Staging Urban Landscapes: The Activation and Curation of Flexible Public Spaces 3035611890, 9783035611892

Citation preview

STAGING URBAN LANDSCAPES

THE ACTIVATION AND CURATION OF FLEXIBLE PUBLIC SPACES

THE PUBLICATION WAS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE KIND SUPPORT OF:

Sasaki Associates, Inc.

Argent LLP

Aspect Studios

LDA Design Consulting Limited Mace Developments Limited — Shaping cities and building sustainable communities

Marshalls plc

Savills (UK) Ltd

B. CANNON IVERS

STAGING URBAN LANDSCAPES

THE ACTIVATION AND CURATION OF FLEXIBLE PUBLIC SPACES

Birkhäuser Basel

CASE STUDIES 74 HARVARD PLAZA Stoss Landscape Urbanism Cambridge, MA, USA

86 GRANARY SQUARE Townshend Landscape Architects London, UK

CONTENTS

94 WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE Denys Lasdun London, UK

102 BRADFORD CITY PARK Gillespies Bradford, UK

108 POTTERS FIELDS PARK GROSS.MAX. London, UK

6 FOREWORD Charles Waldheim

122 LAWN ON D

8 PREFACE

Sasaki Associates Boston, MA, USA

B. Cannon Ivers

10 THE RISE OF FLEXIBLE SPACE B. Cannon Ivers

20 THE CULTURE OF CHANGE: A PERSONAL READING B. Cannon Ivers

38 THE URBAN SURFACE: SHIFTING FIELDS FOR CURATED EVENTS Alex Wall

46 OPEN-ENDED: PUBLIC SPACES AS COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS Chris Reed

54 FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE Nicola Dempsey

58 GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS: PLANNING, PROGRAMMING AND PLAY Chris Wangro

66 SCRATCH THAT! Sergio Lopez-Pineiro

134 A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE Peter Elliott and Taylor Cullity Lethlean Melbourne, Australia

138 JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A Kim Wilkie London, UK

144 BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK LDA Design London, UK

150 MOMA PS1 Various through the Young Architects Program (YAP) Brooklyn, NY, USA

160 SERPENTINE PAVILION Various designers London, UK

168 ROBSON REDUX Various designers Vancouver, BC, Canada

180 RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART COMPETITION Student competition Cambridge, MA, USA

192 LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DES ARTISTES

258 CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES CIUDADANAS (CAAC)

Daoust Lestage Montreal, Canada

Paredes Pino Arquitectos Cordoba, Spain

198 TRAFALGAR SQUARE

262 SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK AT HUMBOLDT FORUM

Foster+ Partners London, UK

relais Landschaftsarchitekten Berlin, Germany

204 SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE GROSS.MAX. London, UK

208 NAVY YARD CENTRAL GREEN James Corner Field Operations Philadelphia, PA, USA

214 THE GOODS LINE ASPECT Studios Sydney, Australia

218 SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ Vetschpartner Zurich, Switzerland

224 BENTHEMPLEIN WATER SQUARE De Urbanisten Rotterdam, Netherlands

230 MORE LONDON Townshend Landscape Architects London, UK

234 BRYANT PARK OLIN New York, USA

240 SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT Donald Insall Associates London, UK

268 DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN SUBLIME: THE UNCANNY AS A PROGRAMMATIC MOTIVATION IN NEW CITY PARKS F. Philip Barash and Gina Ford

271 THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S CROSS, LONDON Ken Trew

275 KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS Kirsten Bauer

278 OPEN AND INVITATIONAL: THE DESIGN APPROACH OF JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS Richard Kennedy

282 PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL CULTURE: PLACE DES FESTIVALS — QUARTIER DES SPECTACLES, MONTREAL Daoust Lestage

285 INNOCENCE Adriaan Geuze and Annemarie Kuijt

288 AFTERWORD: DESIGN, CURATION AND IDENTITY James Corner

244 DU MUSÉE AVENUE Various designers Montreal, Canada

248 BERGES DE SEINE Franklin Azzi Architects Paris, France

254 SCHOUWBURGPLEIN (THEATRE SQUARE) West 8 Rotterdam, Netherlands

290 296 300 300 302 303

Visual index Index About the author About the contributors Acknowledgements Illustration credits

FOREWORD

This publication and the phenomena it describes are timely returns to topics of regularly recurring interest in the design disciplines. The essays and insights, cases and conditions described here offer a contemporary reading of the relations between urban occasions and their containers. Ivers’s longstanding commitment to the topic, the various forms of evidence presented here and the impressive array of co-conspirators that he assembles are testament enough to the significance of the topic for discourse and practices in the urban arts today. In certain respects, this research project is a welcome rejoinder to the decades-long debates on the relationship of the shape of the city to the experience of the urban. For a generation of architects/urbanists steeped in the failures of modernist planning, such activity or event represented a significant and fecund alternative to the stylistic baggage and cultural regression of postmodern or neo-conservative urban projects. Among these, many urbanists educated in Europe became interested in the US city as a model of urban activity organised across a thin horizontal vegetal plane. For these urbanists (Reyner Banham, Kenneth Frampton, Rem Koolhaas, Bernard Tschumi, Lars Lerup and Alex Wall), the density of activity or event and the proximity of bodies in urban space came to stand for urbanity itself, in lieu of the containers of that activity. This position allowed a generation (or more) of European

6

CHARLES WALDHEIM

CHARLES WALDHEIM

urbanists to propose propinquity and potential as more significant indicators of urbanity rather than the superficially stylised neo-traditional forms associated with postmodern urban form. In the discourse and practices of the urban arts in the 1980s and 90s on both sides of the Atlantic, programme or event came to stand as primary referents of the urban project. This tendency lent momentum to renewed interest in landscape as a medium of urban configuration and to infrastructure as an irrigator of urban potential. These tendencies were also a more-or-less direct repudiation of the two other dominant conceptions of urban programme or event in the postwar era: programming of urban institutions on the one hand and the sociology of human behaviour in urban spaces on the other. Beginning with the mathematical modelling emerging from World War II and manifesting through the post-war reconstruction of European cities, architectural programming became a dominant paradigm for the development of urban design in the 1950s. Through the optimisation of adjacencies and efficiencies associated with flexibility, temporal change, and computational modelling, architectural programming came to define an approach to the design of the city from the 1940s through the 1960s. In contrast to that state-supported, institutionally based and ideologically charged approach to city-making, an alternative practice of urban sociology developed in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. This work was more often

based in urban planning or its adjacent fields in the social sciences or policy and was associated with empirical observation of individual and collective human behaviour in urban space. It would be hard to overstate the historical import of the work of Jane Jacobs or William H. Whyte in this regard. This approach to the design of urban spaces tended to focus on the perceived failures of modernist planning to ­address the so-called ‘human scale’, as well as questions of comfort, safety and security. These two paradigms of urban space-making — programming and the sociology of urban behaviour — were both enormously productive in terms of discip­ linary formation as well as projective practices. Both had tremendous success in reproducing themselves as discourses and practices, with myriad built examples of each around the world in the second half of the 20th century. Unfortunately, these two divergent paradigms tended to reinforce disciplinary and professional divisions between architecture and urban design, reflecting design culture versus landscape architecture and urban planning understood as empirical social or natural sciences. In response to this disjunction of realms, and the resulting incoherence of the design disciplines’ response to the question of the shape of the city, the discourse and practices of landscape urbanism emerged in the past two decades. Taking up the critical conceptual and curatorial approach to activity and event used by the European urbanists of the 1980s cited above, landscape urbanism proposed an unlikely alliance of design culture and the curation of urban event. These tendencies are evident in contemporary urban projects and practices internationally, and might be summarised in three complex and potentially contradictory conditions informing urban proj­ ects today. These impulses are evident across the essays and case studies assembled here, and they collectively contribute to the beginnings of a new discourse, and new practices of contemporary urban curation. First, much of the past quarter century of urban programming, and many of the examples arrayed here, have to do with the occupation of sites left vacant in the wake of economic restructuring. Most recently this has to do with the ongoing shift in the sites of industrial production and the vacancy of formerly industrial sites associated with advanced capital. In contemporary practice, these sites are often irrigated with new potential through the installation of new urban infrastructure. These sites are transformed through programming and event, in advance of their urban restructuring. Often these event spaces are temporary, provisional occupation through event and spectacle, as the first wave of a larger, more comprehensive architectural restructuring enabling the new economy through urban form. Projects such as Schouwburgplein (Theatre Square in Rotterdam (p. 254 – 257) and Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam are indicative of these tendencies. Second, contemporary practices of programmed urbanity are often exploiting the abandonment or relative under-utilisation of transportation infrastructure. These are sites that were the result of functionally optimised single-function civil engineering projects for mobility that came to be under-utilised

relative to the economic and cultural potential of the urban sites they occupied. Projects such as Paris Plage or the High Line in New York along with dozens of other contemporary comparables are illustrative of this tendency. A corollary contemporary trend can be found in the reoccupation of space underneath still functioning elevated transportation infrastructure. This trend is evident in projects such as the Underline in Miami and the Bentway in Toronto. Third, the tendency toward the programming of urban space in contemporary practice also reveals the increasing hegemony of neo-liberal economic models imposed on the shape of the city. This tendency is associated with every available urban space being programmed or filled with event. These projects such as the redevelopment of the Southbank in London or the recent plan for Governors Island in New York harbour tend toward an implicit understanding of urban space as essentially transactional. This characterisation of urban life as formed through a series of economic relations in exchange for occupation has been enabled through a host of practices associated with privately owned public space, restrictions on behaviour and speech in the public realm, and the increasing surveillance state of the contemporary urban realm. They have also been underpinned by another equally significant transformation in which private philanthropic models of stewardship and maintenance (conservancies, friends’ groups, merchants’ associations) replace the historic role of the public sector and policy in managing the urban realm. Taken together, these tendencies indicate a coherent, if potentially contradictory, not to say problematic future for curating citizenship in the neo-­ liberal urban landscape. This suggests that our contemporary tendencies might continue in the near future. If so, we might expect contemporary design culture’s menu of oft-repeated urban tropes such as the generic culture ‘shed’, the urban viewing ‘platform’ the programmed urban ‘surface’ and linear park-like ‘lines’, to continue to shape the contemporary public realm in cities around the world.

FOREWORD 7

PREFACE

Since 2007, more people reside in cities than in rural areas, requiring urban open spaces to work hard to accommodate a multitude of uses and cultural demands. The increased pressure on public spaces and a population that is increasing exponentially demand that our squares, streets and parks are renewed and refreshed as a cultural overlay to the urban infrastructure; programmed and changed as an ephemeral stage of human encounter and provocation. The dynamism of urban spaces in cities like London, New York, Barcelona, Paris, Chicago, Montreal, Boston and Copenhagen demonstrates a richness of programmability, which becomes the lynchpin of public life and a catalyst for community cohesion. Subsequently, new energy is consistently breathed into these spaces to stave off the quiet social decay of static monotony or, put simply, space without change. This also encompasses meanwhile uses, where derelict buildings and under-utilised spaces are charged with the energy of community gatherings and visionary art installations that rely on the interaction of the users. Although these spaces act as placeholders for more permanent urban interventions, for a period of months or years such spaces can serve as places of gathering and platforms for social exchange, performance and communal interaction. It is no longer enough to create a space that looks beautiful yet remains static. More often than not, it is the overlay and activation that transforms

8

B. CANNON IVERS

B. CANNON IVERS

a space, impacts adjacent communities and establishes a wellused and appreciated patch of public realm. The space is enlivened, an energetic atmosphere is created, which in turn attracts more people and the pattern continues. The sense of ‘renew and refresh’ that programmed spaces provide can come from borrowed infrastructure, such as the opening and closing of Tower Bridge in London, incidental public exchanges such as the Book Fair under Waterloo Bridge in London or through commerce, such as selling plants in lower Manhattan, that dramatically changes the character of the street once business begins. Water has become indispensable, facilitating a calendar of events, while also activating a space on a day-to-day basis. The simple idea that a shallow film of water can be drained away to provide a performance space or accommodate a community event is enabling cities around the world to establish an active and programmable stage. It is a sign of the times. Other instances of the power of programme are seen in the more deliberate activation of space through theatre, dance, performance and the transformation of a space by changing its use — importing sand, adding turf or interactive public art. The simple alteration to the character of a space can have a profound impact on the way people behave in it, as seen in London’s Trafalgar Square in 2007 when the square was covered in turf and people began to behave as if this central civic square was a park.

The flexibility of space, how the design can accommodate a myriad of events, cultural celebrations and incidental artistic expression, is now featuring on the agenda of more and more client briefs in the public and private sector. Designers are framing proposals and competition entries around an annual calendar of events and a vision of how a proposed design can accommodate change through overlays. Infrastructures to accommodate these overlays are also being integrated into constructed projects, signalling the ambition to make these temporary events a regular and calculated aspect of the life of the space. This is exemplified in Rotterdam’s Binnenrotte Square by West 8, which provided market stall anchor points and collapsible/folding traffic kerbs. This new-found focus on spatial performance rather than static aesthetics can generate revenue through performance and installation, which can be utilised to maintain the space, while acting as a mechanism for place-making through activation and the stirring of that great human condition: curiosity. This approach to public space design is a relatively new prerogative that public space designers must incorporate into the design process in an imaginative and compelling way. The challenge is not to fall victim to the banality of ‘less is more’ in the public canvas of our cities, favouring the capacity to hold large events while neglecting the everyday use of the space. This is a condition that plagues large civic and market squares such as Boston’s City Hall Plaza and Binnenrotte Square in Rotterdam, both of which have been the subject of recent design efforts to address the issue. These spaces look empty and devoid of activity, lacking a sense of purpose, attraction or the provision of comfort on any given day. Perhaps then, the most important aspect of the public spaces of our time is not the fixity of designed configuration, but rather the capacity of the space to be flexible and programmable in order to accommodate an increasingly diverse citizenship as the catalyst for spatial activation. This is a delicate balance to achieve and requires careful consideration and masterful execution through collaboration between clients, designers, event specialists and the creative team that will curate and manage the space once it is on the ground. The most successful case studies involve all of these disciplines imbricated in a bipartisan, non-territorial way. Staging Urban Landscapes explores the mechanics of the programmed space to understand how the space is managed, how many events take place annually and what the variety of overlaid objects is in some of the most successfully activated spaces. The intent of the case studies is to establish what makes a flexible space successful without being an insipid, uninspiring space, devoid of atmosphere when absent of programmed activity. These are the questions the research explores, drawing on successful case studies in London, Boston, Cambridge, Montreal, Vancouver, Zurich, Berlin, Melbourne, Sydney, Rotterdam, Paris, Córdoba, Philadelphia and New York. The culmination of this research features insight from clients, design teams and management teams responsible for the design, implementation and management of these case studies in order to understand how the activation of these

spaces began with the client brief and continued through the design process. Each case study uses drawings and diagrams to explore the design of a space, its component parts, spatial configuration, scale and inbuilt ‘plug and play’ infrastructure that enables a space to accommodate a multitude of uses. The intent of the drawings and diagrams is to explore the relationship between permanence and temporality to ascertain how the space operates on a daily basis and accommodates large gatherings and events. This aspect of spatial design is quickly becoming the catalyst for spatial design within design professions, evolving from the ‘landscape as art’ movement of the late 1980s and early 1990s pioneered by Peter Walker, Martha Schwartz and, to some degree, George Hargreaves. This is not to say that these visionary designers were not considering flexibility and various user groups in the creation of space, but I argue that use was subservient to aesthetics and the artistic arrangement of the designs during this period. Hargreaves’ signature sculpted landform work is largely inclusive of programme as seen at Discovery Green in Houston and stated by Anita Berrizbeitia: ‘Hargreaves composes with program, rather than merely making room for it in a plan.’ Based on the research for this book, I postulate that the mid 1990s saw a shift in the consideration of flexibility and programme in design. Work by West 8 at Schouwburgplein (see p. 254 – 257) in Rotterdam and discursive essays in James Corner’s Recovering Landscape, particularly the text by Alex Wall, signalled a move away from fixity towards flexibility. Stan Allen was also exploring indeterminacy in Points + Lines. Approaches in contemporary design to accommodate flexibility continue to evolve and designers of the age are required to be autodidactic when it comes to acquiring the skills and knowledge to craft programmable s­ paces that are innovative and have longevity in the face of a rapidly changing world. Staging Urban Landscapes is a practical, research- and

precedent-driven design tool to serve design teams in their pursuit of mastering the execution of staging public spaces. Additionally, it is my hope that the content of the book will help those writing design and competition briefs, as well as the talented teams that are enlivening spaces behind the scenes through curated events, community engagement and artistic overlays.

PREFACE 9

THE RISE OF FLEXIBLE SPACE Since early civilisation, urban spaces have been designed both as a utilitarian space of function and routine and as places of leisure and spectacle as described by R. E. Wycherley’s study of the Agora.1 Historically, the necessities of life — food and commodities, exchange of goods and commerce and chance encounter — were the agents in the activation of civic squares and public open spaces as illustrated in the diagram by Jan Gehl on p. 82.2 However, the invention and proliferation of the car in the middle of the 20th century and the subsequent car-centric planning and decision-making rendered the dayto-day activation of public spaces less of an existential urban phenomenon.3 This shift in city-making, in many ways signalled the decline of vibrant city spaces. In response to this, the period from 1960 to 1980 saw the emergence of the Public Life Studies school of thinking, spearheaded by Jane Jacobs, Jan Gehl and William H. Whyte and later by Fred Kent of Projects for Public Spaces.4 Concurrently, Kevin Lynch was immersed in the ‘study of perceptions of the urban environment and urban form’ from an experiential, anthropocentric point of view. His approach to understanding cities at the human scale continues to influence the design of urban spaces today.5 During this period, the celebrated landscape architect Lawrence Halprin, inspired by the dance choreography of his wife Anna Halprin, developed ‘ecoscores’ and ‘motation’ as methods

10

B. CANNON IVERS

B. CANNON IVERS

for documenting and designing for movement and animation in public space. Ecoscores register the flow of natural processes, such as the flow of a river as it coursed through a landscape, where ‘motation’ — movement notations — drew inspiration from traditional music scores as a way of representing movement through time and space diagrammatically. Halprin devised ‘motation’ as an alternative form of spatial representation because he felt that the traditional plans, elevations and sections were too static. In stark contrast to the ‘top-down’ planning construct of the time, Public Life Studies promoted a ‘bottom-up’ type of spatial analysis. This approach resulted in a process of citymaking and an understanding of public space activation that was based largely on first-hand observation of public behaviour and sociology at the human scale. The approach established a new set of ground rules for regaining a pedestrian-focused scaffold to urban planning and place-making.6 Subsequently, through observation and documentation, valuable insight into human behaviour and patterns of occupation in public spaces began to influence the coding and design of public spaces.7 William H. Whyte’s seminal study The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces defined a new method of notation that emulated musical scores or choreographed dance sequences as a method of registering time and spatial relationships (see p. 11).

The Agora served as the centre of social and political life in Ancient Greece. Public spaces were activated in response to the necessities of daily life. Painting by Giuseppe Zocchi, showing designed flexibility of Piazza Del Campo. The Palio at Piazza del Campo in Siena is a famous event that takes place annually, transforming the space into a spectator arena.

The Social LIfe of Small Urban Spaces, originally published in 1980 by the Conservation Foundation.

In response to a new building code in Manhattan that required developers to provide public space, new spaces were created that were devoid of people or any vestige of activity. This rise of ‘dead spaces’ prompted Whyte to study Seagram’s Plaza, in order to extract the aspects of spatial design that made certain spaces attract people and what, therefore, could be introduced to enliven other spaces throughout the city. More importantly, Whyte elucidated the power of activation in public spaces through mechanisms such as travelling food offerings, flexible moveable seating, street performances, incidental encounter and set events. It was this revelatory moment, rooted in commonsense observation, that repositioned the mechanics and operational aspects of a space as important factors in the design development and planning of the urban landscape.8 The influence of Whyte’s work and the subsequent activation of public space was evidenced by the emergence of a multitude of outdoor spaces, in New York particularly, that embraced the mechanisms mentioned above. In the early

THE RISE OF FLEXIBLE SPACE

11

Halprin invented ‘motation’ based on movement and notation. The diagram score illustrates movement in time and space and uses musical notation as a framework. Motation allowed Halprin to design and interpret space with an emphasis on the importance of human movements and interactions within urban spaces. Notation diagram by William H. Whyte from The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces and Whyte’s study of Seagram Plaza in New York. ‘Experiment in the Environment’, 1962. Anna Halprin; the wife of Lawrence Halprin, experimented with the methods and experience of moving through space and the ­capacity of this approach to generate environments was fundamental to the precise and profound ­interest in choreography and movement found later in Lawrence Halprin’s landscape designs.

1980s, when Whyte’s work was published, landscape architects were largely focused on the aesthetic arrangement of space, with a slant towards pop-art and ‘land-sculpting’ as a medium of expression in the landscape. The profession was preoccupied with how the space looked rather than what it did or how it could be used. This epoch in landscape architecture, led by Peter Walker, Martha Schwartz, Warren Byrd, ­Alexander Chemetoff and George Hargreaves,9 favoured the appearance and aesthetics of walking through and occupying a space, but did not particularly prioritise the activation of the space as a driver for design.

12  B. CANNON IVERS

The radical idea to give over half of the site at the Centre Pompidou to an openended flexible space inspired a new direction for the design of public spaces. It challenged designers to balance the permanence of public space with the ephemerality of public life.

However, during this period two notable architecture competitions put programme and activation at the centre of the design response — the Centre Pompidou and Parc de la Villette in Paris. The competition for the Centre Pompidou was won by Richard Rogers and Renzo Piano in 1977. Their proposal was groundbreaking because it set aside half of the total space designated for the building, with the other half ‘following a radical design strategy, devoted to the creation of a public space — the piazza or ‘parvis’.’10 The ‘parvis’ is now a prime space in Paris, ‘[e]njoyed by Parisians, tourists, picnickers, buskers and those who simply enjoy watching the world go by in one of the most popular public spaces in a city already famous for its gardens, parks and street culture’.11

Similarly, Parc de la Villette foregrounded programme and activity as driving forces for the design proposal. Bernard Tschumi designed the park after emerging as the victor of a design competition in 1982. Tschumi ‘envisioned Parc de la Villette as a place of culture where natural and artificial [manmade] are forced together into a state of constant reconfiguration and discovery’.12 Although Rem Koolhaas and his practice OMA did not win the Parc de la Villette competition, their narrative and approach to illustrating programme is still often referenced as a key moment in the emergence of activation and programmability as threads of design and visual representation. OMA’s proposal suggested a ‘method that — combining programmatic

FLEXIBLE SPACE

THE RISE OF 13

Before public life studies became an academic field 1900

1910

1920

1930

1940

PRIMARY PUBLICATIONS Camillo Sitte Ebenezer Howard Der Städtebau Garden Cities of To-Morrow nach seinen (1902) künstlerischen Grundsätzen (1889)

Jan Gehl’s diagram illustrates how the invention and proliferation of the car diminished the incidental activation of public life that occurs through the daily routines of ordinary life.

14

B. CANNON IVERS

Le Corbusier CIAM Vers une architecture La charte d'Athènes (1923) (1933)

Public life studies as a strategic tool

The first public life studies 1950

1960

Jane Jacobs Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961)

INSPIRATION

William H. Whyte The Exploding Metropolis (1958)

Kevin Lynch The Image of the City (1960)

1970

1980

1990

Aldo Rossi Robert Venturi, Steven Izenour L'architettura and Denise Scott Brown della città Learning from Las Vegas (1972) (1966)

1

Public life studies become mainstream 2010

2000

Rem Koolhaas and Bruce Mau S,M,L,XL (1995)

Richard Florida The Rise of the Creative Class (2002)

Ricky Burdett and Deyan Sudjic The Endless City (2008)

Barcelona Den generobrede by (exhibition 1999)

red. Goldsmith, Elizabeth and Goldbard. What We See. Advancing the Observations of Jane Jacobs (2010)

1961

Gordon Cullen The Concise Townscape (1961)

Edward T. Hall Oscar Newman Defensible Space The Silent (1972) Language (1959)

red. Michael Sorkin Variations on a Theme Park (1992)

Erving Goffman Edward T. Hall Robert Sommer Behavior in Pub- The Hidden Personal Space lic Places (1963) Dimension (1969) (1966)

PUBLIC LIFE STUDIES

Jane Jacobs The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961)

Jan Gehl Life between buildings (1971)

Christopher Alexander, Sara Ishikawa and Murray Silverstein A Pattern Language (1977)

William H. Whyte The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980)

Donald Appleyard Livable Streets (1980)

Clare C. Marcus and Carolyn Francis People Places (1990)

Allan Jacobs Looking at Cities (1985)

Peter Bosselmann Urbanism Representation on Track (2008) of Places (1998)

Allan Jacobs Great Streets (1995)

PPS How to Turn a Place Around (2000)

FLEXIBLE SPACE

Jan Gehl Cities for People (2010)

THE RISE OF 15

­instability with architectural specificity — will eventually generate a park’.13 Koolhaas continues: ‘La Villette could be more radical by suppressing the three-dimensional aspect almost completely and proposing pure program instead, unfettered by any containment.’14 The 49 hectares of land were previously occupied by a 19th-century slaughterhouse, which created many logistical hurdles, issues of site reclamation and questions about how to modernise the services on the site. Site issues were exacerbated by a lengthy list of programmatic requirements from the client, with no clear indication of how and when the ­various elements of the programme would emerge. OMA, therefore, approached the problem not as a design exercise in style or expression but rather as an organisational strategy. As stated by Alex Wall in his essay ‘Programming the Urban Surface’: The surface had to be equipped and staged in such a way as to both anticipate and accommodate any number of changing demands and programs. OMA responded with the superposition of four strategic layers for organising different parts of the program: the ‘east-west strips’ of vary-

ing synthetic and natural surfaces, the ‘confetti grid’ of large and small service points and kiosks, the various ‘circulation paths’ and the ‘large objects’, such as the linear and round forest.15 OMA described their project as a ‘landscape of social instruments’. Wall continues: The action of sliding one thing over another allowed for quantitative changes without the loss of organizational structures. This framework of flexible congestion, whose character and efficacy lies in its capacity to adapt to change, set a significant precedent in later formulations of urbanism.16 Following the la Villette competition, OMA continued to explore programmability as a device for design. For the Yokohama Port competition, OMA proposed a ‘continuous and formless project which engulfs the site like a kind of programmatic lava.’ Their proposal introduced a spectrum of events to complement the operational hours of the existing market facilities to create a ’24-hour peak, composed of a mosaic of heterogeneous 21st century life’. 17

Yokohama Masterplan, OMA, 1991. OMA described the Parc de la Villette proposal as ‘Nature—whether the thematic/ discovery gardens, or “real” nature—will also be treated as program. Blocks or screens of trees and the various gardens will act like different planes of a stage set: they will convey the illusion of different landscapes, of depth, without offering, in passing, the substance.’ (Text by OMA)

Initial hypothesis (scale: 1/20,000).

16  B. CANNON IVERS

The strips.

Point grids, or confetti.

Access and circulation.

The final layer.

In 1996 the Dutch landscape firm West 8 completed Schouwburgplein (see p. 254 –257) in the heart of Rotterdam. The project, described as a ‘city stage’, showed a deliberate determination to provide an open area for activation through a calendar of events and programmatic activity. Adriaan Geuze, the founder of West 8, was exploring the notion of the void in the city in his publication Colonizing the Void, which was published in 1996. In 2000, Geuze wrote a text for the book Artificial Landscape titled ‘Accelerating Darwin’. Paradoxically, considering that title, ‘Accelerating Darwin’ evolved from a similar text titled ‘Moving Beyond Darwin’ that Geuze had written for the book Modern Park Design in 1993. In this text he proclaims that [c]ontemporary life [in cities] is a continuous escape, it is a series of illusions, possibilities and experiences, and we are living in a kind of multicultural rainforest. The contemporary city, the new city we are living in, creates its own escape. In this age there is no need to make a new environment that is adapted to man, because man can assimilate into environment. We as landscape architects should provide them with the tools for their behaviour. We are going to give them the equipment to make a beautiful life and I even think there is a need to provoke people, that mankind can work creatively better than he has done. We need to create surrealistic environments, we should provide anarchic environment and even subversive cities and green areas.18 Geuze then describes Schouwburgplein as quite empty and there is little to do there. Most of the time there are even no people. But it can also be nice when it is empty. Sometimes there are many things to do and there are thousands of people. This change in the way it is used is the character of the square.19 Marking what was to become a seminal, pivotal point within the profession, Geuze states that ‘it was not important to complete it [the square] from the very first moment. The idea was that the square could evolve as it went along, because it could be developed by many different artists.’20 This, I believe, sparked a new focus on the role of landscape architects to provide spaces of change, activated through public participation on an unfinished stage. Additionally, this scheme demonstrated the potential for animated objects in the landscape by introducing 35-metretall cranes — originally coin-operated by users of the space but now on a timer — to slowly, mechanically reconfigure. The languid repositioning of the cranes, stirred into action through user participation, provides movement and change when the space is not activated by an event. The fountains also provide a choreography of varying heights in response to the outside temperature, reaching the maximum height when the temperature reaches 30 °C. According to Geuze: ‘Just like the squirrels, the water is playing with and provoking the users of the square.’ The open ‘stage’ area is flanked by long linear bench-

es positioned for maximum sun exposure and to provide seating for people-watching and a degree of anonymity. The stage hosts civic events, artistic exhibitions and community gatherings and provides a cultural hub for Rotterdam. Writing in The Artificial Landscape, Geuze more specifically addresses the zeitgeist of the contemporary city dweller or ‘nomad’. He identifies the effects of what I refer to as the age of instant gratification and short attention spans. He notes that in light of technological advances, [P]eople discover their freedom and choose their sub-cultures, appropriate their own environment. Mass culture and the media generate a collective voyage of discovery. Instead of a tiny elite, the entire urban population takes part. City dwellers are constantly changing their surroundings, as commuters, recreationists, holiday-makers. Speed and time have replaced the traditional idea of space. Movement connects the fragments in space in constantly changing configurations. City dwellers yearn for meaningful experiments that go beyond the development of new park fashions, for experiments that lead to a new genre of public space. Interventions in public space, or rather, in the public landscape, should no longer be focused on generating greenery. The real challenge is to create space and structures for city dwellers to colonize in their turn. The economy and the efficient functioning of the city are based on an optimal layout of functions and a first-rate infrastructure. The euphoria of mass culture is the product of the accessibility and interchangeability of the different cultures, which is what gives urban life the proverbial combinatorial freedom of the video clip. This freedom is paradoxical, however. The price that is paid for it is the fully programmed public space. Contemporary public space reflects the organization and the bureaucracy of the city. Its efficiency, which is attuned to the collective, has a debilitating effect on the individual. The pre-programmed space is one-dimensional. Human beings are demoted to the status of road users, recreationists, or shoppers. This pusillanimous onedimensionality ignores the intelligence of the inquiring urbanite. This demands a reaction, an ultimate manifesto; the call for an uprising of street furniture, for anarchistic street signage and for surrealistic and subversive public spaces. Not in order to shock, but to elicit creativity. The new public spaces must expose preconceived behavior and discretion, must provide and disorient the users. New public space will manipulate users in such a way that they become aware of their behaviour there and then and are no longer able to relapse into mechanical, pre-programmed behaviour. This space transforms anonymity into exhibitionism, spectators into actors. What matters is not the design, or the beauty of the dimensions, materials, and colors, but the sensation of a detached culture, that which the inne-city dweller creates.21 This set the tone for the design of Schouwburgplein and inspired a sense of ‘agoraphobia’.

FLEXIBLE SPACE

THE RISE OF 17

The square’s decor and furnishings, which ultimately determine the mood, are not fixed but arise from specific scenarios: the position of the hydraulic lighting masts can be manipulated by children to perform a mechanical ballet. The pressure of the fountains is linked to the outdoor temperature; there is a mobile green decor of season potted plants courtesy of forklift truck; … there is a plug-in system for specific events. The space and the experience of the space are a conscious step, a choice. The square should be more than a podium and lend itself to flexible use; the square provokes the city dweller and demands an active attitude. It gives the city dwellers back their fantasy and identity.22 In 1996 Stan Allen’s entry for a ‘Logistical Activities Zone’ in Barcelona pushed the concept of programme and deployed the use of scores, diagrams and maps to communicate the project temporarily beyond the static traditional representation of plans, sections and models. According to Allen, ‘[t]he role of the notational schemas collected here is not to set limits but to imagine multiple program scenarios and to chart their interaction. These notations do not so much map an exact correspondence between architecture and activity as articulate a degree of play between form and event, a loose fit of organisation and programme.‘23 In essence, the ambition of the project was to establish a framework or ‘field condition’ that had enough architectural specificity to lend some structure to the project, but was programmatically indeterminate so as to allow the future of the site to develop and evolve organically beyond the confines of the masterplan. Allen created a ‘user manual’ with a series of guiding principles. Point six is particularly germane to the line of enquiry here. Under the heading of ‘Anticipation: changing life of the site in time’, he lists: event scaffold, passive programmes, active, and pro-

Lighting mast and ventilation towers

Floor

Understructure

Roof of Parkinggarage

Garage 1 Garage 2

18

B. CANNON IVERS

gramme scores. Each of these descriptive categories could be used to describe the practice of programmatic activation that is being deployed in contemporary spatial design within an urban context.24 Comparing this approach to that of West 8’s Schouwburgplein, a clear new paradigm of spatial design was emerging that privileged overlay, indeterminacy and future expansion over spatial fixity. Both projects aimed to provide a clear and legible structure that would provide design specificity but would not limit or dictate the way in which the site could be activated with programme, events and unknown functions. Stan Allen puts it this way: Infrastructures are flexible and anticipatory. They work with time and are open to change. By specifying what must be fixed and what is subject to change, they can be precise and indeterminate at the same time. They work through management and cultivation, changing slowly to adjust to shifting conditions. They do not progress towards a predetermined state (as with masterplanning strategies), but are always evolving within a loose envelope of constraints.25 In 1999 Alex Wall, writing in Recovering Landscapes, speaks to the emerging zeitgeist of spatial programmability. He notes: ‘Here, the term landscape no longer refers to prospects of pastoral innocence but rather invokes the functioning matrix of connective tissue that organizes not only objects and spaces but also the dynamic processes and events that move through them.’ Here is a call to arms for designers to revisit their approaches to urban place-making, to concern themselves once again with the provision of flexible, multifunctional surfaces as a means to revitalize the profession. The grafting of new

instruments and equipment onto strategically staged surfaces allows for a transformation of the ground plane into a living, connective tissue between increasingly disparate fragments and unforeseen programs.26 While the discipline of landscape architecture was pivoting away from aesthetic fixity as the primary driver for design and moving towards the emergence of spatial programmability, Fred Kent and Project for Public Spaces (PPS) was continuing to develop a method for bottom-up, community-generated place-making. The work of PPS continues to transform often forgotten and nondescript spaces. There are instances where PPS works alongside the landscape architect to activate the spaces designed and arranged by the landscape architect. This can result in an interesting tension between the landscape architect as spatial designer and PPS as the spatial programmer, raising questions about what is the appropriate amount of additional overlay furniture and activation devices. The Harvard Plaza (see p. 74 – 85) is one such case study that included a team of landscape architects from Stoss and a team from PPS. Some argue the space is over-programmed, others revel in the variety and quantity of additional overlays. PPS’s ‘lighter, cheaper, quicker’ approach to community-led place-making has a following around the world. The ’Tactical Urbanism‘ approach, led by Mike Lydon, is also making a meaningful contribution to the transformation of spaces at a local community level. What this work tells us is that a creative spark can pick up momentum and become a fundamentally important space for building community cohesion, kindling conversation and bringing people together around shared commonalities.

1 R. E. Wycherley, How the Greeks Built Cities, Norton: New York, NY 1976 (2nd ed.). 2 Jan Gehl, Cities for People, Island Press: Washington, DC 2010. 3 Jan Gehl and Birgitte Svarre (eds.), How to Study Public Life, Island Press/ Center for Resource Economics: Washington, DC 2013. 4 Ibid. 5 Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA 1960. 6 William Hollingsworth Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, Municipal Art Society of New York, Life Project Street and Cinema Ltd Direct: Santa Monica, CA 2005. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Marc Treib, Modern Landscape Architecture: A critical review, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA 1993 10 http://www.rpbw.com/project/3/centre-georges-pompidou. Accessed in 2016. 11 http://www.rsh-p.com/work/buildings/centre_pompidou/completed/. Accessed in 2016. 12 Andrew Kroll, ‘AD Classics: Parc de la Villette / Bernard Tschumi’, ArchDaily, 9 January 2011. Accessed 12 December 2014. 13 Rem Koolhaas and Bruce Mau, Small, medium, large, extra-large: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, Monacelli Press: New York 1998 (2nd ed.). 14 http://www.oma.eu/projects/1982/parc-de-la-villette/. Accessed in 2016. 15 James Corner, Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, Princeton Architectural Press: New York 1999, p. 237. 16 Ibid., p. 238. 17 http://www.oma.eu/projects/1992/yokohama-masterplan. Accessed in 2016. 18 Adriaan Geuze, ‘Moving Beyond Darwin’, in Martin Knuijt, Hans Ophuis and Peter van Saane (eds.), Modern Park Design, Thoth Uitgeverij: Amsterdam 1993, p. 255–56. 19 Ibid. 20 Adriaan Geuze, ‘Accelerating Darwin’, in: Hans Ibelings (ed.), The Artificial Landscape: Contemporary Architecture, Urbanism and Landscape Architecture in the Netherlands, NAi Publishers: Rotterdam 2000, p. 256. 21 Ibid., p. 256 22 Ibid., p. 256. 23 Stan Allen, Points + Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City, Princeton Architectural Press: New York 1999, p. 73. 24 Ibid., p. 88 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid., p. 233.

Conceptual design for Schouwburgplein by West 8. Cover of The Artifical Landscape by Hans Ibelings, published in 2000 by the Netherlands Architecture Institute. Stan Allen, in Points + Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City, published in  1999. Cover of Recovering Landscapes, published in  1999 by Princeton Architectural Press.

FLEXIBLE SPACE

THE RISE OF 19

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE: A PERSONAL READING The genesis of this book can be traced back to 2003 when I moved to London from a small rural town in Colorado with a population of 1652. My closest neighbour was a mile away and our house backed on to National Forest. I had no appreciation of the value of public space or even what function public space fulfilled. I studied landscape architecture in the late 1990s and early 2000s at Colorado State University at a time when Peter Walker, Martha Schwartz, George Hargreaves, Kathryn Gustafson and others of that generation were the paragons of the profession. Looking back at this period of enquiry, it certainly felt that our education was driven by aesthetics and form — what a space looked like rather than its usability. People were included in collages largely for a sense of scale and maybe to show how a bench might be used. The precedent projects we were scanning from leading publications often used photographs without people, reinforcing the point that the profession at the time was preoccupied with composition, arrangement and the artful aesthetics of space. Bagel gardens, gold toads, intersecting geometries, mirrored domes and sculpted landforms adorned the covers of many landscape publications. I arrived in London not knowing anyone, which prompted me to explore the city. I was commuting to work by bike, noticing that a number of simply designed spaces were changed regularly through events, performances and installations and

20

B. CANNON IVERS

B. CANNON IVERS

I began to document these spaces. With each return visit, I would endeavour to stand in the same place and frame the scene as I had previously done. Over time, as the photographs multiplied, a powerful matrix of images began to crystallise for me both the importance and the value of public space. Equally, I realised the necessity for designers to create spaces to accommodate these overlay events and think about time in the design process and the democratic life of the space. It is also worth noting that I arrived in London as the creative engine of the city was whirring into life in preparation for hosting the 2012 Olympic Games. Since my arrival in 2003 most of the contemporary public spaces have been completed, likely influenced by the lead-up to the Olympic Games, and have performed an important role of hosting events, performances, installations and other methods for activating spaces, suggesting that London was enjoying a public space renaissance.  These are some of the capital’s exemplar spaces completed since 2003: – More London, Townshend Landscape Architects 2003 (see p. 230 –233); – Trafalgar Square Pedestrianisation, Foster + Partners 2003 (see p. 198 –203); – Duke of York Square, Elizabeth Banks/Robert Myers 2003; – Princess Diana Memorial Fountain, Gustafson Porter 2004;

– Victoria and Albert Courtyard, Kim Wilkie 2005 (see p. 138 –143); – Southbank Centre Square 2007 (see p. 204 –207) and Riverside Square 2005, GROSS.MAX.; – Potters Fields Park, GROSS.MAX. 2007 (see p. 108 –121); – Windrush Square, Brixton, GROSS.MAX. 2010; – Exhibition Road, Dixon Jones Architects 2011; – Jubilee Gardens, West 8 2012; – Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, LDA Design. Hargreaves 2012 and Southpark Hub, James Corner Field Operations 2014; – Granary Square (King’s Cross), Townshend Landscape Architects 2012 (see p. 86 – 93); – Leicester Square, Burns and Nice 2012; – Lewis Cubitt Square (King’s Cross), Olin Partnership 2015; – One St Pancras, Townshend Landscape Architects 2016. Somerset House (see p. 240 –243) and the Royal Academy are two projects that were completed in the early 2000s. I reference them here because they were two of the first projects in

London that used water to enliven the space on a day-to-day basis, and which could be turned off to host events and receive installations. In many ways, these spaces were harbingers of the role of public space in contemporary London and how water could facilitate this new wave of flexible use and began the movement of bringing the inside out. Witnessing firsthand how these spaces are being received by a city that is enjoying a rebirth of quality public space, and the experimentation taking place within them, is the engine behind this book. Through the process of capturing these spaces of change, I began to dial into some of the larger f­ orces at play in and around the spaces. I will explore these further using London as the main reference point although they are universally applicable around the world. Primarily, it is access to open space that is of critical importance. In London, and in other global cities, the proximity of open space is often more important than scale. What appears to be a relatively unremarkable space, inconsequential in scale, is in fact hugely valued communal space for residents and the workforce that revolves around it. At lunchtime on a sunny afternoon a small

Crabtree Fields in London is a small public open space off Mortimer Street in central London. This quiet pocket park offers respite from the energy of the city. These images illustrate the popularity of this space during lunch hours. Like many urban open spaces, it is not the scale of green space but proximity that is most important.

OF CHANGE

THE CULTURE 21

Thousands of visitors await the daily Old Faithful eruption at Yellowstone National Park. While the event lasts no more than 45 seconds to 1.5 minutes, the sense of anticipation in the lead-up to the eruption adds to the spectacle of the event.

22

B. CANNON IVERS

patch of grass is filled to capacity by workers escaping the office for an hour. The other larger forces at play deal more with sociology and psychology. While my initial reading of the city hinged on the spaces, the events and the spatial organisation, I also began to observe human behaviour and the factors in play in public spaces. The first is curiosity. London’s Southbank is a living laboratory for human interaction, efforts in place-making, environmental psychology, sociology and artistic expression. The Southbank has found its stride in the last 15 years, establishing itself as one of the prime destinations in London. Observing how people behave, and my own behaviour when walking along the river there, reveals that people are drawn to areas where other people are gathering. As William H. Whyte patently observed, people do attract other people. If a small crowd is gathered looking over a railing, it is difficult not to drift over to observe the scene for yourself. It may be the case that what people are looking at is not particularly interesting, but it holds people’s attention long enough to attract other people and builds a critical mass of curious drifters. The second phenomenon is anticipation. We see this most vividly at the Old Faithful geyser at Yellowstone National Park where thousands of people gather in eager expectation for a show that lasts no more than a few minutes. But there are lessons here for the activation of public space and the importance of proactively tapping into that irresistible human condition.

London’s Southbank is a living laboratory of creative expression and performance. Crowds of people form organically to watch street performers and a sand artist that transforms the littoral zone of the River Thames during low tide.

OF CHANGE

THE CULTURE 23

Trafalgar Square is one of the main civic squares in central London. For two days in late spring the square was transformed into a lawn with rolls of turf, completely changing the way people used the space and illustrating the social agency of temporary landscape interventions. Even putters and golf balls were provided for people to use. A temporary restaurant, complete with live music, changed the nature of Sloane Square from a place of movement to a space for lingering.

24

B. CANNON IVERS

Lastly, it is about the psychology of the temporary. There is something meaningful about an event or an experience that is ephemeral. Knowing that it cannot be visited or experienced again prompts us to engage with a space — or a moment in the life of that space — in a way that we may not otherwise. In 2007 Trafalgar Square was turfed with rolls of pre-prepared lawn. Soft underfoot and comfortable to sit on, the function of the space was transformed from a place of idle photography and drifting tourists to one of lingering, socialising and even playing mini-golf. This simple change of surface and the psychology of the temporary made this great civic space feel and behave like a London square, one that lasted for only a couple of days. At Sloane Square in southwest London, a hard-paved square that for all intents and purposes is a roundabout, was converted into an al fresco dining experience. Black-tie waiters and live music gave the air of sophistication and luxury and the whole scene became a means of activation in its own right. People stopped, took pictures and commented on the

set-up and the atmosphere. This is what William H. Whyte called ‘triangulation’. Its presence was fleeting but it was an experience that cannot immediately be repeated. The artificial greening of spaces also has an interesting influence on people’s behaviour. At Watch This Space (see p. 94 –101), a simple carpet of artificial grass is laid out each summer to ‘soften’ the small square outside the National Theatre on the Southbank in London. Despite the artificial tactility of the grass, people still gather and congregate as if it were a lawn in a way that they would not if it was a hard-paved plaza. Again referencing Whyte’s triangulation theory, or the notion of incidental encounter, public spaces become platforms for bringing people together in a way that they may not naturally interact. While public spaces accommodate formal, preplanned events, the spontaneous bottom-up community gatherings hold equal weight and demonstrate the necessity of free, unrestricted access to public open spaces and the fostering of spontaneity. Often through the natural rhythms of city

At Watch This Space at the National Theatre Square on the Southbank of London’s River Thames, the simple introduction of artificial grass encourages people to sit in the space, which they wouldn’t naturally do when the space is hard paving.

Infrastructure is also a form of spatial activation. When Tower Bridge is in operation to allow ships to pass along the River Thames, people pause for the infrastructural performance, a type of borrowed activation.

life, spaces are activated by commerce or the selling of plants as evidenced in the images below in Manhattan, where a sidewalk is transformed into a temporary garden. The spectacle of infrastructure, as seen in the opening of Tower Bridge, which prompts people to pause and take in the show before going about their busy lives or seeing the next best thing on their tourist itineraries is a form of borrowed activation. There are also those great initiatives that started as an idea and grew into something lasting and meaningful, such as the Book Fair beneath Waterloo Bridge in London, which transformed an otherwise uninspiring underpass into something of a destination that has been in place ever since. Over the past 15 years a number of methods and devices have emerged that enable a space to have the flexibility to

The quotidian sale of goods is also a form of spatial activation and transformation as seen on this street in Lower Manhattan where plants on show for sale transform the street.

accommodate a multitude of events across varying scales, yet still have a sense of comfort and animation on a day-to-day basis when there are only a few people in the space. This is the greatest dilemma for contemporary public realm designers — how to create a space large enough and open enough to host markets, ice-skating rinks and concerts, yet not feel empty and windswept when no arranged activity or programmed event is taking place. This conundrum has plagued spaces such as City Hall Plaza in Boston, for which there have been multiple design competitions to give the space a sense of purpose, a human-scale attractiveness and character so that people could use it on a daily basis rather than only serving the city and community during large gatherings, concerts, protests or festivals. As I have postulated previously, the design

The recurring event of the Book Fair under Waterloo Bridge in London turns a basic underpass into a cultural destination. Providing simple infrastructure such as the book storage sheds seen in the image below enables cultural gems like this to become established and to flourish over time.

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE

27

Fountains provide daily activation for the Royal Academy courtyard, which can also be turned off to accommodate annual large-scale art installations. Chris Wilkinson’s Landscape to Portrait installation with the fountains turned off. Acqua alta is the phenomenon that happens in Venice when water surges up through the drains in Piazza San Marco. This inspired the design of the Bordeaux Water Mirror (see p. 29), which has had a powerful influence on the flexible design of public spaces with the use of fountains and a thin film of water.

28

B. CANNON IVERS

for flexibility is a new driver in the design of public spaces over the past 20 years. The design profession has made significant strides in devising novel approaches to satisfy the need for flexibility in public spaces and simultaneously establish comfortable spaces that can be used daily. The interactivity of water has had a profound impact on the design of flexible spaces. I have referenced Somerset House (see p. 240 –243) and the courtyard at the Royal Academy in London as examples where pop-jet fountains have been used to bring white noise, animation and playfulness into a space for daily use. The proactive decision to be able to turn off the fountains and convert the space into a plaza as an extended exhibition space has made a meaningful contribution to the design trajectory. However, it is the French Miroir d’Eau (water mirror) movement that has instigated a new paradigm in the use of water in public spaces. The water mirror movement found its genesis in Venice’s misfortune: the fact that Venice is sinking at a rate of 2 mm per year.1 Aqua alta or high water is a term that describes the annual flooding event that happens when high tides and strong sirocco winds converge on the Venetian lagoon. Piazza San Marco, Venice’s main public square, sits just above sea level and each winter floods as water rises through the drains in the square. The result is dramatic, albeit inconvenient and disconcerting for Venetians. St Mark’s Basilica reflects brilliantly on the surface of the water, something I like to refer to as the ‘4th dimension’ that describes the added visual experience of a space and the injection of reflective movement and light. People interact with the water and the piazza in a new way and the edge condition becomes that much more important. Inspired by this annual transmogrification of Piazza San Marco, the fountain designers at Jean Max Llorca (JML) in Barcelona, in collaboration with the late landscape architect Michel Corajoud, created the first water mirror in Bordeaux. Completed in 2006, Bordeaux’s water mirror is the largest in the world. It simultaneously achieves the important combination of spectacle and physical experience, reflecting the dramatic Place de la Bourse, yet encouraging people to interact with the shallow 20 mm surface of water. People capture the reflectivity of the grand adjacent architecture in the water in a photo (spectacle) and recount stories and memories of playing in the fountain (physical experience). Subsequently, Miroir d’Eau projects have been implemented by JML in Nantes, Nice, Marseilles, Paris and Lyon. In the US, Kathryn Gustafson utilised the water mirror at the Smithsonian in Washington, DC, (2007), enabling the film of water to be drained away for large events to take place in the courtyard. At the King’s Cross development in London, Townshend Landscape Architects with Fountain Workshop have created four water mirrors at Granary Square (2012) (see p. 86 – 93), each of which can be drained away individually to respond to various scales of events. Laurie Olin continues this approach at King’s Cross at Lewis Cubitt Square (2015) (see p. 86 – 93 ). In Copenhagen, SLA created dramatic circular pools at the Crystal building (2010) and Kim Wilkie transformed the central courtyard of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London

(2005), creating his own version of the water mirror concept (see p. 138 –143). At Bradford City Park, Gillespies with Fountain Workshop (see p. 102 –107), have realised the vision initially put forward by the late architect Will Alsop to flood the main public space in Bradford. The water mirror has moved beyond the idea of the pop-up fountain because of the reflective drama it brings to a space, as well as the various ways in which visitors can interact with the water and the in-built flexibility the water provides.   The proliferation of competitions to design temporary spaces and structures has also been considerable in the past 15 years. Inspired by more established temporary installations such as the Serpentine Pavilion (see p. 160 – 167) and MoMA PS1 (see p. 150 – 159), and fuelled by the economic crisis in 2008 and the lack of expenditure in permanent spaces, these festivals of ephemerality are making significant contributions to the activation of public spaces. Annual installation, as a placemaking typology, heightens the sense of anticipation and for a short period of time creates a must-see destination. Commissioned annually, the Serpentine Pavilion has established itself as one of London’s greatest architectural and design events.

Le Miroir d’Eau at Bordeaux. The fountain provides multiple atmospheres including mist that people are instantly drawn to. A thin film of water entices people to interact with it, while also creating a compelling composition with the surrounding skyline reflecting on the surface.

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE

29

This is not only because of the architecture it creates, but also because of the life within the pavilion it generates — that is, the culture of the place through performances, discussions and debates, symposiums and attraction around food and drink. These surges of creative ingenuity that emerge through temporary installations spread around the globe, inspiring a new temporary urbanism that will continue to shape the way our cities perform. It is important to note the influence garden festivals have had on popular culture such as at Grand-Métis and Chaumont, as well as annual gatherings such as Burning Man. Below is a list of a number of ephemeral installations: – MoMA PS1, Brooklyn, started in 1998, and subsequently at MAXXI, started in 2011, Rome (see p. 150 – 159); – Fourth Plinth, started in 1999, London (see p. 198 – 203); – Serpentine Pavilion, started in 2000, London (see p. 160 –167); – (Park)ing Day, started in 2005, San Francisco; – Times Square Valentine Heart Design, started in 2009, New York;

– Warming Huts, started in 2009, Winnipeg; – Robson Redux, started in 2011, Vancouver (see p. 168 –179); – Du Musée Avenue, started in 2012, Montreal (see p. 244 – 247); – Future of Shade, started in 2013; – Flatiron Triangle, started in 2014, New York; – MPavilion Australia, started in 2014, Melbourne; – Dulwich Picture Gallery Pavilion, started in 2017, London; – Serpentine Pavilion, Beijing in 2018. Installations and temporary exhibitions have also emerged recently as a method to enliven public space. In 2008 artist Luke Jerram realised Play Me I’m Yours in which 30 pianos were installed on streets, in public squares and parks, train stations and markets. Like a creative blank canvas, the pianos were there for any member of the public to play and engage with. The pianos were in place for three weeks, after which time they were donated to local schools and community groups. In London, some of these temporary installations and events

Winnepeg Warming Huts competition by Patkau Architects. LOT’s Flatiron Sky-Line design for the third annual Flatiron Public Plaza Holiday Design Competition. MPavilion in Melbourne designed by AL_A. The inaugural Dulwich Picture Gallery Pavilion by IF_DO Architects titled ‘After Image’. Collective-LOK’s Heart of Hearts in Times Square. One of the many PARK(ing) Day installations that now take place globally each year.

30

B. CANNON IVERS

have had a lasting legacy on the design of public space, or what ‘social infrastructure’ might be included. In 2010, Ping(!) London placed 100 ping pong tables throughout the city’s main landmarks to encourage people to enjoy the sport. It was a watershed moment and now table-tennis tables feature as permanent elements in many contemporary designed spaces as a way of drawing people into a space and giving them a specific activity to engage in. More recently, Lateral Office designed a public art piece for La Place des Festivals in Montreal called Impulse (see p. 192 –197). The adult-sized, interactive and lit see-saw has since been installed at Harvard Yard and in London as part of the second Lumiere London lighting festival across the city, signalling perhaps a new typology of itinerant, participatory installations. Other examples of overlay activities that have become ubiquitous are winter ice-skating rinks, certainly made popular in London by Somerset House (see p. 240 – 243) in 2000 and arguably most famously at Rockefeller Plaza in New York. Ice rinks are now a staple winter overlay event and a driver for the flexible design of public spaces, exemplified most recently by the novel Maggie Daley Park Ice Ribbon by Michael Van Valkenburgh and Associates in Chicago. Bryant Park in New York (see p. 234 –239) ushered in the popularity of the outdoor cinema, and entrepreneurs have turned summer pop-up cinemas into a business, travelling from park to public space, pulling people into these spaces when they may otherwise not have revisited a place. The proliferation of travelling food trucks has also become a go-to overlay and a method for generating footfall and establishing a critical mass. Finally, the humble shipping container is being utilised as a device to create a semi-permanent meanwhile use while longer-term, multi-phased developments are financed and built. In London, Pop-Brixton, Elephant and Castle and Croydon’s Box Park are but a few examples of this meanwhile-use typology, which creates a sense of place, underpinned by local businesses that give the place an authenticity that appeals to the current preference for smaller, boutique shops over large chainstores. In-built infrastructure that facilitates a set programme is also an important consideration for the design of flexible public space. Binnenrotte Square by West 8 in Rotterdam was completed in 1996 and included permanent fixings to anchor market stalls and horizontal cylindrical barriers to prevent parking. These hinged elements can be folded into the ground to allow access for setting up the market, which is an elegant solution to a very utilitarian design challenge. Binnenrotte Square hosts a market twice weekly, drawing up to 70,000 people. However, it also reflects the challenge of designing for set events and how to make the space interesting, attractive and usable on the days that events such as the market are not taking place. In this regard, Binnenrotte Square has recently been redesigned by OKRA landscape architects, who aspire to create a more hospitable and usable space on a day-to-day basis by introducing more tree planting, herbaceous gardens and lawn areas. The green spaces are designed to be flexible, to accommodate events, performances and installations on the days when the market is not operating.

Play Me I’m Yours in Times Square in New York City. Impulse designed by Lateral Office, was originally installed at La Place des Festivals in Montreal. The installation now travels and is shown here at the historic Harvard Yard.

The Plaza at Harvard University (see p. 74 – 85) by Stoss also introduced fixed infrastructure to support a known programme. In this case, the space must accommodate a large tent/marquee twice a year during the student initiation and graduation. Anchor points for the tent are designed into the paving design, which determines the maximum size of the tent. Smaller tents can be arranged within the field of anchor points to enable the space to serve a range of events of varying scales. The Plaza, like many of the case studies in this book, has incorporated potable water and power which were included early on in the design of the space. This overcomes the challenge of threading cables through the public spaces during events, or having to rely on generators. However, this is still not a foregone conclusion and many spaces fall victim to lack of planning at the design development stage and the space suffers as a result. With the popularity of flexible spaces, designers, spatial planners and event specialists must continue to innovate to maintain momentum and evolve the public space offering. A number of exemplary projects have emerged that illuminate the exciting potential for the future of flexible design in public space. Reconfigured space is the shifting of fixed objects to allow flexibility, or the movement of stationary objects — both

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE

31

mechanically and through the power of the participant — to create change in a space. At the main theatre at the Cornell School of Architecture, OMA has designed flexibility into the theatre by mechanically reconfiguring the space by folding the chairs beneath the floor in a type of ‘transformer choreography’. What was once a formal theatre typology is now an open-ended stage of unrestricted possibility. In a similarly mechanised fashion, a series of hydraulically operated seats designed by Carmela Bogman and Rogier Martens in Utrecht emerge from the ground, transforming a transitional space, a space only for movement, into a space for lingering. The hydraulics are operated by the users, giving them a sense of ownership over the space. Courtyard in the Wind by Acconci Studio uses wind-generated energy to reconfigure a central courtyard space. A wind wheel is fixed to

the top of the adjacent building. As the wind energy is captured and converted to electricity, a ‘turntable’ landscape transforms the courtyard space. What was once a footpath passing through lawn and tree planting is now interrupted by a circular band of grass cutting through the path. Even trees planted in the turntable rotate, breaking the formal bosque of trees and sett paving, replacing it with a lawn. Fixed objects in the landscape can be reconfigured without the use of machines. The landscape practice OKRA designed a series of planters on rails in a courtyard at Inkpot. Allowing the planters to be shifted to the perimeter of the space affords the courtyard with a larger space for gatherings. It also allows users to change the space to suit their particular needs, again empowering users to have ownership of the space. Similarly, at the National Museum in Zurich, carts with trees can be moved around, creating personal shade.

