Diagrams

Stream of Consciousness 1+2

Stream of Consciousness 1:

I’m sitting on the slope of a hill which is mostly rock used for drainage of water. It’s very calm and not a lot of noise besides the people interacting within the space. Right now the people who occupy Ringer Park are either people walking their dogs through or kids skateboarding. I am surprised to see the skateboarders here because the terrain did not seem fit for such an activity. They are using the playground as a skate park essentially which kind of brings a duality and mix use to the space. The trees seem to define spaces around me. I noticed that where the trees are is what separates the function of the park form the basketball courts to the playground, to the baseball fields. It’s very sunny out today, and the air is extremely brisk but not to the point where I am uncomfortable. I can see why a lot of people would be here no matter what time of year. Even now there are at least 25 people or so occupying the park. I can see access into the park may be an issue for people coming from the T.

Stream of Consciousness 2:

I am sitting at the highest point in Ringer Park and the temperature is a lot warmer than the first time I was here. I can basically see the entire boundaries of the park and each function space. A lot more people are filling up the park the longer I stay here. Most likely due to the fact it’s a Saturday. Mostly families with young children are using the space to either play on the playgrounds or to walk through with their family dogs. I’ve noticed from this vantage point that the circulation through the park isn’t entirely composed of paved sidewalks or walkways, but rather the majority are gravel or dirt paths. This gives the space a more natural feel rather than a man made park. The surrounding area seems like it could be slightly intimidating at nighttime due to the excessive amount of graffiti on concrete walls and fences. The whole landscape of the park slopes downward and opens outward to residential spaces surrounding the lower plains.

Ringer Park Interviews

Ringer Park Interviews

Questions:

-How do you view this space, as public or private?

-How often do you use this space?

 -What do you come here to do?

-How did you get here?

-Do you think this space is a successful space for the things you come here to do?

Bill, 32:

-Public definitely

-Every weekend and after work a few times a week

-Walk my dog and sometimes play catch with him

-90% of the time I walk but sometimes I may drive if I feel like a change

-Yes, there is plenty of open space and lots of variety

Miguel, 16:

-Public, I mean there aren’t guards or anything

-Maybe once a week

-Hangout with friends or to skate the playground if it’s empty

-Skateboard

-It’s an okay place. It’s nothing special so I guess technically no it isn’t successful for skating.

Dawn, 29:

-Public, but mostly for the locals

-Once a week

-Bring my daughter to the playground and to walk our dog with her

-Walk, I live up the road

-Yes, it’s a nice park to just come to for an hour or so. Much better in the summer however.

Cameron, 12: (I had to simplify the questions for him)

-Public (from what he said I assumed he meant public)

-On the weekends

-To play with my brother and sister on the playground

-Drive in my mom’s car

-The playground is smaller than my schools but it’s super fun. Especially the swings

Gene, 58:

-Public

-I’m actually just passing through this one time. I’m just visiting a relative for the weekend and this place looked interesting.

-To walk I would say

-Walking

-Other than the graffiti inn many places I would say it’s a decent place to stroll through every now and then.

Week 13 Readings: Public Space and Urban/Rural Health

In response to Frampton;


In this article Frampton talks about not only what critical regionalism is, but also he suggests ideas on how to improve modern architecture with regionalism in mind. Frampton basically defines critical regionalism as a response to the lack of focus on site and meaning within modern architecture. He says that modern architecture should still be seen as a progression into the future, but still hold qualities of previous styles that often focused on such ideas as site context, light, climate/microclimate etc. Critical regionalism relates to the ideas of megaform that were previously discussed in class in a sense that critical regionalism focuses on the region as a whole, rather than a very specific point of interest much like the difference between megaform and mega structure. The Bagsvaerd Church mentioned in the reading stood out to me, primarily because of its modernistic style and how even though the style is such, that it brings back ideas of the cultures past into the nave. The expression of the vaulted roof really emphasizes that in section, as seen in the reading as well. After reading this article I'm beginning to think more about perhaps bringing more of a focus on regionalism and more specific critical regionalism into my own work because of the positive benefits of bringing people together and using the site to create a "universal" space.

