The current Bushwick Inlet site is, quite objectively, an ugly place. Urban decay took its toll over the past several decades, leaving the area as an unkempt, fenced off lot. Rusted scrap metal and miscellaneous garbage plague the entire site. The view of the Manhattan skyline is mostly blocked by either high chain-link fences. The few parts that are not blocked soon will be by an upcoming residential tower. Greenery is rare, appearing only as the odd bush or awkward blade of grass poking through the asphalt.
My project is an upwards peeling of the ground to both combat the boring flatness of the site and bring visitors higher and offer a clearer view of the river and of Manhattan architecture. This ramp-like structure adds much needed verticality to the site and features a green roof with recreational programming, such as a fitness center and a river lookout. This elevated space will cover the fire station and adjacent museum below, boldly mixing the daily lives of the firefighters and the general public. My project will give back to the community what they were promised years ago; a lush, friendly area.
Stephen R. Kellert is a professor emeritus of social ecology and a senior research scholar at the Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, and is decorated with more honors and awards than would ever be rational. His work concerns the relation between humans and natural processes and features, more specifically how this relationship applies to design and development. His book, Building for Life, examines our society’s need for sustainable design in order to achieve a higher quality of life. He champions the ecological and cultural movement in biophilic design, design that appeals to the innate human affinity for natural processes and features.
By eliciting positive, valued experiences of nature within our built environment, we can repair the relationship between nature and ourselves, so that we might easier recognize our dependence on nature, and ultimately become more responsible in our treatment of it. Sustainability aside, biophilia is very much cultural, and is envisions a society of individuals more conscious of their surroundings, first through their natural environment, but also indirectly through their social environment . The Promenade Plantée, or the Bastille Viaduct, in Paris is cited as an effective example as it has successfully “[restoring] contact with nature in an urban context”. He asserts that the project has revitalized the area socially and economically, while returning the city dweller to a more common interaction with nature. At the same time, Kellert is fast to critique the Bastille Viaduct’s failure to address “low environmental impact or ecological landscape design” and entertains the idea that the project may not be a great example. He similarly discusses the work of Frank Lloyd Wright whose prairie houses, most notably with Fallingwater, have demonstrated biophilic principles in establishing a sentimental harmony of human within nature. Yet, due to the cost, heavy use of materials, and limited energy efficiency, Kellert cannot quite call Frank Lloyd Wright the ideal ‘Biophile.’
Three degrees of our human affinity to nature can be considered when applying biophilia to a design: direct, indirect and symbolic. The direct is the hardest, as the built environment can only frame, and never be a direct experience with nature. Full nature does not anticipate the implantation of built works. A greenhouse or courtyard can frame a garden, a direct experience of nature, but the structure around it could simply not be. The indirect experience involves the existence of nature that is dependent on the maintenance and support of human efforts. A fern in a vase, or the fishtank at your dentists’ office are examples of natural environments confined and constrained where their vitality is dependent on third support. Lastly, the symbolic experience of nature, which is the most obvious within art, and has been pursued for as long as architecture has been practiced. Arabic floral patterns, Gothic sculptural details and rose windows, to the efforts of Frank Lloyd Wright to integrate structure into nature, all relate directly to understanding nature through abstraction, through symbol.
Kellert makes one significant assumption that forms the basis of his whole argument, that humanity has a natural tendency to revere what is resemblant of nature. Seemingly sensible in theory, the assumption appears to be false, as aesthetic tastes do exist that appreciate the quality of orthogonality and the hand-prints of man.
Thesis: New York City should undergo a large scale introduction of green, sustainable projects like DSR’s High Line project to combat the effects of uncontrolled urbanization and municipal development.
Abstract:
Questionable power sources such as coal mining and fracking. Hundreds of millions of tons of municipal construction waste. Widespread poor space and resource utilization. These are just some of the vexing issues facing New York City’s environmental situation. These are problems are not isolated to the Big Apple. These are problems echoed across the country but exacerbated by the volume of people and the proximity within which they live. Things that seem natural to a town, such as historical neighborhoods and parks have washed away in waves of urbanization and skyrocketing prices for a square foot of rent. The urbanization of New York has been crippled by its piecemeal growth and small scale projects resulting in an incoherent patchwork of an environmentally unsustainable city. While an occasional project will address these issues, there is an ignorance of the need for green that shoots straight to the top. There have been reports of the ideal scenarios for decades from now, but little legislative legwork to keep things moving along the allotted path (Office of the Mayor, 2007). Environmentally conscious architecture and planning isn’t merely a supplementary certification to boast about but rather, urgently needed. As cities draw more and more people from an ever wider range, their scope of in-demand resources grow too. This ever expanding radius and, in turn, impact per person is putting a strain on the country as a whole and it is beginning to show. California’s drought, crop shortages, and landfill zones running out of space are just a few of the symptoms of this national epidemic, and some of these problems are affecting the big apple as well (WBEZ, 2015).
Now more than ever there is a need to return to the basics, the lifestyle possible hundreds of years ago is still relevant today. I do not mean to imply by any means that horse and buggies are the new Prius, but rather that using what you have and conserving your resources are a way of life, not a choice. For architects this means designing buildings that are adaptive and designed for their location to use a reasonable amount of energy and attempting to gain some through renewable resources. For urban planning this may mean more green space and better regulation of zoning. The city’s planning commissions have consistently approved projects with little to no regard for environmental impacts, or based on a set of standards that only address a specific set of issues (Smith, 2002)(NPR, 2010). Residents of the city are beginning to take notice of the changes all around them, affecting everything from air quality to even how much sun they see (Hughes, 2015). People naturally crave natural features (such as trees and grass) to maintain a positive mood and general well-being. To feed these cravings, New York City needs projects that add green space to the urban fabric.
A step in the right direction can be found in New York City itself. Stretching from Gavensvoort Street to 34th Street, a once disused 1.45 mile long portion of the New York Central Railroad stands proudly 30 feet above street level. The High Line Park, designed by New York architecture firm Diller Scofidio + Renfro (DSR), is an incredibly popular project. Receiving nearly 5 million visitors per year (Lopate, 2011), the HLP is an exemplar of an environmentally thoughtful project. Due to the decreased use of rail traffic through the nation, the original New York Central Railroad became obsolete. The portion of the railroad that would become the High Line sat over Manhattan streets for over 30 years, obsolete and growing hardy wild grasses and shrubs. While slated for demolition in the 1990s (following the trend of wasteful construction), repurposing of the railroad began in 2005, until its completion in the fall of 2014 (Lopate, 2011). Instead of demolishing the railroad, leaving the area as a pile of rubble for several years only to be turned into another environmentally wasteful project, the High Line is an example of successful and effective adaptive reuse.
26th Street Viewing Spur. Photo taken by Barry Munger
The High Line’s success can be attributed to its biophilic design and subsequent effect on its users. Biophilic design appeals to the innate human affinity to natural features and processes (Kellert, 2005). The average New York City daily commuter will likely have his view dominated by the skyscrapers, seeing only steel, glass, and concrete. Stephen Kellert proposed that biophilic architecture is an attempt by humans to act as a substitute for nature itself in a world where rampant urbanization makes visiting actual nature difficult (Kellert, 2005). A 2014 report by the Journal of Leisure Research indicated that per capita visitation to national parks has decreased by roughly 19% over the last 17 years (Walker, 2015). However, the High Line addresses this problem by injecting a green space directly into a concrete and steel construct. This introduction of natural and green features, in addition to its architectural programming (theatres, lookouts, lounges), result in very positive feedback from the surrounding community. This popularity (gauged by its annual 5 million visitor count) is the key to the High Line’s sustainability. An environmentally conscious building is not successful merely due to its green construction or a small energy footprint. Its user base needs to love the building enough to continue its existence. The people of New York City (for the most part) love the High Line. As a result, they will encourage its upkeep and perhaps even upgrade it over the next several decades, therefore prolonging its life. In prolonging its life, it avoids its demolition and stops wastefulness.
Gansevoort End, Plaza and Stairs. Photo taken by Iwan Baan.
The High Line’s popularity has generated a positive, worldwide response. Projects from different continents, such as Europe, Asia, and Australia, are learning from the success of the High Line. They are taking principles similar to those of the High Line and applying it to the problems they face in their own cities. Disused infrastructure is retrofitted via adaptive reuse and transformed into new, public oriented programming. For example, American firm Gensler won the London Planning Award for their concept for the London Underline. The Underline is the adaptive re-use of the abandoned metro tunnels and surplus infrastructure underneath London (Gensler, 2015). The project seeks to turn the existing infrastructure into a subterranean pedestrian/bicycle path, outfitted with programming like shops and restrooms (Gensler, 2015). This would provide not only a safe way for Londoners to travel through the city by foot and bike (avoiding traffic) but also give the abandoned infrastructure a new purpose. Dutch firm MVRDV is transforming a portion of elevated highway in Seoul, South Korea into a large, public “Skygarden” (Dezeen, 2015). The project turns 938 meters of highway into a pedestrian garden/walkway 17 feet above street level. The Seoul Skygarden also plans to host 254 different species of trees to create a “city within a garden” (MVRDV, 2015). The New York High Line is spearheading the international movement to introduce adaptive reuse to abandoned infrastructure and transform abandoned and disused projects into functional, green projects.