Storefront Theater by Matthew Mazzotta transforms Main Street in downtown Lyons, Nebraska, into an outdoor theatre by using an abandoned freestanding storefront wall as its site. Matthew Mazzotta, the Coleman Centre for the Arts and the people of York, Alabama, collaborated to transform a blighted property in downtown York into a new public art project that is in the shape of a house, but which can physically transform into a 100-seat open-air theatre that is free for the public. The Cornell School of Architecture’s Milstein Hall Boardroom, designed by Shohei Shigematsu from OMA New York, mechanically transforms the lecture hall into a boardroom by revealing boardroom chairs from beneath the floor.

32

B. CANNON IVERS

The artist Matthew Mazzotta has been working with the notion of reconfiguration through object-based installations. Two of his pieces in particular are reconfigured to create venues for social gatherings, community meetings and performances. Open House is an installation in Alabama that transforms a small house installation into an open-air performance space by unfolding sections of the house on hinges to provide seating areas. The house opens in five sections to create a formal spectator area, facing a stage or the outdoor cinema. When the show is over, the house is folded back into place and the house is once again an art installation. Storefront Theatre transforms a derelict plot in downtown Lyons, Nebraska, into an outdoor theatre. A false façade is hydraulically folded away and terraced seating for 100 people emerges from the vacant space behind the façade. A film screen hauled by a tractor is

parked in the street to create an outdoor cinema. At the push of a button, the terraced seating is retracted into the vacant plot and the façade slots back into place to restore the continuous line of shops. These precedents suggest a new method for creating flexible space, where fixed, permanent objects in public spaces that make a place function on a day-to-day basis can be mechanically transfigured to create an entirely flexible space, free from any fixed constraints. For the City of Culture celebrations in Liverpool, Diller Scofidio Renfro experimented with mechanised movement of trees in an installation titled Arbores Laetae (Joyful Trees). Three hornbeam trees planted at a 10-degree angle rotate almost imperceptibly to vary the configuration of space but more importantly to create spectacle and cause people to pause and linger. The change is subtle, but enough to challenge

Pop-Up by Carmela Bogman and Rogier Martens is hydraulically controlled by the residents and can be arranged in multiple configurations. The flexibility of the hydraulic system illustrates tremendous potential for the future of public spaces designed for a multitude of uses and events.

THE CULTURE OF CHANGE

33

Arbores Laetae (Joyful Trees) by Diller Scofidio Renfro for the Liverpool City of Culture. I Like to Move It by DIXNEUFCENTQUATREVINGTSIX Architecture. Around-About by Talmon Biran architecture studio.

34

B. CANNON IVERS

the notion that a designed space needs fixity or that it is static. At Piazza Risorgimento in Bari, MaO architects introduced a grove of rotating benches. Users are able to rotate their bench into a position of their preference, whether to catch more sun or sit under the shade of a nearby tree. Groups can swivel the benches in a way that two or three benches come in closer contact to encourage social interaction. Gardens festivals, such as at Grand-Métis, facilitate the creative exploration of an idea without the constraints of standards and the need for longevity. These are important venues to test new possibilities and anticipate the future of the design of public space. Recently, a number of installations have drawn on the power of the participant to change the space. The installation I Like to Move It allowed visitors to move trees along sunken rails to change both the physical layout of the space as well as its functionality — where people might gather in the shade of the trees: ‘Trees, immobile and mute, are rootless and move as living beings. All due to human interaction.’2 The installation Around-About draws on visitor interaction to create a modern Zen garden. Roundabouts inspired by agricultural machinery rotate around a centrally fixed column. Through this interaction, the participant is responsible for composing the patterns on the ground and creating the Zen garden. As the gravel is kicked about, the pattern is lost until the next visitor creates their own personal garden. The Shed by Diller Scofidio Renfro (DSR) at Hudson Yard in Manhattan boldly exemplifies the notion of reconfiguration to facilitate the flexibility of open space and a myriad of programmed activities. The design concept for the Shed is predicated on the fact that many of the cultural institutions in New York do not have the scale of space to accommodate large audiences or the ability to expand an existing venue to respond to the demands of temporary shows or annual festivals. As a result, the city often misses the opportunity to host travelling shows and installations, which require flexible performance and exhibition space. To overcome this, DSR developed the Kunsthalle, a cultural venue and open-ended flexible space devoid of any permanent exhibits. Instead, the 200,000-square foot Shed is envisioned as a venue for temporary shows, performances and set travelling events such as New York’s annual Fashion Week that currently happens under the cover of temporary pop-up tents. The pièce de résistance of the Shed is the 140-foot-high retractable covering that slides on rails to cover a public square. What was once a 19,500-square foot open-air plaza is now a covered performance space with inbuilt sound, lighting and fixings for installations or dance performances. On a day-today basis, the canopy neatly slides back into place over the adjacent building, allowing the plaza to once again be a public space that is open to the elements. When the canopy is deployed, it doubles the size of the building’s footprint and creates a cavernous 17,200-square foot, temperature-controlled flexible stage, a fulcrum between inside and outside. The space created by the canopy has a seating capacity of 1200 and a standing capacity of 2700. The architects designed the ceiling of the canopy to function as a theatre deck with

The Shed, designed by Diller Scofidio Renfro in collaboration with the Rockwell Group at Hudson Yard in New York, can mechanically deploy a canopy to cover the public square to create a sheltered, multi-functional space. The Shed under construction.

rigging and structural capability throughout the space. According to DSR, ‘[t]he Shed is conceived as open infrastructure that can be permanently flexible for an unknown future. The Shed’s “plug and play” capability allows it to be responsive to variability in scale, media technology and the evolving needs of artists.’ Considering the advancements in the activation of public space over the last two decades, it is exciting to hypothesise what the next decade will hold for the design of public spaces. Designers will evolve to be more adept at balancing the need for open flexible spaces where events of all shapes and sizes can take place and, at the same moment, create meaningful, interesting and comfortable spaces for day-to-day use. Rich and varied edge conditions surrounding these open flexible spaces will continue to be critical to the success of our public spaces. Will the users of the spaces we design develop ‘foodtruck fatigue’ and tire of table-tennis tables everywhere? Will underused amphitheatres blight our cities and prompt us to reconsider notions of fixed spaces for particular programmes?

It is of critical importance how the design discipline continues to innovate through collaboration with artists, event specialists, enlightened clients and politicians to enliven public space. The mechanisation of moveable landscapes, which may have a more formal and semi-fixed arrangement on any given day, is likely to become the future evolution of public spaces that are fundamentally designed to be performative as much as they are decorative, ecological, sustainable and democratic. 1 2

See https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2015/jun/16/historyflooding-sinking-city-venice-in-pictures. Accessed in August 2016 See http://www.refordgardens.com/english/festival/garden-135-i-like-tomove-it.php?EC=1. Accessed in August 2016

OF CHANGE

THE CULTURE 35

38 – 45

THE URBAN SURFACE: SHIFTING FIELDS FOR CURATED EVENTS Alex Wall

46 – 53

OPEN-ENDED: PUBLIC SPACES AS COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS Chris Reed

54 – 57

FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE Nicola Dempsey

58 – 65

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS: PLANNING, PROGRAMMING AND PLAY Chris Wangro

66 –71

SCRATCH THAT!  Sergio Lopez-Pineiro

THE URBAN SURFACE: SHIFTING FIELDS FOR CURATED EVENTS My essay ‘Programming the Urban Surface’, describes the urban surface as a diverse formal and multi-functional field supporting new activities, and as an arena for the agency of design.1 Several design strategies were derived from experimental architectural, urban design and landscape projects, including non-programmed use, designing for impermanence, thickening, folding and the deployment of new materials. The urban surface was conceptualised as a vital component of city building, an equal partner to the conventional binary of buildings and landscape. The article appeared at a time when two cascades of innovation were underway. The first of these was the availability of new software applications enabling formal gestures such as ‘folding’, which also produced the three-dimensional coordinates for fabrication. The second cascade was precipitated by the breakthrough of urban and landscape ecology into landscape architecture, and the growing recognition of the needs of the non-human world. Today, three paradigm shifts are underway on the urban surface, which will lead to changes in city form, enlarge what we mean by ‘urban community’, and revalue the undeveloped domain of human agency. Technology, particularly sensing technologies, is the first of these and can monitor both the mineral and living worlds of the city. Experimental projects and installations by young designers and artists hint at spaces and landscapes that respond to visitors’ passage through them, or

38

ALEX WALL

ALEX WALL

are crafted to offer optimal conditions of comfort. I am not imagining a technological utopia, however; instead, I refer to Peter Sloterdijk’s notion that nature-supportive technologies produce a different relationship between technology and the environment, a progression from exploitation to the co-production with natural systems.2 The second paradigm shift involves what Steward T. A. Pickett has described as the ‘ecology of the city’, including all mineral and living systems, respecting the rights of the non-human world.3 The city’s open spaces, bodies of water, urban forest and nature corridors will be equally valued to the built and social fabric, and the human activities taking place within them. Here I am redefining the repertoire of elements and relationships in the city as it has increased in size and slowly reacts to changing weather and climate. The third shift returns us to questions of public space, not in the sense of the successful architectures of Rotterdam’s Schouwburgplein, Copenhagen’s Superkilen or Harvard’s Science Center Plaza, but with a view to activist places ringing with the voices of the public. These are spaces where the empathic power of local communities to manage social and ecological common-pool resources becomes in itself a form of resistance to outmoded economic systems and unrepresentative governments. The paradigm shifts point towards an expanded range and programme for urban spaces. They will become interactive

with their users, able to manage flooding from intense rainstorms, as demonstrated by the Water Squares by De Urbanisten in Rotterdam (see p. 224 – 229). Landscape patches that are subsumed by the expanding city will become an integrated and co-evolving part of the urban fabric. Finally, public spaces might be liberated from their strict spatial boundaries, their formal axiality, and their representation of state, church or corporate power. Their variety will expand to include sites and activities that are part of a public ‘good’, to be managed by collective agreement of the local community in opposition to growing privatisation and exclusion. I will consider these points through a brief comparison of a pair of little-known projects from the 1980s with a contemporary project that treats the urban surface as a hydrological structure that stimulates activities, and with a park project where both its technical equipment and park users are able to modify microclimates and comfort levels. While the first two are remedial, restoring, conserving and reconceiving activities in a public realm, the second two react to climate as a new kind of event to be engaged and celebrated. The text concludes by asking what public space is for, who it belongs to and what the significance is of the activities that take place in an expanding public realm.

ARCADIA INVESTED In his introduction to four projects produced in 1984 for the Greek island of Kefalonia, Elia Zenghelis of OMA introduced the concept of subtly interweaving technology and infrastructure through threatened cultural landscapes, so that they could retain their functional and representational role. For each of the sites, the embedding of these metropolitan attributes was intended to reinforce the essence of the place without transforming it.4 Public space — here, public landscapes — is equipped with new surfaces, fixtures and fittings allowing them to be used for conflicting and unexpected activities. In the valley of St Gerasimos, a sacred avenue leading from a monastery to a holy well was the site of a popular religious festival that included an all-night fair. Large numbers of people and vehicles were damaging the landscape and so, to enable the festival to continue without using permanent structures, a system of marble benches equipped with water and electricity was used to reorder the avenue. At each end, walls framed

Elia Zenghelis (OMA). Monastery and Sacred Avenue at St Gerasimos, Kefalonia, Greece, 1985. Published in L’Architecture d’Aujourd’hui, no. 256, April 1985. Model photo. Painting: Zoe Zenghelis. Valley of St Gerasimos with monastery and sacred boulevard. Elia Zenghelis (OMA). Bay of Koutavos, Argostoli, Kefalonia, Greece, 1985. Oxygenation fountains. Watercolor by Matthias Sauerbruch. Windmill follies. Watercolor by Matthias Sauerbruch.

THE URBAN SURFACE 39

The park at night.

a plinth for the rebuilt monastery and a playground for the village. The ordering of land and event was the result of a discrete technical underpinning of the festival’s activities. The second project involved the hydrological resuscitation of a bay stifled by pollution and inadequate circulation, and the transformation of its shoreline into a linear park to serve the island’s capital, Argostoli. A programme of water sports and ecological remediation established the water’s surface as a field of action. While the areas along the bay’s edge were transformed into landscapes of sport, recreation, gardens and forest, its surface was to be programmed with self-propelling devices oxygenating the water as they criss-crossed it. For Zenghelis, both projects expressed the choreography for a new arcadia. At St Gerasimos, the discrete embedding of infrastructure and services made possible a moment of density in a rural landscape, while in the Bay of Koutavos, the essence of the intervention was the perpetual movement on the project’s liquid surface. Rather than a purely technical project of environmental engineering, the remediated bay is offered to the public as a carnivalesque landscape, where the boundaries between leisure, sport, and remediation have dissolved.

URBAN SPACE AS HYDROLOGICAL NARRATIVE In SMAQ Architects’ Cumulus project (2007), a mixed-use urban development forms a centre for the Grorud Valley near Oslo. The ensemble of new buildings, consisting of small tower blocks constructed over existing recreational and retail structures, is oriented around a public open space. The roofs of the buildings together with the surface of the plaza actively engage the seasonal changes of the water cycle. Summer rainfall is

40

ALEX WALL

During the warmer months the space is used for community activities such as dancing and socialising. Attenuated water is then discharged into the space, which freezes to create an ice rink. Day of the Waterfalls when the stored water is released and then falls on to the public space and freezes.

captured and stored by the system of green roofs. In winter, on the Day of the Waterfalls, the stored water is released and then falls on to the public space and freezes, forming a thin surface of ice in the depressed areas that weave through the complex. In spring, the melting ice flows into the swales, ponds, green spaces and allotment gardens. As Deane Simpson writes, the project itself is a flow diagram of rainwater management that is spatially and temporally inhabited by the public.5 Rather than being hidden in pipes, the hydrological cycle produces a spectacle and gives identity to the public space.

T-Bane Terminal

Allotment Gardens

Allotment Gardens

Bus Terminal

Fitness Studio

Bike Rental

Stair to Parking

Travel Agency

Pizzeria

Flower Shop Entry Parking

Outdoor Pool

Fresh Fruit Market Community Center Weekly Market

Allotment Gardens Public Pool Outdoor Stage

Shopping Mall

Entry to Hammam

Allotment Gardens

Indoor Ice Skating Rink Icecream Parlor

Vacuum-Cleaning Station Entry Parking

Bowling Center

Entry to Cinema

Hot Dog

Stair to Parking

Playground Outdoor Cinema (showing seating topography) In & Out Burger

Plan Public Space Level— Summer.

Water Purification

Bus Terminal

Water Purification

Fitness Studio

Bike Rental

Stair to Parking Pizzeria

Travel Agency Flower Shop Entry Parking

Fresh Fruit Market

Water Purification

Community Center Shopping Mall

Public Pool Mini Topography to Cross the Ice Surface

Entry to Hammam

Allotment Gardens Indoor Ice Skating Rink

Entry Parking

Bowling Center Entry to Cinema

Hot Dog

Bar

Outdoor Ice Skating Surface

Water Purification

Stair to Parking

Gas Station

Playground In & Out Burger Ball Room

Plan Public Space Level— Winter.

THE URBAN SURFACE 41

Climate devices to lower air temperature.

retarding existing microclimatic conditions — from hot, humid and polluted to cool, dry and clean spaces. Rahm has given names to these pavilions and machines hidden in landform, such as ‘Underground breeze’ (convection), ‘Stratus cloud’ (evaporation), ‘Blue-sky drizzle’ (mist-emitting), ‘Desert wind’ (dry air blowers) and ‘Pre-industrial draught’ (pollutionabsorbing). Thus the park’s microclimates are sometimes given by biogeophysical conditions, while at other times they will be given by artificial light, heat or coolness from the conditioning pavilions, surfaces or grills. In Jade Eco Park, diverse microclimates, comfortable and uncomfortable, natural and mediated, will suggest different activities—they become part of the programme.

THE CITY AS COMMONS

A water cycle becomes public: diagram of the new urban centre’s water flow throughout the season.

A MACHINE FOR THE SENSES Philippe Rahm’s Jade Eco Park (under construction since 2016) in Taichung, carried out with Catherine Mosbach, extends Zenghelis’s notion of landscape boosted by infrastructure by embedding a variety of machines within the thickened surface of the park to selectively alter temperature, humidity, and air quality. The 34-hectare Jade Eco Park is being built on the site of an old airport and programmed with leisure, sports, family and tourist facilities. Besides topography, planting and circulation, the park will be inhabited by natural and artificial climate devices. These will create comfort by augmenting or

42

ALEX WALL

What kind of public spaces do we need now? In the face of a precarious and uncertain future, how might public space contribute to building social coherence, empathy and resilience? For strangers and diverse groups, public spaces are necessary for gathering and meeting and also provide ground for negotiation and contestation. The vivid demonstrations that have taken place recently in cities worldwide remind us of a rich history of dissent. Yet demonstrations happen and then dissipate, often resulting in little substantive change. What is public space for then? The social and political struggle over natural resources and for the right to clean air and water will require more than demonstrations in the main public spaces of the city to expedite change. Engagement, action and especially the appropriation and managed use of urban space are needed. The representative public spaces in historic cities have been produced and paid for by established authorities.6 Yet there are other, shared, spaces too, in addition to the authorityowned. In the 1990s Elinor Ostrom, the Nobel Prize-winning sociologist, showed that local communities were able to cooperate to create and enforce rules for managing common resources. In Ostrom’s words, they invented ‘rich mixtures of public and private instrumentalities’.7 Against the background of the many crises that we are facing today, thinking and

i vis t or sc g in om

fr

warm dry polluted

Northern Dryia

dist rict

Northern Coolia from g min s co visitor

for families

Western Coolia

cool dry polluted cool dry clean cool dry polluted cool dry clean cool humid polluted

t

id en tia l

ist ric

re s

sd

warm humid clean

cool dry polluted

Northern Clearia om

es sin bu

Eastern Clearia

for businessmen

Eastern Dryia Middle Dryia visito

Middle Coolia

Middle Clearia rs com

ing from s choo

for tourists

l district

Southern Coolia

touri st

for students

cool humid polluted

for families

cool dry polluted

ng

cool dry polluted

cool humid polluted

id res

ential district

Southern Clearia

ors co m i

warm dry clean

m fro

visi t

warm humid polluted

visitors

cool dry clean

Climatic lands: 5 types of users.

cool humid clean i vis t or

cool humid polluted

sc g in om

om

fr

id en tia l

dist rict

t

re s

ist ric

warm dry polluted

sd

warm humid clean

for businessmen

for families

s visitor

i ng co m

fro

m

es sin bu

Microclimate on site.

visito

for students

ing from s choo

l district

for tourists

touri s t v is

itors

for families

tial district iden res

ors co m i

ng

m fro

cool path dry path clean path

visi t

enacting the commons becomes particularly urgent. Massimo de Angelis asks, whether ‘publicness’, as practiced in public space, emerges in a period of crisis as a new form of commons activity.8 In their article ‘The City as a Commons’, Sheila R. Fuller and Christian Iaione look beyond urban resources and city space as a ‘commons’ towards the concept of the city itself as a commons, an open-access good.9 Public spaces, or an enlarged public realm, then become a network that supports the city as an enabler and facilitator of collaborative decision-making structures to address political, social and economic inequality and vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

rs com

Masterplan composition – neighborhood influences on activities.

THE URBAN SURFACE 43

Rain management.

對周邊的影響

Climatic devise to increase air speed.

44

ALEX WALL

工業革命前的清淨空氣對周邊的影響

A SLICE OF THE BIOSPHERE Twenty years after the original idea of the urban surface, technological change, rampant urbanisation, the consequences of changing climate and social inequality demand a redefinition of the term and a recalibration of the implied potential tools and strategies. The tasks imagined for the urban surface require it to be further articulated mechanically and equipped with sensors. While the responsive city measures traffic, energy use, pollution and stormwater run-off, a responsive landscape can record nutrient flows, ecosystem services and the health and viability of non-human diversity. The urban surface will be mechanical if not machinic, responsive if not yet sentient. The contextual ground of buildings today is no longer a nominally thick urban surface. Rather, it is a horizontal plane mediating a slice of the biosphere, which extends from the aquifer below through the living soils to the field of local weather above. The urban surface — in the form of plazas, parks, forests and the city’s roofscape — supports evaporation, infiltration, storage, filtering and fertilisation. It will channel water, build soils and distribute rain. It becomes a critical infrastructure, not concealed but visible, designed, managed and used — the new story of the city. The regulating instrument of the urban surface becomes an activist public realm, a commons whose guiding principle is that resources should be shared more widely throughout the city on behalf of its inhabitants, particularly the least powerful.

1 2

3

4 5

6

7 8

9

Alex Wall, ‘Programming the Urban Surface’, in James Corner (ed.), Recovering Landscape, Yale University Press: New Haven 1999, p. 233 – 250. Peter Sloterdijk, ‘How big is “big”?’, in Collegium Internationale, February 2010. Available at: http://www.collegium-international.org/contributions/ 127-how-big-is-big.html Steward T. A. Pickett, William R. Burch, Jr., Shawn E. Dalton and Timothy W. Foresman, J. Morgan Grove, and Rowan Rowntree, ‘A conceptual framework for the study of human ecosystems in urban areas’, in Urban Ecosystems, 1997, 1, 185 –199. Available at: https://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/pubs/ jrnl/1997/ne_1997_pickett_001.pdf Elia Zenghelis, ‘Arcadia Invested,’ in L’Architecture d’Aujourd’hui, no. 256, April 1985, English translation by Bert McClure, p. LXXI. Deane Simpson, ‘Inhabited Infrastructures: Beyond the Black Box’, in Sabine Mueller and Andreas Quednau (eds.), Giraffes, Telegraphs and Hero of Alexandria. Urban Design by Narration. Ruby Press: Berlin 2017, p. 378 Stavros Stavrides, ‘On the Commons: A Public Interview with Massimo De Angelis and Stavros Stavrides’, in An Architektur, e-flux journal #17 June– August 2010. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/document/135733677/ An-Architektur-On-the-Commons-A-Public-Interview-With-Massimo-deAngelis-and-Stavros-Stavrides Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons — The evolution of institutions for collective action, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 1990, p. 182. Massimo De Angelis, ‘On the Commons: A Public Interview with Massimo De Angelis and Stavros Stavrides’, in An Architektur, e-flux journal #17 June–August 2010. Sheila R. Foster and Christian Iaione, ‘The City as a Commons’, in Yale Law and Policy Review 281, Vol. 34, Issue 2 (2016), p. 282 –349. Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1698&context=ylpr

Mist, pipes, clouds.

THE URBAN SURFACE 45

OPEN-ENDED: PUBLIC SPACES AS COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS Cities and urban spaces have been rediscovered over the past three decades as places of social and cultural vitality. In part brought on by political leaders with the intention of ridding their cities of crime and vagrancy, these efforts have transformed places like Times Square in New York and resulted in new spaces like Discovery Green in Houston. They are intended to draw in residents and visitors alike and give them reason to be there in the first place. In doing so, leaders have understood the reverberative economic potential of these efforts, in terms of spending by visitors, the economic development of surrounding areas, and the competitive value that can be claimed for cities. Lately the public spaces themselves have been put to work, through programming, in order to generate revenue — especially important in an era in which government resources for open-space creation, upkeep and management are dwindling. But none of this explains why people want to be there in the first place, or what we can do through design to conceive and shape these spaces. I argue for an approach to the design and programming of public spaces that accommodates diversity, flexibility, adaptability and open-endedness. This is an approach that allows for various intensities of use to be played out (and to play themselves out) across daily, seasonal and annual environmental, economic or other long-term cycles. In this public realm, inde-

46

CHRIS REED

CHRIS REED

terminacy is as important as planning for very specific kinds of uses; both are necessary in setting up the right conditions for a vibrant and multi-functional public space. To make this argument, I will draw on the research of urbanists like William H. Whyte, on complex systems ecology dealing with adaptability in the environment, and on our own experiences at Stoss in the design and programming of spaces for free play and flexibility.

SOCIAL ECOLOGIES Complex adaptive systems ecology tells us that healthy ecosystems are characterised by dynamic change over time. An ecosystem’s ability to adapt to new conditions or inputs (water, climate, disturbance, etc.) while maintaining its core structures and mechanisms is what ultimately ensures success and vitality. Within a particular ecosystem, diversity and system variability are two key factors that ensure that the ecosystem will be able to undergo succession and change. Healthy ecosystems are open systems — they remain in contact with the external environment through inputs such as heat and water and outputs such as energy and waste. In this way, individuals within an ecosystem and the ecosystem itself must always be considered in relationship to their larger environments. Dynamic interactions are the defining characteristic of healthy environmental ecologies.

Times Square, reconstructed as a pedestrian-only space by Snøhetta in 2017, and Discovery Green, designed in 2012 by Hargreaves Associates, invite residents and visitors to gather, creating social and economic reverberations in the city. Bass River Park re-ignites social and ecological dynamics that respond to changing environmental conditions.

FLOOD-BRACKISH

WET

FLOOD

NEGLECT / SUCCESSION

FLOOD

START

DRY

SPORT

WINDY

DRY

FLOOD

WET

NEGLECT / SUCCESSION

OPEN-ENDED

47

Four ecosystem functions, redrawn and reinterpreted by Tomás Folch, Nina-Marie Lister and Chris Reed, 2002/2012. Folded benches along The City Deck in Green Bay and the scattered granite boulders of Peter Walker’s Tanner Fountain at Harvard Plaza offer opportunities for inventive and creative play.

48  CHRIS REED

It is not such a leap to apply these same principles to public spaces. Flexibility and adaptability allow for public spaces to change to accommodate different events and activities, and even adapt to new circumstances (physical, hydrological, programmatic, political, etc.) over the long term. These qualities encourage appropriation of many flavours, for activities that might be planned and others that might be spontaneous or invented. They do this in ways that appeal to people’s innate sensibilities as curious and experimental creatures — willing and able to explore new forms, spaces and situations on their own terms, without prescribed ideas about the proper use of something. Think about kids, for instance, and their ability to make a game out of anything or anywhere — like hopping games that utilise the utility covers on an ordinary street or pavement. People are incredibly inventive when given the opportunity or the prompt. Much playground design recently has morphed from prescribed activities on single-use pieces of equipment to more exploratory and open-ended play environments that encourage improvisation and free, creative play. At Stoss, we explored ideas of open-endedness and free and creative play in a garden installation called Safe Zone at the International Garden Festival in Grand-Métis, Quebec. Here a simple, undulating topography of poured-in-place, bouncy rubber surfacing was the prompt, and people were invited to do whatever they liked. Kids quickly made up running and jumping games, but eventually adults were lured in — sometimes pushed as well. The construction manager encouraged wary visitors to remove their shoes and socks to experience the sponginess of the surface directly on their bare feet and toes. And people opened up: exploring, moving about, finding comfortable perches to sit on and slightly secluded depressions to hide in. Gymnastics, handstands and more roughand-tumble games were all part of the play that emerged. The unscripted, open-ended and indeterminate nature of the design was critical in allowing for — even prompting — this physical and social improvisation. Flexibility, open-endedness and even indeterminacy are not completely foreign ideas in the study and design of public space and cities. William H. Whyte’s The Social Life of Small ­Urban Spaces is exemplary in calling out the ways in which people can adapt to public spaces, even those less accommodating. Whyte’s studies of human behaviour, and specifically the ways in which people gathered on the North Front Ledge outside Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram Building in New York, highlighted human behavioural adaptations to this space and its environment. He studied and mapped the evolving relationships of people’s positions on the plaza to changing sunlight, to work and lunch and commuting schedules, and to each other — noting how folks would use the space differently over the course of the day. More recently, and at a larger scale, urban projects like OMA’s proposal for the Yokohama Masterplan show how the programming of an entire district might result in dramatically different characters and combinations of activities over the course of the day and night, if an appropriate combination of facilities and public spaces has been pro-

The undulating topography of Safe Zone was created with a spongy rubber surface that prompted adults and kids alike to explore and bounce and move about.

vided. Both examples point to a need to build in flexibility, redundancy and the ability to change and adapt — whether we are talking about the ways in which people engage with public space, or the ways in which public spaces and districts can be set up to ensure a liveliness throughout the day and year. I am describing here, in different ways and at a range of scales, what I want to put forward as social ecologies: the interactions of and interrelationships between various individuals and each other, and between them and their environments — whether a small play garden or public space or a larger urban district or urban ecosystem is concerned. Social ecologies are grounded in systems or frameworks that are clearly structured but are flexible and open-ended: they are neither singular nor fully prescribed. Social ecologies recognise humans’ innate instincts and curiosities as physical and social beings with a wide variety of tastes, desires, needs, moods and backgrounds. Healthy social ecologies, like healthy ecosystems, are flexible: their embedded DNA allows for shifts and changes in outward expression as circumstances change. They adapt to changing situations. Life endures and thrives.

DESIGN FOR FLEXIBILITY The Plaza at Harvard, designed by Stoss and featured as a case study in this book (see p. 74 – 85), has established new social ecologies in a space previously rendered lifeless by a lack of accommodation for anything but passing through. In contrast, the new space plays on people’s inexhaustible craving for discovery, for physical and sensorial experiences, for social interaction of many sorts. It is flexible and is set up — equipped — to be programmed and reprogrammed over time. The site is an important intersection between Harvard’s historic Yard and its expanding North Campus. According to the University, an estimated 10,000 people used the space as

a daily crossing prior to the redesign. This is in part due to the depression of a local roadway underneath the space, which funnels everyone moving from the River Houses (dormitories) and bustling Harvard Square on the south to university facilities, museums and adjacent residential neighbourhoods to the north. But there was no accommodation for people in this space, and it was not set up to adequately host activity. The University’s President, Drew Faust, wanted to find places for social interaction through her Common Spaces initiative and looked to make this its first significant project. The Plaza was designed both to host an ever-changing array of events and activities and to allow for quieter moments, for unscripted events and spontaneous activities, for openness and emptiness, and moments in which the only activities were two or three people walking across the space in the evening. The edge sumac groves and the area around Peter Walker’s Tanner Fountain always offer these alternative, quieter settings, but this calm can overtake the entire main space too, after tents and food trucks are moved away. The main Plaza was also designed to accommodate spontaneous assemblies and protests. In fact, during the first three weeks after it opened, a student group organised a protest in the form of a mock same-sex wedding ceremony as a stand against policies enacted in their Southeast Asian homeland. In this way, the plaza acts as an open system that can adapt itself to any number of desires or circumstances that are brought into play. These same principles of diversity, flexibility and adaptability that inform the space as a whole are also addressed to the scale of the human body, in the dual seating elements incorporated. Custom-designed wood benches are shaped to accommodate different bodies in different ways, and give options for how people choose to sit — cross-legged, upright, slouchy, lounging, alone or in groups, on laps, cuddling, out-

OPEN-ENDED

49

William H. Whyte studied how people unexpectedly gathered along the ledge of Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram Building in New York, adapting to changing sun and shade. Assemblage of programmes for the Yokohama Masterplan, OMA, 1992.

50  CHRIS REED

right lying down and scratching your belly ... Digital design and fabrication tools allow for simple transitions between specific measured bench profiles, producing a wide variety of sitting options to appeal to people’s moods or physical needs and desires. Seating is at the heart of an agenda for the everyday. While the Plaza’s client was especially interested in accommodating events and activities, we insisted that portions of the space be scaled down and set up to invite people in even at times when no events were taking place, and to design it intentionally for this, so that the space did not seem empty or forlorn when an event was not happening. Multiple forms of seating were important, as was illumination at night to make the place feel welcoming. These kinds of design elements simply encourage people passing through to slow down, to pause, perhaps to sit or hang out — thereby adding another layer of life to the space beyond the destination event.

The Plaza at Harvard established a new flexible crossroads that invites social interaction of many sorts with an ever-changing array of events and activities. The Plaza also offers an alternative to daily activities with space for quiet moments. Digital modelling and fabrication were used to rapidly iterate the design for the bespoke benches at the Plaza and to create a final design with simple profiles that respond to the human body.

OPEN-ENDED

51

Programming site diagram. The Plaza was designed as a flexible space that could accommodate a wide diversity of daily activities and special events. Moveable tables and chairs on the Plaza allow administrators and users to rearrange and test the space to meet their changing needs, whether sitting alone or gathering in groups large and small.

52

CHRIS REED

A student protest gathers between a farmers’ market and food trucks on the Plaza.

The Plaza’s embedded flexibility and diversity in a sense allows it to assume different personalities — equally compelling when throbbing with activity or when small groups are quietly studying or moving through. It is intentionally designed to accommodate multiple time-scales, multiple audiences, multiple voices and multiple agendas. It allows for fitting-out and appropriation in many ways, anticipating many uses but leaving open other possibilities too. In all these ways it embodies the richest ideals of what public space can be — a simple platform for the playing-out of various social lives: dynamic, evolving, open-ended.

LEARNING: CURATION AND ADAPTATION Healthy organisms and ecosystems adapt to changes in their environment, shifting strategy as circumstances evolve around them. Healthy social spaces can learn and adapt too. Here, ongoing design and management practices become key agents in the success of these spaces. Too often, programming is left to groups or organisations like Project for Public Spaces who apply generic toolkits to projects, deploying standard interventions (furniture, games, etc.), adjusted only in colour or combination to a new place. In other cases advisors or clients go too far in filling up spaces every moment of the day. Too much programming can be as problematic as too little — open spaces should accommodate a full range of uses and people, including quieter moments that are more about passive enjoyment or open possibilities for unscripted events. I say this recognising the fact that we cannot dictate what is too much or too little, that in some ways the flexibility inherent in the spatial designs allows for someone else to decide this — that it is, in fact, a sign of success and health that many different inputs and impressions are possible here. The administration of Harvard created a Common Spaces team to oversee and curate activities in the Plaza. This team has had the opportunity to test a wide range of programming events and activities over the many years since the Plaza opened in 2013. They move things around, try different con-

figurations of events and tents and food trucks. They test different activities (winter curling on fake ice!) to see what works and what does not. They bring games and furniture and planted pots in and move them out again. And then, importantly, they adjust. They have had successful lunchtime concerts, a boxing match, ice-skating, arts and crafts fairs, an incredible farmers’ market, ping pong in the grove, and even a petting zoo (outlandishly brought to us by Projects for Public Spaces)! Sometimes it might seem too much, but then tents are taken down, the goats go back to their farm, and people move in to soak up the sun and talk and hang out and watch the world go by on a gorgeously sunny autumn day. The curators at Common Spaces test, learn and adapt — just as an organism within a changing ecosystem would. The many lives of the space, the lives of the multiple publics who occupy the space, even momentarily, go on. One day full of people, the next evening quiet — with just a few students talking, a dad and his kid playing on a bench, a professor walking home. What comes tomorrow and next year and a decade from now is a little uncertain — but is a ripe and healthy and optimistically open question.

This article is an expanded version of short essays on this topic first published in Mohsen Mostafavi with Gareth Dougherty (eds.), Ecological Urbanism, (Cambridge, MA, and Baden, Switzerland: Harvard University Graduate School of Design and Lars Müller, 2016, 2nd ed.) and in Anthos Journal of ECLAS (‘Die Ökologien öffentlicher Plätze/L’écologie des places publiques’, issue 3, 2016, p. 7 –11.). Thanks to Scott Mitchell of Stoss for his assistance and efforts.

OPEN-ENDED

53

FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE

High-quality urban green and open spaces have long been considered a crucial component in our increasingly urbanised landscapes, but as important as we know open spaces are to a city’s greatness, municipal budgets and priorities to manage and maintain them have been on a downward trajectory for a long time. Like many other countries, the UK is still recovering from the recent financial crisis. The impact of government-led austerity measures across the world disproportionately affects ‘cultural services’ including parks, meaning they are often at the top of the list for funding cuts. In this essay I focus on how we fund our open spaces within an increasingly fragile economic climate and refer to case studies in London and Sheffield to show how this happens in practice.

WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES IN FUNDING OPEN SPACES? Green spaces are an ongoing concern. Trees, grass and flowers grow; footpaths get used and need to be looked after through ongoing management. Green spaces should be considered as an investment, but too often parks compete for public money with important statutory services, including health, education and social services. Providing green and open spaces is not a statutory service anywhere in the world, making funding a precarious affair: when public budgets are

54

NICOLA DEMPSEY

NICOLA DEMPSEY

at risk, statutory services take precedence. A recent UK report shows that over 90 per cent of park managers have had revenue budgets cut and 95 per cent expect this to continue over the next three years (Heritage Lottery Fund — HLF — , 2016). Also, local authorities — the main custodians of UK public spaces — operate on annual budgets, meaning that taking a long-term view is very difficult.

SOMEONE WILL ALWAYS LOOK AFTER THE OPEN SPACES … RIGHT? There is an assumption that, once money is spent on creating, changing or regenerating open spaces, they will de facto be looked after and paid for in perpetuity. The original parks movement was based on making places publicly accessible forever when Victorian philanthropists donated parks to towns and cities knowing that long-term management and maintenance would occur (Conway, 1991). Ongoing research suggests this is not a realistic assumption to make (Dempsey et al., 2012, 2016). The focus on place-making is deeply ingrained with policy-makers and practitioners. The wealth of design and planning guidance disproportionately focuses on creating, making and changing the landscape. It tends to consider what comes after implementation — in other words, the place-keeping, the long-term management — as a postscript. Funding

Potters Fields Park from Tower Bridge. The park is the setting of numerous events and activities including locations for TV and films, arts festivals and a tree-dressing day. As seen here, it is also an important everyday space. Food markets often take place on the lawn with the backdrop of the Greater London Authority building, the office of the Mayor of London. Digital screens draw large crowds on to the lawns, shown here during the London Olympics. A view from inside Rosy The Ballerina, by raumlaborberlin, commissioned and produced by UP Projects. This view demonstrates how art installations transform the space and provide an alternative vantage point for Tower Bridge, a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

bodies do the same, prioritising capital works, while paying limited attention to how the ongoing management beyond initial establishment will be funded. So councils have to explore new ways of sustaining open spaces financially. Activating those spaces through programmes, events, seasonal festivities and recurring installations is one such response.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK: A GREEN GEM ALONG THE THAMES Potters Fields Park (see p. 108 –121) almost did not exist. It did not originally feature in the area’s Development Masterplan and was fought for by campaigning community members, leading to a Public Inquiry and the park’s inclusion in 1982 (Potters Fields Trust, 2017). The L-shaped park flanks the River Thames with expansive views towards the City of London, the Tower of London and Tower Bridge, and also provides a quiet stretch of park along the river. With its uniquely prominent location, the park custodians chose to generate a constant funding stream based on leases for events, functions and activities. These are incredibly diverse, ranging from marketing campaigns (including a huge shopping bag emblazoned with David Beckham’s torso), to community and charitable events including a children’s egg hunt at Easter and a campaign against meningitis.

The park is managed by the Potters Fields Park Management Trust — a not-for-profit organisation. The Trust aims ’to occupy, promote, manage and maintain as a public open space the park and garden area known as “Potters Fields Park” in the interests of public welfare, including the educational and recreational benefit of visitors to the park’ (Potters Fields Park, 2016). The park generates a steady income from its high-profile events and activities, renting out a small kiosk, and interest generated from a small endowment. Money raised is reinvested into the site and other open spaces in the area, including St John’s Churchyard. Potters Fields Park does not, therefore, need any public money for ongoing maintenance costs. The Trust leases the Park from the Southwark Council and, as a self-sustaining vehicle, the Trust is arguably better placed to sustain the future of the park than the Council itself (Smith et al., 2009). The Trust is based in the local area and thus can

FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE

55

focus on specific needs, which might relate to particular maintenance requirements after a well-attended event, extensive litter clearing, or choosing projects with community and stakeholder involvement to reinvest revenues into projects. As site managers, the Trust addresses potential conflicts of interest in this publicly accessible park by maximising the income from the minimum number of hire days possible. In this way, the Trust provides events that have a benefit to the local community, and makes the local community aware of the benefits of their business model, which provides far higher standards of maintenance than the conventional council system.

THE VIEW FROM SHEFFIELD

Sheffield Midland train station with South Street Park (green area) and Park Hill (top left) in the background. South Street Park was regenerated to maximise the views of the city and an amphitheatre was constructed to create an attraction. The ‘steel steps’ were improved, and more accessible paths were put in around the site to link the top entrances with the station and city centre beyond. South Street Park: Student Colour Run Event, 29 April 2017.

56

NICOLA DEMPSEY

South Street Park has been changing as a site since 2008 when its regeneration began. It is a high-profile site in terms of its location, visible from much of the central Sheffield city area. It lies immediately behind the city’s train station, is a steeply sloping site (1:10 gradient) and was created in the 1960s, when the Park Hill flats were built to replace extensive slum housing in the area. It had long been managed at a minimal level by the Sheffield City Council, because of the slope and the lack of physical connection between the city centre and surrounding housing. Local people would avoid it because of anti-social behaviour including drug use, and the park became a blot on the city’s landscape. The blot became more visible when the city’s Supertram located a tram stop on its doorstep in the 1990s, and later when the city’s train station was regenerated between 2004 and 2008. This led to plans to redesign the space to improve the experience for pedestrians and attract new users to this site.

The ‘steel steps’ are an important feature of the park, taking people up from the train station in a sweeping gesture past the grassed amphitheatre to the top of the site. The amphitheatre can seat 1000 people and is the main feature of the park. This capacity means that the site is more suitable for smaller and community-based events, which must be why the Council is not under pressure to use the site for commercial events. The Council suggests South Street Park as a venue to organisers of potential events, particularly as the city’s other parks and open spaces are often at full capacity with programmes. Since 2013, between four and seven events have been held annually in South Street Park, most of which have been cinema screenings and theatre productions. To date, these theatre and cinema events have been funded through external initiatives (for example, via the British Film Institute) and are currently not Council initiatives or events, but this may change in the future. When the first theatre production was put on in the amphitheatre, the steps were closed off to commuters and the non-paying public. This caused friction with local residents, who had not been informed about a major event, leading to complaints to the Council about restricted access along the main pedestrian route. This has become less of a problem over time and the Council provides notices to warn local users when the steps are to be closed (30 minutes before and during ­performances). It can sometimes become an issue for event organisers; for example, when a ‘15’ certificate film was screened, they had not anticipated the need (and costs) for grid-fencing with black sheeting erected all around the seating as part of child protection requirements. There is also an issue around the site not having its own electricity and water supply. Reflecting on how commercial activity such as advertising and marketing might form part of events in this city centre location, I asked Council and private event organisers about the scope for doing so in South Street Park. This received a negative response for varied reasons. The event organisers did not consider South Street Park to be a particularly central location, describing the site as ‘out on a limb’, without a lot of footfall. The Council’s event representative said that advertising was not a good idea for the park, ‘because parks should be a haven away from that kind of thing’, and that any promotions in Sheffield parks should be about nature, health and well-being. It seems that the Council would not consider any advertising or marketing activity in this site. With the ongoing stringent austerity measures, and as more residents hopefully continue to move into the regenerated Park Hill flats, one wonders if this attitude might change over time. In conclusion, the current government has reiterated its position that parks cannot become a statutory duty for local authorities, on the advice of the 2016 Parks Inquiry (CLG, 2017). This strongly suggests that income-generating activities will become a much more regular feature in parks and open spaces. Parks have long been the setting for events but does it mean changing our relationship with the park? We do not have a strong tendency to use our parks after dark: should this change? How acceptable to users is closing a green space or

a part of a park for evening events? Perhaps closure is nothing more than an annoying necessity that needs to be extended to more parks. This might incur short-term costs for lighting, providing electricity and water: would such investment feasibly generate sustainable income? We can look at Potters Fields Park as a very high-profile site and apply similar practices to South Street Park. There is real potential to activate this space more regularly to ‘get it on the map’ of Sheffield’s lively calendar of events. Incorporating it into existing and temporary urban walking trails — for example, to spot sculptures (elephants in Sheffield and sheep in Bristol) — can significantly increase pedestrian numbers, with costs borne by the private sector. HLF (2016) describes how around half of UK councils are considering selling off their green spaces or handing over management to other organisations because of reduced budgets and austerity measures. When considered as a stark and over-simplistic dichotomy of parks being kept in public use or sold off for development, it would be churlish to argue. Yet this is happening and so it requires innovative thinking and real changes in the attitudes of all stakeholders to understand the social, cultural, ecological as well as financial value of our 21st-century urban green spaces.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to interviewees, colleagues (particularly my place-keeping mentor Mel Burton) and past students who have contributed to research projects referred to in this chapter, including the Sheffield City Council, the Showroom Sheffield and Potters Fields Park Trust. All photos are taken by the author unless stated otherwise.

REFERENCES Hazel Conway, People’s Parks: the design and development of Victorian parks in Britain, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 1991. Nicola Dempsey, Mel Burton and Rosie Duncan, ‘Evaluating the effectiveness of a cross-sector partnership for green space management: The case of Southey Owlerton, Sheffield, UK’, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 2015, 15, pp. 155–64. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2015.12.002 Nicola Dempsey, Mel Burton and Alice Mathers, ‘Place-keeping — responsive, long-term open space management‘, Town and Country Planning, 2012, 81(10), pp. 431–36.  Department of Communities and Local Government, Government Response to the Communities and Local Government Select Committee Report: The Future of Public Parks, HM Government: London 2017. Heritage Lottery Fund, State of UK Public Parks, Heritage Lottery Fund: London 2016. Potters Fields Trust, Park Chronology, http://pottersfields.co.uk/history/ park-chronology. Accessed in Feb 25 2017 Harry Smith, Marcia Pereira and Mel Burton, ’Physical and institutional requalification for long-term “place-keeping”: experiences from open space regeneration in the United Kingdom’, conference paper, International Association of People-Environment Studies, Culture & Space in the Built Environment Network & Housing Network International Symposium on Revitalising Built Environments, Requalifying Old Places for New Uses, Istanbul 2009.

FUNDING FLEXIBLE SPACE 57

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS: PLANNING, PROGRAMMING AND PLAY

CHRIS WANGRO

PATH I contribute to this book as a practitioner whose practice is changing. For over 30 years I worked as a producer of events in public spaces. I started as director of a small travelling circus working in parks and plazas across Europe and the US. A few adventures later, I was named Director of City-Wide Events for the New York City Department of Parks & Recreation. From there I became an independent practitioner creating and managing concerts, carnivals, festivals, art installations, expos, brand extravaganzas and spectacles as varied as papal masses and pachyderm parades. All these projects had the event as the end goal. In recent years I have been invited to collaborate with municipalities, developers, designers and urbanists on projects focusing on the creation of public space and find myself becoming a producer of the spaces themselves. This shift in my work coincides with the change that I have seen in who is operating public space, how public space is being conceived, and how it is being managed. To understand this, one need only to look at the rise of parks conservancies and Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) and their increasing influence and/or control of public space. This is a key point; those who determine how a space is programmed will usually end up determining who uses it. Programming has long been utilised as a tool for attracting desired demographic groups — and for keeping ‘less desirable’ popu-

58

CHRIS WANGRO

lations away. Reserving value-judgement, it is safe to say that spaces administered by private or public-private organisations are to a large extent less democratic than those run by public offices. Public and private venues are increasingly curated, and curation is a form of control. There are rules and ‘curated’ restrictions on who may use the space, and often what happens in the space is decided by property owners or a space’s controlling board. Downside: the loss of the local community’s organic input into the creation of the space. Upside: the potential to design the experience of a space so that it becomes a well-loved, well-used public asset. As more spaces are being managed by private and semi-public entities, there is an increasing trend to programme these spaces. Unfortunately, people who have little or no experience creating, producing or programming are doing much of this work. In such a setting, risk-taking is often frowned upon and creativity plays second fiddle to the ‘tried-and-tested’. Understandably, there is a tendency for property managers to utilise what they see around them, and this has bred a go-to portfolio of ‘activations’. At the time of writing, this portfolio includes food trucks, ping-pong tables, cornhole (a simple lawn game where beanbags are tossed towards a hole in a slanted piece of wood), more food trucks, outdoor films and maybe a yoga class or two. Not that any of these are inher-

The Lot, overlooked by phase 2 of the Highline, involved the conversion of a vacant car park into a platform for social interaction and artistic expression. Overview of the Lawn on D during Oysterfest.

ently bad, but as a portfolio of public programming, there is nothing innovative, exciting, media-worthy or particularly sponsor-worthy on the list. What I think we all strive for is the creation of public space with a distinct tone and tenor that appeals and responds to the needs of the community. And to go one step further, we aim to build space that creates community. There are essentially two ways to do this: 1) Enter into a space as a curator with a portfolio of ideas, projects and events and parachute that into the venue. 2) Collaborate with the local community and enlist their help to create an informed, relevant and diverse programme.

CASE STUDY LAWN ON D (LOD) Early in 2014, the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority (MCCA) was completing plans for a new park space, a 1.1-hectare parking lot that became known as the Lawn on D (LOD). I was recruited by HR&A’s strategic development team, and named ‘official impresario’ by the MCCA’s chief visionary Howard Davis. My initial assignments were to help the design team evaluate the plans for the space and to create a strategic roadmap for the initial season(s) of programming.

DESIGN NOTES When I started on the project, Sasaki had already completed plans for the LOD’s basic layout and design. The space was to be open and event-friendly, designed to host and attract all types of programming. Reviewing these plans with an eye towards event production in the four key areas below I found the following: 1) Vehicle access Event production brings vehicle traffic into a space. Many spaces try to ban all vehicles but restrictions invariably fail. I would suggest that designing paths that can sustain vehicles is a better and safer way to go. Working with Sasaki we created paths through the LOD that could handle the weight of a 40foot semi-container or stage-truck, as well as accommodate a large vehicle’s turning radius. We widened one area of pathway in order to accommodate a temporary stage. We broadened the existing entry to make it easy for vehicles to enter the space safely from the street, and created another wide gateway at the opposite end of the park so that a vehicle could go straight through the space without needing to turn around. 2) Power Event production requires power, and providing easily accessible power will limit the need for producers to bring gener-

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS

59

Plan of Lawn on D illustrating its activation.

ators into the space. Limiting generators is generally a good thing as they are rarely pretty or quiet, this also reduces traffic through the space — a good thing despite the improvements mentioned above. The expense of generator rental can be prohibitive for smaller community organisations putting on events. Installing power helps attract these organisations and support community programming in the long run. Power needs be placed around the space so that it is easily accessible. For the LOD we added a major power box with the requisite capacity for events and 110volt power taps were added to lamp poles throughout the area for more general needs. It should be noted that ideally the power box is located within 100 feet of where a stage might likely be placed, and located in such a way that cables running from the box to the stage cross as few major pedestrian pathways as possible.

by difficult drainage issues. Puddling in some areas was almost unavoidable.

3) Water Drinkable water is obviously best, but having any water on site is a plus. Non-drinkable water is required for everything from landscape maintenance to washing dishes. Drinkable water allows for all manner of things from water fountains to misting stations, which can be literal lifesavers. We did manage to add a bit of water access to the LOD plan, but this was complicated

I started the roadmap process with a ‘deep dive’ investigating programmes being held in comparable and noteworthy spaces in the region, nationally and internationally. The goal was to create an inventory of programmes in order to learn what was working and why. Most importantly, I met with a broad spectrum of individuals and organisations in the community. This included civic anchors such as Harvard’s ART Theater and the

60

CHRIS WANGRO

4) Emergency exits The initial LOD plans we worked from did not include a fence around the space. There was much conversation about the pros and cons of fencing and ultimately it was decided that this particular space would benefit from an enclosure. It was key for us at that point to be sure that nowhere in the space was more than a couple of hundred feet from an opening, in order to be able to meet the emergency exit requirements for Temporary Public Assembly permits needed for special events.

THE ROADMAP AND BEYOND

Boston Children’s Museum, as well as commercial producers and promoters. I also met with more homegrown posses such as the people behind terrific local events like PorchFest and the Boston Music Awards. Some of these meetings were friendly, some were adversarial, as locals were suspicious of an outsider and sceptical of a large state-funded project. Some of those I met I knew I would never work with; some I hoped might become partners critical to our success. It was a widescale brain-picking and pulse-taking exercise that proved essential. This phase also served another important function — it showed the community that we cared about what they had to say and allowed them to participate and contribute. R&D phase goals: To understand: – What programming in the region is working and why – What there is too much of – What is missing – Who is doing great stuff that we can learn from and/or include – Who is doing great stuff that we can host and help make better – Who can we expect to be our principal audience(s) and how do we get them to consider a trip to our venue worthwhile. With this understanding, I had the unusual opportunity to infuse everything from our bar decor to the concert line-up with a common and informed vision.

Elevated view from the Convention Centre overlooking the Lawn on D showing the perimeter enclosure and entrances. The Play Day event is activating the space. Chris Wangro moderating a discussion between a panel and the audience at a forum he hosted exploring playfulness and public art.

SWING TIME; A STAR IS BORN While surveying the scene in Boston, I was warned repeatedly that it was an extremely divided city of distinct neighbourhoods and communities. The goal of having people leave their comfort zone to travel to a dead zone of the city in order to spend time in a fairly sterile and shade-less few acres alongside a large ugly building was something of a challenge. My colleagues at HR&A had a key insight — they identified the need for an agent of change that would help transform the space, a centrepiece to make this new park pop. My goal was to find a physical structure that would act as an icon and defining element for the space, something that would both encapsulate and broadcast the spirit of the park. We also felt that the space was too wide-open for the day-to-day use we anticipated. We wanted a physical divider that would split the site into zones that allowed for different types of simultaneous usage. Anything that could achieve all this was not going to be cheap. Our client was not easily swayed but we made our case and ultimately the powers that be gave us their backing. The hunt was on. Mutually agreed objectives were that this ‘change agent’ would be ‘design & tech forward’, which was in keeping with the image the MCCA was aiming to create, and as the LOD sat in a dead zone with few pedestrians passing at night, we would need to include light or projection so that passing drivers would take note.

Initially the ‘big idea’ was to work with Janet Echelman, a Boston-based artist whose large-scale public works had become synonymous with new forms in public art. As can happen our project with Janet folded at the eleventh hour for external reasons. Though calamitous at the time, this proved to be fortuitous as it allowed me to hone in on a project that would better represent the spirit of the venue and achieve our specific goals.

PLAY AS A UNITING PRINCIPLE I had been working on a definition of the space in terms of its character and spirit; the focus of my thinking had centred on the idea of playfulness. The goal was to infuse the space with a relaxed and joyful spirit — from the furniture and brightly coloured bar to the art installations and schedule of events. I had begun to think of the LOD as a place where Bostonians could be brought together simply by having fun. One of the things that made replacing the Echelman project daunting was that I was committed to finding a project created by a local. There were other possibilities — notably a hightech installation by a Canadian experiential design team.

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS

61

Janet Echelman’s work eventually activated the Greenway in downtown Boston, creating the opportunity for Swing Time to be designed for the Lawn on D. Lawn on D provides many opportunities for play for both children and adults, including lawn games, foam shipping containers and Play Day installations.

62

CHRIS WANGRO

However, launching the space with a cultural import was not the way to win over the community, nor would it have been right for a project that was state-funded. I researched regional artists, arts groups, cultural and community organisations but came up empty-handed until I called Höweler + Yoon. My first conversation with architect/designer Meejin Yoon was a gift: within minutes we began discussing play. Meejin had been working with her students on ideas relating to a large-scale play structure. We saw that there could be a play piece that would embody all the project’s goals: Swing Time was born. Swing Time delivered on many fronts. It set the tone for the space by declaring it a sophisticated playground. Physically it split the space in two, yet did so in a way that allowed visibility and flow-through. Seductively sculptural and iconic, the swings also had to be tried — to be experienced. It quickly became a destination and ‘the unofficial selfie capital of Boston’. The work drew crowds of all ages and backgrounds as well as attention from local, national and international media. As to the investment’s tangible return on investment, the team leasing the LOD for private events found that Swing Time became their strongest selling point when renting the space. Swing Time also opened the door for us to present a variety of other large-scale playful projects; it created buy-in from MCCA, excitement in the community and a general expectation for more.

Overview of Swing Time during the Play Day event, demonstrating how Swing Time creates enough of a separation between the tent and the lawns but is transparent enough so that it does not create a barrier. Swing Time, coined the ‘selfie capital of Boston’, attracts all ages to enjoy the swings in multiple ways. At night Swing Time transforms the Lawn on D with glowing rings of colour that people are instantly drawn to like moths to a lamp.

GIANT BUNNIES MATTER When meeting with artists and arts presenters in the region, I heard many complain of the ‘white men or horses’ nature of public sculpture in Boston. It was clear that the visual arts programme at LOD needed to create a counterpoint to that tradition. The hunger for something ‘other’ gave us a tremendous opportunity to offer something different. Our experience with Swing Time proved that scale and playfulness had resonance in the city; what could be a better follow-up than giant bunnies? Amanda Parer’s Intrude is a striking piece; it is a series of mass-scale, illuminated, inflated white rabbits. Despite its monumental scale it is a work that does not take itself too seriously. It is childlike and slightly silly, yet carries an environmental message that is slyly thought-provoking. This made Intrude a terrific antidote to Boston’s self-important public art tradition. On encountering it, people respond to Intrude with a smile. It is hard to resist. The work is playful on multiple fronts, not the least of which is its Wonderland-ish ability to transform the space. Confronting the work changes one’s sense of size and self within the environment; everyone simply feels different standing amid a field of 7 metre tall rabbits. The work and its playful spirit have a democratising effect. Swing Time did more than create dynamic seating for the space; it achieved the goal of offering playfulness to a city that needed permission to let its hair down. It also set the bar for

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS

63

People line up to experience the Intrude installation.

the space, creating a sense that the LOD was presenting projects not to be missed. Intrude carried that spirit and message forward. After just one weekend, demand to see Intrude was so great that we had to close the gates of the LOD and queues formed up and down the block. One look at that queue told you that word-of-mouth had carried to a huge cross-section of population, and the investment in Intrude had paid off.