In response to Waldheim;


After this reading by Waldheim I have gained a general understanding of how landscape can effect urbanism and the planning behind urban areas. It was stated in the article that "landscape is merging as a model for urbanism." This to me makes a lot of sense because creating spaces with landscape, particularly green spaces in urban environments can be critical to the success of not only public space but buildings themselves. With the right amount of focus towards the landscape, a building can really become "complete" if you will by establishing a connection between the two. The "Freshkills" projject in the reading tells us how difficult it is to create such a place where the cultural and social aspects work in a positive way with the infrastructure of the area itself.

Week 11 Readings: Creating Public Space: Ritual/Practice and Event Spaces

In response to Roach's "Cities of the Dead"


Overall I found this reading to be very confusing and there was too many "back and forth" moments throughout. Mainly it was figuring out what time period he was talking about and what new or old laws pertained to them. As for the basic ideas behind a parade, I do have my own personal opinion about them. Parades are for the public, or a particular group within the public to express themselves whether it be for political reasons or for protest, or for at least primarily what I have seen in life, for fun or celebration. The role of tradition does come into play for certain things however I feel as though if a tradition involves something such as racial discrimination than that tradition should be altered to follow some of the social orders and well, US laws that are instated. In my opinion a tradition should still be able to be had, just to a certain extent. For example, say a group has a historic tradition to drink alcohol in the public square of town. Now it is technically against the law to do so in a lot of places because it is illegal to drink, or be drunk in the open public. However, I feel as though if the group does not disturb the peace of the public than their tradition should still be able to be had. This creates grey areas for what is right and what is wrong, this I know, but there is always going to be grey areas when it a subject is dealing with both law and tradition and what is "right."

Week 10 Readings: Public Space and Participation/Public Space and Management

In response to Kiefer's "The Social Functions of NIMBYism,"

Nimbyism aka "Not in my backyard", is essentially a term for the people who are against certain proposals of construction in or close to their own neighborhood. In my own opinion I would say I have no problem with people who do this. Even if say I were to design a building in an area and it were to be reacted to in a negative way by the public, I would accept this and potentially find out what exactly is the concern. I feel as though a public interaction with the architect and or construction company is key to success in a project. Especially of that in a city or urban environment, primarily because the number of people affected is most likely going to be increased in said situation. I have actually experienced something along the lines of a "protest" against a project in my own life. When I was in 5th grade, we were told our playground was going to be removed for good, due to a recent accident in which a person broke their arm on the monkey bars. The reason for the proposal of the removal was that the parents suggested a more supervised group activity based recess instead to prevent injuries. Us kids of course were in an uproar... how could they take away our playground we loved so much, just because of one accident. We had just learned about the judicial system in class and a group of friends suggested we have a trial to our teacher against the people trying to remove our playground. Upon which our teacher suggested a petition, which of course was a new idea we had never heard of before, and were eager to try. So our fifth grade class created a "Stop the Playground Removal" petition around school, as allowed by my teacher. Unfortunately the process continued forward and our playground was removed within a month of the incident. However all was not lost for us kids. They installed new, much more safe equipment for us to use, all because they saw how distraught we were to see our playground go. Even at such a young age, and in a sense tiny community, we were able to convince the people otherwise.


In response to "Public Space: The Management Dimension,

In the reading they talked about four main topics and they were as follows, aspirations for public space, public space management structures and coordination, stakeholder involvement in public space management, and lastly challenges facing local authorities. The first topic basically talked about public space and its accessibility. The authorities were arguing that some public spaces do not benefit from 24/7 access, such examples were provided such as, urban parks and places that were framed by academic institutions. I can see why they could argue about that because the safety of the community that which the space is involving could be in jeopardy. The basic behind the second topic was that there was an intention to improve the coordination between different public space management processes and to overcome largely historic rationales for fragmentation. The stakeholder involvement in public space management portion discussed how the community itself and the stakeholders communicate within the project so that the public space being created can be exactly what is needed and what is envisioned. Also so that there are no discrepancies. The final topic, the challenges of facing the local authorities talked about all the issues of a public space such as who will manage and maintain the space, how will it stay successful in the future etc.

