Mapping #whOWNSpace | Photo by Jessica Cronstein

#whOWNSpace: An Introduction
by Jessica Cronstein

The occupation of Zuccotti Park unintentionally brought attention to the nebulous rules that govern New York City’s privately-owned public spaces (POPS). In 1961, the city was changing. Advances in building technology meant office towers could be built higher than ever before, and developers had an interest in making use of this additional square footage. A revision of the zoning laws offered a trade: in return for creating public open spaces — perhaps most importantly, for the Occupy Wall Street movement, spaces “accessible to the public at all times,” unlike city parks which close at dusk — the developers would be allowed a higher floor-to-area ratio (FAR). The idea was to allow for more light and air in dense, vertical areas, and to have developers give back to the city a little bit for what they were gaining by building bigger. The rules governing the design of the POPS, though, were incredibly vague, which led to the creation of inaccessible, inhospitable spaces with little or no public benefit. Revisions were made, including requirements for shade trees, seating and lighting, and zoning amendments were added, allowing owners to apply for permission to close the spaces at night. But still, the laws dictating the management and use of these spaces are vague, and often come down to unspecific semantics.

To address questions of ownership and use of open space in New York City, members of Not an Alternative, DSGN AGNC and DoTank: Brooklyn launched the project #whOWNSpace. Their stated intention is to reveal and question conflicting rules and ownerships of public space, advocate for and propose uses and designs in accordance with their Call to Action for the Rights of Neighborhoods, and to turn ideas and research into material action through intervention in urban space. Earlier this month, the collaborative partnered with The Public School New York to hold a class, in three locations simultaneously, that investigates power dynamics in urban open space.

The class visited three neighborhoods: the Financial District, Midtown and the Upper East Side. Each section was given two public spaces to visit, observe, diagram and discuss. Afterwards, all groups convened in midtown to share ideas and results.

Mapping a POPS at WTC-7. The POPS was barricaded by NYPD and closed to the public by its owners, who feared the space would be overtaken by the Occupy Wall Street movement. | Photo by Mercedes Kraus

#whOWNSpace: Financial District
by Mercedes Kraus 

Guided by Rena Mande and Amanda Rekemeyer, DSGN AGNC collaborators, my class walked through the western part of the Financial District.

The route took us from Battery Park City ballfields (a well-maintained, pay-to-use, privately managed public park) to the Goldman Sachs World Headquarters (no POPS), a park at 7 World Trade Center (a new POPS with a Jeff Koons sculpture, funded by the 9/11 recovery monies), 101 Barclay Street (an indoor POPS, as listed by the city, that in reality doesn’t exist) and, finally, to two publicly-owned open spaces (POOS): Washington Market Park and Duane Park.

Our stop at the Goldman Sachs HQ was particularly interesting. Because the firm received extra incentive from the city to stay in the Financial District after 9/11, the only “public benefit” the fortress-like building gives is a mural inside its lobby, to be viewed from the outside, on a sidewalk only for walking (security guards ensure that no other activity takes place).

Upon arrival at the small plaza adjacent to WTC-7, closed by the owner and barricaded by the NYPD (for fear that OWS might occupy it), we mapped the POPS, observing lighting, seating, use, access, etc. Sarah Williams, of the Spatial Information Design Lab, introduced us to the idea that “maps allow us to read places in a different way … mapping is marking reality but also how you observe reality.” I did, in fact, feel more engaged with the levels of meaning and use of the space once I had marked it and also looked at the markings of my peers. Making maps, then, serves as means of conversation, for which reason #whOWNSpace will soon launch an open-sourced map of NYC POPS and POOS on the project’s website.

When we left the tall towers and regulated POPS of the WTC area, we visited Washington Market Park, which, besides having one small, slightly hidden entrance and a short list of rules (its own form of security), is a rather large space designed and used for diverse activities. It has a large playground, public bathroom, pavilion, and community garden, and I felt more welcome here than at any other site the class visited. Our last stop of the day was Duane Park, also a POOS. No rules were posted regarding use or hours, and most of the (small) walkway was lined with good benches, making it a good, though simple, public space.

