Transforming Elephant and Castle in between

Transforming Elephant and Castle in between

BU1. Transforming Local Areas: Urban Design for DevelopmentCamillo Boano and Melissa García Lamarca

Second Term, 2011-2012Urban Analysis for a Study Area in Elephant and Castle, London

Ojama Akagwu, Elsbet Alen, Petra Barran, Elisabetta Bricchetto, Camila Cociña,Shirin Husseini, Martha Mingay, Francesco Pasta, Claire Quam-Wickham, Bethany Ritter, Yingdong Yan, Han Zhu

SUMMARYThe Elephant and Castle stands at the precipice of the urban regeneration that has reshaped large swathes of Britain’s inner cities in the last fifteen years. With a critical awareness of the potential temporal, spatial and human disjunc-tures that have often accompanied these processes, Elephant & Castle In Between attempts to ameliorate existing proposals with both interim and permanent design and use proposals that attempt to address this dissever-ment by emphasising the local.

This report is organized in 5 sections. The first one contextualizes the Elephant and Castle situation and the regeneration project. The second one is an Urban Design Analysis based on the goals as stated by Southwark Council and Lend Lease, and a critique to the implementation of such goals. Then, there is a SWOT analysis, based in the Urban Analysis produced in the stage one of this exercise. The fourth section presents our vision and urban design entry points, and finally the fifth section presents our seven proposals. Five of this proposals are grounded on the idea that the final image envi-sioned by the redevelopment plan assumes both a physical and social transformation of the area. However, it will take a long time to reach such transformation. The “in between time” will be considerable and likely to extend, so social processes should be considered in the interven-tion. The process that will occur during that “in between” will also transform the “final image” proposed. The other two are recommendation to the redevelopment plan in order to support more effectively these social transformations.

2

‘For this metropolis is not simply the final stage of a poignant narrative, of apocalypse and nostalgia, it is also the site of the ruins of previous orders in which diverse histories, languages, memories and traces continually entwine and recombine in the construction of new horizons’ (Chambers, 1990: 112).

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURESIntroduction

1. Context2. Urban design analysis3. SWOT analysis 3.1 Housing 3.2 Economic activities 3.3 Open and public space 3.4 Movement, infrastructure and accessibility 3.5 Liminal spaces 3.6 Culture, arts, participation and social activities 3.7 Voids, emites, leftovers 3.8 Swot in the space4. Vision and urban design principles5. Intervention sites and design response 5.1 Training 5.2 Food Market 5.3 Gardening 5.4 Use of Shopfronts 5.5 Use of Heygate Spaces 5.6 Housing Typology 5.7 Roundabout

ConclusionReferences

4

58

1112131415

1617

1819212324252627282929

3031

Figure 1. Elephant and Castle opportunity area in London.Figure 2. The Elephant and Castle Theatre 1850-1950.Figure 3. Heygate original architect’s sketches from 1969Figure 4. Housing proposed by Lend LeaseFigure 5. Street activity proposed by Lend Lease Figure 6. Park comparison: Lend Lease proposal and Tavistok Square, same scaleFigure 7. Green areas proposed by Lend LeaseFigure 8. Housing generation’ architect’s plans from 2009Figure 9. Liminal spacesFigure 10. Cultural activities in Elephant and CastleFigure 11. Strengths in the spaceFigure 12. Weakness in the spaceFigure 13. Opportunities in the spaceFigure 14. Threats in the spaceFigure 15. SWOT analysis summaryFigure 16. SWOT analysis summary in the spaceFigure 17: A survey map of the Walworth Road paralleled with a map of the world, indicating the origins of the independent shop proprietors in relation to their position on the streetFigure 18: Integrating neighbourhoods and boundariesFigure 19: Temporal aspect – the lacunas of developmentFigure 20: Strengthening community networksFigure 21: City connectivity vs. Local accessibilityFigure 22: Interventions and current usesFigure 23. Training: Localization of actors and interventionsFigure 24. Training: Presence of local activities in new developmentFigure 25. Food Market: Localization of actors and interventions. now, in between, futureFigure 26. Food Market in Elephant RoadFigure 27. Mobile Gardens: Localization of actors and interventions. now, in between, futureFigure 28. Allotments in HeygateFigure 29. Mobile gardens 1Figure 30. Mobile gardens 2Figure 31. Use of Shopfronts: Localization of actors and interventionsFigure 32. Use of Shopfronts: Strata ground floorFigure 33. Use of Heygate spaces: Localization of actors and interventionsFigure 34. Use of Heygate spaces.Figure 35. Expositions in Heygate spaces.Figure 36. RoundaboutFigure 37. Conceptual diagram

Table 1. A consideration of legal, market and policy realities and potential utopian flexibilitities surrounding the regeneration of the Opportunity AreaTable 2. Stage 1 themes and SWOT Analysis Table 3. Entry points and InterventionsTable 4. SWOT analysis and Interventions response

3

INTRODUCTION

This project was undertaken as part of the Bartlett Development Planning Unit post-graduate module ‘Transforming Local Areas: Urban Design for Development’ at UCL. Research at the Elephant and Castle was over two months, between January and March 2012. The exercise took place in collaboration with the London Borough of Southwark’s Planning Department, specifi-cally Nick Wolff (Project Development Man-ager, Economic Development) and Tim Cutts (Head of Planning Policy). Meetings were also held with a number of key actors, includ-ing community groups, the Elephant Amenity Network and Lend Lease, a key developer for the Opportunity Area.

We wish for our interventions to have maxi-mum possible practical recommendation for the Opportunity Area, and for this reason we have attempted to ground them among key considerations of the legal, market and political realities of contemporary regenera-tion in London. However, we believe some of these realities contain a degree of flexibility should actors, particularly Southwark Council and the Mayor of London, reconsider previ-ous decisions, particularly in regard to the housing split and plans for the ‘Civic Square’ at the roundabout. Nonetheless, engineering such a change of framework at this stage would take a good deal of lobbying and co-operation.

Our considerations of reality and utopian flexibility are considered in Table 1.

This responsive report is based on extensive analsyis of the site along key themes that are assessed and catego-rized in our SWOT analysis. From this textured understanding of the Elephant, we propose a vision of the neighbourhood that functions success-fully on every scale, but prioritises the local. To enable this, analysis and community proactivity suggest a tem-poral focus, expecting lacunas of development and with respect to the Elephant’s past, is vital. Our interven-tions are therefore designed along two strata: immediate interventions that can be ‘grown’ through community engage-ment, and later, permanent sugges-tions for the Opportunity Area. While these perhaps conflicting strategies require varying constellations of actors and scales of finance and skills, such an approach is necessary to recognise and attempt to address the inherent potential of conflict in processes of regeneration. We aimed to design a development that respects, maintains and enables new beginnings of the deep connections the area has always attracted.

Reality Utopian FlexibilityLEGAL: Constraints on actors

The UK Planning System Health & Safety - a possible conflict with interim use

LEGAL: Public space - should be managed by public bodies "in the public interest"

POLICY: The declining autonomy of local govern-ment

No political will to retain the Heygate housing blocks

POLICY: The May 2012 Mayoral Election: Abandoned plans for the Roundabout

Grampian Planning Conditions to maximise interim use.

