NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

EATING | NEW YORK 

Infoodstructure: Brooklyn Case Study. Bushwick and Bedford-Stuyvesant are Brooklyn neighborhoods that are underserved by supermarkets and suffering from a number of health problems associated with poor diet. We propose a new food infrastructure for these neighborhoods that can eventually spread to the entire city 

I. Transportation
We declare that New York will be completely fee of the combustion engine and private transportation will be dramatically reduced. Most people will travel by foot, bicycle, rickshaw or an expanded network of public transportation, including a new gondola-based personal rapid transit system which will seat up to eight people and allow each car to choose a unique destination.

II. Farm-Streets
Some streets will therefore be able to be completely liberated from vehicular traffic and transformed into vast, linear urban farms for the community – with bicycles and pedestrians alongside. Concentrating primarily on North-South running streets, this new network of fresh produce will not provide all of the district’s caloric requirements, but will introduce people to the pleasures of organically grown fresh fruit and vegetables.

III. Bodegas, Greenmarkets, and Hubs
Bodegas are currently the main source of food. We propose each bodega specialize in one type of organic specialty food: fish, meat, vegetables, fruit, dairy etc. Bodegas will be supplemented by a local greenmarkets, featuring food from small scale regional farmers. A series of distribution hubs at strategic locations will provide a new, localized food distribution.

IV. Aquaponics
Aquaponics combines fish-farming tanks and greenhouse-grown plants. The fish waste fertilizes the plants and the plants are used to feed the fish and clean the water. We propose to create an entire underground aquaponics network, allowing the fish to swim between bodegas and greenmarkets while growing. Locking-gates allow full-grown fish to be harvested locally.

http://work.ac/infoodstructure/
Here, WORKac focuses on the ‘food desert’ in the Bed-Stuy and Bushwick neighborhoods of Brooklyn and maps the potentially resourceful ways of re-appropriating the streets to harvest food, from future transportation (gondola-type links) to a hybrid fish farm and greenhouse-grown plants (Aquaponics).

This proposal considers the potential impacts on the city in a broad context.  The urban farming is more integrated, minimising impact on the streetscape as such and uses below the ground plane to cultivate fish.  By focusing on the health concerns, it looks at a wider varitey of issues - policy, health, social etc and gives the proposal even more reason to be implemented.

Application to Paddington: The use of urban farming throughout Paddington in a street, on the footpath, within the complex, on hard surfaces, above the ground plane, below the ground plane.  Encourage social interaction, purify the air, decrease need to import food, economic growth.

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

EATING | AMSTERDAM

http://www.vanbergenkolpa.nl/en/53_recent.html

Van Bergen Kolpa Architects imagines a Landscape Supermarket, where varieties of food can be grown and sourced in park-like environments run by city dwellers.

This proposal encourages people to take pride and ownership over these park-like environments.  It is very much reflective of Christopher Alexander's city/country fingers.   Although in theory it sounds like a good idea, I see problems with this proposal.1) the theory has existed for decades and yet remains unpresent in modern society.  Land is a precious commodity - it can sell for large $ and in a world that turns because of $, food, being a basic necessity that doesn't pay as well as land, means nothing.  We need to figure out new ways to encourage food production in our high density neighbourhoods. It also reflects back to the New York | Dwelling proposal: theories are often planned as wholes when they inevitably parts of a whole.

Application to Paddington: Ownership of public space. This creates the ability to educate through the learning experience and encourages social interaction and a sense of place and belonging meaning the public is more likely to utilise the space.

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

MAKING | NEW YORK

In The Refinery, Solid Objectives-Idenburg Liu (SO-IL) imagined a floating market place where robotic arms compartmentalise waste materials to mend a broken landscape.

I am a very big fan of recycling on all scales.  Finding use for objects that had been classified as useless brings a certain amount of delight. 

Application to Paddington.  Paddington is a quirky suburb: vintage shops and retro details of 'used items' are plentiful and can be seen here and there at every turn, adding charm and character to the suburb.  I feel like this is something that needs to be reflected in Paddington Central. How? I'm working on it.

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

MAKING | AMSTERDAM

  

 

http://www.w-architecture.com/index.php?sec=projects&pg=glimpses

Barcode Architects have developed a contained mega science park from which to export knowledge – “the most valuable commodity of The Netherlands in 2040” said Caro van der Venne of Barcode.

