Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown. Dima Srouri University College London, UK

Transcription

1 Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown Dima Srouri University College London, UK Abstract This paper investigates the notion of campus community and its interaction with the big community, which is the society in which it exists. It examines the interaction between students and residents for a campus that is located in the city center from a spatial point of view. The Campus chosen for this study is one of the oldest campuses that adopt the collegiate system, the University of Cambridge campus. This system has been the subject of so much debate for researchers in the field of higher education in general, and in campus planning in particular. The study is carried out by constructing the spatial accessibility map for both students and residents, spotting areas of spatial overlap and examining their characteristics as well as their role in providing encounter. In doing this, the study tries to throw some light on university campus planning and to detect a theoretical model for a university campus from this particular case. This paper suggests that the collegiate system has an effect on students life and therefore their performance, and that the location of colleges plays an important role in this particular case. 1. Introduction The University of Cambridge occupies a great deal of land in the heart of Cambridge, which is known to be a university town. The location of the university campus is critical because of the physical closeness of town and gown and the fact that it involves daily interaction between students and residents. The type of community that the campus has and its relation to the whole community in the city raises an interesting question whether there is a spatial pattern in which they both interact. And if so, what are the characteristics of this pattern? Does this pattern draw the line between the university and the city? Moreover, what theoretical model for a university campus can be therefore detected form this particular case? The methodology followed to answer the above questions is based upon a theoretical framework that builds upon two major works. The first is Allen s Managing the Flow of Technology (Allen, 1977), and the second is Granovetter s The strength of weak ties (Granovetter 1982). Building upon these two theories for this particular case entails tracing back the origins of the university of Cambridge campus and the establishment of the collegiate system as well as analyzing the spatial structure using space syntax methodology by constructing the spatial accessibility map for both students and residents. Conclusions are drawn from the analysis by relating space syntax analysis to the above theories in an attempt to reveal the characteristics of the interaction pattern between students and residents and to detect a theoretical model for a university campus.

2 256 Dima Srouri 2. Theoretical framework The main theoretical frame for this study is an investigation of campus community through the notion that social aspects can be derived from spatial aspects. It is suggested that there is an effect of campus design on the socialization of students and the effectiveness with which the mission of higher education can be carried out. The focus of recent research has been on the transmission of knowledge and innovation in general. In studying communication and innovation in engineering, Allen states that advances in knowledge depend much more on interaction between people that are not part of the same field, than on communication within the same field (Allen, 1977). Allen suggests that the patterns of encounter generated by the movement of people through the public space network may be a key factor in the generation of innovation. Relating Allen s observations to this study suggests that while interaction between students occur naturally, interaction between students and residents does not occur naturally, and therefore the pattern in which they both interact through open space might be held to generate this interaction. On the other hand, in studying social networks, Granovetter introduces strong and weak ties between people in social networks (Granovetter, 1982). By strong ties, he refers to friends that know each other, and by weak ties, he refers to acquaintances in the social network. He stresses the importance of weak ties as bridges that extend the individual s realm of support system. Granovetter s findings complement Allen s work by signifying the role of space in generating strong and weak ties. Relating Granovetter s argument to this study suggests that as it is important to create solidarity among students, it is also important to allow for the formation of weak ties between students and society. This argument might have interesting spatial implications for university campuses, since they provide the preliminary conditions for encounter. The spatial model proposed by Hillier and Hanson (Hillier & Hanson, 1984) suggests social and spatial rules to understand the spatial structures. They introduce long and short models or high and low frequency encounters. Long models are models where activities are ritualistic, while short models are models where activities are practical. The short model suggested here represents the students daily activities, while the long model represents the interaction between students on campus and the surrounding urban context. Hillier and Hanson emphasize the importance of encounter in the realization of weak ties that would promote interaction between the campus and the city. This study uses Space Syntax methodology to investigate the extent to which spatial configuration can be held to have an effect on the type of interaction between the university and the city. The hypothesis is that spatial configuration plays a key role in providing the conditions in which this interaction can be realised. The following section investigates the historical background of the university as well as the city, and the factors that have influenced them until they have developed the spatial layout of today. 3. The Evolution of Cambridge Contrary to the common presumption that Cambridge is essentially a university town, from its early thirteenth century beginnings, the university had to find its place in an already thriving county and market town (Brooke, 1993). The origin of the collegiate system has been the subject of as much detailed academic research and debate as that of the university itself. Physically, a college was intended to provide one set of buildings in which Masters and scholars lived together. Ultimately, this system has become what is

