urban metabolic growth models

abstractdom

ainm

ethodologyintroduction

design scenarioconclusion

appendix141

abstractdom

ainm



appendix143

docklands, london, UK

144

LONDON, UK

The London Docklands are located geographically within a tempereteclimate

abstractdom

ainm



appendix145

tehran, iran

london, uk

northern iran

146

London

Docklands

INTRODUCTION

Located in the east of London along a strong curve in the river Thames, are the Docklands (fig. 5,2,a).

“The changes that have been made to the London Docklands in the past 25 years have been among the most striking and most dynamic developments in the world. The London Docklands Development Corporation (1981-1998) played a huge role in the area’s transformation, turning what used to be industrial wasteland into a vibrant area for commerce, residential life, and tourism.

The area of the Docklands is over eight and a half square miles, all of which have been affected by the new developments in businesses and transportation. The Docklands represent one of the largest concentrations of twentieth and twenty-first century architecture in the world, and with new projects in development now, it will continue to grow, benefiting not only the area but London as a whole (fig. 5.2.c).

fig. 5.2.a: London, Docklands

source: TopSat consortium, copyright QinetiQ

abstractdom

ainm



appendix147

The history of the London Docklands is a dates back to the early 17th century when the first docks were built as a part of the East India Company. The number of docks began to grow, experiencing a boom during the 1800s (fig. 5.2.b). The Docklands reached their peak in the 1930s when over 100,000 people were connected to the Port of London through their jobs.

However, in the post-World War II years, people began to see the decline and closure of docks around the world, and the docklands of London were no different. New technology, such as containerization and air transport had made the docks seem antiquated and no longer as useful as they once were. Many docks around this area were closed in the 1960s, leaving behind empty warehouses and creating a very uninviting environment.

London

Docklands

fig. 5.2.b: London, Docklands 1899 fig. 5.2.c: London, Docklands 2010

148

By 1981, 59.7% of lands and buildings that fell under the control of the London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC) were considered derelict, vacant, under-used, or unused. The area had experience a severe loss of jobs from 1978-1983, as the skills of the people in the area were not appropriate for new industries. The condition of much of the property in the Docklands was so bad that most investors did not wish to take a gamble on trying to develop this property. Plus, there was very little transportation between the Docklands and Central London, meaning that if the area was to be refurbished, investors would also have to pay for transportation improvements to make the area more accessible, a project that would tack on millions, if not billions, of pounds. The Docklands were in a downward spiral, and without intervention, the situation looked grim (fig. 5.2.d).

However, in 1981, hope came for the Docklands. The London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC) was founded in the Local Government Planning and Land Act of 1980 with four primary goals: making the lands and buildings useful once more, encouraging new industry and commerce in the area, ensuring good housing and amenities for its residents, and creating a pleasant environment. Instead of relying on a grand plan for development, the LDDC instead focused on market-led development in order to be more flexible.

fig. 5.2.d: derelict land, London Docklands, 1980’s

abstractdom

ainm



appendix149

Perhaps the most iconic development in the London Docklands is the area known as Canary Wharf, on the northern end of the Isle of Dogs (fig. 5.2.e). Development of Canary Wharf began in 1982, with the conversion of an old warehouse into the television studio complex Limehouse Studios. This work was done in an attempt to revitalize the area by bringing in a different kind of tenant in this case, the television industry. In time, the Canary Wharf development would continue to grow and attempt to attract many different groups to its land.

As with the rest of the Docklands, the Canary Wharf development began as a primarily low-rise complex. Most likely in an effort to maximize floor space to entice firms to move there from the City, high-rise development was called for, despite the protestations of many, who claimed that high-rise development would be too visible, particularly from Greenwich Park. Regardless, it was decided that this new type of development would be situated directly above the Docklands Light Railway station in the center of Canary Wharf.”(Jenny McClain, Modern British Architecture, 2007)