MARKET: Private sector led development and so must be profitable

Affordable Housing at a likely maximum of 35%

Global uncertainty could lead to lacunas

MARKET: Development to achieve off-plan valuations so budgets for interim use are protected

A glut of commercial property locally and Londonwide - ensuring low rental value for commercial units over the period of develop-ment and beyond

Ignore Lend Lease's trade off between unit size and the number of affordabe units

Table 1. A consideration of legal, market and policy realities and potential utopian flexibilitities surrounding the regeneration of the Opportunity Area

4

1. CONTEXT

All Roads Lead to the Elephant

The Elephant & Castle, located within cen-tral, inner south London at the strategic junction of the A2 and A3, linking the central bridges across the Thames with the main Roman roads through South-East and South-West London respectively, is of unde-niable metropolitan significance as a trans-port node. Given this situation, the Elephant is largely considered a roundabout by Lon-doners, earning it the colloquial reputation as “the real centre of London”. With South London’s relative dearth of London Under-ground stations, the connectivity of the Northern and Bakerloo Lines with National Rail routes alongside twenty-eight bus routes, this role is confirmed by its key loca-tion to South London’s public transport, a busy site of interchange twenty-four hours a day.

The post-war physicality of the Elephant reflects this situational significance to the capital. Given its arterial road and rail links, alongside the industrial economy of northern Southwark, the Elephant experienced heavy German bombing in World War Two. This erasure of architecture and urban form allowed the post-war prioritisation of the car, in the widening of the New Kent Road and the roundabouts that form the centre of the Opportunity Area. To this day, local mobility, particularly that of pedestrians, remains constrained by the infrastructure and built environment designed to facilitate the fast flow of daily dense traffic from London’s periphery to its core and back again.

The extensive wartime damage is also evident in the abundance and large scale of post-war architecture, most significantly in

the massive Heygate estate, commissioned in 1962 and complete for inhabitance in 1974 alongside the Elephant & Castle Shopping Centre, Europe’s first on opening in 1965. But almost simultaneously to the Heygate’s completion, the proclamation of the “The Failure of Modern Architecture” (Brolin, 1976) saw the Elephant’s architecture and urban planning soon heralded as London’s carbun-cular testament to the failure of the modern-ist, welfare state utopia. A reputation as “muggers paradise” (the Evening Standard 22/2/12), somewhat furthered by the estate’s use as a dystopic film location, came to blight the estate.

In 1999, against the recommendations of a 1998 scoping report, the decision to “decant” the community and demolish the Heygate blocks for regeneration.

"Suddenly the place was being labelled a problem estate. This is all part of this regeneration discourse. Because there's nothing wrong with the buildings, they have to find an excuse to regenerate the place, ie knock it down and replace it." Adrian Glasspool, Heygate Resident, quoted in S Moss ‘The Death of a Housing Ideal The Guardian 4/3/2011

Source:http://www.arthurlloyd.co.uk/Elephant.htm

Figure 1. Elephant and Castle opportunity area in London Figure 2. The Elephant and Castle Theatre 1850-1950.

Source: Authors 5

“We Was All One”

But while the Elephant & Castle has gained a metropolitan reputation as an ugly round-about, the Elephant, Newington and Wal-worth have functioned on the local scale as a neighbourhood. London experienced the steady depopulation of the Inner City until the 1990s and the area sank into relative decline as Britain shifted to a post-industrial economy, untouched by the transformation sparked by the deregulation of the City a mile north. Yet the Elephant became increasingly multicultural, the neighbourhood and its significant housing stock at first absorbing significant Carib-bean and African populations focused on Peckham and Brixton, while the 2000s saw a growing role as the locus for London’s rapidly growing Latino population, with activity, economy and social encounter focused within the Shopping Centre.

Statistics support the architectural and commercial signifiers of deprivation and diversity. The Opportunity Area spans the Cathedral, Chaucer, Faraday, Newington and East Walworth wards of Southwark, itself the 26th most deprived local authority of England’s 326. At the ward or ‘Lower Super Output Area’ level, East Walworth stands as the most deprived ward in South-wark (2007 Index of Multiple Deprivation). Southwark saw a significant decrease in deprivation in the 2000s, but the deviated deprivation statistics confirm this is due to

falling unemployment rather than wage rises. As such, the population of 60,000 (approx.) across the four wards retains a significant number of low-wage house-holds.

But the neighbourhood also has a reputa-tion as a successful site of multicultural diversity. The 2001 census, the last avail-able, illustrates the diversity of the Wal-worth Community Council area.

Ethnic Group Percentage of Population

White British 46%Black/African/Caribbean 31%(Black African) 22%Other Ethnic Minority Groups 12%

Source: London Borough of Southwark Walworth Commu-nity Council Population in Walworth 2008

Residential statistics do not appreciate the economic and cultural contribution of BAME groups that work inside the area but live elsewhere.

The Elephant and Castle has therefore recently proved a neighbourhood with rapidly increasing economic diversity yet the Equali-ties Impact Assessment of the Opportunity Area (p 9) recognizes the development could threaten the Elephant’s role in London’s low-revenue economy.

“Southwark is becoming Shirley Porter's Westminster, clad in timber and Trespa” Owen Hatherley, After the Heygate, a grey future awaits’ The Guardian 8 February 2011

As the post-war changes of the Elephant reflect the wider social history of Britain’s Inner Cities, it also portrays a top-down narrative of governmental attitudes to social housing and the inner city. The sheer scale of the utopian vision of the Heygate illus-trates the ambitions and autonomy of local and regional government in the rebuilding of post-war London, providing Parker Morris standard homes for the low income inhabit-ants of the Victorian housing that survived. Following the outlawing of social housebuild-ing, the Right to Buy and stock transfer, London Boroughs are significantly con-strained in their abilities to build and provide affordable housing in a context of rising demand, only able to negotiate with the market and encourage Registered Social Landlord development. Policy mechanisms to boost affordable housing from the regional scale, the Greater London Authority, have proved ineffective in both Ken Livingstone’s regular compromise of his 50% target and Boris Johnson’s failure to achieve 50,000 affordable homes within his first three years.

The Elephant and Castle stands at the precipice of the urban regeneration that has reshaped large swathes of Britain’s inner cities in the last fifteen years. With a critical awareness of the potential temporal, spatial and human disjunc-tures that have often accompanied these processes, Elephant & Castle In Between attempts to ameliorate existing proposals with both interim and permanent design and use proposals that attempt to address this dissever-ment by emphasising the local.

This report is organized in 5 sections. The first one contextualizes the Elephant and Castle situation and the regeneration project. The second one is an Urban Design Analysis based on the goals as stated by Southwark Council and Lend Lease, and a critique to the implementation of such goals. Then, there is a SWOT analysis, based in the Urban Analysis produced in the stage one of this exercise. The fourth section presents our vision and urban design entry points, and finally the fifth section presents our seven proposals. Five of this proposals are grounded on the idea that the final image envi-sioned by the redevelopment plan assumes both a physical and social transformation of the area. However, it will take a long time to reach such transformation. The “in between time” will be considerable and likely to extend, so social processes should be considered in the interven-tion. The process that will occur during that “in between” will also transform the “final image” proposed. The other two are recommendation to the redevelopment plan in order to support more effectively these social transformations.