3 Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown 257 Figure 115: Land use map of Cambridge (drawn by the author) called the traditional Oxbridge college structure (referring to Oxford and Cambridge). The pace of development for both the university and the town quickened and by the sixteenth century, both the university and the town had broadly assumed the form known today, and there was little alteration to it in spatial terms until the nineteenth century. The market was the key area of the town and its location has never changed although there were changes in economic activities and their locations as well as the character of some buildings in the market area over the centuries (Brooke, 1993). The core area was essentially confined within the central triangle of the main roads. The relationship between the university and the town was symbiotic as the university brought considerable trade and wealth to the town. The period up to 1950, Cambridge became a center of scientifically based research industries (Brooke, 1993). The post 1950 expansion of the university and other educational centers, together with its housing and economic activities, seemed to create a certain symbiosis that has developed between the university and the local business community. As the historical background showed the evolution of both the university and the city, a closer look at the current spatial layout and the specific land uses is needed to capture the main functions of the spatial system in the city. 4. Building typology The land use map for Cambridge reveals an inter-weaving of different types of landholdings around the campus, with a concentration of retail and commercial uses in the central triangle in the city spreading linearly towards the north and south (figure 115). The main examination of building types in Cambridge brings about the distinction between colleges and departments (figure 116). As it was mentioned earlier, colleges are where students actually live. Students from different disciplines live in colleges, which are located on main streets. These streets have become the busy streets of the university and the collective areas of students for developing communal activity.

4 258 Dima Srouri Figure 116: Locations of colleges and departments in Cambridge (drawn by the author) Colleges overlook the river on the other side creating what is called the Backs, an uninterrupted stretch of green space along the river. On the other hand, departments are in different locations, generating their own interconnected systems and their zones of isolation. These are the areas of individual activity and movement. The layout of the colleges suggests a specific accessibility pattern since colleges are essentially for students, and yet they attract residents as well as visitors to the town. An examination of spatial accessibility is carried out next to inspect different patterns of interaction. 5. Spatial Accessibility Basic accessibility analysis of functions for students as well as residents is examined through determining what functions are accessible to students and what functions are accessible to residents through different times of the day. Categories are basically divided into students and residents. As colleges are essentially for students, residents are not expected to walk through colleges. However, since there are only few routes to cross to the other side of the river Cam, residents tend to walk through colleges to cross the river, or simply enjoy the scenes at the Backs. Tourists also walk through colleges, to view the architecture of the university buildings. The colleges layout is made out of central green space courtyards with restricted footpaths to all but fellows of the university, meaning that the only access is provided through the walkways surrounding the central courts. Spatial accessibility is represented by the axial map (Hillier, 1999b), which is the map of the longest and fewest lines that represent the street network. The axial map is drawn according to the routes, or lines, that are accessible. In this case, the axial map is constructed according to two scenarios: Spatial accessibility with access through colleges representing student accessibility

5 Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown 259 Spatial accessibility with no access through colleges representing non-student (or resident) accessibility The global integration analysis with no access to colleges shows that the main integrators are the ring road around the city to the south east side, intersecting with the route going from Regents Street to Bridge Street. This route is the main shopping street in the city center (figure 117). On the other hand, global integration with access through colleges considerably increases integration values making the overall system more integrated, and draws the integration pattern to the west towards the colleges, creating a triangle of the main integrators in the center of Cambridge. Although access through colleges is presumed, colleges still have a certain degree of segregation. Access through colleges also creates another main integrator, which is the ring road on the west side of the river that has some departments and the main university library. The integration nucleus has the main shopping area in the centre surrounded by colleges on all sides with less concentration of colleges on the east side. The local integration pattern - or radius-3 integration which is integration only up to three lines away from each line in every direction - with no access through colleges shows the route following King s Parade and Trinity Street, which is the main university street, to be the most integrated followed by the shopping street (Regent Street) then the main ring road (Figure 118). The local integration pattern also picks up some of the globally segregated lines in residential areas. Local integration with access through colleges remains almost the same as the local integration presuming no access, and it also picks up some globally segregated lines inside colleges. Correlating global integration to local integration, which is called synergy, shows a strong relation between the two (figure 119). The results show better correlation considering there is no access through colleges, since colleges are globally segregated - to provide a certain degree of privacy - and locally more integrated. There seems to be a good correlation between the local and global integration, which means that there is a clear relation between the local and global structure. Due to the historical development of the town, the main geometrical characters of the axial map shows that Cambridge has a deformed grid as opposed to an orthogonal or a radial one. By examining line length and the angle of intersection of the main integrators of the axial map, the main geometric aspects of the grid are revealed. The angle of incidence of the main integrators is an obtuse angle - about 15 degrees of a direct 180 degrees continuation. Obtuse angles are usually associated with longer lines and therefore they have long lines of sight. Relatively segregated lines in Cambridge lie on near right-angle connections, within about 15 degrees of 90 degrees. These are usually associated with shorter lines that do not allow for long lines of sight providing for some degree of privacy. The visual integration analysis echoes the axial map integration in general (Figure 120). It also shows that the visually most integrated area is the area between Market Hill and King s college, which lies in the centre of the main triangle. Integration values are correlated with gate counts to examine the relationship between movement and integration of the main streets. This correlation is categorized by students and residents, to detect in which streets students movement occurs and in which streets residents movement occurs through different times of the day. The data show that there seems to be a reasonably strong correlation between movement and integration throughout different times of the day, except for rush hours, which witness relatively more movement of both students and residents (figure 121). The correlation shows that students movement