fig. 5.2.e: Canary Wharf development, 2000’s

150

Milt

on K

eyne

s, U

Kpl

anne

d ci

ty

42% 27% 18%RA/TA RA/TA RA/TA

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

23% 26% 26%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

H/L H/L H/L0.32 0.28 0.310 50 50 5

Am

ster

dam

, The

Net

herl

ands

evol

ved

city


0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

52% 37% 42%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

H/L H/L H/L0.29 0.19 0.0800 50 5

mid

-ris

e

low

-ris

e

32% 52%RA/TA

0% 100%

16%7%A/V

0% 100%

1.23 2.25H/L

0 5

27% 48%RA/TA

0% 100%

13% 18%A/V

0% 100%

0.46 0.86H/L

0 5

23% 36%RA/TA

0% 100%

23% 40%A/V

0% 100%

0.23 0.28H/L

0 5

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

32% 52%

16%7%

2.251.23

14% 42%

52%23%

0.320.29

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

27% 48%

18%13%

0.860.46

16% 27%

37%26%

0.280.19

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

23% 36%

40%23%

0.280.23

8% 18%

42%26%

0.310.08

case studies range of ratio

London, UK (existing conditions) range of ratio

range of ratio

Doc

klan

ds, L

ondo

n, U

Khi

gh-r

ise

case

stu

dies

ca

se s

tudi

es

case

stu

dies

UR

BE

SA

32% 52%14%0% 100%42%

1.23 2.250.29 0.32

7% 16% 23% 52%

16% 27% 48%

0.28 0.46 0.860.19

13% 18% 26% 37%

0% 100%

0 5

UR

BE

SA

0% 100%

0% 100%

0 5

23% 36%8% 18%

0.310.08 0.280.23

23% 26% 42%40%

UR

BE

SA

0% 100%

0% 100%

0 5

case studies and selected site, range of ratio

LON

DO

N, U

Khi

gh-r

ise


Lond

on, U

Km

id-r

ise


Lond

on, U

Klo

w-r

ise

abstractdom

ainm



appendix151

Milt

on K

eyne

s, U

Kpl

anne

d ci

ty


0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

23% 26% 26%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

H/L H/L H/L0.32 0.28 0.310 50 50 5

Am

ster

dam

, The

Net

herl

ands

evol

ved

city


0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

52% 37% 42%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

H/L H/L H/L0.29 0.19 0.0800 50 5

mid

-ris

e

low

-ris

e

32% 52%RA/TA

0% 100%

16%7%A/V

0% 100%

1.23 2.25H/L

0 5

27% 48%RA/TA

0% 100%

13% 18%A/V

0% 100%

0.46 0.86H/L

0 5

23% 36%RA/TA

0% 100%

23% 40%A/V

0% 100%

0.23 0.28H/L

0 5

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

32% 52%

16%7%

2.251.23

14% 42%

52%23%

0.320.29

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

27% 48%

18%13%

0.860.46

16% 27%

37%26%

0.280.19

UR

BE

SA

UR

BE

SA

23% 36%

40%23%

0.280.23

8% 18%

42%26%

0.310.08

case studies range of ratio

London, UK (existing conditions) range of ratio

range of ratio

Doc

klan

ds, L

ondo

n, U

Khi

gh-r

ise

case

stu

dies

ca

se s

tudi

es

case

stu

dies

UR

BE

SA

32% 52%14%0% 100%42%

1.23 2.250.29 0.32

7% 16% 23% 52%

16% 27% 48%

0.28 0.46 0.860.19

13% 18% 26% 37%

0% 100%

0 5

UR

BE

SA

0% 100%

0% 100%

0 5

23% 36%8% 18%

0.310.08 0.280.23

23% 26% 42%40%

UR

BE

SA

0% 100%

0% 100%

0 5


LON

DO

N, U

Khi

gh-r

ise


Lond

on, U

Km

id-r

ise


Lond

on, U

Klo

w-r

ise

BUILT ENVELOPE

For the developed growth model that will be applied to the docklands, the parameter BUILT ENVELOPE is prioritized. With London being geographically located within a temperate climate, with cold winters and not very sunny summers, most concern is about thermal energy or heat loss of urban morphology. The built envelope parameter measures the morphological surface area and is calculated as the square metre of the surface area, divided by the volume. It is used in conjunction with the density, which measures the cubic metre volume per square metre patch area.

When prioritizing the built envelope parameter, it will be considered with density as a variable value. The relation between them will be utilised as a global output by local interactions. And it will also be

evaluated when combined with increasing density as output.

If the other parameters were also to be used for this growth model, they would interfere too much with the continuity of the results. It would be hard to control the process because output is always compromised and the result is not entirely based on built envelope. Multi parameter optimization is simply too complex for this type of, already, complex generative design method.

In the graph shown above the ranges of the ratios are obtained for each classification. These ranges are compared with the ranges of ratios obtained from the case studies that were analysed previously.

152

“Once the world’s largest port, London’s docklands had become so desolate by the 1980’s that Stanley Kubrick used them as a backdrop for his Vietnam war film “Full Metal Jacket”. Thanks to government investment and private enterprise, the area is now a shimmering succes story.”(The Economist, february 5th-11th 2011)

abstractdom

ainm



appendix153

Isle of Dogs

Canary Wharf

ISSUE

With this “shimmering success story”, one might argue and wonder what they mean? From a corporate and real estate point of view the Canary Wharf area is definitely a success story. But it remains still a question whether the high-rise developments do any good to the rest of the docklands concerning environmental and ecological aspects. Canary Wharf mainly consists of high-rise office buildings. They are out of balance with the rest of the Isle of Dogs that mainly consists of low-rise, small, family and terrace houses. Concerning energy production or consumption, this small scale, low-rise morphology is very inefficient.

These two distinctly different types of morphology cause a conjoined density and overflow of energy. And while the Isle of Dogs is completely isolated between Canary Wharf and the river, it also takes up much costly space that mostly just consumes a lot of energy of which the costs have to be covered by individual households. The single storey low-rise morphology also offers little chance for mixed-use typology buildings to emerge. The polluted densities cause spatial problems in relation to the docklands.

154

Milton Keynes, UK

Amsterdam, The Netherlands

52%37%A/V

0% 100%BE

26%23%A/V

0% 100%BE

current situation

built envelope %(Surface area/Volume)

density ratio(Volume/Area)

individualsA1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 G2 H30

10

20

30

40

50

23% 26% 26%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%BE BE BE

52% 37% 42%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%BE BE BE

obtained built envelope % range from 3 patches ranges

case studies Canary Wharf and Docklands

compare

This graph measures the density in relation to the built envelope of the current situation in the docklands. The lower the density is, the higher the built envelope will be. This obviously is occurring in the low-rise part of the docklands. These values are also compared with the ratio ranges for the built envelope in Milton Keynes and Amsterdam. Amsterdam seems a reasonable target to reach for part of the built envelope in the docklands that is higher than the built envelope in Amsterdam. Unlike Milton Keynes, as a planned city, which is very energy inefficient with regards to its built envelope.

Ultimately, the values for built envelope from Amsterdam are just a target compared to the Docklands. The part of the Docklands that exceeds the range of Amsterdam is of most interest and will be focused on from the start.Where Amsterdam will be from the year 2050 is not clear. But it will certainly have grown a lot in terms of expansion, rather than densifying with more high-rise morphology.

302520151050

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

climate

will generate spreadbuilt envelope /density ratio lower

spatial variation>varied classifications

social variation>varied program

conjoineddensity

hybrid condition

surface area x m2volume x m3

surface area x m2*3volume x m3*6

built envelope ratio DECREASE

abstractdom

ainm



appendix155

Milton Keynes, UK

Amsterdam, The Netherlands

52%37%A/V

0% 100%BE

26%23%A/V

0% 100%BE

current situation




10

20

30

40

50

23% 26% 26%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%BE BE BE

52% 37% 42%A/V A/V A/V

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%BE BE BE

obtained built envelope % range from 3 patches ranges

case studies Canary Wharf and Docklands

compare

302520151050

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

climate

will generate spreadbuilt envelope /density ratio lower

spatial variation>varied classifications

social variation>varied program

conjoineddensity

hybrid condition



built envelope ratio DECREASE

TARGET

Building envelope releases or loses heat in temperate climates (fig.5.2.f).

So the more surface area in relation to volume a building has, the more inefficient it is in terms of thermal energy loss.

When increasing the building volume (or increasing the building density), the surface area increases proportionally less.

The spatial aim is to generate a hybrid model with the use of the three given classifications. In this temperate climate the low rise is inefficient. And the high-rise in not an ideal solution either when it dominates or over shadows by conjoining the low-rise morphology. The graph above shows how the classifications are divided. A more ideal solution for a balanced thermal energy flow would be a combination of mid-rise with high-rise with a little bit of low rise.

fig. 5.2.f thermal energy, heat loss through built envelope

abstractdom

ainm



appendix157

STRATEGY

158

A 12

34

56

BC

DE

FG

H

A 12

34

56

BC

DE

FG

H

A 1

2

3

4

5

6

B

CD

EF

GH

rectangular girdprojected on the site

site current condition

grid cuts through geographyavoiding morphology

44 individual patches are separated each consisting of variable and constant data

riveranddocks

geography

currentmorphology

greenparks

road networkandtube lines

connections abstracted from networkconsisting of:-tube lines-main roads-subroads

distinction between two different zones:-Isle of Dogs-Enterprise zone

Enterprise zone

Isle of Dogs

ABSTRACTED LAYERS The docklands current situation is analyzed with the use of a three-dimensional digital model. The different layers that can be abstracted from this model, regarding environmental, ecological, geographical and social/ spatial aspects, will be used for the strategy. They each will provide data that can be input for parameters in the design process. Some of them consist of variable data and others will give constant data, depending which aspect they refer to.

When using this input data, a logical measurement must be considered first. For each layer an appropriate measurement ensures a valid output value that can be used in relation with new input for evaluations.

abstractdom

ainm



appendix159

A 12

34

56

BC

DE

FG

H

A 12

34

56

BC

DE

FG

H

A 1

2

3

4

5

6

B

CD

EF

GH

rectangular girdprojected on the site

site current condition

grid cuts through geographyavoiding morphology

44 individual patches are separated each consisting of variable and constant data

GRID APPLICATION

After abstracting the various layers, a rectangular grid is projected onto the digital three-dimensional model of the current situation of the docklands.

To ensure the grid does not cut through existing buildings, it will adapt to the pattern of the morphology. The graph above shows how that changed or rationalized the grid.

This will cut out and separate 44 unique individuals each with its own individual piece of geography.

Each individual patch now contains of a unique set of data that relates back to the previously discussed layers. This data will change throughout the design process. And much care has been taken over recording this change of data.

riveranddocks

geography

currentmorphology

greenparks

road networkandtube lines

connections abstracted from networkconsisting of:-tube lines-main roads-subroads

distinction between two different zones:-Isle of Dogs-Enterprise zone

Enterprise zone

Isle of Dogs

160

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5

F

Enterprise zone tube station

road connection

site coverage 25 %density x



river

park

site coverage 25 %density x*4


Isle of Dogs

classification

% zone

INPUTREQUIREMENTS for local, spatial

modifications

OUTPUTPARAMETERS for global, spatial organisation, affecting energy indicators

on river - park

# connections + # tube stations density ratio

% built envelope

E4(-X)

6m

24m 24m

36m 36m

UP

low rise

mid rise

high rise

location in grid

the two different zones give eachindividual a constant value and

require different local rules

a local variable that requires the individual to go one classification

up when altered with local rules

a local constant value that requires the individual to be altered diferently

if it is located on park or river

the VARIABLE amount of connections is counted in each patch of the grid-road connection = 1-tube station = 10

variable in each individual-building density ratio:VOLUMe / (site)AREA

variable in each individual-built envelope %:SURFACE AREA / VOLUME

selection count

GENOME

GENOME STRATEGY

Each individual is given a genome, which consists of two sets of parameters. One is for local input and the other is for global output. Local input is always seen a requirement for local rule modifications, that will have an effect on the global output. And therefore the global output is seen as values for global, spatial organization, affecting the parameters related to energy (built envelope and density).

