Urban Design Principles: The Impact of Time

Summary

This talk explores how urban environments evolve at different rates, with buildings changing slowly while their uses shift more rapidly. It highlights that significant improvements in cities can often be made without demolishing buildings, but by enhancing public spaces and the quality of life. Using examples from London, such as Victoria Park and Canary Wharf, the speaker shows how changes to public realms—like removing unnecessary additions—can transform urban experiences, making them more accessible and visually appealing without major redevelopment.

Takeaways

• 😀 Urban environments change at different paces: buildings and the built fabric change slowly, while the uses of buildings can change more rapidly.
• 😀 Public spaces, like streets and open areas, change at an even faster rate than buildings, significantly impacting the quality of urban life.
• 😀 The public realm (e.g., streetscapes and public areas) can degrade without proper maintenance and care, even in prosperous areas.
• 😀 Changes to the built environment should focus on the public realm, rather than just demolishing and replacing buildings.
• 😀 Even in residential districts, change can occur over decades, such as houses being converted to flats and back again depending on demand.
• 😀 A city's appearance and functionality can be dramatically improved by removing unnecessary additions, rather than adding more elements to the environment.
• 😀 Urban spaces should be accessible and user-friendly, with thoughtful planning that ensures easy movement for all, including those with disabilities.
• 😀 The example of Victoria Park in South Hackney shows that even historical buildings, when maintained, contribute to the continuity of a space.
• 😀 The importance of visual environments is highlighted in examples like the entrance to Waterloo Station, where poor urban planning degraded the space despite intact historic structures.
• 😀 Art installations and urban design features should serve functional and aesthetic purposes, rather than becoming obstacles or distractions in the urban landscape.

Q & A

What are the different paces of change in urban environments as discussed in the transcript?

The transcript explains that urban change occurs at varying speeds: the grid plan of a city changes very slowly, buildings change more rapidly, and the uses of buildings can change quickly, especially in commercial areas. Residential areas change more gradually, with properties sometimes being converted for different uses.

How does the speaker illustrate the difference in pace of change using the example of a city grid plan and buildings?

The speaker highlights that the city grid plan is unlikely to change over a long period, while the buildings within the grid change more rapidly due to shifts in urban needs. The functions of these buildings (e.g., residential to commercial or vice versa) can change even more quickly, particularly in central or commercial areas.

What is the significance of the Victoria Park area in South Hackney as an example in the transcript?

The Victoria Park area is used to show how the buildings in a residential area may remain unchanged for over a century, while the surrounding public realm (streets, spaces, etc.) can deteriorate over time. This example demonstrates that maintaining and improving the public space is just as important as preserving buildings themselves.

What does the speaker mean by 'degraded public realm' in the context of Victoria Park?

The 'degraded public realm' refers to the condition of the streets and outdoor spaces around the buildings in Victoria Park, which have deteriorated over time. Despite the area being relatively prosperous, the lack of care and proper maintenance of the public spaces has led to their decline.

How does the example of Waterloo Station demonstrate the effects of public realm changes?

The speaker uses the example of Waterloo Station to show how public realm projects, such as poorly planned additions and replacements, have negatively impacted the accessibility and aesthetic of the area. The space, which once had a clear and pedestrian-friendly entrance, is now cluttered and difficult to navigate, especially for those with mobility issues.

What is the speaker's view on public realm projects in cities?

The speaker argues that many public realm projects in cities, often involving the addition of unnecessary features, can worsen urban spaces. Instead of adding new elements, the speaker believes that removing unnecessary additions and simplifying the design would improve the quality of life in cities.

What does the speaker mean by 'removing things rather than adding' in urban planning?

By 'removing things rather than adding,' the speaker suggests that in many cases, urban spaces can be improved by eliminating clutter and unnecessary features. This approach would make cities more functional, accessible, and pleasant to navigate without the need for major redevelopment or construction.

How does the speaker critique public art installations in urban spaces, like the one near Canary Wharf?

The speaker critiques the public art installation near Canary Wharf by pointing out that it is visually similar to highway engineering, thus failing to serve its intended purpose of enhancing the urban environment. The speaker suggests that urban art should prioritize functionality and contribute meaningfully to the public space, rather than just adding visual appeal.

What is the key takeaway from the speaker's discussion on improving urban spaces?

The key takeaway is that urban spaces can be significantly improved by focusing on functional design, accessibility, and the removal of unnecessary elements. Rather than focusing on major redevelopment or the construction of new buildings, thoughtful planning and minimal interventions can make a big difference in the quality of life for city dwellers.

How does the speaker contrast the 'Victoria Park' and 'Waterloo Station' examples in terms of urban change?

The speaker contrasts the two examples by showing how Victoria Park represents a slow pace of change, with buildings remaining largely the same over time, while the public realm has deteriorated. In contrast, Waterloo Station illustrates how rapid changes in public realm projects and infrastructure can create a negative impact, making the space more difficult to navigate and less welcoming.