Week 9 Readings: Public Space as Cosmopolitan

In response to Cronon's "A Place for Stories..."


After reading about these two author's and there interpretations of the same event, I tried to relate it in some way to public space, or even architecture in general. Both the authors talked about in the reading wrote about the same occurrence, used the same knowledge and it was even said that, a lot of the material they researched from was similar. Some how though they came up with polar opposite conclusions. How this relates to architecture and public space is that even if given the same exact site for a project, two architects can come up with different solutions, or creations to fill that void. In relation to public space, one can imagine the same sort of thing. I p;ace that may be the perfect setting for a public space can be ruined or mis-used to create something that is a failure.

Week 8 Readings: Public Space as Cosmopolitan: Sociability and Exchange

In response to Avermaete's "Making Things Public"


The privatization of public space hampers true public action in a sense that it literally takes the meaning of "public" out of a "public space." When a space becomes privatized it then turns into an area which may or may not be accessible to the general public. For an example, say a space is inside a parking garage complex, the public won't necessarily access this place unless of course they are parking in said garage. It takes away as previously stated, the sense of "public" in a public space. I found it interesting when Avermaete talked about how the modern technology we have today is turning public space from an architectural and landscape type of ordeal into an engineering and computer type of "space." Today thousands of people gather in this virtual public space and use such things as blogs and popular social networking sites i.e. Facebook and Twitter. So to say that an architect should begin to think about designing a public space with both these ideas in mind, than one might be able to create a working public space in today's age, while still maintaining the original ideas of a public space. One other interesting point made by Avermaete was the ideas around public space and sustainability and how the two can coincide and work effectively in modern public space design.

In response to "Everyday Urbanism"


Essentially what the authors of this reading define "public"as something they call a public sphere. In which everyone in the general public has the right to be there, what they call a "space of democracy." I found the connection to the ancient Greeks and their public space. WHile women and other people not technically considered a citizen weren't treated equally in most aspects of life, the public space was open to them. This developed into our knowledge of what the term public space is supposed to mean, and that is a place that is open to everyone in the public realm, from rich to poor and in todays context of every age, race, and nationality.

Project 4: Benches

Benches or should I say, places to sit and relax have been around for thousands of years. The purpose for them have essentially remained the same throughout history as well. The bench is often used for sitting, relaxing, spectating, reading, drawing, you name it. It's an all around versatile object, and it's no surprise why one will find benches in almost every public space or any place where people may gather. What I learned from taking all these pictures of different benches was that the materiality and sometimes even the structure of the bench itself were based upon the surrounding environment and its elements. For example the smooth grey metal bench was found on Northeastern's campus and has a more modern and "futuristic" look to it which is much like what Northeastern is going for with it's recent campus renovations and projects. Other benches such as the green painted wooden benches I saw in Cambridge have more of a historical feel with the old wood and rusting metal. Another thing I noticed was how all the benches I saw in parks were very similar, and often made from a combination of a darker metal and either stained or painted wood.

Project 4: 10 Benches Around Boston

Week 7 Readings: Megaform & Educator

In response to Frampton's "Megaform as Urban Landscape:


The difference between a megaform and a megastructure is the relative continuity in form. So basically saying a megastructure can reside within a megaform. Frampton begins to describe what exactly makes a megaform, a megaform. A major characteristic of a megaform is that it is a large for that extends horizontally rather than vertically. As well as a form that is orientated towards the densification of the urban form. What really makes megaforms directly related to creating great public spaces is how megaforms relate to the surrounding topography. This almost creates natural spaces in which people may gather. I found how the Baker Dormitory in Cambridge, designed by Aalto connects to the Charles River and has this continuation of form to be very intriguing. The almost direct form and "path" if you will, that the building creates with the topography is spectacular. The ideas of long term stability and creating a group form developed by Maki and Ohtaka create a new kind of look on the megaform.

