New blog for Faversham Yellow Lines campaign

Information on the campaign against the painting of yellow lines across Faversham town centre has moved to a new blog.

Thank you for all the support so far!

Posted in Beauty, Business, Culture, Faversham, Landscape, Performance, Planning, Press article, Social, Sustainability, Transportation, Urbanism | Leave a comment

Faversham Yellow Lines campaign update

Conservation lines in Faversham

Many thanks to all those people who have already signed the petition against the painting of yellow lines throughout Faversham town centre. If you haven’t then please do so:

Sign the petition

Are you able to take one more step and share this campaign within your network of friends and colleagues? I hope so.

Twitter
#PaintFreeFaversham

Facebook

I’ve written a brief note below to help explain our aims. Continue reading

Posted in Beauty, Buildings, Business, Culture, Design, Economic, Environmental, Faversham, Landscape, Planning, Sustainability, Transportation, Urbanism | Leave a comment

UK Spatial Infrastructure Model

Slide1

This is a model of the spatial infrastructure of Great Britain (and will soon include Northern Ireland to become a model of the United Kingdom). It allows us to zoom in and out on cities, towns and villages as well as the connections between them. It also lets us understand the hierarchy of connections at different scales – which routes are more important at a local, pedestrian scale and which are more important at a cross-country, car scale. More important routes are coloured red, then orange and green to less well connected routes in blue.

The colours are created by a computer program that calculates how likely it is that any route will be travelled along by people going from anywhere to anywhere else. The program tries many different kinds of journeys: longer ones right across the UK to shorter ones within local neighbourhoods. By doing so it simulates the real nature of movement in the UK: some is longer-distance and some shorter.

Origins of the model
My colleagues and I at Space Syntax have developed this model because we passionately believe that the practice of planning needs support through more effective, science-based tools. This particular tool allows us to simultaneously think about local as well as global journeys between places. It lets us analyse pedestrian, cycle and car journeys at the same time and within a single modelling framework. There is no other model that does so. Our plan is for the model to be disseminated into urban planning practice so that practitioners can use it in a hands-on way first, to understand how places are currently working and then to plan change. By using the model, people can clearly see the impact of the proposed change.

We are dissatisfied with the current situation in the delivery of urban infrastructure in the United Kingdom which is led predominantly by transport modelling that prioritises the car. This approach has created car-dependent development that isolates people who either can’t drive, don’t have access to a car or prefer not to drive. Our argument is that you get what you are given and what people have been given by the spatial planning industry is based on models that only assess car journeys. We haven’t had cycling models; we haven’t had pedestrian models. It’s no surprise then that we have poor pedestrian infrastructure and poor cycle infrastructure. We have housing estates cut off from shopping centres.

Using this model we can now think about providing infrastructure that works for all modes of movement. Our experience shows that this leads to more sustainable places that deliver financial returns and create social conviviality.

Posted in Development, Future Cities, Planning, Ruralism, Space Syntax, Spatial layout, Spatial modelling, Sustainability, Transportation, Urbanism, UrbanRural | Leave a comment

Spatial Layout as Critical Infrastructure

Stub…notes for an upcoming conference talk

Key issue to be addressed:

- Urban-Rural development

- Urban Regeneration

- Smart Cities.

When a network of streets is laid out, planners and designers build in an enormous amount of “embedded potential”:

  • the pattern of movement
  • land use potential
  • safety
  • land value
  • social interaction
  • public health
  • carbon emissions.

The design of the street network has a fundamental and measurable influence on each of the above.

Later changes – to land use pattern or to the local design of streets (eg road widening or narrowing, adding cycle lanes or public transport) – can enhance or even diminish these potentials, but such later changes always occur around a benchmark that is set by spatial configuration decisions.

Buildings come and go – are built and demolished – but the spatial network, once laid out, is harder to adjust.

Exceptional new connections – such as bridges – can be built to connect disconnected networks but grids are resilient to change. Therefore, putting the wrong grid into an urban development can be a pathological move, setting the socio-economic potential of places for generations to come.

How do we know this?

The evidence-base: post-war housing estates; UK New Towns. Places that go wrong within a generation, if that – sometimes within a few years. Car-dominant transport planning. Land use zoning.

Risk of failed UK models.

In finding a balance between the tension of urban and rural development, Chinese towns and cities should learn from China first:

- mixed use planning: marginal separation by linear integration.

- mixed mode planning: roads, streets, lanes, canals: Jiading.

- mixed character planning.

What are the Spatial Layout requirements?

The historic Chinese grid: rectilinear hierarchy.

Pervasive centrality.

A smart street-grid.

To be developed…

Posted in Carbon emissions, Cities, Conference talk, Design, Development, Performance, Planning, Smart Cities, Space Syntax, Spatial modelling, Spatial planning, Sustainability, Transportation, Urbanism, UrbanRural | Leave a comment

SkyCycle – elevated but not remote

The comparison between SkyCycle – a proposal to create a network of strategic cycling routes above London’s radial railway lines – and the City of London’s much maligned network of (unbuilt or demolished) upper level walkways is one worthy of attention.

1.         The City of London “Pedways” often paralleled routes at street level. When they did so they effectively split the pedestrian flow between upper level and street level – thus typically making neither level particularly/sufficiently vibrant. This is why most of them did not work or were resisted from being built in the first place.

However, as all good students of spatial networks understand, not all links are equal. When upper level walkways genuinely create routes that are not available at ground level then the evidence of observation surveys shows that they can be very well used. Some of the upper level routes through the Barbican are as well used as ground level residential streets elsewhere in London. Reality is, as always, more subtle than simplistic classification.

2.         In contrast, SkyCycle follows railway lines that have historically created morphological “fissures” in the street network either side of them. In this way SkyCycle does not recreate routes that are already available. Instead, it create new routes.

3.         Spatially, these SkyCycle routes have two important characteristics:

a)         because they connect directly from the edge of London to the centre, linking to the ground level at accessible points in the street network (identified by Space Syntax through spatial accessibility analysis) SkyCycle routes add to London’s “foreground network” of important arterials (the red and orange links in a Space Syntax map of London).

London_Global Choice

Continue reading

Posted in Cities, Cycling, Design, Planning, Space Syntax, Spatial layout, Spatial modelling, Spatial planning, Transportation, Urbanism | Leave a comment

Space Syntax_Integrated Urban Model

Space Syntax_Integrated Urban Model

Image | Posted on by | Leave a comment

Space Syntax: the push of intent, the pull of need and the resistance of the “pre-digital”

I was asked an interesting question yesterday about the barriers to growth and acceptance of Space Syntax and Integrated Urban Models.

I believe there are three important components to the answer.

First, the growth of Space Syntax Limited‘s business was robust for 19 years, following its startup as a UCL spinoff company in 1989 – until 2008, when the bottom dropped out of the global real estate market. In that initial period, the company’s turnover grew at an annual rate of over 20%. This allowed continuous staff growth and market penetration. During this time the company devoted profits to the production of new software and new research findings as well as a modest return to shareholders and staff bonuses. It invested this way because it was determined that its growth should be about long term success and sustainability, not short-term reward.

2008 saw the global financial crisis hit the urban planning and design industry at home and abroad. This disrupted the growth curve at Space Syntax for two years. The company is today back on an accelerated growth track having seen consistent turnover growth at over 40% in each of the past two years, the steepest rate in its history. Continue reading

Posted in Architecture, Art, Business, Design, Digital phenomena, Digital Urbanism, Future Cities, Science, Smart Cities, Space Syntax, Technology, Training, Urbanism | Leave a comment