R-Urban Development Approach: Responding to Efficiency and Sustainability - Research Proposal Example

R-Urban Development Approach: Responding to Efficiency and Sustainability Total Number of Words: 5,000 Chapter Introduction 1.1 Introduction Globalization significantly changed the way we run and manage our wealth, the economies, civilization, trade, culture, religion, and humanities. As the number of human population increases, demand for the available goods and services also increase. To ensure that there will be sufficient land area to meet the increasing needs of each person, land developers and societal planners are continuously being challenged to create an entirely new paradigm, strategies and approaches in the way people should utilize the existing space and resources available in our environment. Basically, one of the newly proposed approaches is the use of the R-urban strategy (Petcou and Petrscu, 2011). Currently promoted throughout the different European cities, the concept of R-urban aims to create a local network that will link a series of urban activities through the use of the available land (Urban Tactics, n.d.). At first glance, the definition of R-urban may seem to be very complex. However, the concept of R-urbanization is generally pretty simple. First of all, one should be able to understand that R-urban planning focuses on how one should create a network of local and closed ecological systems that could support urban activities (R-Urban wick, n.d.). As such, the R-urban planners should be able to create efficient mobility that could support the nation’s economy, social, environmental, and cultural concerns (Petcou and Petrscu, 2011; Constantin PETCOU, n.d.; Urban Tactics, n.d.). The concept of R-urbanization is more than the need to create an easy access between urban agriculture, technologies, and industry to the place where people live (R-Urban wick, n.d.). In the process of attempting to integrate communities to fulfill the existing human needs, it is equally important on the part of the land developers and societal planners to incorporate the need to protect our ecological system (R-Urban wick, n.d.). Basically, the importance of protecting our ecological system is what makes R-urbanization sounds a little more complicated. As such, R-urban planners and developers should consider ways on how they can promote people’s quality of life by preserving the quality of soil and water as well as the need to prevent further degradation of our landscape and natural resources (Rurbance, 2013). Petcou and Petrscu (2011, p. 64) explained that the letter ‘R’ in R-urban represents the need to ‘reduce, reuse, and recycle’ as well as the need to ‘repair, re-design, rethink, and re-assemble’. Therefore, among the few most effective strategies to promote renewability and sustainability in our environment is to include the need to incorporate the importance of promoting the practice of re-using, repairing, and recycling in R-urban planning (Constantin PETCOU, n.d.; R-Urban wick, n.d.). In the process of re-using, repairing, and recycling used materials, R-urban can play a significant role in reducing the risks of global warming as well as the long-term social and economic consequences of depleting our natural resources (i.e. fossil fuels, etc.) (Petcou and Petrscu, 2011; Constantin PETCOU, n.d.). In line with this, one of the best ways to protect our environment from further degradation is to create a balance between consumption and production (R-Urban wick, n.d.). It means that people should produce products just enough for the public to consume; and vice versa. To avoid future socio-economic and environmental problems, the R-urban planner should also consider the projected increase in the future population growth rate, the risks for employment crisis, housing development, geo-political conflicts as well as the risks for socio-economic problems (Petcou and Petrscu, 2011). To sum it up, R-urbanization is all about being able to plan and create a landscape architecture that will help us make use of the available land resources in a more efficient and more sustainable way (Vanempten, 2009). 1.2 Purpose of the Study London is one of the places in the United Kingdom that has been subjected to R-urban planning. For this reason, the main purpose of this study is to examine the progress of R-urbanization model that is currently present in Hackney Wick, East London in UK. 1.3 Research Objectives As a small town, Hackney Wick is facing serious problems because of the limitations in the available public space (Fior, 2012). In line with this, the main objective of this study is to closely analyze the extent in which Hackney Wick was able to adapt the concept of R-urban planning. As such, the following sub-objectives will be considered throughout the synopsis: 1. To be able to map the demographic distribution and geographical location of Hackney Wick; 2. To identify and discuss all the existing R-urban initiatives that has taken place in Hackney Wick; 3. To examine how far Hackney Wick is from being able to make use of the available land resources in a more efficient and more sustainable way. 1.4 Research Questions The following research questions will be addressed in this synopsis: 1. Where exactly is Hackney Wick located? 2. Has the demographic distribution or socio-economic profile of people living in Hackney Wick improved over time? 3. What are the previous and on-going R-urban planning initiatives taking place in Hackney Wick, East London? 4. Has Hackney Wick been successful in terms of being an R-urban society? 