In response to Borden's "Another Pavement, Another Beach: Skateboarding and the Performative Critique of Architecture":

I found this article to be one of the more interesting ones we have read through out the year. Primarily because skateboarding has always been an interest of mine, and I find it very fascinating. What may be surprising is that I don't skateboard all that well myself, however I still understood many of the relationships the author kept making between the modern city and skateboarding. The relationship between the skateboarders and their urban environment is starting to bring up new ideas on how architecture can not only create an environment in which the general public can enjoy but as well as the skateboarding community. Skateboarding could only happen in the modern city, as opposed to the renaissance or medieval city for many reasons. For one the architecture of those times did not provide applicable space for the moves and such that skateboarders often attempt. One obvious reason that i feel is the most important that the author seems to leave out is roads and street conditions. The roads of today are often paved with asphalt or concrete, and these materials are best for the skateboard. In the case of prior generation cities the roads were often dirt, cobblestone, or gravel. All of which are basically impossible to skateboard on.

Sketch of Dewey Square. Shows the division of space created by walkway through the middle

Dewey Square

Interviews

The following are the 5 questions I asked to 5 different people at the protesting at Dewey Square. I changed the language of the required questions so that I’d get more natural responses rather than more formal ones.

1. Why did you choose to protest in the streets, rather than doing the same, but on the internet and blogs?

2. Does Dewey Square as a space benefit protesting? Or does it diminish it in anyway?

3. How have you coped with living here in the public?

4. The weather has been very nice lately. If it were pouring rain out, or maybe the middle of winter, would you still be here?

5. Do you plan on staying here as long as possible, or do you have other commitments, such as a job, or a family to attend to?

Stan, 42 years old:

-With the internet the public doesn’t see your face, or who you are. Out here we can reach out to more than just people who use the internet.

-It definitely helps us more than it hurts. Yeah we have to deal with police, but being in such a populated area really helps.

-It hasn’t been that bad actually. The others here are very friendly and this weather has been great.

-Of course. I stand by my rights and my opinion and weather doesn’t affect how I’m going to express myself.

-Until they kick us out, I’ll be here. My family understands my decision.

Matt, 27 years old:

-The internet? The streets and public is something we’ve always had, so I think it reaches out to more people.

-This place is vibrant with people of all ages and classes. But the actual physical space you mean? It’s small, but that doesn’t hurt us. SO I’ll say it benefits us as a group because we interact with each other.

-Just like camping, but with loud noises. (laughter). I’ve dealt with it pretty well I’d say.

-As hard as it may be, I just may stay here in either case. I feel very strong about my opinion so if that’s what it takes, than sure.

-I’m actually in grad school so my work is getting a bit behind, but I plan on staying for as long as I can.

Cara, 25 years old:

-I could do both if I wanted, with today’s technology. But out here, I feel more of a connection. Like I’m making a difference.

-Helps, for sure. The smaller space brings us protesters together and gives “one voice.” Plus with these large buildings surrounding us it kind of brings us out more to people.

-It’s been a little rough. I’m a light sleeper so the noise has been the most difficult when it comes to sleep. Other than that I don’t really mind it.

-It would make it much, much harder to stay as long as I have, but I still think I would be here that’s for sure.

-My family doesn’t want me to be out here, so rule them out. My job on the other hand might be in jeopardy pretty soon, which really sucks because I wish I could let people hear me out without possibly ruining my future.

Paul, 58 years old:

-I don’t even own a computer, so that’d be impossible young man. Even if I did, I have no intentions to do so. The public eye is more important to me than a computer screen.