6

But social housing policy reveals a wider, ideological politics, of the legitimacy of the central presence of the low income within a ‘World City’, London a “Global centre of command” (Massey 2007: 39). Where once the Greater London Council defended inner London’s from commercial expansion, most notably at Coin Street, the Greater London Authority’s existence since 2000 has over-seen a period of the subtle sprawl of com-mercial development to fill a widely drawn ‘Central Activities Zone’ (the London Plan, 2004, 2007, 2011), evident in the continuous stream of “flagship regeneration” (Raco, 2009: 112) transformations of Paddington, King’s Cross and Battersea among smaller redevelopment areas. The Coalition Government’s restructuring of the Local Housing Allowance, removing the ability of many to live in central, private rented accom-modation, somewhat confirms a shift within London, towards a Parisian model where the poor are excluded to the suburbs.

The Elephant in the Room: Contradiction and Conflict

These residential and commercial pressures, encouraged by local, regional and central policy have sharpened considerably in the thirteen years since the decision to dehouse and demolish the Heygate estate, rendering centrally located, large scale social housing almost anachronistic.

Contradiction appears to characterize the area, not only as a testament to withered welfare statism, but its dual cognitive reso-nance as either a roundabout or a neighbour-hood, alongside varying perceptions of its cultural and economic health. It is these contradictions we wish to retain through the redevelopment, as a continuity of place.

There can be little doubt the decision to develop among these wider social pressures result in conflictual tensions arising locally and recognized by local politicians. This has already been seen in the community’s oppostition to regeneration as gentrification. Design interventions must acknowledge these tensions and seek to remedy them through inclusion and encounter. For this reason, as the material changes of the long term redevelopment begin, the diachronic perspective that informs our design analysis must begin with an appreciation for the rich texture of its rapidly disappearing past.

"This new deal with Lend Lease amounts to little more than throwing Heygate residents out of their homes and building new luxury housing which they won't be able to afford". Cllr Peter John, now Leader of South-wark Council, prior to the 2010 elec-tion

Figure 3. Heygate original architect’s sketches from 1969

Source: http://southwarknotes.wordpress.com/heygate-estate/

Figure 1. Elephant and Castle opportunity area in London.Figure 2. The Elephant and Castle Theatre 1850-1950.Figure 3. Heygate original architect’s sketches from 1969Figure 4. Housing proposed by Lend LeaseFigure 5. Street activity proposed by Lend Lease Figure 6. Park comparison: Lend Lease proposal and Tavistok Square, same scaleFigure 7. Green areas proposed by Lend LeaseFigure 8. Housing generation’ architect’s plans from 2009Figure 9. Liminal spacesFigure 10. Cultural activities in Elephant and CastleFigure 11. Strengths in the spaceFigure 12. Weakness in the spaceFigure 13. Opportunities in the spaceFigure 14. Threats in the spaceFigure 15. SWOT analysis summaryFigure 16. SWOT analysis summary in the spaceFigure 17: A survey map of the Walworth Road paralleled with a map of the world, indicating the origins of the independent shop proprietors in relation to their position on the streetFigure 18: Integrating neighbourhoods and boundariesFigure 19: Temporal aspect – the lacunas of developmentFigure 20: Strengthening community networksFigure 21: City connectivity vs. Local accessibilityFigure 22: Interventions and current usesFigure 23. Training: Localization of actors and interventionsFigure 24. Training: Presence of local activities in new developmentFigure 25. Food Market: Localization of actors and interventions. now, in between, futureFigure 26. Food Market in Elephant RoadFigure 27. Mobile Gardens: Localization of actors and interventions. now, in between, futureFigure 28. Allotments in HeygateFigure 29. Mobile gardens 1Figure 30. Mobile gardens 2Figure 31. Use of Shopfronts: Localization of actors and interventionsFigure 32. Use of Shopfronts: Strata ground floorFigure 33. Use of Heygate spaces: Localization of actors and interventionsFigure 34. Use of Heygate spaces.Figure 35. Expositions in Heygate spaces.Figure 36. RoundaboutFigure 37. Conceptual diagram

Table 1. A consideration of legal, market and policy realities and potential utopian flexibilitities surrounding the regeneration of the Opportunity AreaTable 2. Stage 1 themes and SWOT Analysis Table 3. Entry points and InterventionsTable 4. SWOT analysis and Interventions response

7

2. URBAN DESIGN ANALYSISRegeneration Agenda Critique

Alongside our SWOT analysis, we closely examined the numerous policy documents that have been published since the decision to regenerate to gain a deeper understanding of the proposals and identify any decisions that could invoke path dependencies later on.

.The critique thus examines the principles of the development as laid out in:• The draft Elephant & Castle Master Regen-eration Plan, (Version 16), published by June 2010 jointly by Southwark Council and Lend Lease.• The Southwark Draft Elephant & Castle Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) /Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF), 2011, on which public consultation closed on March 2 2012. • The Lend Lease Sustainability Pamphlet, 2012• The Lend Lease Influence of Consultation on the Masterplan 2012

As some of these documents are in draft form, it is possible one or more of these principles have been omitted, but the continuity of docu-ments does lend a degree of certainty.

2.1 A Mixed and Inclusive Neighbourhood

Lend Lease refers to affordable rooms, not units, creating an artifical trade-off between the number of affordable units and the total of ‘family sized’ housing across the split.

There is also implications in terms of the long term effect of the regeneration on social composition of the area.Figure 4. Housing proposed by Lend Lease

Source: http://www.elephantandcastle.org.uk/ 8

“We aim to deliver a genuinely mixed-used London neighbourhood [...] for all ages, background and means” The Lend Lease Sustainability Pamphlet, 2012, p 1.

“Provide a balanced and integrated mix of residential accommodation, across the full range of private and affordable housing” The Southwark Draft Elephant & Castle Supplementary Planning Docu-ment (SPD) /Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF), 2011, p 9.

"Up to 2,462 homes with a population of circa 4,000 people. A minimum of 25% of habitable rooms in the development will be affordable.” The Lend Lease Influence of Consultation on the Masterplan 2012, emphasis added.

2.2 Increasing the community’s economic opportunities

RetailThe arrival of new communities with new demands is likely to lead to pressures for higher value, comparison goods, it is pos-sible this could threaten the unique retail offers of the Elephant & Castle, particularly the diasporic retailers, products and other low revenue economies that have emerged due to the low rent per unit in the Shopping Centre.

While Southwark Council aims to maintain more money within a local multiplier effect, the proliferation of UK and international chains, potentially attracted by the changing income profile of the area is perhaps less likely to ensure cash is retained within the local economy.

2.3 Culture-Led Regeneration

The denotion of the area as a “cultural hub” suggests a narrow focus on the economically productive ‘creative industries’, perhaps ignoring wider culture and creative practices. However, the question is Whose identity is the project building.

Community, creativity and culture, if widely defined, are likely to decrease in the early stages of the development, particularly with the loss of participation space scheduled for early demolition, most notably the Crossways Church and the Community Club building on Rodney Place. As Stage 1 analysis indicated, the organisations using these premises are yet to find alternative spaces.