5. What are some ideas or suggestions that can further improve Hackney Wick as a successful R-urban society? Chapter 2 – Literature Review 2.1 Mapping the Demographic Distribution and Geographical Location of Hackney Wick Hackney Wick is situated in the boundary of London Borough of Tower Hamlet and London Borough of Hackney in East London. In history, Hackney Wick is situated adjacent to the 2012 London Olympic Site (Fior, 2012; Zlatanova et al., 2012, p. 169). Because of the 2012 Olympic Games, some pavements of Hackney Wick had been widened by at least 3 metres wide (Fior, 2012). Over time, significant changes in its infrastructure benefited not only the residents but also the industry sector. In late 1800s, people who lived in Hackney Wick were a mixture of very poor and having a comfortable life (Charles Booth, 2014). Shown on figure I, community areas marked with dark blue and light blue shades are those residents living in ‘very poor’ and ‘poor’ condition respectively. Marked with purple are mixture of people who are poor and those who are living a comfortable life (Charles Booth, 2014). (See Figure I – Socio-Geographical Map of Hackney Wick between 1898 to 1899 on page 6) Figure I – Socio-Geographical Map of Hackney Wick between 1898 to 1899 Source: Charles Booth, 2014 Since the early part of the 18th century, the Hackney Wick has been focused on improving its industrial zone. During the middle part of the 18th century, Hackney Wick was not only known for being the centre of industrialization but also became one of the most preferred locations close to bodies of water (Brickfields, n.d.). Basically, one of the main reasons why some people chose to live in Hackney Wick, away from other cities and suburban locations, is because of the continuous improvement in its transportation system (Brickfields, n.d.). In 2000, city planners were able to segregate commercial centres from the London Stadium, Arena Field, cold stores, and the residential area among others (Charles Booth, 2014). Notice in 2000, the socio-economic condition of people in Hackney Wick had significantly improved. First of all, only a small part of this area lives in poverty (marked in light blue). Majority of its population now-a-days are living in upper-middle and upper class society (marked in yellow) (Charles Booth, 2014). (See Figure II – Socio-Geographical Map of Hackney Wick in 2000 on page 8) Figure II – Socio-Geographical Map of Hackney Wick in 2000 Source: Charles Booth, 2014 2.2 Previous and On-going R-urban Planning Initiatives in Hackney Wick, East London Hackney Wick is a small town with some factories, civic amenities and residential areas (Fior, 2012). As a result of the continuously improvement in its industrialization and the substantial increase in its population, Hackney Wick started facing problems related to health, traffic congestion, safety, and pollution (Zlatanova et al., 2012, p. 169). Likewise, Hackney Wick is also being challenged by its limited public space (Fior, 2012). Aside from the need to improve mobilization, Hackney Wick has undergone a lot of mapping changes in order to solve problems related to housing issues, challenges associated with being sustainable, noise pollution coming from the airports, environmental degradation, and access to schools, local authorities, industries, ports and the London City Airport (Zlatanova et al., 2012, p. 169). In relation to the previous and on-going R-urban planning initiatives in Hackney Wick, East London, the following sub-section will focus on discussing development in residential areas, recreation and heritage centres, industrial area, recycling hub, and transportation networks. 2.2.1 Residential Area Up to the present time, the residential density in Hackney Wick remains low (Fior, 2012). 2.2.2 Development of Recreation and Heritage Centres During the end part of 19th century, city planners decided to create a balance between work and life by increasing the number of music halls, theatres, and parks within the vicinity of Hackney Wick (Brickfields, n.d.). 2.2.3 Development in Industrial Area 2.2.4 Recycling Hub 2.2.5 Transportation / Mobility In 1970s, Hackney Wick was also under mobility or transportation improvements. However, due to insufficient government budget, the city planners back then were unable to create toll roads, expand nor widen the capacity of the motorway network, nor create more Greenfield road buildings (OECD, 2007, pp. 475–476). Passing through the North London Line, the London Overground officially opened the Hackney Wick railway station in May 1980 so as to serve the transportation needs of the people (Butt, 1995, p. 111). Since part of the London buses is connected to the Hackney Wick railway station (i.e. route 276), the number of people using the train each year has significantly increased from 68,367 between 2004 to 2005 up to 1.307 million between 2012 to 2013 (Office of Rail Regulation, 2014). Back in 1970s, the process of building new routes was not popular in urban planning (OECD, 2007, p. 476). As a result, government officials in the past were not keen in financially supporting the infrastructure developments in Hackney Wick. (See Figure III – Usage of National Railway from 2004 to 2013 below) Figure III – Usage of National Railway from 2004 to 2013 Source: Office of Rail Regulation, 2014 In relation to problems related to traffic congestion, the city governments together with the land owners are charging vehicle owners with parking fees. Depending on location and private owners, the parking fees throughout the vicinity of Hackney Wick ranges between £5.60 to £43.80 per day (Just Park, 2014). Basically, the use of this particular strategy will encourage more people to use the public transportation instead of their private vehicles. (See Table I – Parking Fees throughout Hackney Wick Area below) Table I – Parking Fees throughout Hackney Wick Area Location Parking Fees (£) 1 Cadogan Terrace 10.00 2 Mallard Close 10.00 3 Mallard Close - Driveway 12.50 4 Shalbourne Square - Driveway 11.50 5 Danesdale Road - Driveway 10.50 6 Homerton & Olympic Site 10.50 7 Hornbeam Square 31.50 8 Sadler Place 9.00 9 Canary Wharf / Olympics Car Space 9.50 10 Hewison Street 7.50 11 Old Ford Road 7.50 12 Hewison Street 5.00 13 Hewison Street - Driveway 10.50 14 Printers Mews 5.60 15 Hewison Street 7.00 16 Printers Mews 9.00 17 Hewison Street 7.50 18 Hewison Street 9.00 19 Blondin Street 9.00 20 Blondin Street 14.00 21 Fairfield Road 13.80 22 Fiarfield Road 10.00 23 Rowse Close 11.50 24 Wrexham Road 9.50 25 Eastside Mews 43.80 Source: Just Park, 2014 Chapter 3 – Discussion Today, increase in environmental protection creates more challenge particularly when it comes to building new infrastructure (OECD, 2007, p. 476). Aside from the need to protect cultural heritage, city planners and developers should also consider issues related to carbon emissions, noise pollution, natural resources and biodiversity when creating further improvements on existing infrastructure (OECD, 2007, p. 476). Chapter 4 – Conclusion and Recommendations Read More