A New Opportunity for Partnership
between
Urban Designers and Engineers
Peter Jones
Centre for Transport Studies, UCL
Overview
• During latter half of 20th century, urban street
design dominated by traffic engineers
• Resulting street designs vehicle-dominated and
unattractive – contributing to high street decline
• New ways of viewing and classifying streets are
confronting this imbalance, giving greater weight
to public realm and urban design principles
• …and providing new opportunities for partnership
between urban designers and engineers
Vehicle-dominated street designs
Designs for all street users
Change in perspective
• 1900s:
– Urban streets designed to accommodate high
volumes of fast-moving motorised traffic
– Streets classified in terms of motor traffic
distribution function (e.g. ‘primary distributor’)
– Streets EITHER for Movement or Access
• 2000s:
– Streets accommodate many modes of transport
– Also provide important Places for street
activities, enhancing economic, social and
cultural life on and adjacent to streets
Part of change of macro policy -1
Part of change of macro policy - 2
Part of change of macro policy - 3
Part of change of macro policy - 4
A shift in design philosophy
‘Rooms & Corridors’
(Buchanan, 1963)
‘Open-plan’ Office
(Link/Movement & Place)
A new street classification system
LINK/MOVEMENT
street as a
movement conduit
PLACE
street as a
destination in its
own right
Design objective:
save time
Design objective:
spend time
Application to Mayfair
Part of Hounslow L & P Street Network
Design implications
• Example below shows two streets of the same width,
but possessing different link and place status
• Different cell => different design solution
I-A
I-B
I-C
I-D
I-E
I-A
I-B
I-C
I-D
I-E
II-A
II-B
II-C
II-D
II-E
II-A
II-B
II-C
II-D
II-E
III-A
III-B
III-C
III-D
III-E
III-A
III-B
III-C
III-D
III-E
IV-A
IV-B
IV-C
IV-D
IV-E
IV-A
IV-B
IV-C
IV-D
IV-E
V-A
V-B
V-C
V-D
V-E
V-A
V-B
V-C
V-D
V-E
Different balanced along a corridor
• Link status is the same
• Place status is higher on section 2
Section 1:
Residential
Section 2:
District Centre
Aid to public engagement
• Link and Place provides an intuitive basis
for involving wide range of stakeholders in
street redesign exercises:
– Agree on street category
– Agree on vision and constraints
– Explore design options using a ‘Planning for
Real’ approach
• Method has proved successful in reaching
a consensus in contested situations
Functions and constraints
LINK Function:
Link status
Place status
national
highway
city
boulevard
district
high street
local
streets
PLACE:
Function:
Minimum
spaces
Parking Bays
13
Loading Bays
12
Disabled Bays
4
Bus Stops
8
Crossings
3
Design workshops
Roles for different professionals
Wider benefits - Hounslow
• Common agreement across Borough departments
on function of each street section => coordination
• The Hounslow Streetscape Design Guide indicates
appropriate treatments for different street types
(e.g. where to consider introducing a 20mph zone)
A
B
C
D
E
1
2
3
4
5
20mph Zones
Methodological imbalances remain
Link effects still better quantified than Place effects, so
giving them greater priority in some formal appraisal
exercises….
LINK:
• Full design standards
PLACE:
• Partial design standards
• Quantitative PIs
• Qualitative PIs
• Modelling flows, etc
• Modelling - ?????
• Evaluation of user
benefits:
• Evaluation of features;
no direct measures of
user benefit:
– VoT savings
– NOT value of bus lane!
– VoT SPENT
– Quality of experience
New street classification for London
• Proposed as part of work of the Mayor’s
‘Roads Task Force’…..
• London’s street’s perform a range of
functions, which should be grouped into
two primary dimensions:
– Movement: with an emphasis on person
(rather than vehicle) movement, plus freight
and servicing
– Place: on-street economic and social activity,
vehicle frontage access, public realm, etc.
‘Movement’ and ‘Place’ dimensions
London’s ‘street family types’
London’s street family appearance
A10 corridor: changing Place types
• It is the combination
of the movement and
place levels that
defines the streettype.
• The movement level
typically remains the
same while the place
level changes along
the corridor.
• Therefore the streettype changes as you
move along the
corridor
Street Types Perspective - 1
This quite different approach recognises:
• Urban roads/streets are important both for
Movement and for Place-related activities
• ‘Movement’ is now defined in terms of people
(and goods) movement, not vehicles
• ‘Place’ covers both activities on the highway
(e.g. pavement cafes) and the relationships with
frontages adjacent to the street
Street Types Perspective - 2
It means that:
• Even on very busy strategic roads, consideration
needs to be given to Place impacts (economic,
social, pollution, severance, etc.)
• On some streets, a much higher priority will be
given to Place than to Movements needs – while
catering for minimum requirements (e.g. local
access)
• There is no single ‘road user hierarchy’ – this will
vary according to the Street Family Type
Practical Implications
• It provides a constructive framework for TfL and
the boroughs to work more closely together
• Corridor studies will look at all Movement
options (e.g. re-routing, re-timing, greater use of
rail)
• Major redevelopments will have implications for
Place street design as well as influencing
demands for street Movement
• Where the Place function is very important, it will
be a much bigger factor in street redesign that
was previously the case – e.g. Elephant and
Castle.
Thank you!
peter.jones@ucl.ac.uk
See also:
“Link and Place – bridging stakeholder divides”, in:
M. Carmona (ed) (2014) Explorations in Urban Design,
Chapter 9, Ashgate.