A NOTE ON PARTNERSHIPS It is standard practice in public space management to host or issue permits for event organisers, exhibits and community organisations. Often these outside groups are seen as invaders and the relationship between their producers and venue management is adversarial. This is not only a waste of energy, it is a waste of opportunity. Seeing outsiders as partners — and treating them as such — can be mutually beneficial. Event producers, artists and organisers can and will carry word of the space back to their communities. Their experiences and community word-of-mouth is powerful and important. Their networks, connections and capabilities can become great assets to the space and its programming. Treating organisers as partners can also create a wealth of resources for the space and other programmes. For example, a music producer presenting a concert in the space might well support another organisation’s family festival with music; an arts organisation that creates a mural project might well de-

64

CHRIS WANGRO

sign graphics for other programmes. The point is that by supporting and embracing outside organisers as partners, you build a collaborative internal community that can support and enrich each other’s work. There are many ways to offer support to those you host. Offering the venue for free is always best and there are few better ways to attract great programmes to your space — but this is not always viable. Bolstering programmes by offering venue resources is also meaningful; it will create better events, collaborative spirit and general goodwill. The resources you offer need not be financial: staffing, marketing and access to basic equipment and infrastructure can be a big draw. Finally, as programming budgets are usually tight, attracting projects to a space by treating producers as partners is a powerful way to create strong and diverse programming that by nature of its design is likely to be a collaboration of, by and for the people.

Intrude in the daylight still provides a spectacle and the foam shipping containers play feature double as a makeshift seating for groups to gather and socialise. In 2015, the Lawn on D hosted Intrude, a collection of illuminated over-sized bunnies, simultaneously statuesque and cuddly.

GIANT BUNNIES AND ELECTRIC SWINGS

65

SCRATCH THAT!

As this book demonstrates, the planning and design of public spaces in parallel to and in coordination with a curatorial plan is a design trend that has been gaining traction in the recent past. This is to say that the future performance of public spaces, via the curation of the events that will be taking place within them, is now playing a role in the conception and design of public space. It could be argued that, according to this trend, public space is no longer considered to be only physical space but, rather, it is seen as a combination of physical space with a curatorial program. As a spatial typology, public space is now undergoing a transformation similar to that experienced by museums in the 1980s and early 90s. At that time, curatorial practices became consolidated as programmes capable of adding new dimensions to museums’ traditional physical spaces. Through their ever-changing curatorial programmes, curators added a new temporal dimension to the static character of museums’ physical spaces. From that point onward, a museum’s character would no longer be exclusively defined by the building’s physical presence; rather, the museum’s exhibition and event programmes would become an essential defining factor. Through their permanent use of media, curators also contributed to the reconstruction of the museum’s identity. A museum’s identity would no longer be exclusively defined by the building’s physical presence either. The use of public media as

66

SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO

SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO

a disseminating agent would also become an essential defining factor. In this new paradigm, public space has come to be understood as a place offering ever-changing programmatic fulfillment that is permanently broadcast via social media. The continual superimposition of temporary occupations by different publics can avoid a single, permanent and exclusive public. For this reason, the curation of a constantly changing set of spatial opportunities can be an appropriate technique for enabling heterogeneous and contradictory publics — a critical condition for an open and pluralistic society. It may be argued that a curatorial plan could potentially guarantee equal access to all types of publics, especially to those who might feel intimidated or at a disadvantage under normal circumstances. However, curatorial programmes present several drawbacks that are due precisely to their own strengths. In this essay I point out a few of these but the primary one is that curatorial programmes are obviously curated. In this new paradigm, the definition of publicness within these public spaces rests upon the curators themselves. And, regardless of the curators’ intentions and programming agenda, publicness cannot be controlled by a handful of individuals. A curated strategy, then, may seem to run counter to the very principle of publicness as a characteristic that is defined by many people, not only by a few.

Through a palimpsestuous process similar to the methods followed by the public spaces described in this book, this text surveys a variety of approaches in order to confront the design of public space as a medium that can enable cultural diversity. Similar to the operating procedures followed by the public spaces analysed in this book, this text is written as a series of positions that need to be erased or overlaid in order to make room for new ones. In this regard, this article is both medium and message: through its own structure the text embodies the arguments it discusses.

CURATING CHANGE Public space is not only the physical presence of the public realm, it is also the space where publics (both already existing and newly formed) gain political visibility. This process has been thoroughly described by Don Mitchell in his analysis of the People’s Park in Berkeley, California. As he explains, ‘by claiming space in public, by creating public spaces, social groups themselves become public. Only in public space, for example, can the homeless represent themselves as a legitimate part of “the public”. Insofar as homeless people or other marginalised groups remain invisible to society, they fail to be counted as legitimate members of the polity. And in this sense, public spaces are absolutely essential to the functioning of democratic politics.’1 Based on these relationships between physical space and social realm, the definition of public space is a complex matter since what is referred to as ‘the public’ is a formless, heterogeneous, multi-faceted, fragmented and constantly changing social body. The public spaces included in this book are perhaps examples of a new way of reconceptualising public space so that it is capable of accepting multiple publics, sensibilities and forms of expression. By curating events, these public spaces seem to embrace openness, acceptance and diversity. In this context, curation appears to become a political act, ideal for the construction and definition of public space. However, through their curation, access and exposure in these spaces are also being carefully controlled, regulating change for the consumption of a specific and selected public. Therefore, despite its political potential, curation can be a way of accidentally or willfully hiding those publics that remain ‘unselected’ … wait, scratch that then!

All images accompanying this article on public space are pictures of Times Square, New York. New York action in solidarity with Ferguson, Missouri, encouraging a boycott of Black Friday consumerism, 2014.

SCRATCH THAT!

67

AT YOUR OWN RISK What is required for public space to be truly public is the allowance ‘for contest and struggle’.2 ‘What makes a space public is democratic control over that space, and therefore the willingness to allow a space to host sometimes contentious publics.’3 Don Mitchell and Richard Van Deusen’s analysis of the Downsview Park competition points toward the defining characteristic of public space. To this end their text highlights the difference between open and public space, pointing out that ‘most of the open space that is planned in modern Western cities — parks, plazas, shopping malls, arcades — is decidedly not public: its purpose is to control and direct social interaction, to police it, rather than to provide a stage on which various publics can come together in all their often contentious

differences and spark a conflagration of public, political, and social interaction. In fact, much contemporary open space design stands opposed to public space.’4 In this regard, Liana Finck’s characterisation of the difference between private and public property wittily exemplifies this difference: ‘Private! Do not enter. Public! Enter at your own risk.’5 Due to the relative stability of Western democracies, the design of public space has shifted from concerns regarding the portrayal of the public realm to concerns regarding its consumerist performance. The activities shown by many of the public spaces in this book are, from a political point of view, quite harmless. However, it is probably due to their lack of political intensity that these public spaces enjoy a high degree of popularity. While most of these spaces should probably be labelled as open and not necessarily as public — following Mitchell and Van Deusen’s ideas — they demonstrate a certain lightness that is surely at the core of their success as places of public interest. Projects and texts discussing the reimagination of public space tend to assume that political relevance should be present at all times in the design of public space. However, the reconceptualisation of public space could potentially originate from a position at the other end of the spectrum of political weight, benefitting from the lightness that is exemplified in the public spaces shown in this book. The objective in the construction of public space should be the design of a space that remains open and indeterminate to different publics so that people can appropriate it according to their political leanings, religious beliefs or aesthetic forms of expression. The projects analysed in this book show how this perpetual change of function and occupation can be the means of addressing multiple publics and sensibilities. However, if what we call public space is to be fully public, these shifts and the different opportunities they enable should allow more risks, testing the acceptance of a public that might only be concerned with the enjoyment of a carefully curated and safe experience … wait, we might need to scratch that too then!

LOW-COST GRAVITAS

Times Square after New Year’s Eve party, 2007. Inside Out New York, 2013 by the French artist JR.

68

SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO

Due to their role in the construction and definition of the public realm, public spaces are expected to embody a well-defined character and gravitas. Due to the multiplicity of publics, however, such spaces must engage with temporary, overlapping and often contradictory sensibilities and occupations. The design question that emerges is, what type of character and gravitas can be achieved with temporality and spontaneity? The dichotomy constructed by the conflicting and competing forces of the permanent and the temporary has shaped the design of public space since World War II. The 1940s’ modern focus on a new type of monumentality epitomised by Sigfried Giedion, Josep Lluís Sert and Fernand Léger and their ‘Nine points on monumentality’ was later questioned by those 1960s’ projects embracing instantaneity and flexibility exemplified, for instance, by Archigram’s ‘Instant city’. At the extremes of this dichotomy shaped by permanence and tempo-

rality are two distinct types: the monument and the pop-up. The monument as the permanent fixture with fixed cultural meaning, will only come down, sometimes violently, when the sociocultural and politico-economic context changes. The popup is the fleeting consumerist instant without obvious meaning but which, through its sharing, becomes a powerful vehicle for social consciousness. Most public spaces of the last 60 years have been conceptualised and designed as outcomes of this dichotomy. This dichotomy, however, has been recently influenced by technological advances as well as cultural and economic changes — all gravitating around social media — that appear to have shifted its point of equilibrium. The traditional balance was achieved by accepting that public space was capable of providing character and gravitas through permanence (core) while moveable parts (furniture) were able to provide the changing content, constructing diverse temporal frames capable of addressing different publics and sensibilities within a fixed and determined physical space. In this traditional balance, most of the financial investment was placed on the core, defined by different physical elements such as the construction of the ground, for example. However, when the financial burden becomes too high, or when the core risks become obsolete as quickly as the current context seems to suggest, opportunistic design strategies seem to indicate that we can get rid of gravitas altogether and just accept temporality: evanescence without a core. No monument, just a pop-up. No gravitas, only enjoyment. The influence of the low cost involved in setting up this new condition has been explored previously by Alejandro Zaera-Polo in his article ‘No frills and bare life’,6 in which he interrogates a change in design sensibility that is necessary due to financial and cultural shifts. In the current context, then, flexible programming and quick and low-cost adaptation coupled with social media emerge as the main sensibility through which to design public space, setting up a new point of equilibrium. Instagram, for example, has the power of transforming unknown and out-of-the-way places into destinations.7 The physical popup installation of the 20th century has acquired its virtual equivalence with its pop-up digital presence of the 21st century. As the projects in this book demonstrate, this shift is now widespread and has defined its own set of paradigms and design techniques. This consolidation seems to indicate, for instance, that in the current moment physical gravitas has been completely replaced by instant social media and, consequently, consumerism via temporary programming and digital sharing has completely depoliticised public space … wait, let’s scratch that then!

Sessions from US Attorney to Federal Judge. In the letter Mrs King argued that Sessions’ well-documented racist practices should prevent him from becoming a federal judge. To the surprise and consternation of many people, Senator Warren was stopped and silenced by the Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, who justified the action by explaining that ‘Senator Warren was giving a lengthy speech. She had appeared to violate the rule. She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted.’8 The opportunity for protests to exist and persist is an essential feature of dissent. Speakers’ Corner, located on the northeast edge of Hyde Park in London, has been a ‘traditional site for public speeches and debates since the mid 1800s when protests and demonstrations took place in Hyde Park’.9

NEVERTHELESS, SHE PERSISTED In the US Senate debates preceding the confirmation of Jeff Sessions as the US Attorney General to serve under President Trump, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) attempted to read a letter written in 1986 by Coretta Scott King, the widow of Martin Luther King Jr, when she opposed the elevation of

V-J Day in New York, 1945: crowds gather in Times Square to celebrate the surrender of Japan. . Marines with the Special Marine Ground Task Force demonstrated the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program as well as displayed weaponry in support of Fleet Week, New York, 2010.

SCRATCH THAT!

69

Car race New York–Paris, 1908: car inspection before the start in Times Square. Times Square at night, 2013.

On the morning of 19 June 2015, in Times Square, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, with wildlife and conservation partners, hosted its second ivory crush event. Sree Sreenivasan teaching a social media class in Times Square during Social Media Weekend 2016. Looking south as people relax in the new furniture of Times Square on a cloudy midday 2016.

70

SERGIO LOPEZ-PINEIRO

This space came into being due to a series of protests that resulted in the 1872 Park Regulations Act, a piece of legislation that regulated the right to meet and speak freely in Hyde Park. Due to this opportunity for free speech, the ideas voiced and shared at this Speakers’ Corner, as well as at others throughout the world, played an important role in several defining moments of the construction of modern society: from women’s suffrage to the eight-hour day. Because these achievements mostly took place at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, speakers’ corners might be considered a thing of the past but their impact has remained until today. In a speech given in London in 2014 to both Houses of the UK Parliament, the German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel recalled her first visit to London in the spring of 1990: ‘We walked through Hyde Park looking for the Speakers’ Corner, which — especially for us as East Germans — was legendary, the very symbol of free speech. I hope that is not an insult to you, the members of the British Parliament.’10

As digital versions of traditional speakers’ corners, different forms of social media, Twitter for example, now offer the opportunity to speak without having to be physically present at a specific space or place. In many ways, it could be argued that Twitter has ungrounded speakers’ corners. Despite this assessment, speech in public continues to be a powerful and necessary vehicle for democratic discussions,11 as it has been continuously demonstrated by popular uprisings such as the Occupy movement in the US and UK or the 15-M movement in Spain. The public spaces analysed in this book are mostly conceptualised and designed to enable programmatic and functional flexibility according to consumerist patterns and trends established by its curators via moveable furniture and amplified by its users via digital social media. Dissent, though, cannot be curated or programmed. Speakers’ corners allowed for multiple points of view to be shared at once but these were never curated. Rather, space was merely made available and persistence, not curation, became the selective force. If free speech is to have a visible and relevant presence in public space, its programming needs to be much looser. Accordingly, consumerist patterns and trends might need to be relegated to a lesser role in the conceptualisation and design of public space, probably resulting in a decrease of the popularity of public space itself … wait, we need to scratch that then!

REVERSIBILITY The disciplines of anthropology and ethnography have shown the many roles that space plays in both the physicalisation of our societal relationships as well as in the construction of new cultural relationships. For this reason, the disciplines invested in the design of the built environment can be described as instruments for materialising sociocultural forces into physical spaces. Physical spaces, in return, help shape and change traditions, rituals and habits. Undoubtedly, most designers aspire to master this feedback loop. However, this mirroring between forces and spaces can be too restrictive in the design of public space. A traditional way of avoiding this problem has been to think of space as a framework that loosely fits many societal protocols and enables different types of activities. Peter Smithson expressed this positioning in an interesting manner: ‘In a way, what I am explaining is like a children’s party. The mother organises certain possibilities for play, but whether the party goes well or not depends on the invention of the children. The mother is designing a framework.’12 This approach to design severs the links between sociocultural forces and spatial organisations, and puts emphasis instead on the events planned to take place. A different way of understanding this connection between forces and spaces can be achieved through perpetually reversible building processes. In this context, temporality implies not just the duration of an activity but also a specific physical context that will have to be undone once the activity is finished. In their analysis of the Kumbh Mela, a religious event that

takes place in India every twelve years and involves the construction of a temporary city for five to seven million people, Rahul Mehrotra and Felipe Vera use the term reversibility to address questions of temporality and adaptation within current discourses of urban planning and design. ‘Reversibility can be examined in two contrasting dimensions: on one hand its material aspects, which translate in a physical reversibility of the constructed armature that supports the existence of the Kumbh Mela. And on the other hand there are the immaterial agreements that frame a reversible political and institutional framework that supports the construction and organization of the ephemeral city.’13 In lieu of permanence and memory, reversible spaces suggest ephemerality and adaptation, which brings us back to the first point of this short text on the importance of curating change … wait, scratch that!

1 Don Mitchell, The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space, Guilford Press: New York 2003, p. 129. 2 Don Mitchell and Richard Van Deusen, ‘Downsview Park: Open space or public space’, in Julia Czerniak (ed.), CASE: Downsview Park Toronto, Prestel: Munich, New York and Harvard University Graduate School of Design: Cambridge, MA 2001, p. 104. 3 Ibid., p. 113. 4 Ibid., p. 103. 5 Cartoon by Liana Finck. Accessed 4 January 2017: http://www.instagram. com/p/BLbWaIUDmv2/ 6 Alejandro Zaera-Polo, ‘No frills and bare life: Cheapness and democracy’, Log no.18, Winter 2010, p. 15–27. 7 Alissa Walker, ‘Hashtag tourism: Using Instagram to explore our neighborhoods’, Curbed, 21 December 2016. Accessed 15 February 2017: http://www.curbed.com/2016/12/21/13436308/instagram-hashtags-publicart-placemaking 8 Amy B. Wang, ‘“Nevertheless, she persisted” becomes new battle cry after McConnell silences Elizabeth Warren’, The Washington Post, 8 February 2017. Accessed 17 February 2017: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/08/nevertheless-she-persisted-becomes-newbattle-cry-after-mcconnell-silences-elizabeth-warren/ 9 ‘The Royal Parks: Hyde Park, A Royal Park: Speakers’ Corner.’ Accessed 24 January 2017: http://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/hyde-park/things-tosee-and-do/speakers-corner 10 ‘Speech by Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel in London’, Thursday 27 February 2014. Accessed February 8, 2017: http://www.parliament.uk/ documents/addresses-to-parliament/Angela-Merkel-address-20130227. pdf 11 For an interesting description of the origins of democratic assemblies and the important role that physicality played in their construction see, Peter Sloterdijk, ‘Atmospheric politics’, in Bruno Latour and Peter Weibel (eds.) Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. and ZKM/Center for Art and Media: Karlsruhe 2005, p. 944– 951. 12 Catherine Spellman and Karl Unglaub, Peter Smithson: Conversation with students, Princeton Architectural Press: New York 2005, p. 81. 13 Rahul Mehrotra and Felipe Vera, ‘Reversibility’, 720, no. 4 Summer 2014: p. 5.

SCRATCH THAT!

71

CASE STUDIES BRADFORD CITY PARK p. 102 – 107

POTTERS FIELDS PARK p. 108 – 121

LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DES ARTISTES p. 192 – 197

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE p. 94 – 101

RADCLIFFE WALLACH GARDEN p. 180 – 191

ROBSON REDUX p. 168 – 179 BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK p. 144 – 149

DU MUSÉE AVENUE p. 244 – 247

HARVARD PLAZA p. 74 – 85

LAWN ON D p. 122 – 133

GRANARY SQUARE p. 86 – 93

A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE p. 134 – 137 SCHOUWBURGPLEIN p. 254 – 257

SERPENTINE PAVILION p. 160 – 167

MOMA PS1 p. 150 – 159

THE GOODS LINE p. 214 – 217

NAVY YARD CENTRAL GREEN p. 208 – 213

TRAFALGAR SQUARE p. 198 – 203

0°°

BRYANT PARK p. 234 – 239

MORE LONDON p. 230 – 233 BENTHEMPLEIN WATER SQUARE p. 224 – 229

SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT p. 240 – 243

CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES CIUDADANAS (CAAC) p. 258 – 261 JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A p. 138 – 143

SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK AT HUMBOLDT FORUM p. 262 – 265 SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE p. 204 – 207

SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ p. 218 – 223

BERGES DE SEINE (shown ½ scale here) p. 248 – 253

HARVARD PLAZA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Stoss Landscape Urbanism LOCATION: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA COMPLETION: 2013 SIZE: 4500 square metres CONTEXT: University/campus ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Project for Public Spaces, Interboro Partners, MVVA RECURRING OVERLAYS: Farmers’ market, ice-skating rink, curling mats, fire pits, food trucks, live music, flexible furniture, covered tent space

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The plaza space at Harvard University sits to the north of the historic Harvard Yard, at a confluence of pedestrian movement that is the busiest intersection on the Harvard campus. The original layout of the space consisted of a nondescript lawn area bisected by footpaths aligning with desire lines, a strategy that can be seen across the entire campus. The space lacked character or focus, excluding of course the now-revered Tanner Fountain that Peter Walker installed in 1984. The location of the space, its spatial arrangement and limited public offering resulted in a space of transit — somewhere passed through to get from one place to another without taking time to linger and take in the surroundings. This, to a degree, was also the sentiment some planners at Harvard University held about Harvard Yard. As a result, in 2009 the campus started an initiative called Common Spaces, charged with the task of ‘fostering a stronger sense of

community across Harvard by providing opportunities to share space and experiences’. The first initiative for the Common Spaces team was the introduction of moveable chairs following advice from Fred Kent, founder of Project for Public Spaces. The chairs encourage people to linger in Harvard Yard, rather than simply passing through it. The non-intrusive provision of colourful moveable chairs made a noticeable contribution to the atmosphere of the Yard, as people attract people and a sense of ‘something going on’ materialised. Building on the successful experiment in the Yard, guided by Project for Public Spaces, the Common Spaces team began to experiment with additional ways in which the existing plaza space could be reimagined. It was determined early on that the space needed to be revamped, redesigned and repurposed to provide a space for campus-wide use and gatherings.

Aerial view overlooking the eastern edge of the plaza where food trucks, moveable tables and chairs, ice cream kiosks and a chess set combine to create a lively atmosphere.

Colourful moveable chairs were introduced to Harvard Yard as the first initiative of the Common Spaces committee to activate the campus-wide open spaces. In what was otherwise a space that people passed through, the chairs have created a space where people now linger, socialise and gather in small groups. The simple introduction of these chairs has made a noticeable contribution to the atmosphere of the historic Harvard Yard.

74

STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

Prior to the redesign of the Plaza, the design team experimented with possible overlay activities to gauge the popularity and effectiveness of the various social events. Clockwise from top left: the social activators include moveable chairs and tables, prototype testing of the custom benches, moveable planters, a large tent that hosted music, boxing and graduation festivities and an ice-skating rink.

Over a ten-month period, as a permanent design for the space was being considered, the Common Spaces team introduced a series of temporary installations to test the popularity and probability of potential programmatic elements that could be incorporated into the design for the permanent space. The initial temporary overlays included an ice rink, trees and bamboo in moveable planters, pop-up entertainment within a large tent and food trucks. These took place on the existing lawn surface. Although the existing space was nothing more than a threadbare lawn with criss-crossing footpaths, the programmatic overlays successfully encouraged people to linger there. This created a critical mass, transforming the plaza from a place of transit to a gathering space. As the programmed cultural overlays gained momentum, the Common Spaces team expanded to include a dedicated employee associated with the Office of the Arts at the University, acknowledging that a creative curation of programme would be needed to sustain the life of the new plaza space once implemented. As temporary events in the plaza space became more popular, student requests to perform, protest and organise added a fresh dimension to the programme of the space. These student initiatives activated the space without organisational cost, aside from the hourly fee for the programme coordinator. After a ten-month testing period, a list of successful programmatic overlays was written into the brief that would guide the design and implementation of the permanent space. The design firm Stoss won the commission to redesign the space, known now as The Plaza, which was completed in 2013. Their design responded to pedestrian desire lines between campus facilities and rigorously explored multiple configurations of potential programme overlays to activate the space. Stoss developed a notational language inspired by Lawrence Halprin’s motation studies and William H. Whyte’s research at Seagram’s Plaza to choreograph how the space would be used and activated over a 24-hour period, as well as through the changing seasons (see p. 78). The final design that emerged consisted of a large flexible open space on the western end of the plaza with a strong seating edge to the south benefitting from the shade of the mature trees in the adjacent Harvard Yard. To the north, intimate areas with seating beneath gingko and sumac trees with fern understorey planting offset the openness of the plaza. According to Chris Reed, founder of Stoss, the day-to-day was the most important programme consideration for the design team. The space had to accommodate large events such as ice-skating and graduation ceremonies but, more importantly, it

needed to be lively and vibrant on any day of the week. The eastern third of the plaza is the anchor of the site and is activated daily by food trucks and people socialising and relaxing on clustered seating and picnic tables. The pedestrian thoroughfare linking Harvard Yard to Josep Lluís Sert’s Harvard Science Center holds the edge of this active space naturally, which leaves the open area of the plaza to be programmed accordingly. The strong seating edge to the south is the signature element of the scheme, both for its design execution and for its unexpected contribution when the plaza is not in use. Complex timber and concrete benches, beautifully crafted using cutting-edge fabrication technology, create a variety of ergonomic configurations that allow users to be creative in the way they use the benches. This sculpted complexity also acts as a foil for the expansive and minimal arrangement of the plaza. Without the sculptural qualities, scale, quantity, complexity and sensual character of the benches, the plaza would risk being pedestrian and bland. By assuming the role of an aesthetically pleasing ‘sculpted object’, the benches become interesting to look at and admire rather than being reduced to empty benches that do nothing but clutter the space when not occupied. The timber has taken on a rich patina, which when lit by the setting sun in the evening, coupled with the sound of live music in the background, contributes to a magical atmosphere. The decision to have a flexible open area was the result of a requirement for a large tent that would be assembled and disassembled on a regular basis to facilitate campus events and ceremonies. The final design included built-in foundations for the tent and pop-ups for water and power. The large tent, which has a maximum capacity of 1000 people, is rented by the University. The flexible open area of the plaza hosts a number of regular programmed events. A farmers’ market is held every Tuesday throughout the summer and the University does not charge the organisers because the market fosters a sense of community, both within and beyond the campus. The market is valuable in that it provides a sense of anticipation and regularity, and this is worth more to the University than the revenue that would be generated from charging for the market. In the winter, the Common Spaces team erects an ice-skating rink that is free to use and charges $ 5 for skates, which goes towards covering the cost of the rink and its operation. It is a valuable programmatic overlay that stitches the campus community together, while providing a much-needed activity in the months when programming the space is more challenging. Project for Public Spaces created

G D

E

F

:; C

9

B

Interboro Partners was commissioned in 2015 to develop a winter deck to increase accessibility, provide seating and storage, and to shield the mechanical plant required for the ice-skating rink. The modular timber elements are rearranged in the summer months for additional seating and flexible platforms for performances and social gatherings.

76

STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

This overhead view of the plaza illustrates how the space is activated by food trucks, flexible overlay elements and the farmers’ market. Tanner Fountain, visible at the bottom of the image, is now operational again after being out of commission for a number of years.

a winter programme, which introduced fire pits and curling mats. The fire pits are supervised by a member of the fire department and pre-packaged S’mores can be purchased from the ice-skating kiosk. Interboro Partners was commissioned to design additional seating elements to contribute to the winter overlay and these were implemented in 2015 and again in 2017 with a more ambitious design. The food trucks, which occupy the eastern edge of the space, are the backbone of the programmatic calendar. Their daily presence is fundamental to the activation of the plaza. The first truck arrives at 8:30am and with it come people and healthy commotion. The tables and chairs are rarely empty around this area. Throughout the day, up to five food trucks are parked on the plaza until 7:00 pm; they are charged $ 50 a day by the University. The Common Spaces website provides a timetable for the trucks, indicating the type of food and

the hours of operation as a way for users to engage with the Common Spaces initiative. With the design of flexible, programmable spaces, which requires open areas to accommodate large gatherings or repeat events, careful consideration is necessary to ensure the space is not empty, banal and uninspiring when not in use. The space also needs to offer a variety of events both surprising and predictable with a sense of anticipation and excitement. The plaza manages this balance well due to strong design execution and strategic programme planning throughout the design process. In particular, the benches and planting provide a degree of complexity and seasonal variation to capture the attention when the large open space is without programme or events. Lastly, the plaza benefits from a steady footfall of pedestrian traffic and a student body that participates in the performance-based

HARVARD PLAZA

77

large tent

large tent

0000

casual hang-out move out ice-skating informal event arts first

1800

ping pong

food trucks

fire pits

farmer’s market tour live

music

food trucks

1200

housing day

curling

commute move in/classes begin

passer-by

0600

D

N

O

S

A

J

J

M

A

M

F

J

commencement

The notation diagram above, inspired by the work of William H. Whyte, proposes methods to activate the plaza throughout the year. The drop-down diagrams indicate the layout of each major regular event: farmers’ market, tent for graduation, winter overlay with ice-skating rink and the seating area with food trucks. Original notation diagram provided by Stoss with alterations by B. Cannon Ivers.

78

STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

N

o

Up t

pm

O

Farmer’s market ends

ntil 7

tay u

ks s

c 2 tru

A large tent is erected twice a year during graduation and when students are moving onto campus in the fall.

Peak

riod

h pe

lunc

p to

u with

cks

5 tru

J

A

S

Tent set up for move-in

Tent removed for the summer

J

Farmer’s market begins The market happens every Tuesday from June to November from 11– 4 pm. 22 stalls make up the market.

ruck

od t

8:30

st fo m fir

es arriv

a

A

M

Graduation ceremony

Tent erected for graduation

J

F

M

Winter layout removed

Winter layout set up

25

Each winter a 20 × 15 m iceskating rink, 3 curling mats and 3 fire pits are set up. The fire department is on hand to monitor the fire pits where students make S’mores from kits purchased on the plaza.

m

32 m

117

m

55 m

North

D

m 32

m 20 ck d ba rippe

yout er la

se to ea

snow

oval

rem

wint

St

During the winter months the majority of overlay objects are removed and stored in a warehouse off campus to make snow removal more efficient. A small number of chairs remain in the plaza, as do the signature timber and concrete benches, although these have been designed to be de-bolted and removeable. The food trucks still occupy the plaza throughout the winter.

HARVARD PLAZA

79

activation of the space. Tanner Fountain serves an important function in providing informal seating and children’s play in the shade of a magnificent oak tree on the edge of the space, where users can be spectators watching other users as performers. This edge condition is of fundamental importance in the design of public space and is often where people want to sit and rest in public space. Jan Gehl explains this aspect in his book Life Between Buildings.1

1

Jan Gehl, Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space, The Danish Architectural Press: Copenhagen, 2006 (6th ed.).

The diagrams above explore the potential activities and event configurations produced by Stoss during the design development of the project.

The colour bands below each image indicate when each social overlay is present on the plaza. The gradient scale includes grey for winter, pink for spring, blue for summer and orange for autumn.

The winter layout begins in December and runs until late March. The layout includes an ice-skating rink, three curling mats, three fire pits and temporary spectator seating designed by Interboro Partners.

82

STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

The farmers’ market happens every Tuesday on the plaza from June to November from 11 am—4 pm. Twenty-two stalls make up the market. The University does not charge the organisers of the market to use the plaza. The arrangement of the stalls varies from week to week, which adds to the overall animation of the space, but the regularity builds anticipation and ensures a critical mass of people each week.

Inbuilt tent foundations to receive the tent twice a year Food truck and maintenance access from adjacent Oxford Street

o

+

o

Utility corridor shown in grey

o

Underground steam corridor shown in blue o

+ The plaza has a number of design infrastructures to accomodate event overlays. Tent foundations enable the tent to be quickly erected and the plaza has been engineered for vehicle loading and to utilise the existing steam exchange running across the plaza. Power points are provided in various locations as in-ground hookups ( × ) as well as hookups embedded in furniture and light columns ( o ). Potable water hook- ups are associated with adjacent buildings with hot and cold water supplies ( ). The hot water is used for the installation of the ice rink because the cold water freezes instantaneously.

A large tent is erected twice a year for events related to graduation in May and again in the autumn when students are moving on to the campus. The tent is taken down in mid June and the farmers’ market takes place on the open plaza. Other spontaneous events happen during this time, such as yoga, group dance sessions and student gatherings.

There is a short period of time when the large flexible space remains open after the winter overlay and the tent is erected for graduation ceremonies.

HARVARD PLAZA

83

Live music and a comfortable place to sit in the sun and shade is a reliable combination for encouraging people to linger in a public space. Power supply ensures that the stage and musical equipment can be easily set up. The large tent provides respite from the sun on hot days for more formal events. There is often live music being played on the plaza, which leads to spontaneous dancing as a subsequent and unplanned activity in the space.

These views, taken from the same vantage point, illustrates how the custom benches have a sculptural quality when not in use, and how the overlays of the farmers’ market and the tent bring activity into the space.

84

STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

In 2018, Interboro created an installation called Wavelength on the northern edge of the plaza. This suggests an additional type of activation for the site, which may be run as an annual competition in the future. The US camping tradition of roasting marshmallows and making S’mores happens on the plaza and S’mores packs can be purchased from the ice-skating hire caravan. A fire warden is in attendance when the fire pits are in operation. The fire station is visible in the images (pitched roof above the food truck).

Each year the Common Space team design a winter overlay to enliven the harsh New England winters. This includes ice-skating and curling mats.

HARVARD PLAZA

85

GRANARY SQUARE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Townshend Landscape Architects LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2012 SIZE: 7700 square metres CONTEXT: In close proximity to major rail hub, University of the Arts London and urban residential areas and commercial office buildings ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Argent (client and developer), Allies and Morrison Masterplan Team, Fountain Workshop RECURRING OVERLAYS: Strawberries and cream for Wimbledon tennis tournament, pumpkin-carving display, Lumière Lighting Festival, floating cinema, concerts, food markets, art installations and fitness activities

0

250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Granary Square is the central space of the 57-hectares Argent development at King’s Cross in London. The space consists of four separate water features measuring 6 × 22 metres with 1080 individual fountains designed by Fountain Workshop. Each of the four water features can be turned off individually to enable the space to accommodate a variety of events and installations across a multitude of scales, as well as activating the space on a daily basis through choreographic ‘dancing’ fountain sequences. Fountain Workshop also created an app that allows visitors to play a version of the game Snake with the fountains. Sculpted granite benches are placed to the north and south of each fountain and flexible deckchairs are scattered throughout the space. The site is bordered to the north by the University of Arts London, also known as Central Saint Martins, which ensures a constant footfall and a creative cohort utilising the square. At the west end of the site, a grid of 24 box-clipped lime trees provides a shady respite from the otherwise open and south-facing square. Beneath the trees are brightyellow bistro tables and chairs and soft underfoot self-bound gravel. In the northwest corner of the site, the ground floor of the building

provides catering outlets, with al fresco dining overlooking the square. To the south, terraced stone lounger steps overlook Regent’s Canal, which is animated by narrow boats coursing through the site. These terraced seats are used for art installations, pumpkin-carving displays, dance performances and spectator seating for the Floating Cinema that holds screenings each summer. Each lounger terrace measures 1.8 metres wide × 430 millimetres high, which provides a generous sun-drenched place to relax and socialise. The terraces are wrapped in artificial grass signalling the arrival of spring, which has a surprising effect on the space and visually enhances the arrival experience when crossing the bridge over the canal. Granary Square owes much of its success to the Argent King’s Cross masterplan, developed with Allies and Morrison architects. The King’s Cross development is one of London’s most successful modern developments. Although the masterplan is still not fully complete, it has already delivered many of London’s most celebrated new public spaces, which are proactively enlivened by an active arts programme and calendar of events. The arts programme is coupled with ‘meanwhile uses’, and this has fostered a sense of community as the near-

Granary Square hosts a screen each year for viewing the Wimbledon tennis tournament. The work titled Across the Buildings by Felice Varini can be seen in the background. Up to 3000 candle-lit pumpkins are arranged on the canal-side steps at Granary Square each year.

86

TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

A view across Granary Square shows the arrangement of the fountains, box-clipped lime trees, seating and the lounger terrace overlooking the canal. It is the combination of these landscape features and the proactive curation by Argent that makes Granary Square a successful public space. The temporary art work Across the Buildings by Felice Varini is one example of the success of public art at Granary Square. Even before any of the buildings were constructed, Granary Square was a major public space hosting concerts and public events. The Bird Cage installation can be seen lit up in the distance with King’s Cross and St Pancras transport hubs in the background.

RE

GRANARY SQUA 87

An overview of Granary Square, showing the lounger terraces in the foreground and the fountains in the background. This image also shows the importance of public art within the masterplan at King’s Cross, with Felice Varini’s work Across the Buildings on display. The Waterlicht installation by Studio Roosegaarde transforms Granary Square as part of the annual Lumière London Lighting Festival.

88

TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

Although the water ‘pads’ and fountains are left on during the screening of the Wimbledon tennis tournament, there is still adequate spectator space and children will play for hours in the fountains, allowing families to remain in the space for the entire afternoon. The ability to turn off the ‘pads’ of water and fountains, enables the square to host various cultural events and food markets.

* Potable water connection + Power and Comms box

Lewis Cubitt Square sits to the west of Central Saint Martins art school building. The square measures 90 × 40 metres and consists of five shallow water features with 11 playful arching fountains per feature (55 in total), seating and a generous hard-paved area. Inspired by the way that Granary Square was being programmed, Lewis Cubitt Square was designed to host events. Fountains are drained to create an open, hard-paved square to host markets, a craft beer festival, outdoor cinema, fitness sessions and cultural events such as Strawberry and Screen during the Wimbledon tennis tournament. The square has capacity for 2250 people. The trees and understorey planting soften the edge of the space and create a comfortable and attractive edge condition overlooking the open square. The space includes 14 16-amp supply points and a central events supply for a stage/outdoor cinema. A central wifi access point is integrated into a lighting mast above the trees. The hard-standing area has been designed to accommodate 361 kilonewtons / square metre loading for lorries and events. The fountains can take 147 kilonewtons / square metre. Five 13-metre-high lighting masts are set within the planted areas to provide adequate lighting across the square.

40 m

5m 12 m

++ *

* 103

Granary Square measures 103 × 44 metres and has four ‘zero-depth’ fountains measuring 18 × 6.75 metres, which are flanked by bespoke granite benches on the north and south sides designed by Ian McChesney. Within the shallow planes of water, there are 1080 individual fountains, each of which can be programmed in a multitude of sequences to animate the space. Each plane of water can be drained away, enabling the space to be used in a variety of ways across different scales. The fountain designers have also developed an app so visitors can play the game Snake with the fountains. To the west of the fountains, there are 24 square-clipped lime trees with bistro-style moveable chairs beneath them, providing a quiet shaded edge overlooking the more active square. Outdoor dining terraces face on to the square, creating an active frontage. The space is lit by two 13-metre-high light masts and the central square has a loading capacity of 105 kilonewtons / square metre.

90 m

m

18 m 6.75 m

To the south of Granary Square, a series of eight terrace seats measuring 37 × 19 metres overlook the canal that courses through the site. The steps are 1800 millimetres wide × 430 millimetres high, which creates a generous lounging area. The steps are wrapped in artificial grass each spring and host dance performances, pumpkin-carving competitions and outdoor cinema viewing with the Floating Cinema on a houseboat on the canal. The south-facing orientation of the steps make them a destination for lunch socials and day-to-day relaxation.

* *

19 m

44 m

37 m

Granary Square sits to the south of the University of Arts London (also known as Central Saint Martins). The main square provides a series of fountains and seating under trees. Terraced loungers overlook the canal to the south and Lewis Cubitt Square to the west of Central Saint Martins provides further flexible space for events.

North

RE

GRANARY SQUA 89

A set of lounging terraced steps overlooking the canal are transformed during Halloween with a pumpkin-carving display. The lounger terraces hosts a variety of art installations and temporary events. This image was a fresh flower takeaway event. The steps have also been used for impromptu dance performances as spectators travelling along the canal stop momentarily to enjoy the performance. This in turn attracts more people because we are all curious and when a crowd gathers we want to see the action firsthand. The Floating Cinema is produced by UP Projects and is a free event, although spaces can be booked to guarantee a seat.

90

TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

by residential units are completed. These meanwhile uses have included a natural swimming pool, a sculptural swing called the Bird Cage and a temporary, although hugely successful, theatre for paid stage performances. The activation of both Granary Square and Lewis Cubitt, a space to the north of Granary Square designed to host events, are funded through an Argent marketing budget, which is written into the business plan. Argent’s place-making philosophy is to provide public space and allow people to use and enjoy the spaces before the buildings are complete, asking the question of ‘what’s in it for the locals?’. The proposals for events that the team receives are discussed internally with a multi-disciplinary team at Argent before the final selection is agreed, as well as where the event should happen within the development. The event location may be chosen on the basis of scale, size or desired atmosphere. This process focuses the curation of events and the overall direction of the life of the spaces throughout the development. As many as 147 events have been held within the development annually, with 67 of those generating sponsorship income. A key component in the growing success of the events and public spaces is due to Argent’s funding a full-time photographer on their staff to document the events and spread the excitement across the internet and social media. Finally, the temporary provision of toilets is fundamental to keeping people in the spaces. This is often an oversight when planning for programmed activities and can make or break the success of the curation of a space.  

This image illustrates how the water ‘pads’ or zero-depth water features contribute to the ambience when the space is quieter, reflective and poetic. The four water features reflect the tastefully lit building façade and the sculptural trees in the distance. The use of water creates various atmospheres, which is a fundamental characteristic of Granary Square. With 1080 individual fountains, Granary Square is a lively destination in the summer months and is the ‘main event’ of the space. The arrangement of the design provides adequate space to sit and watch children and families playing in the water features, or simply to sit and people-watch. The clipped lime trees provide a degree of shade and respite from the sun. This image illustrates the flexibility that the water features provide. The fountain in the foreground has been drained away to allow more space for deckchairs and socialising. The other three fountains provide play and entertainment for residents and visitors to the space. This image also showcases Felice Varini’s Across the Buildings. Public art has been critical to the success of place-making at Granary Square and King’s Cross as a whole. Art curators work with the King’s Cross Team on a three-year cycle. The dramatic illumination of the 1080 fountains is a spectacle as night falls on Granary Square. Fountain Workshop, the designer of the fountains, developed a smartphone app that allows visitors to play the classic game Snake with the light and the fountains.

The combination of relaxation, water play, temporary markets and food trucks creates an attractive atmosphere at Lewis Cubitt Square. Outdoor fitness classes bring the community together around an activity. Here the fountains are still in operation so that other users can still engage with the space. A temporary art installation acts as backdrop and conceals the construction site next door. KERB Street Food activates the space with al fresco dining and cafe tables and chairs, while the fountains entertain families for the day. Inspired by the way Granary Square was being activated with events, Lewis Cubitt Square was designed as a flexible platform to accommodate markets, outdoor cinema, concerts and seasonal events. The square has capacity for 2250 people.

92

TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

During the Strawberry and Screen event for the Wimbledon tennis tournament, the fountains are drained away and the space is filled to capacity with spectators. During the quieter times of the Strawberry and Screen event, the fountains can be turned on to enliven the space, which also cools the air and allows people to splash around in the fountains while watching the Wimbledon tennis tournament.

RE

GRANARY SQUA 93

WATCH THIS SPACE—ROYAL THEATRE ARCHITECT: Denys Lasdun LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 1976 SIZE: 1550 square metres CONTEXT: Riverside location in central London ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Recently redesigned by GROSS.MAX. and Haworth Tompkins RECURRING OVERLAYS: Oversized furniture — ‘Armchair Theatre’, theatrical performances, artifical grass surface, food trucks, performances

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Watch This Space is a 23 × 45-metre hard-landscaped space on the Southbank, on the River Thames in London. The space is part of the National Theatre building designed by Denys Lasdun in 1976; it sits to the northwest of the building and is flanked by the Waterloo Bridge flyover. There is a cafe on the ground floor of the National Theatre, slightly elevated above the square, which adds to the foot traffic across the space and the active atmosphere. Additionally, there is a cafe/bar beneath the Waterloo Bridge flyover associated with the British Film Institute, as well as the daily book market that has been sited there since 1982, now a destination in its own right. Adjacent to the space is a sculpture titled The Arena, designed by John Maine. The combination of these cultural facilities is a driver for the success of Watch This Space. It is also important to note the popularity of the Southbank as a destination for tourists and locals alike, ensuring a steady footfall of idle passers-by that stumble across the square.

The small square was branded Watch This Space, a title that encapsulates the transient and ephemeral nature of the space. For 15 years the space has been used as a modern platform for events and performances throughout the summer, providing free concerts and entertainment for people walking along the Southbank or for visitors coming to a specific performance, all of which are free of charge. Throughout the summer months the space is transformed almost daily with a new theatrical performance or installation. Bright colours adorn Denys Lasdun’s Brutalist architecture and give the space an edgy, temporary and party-like atmosphere. The relationship between the space and the building is also worth recognising, because the various levels of the building enable larger crowds to assemble for the more popular performances happening in the space. The Waterloo Bridge flyover also serves as a spectator area for passers-by who are simply crossing the river and are drawn into the performance happening below.

Over-sized pieces of furniture called Armchair Theatre are placed in the space every summer, designed by Angus MacKechnie and built by a team at the National Theatre. The regularity of this installation signals the start of the summer theatre programme. The furniture is used in a variety of ways and can be arranged to accommodate the different performance stages and installations.

When not activated with cultural performances, the modest space includes installations and exhibits, often reflecting the programme happening inside the theatre. Additionally, the external walls double as an extension of the space and marketing for the activities happening on the space below. This increases the visibility to passers-by on the bridge above who would not otherwise look down onto the space from Waterloo Bridge.

94  DENYS LASDUN

Watch This Space (Theatre Square)

The Southbank Walk

Sculpture The Arena by John Maine

Book fair underneath Waterloo Bridge

e Th m ha rT ve Ri

North

es

The Southbank Walk

ne

ut li

nc

tio Sec

Stepped spectator seating

ge

Brid

Theatre Square

National Theatre — tiered overlook

6.5 m

Sculpture The Arena by John Maine

oo

terl Wa

28 m

4.5 m

19 m

15 m dia. Sculpture The Arena

The area is activated not only by Watch This Space but also by The Arena and the book market that takes place under Waterloo Bridge. The strong relationship between these three elements increases footfall and activates the space. The Arena is used informally for play, community gatherings and wheel sports, and is formally activated with installations.

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE

95

Active

fronta

ge

3.4 m

.6 m

13.5 m

23

m

45 m

Th e a t

re Sq

'The A re

na'

uare

Ca a fe/ be nd b al fr low oo es c br k st o d idg all in e s ing

LARGE / EXTRA LARGE: When large events are taking place at Theatre Square, the building designed by Denys Lasdun acts as a stacked spectator area. The adjacent Waterloo Bridge performs the same function. Capacity: 5000 at three people per square metre.

Bo

ok

a’ Sc en

sta

lls

‘Ar

MEDIUM TO LARGE Watch This Space at Theatre Square hosts more than 150 free concerts, festivals and children’s events annually. There is a broad scale of events, which demonstrates the overall capacity of the space.

Symbiotic relationship with Theatre Square and the Southbank book market

e 15 tur ulp

m dia.

The design of the building includes a number of external terraces. When events are taking place at Watch This Space, these outdoor terraces act as spectator areas and increase the viewing capacity in the square. Additionally, Waterloo Bridge acts as a viewing platform for passers-by who stumble across the performances happening below.

DAILY TO SMALL EVENTS The National Theatre is a major attraction on London’s Southbank. In 2013/14, 1.4 million people visited the theatre. This volume of footfall ensures the daily activation of Theatre Square.

The Arena on any given day adds a sculptural object to the experience of walking along the Southbank, one of London’s greatest attractions and an area with highly diverse offerings to the public. The void created by The Arena is filled with informal community events and formal seasonal festivities. The sculpture was designed by John Maine and installed in 1983.

96

DENYS LASDUN

The Watch This Space festival runs through the summer until September. The festival took place in the square at the main entrance to the National Theatre until it was relocated to a new space on the northeast side of the building in 2016 following the refurbishment. The matrix of images above shows the variety and popularity of the free theatre festival and installations. During the refurbishment a 225-seat temporary auditorium called The Shed was built in the space. The bright-red structure was designed by Haworth Tompkins to provide temporary performance space while Haworth Tompkins renovated the 1970s building designed by Denys Lasdun.

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE

97

Oversized pieces of furniture covered with artificial grass were designed by the director of Watch This Space, Angus MacKechnie, and fabricated by an in-house team at the National Theatre. Titled Armchair Theatre, these elements signal the start of summer for the Southbank and the beginning of the summer festivities that take place from July to September. There are two chairs, one sofa, a lamp and a large coffee table. These anchor the space during performances and are magnets for children, tourists and frequent visitors.

The Arena is a 15-metre-diameter sculpture by the artist John Maine, which was installed in 1983. The sculpture can be used in a variety of ways ranging from informal play and a stage for community dance events to a platform for a sand castle competition with imported sand.

Moveable tables and chairs and umbrellas are added to the space in early spring when the weather begins to warm up and the internal cafe can spill out into the square.

Theatre Square is a simple square with gentle steps leading up to the Southbank walk along the River Thames. The steps function as spectator seating during the festival. When the square is not in use as part of the Watch This Space summer festival, it remains empty, occasionally displaying travelling installations.

North

Wa

Storage facilities that house the books each night

98

Active frontage and an al fresco dining area activate the space when the book market is closed.

DENYS LASDUN

oo terl

Brid

ge

Since 1982 the Southbank book market has been set up under Waterloo Bridge. Benefitting from the steady pedestrian traffic on the Southbank, the market is open daily until 7pm. The books are stored each night in seven storage containers that sit against the river balustrade. Eight tables are filled with books, maps and antique prints on a daily basis. Vendors pay to rent the space and sell the books and monitor their tables each day.

SEMI-PERMANENT: Umbrella (14 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Table and Chairs (20 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Lamp (1 no.) J

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

m

2.2 m

2.1

F

5.5

TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Chair (2 no.) F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

SEMI-PERMANENT: Square Umbrella (6 no.)

D

J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

2.2 m

J

m

m

2 m

1.5

TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Sofa (1 no.) J

TEMPORARY: Armchair Theatre Table (1 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Branded Deckchair (12 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE

99

D

The oversized Armchair Theatre draws people into the space, encouraging them to linger and relax in the space. During events and performances, dancing and playing activates the space, even attracting other people to come and watch the dancing.

Custom-branded deckchairs are a lightweight, inexpensive way of inviting people of all ages into the space.

Watch This Space is the brainchild of Angus MacKechnie. The external performance space spawned from the need to ‘unearth new audi­ ences’ according to MacKechnie, who programmed Watch This Space for ten years, a difficult brief because a new audience is a ‘fluid quantity’. By extending the theatre offering into the public sphere, Watch This Space engaged with the public in a profoundly new way, without tickets and without asking for anything in return. Watch This Space enabled any demographic or social class to have a full summer of events and entertainment without buying a single ticket. The new type of public space emerged at a time when economic conditions limited the amount of capital expenditure for permanent spaces and events. Watch This Space was a harbinger of the rise of the flexible space — the power of the inside coming out into the public realm and the latent success of the pop-up that is now prevalent in urban settings around the world. The space set a new precedent for the activation of public spaces in London, prompting other cultural institutions around the capital to establish recurring annual installations and events such as winter ice-skating rinks, summer outdoor cinemas, food trucks and cultural markets and festivities. The eye-catching element of Watch This Space is a collection of oversized furniture called Armchair Theatre. These pieces were designed by MacKechnie and fabricated by a team within the National Theatre. The furniture has become a symbol of the start of the summer festivities within the space, with tourists flocking for a selfie on the large lounger seat or next to the oversized lamp. This simple installation  —  nothing more than low-cost construction materials wrapped in artificial grass — gave Watch This Space the ‘instagrammable’ objects needed to pull people off the riverside walk and into the space. In 2016 Haworth Tompkins completed the refurbishment of the National Theatre and GROSS.MAX. redesigned the plaza that is Watch This Space. The space remained as originally designed and GROSS.MAX. improved and modernised the paving.

WATCH THIS SPACE — ROYAL THEATRE 101

BRADFORD CITY PARK LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Gillespies LOCATION: Bradford, UK COMPLETION: 2012 SIZE: 2.4 hectares CONTEXT: City centre ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: CAL Architects, Fountain Workshop RECURRING OVERLAYS: Bradford Festival, three-day art festival, Christmas Lights Switch On BUDGET: £ 24 million CURATION AND MANAGEMENT BUDGET: £ 450,000

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Bradford City Park is the centrepiece of Bradford town centre. The space is bordered by the 19th-century Grade 1-listed City Hall building, a gallery and a retail offering, drawing people into the heart of the space throughout the day. The main feature of Bradford City Park is the central water feature, the largest of its kind in the UK, measuring 76 × 58 metres with a maximum depth of 220 millimetres when filled to capacity. Throughout the day, the water feature changes the character and use of the space. At the start of each day, the fountain is empty, giving the appearance of a grand, flexible civic square, a fitting typology in front of the City Hall building. As the day progresses, the depth of the water rises, revealing the key desire lines through the space and ensuring smooth flows of pedestrians, while also creating three separate interactive water features. Each of the smaller features can be independently drained to allow more hard-standing areas for programmed events, school gatherings and performances. By mid-afternoon, the fountain is fully charged, holding 600 cubic metres of water

and acting as a water mirror to reflect the 19th-century clock tower and the animation of clouds passing overhead. Since the water is drained away each day, costly maintenance, treatment and cleaning are minimised. This dramatic water feature completely transforms the character and functionality of the space from a large civic public square into an interactive and playful fountain. Within the water feature, 54 perimeter jets provide choreographed animation to the space and engage the visitors, children and adults alike. In the centre, a spectacular geyser reaches 30 metres into the air, and is encircled by 6-metre-high ‘barrier’ fountains to deter people from getting too close to the geyser. Clustered play jets sit within the three individual pools that are defined by the footpath. The fountains are lit by 24 LED lights, which adds additional animations and changes the space at night. The artist Wolfgang Buttress designed ten lighting columns to look like giant water reeds around the central fountain. These elements contain smart lighting features that work with the LEDs to create a dramatic night scene. The light

Fountains are a critical element of the space. The fountains provide spectacle with the dramatically lit geyser as well as interactive fountains for play and enjoyment.

102  GILLESPIES

Blasting up to over 30 metres in the air, this is the highest urban fountain in the UK. Twenty barrier fountains reach up to 6 metres high and provide a safety barrier to deter people from getting too close to the central fountain. At night 24 bright LEDs light the fountain, adding another degree of animation and variety to the space. The artist Wolfgang Buttress designed the ten lighting columns to look like giant water reeds. These elements contain smart lighting, allowing the fountain LEDs to look their best, and the light columns also feature clever motion sensors and laser projectors which create a subtle laser show at night.

Fifty-four vertical fountains run around the edge of the Mirror Pool. They can be programmed to produce hundreds of different combinations including ‘celebrate’ (simultaneous), ‘chase’ (sequential) and ‘shy’ (diminish as you walk towards them). At night the perimeter fountains are lit by three primary-colour LED lights to produce thousands of beautiful colours. Play jets from 50 millimetres to 600 millimetres height

Spontaneous geyser jets

10 arching jets. only operate when the mirror pool is empty.

58

m

76 m

North

Diagram showing the set-up for a large-scale concert configuration.

Diagram illustrating the configuration for a seated event.

The 370-square-metre Mirror Pool is the largest urban feature in the UK and measures 58 metres wide × 76 metres long with a maximum depth of 220 millimetres.

Diagram for a small event with the pool partly filled and the fountains operational.

BRADFORD CITY PARK

103

EMPTY: The fountain begins each day in an empty state, with a series of mist emitters blanketing the square in an atmospheric haze. The fountain measures 76 × 58 metres, covering an area of 370 square metres.

104

GILLESPIES

REVEALING PATHS: As the fountain fills with water, pathways are revealed and defined by the shallow water (220 millimetres maximum). The pathways divide the feature into three separate pools that can be drained in any combination to create more intimate events spaces as shown above.

REFLECTIVE POOL: When the pool is fully charged, it acts as a water mirror, reflecting the adjacent 19th-century architecture, and animates the space by reflecting the moving clouds and people passing through the space. The pool holds over 600 cubic metres of water and is drained daily, which reduces the need for specialist cleaning operations and other costly routine maintenance.

Bradford City Park demonstrates the importance of flexible space and the myriad ways that a space can be used by the community for celebrations, installations and as a successful everyday space with water play.

BRADFORD CITY PARK

105

**

Forty-seven built-in anchor points at 3-metre spacing for outdoor market stalls. These were not implemented as part of the final project; however, the proposed feature does illustrate the intent of the design team to integrated infrastructure to accommodate temporary events.

** ** **

* Power hook-ups for events and celebrations

Vehicular access route for event preparation and performances

106

GILLESPIES

The spectacular central geyser fountain reaches 30 metres into the air.

columns also feature motion sensors and laser projectors that create a subtle interactive laser show at night. The drainable water feature allows the space to be used as a flexible stage for events and performances and has held a capacity of up to 20,000 people for the hour-long Christmas Lights Switch On celebration. During the year ten major events take place within the space, including the three-day arts and music festival called the Bradford Festival, which includes added overlay infrastructure, yet still provides a capacity of 10,000 people. In addition, the space was used for approximately 95 different events in 2015. The space provides power supplies and water points, but there are no built-in foundations for tents or other structures. The central area was designed to withstand heavy vehicle loading. The events team is made up of an events manager, an events officer and an assistant, who devise and manage the Council-organised events: Armed Forces Day, Bradford Festival, Summer Fun Days — one

day a week during the holidays, showing films and setting up fun activities — Christmas Lights Switch On, three ballet and opera screenings streamed live from the Royal Opera House in London and sports celebrations, such as the Bradford teams winning major competitions. The events team also takes bookings for the space. The Council owns a number of tent structures, which are stored at the City Hall building. The space is maintained by City Centre managers who act as wardens during the day. The annual budget for the Council-organised events is £ 450,000. The events team also receives annual revenue from the incidental events (in the region of £ 8000 in 2015), with growing commercial interest suggesting the space may generate more revenue in the future.

BRADFORD CITY PARK

107

POTTERS FIELDS PARK LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: GROSS.MAX. LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2007 SIZE: 1.5 hectares CONTEXT: Riverside park in central London ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Piet Oudolf RECURRING OVERLAYS: Thames Festival, regular installations and performances, food festivals and cultural celebrations BUDGET: £ 3.2 million CURATION AND MANAGEMENT BUDGET: £ 20,000 events budget and £ 160,000 maintenance

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Potters Fields Park is situated on the Southbank of the River Thames in London, adjacent to the World Heritage Site Tower Bridge and the Greater London Authority headquarters, the home of the Mayor of London. The park includes two different spaces, an open lawn area with terraced seating looking north across the Thames towards the Tower of London and a ‘community garden’ of perennial planting designed by renowned plantsman Piet Oudolf. The park is also adjacent to More London, a high-quality semi-private public space with fountains, planting and an amphitheatre, which is discussed as a case study in this book (see p. 230 – 233). The high-profile location of the park has made it a popular location for corporate-sponsored installations, utilising Tower Bridge as a backdrop to signal the prominent central London location next to the halls of political power and influence in the capital. The park was set up as a trust to enable the park to determine how revenue generated from the corporate-sponsored installations could be used to maintain and safeguard the facility over time and maintain the world-class perennial garden, Piet Oudolf’s only designed public garden in central London. In 2003 the magician and illusionist David Blaine was suspended in a Perspex box above Potters Fields for 44 days, ostensibly without food. This stunt took place before the park was redesigned by GROSS. MAX., but it was a precursor to the role that Potters Fields would play as a stage for events, installations, festivities and cultural celebrations. The park was reopened in 2007 and since that time it has hosted myriad events. Approximately 30 events are held in the park each year and around five of those are repeat events. The licensed capacity of the park is 4000 people but the maximum the park management team allows is 3000 people. The management team consists of a manager, a part-time administrator and three contract gardeners

During the 2012 Olympic festivities, a car company advertises their range of cars using a long jumper on the lawn at Potters Fields. A half-buried and over-sized swimmer acts as a point of interest at the lawn at Potters Fields.

