1. Agenda Space Matters Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert CampusAnalyst Towards a spatial benchmarking system for university campuses A case study of the university Hamm-Lippstadt Santiago de Chile – Space Syntax Symposium 8 January 2012

2. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Holistic planning process for lively universities University planning

3. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Patterns in behaviour change  The internet affects our perception of space and time  New learning methods evolve, which are based on new ways of acquiring knowledge  Demographic change of the population  Lifelong learning  Financial context changes, higher level of competition, pressure on resources  The role of public buildings in the community changes, higher participation  Mixture of life, learning and leisure University planning

4. 3  In this context it is no longer enough to provide any university spaces  As a growing challenge it is important, to create a consistent environment  An holistic concept is necessary to generate places for essential and inspiring communication and to make sure the required work / study can be done in the right environment  Thereby space has a crucial role  most important the right in-between space … the right space University planning

5. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert  Contact/exchange  Cooperation  Time between activities  Transfer between different areas, exchange between departments  Work, eat, talk, rest  Natural traffic areas change, ad hoc they could become workspaces In-between space In-between spaces University planning

6. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Integral planning approach Holistic method - Connection and linking of all processes Structural base HSEP NQM FMQ PPD Preliminary design Design Communication / Project Management Definition of project goals function, form, time, costs Completion Functional and creative requirements  Structural base  Function scheme  Space scheme  Structural requirements  Analysis  space schemes  Constructional planning  building structure  Efficiency  Cost fixation  Sustainability method

7. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Requirement Planning Continuous support of our clients to strengthen user and operator Investment and operational costs Mio € DecisionPlanningExecutionOperation t Project information Cost influence Project profile definiton Development planning Competition management User and Quality management FM - Qualification method Equipment and furniture planning

8. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Tools for active user involvement Space Syntax in the planning process

9. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Key Issues Problems in University Locational Development Strategies Space Syntax in the planning process Kommunikationspotential Urban fabricWay findingMovementCommunication Street Segment Analysis Campus Structure Analysis Agent AnalysisVisibility Graph Analysis

10. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Goal for the new universities in Hamm and in Lippstadt  Integration of the campus in the urban fabric  Linkages between different disciplines to increase change encounter and encourage informal communication  Flexibility and variability of the building structure Space Syntax in the planning process

11. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Question: connection to town center, station and industries Catchment area – red = 400m blue > 6km Space Syntax in the planning process – Road/StreetSegment Analysis – metric distance Campus Town Centre Station Motorway Industry Town Centre Station Motorway A44 Campus Hamm Lippstadt A2 River Lippe

12. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Goal: good connection to town center, station and surrounding industries Space Syntax in the planning process – Road/Street Segment Analysis – metric distance Campus Town Centre Station Motorway Industry Town Centre Station Motorway A44 Campus Hamm Lippstadt A2 River Lippe 1,5 km east of town center center + train station can be reached (car) in 5 min strong link to industries (7-10 km) closer to town 1km town smaller, campus closer to center + station Both campus are located equally well within urbanised area, the city center + industries There is a good potential for extension close to attractors as well as to industries (1 to 5 km) Hamm Lippstadt

13. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Question: Integration values of Hamm and Lippstadt Hamm Lippstadt Campus B1 B55 A2 B63 B61 Campus Town Centre Hamm Lippstadt River Lippe Space Syntax in the planning process - RoadSegment Analysis – global integration

14. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Goal: Integration to streets / town city center is very well integrated north-south and east-west links cross more anchor university close to city Campus B1 B55 A2 B63 B61 Campus Town Centre Hamm Lippstadt River Lippe Space Syntax in the planning process - RoadSegment Analysis – global integration medival city center, pedestrian area, blocked for cars traffic shift to the east  integration north/south axis town center disconnected by parc campus connected to highway but disconnected to town In comparison the Hamm campus is more an integral part of town, an anchor university. The Lippstadt campus is more independent, not so much an urban catalyst. Hamm campus is on a secondary road part of the urban grid, while Lippstadt campus is on a global link and more accessible than the town center.

15. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Spatial structure of the campus Medival structure, crossroad, close to bridge urban extension: grid structure in the south highest integration at transition new development axis: campus – court - station Space Syntax in the planning process - Street Segment Analysis – local integration Hamm Lippstadt Soeststr. Esbecker Str. Cappellstr. Lange Str. Klosterstr.. Station Weststr. Oststr. Ostenallee Nordstr. Goethestr. Marker Allee Campus Station Hansastr. Rixbecker Str. Südertor Beckumer Str. Südenstr. Alleestr. Court highest integration Historic core less integrated in surrounding campus separated at secondary east-west route links with station + commercial area, but bypasses the town Axis separeted In front of station Axis bypasses town Hamm is in more favourable location in terms of the urban structure, combining local and global accessibility, while Lippstadt is good globally but lacks local integration.

16. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Campus Structure Analysis Space Syntax in the planning process - Micro analysis – closeness, centrality and hierarchy Library Info Institutes Auditorium Canteen Auditorium Institutes Laboratories Canteen Info = rooms = connections grid structure with central + decentral elements star shaped around central courtyard + additional ring circulation: main internal corridor multiple entrances, various choices of routes stairs central, easy wayfinding centralised structure in shape of star every building has only one entrance to courtyard central structure, more encounters more depth, means longer ways buildings hierarchically organised Contrasting organisational structures, Hamm: grid-shaped, Lippstadt: star-shaped From previous research it is expected that there will be more chance encounter on the open courtyard in Lippstadt, but increased distance with the more centralised structure

17. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Visual Integration – to identify locations that are highly visible visual integration in institute buildings is low seminars close to institutes  students go there labs isolated  good privacy, less interaction Space Syntax in the planning process - Visibility Graph Analysis Hamm Lippstadt Laboratories Library Canteen Institutes Auditorium Canteen Auditorium Institutes Laboratories Info labs and institutes share one corridore  good for interaction between different institutes seminar rooms in auditorium building  stronger separation between students and staff both courtyards are the space with the highest visual integration all entrances are good integrated as well as the staircases, good orientation inside buildings

18. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert high visibility spaces  these are used for informal communication + breaks Lots of different kinds of spaces, possibility for good meeting points i.e. cafeteria, auditorium, entrances  due to grid-like organisation Space Syntax in the planning process - Visibility Graph Analysis - Clustering hierarchical structure  fewer junction points  less spaces for informal meetings Visibility properties in Hamm provide a higher diversity of spatial qualities In Lippstadt there is integration in fewer junctions and more segregation in the clusters

19. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Simulated movement paths – shown at noon Space Syntax in the planning process - Agent Analysis Hamm Lippstadt Laboratories Library Canteen Institutes Auditorium Canteen Auditorium Institutes Laboratories quiet highest density Two different campus concepts have different user pattern: Hamm: wide courtyard, distributed entrances  spread out movement over entire campus Lippstadt: compact courtyard, centralised entrances  concentrated movement pattern

20. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Pattern of mobility answers questions of future movements… Space Syntax in the planning process - Agent Analysis Hamm Laboratories Library Canteen Institutes Auditorium Where are the main entrances of the campus and the ones mostly used? Where rest people most likely? Where will people move between activities and the different spaces ? Where will people meet by accident? Which paths will people use as starting and ending points?

21. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Movement density Path overlap shows the movements many persons will use in red and those only few people might walk along in blue. Space Syntax in the planning process- Agent Analysis Hamm Lippstadt Laboratories Library Canteen Institutes Auditorium Canteen Auditorium Institutes Laboratories

22. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Main findings for these two universities The study shows that the two campus perform very differently  The campus Hamm is more integrated into the urban fabric  it is on a secondary road part of the urban grid  It has a grid-like internal structure  wide courtyard, distributed entrances  spread out movement over entire campus  The spaces in the buildings provide a higher diversity of spatial qualities for communication  Hamm is an anchor university  The campus Lippstadt is more globally connected  and is even more accessible than the town center  It has a centralised star-shaped structure  compact courtyard, centralised entrances  concentrated movement pattern  It is expected that there will be more chance encounter on the open courtyard  Lippstadt is more independent Space Syntax in the planning process

23. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Space Syntax helps to find the right in-between spaces  Study spaces  Spaces for rest  Informal spaces  Meeting spaces  Lounges  … Space Syntax in the planning process

24. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert In-between spaces in Hamm and Lippstadt Study spaces alone and in groups Lively learning spaces

25. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert In-between spaces in Hamm and Lippstadt Learning spaces and informal meeting areas Lively learning spaces

26. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert In-between spaces in Hamm and Lippstadt Learning and meeting Lively learning spaces

27. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Outlook: Research on university campus Campus location Space Syntax research for campus planning Stuttgart Innsbruck Cottbus Paderborn Bordeaux Hohenheim Ulm Tübingen

28. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Outlook: Research on university campus Campus structure Space Syntax research for campus planning Stuttgart Paderborn Bordeaux Hohenheim Tübingen

29. rheform GmbH Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Main field of application for university planning Holistic planning process without loosing track of the first idea  Method shows the performance of the universitiy + the overall networking possibilities  the accessability of the different buildings + how easy they are to find  the strategic visibilities  the patterns of movement at different times of the day  to find out about the possibilities for informal change encounters + communication  and the right in-between spaces  to find the best fitting layout in competitions Space Syntax in the planning process

30. Thank you! Munich rheform - EntwicklungsManagement GmbH Herzogspitalstraße 8 D - 80331Munich Telefon089 - 30 90 88 88 Telefax089 - 30 90 88 86 Contact Prof. Dr. Christine Kohlert Christine.kohlert@rheform.de