I feel this is a precious message - the making of knowledge is important. The internet and other technologies have allowed us information at our fingertips.  It has allowed modern society to be exposed to ideas and discoveries at break neck pace, therefore speeding up the cogs in the knowledge making process. 

Application to Paddington. Allowing the greater community access to resources that once were not readily available to them. HOW? Through flexibility in design.

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

BREATHING | NEW YORK 

IMAGE ABOVE: LAUNCHES

IMAGE ABOVE: DREDGE USE ALONG THE HUDSON RIVER ESTUARY

NYC is a marine city built on the world's fourth largest estuary. Since its founding in the early 1600s until the late 1900's, this environment has been in decline and its great biodiversity has been replaced by cultural diversity. This proposal creates a new infrastructure for uniting these disparate realms by building a series of archipelagos and marine streets along the Hudson. As more and more NYC coastline is converted from industrial to recreational uses, this proposal seeks sustainable relationships of exchange between working and recreational waterfronts, terrestrial and aquatic habitats.

Our “Dredgescape” proposal looks beyond the shoreline to create opportunities for New Yorkers to use the entire estuary as a park and creating a series of launches and landings for human powered water vessels. The islands are grouped across from one another on the shores of New Jersey and New York, making it possible to kayak from one side to the other more easily. The archipelagos will be place at intervals approximately two rowing hours apart from the port at the base of Manhattan all the way up the estuary to Troy New York. This will allow for trips at all skill levels and even offer camping amenities for a weeklong trip.

While greatly expanding the recreational experiences for the community, the islands would also create a rich ecology making a more sustainable and stable environment. “Dredgescape” would greatly increase the wetlands in the Hudson River, providing a more natural and diverse ecosystem. The marine street launches would improve stormwater management while protecting the city from unpredictable storm surges. 

Not only would the proposal reunite the urban city with its natural environment but would provide an opportunity to locally utilize the dredge material constantly created from maintaining the active shipping routes along the Hudson River. Currently this material is relocated to Virginia and Texas. We estimate that the islands would reuse approximately 20% of the dredge material produced between now and 2040.

http://www.w-architecture.com/index.php?sec=projects&pg=glimpses

W Architecture and Landscape Architecture have also taken water as their starting point. They have created archepelagos, made using dredge from the port, which provide habitats as well as landing banks.  The energy exchange between work and recreation, terrestrial and aquatic is interesting and the planned forecast for years to come shows foresight.

 

Application to Paddington. Fusion of work and recreation? Why does everything have to be segregated? The opportunities created between hybrid spaces is interesting and should be explored - linking up spaces that have no relevance to each other and no delineation between these opposing uses.

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

BREATHING | AMSTERDAM 

Project: Future 2040

Location: IJ, Amsterdam

Client: Arcam

Team: Dingeman Deijs and Delva Landscape Architects

Start glimpse of the `` Breathing is the IJ: once the front of Amsterdam, now the back, soon the heart of the city.

Outside North Amsterdam transforms into a self-sustaining recreational archipelago city, the result of creating an energetic underwater landscape.

Urban energy landscape

Netherlands has a rich history in the field of energy landscapes. First there were the peat mining (physical manifestation of energy production) which suggested a strong connection between human energy and landscape. By the second generation energy landscapes - with its underground cables and pipes - this was all lost.

With this glimpse, we give you an idea how we thorough third generation energy landscapes: a durable machine pressed into the hinterland, but physically in the city. Shaping the energy landscape leads to the new urban configuration of the district: 'New Amsterdam'.

Self-sufficiency

New Amsterdam, an area as large as the canal, providing for the future both themselves and the old center of sustainable renewable energy.

Thoughtful modulation of the underwater landscape creates a continuous flow and diversity in depths.

Buildings provide for their warmth or cooling requirements by the temperature differences in the various water depths of the IJ. The underground soil acts as storage.

The IJ is used as a major ecological purification. The cane fields, along with the floating islands food purify the polluted water. `New` Amsterdam provides himself that way of drinking water and basic nutrition.

Energy Storage

For the energy synchronized smoothly with the amount of renewable energy generated, located in Amsterdam `New` some atoll islands. These are pumped with energy surplus and are empty at high energy (surfing the waves). Also get some new buildings large basins on the roof. When this energy surplus pumped and demand for energy is made use of (waterfall). They are renewable energy machines that have a huge impact on the recreational potential of this new city district.