The group discusses the lack of public space at the Goldman Sachs World Headquarters, adjacent to the Hudson River Greenway. The only public amenity offered is a mural in its lobby, publicly viewable from outside the building. | Photo by Mercedes Kraus

#whOWNSpace: Upper East Side
by Jessica Cronstein 

My group met in front of the offices of the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation at 64th Street and Fifth Avenue, where we were given blank maps with inset plans of the two spaces we were to visit (both Trump buildings). Each member chose one element to diagram while at the sites: access, edge conditions, seating, lighting, activities, signage / graphics, design / branding, circulation or demographics.

Our first stop, the public space attached to Trump Palace, was designed to appear as part of the building, giving passers-by the impression that it is only for residents. The gates that demarcate the space — beige-painted metal, not likely to be part of the plaza’s original design, which is predominantly marble —  seem to be permanently closed. The plaza looks, from the outside, like a maintenance entrance for the building. The space is shady, which, in November, means cold seating. While there, though, we saw it used by a group of construction workers eating their lunch and an elderly woman who stops in every day on her walk through the neighborhood.

The second space we visited, Trump Plaza, feels like an extension of the lobby of the building. It is directional and ends at the main entrance to the building. Some of the problems are the same as before: cold seating in a shady plaza, and a feeling (amplified by the watchful eye of the nearby doorman) that you need an invitation to use the space.

The problems built into these two spaces were problems of management and design: they were designed to be uninviting, to feel like private spaces for the residents of the towers above. The beauty of the small parks that exist only blocks away is that they are rarely crowded and are perfect lunch spots. But they will never have the identity of a full-fledged park. They are always associated with the building or the block. In the residential neighborhood of the Upper East Side, the character and expectations of the spaces were different than those of Midtown and the Financial District.

Trump Plaza at 167 E. 61st St. | Photo by Jessica Cronstein

#whOWNSpace: Midtown
by Max Podemski 

Amidst businesspeople, tourists and a pair costumed as Shrek and Elmo at the northwest corner of Bryant Park, my group met Quilian Riano, an urban design professor at Parsons and co-founder of design collective DSGN AGNC, and Phillip Grimaldi, a designer and also a member of DSGN AGNC.

Before the class even began a security guard demanded that Quilian take down a poster taped to a sign for the Citi Pond Ice Skating Rink. This is “private property,” the guard told us, who then proceeded down to the corner to kick out Shrek.

Mapping the 1095 Avenue of the Americas POPS | Photo by Max Podemski

The current incarnation of Bryant Park is the result of a Project for Public Spaces (PPS)-led renovation in 1981. However, rather then finding a vibrant, democratic, public space, our group found a park that more closely resembles a rotunda inside a mall. Every usable inch of the park has been programmed, ranging from ping pong tables to corporate marketing tents to a New York-themed tchotchke bazaar. The pure domination of the space by monetized interest leaves little room for its use as a democratic public commons.

After visiting Bryant Park, ostensibly a publicly-owned private space, we visited several privately-owned public spaces or POPS. The first “covered pedestrian space” we examined was in the Phillip Morris building at 120 Park Avenue. At one time this space housed a Whitney Museum affiliated sculpture galley. Today it is an antiseptic room, reminiscent of an extremely luxurious DMV office. A guard at a flimsy desk stood watch over the three people sitting at tables in the plaza, which is sunken below the lobby of the building that looks down on the space through enormous windows — a panopticon, one participant called it. The consensus of our group was that this was, by far, the creepiest of the POPS on the tour.

The second stop was the Grace Plaza on 43rd Street. This outdoor space is connected to the W.R. Grace Building, named after a chemical company famous for its more than 200,000 asbestos-related lawsuits. In spite of two qualities often associated with successful public spaces, moveable chairs and a programmed use via a small gallery for the International Center for Photography, our tour still found many flaws in this plaza such as the open, windswept nature of the space and the cold hard material of the oddly-configured seating area.

The third and final of the POPS we visited was affiliated with the 1095 Avenue of Americas Building, which recently underwent an extensive renovation. Rather then occupying the front of the tower facing Bryant Park, this plaza is sequestered behind it, lying in a narrow canyon between the massive buildings of midtown. Pleasant wood benches stand in rows facing small trees. However, flanking the entire east side of the plaza is a large window looking into the lobby of the tower, in the center of which sits a guard who soon came out and ordered one person in our group not to stand on a bench. With that, our investigation of who owns space in midtown concluded.

