#goodsyard

View from Wolfartsweier Brücke, Karlsruhe. June 2019

Nature Taking Back The City!

Visibility of Tall Buildings Given that tall buildings are more likely to be seen in the Medieval city, it is important that the buildings are designed to be seen in the round.

- Just as a piece of sculpture is normally intended to be seen from multiple viewing angles, so too should a tall building that is located within an urban field, responding to multiple conditions and displaying a richness of form and narrative instead of flatness.

Mediator Between Scales The massing of Plots F & G has an important role within the overall Goodsyard Masterplan in mediating between the contrasting scales of the larger city scale to the south-west and the smaller scaled Brick Lane area to the east.

- Being located on the south west edge of The Goodsyard masterplan, the Plots will naturally form a dialogue with the existing commercial and emerging residential developments that line Bishopsgate.

- The IPG suggests that ‘larger scaled buildings around the new station and in relation to the scale of the northern cluster’ should be located to the west of the masterplan, whilst buildings to the east of the Masterplan should possess ‘a street scale at the perimeter of the site, that relates to the existing building heights and Brick Lane’.

- It has been assumed that the northern cluster is formed of 201 Bishopsgate and Principal Place, both to the south-west of plots F and G.

- Being the tallest buildings within the Proposed Development, F & G will establish a hierarchy of forms that drop in height moving eastwards towards the smaller scale of the Brick Lane area.

A New Landmark & Gateway Being at the perceived threshold between the City of London and beyond, Plots F & G will have an ability to mark the gateway into Shoreditch from the City and vice versa.

- Visible at the end of the long vistas of Bishopsgate, Commercial Street, Great Eastern Street and Shoreditch High Street, the Plots also have a unique ability to provide a landmark on this western edge to The Goodsyard development.

-  The highest quality of design will be required in order to achieve the well composed silhouettes and elevations needed to warrant this honour.

-  The form and articulation of the buildings should also have special consideration to merit the ability for the ultra visible taller buildings to be seen from multiple viewing locations around the site from a multitude of distances.

The IPG The IPG identified a regeneration target for The Goodsyard Masterplan of approximately 350,000 sqm of overall development including up to 2,000 homes across the site.

- However, the lack of foundable area across the Masterplan (only approximately 30% of the entire site is foundable) provides a good indication of the degree of constraints experienced across the Masterplan site. This inevitably leads to more challenging conditions in which to achieve viability.

- Plots F & G are particularly constrained, and substantial investment in a significant engineering solution will be required in order to surmount the challenging presence of the below ground rail elements whilst adhering to the principles of the IPG and providing a suitable quality and quantity of public realm.

- To achieve the masterplan’s overall townscape objectives it is necessary to place limitations upon the scale of development across all Plots in order to achieve a compelling and cohesive result. F & G, being the location identified as most suitable to accommodate a larger scale, therefore comes under pressure to provide a good proportion of the homes identified in the IPG.

Plots F & G Massing Studies Analysis of massing options on Plots F & G was undertaken taking into consideration the townscape views, site constraints, and overall masterplan objectives. The height, position, massing, organisation and number of buildings were studied and assessed against the above criteria whilst each option is predicated on a set quantum of development.

- Commercial uses were considered on plot F & G, however, the significant constraints, below ground and above, dictate small building footprints that would be viable only for residential use.

- A single slender tower (massing 1) was tested but this was found to have a detrimental impact on the views of St Paul’s from Queen’s Walk on the South Bank. The tower was dropped in height (massing 2) to mitigate against the Queen’s Walk views but the resultant girth read a too bulky in the local views and entailed overly deep apartments.

- Massing 3, 4 and 5 looked at dropping the height further whilst providing a long slender building, a courtyard building and a U-shaped building respectively. These all proved too bulky and monolithic in the local views, removing a great deal of sky.

- After three linear bars were studied (massing 6), massing 7 reduced this down to two slender bars in order to increase the severely limited distances between buildings. The reduction in building numbers dictated taller buildings which, combined with the long lengths of the buildings, read as bulky in the local views.

- The building footprints were changed to more square forms (massing 8) with the resulting taller towers seeming too close together. Massing 9 reduced the footprints of the buildings whilst increasing in height to provide a pair of slender towers.

- The exact heights and orientation were adjusted as the scheme developed during both the submitted application and amended scheme. Details of these can be found in 6.1.3.16 and

Plot C Massing Studies All massing options were predicated on a podium, to enable the structural transfer over the London Overground Viaduct, and a set quantum of development above.

- Massing 1 featured a single tower on top of the podium however the height necessary to achieve the set quantum meant the tower would be too tall and bulky within the local views.

- To reduce the height a courtyard building filling the Plot (massing 2) was tested, and to avoid single aspect north facing apartments the north and south wings were reduced in width(massing 3).

- Further height was required to compensate for the loss of the south wing (massing 4) to improve daylight penetration into the courtyard apartments and improve visual amenity.

- To reduce bulkiness, particularly from the more sensitive north, the north bar was rotated to provide allow a reduced scale (massing 5), however, the lack of distance between forms led to this volume being redistributed onto the emerging two slender bar shaped buildings (massing 6).

- The north and south faces of the buildings were pushed back to address Bethnal Green Road and the park more appropriately (massing 7) and the height of the two buildings were adjusted to fit in with the masterplan objectives (massing 8).

- Each tower was broken down further in order to reduce the scale and further give the impression of slenderness (massing 9) whilst the eastern tower was reoriented to allow greater daylight and sunlight penetration to existing properties on the north side of Bethnal Green Road and better visual amenity to the two towers (massing 10).

- The exact building heights were adjusted as the scheme developed during both the submitted application and amended scheme. Details of the latter can be found in 6.1.3.17.

Sculpting of the Towers The position, massing and sculpting of the towers are the result of careful consideration to reduce the bulk and impact upon the local and wider context whilst creating a well composed addition to the skyline, and achieving the masterplan’s objectives.

- The form and articulation of the buildings have been specifically crafted to merit the ability for the taller buildings to be seen from multiple viewing locations.

- The highly visible buildings have been carefully designed and sculpted to enhance views of them, carefully articulated to form sensitively composed elevations and silhouettes, as described in section 6.1.

The Goodsyard Meanwhile Uses Strategy

The following proposals are not fixed proposals but illustrative examples only of what might be possible opportunities.

This site could provide multiple opportunities for creative temporary interventions in this highly creative part of London. An engaging arts-led meanwhile strategy would play on the creative strengths and celebrate the heritage and identity of The Goodsyard.

Time-based + Diverse and Site-specific Interventions. The following list sets out five conditions as a mixture of commercial, cultural and community engaged programmes.

Ongoing Activities that harness local culture and create a window into local heritage • Flexible, short-lived, nimble and mobile interventions that utilise local resources and new technology; e.g.: temporary installations in empty shops and existing shop-windows, on shop shutters, appropriate street furniture such as lamp-posts and bus stops, even in remote locations integrating smart technology; • To celebrate the everyday and the shared memories of the local community; e.g.: ‘portraits of other people’... • Reactivate vacant spaces to generate interactions between locals and new residents. E.g.: a hall for ping-pong tournaments • Create a ‘room’ hosting artist residencies in a range of disciplines; e.g.: writing & story-telling, music composition & radio broadcasting and so on; • Create opportunities for new business concepts; e.g.: pay as you go cafe where people pay for the time they spend • A network of temporary events sprouting across the site; e.g.: guided tours, film screenings, exhibitions, performances ...Towers & Periscopes: to provide visual access to and frame a ‘view’ of the building site

Sketch Book Goodsyard

The Goodsyard, Shoreditch