108  GROSS.MA X.

0

75 m

Rosy The Ballerina, by raumlaborberlin, commissioned and produced by UP Projects, creates a focal point and a destination on the lawn.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

109

Contents

5.1 6

1 2

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4 Booking the Park ...................................................................................................................... 4 2.1

Bookings, deposits and payments ............................................................................. 4

2.2

Deposits against additional costs ............................................................................... 5

2.3

Fees and charges.............................................................................................................. 5

2.4

Management of events ................................................................................................... 5

2.5

Site visit ............................................................................................................................... 5

Documentation required: .............................................................................................................. 5

3

4

5

2.6

Event Safety Plan ............................................................................................................. 5

2.7

Insurance............................................................................................................................. 6

Health and Safety..................................................................................................................... 6 3.1

Health & Safety ................................................................................................................. 6

3.2

Event Safety Officer (ESO) ........................................................................................... 6

3.3

Accidents, prevention and notification ..................................................................... 7

3.4

Children and Young People ........................................................................................... 7

3.5

Evacuation ........................................................................................................................... 7

3.6

Wind Management ........................................................................................................... 7

6.1

Animals ............................................................................................................................... 10

6.2

Deliveries and collections ............................................................................................ 10

6.3

Facilities ............................................................................................................................. 11

6.4

Tree protection ................................................................................................................ 11

6.5

Lighting .............................................................................................................................. 11

6.6

Filming ................................................................................................................................ 11

6.7

Keys ..................................................................................................................................... 11

6.8

Location/how to find us ............................................................................................... 11

6.9

Opening hours ................................................................................................................. 11

6.10

Security and stewarding .......................................................................................... 12

6.11

Plans ................................................................................................................................ 12

6.12

Police ............................................................................................................................... 12

6.13

Vehicle access .............................................................................................................. 13

6.14

Waste management .................................................................................................. 13

Construction, Design & Management Regulations CDM 2015 .............................. 13

License Requirements............................................................................................................. 8 4.1

Premises Licence .............................................................................................................. 8

4.2

Sale of alcohol ................................................................................................................... 8

4.3

Serving of Free Alcohol .................................................................................................. 8

4.4

Control of Noise ................................................................................................................ 9

4.5

Temporary Structures .................................................................................................... 9

Damage ...................................................................................................................................... 10 2

The website for Potters Fields includes a calendar of events, a photo gallery and a news board. The Trust behind the project also provides a ‘Guide to Running Events’ at the site. This illustrates the importance of the flexibility of the space to generate revenue and maintain a sense of variety and change in the space.

110  GROSS.MA X.

7

Damage, repairs and reinstatement ....................................................................... 10

General ....................................................................................................................................... 10

3

Within the guidance document, an illustrative plan explains the layout of the park, indicating the measurements of the lawns and the power supply locations.

who maintain the Oudolf garden, oversee the lawns and returfing as required. More importantly, the gardeners act as community liaisons, developing relationships with locals, informing tourists about the history of the park and identifying plants in the garden for people who are visiting the park to see Oudolf’s work. The park’s infrastructure includes two power points and a potable water supply that was installed as demands increased. While the park hosts a number of events, the access was specifically designed to limit the size of vehicle that can access the site, which determines the type of event that can take place on the lawns. The events take place on the open lawn areas and there are very clear guidelines for the types of structures. The website provides a ‘Guide to Running Events’ that covers all the operational issues. The management team only programmes one or two community events per year from an annual budget of £ 20,000. The park will seek local, council and government sponsorship and grants for larger

events. All the other events that take place are external and, therefore, hire the space. This generates an income for the park of £ 260,000 per year. The total revenue of the park is £ 400,000 per year, which covers the cost of garden maintenance, repair to the lawns and staff salaries and allows the Trust to improve the park’s infrastructure, refurbish the footpaths and enhance the park as it evolves and its uses change. As of 2016/17 the budget for landscape maintenance and improvements was £ 128,184; for repairs and improvements to the hard landscape the budget was £ 30,000.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

111

Community perennial garden Planting design by Piet Oudolf Greater London Authority: Office of the Mayor of London Design by Foster + Partners

Events lawn Tower Bridge World Heritage Site

North

Terraced seat edge with views to Tower Bridge and the Tower of London directly across the River Thames from the park

The success of the site as a platform for corporate sponsorship and advertising owes its success to the backdrop of the World Heritage Site of Tower Bridge. The space is designed for flexibility but also for everyday use and the design provides a series of terraced steps for tourists and locals to lounge and enjoy views across the Thames to the Tower of London as well as Tower Bridge. At the southern end of the site, a perennial garden designed by Piet Oudolf adds seasonal colour and variation to the project and provides a quiet garden away from the throngs of people moving along the riverfront.

112

GROSS.MA X.

Herbaceous perennial and ornamental grass garden maintained by three gardeners paid for by the funds generated by the events lawn.

Lawn

4

Pop-up power supply

* EVENTS LAWNS: 30 events annually 5 annual recurring events 3000 person capacity £ 400k of revenue generated

3 Lawn 2 Lawn

lar Vehicu

access

to park

fe

ca

cafe

There are two key elements to the design of Potters Fields: a flexible lawn with terraced seating and a colourful perennial community garden. The lawn provides the platform for sponsored installations, community gatherings and cultural events, which ensures something different is happening throughout the year, providing interest, intrigue and fuelling anticipation. The garden also performs a similar role as colours and textures emerge and then fade throughout the year. Between the flexible lawn and the vibrant community garden, Potters Fields Park is in a state of perpetual change.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

113

The lawn hosts a variety of sponsorship installations, cultural celebrations and community gatherings. This variety of events animates the site, brings change and a sense of intrigue and anticipation. The pages that follow showcase a selection of the sponsorship installations, cultural events and community celebrations that happen at Potters Fields Park.

114  GROSS.MA X.

As the flexible lawn space accommodates a calendar of colourful events, installations and performances, the Piet Oudolf-designed garden is also giving a performance as the garden undergoes dramatic changes from spring to autumn. The following pages demonstrate how the garden changes with the seasons, from three keys points within the garden. This natural metamorphosis is a type of spatial activation in its own right. It ensures there is something new on each visit. Clockwise from top left shows the garden from March to December.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

115

Sponsorship installations and cultural events taking place on the flexible lawn at Potters Fields with Tower Bridge as an iconic landmark.

116  GROSS.MA X.

The Piet Oudolf-designed perennial garden puts on a dramatic performance throughout the seasons, with new colours, textures and architectural seed heads. Clockwise from top left shows the garden from March to December.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

117

Sponsorship installations and cultural events taking place on the flexible lawn at Potters Fields with Tower Bridge as an iconic landmark. In 2003, before Potters Fields was redesigned by GROSS.MAX., the illusionist David Blaine spent 44 days in a glass box suspended above the park.

The garden undergoes a dramatic transformation and drifts of planting reveals new colours, textures and forms. The evergreen yew hedges give the garden structure while the perennials put on a show. Clockwise from top left shows the garden from March to December.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

119

The management team at Potters Fields Park annually replace parts of the lawn that are hardest hit by the events. This takes place from late October due to the event calendar. In previous years the team has re-laid about 15 per cent of the lawns and drill-seeded about 65 per cent, which has been a successful maintenance strategy. This figure has come down every year from 2010, when the team drill-seeded all the lawns and had little success. In 2011 the team returfed 85 per cent of the lawns. Each year the head gardener and his team try to bring down the amount of returfing. Additionally, they are looking at ways of dealing with the deep, heavy compaction from the estimated 8 – 9 million people passing through More London and Potters Fields Park annually. This is proving to be one of the main issues for the management of the park. The Trust has consulted with a soil specialist and his recommendations are to hollow tine the lawns (create aeration holes), remove the waste created and fill the holes with a green mulch to get more organic material into the soils. Despite feeding five times annually the soils are still relatively sterile. Once the lawn is reinstated, it is returned to an open lawn area for day-to-day activities for tourists, local employees and community members as well as for accommodating a wide range of events and installations.

Since the lawn is so heavily used for events, it occasionally needs to be returfed. The biggest challenge for the team is the compaction of the soil from the estimated 8 – 9 million people passing through Potters Fields Park annually.

120  GROSS.MA X.

The head gardener Ian Patrick Mould and his team tending to the Piet Oudolf-designed perennial garden.

The revenue generated from the sponsorship installations makes possible the employment of two full-time gardeners and caretakers for the Piet Oudolf-designed gardens and the rest of the space. The gardeners also serve as a community liaisons, meeting and conversing with local dog walkers and park users, as well as providing information about the gardens for tourists and visitors.

POTTERS FIELDS PARK

121

LAWN ON D LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Sasaki Associates LOCATION: Boston, MA, USA COMPLETION: Spring 2014 SIZE: 1.1 hectare CONTEXT: Emerging innovation district near a convention centre ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: HR&A, Utile, Chris Wangro, Höweler + Yoon RECURRING OVERLAYS: Ping-pong tables, food trucks, food tent, cornhole boards, art installations, Jenga blocks, bocce, children’s events, carved pumpkin display, live music concerts BUDGET: US$ 1.5 million CURATION BUDGET: US$ 1.4 million

0

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Lawn on D represents a new kind of experimental, curated public space. The site measures 145 × 80 metres and is largely a flat open space with sloped banks flanking the longer edges of the rectangular space. The Sasaki design provides three equal-sized lawns that measure 30 × 27 metres, tarmac paths enlivened with brightly coloured paint and patternation and a ‘planted frame’ around the perimeter of the site. The design also includes a tent structure measuring 30 × 15 metres, which houses a bar, grill and multiple picnic tables. The southeastern corner has a finer-grain playfulness with bright-orange lighting columns and catenary lighting, bright-green tessallating geometry painted on the tarmac, ping-pong tables, seating areas and adequate space for food trucks to set up shop. Two bright-orange pathways give a ‘yellow-brick-road’ effect leading to the convention centre, which houses the public toilets for the space. Writing for Landscape Architecture magazine, Elizabeth Padjen describes the Lawn on D like this: ‘It’s a schoolyard. Anyone who has ever seen a New York City neighborhood playground will recognise it immediately. Flat. Asphalt paving. A fence. A swing set. People playing games. Others hanging back, watching. A couple of authority figures discreetly monitoring the action, ready to jump in if things get out of hand. A big building looming behind it all. The Lawn on D takes that basic model and amps it up into the realm of urban cool. It’s cheap. It’s modest. It’s ambitious. It’s owned by a behemoth of a public agency, but it’s one of the coolest spaces in the city.’ In many ways the Lawn on D feels like a pop-up installation, now featuring in cities worldwide as a way for communities to repurpose unloved patches of open space that authorities do not have the time or resources to do anything with. However, the Lawn on D is much more deliberate and curated, with years of planning to make it a reality. In 2010 the convention centre was developing plans to expand,

During an outdoor cinema showing of Jaws, the Lawn on D is filled with inflatable dinghies. During the winter months, the Lawn on D features an ice maze. This attraction adds something different from the offerings of other public spaces and in turn makes the Lawn on D a destination.

122

SASAKI ASSOCIATES

75 m

The area west of the tent has a more intimate scale than the rest of the Lawn on D. Ping-pong tables, food trucks, tables and chairs, seating areas, playful lighting and bold paving makes this place feel lively and energised.

L

123

but to do so in a way that would give it a competitive edge and reimagine how conventions could be held. Part of the expansion plans included a park, which in reality would have been more of an events space that would be open to the public. The design team had no precedent for the type of events space they envisioned. An idea was presented to the board of the convention centre to develop the walkway that connected the adjacent hotel and the convention centre (now the bright-orange paths through the Lawn on D) and the adjacent 1.1-hectare site. The team concluded that they would try out a number of different ideas to gauge which events and elements worked, both for the public and for the convention centre. The knowledge gained through this ‘eyes-wide-open experiment’ as the team referred to it, would guide the design. It was imperative that the site generated publicity, for the existing convention centre and for the emerging innovation district. The board gave approval to commit $ 1.5 million for the construction of the Lawn on D and $ 1.4 million for the first year of programming the space (excluding other operating costs). The construction of the Lawn on D was completed in August 2014, and the ‘eyes-wide-open experiment’ soon followed. Chris Wangro’s

The Lawn on D is a platform with a variety of overlays at different scales and complexities. The Intrude installation was one of the more dramatic events in the space, but the daily use of the lawn is equally important, such as the foam shipping-container play elements, which are stored on site when not in use.

124

SASAKI ASSOCIATES

expertise in programming public spaces was instrumental in creating the much-needed buzz for the lawn to gain traction and become a destination. Chris helped to get an events team in place to manage the events and curate the activities. It was important that the events did not feel as if they had been parachuted into the space, but rather grew organically from the character and personality of South Boston. Chris and his team alongside HR&A worked with local community groups and artists to give the lawn an identity and brand recognition. The opening was a success, fed not by extensive marketing or promotion but rather by social media. The main success came from the Höweler + Yoon installation called Swing Time, an interactive public art piece.

EXPERIMENT AND ENTERTAIN Elizabeth Padjen called it ‘Boston’s proclaimed selfie capital’. Swing Time does have a pull like gravity, with people of all ages lining up for a place on one of the 19 circular swings, playfully lit and changing colour through public participation. The swings have been so successful that Höweler + Yoon has revisited the detailing and materiality to withstand the pressures of its success. It was not just Swing Time that was a draw for the space, the calendar of events that Chris curated included concerts, food trucks, a screening of Jaws with rubber life rafts to set the mood, themed weekends, a ski hill, fire pits and an ice maze. All of these were supported on a day-to-day basis with lawn games such as bocce, giant Jenga, cornhole and Adirondack chairs for lounging in the sun. The lawn also hosted significant installations titled Intrude, which populated the lawn with giant inflatable bunnies and Pentalum, an inflatable and colourful maze that took over the entire lawn. The design team puts the success of the Lawn on D down to the sense of safety that the lawn provides, the opportunity for peoplewatching and the variety and range of events throughout the year. Another key point to make about the activation of the space here is the inclusion of an alcohol licence. One cannot underestimate the significance of this, as it effectively created one of Boston’s only public open spaces where visitors could lounge on the lawns sipping white wine and cocktails, conjuring images of the freedom of European parks. Small moveable stands sell beer and wine throughout the park, which has now evolved to include craft brew nights, and the alcohol helps to fuel the energy of the live music and concomitant dancing evenings. After the Lawn had been open for 18 months, more than 230,000 people had visited it, throwing into question what the future of the space should be and how it could ever be a temporary experimental space. A change in political leadership jeopardised the permanent space that would replace the Lawn on D. It threatened the Lawn on D because of the cost-cutting measures that were taking place and the fact that the Lawn had an annual budget of $ 2 million. Due to this, it was determined that the Lawn on D would need to ‘wipe its own face’ if it was going to remain the popular destination it had become, and it would have to generate a revenue. Citizens Bank donated $ 250,000 in sponsorship, and now has an ATM kiosk at the entrance. The space is now referred to as the Lawn on D Powered by Citizens Bank. Visiting food trucks no longer feature in the space as a contract with a local restaurant to serve food and drinks with a wine and beer licence has been implemented. The convention centre pockets 15 per cent of the gross take from the food and drink offering. Both this tent and the large catering tent are now owned outright rather than rented. The lawn games and food and beverages are available for use on Thursday afternoons and evenings, Fridays and weekends. An additional tent for small private events has been added to the northern edge of the Lawn on D near the convention centre with a

The Pumpkin Fest is a weekend-long event that begins with a collective pumpkin-carving session throughout the day on Saturday and Sunday and then the pumpkins go on display on Sunday evening. It is a great example of community involvement and a simple way to add a sense of spectacle to a space.

new feature swing from Höweler+ Yoon called the Halo Swing. With a capacity of 350 people, at the time of writing, the tent already has 80 bookings for the 2017 season at a cost of $ 4000 – $ 5000 per day. Some of the bookings will utilise the entire site at a cost of between $ 17,000 – $ 25,000 and often provide their own activities, such as bouncy castles. These revenue-generating efforts have cut the $ 2.3 million loss to a projected $ 250,000 – $ 350,000 loss for the year. The Lawn on D initially had a ‘principal park supervisor’, an operations and a production director to help with technological requirements.

L

125

31

m

The eastern section of the Lawn on D provides two open lawn areas measuring 27 × 31 metres for lawn games, concerts, weekly yoga and large-scale installations. These lawns are flanked by sloping banks where visitors can seek shade and respite from the sun and view the wealth of installations and interactive events that take place on the lawns. The sloped lawns are an important design feature and contribute to the success of the space by providing a desirable edge condition and spectator perch. The banks also include a number of small-scale artistic installations and formal gathering areas.

27 m

Swing time is an installation by Höweler + Yoon Architects and is the most popular element of the Lawn on D. The lightweight structure supports 14 circular swings for children and adults. By night they are illuminated by solar power captured during the day. Swing Time sits near the tent, separated by enough space for leisurely lawn games and quick access to food and drinks.

9

The tent anchors the Lawn on D, providing food, soft drinks, alcohol, food trucks and places to sit and play ping pong. The geometric pattern painted on the ground plane adds to the energy of the space. Overhead lighting creates a lively atmosphere by night and a safe access route to the convention centre and across the street to the adjacent hotel.

m 26 30

m

31

m

m 15

Se

rv

ic

e

ve

hi

cl

e

ex

it

m 5 14

14

m

m

41 ss ce

66

m

Ve

hi

cl

e

ac

m

12

26

m

m In 2016 a second permanent tent was implemented at the Lawn on D as a venue for private hire and as a mechanism to generate revenue to contribute to the maintenance and programming of the overall space. Adjacent to the tent is a private lawn area with games and seating away from the larger lawns and Höweler + Yoon installed a second swing feature here called the Halo Swing.

126

SASAKI ASSOCIATES

North

The plan above shows the indicative landscape plan developed by Sasaki prior to Chris Wangro getting involved and working to develop Swing Time as the prime feature of the lawn. The diagrams above indicate potential configurations for temporary uses in the space.

L

127

SEMI-PERMANENT: Sun Lounger (7 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

PERMANENT: Lighting J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Cornhole Pairs (8 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Love Seat (3 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Cocktail Bar (2 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Bocce Set (2 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Adirondack Chairs (22 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

S

O

N

PERMANENT: Halo Swing PERMANENT: Swing Time Installation (1 no.) J

128

F

M

A

SASAKI ASSOCIATES

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Child-size Table and Chairs (4 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Tables and Chairs (3 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Soft Play Shipping Containers (12 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Table-tennis (5 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Picnic Tables in Tent (20 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Food Trucks (4 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

SEMI-PERMANENT: Jenga Blocks (3 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

TEMPORARY: Fire Pits (3 no). D

J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju A

S

O

SEMI-PERMANENT: Side Tables (8 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

PERMANENT: Food and Bar Tent 15 × 30 m (1 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

L

N

D

129

N

D

N

The two lawns are activated by lawn games such as bocce, giant Jenga blocks, cornhole and children’s play-foam shipping containers. The lawns are used as yoga platforms and to accommodate large-scale installations and performances, such as the inflatable Pentalum installation, which creates a surreal colourscape for visitors. Here, people are queuing for the event.

130

SASAKI ASSOCIATES

Concerts, televised sports games and community events are a large part of the calendar of events. The open space of the lawns and the covered tent provide flexibility to accommodate a variety of events at different scales. Alcohol is served in the tents, which naturally leads to dancing.

L

131

Swing Time by Höweler + Yoon Architects is the centrepiece of the Lawn on D. It has been described as the ‘selfie capital of Boston’ with its vibrant changing colours and languid swinging motion. There is often a queue of people waiting for their turn on the swings. The architect continues to update the materiality of Swing Time to stand up to the increased use, since the feature was designed as a temporary installation.

132

SASAKI ASSOCIATES

Amanda Parer’s Intrude installation. Large-scale and ambitious installations, either as feature art installations or seasonal displays, characterise the success of the Lawn on D project. It is this ambitious curation that has made this experiment in social engagement a success. Pumpkin Fest and Play Day are two of the staple events that happen each year.

L

133

A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE ARCHITECTS: Peter Elliott and Taylor Cullity Lethlean LOCATION: Melbourne, Australia COMPLETION: Spring 2014 SIZE: 2,800 m2 CONTEXT: University Campus ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Artist Ash Keating RECURRING OVERLAYS/FEATURES: Ping pong, sports courts, barbecue area, wifi, spectator seating, public art, moveable planters BUDGET: AU$ 1.2 million 0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT A’Beckett Square transformed a 2800-square-metre car park at RMIT University in Melbourne. Like other pop-up projects, A’Beckett Square is a holding space while the university determines redevelopment plans. The square is dominated by two brightly coloured multi-use sports courts. This defining feature differs from the other case studies examined as part of this research by putting sports and recreation at the heart of the space. The two main courts measuring 15 × 31 metres are separated from two half-court practice areas by a 40-metre-long timber bench. This bench, half of which has a seat back for spectator seating, acts as a staging area for teams to prepare for games, but also has a spatial function in defining the space. The eastern edge of the site is more intimate in scale and function and includes five linear benches up to 10 metres in length, 20 moveable containers with trees and planting and a sheltered barbecue area that overlooks the sports courts. There is also a ping-pong table and moveable chairs with tables on wheels that can easily be rolled into the adjacent road, expanding the space as needed. A defining feature

Table-tennis tables, placed on artificial turf, add interest to the space and provide the campus community with a playful addition to the public space.

134

PETER ELLIOTT AND TAYLOR CULLIT Y LETHLEAN

of the space is the treatment of the adjacent walls that have been transformed into a striking mural by Melbourne artist Ash Keating. The installation, titled Natural System Response, represents urban forests and desert landscapes, created using airless spray from fire extinguishers filled with paint and retroactively pressurised. This backdrop adds the eye-catching element that initially pulls people into the space who may otherwise not know about it. In truth, footfall is not a problem due to the proximity of the space to the university. The space is a popular place for active recreation, but also for people-watching and relaxation. According to the architects, the creative approach to the space was to keep the space deliberately lean, inspired by demountable installations. The choice to use bold colours was driven by the intent to distinguish between the active sports court areas and the quieter soft zones delineated by a carpet of artificial grass. This pays for the scheduled sports, which include futsal, volleyball, basketball and netball. The space is predominantly used as a free play space for students and is therefore available for them to use as they wish. What the future of this space holds is uncertain, as is often the case with temporary or pop-up designed spaces. It is possible that the university may expand and introduce a building in place of the sports courts. Alternatively, the City of Melbourne has plans in the works for an extension to the underground rail network and is consequently seeking space above ground for equipment to undertake this significant infrastructure project. I’m told that the university and the students may lose the courts as a result. Whatever the future holds, this is a strong example of how creative curation of under-used space and how the conversion of a static car park can serve the community and enliven the public realm.

The site is divided into an active zone and a social zone. The active zone, with brightly painted sports courts, provides two full-length basketball courts and multi-use games areas, as well as two half-court warm-up areas for basketball games. A 40 × 1.5-metre-long bench separates the warm-up area from the main sports courts, doubling as a spectator seat and a place for players to store their belongings and get ready for a game. The social zone is defined by artificial turf and includes 23 moveable planters and five long benches. This area also includes a covered barbecue area and looks across the sports court to the mural that wraps the site on two sides, created by Melbourne artist Ash Keating.

Long benches and moveable planters from recycled materials give the space an urban feel and provide plenty of spectator seating to watch basketball games or for socialising. The long feature bench separates the practice courts from the main full-length basketball courts. It provides a perch for players to get ready and for people to sit and watch the games.

A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE

135

A 40 × 1.5-metre-long bench separates the half-court warm-up courts from the two full-length basketball courts. A portion of the bench has a seat back for spectator seating, and the other is open and more flexible for players to prepare for the game.

8 m

m 16

43 m m 14

50

The social section of the space is defined visually by artificial turf, which contrasts against the colourful and playful character of the active area. The social space includes five long benches at various lengths from 10 metres to 5 metres, 23 moveable planters with planting and trees and a shaded barbecue area.

m

Two multi-use games courts, measuring 15 × 31 metres, dominate the space, providing free recreation for students and locals, and in turn activate the public space. 13 m

Terraced spectator seats hold the edge of the space and provide an ample area for relaxing, sunbathing and watching the sports games.

35

m 31

m

15 m

North

56 m 50

m

The adjacent road provides additional flexible space, where rolling tables and chairs can be placed to provide additional seating and encourage people to linger and relax in the space.

136

PETER ELLIOTT AND TAYLOR CULLIT Y LETHLEAN

PERMANENT: Ping Pong Table (1 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

PERMANENT: Barbecue (3 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

PERMANENT: Rolling Table and Chairs (6 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

PERMANENT: Timber Planters (23 no.) PERMANENT: 40m Feature Bench (1 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

D

PERMANENT: Overhead Lights 15m (7 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

PERMANENT: Basketball (2 full and 2 half courts) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

PERMANENT: Benches (5 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

PERMANENT: Flexible Structure (1 no.) J

F

M

A

M

J

Ju

A

S

O

N

D

A’BECKETT URBAN SQUARE

137

N

D

JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Kim Wilkie LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2005 SIZE: 3175 square metres CONTEXT: Open-air courtyard at the Victoria and Albert Museum ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Fountain Workshop and Texxus RECURRING OVERLAYS: London Design Festival annually in September, children’s programme, village fete, summer party BUDGET: £ 2 million

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The John Madjeski Courtyard is a central green space and water feature at the Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A) in London. Kim Wilkie won the competition to design the new garden at the V&A in 2003. The competition featured designs by six internationally acclaimed landscape architects and was judged by a panel of experts from the realms of horticulture and design. The competition for the garden was supported by the Friends of the V&A. Flexibility was a key part of the design brief and I recall seeing Martha Schwartz’s competition proposal at a public exhibition, which proposed a series of planters on rails that could be shifted to the perimeter to create an open flexible square. While Martha’s proposal was unsuccessful, it did illustrate the courtyard’s prerequisite to deliver a highly flexible space. Kim Wilkie’s solution includes a shallow water feature that can be drained away to reveal a ‘stage’ surrounded by gentle steps that act as an elegant amphitheatre. Examples of the effectiveness of this approach can be

seen in the following pages where the square accommodates a village fete and acts as a platform for outdoor performances. Like the museum, entry to the courtyard for the general public is free. The main elements of the space are the elliptical water feature measuring 20 × 41 metres with seating steps and two gentle ramps with fountains incorporated into the steps at the ramp locations. The central pool area is also a feat of geometric stone-cutting precision, with each stone cut individually by a company called Texxus. The water depth is approximately 200 millimetres and people are welcome to wade into the pool. Two lawn areas adjacent to the elliptical pool measure 20 × 20 metres and provide areas for relaxation and picnicking, overlooking the pool. At the perimeter edge of the lawns, 24 glass planters enhance the formal symmetry of the space. Originally these planters were planted with citrus trees, which were to be replaced by clipped

In 2016 Achim Menges used robotics to construct the Elytra Filament Pavilion. The performative aspects of this installation point towards a novel form of spatial activation that showcases the making of art rather than the display of art.

138

KIM WILKIE

In 2006 United Visual Artists installed Volume. The installation took place on the plaza revealed by draining the water feature. This image demonstrates the multi-functionality of the central water feature, which offers the flexibility of being drained in order to create a hard plaza space to accommodate installations and allow crowds of people to gather.

holly in the winter and then brought back out in the summer months. However, the strategy changed due to budgetary constraints and the planters have been planted with evergreen bay trees. I make note of this because, as is seen with the Orangery at Versailles, the subtle change of vegetation (although dramatic in the case of Versailles) adds something different to a space and is an important device to introduce a freshness and vitality to the public realm. The outer perimeter is planted with a variety of seasonal bulbs and perennials and there are two large liquidambar trees in the northern corners of the space, all of which put on a colourful transformation throughout the year, bolstering the changing nature of the courtyard. An outdoor cafe station was added to the courtyard with tables, chairs and umbrellas to support the permanent interior cafe. The tables and chairs are clustered in the northern edge of the courtyard to get maximum sun exposure. This introduction has contributed to the active character and atmosphere of the courtyard. The courtyard frequently features an installation as an extension to the exhibits within the museum. The London Design Festival installs a temporary installation every year in September and 2018 will be the

10th anniversary of the V&A being the official home of the London Design Festival. On average, 25 events take place in the courtyard each year and approximately half of those are repeat events. These events take place during the peak summer season. The garden remains open and managed throughout the year for visitors to the museum to enjoy. On the last Friday of every month, the museum and courtyard extend the open hours for contemporary events, artists, designers and programme. The space often hosts private events and has the capacity for 600 guests.

JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A

139

20 m

41 m

The central water feature creates a playful space in the summer months with people of all ages walking through the water. The pool remains in place through the winter and can be drained away in an hour to allow the central space to function as a plaza. Two ramps provide access into the pool and contain playful fountains.

23 m

46 m

20

m

31 m

46

m

Two level lawn areas and trees in glass planters flank the central water feature. On any given day these lawns provide space for relaxing and socialising, as this is a popular weekend destination. During installations and cultural events, the lawns provide additional spectator space. The planters around the edges were originally designed to change with the seasons to provide further variety to the space and originally included citrus trees, which were later changed for bay trees.

The enclosed character of the courtyard creates a surprisingly tranquil space considering it is adjacent to central London roads with high traffic volumes. At the edge of each building is a 1-metre-wide planting strip, bringing colour and seasonal change to the space.

69 m

North

The subtle sunken water feature provides generous stepped seating with elegant ramps to access the water, with lawns at the upper terrace providing space for socialising, people-watching and quiet reflection.

140

KIM WILKIE

Central area filled as a water feature with adjacent lawns.

The water feature can be drained away to create a flexible space.

The images above show the flexibility that the central water feature provides. On any given day it is a playful, soothing water feature that children and families are drawn to. For formal events such as a village fete, the drained pool can dramatically transform into an active plaza. The images above also show the capacity of the space to exhibit temporary installations, illustrated here with the 2016 Elytra Filament Pavilion by Achim Menges, an installation developed using robotics on display to further engage with the public.

JOHN MADJESKI COURTYARD V&A

141

The upper images show the Volume installation by United Visual Artist and the 2014 installation by the late Zaha Hadid titled Crest, both shown as part of the London Design Festival. The V&A is the main space for the London Design Festival, now in its tenth year, that takes place each year in September. Clockwise from top left for the bottom four images: Stack ‘M Up by Martino Gamper (2009), Blow and Roll installations by Zieta Prozessdesign (2010), You Know, You Cannot See Yourself So Well as by Reflections by Frida Escobedo (2015) and a dance performance once the pool is drained.

142

KIM WILKIE

2015 Installation You Know, You Cannot See Yourself So Well as by Reflections by Frida Escobedo. Mirror Mirror installation by Jason Bruges Studio in 2010. During the summer, the fountain can be drained to create a spectator area for music performances.

JOHN MADJESKI COURT

BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: LDA Design LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2013 SIZE: 1.5 hectares CONTEXT: Brownfield site adjacent to one of London’s most iconic industrial buildings ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Simpson Haugh Architects and Exterior Architecture RECURRING OVERLAYS: Community celebrations, music performances, film festivals, food markets

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Power Station Pop-up Park opened in May 2013 and hosted the annual Chelsea Fringe Festival as its first overlay event, a grassroots horticulture event that corresponds to the prestigious Chelsea Flower Show in London. The park sits to the north of Battersea Power Station overlooking the River Thames and was the first public open space to be created there in the history of the Power Station. Battersea Power Station, an industrial-age icon that has been derelict for 30 years, is currently undergoing one of the most ambitious regeneration efforts in the UK. As part of the regeneration, the Pop-up Park was designed to create a setting for the phase 1 marketing suite so that potential investors could get a personal view of the impressive Power Station. The Pop-up Park was also intended to be a platform on which gatherings and events could be held to build the brand and foster the spirit of community that would be at the heart of the development even before the first new residents moved in. LDA Design, commissioned to create the design for the permanent public realm of the development, was tasked with designing the park. The design creates two flexible spaces: a lawn measuring 90 × 30 metres and a hard-standing space measuring 30 × 30 metres. This approach enabled the space to accommodate large gatherings, utilising both the hard-standing areas and the lawn, or smaller events could be held in the hard-standing area only, contained by trees and with the new phase 1 marketing suite in the background. Existing utility elements that had to remain on site were clad with timber and utilised by the events team to contribute to the vibe and energy of the events they were hosting. To create more intimate areas and varied spaces, clusters of trees in raised planters were used to create seating areas and a place to sit in the shade and watch the events or enjoy lunch from the food festivals. Flanking the northern edge of the lawn is an 80-metre-long rain garden that takes all of the surface water from the adjacent hard-standing area to sustain a perennial garden that changes from month to month. The planting design was intended to provide a sense of something new and different at each visit, so it was not just the social calendar that was transforming the space but the rooted gardens fulfilling the transformative role as well. Throughout the summers of 2014 and 2015, the events team developed an enticing programme of events, ranging from food parties, concerts and the Fire Festival to the Power of Summer outdoor cinema by Everyman Cinema, all against the backdrop of the Power Station. The building provided an irresistible draw for people since it

144

LDA DESIGN

has been cordoned off and unreachable for so long, but the delight and entertainment devised by the events team encouraged people to stay and linger and return throughout the summer months. The Popup Park provides a glimpse of how the future park will perform. It will be a stage for a multitude of events, performances and installations. On a day-to-day basis, the open aspect of the lawns will allow people to relax and look out across the river. The project manages to carefully accommodate the need for flexibility with the desire to have an attractive space when occupied by only a few people.

The Pop-up Park shown in the context of the existing Battersea Power Station, with the first phase of the development under construction to the right of the image, which was completed in 2017.

The central lawn space was used as a spectator space for a series of concerts and performances; shown here is the Ignite festival with the band Jungle and the Power Station animated by Projection Artworks. Existing site infrastructure was clad in timber and used as a playful hand-painted billboard by Bread Collective. This created an edgy and lively atmosphere for the Power of Summer outdoor cinema.

Authenticated BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK 145

37 m

m 20

93 m

The hard-paved area measures 106 × 37 metres, but the main flexible space without any tree planting or obstructions is 63 × 37 metres. This space enabled marquees, food stalls and stages to activate the Pop-up Park. The adjacent seating area beneath the trees acted as a counterpoint to create more intimate areas, doubling as spectator areas and perches for people-watching. 106

m

The Pop-up Park included a hard-paving area with tree planters that doubled as seats to create intimate seating areas, a lawn area and an 80-metre-long rain garden that captured all the surface water drainage and separated the hard space from the lawn. The planting in the rain garden was designed to display a ‘star performer’ each month, ensuring a colourful display and something new for those who visited the site often.

37 m 63

m

m

59

The Power Station Pop-up Park was a temporary park that was in place for two summers from May 2014 to 2016. The park overlooked the River Thames and was built directly north of the iconic Battersea Power Station. The park opened in time to host the Chelsea Fringe Festival, a grassroots horticulture event that coincides with the Chelsea Flower Show. The Pop-up Park accompanied a marketing suite for the first phase of the regeneration of the Power Station. The park was open to the public via an underpass to the west of the site.

146

LDA DESIGN

For larger events, the lawn became a gathering area and a performance space. It also gave visitors a place to lounge in the shadow of one of London’s most iconic buildings. Irrigation and ‘self-repairing’ grass helped to keep the lawn lush and attractive. In the lifespan of the Pop-up Park the lawn was never replaced even though it was well used for events and daily use.

180

m

North

At a corporate event, street performers entertain the crowds from temporary stages. The layout of the Pop-up Park provided flexible space on a central lawn, as well as a generous hard landscape area for other events. An 80-metre-long rain garden planted with perennials added to the changing nature of the site, with new colours and textures emerging throughout the year. The Power Station Pop-up Park was opened officially for the Chelsea Fringe Festival in May 2013, a grassroots event equivalent to the more established Chelsea Flower Show. The lawn included an engaging sculpture called Bloom that morphed and grew through participation with the visitors to the park. The Fire Festival transformed the site into a spectacular art installation, drawing huge crowds to the site.

Authenticated BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK 147

For the summers that the Pop-up Park was in place, food festivals and cultural celebrations created a lively atmosphere, with people coming to socialise and take the opportunity to see the Power Station up close, as the site had been disused and fenced-off for three decades. The Power of Summer outdoor cinema by Everyman Cinemas with the Power Station as a backdrop, plus beanbag seating, created a destination for the summer. The Pop-up Park included areas for gathering and also intimate spaces to relax and linger.

148

LDA DESIGN

The Fire Festival against the backdrop of two industrial-age cranes along the River Thames. The Pop-Up Park during the Chelsea Fringe Festival.

Authenticated BATTERSEA POWER STATION POP-UP PARK 149

MOMA PS1 DESIGNER: Various through the Young Architects Program (YAP) LOCATION: Brooklyn, NY, USA COMPLETION: Annually since 1998 SIZE: 1900 square metres CONTEXT: Courtyard at MoMA, the Museum of Modern Art in Long Island ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Each installation is designed by a different design team RECURRING OVERLAYS: Architecture installation to accompany the annual ‘Warm Up’ music festival BUDGET: Various; circa US$ 80,000 for the installation

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT For 19 years MoMA PS1 in Long Island, NY, has hosted an architectural and music series in the outdoor courtyard. The Young Architects Program (YAP) began in 1998. The annual installation has provided emerging architecture talent with a platform to design and implement creative ideas for the MoMA PS1 courtyard. The purpose of the installation is to provide visitors to the museum with an outdoor space, and each installation must provide seating, shade and water. Each successful architect follows a programme and tight budget and takes the project through every stage of the process, from design to implementation. The brief requires the architect to address environmental issues, including recycling and sustainability. The installation is built each year in June to support the summer music series Warm Up, featuring experimental music with DJs and live bands. The event is curated by the Architecture and Design Department at MoMA and MoMA PS1. Bloomberg Philanthropies has supported YAP since 2007

and will continue to sponsor the installation until 2018. Each project also receives generous sponsorship for other groups or individuals to realise the installation. The budgets vary but, as an indicator, the 2010 Pole Dance had a budget of $ 80,000. MoMA and MoMA PS1 have also partnered with MAXXI in Rome, Constructo in Santiago, Istanbul Modern in Istanbul and MMCA in Seoul to create an international extension of YAP. In 2011 two entries were selected, with one installed at MoMA PS1 and another at MAXXI in Rome. The dedicated website features proposals and winners of the annual competition, as well as interviews with the curators and videos of the installation process. The process of choosing an architect for the project each year involves deans of architectural schools and the editors of architecture publications putting forward up to 20 students, recent graduates from architecture programmes and established architects who are pushing

Part of the brief stipulates that the installation must include water to provide visitors with a place to cool down. The image above shows the 2014 installation by The Living.

Each summer the VW Dome is erected in the PS1 courtyard as a flexible events space for the Sunday Sessions, providing live, real-time art exhibits, performances and installations. The dome was first installed in 2010 and is funded by Volkswagen.

150

YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

The 2018 installation titled Hide and Seek by Dream the Combine includes a runway, collective hammock seating areas, atmospheric clouds of mist and mirrors that move with the wind or with human touch.

151

18 m 17 m

m 45

61

The installation space in the courtyard is divided into three rooms. Many of the architecture installations have engaged all three rooms.

m 36 m

The steps between the courtyard and the museum create a raised platform where performers and DJs entertain a crown of spectators at the lower level of the space, mingling and socialising around the annual architecture installation.

The MoMA PS1 is in Brooklyn in an area characterised by large industrial blocks, wide streets and large car parks, with adjacent apartment blocks. The gallery courtyard is enclosed by high walls to create a contained space accessible only through the gallery.

North

152

YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

The 2017 installation titled Lumen by Jenny Sabin Studio.

new materials, styles or techniques. The invited designers submit a portfolio of their work, which is reviewed by a panel of experts and curators. The finalists develop initial ideas and the winner is announced in February, leaving four months to fully design and implement the installation. The courtyard also accommodates the VW Dome, a geodesic dome that hosts the Sunday Sessions at MoMA PS1. The Sunday Sessions invite visitors to experience art live and in real time. The sessions include performances, music, dance, conversations and moving image to challenge contemporary culture and encourage a creative and imaginative dialogue. The sessions are sponsored by Volkswagen of America, who have sponsored the tent since its inception in 2012.

2016 Installation Weaving the Courtyard by Escobedo Soliz Studio. 2015 Installation COSMO by Andrés Jaque. 2015 Warm Up Festival with COSMO as a backdrop. 2014 Installation Hy-Fi by The Living.

154

YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

2012 Installation titled Wendy by HWKN. 2013 Installation titled Party Wall by CODA. 2011 Installation titled Holding Pattern by Interboro Partners. 2011 Installation titled Holding Pattern by Interboro Partners.

155

2010 Installation titled Pole Dance by SO-IL. 2009 Installation titled Afterparty by MOS. 2008 Installation titled Public Farm One by WORK Architecture Company. 2007 Installation titled Liquid Sky by Ball-Nogues Studio.

156

YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

2006 Installation titled BEATFUSE by OBRA. 2005 Installation titled SUR by Xefirotarch. 2005 Installation titled SUR by Xefirotarch.

157

2004 Installation titled Canopy by nARCHITECTS. 2003 Installation titled Light-Wing by Tom Wiscombe of Emergent. 2002 Installation titled Playa Urbana by William E. Massie.

158

YOUNG ARCHITECTS PROGRAM

2001 Installation titled SubWave by ROY. 2001 Installation titled SubWave by ROY. 2000 Installation titled Dunescape by SHoP. 2000 Installation titled Dunescape by SHoP. 1999 Installation by Philip Johnson. 1998 Installation titled Percutaneous Delights by Gelatin.

159

SERPENTINE PAVILION DESIGNER: Various LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: Annually during the summer, on-going SIZE: 750 square metres CONTEXT: Adjacent to the Serpentine Gallery in Kensington Gardens ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: ARUP and AECOM RECURRING OVERLAYS: Associated cafe, performance space and cultural venue with lectures and discussions BUDGET: Varies; 2014 cost £968,000 to build and was sold for £450,000

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Serpentine Pavilion is a temporary summer installation that takes place annually in the lawn space directly east of the Serpentine Gallery in Kensington Gardens in London. The level lawn space is approximately 25 × 30 metres, surrounded by mature trees and the two-storey gallery. In 2000, instigated by a response from Princess Diana to attend a celebratory dinner following renovations to the gallery in 1997, the late Zaha Hadid was invited to design an installation that would encapsulate the future of architecture. Historically, pavilions within the Royal Parks in London, of which Kensington Gardens is one, could only be erected for one month, but the Secretary of Culture, Media and Sports interceded so that effectively the first outdoor cafe at the Serpentine Gallery could be created. This put into motion one of the most successful temporary architecture installation series in the world. A pavilion has been built every year since 2000, except for 2004 when MVRDV proposed to completely cover the gallery to create an artificial mountain and unfortunately the proposal was never real-

A cafe is a staple aspect of the annual pavilion, creating a lively and attractive place to linger throughout the life of the pavilion installation. Gallery Pavilion 2005 designed by Álvaro Siza and Eduardo Souto de Moura and Cecil Balmond with Arup.

160

VARIOUS DESIGNERS

ised. Forty per cent of the budget for the pavilion is generated by the sale of the pavilion after the summer season. The designer for the annual pavilion is chosen by a curatorial committee and the key stipulation is that the architect cannot have completed a building in the UK at the time of their selection as the pavilion architect. The provision of a food and beverage offering in the form of a cafe is key to the design of the pavilion to encourage people to linger within the pavilion. While the Serpentine Pavilion is about architecture and creating a temporary and striking structure, it is also about creating a place, a summer destination for locals and tourists alike. The pavilion series is a spectacle to attract people and offers an experience that sparks conversation and fuels debate. It also creates a chic and trendy location for lounging and generating social media posts. In 2006 the first non-stop conversation or marathon took place. During this 24-hour series, Rem Koolhaas interviewed ‘72 leading figures in the UK, mapping the city through the protagonists

The 2015 Serpentine Pavilion by Selgascano featured highly tactile materials that engaged visitors in a powerful way.

25 m

30 m

North

For most of the year the site of the Serpentine Pavilion is a patch of lawn outside of the Serpentine Gallery, set within Kensington Gardens. Construction of the annual pavilion begins in the spring in time for the opening in early summer. Throughout the time that the pavilion is in place, a series of talks and cultural events makes the installation more than an architectural piece, it becomes a cultural destination.

SERPENTINE PAVILION

161

who inhabit it’. In 2007 the artist Olafur Eliasson continued a marathon experiment to map the overlaps and interfaces between art and science, while 2008’s Manifesto Marathon examined the relationship between art and politics. As Philip Jodidio identified in his comprehensive book Serpentine Gallery Pavilions, published in 2011, these commissions adopt Cedric Price’s view that architecture should be more than hardware: it should also be about content. The marathons are about going beyond the fear of pooling knowledge, a sketch for a transdisciplinary school. In 2008 Frank Gehry’s pavilion was a performative space that hosted the British composer Thomas Adès for Park Nights. This has become a significant aspect of all the pavilions. The pavilion also features a Family Sunday, to encourage children to engage with artists and designers to respond creatively to the architecture of the pavilion. In 2016, the 16th year of the pavilion series, four additional 25-square-metre Summer Houses were created to celebrate the retirement of Dame Julia Peyton-Jones from the Serpentine Gallery. This was the first time that more than one pavilion had been erected in 2000 Installation by Zaha Hadid. 2001 Installation by Daniel Libeskind with Arup. 2001 Installation by Daniel Libeskind with Arup. 2002 Installation by Toyo Ito and Cecil Balmond with Arup. 2002 Installation by Toyo Ito and Cecil Balmond with Arup.

162

VARIOUS DESIGNERS

Kensington Gardens. Bjarke Ingels Group’s (BIG) Unzipped Wall, complemented by the four Summer Houses, was a powerful conclusion to Peyton-Jones leadership of the programme. The effect of the Serpentine Pavilion goes beyond a statement of architecture. The summer programme is an exercise in place-making, creating performances, lectures and debates and the chance for people to engage in a conversation about the trajectory of design and creative culture. The cafe encourages people to linger in the shade of the pavilion and assess the architecture to engage at the ground level with other visitors to the site. For the short period that the pavilion is in place, June to October, it becomes a destination in London. While the architectural responses are fascinating, my interest with the pavilion is its effect on the ground and what it does culturally and within the realm of social media. The Serpentine Pavilion exemplifies the possibility of a temporary installation to become a destination. The Serpentine Galleries and WF Central in Beijing will partner in 2018 to install the first Serpentine Pavilion outside of the UK, which will be designed by JIAKUN Architects.

2004 Proposal by MVRDV, (unrealised). 2004 Proposal by MVRDV, (unrealised). 2003 Installation by Oscar Niemeyer. 2003 Installation by Oscar Niemeyer. 2005 Installation by Álvaro Siza and Eduardo Souto de Moura and Cecil Balmond with Arup.

SERPENTINE PAVILION

163

2006 Installation by OMA/Rem Koolhaas and Cecil Balmond with Arup. 2006 Installation by OMA/Rem Koolhaas and Cecil Balmond with Arup. 2007 Installation by Olafur Eliasson and Kjetil Thorsen. 2007 Installation by Olafur Eliasson and Kjetil Thorsen. 2008 Installation by Frank Gehry.

164

VARIOUS DESIGNERS

2009 Installation by Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa of SANAA. 2010 Installation by Jean Nouvel. 2010 Installation by Jean Nouvel. 2011 Installation by Peter Zumthor and Piet Oudolf. 2011 Installation by Peter Zumthor and Piet Oudolf.

SERPENTINE PAVILION

165

2012 Installation by Herzog & de Meuron and Ai Weiwei. 2012 Installation by Herzon & de Meuron and Ai Weiwei. 2013 Installation by Sou Fujimoto. 2013 Installation by Sou Fujimoto. 2014 Installation by Similjan Radi´c. 2014 Installation by Similjan Radi´c.

166

VARIOUS DESIGNERS

2015 Installation by Selgascano. 2015 Installation by Selgascano. 2016 Installation by Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG). 2016 Installation by BIG. 2017 Installation by Francis Kéré. 2018 Installation by Frida Escobedo.

SERPENTIN167

ROBSON REDUX DESIGNER: Various LOCATION: Vancouver, BC, Canada COMPLETION: Annually, from 2011 to 2015 SIZE: 79 × 24 metres CONTEXT: Adjacent to Robson Square and Vancouver Art Gallery ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Engineering department at Viva Vancouver RECURRING OVERLAYS: Temporary street installation taking place during the summer months when the road is closed to traffic. BUDGET: C$ 40,000 for design and implementation and C$ 5000 honorarium

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Robson Redux is a temporary installation to transform the 800 block of Robson Street in Vancouver into a public space from July to September. The international design competition to reimagine the street took place annually from 2011 to 2015 before the city of Vancouver set in motion plans to permanently remove bus traffic and convert the street into a pedestrian-only space to unite the street with the adjacent Robson Square and strengthen the relationship with the Vancouver Art Gallery. The street runs north to south and is 79 metres long by 24 metres wide. The base plan as part of the brief allocates a space for the installation directly opposite the art museum that measures 30 metres in length by 6.82 metres wide. However, from the installations, it appears that this is an indicative measurement since many of the installations run the full length of the street. The genesis of Robson Redux began with Vancouver hosting the Winter Olympics in 2010, and the Canadian team winning the gold medal in ice hockey. As the heart of Vancouver, Robson Square became the civic place of celebration, with people filling the street to

celebrate the win. Seeing the jubilation and social engagement of people in the street inspired a small team within the engineering department at Viva Vancouver to develop ideas to ‘convert street spaces into people spaces’. The city was already considering pedestrianising the street and the excitement of the Olympics galvanised their commitment. However, it took seven years to come to fruition. In 2011 Viva Vancouver put out a call for ideas to activate public spaces in Vancouver. Picnurbia was born; however it was intended for a residential area and the residents protested against its installation. They liked the idea but felt it was in the wrong place. At the same moment, a membrane at the 800 block of Robson needed to be replaced after the Winter Olympics, which meant the road would need to be closed. This presented Viva Vancouver with the opportunity to keep the road closed through the summer months until September and install Picnurbia. Even before the tape had been cut to open the installation, it was a success with people flocking to it. Viva Vancouver funded and fabricated Picnurbia with an internal team, which inherently

2015 Installation titled Porch Parade by Design With Company.

2014 Installation titled Urban Reef by Kaz Bremner, Jeremiah Deutscher and Higher Works.

168

VARIOUS DESIGNERS

Robson Redux transforms the 800 block of Robson Street into a summer destination from July to September. The street sits adjacent to Vancouver Art Gallery and Robson Square and is the civic heart of Vancouver. The regularity of the annual installation adds anticipation, engages with the community and gives locals something to look forward to and enjoy in the summer months. The competition has gained international recognition, attracting 89 entries in 2014.

24 m

6 m m Ho f ro

6.8 m

r by

The street is 79 × 24 metres and the brief identifies a 30 × 6.82-metre portion of the street for the installation. However, most installations are stretched along the entire length of the street, suggesting this dimension is only a guide.

St 30 m m 79

North

ROBS169

shaped the fabrication portion of the brief for future proposals and installations. Picnurbia was in place from the Canada Day long weekend through to Labour Day (1 July to 5 September). Inspired by the success of the Winnipeg Warming Huts annual competition, Viva Vancouver established the Robson Redux annual competition. In 2012 and 2013, Viva Vancouver put out expressions of interest to people on procurement frameworks but the quality and quantity declined significantly, with only nine to ten entries. There was criticism from the local design communities due to the lack of honorariums and the absence of any indication of a budget or a brief. However, Robson Redux did guarantee that the idea would be implemented, which incentivised potential designers to submit ideas. In 2014 the competition was formalised with a solid brief, a clear budget and an entrance fee. Additionally, Viva Vancouver appointed a social media specialist to garner support and spread the word with ‘taste makers and influencers’. A dedicated website was constructed, the People’s Choice award was established and there were major events and speakers at the opening of the installation. The 2014 call for entries resulted in 89 entries from around the world. A jury and the Viva Vancouver staff would select a winner, and the actuality of the project getting built within the budget was a driving factor in the decision-making process, a lesson that was learned with Picnurbia. The People’s Choice award added an important dimension to the project because it engaged with the community on multiple levels. The final year of the Robson Redux was 2015. In April 2016 the city put in motion plans for the 800 block of Robson Street to become a permanent pedestrian space that would create a seamless pedestrian block with Robson Square, which is also being redesigned. Since Robson Redux, a team dedicated to public spaces and streets has been established within the engineering department at Viva Vancouver, testament to the success of Robson Redux and the transformative role the temporary installations had on the city. Robson Redux did not invent the idea of closing the street to traffic, but it most certainly demonstrated the lasting measurable impact the new space would have on the city and its citizens. It is likely that Robson Redux has come to a natural conclusion since the street has now been permanently closed to traffic. Viva Vancouver’s philosophy is to ‘Innovate, Incubate, and Integrate’. This approach will no doubt guide the activation of the new permanent space, paying homage to Redux.

2011: PICNURBIA Design team: Loose Affiliates

The lightweight, low-cost materials of temporary installations do not limit the functionality of a space. Picnurbia is testament to the transformative potential of low-cost, temporary events.

In the summer, Vancouverites leave their neighbourhoods and head to the beach, inhabiting the edge of the city. Picnurbia suggests an alternative to this exodus, creating a downtown zone for people to gather and picnic. At Picnurbia, the summer act of picnicking is heightened by an ‘über-­picnic-blanket’. This undulating landscape provides spaces for people to hang out and play in alternative formations, providing a new experience of urban picnicking. Picnurbia offers space for people to come together, relax and watch. Inserted into the urban downtown neighbourhood, a community where people already live, work and visit, the site is intended to become an easily inhabited summer zone. Picnurbia is designed to offer an ‘on-the-block’ amenity where people can drop by on purpose or stumble upon more informally as they walk or bike home. This will establish Picnurbia as a summer node, carried on mouth-to-mouth, ‘Let’s meet at Picnurbia’. Text by Loose Affiliates

170  LOOSE AFFILIATES

ROBSON RE AuthenticatedDUX 171

2012: POP ROCKS Design team: AFJD Studio and Matthew Soules Architecture Pop Rocks, a temporary architectural installation commissioned by the City of Vancouver, transformed a block of Robson Street in downtown Vancouver during the summer of 2012. Pop Rocks is a radically experimental temporary design that borrows post-industrial waste on its way to be recycled. Pop Rocks deploys 15 large pillow-like forms, made from postindustrial waste, across a city block to create an alien landscape that offers a soft place to rest while inhabiting a monumental presence at the centre of the city. Pop Rocks is radically sustainable, responding to the City of Vancouver’s ambition to become the greenest city in the world by 2020. The installation is constructed entirely from reused materials that will be recycled at the end of the project. Each of the soft forms is sewn from recycled Teflon-coated fibreglass fabric provided from the refurbishment of the tensile membrane roof of Canada Place, a local iconic building. Pieces of the roof were sewn by a local sailmaker into shapes that were filled with recycled polystyrene beads provided by Mansonville Plastics, a company that recycles polystyrene from throughout Metro Vancouver. Pop Rocks’s design methodology marks a departure from traditional top-down design methods towards a contingent, emergent and tactical design ethos. Text by AFJD Studio

The comfort and delight of Pop Rocks encouraged people to linger in the space longer than they may have done if the installation was purely sculptural. The interactive aspect of temporary installations is important.

172

AFJD STUDIO AND MATTHEW SOULES ARCHITECTURE

2013: CORDUROY ROAD Design team: Hapa Collaborative The history of settlement in the Northwest has long referenced the term ‘corduroy roads’, describing the use of rough-cut planks or logs laid side to side, running perpendicular to the road’s direction. Our vision for the temporary installation on the 800 block of Robson Street was to make reference to a past condition, an often interim solution before a final goal, and to highlight this state of transition. The use of simple planks is a direct material connection to the past, while the ability of the material to bridge the road represents a potential future condition. The playful configuration of the decking creates uniform, curbless connections across the road, while the uniquely coloured benches create informal seating, vantage points and a new form of public realm. Text by Hapa Collaborative

The simply inclusion of the humble umbrella provides cover and respite from hot summer days and periods of rain. This encourages people to linger in the space where chance encounters may happen.

174

HAPA COLLABORATIVE

2014: URBAN REEF Design team: Kaz Bremner, Jeremiah Deutscher and Higher Works The winning design, known as Urban Reef, stemmed from two ideas highlighted in the competition brief. The first was the concept of engaging Vancouver’s urban vibrancy. While Vancouver is frequently noted for its natural setting and scenic amenities, a rich urban fabric and culture exists that the City wanted to highlight through the Robson Redux competition. The second idea was the underlying theme for the competition: connection. The design of Urban Reef folds these two ideas together while responding to the specific qualities of the site, creating a public sculpture and armature for socialising and performance. Through the activity that Urban Reef generates, from street performances to casual chance encounters, the project’s goal was to connect people to one another and to the space in a new way. The installation acts in much the same way as a reef in the ocean, as an armature that facilitates the life around it by creating a vibrant new ecosystem. By the simple addition of Urban Reef to the 800 block of Robson Street the surrounding plaza is repurposed and Vancouver’s urban vibrancy has a place to come to life. Urban Reef’s form was generated through a series of sections that suggest different types of occupation ranging from lounging to tiered seating for watching performance and overlapping benches to enjoy friends. These sections morph into one another as the installation snakes along the site creating a dynamic form that sparks curiosity and invites exploration. While the changing sections suggest different ways of occupation, the plan responds to the existing context and organises the surrounding space for a variety of uses. Text by Kaz Bremner, Jeremiah Deutscher and Higher Works

The various ergonomic configurations that the Urban Reef provides invites people of all shapes and sizes to find a comfortable perch and soak up the atmosphere of the street.