Climate

Besides the basic energy facilities provides 'New Amsterdam' for the necessary security to climate change for example by increasing the water storage capacity and the reception of large fluctuations. Residential areas are above the NAP (New Amsterdams level) to lie. The city has again breathing space.

Breathing Space

In the urban energy landscape 'New Amsterdam' creates opportunities for nature, ecology, recreation and economy

http://delva.la/nieuws/glimpses-new-amsterdam/

Delva with Dingeman Deijstake take water as their starting point and use the IJ estuary as a generator for energy. In doing so, they have (like other Amsterdam proposals) shifted the city centre. They have used the IJ as a 'heart' as such, pumping energy around to support the city.

Application to Paddington.  Seeing as Paddington is an inner city suburb, it can't be pushed to be the hub of city activities. What can be done however, is take our concept of dispersed nuclei around the land from the first project, and allow Paddington Central become the 'beating heart' as such.

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

MOVING | NEW YORK

dlandstudio based their future proposal on sea levels rising.  The sea level at Hunters Point, Queens will be inundated in 2040 and dlandstudio has developed on the opportunities that this creates by creating a more connected city through inland ferry access.  This in turn creates the opportunity to better integrate bus, train, automobile, bicycle and pedestrian circulation.  Interesting how Fabric focused on individual transportation and dlandstudio leaned towards public.

Application to Paddington.  As much as I believe the use of private vehicles for transport could be and needs to be eliminated, I don't think any public transport system can replace the level of comfort and convenience that comes with owning a car.  Paddington is also quite a hilly suburb, so bike use would be limited and since the focus of the suburban group is retail, lets not forget to mention trying to carry a big grocery shop home on a bike safely. A transport system that integrates public and private within the same network may be a solution in the future, but I don't think it would be feasible to say such a system would be in place by 2030.

http://www.dlandstudio.com/

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

MOVING | AMSTERDAM

Fabric's proposal suggests a more integrated and intensified city.  Currently, the city seperates people, goods, leisure, work, play, information and energy.  Thus, seperation = time, energy and fuel.  By integrating these currently segregated aspects, they have created a playful and functional cityscape designed at human scale.  
The advantages are not only technological (new fuel, engines and use of renewable energy), their key position is that modern transportation has essentially shifted the orientation of the city 180degrees from the IJ waterfront and focused on the south axis and its international connectivity: where local and global connect, a 'front door' as such. 
Transport has moved above and below ground plane, freeing up much space for activation.  It is also more intelligent (collision self-avoiding capacity, non-polluting engines) and a shift to individual transport modules.

Application to Paddington.  Transport integration for Paddington currently:
- reliant on buses to City/Valley/Gabba
- train station at Milton - access not easy
- bike pathways - limited road access (streets too narrow).  hilly. 
- car heavy

Solution
- possible integration of public transport stop 1) to connect site to city centre 2) bring people to site
- lessen car parks to encourage public transport but still have possibility for people to drive
- if integration of supermarket remains, heavy reliance on delivery, therefore loading dock needs to be included
- more bike paths/parks

http://www.fabrications.nl/projectlist.php

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

DWELLING | AMSTERDAM

The 'Glimpses' manifestation was set up by ARCAM, Amsterdam Centre for Architecture, and the Center for Architecture New York. The project explores the long-term future of both cities, and focuses on creating a vibrant and sustainable city. Space&matter was invited to create a glimpse on the future of dwelling in Amsterdam.

Recently Dutch parliament has officially given up on the once cherished multicultural society. The states ideal to be a society in which people with different cultural backgrounds respectfully coexist, did not have the desired outcome. Also the social connection between different educational backgrounds has considerably decreased since the church lost its influence on Dutch society. Today we find ourselves in a polarizing society in which differences in culture, education level and political standpoint are becoming more distinct then ever. As a result people are increasingly drawn to like minded individuals. Amongst those, they find security in a collective identity. Our glimpse into the future contemplates on how this polarizing trend can be turned around into a cohesive society.

