes that dont interfere with pedestrian flows.

b. Reduce street clutter (furniture, signage, bus stops) in busy areas yet maintain presence of supporting furniture elements. 3. Catalyst interventions & open landmark spaces a. Introduce design interventions for specific space improvement along general policies of spatial upgrade. b. Reinforce existing openings (wide streets, markets, lots) with character elements: sitting space, green areas and pavements. 4. Lighting and safety a. Create a lighting language across the area, highlighting important paths and supporting a sense of environmental safety. b. Support transparent building frontages at night that integrate with the exterior. c. Introduce quality street furniture and plants with an adequate scale.

59

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

4.3.7_Micro Level

Defining Character of the Site This brief suggests a few broad characteristics that offer a set of attributes that are desirable for the Public Realm taking cues from the urban analysis stage and in terms of its critique. These PERMEABILITY

characteristics have been laid out in a matrix to better explain the interconnectivity and complexity. They are not mutually exclusive of each other and should be read in conjunction with the Urban Design Characteristics defined in the previous sections. CONNECTIVITY

The visual and physical apects that would promote legibility, facilitating access and a sense of security

Connections within the site will promote activity and a thorough vitalising of the public realm

PLURALITY, FLUX & FORMALITY

LANDMARK SPACE

Temporary multiuse spaces would promote inclusivity, integrate safety, and security related aspects.
60

Creating an identity for the site and the space would increase its legibility and readability.

4.3.7_Micro Level

Design Guidelines The guideline for the first level should juxtapose public and private space, both in terms of horizontal layering and its interface with the street. This relies on the pedestrian openings that will run accross the site.
MAINTAINING A MIXED/PLURAL EDGE BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

The ground is proposed to be public including ground floors of buildings. The first level is also proposed to be public which includes the roof-top park promoting horizontal and vertical connections.

PLANNING GUIDELINES: EXTRUDED REALMS

The second level is proposed to be semi-public with the subsequent levels being private. Smooth transition to the second level should allow a gradual access to the roof-top garden while avoiding vertical exclusion.

LEVELS 0 AND +1 CATERING TO PUBLIC FUNCTIONS IN THE PUBLIC REALM

A well balanced combination of public and semipublic vertical interfaces between the street and the buildings promote a mix of activities and create opportunities for multiuse and multipurpose spaces.

LEVELS +2 AND ABOVE WITH SEMI-PRIVATE AND PRIVATE LAYERS

These levels are proposed within the physical structure of Bishopsgate Goods Yard Planning Guidance. The Public realm is proposed to flow through the buildings in a horizontal and vertical continuum at both levels.

INTERFACE WITH STRUCTURE FROM PLANNING GUIDELINES

61

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

5.0

Phasing

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

5.1_Phasing Plan

The complexity of the site and its influence on the surrounding urban fabric, the range and scope of potential development interventions and uncertain economic climate combine to indicate the necessity of a phased development. Any phasing must be sensitive to these variables as well as timebound external drivers such as the opening of the ELL extension and the London 2012 Olympics. The proposed phasing of the development is driven through initially realizing the use value of the site following the opening of Shoreditch High Street Station in 2010 and up to the London 2012 Games with the initiation of a range of temporary uses, community focused activity, and increased connectivity through the site and access to open space. In subsequent medium term (up to 2017)

to longer term (up to 2020) phases, anticipating economic recovery and increased demand for commercial and high income housing space, more intensive commercially driven development is anticipated to more fully realize the economic value of the site and achieve a peak intensity of use.

64

5.2_Cost Analysis

This phasing model requires a level of up-front investment in opening up the site to the shorter term uses and enabling works with significant commercial returns potentially still some years away. A cost model must therefore be developed that resources this initial investment. Because of the delayed returns it is likely that a mix of public and private funding will be required to realize the short term ambitions for the site. A strategy of phased planning obligations for the priority works will be critical in achieving this. For public realm projects, inviting investment from the private sector should not lead to monopolizing of space by the investor. Hence, in order to ensure that the public realm is associated with all the principles expressed earlier in this report, the space has to be linked with public funding or sharing of funds with the private sector are the two most viable options. Another aspect to be considered is the initial investment and the long-term cash flow for operations and maintenance. 1. A viable alternative for initial funding is through Planning Obligations associated with lease of plots to developers. It is proposed that the lease include a sum towards initial investment in the public and common areas including soft and hard landscape. In the long-term, these areas will be absorbed within the councils purview for maintenance. 2. In case of Braithwaite Viaduct, Heritage Grants, Access to Nature Funds by Natural England (for green spaces) and similar sources can be accessed apart from funds form the council itself. The rentals form the users of the arches can be used for operations and maintenance. 3. Another alternative is to include adjacent portions of the common areas within the plot area of private development. The developer will need to make the initial investment for development and they are responsible for maintenance of the area as per council standards. However, a differential in the level of maintenance is an issue to be con-