176

KAZ BREMNER, JEREMIAH DEUTSCHER AND HIGHER WORKS

2015: PORCH PARADE Design team: Design With Company The porch is the architectural element that connects people and buildings to the city. It is where you cool off on a hot summer day. It is where you greet neighbours passing by. This project presents an ad hoc arrangement of typical domestic front porches, complete with appropriate accoutrements, in a parade along Robson Street. Each porch straddles the sides of a single party wall, creating a spatially complex, yet simply constructed neighbourhood. As a whole, the porches appear abstract and unfamiliar in their new context and arrangement. However, when fully activated with visitors, the project presents a lively and familiar atmosphere for downtown Vancouver. The project uses conventional materials and construction techniques, ensuring that the project can be completed on time and on budget. Further, the elements made for the new construction (porches, etc.) were donated to the local chapter of Habitat for Humanity for porches on their home builds. Text by Design With Company

The typology of the front porch has an enduring familiarity in the minds of many people. Coupled with bright colours, people are drawn into the more intimate spaces that Porch Parade creates.

178

DESIGN WITH COMPANY

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART COMPETITION DESIGNER: Student competition LOCATION: Cambridge, MA, USA COMPLETION: Biennial, on-going SIZE: 19 × 15 metres CONTEXT: Within the Radcliffe University Common near Harvard University ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Stoss Landscape Urbanism as design phase consultant RECURRING OVERLAYS: Biennial public art installation designed by students from Harvard or Radcliffe Universities chosen by a panel of professionals and campus affiliates BUDGET: US$ 40,000 for design implementation and US$ 10,000 prize money

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Radcliffe Public Art Competition is a biennial competition and installation that takes place within the Radcliffe University Common in Cambridge, MA. As part of a masterplan by Stephen Stimson landscape architects, a 31 × 26-metre site was designed adjacent to Brattle Street, a major pedestrian route leading to the heart of Harvard Square. It is also important to note that the site sits opposite the American Repertory Theatre. Within this space, there are permanent landscape elements to hold the edge of the site, including areas of planting and two rows of trees on the north and south edge of the site. Additionally, seven solid granite seats are permanent features on three sides of the space. The rest of the space is a flexible self-bound gravel material, which is easy to lift and reinstate measuring 19 × 15 metres. With the installation of the permanent landscape, the parameters were set to create a testing ground of ideas that would see a new

installation occupy the space every two years. Before formally launching a competition, the founder of Stoss, Chris Reed, was asked to design a temporary installation following a cross-campus collaboration between Radcliffe University and the Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD). Stock-Pile as the installation was titled, was implemented in 2009, setting in motion the Radcliffe Public Art Competition. The competition is sponsored by Susan S. and Kenneth L. Wallach. The sponsors see the garden as a metaphor: ‘This open space, like the Radcliffe Institute, is about experimentation and excitement, encouraging the kind of discoveries an established university needs to move ideas forward.’ According to the Dean of Radcliffe University, Lizbeth Cohen, ‘[w]e launched this student competition hoping to provide an opportunity for students to create public art to be enjoyed by the University and Cambridge communities. But we had no idea how strong the response would be.’ The aim of the public art competition

Latent (e)Scapes by Christina Geros filled the space with dynamic acrylic LED lights and planted landforms in 2015.

The site of the Wallach Garden is defined by self-bound gravel and bordered by seating, planted areas and trees. The central self-bound gravel area defines the boundary for the biennial design competition. In this image, Latent (e)Scapes is being implemented.

180

STUDENT COMPETITION

Overhead view of the 2015 installation, showing the permanent edges of the space and the central area that is transformed biennially by the winning student entry.

Authenticated 181 RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART COMPETITION

The above masterplan shows the Wallach Garden adjacent to Brattle Street. Pedestrians on Brattle Street are drawn into the space by the installations.

182

STUDENT COMPETITION

The central area of Wallach Garden measures 15 × 19 metres and is surfaced in self-bound gravel, which is easy to remove to install the installation. This defines the boundary of the design competition site, with the surrounding streets, planted areas and tree planting remaining undisturbed or affected by the installations.

m 16

m 15

22

m

19 m

As part of the implemented landscape masterplan, the site is planted with rows of trees on two sides and generous planted areas to the edges. Solid granite seats are also a permanent feature and edge three sides of the site.

31 m

m 26

Wallach Garden sits within the beautiful Radcliffe Campus, adjacent to Brattle Street in Cambridge, MA.

North

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART CO183

is to make visible the creativity of the student body and make Radcliffe Yard a more dynamic, visible and attractive place for the campus. According to Anita Berrizbeitia, the chair of the Department of Landscape Architecture at Harvard GSD, ‘[the competition] initiates a conversation about the role of public art and design at the university and its relationship with the city and the larger public’. The design competition is unique in that it gives students the opportunity to realise a project on the ground, marrying academic theory with the practice of design. The design brief requires the students to develop a construction budget for realising the installation as well as a detailed explanation of the materiality of the proposals and how the ideas will be delivered, working with Stoss as the design phase consultant. Radcliffe has recently put in place an intensive winter workshop designed to equip applicants to understand the sensitivities of place-specific works of art that function as a public space, as well as offering mentoring to improve their submissions and resolve some of the technical aspects of the designs. As of 2016, the formal competition has had three ‘cycles’ and including the Stoss installation, the site has been reconfigured four times since 2009. In 2016 an undergraduate student won the award for the first time, with the previous two winners hailing from masters of design programmes at the GSD. Each year the quality and quantity of submissions increases, due in part to the fact that the winner of the competition is awarded a $ 10,000 prize. A $ 40,000 budget, funded by the Wallachs, covers the procurement of materials, labour costs, installation and restoration of changes made to the garden. Radcliffe is an ecologically minded organisation, and often reuses materials from previous installations like self-bound gravel, soil, lighting, plant material and seating, when appropriate. There is a different budget for the design phase, which includes design consultant costs to implement the work of art, also funded by the Wallachs. In 2013 the winning scheme Saturate the Moment was selected from 20 design submissions; the 2015 winner Latent (e)Scapes was selected from 22 entries; and the 2016 winner titled 73 Brattle was selected from 40 submissions. From the pool of submissions, up to five teams are selected to develop their ideas further before presenting to a jury made up of Harvard and Radcliffe faculty.

2009: STOCK-PILE Design team: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Stoss Landscape Urbanism was the first designer to implement a project at the Wallach Gardens titled Stock-Pile in 2009. The first design competition was implemented in 2013 and since then a new design has been implemented on a two-year cycle.

… a storage pile or heap of material; a reserve supply of something essential; a gradually accumulated reserve of something, esp. something vital or indispensable (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged) This installation occupies a temporary site in Radcliffe Yard, scheduled to be turned over for construction lay-down space within two years. The essential elements of landscape construction — stone, aggregate, sand, soil: diverse and rich in colour, shape and texture — are arranged in simple piles on a north–south grid. Two are planted with ancient ferns. All start stacked impossibly steeply, poised to subside — each of its own accord, in keeping with its inherent physical and structural characteristics. The installation was completed in celebration of the 10th anniversary of the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study. Text by Stoss Landscape Urbanism

184

STOSS LANDSCAPE URBANISM

2013: SATURATE THE MOMENT Design team: Keojin Jin and Juhun Lee Jin and Lee’s design was inspired by the shell of the desert beetle, which collects condensation to survive. The surface of Saturate the Moment is designed to collect condensation, which will nourish plants below it and perpetuate a dynamic cycle. Jin described the work as an opportunity to ‘think more deeply about our environment and how a physical, low-tech object can interact with the energy and vibrant atmosphere around it’. The landscape sculpture consists of a resin composite framework whose parallel lines resemble a schematic of rippling radio waves that fold in on themselves. The structure is set atop a large swatch of lawn. The ambitious project required the use of innovative materials. The undulating ribs of the piece were made at a boatyard, using marine construction products. Text by Keojin Jin and Juhun Lee

RadCliffe Competition 2nd Phase

186

KEOJIN JIN AND JUHUN LEE

Shortlisted competition entry titled Lost Star Matrix by Cali Pfaff and Hope Hardesty, Harvard Graduate School of Design. Shortlisted competition entry titled Anti-Object by Mariano Gomez Luque, Pablo Roquero, Matt Scarlett, Harvard Graduate School of Design. Various images of the winning entry Saturate The Moment and the various ways in which people interact and observe the installation.

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART CO187

2015: LATENT (E)SCAPES Design team: Christina Geros with ULR Studio An interactive and kinetic media installation, Latent (e)Scapes explores the natural-synthetic landscape through systematising the implicit and explicit impacts of human and non-human forces within the garden. Finding inspiration in the swaying grasses of the prairies and coasts, the work calls into question our roles within everyday environments and creates an immersive experience contrasting the typical urban landscape. The installation can be seen as a physical metaphor of an attitude towards symbiotic relationships between natural and synthetic, the implicit and the explicit, the static and kinetic manifestations of energy. As human impact is registered through the synthetic elements, the interactivity makes explicit the synthetic nature of the ecology, while the effect of natural environmental forces are simultaneously implied in the structure and material of the installation. This interweaving of natural/synthetic ecologies serves as a critique and method in which artificial systems could possibly be designed to mimic, co-exist and co-create within the natural-synthetic landscape of the Anthropocene. Text by Christina Geros with ULR Studio

188

CHRISTINA GEROS WITH ULR STUDIO

The main image above and opposite illustrate the dramatic effect of the installation when night falls. Sketch ideas and 3D rendered plans show the creative process of designing Latent (e)Scapes.

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART CO189

2017: IN SEARCH OF 100 YEARS AT 73 BRATTLE STREET Design team: John Wang Wang’s inventive design proposal is titled In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle. Now the site of the Wallach Garden, 73 Brattle was the street address for the Sawin Building, a private residence that Radcliffe purchased from Cambridge businessman Moses Sawin in 1917 and turned into a structure that housed Radcliffe College classrooms, furthering the education of women. The building was demolished in 1932 and the space was an under-utilised garden until the Radcliffe Institute unveiled the first installation of the Public Art Competition in 2013. Wang’s installation will create a garden on the former building’s footprint, which highlights the changing history of Brattle Street and Radcliffe’s place in that evolution. Granite blocks will establish the building’s footprint, while benches and drawing or writing surfaces will invite people to gather and share ideas. The proposed use of the

garden reflects the Radcliffe Institute’s commitment to convening scholarly exchanges across disciplines and with the public. Wang relied on the Schlesinger Library at the Radcliffe Institute to discover the many roles the site has fulfilled over the years. Based on that research, Wang proposes: ‘the creation of this gathering space aims to further the goal of today’s Radcliffe, just as Sawin House once did by creating an enjoyable space for interactions and conversation.’ The jury selected Wang’s design from more than 40 design submissions. The submissions shared innovative perspectives on a wide variety of topics, including the juxtaposition of poverty and wealth, biological processes, land use, urban history, and play. Text by John Wang

In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle Street by John Wang.

Shortlisted competition Reflections, entry by Tomastu Ito and Hui Wang, Harvard Graduate School of Design.

190

JOHN WANG

Shortlisted competition Radcliffe Slum, entry by Ignacio Cardona, Harvard Graduate School of Design.

In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle

From Demolished Classrooms to Historic Gathering Space

Submission by: John Wang Harvard College Class of 2016 History of Art and Architecture Cabot House

Designated Area

Reclaimed Granite as textured benches

Granite Tile Paving Sawin House Frosted Glass Panel

Former Plot of 73 Brattle Former Building Footprint

Designated Edge

Illustrative view of In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle Street by John Wang, an undergrate student of Harvard College with a concentration in the history of art and architecture at Harvard College.

Shortlisted competition Above Ground, entry by Johanna Cairns and Taylor Baer, Harvard Graduate School of Design.

Shortlisted competition Chora, entry by Ruth Chang and Maia Peck, Harvard Graduate School of Design.

RADCLIFFE PUBLIC ART COMPETITION

191

LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DES ARTISTES URBAN DESIGNER AND ARCHITECT: Daoust Lestage LOCATION: Montreal, Canada COMPLETION: 2012 SIZE: 6.2 hectares RECURRING OVERLAYS: Festival of Light winter installation, Montreal Jazz Festival, art installations, performances BUDGET: C$ 95 million 0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT La Place des Festivals and La Promenade des Artistes are two significant public realm spaces within a major renewal project within the theatre district in Montreal known locally as ‘le Quartier des Spectacles’. Daoust Lestage was commissioned to formalise a network of open theatres surrounding Place des Arts, which is the cultural heart of Montreal. The project transformed existing surface car parks into outdoor theatres for everyday urban life and large-scale ephemeral events, such as the Jazz Festival and the Festival of Light. La Place des Festivals is the largest space, measuring 189 × 70 metres, and magnifies the ‘stage’ to the scale of the city. The space is divided through contrasting materials consisting of a gently sloping lawn with 350 trees that serve the day-to-day use of the site, frame the square, and provide a more intimate edge to the hard granite-paved area that comes to life with the largest interactive fountain in Canada. The fountain is critical to the success of the scheme because it provides animation and spectacle and makes the space feel busy when only a few people are coursing through it. Simply turning

off the fountains transforms the space into a city stage, capable of accommodating huge crowds for large-scale events such as the Jazz Festival. Red and white curtains of water and a 12-metre-high central ‘geyser’ fountain are programmed to respond to movement, light and sound, strengthening the sense of something new happening in the square, thereby staving off stagnation while fostering public interaction. Edging the square are four mega-lighting structures, which formalise the ‘wall and ceiling’ of the outdoor theatre and act as an urban beacon when seen from a distance. The 25-metre-high features immediately give the space a signature identity and signal to visitors that they have arrived. The other important element of La Place des Festivals are the Vitrines Habitées, which are two 40-metre-long × 4-metre-wide glass and aluminium boxes designed to allow views into and through the restaurants set within the boxes. By night these structures become part of the spectacle of the place as they whirr into life with the culture of the city.

Festival of Lights at La Place des Festivals.

Kurt Perschke’s Red Ball project installed at La Promenade des Artistes in 2014.

192

DAOUST LESTAGE

Lateral Office’s 2015 installation titled Impulse brings a playful component to La Place des Festivals to enliven the square during the winter months.

LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DESAuthenticated ARTI STES 193

The sloping lawn and steps overlook the fountain area and together provide a more relaxed space for people to use daily. The sloped character also functions as an amphitheatre during larger festivals and cultural events.

22 m

The central space is defined by a flexible hard landscape with fountains and a generous seating edge at the base of the sloped lawn area. The fountains add daily animation and provide a play feature in the summer months. The fountains can be turned off for large events such as the Jazz Festival that takes place in the space each year. Two restaurants edge the space to the north with views across the space. Twenty-five-metre-high light columns define the edge of the space and give the overall design a signature identity when approaching from afar, providing a ‘wall’ and ‘ceiling’ for the space.

27 m 50 m

Seven lightweight structures are arranged along the length of La Promenade des Artistes. The structures act as a scaffold to display art installations and exhibitions, while also accommodating kiosks during festivals and events.

40

m 3.5

m

5 9. m

m 45 3.0 m

30 m

30

m

0 17

9 18

m

m

m 70 9m

North

194

DAOUST LESTAGE

La Promenade des Artistes is a long linear space to the north of La Place des Festivals. The key feature that activates the space and provides a sense of ‘renew and refresh’ are the Vitrines Evènement, a series of seven lightweight architectural frames. Serving as a sort of scaffold, the frames define the edge of the space and support ephemeral installations that reinforce the cultural vitality of Quartier des Spectacles. Installations within the vitrines have ranged from Kurt Perschke’s Red Ball project to the 2011 art installation 21 Swings, which used the vitrines to create a fun and playful atmosphere. The interactive installation generates musical notes through the movement of the swings. Nine swings emulate a piano, six give the sound of a guitar and the remaining six create the sound of a vibraphone. The tone of the musical notes responds to the height and strength of the swing. The installation is designed to be a collective installation, with the best sound being generated when all of the swings are in motion. Again, user participation is a critical contributing factor to La Promenade des Artistes, as it is for La Place des Festivals. The success of both spaces is evidenced by the forward-thinking planning for flexibility in order to create platforms on to which the creative culture of Montreal could be exhibited. In many ways, neither of the spaces are ever complete because they are in a state of perpetual change, reinvention and creative expression. These projects represent the very best of designing for flexibility, curation and collective curiosity and invention. The people of Montreal have claimed the district as their own — the ultimate sign of success.

La Place des Festivals is able to accommodate enormous crowds for major cultural events like the Jazz Festival and still has more intimate areas where smaller events can take place and not feel inconsequential within the expanse of the space.

La Place des Festivals changes dramatically throughout the seasons, displaying one of the greatest light festivals in the winter months. A creative calendar of events, coupled with a flexible design, ensures that the space offers a lively public realm and an attractive draw for locals and tourists alike.

196

DAOUST LESTAGE

The 2011 art installation 21 Swings uses the scaffold of the structures on La Promenade des Artistes to create a fun, playful atmosphere. The interactive installation generates musical notes with the movement of the swings. Nine swings emulate a piano, six give the sound of a guitar and the remaining six create the sound of a vibraphone. The tone of the musical notes responds to the height and strength of the swing. The installation is designed to be a collaborative installation, with the best sound being generated when all the swings are in motion. La Promenade des Artistes creates a scaffold for the space to change through creative curation. Seven structures are repurposed with art installations, exhibits and displays and used as kiosks during festivals and events. Past installations include Guy Laliberté photos of an 11-day journey in space and Kurt Perschke’s Red Ball project.

LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS AND LA PROMENADE DESAuthenticated ARTI STES 197

TRAFALGAR SQUARE ARCHITECTS: Foster + Partners LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2003 SIZE: 4.8 hectares CONTEXT: Main civic square in central London adjacent to the National Gallery ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Atkins, PWP Landscape Architects RECURRING OVERLAYS: Cultural festivals, carnivals/fairs, winter celebrations

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Trafalgar Square could be described as one of London’s leading civic spaces that features on the itinerary of most visitors to London. The key design move that has enabled Trafalgar Square to serve as a flexible and programmable space capable of holding up to 15,000 people was the pedestrianisation of the road that separated the square from the National Gallery. The closure of this road as part of the Foster + Partners design not only united the square with the National Gallery, but it also created an upper terrace that is used for circulation, street performances and as a spectator area for large events and performances. The change from a road to a pedestrian area was transformational. Another change that redefined the role of the square was the Greater London Authority and the Mayor of London’s office assuming daily operational responsibility and control of it. This also included managing and overseeing the Fourth Plinth public art component of the square through a Commissioning Group Panel that directs and

oversees the installation of internationally renowned public art within the public realm. Since 2003 Trafalgar Square has hosted a multitude of events, covering every major cultural, religious and sporting achievement since that time. The square is also used for commercial events, rallies and demonstrations, all of which must be booked online through a comprehensive application form. The square is approximately 100 × 100 metres and includes two fountains designed by Edwin Lutyens, a large plinth topped with Nelson’s Column and four large-scale lion sculptures. Even though the square has a number of these fixed items, there is still a degree of flexibility to host various events. At the foot of a grand staircase leading from the square to the upper terrace, there is a 30 × 20-metre area that is level, open and suitable for installations, displays and performances. With events set up in this area, the grand staircase assumes a new role as an informal spectator seating area, the fountains act as dramatic ‘props’ on stage left and stage right and Nelson’s Column

The hedge maze occupies Trafalgar Square as a temporary installation.

Spectators fill the northern steps of Trafalgar Square for the annual Passion of the Christ performance. During performances the steps and elevated viewing deck at the National Gallery double as spectator space.

198

FOSTER + PARTNERS

5m

2m

Since 1999 an annual art installation has been installed on the Fourth Plinth. For 150 years there was debate about what should stand on the plinth. In 1998 three contemporary sculptures were commissioned and displayed temporarily. Following this, public opinion and guidance from Arts Council England determined that the installation on the Fourth Plinth should remain annual and temporary rather than a permanent sculpture. Since 2003 the installation has been commissioned by the Mayor of London.

100 m

85

Trafalgar Square is a major civic space in London, located adjacent to the National Gallery, which is one of London’s most popular art galleries. The design by Foster + Partners architects united Trafalgar Square with the National Gallery by removing vehicular traffic to the north of the square and converting the street to a pedestrian-only space.

m

20

m

The square consists of generous steps to the north that overlook two fountains designed by Edwin Lutyens, Lord Nelson’s Column surrounded by four large bronze lion sculptures and open space. The northwest corner of the site is held by the Fourth Plinth, which acts as a platform for an annual art installation.

North

TRAFALGAR SQUARE

199

and Big Ben as a dramatic backdrop. For larger events, the plinth of Nelson’s Column acts as a staging area. The space at the base of the steps becomes a generous standing spectator area with additional seating and gathering space on the steps with the upper terrace and the steps to the National Gallery completing the full spectator ‘arena’ space. In this regard, the change in level between the upper terrace and the main square is a contributing factor to the success of the programming of the square because it provides a natural stage/spectator relationship. The Fourth Plinth is of particular interest and importance to the square. Since 1999 the plinth has presented, on a temporary basis, a contemporary public art piece. The ephemeral quality of the Fourth Plinth brings added animation, anticipation and change to the space. In 2009 Antony Gormley presented One and Other on the Fourth Plinth, which introduced a new manifestation of the temporary installation and the activation of public space. For 100 consecutive days, over a 24-hour period, a member of the public would occupy the Fourth Plinth for an hour. This, more than any inanimate object that has been placed on the plinth, created a spectacle and engaged an audience largely because it changed frequently and because it played on one of our most basic characteristics: curiosity. Visitors and locals alike were drawn to the installation because they were being entertained and amused, even their beliefs challenged. Moreover, the installation was changing hourly, so a return visit would result in a different performance. The Fourth Plinth is still one of the only typologies of this kind. However, the model has resulted in a multitude of ‘pavilions’ and temporary installations around the world.

Between 1996 and 2003 Foster + Partners dramatically transformed Trafalgar Square by removing traffic between the square and the National Gallery at the northern edge of the square. The upper terrace now doubles as a flexible space, where street artists and buskers often perform. The images above show the ‘before’ and ‘after’ of the upper terrace of Trafalgar Square between the Square and the National Theatre.

200

FOSTER + PARTNERS

Trafalgar Square functions as a prime civic space in central London. The square changes throughout the year through numerous cultural celebrations, artistic installations, sponsored events and peaceful protests. The Trafalgar Square Christmas tree has been gifted to the people of London from Oslo, Norway, since 1947. It is in the square from early December to early January. How a space accommodates these fixed annual set pieces is also an important element of staging urban landscapes.

TRAFALGAR SQUARE

201

The Fourth Plinth is an annual art installation that sits on the northwest corner of Trafalgar Square. A new installation has been installed each year since 1998. The plinth was empty for 150 years, due to insufficient funds to erect an equestrian statue of William IV.

1999: Ecce Homo by Mark Wallinger. 2000: Regardless of History by Bill Woodrow. 2001 Monument by Rachel Whiteread. The Fourth Plinth remained empty until 2003 when the Greater London Authority and the Mayor of London assumed control of Trafalgar Square and the Fourth Plinth. 15 September 2005 to late 2007: Alison Lapper Pregnan’ by Mark Quinn. 2007: Model for a Hotel, formerly Hotel for the Birds by Thomas Schütte.

202

FOSTER + PARTNERS

6 July to 14 October 2009: One and Other by Antony Gormley. 24 May 2010 to January 2012: Nelson’s Ship in a Bottle by Yinka Shonibare. 23 February 2012 to April 2013: Powerless Structures by Michael Elmgreen and Ingar Dragset. 25 July 2013 to 17 February 2015: Hahn/Cock by Katharina Fritsch. 5 March 2015 to 6 September 2016: Gift Horse by Hans Haacke. 29 September 2016: Really Good by David Shrigley. 28 March 2018: The Invisible Enemy should Not Exist by Michael Rakowitz.

TRAFALGA203

SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: GROSS.MAX. LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2004 SIZE: 2500 square metres CONTEXT: Adjacent to the Southbank Centre in central London RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer food market, installations as part of the London Design Festival

0

250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Southbank Centre Square sits to the southeast of the Southbank Centre, formerly known as the Royal Festival Hall. The square is approximately 100 metres in length and between 25 and 35 metres wide. It was identified in the Rick Mather Architects masterplan that there were conflicts around the Southbank Centre between cars and pedestrians, predominately related to circulation, navigation and movement. The masterplan reorganised the site so that all of the entrances to the building were at ground level and that a mix of uses such as cafes, foyers and retail space all related to the arts were installed. The new active ground-floor uses diversify the user groups visiting the Southbank Centre and extend the times when people visit the site. This move has had a profound effect, evidenced by the sheer volume of people at the Southbank Centre at any given time. Additionally, this has elevated the importance of the public realm, namely the Southbank Centre Plaza to the southeast and Festival Riverside that fronts on to the Southbank Walk and the River Thames.

The Southbank Centre Square was designed by GROSS.MAX. as part of the first phase of the masterplan. The square is paved in natural stone, with reflective modules interspersed throughout the square, which reflect the colourful lighting at night adding to the atmosphere of the space. Additionally, there are five bands of lights incorporated into the ground plane that act as an ‘equaliser’ on a stereo to reflect the sounds of performances that are taking place inside. The dynamic lighting feature pulses with the volume and crescendos of the performances, powerfully linking the inside with the outside. During the opening ceremony, the square became a spectator area as film footage was cast across the southern façade of the building. Three light columns with a spectrum of filters hold the southern edge of the square and create a festive and playful atmosphere by night. The lower ground floor of the building is an active space that spills out on to the square and provides al fresco dining. Since the square opened in 2007, it has acted as a flexible space to extend the

Bands of lighting within the space perform like an ‘equaliser’ on a stereo in response to the performances taking place within the building, bringing the inside outside and connecting the square to the building in a visually interactive way.

Projections on to the façade of the Southbank Centre at the opening of the refurbishment of the building. The space to the south of the building became a spectator area to watch the show.

204

GROSS.MA X.

25 m

The square was designed by GROSS.MAX. and includes a homogenous paving detail, interspersed with polished modules that reflect the light. Three multi-coloured light columns are located on the southern edge of the site. Five featured paving bands, including embedded light features, act as dynamic stereo ‘equalisers’ depicting the soundtrack of the performances taking place inside the Southbank Centre. 0 10 m

Jeppe Hein’s Appearing Rooms has activated the space every summer since the Southbank Centre retained the fountain as a permanent feature in 2006. The outer fountain walls create one large room, which is divided further by internal fountain walls to create four smaller rooms. The fountains reach 2.3 metres in height and randomly rise and fall to surround people that are interacting with the fountain. People wait for one of the fountain walls to disappear so they can move into the next room. The fountain engages a range of users from young children through to seniors. It measures 7 × 7 metres.

7m

m 35

7m

The square sits to the south of the Southbank Centre, formerly known as the Royal Festival Hall. The space was conceived as part of a masterplan for the site by Rick Mather Architects, which dropped an elevated road and opened up pedestrian connections between the Southbank Centre and nearby Waterloo Station. The square is bordered by the Hayward Gallery on the east and an elevated railway to the west.

North

SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE

205

Previously, the site was overshadowed by an elevated road with no active frontage at the ground floor. Reflective paving and multi-coloured light creates an interesting atmosphere in the night. The flexibility of the square means that temporary structures can be erected for community events and to act as an extension to the Southbank Centre. The food market is a regular feature from Friday to Monday. Large-scale installations often feature on the square as part of the London Design Festival that takes place annually in London in September. Shown here is Prototile by Amanda Levete.

206

GROSS.MA X.

arts from the Southbank Centre out into the public realm. During the London Design Festival, the space often hosts a contemporary sculpture designed by a leading UK architect. Throughout the summer, a weekend market is held in the square, which is popular with tourists and locals alike. Festival Riverside Square sits to the north of the building and consists of two public squares split across two levels. The upper level provides a wonderful perch overlooking the River Thames and the popular Southbank Walk, with ample bistro-style seating served by an indoor cafe. At the eastern edge of the square, there is a large open hard space at the interface with the Hayward Gallery. The space is too far from the cafe to extend the bistro seating, so it has ended up as a kind of leftover space. The open space would prove to be an ideal setting for the Jeppe Hein installation Appearing Rooms. The installation was a travelling art installation that migrated around Europe, activating frontages to art institutions with a playful grid of fountain partitions that invites views to participate with the art piece. In 2006 the Southbank Centre purchased Appearing Rooms and it has since become a harbinger of the summer months and warmer weather and is popular with people across all age groups and demographics. It is not uncommon to see people in dress trousers and shirts soaked through because they were having too much fun with the fountain and got stuck between Appearing Rooms. The fountain is visible from the lower level at the Southbank Centre Square, which pulls people to the upper level and into the Southbank Centre. Between the Southbank Centre Square, Festival Riverside and Appearing Rooms the public realm at the Southbank Centre creates an attractive and engaging complement to the more formal performances taking place inside.

When the Appearing Rooms installation is not in place, the upper terrace of the Southbank Centre is empty and open. Appearing Rooms is a magnet for people in the summer months, drawing people to the upper terrace. The empty space without the fountain is nothing more than a transitional space. Appearing Rooms becomes a destination on the upper Festival Riverside Square, dynamic, interactive and in a state of constant change. People often linger and watch the animation of Appearing Rooms trapping people in partitions of water, escaping to an empty room before the next wall of water appears. This idle people-watching creates critical mass and makes the space feel active. This confirms William H. Whyte’s observation that people attract people.

SOUTHBANK CENTRE SQUARE

207

NAVY YARD CENTRAL GREEN ARCHITECTS: James Corner Field Operations LOCATION: Philadelphia, PA, USA COMPLETION: 2015 SIZE: 2.02 hectares CONTEXT: Set within a 485 hectares urban development promoting business growth and smart-energy innovation RECURRING OVERLAYS: Hammock grove, bocce court, amphitheatre, social track, table-tennis, communal picnic table, fitness station BUDGET: US$ 9.6 million

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Central Green is a 2.02 hectares public space set within an ambitious new urban development in Philadelphia. The business campus has 11,000 employees and includes the $ 35 million office building at 1200 Intrepid, designed by BIG Architects and fronting Central Green. The design includes a series of individually programmed rooms, providing variety for the people that work at Navy Yard. While each room has a very specific use, collectively the spaces form one multi-functional park that represents a trendy working environment with flexible collaborative space, playful games rooms and collective dining experiences to keep the employee base developing ideas over lunch. The rooms provide a range of activities for different user groups. The space is contained by the Social Track, a .2-mile-long (320 metres) circular running track with three 2-metre-wide lanes and a metrics

marker that displays the time and gives runners a measure of the distance travelled. Within the social track, rooms for quiet reflection such as the hammock grove, the sun lawn/amphitheatre, open lawns, rain gardens and flowering meadows are coupled with active rooms such as table-tennis and bocce courts, fitness stations and a communal dining area. The individual rooms are held together with the use of a single yellow colour, used on the furniture, running lanes, tabletennis tables, signage, fitness station and the bocce balls. Dedicated parking for food trucks completes the range of go-to overlays to enliven public space. Central Green represents a shift in the design of active landscapes, encouraging users to engage with the landscape in a prescribed way. This case study is set apart from the other project examples because

The fitness station room at Central Green reinforces the sense of health and wellbeing that Central Green and the whole Navy Yard development promote. Fixed fitness features are complemented by flexible yellow ‘fitness furniture’.

Open lawn areas with canary yellow bistro-style chairs provide flexible and open lawn space to complement the programmed rooms and provide seating for lunch gatherings around food trucks.

208

JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS

Central Green is dramatically arranged in a series of nested rings that looks striking from above, while at ground level the circuitous path system that the circles create gives the impression that the park is bigger than it actually is.

NAVY YARD CENT209

Central Green is surrounded by a number of four-storey office buildings, including BIG Architects’ $ 35 million building at 1200 Intrepid, to house the 11,000 (and growing) employee base. In addition to a variety of rooms, Central Green includes 304 trees, 42 types of groundcover, 10,105 shrubs and more than 13,600 bulbs. It also has dedicated parking areas for food trucks. The park covers five acres.

North

210

JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS

Two bocce courts hold pride of place at Central Green, flanked by lawn space with bright-yellow Adirondack chairs for spectator seating and idle relaxation. The bocce courts are 15 × 2.5 metres, recessed into the groundplane, doubling as an informal seating edge. The courts sit within a 19-metre-diameter room.

A purpose-made fitness station with pull-up bars and other exercise equipment adds to the sense of health and wellbeing that Central Green and the entire Navy Yard development promote. Brightly coloured flexible ‘fitness furniture’ can be used for step-ups, crunches and other individual fitness regimes.

As a counterpoint to the active rooms within Central Green, the hammock grove provides a quiet and protected place of retreat and relaxation with six bright-yellow hammocks tucked within a pine grove. The ground plane is covered in pine needles, reinforcing the sense of being in a forest.

Three canary yellow table-tennis tables add to the Central Green brand and provide employees with a chance to compete with their colleagues.

The sun lawn is a raised amphitheatre with four terraced seating areas overlooking a small half-circle lawn ‘stage’. The structure houses restrooms and storage areas for Central Green, concealed by an elegant timber screen. The feature is 25 metres in diameter and the terrace seats are between 14 and 18 metres long × 2.5 metres deep (500 millimetres seat and 2 metres of lawn). The small stage is 3.5 metres wide × 15 metres long.

A bold x-shaped picnic table brings people together to continue discussing ideas and further the creative exchange of ideas. Each arm of the table is 6 metres in length and it sits within a 16-metrediameter room encircled by trees.

The social track is 100 metres in diameter and defines the core layout of Central Green. Three 2-metre-wide running ‘lanes’ and a metrics marker allow users to measure the distance they have covered while socialising with colleagues. Five laps around the track equals one mile. Timber loungers line the social track, acting as a relaxing spectator space.

Central Green provides a number of programmed rooms, as well as sustainable and diverse flowering and wet meadows. The rooms cover a range of uses from active to quiet: table-tennis, bocce, fitness stations, communal dining, an amphitheatre/sun lounge, a hammock grove, perennial meadow, wet meadow and open lawn areas. The smallest room, containing three table-tennis tables, is nine metres in diameter and the wet meadow is 36 metres in diameter. A social track structures the space. The design of the park is a deliberate external representation of the hipster workspace — flexible, fun and intended to foster self-expression to further creativity.

NAVY YARD CENT211

Aerial view of Central Green showing the various active and quiet rooms and the wet meadows, open lawns and perennial flowering meadows.

the programme is defining the ‘permanent’ spatial arrangement of the design, rather than a space being designed to accommodate events and programme, which may come later, implemented by a different agency when the landscape architect is no longer involved. This scenario often results in disparate activities, over-filled spaces with too much going on, and no sense of visual or aesthetic cohesion. Central Green avoids that by carefully determining the use, the space requirements for that use and then designing to those parameters, before emphatically uniting the uses with the single bold colour and geometry, the bright canary yellow that instantly brands the park and lifts the mood. Central Green challenges us to reconsider the role of the designer in shaping space. Is the role of the designer to orchestrate the activities of a space, calibrate the intensity from adrenaline-pumping to quiet reflection and predetermine the movement through the landscape analogous to a modern-day William Kent carefully curating the scenographic movement through the Rousham Gardens? Perhaps this is something landscape architects have always done and this approach to provide a series of set pieces, each with a creative name, is not novel in the world of design. However, Central Green has done something fresh and unique. It has not shied away from being prescriptive about defining a space around an activity. Flexibility does not need to feature here, because each type of use is neatly catered for and the design still demonstrates a sensitivity in its recognition that

212

JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS

people also need space where they can create their own fantasy and programme, moments of quietude and tranquility — moments of being, not doing. The diversity of playful rooms gives the sense of a lot going on even when the space is devoid of crowds of people, something that is important in the age of instant gratification and social media where success is measured on popularity, tweets and image posts. The approach to creating active rooms is becoming more common in urban public spaces, which I believe Central Green has influenced. Will the design of public spaces continue this trajectory, with creative efforts from design teams invested in devising the next best game to populate an active room, or will the ubiquitous food truck and tabletennis table drift away in favour of more unprogrammed open space? Can strong, bold prescriptive designs like Central Green adapt to respond to changing habits and behaviours, signalling a new type of pseudo-temporary landscape where a strong framework of ‘permanent’ rooms is implemented and the lighter, more easily swappable elements evolve to match the emerging raison d’être of social spaces?

Each nested ring has a specific social use to activate the space and encourage conversation and the exchange of ideas. The images clockwise from the top left show: the hammock grove nestled in evergreen pines, bocce courts with Adirondack chairs, canary yellow table-tennis tables, the Social Track with 2-metre lanes and a metric marker, the collective dining table and the terraced amphitheatre with a lawn ‘stage’.

NAVY YARD CENT213

THE GOODS LINE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: ASPECT Studios LOCATION: Sydney, Australia COMPLETION: 2015 SIZE: 500 metres in length and 15 – 25 metres in width CONTEXT: Elevated public space adjacent to cultural institutions such as the Powerhouse Museum, ABC studios and the University of Technology Sydney ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: CHROFI Architects RECURRING OVERLAYS: Table-tennis, children’s water play area, ‘Amphitheatre’ seating, communal dining, fitness stations, communal seating for 20 with power points and wifi and study pods BUDGET: AU$ 15 million

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Goods Line is an elevated public space in Sydney, that has been converted into a new civic spine from a former railway line. Before it was opened to pedestrians, the space had not welcomed people for a century and a half. The new linear space fulfills the vision of the New South Wales government to connect the areas of Central to Darling Harbour. In doing so, the civic spine now connects 80,000 students, locals and visitors to the destination attractions of Sydney. The Goods Line is flanked by Frank Gehry’s newest building for the University of Technology Sydney, dubbed the ‘paper bag’. The design represents a new shift in the design of public space by providing a series of ‘platforms’ for a variety of user groups. The platforms can be used in a variety of ways, including public entertainment, recreation, studying and cultural festivals, as well as prescribed uses such as play, tabletennis and fitness stations, communal dining for 20 people with power points and wifi and quieter ‘study pods’, as the design team describes them, under the shade of fig trees.

The project introduces a fresh nomenclature for this type of approach to design — social infrastructure. Social infrastructure suggests a deliberate design move by the landscape architect to inject the space with fixed programmes that establish a ‘social’ culture, where students, tourists and locals can hang out and spark new conversations and relationships. It is a modern-day nod to William H. Whyte’s central tenet of ‘triangulation’: the notion that when an event or programme is presented in public space, it offers the opportunity for people to strike up a conversation that would otherwise not happen. Terraced amphitheatre seating encourages students to linger in the space, idle passers-by might play a pick-up game of table-tennis while local families with small children develop a relationship as their children play together in the water play space. The variety of platforms provides a range of social experiences that cater to the individual and collective groups across a multitude of age ranges and social classes. According to the designers, ‘the strong overarching narrative of the

Table-tennis and raised lawn platforms hold the edges of the Goods Line, allowing the central walkway to remain a pulsing pedestrian link.

More intimate areas off the main circulation spine include spaces like the fitness station, set within trees and at a slightly lower level than the main route.

214

ASPECT STUDIOS

The aerial view of the Goods Line shows the amphitheatre seating, fitness station and the ‘seating for 20’ communal dining space that provides power points and wifi.

THE LINE 215 GOODSAuthenticated

Table for 20 with Power Points and Wifi 12 m

m 7.5 35 m

23 m

Children’s Water Play Space 7m 12 m

Table-tennis

8m

Terrace Seating and Steps 16 m 7m

Fitness Station 4m

42 m

The ‘Transformer’ Pavilion by Chofri Architects (not completed)

Table-tennis 6.5 m

Private Function

Music Concert

Outdoor Cinema

Large Function

Cocktail Bar

20 m

270 m

North

216

ASPECT STUDIOS

The ‘seating for 20’ provides a generous communal dining area and flexible gathering space, complete with power points and wifi, to encourage people to hang out in the space and foster a strong social culture in it. The terraced amphitheatre is used casually as a place to sit and socialise on any given day. The space can also have a more formal use, as illustrated here during an outdoor cinema screening. The central walkway remains open so that people walking through the space can stop and take in the show.

Goods Line is about the move from rail infrastructure to social infrastructure. It’s the movement of a new commodity: culture, creativity and community.’ The design represents the urban shift away from a place rich in industrial heritage to a place replete with ‘social interaction, creative industry and the promotion of innovation’. Due to the linear nature of the site, the design consists of a direct pedestrian and cycle route down the centre of the space with the social platforms holding the edges of the space. People can slow the pace and become spectators on the fringes of the central walkway. Beneath a healthy line of mature fig trees, elevated platforms extend through the trees to create intimate and quieter areas with generous seating space, the study pods. Visitors can step off the concrete walkway into planted areas where the historic railway lines intermingle with soft planting and bold, playful furniture — all branded in bright yellow. CHROFI Architects proposed to build a flexible pavilion structure called the Transformer on the western end of the Goods Line. The pavilion was never constructed but, had it been, it would have provided an internal flexible space for functions, events, cinemas, a cocktail bar and music concerts.

THE GOODS LAuthenticatedINE 217

SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Vetschpartner LOCATION: Zurich, Switzerland COMPLETION: 2014 SIZE: 1.6 hectares CONTEXT: Adjacent to the opera house ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Zach und Zünd Architekten RECURRING OVERLAYS: Burning of the Böögg, Circus Knie, Zurich Film Festival, live outdoor opera screening, winter market BUDGET: CHF 26.6 million

0

250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Sechseläutenplatz is the largest public square in Zurich and is located on the east shore of Lake Zurich. The Opernhaus (Opera House) and Bernhard Theatre buildings sit to the south of the plaza providing a strong edge to the space. Previously the site was a surface car park for the Opera House, before parking was pushed below ground as part of the project. During the construction of the underground car park, prehistoric pile dwellings were discovered, which led to the works being suspended for nine months for careful archaeological work to take place to preserve this important discovery. The artifacts uncovered in the dig are now a permanent exhibition accessed from a stand-alone building in the square that goes below ground to the excavation site. The brief for the project was to create a ‘place of international appeal’ that could provide a significant space for residents of Zurich and visitors alike. The space already hosted an annual tradition known

as Burning of the Böögg, which is winter in effigy in the form of a snowman that is burned during Sechseläuten in late spring (the third Monday in April) to mark the beginning of summer. As part of the design process, the design team analysed the multiple events that were taking place in the space to provide the infrastructure to facilitate these events. This included the integration of the anchors for the Circus Knie tent within the paving, which makes the circular diameter of the circus tent visible in the ground plane with anchor covers, and 26 bronze plaques that make reference to the city’s history. It was the government’s vision that events could be held in the square for up to 180 days per year. The main events include the Circus Knie, Zurich Film Festival, winter markets with up to 100 stalls, the Burning of the Böögg and the open-air screening of opera performances. Clear parameters also state that the square must have full public access for at least 120 days, functioning as the main public

The space sits adjacent the opera house and Lake Zurich. The scale of the space accommodates the Circus Knie and ‘pebbles’ of tree planting provide a more human scale. The design incorporates the required anchor points for the tent into the permanent design of the space.

The Christmas Fair provides up to 100 stalls and an ice-skating rink, creating a strong seasonal atmosphere and serves as a destination in the winter months.

218

VETSCHPARTNER

The House of Switzerland transformed Sechseläutenplatz for the 2014 European Athletics Championship in Zurich as a dynamic meeting point for the duration of the championship.

square. Summer events are, therefore, restricted to certain areas of the square. The design of the Sechseläutenplatz is characterised by a hardpaved open area that is made up of 110,000 Vals quartzite paving modules measuring 130 × 1300 millimetres. The paving was rigorously tested for day-to-day slip resistance and cleaning, as well as ensuring the material would withstand the Burning of the Böögg, which required additional firebrick to be installed. The stone was also tested against elephant excrement, a likely occurence from the Circus Knie events. In total, the Val quartzite covers 12,600 square metres. In the centre of the space, a circle of textured quartzite marks the location of the Burning of the Böögg during the annual Sechseläuten festival. On the edges of the site, five amorphous pockets of soft underfoot paved areas coupled with moveable chairs and tree planting give the square a more intimate feel for day-to-day use and bring an important human scale to the space. These ‘pebbles’ are planted with 21 red

oak trees and 35 tulip trees. Two of the ‘pebbles’ are associated with the two cafes that are in the space, which also serve as access to the 299-space car park over two levels. The moveable chairs often spill out of the tree-planted ‘pebbles’ as people are free to arrange them across the square to suit their personal seating preferences. There is a fountain in the northern portion of the square closely linked to the cafe and tree-planted areas. The fountain can be programmed to a piece of music and the individual fountains can reach eight metres in height. Parents can sit under the shade of the trees and watch their children interact with the fountain, making this an important feature in the space. A 50 meter long bench holds the southern edge of the space, acting as a sculpture when not in use. The integration of infrastructure at Sechseläutenplatz facilitates the various events with rooms under the square that provide the hidden systems for lighting, the distribution of power for events and the control rooms and pumps for the fountain.

SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ

219

The Sechseläuten is a traditional holiday that takes place in the spring each year in Zurich. The climax of the festival is the Burning of the Böögg, where an effigy of a snowman is set alight with explosives.

220

VETSCHPARTNER

Sechseläutenplatz operates on two levels to create a space for events and cultural celebrations as well as for the day-to-day. To break down the expansive character of the space, five ‘pebbles’ are planted with trees to create more comfortable and enclosed spaces, and moveable chairs allow people to occupy the space as they choose. The edge effect that the pebbles create is an important design consideration when creating flexible public space. People feel safe and comfortable under the trees but have an open, unobstructed view across the square.

57 m

The transformation of Sechseläutenplatz from a surface car park created a much-needed central public space for the city of Zurich. It serves as prime programmable space for large formal events, provides the opportunity for people to experience the adjacent performances of the Opera House and to continue the long-standing cultural tradition of the Burning of the Böögg. Although the space hosts a wide array of events throughout the year, the square must remain without any events for 120 days per year.

100 m

50 m

170 m

North

Sechseläutenplatz sits adjacent to Zurich’s main Opera House (Opernhaus) and the open expanse of Lake Zurich. It is the largest open space in Zurich.

The transformation of the space from a surface car park to Zurich’s largest open space was afforded by the logic to give the space to people and put the cars below ground.

SECHSELÄUTENPLATZ

221

At the centre of the square, a textured circle demarcates the staging of the Burning of the Böögg, an example of how programme articulates the space. Smaller articulations in the paving are formed by the anchor points for the Circus Knie tent. This type of integrated infrastructure demonstrates the shift in public space towards functionality coupled with aesthetics. Built-in infrastructure is placed throughout the plaza to provide access points to power and water supplies to ensure the square can be fully activated with events and cultural celebrations.

222

VETSCHPARTNER

Each summer live streaming of the opera takes place in the plaza. The physical connection between the inside and outside becomes a powerful tool for spatial activation. Market stalls and festivals often feature in the space, bringing a new experience to the city for the residents and visitors. The ‘pebbles’ break down the scale of the plaza to create more comfortable, human-scaled spaces. An access chamber is built into the plaza to maintain the pump room. The set-up for the annual Sechseläuten creates a spectacle in the space and reason for the community to convene in the plaza.

dLATZ

SECHSELÄUTENPAuthenticate 223

BENTHEMPLEIN WATER SQUARE

0°°

URBAN DESIGNER: De Urbanisten LOCATION: Rotterdam, Netherlands COMPLETION: 2013 SIZE: 7500 square metres CONTEXT: Urban location near a university RECURRING OVERLAYS: Sports, skateboarding, stage and spectacle of the water cycle BUDGET: € 3.4 million

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Benthemplein Water Square is a public space in Rotterdam, which doubles as an active square as well as a dramatic design for water attenuation. The first of its kind, the ‘water square’ retains rainfall from both the adjacent paving areas, and the adjacent buildings. Traditionally, this stormwater would be fed into the sewer system and discharged into adjacent canals or attenuation basins off site. The Water Square enables the adjacent buildings to be detached from the drainage system and, in doing so, creates a dramatic spectacle that categorically transforms the character, use and appearance of the space after a storm. Three sunken areas, programmed with sports courts, skateboard areas and an open platform for dances and performances, define Benthemplein and structure the space. Seating steps and lounger terraces face on to the spaces, providing space for relaxing and socialising and for spectator seating areas. During cloudbursts, opendrainage channels direct water into these sunken spaces, flooding the sports courts, platforms and seating areas, creating a reflective

surface that picks up the movement of the clouds and creates an added dimension to the space. What was previously an active central area is now a void, with the activity transferred to the interstitial spaces between and around the charged attenuation areas. Two shallow basins receive adjacent surface water drainage and the central feature, which is deeper than the other basins, is filled when the rain falls consistently for a longer duration. The basins are fed by oversized stainless steel channels intended to make the water cycle visible and an inherent part of the space. The design of the channels also enables skateboarders to engage with the edges of the channels so that the features serve to activate the space during days without rain. The stainless steel channels are fed by a ‘rain well’, a pipe connected to an undergound storage tank. When it is full, the water rises to the pipe and down the stainless channel. The water from the well is actually water from the adjacent buildings that is channelled below ground before resurfacing in the well. The ‘water wall’ fills the deep basin in the centre of the space and emulates the intensity of water

The dry basin provides a performance platform with stepped seating and spectator areas.

The sunken public spaces act as large water-retention basins, capable of holding 1.7 million litres of water during periods of heavy rainfall.

224

DE URBANISTEN

This sequence of visualisations demonstrates how the space is transformed by a rain shower and how people are able to interact with this natural phenomenon.

Water fills the plaza from water gathered from nearby buildings and the adjacent surface during periods of deluge. The diagrams above illustrate the water movement strategy to fill the attenuation basins.

Water forms one element of the activation strategy of the site, but during dry periods the space operates on a number of levels to allow students and the community to engage with the space.

The process of directing water to the basins is made visible, adding to the event and spectacle of the space changing from an active plaza to a water-filled and reflective space. The process of making water drainage visible is a less overt form of spatial activation, yet has a transformational effect on the space.

226

DE URBANISTEN

Three attenuation basins define rooms of activity on dry days, which include basketball courts, skate parks and a platform for performances, education and informal gatherings.

29

m

22

17 m

m

32 m

14 m

22

m

14 m

17 m

The Water Square is an interconnected system of water attenuation, where the process of collecting water animates the space with channels of captured rainwater and attenuation basins that are ball and wheel-sport courts when the basins are not charged with water.

The surrounding architecture plays a critical role in the operations of the Water Square. The buildings create enclosure and definition to the square as well as capturing rainwater to transform the square’s three basins during a storm.

North

BENTHEMPLEIN WATE

227

Primarily, the use of the space is sports-driven, including ball and wheel games. The space also provides a platform and a flexible stage for a multitude of events: a spontaneous skate contest, baptising ceremonies and outdoor church services conducted by the adjacent local church including a piano concert. Additionally, markets and neighbourhood summer fairs in the space are often organised by the community.

The impermanence and temporality of the water’s transformation of the square signals a new precedent for activating public space. In this instance, it changes not just the use but the atmosphere and emotive qualities of public space.

falling from the sky through a series of outlets that spill water depending on the intensity of the storm. After a storm, the two shallow basins discharge into an underground filtration system, which naturally seeps back into the water table. After 36 hours the central basin dissipates back into the open water system of the city to prevent water stagnation and avoid any water-borne bacteria from forming. The ‘water square’ has introduced an alternative method to the traditional means of spatial activation by making visible the water cycle. Aside from the powerful and important environmental message that the Benthemplein Water Square communicates about urban cooling and the natural systems at play, the square is primarily a social space. For the majority of the time, the space is active with ball games, wheel sports and informal performances and there is a permanence about the life of the space. Following a storm the space is transformed, introducing a peaceful temporality with the reflective

surface of the attenuation basins. What was once an active, noisy and kinetic space is suddenly devoid of movement, sound and human interaction. As the water slowly dissipates, the active life of the space returns and the cycle repeats itself. Further, the space is never in a static state. It is either animated by activity, sports, performances and idle conversation or it is in a state of transformation with flowing water, dramatic cascades and the emergence of reflective pools. This project, more than any other case study in this book, points to a new paradigm in the melding of culture and ecology, of human interaction and natural systems. It is weather as event, climate as change.

BENTHEMPLEIN WATER SQUARE

229

MORE LONDON LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: Townshend Landscape Architects LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2005 SIZE: 7500 square metres CONTEXT: Riverside commercial development adjacent to the office of the Mayor of London and UNESCO World Heritage Sites Tower of London and Tower Bridge ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Foster + Partners masterplan RECURRING PROGRAMME: Outdoor cinema, fitness classes, theatre performances, temporary art installations, travelling photography, Mayor of London Thames Festival

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Scoop is the central space of the More London development on the Southbank of the River Thames in London. More London was masterplanned by Foster + Partners and includes the headquarters of the Greater London Authority, the office of the Mayor of London, also designed by Foster + Partners. More London is adjacent to London Bridge Station, one of London’s busiest multi-modal transport hubs. As for Potters Fields Park (see p. 108 – 121), the UNESCO World Heritage Site of Tower Bridge acts as the backdrop to the project, informing the overall layout of the masterplan and the landscape. The Tower of London sits across the river from More London. Below the open space are a number of basement offices, therefore Townshend Landscape Architects designed a solution to deliver natural daylight to the underground meeting rooms. Rather than creating a utilitarian aperture, the designers developed a stepped outdoor auditorium capable of hosting concerts, performances and outdoor

cinemas for up to 800 people. Additional events include temporary art installations, exhibitions, drama and educational programmes to bring tourists, local community members and employees from the adjacent offices into the space. In particular Southwark Theatre’s Drama Education Partnership holds local fitness classes, free film screenings, theatre and music performances in addition to the Mayor’s Thames Festival. The Scoop also hosts the London Bridge City Summer Festival and a Christmas market. The calendar of events that take place in the Scoop allows a playful and varied sense of community to emerge. Whether it is a lunchtime fitness session or a staged performance, the Scoop brings a diverse mix of people into the heart of what is otherwise a corporate setting in the shadows of London’s political power. The Scoop holds approximately 100 events per year and approximately 25 per cent of those are repeat events, both monthly and annually. A team of three

The Telectroscope by artist Paul St George was a temporary installation in 2008 that allowed Londoners and New Yorkers to connect in real time.

London Riviera at More London sits to the north of the Scoop and activates an open paved area. It serves breakfast, lunch, dinner, drinks and coffee and adds free summer entertainment.

230

TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

The Scoop is a central performance space in the More London development adjacent to the River Thames, the office of the Mayor of London and the backdrop of the World Heritage Site Tower Bridge and Tower of London. The amphitheatre provides south-facing seating and a spectator area for performances. The sunken area also allows natural daylight to reach the offices beneath the plaza.

MORE LONDON

231

To the south of the Scoop, structured bands of planting and seating beneath the shade of semi-mature oak trees provide the space with an important human-scale edge condition with an intimate, planted feel.

m 20

The Scoop is a sunken amphitheatre that functions as a lightwell to allow natural daylight into the basement offices below the adjacent plaza. Twelve amphitheatre seats measuring 800 × 400 millimetres overlook the open, flexible performance space.

36 m

On the upper terrace of More London, four bands of fountains activate the space. Two-metre-wide seats act as platforms for people to relax comfortably in the space.

8m

16 m

More London is a contemporary urban development masterplanned by Foster + Partners on the Southbank of the River Thames. The Greater London Authority building is the office of the Mayor of London and sits adjacent to the Scoop, a sunken amphitheatre in the heart of the plaza.

232

TOWNSHEND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

North

organises and facilitates the events: Head of Events and Communications, Events Manager and Assistant Communications Manager. The Scoop is actively promoted on a dedicated website, communicating weekly events and happenings in the space, which are all free-ofcharge and open to the public. The space is managed and maintained by dedicated cleaning, engineering and security teams. Most of the events that take place in the Scoop are designed by others, including set design and facilities. The Scoop team has marquees, which are stored near the facility in the estate office. The budget for the Scoop and the associated events is generated from a service-charge contribution from the tenants of the More London development. Additionally, the space generates an income from branded promotional events. The open space between the Scoop and the River Thames, called More London Riverside, hosts travelling exhibits and cultural installations. During the summer months the London Riviera bar and coffee shop provides a relaxed atmosphere with deckchairs and palm trees. The London Riviera is the latest addition to More London, reinforcing the acceleration of the activation of this public space with overlay events and installations. More London and the Scoop demonstrate the agency of the public realm to create meaningful places that draw communities together. The sustained efforts of a dedicated team to enliven the space ensure that there is always variety to generate renewed interest and anticipation for those that frequent the space daily and those visiting for the first time.

The Scoop was designed as a lightwell to deliver natural daylight into the meeting rooms beneath the plaza. Rather than an engineered response, the landscape architects designed an amphitheatre and stage capable of holding 800 people. The Scoop has an established calendar of events to ensure something is always happening in the space to enliven More London and encourage the community to come together.

MORE LONDON

233

BRYANT PARK URBAN DESIGNER: OLIN LOCATION: New York, USA COMPLETION: 2013 SIZE: 4 hectares CONTEXT: Adjacent to New York Public Library ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: William H. Whyte RECURRING OVERLAY: HBO Summer Screen, winter market BUDGET: US$ 18 million

0

250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Bryant Park is located between Fifth and Sixth Avenues and 40th and 42nd Streets in Midtown Manhattan. The New York Public Library sits to the east of Bryant Ppark, providing a backdrop to the open lawn space. The Park’s simple arrangement is one of its great successes. The space consists of a slightly sunken central lawn space measuring 91 × 65 metres. The northern and southern edges are lined with three rows of mature London Plane trees on either side, towering over the lawn and bringing a comfortable human scale to a space surrounded by Manhattan skyscrapers. The relationship between the open lawn and the shaded edges exemplifies the edge effect explained by Jan Gehl in Life Between Buildings.1 People sit under the protection of trees, overlooking the sun-drenched lawn. This spatial relationship, coupled with the change of level, is a critical consideration when designing spaces to be flexible enough to accommodate cultural events and installations. The rich edge condition creates an attractive and comfortable space for the day-to-day use of the space during the times when the larger flexible spaces are not used for events or programmed activities.