Since the commercial developments are scarce in the current financial climate, much hope is aimed at private initiative. Especially collective private commissioning (CPO) or building groups (usually friends or like-minded people) are encouraged to take initiative and develop their own buildings. What if a complete neighborhood would be build up by building groups. What if these groups would be clustered in interest based building blocks with a collective courtyard. What if one of the buildings around the courtyard would be social sector housing. What if the residents of the block have the responsibility to fill the ground-floor plinth with specific amenities so they would be actively opened to the neighborhood. Would people that feel safe in their collective dwelling environment be more open to others? Would articulating cultural differences on block-scale create an inviting and accessible heterogeneity. Could a juxtaposition of these microcosms be a way to evoke a socially sustainable society?

http://www.spaceandmatter.nl/architecture/glimpses-/

It is interesting (and realistic) to see that Space and Matter has segregated living situations to groups of like-minded's as a response to current issues.  Instead of trying to 'fix it' as such, they've proposed a scenario in which the problem has metabolised and as a result, these "microcosms" breed their ideas and beliefs and they become what is essentially a gallery of interests within the city context.  It is plausible: they have turned something that could be seen as a negative into a potentially positive solution.

Application to the task at hand.  Paddington and Retail. What is negative? What is positive?
Here are some facts:

People	7,987
Male	3,817
Female	4,170
Median age	32

Families	1,847
Average children per family	1.8

All private dwellings	3,628
Average people per household	2.4
Median weekly household income	$2,072
Median monthly mortgage repayments	$2,557
Median weekly rent	$400
Average motor vehicles per dwelling	1.6

People — demographics & education

demographics & education | cultural & language diversity | employment

People	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Total	7,987	--	4,332,739	--	21,507,717	--
Male	3,817	47.8	2,148,221	49.6	10,634,013	49.4
Female	4,170	52.2	2,184,518	50.4	10,873,704	50.6
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people	51	0.6	155,825	3.6	548,369	2.5

In the 2011 Census, there were 7,987 people in Paddington (Statistical Local Areas) of these 47.8% were male and 52.2% were female. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people made up 0.6% of the population.

Age	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
People
0-4 years	521	6.5	297,893	6.9	1,421,050	6.6
5-9 years	362	4.5	286,989	6.6	1,351,921	6.3
10-14 years	249	3.1	290,982	6.7	1,371,054	6.4
15-19 years	349	4.4	293,917	6.8	1,405,798	6.5
20-24 years	940	11.8	293,845	6.8	1,460,673	6.8
25-29 years	1,166	14.6	300,709	6.9	1,513,236	7.0
30-34 years	873	10.9	286,697	6.6	1,453,775	6.8
35-39 years	755	9.5	308,180	7.1	1,520,138	7.1
40-44 years	557	7.0	312,567	7.2	1,542,879	7.2
45-49 years	453	5.7	302,744	7.0	1,504,142	7.0
50-54 years	428	5.4	288,140	6.7	1,447,404	6.7
55-59 years	374	4.7	257,962	6.0	1,297,244	6.0
60-64 years	352	4.4	243,125	5.6	1,206,116	5.6
65-69 years	186	2.3	185,758	4.3	919,319	4.3
70-74 years	126	1.6	136,885	3.2	708,090	3.3
75-79 years	101	1.3	99,572	2.3	545,263	2.5
80-84 years	98	1.2	76,971	1.8	436,936	2.0
85 years and over	97	1.2	69,801	1.6	402,681	1.9
Median age	32	--	36	--	37	--

Education	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Pre-school	98	4.2	50,615	3.9	332,844	5.1
Primary - Government	291	12.6	258,616	20.2	1,181,787	18.2
Primary - Catholic	127	5.5	72,713	5.7	359,062	5.5
Primary - Other Non Government	31	1.3	48,450	3.8	214,359	3.3
Secondary - Government	71	3.1	154,133	12.0	774,074	11.9
Secondary - Catholic	67	2.9	51,966	4.1	307,142	4.7
Secondary - Other Non Government	103	4.4	52,454	4.1	254,828	3.9
Technical or further education institution	138	6.0	79,238	6.2	473,606	7.3
University or tertiary institution	892	38.5	173,433	13.5	932,524	14.3
Other	58	2.5	28,841	2.2	161,660	2.5
Not Stated	440	19.0	311,791	24.3	1,511,694	23.2
Total	2,316	--	1,282,250	--	6,503,580	--