sidered. the different times for the development of different plots is also an issue. 4. With an emphasis being placed on the importantce of green infrastructure, there are sources avaialable through the EU: European Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General and the European Prize for Urban Public Space Some wider potential sources of funding for shorter term uses include: European Regional Development Fund Priority 3 - Sustainable Places for Business (no current funding rounds open) London Development Agency New Urban Agenda Transport and Development - Transforming places to enhance economic prosperity theme Arts Council - funding for temporary arts uses Big Lottery funding - for temporary uses for community benefit

65

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

5.2_Cost Analysis

A case for developer funding the refurbishment of the listed arches The opportunity to refurbish the listed viaduct arches to a standard suitable for commercial activity to take place represent an exception to the lack of commercial return from the shorter term works. Because of their listed status this investment will be required at some stage and commercial precedents of railway arch refurbishment in London have demonstrated the viability and popularity of this structural form for a wide range of commercial uses and activities. By focusing on refurbishing the listed section for commercial activity, this approach also allows a variety in the type and use of space available in the western unlisted section, which can complement the more structured, commercially driven activity in the listed arches with non-profit community, arts etc driven activities. An indicative cost model based on similar arch refurbishment projects in Southwark and Lambeth, suggests that the costs of refurbishment could be recovered through rent in approximately 4 years. While this is only an approximate model based on assumptions, it suggests a strong case for developer investment in this short term use.

66

6.0

Conclusions

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

68

6.1_Conclusions

The planning guidance for the Bishopsgate Goods Yard is an opportunity to develop the site, and the surrounding area, into an inclusive space, fully integrated into a wider London community in addition to creating a unique and distinct neighbourhood in its own right. Urban design interventions should take into account the social dimension of the public realm, urban structure and accessibility, in addition to the prevailing physical aspects. In the case of this development brief, proposed improvements of green spaces (including the site) link to the aims of sustainability and respond to socio-economic deficiencies of Hackney and Tower Hamlets, including health and welfare issues. Planning guidelines should encompass interventions within the public space and urban structure in the wider area, avoid the creation of generic spaces, and consider the future densification of the area, as well as, current social needs. Moreover, interventions should focus on strengthening connectivity networks in terms of both access and green spaces. These developments should also extend vertically above the ground level, and public space should not be limited to a horizontal ground-level manifestation. In regards to development interventions within the wider area of the site, strengthening network links would result in diverse public spaces and better connectivity, enhancing safety. Development of BGY could serve as a catalyst mediating the corridors represented by Shoreditch High Street and Brick Lane. In order to serve this purpose of upgrading the three core elements of this brief, public realm, urban structure and access, development strategies must include implementation of better pedestrian policies, reducing street cluttering, reinforcing existing openings with character elements, improving lighting and safety measurements via design. To do this, giving voice to genius loci through artistic shaping of a common and collective language and aesthetic will enhance legibility and sense of community ownership.
69