Bryant Park has not always been the successful, attractive, must-see park that it is today. In the 1970s the park was derelict, neglected and considered unsafe. Police barricades became necessary at all entrances to the park after 9.00 pm. An initiative to transform the park over a four-year period from 1979 to 1983 consisted of a series of programmed cultural overlays that included book and flower markets, cafes with moveable bistro-style chairs, proposed by Laurie Olin, and other entertainments. This coincided with the New York Public Library’s plans to renovate the buildings and improve Bryant Park. William H. Whyte analysed the site and concluded that aspects of the existing condition of the site were reinforcing the unattractive appearance and uses of the park. He suggested the removal of iron railings and overgrown landscape to make the space more accessible, both visually and physically. Laurie Olin and his team then redesigned the park to have more visibility, to feel safer and to invite the public in. The ASLA identified Bryant Park as a ‘landmark experiment in design and social program-

The HBO Bryant Park Film Festival began in 1993 and has taken place annually since then.

Some say that the public/private partnership model puts too much programme and events into Bryant Park. The day-to-day use of the park is equally important and the moveable chairs allow people to make the space their own.

234

OLIN

The HBO Summer Film Festival is one of the most popular events at Bryant Park. The outdoor cinema has inspired a similar use in other major cities as a method of bringing people together in public spaces.

ming created in response to sociology and behavioural research’, which was largely led by the work of William H. Whyte. In addition to the physical improvements — introducing more entrances, access ramps and paths to improve circulation, and public restrooms — planned programming, entertainment and concessions were an important consideration for the design team. The central lawn was enlarged and the edge condition was improved with two 300-foot perennial borders designed by Lynden Miller that are visible throughout the park. The lawn is in fact a green roof, sitting atop the extension of the New York Public Library, where more than three million volumes are stored. Since its completion, the park continues to sustain a year-round calendar of events, including concerts, performances, ice-skating rink, winter markets and outdoor cinema. The HBO Bryant Park Film Festival began in 1993 and has taken place annually since then. The use of outdoor film at Bryant Park has inspired the enlivenment of many

similar spaces around the world, now a reliable device for activating public spaces. A key initiative of the design team was to ensure that Bryant Park was sustainable economically. To achieve this, the restoration of the park involved introducing a new era of financing public spaces through public/private partnerships. Bryant Park is managed by a not-for-profit private company, originally organised to generate private funds for the restoration of the park. The corporation, in partnership with the New York Parks Department, agreed to take over the park for $ 1 a year for 35 years to manage and activate it. The company is responsible for maintenance of the space and programming, which is entirely financed by private equity, with a significant portion generated from local merchants, property owners, neighbours and citizens. It is the largest organisation in the USA to manage a public park with private funding. When it opened in 1991, it had a budget six times greater than the city’s budget for maintaining the park

BRYANT PARK

235

The central lawn is slightly sunken from the treelined edges and measures 85 × 55 metres. Due to the intensity of use throughout the year, the turf is replaced annually.

m 55

Outdoor film at Bryant Park has inspired similar use in many spaces around the world. The films are shown throughout the summer on Monday nights. The lawn opens at 5 pm to allow people to gather and socialise before the film begins 30 minutes after sunset.

85 m

The open lawn fronts the New York Public Library, which provides the lawn with a distinct backdrop. The north and south edges of the space are defined by impressive rows of mature London plane trees. These tree-lined edges are critical to the space, creating dappled shade areas. Up to 2000 moveable chairs are in use around the park.

155 m

180 m

Bryant Park is surrounded by towering New York architecture, defining a profoundly important open space. It signals the necessity of flexible, open spaces that can host a multitude of events catering for different demographics and cultures. One of the challenges of the success of the park is turning down applications for events.

North

236

OLIN

before the public/private partnership was established. During the summer, the park employs about 55 people who manage security, sanitation, gardening and special events. Each year 400 chairs have to be replaced through wear-and-tear and up to eight are stolen. The Bryant Park Restoration Corperation maintains the number of chairs in the park at around 2000. The park offers free wifi funded through corporate sponsorship, encouraging visitors to linger in the park, contributing to the atmosphere and in turn attracting more people. 1 Jan Gehl, Life between Buildings: Using Public Space, Island Press: Washington, DC 2011 (6th ed.).

Programming has included events such as the Seventh on Sixth fashion shows (which no longer happens), the JVC Jazz Festival, the New York Times Young Performers Series, lunchtime concerts by Juilliard students, the HBO Bryant Park Film Festival on Monday nights, the Kaleidoscope Circus, boules and chess games and full-size temporary tennis courts. Year-long attractions are the Bryant Park Grill, the Bryant Park Café, and six kiosks.

The kiosks include Foccacia Fiorentina (pasta and sandwiches), Simon Sips (coffee), ice cream stalls and Café Crème (crepes, sandwiches and beverages). Bryant Park can be rented for private events, provided they are open to the public and approved by the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation and BPRC.

BRY237

In addition to the larger, more formal events such as ice-skating, the Christmas market and outdoor cinema, Bryant Park also provides smaller, more intimate events. These include the Reading Room beneath the trees, community concerts and the annual global event Diner en Blanc. Yoga and the square dance also happen on the lawn.

238

OLIN

SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT ARCHITECTS: Donald Insall Associates LOCATION: London, UK COMPLETION: 2000 SIZE: 3700 square metres CONTEXT: Adjacent to Somerset House, Courtauld Gallery and Kings College London ADDITIONAL DESIGN INPUT: Dixon Jones masterplan, OCMIS Fountain Designers RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer Series, Film4 Summer Screen and Winter Skate, Photo London, ‘Now Play This’, historically the London Fashion Week, bespoke events at a cost of £ 35,000

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Edmond J. Safra Fountain Court at Somerset House is one of London’s main public spaces. The courtyard is 65 × 48 metres and is enclosed by dramatic 18th-century facades. The courtyard is one of the first contemporary spaces in London designed as a flexible space and subsequently programmed with a range of activities, installations and performances. Writing for The Guardian in 2000, architecture critic Jonathan Glancey noted: ‘It will be one of Britain’s finest cultural venues and an example of how, across the country, we might begin to rethink the way we use public buildings, public space and the public realm.’ In the late 1990s Dixon Jones Architects was commissioned to develop a masterplan for Somerset House and re-establish the important 18th-century building as an attraction for London and a centre for the arts. Key to the vision of the masterplan was to transform the central parking area used by the Inland Revenue Service into a space that could be used by the public and would be capable of hosting open-air events and seasonal installations — by day a space sheltered from the noise and pollution of the major streets adjacent to Somerset House and by night a destination for ‘intelligent entertainment’.

Donald Insall Associates developed the design following the Dixon Jones masterplan. The courtyard is paved in a single granite surface that unifies the space and creates an uncluttered, flexible stage. At the centre of the courtyard, 55 choreographed water-jet fountains spray six metres into the air to animate the space on a daily basis, creating a playful atmosphere with children and families playing in the fountain. With the flick of a switch, the fountains can be turned off to create a 3700-square-metre stage for a multitude of events. In 2000, shortly after the completion of the courtyard, a temporary ice-skating rink was installed for the first time. The ice rink, now known as Skate, has taken place every year since and has become a popular destination between November and January. It has inspired ice-skating rinks in many of London’s best-known landmarks. What began as an experiment in space activation has become a place-making model for establishing a seasonal attraction across the capital. In 2001 the fountains were turned off to accommodate the first live music concert by the US band Lambchop, which again resulted in a recurring annual event called the Summer Series that showcases a

London’s Largest Living Room in the Edmond J. Safra Fountain Court, Somerset House, for the launch of the London Festival of Architecture 2008. Furniture designed by Studio Weave and Eley Kishimoto, Living Room carpet designed by Studio Myerscough. Creative direction by Gerrard O’Carroll. The Teaser is a light-box installation, a three-dimensional transformation of the book The Academic Year by Rut Blees Luxemburg and Alexander Garcia Duttmann and illustrates the flexibility that the fountains provide, with half of them left turned on for atmosphere and play.

240

DONALD INSALL ASSOCIATES

Bistro-style tables and chairs edge the fountains at Somerset House, providing overflow space from the cafe. Counterpoint dance performance in 2010 took place in the fountains, telling a compelling story of 21st century London with an all-female cast, choreographed by Shobana Jeyasingh, with the sound artist Cassiel.

range of performers for ten days in July. In 2004 the first Film 4 Summer Screen transformed the courtyard into an outdoor cinema with surround-sound and state-of-the-art projections. Now in its 14th season, the Film 4 Summer Screen runs for two weeks in August, screening 14 films across a range of genres and generations from classics to cartoons. In addition to the movie, DJs spin sets inspired by the films, which are followed by live introductions from producers or film stars. The Film 4 series is the largest outdoor cinema of its kind in London and often sells out immediately. London Fashion Week took place in the courtyard from 2009 to 2016 until it moved to Store Studios near Somerset House. Since 2015, Photo London has been held

in the courtyard in May, the largest photography exhibition of its kind in London. In addition to the staple events at the courtyard — Skate, London Fashion Week, Summer Series, Photo London and Film 4 — the courtyard is used as a platform for annual installations such as the London Festival of Architecture, which demonstrates the flexibility of the space as only some of the fountains may be turned off. Impromptu dance performances also take place within the fountain. With a standing capacity of 1500 and a seating capacity of 550, the courtyard can also be rented out for private events for £ 35,000.

SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT

241

65

m

48

m

The overall dimensions of the courtyard are 48 × 65 metres, which is all hard paving with natural stone. In the centre of the courtyard there are 55 water jets that add to the atmosphere of the space. The jets animate the space with white noise and children playing in the fountains and can be turned off to create a large flexible space for events.

18 m

48 m

The architecture that surrounds the courtyard is impressive and gives the courtyard an atmosphere of grandeur. The space is appropriately scaled to complement the character of the architecture.

The courtyard at Somerset House is one of London’s greatest open spaces and is located on the Strand, a lively street in central London. One of the campuses of King’s College London, part of the University of London, is adjacent to Somerset House, increasing the amount of footfall into the space. People can also walk through the courtyard to get to the Thames, where there is also the River Terrace and Café.

North

242

DONALD INSALL ASSOCIATES

The courtyard hosts a calendar of set events such as Skate, the Summer Series Music Festival, Film 4 Summer Screen, Photo London and London Fashion week, which has since moved out of the courtyard to Store Studios. In addition to these larger events, the courtyard showcases a multitude of smaller installations by emerging and established artists. Before it was transformed into one of London’s vibrant public spaces, it was a car park for the Inland Revenue Service, as seen in the photo above.

SOMERSET HOUSE FOUNTAIN COURT

243

DU MUSÉE AVENUE DESIGNER: Various LOCATION: Montreal, Canada COMPLETION: Annually since 2012 SIZE: 350 Square metres CONTEXT: Adjacent to Montreal Museum of Fine Arts RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer installation following pedestrianisation of the street BUDGET: C$ 25,000

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Du Musée Avenue is a 57-metre-long road in Montreal, Canada. The street is bordered by the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, the Pavilion of Canadian Art, the Claire and Marc Bourgie Pavilion and the Michael and Renata Hornstein Pavilion for Peace. Although the street is normally open to traffic, the edges of the street contain sculptures, transforming it into a sculpture garden associated with the Museum of Fine Arts. Since 2012, the street has been closed annually from May through to October to create a pedestrianised street, where an installation extends the idea of the sculpture garden. Each year, a design team is invited by the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts and the construction budget is funded and commissioned by the City of Montreal in association with the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts. The first installation was by Claude Cormier+ Associés, titled TOM (Temporary Overlay Marker). Using 3500 utilitarian highway markers, the street was transformed, inspired by the emotive qualities of passing through a field of daisies.

In 2013 Cormier experimented with TOMs II, this time drawing inspiration from Van Gogh’s painting ‘A Field of Poppies’. Densifying the number of TOMs to 6000, created an even more dramatic installation than in 2012. The team utilised the slope of the street so that for viewers looking up the street the silhouette of the backdrop of the Mount Royal Park designed by Frederick Law Olmsted was incorporated into the scene of poppies. Cormier continued his use of the TOM device in 2014, densifying the installation further to 10,000 TOMs, which created a work of art that reflected the craftsmanship of a Fabergé egg. This coincided with an exhibition of work by the artist Fabergé in the Museum of Fine Arts. Consisting of two-sided TOMs, the installation produced a different visual effect when viewed from the top of the street or the bottom. This encouraged visitors to walk up and down the street to engage with the installation from different angles and vantage points. In 2015 the installation was awarded to NIPPAYSAGE, titled Labyrinth. Visitors interacted with the maze, which wove both sides of the

2016: Dance Floor by Jean Verville Architects.

2017: TOM IV by Claude Cormier.

244

VARIOUS DESIGNERS

TOM IV in 2017, showing the street transformed into a performance space during the temporary installation.

street together, playfully introducing visitors to the 22 permanent works of art by Québécois, Canadian and international artists that can be admired in the Museum’s Sculpture Garden. Breaking the orthogonal geometry of the labyrinth, large bright-orange platforms created opportunities for performances and informal seats for people to relax and take in the atmosphere that was created by closing the street to cars and introducing the interactive art piece. Dance Floor, installed in 2016, built on the interactivity of Labyrinth to create a bold installation that invited visitors to dance across the avenue. Designed by Jean Verville Architects, over 5000 footprints created a striking installation, rendered in a shimmering metallic hue; the pattern was reminiscent of hammered gold — a nod to the theme

of the Museum’s Pompeii exhibition that was running concurrently. On the edge of the street, cubes were installed for seating or as elevated dance platforms. 2017 saw the return of Claude Cormier’s TOM installation, this time taking inspiration from the firework celebrations during Expo 67, celebrating the 50th anniversary of this seminal event. Double-sided TOMs swirl up and down the street in a spectrum of colours, with bright-pink platforms placed throughout the street for seating, perching and incidental performances. The installation is largely something to look at, but the transformation of the vehicular street to a public space enables the space to host events and concerts, making the installation something more than just a visual art piece.

DU MUSÉE AVENUE

245

The street measures 57 × 6.2 metres and is edged by soft grass areas and sculptures and tree planting. There is a significant topographic change to the street and a backdrop of Mount Royal Park.

6.2 m

57 m

The street is framed by the Pavilion of Canadian Art, the Claire and Marc Bourgie Pavilion and the Michael and Renata Hornstein Pavilion for Peace. The street, normally open to traffic, is closed in the summer for the installation.

North

Illustrative plan of the 2017 TOM installation courtesy of Claude Cormier + Associés.

246

VARIOUS DESIGNERS

2012: TOM (3500 Temporary Overlay Markers) by Claude Cormier, inspired by walking through fields of daisies. 2013: TOM II (6000 Temporary Overlay Markers) by Claude Cormier, drawing inspiration from van Gogh’s ‘Field of Poppies’ painting. 2014: TOM III (10,000 Temporary Overlay Markers) by Claude Cormier drawing inspiration from a Fabrege Egg. 2015: Labyrinth by NIPPAYSAGE inspired by Mount Royal Park and the decorative texture of the trees. 2016: Dance Floor by Jean Verville Architects, the gold colour inspired by the Pompei exhibit. 2017: TOM IV by Claude Cormier taking inspiration from the fireworks as part of the 50th anniversary of Expo 67. 2018: Moving Dunes by NÓS Architectes and produced in collaboration with MU is inspired by From Africa to the Americas: Face-to-face Picasso, Past and Present being presented at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts.

DU MUSÉE AVENUE

247

BERGES DE SEINE ARCHITECTS: Franklin Azzi Architects LOCATION: Paris, France COMPLETION: 2013 SIZE: 2.3 kilometres long and 4.5 hectares CONTEXT: South bank of the River Seine opposite the Tuileries Gardens and the Louvre RECURRING OVERLAYS: Summer installation following the pedestrianisation of the street CONCEPT: Lille3000/ Didier Fusillier, Thierry Lesueur DESIGN: Azzi Architecture/ Franklin Azzi, Anne Magdalena PRODUCTION: Carat Sport/Olivier Bischoff, Julie Gavrel GRAPHICS AND COMMUNICATION: Change Is Good/José Albergaria, Rik Bas Backer ORGANISATION: Artevia/Alain Thuleau, Pierre Grand, Annette Poehlmann BUDGET: € 35 million

0

250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The promenade Berges de Seine is a public open space created by the closure of a former highway that ran along the left bank of the River Seine. The public promenade runs from the 7th arrondissement of Paris between Pont de l’Alma and the Musée d’Orsay, passes under four bridges, and sits across the river from the Tuileries Gardens near the Louvre. In 2001, Paris began to experiment with the closure of the highway by restricting traffic on Sundays, opening the promenade for pedestrians, runners and families. In 2008 the architect Franklin Azzi developed a vision for the promenade, creating a series of rooms along the 2.3-kilometre length of the promenade, all of which could be dismantled within 24 hours should the Seine flood, which it did spectacularly in 2018. It offers different experiences based on three themes: nature, sports and culture. A key feature of the promenade is the floating garden, which was designed by Jean Christophe Choblet and includes hammocks,

sun loungers, incidental children’s play features and a Tetris-style concrete block-seating area overlooking the river, 60 trees and extensive planting. Five tethered barges make up the gardens, which have been secured to the bottom of the river. The garden sits at the western end of the Berges de Seine; it bookends the space while a series of terrace steps that bridge over the promenade linking Berges de Seine to the Musée d’Orsay functions analogously at the eastern end of the promenade. The promenade has been designed as a series of rooms with a powerful introduction and conclusion through the steps and the floating garden respectively. Starting the journey at the eastern end of the promenade, the terrace steps arc over to promenade so pedestrians on Berges de Seine can continue along the promenade and exit onto the upper promenade using the retained highway off-ramps to access the Musée d’Orsay. The steps provide direct access to the museum,

Temporary games, art installations and painted graphic installations combine to create a playful and engaging 2.3-kilometre promenading experience along the south bank of the Seine.

Along the length of the Berges de Seine, shipping containers titled ZZZZ have been converted to flexible spaces that can be rented as offices, co-working hubs or for private parties. Working with wood engineer Jean-Louis Vigier, Franklin Azzi designed a simple stacked timber seat that is configured in various ways.

248

FRANKLIN AZZI ARCHITECTS

A view of the seating steps at the foot of the Musée d’Orsay with graphic installations on the road by Change Is Good.

BERGE249

To create a continuous journey along the Berges de Seine and provide access to the Musée d’Orsay, Franklin Azzi designed a stepped seating area that people on the promenade can walk beneath. The steps are used casually for socialising and relaxing as well as for formal events such as concerts and outdoor cinema. The artists of Change Is Good enlivened the road surface with patternation and a scale comparison study with different animals.

while also creating a comfortable area to sit and relax and take in the impressive ensemble of the river and the Tuileries Gardens opposite the river. After passing under the steps, visitors enter the first room of the promenade. The wide, open space is activated with a variety of shapes, games and typography painted on the road. This includes a large maze and a world map. A number of shipping containers have been redesigned to include generous windows and seating areas, and these can be rented as office spaces, co-working hubs and venues for parties. There is also an outdoor gym tucked against the existing retaining wall separating the upper and lower promenade. The first of a series of seats made of stacked timber is placed here and

250

FRANKLIN AZZI ARCHITECTS

continues along the full length of the promenade — a signature feature of the project. Passing under the Passerelle Léopold-Sédar-Senghor, an elegant pedestrian bridge, the second room includes five tipis, which can be reserved for meetings and gatherings. The floorscape has been articulated with a variety of painted life-sized animals to show a comparison of scales with humans, a long-jump metric and artistic pattern throughout. This room also features a 20-metre-long chalkboard as a temporal sort of graffiti wall. Shipping containers converted into cafes sit centrally in this room, with picnic tables with integrated board games and deck-chairs overlooking the river. This room remains flexible, showcasing a travelling fashion photography exhibition, for instance, when I visited. Public toilets and large bin stores have been tucked against the existing wall and a more permanent public toilet is integrated into the wall itself. The stacked timber benches are set up as parcours and fitness stations. Between Pont de la Concorde and Pont Alexandre III the promenade is transformed into a hub of restaurants, bars and cafes with a number of floating venues. The next significant experience is a play area and climbing wall at the base of Pont des Invalides. Designed as a bouldering wall, encouraging climbers to climb horizontally rather than vertically, this feature is one of the most successful aspects of the project, challenging adults and children alike through a sequence of climbing holds and rope features. Berges de Seine concludes with the verdant and effective floating gardens at Pont de l’Alma as a significant punctuation point to the playful, varied and imaginative spaces of Berges de Seine.

Temporary Tipis d’Anniversaire, or Birthday Tepees, can be hired out for parties. A 20-metre long chalkboard allows anyone to be a street artist. The simple inclusion of the chalkboard transforms the structural embankment wall into a feature of the Berges de Seine. Climbing play wall. A 100 m running track designed and installed by Change Is Good is located near the climbing wall play area. The Berges de Seine weaves play, sports, relaxation and nature to create a place for all. Hammocks on the floating gardens by Niki de Saint Phalle.

r-S

en

gh

or

The first stretch of the Berges de Seine is adjacent to the Musée d’Orsay. Seating steps connect Berges de Seine to the museum, allowing people to pass under the steps to continue walking along the river. Change Is Good created a series of painted installations including a maze, a world map and a life-size scale comparison that stretches from a whale to a penguin. There are a number of shipping containers for flexible uses as well as an open area for photo exhibitions. A 20-metre-long chalkboard at the base of the embankment wall transforms this otherwise empty structural wall into an ever-changing art mural.

30

m

Pa s

se

re

lle

Lé

op

ol

d-

Sé

da

362 m

m 23

Between Pont de la Concorde and Pont Alexandre III, the Berges de Seine is transformed as a food hotspot, with floating restaurants and takeaway food stalls with plenty of seating and deckchairs. Two floating restaurants — Rosa Bonheur and Flow — provide a more formal dining experience with lively views of the activity along Berges de Seine. 405 m

er

el

le

op

ol

éd

ar

gh

or

252

FRANKLIN AZZI ARCHITECTS

Pont Alexandre III

Po n

td

e

la

Co

nc

or

de

ss Pa

Lé

S d-

n Se

15 m

15 m

At the end of Berges de Seine, where the promenade meets Pont de l’Alma, is one of the main natural features of Berges de Seine called Jardins flottants (floating gardens) bearing the name of the late artist Niki de Saint Phalle. The city wished to pay tribute to the artist who passed away in 2002. The five interlocking barges each represent a characteristic of the landscape along the banks of the Seine. This includes the central island, which is mostly hard paving, the prairie island, planted with long grasses, the apple orchard island and the wild and naturalistic island for the birds. The floating gardens include hammocks, lounger seats, a stacked concrete seating area overlooking the river and incidental play elements.

170 m 365 m

ma l’Al

Invalides Pont des

North

de

7.5 m

5m 18.

111 m

t Pon

25 m

A small nook at the base of Pont des Invalides transforms the embankment wall into a climbing feature for children and adults alike. Designed as a type of bouldering wall, visitors traverse along the wall using rock-climbing holds, cable bridges and ropes. The route is designed so that all ages can use the climbing wall and transforms an otherwise dead space into a highlight of the promenade. There are two stand-alone play elements for younger visitors. There is also a fourlane 100-metre dash graphic installation designed by Change Is Good that passes under Pont des Invalides.

BERGE

253

SCHOUWBURGPLEIN (THEATRE SQUARE) URBAN DESIGNERS: West 8 LOCATION: Rotterdam, Netherlands COMPLETION: 1996 SIZE: 1.23 hectares CONTEXT: Adjacent to the municipal theatre, concert hall with restaurants and cafes RECURRING OVERLAYS: Installations, yoga, sports days

0

75 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Schouwburgplein translates in English to Theatre Square. The space sits at the heart of Rotterdam and is bordered by the city’s largest cinema complex, the city theatre, the music hall and is close to Europe’s largest port. New restaurants and cafes now surround the square, demonstrating the attraction and success of the space to transform the area into a place of culture and entertainment. In the words of the designer of West 8: ‘Nowhere else in the world is there a square so relevant to its context.’ The space was realised between 1991 and 1996 and, since its opening, it has hosted multiple installations, festivals and cultural celebrations. As I have noted in my introductory essay (The Rise of Flexible Space, see p. 10 – 19), Rotterdam’s Theatre Square has had a profound influence on the trajectory of the landscape architecture profession, ushering in a new method for the design of public space that privileges flexibility over fixity. The square may initially appear as an empty and simple space, but in truth it is an extraordinary urban platform upon

which the citizens of Rotterdam can express themselves and bring their own programme and entertainment. The design celebrates the ‘void’ at the heart of the city that is the result of the 1985 Inner City Plan that resulted in high-rise towers in this location. The space recognises the possibilities of an open space with a full view of the city that lies waiting for people, culture and creative prowess to bring life to the space. The main open area of the square measures 138 × 36 metres and up to 90 m wide at the southern edge, and is slightly raised above the adjacent surface to strengthen the notion of the space as the ‘city square’. The edges of the square are lit at night, giving the sense that the square is floating above the city. The space is defined by the theatre on the west side and 15-metre-high ventilation towers that are finished with LED lighting to form a digital clock across three towers. The striking feature of the space is the family of dynamic, participant-powered (coin-operated) hydraulic cranes that animate the space in a myriad of configurations and choreography. Reaching

The concept diagram by West 8 shows the layering of elements in the space and the playful activation of the plaza with spotlights.

The hydraulic cranes create spotlit pools of light on the surface.

254 WEST 8

A maze breathes new life into the space. The seating edge maintains the day-to-day use.

a maximum height of 26.5 metres, the cranes illuminate the square with pools of light, transforming people simply walking through the space into performers. The eastern edge of Theatre Square is the comfortable edge of the site. South-facing and therefore receiving lots of sunlight, its long bespoke benches provide visitors with various ways of sitting and watching people move through the space. The configuration of Theatre Square is predicated on the indeterminacy of uses at different times of the day and how the movement of the sun informs the uses of the square. The ‘stage’ area is articulated with chevron timber paving, which contrasts with the steel planks that run lengthwise across the site. A modest but successfully proportioned fountain at the southern end of the site provides activity and entertainment when the square reaches its full use in the summer months. A long linear service trench runs the length of the western edge of the square and electrical connections and mechanical anchoring points are incorporated into the

design of the raised platform, which allows the space to be easily activated with public events such as the Latin carnival, dance music parades, the World Harbour Days, the International Film Festival and informal gatherings, markets and artistic installations. The paradigm shift in conceptual design thinking that Theatre Square has introduced is couched in the place-making ideas explored by William H. Whyte, Jan Gehl and Fred Kent, who expound the idea that if a space is provided that people can adjust to suit their own individual uses, then they will. The square also demonstrates the power of ephemerality through installations, temporary events and pop-ups. The square provides spaces for people to experiment in, but it is also actively programmed to showcase a variety of installations. These in turn give the square a renewed appearance.

SCHOUWB

255

There are four kinetic cranes that are the signature elements of the space. Capable of reaching a maximum height of 26.5 metres, the cranes are like curious transformers overlooking the space and their form is changed by coin-operated machines. By night, they act as spotlights, changing pedestrians into performers.

95 m

48 m

36 m

21 m

The main open portion of the square is 95 × 36 metres and is paved in aluminium planks with platforms of timber laid in a chevron pattern. This portion of the square provides an open, flexible space overlooked by the seating edge and illuminated by the kinetic cranes.

6m

On the eastern edge of the space there is a zone with customised seating and 15-metre-tall ventilation shafts for the underground car park. These plinths provide a digital clock for the space.

138 m

90 m

The open, flexible area of the square measures 138 × 90 metres and is up to 90 m wide at the southern end. The eastern edge of the space is a spectator area where people can sit and watch people as performers on the plaza. A band of play fountains is located at the southern end of the square. There is a linear service trench on the western edge of the site that provides the space with a power supply for temporary events.

Schouwburgplein fronts the Pathé theatre in Rotterdam and was designed by West 8 as an urban stage and a space to celebrate the void in the city.

North

256 WEST 8

The Flying Carpet installation transforms Theatre Square and demonstrates how temporary installations can dramatically change the appearance of space to provide a sense of renewal and revitalisation. Other overlay installations include Rising Water sound installation by Amund Sjølie Sveen, which placed red triangular speakers in the space. Sports also feature, with basketball and a dunk contest.

SCHOUWB

257

CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES CIUDADANAS (CAAC) ARCHITECTS: Paredes Pino Arquitectos LOCATION: Córdoba, Spain COMPLETION: 2010 SIZE: 1.2 hectares CONTEXT: Adjacent to a hospital and high-speed railway station RECURRING OVERLAY: Weekly Market BUDGET: € 3.3 million

0

250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT The Centro Abierto de Actividades Ciudadanas or Open Resident’s Activity Centre (CAAC) occupies a triangular site in Córdoba, Spain, that measures 209 × 138 metres. The site sits in the context of new housing in close proximity to the Córdoba railway station, with connections to Madrid. The space also fronts a new hospital. It is a space of leisure, commerce and flexible use that acts as the urban heart of Córdoba for celebrations and community gatherings. Designed by Paredes Pino Arquitectos for the City of Córdoba, the project consists of a number of raised circular canopies that vary in height between four and seven metres to emulate the shadows cast from a forest. The canopies vary in diameter from seven to 15 metres so that as the sun moves across the sky, the shadows may overlap providing complete shade and shelter from both inclement weather and hot summer days to enable a market to take place on the site twice a week. The tops of the canopies are brightly coloured, making them visible from the adjacent residential buildings and turning the space into a landmark. The underside of the canopies is reflective white, which bounces light throughout the space. Rainwater is col-

Colourful canopies, mimicking the shadow of a forest, provide cover for a weekly market.

258

PAREDES PINO ARQUITECTOS

lected by the canopies and passes through the support of each canopy, and this prevents intense rainfall on the surface of the market square. Playful lighting is incorporated into the canopies to reduce additional clutter and to throw colour and varying intensity of shadows across the ground plane. While the canopies create a seemingly interconnected roofscape, they meet the ground plane in such a way that the space remains flexible. The ground plane is designed as a giant activity board with games set into the paving or painted on the surface. The ground plane also includes articulations in the paving to situate the market stalls when the surface is transformed from a place of movement and leisure to a place of commerce and employment. The paving includes colourful painted circles arranged in a large circle around the central support. A patchwork of rectilinear planting of varying shades of colour, both contrast with and complement the circular forms of the umbrella canopies. The edge of the market square is raised to create a seating edge and to establish a green planted perimeter to the space with trees and understorey planting.

The colourful canopies are the defining elements of the space. They are visible from nearby balconies and add to the character of the neighbourhood.

The CAAC exemplifies the approach of multiplying the ground, to create a dramatic space that remains open-ended and flexible. Through this flexibility the ground plane is multiplied and is, therefore, greater than the sum of its parts. The elevated canopies dramatically situate the project in the urban grain of Córdoba. However, the space remains relatively unfixed, inhibited only by the structural columns of the canopies. The project also demonstrates the successful design of flexible space to accommodate a fixed activity such as the market, while simultaneously designing for an unknown set of events and activities. The movement of the sun and the animation of shadows across the surface become part of the animation of the space. Devoid of any formal programme or planned activity, the space is in a state of constant change as the shadows dance and reconfigure across the surface of the market square.

CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES CIUDADA AuthenticatedNAS

259

The distinctive element at the CAAC is the use of circular canopies that vary in height between four and seven metres to emulate the shadows cast from a forest. The canopies vary in diameter from seven to 15 metres and display eight different colours. They collect rainwater that is directed to the centre of each canopy into a downpipe within the support column.

The CAAC plaza beneath the canopies has been designed as a playboard with various games and paving articulations that people can engage with when the space is not being used by the market, which happens twice a week. The canopy support columns are spaced circa 15 metres apart.

m 13 7

The square measures 137 × 208 metres in a triangular shape. The edges of the site are held by raised planters in a geometry as if the canopies were cut from the planters. The central area is covered by raised canopies to create a shaded area for the market.

15 m

208

m

The CAAC sits within a residential area near a major rail hub. The space fronts a recently completed hospital.

North

260

PAREDES PINO ARQUITECTOS

The canopies themselves change with lighting and shadows. The surface beneath the canopies is a type of gameboard, which also hosts a weekly market.

CENTRO ABIERTO DE ACTIVIDADES CIUDADA AuthenticatedNAS

261

SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK AT HUMBOLDT FORUM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS: relais Landschaftsarchitekten LOCATION: Berlin, Germany COMPLETION: 2009 SIZE: 4.7 hectares CONTEXT: Historic palace site, adjacent to Berlin Cathedral and edged by two canals BUDGET: € 1.4 million

0

250 m

BACKGROUND TO PROJECT As part of the construction of the Humboldt Forum, one of the most striking and symbolic places of the Berlin city structure became a public space for a limited time. During this transition phase, the design aimed to create an open system in which a wide range of intermediate uses as well as construction and excavation activities could be integrated. The scaffolding became legible through the wooden boardwalks, which functioned as spatial connection and tied the entire site together as lines of circulation but also provided a platform for socialising. These boardwalks passed through the site, lightly touching the ground to reinforce the temporary character of the project, while revealing the archaeological excavations of the former palace. These 2.5-metre-wide untreated European larch boardwalks converted to a structure through which the ephemeral ground below could be discovered and observed. The open-ended, unfinished qualities of the conceptual approach were expressed in the use of transitional low-cost materials, which corresponded to the flexible uses of the site. The boardwalks acted as guides for understanding the site in both its former state through the demolition of the Palace of the Republic and its exposed foundations, and the future of the site with

the construction of the Humboldt Box exhibition space and the construction of the underground station. After clearing the site and removing the asphalt pavement, the area level was lowered so that the boardwalks hovered about 30 centimetres above the ground. The archaeological excavation areas were framed and developed by the wooden platforms. Information panels were mounted along the boardwalks and provided information on the history of the place, on the demolition of the Palace of the Republic and the future plans of the Humboldt Forum. The base of the former national monument was accentuated as a raised terrace and was available for cultural activities. The stairs adjoining the cafe of the Kunsthalle were designed as a wooden seating area, which invited passers-by to relax and linger. The design addressed the perception of the contextual present and the temporality of the site. Therefore, authentic relics such as the exposed foundation walls of the city castle (Stadtschloss), the bounding walls of the Palastwanne, i. e. the trough-like foundations of the Palace, as well as the pedestals of the former Kaiser Wilhelm National Monument were highlighted and conveyed the historic importance of the precinct. Within the bounding walls, the topography was slight-

The temporary walkways gently touch the ground, reinforcing the temporary nature of the space.

262

RELAIS LANDSCHAFTSARCHITEKTEN

Illustrative plan of the temporary park with all three phases complete. This sequence of images, from left to right, shows the three phases of the project.

ly inclined towards the River Spree and a play and sports lawn was laid, framed by the existing foundation walls of the palace. At this point, the wooden boardwalks aggregated and consolidated to form a generous sun deck and wooden promenade along the banks of the Spree. The design, in this historically and culturally dense context, aimed to reveal the hidden, establish a certain openness and communicate the broad cultural potential of the site for events, celebrations and installations. In collaboration with the landscape architects, the project Soundtrack in Berlin was realised under the artistic direction of Georg Weckwerth as part of the second phase of the building. These were alternating computer-controlled sound works specially developed for this location by international artists. On a length of approximately 50 metres, several loudspeakers were integrated into the wooden bridge adjoining the palace to the west, from which the multichannel compositions could be heard in temporally different intervals.

The temporary activation of this important space safeguarded one of Berlin’s main historic locations as a place for the people to use and enjoy. The design team created a bold simplicity that connected the site to the surrounding buildings and the River Spree. The temporality of the site was reinforced in the phased construction of the project, where the design took into account the future construction of the Humboldt Forum by Italian architect Franco Stella. This critically important building will occupy the entire site once complete.

SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK AT HUMBOLDT FOR AuthenticatedUM

263

The Temporäre Kunsthalle Berlin, a temporary exhibition venue on the western side of the Schloßplatz held a number of contemporary art exhibitions overlooking the excavation of the former palace walls.

The temporary Humboldt Box building with a temporary art installation on the lawn.

264

RELAIS LANDSCHAFTSARCHITEKTEN

45 m

5m 15

The timber boardwalks ramped down from the adjacent streets at a higher level to connect people across the site. The ramps also created places for people to sit and relax on the edge of the boardwalks. These acted as edges to lawn areas, defining the perimeter and containment of a series of different-size lawn spaces.

The overall temporary landscape measured 206 × 185 metres, comprised of lawn spaces and boardwalks with seating edges. On the western side of the site there was a temporary art gallery with terraced seating.

206

m

5 18 m

m 77

There is a strong historic context to the site, with archeological excavations of the former palace walls and views to the Berlin Cathedral. There are two canals to the east and west of the site.

North

SCHLOSSPLATZ — TEMPORARY PARK AT HUMBOLDT FOR AuthenticatedUM

265

268 – 270

DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN SUBLIME: THE UNCANNY AS A PROGRAMMATIC MOTIVATION IN NEW CITY PARKS F. Philip Barash and Gina Ford

271 – 274

THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S CROSS, LONDON Ken Trew

275 – 277

KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS Kirsten Bauer

278 – 281

OPEN AND INVITATIONAL: THE DESIGN APPROACH OF JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS Richard Kennedy

282 – 284

PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL CULTURE: LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS — QUARTIER DES SPECTACLES, MONTREAL Daoust Lestage

285 – 287

INNOCENCE Adriaan Geuze and Annemarie Kuijt

288 – 289

AFTERWORD: DESIGN, CURATION AND IDENTITY James Corner

DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN SUBLIME: THE UNCANNY AS A PROGRAMMATIC MOTIVATION IN NEW CITY PARKS

The 21st century is experiencing a resurgence of investment in urban public spaces. Once considered largely for tourists or for the expression of a crisp civic identity — like the verdant Boston Common or Boston’s windswept ceremonial City Hall Plaza — city spaces are now responding to new, unanticipated pressures of the great urban migration. Today, expectations of our city parks, plazas and streets are much higher and demands much more diverse. Visiting families and resident hipsters, retirees and students, street performers and French bulldogs all vie for a place in today’s public realm. And all of them must have a ‘thing to do’ or, perhaps more to the point we’ll raise here, must be able to feel ‘at home’. What typology fills these incongruent demands? A far cry from the pastoral escape promised by Olmsted or the shaggy authenticity of urban parks of a generation past, urban spaces espouse the parkas-platform approach, unwittingly moving towards a banality of programming formulas. For such spaces, success is a series of sympathetic programmatic adjacencies: a dolled-up stage set. Just add human actors. And yet, for all of its elaborate staging, the performance lacks magic. What of magic? Terms like sublime or awe-inspiring, wild or terrifying, sacred or magical have left our lexicon — they seem needlessly florid to describe the everyday. Yet the spaces that are most meaningful, the spaces that draw us back time after time, are precisely those that exercise upon us an effect that is irreducible either to the trade jargon of design or to bland entertainment programming. They intend, rather, to have us tremble in desire, delight, disorientation. They titillate us with expectation. They paralyse us with awe. They release us into wonder.

In a strict psychoanalytic sense, these kinds of spaces produce the sensation of the ‘uncanny’. In contemporary American use, uncanny means something like ‘discomforting’ or ‘disorienting’. Like most other emotional responses, the uncanny has a wide range of intensities, from mild surprise to terror. In German, as Freud observes in ‘The Uncanny’, the word unheimlich comes from the root heimlich, meaning familiar — or, literally, homely. Yet some uses of heimlich ascribe to it a sinister and secretive cast: ‘Where public ventilation has to stop, there heimlich machinations begin,’ he quotes. What appears comfortable and familiar in one context — like the domestic hearth — seems like inappropriate ‘machination’ in another. These dual aspects of the word — the one familiar, the other discomforting; the homely and the unhomely — converge on a spatial metaphor of private and public space. In exploring our approach to recent urban park programming, design and construction, we could easily focus on the physical constituent parts of space design and use. We focus instead on the metaphysical dimension: the ways that a deeper integration of familiar programming ideas into a landscape can evoke this sense of ‘the uncanny’. The following examples each bring the park user into closer contact with experiences — of natural dynamics, engaged body experiences and social collisions — that are simultaneously familiar and jarring. These are spaces at the intersection of domestic familiarity and its corollary: that ‘unhomely’ effect that the best public spaces force us to encounter and embrace. They confront us with a programme that engages senses and feelings, asking us to see things anew, to rethink the normative experiences of traditionally defined programmatic typologies.  

The Riverwalk re-design connects people with the river on multiple levels and introduces new activity within the archways.

268

F. PHILIP BARASH AND GINA FORD

F. PHILIP BARASH AND GINA FORD

Chicago Riverwalk: a place to perch in the Jetty. Chicago Riverwalk: at the water’s edge in the Marina. Chicago Riverwalk: The Cove.

DESIGNING FOR THE URBAN SUBLIME

269

encounters, from the densely packed din of social interaction to a profoundly intimate closeness to the river surface. The presence of constant change in this landscape, whether via seasonal change or ever-changing flood dynamics, makes nature tangible in the midst of a city.

SPACES OF RISK: CINCINNATI’S SMALE RIVERFRONT PARK

Smale Riverfront Park: inter-generational play.

In the past three generations, spaces for play have become severely constrained. High fences keep kids in. Soft surfaces guard from injury. Standardised equipment is shaped for children of different ages — and placed apart to minimise overlap between rambunctious older kids and the younger ones. Seating at edges allows parents to watch over their kids (or, more likely, get lost deep in their iPhones). To understand how these risk-free spaces limit learning and imagination, we recently launched a research initiative of play spaces as a programme element in contemporary urban park design. This research informed an approach to designing play spaces, such as the Smale Riverfront Park in Cincinnati, that stand in strong contrast to traditional play guidelines. At Smale, the space is boundless — no fence holds anyone in or keeps anyone out. Instead, planting and natural elements are used to create many subtly protected spaces. Play elements are designed to encourage collaboration. Some features require, for instance, the cooperation of a team to activate or simultaneous engagement to make the experience fun. Kids and parents are encouraged to hide, play, splash, roll, jump, slide, climb and get dirty (in real mud). It is a play space that encourages imagination and risk. It draws people from throughout the region who long for the familiar — but forgotten — wonder of childhood.

Lawn on D: face-to-face with the ‘Other’.

FACING ‘OTHER’: THE LAWN ON D

AT THE WATER’S EDGE: CHICAGO RIVERWALK The Chicago Riverwalk is a six-block stretch of new public realm threaded along the main branch of the Chicago River. The site itself is humbling in scale, a powerfully memorable canyon of space lined by skyscrapers and punctuated by Chicago’s iconic bascule bridges. Its identity is inextricably of the city. Our charge was to build new land to create a continuous walkway. In response we forewent previous precedents of high-banked edges, standard-height handrails and fixed programme. Instead, the new public walkway was set just about at the level of the river’s average elevation. No barrier separates Chicagoans and visitors from the primordial fear and desire that water represents. Here, at the edge of city and water, the Chicago River figures both as a safe, engineered product and as an ancient natural force. Importantly, each block’s shape and programme is inspired by a different river-based typology — the path leads, for instance, past the Marina (a place to watch boats), the Cove (a place to slide a kayak into the water) and the Jetty (a place to perch out over the water and fish). But none of these are spaces for passively viewing the river. Rather, they invite physical engagement with water. In this way, ‘programme’ is nested in physical experience rather than a prescribed one. Walking along the new blocks brings an exciting unfolding of new and diverse

270

F. PHILIP BARASH AND GINA FORD

Boston’s Lawn on D (see p. 122 – 133) is a temporary, experimental landscape aimed at announcing and giving identity to a burgeoning new urban corridor along Boston’s D Street. The Lawn is a testing ground for use and programming strategy that will eventually inform the design of a permanent event space associated with a planned convention centre expansion. Conceived as a platform for innovation and an armature for infinite programming, we designed the Lawn to accommodate endless possibilities into 9.7 hectares. As the Lawn is radically impermanent, its design was guided by cost-effective implementation, flexibility and ease of transformation. Inspired by the humanistic principles of prospect — refuge and the bombastic clarity of formal parterre gardens, the Lawn on D is a series of wildly coloured geometric surfaces framed by a continuous planted buffer. Hosting fire pits and food trucks, table games and ice mazes, the plaza is a welcoming place for chance encounters and unexpected interactions. Whether watching Jaws from a life-raft, playing bocce with friends or touching giant glowing inflatable bunnies, visitors to the lawn are treated to an ever-changing array of experiences. In communion with a throng of strangers from throughout the city, gathered in the shadows of outsized bunnies, it is a kind of magic — greater than the sum of its programmatic parts. Embedded in these projects — beyond a critique of unquestioned or banal programme formulas or predestined design solutions — are glimpses of the uncanny. In a cultural context of internet rabbit holes, social media ‘echo chambers’ and screen-time quotas, we are seeking to shake some part of our park users’ psyches, waking them to experiences both familiar and disruptive. These are not parks to escape the city. These are not knolls to take a nap. These are not homey spaces. No: these are places to meet strange experiences and strangers, places where we find ourselves talking about uncomfortable topics or, at least, thinking about them. These are places to be present, to feel and to leave having been woken up.     

THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S CROSS, LONDON

INTRODUCTION The King’s Cross (KX) development site occupies 57 hectares of redundant and derelict railway land to the north of KX and St Pancras stations. Goods traffic declined and ceased altogether in the 1950s as road transport replaced rail. Access to the railway lands remained restricted and the area became associated with transitional land uses and with crime, including prostitution and drugs. Hampered by planning blight, the transformation of KX finally became possible by the decision in 2004 to use St Pancras station as the London terminus for Eurostar. Further impetus was provided by the selection of nearby Stratford in East London as the location for the 2012 London Olympics and this also unlocked funding for the redevelopment of King’s Cross station.

APPROACH Argent were selected in 2000 to work with the landowners to form a partnership to deliver the regeneration of the site. Argent’s successful development at Brindleyplace in Birmingham had demonstrated the importance of the public realm and estate management in creating and enhancing places with a distinctive and enduring quality. This philosophy of a public realm-led approach to development was developed on a much larger scale at KX. … [I]t is the framework of the public realm, the streets and the squares, the places and the parks, which are the lasting legacy of development on this scale… The framework engenders connectivity both within and beyond the masterplan site, providing accessibility from and into the areas round, for both public transport and pedestrians. Without this interaction, the new ‘set piece’ open spaces within the development itself would be starved of the vital transfusion of people which can bring them alive, and transform them from spaces into places … David Partridge, Managing Partner, Argent

The strategy for KX recognised the importance of attracting people in order to bring vitality and purpose to urban spaces. Generating the footfall needed to sustain the early food and beverage outlets, was a commercial necessity too. The wider strategy to increase visitor numbers and change perceptions about KX involved running events and the ‘activation’ of spaces. The need to bring more people to the site was also partly driven by the approach to the sequence of construction. The streets and square were to be built first to provide the context and infrastructure for individual plots and, proportionally, the intention was that there would always be more public realm than occupied buildings. Visitors were crucial to enliven the public squares while the on-site population of KX built up. Visitor numbers provided an impression of what it would be like to live and work at KX on completion to potential residential

KEN TREW

and office occupiers and explains why the ‘invigoration’ of the site was funded as a marketing cost! Feedback from extensive public consultation endorsed the view that these ‘soft’ place-making issues were seen as equally important to the structure of the public realm. After years of neglect there was pressure to open up the site quickly and to create a clean and safe environment for local people passing through as well as tenants and visitors. Argent’s response was to prioritise the early infrastructure works and build Granary Square, the central open space and access to it from the stations via King’s Boulevard. This strategy had a very practical basis in the need to provide access for the 4500 staff and students of the University of the Arts London (UAL) by September 2011, but it was also designed to bring people into the heart of the scheme at the earliest opportunity. They would then be able to see what the new KX was going to be like and enjoy the amenities on offer. With such a large, complex and lengthy development, it was important to deliver a public realm with ‘timeless’ qualities that would endure long into the future. This meant allocating sufficient resources to the long-term maintenance of the estate and avoiding designs that were overly fashionable and therefore likely to be short-lived in their appeal. Promoting active enjoyment of the main squares and routes was the priority; the public realm was designed as a neutral background, a stage, to encourage public activity and support a changing programme of events to attract and entertain.

CURTAIN UP Planning consent was given in December 2006 and work started on site in 2007. As construction progressed, preparations were made to open the first part of the estate to the public. These included making arrangements for cleaning, litter collection, security, servicing, events and public art. Having been, as it were, in sole possession of the site since 2000, it was an odd sensation to think about sharing it with other people. Would they like it? Had we made the right choices? At this stage Argent had committed to the design of the public realm, but there were still decisions to be made about the ways in which it was to be brought to life. Argent opted to commission public art through a series of three-year fixed-term commissions. The first curators (2012–15) were Michael Pinsky and Stéphanie Delcroix, who developed the RELAY programme for KX. An Advisory Panel was established to oversee the selection of curators, artists and installations to ensure a consistent approach to providing high quality of art at KX. The initial events programme was also curated by an external team (We Are Groundbreaking) but was later brought in-house by Argent, supported by Produce UK. The aim was to create ambassadors for KX, by providing them with a great experience so that they would tell our story for us: the message was ‘KX is changing, come and see’. The initial events were designed to celebrate construction milestones, inviting the (1000+) development team of consultants,

THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S AuthenticatedCROSS

271

Granary Square opened in June 2012 with dancers in the fountains heralding what would be the first of a series of events that would put King’s Cross on the cultural map of London. Granary Square in 2007 as site clearance began. After rail uses ceased in the 1950s, the site had become a road freight depot.

contractors and local stakeholders. A programme followed aimed at tenants, local families and visitors, which included a short-term restaurant in an old petrol-filling station, a temporary sports pitch and music events in Granary Square. Events were selected for their relevance to the KX story and their contribution to London-wide festivals such as the Chelsea Fringe, the London Olympics and the growing range of national and international architectural tours.

GRANARY SQUARE AND THE FOUNTAINS, OPENING IN JUNE 2012 Granary Square was the first and largest area of public realm to be built at KX. The layout of the square was largely determined by its contribution to the setting of the listed Granary building and its past use as a canal basin (and latterly as a storage yard). The fountains were acknowledged to be a modern interpretation of the old canal basin and created a focal point to the square (and the development

272

KEN TREW

as a whole). Some minor changes were incorporated in the final design: further trees were added at the periphery to green up the canal frontage and large timber benches and bistro chairs were also introduced to increase seating numbers. The white fountain lights were upgraded to colour to enhance the display and the large stone sculptures were redesigned by Ian McChesney. When Granary Square officially opened to the public in June 2012, it hosted a range of events including the reception of the Olympic torch by barge from Regent’s Canal. The telecasting of Andy Murray’s Olympic tennis success in 2013 (complete with deckchairs) attracted more than 3000 people and demonstrated the potential of the space as a stage for large events. From the beginning, the square was successful in attracting a wide range of visitors and local families, particularly in the summer when the majority of the events of all sizes and attractions were held. Despite some initial apprehension about what behaviour was and was not permitted, soon both children and dogs literally took the plunge and the fountains became an urban

The Identified Flying Object (commonly known as The Birdcage) by Jacques Rival was the first piece of public art at King’s Cross and is now located adjacent to King’s Cross station. The swing inside the structure is popular with all age groups. KERB is a street food collective that has been involved with King’s Cross since 2012. The stalls are still to be found on King’s Boulevard, their original home, but now have a wider role in supporting functions and events across the site.

beach. Families would arrive early with their towels and lunchboxes to secure the best sites for the day. The south-facing steps down to the canal were also a hit with sun-seekers and those who just wanted to watch the boats go by. The granite seating was a little uncomfortable and artificial turf was laid on the steps as an experiment in spring 2013, adding a welcome layer of green to the square. This seasonal clothing of the steps is now repeated annually from the beginning of spring to the end of autumn, helping to mark the seasons at KX. It has also proved to be the catalyst for curating the steps as a location for short, temporary displays. In December 2014, Winter Sun, a demountable covered stage was commissioned to accommodate a cafe/bar with live music. It was located in the wooded area within the Square and was subsequently moved to Lewis Cubitt Square where it has been adapted as a stage for music and dance with seating provided.

THE EVENTS PROGRAMME The physical development of KX has been matched by growth in events and marketing along with a retail strategy that encourages both short- and long-term leases favouring a ‘quirky’ mix of international and independent retailers. Together these strands have blended to create a strong identity for KX as a place and as a ‘destination’. Between 2013 and 2016 the number of events increased from 67 to 138 per year with around 130,000 attending per annum. The cost of a two-day weekend festival can range from a few thousand pounds (GBP) with external partners/sponsors for the KX estate, up to £250,000 for the estate fully funding the event and delivering the appropriate pan-London/national marketing. This programme is managed by one full-time member of staff with support from the estate management team in licensing events and dealing with issues including access,

LEWIS CUBITT SQUARE, OPENING IN 2014 Due to the success of Granary Square as a meeting place and urban ‘water park’, a decision was taken to reduce the number of events there in order to avoid closing the fountains during the summer. As a result, the design for Lewis Cubitt Square was altered to cater for events hosting up to 2000 people. The west-facing side of the square incorporates a linear arrangement of water jets and a buffer of planting between the square and the adjacent road. The large paved area provides maximum flexibility for hosting events and has been used for everything from Welsh beer festivals to fashion shows and a Diwali festival. The design of the building(s) on the eastern side of the square is still to be finalised, but the intention is that it will incorporate some degree of noise protection for the new canal-side flats that are nearing completion. In the meantime, the events programme for the square has been modified to take account of potential impacts on residents.

The box-headed lime trees in Granary Square provide welcome shade in the summer and a more intimate scale within the main square. The loose bistro chairs and tables contrast with the formal seating around the fountains and are in demand for relaxing and impromptu business meetings.

THE REDEVELOPMENT OF KING’S AuthenticatedCROSS

273

The Varini art installation was designed to be viewed from the viewing platform overlooking Granary Square. At street level, the shapes seemed to be randomly placed, but from an observation point at the junction of King’s Boulevard and Goods Way, the geometric forms magically came together. It was only from this one viewpoint that you could see the whole picture. Lewis Cubitt Square can host up to 2000 people for large events. The green edge provides seating and shade and is perforated to provide links between the square and the adjacent Stable Street. Lewis Cubitt Park lies immediately to the north of the square and is occasionally used to provide additional capacity for larger events. The first stage of the park included a temporary public art project (now removed) called Of Soil and Water. It consisted of a pond for swimming, using naturally filtered water, and was created by Ooze Architects and artist Marjetica Potrč.

safety and insurance. Events are now being targetted towards a specific KX audience with input from the in-house marketing team that has doubled in five years from five to ten. Their input includes dedicated PR, marketing and design. Social media is an important part of the toolkit the marketing team uses to promote events at KX; other digital elements include regular newsletters and a constantly updated website with engaging ways to get involved. Visitor numbers have increased steadily from five million in 2014 with ten million expected for 2017, exceeding projections. On completion, it is anticipated that there will be about 42,000 people living and working at KX and up to 20 million visitors a year. The events programme will continue but probably on a smaller scale; and the ambition is that the developer’s contributions to the events programme will be matched by those of other partners and tenants wanting to promote ‘their KX’. There is a general perception based on press coverage and customer feedback that events at KX are much more than a marketing tool and have become an intrinsic part of its identity, as important as the physical layout of the public realm and buildings. Other regener-

274

KEN TREW

ation projects in the UK have adopted a similar approach, with varying degrees of success. However, this approach should not be seen as a panacea for poor masterplanning and place-making. The events need to have some basis in the ‘genius loci’ or spirit of the place, its history and its character. In this respect KX has benefitted from an authentic heritage of film-making, nightclubs and ‘alternative’ lifestyles of people who lived in and used the area from the 1960s to the 1980s. These times are still fondly remembered. The current events programme has built on that image of KX as being different to other parts of London, a place to meet, relax and enjoy yourself. While KX has enjoyed a successful start, there is more to come, as the final buildings and gardens are completed and the new retail hub at the Coal Drops Yard opens in 2018. It will then be possible to see the full benefits of the physical and social strategies that have shaped the development and delivered the place-making principles that are now synonymous with KX.

KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS

Over the last quarter of a century, a number of large-scale place-making projects have been pivotal in transforming the life of Australia’s major cities. Among them are: the post-Expo South Bank development in Brisbane by Media 5 and Denton Corker Marshall (1992); the Federation Square cultural precinct in Melbourne by Lab Architecture Studio and karres+brands landscape architects (2003); Darling Quarter in Sydney by fjmt architects and ASPECT Studios (2011); Victoria Square/Tarndanyangga in Adelaide by T.C.L landscape architects and Tonkin Zulaikha Greer (2014); and Yagan Square in Perth by Lyons, iredale pedersen hook, and ASPECT Studios (2018). The place-making strategies used in these projects span the ever-shifting space between prescribed or set activation and ephemeral, curated activation. Commerce, cultural facilities, outdoor dining, play, community consultation and active event curation are all part of the toolbox. South Bank initially used artificial beaches, play spaces, canals and its butterfly aviary (now gone) and anchored these with retail and cultural facilities and more traditional promenades and streets. Federation Square carved a traditional Italian-style piazza out of a cultural precinct, using its complex topographic slope as a highly performative link that works as an outdoor amphitheatre featuring a stage and public screen, with few explicit design elements apart from seating edges and places for outdoor dining. Flexibility, liberation in the play of the slope, and the views out to the city beyond combine with highly curated events by private-public management to activate the space. Darling Quarter combines intricate, large-scale water play with public life and retail. Tarndanyangga combines modernity and First Peoples’ place in an event-driven approach. Yagan Square will bring leisure, cultural, retail and indigenous values into one place. Activation of space and place-making is the process of creating meaningful and layered places, bringing together and expressing the essential qualities of place, the landscape, its history, social rituals and cultural significance into the design of place. It aims to promote human interaction, connection to the street, and to allow people to participate in their public domain. The most successful examples of place-making operate and succeed on a number of levels and benefit

ASPECT Studio use approaches to activation in public spaces.

