Urban Design Discussion

 

The details on a “Reach by Reach” basis are well worth some “urban design” quires and perusals.  To this end, I suggest the following stipulation to your examination. 

We have long known that we see is what we think is there and that this can be correct or incorrect at anytime but always considered correct, and we know that not every observation we make is exact.  We know errors in perception and measurement exist.  These elements of the human condition are fundamental and accepted collectively in science and psychology.  The more important issue is our responsibility to seek or development statements of fact that have such lasting clarity in describing the conditions of our time they will continue to make sense in a distant future despite these errors.   I would like your opinion of the waterfront draft on this basis. (or how much jargon can plan one take?) 

Armed with this knowledge please read the “Waterfront Plan” for recommendations and procedures most likely to reduce error when discussing measurements and second, suggest ways to find these errors during the implementation of plan components that provide for adjustments. 

There are no design police.  Nevertheless, the New Yorker only needs to recall the 6^th Avenue commercial office bonus scheme to realize the limitations involved in the public’s regulatory interest in extending Central Park a bit to south with urban plazas along the avenue.   One only needs to look at “restrictive declaration” used in Astoria, to recognize a public access failure when you see it.  Both represented a straightforward and honorable desire, but one that was interpreted very differently by the developer’s bottom line of that time.  Today we have a double bottom line approach.  Please bring this “do no harm” value to your review of the plans revision as follows:  

The New York Department of City Planning website asks you to get involved with Vision 2020: NYC Comprehensive Waterfront Plan.   It offers a set of links (below).  Each seeks thoughtful people to reflect on “new public realm” and to deduce the purpose of the update from its 1992 version under Wilber “Bill” Woods. 

Seek out the following and provide your view using the resource links below and share facts and opinions with this blog or the other venues known to many of you as listed below:  

1.   Read the Draft Recommendations – NEW 
2.   Send us your comments online
3.   Read a recap of the workshops
4.   Subscribe to our email newsletter  

The “connection” of New York City’s 500+ miles of “blue-interface” to regulatory entities such as the NYC Building Code, the Clean Water Act, and the long list or labyrinth of permits demand site-t0-site complexities.  The call for waterproofing every new structure within a few hundred feet of the waterfront at 14 feet “ABOVE” mean high tide is a “code” example.   

Another is use of the word “elevated” in reference to the inevitable rise of sea levels.  It suggests the need for other measurements to sustain the basic value of public access that sits as the foundation of the public interest.    Perhaps it would be a good thing to see NYC function as well as Venice has in the centuries to come, or to plan as well as our friends in the Netherlands.  It would seem prudent in a ten-year plan to outline factors that are in NYC’s interest as far into the future as reasonable. 

• Note: The word “elevated” in the DRAFT is found twice as follows: “Provide elevated views to waterfront” in Reach 2 — Lower Manhattan and “Explore creation of elevated viewing deck overlooking cruise terminals” in Reach 3 – Lower West Side.  What exactly is the measure for “elevated” and how might this carry over or affect the entire waterfront.

Unlike the folks in the Netherlands that have confidently stated the country to be “climate proof”, NYC-DCP selection is “climate resilience”.  It says: 

While Vision 2020 is focused on the next ten years, the plan recognizes the need to plan for a much longer timeframe as well. The New York City Panel on Climate Change.  See 2010 Report (354 pgs) from the NY Academy of Sciences.  It has projected hat sea levels are expected to rise anywhere from 12 inches to 55 inches by 2080. In addition, severe storms and the floods associated with them are expected to occur more frequently. 

As a coastal city, many New York neighborhoods experience flooding and storm surges. These risks are expected to increase as the affects of climate change are felt.  The Department of City Planning is working with other City agencies on assessing the risks associated with sea level rise in order to develop strategies for the city to increase its resilience. Strategies include regulatory and other measures to improve the flood resistance of new and existing buildings, as well as exploring soft infrastructure approaches to coastal protection. 

Apologies 

That is far more introduction than needed.  I implore you to read the DRAFT using your “urban design” lens as a planner or architect and offer your opinions.  Observations from other cities, states in the USA or throughout the precious orb of life we call earth.  

The venues for discussion are: 

APA Metro NY Urban Design Committee
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=41374&trk=anet_ug_hm 

There are 40 members in this section and the activity level is low.  LinkedIn is known for its a job networking services, but its “group” function makes this system available to members to share articles, post questions and define issues affecting New York City and the Region.  Anyone can view group content, request an invitation to join, become managers or set up a subgroup on an issue. 

Urban Design Network
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=95125&trk=anet_ug_hm 

There are about 3,000 members in this group with 9  managers and 12 moderators involved in sharing data on issues in the broad context of Urban Design as it is experienced from Dabronx to Dubai 

Urban Design Committee Via Google 
http://groups.google.com/group/urban-design-committee 

There are 64 members with a low activity rating.  The objective is to use this area to sift through issues that may occur with the revision of the 1992 NYC Waterfront Plan (or other issues)  and it connects to various WebEx, Google Docs, WindowsLive locations, and so on.  Members are encouraged to develop individual “draft development” areas.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS