Parks with Purpose
Preserving the Past, Designing the Future
By Emily Tipping
This is not to say that Birnbaum is opposed to any additions to existing parks. In fact, he said, "I'm a big fan of a lot of the kinds of programmatic additions bringing people back to parks, but they shouldn't be done at the expense of significant cultural fabric."
For example, the 6.2-acre Madison Square Park, located in the heart of Manhattan's Flatiron District, underwent a $6 million renovation and revitalization, completed in 2001. "They've done so much to make that park come alive again. The Shake Shack is teeming with people on a nice evening," Birnbaum said. "They also built a new several-story children's playground in the middle of the park."
Unfortunately, Birnbaum said, the way the playground was sited disrupted a view—recorded in a classic photograph by Alfred Stieglitz—of the Flatiron Building. "Because that playground is now in the viewshed, you've destroyed that connection of these hundred-year-old trees framing the Flatiron Building. It's not to say that the tot lot is bad, but the way it was built is bad, because you destroyed a major part of that view. There are a lot more people living in Gramercy Park who need a place to take their kids. Imagine if instead, the tot lot was depressed two feet and had a perimeter seat wall built into it.
"These are design issues," he added. "It becomes a question of carrying capacity and appropriate scale. We like to create stereotypes: These people are only interested in history, and these people are only interested in program. But the challenge for designers is how do we transform program? …Any landscape of historic importance should have research done. You wouldn't go to the dentist, open your mouth and say, 'Start drilling.' You'd want to get X-rays and give your dental history. Parks are the same way. We need to understand that history to guide change."
Birnbaum decries the destruction of open space and beautifully designed landscapes envisioned by such masters as Olmsted and Halprin. "A lot of people don't realize that 70 to 80 percent of people who use parks use them for passive enjoyment," he explained. "Why are not trees and lawns sufficient?"
|