Figure 5. Street activity proposed by Lend Lease

Source: http://www.elephantandcastle.org.uk/ 9

“We aim to realize community, education, employment and business opportunities” The Lend Lease Sustainability Pamphlet, 2012 p 1.

“Provides opportunities for local indepen-dent retail businesses, reflective of the diversity of the surrounding residential populations, to contribute to the distinctive identity of E&C” The draft Elephant & Castle Master Regeneration Plan, (Version 16) 2010, p 9.

“Provides training and employment oppor-tunities for Southwark residents both during construction and in the completed scheme” The draft Elephant & Castle Master Regeneration Plan, (Version 16) 2010, p 9.

“Community, creativity and culture all will play a role in shaping the place that the Elephant and Castle will become, and in bringing forward the area’s potential as a cultural hub of London” Elephantandcastle.org.uk, The Lend Lease and Soundings information website.

2.4 A New Park for London: Green and Public Space

Lend Lease boast of “London’s first new park for 70 years”, yet Figure 6 illustrates this park is approximately the same size as a Blooms-bury square, yet it will be surrounding by a considerably denser population with little immediate alternative provision.

The development proposals also contain raised private outdoor spaces. The number of these have already been reduced follow-ing consultation, and it is preferable public space is open to all. Nonetheless, outdoor spaces with limited access may also provide an opportunity for spaces of participation e.g. children’s play areas, or raised allotments. Access to these spaces could be extended beyond residents of the development, perhaps to food businesses, providing valu-able activities for embedding the new build-ings within the wider neighbourhood.

Figure 7. Green areas proposed by Lend Lease

Source: http://www.elephantandcastle.org.uk/

Figure 6. Park comparison: Lend Lease proposal and Tavistok Square, same scale

Source: Authors

10

“We aim to enhance the natural environ-ment and increase the opportunity to interact with nature.” The Lend Lease Sustainability Pamphlet, 2012, p 1.

“Contains a range of high quality public spaces The draft Elephant & Castle Master Regeneration Plan, (Version 16) 2010, p 9.

3. SWOT ANALYSIS

Thus contextualised, we recognised the need for the often contradictory and heterotopic urban fabric of the Elephant and Castle to act as the linchpin for our SWOT analysis if we were to propose instrumental, lasting and meaningful design interventions. Accordingly, while simply pinpointing specific strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of each thematic would prove a vital jumping off point, the critical component of the SWOT would be capturing the complexity of the network by drawing connections amongst the themes, matching strengths with opportuni-ties and converting weaknesses and threats to inform the interventions themselves. We began this process by reflecting on the analyses from each of the Stage 1 themes.

Conceptually, the analyses focused around the socio-political factors involved in the production of space, the democratic process and the uneven power relations amongst actors involved, the vulnerability of various groups and places in a temporal spatiality, the scalability of the local/metropolitan/global trifecta, and the transformations of utopic ideals into realistic circumstance. Out of these conceptual analyses came our consid-erations for practical and quantifiable charac-teristics (please see Table 1). From there we were able to draw parallels amongst themes and connections between the strengths and opportunities and the weaknesses and threats (please see Figure 15 in page 20). Across themes, social diversity, strong com-

munity, glocal links, centrality, and available space were highlighted as strengths and opportunities that should be reflected into the vision and design interventions. Weaknesses and threats across themes were particularly apparent with regard to crime and safety, fragmentation, awareness, incoherency, stigmatisation and displacement. Boiled down, the fractionalisation of both the built and lived environments in time and space severely affected the working viability of the area at all scales. In order to effectively overcome this fragmentation, design entry points must address themes of temporal and spatial disconnection.

Table 2. Stage 1 themes and SWOT Analysis

Source: Authors

Com

mun

ity

Land

Val

ue

Cen

tralit

y/Ac

cess

ibilit

y

Soci

al D

iver

sity

Inde

pend

ent B

usin

esse

s

Glo

cal L

inks

Soci

al D

iver

sity

Uni

vers

ity

Avai

labl

e Sp

ace

Loca

tion

Cen

tralit

y/ac

cess

ibilit

y

Pote

ntia

l Glo

cal L

inks

Bran

ding

Con

nect

ion

with

Eas

t St.

Mar

ket

Crim

e/Sa

fety

Inco

here

ncy

Frag

men

tatio

n

Awar

enes

s/un

ders

tand

ing/

ease

/Inco

here

ncy

Car

-cen

tere

d D

esig

n

Ret

ail D

iver

sity

Jobs

Stig

mat

izat

ion

Dis

plac

emen

t

Top-

Dow

n Pl

anni

ng

Ove

r-Con

trol o

f Spa

ce

Housing X X X X X X X XEconomic Activity X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XPublic/Open Spaces X X X X X X X X X XIntrastructure/Movement X X X X X X X X X XLiminal Spaces X X X XCulture X X X X X X X X X X X X XVoids X X X X X X X X

WEAKNESSESOPPORTUNITIESSTRENGTHS THREATS

STA

GE

1 TH

EMES

11

Reflections on Urban analysis phase

-AffordabilityThe affordability of the new houses is under threat to the original residents.

-Unit typologyA full range of housing types are needed in this area and the units with 3 or 4 bedrooms are in high demand.

-Social diversityThe diversity of social and cultural differen-ces should be taken into account and their need should be catered for by the blocking of housing.

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

Strong communityThere are diverse cultural groups in Elephant & Castle and a strong cohe-sion has been developed within the community.

High land valueLand value is especially high owing to its strategic central position in the city.

High crime rateThe crime rate is relatively high due to the physical boundaries and ensuing ‘trouble spots’ of the Heygate.

Cultural DiversityThe provision of more housing – both in size and affordability – in the regeneration plan will open up possi-bilities for a more diverse area as a whole, and the community benefits that attend it.

StigmatizationPeople’s impression of the E&C has not been updated and is handicapping the area’s development.

Displacement of residents and retailersThe displacement of residents and retail-ers will damage economic growth and will continue to recede during the transforma-tion process.

Top-down planningPlanning method does not consider people’s needs at the local level.

3.1 URBAN ANALYSIS: HOUSING

KEYSTRENGTHSWEAKNESSOPPORTUNITIESTHREATS

Figure 8. Housing generation’ architect’s plans from 2009

Source: http://southwarknotes.wordpress.com/heygate-estate/

12

3.2 URBAN ANALYSIS: ECONOMIC ACTIVITY



-Glocal connections Many immigrants use the Elephant & Castle to develop businesses, giving the area a global link through flows of commodities and people.

-Independent retailersThe retailer’s are small, fairly tectonic busi-nesses without a strong cohesion with each other. However, there are many possibilities for development in this sector.

-Need for training, diversification of activities and employment opportunities The future development of this area requires more training and educational opportunities.

Centrality: The highly active economy is due to its key central location.Accessibility: The convenient and prolific public transportation of the area brings business.Social Diversity: Social diversity contributes to the multiple options of different retailers.Independent businesses The businesses here are mostly on a small scale so have diverse possibilities.Strong community: Plenty of opportunities to harness the cohesion developed by small groups within the community for collective, commerce-focused growth.Glocal links: The immigrant population contribute to the global-local links.The high land value is both an opportunity and a weakness to economic activities: On one hand it is possible to attract more “powerful” business but on the other it stands as a direct threat to the flourishing of smaller, less economically justifiable businesses.