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

6.2_References

Atkins (2004), Hackney Open Space and Sports Assessment, Atkins.Volume 1: Final Open Space Assessment. BBC. (2009) Green spaces improve health. . [Online] Available from: BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8307024.stm [accessed 23 March 2010] Bentley, I., Alcock, A., Murrain, P., McGlyn, S., & Smith, G., (1985). Responsive environments: A manual for designers. London, UK. Architectural Press. Bently Ian (et al.), (1985), Responsive Environments, A Manual for Designers, Butterworth Architecture, Oxford Bing, (2010). Multimap. [Online] Available from: www.multipmap.com [Accessed 24 February 2010] Brown, A. (ed.) (2007) Contested space: street trading, public space, and livelihoods in developing cities. ITDG Publishing. Careri, F. (2002) Walkscapes : El andar como prctica esttica =Walking as an aesthetic practice. Editorial Gustavo Gili. Barcelona. Carmona, M., (2003) Public places, urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design. Architectural press. Oxford. Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S. (eds.), (2007) Urban design reader. Architectural press. Oxford Carr, S., (1992) Public space. Cambridge University Press. New York. P.xi CASA Blog (2010). [Online] Available from: http://blog.casa. ucl.ac.uk/?cat=20 [Accessed 24 February 2010] CASA, (2010). The London Profiler. [Online] Available from: www.londonprofiler.com [Accessed 24 February 2010] Catford, N. (1995). Subterranean Britannica. [Online] Available from: Subterranean Britannica Site. http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/sites/b/bishopsgate_ goods_station/index2.shtml [Accessed 20 February 2010] Church, D., Nguyen, Y., Sisternas-Tusell, M., Vergara-Petrescu, J.(2009) Bishopsgate as a Border. London School of Economics. London. Cenzatti, Marco (2008), Heterotopias of difference, in Dehaene, M. and De Cauter, L. (eds.), Heterotopia and the city. Public space in a postcivil society, Routledge, London Cowan, R., (2005). The Dictionary of Urbanism. Wiltshire, UK. Streetwise Press Ltd. Davis, J. (2008). Re-imagining Bishopsgate goodsyard. Cambridge Journals, p. 12 - 25.
70

Deleuze, Gilles and Felix Guattari (1988), A thousand plateaus : capitalism and schizophrenia, Athlone Press, London Department of Health and the Ageing. (2009). Healthy Spaces and Places. Kingston, Australia: Planning Institute of Australia. English Heritage. (2004). English Heritage. [Online] Available from English Heritage Website: http://www.english-heritage. org.uk/upload/pdf/bishopsgate.pdf [Accessed 16 February 2010] English Heritage (2010) Heritage Protection; What is a Conservation Area [Online] Available from: http://www.englishheritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1063 [Accessed 15 February 2010] English Heritage, Kim Wilkie Associates, [Online] Available from: Delivering the Goods - Bishopsgate Goodsyard, An Alternative Vision. [Accessed 23 March 2010] Gehl, J (2004) Towards a fine city for people: public spaces and public life-London. Report for Transport for London. Gehl Architects: Copenhagen. Global Cities Exhibition, (2007). Tate Modern. Guardian.co.uk. (n.d.). British Identity and Society., from Guardian.co.uk: http://www.guardian.co.uk/graphic/0,5812,1395103,00.html [Accessed 24 February 2010] Hackney, London Borough of (1995) Hackney Unitary Development Plan. London Borough of Hackney. London. Hackney, London Borough of (2005a), Hackney Tall Buildings Strategy: Final Report Hackney, London Borough of (2005b) The State of Hackneys Historic Environment. London Borough of Hackney, September 2005 [Online] Available from: www.hackney.gov. uk [Accessed 12 February 2010] Hackney, London Borough of (2006a), South Shoreditch Local Development Framework Hackney, London Borough of (2006b) Hackney Transport Strategy, [Online] http://www.hackney.gov.uk/streetscene_hackney_transport_strategy.htm [Accessed 23 February 2010] Hackney, London Borough of (2006c) Hackney Cycle Plan, [Online] http://www.hackney.gov.uk/local_implementation_plan_-_ hackney_cycle_plan.pdf [Accessed 23 February 2010] Hackney, London Borough of (2006d) London Develop-