London Underline Concept Rendering. Produced by Gensler.
Seoul Skygarden Concept Rendering. Produced by MVRDV.
While widely praised for its positive effects and architectural legacy, the High Line is not perfect. While it does offer positive, green effects to the surrounding area, it comes with a list of consequences. The High Line runs through the Chelsea neighborhood, traditionally seen as a gritty area in an overall poor condition (Koblin, 2007). The High Line’s popularity has resulted in a real-estate boom along the path and revitalization of the area. A number of (expensive) luxury condominium complexes are in progress along the High Line’s run (Tablang, 2015). However, this has not been a victimless event. The park has been described as a “tourist clogged catwalk”. Established small businesses in the area have suffered, some closing down due to loss of their usual local customer base and increased rent costs (Moss, 2012).
The Highline is a big step in the right direction towards a newer, green New York City and world at large. Its adaptive reuse of an obsolete railroad has turned what was once a decrepit piece of concrete and steel into a sprawling garden complex visited by thousands every day. Despite its negative effects on the economic and social conditions of its surroundings, the High Line, as an individual entity, is sustainable and its efficacy as an adaptive reuse design should be followed in future New York City projects.
Works Cited:
“Not It!’ This American Life. NPR. WBEZ, Chicago. 10 April. 2015. Radio.
Hughes, CJ. “The Stress of New Construction.” The New York Times. 25 September 2015. Online. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/27/realestate/the-stress-of-new-construction.html.
Moss, Jeremiah. “Disney World on the Hudson”. The New York Times. 21 August 2012. Online. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/22/opinion/in-the-shadows-of-the-high-line.html.
plaNYC: A Greener, Greater New York.New York, New York: Office of the Mayor of the City of New York. 2007. Online. http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc/downloads/pdf/publications/full_report_2007.pdf.
“Critics Say LEED Program Doesn’t Fullfill It’s Promises.” NPR. NPR, 8 September 2010. Online. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129727547
Smith, Neil. New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Urban Strategy. Oxford:
Kellert, S. R. 2005. Building for Life: Designing and Understanding the Human-Nature Connection. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Lopate, Phillip. “Above Grade: On the High Line,” Places Journal, November 2011. 25 October 2015. https://placesjournal.org/article/above-grade-on-the-high-line/
Walker, Jonce. Biophilic Urban Acupuncture: The Importance of Biophilia in Urban Places. Terrapin. 21 October 2015. Terrapin Bright Green. Online. http://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/blog/2015/10/biophilic-urban-acupuncture-biophilia-in-urban-places/
Koblin, Josh. High Line Park Spurs Remaking Of Formerly [Gritty] Chelsea. Observer Real Estate. 2 April 2007. Observer Real Estate. Online. http://observer.com/2007/04/high-line-park-spurs-remaking-of-formerly-grotty-chelsea/
Gensler. Gensler Vision for Disused London Metro Lines Wins London Planning Award. Gensler. 3 February 2015. Online. http://www.gensler.com/news/press-releases/gensler-vision-for-disused-london-metro-lines-wins-london
Tablang, Kristina. 5 Luxury Condos Sprouting Up Along New York City’s High Line. Forbes. 28 February 2015. Online. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kristintablang/2015/02/28/5-luxury-condos-new-york-city-high-line/
MVRDV. Seoul Skygarden. MVRDV. June 2014. Online. http://www.mvrdv.nl/projects/seoul-skygarden
Dezeen. MVRDV Studio http://www.dezeen.com/2015/05/13/mvrdv-studio-makkink-bey-transform-seoul-overpass-into-high-line-inspired-park-seoul-skygarden/
Haley’s project is dedicated to having her fire station as a strong symbol of civic duty giving back what was promised to the Greenpoint community years ago in the proposed park master plan. Her site features large swaths of land to be revamped as friendly, public spaces. Site programming is organized in a V-shape, vertexes pointing south and west (Manhattan). She also adds a winding, elevated bridge and walkway travelling along and over the coastline of the inlet. The inlet coastline is outfitted with constructed wetlands and bioswales to clean up the environment and combat flooding.
The fire station itself is organized into two sections, public and private spaces. Public spaces are to guide the general public in to its programming and also guide them away from the firefighter’s buildings to keep them out of the way in day to day operations. The fire station features a tall hose drying tower (a frequent used symbolic element of fire stations) standing 2 stories above the other structures to serve as a beacon for the building and site at large. The general public will be able to go into this tower to observe the exciting process of hoses drying and also catch a view of Manhattan from the vantage point the tower offers.
The building features two pavilions for either public or private (firefighter) use. The public pavilion is on the western vertex and is attached to the kayak and canoe launch. The private firefighter’s pavilion is on the southern vertex, and features a semi-covered condition. This is to shelter firefighters and EMT’s bringing casualties (injured persons) over to Manhattan for medical attention, as stipulated in the program requirements.