-Helps, helps, helps. The way this space is set up, and its location is amazing. It brings focus to us.

-I’ve been doing this kind of living for years now. It’s second nature, so I wouldn’t say I’d need to “cope” with anything.

-Once again, I’ve lived in those conditions for quite some time now. So that wouldn’t change anything.

-My job is this. Speaking for the 99% of Americans that aren’t running this country into the ground. I’ll be here and elsewhere for as long as I live.

Kim, 33 years old:

-I’ve actually been involved with many blog sites and voiced my opinion there as well. Out here however I feel like I get more of our point across.

-Neither. It’s more about location than the space itself in my opinion. We’re near the Financial District, so that obviously plays a huge part in it all.

-Everything has been going great! Except for maybe the hygiene. I’ve found myself wandering off just to use the bathroom, which may be looked at negatively by other protesters but oh well.

-I’ll be honest. I would probably be blogging still. I’m all for getting out into the public and making a stand, but I think health comes first; At least to me.

-I took a week off from work, and plan on going back after Columbus Day. I still feel like I’ve done a lot just by being here though. The length of stay shouldn’t matter as long as you are prideful about your opinion. 

Materiality Diagram of Copley Square

Week 4 Readings: Linear Model

In response to Whyte's The Street


In this Reading Whyte discusses the importance of the street in relation to a public space. He says that the street, and more specifically the street corner is a key space for a plaza. This is because a lot of traffic happens on the street and on the street corners. The interaction between vendors and other people conversing makes the streets something that can be used to better a plaza. Whyte says that the transition between the street and the plaza is a key aspect between success and failure and that, "the transition should be such that it's hard to tell where one ends and the other begins." I also believe this is a key part to a plaza because if you think about it, if the transition is extremely smooth one might find themselves simply stumbling upon the plaza. You could be walking along the street and then bam, you're in a beautiful plaza where you might venture again and again, day after day. Basically what I got out of this reading is that to create a successful plaza or public space in general, connecting with the street is a key aspect of the design that should be thought out in a rigorous manor. Also creating a sense of wonder or curiosity from the street looking towards the plaza is something to think about.

In response to Lane Barden's The River


When I think of a river I think of a winding path of water going through vegetation, most likely trees and tall grass. What else comes to mind is rocky ledges and just pure nature essentially. I have never really experienced any urban rivers in my life, coming from New Hampshire all the rivers are natural rather than man made or even in an urban context. The closest thing would be in Manchester, NH where the city is basically built a long a river and was once a town for paper mills. The ideas behind the manmade river in LA are quite interesting. It was created to control and lessen the chance of flooding in the area. However this takes away form the natural beauty of a "real" river. Yes the chances of flood are increased , but there are many things an architect or designer can do to solve that issue. Another issue I found with the river in LA is that the vandalism that is increasing along the structure, thus creating a visually displeasing look.

Week 4 Readings: Center/Node

In response to W. H. Whyte's "Plazas"

According to Whyte, the best used plazas are most often used as a "sociable places." He notes that in the most successful plazas in New York that 42% of the total people there were in groups of two or more, while in the least successful that number dips down to 32% This makes complete sense to me because usually plazas that are successful would see groups that are meeting there for a reason or as Whyte says, they decide to go there rather than just simply passing through. Women differ from men in their plaza choices in that women are more selective when it comes to comfortability, and are more likely to choose a "better plaza." I don't find this surprising really because men seem to care less about the comfort and more about the women, or at least that is what Whyte says. I found that interesting that the more successful plazas have more women. This is primarily due to the increase in men that will also show up if the ratio of women to men is good from their perspective.