ment Framework,Supplementary Planning Document: South Shoreditch. Report for Hackney. London. Hackney, London Borough of (2009), Better Homes, Places and Opportunities: Hackney Housing Strategy 2010-2015, Draft for Consultation. London: Hackney Council. Hackney, London Borough of, (2010a). [Online] Available from: http://www.hackney.gov.uk/hackney-ward-profiles-2007.htm [Accessed 24 February 2010] Hackney, London Borough of. (2010b). [Online] Available from: Hackney Council Facts and Figures: http://www.hackney.gov.uk/xp-factsandfigures.htm [Accessed 18 February 2010] Hall, Tarquin. (2005) Salaam Brick Lane: A Year in the New East End. London, John Murray (Publishers). Halprin, L. (1979) The collective perception of cities. In Lisa Taylor(ed.) Urban Open Spaces, Cooper-Hewitt Museum and the Smithsonian Institution. Haydn, F., Temel, R. (2006) Temporary urban spaces: concepts for the use of city spaces. Birkhuser. Basel. ICube. (n.d.). Bishopsgate Development Framework. [Online] Available from: Bishopsgate Development Framework Ballymore/Hammerson: http://icube.ltd.uk/project_bishopsgate. shtml [Accessed 20 February 2010] John V. Davis, P. (2004). Psychological Benefits of Nature. Boulder, Co: Naropa University. Lamit, H., 2004. Redefining Landmarks. Jurnal Alam Bina, 6(1), pp.66-76. London Evening Standard. (2010). [online]. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ article-23806415-tracey-emin-leads-protest-at-hijab-gatesplan-for-brick-lane.do [Accessed 24 February 2010]. London, Mayor of (2008) Draft City Fringe Opportunity Area Planning Framework. Greater London Authority. London. London, Mayor of (2009a). The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. Greater London Authority. London. London, Mayor of (2009b), Mayors Transport Strategy, Public Draft, Published for public consultation. Chapter Three Context [online]. Available from http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/mts09chapter-3-context.pdf [Accessed 24 February 2010]. Lynch, K. (1960) The Image of the City. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusets. Madanipour, A. (2003) Public and private spaces of the city.

Routledge. New York. Maller, D. C.-W. (2008). Healthy parks, healthy people: The health benefits of contact with nature in a park context. Melbourne: School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University. Meeda, B., N. Parkyn, et al. (2007). Graphics for urban design. Thomas Telford. London. Metropolitan Police, (2009). Metropolitan Police Crime Mapping. [Online] Available from: http://maps.met.police.uk/ [Accessed 24 February 2010] Metropolitan Police, (2010). Latest Crime Figures for London. [Online] Available from: www.met.police.uk/crimefigures [Accessed 24 February 2010] Myhouseprice.com. (n.d.). Thematic Map of Average House Prices (2000 - 2004). Retrieved February 20, 2010, [Online] Available from myhouseprice.com: http://www.myhouseprice.com/marketanalysis/images/london.pdf [Accessed 23 February 2010] New London Architecture publication (2010). [Online] Available from: http://www.newlondonarchitecture.org [Accessed 24 February 2010] Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Home Office (2004). Safer Places: the planning system and crime prevention. London, ODPM Office for National Statistics. (2001a) Office for National Statistics. from Neighbourhood Statistics. [Online] Available from: http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/ [Accessed 15 February 2010] Office for National Statistics, (2001b). [Online] Available from: http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/ [Accessed 24 February 2010] Office for National Statistics, (2007). London Regional Profile. [Online] Available from: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1078 [Accessed 24 February 2010] Office for National Statistics, (2007). Population Density for London. [Online] Available from: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/ downloads/theme_population/regional_snapshot/RS_Lon. pdf [Accessed 24 February 2010] Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004), Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention. London: HMSO Oluseyi, O., (2006). Analysis of Inter-Connectivity Levels of Urban Steeet Networks and Social Interactions in Enclosed Neighbourhood in Johannesburg RSA. Humanity and Social Sciences Joournal, 1 (1), pp.79-95.
71

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief

Open Shoreditch (blog), [Online] Available from: www.openshoreditch.blogspot.com/ [Accessed 18 February 2010] Paolo Luria, M. L. (2010). Urban Green Space and Public Health. [Online] Available from: Liverpool JMU, Centre for Public Health: http://www.cph.org.uk/showPublication. aspx?pubid=618 [Accessed 23 March 2010] Pedley Street Rip (blog), [Online] Available from: http://pedleystreetrip.blogspot.com/ [Accessed 24 February 2010] Public Profiler, (2004). Crown Copyright, London. [Online] Available from: http://www.publicprofiler.org/publicprofiles/ redirect.php?postcode=E1+6JJ [Accessed 24 February 2010] Punter, L. (2007). Design-led regeneration. Evaluating the design outcomes of Cardiff Bay and their implications for future regeneration and design. Journal of urban design 12(3): 375405. Schwarz, T., Rugare, S. ed., (2009). Pop Up City, Kent State Universitys Design Collaborative, Cleveland, Ohio Sharp, D. (2007). Giving People More Green Space. Journal of Urban Health, p.3-4. Smith, J. and Rogers, R. (2006) Behind the Veneer; The south Shoreditch furniture trade and its buildings. English Heritage, Swindon Sol-Morales, M. (2000) In: Parcerisa-Bundo, J., de Ventos, M. La ciudad no es una hoja en blanco: hechos del urbanismo. Ediciones ARQ. Santiago, p. 129 Subterranea Britannica, Sites: Bishopsgate Goodsyard, [Online] Available from: http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/ sites/b/bishopsgate_goods_station/index.shtml [Accessed 18.2.2010] Telford, T (2004) Safer places the planning system and crime prevention with the Home Office and ODPM. [Online] Available from: http://www.cabe.org.uk/publications/safer-places [Accessed 24 February 2010] The Area Based Analysis Unit (2009a). Analysing change over time for small areas- guidance. [Online] Available from: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/RegionalTrends/RT41Article7.pdf [Accessed 24 February 2010] The Area Based Analysis Unit (2009b) Understanding Patters of Deprivation. [Online] Available from: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/article.asp?ID=2227 [Accessed 24 February 2010] Thompson, T. (2001, April 22). UK News. Retrieved February 22, 2010, from The Obvserver: http://www.guardian.co.uk/
72