STRUCTURED ROOMS FOR ACTIVATION

KIRSTEN BAUER

from a highly collaborative design process, including artists, architects, local experts and end users of a place — the public. Successful placemaking also extends beyond the physical design and delivery and integrates long-lasting ‘place management’ and ongoing activation through curated events. The following are important considerations for successful place-making which underpin ASPECT’s approach to public activation. PUBLIC DEMOCRATIC LIFE: To ensure public enjoyment is not contingent on private commerce, while recognising the beneficial synergies between public life and commercial activity. Equity and full access are essential in the public realm. THE RIGHT SCALE is critical. FIXED VERSUS FLEXIBLE ACTIVATION: Every space needs its own particular solution with regard to prescribed activation elements such as play spaces, fitness equipment, stage, sports courts and furniture on the one hand and flexible, less prescribed places such as lawns, walkways and parkland. SOFT AND HARD INFRASTRUCTURE: Soft infrastructure means place-programming features and events (such as pop-up stores and festivals); it works in tandem with the hard infrastructure such as seating and spatial arrangement. BEWARE OF OVER-ACTIVATION: Not all places need more activation. The success of a public space should not depend solely on programmed activation. ROOMS VERSUS OVERLAY: Context and functional ambition determine which strategy to use. Segmenting activation into more defined ‘rooms’ works for activities that need some separation and ensure choice, while overlapping activation is good for creating inter-age and broader social interactions.

OVERLAY OF PROGRAM FOR ACTIVATION

TEMPORARY INSERTION OF ACTIVATION

KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS

275

The Goods Line. A series of urban rooms, with both fixed and flexible activation. Promenade space is open, but framed to hold multiple events at Junction Place.

COMMUNITY ACTIVATION: Community buy-in is critical; the hope is that the community self-generates events and programmes for the place.

public steps and amphitheatre). The overt graphic colour of yellow is used to identify and mark activities such as seating, communal table, fitness areas and ping pong.

POP-UPS: Pop-ups offer opportunities to experiment with activation to see ‘what works’ and to activate spaces otherwise vacant for long periods of time. However, quality investment in permanent public spaces cannot be offset by pop-ups, and initial investment may overrun eventual social benefit.

JUNCTION PLACE, WODONGA A series of large-scale urban rooms connected along a former railway line. The rooms, a quite large square and a park are comprised in turn of smaller rooms of activity. The key activation spaces are the very long promenades designed for weekly farmers’ markets and outdoor dining that spills from the repurposed historic buildings. When not activated by events, the smaller, more intimately crafted elements connect to history and enable more casual public life.

EXPLICIT ACTIVATION: Highly graphic and visible design can emphasise the changing point in the history of the landscape where design is explicitly intended to activate a space. CRAFTED INTIMACY: Small, well-crafted moments can serve to connect the community to the history of a site and neighbourhood in order to enable intimate and meaningful experiences.

HARTS MILL, ADELAIDE A catalyst to bring new activities to a disused dock area, a heritage building has been repurposed as a gallery and community space and a new play and market space. The explicit forging of a new identity was made physically evident through the use of the former flour mill processes in the play space design.

Some key projects illustrate our approach to activation. THE GOODS LINE, SYDNEY (see p. 214 – 217) A series of urban rooms, connected along a former railway line, each is an open and flexible space or has a prescribed activation element. The types of activation are driven by synergy with adjacent land use, such as education (with the provision of study space) or street (with

276

KIRSTEN BAUER

BOX HILL GARDENS MULTI-PURPOSE SPACE, MELBOURNE A new recreation space with multiple sport programmes laid over two landscape terraces inserts contemporary social and recreation activities into a historic park. The overlaying of sporting activities such as basketball, cricket, netball, tennis and badminton brings different social and age groups together. The graphic nature of the play surface

Connection between industrial process of heritage building and play space. Box Hill Gardens multi purpose space. Physical and graphic expression of overlay of programme. Highpoint Shopping Centre, Harts Mill, Adelaide. Moveable play items, furniture and table-tennis tables provide visitors with opportunities for free activities.

distinguishes it from traditional green parkland and the more gentle activities found there. HIGHPOINT SHOPPING CENTRE, MELBOURNE This pop-up project to enliven an unpopular entry space at a largescale shopping mall was instigated by the mall owner to provide more diversity of use by the local community and to test the potential to fully redesign the forecourt. The design provides free activities, encourages the community to stay and play, and the use of cheap and easy-to-maintain-and-install materials avoids over-investment.

community desire for more active recreation, an urban gym and a space for dogs. The project keeps costs and energy use to a moderate level by reusing materials from the precinct construction process. The design elements may be reused and relocated. DANDENONG POP-UP PARK, MELBOURNE This semi-permanent pop-up park is a connector between a long-term urban regeneration programme and a main train station, partnered with social enterprise to build and manage the park. Local council and community groups run the space, and it has become a very popular football field with young people from new immigrant communities.

DOCK SQUARE TEMPORARY ACTIVATION SPACE, MELBOURNE A pop-up developed as part of a larger urban-precinct high-rise development, this project will run for five years. It was driven by

KEY PROJECTS OF ASPECT STUDIOS

277

OPEN AND INVITATIONAL: THE DESIGN APPROACH OF JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS

RICHARD KENNEDY

It is a great time to live in cities. Life happens in the city — it is where the action is! And much of the life in cities takes place in the public realm. We do appear to be in a period of renewed optimism involving urban parks and public spaces: there is a remarkable array of exciting and vibrant new parks around the world — projects that are more inventive, well-crafted and diverse than at any previous point in history. More than ever, parks are understood as stages where public life can be played out — open, flexible and engaging spaces for coming together; dramatic spaces for social theatre; recreational spaces for play, health and well-being; ecological spaces improving the quality of water, air, food and natural habitat; and regenerative spaces contributing to the economic competitiveness of their cities. Beautifully designed public spaces do indeed become living platforms around which people interact and commingle, observe and entertain, play and simply take in the scene. In other words, great design matters. The art of design and placemaking requires imagination and invention to create settings that invite and inspire diverse and vibrant forms of public activity and interaction. Great parks are sufficiently ‘open‘ to flexibly accommodate a wide variety of programmed events, from recreation and play, food markets and festivals, concerts and performances to arts, culture and

The High Line: Food carts and open-air cafe in the semi-enclosed Chelsea Market Passage. Ever-surprising art interventions at the Billboard. Invitational seating terraces and viewing frame at the Sunken Overlook. Interactive and playful transformation of the High Line’s structure at the Pershing Square Beams.

278

RICHARD KENNEDY

The Navy Yard Central Green: The framework for organising play consists of two devices: first, a 1000-foot-long meandering arbour planted with native woody trees and vines to create a shaded pathway and unifying element; second, a series of six outdoor ‘play nests’ arranged on alternating sides of the arbour.

education. At the same time these parks must be sufficiently inviting, offering settings and features that are welcoming and appealing to a broad spectrum of the public on ordinary, unprogrammed days. These notions of ‘openness’ and ‘invitation’ form the basis of much of our design work at James Corner Field Operations. We can point to several recent projects that utilise well-organised and imaginative frameworks that equally accommodate ‘openness’ — flexible spaces to support a diverse and evolving calendar of organised and improvised programmes throughout the year — and ‘invitations’. These offer intimate spaces and features that welcome a diversity of use and experience, and support everyday use and enjoyment.

Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’s South Park Plaza: Stage, terraces and park overlook at the Theatre Room, designed in collaboration with LDA Design.

THE HIGH LINE While much has been written about the history, inception and design of the High Line in Manhattan, it is the vibrancy of its life and the diversity of activity that continues to surprise and astound. The mosaic of uses — from casual to curated — is extraordinary, and the park’s intense activity and popularity has exceeded everyone’s expectations. The design language and framework of the High Line can be understood most simply as a systematic promenade, meandering through highly diverse plantings, and punctuated with opportunistic and ­theatrical ‘stages’. These include the Sundeck and Water Feature, the 10th Avenue Square and Sunken Overlook, the West 23rd Street Lawn, the Woodland Flyover, the 12th Avenue Seating Steps — all aiming to heighten the experience of being above the city at that particular place at that particular time. Since the opening of Phase 1 in 2009, the Friends of the High Line have cultivated an ever-expanding and ever-adapting culture of ­programming at the park. This ranges from cultural events involving performances; community programmes focused on wellness, fitness and play; youth programmes produced by local teens focused on arts, culture, horticulture and social equity; and an inspiring public art ­programme incorporating site-specific commissions, performances, video programmes and billboard interventions. With the Friends’

c­ uratorial approach to programming and their commitment to expanding their invitations through intensive outreach across the city, the vibrancy of use and diversity of experience on the High Line will only continue to exceed expectations.

THE NAVY YARD CENTRAL GREEN Once a collection of wetlands and meadows at the centre of a massive Naval Facility, the 2.2-hectares Central Green is now the physical centre of the Navy Yard in Philadelphia, one of the city’s most innovative and progressive commercial developments and burgeoning neighbourhoods. The design can be understood as a framework for collect­ ive activity. Recognising the trend in 21st-century workplaces to provide shared amenities — collective spaces for collaboration, health and wellness, or eating and drinking — the design organises a variety of attractions and features to encourage outdoor activity and interaction within and for the entire campus. A framework of nested ‘rings’ organises the site’s circulation and shapes a unique collection of active and passive spaces. Taken on its own, the framework of rings is visibly powerful — the striking

OPEN AND INVITATIONAL 279

Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’s South Park Plaza: The interactive water labyrinth as the centrepiece of the Event Room, designed in collaboration with LDA Design and Fountain Workshop.

geometry is meant to draw people outdoors and into the shared space. A closer reading of the framework reveals a rich collection of settings and attractions: some spaces are open, flexible and informal (the open lawn, flowering meadows and loose seating), while others are invitations for activity and play (a hammock grove, an outdoor conference room, bocce courts, games tables, fitness stations and an outdoor amphitheatre). The flexibility of the framework is twofold: the arrangement of spaces accommodates a broad set of activities and experiences for today’s workplace tenants with specific elements being interchangeable and adaptive as needs, preferences and trends evolve over time.

SHELBY FARMS PARK’S WOODLAND DISCOVERY PLAYGROUND In an effort to expedite implementation of the Shelby Farms Park Masterplan, the Shelby Farms Park Conservancy supported a number of early projects that had a significant impact on subsequent fundraising and public confidence. The first of these projects was the Woodland Discovery Playground — a 0.8-hectare playground at the centre of the park. This early investment in play was an effort to foreground inclusivity and family-oriented activity, while cultivating healthy development of children’s physical and social well-being. The framework for organising play consists of two devices: first, a 1000-foot-long meandering arbour planted with native woody trees and vines to create a shaded pathway and unifying element; second, a series of six outdoor ‘play nests’ arranged on alternating sides of the arbour. Each nest is topographically shaped and scallopped into circular hollows, and each offers a rich variety of invitations to play that incrementally increase in challenge, adventure and risk across the space: an open lawn, a sand nest, a slide nest, a swing nest and a climbing nest, all inviting outdoor discovery and sensory experiences, which specifically target children of different ages, developmental abilities and interests. While programmatically focused on play, the playground is still fundamentally open and flexible, as each visit offers new possibilities to slide, climb, run, scramble, swing, build, find and discover.

280

RICHARD KENNEDY

QUEEN ELIZABETH OLYMPIC PARK’S SOUTH PARK PLAZA Prior to the 2012 Olympic Games, the Lower Lea Valley in the heart of East London had become one of London’s most physically fragmented, environmentally compromised and socially deprived districts. The 2012 Olympics reversed this pattern, allowing the remarkably diverse communities surrounding Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park to become the beneficiaries of this significant urban transformation and investment. As the centrepiece of the wider Olympic parklands; as a counterpoint to the nature-oriented, northern portion of the park; and as an inviting and inclusive park for the communities of East London, James Corner Field Operations conceived the South Park Plaza as a 21st-century ‘pleasure garden’. In this way, the Plaza would build upon London’s great tradition of pleasure gardens, from Vauxhall and Marylebone to Ranelagh and Cremorne — all destination parks renowned for their beautiful landscapes, cultural attractions, mystery, dreaminess, surprise and fun. The South Plaza is organised around a clear geometrical framework of connections, spaces and features. The Arc Promenade serves as the main armature along which all spaces are organised. A series of ‘event platforms’ carved out of tall meadow plantings support the primary event and attraction spaces. The design is clearly legible, playful and varied, while at the same time capable of supporting a diverse range of uses. This theatrical event site, set within a larger network of ecological green systems, waterways and world-class attractions, offers ‘something for everyone’. East London residents, regional visitors or international tourists can all enjoy the scenic and social on a daily basis, and eventful and active when programmed. Today, the sheer spectacle of myriad visitors from all walks of life, strolling, sitting, bicycling, playing, climbing, performing, acting out and just taking in the scene and place, is extraordinary.

CLEVELAND’S PUBLIC SQUARE Opened in June 2016, the 2.4-hectare Public Square at the centre of downtown Cleveland dramatically reconfigures once fragmented quadrants into a newly unified whole. The design bestows a bold and iconic new identity to the Square, while addressing key challenges of

Cleveland’s Public Square: The Fountain Plaza with its mirror pool and jets that can be turned off to create an open and flexible Square. The flexible Event Lawn with its elevated corners that tilt towards the sun and skyline views.

unification, clarification and activation. The design organises space and activity through three unifying moves: first, the ‘perimeter gardens’ frame the outer edge and invite visitors into the Square’s interior with seating and green, tactile and seasonal plantings; second, the ‘ribbon promenade’ is the primary line of movement through the Square, linking all the spaces and tying the corners to the centre; and, third, the ‘civic rooms’ — the Event Lawn and Fountain Plaza — that serve as the large-scale, flexible spaces that accommodate activity and use throughout the year. Taken as a whole, the Square offers experiences small and large — intimate and delightful for the everyday and generous and accommodating for spectacle and events. Each of these five parks offers a different framework for organising spaces to invite a diversity of use and experience, whether for calm, play or theatre — while also flexibly accommodating new and different activities and forms of use over time. The ‘stages’ of the High Line; the ‘rings’ of the Navy Yard Central Green; the arbour and ‘nests’ of Shelby Farms Woodland Discovery Playground; the ‘promenade’ and

‘event platforms’ of Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’s South Plaza; and the ‘civic rooms’ of Cleveland’s Public Square have all become one of the signature spaces of their cities, populated and activated by their diverse communities and representative of the optimistic turn towards the renewed potential of parks for the 21st-century city.

OPEN AND INVITATIO AuthenticatedNAL

281

PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL CULTURE: LA PLACE DES FESTIVALS — QUARTIER DES SPECTACLES, MONTREAL

Creating a successful public realm requires more than the construction of high-quality spaces. It requires active participation by the community. In the best urban spaces, these two components should interact to produce a stronger ensemble: uniting permanent and ephemeral culture. Permanent culture is manifested in the built forms of public space. Designing for these sites requires intertwining multiple layers to capture the complexity of the civic realm. From urban design, landscape, lighting and architecture, down to industrial design, graphics, kinetic installations and signature pieces of artwork, all elements must contribute to a well-proportioned and comfortable environment, particularly at the pedestrian scale. At the conceptual level, the overarching narrative for the design of these spaces should draw upon the genius loci, in order to root the design to its context. Even more important in this era of globalization, public spaces are most successful when they are forged from the history and traditions of a specific place. Ephemeral culture, by contrast, is an essential part of the public realm that cannot be rigidly incorporated into a design. Its form is always changing, as different events take shape, cultural moments pass and people gather and disperse. In many ways it seems impossible to design for these ineffable parameters, yet through careful consideration, functional urban objects and multi-use spaces can set the stage properly. Even when the future needs of a space are uncertain, providing generous pieces of public infrastructure that people can interact with in multiple ways ensures that a place is well used for years to come. La Place des Festivals was commissioned to host major events such as the Montreal Jazz and Just for Laughs festivals. Originally the site of car parks and with very little pedestrian life, the square was to accommodate up to 25,000 people yet celebrate the quiet moments of urban life when less heavily used. A varied spectrum of activation was required, demanding attention to detail and design strategies spanning from the city to the object. La Promenade des Artistes, the east-west connection between the two main squares of the Montreal Theatre District (Quartier des Spectacles), is an urban connector on a challenging site composed of the back façades of cultural buildings. It was designed to offer people an animated pedestrian route, structured and given rhythm by the lightweight concrete and steel frames that define the space at pedestrian scale. These ephemeral vitrines also serve as an armature for kiosks, performances and exhibitions showcasing the cultural life of Montreal throughout the year. A rich and continuous dialogue with the client (Quartier International de Montréal), city officials and event organisers was essential throughout planning and design. By understanding the technical requirements of the festivals and forming a strong working relationship with each group, QIM and Daoust Lestage were able to emphasise the importance of high-quality urban design and architecture. The most important challenge was undoubtedly finding the proper balance between the everyday and special event modes. During

282

DAOUST LESTAGE

DAOUST LESTAGE

Côté jardin (stage left) and côté cour (stage right) become the articulating language, contrasting the soft, green landscape with the hard black-and-white granite surface of the plaza.

La Place des Festivals captures the transient nature of the festival, drawing the playfulness of nightlife into the daily experience of the city.

­ erformances, one could imagine that all visual obstacles should idep ally be removed to optimise views to the stage, hard surfaces maximised to facilitate the movement of the crowd and seating minimised to reduce impediments — all strategies that run counter to the creation of a welcoming place for people on a more typical day. Retaining the planted landscape, for example, was a struggle throughout the process. The trees and the inclined green surfaces that formed a type of ‘urban origami’ were a signature element for the project and, while not optimal for performances, they were essential components for softening the edges of the square, breathing air into the Quartier and providing shade in summer. Agreements were ultimately reached as

the events group came to see that no single element, activity or event could dominate the scheme; that the space would ultimately be a living, changing thing; and each piece would have to be flexible enough to accommodate this reality. Every component Daoust Lestage designed had to take on this multi-purpose mandate. For example, on La Place des Festivals hundreds of interactive fountain heads and lights animate the space while in urban mode in the warmer months but these are shut down for event purposes and during the winter. The mega-lighting structures lining the square act as icons for the district and define the wall and ceiling planes of a large outdoor room created for visitors. On event days they define the edges of the urban

PERMANENT AND EPHEMERAL CULAuthenticatedTURE

283

The foot recess at the linear bench beside the square, which becomes a trough for cables during shows.

theatre, while also providing scenographic lighting, power, data and water to the set and stage. Similarly, the moveable concrete benches or ‘urban sofas’ and other modular street furniture were designed to be welcoming and comfortable for small gatherings on non-festival days and to encourage public interaction in combinations conceived as ‘urban lounges’. At the same time, these heavy and durable elements were designed to be moved via forklift so they could be rearranged like sectional furniture and moved completely out of the way during large events. This type of flexibility informs the smallest details, like the foot recess at the linear bench beside the square, which becomes a trough for cables during shows. Every element was designed to be as functional for thousands of people as it would be for just one person. The final elements that Daoust Lestage introduced to the site were two linear buildings at the eastern edge of La Place des Festivals, glazed volumes referred to as ‘inhabited vitrines’ (vitrines habitées). True to their name, these structures provide an essential piece to complete the public assemblage: all-weather restaurant spaces that

The theatrical curtains of water and light rise 2.2 metres, creating an experiential light and soundscape.

284

DAOUST LESTAGE

ensure a public presence on the square late into the evening and through all seasons of the year. By maximising the glazed area and transparency of the building envelopes, the vitrines habitées become porous pavilions, with the crowds dining while acting alternately as audience and spectacle. The continued evolution of the Quartier since the projects’ opening in 2009 has required ongoing stewardship. While good design and public engagement were essential at the outset of the project, the long-term maintenance and management of the hundreds of different activities, events and festivals that take place on the site each year is equally important. The Quartier des Spectacles Partnership, a not-forprofit organisation originally created in 2003, took on a larger role following the opening of the new plazas, and is responsible in large part for their continued success. The Partnership is now the guardian of the spaces; it is responsible for the technical quality of installations during the festivals, ensuring the design vision is carried out and even expanded from year to year. In the process, they have become an important ally and advocate for public design in Montreal, creating new programmes to encourage design thinking and civic engagement, including open competitions like Luminothérapie, the interactive light installation constructed on the plaza each winter, and spring events including the ‘21 Balançoires’ (21 Swings) installation by design studio Daily tous les jours. This artwork was originally conceived for the ephemeral vitrines on La Promenade des Artistes, and has returned for several years and travelled to many cities around the world. In a part of the city that was still seldom visited on foot a few years ago, the design and construction of these spaces and urban elements has provided a spark that has led to a space that is active and lively all year round. While the built forms have created an iconic sense of the Quartier as the heart of the city of Montreal, it is the ongoing high-quality programming and public engagement that have made it into a permanent stage at the centre of the city. Parades for national holidays or victorious sports teams and cultural festivals now all end at La Place des Festivals. It has transformed into a true civic destination: the perfect place to gather, to watch and to celebrate.

The largest interactive fountain in Canada, its theatrical curtains of water and light are composed of 235 jets and 470 lights. The focal point of the plateau is the central fountain that rises 12 metres above the surface of La Place des Festivals.

INNOCENCE

ADRIAAN GEUZE AND ANNEMARIE KUIJT Translation by Michael O’Loughlin

INTOXICATING CITIES: BARCELONA AND PARIS 1980 – 1990 The death of Franco and the definitive Spanish move towards democracy lent new self-confidence to Catalonia. Nationalism and rivalry with Madrid played, and continues to play, a large role for the region. This was also the golden age for the football club FC Barcelona. Traditionally, Catalonia has been the gateway to Europe for the Iberian peninsula, which opened up new prospects when Spain joined the European Community in 1986. An explosive growth in tourism to the Costa Brava and Barcelona lent great impetus to Catalonia and Barcelona was awarded the 1992 Olympic Games. It was decided, borne on this wave of euphoria, to build an Olympic city on the beach at Montjuic and to welcome the world in a beautiful historic city. A unique urban revitalisation project was begun, which initiated the demolition of derelict buildings in order to then transform those sites into squares or small parks. The designs had to relate to the Mediterranean typology of popular public space. The residents of each participating neighbourhood benefitted from the programme and took ownership of the new urban spaces. For young architects, designing a small square was an exceptional opportunity to establish a reputation. In the absence of any building, they tried to apply their design talents to every element in the exterior space. In the sparse relief of their sites, they saw an opportunity for breathtaking compositions of zig-zagging ramps, retaining walls and slanted steps. Squares were paved with stone in diagonal relation or with concrete, which could sweep up from the flat surface to articulate individual spots. Streetlights, pergolas, shading structures, railings, trellises and bins were designed with great ambition and rather pretentiously made in intrusive materials like stainless steel and corten steel. Unlike in public spaces in the rest of the world, the streetlights were twisted or slanted. Trees were selected on the basis of their architectural appearance. A fountain or water feature was situated on the square, which usually arose from the composition of the base and the retaining walls. Each square was provided with a modern abstract artwork. The same design approach was also used for the showcase Olympic Games projects, such as the Sants Station Square, the Olympic Waterfront and the slopes of Montjuic. Large and idiosyncratic shading structures and light poles were designed. Striking architectural detailing seemed an end in itself. The architects were given carte blanche in their designs and worked outside the usual catalogue standard for materials and outside the prevailing management programme for the city’s exterior spaces. This seemed to mark an end to the years of political stagnation and decay. The construction industry and architecture enjoyed a boom. The postwar cultural impasse and the design talent that had been kept undeveloped for decades was like a volcano that erupted with hot dollops of lava landing in every neighbourhood. This hardened and solidified lava became Barcelona’s proud welcoming sign for visitors to the Games. The bustling everyday life

on the more than 100 little squares and parks beneath the Mediterranean sun in the eternally Gaudiesque tourist Barcelona came as a revelation. The subtle urbanist interventions focused on public space, and this seemed to be the recipe for successful urban renaissance. At the same time, the French president was presenting his political legacy. Mitterand introduced his grands projets, intended to recalibrate Paris’s reputation as the prototype of the ultimate city. To the fore among these grands projets were two new urban parks, Parc de la Villette and Parc André Citroën. An international competition was announced for the design of Parc de la Villette on the site of the old slaughterhouses. The Parc de Bercy, commissioned by the former President of France (1974 – 81) Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, was also realised on the site of the beloved wine cellars opposite Mitterand’s Grande Bibliothèque. For the first time since Napoleon III’s boulevards and the 19th-century parks, Paris was being updated as a concept. Paris and Barcelona were proof that exterior spaces could bring the city to life. The Olympic squares would be a turning point for urban design and the design of public spaces, the equivalent of Mies van der Rohe’s influence on architecture with the German Pavilion, designed for the World Fair in Barcelona in 1929. There were two eras: before Barcelona and after Barcelona. The renaissance of the Catalan capital through the realisation of hip exterior spaces and the new Parisian parks were imitated in European cities during the economic boom of the 1990s. The flood of projects led to a new specialisation within architecture and landscape architecture: the design of exterior space. It became a professional emancipation with viral characteristics. Study trips, publications and conferences sprang up, annual prizes were established, with cities engaging in real competition. In art, design and architecture faculties, a new generation of students graduated in the design of squares and parks. Lyon, Stockholm, Helsinki, Copenhagen, Reykjavík, Manchester, London, Glasgow, Berlin, Hamburg, Moscow, Amsterdam and Antwerp modeled themselves on Barcelona, though without the context of the Mediterranean sun and without the cheerful public culture of Latin society. The new Barcelona formula was applied to European squares, shopping streets and waterfronts. New parks were being constructed everywhere. The new discipline was imitated in China, Southern Korea and North America. Everyone would get their own Ramblas, every city its Bercy. In historical terms, the Barcelona style arises from an architectural attitude to design in which the exterior space is not the natural urban void, but is seen as an object. In this approach, the unpretentious urban space cannot invite urban activity or a seasonal atmosphere. The European city derives its character from public space with its own style and tradition. This is produced by the standards for trees and material ornament. Each city has its own DNA. Urban management was always based on a modest catalogue and enduring local customs. All that changed after Barcelona. The urban void would bear the signature of the coquettish architect of the day. The predictable

I285

humourless and idealised cultural and ethnic self-image. All danger has been banished. The artists’ impressions are in every way the grotesque contemporary equivalent of medieval prints and paintings of Paradise — Mother and Child in the garden. In paradise it is always spring too, people do not age, there is the tree of knowledge, there are fruits and flowers and birds. The people love, sing, read, garden. Paradise is safe and enclosed. The water babbles, but unlike in the Photoshop pictures, there is a snake in the tree, biding its time. The new Photoshop collage technique degenerated into the brazen display of good intentions. With their illustrated designs, the architects sold fake propagandistic manifestos for the new Utopia, with purely well-meaning and innocent public space.

MASS CULTURE AND THE ACCELERATION OF THE MODERN CITY

The little Garden of Paradise by the Upper Rhenish Master displays a hortus conclusus, an enclosed garden. The hortus conclusus is a traditional motif in painting which in the Middle Ages symbolised Mary’s innocence.

obstacle-free void between façades and buildings would disappear. The urban space inspired a lost, restless design, in which each component was given an explicitly architectural role. The space became an interior, stuffed with furniture, sculptures and objects with stylised detail. The new international attitude embraced a generic decorative modernism, without context, without dogma, without narrative. The new urban space lacked modesty and sobriety. The urban environment was no longer a naturally neutral domain — the public space — but became the glittering goal, the destination, the object.

A CULTIVATED INNOCENCE Political leaders envisaged the transformations of brownfield sites and the gentrification of rundown neighbourhoods. Working with the realestate market, programmes were set up in which the approach to exterior space and parks played an important role. This was a great stimulus to the new professionals. The emancipation of the design of the exterior space went hand in hand with a major innovation in graphics: Adobe’s Photoshop software. For local government officials and clients who couldn’t read architectural plans and for developers who wanted to back up their promises, the artist’s impressions was vital. Photoshop was developed as a technique for collage and copying, in which each image could be evoked or combined and coloured. Photoshop offered designers a graphic rhetoric of self-quoting clichés. This made designing external space an easy sampling practice, for a constant reproduction of the generic Barcelona style. Photoshop was like painting for amateurs and had a huge influence on mannered design. The architects cultivated a benevolent world of harmony and innocence. The artists’ impressions have a Mediterranean sky where it is always springtime, with blooming plants and blossoming trees. There are balloons. Happy children are playing in the foreground. Women are strolling, sitting, chatting. People are captured in an innocent moment of happy interaction. Water is safe and inviting to the touch. Cars and commerce behave themselves. The images display a

286

ADRIA AN GEUZE AND ANNEMARIE KUIJT

The illusion of idealised and innocent exterior space is in sharp contrast to the rapid evolution of the contemporary city. People used to travel to a city, looking for the protection of securely defined spaces with their own landmark institutions. The city was the destination. Now, we are constantly travelling through the city. The border between city and nature has faded away, the city extends itself endlessly with sub-centres containing suburbs, malls, business parks and wastelands. The original agricultural landscape has been hacked to pieces and is only recognisable in fragments. The new topography is an amorphous urban fabric shot through with a spaghetti of infrastructure. The lines of movement of rail and highway are usually walled-in, daubed and full of screaming billboards. Athletic bridges, stadiums, highway slip roads and metro stops are the new focal points in the mental map. This contemporary city is a three-dimensional moving decor; a chaotic, sometimes hypnotically cinematic, experience of images and sounds. The city displays the euphoria and brashness of mass culture in a visual bombardment of thousands of clichés from the media and everyday commerce. Images and sensations are barely consistent, more like a hybrid culture of shards and fragments. The familiar image of streets, squares and parks with public platforms and public buildings turns out to be outdated. We have only recently become acquainted with the new public domains of ubiquitous television, the highways, transport terminals, the malls and the lobbies. On top of that, the internet arrived. The media has an enormous influence on the city. A hybrid form of domains has emerged, everything seems turned upside down. The tables of the ubiquitous coffee chains are occupied by people working on their laptops. For students, the coffee chain has become the new library. The shopping streets and boulevard façades seem to coincide with internet pages. Old, unlovely abbattoirs, industrial skeletons and harbour warehouses turn out to be centres of innovation with prime real estate. Smart apps turn student rooms into short-stay hotels, and every car becomes a taxi. The mobile phone delivers more information and entertainment than all the newspapers, cinemas and concert halls could ever dream of. Museums, restaurants and shops all look similar. The egos of branding are driving the authentic soul out of the city. Cities are beginning to look like each other and lose authenticity. People hardly figure in them any more as individuals but as abstract caricatures of their subculture in permanent mutual congestion: commuter, shopper, worker, tourist, dog-owner, schoolchild, jogger. They are recognisable as such, in their appropriate costumes, and they move as if in a pre-programmed ritual dance. In a trance, to the beat of their smartphones, they navigate the preferred route according to their satellite. Addresses have a ranking or assessment, or they do not exist. Public places are increasingly semi-public, private domains. These inviting and delineated domains of shopping centres, lobbies, terminals and event spaces confuse

and manipulate their public with their controlled openness, their own security and management. Even the little public space that is left is strictly limited and laid out, so much so that it is questionable whether such a thing as public space even exists any more. The space has strict codes that refer to specific legal use. The street is subdivided and laid out for individual functions and this has made public space one-dimensional. In the contemporary city the space confines and worries you. Each zone is limited to familiar and desirable behaviour. In this way, public space deprives the city-dweller of creativity and intelligence. Whereas human evolution shows us that we can adapt to anywhere and that adaptation is in fact our greatest talent, it is this exact characteristic that the city dweller is being deprived of. This is even more true of the desire for encounter, exploration, play, contemplation and challenge. Living in this truncated biotope, the city dweller is constantly exposed to the seduction of commerce, and the odours of unhealthy food. The city dweller is being trained to become a walking, fast-eating primate. Individual public consumption has become the norm in the city street or on the park bench. Public space will soon become adaptive and interactive, data-driven. Sensors will measure everything and adjust the characteristics of the space. Shop windows with facial recognition, pavements with guidance and talking kerbs, LED streetlighting manipulating colour, temperature, neighbourhoods with micro-field wifi and self-driving cars. The fear of terrorism, riot and accidents have legitimised camera surveillance of the entire city. That has led to play, improvisation and suspicious behaviour no longer being acceptable. The expression of ethnic, religious, political or gender-based activity is also frowned upon. CCTV circuits with behaviour and facial recognition record all movements, witnessing every encounter. Ongoing dealings with time and place are stored away for evaluation. The beaten-down and weakened city dweller is distraught and withdraws into individual air bubbles, choosing the relative security of the subcultures that avoid interaction.

design is no longer relevant. There is a great need for discussion, academic and even political, about the public realm, about freedom, and about the important values of the Western world. There is a need for a new extra realm of public urban space: the fundamental public space. This space must guarantee privacy, freedom from surveillance and constant monitoring and must be safeguarded from any functional claims and commercial manipulation. The authentic classical space, the Agora and the English common are excellent prototypes for this desire. This space must be a forum, a safe platform for improvisation, play and exploration. Freedom of expression is a fundamental principle here. The space must have multifunctional uses and be open to pop-up culture. The new Agora has to affirm citizens’ rights, and in principle you could even place a guillotine there. Only then would you have a truly public realm. Designers have to once again lend meaning to this new generation of shared, common space. It is inevitable that their quest will lead to space that is simple in the architectural sense. The city dweller, stripped of dignity and individuality, seems strongly attracted to informal, improvised spaces, the delicious anonymity of spaces that have not yet been appropriated by city branding and programme. Car parks, abandoned factory sites, harbours and warehouses are magnets. It would seem that they offer the best guarantee to satisfy a natural desire for freedom and democracy. Commerce, aesthetics and formality are a threat to this. Unpretentious, leftover spaces offer the perfect status quo to inspire designers.

THE NEW AGORA The user of the contemporary urban space has become a victim, prisoner of an unscripted conspiracy. He or she can no longer depend on the old categories and references, not knowing how far freedom extends into the public space, manipulated at all times by commerce and restricted by rules of behaviour, spied on by cameras, with algorithms determining what is inappropriate activity. Even the combined talents of all the Catalan designers together could offer no solace in the current situation of anti-terrorism buffers, CCTV, legal standards, fast-food banners, ongoing festivals and the addiction to wifi access. Barcelona’s Olympic squares of yesteryear are overrun by millions of semi-naked tourists. Additionally, the world’s most legendary promenade, the Ramblas, was chosen for a perverse terrorist attack. This deed left far more traces behind it than just the blood on the hexagonal paving stones. The relaxed urban stroll now demands permanent vigilance and a state of high alert. Bollards, police in hi-vis vests and armed soldiers have become part of the streetscape. It is true that in New York, capital of the free spirit, the members of the Occupy movement were allowed to express themselves — as long as they stayed away from Wall Street. An invisible red line had been drawn somewhere, three miles from Downtown, indicating how far political freedom could be extended into the public space. In North America, Australia and Asia, as well as in Europe, real-estate magnates exert great influence over important urban spaces. They programme the space and are constantly restricting the target groups. In the contemporary urban environment the quest for innocence is a perilous adventure but it cannot be disputed that designing public space needs a new perspective. The contemporary city dweller longs for an unambiguous view. The world of innocence and generic

I287

AFTERWORD: DESIGN, CURATION AND IDENTITY

Public spaces in the city have long been valued for their various social and ecological functions, as well as for their capacity to imbue a place with a unique identity. Public spaces reflect the particular time and culture of a place, shaping its identity, while lending a specific character and eventfulness that inevitably distinguishes one city from another. Hyde Park, Trafalgar Square and the various parks and gardens of London offer a unique profile and a set of experiences that are quite different from the squares and piazzas of Rome or the boulevards and parks of Paris, for example. Each city has its own unique character, and each particular space has its own individual detail, feeling and sense of place. For the past few decades cities around the world have sought to further enhance and diversify their public spaces, partly for the same social and ecological reasons that have always supported the value of public space, but also for renewed priorities around identity. Cities are looking to leverage their own unique attributes in an effort to differentiate themselves from other cities, to present a competitive advantage in terms of attracting investment, residents, workers, businesses and visitors. Increasingly, this interest leads not only to inventiveness with regard to physical design (what a place looks and feels like) but also in terms of its programming and activation. Markets, parades, festivals, performances, assemblies and other events enrich the culture, identity and experience of any particular place. There is an inevitable reciprocity, or synergy, between the physical, designed characteristics of a space and the events that take place in it at any given moment in time. This wonderfully creative and instructive book speaks to the diverse range of social occasions that can occur in a variety of public spaces around the city. Some of the spaces described are photographed from a single vantage point at different times to capture the variations of use over a long period – music festivals one day, arts and sculpture the next, food markets another day, winter ice-skating the next, and so on. Sometimes a kind of collage-like displacement occurs, when one sees expansive areas of grass and flowers with deck chairs in the otherwise stone-hard Trafalgar Square for example, or the dramatic lighting of the massive Battersea Power Station façade with colourful and cinematic imagery, a dramatic backdrop for concerts, events and art. These kinds of theatrical surprise evoke a sense of wonder and play, effectively revitalising habitually overlooked or taken-for-granted backgrounds into provocatively new and fresh experiences. Given the duration of time, the eventfulness of a particular place only gets richer and deeper as more visits yield more varied kinds of experience, encounter and memory. One day emptiness and solitude, another a spectacle of colour and sound, another a bustling market, another a massive bloom of flowers, and so on, as the vagaries of weather, season and the specific nature of the occasions themselves lend an ever-accruing depth of consciousness, with layers of special and unrepeatable experiences. Such is the richness of life — the reason why, as social animals, humans like to be immersed in places

288

JAMES CORNER

JAMES CORNER

with other people, and often with other people who are diverse and different. Think of the cosmopolitan vitality of the bazaar, the spectacle of the theatre, the bustling crowds of the market or the pleasures of simply passing time in the green urban park. Many of the examples and images in this book speak beautifully to the richness of life in the varied public spaces of the city, and they do so in often surprising and inventive ways, with all sorts of new uses, colourful settings, unusual activities and surreal experiences. The inventiveness of spatial activation has today become a specialty itself. Public space programmers, curators and directors are now widely sought after, bringing with them an entrepreneurial sense of mission and a creative eye for drama. Often, locality is the key inspiration — looking to leverage the peculiarities of the place: local weather, neighbourhood, vibe, context and particular people, groups or adjacent actors. New York’s High Line still maintains an air of counterculture and ‘edge’ in its programming, for example, reflective of its industrial history and diverse neighbourhood context, and curated by the very capable and creative Friends of the High Line. In fact there are several ‘curators’ of the High Line — arts, horticulture, community and special events — each occasion nuanced to reflect imaginative reinterpretations of the High Line mystique, while catering to a diverse range of interest groups. Special efforts are made to reach out to diverse and often underserved social groups to ensure a sense of equitable inclusion and participation, leading to special cultural events, ethnic food festivals, local music, special education sessions and other such locally inspired occasions, authentic to the place. Similarly, many cities and developers are looking for the special ‘place-making’ ingredients that will help their own projects distinguish themselves, with programming now front-and-centre. We are seeing in cities everywhere a renewed optimism and commitment to the activation of public space, largely because it is fun and people are drawn to it but mostly because of the emphasis upon local identity, and the capacity of amped-up locality to catalyse investment and community. Programming also, obviously, helps not only in attracting people but with revenue generation that can also help support the expenses of orchestrating events, maintenance and upkeep. So in cities all around the world we are seeing increased interest, investment and expertise devoted to the activation and curation of public spaces. However, amid all of this excitement for programming and activation, might we not also detect a depreciation of interest in the design of the physical space itself? After all, in the world of programming, ‘design’ can be viewed as an impediment or a limitation. Image and look may still be important, if only superficially, while programmers prefer an ‘open’ and ‘flexible’ arrangement, with little encumbrance. Spaces whose design is primarily driven by a mandate of maximum flexibility can often end up with very similar characteristics: furniture is temporary and moveable; surfaces level, flat and expansive; planting limited to edges and ideally in moveable planters; lighting confined to

tall masts for maximum flexibility; water features mandatory for playful interaction, but designed to be turned off at any time to provide useable floor area; a token big icon or artwork somewhere for image; and large access points with hidden cameras for security and surveillance. First impressions might be of a modern, minimalist space, clean and unencumbered, but ultimately these spaces are bland with little personality, charm or capacity to uplift the spirit, just a vacant ‘anywhere’ emptiness awaiting activation. ‘Programming the urban surface’ and a design vocabulary of sheds, platforms, stages, plinths, theatres, frames, equipment, infrastructures, utilities and similar invitations for infinitely flexible use can all too easily lead to impoverished or formulaic physical designs. It is surprising to many to learn that the High Line, for example, was never designed for programme or activity per se; the design was simply inspired and informed by its history and unique aura and atmosphere as a ‘found object’ in the context of Manhattan’s West Side. The curators were brought in after the design to interpret how its various spaces might be most effectively appropriated. Similarly, the magnificent Bryant Park is first a strong and clear design before it is the amazing theatre of richly varied programming that it supports. It is all too easy to dismiss, overlook or discount the design of the physical setting as the event begins to assume the headlines. Landscape architects and urbanists should definitely worry when they encounter various agencies who think that all the designer needs to do is to create a relatively simple enclosure, with a flat and level surface, supplied with electricity and water at key spots, and scattered with colourful off-the-shelf moveable furniture. In their mind’s eye, the programmers want maximum flexibility, a blank canvas; the events they will conjure up are what matter most; design can be too much of a limitation on what is possible. This mentality misses the value that good design brings to locality, to identity, to everything that imbues urban eventfulness with place and specificity. To see the same open spaces in every city — with red tables and chairs scattered around a relatively uninspired open surface of either gravel or lawn, with a standard café pavilion and some random interactive features — fails to meet the measure of what it means to create uniquely designed environments that are peculiar to and resonant with their place and time, that precipitate a vital sense of special identity, and that create the very ‘theatre’ for life to play out in newly dramatic ways. Good design provides flexibility and space for a wide variety of possible events and activities, while also shaping the constraints and characteristics that demand novel approaches toward programming. Generic design supports generic programming; place-specific, inventive design invites new interpretations and new possibilities for programming and activation. There are many examples in this book of colourful appropriations of inventive installations, activations and curated programmes, but the truly exceptional examples are those that marry uniquely designed places with creative programming. Truly great and timeless places foreground a powerful synergy between the designed setting and the sheer range of experiences that the space might then support, often specific to locale, environment and culture. Such reciprocity is essential to good design and to the artful enrichment of diverse urban cultures, and this book is testament to the powerful appeal of good design, artful curation and the shaping of local identity.

AF289

Fit

Fit

ne

ss

(So

Fit

cia

ne

ss

Fo p. od T 74 ru – 8 ck: 5 Ha

l Tr

ac

(10

k):

0m

Ce

ntr

Tra c

al

k):

Gre

Be

en

rge

p. 2

sd

08

eS

–2

ein

rd

Pla

za

.2

mm

48

oc

–2

k:

Fit n p. ess 13 4 – (Bas 13 ket ba 7 53

Ce

ntr

al

Gre

en

p.

20

8–

21

Ha p. mmo 24 8 – ck: B 25 e 3 rges

Ha

lo

Sw

Jen

ing

ga

:L

aw n

Blo

292

ck

s:

on

Dp

La wn

.1

22

on

–1

Dp

33

.1

22

33

(Ou

tdo

or

Gy

m)

:C

en

tra

lG

ree

np

.2

08

–2

13

Lig

hti

ng

ll):

A’B

ec

ke tt

Ur

ba

nS

qu

are

3

Ice de

Se

ine

La mp p. 94 : Wa –1 t 01 ch T his

–1

ss

13

ep

Ha

rva

ne

:L

aw n

on

Dp

.1

Sp

22

ac

e

–1

33

-sk

ati

ng

:H

arv ard

Pla

za

p.

74

–8

5

Lig Sq hting ua re : A’B p. 13 ecke 4 – tt U 13 7 rban

Lin

Lin e p. Art 24 8 – (Scal 25 e C 3 om

pa

ris

on

): B

erg

es

de

Se

Pic

on

nic

Pla p. tform 74 – 8 : Ha rva 5

Pla

tfo

rm

(St

ag

e):

eA

rd

Ha

le:

rt (

Wo rl

dM

ap

): B

erg

es

de

Se

ine

p.

24

8–

25

Pla

rva

ntr

al

Gre

en

p.

20

za

rd

Pla

8–

21

3

nte

rs:

Ha

rva

rd

Pla

za

p.

74

–8

74

): B

erg

es

de

Se

ine

p.

24

8–

25

3

–8

5

Tre p. e Pla 13 8 – nter 14 : V& 3 A

Co

urt

oo

ds

Lin

e

ke tt

Ur

ba

Pic p. nic T 74 a – 8 ble: 5 Ha

n

pla yB

oa

rd)

:B

erg

es

de

sS

Pla yE ein

e

lem

en

ts:

rva

rd

La wn

Pla

on

za

Dp

.1

22

–1

5

Tre e p. 1 Pla 44 nter –1 : B 49 att e p.

ec

Pic t p. ure F 20 8 – ram 21 e (D 3 is

Pla

za

ze

3 Pic Sq nic T ua a re ble ( p. 13 Whe 4– e 13 ls): A 7 ’B

Ce

Ma

Pic n p. ic Ta 21 4 – ble: 21 The 7 G

D

Tab

rt (

ine

Lin

Pic n p. ic Ta 12 2 – ble: 13 Law 3 n

eA

rse a

Po we r

Sta

tio

nP op

Tre e p. Pla 13 n 4 – ter: 13 A’B 7 ec

-Up

Pa rk

ke tt

Ur

ba

nS

qu

are

ya rd

VISUAL 293

AuthenticatedINDEX

33

Se

Se

at:

Wa tc

hT his

Sp

ac

ep

.9

4–

10

at

at:

Wa tc

hT his

un

Lou

ng

er)

: La wn

on

Dp

. 12

2–

13

ipp

ing

Co

nta

ine

r: B

erg

es

de

Se

ine

ac

k):

La wn

on

Dp

.1

22

Sp

ac

ep

.9

p. 2

4–

10

–2

33

r):

1 at

at:

Th e

Go

od

sL

ine

p. 2

14

(De

ck

ch

air

): L

aw n

on

Dp

.1

22

–1

La wn

on

D

33

–2

Se a p. 1 t: Ch 22 ildr – 1 en 33 ’s s

17

Se a p. t: Ta 12 2 – ble a 13 n 3 d Ch

48

–1

3

Se

Sh

nd

Se a p. t (Su 12 2 – n Lo 13 un ge 3

Se t (S

iro

1 Se

Sea

(Ad

53

air s:

La wn

on

et

up

:L

aw n

on

D

D

Se a Gra t: Ta Wa nary ble a tch Sq nd Th uar Cha is S e/L i pa ew rs: H a ce is p. Cub rvard 94 – 1 itt p. Plaz 01 86 a p -93 . 7 4–

Str

Str p. 1 uctur 92 e (V –1 i 97 trine

294

s):

La

Pro

me

na

de

de

sA

rtis

tes

uc

tur

e(

Sw

ing

Tim

e):

La wn

on

Dp

.1

22

–1

33

85

Tab

Str p. 1 uctur 34 e (B –1 37 arbe

cu

e):

A’B

ec

ke tt

Urb

an

Sq

ua

le:

La wn

on

Dp

.1

22

–1

33 Tab Th le-te eG n oo nis: ds H Lin arva e( Bra rd Pl nd aza ed ) p p. 74 .2 14 – 85 –2 17

re

Tab Ce le-te ntr al nnis Gre (B en ran p. ded 20 8 – ): La 21 wn 3 on

Ten

t: L

aw n

on

Dp

.1

22

–1

pe

e:

Be

.1

22

–1

33

33

Ten

Tee

Dp

t: H

arv ard

Pla

za

p. 7

4–

85 Um

rge

sd

eS

ein

ep

.2

48

–2

53 Um

Um Ha brel rva la: W rd Pla atc za h T p. his 74 S – 8 pac e 5

p.

94

–1

01

Um

bre

bre

lla

lla:

CA

:W atc

AC

p. 2

hT his

Sp

58

ac

–2

ep

bre

lla

:H

arv ard

Pla

za

p. 7

4–

85

61

.9

4–

10

1

VISUAL 295

AuthenticatedINDEX

INDEX

SUBJECT INDEX 2012 London Olympics 271 4th Dimension 29 Accelerating Darwin 17 Adaptability 46, 48, 49 Adaptive systems 46 Advertising 57, 108 Age of instant gratification 17, 212 Agora 10, 287 Al fresco dining 25, 86, 92, 96, 98, 204 Amphitheatre 35, 56, 57, 108, 138, 194, 208, 211, 213, 214, 215, 217, 231, 232, 233, 275, 276, 280 Anchors 60, 126, 218 Annual installations 101, 241 Anthropology 71 Architectural frames 195 Artificial beaches 275 Artificial grass 25, 86, 89, 98, 101, 134 Arts programme 63, 86 Assemblies 49, 71, 288 Barbecue (BBQ) 134, 135, 136, 137 Basketball 134, 135, 136, 227, 257, 276 Bazaar 288 Beanbags 58, 80 Book Fair 8, 27, 95 Borrowed activation 27 Built-in foundations 76, 107 Burning of the Böögg 218, 219, 220, 221, 222 Café 237, 242, 289 Calendar of events 8, 9, 17, 57, 86, 110, 124, 131, 196, 230, 233, 235 Canopy 34, 35, 158, 258, 259, 260, 261 Car Park 59, 134, 152, 192, 218, 219, 221, 243, 256, 282, 287 Carnivals 40, 58, 198, 255 Chalkboard 250, 251, 252 Chance encounter 10, 176, 270 Chelsea Fringe Festival 144, 146, 147, 149, 272 Christmas 102, 107, 218, 230, 238 Circus Knie 218, 219, 222 Climate as change 229 Climbing wall 250, 251, 253 Commercial events 57, 198 Community activation 276 Community cohesion 8, 19 Competitions 27, 29, 89, 284 Competitive advantage 288 Concerts 27, 53, 58, 86, 87, 92, 94, 96, 122, 124, 126, 131, 144, 145, 217, 230, 235, 237, 238, 245, 250, 278 Consumption 67, 287 Craft Beer Festival 89 Cultural diversity 67 Cultural overlay 8, 76, 234 Curated Events 9, 38, 275 Curation 7, 53, 58, 66, 67, 71, 76, 87, 91, 133, 134, 195, 197, 275, 286, 289 Curling 53, 74, 77, 79, 81, 82, 85 Dancing 40, 84, 100, 124, 131 Day of the Waterfalls 40 Deckchairs 86, 91, 101, 233, 252, 272 Democracy 287 Demonstrations 42, 69, 198 Demountable installations 134 Desire lines 74, 76, 102

296

Digital presence 69 Diner en Blanc 238 Dinghies 122 Diversity 45, 46, 49, 52, 53, 67, 212, 277, 279, 281 Ecology of the city 38 Edge condition 29, 35, 82, 89, 126, 232, 234, 235 Educational programmes 230 Emergency exits 60 Ephemeral culture 282 Equity and full access 275 Ergonomic configurations 76 Ethnography 71 Festival of Light 192 Festivals 27, 29, 30, 34, 55, 58, 96, 108, 144, 148, 194, 196, 197, 198, 214, 223, 254, 272, 273, 275, 278, 282, 284, 287, 288 Field Condition 18 Fire pits 74, 77, 79, 81, 82, 85, 124, 129, 270 Floating Cinema 86, 89, 90 Floating Garden 248, 251, 253 Food markets 55, 86, 88, 144, 278, 288 Food trucks 31, 49, 53, 58, 74, 76, 77, 79, 80, 92, 94, 101, 122, 123, 124, 126, 129, 208, 210, 270 Fountains 17, 18, 28, 29, 39, 60, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 102, 103, 108, 138, 140, 192, 194, 198, 199, 219, 232, 240, 241, 242, 256, 272, 273 Funding 54, 55, 91, 235, 271, 273 Giant Bunnies 58, 63 Greater London Authority (GLA) 55, 108, 198, 202, 230 HBO Summer Screen 234 Health and well-being 57, 208, 211, 278 Human behaviour 6, 7, 10, 23, 48 Human scale 7, 10, 218, 219, 234 Hydraulic cranes 254 Ice maze 122 Ice rink 31, 40, 76, 83, 240 Identity 18, 40, 66, 124, 192, 194, 268, 270, 273, 274, 276, 280, 288, 289 Improvisation 48, 287 Incidental encounter 11, 25 Indeterminacy 18, 48, 255 Indigenous values 275 Infrastructure 7, 8, 9, 18, 26, 27, 31, 35, 39, 40, 42, 64, 83, 106, 107, 111, 134, 145, 214, 217, 218, 219, 222, 271, 275, 282 Instant city 68 Insurance 274 Interactive 8, 31, 38, 102, 107, 124, 126, 188, 192, 195, 197, 204, 245, 278, 280, 283, 284, 287, 289 Intimacy 276 Jenga blocks 122, 129, 130 Kumbh Mela 71 Layered places 275 Lighting 18, 34, 57, 89, 102, 103, 122, 123, 126, 128, 192, 204, 219, 254, 258, 261, 282, 283, 284, 287, 288 London Design Festival 138, 139, 142, 204, 206 Low-cost adaptation 69 Lumiere London 31 Luminothérapie 284 Maintenance 7, 55, 56, 60, 83, 102, 104, 111, 120, 126, 235, 271, 284, 289 Markets 27, 30, 55, 88, 89, 92, 101, 218, 228, 234, 235, 255, 276, 278, 288 Marketing 55, 57, 64, 91, 94, 124, 271, 273, 274 Marketing suite 144, 146 Meanwhile uses 8, 91 Memory 71, 288 Metric marker 213 Miroir d’Eau 29 Montreal Jazz Festival 192 Motation 10 Motion sensors 103, 107 Moveable landscapes 35 Moveable parts 69 Moveable tables and chairs 52, 98

Multiplicity of publics 68 Multi-purpose mandate 283 Natural swimming pool 91 Nested rings 209 Notation 10, 12, 18, 76, 78 Occupy movement 71, 287 Olympics 55, 168, 271, 272, 280 Outdoor cinema 31, 33, 89, 92, 101, 122, 144, 145, 148, 217, 230, 235, 238, 241, 250 Palio 11 Parcours 250 Paris Plage 7 Park-as-platform 268 Participatory installations 31 Parvis 13 Pavilions 42, 160, 162, 200, 284 Pedestals 262 Pentalum 124, 130 Performers 23, 82, 127, 152, 237, 241, 256, 268 Permanence 9, 13, 38, 68, 69, 71, 88, 229 Photo London 241, 243 Photoshop 286 Physical experience 29, 270 Piazza 11, 13, 29, 34, 275, 288 Picnic tables 76, 122, 129, 250 Place-making 9, 10, 18, 19, 23, 29, 54, 91, 163, 255, 271, 274, 275, 278, 288 Planters 32, 75, 76, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 144, 146, 260, 288 Play Day 61, 62, 63 Play nests 280 Play spaces 270, 275 Playgrounds 40, 48, 62, 122, 280 Pleasure gardens 280 Plug and play 9, 35 Plug-in system 18 Pluralistic society 66 Pop-up 29, 31, 34, 69, 76, 101, 122, 134, 255, 275, 276, 277, 287 Postmodern 6 Power of the participant 32, 34 Programmatic elements 76 Protests 27, 49, 69, 70, 201 Psychology 23 Psychology of the temporary 25 Public Art 8, 31, 32, 61, 63, 88, 91, 124, 180, 184, 198, 200, 271, 273, 274, 279 Public life studies 10 Public participation 124 Public realm-led approach to development 271 Public/Private partnerships 235 Publicness 43, 66 Pumpkin Fest 125 Reciprocity 288 Reconfiguration 31, 33, 34 Recycling 150 Regeneration 56, 144, 146, 271, 277 Repeat events 77, 108, 139, 230 Restrooms/toilets 91, 122, 211, 235, 250 Reversibility 71 Running lanes 208 Scale 123, 124, 130, 131, 133, 134, 192, 198, 206, 218, 219, 223, 232, 234, 242, 250, 252, 270, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 281, 282 Sculpture gardens 244 Seasonal variation 77 Seating 11, 33, 49, 50, 57, 63, 65, 76, 77, 82, 86, 87, 89, 95, 98, 108, 113, 122, 123, 126, 134, 135, 136, 138, 140, 144, 146, 148, 150, 174, 176, 180, 184, 194, 198, 200, 206, 208, 211, 214, 215, 216, 217, 219, 224, 231, 232, 241, 245, 248, 249, 250, 252, 253, 255, 256, 258, 262, 265, 270, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 278, 279, 280, 281, 283 Security 7, 233, 237, 271, 286, 287, 289 Selfie 62, 63, 101, 124, 132 Sense of place 31, 288 Service trench 255, 256 Shipping container 31, 62, 65, 129, 130, 248, 250, 252

Social activators 75 Social coherence 42 Social ecologies 46, 49 Social infrastructure 31, 214 Social media 66, 69, 70, 71, 91, 124, 160, 163, 170, 212, 270, 274 Social rituals 275 Social theatre 278 Sociology 6, 7, 10, 23, 235 Soft and hard infrastructure 275 Spaces of change 17, 21 Spatial programmability 18, 19 Speakers’ Corner 69, 70, 71 Spectators 17, 82, 90, 93, 152, 198, 217 Sponsored installations 108, 113 Sponsorship installations 114, 116, 118, 121 Spontaneity 25, 68 Static monotony 8 Storage 27, 45, 76, 98, 184, 211, 224, 272 Strawberry and Screen 89, 93 Study pods 214, 217 Sun loungers 128, 248, 295 Surveillance 7, 287 Sustainability 150 Tents 31, 34, 49, 53, 107, 131 Terrace seats 89, 211 The City as Commons 42 Theatres 192, 289 Theatrical surprise 288 Tipis 250, 251 Triangulation 25, 214 Twitter 71 Umbrella 81, 98, 99, 139, 258 Uncanny 268, 270 Under-utilised 8, 190 urban community 38 Urban eventfulness 289 Urban surface 16, 38, 45, 289 Utopia 38, 286 Vehicle access 59 Viewing platform 96, 274 Vitrines Evènement 195 Water attenuation 224, 227 Water cycle 224 Water mirror 29 Water park 273 Water play 92, 105, 214, 216, 275 Water supply 57, 111 Weather as event 229 Websites 77, 110, 111, 150, 170, 233 Wifi 89, 134, 214, 215, 216, 217, 237, 287 Yoga 59, 83, 126, 130, 238, 254