Photo by Jessica Cronstein

#whOWNSpace: Wrap-up Session
by Jessica Cronstein 

At the end of the day, the three groups converged on the Verizon POPS between 41st and 42nd Streets, east of 6th Avenue, before moving to another POPS, the Philip Morris covered pedestrian space at 42nd Street and Park Avenue. We compiled our research to create a master map, and representatives from each group shared their diagrams and described the qualities of the spaces they visited.

The characters of the three neighborhoods became apparent. In the Financial District, the management of each space was on red alert, security guards were conspicuously present, looking out for another Zuccotti Park incident. These POPS are designed to be shortcuts, they aren’t meant to be oases within the city. In Midtown, the plazas are interior spaces or between buildings, used differently by two distinct demographics: office workers during the week and tourists during the weekend. They are more conducive to enduring visits, but are still less than welcoming. On the Upper East Side the plazas are attached to residential buildings, giving the appearance of more privatized ownership.

Who were these spaces designed for? And how were they designed to be used? What constitutes the public? What is the value of small public space? And to whom? What are the rights of the management? And how do they infringe on the rights of the public? The questions raised by #whOWNSpace are ones the city has contended with for 50 years, and will continue to for years to come. They won’t be answered in one afternoon.

Photo by Jessica Cronstein

Correction: an earlier version of this article referred to the Battery Park City ballfield as a POPS, when in fact it is a POOS, or privately owned open space. 

Mercedes Kraus is a Brooklyn-based writer and editor. She co-founded and publishes Womanzine and has worked to engage the public in the built environment at both Van Alen Institute and the Institute for Urban Design. She loves pizza, outer space, and .gifs of both. 

Max Podemski is currently a graduate student studying urban planning at Columbia University. Previously he was the coordinator for the Pacoima Wash Initiative and served on the board of CicLAvia in Los Angeles.

The views expressed here are those of the author only and do not reflect the position of Urban Omnibus editorial staff or the Architectural League of New York.

screengrab of Examining MetroCard Usage from wsj.com

EXAMINING METROCARD USAGE
The Wall Street Journal has sifted through a year’s worth of data about MetroCard use, recently released by the MTA, to see what they could find out about how people move around New York. By breaking down what kinds of cards (unlimiteds, pay-per-rides, senior discount) are used where, patterns emerge across demographics and neighborhoods. A high percentage of senior discount MetroCards swiped at a station suggests an older population, and the variation in use of 30-day-unlimited cards versus pay-per-ride cards tells a story of where commuters go as opposed to visitors. The dataset also coincides with the most recent fare hike, which allows for additional analysis into how the cost increase has affected ridership city-wide as well as ways it has disproportionately affected people of lower income levels. Read more about the analysis here, or head straight to the interactive map to explore for yourself.

EAST RIVER FERRY EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS
When East River Ferry service launched early this summer, the city was optimistic that New Yorkers would take to the waters for a more pleasant commute away from subway crowds and service changes, but detractors claimed that waterborne travel was a flash in the pan, noting a drop in ridership once a month-long free pilot period ended. But now, word is that ferry use has exceeded expectations, drawing twice as many riders as anticipated (on weekends, ridership is six times higher than projected). Ferry operators are eager to expand service in response to enthusiasm and demand from both residents and tourists, and both the operators and the City agree that ferry service has the potential to bring economic activity and aid development in areas along the route. But city officials cite limited financial resources as a significant obstacle, and some are waiting until cold weather sets in to determine whether adding capacity year-round makes sense. Read more in The New York Times and The Brooklyn Paper.

Image by Massachusetts Institute of Technology via theatlanticcities.com

CAT SCANS FOR CITIES
Improved energy efficiency and reduced environmental impact are topics that dominate contemporary discourse about our built environment and urban spaces. Now, cities have a new tool to properly identify existing problems and better understand how to address them. A group at the MIT Field Intelligence Lab is advancing the use of “energy diagnostic imaging,” inspired by medical diagnostic scans like MRIs and CAT scans. Infrared cameras capture differences in energy use in the urban landscape in “thermal portraits” that divulge where insulation is failing or excess energy is being produced. Pinpointing the source of the inefficiency allows for more accurate and effective solutions, and a healthier city. Read more on The Atlantic Cities.