The output ‘connections’ is a variable value that can also change due to local rule modification because within the road network, the sub-roads are not fixed and they can be adjusted to the resulting densified morphology of the individual patch.

In the diagram above it is shown what the parameters are and what the relating data consists of. The variable data will change throughout the process of design through local rule adjustments with a global selection.

abstractdom

ainm



appendix161

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5

F

Enterprise zone tube station

road connection

site coverage 25 %density x



river

park



Isle of Dogs

classification

% zone

INPUTREQUIREMENTS for local, spatial

modifications

OUTPUTPARAMETERS for global, spatial organisation, affecting energy indicators

on river - park

# connections + # tube stations density ratio

% built envelope

E4(-X)

6m

24m 24m

36m 36m

UP

low rise

mid rise

high rise

location in grid

the two different zones give eachindividual a constant value and

require different local rules

a local variable that requires the individual to go one classification

up when altered with local rules

a local constant value that requires the individual to be altered diferently

if it is located on park or river

the VARIABLE amount of connections is counted in each patch of the grid-road connection = 1-tube station = 10

variable in each individual-building density ratio:VOLUMe / (site)AREA

variable in each individual-built envelope %:SURFACE AREA / VOLUME

selection count

GENOME

rule set 1 SLOWEST / SLOWEST cluster replacements - copy - move: to all

SLOW / SLOW

FAST / FAST

FASTEST / FASTEST

rules

volume 216 m3surface area 180 m2

BE: 83%

INCREASE density ratio / DECREASE built envelope % applied alteration / to what?

set 3

set 4

set 1

set 2

copy - move - rotate:selected or neighbour

copy - move - rotate:selected

scale up - copy - move:selected

rule set 2

rule set 3

rule set 4

LOCAL RULES

Local rule sets are used to modify the individuals where appropriate. Depending on the data in the genome’s requirements input, different rule sets can be applied for different paces of densification and decrease of built envelope. Simple alterations are applied to the existing morphology of the individual in order to alter the output data. The main rule is to modify the individual to such extend, that it will go one classification up.

Other rules applied are: -Towers at main road and river -Keep park buildings as low as possible -New buildings must be adapted in form to neighbouring buildings -There is a limited building distance to be defined

162

Enterprise zone

river

park

set 1

set 2

set 3

set 4

Isle of Dogs

GENOMErequirements

INPUTvariables

LOCAL RULESsets

classification

on river - park

low rise

mid rise

high rise

% zone

LOCAL RULE APPLICATION

The diagram above shows the way the system works. The input requirements (local values) each contain variable data. The diagram above shows which input value belongs to which local rule set. Once it is clear which rule set has to be applied, the individual can be modified with the simple alterations belonging to the rule set.

abstractdom

ainm



appendix163

Enterprise zone

river

park

set 1

set 2

set 3

set 4

Isle of Dogs

GENOMErequirements

INPUTvariables

LOCAL RULESsets

classification

on river - park

low rise

mid rise

high rise

% zone

Population 1

Primitives

3 generations for generating VARIATION

Population 2

weakest individuals will be selected and modifiedtogether with neighbour with lowest density

fittest individuals will be selected (NOT MODIFIED)and their neighbours with highest built envelope will be modified

Remaining individualsjoin modified ones in next population

Neigbour with lowest density selected and modified with neighbour rule



Modified with local ruleset according to requirements in genome

1 classification up

Population 3

1currentsituation

global configurations of the generations throughout the algorithm

stage 1 stage 2

2 3 4 5 6

1 classification up


Neigbour with lowest density selected


Population 5

Population 4

next 3 generations for OPTIMIZING AND GROWING

Population 6



1 classification up



1 classification up

STAGE 1 STAGE 2

APPLIED ALGORITHM

The proposed algorithm that will be applied to the growth model consists of two stages, each with three generations. After the first stage, an evaluation will be done to see how the parameter configuration had an effect on the built envelope when densifying with the local rule sets.Depending on the global selection, each generation has a different amount of individuals suitable for modification. The remaining individuals are placed back next to the modified ones in the next generation.

Stage 1 is for generating variation in the population and optimization of the spread of density.

Stage 2 is developed in order to let the growth model optimize and grow from successful (measured with output data) locations in the grid.