Employment	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
People who reported being in the labour force, aged 15 years and over
Worked full-time	3,449	66.1	1,302,955	60.0	6,367,554	59.7
Worked part-time	1,338	25.6	611,296	28.2	3,062,976	28.7
Away from work	238	4.6	125,025	5.8	627,797	5.9
Unemployed	193	3.7	131,798	6.1	600,133	5.6
Total in labour force	5,218	--	2,171,074	--	10,658,460	--

Employment - hours worked	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Labour force, people aged 15 years and over
1-15 hours per week	502	10.0	211,872	10.4	1,087,799	10.8
16-24 hours per week	406	8.1	179,614	8.8	947,792	9.4
25-34 hours per week	430	8.5	219,806	10.8	1,027,380	10.2
35-39 hours per week	728	14.5	369,264	18.1	1,808,879	18.0
40 hours or more per week	2,724	54.2	933,696	45.8	4,558,678	45.3

Occupation	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Employed people aged 15 years and over
Professionals	2,053	40.8	385,581	18.9	2,145,442	21.3
Managers	755	15.0	245,606	12.0	1,293,970	12.9
Clerical and Administrative Workers	712	14.2	299,326	14.7	1,483,558	14.7
Technicians and Trades Workers	426	8.5	304,563	14.9	1,425,146	14.2
Community and Personal Service Workers	420	8.4	202,978	10.0	971,897	9.7
Sales Workers	374	7.4	199,634	9.8	942,140	9.4
Labourers	160	3.2	215,235	10.6	947,608	9.4
Machinery Operators And Drivers	69	1.4	149,322	7.3	659,551	6.6

Industry of employment, top responses	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Employed people aged 15 years and over
Architectural, Engineering and Technical Services	295	5.9	40,767	2.0	178,212	1.8
Hospitals	259	5.2	82,443	4.0	361,011	3.6
Cafes, Restaurants and Takeaway Food Services	242	4.8	84,805	4.2	412,804	4.1
Legal and Accounting Services	238	4.7	38,859	1.9	209,182	2.1
Tertiary Education	200	4.0	36,410	1.8	198,933	2.0

Median weekly incomes	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
People aged 15 years and over
Personal	985	--	587	--	577	--
Family	2,572	--	1,453	--	1,481	--
Household	2,072	--	1,235	--	1,234	--

Travel to work, top responses	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Employed people aged 15 years and over
Car, as driver	2,247	44.7	1,248,542	61.2	6,059,972	60.2
Bus	715	14.2	67,191	3.3	301,187	3.0
Walked only	521	10.4	75,560	3.7	377,043	3.7
Car, as passenger	224	4.5	125,269	6.1	537,638	5.3
Bicycle	150	3.0	21,575	1.1	103,914	1.0
People who travelled to work by public transport	914	18.2	154,773	7.6	1,046,721	10.4
People who travelled to work by car as driver or passenger	2,474	49.2	1,378,983	67.6	6,620,840	65.8

Family composition	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Couple family without children	868	47.0	453,102	39.5	2,150,301	37.8
Couple family with children	691	37.4	491,200	42.8	2,534,399	44.6
One parent family	222	12.0	184,547	16.1	901,637	15.9
Other family	67	3.6	19,330	1.7	97,722	1.7

Dwelling type	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Occupied private dwellings	3,178	91.8	1,547,303	89.7	7,760,320	89.3
Unoccupied private dwellings	284	8.2	177,911	10.3	934,470	10.7

Dwelling structure	Paddington	%	Queensland	%	Australia	%
Occupied private dwellings
Separate house	2,119	66.7	1,215,302	78.5	5,864,574	75.6
Semi-detached, row or terrace house, townhouse etc	282	8.9	129,429	8.4	765,980	9.9
Flat, unit or apartment	764	24.0	181,717	11.7	1,056,237	13.6
Other dwelling	12	0.4	19,575	1.3	66,666	0.9

http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2011/quickstat/305011454?opendocument&navpos=220

NEW YORK | AMSTERDAM | GLIMPSES 2040

DWELLING | NEW YORK

THE NEWARK VISIONARY MUSEUM

2011

The Newark Visionary Museum is Interboro’s submission to the “GLIMPSES of New York and Amsterdam in 2040″ exhibition, which will open on June 8, 2011 at the Center for Architecture.