Limited retail offer The limbo of the area leads to a limited retail offer.

Lack of jobsThe lack of jobs would harm the activity of the local economy.

High crime rateHigh crime rate stops outsiders participating in the local economic growth.

Lack of awareness of situationRetailer’s relative obliviousness of the situation is not good for them in making plans going forward.

UniversityThe students in the university could bring economic opportunities, both seasonal and long-term.Connection between E&C and East Street MarketThe connection between the Heygate and the EastSstreet Market could bring more economic opportunities and diversities.BrandingUsing Elephant & Castle as a brand could bring a new and exciting economic develop-ment point.

Displacement of residents and retailers The displacement of residents and retailers could result in the death of local economic activities during the transformation period.

Top-down planning approachThe top-down planning approach would lead to a total economic transformation in this area with little or no remaining connection to past endeav-ours.


OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

13

3.3 URBAN ANALYSIS: OPEN AND PUBLIC SPACES



AccessibilityThe public external open space surrounding residential areas is not located on the ground level, which limits the pedestrians ability to orientate themselves easily through the public open space.

LegibilityMost parts of the space are not organised, visually recognisable or in a coherent pattern.

Conceived Vs. Perceived spaceRecreational space, cultural/social space, commercial space, connective space.

Ownership Vs. UseThe difference between public and open spaces owned by people and spaces used by them

Shifting uses over timeThe change in land use over time from open to built space or from public to private use

Social diversityMultiple user groups of open and public spaces infer a diverse social community base

Old treesOld trees already in existence on the site are a good base for landscape design.

High crime rateUnused public and open spaces by community are a potential space for criminal acts to take placeFragmentationFragmented urban layout leads to contested open and public spacesIncoherent transport infrastructureBreaks spatial linkages to lead to contested open spacesDisconnection between E&C and East Street MarketMisses the opportunity of achieving a coherent and critical mass of commercial/social public lifeAccessability

Available spaceAn availability of space will allow for new uses to emerge

Top-down planningPlanning is not giving priority to people’s needs for open and public spaces.

Over control of spacesRestricts people’s sense of ownership of place and development of a people-driven community


OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

14

3.4 URBAN ANALYSIS: MOVEMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE AND ACCESSIBILITY Reflections on Urban analysis phase

Accessibility and MobilityThere are different levels of access to infras-tructure and spaces and movement around/between them.

Legibility and PermeabilityThe physical movement allowed by the network in the area, and the barriers and pathways of the network.

Pedestrian and cycle routesThere is a movement hierarchy of routes, connections & disconnections, and appro-priate infrastructure

FragmentationSegregation between spaces caused by transport network.

Tension: Local vs. Metropolitan transport nodeA variety of users and activities on the local level Vs. a transport hub which connects E&C with surrounding areas effectively.


CentralityLocated in London’s central area, articulated around one of the major traffic intersections of London

MobilityEfficient public transport connectivity, available interchange between differ-ent transport modes

Car-centred designTransport network design gives priority to car users and excludes other trans-port modes such as walking and cyclingNon-safeHigh accidents rates , spaces of exclu-sion are many potential places for criminal actsFragmentationThe transport network has resulted in a fragmented urban layoutIncoherent transport infrastructureProblems of obsolescence, lack of accessibility and connectivity

Location and CentralityE&C has been identified as an Opportunity Area in the London Plan because of the potential it has – due to location and make-up – to become a thriving urban Centre.

Strategic location and excellent access to transport links

Top-down planningCar based planning is not facilitating multimodal access for a heterogeneous public. (Walking and Cycling)

Local vs. Metropolitan transport nodeA transport hub which connects E&C with surrounding areas may exclude local residents and increase the area’s frag-mentation


OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

15

3.5 URBAN ANALYSIS: LIMINAL SPACES Reflections on Urban analysis phase

-Places of interaction amongst different groups

-Spaces that change use and character depending on those inhabiting them and which vary over time

-Significance of temporary and unexpected uses

-These uses highlight the conflict zones as well as areas of opportunity


Social diversityMultiple uses of liminal spaces by different groups suggest a diverse social community base

FragmentationFragmented urban layout leads to contested liminal spaces

Car centred designBreaks spatial linkages that leads to contested liminal space

Blurred and indeterminate boundaries The freedom of public space con-stantly threatens private-sector appro-priations (pavement dining, corporate events)

Available spaceAn availability of space will allow for new uses to emerge Displacement of residents

Displacing the residents will reduce the diversity and complexity of the existing liminal spaces


OPPORTUNITIES

THREATSFigure 9. Liminal spaces

Source: Authors

16

3.6 URBAN ANALYSIS: CULTURE, ARTS, PARTICIPATION AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Reflections on Urban analysis phase

- Temporary loss of community centreDisplacement of core community activities and networks

- Multicultural identitityWide variety of users and communities across the wider opportunity site

-Temporary uses for open spaceBrings attention to the cultural needs of the various communities


Social diversityMultiple cultural groups infer a diverse social community base

Independent businessesA strong network of cultural shops and restaurants

Strong communityOrganised, motivated and mobilised

Glocal linksNetworks extend beyond Elephant & Castle to include wider London and further to other parts of the globe

Perceptions of a high crime rateA stigmatization on the local cultures, with possible consequences for eco-nomic opportunities.

Available spaceAn availability of space will allow for the uses which emerged from the voids to become more prominent

UniversityStrong linkages to training and cultural opportunities with the local universities

Potential of glocal linksChance to expand and build on the existing networks

StigmatizationA stigmatization of the area will lessen the cultural opportunities of the area

Over control of spaceAn over control of space will limit the visibility and opportunities of cultural spaces


OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

Figure 10. Cultural activities in Elephant and Castle

Source: Stage 1, Cultural analysis group

17

3.7 URBAN ANALYSIS: VOIDS, EMPTIES, LEFTOVERS Reflections on Urban analysis phase

-Places of interaction amongst different groupsOffers possible uses to a wide variety of user groups

-Significance of temporary and unexpected usesHighlights the lack of consideration for certain uses within the planned environment

-The role of social and physical barriers in the creation of voidsCertain design decisions could lead to voids which may have limited opportunities for appropriation and use


Social diversityMultiple cultural groups suggest a diverse social community base

FragmentationFragmented urban layout leads to possible voids and empty spaces

Incoherent transport structureHas a tendency to break spatial link-ages, leading to voids and empty spaces

Available SpaceAn availability of space will allow for new uses to emerge

Displacement of residentsDisplacement of the residents will reduce opportunities afforded by the presence of voids

StigmatizationA stigmatization of the area will promote less liberal appropriation of the voids

Over control of spaceAn over control of space will limit the visibility and opportunities offered by voids


OPPORTUNITIESTHREATS

18

3.8 SWOT IN THE SPACEFigure 11. Strengths in the space Figure 12. Weakness in the space

Source: Authors

Figure 13. Opportunities in the space

Source: Authors

Figure 14. Threats in the space

19

Source: Authors

Figure 16. SWOT analysis summary in the spaceFigure 15. SWOT analysis summary

Source: Authors

BrandingLocationConnec-tion with East St. Market

Glocal links

Strong community

Independ-ent businesses

Social diversity

UniversityAvailable spaces

Land Value

Crime \ Safety Unemploy-

ment

Lack of aware-ness

Limited retail offer

Incoherency

Stigmatiza-tion

Overcon-trol of spaces

Top-down planning

Displace-ment


OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Centrality and accessibility

Fragmentation

Car-centred design

20

4. VISION AND URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES

THE ELEPHANT: LOCALLY GROWN, GLOBALLY NETWORKED

Our vision for the development is a commu-nity that continues the strong local sense of place and identity while maximizing its diasporic links and other strengths in the global economy so concentrated on London.