164

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

built

env

elop

e

conn

ectio

ns

dens

ity

+

-

built

env

elop

e

conn

ectio

ns

dens

ity

+

-

selection

selected to connect different densitiesand prevent conjunction

selected(not modified)modified with different

ruleset

1 neighbour with LOWEST DENSITY is selected 2 neighbours with HIGHEST BUILT ENVELOPE are selected

neighbour rule

modified with differentruleset

to grow from succesful locationsand optimize built envelope

STAGE 1 STAGE 2

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

RANKING AND SELECTION

In stage 1 the global selection graph tool is used to rank and selectwith three parameters values:-LOW density-HIGH built envelope-HIGH amoutn of connections(these values make the individual WEAK AND SUITABLE for modification)

The neighbour with LOWEST density will be selected and modified as well, but then not ‘one classification up.

In stage 2 the global selection graph tool is used to rank and selectwith three changed parameters values:-HIGH density-LOW built envelope-HIGH amoutn of connections(these values make the individual FIT AND NOT SUITABLE for modification and therefore they will remain the same)

The two neighbours with HIGHEST built envelope will be selected and modified.

abstractdom

ainm



appendix165

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

built

env

elop

e

conn

ectio

ns

dens

ity

+

-

built

env

elop

e

conn

ectio

ns

dens

ity

+

-

selection

selected to connect different densitiesand prevent conjunction

selected(not modified)modified with different

ruleset

1 neighbour with LOWEST DENSITY is selected 2 neighbours with HIGHEST BUILT ENVELOPE are selected

neighbour rule

modified with differentruleset

to grow from succesful locationsand optimize built envelope

STAGE 1 STAGE 2

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

URBAN GROWTH MODEL

166

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

From here is the start of stage 1 of the algorithm

selected individuals

A5

D5

neighbours with lowest density

selection of individuals for nextgeneration’s modi�cations with local rule sets

individuals selected according to 3 parameters

A4

E5

F2 E2

F6 F5

G3 F3

G4 F4

G6 G5

H5 H4

302520151050

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

CURRENT SITUATIONglobal configuration

stage 1

abstractdom

ainm



appendix167

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

From here is the start of stage 1 of the algorithm


A5

D5




A4

E5

F2 E2

F6 F5

G3 F3

G4 F4

G6 G5

H5 H4

302520151050

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

A1-Enterprise 59%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 8 + Tube St. 1-Density 6,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 19% -On river

A2-Enterprise 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 2 -Density 9 V/Area-SA/Volume 12%

A3-Enterprise 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 2 + Tube St. 2-Density 2 V/Area-SA/Volume 14%

A4-Enterprise 60%-Low rise-Conn. 2 -Density 0 V/Area-SA/Volume 0%

A5-Enterprise 99%-Low rise-Conn. 9 + Tube St. 1-Density 0,43 V/Area-SA/Volume 27%

A6-Enterprise 94%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 5 -Density 3,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 15% -On river

B1-Isle of Dogs 96%-Mid rise-Conn. 3 -Density 2,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 19% -On river

B2-Enterprise 91%-Low/High rise-Conn. 11-Density 21,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 8%

B3-Enterprise 100%-High rise-Conn. 2 + Tube St. 2-Density 45 V/Area-SA/Volume 8%

B4-Enterprise 66%-Low/High rise-Conn. 7 -Density 16,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 8%

B5-Enterprise 66%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 7-Density 3,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 26%

B6-Isle of Dogs 54%-Mid rise-Conn. 3-Density 7,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 20% -On river

C1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 8,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On river

C2-Enterprise 69%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 10 + Tube St. 1-Density 11,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 13%

C3-Enterprise 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 9 + Tube St. 2-Density 22,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%

C4-Enterprise 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 7,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 15%

C5-Enterprise 60%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 9-Density 4,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On river

D1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 0-Density 8,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 26% -On river/park

D2-Isle of Dogs 76%-Low/Mid/High rise-Conn. 10-Density 5,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On park

D3-Enterprise 100%-Low/Mid/High rise-Conn. 7-Density 10,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 15%

D4-Enterprise 96%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 3-Density 7,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 17%

D5-Isle of Dogs 85%-Low/ Mid rise-Conn. 15-Density 3,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 28% -On river

D6-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 4,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 35% -On river

E1-Enterprise 74%-Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 5,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 18% -On river/park

E2-Isle of Dogs 52%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 6-Density 2,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 31% -On park

E3-Enterprise 74%-Mid rise-Conn. 5-Density 6,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 15%

E4-Enterprise 63%-Mid rise-Conn. 12 + Tube St. 1-Density 5,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 17%

E5-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 11 -Density 2,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 30%

E6-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 3-Density 3,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 24% -On river

F1-Isle of Dogs 88%-Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 3,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 32% -On river

F2-Isle of Dogs 96%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 14-Density 4,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 27% -On river

F3-Isle of Dogs 97%-Low rise-Conn. 8-Density 2,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 34%

F4-Isle of Dogs 95%-Low rise-Conn. 3 + Tube St. 1-Density 2,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 27% -On park

F5-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 8 -Density 1,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 38% -On park

G2-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 6-Density 3,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 27% -On river

G3-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 17-Density 3,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 31%

G4-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 11 + Tube St. 1-Density 1,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 41% -On park

G5-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5-Density 3,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 27% -On park

G6-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 21-Density 2,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 32% -On river

H3-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 9-Density 4,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 25% -On river

H4-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 12-Density 4,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 25% -On river

