Evidence Domain

Spatial Planning

What it studies

The organisation of space across scales: allocation, adjacency, zoning, circulation and capacity — the analytical discipline of who and what goes where, and what the arrangement makes easy or hard. In workplace terms it spans from portfolio distribution down to floor-level blocking.

Why it matters

Spatial planning is where organisational structure and physical structure negotiate. Adjacency decisions determine which collaborations are cheap and which are expensive; zoning decisions determine what can coexist; capacity distribution determines where friction concentrates. It is the discipline behind stacking, blocking and the programme of requirements — quantitative, consequential and chronically underestimated.

Questions it answers
  • Which adjacencies does the evidence require, and which arrangements can deliver them?
  • How should capacity distribute across floors, buildings and locations against demand rhythm?
  • What zoning logic reconciles openness, confidentiality and customer presence?
  • What does a given arrangement cost in movement, encounter and separation?
Evidence sources
  • Space syntax and spatial analysis research
  • Adjacency and interaction studies
  • Occupancy and movement data
  • Programming and space-planning methodology literature
Design and policy implications

Stacking and blocking modelled against evidence-weighted adjacency requirements; vertical separation costed honestly; circulation designed as encounter infrastructure; capacity planned as distribution against rhythm, not as area per head.

Related methods
Common misuse

Planning by precedent and politics: adjacencies allocated by seniority, ratios imported from benchmarks, and space syntax invoked decoratively rather than analytically. The counter-discipline is the evidence chain — every planning decision traceable to a measured requirement.

Further research

Space syntax findings on movement and encounter are robust; their extension to organisational outcomes (collaboration quality, innovation) is more contested and warrants careful claims.