The slogan ‘Locally Grown, Globally Net-worked’ refers to this vision of local economic and cultural strength from the bottom up, each word containing multiple imaginings of the dynamics of the new community:

LOCALLY Design interventions should prioritise the local experience over the metropolitan role and reputation. If executed progressively this will serve the wider London image anyway by maintaining and nurturing an authentic com-munity - something increasingly valued in the present day urban context:• Respect to local history: retaining and explaining culture and heritage• Affordability: maintaining a mixed, stable community of people with varying lengths of connection to the area• Maintaining the income, ethnic and age diversity of the area• Supporting and validating local memory and cultural expression

GROWN Appreciating development as a slow, diachronic process, with design interventions ‘now’, ‘in-between’ and ‘after’, and also reflective of the Masterplan’s goals for a ‘flourishing’ urban quarter:• The desire of local economic growth to allevi-ate social deprivation of existing population• Opportunities to attain new skills, catalyzing the personal growth of residents• Growing the capacity of the local commu-nity and voluntary sector• Growing the Creative offer, employment and economy of the local area• A place to grow up – a ‘home’ to new gen-erations, sustainable communities with family-sized homes• Food growing: sustainability, participation, education and glocal connectivity

GLOBALLYStrengthening the Elephant & Castle within the reality of a Global or ‘World City’;• Retaining and maximizing the economic, social and cultural contribution of the Elephant’s multicultural community. • London ranked second by the Global City Index - London is a node for the flows of global capital but the financial sector also supports a massive low-wage sector of the labour market. A global city with central affordable accommodation for all

NETWORKEDMaximising the physical, social, cultural and technological connections of the neighbourhood to the wider world:• Fostering harmony in new social constellations through participation: preventing barriers between owner-occupiers and social housing residents. • Increasing the ease of public transport inter-change• Opportunities in an increasingly atomized labour market.• Connections across the “glocal diaspora”: a nexus for financial, human, knowledge and cultural flows and interchanges (Castells, 1996).Figure 17: A survey map of the Walworth Road paralleled with a map of the world, indicating the origins of the indepen-dent shop proprietors in relation to their position on the street

Source: Hall (2011) 21

From the findings of our SWOT analysis, and the vision of a ‘Locally Grown, Globally Networked’ development allowed us to elucidate four key principles that would serve as guidelines for our design interventions. These principles are:

1. Integrating neighbourhoods and boundariesThere is a recognition by all actors, including Lend Lease, of the importance of integrating the redevelopment with neighbouring areas, this is translated as street continuity, but doesn’t necessarily consider wider spatial and social continuity. Urban design must recognise and embrace the potentiality of a symbiotic and reciprocal relationship, between the redevelopment area and the surrounding neighbourhoods.

2. Temporal aspect – the lacunas of devel-opmentThe final image envisioned by the redevelop-ment plan assumes both a physical and social transformation of the area. However, it will take a long time to reach such transfor-mation. The “in between time” will be consid-erable and likely to extend, so social processes should be considered in the inter-vention. The process that will occur during that “in between” will also transform the “final image” proposed.

3. Strengthening community networksThe area contains a variety of communities with different identities and cultures. This entry point refers to the importance of recog-nising these communities as the main network that will support the transformation of the area. Therefore, is important to not just consider these networks, but boost them through the intervention.

4. City connectivity vs. Local accessibil-ity Elephant & Castle contains a spatial tension between its local and strategic functions. On the one hand, it has a role in terms of metro-politan connectivity, acting as a transport node. On the other, there is a commitment to improve the condition of pedestrian and cyclists. It is important to balance these tensions and emphasise the local where possible.

Figure 18: Integrating neighbourhoods and boundaries

Source: Authors

Figure 19: Temporal aspect – the lacunas of development

Source: Authors

Figure 20: Strengthening community networks

Source: Authors

Figure 21: City connectivity vs. Local accessibility

Source: Authors22

5. INTERVENTION SITES & DESIGN RESPONSE

ENTRY POINTS / PRINCIPLES Trai

ning

Food

Mar

ket

Gar

deni

ng

Use

of S

hopf

ront

s

Use

of H

eyga

te s

pace

s

Hou

sing

Typ

olog

y

Rou

ndab

out &

Roa

ds

Neighborhoods/Boundaries X X X XTemporal Aspects/Lacuna X X X X XStrengthening Community Networks X X X X X XCity Connectivity, Local Accessbility X X

INTERVENTIONSTable 3. Entry points and Interventions

Table 4. SWOT analysis and Interven-tions response

Source: AuthorsSource: Authors

We defined 7 projects that address the process of transformation of Elephant and Castle, in order to challenge the social composition that the Lend Lease regenera-tion plan proposes. Five of these projects are related with community organization and social behaviors, in order to transform the "in between" process of the area and thus the final outcome. The other two are recommen-dation to the redevelopment plan in order to supportmore effectively these social trans-formations. All of them challenge the future image proposed by the plan, through sub-versive practices that redefine it.

Com

mun

ity

Land

Val

ue

Cen

tralit

y/Ac

cess

ibilit

y

Soci

al D

iver

sity

Inde

pend

ent B

usin

esse

s

Glo

cal L

inks

Soci

al D

iver

sity

Uni

vers

ity

Avai

labl

e Sp

ace

Loca

tion

Cen

tralit

y/ac

cess

ibilit

y

Pote

ntia

l Glo

cal L

inks

Bran

ding

Con

nect

ion

with

Eas

t St.