Christopher Columbus Park Boston, MA

Yawkey Way, Fenway Park

Week 2 Readings: Public Space as Ideal Form / Grid / Ubiquitous

Response to Rowe, C., & Koetter, F. Collage City

When reading this portion of Collage City I became very intrigued at the points that the author(s) were trying to make. However, the language used was rather too complex for my liking and I found myself lost multiple times, and having to back track just to get an understanding at all. Using what I could understand out of it I noticed some very interesting ideas as well as quotes to back up said ideas. Basically, as I understood it to be, the original idea of a city needed to go, so that the new idea could come into place. However the new ideas of a modern city also had it's major flaws. Therefore a healthy balance of the two is needed to be created. The right combination of public space with buildings is what architects and urban planners are seeking. An example using Gestalt diagrams proved to be a helpful example in the reading. The two extremes being one having mostly black with a tiny bit of white, and vis versa. In relation to a city one would be buildings with spaces cut out of them, and on the other hand would be space with buildings created within it. Also said in the reading is that objects or spaces may characterize the "old" city or the "new" city, however they can be used to create an equality amongst one another. "A debate in which victory consists in each component emerging undefeated" (Koetter, 83). To summarize what I learned in one sentence, basically what it's all about is creating a combination of the ideas of the old city with the ideas of the new city, in a way that works for todays society. On a side note, one quote stood out a lot to me and it said, "A building is like a soap bubble. This bubble is perfect and harmonious if the breath has been evenly distributed from the inside. The exterior is the result of an interior" (Koetter 58). I found this very inspirational because it gave me a new perspective about architecture that I had not really thought about in depth, and will not most likely look back on this quote in the future.

Week 2 Reading Responses: Public Space as City Organizer

Response to Kevin Lynch, Image of the City

After reading the first chapter of Kevin Lynch's Image of the City, I have many opinions on the various subjects discussed in the reading. First off I'd like to agree with Lynch's statements about gathering a "public image" when it comes to navigating a city or an environment. If there is some sort of visual image, or structure or even area that is commonly recognized by not only one individual but rather a large group, than that is an example of a successfully planned out environment. However it is also a good thing to have this "public image" be something that can be looked at from many perspectives. I also agree with Lynch when he says that, "The observer himself should play an active role in perceiving the world and have a creative part in developing his image. He should have the power to change that image to fit changing needs." Basically saying that the people should be able to see their "image" no matter what the conditions. Finally I'd like to comment on the section of the reading where Lynch discusses devices that aid orientation and how the "breech the experience of interconnection." I can see where he is coming from when this is said. Devices such as GPS and smart-phones take the individual away from the environment. Instead of learning the surroundings by gathering visual images, the individual simply relies on animated roads and electronic voices as their guide. This in turn prevents a legitimate understanding of a place. I tend to agree on many points that Lynch as making, and overall really enjoyed the perspective he takes on the ideas of a city as an environment. He does not side with either traditional style of city such as the "organized grid" such as New York City nor the mess of urban planning that is Boston. To Lynch it's all about whether or not everything works in synchronicity and can be easily navigated through ideas such as the "public image" and without devices that aid orientation.


Response to William H Whyte, Sitting Spaces


Through out the entire reading all I could ask myself was, "what took these people so long to figure it out." The process that they took was more or less an adequate way of doing things, however the order in which it was done was completely off. One would think that when trying to figure out why certain plazas gather more people, you would look into the seating space. Yes the sun and dimensions of a plaza play a role but those are secondary issues in this case. So to me the process was more shocking than the actual finding itself. To create a space that will allow more people to gather, one must allow the space in which people can sit to grow and be quite large it's as simple as that. In relation to that point, if I were a designer convincing client to remove handrails form planters around the plaza I would simply say that if they want more people to gather in the plaza than putting up handrails around the planters would be a bad decision. Removing them would allow ledges that people can sit on, and people can sit where ever along said ledge without being restricted to specific areas like in the case of an individual stationary chair. An argument can be made however for placing handrails along said planters. The handrails, depending on height can be used to lean on for individuals who may choose not to sit. They also can prevent damages done to the plants because the rails themselves creates what is understood to be a boundary line.