6 260 Dima Srouri Figure 117: Global integration map with and with no access through colleges (drawn by the author)

7 Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown 261 Figure 118: Local integration map with and with no access through colleges (drawn by the author)

8 262 Dima Srouri Figure 119: Synergy with and with no access through colleges (produced by the author) takes place at certain streets during certain times of the day, and the same holds true for residents. Students movement is generally clustered in the route following Trumpingdon Street to St. John s Streets with more movement during the lunch and evening rush hours. On the other hand, residents movement takes place in the east-west direction inside the triangle where Market Hill and the main shopping areas are located, with less variation during different times of the day except at evening rush hour, which witnesses more movement. It can be suggested that most of the students movement comes from the west side, and eventually meets residents movement coming from the east side. The encounter between students and residents takes place within the central triangle and spreads on both sides. This follows on the line of argument suggested that town centers can be defined as complexes of interdependent facilities, so that if you come to use one, it is easy to use others, and interaccessibility provides for this (Hillier, 1999a). Hillier suggests that this mix of use is part of a process called the movement economy in which the layout of space first generates movement, then movement-seeking land uses migrate to movement rich lines, producing multiplier effects on movement, which then attract more retail and other services. This eventually creates the urban buzz through the mix of uses within the city grid (Hillier, 1996a). The central triangle creates an area that provides for an ease of encounter between students and residents within a mix of uses. The above observations might lead to a better understanding of university campuses in general and not only this particular case, through the investigation of a theoretical model for a university campus. Using the previous investigations as well as some other theoretical models proposed by other theorists in this field might lead to that.

9 Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown 263 Figure 120: The visual integration analysis of Cambridge (drawn by the author using Depthmap)

10 264 Dima Srouri Figure 121: The correlation between integration and movement during different times throughout the day (produced by the author)

11 Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown 265 Figure 122: Theoretical graph with and with no access through colleges (drawn by the author) 6. A theoretical model Spatial accessibility was previously represented as a matrix of the longest and fewest lines, or the axial map. It is suggested that translating the line matrix into a graph might capture the logic of the system (Hillier, 1999b). Measures from graphs can express the connectivity of communication networks and they are used to describe the complexity and intensity of the use of space. Accessibility through streets is investigated through land use to detect what functions are accessible to students and what functions are accessible to residents. A graph is plotted accordingly from the point of view of functionality. As the axial map presumes two scenarios of accessibility, this graph will assume the same scenarios as well (figure 122). The graph with access through colleges follows the theory of partitioning (Hillier, 1996b), which suggests that increasing connectivity in the system minimizes depth gain and therefore makes the system more integrated. Further investigation of some other models for a university campus proposed by theorists, such as Leslie Martin (Martin, 1972) might throw some light on the theoretical model suggested. Sir Leslie Martin urges maximum contact between educational establishments and other community facilities, and finds in this a possible solution to the problem of conflicting uses of land. He suggests the concept of an educational building as a node of activity within a total community, which is dependent on the knowledge of how educational buildings of all kinds develop and change as related parts of a developing and changing community pattern (Martin, 1972). The developing of an educational mix not only within the institutions themselves but also with the urban area in which they are located is proposed. Within that mix, space itself will become increasingly interchangeable between uses. For example, the university theatre and the college of music can offer educational opportunities for the general public. All these things are an indication of the rich diversity of interests and interactions when the educational pattern is moved outside