Mar

ket

Crim

e/Sa

fety

Inco

here

ncy

Frag

men

tatio

n

Awar

enes

s/un

ders

tand

ing/

ease

/Inco

here

ncy

Car

-cen

tere

d D

esig

n

Ret

ail D

iver

sity

Jobs

Stig

mat

izat

ion

Dis

plac

emen

t

Top-

Dow

n Pl

anni

ng

Ove

r-Con

trol o

f Spa

ce

Training X X X X X X X X X X X X

Food Market X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Gardening X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Use of Storefronts X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Use of Heygate spaces X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Housing Typology X X X X X X X

Roundabout X X X X X X X X X X X X X

STRENGTHS OPPORTUNITIES WEAKNESSES THREATS

INTE

RVEN

TIO

NS

Figure 22: Interventions and current uses

Source: Authors

Projects 1.Training2. Food market3. Mobile gardens4. Use of storefronts5. Use of Heygate empty spaces

Universities / higher educationSchoolsCommunity facilitiesRetailGreen areasBuilding sitesEmpty units

Current uses

23

5.1. TRAINING

The need to diversify and increase the employ-ment offer appears to be the main challenge in terms of economic development of the area. A training programme would promote the creation of new capabilities and skills, and should be particularly focused at current residents of the Opportunity Area. This programme should be delivered in partnership with the local Universi-ties (London South Bank University and the London College of Communication) alongside Southwark College, in order to boost the links between the educational sector and the regen-eration. Additionally, programmes targeting spe-cific groups, particularly the 18-24 demographic should be developed in partnership with local institutions including local schools, pupil referral units, the probation service, JobCentre Plus and the youth organisations that already exist on the area.The training program could predate the physical developmentIt must have a constant presence both during transformation process and con-tinue after the regeneration, with a particular focus on embedding security in terms residents’ livelihoods and adaptation to the ongoing social and physical transformation.f economic development of the area is the diver-sification and increase of employment sources. A training programme promotes the creation of new capabilities and tools, especially to the currents residents of the area and their liveli-hoods needs. This program will be managed for the University of Southwark, in order to boost the links among the university and the new development. Additionally, the program will

include another groups as the youngsters, and institutions as school, job centre and the youth centre that already exist on the area.The training program can start immediately. However, it has to have a constant presence both during the transformation process and after the regeneration, with special focus on the residents’ livelihoods and their social adapta-tion to the physical transformation ongoing.

HOW DOES IT COMPLY WITH THE VISION?

GROWN:Opportunities to attain new skills, catalys-ing the personal growth of residents.Actors: Southbank University, local busi-nesses, youth, schools, Job Centre, youth centre

NETWORKED:Connections across the “glocal Diaspora”: a nexus for financial, human, knowledge and cultural flows and interchanges. Actors: Local businesses, traders, resi-dents and growers

HOW DOES IT SHAPE THE FUTURE?It will contribute to the adaptation and inte-gration of current residents into the new physical structures as a process of social and economic adaptation. It will aim to permanently embed existing businesses in the new scheme.

Figure 23. Training: Localization of actors and interventions

Source: Authors

Figure 24. Presence of local activities in new development

Source: Authors 24

5.2. FOOD MARKET

Street food brings street life. This project seeks to integrate different communities in the public space in a long-term project that can transform the character of the area, consolidating its multi-cultural nature. This street market will be consti-tuted by the inclusion of local restaurants, some workers of East Street Market and Shopping Mall Market, and the various immigrants from different parts of the world that could be included through the training program.The market will take place in Elephant Road, a small street along the elevated railways that is between the Heygate and the Shopping Mall and tube. Currently there is a fence along it, and the market would be a way to reactivate the street life. In the mid-term, Tribeca Square will be finished and the market can occupy this space as a way to integrate the future develop-ment to this area. HOW DOES IT COMPLY WITH THE

VISION?

LOCALLY:Respect to local history: retaining and explaining culture and heritage.Actors: Traders, local community of diverse immigrant groups, Mobile Garden-ers.

GROWN:Growing the Creative offer, employment and economy of the local area.Actors: Traders, local and city-wide com-munity

HOW DOES IT SHAPE THE FUTURE?Through the immediate establishment of a food market, the provision of a low-cost social activity will ensure the use of new spaces, preventing neglect or a void during transition. This intervention links and ensures an existing, ‘organic’ activity to the future development, and will strengthen the connection between the new Tribeca Square with Elephant Road. The market should include existing caterers, increasing the visibility of multicultural identity within London.

Figure 25. Food Market: Localization of actors and interventions. now, in between, future

Source: Authors

Figure 26. Food Market in Elephant Road

Source: Authors 25

5.3. MOBILE GARDENS

Currently, several open spaces across the area and especially within the Heygate estate are being used as vegetable gardens by locals. With the redevelopment of the site, these vegetable gardens are going to be lost and not replaced, even though they represent an element of the identity of the place. By sub-stituting them with mobile gardens, that can be moved across the site during the construc-tion phases, this element of identity could be maintained to some extent: the mobile gardens can adapt to the new spaces in paral-lel with the evolution of the neighbourhood. This intervention can be realized drawing on an already established Mobile Gardeners group (located in Wansey Street), squats (in Pullens) and youngsters and retired people from the community.


GROWN:Food growing: sustainability and participation. Actors: Local community – residents, schools, youth, Capital Growth, Elephant Urban Forest, Mobile Gardeners.

NETWORKED:Fostering harmony through participation: preventing barriers between owner-occupiers and social housing residents.Actors: Local residents and local community.

HOW DOES IT SHAPE THE FUTURE?

It will maintain a continuous element of identity during the whole process, by enhancing the appropriation of both liminal and final public space.

Figure 27. Mobile Gardens: Localization of actors and interventions. now, in between, future

Source: Authors

Figure 28. Allotments in Heygate

Source: Authors

Figure 29. Mobile gardens 1 Figure 30. Mobile gardens 2

26

5.4. USE OF SHOPFRONTS

Many empty storefronts are to be found in the opportunity area. These are not only derelict, old retail units (as in London Road or in Wandsworth Road), but also in recently completed buildings (as in the Strata Tower, or in New Kent Road). By establishing a partnership between the owners and the Council, these spaces can be rented out at subsidized, limited term rates to local people. This will help start up and embed new busi-nesses in the area. The project can be linked to the above mentioned training structures, in collaboration with the universities and the job centres.


LOCALLY:Affordability: maintaining a mixed, stable community of people with varying lengths of connection to the area.Actors: The council, entrepreneurs (local residents and local community, past residents), Southbank University students, Space Makers NetworkGROWN:The desire of local economic growth to alleviate social deprivation of existing population.Actors: The council, EAN, local entre-preneursNETWORKED:Opportunities in an increasingly atom-ized labour market.Actors: Southwark Council, students, local youth, local community


It will contribute to the overall economic situation of the Elephant & Castle, helping start-up business and empower-ing local entrepreneurs. It will also improve the articulation of buildings at street level.

Figure 31. Use of Shopfronts: Localization of actors and interventions

Source: Authors

Figure 32. Use of Shopfronts: Strata ground floor

Source: Authors 27

5.5. USE OF HEYGATE SPACES

The demolition of the Heygate estate will happen in phases and won’t be completed in the mid-term. In the meanwhile, most of its spaces can be used actively for exhibitions or community activities, in collaboration with the Council, the nearby Universities, and community associations. This will attract people from a wider area to the Heygate, limiting its potential use, a hole in the urban tissue. This temporary use can engender a shift in the perception of the place, which can be maintained after the site itself has changed face.


LOCALLY:Supporting and validating local memory and cultural expression.Actors: Southbank University, EAN, Southwark Council, local cultural groups/youth centres, residents.

GROWN:Growing the capacity of the local commu-nity and voluntary sector.

Actors: Southbank University, EAN, Southwark Council, local cultural groups, residents.


It will contribute to creating a different memory in order to change the position of Heygate in the collective imagination, and counter the stigmatization that affected it.

Figure 33. Use of Heygate spaces: Localization of actors and interventions

Source: AuthorsFigure 34. Use of Heygate spaces.

Source: Authors

Figure 35. Expositions in Heygate spaces.