Juror Sandra stated, as an overall comment on the project, that Haley’s formal decisions have been trumping many of her practical decisions. For example, Haley sought a level of balance and keep the firefighter’s pavilion semi-covered because the public pavilion on the opposite vertex was not covered. However, Sandra proposed a situation in which a patient with a heart attack would much prefer to be carted over to Manhattan under a covered pavilion if it was raining or snowing. What an architect thinks to be stronger for their concept does not matter to a firefighter trying to save a life.
Sandra also believes that Haley’s organization of programming should be more carefully considered. She said that there should be more of a focus on “where and why”. She cited the position of a computer room placed next to a training/presentation room, both of which are rather close to the apparatus bay. The computer room and training room, as stipulated in the program, should be quiet places for firefighters to focus. The loud activities in the apparatus bay would disturb that.
Juror Ross criticized the amount of space on site left unaccounted for between the coastline and the building itself. He also encouraged Haley to start looking at different materials to help with her “symbol of civic duty” idea. He understood that the project is still in the schematic phase but stated that thinking about materials earlier may help the project development.
I appreciate Haley’s strong, bold geometry of her project. Her project idea is declaring that the site needs revitalization and she does so with this very expansive, bold complex. In my project, I am struggling with my site at large because I have the fire station and monitor museum as a single entity, but I am unsure with how to treat the rest of the land with rhyme and reason. Haley solves that by creating that V-shaped frame. Ross criticized her for not doing much with the space between the two vertexes and I agree; the area is rather undeveloped. However, by framing the area with her V-shape geometry, she has set herself up for an area with a lot of potential.
I also greatly enjoy the hose drying tower Haley designed. I think that the hose tower, once a strong symbol of fire stations, is now widely forgotten by the general public. By reintegrating it to her station and making it 2 stories higher than the rest of the structure she makes it an object of importance. I am also a fan of her programming allowing for visitors to enter the tower to not only see the hoses drying, but offer them an incredible view of the Manhattan skyline.
While I like the building’s form, I think the function and programming needs to be thought about more thoroughly. Sandra suggested that Haley think more about the “where and why”. I can’t help but feel as though Haley’s form is hindering the success of her program layout. For example, her apparatus bay seems somewhat cramped because it is being organized linearly due to its long, trapezoidal form. While on paper it would make sense, it seems somewhat inconvenient for firefighters to travel through. I would recommend thinking about program adjacencies a bit more. For example, it would be prudent to place the sanitation programming close to where HAZMAT engines park for convenience.
While some spaces are thought out well enough in terms of detail, Haley leaves some large spaces unaddressed. There are large spaces laid out for dining/living, recreation/fitness, and indoor gardening, but there is nothing laid out within them. I would suggest researching successful examples of these types of program and adding walls or partitions to plan out spaces within.
Visual communication is strong in her presentation. Line weights are crisp and clear and I can easily see what is happening in her drawings. However, I think it would be very helpful to see her building in perspective on the board. While the hose-drying tower perspective is interesting, I think internal perspectives of how adjacent programs interact would be much more meaningful. It would also be helpful to make the site plan clearer. The plan was color coded, but I think in a situation with many different programs over a large span of land, it would be much more helpful to have a diagram with actual words marking the program or clear, sensible symbols (symbol of a park bench = park space).
Overall, I think Haley’s project has incredible potential. She has set up a very bold geometry which that carries her concept with force. The area defined by her two vertexes frame where she can easily place outdoor programming. She simply needs to give some more detail to some points of her building and really grasp what exactly a firefighter or visitor will truly find useful or convenient. Presentation wise, there just needs to be another hour or two of elbow grease (maybe even less because of the already detailed Revit model) and it will be just fine. Haley is on a straightforward path to an airtight project.
Photo: Da-Yo Fire station by K-Architect, taken by Lee Fotografy
The current Bushwick Inlet site is, quite objectively, an ugly place. Urban decay took its toll in the several decades, leaving the area as an unkempt, fenced off lot. Scattered garbage and its stench plague the entire site. The view of the Manhattan skyline are blocked by either high chainlink fences or will soon be blocked by imposing residential towers. Greenery is rare, appearing only as the odd bush or awkward blade of grass poking through the asphalt.
My project is an upwards peeling of the ground to both combat the boring flatness of the site and bring visitors higher and offer a clearer view of the river and of Manhattan architecture. This lifted structure will feature a green roof and give back to the community what they were promised years ago; a lush, friendly area. This elevated space will cover the fire station below, boldly mixing the daily lives of the firefighters and the general public.