12 266 Dima Srouri the confines of its institutionalized limits. His pattern of education without walls ceases to be a series of specialized buildings within a campus (Martin, 1968). It becomes a clustering of a much wider range of buildings in an area of a city held together by a network of linkages, extending to the city itself. Martin suggests that the problem of residential accommodation for the total student population can never be regarded as something separable from the housing problem of a city itself. The campus will not be deserted after the end of the day s teaching by bringing of student housing on to the central site to infuse some life into the university at night. This aims at the establishment of some links between the total integral pattern and its extensions outwards into residence within the city itself. Educational buildings will increasingly cease to be isolated and specialized objects. The outside pressure of their growing relationship to their urban setting will bring them more strongly into line with the overall texture of the city. The focus is on systems of interaction between buildings rather than only on buildings treated separately as specialized objects. For it is only around systems and frameworks that changing activities can organize themselves. This suggestion is seen to be analogous to space syntax theories which might supply a framework around which campus planning decisions can be taken. 6. Conclusions The Analysis shows that global integration increases presuming access through colleges. Global integration with access through colleges draws the integration pattern towards colleges, creating a triangle of the main integrators in the center of Cambridge. Colleges at Cambridge seem to promote the integration of students social life within the city centre. On the other hand, residents have access through colleges to cross the River Cam, enjoy the scene at the Backs or punt along the river, which integrates residents into the students activities. The River Cam plays a particular role in this case, which is to attract activities of both students and residents due to the location of the campus along the river. As the local integration pattern remains almost the same with both scenarios, it is suggested that local integration seems to predict intra-campus relations, while global integration seems to predict inter-campus interactions. Therefore, local integration represents student-student interaction as well as resident-resident interaction, while global integration represents student-resident interaction. It seems that local integration generates local group identity as well as some global segregation. On the other hand, spatially restricted networks between the university and the city seem to depend on global integration (see Greene & Penn, 1997). It seems that strong ties are generated by local integration, while weak ties are generated by global integration and that weak ties are created only when strong ties are previously established. Strong ties require space to be realized and therefore the spatial configuration is held to generate both strong and weak ties. The streets and collective areas of the university become potentially an extension of the framework of the city itself. Global and local integration show that colleges maintain a certain degree of segregation and at the same time they lie on well-integrated streets. The configuration of colleges and how they act as a façade to the campus where accessibility for residents is partially restricted seems to draw a borderline between the university and the city. It seems that hierarchy in spatial configuration and not physical boundaries is what creates a borderline between the university and the city. It is suggested by Hillier (Hillier, 1996a) that good urban space has segregated lines, but they are close to integrated lines, so that there is a

13 Colleges of Cambridge: The Spatial Interaction between the Town and the Gown 267 good mix of integrated and segregated lines locally. Colleges at Cambridge seem to act as a residential complex within the city, and therefore the campus becomes a small society within the big Cambridge society and the way they both interact, to integrate social activity into the city within certain restrictions, seems to be essential for their prosperity. Finally, it is suggested that educational buildings should be seen increasingly as part of the strategy of urban development, moving towards the creation of a new urban environment in which buildings and the spaces between them are part of the same system. Educational buildings should not be isolated from the rest of the city; they are interrelated parts of one single system. The principles that apply to cities equally apply to campuses. Literature Allen T., (1977) Managing the Flow of Technology, Cambridge, MIT Press. Brooke N. L., (1993) A History of the University of Cambridge, Vol. 1-4, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Granovetter, M., (1982) The strength of weak ties, Social Structure and Network Analysis, P.V. Marsden and N. Lin (Eds.), Beverly Hills, Sage Publications. Greene M. and Penn A., (1997) Socio-spatial analysis of four university campuses, proceedings of the 1st International Space Syntax Symposium, London. Hillier, B. and Hanson, J. (1984) The Social Logic of Space Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Hillier, B. (1996a) Cities as movement economies, Urban Design International, Vol. 1, p Hillier, B. (1996b) Space is the Machine, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Hillier, B. (1999a) Centrality as a process: accounting for attraction inequalities in deformed grids, Urban Design International, 4(3&4), p Hillier, B. (1999b) The hidden geometry of the deformed grids: or, why space syntax works, when it looks as though it shouldn t, in: Environment and Planning B: planning and Design, Vol. 26, p Martin, L. and March, L. (1972) Urban Space and Structures, in: Cambridge Urban and Architectural Studies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Martin, L. (1968) Education without walls, RIBA Journal, August 1968, p

14