uk/2001/apr/22/tonythompson.theobserver1 Tower Hamlets, Borough of (1998) Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan 1998. London Borough of Tower Hamlets. London. Tower Hamlets, London Borough of (2007a), Tower Hamlets Interim Planning Guidance: City Fringe Area Action Plan Tower Hamlets (2007b) Character Appraisals & Management Guidelines; Brick Lane and Fournier Street, Boundary Estate, Elder Street, Redchurch Street & South Shoreditch. [Online] Available from: http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lgsl/501550/511_conservation_areas/character_appraisals.aspx [Accessed 15 February 2010] Tower Hamlets, London Borough of (2008), Documents for the demolition of existing building and erection of two buildings ranging from 4 to 25 storeys in height, online at http://194.201.98.213/WAM/ findCaseFile.do?appNumber= PA/07/02193&action4=Search accessed 18.2.2010 Tower Hamlets, London Borough of (2009a), Tower Hamlets Housing Strategy Summary 2009-2012. Tower Hamlets. (2009b). Tower Hamlets Housing Strategy. London: Tower Hamlets. Tower Hamlets Council, Hackney Council and the Office of the Mayor of London (2009c) Bishopsgate Goods Yard Planning Guidance [Online] Available from: http://mginternet.hackney.gov.uk/Published/C00000111/ M00000671/AI00004621/BishopsgatePlanningGuidanceAPPENDIX1_v1.pdf [Accessed 24 February 2010] Tower Hamlets Council, (2010). [Online] Available from:http:// www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lgsl/800001-800100/800018_in_ your_ward.aspx [Accessed 24 February 2010] Tower Hamlets. (n.d.). New future planned for Bishopsgate Goods Yard. from Tower Hamlets Local Development Framework. [Online] Available from: http://www.towerhamlets.gov. uk/lgsl/851900/856_local_development_framewor/bishopsgate_goods_yard.aspx [Accessed 14 february 2010] Transport For London (2006) Transport Assessment Best Practice Guidance document, [Online] Available from: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/businessandpartners/transport-assessment-guidance-2006.pdf [Accessed 24 February 2010] Transport for London (2007) East London Line: Phase 1Strategic Urban Realm Plan Strategic Proposals Report. TfL and Mayor of London Publication, December 2007

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Encyclopedia, (2009). Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Victoria, Canada. University of London & History of Parliament Trust ,(2009). British History Online [Online] Available from http://www.british-history.ac.uk/Default.aspx [Accessed 15 February 2010] Visit London (2010) London Markets. [Online] Available from: http://www.visitlondon.com/attractions/shopping/markets/ markets [Accessed 10th February 2010]. Warkwickshire. Llewelyn-Davies. (2000) Urban Design Compendium. English Partnerships and Housing Corporation. London. Watson, D., Plattius, A., Shibley, R., (2003). Time-Saver Standards for Urban Design. McGraw Hill. New York. Wilson, S. R. (1993). The Biophilia hypothesis. Washington DC: Island Press. Wolffe, L. (1972). A Density impact Density: Five perspectives A ULI Special Report. Washington D.C.,Urban Land Institute, pp.25-31

73

DPU_BUDD_2010_BU1_Bishops Gate Goodsyard_Development Brief