INDEX OF NAMES Acconci Studio  32 Adès, Thomas  162 AECOM  160 – 67 AFJD Studio  172 – 173 AL_A 30 Albergaria, José  248 – 253 Alexander, Christopher  15 Allen, Stan  9, 18 Allies and Morrison Masterplan Team  86 – 93 Appleyard, Donald  15 Archigram 68 Argent  86 – 93, 271 – 274 Artevia  248 – 253 ARUP  160 – 167 ASLA 234 ASPECT Studios  214 – 217, 275 – 277 Atkins  198 – 203 Azzi Architecture  248 – 253 Azzi, Franklin  248 – 253 Backer, Rik Baas  248 – 253 Baer, Taylor  191 Ball-Nogues Studio  156 Balmond, Cecil  160, 162, 163, 164 Banham, Reyner  6 Banks, Elizabeth  20 Barash, F. Philip  268 – 270 Bauer, Kirsten  275 – 277 Belcic, Larissa  189 Berrizbeitia, Anita  9 Bischoff, Oliviewr  248 – 253 Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG)  163, 167, 210 Blaine, David  108, 118 Bloomberg Philanthropies  150 Bogman, Carmela  32–33 Bosselmann, Peter  15 Bread Collective  145 Bremner, Kaz  176 – 177 British Film Institute  57, 94 Brown, Denise Scott  15 Burdett, Ricky  15 Burton, Mel  57 Buttress, Wolfgang  103 Byrd, Warren  12 Cairns, Johanna  191 CAL Architects  102 – 107 Carat Sport  248 – 253 Cardona, Ignacio  190 Cassiel 241 Change Is Good  248 – 253 Chang, Ruth  191 Chemetoff, Alexander  12 CHROFI Architects  214 – 217 CIAM 14 Claude Cormier+ Associés  244, 246 CODA 155 Cohen, Lizbeth  180 Coleman Centre for the Arts  32 Collective-LOK 30 Colorado State University  20 Common Spaces, Harvard  53, 74, 76, 77 Conway, Hazel  54 Corajoud, Michel  29 Cormier, Claude  244, 245, 247 Corner, James  9, 208 – 213, 288 – 289 Cullen, Gordon  15 Daily tous les jours  284 Daoust Lestage  192 – 197, 282 – 284 Davis, Howard  59 de Angelis, Massimo  43 Delcroix, Stéphanie  271 Dempsey, Nicola  54 – 57 Denton Corker Marshall  275 Design With Company  168, 178 – 179 De Urbanisten  224 – 229 Deutscher, Jeremiah  176 – 177 Diana, Princess of Wales  160 Diller Scofidio Renfro (DSR)  33, 34, 35 DIXNEUFCENTQUATREVINGTSIX ­Architecture  34 Dixon Jones Architects  21, 240 – 243 Donald Insall Associates  240 – 243 Dougherty, Gareth  53 Dragset, Ingar  203 Duong, Luat  189 Eichelman, Janet  61, 62 Eliasson, Olafur  162, 164

Elliott, Peter  134 – 137 Elmgreen, Michael  203 Emergent 158 Escobedo, Frida  142–143 Escobedo Soliz Studio  154 Exterior Architecture  144 – 149 Fabergé 244 Finck, Liana  68 fjmt architects  275 Florida, Richard  15 Folch, Tomás  48 Ford, Gina  268 – 270 Foster+Partners  198 – 203, 230 – 233 Fountain Workshop  29, 86 – 93, 102 – 107, 138 – 143, 280 Frampton, Kenneth  6 Francis, Carolyn  15 Franco, Francisco  285 Franklin Azzi Architects  248 – 253 Freud, Sigmund  268 Fritsch, Katharina  203 Fujimoto, Sou  166 Fuller, Sheila R.  43 Gamper, Martino  142 Garcia Düttmann, Alexander  240 Gavrel, Julie  248 – 253 Gehl, Jan  10, 14, 15, 234 Gehry, Frank  162, 164 Gelatin 159 Geros, Christina  180, 188 – 189 Geuze, Adriaan  17, 285 – 287 Giedion, Sigfried  68 Gillespies  102 – 107 Giscard d’Estaing, Valery  285 Glancey, Jonathan  240 Goffman, Erving  15 Gomez Luque, Mariano  187 Gormley, Antony  200, 203 Grand, Pierre  248 – 253 GROSS.MAX.  21, 94, 101, 108 – 121, 204 – 207 Gustafson, Kathryn  20, 29 Gustafson Porter  20 Haacke, Hans  203 Hadid, Zaha  160, 162 Hall, Edward T.  15 Halprin, Anna  10, 12 Halprin, Lawrence  10, 12, 76 Hapa Collaborative  174 – 175 Hardesty, Hope  187 Hargreaves Associates  47 Hargreaves, George  9, 12, 20 Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD)  180, 187, 190, 191 Haworth Tompkins  94, 97, 101 Hein, Jeppe  205, 206 Heritage Lottery Fund  54 Herzog & de Meuron  166 Higher Works  176 – 177 Howard, Ebenezer  14 Höweler + Yoon  62, 122 – 133 HR&A  59, 61, 124 – 133 HWKN 155 Iaione, Christian  43 Ibelings, Hans  18 IF_DO Architects  30 Interboro Partners  74, 76, 77, 155 iredale pedersen hook  275 Ishikawa, Sara  15 Ito, Tomastu  190 Ito, Toyo  162 Izenour, Steven  15 Jacobs, Allan  15 Jacobs, Jane  7, 10, 15 James Corner Field Operations 208 – 213, , 278 – 281 Jaque, Andrés  154 Jason Bruges Studio  143 Jean Max Llorca (JML)  29 Jean Verville Architects  244, 245, 247 Jenny Sabin Studio  153 Jerram, Luke  30 Jeyasingh, Shobana  241 JIAKUN Architects  163 Jin, Keojin  186 – 187 Jodido, Philip  162 Johnson, Philip  159 karres+brands landscape architects  275 Keating, Ash  134 – 137 Kennedy, Richard  278 – 281

Kent, Fred  10, 19, 74 Kéré, Francis  167 Kim Wilkie  20, 138 – 143 King, Coretta Scott  69 King, Martin Luther Jr  69 Kishimoto, Eley  240 Koolhaas, Rem  6, 13, 15, 16, 160, 164 Kuijt, Annemarie  285 – 287 Lab Architecture Studio  275 Laliberté, Guy  197 Lasdun, Denys  94 – 101 Lateral Office  31, 193 LDA Design  144 – 149, 279, 280 Le Corbusier  14 Lee, Yuhun  186 – 187 Léger, Fernand  68 Lerup, Lars  6 Libeskind, Daniel  162 Lister, Nina-Marie  48 Loose Affiliates  170 – 171 Lopez-Piniero, Sergio  66 – 71 LOT 30 Lutyens, Edwin  198 Luxemburg, Rut Blees  240 Lydon, Mike  19 Lynch, Kevin  10, 15 Lyons 275 MacKechnie, Angus  94, 98, 101 Magdalena, Anne  248 – 253 Maine, John  94, 98 MaO architects  34 Marcus, Clare C.  15 Martens, Rogier  32–33 Matthew Soules Architecture  172 – 173 Mazzotta, Matthew  32–33 McChesney, Ian  272 McConnell, Mitch  69 Media 5  275 Mehrotra, Rahul  71 Menges, Achim  138, 141 Merkel, Angela  70 Michael Van Valkenburgh and ­Associates  31 Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig  48, 50, 285 Miller, Helen  189 Mitchell, Don  67, 68 Mitchell, Scott  53 Mitterand, François  285 MOS 156 Mosbach, Catherine  42 Mostafavi, Mohsen  53 Murray, Andy  272 MVRDV 163 MVVA 74 Myers, Robert  20 nARCHITECTS 158 Newman, Oscar  15 Niemeyer, Oscar  163 NIPPAYSAGE  244, 247 Nishizawa, Ryue  165 NÓS Architectes  247 Nouvel, Jean  165 OBRA 157 O’Carroll, Gerrard  240 OCMIS Fountain Designers  240 – 243 OKRA  31, 32 Olin, Laurie  29, 234 OLIN Partnership  21, 234 – 239 Olmstedt, Frederick Law  244, 268 OMA  13, 16, 32, 39, 48, 50, 164 Ooze Architects  274 Ostrom, Elinor  42 Oudolf, Piet  108 – 121, 165 Padjen, Elizabeth  122, 124 Paredes Pino  258 – 261 Parer, Amanda  63, 133 Partridge, David  271 Patkau Architects  30 Peck, Maia  191 Perschke, Kurt  192, 195, 197 Peyton-Jones, Julia  162, 163 Pfaff, Cali  187 Piano, Renzo  13 Pickett, Steward T. A.  38 Pinsky, Michael  271 Poehlmann, Annette  248 – 253 Potrč, Marjetica  274 Potters Fields Park Management Trust 55 Price, Cedric  162

Produce UK  271 Project for Public Spaces (PPS)  10, 19, 53, 74 Projection Artworks  145 PWP Landscape Architects  198 – 203 Quinn, Mark  202 Radcliffe University  180 Radić, Similjan  166 Rahm, Philippe  42 raumlaborberlin  55, 109 Reed, Chris  46 – 53, 76, 180 relais Landschaftsarchitekten  262 – 265 Rick Mather Architects  204, 205 Rival, Jacques  273 Rogers, Richard  13 Roquero, Pablo  187 Rossi, Aldo  15 ROY 159 Saint Phalle, Niki de  251, 253 SANAA 165 Sasaki Associates  59, 122 – 133 Sauerbruch, Matthias  39 Scarlett, Matt  187 Schütte, Thomas  202 Schwartz, Martha  9, 12, 20, 138 Sejima, Kazuyo  165 Selgascano  160, 167 Sert, Josep Lluís  68, 76 Sessions, Jeff  69 Shigematsu, Shohei  32 Shonibare, Yinka  203 SHoP 159 Shrigley, David  203 Silverstein, Murray  15 Simpson, Deane  40 Simpson Haugh Architects  144 – 149 Sitte, Camillo  14 Siza, Álvaro  160, 163 SLA 29 Sloterdijk, Peter  38 SMAQ Architects  40 Smith, Lance  189 Smithson, Peter  71 Snøhetta 47 SO-IL 156 Sommer, Robert  15 Sorkin, Michael  15 Souto de Moura, Eduardo  160, 163 Sreenivasan, Sree  70 Stephen Stimson landscape architects  180, 182 St George, Paul  230 Stoss Landscape Urbanism  19, 31, 48, 49, 53, 74 – 85, 180 – 191 Studio Myerscough  240 Studio Roosegaarde  88 Studio Weave  240 Sudjic, Deyan  15 Sveen, Amund Sjølie  257 Talmon Biran architecture studio  34 Taylor Cullity Lethlean  134 – 137 T.C.L landscape architects  275 Texxus  138 – 143 The Living  154 Thorsen, Kjetil  164 Thuleau, Alain  248 – 253 Tonkin Zulaikha Greer  275 Townshend Landscape Architects  20, 21, 29, 86 – 93, 230 – 233 Trew, Ken  271 – 274 Trump, Donald  69 Tschumi, Bernard  6, 13 ULR Studio  188 – 189 United Visual Artists  139 UP Projects  90, 109 Utile  122 – 133 Van Deusen, Richard  68 van Gogh, Vincent  247 Venturi, Robert  15 Vera, Felipe  71 Vetschpartner  218 – 223 Viva Vancouver  168, 170 Volkswagen  150, 153 Walker, Peter  9, 12, 20, 48, 49, 74 Wall, Alex  6, 9, 16, 18, 38 – 45 Wallach, Susan S. and Kenneth L.  180 Wallinger, Mark  202 Walsh, Cara  189 Wang, Hui  190 Wang, John  190 – 191

INDEX 297

Wangro, Chris 58 – 65, 122 – 133 Warren, Elizabeth 69 We Are Groundbreaking 271 Weckwerth, Georg 263 Weiwei, Ai 166 West 8 9, 17, 18, 21, 31, 254 – 257 Whiteread, Rachel 202 Whyte, William H. 7, 10, 11, 12, 15, 23, 25, 46, 48, 50, 76, 78, 207, 234 – 239 Wilkinson, Chris 28 Wilkie, Kim 29 William IV, King of the United Kingdom 202 Wiscombe, Tom 158 Wisniewski, Andy 189 Woodrow, Bill 202 WORK Architecture Company 156 Wycherley, R. E. 10 Xefirotarch 157 Yoon, Meejin 62 Young Architects Program (YAP) 150 – 159 Zach und Zünd Architekten 218 – 223 Zaha Hadid Architects 142 Zenghelis, Elia 39, 40, 42 Zenghelis, Zoe 39 Zhou, Ziyin 189 Zieta Prozessdesign 142 Zocchi, Giuseppe 11 Zumthor, Peter 165

298

INDEX OF PROJECTS 21 Balançoires (21 Swings), installation 195, 197, 284 A’Beckett Urban Square, Melbourne, Australia 134 – 137 Across the Buildings, London, United Kingdom 91 After Image, installation 30 Afterparty, installation 156 Alison Lapper Pregnant, installation 202 Anti-Object, installation 187 Appearing Rooms, installation 205, 206, 207 Arbores Laetae, Liverpool, United Kingdom 33, 34 Armchair Theatre, London, United Kingdom 94, 98, 100, 101 Around-About 34 Bass River Park 47 Battersea Power Station, London, United Kingdom 144, 288 Battersea Power Station Pop-up Park, London, United Kingdom 144 – 149 BEATFUSE, installation 157 Benthemplein Water Square, Rotterdam, The Netherlands 224 – 229 Bentway, Toronto, Canada 7 Berges de Seine, Paris, France 248 – 253 Binnenrotte Square, Rotterdam, The Netherlands 9, 31 Bird Cage, installation, London, United Kingdom 87, 273 Blow and Roll, installation 142 Bodyscapes, installation 189 Book Fair under Waterloo Bridge, London, United Kingdom 8, 27, 94 Boston Children’s Museum, Boston, Massachusetts, USA 61 Boston Common, Boston, Massachusetts, USA 268 Box Hill Gardens multi-purpose space, Melbourne, Australia 276 – 277 Bradford City Park, Bradford, United Kingdom 102 – 107 Brindleyplace development, Birmingham, United Kingdom 271 Bryant Park, New York City, New York, USA 31, 234 – 239, 289 Canopy, installation 158 Centre Pompidou, Paris, France 13 Centro Abierto de Actividades Ciudadanas (CAAC), Córdoba, Spain 258 – 261 Chicago Riverwalk, Chicago, Illinois, USA 268 – 270 Christmas Lights Switch On, Bradford, United Kingdom 107 City Hall Plaza, Boston, Massachusetts, USA 9, 27, 268 Consequence of Engagement, installation 189 Corduroy Road, installation 174 – 175 Cornell School of Architecture, Ithaca, New York, USA 32 COSMO, installation 154 Courtauld Gallery, London, United Kingdom 240 Courtyard in the Wind 32 Crest, installation 142 Croydon’s Box Park, London, United Kingdom 31 Crystal Building, Copenhagen, Denmark 29 Cumulus, Gorud Valley, Norway 40 Dance Floor, installation 244, 245, 247 Dandenong Pop-Up Park, Melbourne, Australia 277 Darling Quarter, Sydney, Australia 275 Discovery Green, Houston, Texas, USA 9, 46, 47 Dock Square temporary activation space, Melbourne, Australia 277 Downsview Park, Toronto, Canada 68 Duke of York Square, London, United Kingdom 20 Dulwich Picture Gallery Pavilion, London, United Kingdom 30 Du Musée Avenue, Montreal, Canada 30, 244 – 247 Dunescape, installation 159

Ecce Homo, installation 202 Eighteen Turns, Serpentine Gallery Pavilion 2001, London, United Kingdom 162 Elephant and Castle, London, United Kingdom 31 Elytra Filament Pavilion, London, United Kingdom 138, 141 Exhibition Road, London, United Kingdom 21 Federation Square cultural precinct, Melbourne, Australia 275 Flatiron Public Plaza Holiday Design Competition 30 Flatiron Triangle, New York City, New York, USA 30 Floating Cinema, London, United Kingdom 90 Flying Carpet, installation 257 Fourth Plinth, London, United Kingdom 30, 198 – 203 Future of Shade 30 German Pavilion, Barcelona World Fair 285 Gift Horse, installation 203 Governors Island, New York, USA 7 Granary Square (King’s Cross), London, United Kingdom 21, 29, 86 – 93, 271, 272, 273, 274 Grande Bibliothèque, Paris, France 285 Hahn/Cock, installation 203 Halo Swing, Boston, Massachusetts, USA 126 Harts Mill, Adelaide, Australia 276 Harvard Plaza, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 31, 38, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 74 – 85 Harvard Science Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 76 Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 19, 53, 74 – 85 Harvard Yard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 31, 49, 74, 76, 84 Heart of Hearts, installation 30 High Line, New York City, New York, USA 7 Highpoint Shopping Centre, Melbourne, Australia 277 Holding Pattern, installation 155 Humboldt Box, Berlin, Germany 264 Hy-Fi, installation 154 Identified Flying Object (‘The Birdcage), installation 273 I Like to Move It, installation 34 Impulse, installation 31, 193 In Search of 100 Years at 73 Brattle Street, installation 189, 190 – 191 Intrude, installation 63, 64, 65, 124, 133 Jade Eco Park, Taichung, China 42 John Madjeski Courtyard V&A, London, United Kingdom 138 – 143 Jubilee Gardens, London, United Kingdom 21 Junction Place, Wodonga, Australia 276 Kings College, London, United Kingdom 240 King’s Cross development, London, United Kingdom 29, 86, 270 – 274 Labyrinth, installation 244, 245, 247 Landscape to Portrait, installation 28 La Place des Festivals and La Promenade des Artistes Montreal, Canada 31, 192 – 197, 282 – 284 Latent (e)Scapes, installation 180, 181, 188 – 189 Lawn on D (LOD), Boston, Massachusetts, USA 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 122 – 133, 270 Le Miroir d’Eau, Bordeaux, France 28, 29 Lewis Cubitt Square (King’s Cross), London, United Kingdom 21, 29, 92, 273, 274 Light-Wing, installation 158 Liquid Sky, installation 156 London’s Largest Living Room, installation 240 Lost Star Matrix, installation 187 Louvre, Paris, France 248 Lumen, installation 153

Maggie Daley Park Ice Ribbon, Chicago, Illinois, USA 31 MAXXI, Rome, Italy 30, 150 Milstein Hall Boardroom, Cornell School of Architecture, Ithaca, New York, USA 32 Mirror Mirror, installation 143 Mirror Pool, Bradford, Uniteds Kingdom 13, 102 – 107 Model for a Hotel, installation 202 MoMA PS1, Brooklyn, New York City, New York, USA 30, 150 – 159 Montjuic, Barcelona, Spain 285 Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, Montreal, Canada 244 – 247 Monument, installation 202 More London, London, United Kingdom 20, 230 – 233 Mount Royal Park 244 Moving Dunes 247 MPavilion Australia, Melbourne, Australia 30 Musée d’Orsay, Paris, France 248 National Gallery, London, United Kingdom 198 National Theatre, London, United Kingdom 25, 96, 97, 101 Natural System Response, mural 134 – 137 Navy Yard Central Green, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA 208 – 213, 279, 281 Nelson’s Ship in A bottle, installation 203 New York Public Library, New York City, New York, USA 234 Of Soil and Water, installation 274 Olympic Waterfront, Barcelona, Spain 285 One and Other, installation 200, 203 One St Pancras, London, United Kingdom 21 Open House, installation 33 Opera House, Zurich, Switzerland 221 Parc André Citroën, Paris, France 285 Parc Bercy, Paris, France 285 Parc de la Villette, Paris, France 13, 16, 285 Paris Plage, Paris, France 7 (Park)ing Day, San Francisco, California, USA 30 Party Wall, installation 155 People’s Park, Berkeley, California, USA 67 Percutaneous Delight, installation 159 Piazza Del Campo, Siena, Italy 11 Piazza Risorgimento, Bari, Italy 34 Picnurbia, installation 168, 170 – 171 Ping(!) London, London, United Kingdom 31 Playa Urbana, installation 158 Play Me I’m Yours, Installation, Times Square, New York City, New York, USA 30, 31 Pole Dance, installation 150, 156 Pop-Brixton, London, United Kingdom 31 Pop Rocks, installation 172 – 173 Porch Parade, installation 168, 178 – 179 Potters Fields Park, London, United Kingdom 21, 55, 108 – 121, 230 Powerless Structures, installation 203 Princess Diana Memorial Fountain, London, United Kingdom 20 Public Farm One, installation 156 Public Square, Cleveland, Ohio, USA 280 – 281 Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, London, United Kingdom 21 Radcliffe Public Art Competition, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 180 – 191 Radcliffe Slum, installation 190 Really Good, installation 203 Red Ball, installation 192, 195, 197 Reflections, installation 190 Regardless of History, installation 202 Rising Water, sound installation 257 Riverside Square, London, United Kingdom 21

Robson Redux, Vancouver, Canada 30, 168 – 179 Rockefeller Plaza, New York City, New York, USA 31 Rosy The Ballerina, London, United Kingdom 55, 109 Royal Academy Courtyard, London, United Kingdom 21, 28, 29 Safe Zone, installation, Grand-Métis, Canada 48, 49 Sants Station Square, Barcelona, Spain 285 Saturate the Moment, installation 186 – 187 Schlossplatz — Temporary Park at Humboldt Forum, Berlin, Germany 262 – 265 Schouwburgplein, Rotterdam, The Netherlands 7, 9, 17, 18, 38, 254 – 257 Scoop at More London, London, United Kingdom 230 – 233 Seagram Building, New York City, New York, USA 48, 50 Seagram Plaza, New York City, New York, USA 11, 12 Sechseläutenplatz, Zurich, Switzerland 218 – 223 Serpentine Pavilion, Beijing, China 30, 163 Serpentine Pavilion, London, United Kingdom 30, 160 – 167 Shelby Farms Park, Memphis, Tennessee, USA 280, 281 Smale Riverfront Park, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA 268, 270 Somerset House, London, United Kingdom 240 Somerset House Fountain Court, London, United Kingdom 21, 29, 31, 240 – 243 Soundtrack in Berlin, project 263 South Bank development, Brisbane, Australia 275 Southbank, London, United Kingdom 7, 23, 25, 94, 98, 108 Southbank Centre Square, London, United Kingdom 21, 204 – 207 Southpark Hub, London, United Kingdom 21 South Park Plaza, London, United Kingdom 280, 281 South Street Park, Sheffield, United Kingdom 56, 57 Stack ‘M Up, installation 142 St John’s Churchyard, London, United Kingdom 55 Stock-Pile, installation 180, 184 – 185 Storefront Theater, Lyons, Nebraska, USA 32, 33 Strawberry and Screen, event, London, United Kingdom 93 SubWave, installation 159 Superkilen, Copenhagen, Denmark 38 SUR, installation 157 Swing Time, Boston, Massachusetts, USA 62, 63, 64, 124, 126, 127, 132 Tanner Fountain, Harvard Plaza, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 48, 49, 74, 82 The Arena, sculpture, London, United Kingdom 94, 95, 96, 98 The Goods Line, Sydney, Australia 214 – 217, 276 The High Line, New York City, New York, USA 278 – 279, 281, 288 The Shed, Hudson Yard, New York City, New York, USA 34, 35 The Teaser, installation 240 The Telectroscope, installation 230 Times Square, New York City, New York, USA 30, 46, 47, 67, 68, 69, 70 Times Square Valentine Heart Design, New York City, New York, USA 30 TOM (Temporary Overlay Marker), installation 244, 246, 247 Tower Bridge, London, United Kingdom 8, 26, 27, 55, 108, 114, 116, 118, 120, 230 Tower of London, London, United Kingdom 230

Trafalgar Square, London, United Kingdom 8, 24, 25, 198 – 203, 230, 288 Transformer, pavilion 217 Underline, Miami, Florida, USA 7 University of Arts London, London, United Kingdom 86 Unzipped Wall, London, United Kingdom 163 Urban Reef, installation 168, 176 – 177 Victoria and Albert Courtyard, London, United Kingdom 20, 29 Victoria and Albert Museum, London, United Kingdom 138 – 143 Victoria Square/Tarndanyangga, Adelaide, Australia 275 Volume, installation, London, United Kingdom 139 VW Dome, New York City, New York, USA 150, 153 Warming Huts, Winnipeg, Canada 30, 170 Watch This Space — Royal Theatre, London, United Kingdom 94 – 101 Weaving the Courtyard, installation 154 Wendy, installation 155 Westergasfabriek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 7 Windmill follies 39 Windrush Square, Brixton, London, United Kingdom 21 Woodland Discovery Playground, Shelby Farms Park, Memphis, Tennessee, USA 280, 281 Yagan Square, Perth, Australia 275 Yokohama Masterplan, Yokohama, Japan 16, 48, 50 You Know You Cannot See Yourself So Well as by Reflections, installation 142, 143

INDEX OF PLACES Adelaide, Australia 275, 276 Amsterdam, Netherlands 7, 285 Antwerp, Belgium 285 Barcelona, Spain 8, 18, 285, 286, 287 Bari, Italy 34 Bay of Koutavos, Argostoli, Kefalonia, Greece 39, 40 Beijing, China 30, 163 Berkeley, California, USA 67 Berlin, Germany 9, 262 – 265, 285 Birmingham, United Kingdom 271 Bordeaux, France 28, 29 Boston, Massachusetts, USA 8, 9, 27, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 122 – 133, 268, 270 Bradford, United Kingdom 102 – 107 Brisbane, Australia 275 Bristol, United Kingdom 57 Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 19, 31, 48, 74 – 85, 180 – 191 Chaumont 30 Chicago, Illinois, USA 8, 31 Cincinnati, Ohio, USA 268, 270 Cleveland, Ohio, USA 280 – 281 Copenhagen, Denmark 8, 29, 38, 285 Córdoba, Spain 258 – 261 Ferguson, Missouri, USA 67 Glasgow, United Kingdom 285 Gorud Valley, Norway 40 Grand-Métis, Canada 30, 34, 48 Hamburg, Germany 285 Helsinki, Finland 285 Houston, Texas, USA 9, 46 Istanbul, Turkey 150 Liverpool, United Kingdom 33, 34 London, United Kingdom 7, 8, 9, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 54, 55, 70, 86 – 93, 94 – 101, 108 – 121, 138 – 143, 144 – 149, 198 – 203, 204 – 207, 230 – 233, 240 – 243, 270 – 274, 281, 285, 288 Lyon, France 285 Lyons, Nebraska, USA 32, 33 Manchester, United Kingdom 285 Marseilles, France 29 Melbourne, Australia 9, 30, 134 – 137, 275, 276, 277 Memphis, Tennessee, USA 280 Miami, Florida, USA 7 Montreal, Canada 8, 9, 30, 31, 192 – 197, 244 – 247, 282 – 284 Moscow, Russia 285 Nantes, France 29 New York City, New York, USA 7, 8, 9, 11, 30, 31, 34, 35, 46, 48, 50, 67, 68, 69, 70, 122, 150 – 159, 234 – 239, 278, 279, 288, 289 Nice, France 29 Oslo, Norway 40 Paris, France 7, 8, 13, 29, 248 – 253, 285 Perth, Australia 275 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA 9, 208 – 213, 279 Piazza San Marco, Venice, Italy 28, 29 Place de la Bourse, Bordeaux, France 29 Reykjavík, Iceland 285 Rome, Italy 30, 150 Rotterdam, Netherlands 7, 9, 17, 31, 38, 224 – 229, 254 – 257 San Francisco, California, USA 30 Santiago, Chile 150 Seoul, South Korea 150 Sheffield, United Kingdom 54, 56, 57 Siena, Italy 11 Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C., USA 29 Speakers’ Corner, Hyde Park, London, United Kingdom 69, 70 St Gerasimos, Kefalonia, Greece 39, 40 Stockholm, Sweden 285 Sydney, Australia 214 – 217, 275, 276 Taichung, China 42 Toronto, Canada 7 Utrecht, Netherlands 32 Vancouver, Canada 30, 168 – 179 Venice, Italy 28, 29 Washington, D. C., USA 29

Waterloo Bridge, London, United Kingdom 8 27 Winnipeg, Canada 30, 170 Wodonga, Australia 276 Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA 22, 23 Yokohama, Japan 16, 48, 50 York, Alabama, USA 32 Zurich, Switzerland 9, 218 – 223

INDEX

299

ABOUT THE AUTHOR B. Cannon Ivers is a landscape architect whose professional work includes urban parks, education and business campuses, public spaces and shared private courtyards in the UK, UAE, Finland, Italy, Greece, Belgium and the USA. He frequently contributes to design discourse through publications examining 3D design and digital fabrication, spatial programmability and cultural vitality, intelligent water design and high-impact, low-maintenance planting design. He graduated from Colorado State University where he received the Landscape Architect of the Year award and the top honours award from the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA). He holds a Master in Landscape Architecture degree with Distinction from the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, where he was again awarded the highest honours by the ASLA. Cannon is a chartered member of the Landscape Institute in the UK where he lives with his wife and two children in London.

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS F. Philip Barash lives and writes at the intersection of design and cultural critique. He has contributed critical essays, reviews and interviews to national publications that focus on design discourse. As a curator and place-making expert, Barash has worked with civic and non-profit organisations to articulate and promote a strong sense of place, including the Chicago Architecture Foundation, the Poetry Foundation, the Obama Presidential Center and the National Park Service. He is an alumnus of the University of Detroit Mercy and the University of Chicago, and currently lives in Boston with his partner and their cat.  James Corner (RLA, ASLA) is the Founding Partner and CEO of James Corner Field Operations. He has devoted the past 30 years to advancing the field of landscape architecture and urbanism through his leadership on high-visibility, complex urban projects at Field Operations, as well as through teaching, public speaking and writing. His work has been recognised by the National Design Award, the American Academy of Arts and Letters Award in Architecture, the AA&D Black Pencil Award and the Chrysler Design Award. His work has been published widely and exhibited at the New York Museum of Modern Art, the Cooper-Hewitt Design Museum, the National Building Museum, the Royal Academy of Art in London, and the Venice Biennale. His books include The High Line (Phaidon, 2015), The Landscape Imagination (Princeton Architectural Press, 2014) and Taking Measures Across the American Landscape (Yale University Press, 1996). Corner is an Emeritus Professor of Landscape Architecture and Urbanism at the University of Pennsylvania School of Design, and serves on the Board of the Urban Design Forum.

300

Nicola Dempsey (PhD) is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Landscape at the University of Sheffield. Her research focuses on place-keeping, which conceptualises the design, planning and management of places as an ongoing process that, simply put, does not end when the contractors leave the site. With its focus on the long term, place-keeping involves the examination of partnership, governance, funding, policy, design and communication. The place-keeping research is underpinned by a process of ‘post-occupancy evaluation’ of everyday landscapes in our towns and cities, which calls on her extensive experience of researching public space in the urban environment. By applying a long-term perspective to urban landscapes, her research contributes to an understanding of the impact of different perspectives held by those who influence, and are influenced by, urban change.  Gina Ford is a landscape architect, and Co-founder and Principal of Agency Landscape+ Planning. Underpinning her two decades of practice are a commitment to the design and planning of public places and the perpetuation of the value of landscape architecture via thought-leadership, teaching, writing and lecturing. Her work has received awards from the American Society of Landscape Architects, the American Planning Association and the American Institute of Architects, among others. She is on the board of directors for the Cultural Landscape Foundation and was the recipient of the Harvard Graduate School of Design’s Charles Eliot Traveling Fellowship and Wellesley College’s Shaw Fellowship. Adriaan Geuze is the Founding Partner and Design Director of West 8, a leading, international design practice. Having set up the firm in 1987, Geuze and West 8 were awarded the prestigious Prix de Rome in 1990, thereby establishing an international reputation for their singular approach to planning and design of the public environment. This also set the stage for what has become a substantial portfolio of commissions around the globe. Geuze’s vision of a truly interdisciplinary practice involves some of the most talented landscape architects, urban designers, architects, planners, engineers and industrial designers in the field today. It is built upon the notion of incorporating contemporary culture, urban identity, architecture, public space and engineering within one design, using context as the point of departure. West 8 has implemented large projects such as Governors Island in New York, Madrid Rio, Toronto Central Waterfront and Miami Beach SoundScape Park.   Richard Kennedy (RLA, ASLA) is a Senior Principal at James Corner Field Operations. With more than 15 years of professional experience, he is currently leading Field Operation’s San Francisco office, whose portfolio includes the design of the Presidio Tunnel Tops Project and Resilient by Design’s Bay Area Challenge. He also led the design and implementation of Cleveland’s Public Square, Shelby Farm Park in

ABOUT THE AUTHOR B. Cannon Ivers is a landscape architect whose professional work includes urban parks, education and business campuses, public spaces and shared private courtyards in the UK, UAE, Finland, Italy, Greece, Belgium and the USA. He frequently contributes to design discourse through publications examining 3D design and digital fabrication, spatial programmability and cultural vitality, intelligent water design and high-impact, low-maintenance planting design. He graduated from Colorado State University where he received the Landscape Architect of the Year award and the top honours award from the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA). He holds a Master in Landscape Architecture degree with Distinction from the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, where he was again awarded the highest honours by the ASLA. Cannon is a chartered member of the Landscape Institute in the UK where he lives with his wife and two children in London.

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS F. Philip Barash lives and writes at the intersection of design and cultural critique. He has contributed critical essays, reviews and interviews to national publications that focus on design discourse. As a curator and place-making expert, Barash has worked with civic and non-profit organisations to articulate and promote a strong sense of place, including the Chicago Architecture Foundation, the Poetry Foundation, the Obama Presidential Center and the National Park Service. He is an alumnus of the University of Detroit Mercy and the University of Chicago, and currently lives in Boston with his partner and their cat.  James Corner (RLA, ASLA) is the Founding Partner and CEO of James Corner Field Operations. He has devoted the past 30 years to advancing the field of landscape architecture and urbanism through his leadership on high-visibility, complex urban projects at Field Operations, as well as through teaching, public speaking and writing. His work has been recognised by the National Design Award, the American Academy of Arts and Letters Award in Architecture, the AA&D Black Pencil Award and the Chrysler Design Award. His work has been published widely and exhibited at the New York Museum of Modern Art, the Cooper-Hewitt Design Museum, the National Building Museum, the Royal Academy of Art in London, and the Venice Biennale. His books include The High Line (Phaidon, 2015), The Landscape Imagination (Princeton Architectural Press, 2014) and Taking Measures Across the American Landscape (Yale University Press, 1996). Corner is an Emeritus Professor of Landscape Architecture and Urbanism at the University of Pennsylvania School of Design, and serves on the Board of the Urban Design Forum.

300

Nicola Dempsey (PhD) is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Landscape at the University of Sheffield. Her research focuses on place-keeping, which conceptualises the design, planning and management of places as an ongoing process that, simply put, does not end when the contractors leave the site. With its focus on the long term, place-keeping involves the examination of partnership, governance, funding, policy, design and communication. The place-keeping research is underpinned by a process of ‘post-occupancy evaluation’ of everyday landscapes in our towns and cities, which calls on her extensive experience of researching public space in the urban environment. By applying a long-term perspective to urban landscapes, her research contributes to an understanding of the impact of different perspectives held by those who influence, and are influenced by, urban change.  Gina Ford is a landscape architect, and Co-founder and Principal of Agency Landscape+ Planning. Underpinning her two decades of practice are a commitment to the design and planning of public places and the perpetuation of the value of landscape architecture via thought-leadership, teaching, writing and lecturing. Her work has received awards from the American Society of Landscape Architects, the American Planning Association and the American Institute of Architects, among others. She is on the board of directors for the Cultural Landscape Foundation and was the recipient of the Harvard Graduate School of Design’s Charles Eliot Traveling Fellowship and Wellesley College’s Shaw Fellowship. Adriaan Geuze is the Founding Partner and Design Director of West 8, a leading, international design practice. Having set up the firm in 1987, Geuze and West 8 were awarded the prestigious Prix de Rome in 1990, thereby establishing an international reputation for their singular approach to planning and design of the public environment. This also set the stage for what has become a substantial portfolio of commissions around the globe. Geuze’s vision of a truly interdisciplinary practice involves some of the most talented landscape architects, urban designers, architects, planners, engineers and industrial designers in the field today. It is built upon the notion of incorporating contemporary culture, urban identity, architecture, public space and engineering within one design, using context as the point of departure. West 8 has implemented large projects such as Governors Island in New York, Madrid Rio, Toronto Central Waterfront and Miami Beach SoundScape Park.   Richard Kennedy (RLA, ASLA) is a Senior Principal at James Corner Field Operations. With more than 15 years of professional experience, he is currently leading Field Operation’s San Francisco office, whose portfolio includes the design of the Presidio Tunnel Tops Project and Resilient by Design’s Bay Area Challenge. He also led the design and implementation of Cleveland’s Public Square, Shelby Farm Park in

Memphis, the award-winning South Park at Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park in London and the Urban Metabolism exhibition for the 2014 International Architectural Biennale in Rotterdam. Kennedy holds a Master in Landscape Architecture degree with Distinction from Harvard University, where he was awarded the Jacob Weidenmann Prize for Excellence in Design, and a BA in Landscape Architecture from Cornell University. He has taught and lectured at the University of Pennsylvania School of Design and at other design institutions. Daoust Lestage has worked since 1988 as a multidisciplinary firm concerned with design at every scale, to bridge the limitations of traditional design practices and overcome boundaries between urban design, architecture, landscape, graphic, interior, industrial and furniture design. The approach for each project is based upon a careful understanding of the space or site’s current and historical characteristics in order to anchor the proposed intervention with the intrinsic qualities of its surroundings, revealing traces of the past through a resolutely contemporary language. Characterised by their simplicity, the firm’s designs demonstrate an ability to conceptualise projects of varied nature and scope. From large-scale urban improvement projects and architectural schemes to interior and furniture design, the team has acquired unique expertise in planning, design and realisation of diverse and award-winning projects with over 100 project awards at provincial, national and international levels. These accolades recognise Daoust Lestage’s preoccupation with the realisation of significant, high-quality projects, and their commitment to wellconsidered design that creates enduring environments at urban and architectural scales. Sergio Lopez-Pineiro is the founder of Holes of Matter, a research and design practice exploring voids as sources of freedom, diversity and spontaneity. Lopez-Pineiro is a lecturer at the Harvard Graduate School of Design where he teaches studios and seminars on architecture, landscape architecture and urbanism. He has held the Reyner Banham Fellowship at the University at Buffalo (2006–07) and the Daniel Urban Kiley Fellowship at Harvard University (2014–15). His work has been supported by the New York State Council on the Arts and the MacDowell Colony and has been published by a+t, MAS Context, Bracket, arq: Architecture Research Quarterly, Places and 2G, among others. Lopez-Pineiro graduated from Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura de Madrid and received his MArch from Princeton University, where he was awarded the Suzanne Kolarik Underwood Prize. A registered architect in Spain, Lopez-Pineiro has worked at No.mad and Foreign Office Architects. Chris Reed is Founding Director of Stoss Landscape Urbanism. He is recognised internationally as a leading voice in the transformation of landscapes and cities, and he works alternately as a researcher, strategist, teacher, designer and advisor. His work collectively includes urban revitalisation initiatives, climate resilience efforts, speculative propositions, adaptations of infrastructure and former industrial sites, dynamic and productive landscapes, and numerous landscape installations, all producing vibrant public spaces that cultivate a diversity of social uses and cultural traditions. Reed is the co-editor of Projective Ecologies (Actar, 2014) and a contributing author to leading publications across the globe. He is a recipient of the 2012 Cooper-Hewitt National Design Award in Landscape Architecture and a Fellow of the American Society of Landscape Architects. He is Professor in Practice of Landscape Architecture and Co-Director of the Master of Landscape Architecture in Urban Design Program at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design.

experience was at Michael Brown Partnership as a consultant for public-sector housing projects in London. He moved to BDP where he became a landscape partner and developed expertise in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Later he moved to Oxford and joined RPS as Operational Director. Trew has contributed to publications on landscape assessment and acted as an expert landscape witness at many planning inquiries. In 2000 he was commissioned by Argent to undertake the EIA for King’s Cross and in 2007 he joined the project delivery team in London. He was responsible for managing the design and implementation of the public realm at King’s Cross and also for the Paradise development in Birmingham. He retired from Argent in 2016 but remains a consultant for King’s Cross and on projects at Tottenham and Birmingham. Charles Waldheim is a North American architect, urbanist and educator. Waldheim’s research examines the relations between landscape, ecology and contemporary urbanism. He coined the term ‘landscape urbanism’ to describe the emergent discourse and practices of landscape in relation to design culture and contemporary urbanisation. On these topics he is the author of Landscape as Urbanism: A General Theory (Princeton University Press, 2016) and editor of The Landscape Urbanism Reader (Princeton Architectural Press, 2006). Waldheim is the John E. Irving Professor at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design where he directs the Office for Urbanization. He is a recipient of the Rome Prize Fellowship from the American Academy in Rome, the Visiting Scholar Research Fellowship at the Study Centre of the Canadian Centre for Architecture, the Cullinan Chair at Rice University, and the Sanders Fellowship at the University of Michigan. Alex Wall is Professor of Practice in the School of Architecture at the University of Virginia (UVA), and Director of the Urban Design Certificate. After receiving his Diploma at the Architectural Association, he worked at OMA in London and Rotterdam (1982–89). Between 1998 and 2013, he was Professor of International Urban Design at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany, focusing on integrated multiscale design and planning. In 2005 he published Victor Gruen: from urban shop to new city (Actar). He was a partner of UMnet / `asp´Stuttgart between 2009 and 2013, winning competitions for a prototype energy-efficient office building, and the urban centre of the Tuzla Logistics City, Istanbul. At UVA, his current research is titled ‘Resilient Settlement and Productive Aquatic Landscapes: Framing Long-term Redevelopment Strategies for Virginia’s Coastal Communities’. His most recent paper, ‘Sprawl is Dead, Long Live the Low-density City’, is part of MIT’s Infinite Suburbia project (2017). Chris Wangro, one-time circus ringmaster and former tsar of Special Events for the City of New York, is acclaimed as one of the most imaginative impresarios of public events in the US. For more than three decades, Wangro produced a dizzying variety of projects that included dozens of prestigious arts festivals, concerts and cultural expositions. He has created and directed presidential summits, papal visits and massive public spectacles. He has masterminded benchmark events for the United Nations, humanitarian organisations and NGOs worldwide. His work has won numerous awards, captured global media attention and generated over a US$ 100 million for people in need. In recent years Wangro has turned his focus towards the development of public space and is known for combining decades of programming and producing experience with an uncommonly joyful and creative approach to place- and community-making.

Ken Trew, BSc (Hons), Dip LD, FLI, trained as a landscape architect and became a Fellow of the Landscape Institute in 1993. His early

Authenticated ABOUT THE AUTHOR / ABOUT THE CONTRIBUT ORS 301

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It has been a pleasure to create this book, largely because of the incredible people that I have met throughout the process. The success of our public spaces begins with the energy and creativity of the people tasked with designing a place, the teams considering the curatorial calendar to keep the life of the space fresh and interesting and the clients who see the enduring value of creating quality public realm — and are willing to pay for it, maintain it and enliven it. Without the tireless determination from all those involved to push the profession forward, many of the projects featured here would not have been realised. I am grateful for the sustained patience and encouragement from my wife and children, who consistently carved out space to allow me to progress the drawings and text for this book. And to my mother and father for inculcating curiosity, creativity and ambition in my life from a young age. A special thanks to Charles Waldheim, Chris Reed and Sergio Lopez-Pineiro for their considered guidance and instruction as I was developing the concept for this book during my time at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. I am grateful that our friendship and collaboration was extended with this project and I look forward to other shared projects. Thank you to Neil Mattinson, Andrew Harland, Rob Aspland, Benjamin Walker and the wider team at LDA Design for their support and encouragement over the past decade. I am grateful to Brad Goetz, Merlyn Paulson and Kelly Curl, from my alma mater Colorado State University, for their support with this book project and encouragement over the years.  Thank you to the team at Birkhäuser: Henriette Mueller-Stahl, Andreas Müller, Heike Strempel, Rosa Ainley and Silke Nalbach for patiently putting the content of the book together. It was a pleasure to work with you all. I’m also grateful to the sponsors: Sasaki, Argent, ASPECT Studios, LDA Design, Mace, Marshalls and Savills. I hope the content of this book inspires your teams and enriches the built environment realms you operate within. Many of the contributors in this book are at the apogee of their careers — influencing the trajectory of the profession, inspiring the next generation of young designers, both pedagogically and professionally, advancing design discourse through the delivery of projects on the ground — still they made time to produce thought-provoking, challenging, edifying and entertaining texts to complement the case studies. A special thanks to Alex Wall, Chris Wangro, Gina Ford and Adriaan Geuze for the face-to-face discussions via video conferencing, often late in the evening or at the weekend, and to every other contributor who I contacted on multiple occasions by phone and email. Thank you to Richard Kennedy for your creativity and vision in leading our generation to shape the future of design. I’m very much looking forward to sharing in the landscape architecture profession with you over many decades to come. I’d also like to thank the teams behind the contributors: Scott Mitchell at Stoss; Margaret Jankowsky and Chelsi Parani at JCFO; Annemarie Kuijt at West 8; Marie-Josée Gagnon at Daoust Lestage;

302

Atsuko Kunigi at ASPECT Studios; Isaac Amin, Rachel Caltagirone and Steve Alderson of Argent. It has been a pleasure communicating with you and I’m grateful for your support. I’d also like to thank Tricia Lewis at the Bryant Park Corporation and Meg Rotzel from Radcliffe, both of whom helped enormously with sourcing photographs. Further, I am grateful to all the photographers who have generously supported this project with their images that capture the culture, energy and life of the spaces that are featured in this book. Many of these performances and installations are fleeting, and without your photographic eye, these moments would not be captured. There have also been many colleagues and friends on various continents that have assisted with images of installations or suggested projects that I should consider for the case studies and I’d like to thank Alex Cassini in this regard for his sustained support. Thank you also to Michael O’Loughlin for the masterful translation of Adriaan Geuze’s text from Dutch to English. I’d also like to thank Adriaan Gueze for taking the time to write his essay and then revisit the text to strengthen the conclusion (and Michael for translating it again). Finally, I would like to thank James Corner for concluding this book with the clarity and precision that has defined his writing and design work over the past decades. It is an honour and a privilege to feature your text within Staging Urban Landscapes.

ILLUSTRATION CREDITS

All illustrations not mentioned below were taken or drawn by B. Cannon Ivers. 20min.ch 223 bottom left Adam Aswald 159 upper middle right Agence Rol 70 top right Alex Cassini 247 bottom right Alison Meyer 30 top right Amund Sjølie Sveen 257 middle right Amy Tomasso 74 bottom right Andrew Ho 97 lower middle (middle) Andrew Latreille 168 bottom left, 176 top, 176 middle, 177 Andrew Lloyd 279, 280 top right, 280 bottom Angelito Jusay 234 bottom left, 235, 237 middle left, 238 top, 239 Anthony Reynolds Gallery 202 top left Anthony Worsdell 203 top right Art in the City 192 bottom left, 192 bottom right, 196 top left, 196 top right, 196 upper middle (all), 196 lower middle (all), 197 middle, 197 bottom left, 197 bottom right Art Poskanzer 48 botom Aurélien Guichard 94 bottom right Balmond Studio 162 bottom right Barrett Doherty 84 top right, 278 middle right Bianca Mauro 59 middle, 61 all, 62 bottom, 63 top, 63 middle, 64, 65 all, 122 middle, 122 bottom, 124 all, 125, 130 all, 131 all, 132 all, 133 all Bob O’Connor 180 bottom right Bread Collective 145 bottom Brendan De Souza 56 middle Bruce Petschek 62 top Bryant Park Corporation 234 bottom right, 237 top right, 237 bottom left © 2000 Hélène Binet Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 162 top © 2003 Richard Bryant/archaidimages 163 middle right © 2005 Sally Tallant 163 bottom right © 2005 Sylvain Deleu 160 bottom left, 162 middle right, 162 bottom left © 2006 John Offenbach Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 164 top left © 2007 Deborah Bullen Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 164 middle right © 2007 Luke Hayes Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 164 middle left © 2009 Claire Byrne Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 165 top © 2010 Philippe Ruault 165 middle left © 2011 Hufton & Crow 165 bottom left © 2012 Iwan Baan Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 166 top left © 2013 Jim Stephenson 166 middle left, 167 top right, © Iwan Baan Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 167 middle left © Jim Stephenson 167 top right, 167 middle right © Loz Pycock 164 bottom right, 166 bottom left, 202 bottom right Canadian Centre for Architecture 50 top Cara Protzco 156 top right Cars Coop 108 middle

CatbirdinGreece 11 top Cecil Barnes 154 bottom Chensiyuan 70 middle right Chiara Isserlis 193 Chris Bruntlett 251 middle right Christina Geros, SHO 188 bottom left, 188 bottom right Claude Cormier + Associés 244 bottom right, 245, 246 bottom, 247 top left, 247 top middle, 247 lower middle left, 247 bottom left Colin Miller 237 bottom right, 238 bottom left, 238 bottom right Corporal Patrick P. Evenson 69 bottom Courtesy of Canadian Centre of Architecture 50 top Courtesy of Diller Scofidio Renfro in collaboration with Rockwell Group 34 top left, 35 top left, 35 middle left Courtesy of the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority 269 all, 270 middle Cycle Fun Montreal 196 bottom left Daoust Lestage 283 right, 284 top left David Iliff 24 top, 201 top right David Joseph 159 middle left Design With Company 168 bottom left De Urbanisten 224 bottom right, 225 all, 226 all, 228 all, 229 Denise Oliveira 150 bottom left Deverill Jenkins 165 middle right Diane Salazar 116 middle left Don Brice 280 top left Eddy Motion 218 bottom right Ed Reeves courtesy of London Design Festival 142 top right Ed Schipul 47 middle Elia Zenghelis and Elias Veneris, OMA, Athens (painting by Zoe Zenghelis) 39 Elizabeth Sellers 143 bottom right Event Industry News 105 bottom right Florian Groehn 214 bottom left, 214 bottom right, 215, 217 top Frank Blaser 223 top left Fred Romero 250 middle left Fuzheado 70 middle left Gary Hoyer 202 lower middle left Garry Knight 203 upper middle right Gerold Guggenbuehl 223 top right Gifas 222 bottom Grumpylumixuser via Wikimedia Common License 28 bottom Guardian 195 top Gwen Webber 156 bottom left Halkin Mason Photography 208 bottom left, 209, 212, 213 all Hannah Gray 114 top, 114 middle, 114 bottom left, 114 bottom middle, 116 top, 116 middle right, 116 bottom right, 118 middle, 118 bottom, 120 all HAPA Collaborative and Joshua Dool Photography 174 all, 175 House of Switzerland 219 Hufton + Crow 166 bottom right Penny Williams 247 top right inatheblue 29 bottom Interboro Partners 76 all, 85 middle right itchymoblog 204 bottom left Iwan Baan 278 bottom left Iwan Baan Courtesy of Diller Scofidio Renfro in collaboration with Rockwell Group 35 middle right Iwan Baan Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 167 top left Jacques Leroy for Franklin Azzi Architects 249 Jake Belcher 31 bottom James Bryant 243 bottom right James Corner Field Operations 208 bottom right Jane Roberts 202 lower middle right Jean Gagnon 196 bottom middle, 197 top Jeff Knowles 241 top Jennifer Lenhart 251 bottom Jesse Zryb 59 top Jessica Sheridan 155 top right Jim Henderson 70 bottom left Jim Stephenson, courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 160 right JML Water Feature Design 29 top

Joakim Boren 30 middle right Joe the Explorer 114 bottom right John Adrien courtesy United Visual Artists 139, 142 top left John Gollings 30 middle left, 134 bottom, 135 all John Horner Photography 63 bottom John Sturrock, courtesy of King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership 86 bottom left, 86 bottom right, 87 all, 88 top, 88 bottom left, 88 bottom right, 90 top, 90 middle left, 90 bottom, 91 all, 92 all, 93 all, 272 all, 273 all, 274 all Jon Barraclough 34 top right Jonathan Green 147 bottom right Josef Pinlac 238 middle right JR 68 bottom Justin Bettman for Times Square Art 30 bottom left Karen Firestone 238 middle left Katherine Isidro 85 upper left Katyboo 28 top left Kelvin Woo 141 bottom right Keven Law 108 bottom Kevin Grady, courtesy of the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University 186 top, 186 middle, 186 bottom left, 187 top, 188 lower middle, 190 middle Krista Jahnke 170 bottom, 173 Lawrence Halprin 12 top Light Surgeons 204 bottom right Luke Hayes 28 top right Luke Jerram 31 top Manuel Bauer 222 top Marc Cramer 195 bottom, 282, 284 bottom left, 287 bottom middle Marco de Swart 255 Maria Azzurra Mugnai 68 top Maria Spadafora 105 top left Marja Van Bochove 257 top right Marjoleinnyssen Courtesy of Serpentine Galleries 163 top right I Martin Bond 34 middle, 34 bottom Martina Alagna 88 middle Mary Kay 248 bottom right, 251 top left Matthew Mazzotta 32 top, 32 middle Matthew Neilson 150 right Maxime Brouillet 244 bottom left, 247 upper middle left Maxime Dufour 248 bottom left, 250 top Mel Burton 55 top left Michael Grimm 47 top Ed Schipul (Discovery/Green) 47middle Michael Haug 218 bottom left Miguel de Guzmán 154 top right Mina Carson 251 top right The Museum of Modern Art and MoMA PS1 154 middle, 155 bottom right, 156 bottom right, 157 all, 158 all, 159 top left, 159 lower middle right, 159 bottom right Montreal Visitors Guide 196 top middle MVRDV 163 middle left, 163 bottom left Neil Turner 102 bottom left Nelvin C. Cepeda 30 bottom right Nicola Di Turi 11 middle right Oerend Hard 257 bottom left Olololrororo 90 middle right OMA 16, 39 all, 50 bottom OMA New York 32 bottom left, middle, right Paredes Pino Arquitectos 258 bottom left, 258 bottom right, 259, 261 all Patkau Architects 30 top left Paul Appleyard 203 lower middle right Penny Williams 247 top right Peter Culley 206 top Peter MacDiarmid 243 bottom left Philafrenzy 201 bottom left Philip Winn Courtesy of Projects for Public Space 85 middle left Philippe Rahm architects, Paris 42 all, 43 all, 44 all, 45 all Potters Fields Park 110 all, 111 Prioryman 203 middle right Rag Ririn 257 top left Rebecca Harmer 144 bottom Reimagine 168 bottom right relais Landschaftsarchitekten 263 all Renee Hoeflaak 257 middle left

Richard Haughton 241 middle Robin Forster, courtesy of LDA Design 279 all, 280 Roeldinkstra 257 bottom right Roger Jones, Geographic Society 141 middle right Rogers Stirk Harbour Architects 13 bottom Roland zh 223 middle left, 223 bottom right Roland ZH 220 Rowa Lee 278 bottom right Ruben Segovia 85 middle right Rudy Bender 12 bottom Rut Blees Luxemburg 240 bottom right Ruth Hartnup 172 top Sahar Coston-Hardy 281 all Sam Walker 200 top Sasaki 60, 123, 127 all, 268 all, 270 top Schouwburgplein Facebook 254 bottom right Scott Lynch 151, 153 all, 154 top left, 155 top left, 155 bottom left Sean Dempsey 202 upper middle left SHO 180 bottom left, 188 top, 188 upper middle, 189 top Simon Whitbread 217 bottom left SMAQ Architecture, Urbanism, and Research, Berlin 40 all, 41 all SO-IL 156 top left Somerset House 243 top left, 243 top right, 243 middle left, 243 middle right Stefan Müller 262 bottom left, 262 bottom right, 264 top left, 264 top right, 264 middle right, 264 bottom left Stephen Stimson landscape architects 182 Steve Stills 97 bottom middle Stewart Morris 231 Stoss 47 bottom, 51 bottom, 52 all Stoss Landscape Urbanism 75 all, 184 all, 185 all Stoss/Charles Mayer 51 top left Stoss/Chris Reed 51 top right Stoss/Mike Roemer 48 middle Stoss/Yvan Maltais 49 Studio Daniel Libeskind 162 middle left Studio Weave 240 bottom left Subwave by Roy 159 top right surveyor.in-berlin.de 264 bottom right Su Yuen Ho/Battersea Power Station Development Company 148 bottom left, 149 all Susan St. Lawrence 203 bottom left Taylor Herring 116 bottom left Telegraph and Argus 105 top right, 105 middle right, 105 bottom left The All-Nite Images 67 all The Girl Next Shore 148 bottom right Theresa Arzadon-Labajo 171 Tim Green 105 middle left, 107 Timothy Schenck, courtesy of Friends of the High Line 278 top right Toby Honey 203 top left Tom Dolan 84 middle left, 84 bottom left Trademark Tours 53 Traveldigg 198 bottom left Tylar Greene/FWS 70 top left Upper Rhenish Master, Städel Museum, 1410/1420 286 UP Projects 109 V&A 138 bottom, 142 middle left, 142 bottom left, 142 bottom right, 143 top Vancouver Public Spaces 170 middle Vancouver Public Space Network 172 bottom Vetschpartner 221 Victor De Jesus 102 bottom right, 103 bottom left, middle and right Villa d’Arte 11 middle left VIVA 170 top Viva Vancouver 172 middle, 176 bottom, 178 all, 179 West 8 18 bottom left, 254 bottom left Whereourtimewent 148 top Wikimendia Commons 67 all, 68 all, 69 all, 70 all Wim Kuijkin 224 bottom left Yannick Grandmont 284 bottom right Zefrog 24 bottom right Zieta Prozessdesign 142 middle right

Authenticated ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS / ILLUSTRATION CR EDITS 303

L AYOUT, COVER DESIGN AND T YPESET TING Silke Nalbach, Mannheim FRONT AND BACK COVER ILLUSTRATION B. Cannon Ivers, London PROJECT MANAGEMENT Henriette Mueller-Stahl, Berlin COPY EDITING Rosa Ainley, Whitstable, Kent TRANSL ATION FROM DUTCH P. 285–287 Michael O’Loughlin, Dublin PRODUCTION Heike Strempel, Berlin

LITHOGRAPHY bildpunkt Druckvorstufen GmbH, Berlin PAPER 120 g/m² Amber Graphic PRINTING Grafisches Centrum Cuno GmbH & Co. KG, Calbe, printed in UltraHDprint

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018937446 Bibliographic information published by the German National Library The German National Library lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in other ways, and storage in databases. For any kind of use, permission of the copyright owner must be obtained. ISBN 978-3-0356-1189-2 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-0356-1046-8.

© 2018 Birkhäuser Verlag GmbH, Basel P.O. Box 44, 4009 Basel, Switzerland Part of Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printed on acid-free paper produced from chlorine-free pulp. TCF ∞

Printed in Germany

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

www.birkhauser.com