I am an architect. I know what is to come by the principle on which it is built. . . Now you know why I dynamited Cortlandt. . . I agreed to design it for the purpose of seeing it built as I wished. . . My building was disfigured at the whim of others who took all the benefits of my work and gave me nothing in return. I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy, nor to any achievement of mine. No matter who makes the claim.

-Howard Roark, from Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead

Poor Howard! If only he had chosen painting, or poetry, or some other medium that he could have had more control over! If only he was born later, and could have lived through the 70s, where, joined by a coterie of theoretical “paper architects,” he could have pursued a pure, uncontaminated, unchanging vision that would have been his and his alone. Robert Moses famously said that when building in a crowded city, you have to “swing the meat axe,” but Moses learned later that crowded cities swing back: when visions for what cities should look and feel like make it off the page and into the world, they are sometimes so highly compromised that they are unrecognizable. Neither Radburn nor any other “model” Garden City ever got a greenbelt (the essential component, according to its primary theorists), a highway interchange is built where the Plan of Chicago’s civic piece de resistance was supposed to go, and Hope VI has replaced our Towers-In-The-Park with housing typologies—medium-density, low-rise townhouses—that the Towers-In-The-Park were themselves built to replace. Even when things were built according to plan, they didn’t evolve according to plan. When the Levittown historical society was looking for an original, unmodified house for their headquarters, they realized that almost none existed, as most had been transformed over the decades by resourceful inhabitants. Barring the sports fields, Central Park might not look so different than 1858’s Greensward Plan, but Olmstead’s hope that his park would inspire genteel, assimilative behavior would appear an idle one to anyone who spends time in it.

Broad Street in Newark is fascinating to consider in this context because it is a virtual museum of stalled 19th, 20th, and 21st century urban visions. Like objects in a museum, many of the buildings depicted here seem to occupy their own worlds, and are separated from the other worlds that surround them. Introducing our own vision (our glimpse) in this environment thus engendered a certain amount of self-reflexivity. Why would we succeed where Frederick Law Olmstead, Louis Danzig, and Henry Cisneros and so many other giants of city-making failed? One “big bang” seemed out of the question. Instead, what we present—apart from a critical historical context—is a collection of sensible moves at a variety of scales that we think could better integrate and connect the islands in the archipelago. Thus instead of introducing another part, we’re proposing ways to connect parts that already exist. These range from ideas for regional transportation (why not extend Manhattan’s 7 train to Newark?), to increased housing options (for example, better senior housing), to programs (boat tours of the Passaic River), to admittedly utopian policies (annexation and home-value insurance). Could there be a way to bridge Mies and McDonalds? If there is a criticism here, it’s that visions fail because they are too often conceived of as wholes, when inevitably they become parts of a whole. A self-sufficient suburb? A machine for living? Private, climate-controlled, drive-through shopping? These visions pursued phantoms from the start. Like Roark, they never fully understand the need for negotiation, interconnectedness, and interdependency.

Project Team

Tobias Armborst, Daniel D’Oca, Georgeen Theodore, Lesser Gonzalez

http://www.interboropartners.net/2012/the-newark-visionary-museum/

REFLECT
The reason why visions fail is "...because they are too often conceived of as wholes, when inevitably they become parts of a whole".

The stance that Interboro takes is one that is both appropriate to the task at hand for this assignment and also what has happened in the past and happens in the present.  When design "happens", the scale of work happens at the city scale and often the human scale is forgotten.  Buildings are for people to use. The city is one that is inhabited by people.  I think the most over planned but underthought aspect of our environment is suburbia.  Access to green space, amenities and the like never result as planned and the room for spontaneous encounters is not accounted for.  This takes me back to the reading in week 4

" "Derive":instead of working, walk the streets in search of the unknown.  Engaging and being absorbed into. Social encounters with strangers is encouraged. Encountering the unfamiliar is key to this." 

The work presented here by Interboro with voices of past and present planners is both interesting and amusing.  What happened in the past may have been relevant then, but as times change, needs change. The need for flexible space, not only for planned (or unplanned) activities at one moment in time, but also for building reuse, is becoming more and more relevant. 

Application to Paddington. What does retail's physical presence become in the future? The need for SPACE will be more about storage facilities and delivery of goods as the shift from bricks and mortar to online becomes more and more imminent.  The Paddington site now caters mainly as a grocery store with a few supporting stores. In 2040....