I’d like to learn more about these mounds. Building into the ground may be a good way of reducing consumption of energy and other resources. There are some videos about Cahokia mounds (near Saint Louis) here and here.

[Originally posted to polis] Do you have a favorite public work of art? Or least favorite? Whose work would you like to see more of? Or less?

Great public art doesn’t always share the qualities that are thrilling in galleries. I like Georg Baselitz statues, but I would feel uncomfortable viewing some of them in the presence of children and grandparents. At the same time, it can be uncomfortable when public art is boring or just not appealing. This is subjective, but it is also why thinking about public art is important — it enters the lives of many different people, few of whom have any say in the matter.

Not having a say can be good if it exposes us to delightful things we never knew existed. There is a hit-or-miss quality that keeps things interesting, as long as they don’t become static. To keep this from happening, maybe there should be some kind of periodic review for public works of art. This could be a chance for people who experience them to voice their opinions. If a piece turns out to be well loved, it could be preserved. If people are repelled or indifferent, maybe it could be moved to make way for something new. Allowing for a constant stream of work, and keeping the ones that fit, might improve upon the places we move through each day.

It’s nice to see interactive public art, with people stopping to look closer when they’re late for work, kids playing on sculptures, friends posing for funny pictures, couples hiding away, or skateboarders jumping on and off. Art doesn’t have to be social in this way, but it can be great for public spaces when it is.

Credits: I can’t remember where I found this picture of a skateboarder in Philadelphia’s Love Park, but I hope, since I’m not making any money, the photographer won’t mind that I post it. Please let me me know if you have any leads.

[Originally posted to polis] Plans for Governors Island are gaining momentum! Located in the New York Harbor less than half a mile from Manhattan, the island offers breathtaking views of the city. For nearly 200 years it was a military base with limited public access. In 2003, the state purchased the island for a dollar with the stipulation that it not be used for permanent housing or casinos. It is now open on weekends from the end of May through mid-October.

Big ideas have been proposed, including a New Globe Theater by Foster + Partners and a gondola system by Santiago Calatrava. Perhaps even more impressive are the steps initiated by Leslie Koch of the Governors Island Preservation and Education Corporation (GIPEC). There is now a ferry service free of charge. There are wooden bikes to borrow, hammocks along the shore, and a miniature golf course designed as part of an annual arts festival. The island is currently hosting Plot/09, an exhibition curated by Creative Time. GIPEC has sought ideas from the public and proposals from private developers. They’ve commissioned the design of a park with allées, wetlands, flower gardens, and scenic hills built from local debris covered with soil.

Funding for the island’s renewal is tenuous, so I’d like to ask how you might go about making ideas happen inexpensively. This takes a creativity that compliments the generation of ideas. It brings together the contributions of many, and can gain momentum through a succession of small victories. It is an essential part of shaping the world around us for a common good. If you’d like to get involved or follow the island’s development, more information can be found at govisland.com and govislandblog.com.

Credits: Photo of Governors Island from the gallery section of the GIPEC website.

[Originally posted to Where] When it comes to transition, it seems there is a lot to learn in Moscow. I’m currently writing from there, after a day of walking around and taking a few pictures. The things that really stand out are the lasting marks left on the city from very different governing ideas: ornate metro stations, trees everywhere, aging apartment blocks, modernist masterworks, cars racing down streets that take an incredibly long time to cross. Everything Stalinist is gigantic.

Many public works have aged remarkably well. The metro stations are efficient and well maintained. The ones in the center of town have all kinds of architectural touches usually reserved for mansions, theaters, monuments, city halls, and museums. There is a basic sturdiness that prevents them from seeming too extravagant. Public green space lines the streets and fills the insides of apartment blocks. It’s very refreshing on summer days. Parks are full of young couples, new families, and elders reading or just watching people pass by. The ones I’ve seen so far have been clean but not highly manicured, which gives them a kind of wilderness feel.

(more…)

I’d like to add a detailed post on the ideas of Peter Kropotkin in relation to environment and planning. For instance, Lewis Mumford noted his influence on Ebenezer Howard, and Paul Robbins has described him as a sort of grandfather to political ecology.

For now just an immediate thought on anarchy: it’s interesting that the word has come to mean chaos, even though (I think) at root it just means without a ruler. Is it possible to prevent chaos in the absence of a ruler? Anarchy also shares a root with architecture. Different connections between architecture and rule never stop fascinating me.

Credits: Photo of Peter Kropotkin from the Anarchist Library.

[Originally posted to Where] Camillo Sitte thoughtfully explained the interior qualities of his favorite public spaces. Though generally open to the sky, they were surrounded by varied building types and furnished with stairways, arches, and sculptures. They were intimate and often irregular, with engaging views on all sides. He lamented the abandonment of plazas as daily life moved increasingly indoors.

Today life moves increasingly online, but the places we inhabit — whether physical or virtual — are no less important. Even looking out the window affects our state of mind. This is hard to measure, but it’s fairly clear when we feel comfortable, depressed, inspired, fearful, or healthy in response to our surroundings.

Sitte envisioned outdoor space that didn’t feel desolate. When we think of The Great Outdoors, we usually mean forests, mountains, rivers — not cities. But in many ways forests have more in common with cities than with prairies or deserts. They are full of proximate activity, and contain many unique places. I wonder how cities might eventually be considered part of The Great Outdoors.

(more…)

[Originally posted to Where] There is an interesting perspective on cities in a short essay by Matthew Gandy, titled “Urban Nature and the Ecological Imaginary.” In referring to urban nature, Gandy includes both concrete elements and abstract ideas. The ecological imaginary is an example of the latter, as in the use of scientific metaphors (such as organism and metabolism) to represent cities. This way of thinking seems to have gained momentum in response to industrialization, as urban areas were increasingly viewed as separate from and harmful to nature. Thus planners sought to reconnect cities with a natural ideal.

According to Gandy, urban space is produced through a nature-culture synthesis. In other words, cities take shape through our actions in combination with biophysical processes. Kevin Lynch found that “the quality of a place is due to the joint effect of the place and the society which occupies it” (Good City Form, p. 111). Gandy proposes a political approach that recognizes this co-evolutionary dynamic and moves away from the idea of cities as unnatural.

(more…)