H5-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5 + Tube St. 1-Density 2,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 32% -On river/park

H6-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 5,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 25% -On river/park

F6-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 15-Density 3,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 31% -On river

selected individualsneighbour with lowest density

CURRENT SITUATIONindividuals

stage 1

168

A5-1-Enterprise 99%-Low rise-Conn. 9 + Tube St. 1-Density 4,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%

A4-1-Enterprise 60%-Low rise-Conn. 2 -Density 0 V/Area-SA/Volume 0%

G4-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 13 + Tube St. 1-Density 6,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On park

F4-1-Isle of Dogs 95%-Low rise-Conn. 3 + Tube St. 1-Density 2,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On park

F2-1-Isle of Dogs 96%-Mid rise-Conn. 15-Density 8.4 V/Area-SA/Volume 21%

E2-1-Isle of Dogs 52%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 6-Density 4,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On park

H5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5 + Tube St. 1-Density 6,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On river/park

H4-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 10-Density 6 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On river

G3-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 20-Density 8,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 22%

F3-1-Isle of Dogs 97%-Low rise-Conn. 4-Density 4,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 22%

F6-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 15-Density 9,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 19% -On river

F5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 6 -Density 2,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 26% -On park

D5-1-Isle of Dogs 85%-Mid rise-Conn. 10-Density 11,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 16% -On river

E5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 10-Density 4,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 19%

G6-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 18-Density 8,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On river

G5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5-Density 4,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On park

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

selectedindividuals

global organisation inprevious selection result

selectedneighbour

neighbourwith lowest density ratio

selectedindividuals


POPULATION 1modified individuals

stage 1

abstractdom

ainm



appendix169

A5-1-Enterprise 99%-Low rise-Conn. 9 + Tube St. 1-Density 4,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%

A4-1-Enterprise 60%-Low rise-Conn. 2 -Density 0 V/Area-SA/Volume 0%

G4-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 13 + Tube St. 1-Density 6,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On park

F4-1-Isle of Dogs 95%-Low rise-Conn. 3 + Tube St. 1-Density 2,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On park

F2-1-Isle of Dogs 96%-Mid rise-Conn. 15-Density 8.4 V/Area-SA/Volume 21%

E2-1-Isle of Dogs 52%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 6-Density 4,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On park

H5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5 + Tube St. 1-Density 6,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On river/park

H4-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 10-Density 6 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On river

G3-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 20-Density 8,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 22%

F3-1-Isle of Dogs 97%-Low rise-Conn. 4-Density 4,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 22%

F6-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 15-Density 9,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 19% -On river

F5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 6 -Density 2,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 26% -On park

D5-1-Isle of Dogs 85%-Mid rise-Conn. 10-Density 11,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 16% -On river

E5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 10-Density 4,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 19%

G6-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 18-Density 8,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On river

G5-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5-Density 4,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 22% -On park

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

selectedindividuals


selectedneighbour


selectedindividuals


Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

mid rise

15

20

25

10

5

low rise

high riseclassifications

0


A1

A3




B2

A4-1

E4 F4-1

F2-1 F1

G3-1 G2

G4-1 G5-1

G6-1 F6-1

H5-1 H6

GENERATION 1global configuration

stage 1

170

A1-1-Enterprise 59%-Mid/ High rise-Conn. 8 + Tube St. 1-Density 19,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 12% -On river

B1-1-Isle of Dogs 96%-Mid rise-Conn. 3 -Density 3,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 17% -On river

E4-1-Enterprise 63%-Mid/ High rise-Conn. 8 + Tube St. 1-Density 16,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 12%

F4-2-Isle of Dogs 95%-Low rise-Conn.1 + Tube St. 1-Density 2,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 20% -On park

A3-1-Enterprise 100%-High rise-Conn. 2 + Tube St. 2-Density 21,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%

A4-2-Enterprise 60%-Mid rise-Conn. 2 -Density 11,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 9%

G4-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 13 + Tube St. 1-Density 11 V/Area-SA/Volume 15% -On park

G5-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5-Density 5 V/Area-SA/Volume 20% -On park

F2-2-Isle of Dogs 96%-High rise-Conn. 13-Density 16 V/Area-SA/Volume 16% -On river

F1-1-Isle of Dogs 88%-Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 7,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 18% -On river

H5-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 5 + Tube St. 1-Density 10,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 18% -On river/park

H6-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 6,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 17% -On river/park

G3-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 14-Density 17,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 14%

G2-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 3-Density 5,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On river

G6-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 17-Density 17 V/Area-SA/Volume 15% -On river


A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

selectedindividuals


selectedneighbour


selectedindividuals



stage 1

abstractdom

ainm



appendix171

A1-1-Enterprise 59%-Mid/ High rise-Conn. 8 + Tube St. 1-Density 19,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 12% -On river

B1-1-Isle of Dogs 96%-Mid rise-Conn. 3 -Density 3,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 17% -On river

E4-1-Enterprise 63%-Mid/ High rise-Conn. 8 + Tube St. 1-Density 16,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 12%

F4-2-Isle of Dogs 95%-Low rise-Conn.1 + Tube St. 1-Density 2,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 20% -On park


A4-2-Enterprise 60%-Mid rise-Conn. 2 -Density 11,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 9%