Source: Authors 28

29

5.6. HOUSING TYPOLOGIES

Prior to their evacuations, the Heygate Estate and surrounding areas housed large families in multi-bedroom flats. The proposed Lend Lease plan for new housing only allows for ten percent to be three-bedroom units. This will drastically change the make-up of the community currently residing in the neighbourhood as it will provide only for double-income-no-kids-yet couples (DINKYs) and smaller families. Consequently, we propose that the number of three-bedroom units be increased and that four-bedroom units be reinstated into the plans.


This will help to enable the retention of the old families while attracting potential community members more akin to those already there, and thus will help to strengthen the urban fabric rather than destroy it. It will increase the diversity of the popu-lation in the new Elephant & Castle.

5.7. ROUNDABOUT AND NEW KENT ROAD

Major structural interventions on the thor-oughfares of the area are currently needed as the car-centered design impedes on movement and flow around the area. In particular, the Elephant & Castle roundabout and New Kent Road should be rearranged to become more pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly. This intervention includes the removal of the subways at the Elephant & Castle and their substitution with ground-level crossings in conjunction with a partial closure of the roundabout, the broadening of New Kent Road pavements and the creation of cycle lanes.


It will improve the links between the Heygate site and the rest of the neigh-bourhood, while continuing to prioritize the local dimension.

Figure 36. Roundabout

Source: Authors


GROWN:A place to grow up – a ‘home’ to new generations, sustainable communities with family-sized homesActors: Lend Lease, Southwark, previous residents, future residents

GLOBALLY:London ranked second by the Global City Index - London is a node for the flows of global capital but the financial sector also supports a massive low-wage sector of the labour market. A global city with central affordable accommodation for allActors: Southwark, Lend Lease, EAN, previous residents, future residents

LOCALLY:Maintaining the income, ethnic and age diversity of the areaActors: Southwark, Lend Lease, EAN, previous residents, future residents


GLOBALLY:Increasing the ease of public transport interchangeActors: Lend Lease, Southwark, TFL, Network Rail

NOW REGENERATION PROCESS FINALIMAGE

NOW REGENERATION PROCESS

HOUSING TYPOLOGIES

ROUNDABOUT

TRAININGFOOD MARKET

MOBILE GARDENSUSE OF STOREFRONTSUSE OF HEYGATE SPACE

CO

-PR

OD

UC

EDFU

TUR

E

CONCLUSIONS

30

Figure 37. Conceptual diagram

Source: Authors

Over the course of the Elephant & Castle In Between, we have aimed to nurture the growth of small-scale, local transformations in order to ensure the large-scale, metropoli-tan and global networks necessary to provide for the area’s long-term vitality. Current proposals apply a hazy definition of ‘commu-nity’, and do not take into account the com-plexity and diversity that already exist, let alone include them in future plans. From the Opportunity Area’s history to our SWOT analysis, it is clear that these communities host a wealth of strengths and opportunities already ingrained in the urban fabric. It is also clear that with the realities of the current market and the slow approach of develop-ment, the key to the area’s future success lies in its ability to work within the lacuna of development. Accordingly, we widened the vision to include the multiplicity in actors and scales, uses and existing communities and, through design principles and interventions, have pursued the creation of a ‘good city’ by easing the transition from the temporal realm

into the reality of the developed plans. Each intervention - from the training center to the New Kent Road - strives to harness the area’s undeniable strengths into the future plans; leveraging the benefits of the new development while maintaining a sense of place for its existing residents. By weaving the temporal into the future, we have presented a final image that aims to create rather than deconstruct, and shift slowly into the future without disconnecting from its past.

‘Our current times see a further signifi-cant wave of change through proposals for new developments and large scale regeneration. […]Those involved appreci-ate that this is a long-term journey and are keen to ensure that the momentum, built up over the last year, is captured and generates the inspiration for the next stage’ (Elephant Amenity Network Interim Use, 2011: 6).

Lend

Lea

se p

roje

ctA

ltern

ativ

e pr

opos

al

REFERENCES

Bibliography

B Brolin (1975) The failure of modern architecture New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co

M Castells (1996) The Rise of the Networked Society New York: Wiley

I Chambers, (1990) Border dialogues — journeys in postmodernity. London: Comedia

D Massey (2007) World City Polity Press: Cambridge

A Minton (2009) Ground Control: Fear and Loathing in the Twenty-First Century City London: Penguin

M Raco (2009) ‘Local government and the politics of flagship regeneration in London: the development of Paddington’ in R Imrie, L Lees & M Raco eds (2009) Regenerating London: Governance, Sustainability and Community in a Global City Abingdon: Routledge

Policy Documents

Departmenr of Communities and Local Government The Index of Multiple Deprivation 20-7 available here: http://data.gov.uk/dataset/index_of_multiple_deprivation_imd_2007 [Accessed 17 March 2012)

London Borough of Southwark (2011) Core Strategy London: London Borough of Southwark

London Borough of Southwark and Lendlease (June 2010), The draft Elephant & Castle Master Regenera-tion Plan, (Version 16), London: London Borough of Southwark

London Borough of Southwark (2011) The Draft Elephant & Castle Local Development Framework/Opportunity Area Policy Document, London: London Borough of Southwark

London Borough of Southwark (2011) The Draft Elephant & Castle Local Development Framework/Opportunity Area Equalities Impact Assessment, London: London Borough of Southwark

Lend Lease (2012) Sustainability Pamphlet/ Consulta-tion Board London: Lend Lease and Soundings (Accessed February 2012, removed by 16 March 2012)

Lend Lease (2012) Influence of Consultation on the Masterplan London: Lend Lease and Soundings (Accessed February 2012, removed by 16 March 2012)

News Articles [All last accessed 17 March 2012]

M Blunden “The Makover of ‘muggers paradise’ Heygate Estate”, the Evening Standard 22 February 2012 available at: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/london/makeover-of-muggers-paradise-heygate-estate-7445697.html

S Moss ‘The Death of a Housing Ideal The Guardian 4 March 2011 available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/mar/04/death-housing-ideal

O Hatherley ‘ After the Heygate, a grey future awaits’ The Guardian 8 February 2011 available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/08/heygate-estate-housing-gentrification

SE1.co.uk ‘Boris refuses to back removal of Elephant and Castle roundabout’ 12 July 2011, available at: http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/5407

SE1.co.uk ‘Southwark still pursuing Elephant Civic Square Plan says regeneration boss’ 19 July 2011, available at: http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/5430

SE1.co.uk ‘Will Boris cough up for Elephant & Castle Tube Station plan after all?’ available at: http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/5821

WebsitesLend Lease & Soundings ‘Community Website’, available at: www.elephantandcastle.org.uk [Accessed: 16 March 2012]The Elephant Amenity Network available at: www.elephantamenity.wordpress.com [Accessed: 16 March 2012]Southwark Notes available at: southwarknotes.wordpress.com [Accessed: 16 March 2012]SE1.co.uk available at www.london-se1.co.uk [Accessed: 16 March 2012]

31

Transforming Elephant and Castle in between

Documents

castle figure

interventions figure

space figure

heygate figure

lease figure

street figure

roundabout figure

future figure