Recap of Issues I

The Issues 1 report had to tackle three general points. How to retaining high environmental quality, creating sustainable lifestyles whilst in the midst of intensification and high density levels.

To very briefly recap the definitions;

Intensification, creates a more efficient usage of land by making the built form more dense and compact with a variety of landuses. This allows greater opportunities sustainable travel e.g. walking and cycling as amenities are closer together.
Sustainable lifestyle, defined as a way of living, and how we organize our everyday life, based on the Bruntland reports (1987) definition of sustainable development. It must be socially balanced, and ecologically/environmentally inclusive (e.g. biodiverse and environmentally friendly through green technology)
Environmental quality, the adaptability of design and safety needs to respond to the needs of the community on varying scales from the plot, to the neighbourhood, to the township, in essence the design needed to be a "good place to live".

To this end a great deal of focus was spent on creating pedestrian orientated walkable neighbourhoods emphasizing theories such as Townscape, (by Gordon Cullen) and Legibility (by Kevin lynch) and built around the principles from Responsive Environments (1985) and Shaping Neighbourhoods (2010) to enable streets to be visually engaging, easy to navigate around and at a human scale designed for people.

The master-plan was designed on the basis of a compact city by Barton et al (2010). The city would comprise of four separate districts each 400x400 metres in size with the highest levels of density along the busiest transport routes. The further away from main transport routes, the lower the density of development.

Each district would have a centre with four neighbourhoods in each district, within each neighbourhood there would be a centre as well with small local shops and amenities.

This principle applied to open space as well, each district would have a park capable of hosting events and fairs etc. with each neighbourhood having a pocket park serving different needs at different scales.

Local centre

district centre

Local centre

1/2

Plan view of conceptual district

Proposals Map

Plan view of conceptual district

1/2

Legibility Model

Density Hierarchy

Legibility Model

1/2

Primrary Street

Secondary Street

Tertiary Street

Primrary Street

1/3

fig 5, Plan of conceptual model (author)

fig 6, Proposals map of conceptual model (author)

fig 7, Model of local centre (author)

fig 8, Model of district centre (author)

fig 4, Overview of conceptual model (author)

fig 2, fig 3. legibility and density breakdown from issuses I (author)

fig 1, Street hierarchies from issues I (author)

Well connected and easily navigable streets
Intensification of density along transport routes
Alternative transport options, encouraging walking and cycling

Improve social cohesion through variety of dwelling types and tenure to enable a diverse mix of residents

Design streetscape according to townscape principles
Design flora for visual attraction, smell, food production
Incorporate green corridors throughout the site, and high quality public open space and green at varying scales of size and walking distance i.e. pocket park, neighbourhood park and district/city park.

Accessibility and legibility

Diversity

Robustness

Richness

Safety and surveillance

shared communal resources e.g. urban agriculture and water/waste recycling.
design of micro-climates to encourage solar gain etc.
Adaptability to changing requirements of users, through variety of household types and design of public space

Natural surveillance throughout the day through use of active frontages by distribution of landuses to and mixed usage throughout the site

Issues I Design Principles

To the right is a summary of the main design themes that our model was based around in order to meet the three goals of intensification, sustainable lifestyles and environmental quality.

Urban Design Issues

Milton Keynes, Thomas Smith-Keary, 14045700

"How can retrofitted transport infrastructre create innovative & vibrant social spaces for people that impacts positevley on local identity?"

Recap of Issues I

The Issues 1 report had to tackle three general points. How to retaining high environmental quality, creating sustainable lifestyles whilst in the midst of intensification and high density levels.

To very briefly recap the definitions;

Intensification, creates a more efficient usage of land by making the built form more dense and compact with a variety of landuses. This allows greater opportunities sustainable travel e.g. walking and cycling as amenities are closer together.

Environmental quality, the adaptability of design and safety needs to respond to the needs of the community on varying scales from the plot, to the neighbourhood, to the township, in essence the design needed to be a "good place to live".

Each district would have a centre with four neighbourhoods in each district, within each neighbourhood there would be a centre as well with small local shops and amenities.

This principle applied to open space as well, each district would have a park capable of hosting events and fairs etc. with each neighbourhood having a pocket park serving different needs at different scales.

fig 5, Plan of conceptual model (author)

fig 6, Proposals map of conceptual model (author)

fig 7, Model of local centre (author)

fig 8, Model of district centre (author)

fig 4, Overview of conceptual model (author)

fig 2, fig 3. legibility and density breakdown from issuses I (author)

fig 1, Street hierarchies from issues I (author)

Well connected and easily navigable streets

Intensification of density along transport routes

Alternative transport options, encouraging walking and cycling

Improve social cohesion through variety of dwelling types and tenure to enable a diverse mix of residents

Design streetscape according to townscape principles

Design flora for visual attraction, smell, food production

Accessibility and legibility

Diversity

Robustness

Richness

Safety and surveillance

shared communal resources e.g. urban agriculture and water/waste recycling.

design of micro-climates to encourage solar gain etc.

Adaptability to changing requirements of users, through variety of household types and design of public space

Natural surveillance throughout the day through use of active frontages by distribution of landuses to and mixed usage throughout the site

Issues I Design Principles

To the right is a summary of the main design themes that our model was based around in order to meet the three goals of intensification, sustainable lifestyles and environmental quality.