G5-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low rise-Conn. 5-Density 5 V/Area-SA/Volume 20% -On park

F2-2-Isle of Dogs 96%-High rise-Conn. 13-Density 16 V/Area-SA/Volume 16% -On river



H6-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 0-Density 6,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 17% -On river/park


G2-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-Low/Mid rise-Conn. 3-Density 5,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 21% -On river

G6-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 17-Density 17 V/Area-SA/Volume 15% -On river


A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

selectedindividuals


selectedneighbour


selectedindividuals

neighbourwith lowest density ratio Network

connections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

15

20

25

10

5

0

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

selected individuals neighbours with lowest density



A5-1

C2

A6

D2

F6-2 F5-1

G4-2 F4-2

H5-2 G5-2


stage 1

172

C2-1-Enterprise 69%-High rise-Conn. 7 + Tube St. 1-Density 33,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%

D2-1-Isle of Dogs 76%-Low/Mid/High rise-Conn. 9-Density 9,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 16% -On park

A5-2-Enterprise 99%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 9 + Tube St. 1-Density 16,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 9%

A6-1-Enterprise 94%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 5 -Density 6,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 12% -On river


F4-3-Isle of Dogs 95%-Mid rise-Conn.1 + Tube St. 1-Density 11,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 12% -On park


G5-3-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 5-Density 11,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 14% -On park

F6-3-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 14-Density 38,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 9% -On river

F5-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 6 -Density 7,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 18% -On park

selectedindividuals


neighbour


A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

selected


stage 1

abstractdom

ainm



appendix173


D2-1-Isle of Dogs 76%-Low/Mid/High rise-Conn. 9-Density 9,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 16% -On park

A5-2-Enterprise 99%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 9 + Tube St. 1-Density 16,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 9%

A6-1-Enterprise 94%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 5 -Density 6,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 12% -On river


F4-3-Isle of Dogs 95%-Mid rise-Conn.1 + Tube St. 1-Density 11,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 12% -On park


G5-3-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 5-Density 11,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 14% -On park

F6-3-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 14-Density 38,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 9% -On river

F5-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid rise-Conn. 6 -Density 7,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 18% -On park

selectedindividuals


neighbour


A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

selected

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

15

20

25

10

5

0

FROM THIS POINT THE ALGORITHM CONTINUES WITH STAGE 2The selection criteria changed in order to select the fittest individuals. Only the neighbours with the highest % built envelope will be modified. This is to densify from succesful locations while optimizing the % built envelope.

selected individuals(not to be modi�ed) neighbours with highest BE



B3

C2

A3-1

C1

F6 E6

G4 G3-2

H5 G5-4

C3

D2-1

F5-2

H4-1

H6-1


stage 1

174


C1-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 0-Density 12 V/Area-SA/Volume 18% -On river


G5-5--Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 5-Density 21,2 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%-On park

F5-3-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 5-Density 15,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 14% -On park


D2-2-Isle of Dogs 76%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 8-Density 23,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 11% -On park

H4-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 7-Density 15,7 V/Area-SA/Volume 14% -On river

H6-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 0-Density 17,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 13%-On river/park

E6-1-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 1-Density 20,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 13% -On river

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

selectedindividuals(NOTMODIFIED)


selected (NOT MODIFIED)neighbour

2 neighbourswith highest built envelope


stage 2

abstractdom

ainm



appendix175

Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

0

5

10

15

20




A3

B3

A2

B2

C3 C4

G3 F3-1

F6 F5-3

A4-2

B4

D3

H3

G6-2


stage 2

176

A2-1-Enterprise 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 2 -Density 25,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 10%

B2-1-Enterprise 91%-High rise-Conn. 11-Density 40,9 V/Area-SA/Volume 7%

C4-1-Enterprise 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 0-Density 21,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 10%

F3-2-Isle of Dogs 97%-Mid rise-Conn. 4-Density 15,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 13%


A4-3-Enterprise 60%-High rise-Conn. 2 -Density 28,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 8%

B4-1-Enterprise 66%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 7 -Density 34,4 V/Area-SA/Volume 7%

D3-1-Enterprise 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 7-Density 21,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 12%


G6-3-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 13-Density 30,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 10% -On river

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F






stage 2

abstractdom

ainm



appendix177

A2-1-Enterprise 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 2 -Density 25,6 V/Area-SA/Volume 10%


C4-1-Enterprise 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 0-Density 21,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 10%

F3-2-Isle of Dogs 97%-Mid rise-Conn. 4-Density 15,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 13%




D3-1-Enterprise 100%-Mid/High rise-Conn. 7-Density 21,1 V/Area-SA/Volume 12%



A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F





Networkconnections

Density

Built envelope %

010

2030

5060

40

10

20

30

50

60

40

10

20

30

5060

40

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

mid rise

low rise

high rise

classifications

0

5

10

15

20




A3

B3

A2-1

B2-1

C3 C2-1

F6 E6-1

G3 G2-1

A4-3

B4-1

D3-1

F5-4

H3-1


stage 2

178






A4-4-Enterprise 60%-High rise-Conn. 2-Density 45,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 7%


D3-2-Enterprise 100%-High rise-Conn. 7-Density 28,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%

H3-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 7-Density 35,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 11% -On river

E6-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 1-Density 31 V/Area-SA/Volume 11% -On river

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F






stage 2

abstractdom

ainm



appendix179






A4-4-Enterprise 60%-High rise-Conn. 2-Density 45,8 V/Area-SA/Volume 7%


D3-2-Enterprise 100%-High rise-Conn. 7-Density 28,5 V/Area-SA/Volume 11%

H3-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 7-Density 35,3 V/Area-SA/Volume 11% -On river

E6-2-Isle of Dogs 100%-High rise-Conn. 1-Density 31 V/Area-SA/Volume 11% -On river

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

1 2 3 4 5 6

F





0

5

10

15

20

mid rise

low rise


mid rise

15

20

25

10

5

low rise

high rise

classifications

0

0

5

10

15

20

mid rise

low rise


mid rise

15

20

25low rise

high rise

classifications

10

5

0

0

5

10

15

20

mid rise

low rise


0

5

10

15

20

mid rise

low rise


1

6

2

3

4

5

The final generation has a succesful result regarding the spread of classifications. Spatially, this means that a hybrid model is generated with a combination of an equal amount of individuals in both high rise and mid rise.

GENERATION 6global (FINAL) configuration

stage 2

180

25

30

20

15

10

5

current 1 2 3 4 5 6

low rise mid rise high rise

generations

number of individuals

EVALUATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS

This graph shows the evaluation of spatial change through the amount classifications, spread over the number of individuals in each generation. In stage 1 there is a much stronger decrease of low-rise. This is because of the global selection parameters setting. So in the first three generations, mainly the individuals with the low rise were selected and modified together with their neighbours. In stage 2, slowly the pace of increase of mid and high-rise slows down. This is because of the building height rule. It restricts going higher at some point. It is visible in the graph where the two clas¬sifications meet equal amounts. As for the spatial change it caused, it is clear that with the increase of mid-rise and high-rise there is more space for combining program and creating mixed use development. That will enhance the social interactions between different users and increase the opportunity for community life to emerge.

abstractdom

ainm



appendix181

25

30

20

15

10

5

current 1 2 3 4 5 6

low rise mid rise high rise

generations

number of individuals

25

20

15

10

5

0

current 1 2 3 4 5 6


generations


EVALUATION OF DENSITY AND BUILT ENVELOPE

The numerical values of the density and built envelope through the six generations are as predicted. While the density increased, the built envelope decreased.

However, there is a limit to this. As is visible in the graph, in stage 2 both the increase of density and the decrease of built envelope, reduce. This means that after a certain amount of generations, the resulting change will become less radical. After an evaluation of the results of the third generation, a tipping point for the built envelope value has started to occur. From the beginning of the second stage, the density kept increasing it value, while the built envelope stayed the same, especially from the fourth till the fifth

generation. This has to do with the fact that high-rise doesn’t offer an ideal solution with regards to the built envelope. Therefore the mid-rise will balance this out by increasing its number of individuals. This is done with the second stage’s neighbour rule; the already successful (high-rise) selected individuals are not modified. But their neighbours with a high percentage of built envelopes are. Then the question only remains: what if the neighbour already has a lot of high-rise? This will come down to common sense while modifying it. Also the more mid-rise is added, the better the relation is between the increase of density and the decrease of built envelope.

182

current situation




10

20

30

40

50

GENERATION 6




0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Milton Keynes, UKbuilt envelope

Amsterdam , The Netherlandsbuilt envelope

revisiting the outputby comparisation of the resulting output with the input

CONCLUSION

To evaluate the final generation, the density and the built envelope for each single individual are compared with their values in the current state and at the same time they are compared with the target values for built envelope from the case studies. Wherever in the grid there was a low density, it is now significantly higher, with a much lower built envelope. And also important is the fact that there is now a much more varied distribution of density over the whole generation. This is because of the first stage’s parameter value selection configuration. The main issue with the current state was that it caused a conjoined density. There was a spatial imbalance, which caused an energy flow pressure. After generating the proposal globally with local rules and keeping record of each step and evaluating the results, its improvements are very visible and its deficiencies present themselves

with an opportunity to adjust. These adjustments can take place in the local rules and in the selection criteria (these are the ‘fitness’ criteria of the algorithm). This so called engine that comprises the whole system can be seen as a metabolic growth model that improves itself by trial and error. This whole design process was one of those trials (experiments) And all the evaluated deficiencies can therefore be an input for a next run of the algorithm.It is difficult to compare a future proposal with a city like Amsterdam in its current state, regarding built envelope as an energy indicator, since the evolution is based on very traditional rules with no high rise. In many mature existing cities and also to-be-newly-built cities this is something that will have to change if we want to accommodate the expected population growth by 2050 or later.

abstractdom

ainm



appendix183

current situation




10

20

30

40

50

GENERATION 6




0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Milton Keynes, UKbuilt envelope

Amsterdam , The Netherlandsbuilt envelope

revisiting the outputby comparisation of the resulting output with the input

PROPOSED DESIGN

urban metabolic growth models

Documents

docklands of london

ukthe london docklands

east of london

central london

port of london

vibrant area

new developments

closure of docks