NEW ZONING FOR NEW YORK
The 1906 and 1916 zoning ordinances in New York City were landmark policies that combined use zoning and form zoning, and were incredibly forward thinking for their time, setting the standards for cities around the country. But our zoning ordinances, which have enormous impact on determining the form of our built environment, haven’t been comprehensively rethought for 50 years. Last week, during the Municipal Art Society’s second annual MAS Summit for New York City, a panel of zoning experts convened for “A New Zoning Resolution for the 21st Century: Its Necessity and Potential” to discuss the ways New York’s regulations don’t align with the changing needs of its residents and what could be done to make them better. Touching on land use codes, environmental review processes and contextual zoning, the conversation also focused on housing issues, such as the restrictive definition of what a “family” is according to zoning code. These topics were highlighted by panelist Jerilyn Perine, the executive director of the Citizens Housing & Planning Council (and our partner in Making Room, the project we introduced earlier this month to address how we can make New York’s housing more responsive to the ways we live now). For more coverage of the panel, check out Streetsblog.

Video of “Rebuilding Crumbling Infrastructure” with Chris Ward, Vishaan Chakrabarti and Madelyn Wills from masnycsummit201

REGION IN CRISIS
Also at the MAS Summit, outgoing Port Authority Executive Director Chris Ward expressed some big ideas for New York. Calling the New York metro area a region in “economic and environmental crisis,” he emphasized the need for the city to wean itself off its dependence on truck transport and instead advocated the expansion of freight rail service — a topic we explored in depth earlier this week. Equally transformative was his vision for the Brooklyn waterfront and Governors Island. According to Ward, the success of Governors Island rests upon moving the activity of the Red Hook Container Terminal further south, to the South Brooklyn Marine Terminal, and rethinking the use of different portions of Brooklyn’s waterfront, focusing instead on recreation and transportation to spur development. For more on Ward’s ideas from the Summit, as well as a recap of frequent Omnibus contributor Vishaan Chakrabarti’s thoughts on the advantages of intense densification for New York from the same session, click here. And to learn about Patrick Foye, Governor Cuomo’s choice to run the Port Authority when Ward steps down at the end of this month, click here.

MTA MANUFACTURING
Chris Ward’s proposal to shift industrial use out of Red Hook doesn’t mean the city is ready to abandon industry in the five boroughs. In fact, efforts are strong to restore manufacturing capabilities to some key sites. Building the Future, a conference organized a few weeks ago by “a coalition of union interests, policy organizations and sustainable-living advocates,” met to discuss options for encouraging the return of manufacturing to both New York City and State. One proposal: manufacturing for the MTA. The city’s public transportation system is in a constant state of disrepair — as many things that are loved and used constantly often are — but the production of repair parts and new vehicles is increasingly contracted to facilities out of state. Returning MTA manufacturing and repair to New York would be a boon for the economy and the job market, so what’s holding the MTA back from staying local? The buildings still exist, the workers are still here, but the money isn’t. Both the city and the state have decreased funds towards the MTA in the past three decades, and the proposals set forth by Building the Future would require unavailable public funds. Read more in The New York Times.

.
The Roundup keeps you up to date with topics we’ve featured and other things we think are worth knowing about.

Rendering by MIR and Snohetta, courtesy of NYC DOT

TIMES SQUARE PLAZAS MADE PERMANENT
On Tuesday, September 27, Manhattan’s Community Board 5 met with Craig Dykers of Snøhetta to review their plans for the Times Square pedestrian plazas of the not-so-distant future. No more lawn chairs, no more paint as marker for where the car space ends. The plan calls for a leveling of the streets and curbs, to create a continuous pedestrian surface of dark concrete. Inlaid into the pavers will be steel rivets to reflect the bright lights of the big city. Benches and street furniture will provide seating as well as space demarcation to aid pedestrian flow, making the plazas useful as lounge spaces and as thoroughfares. The intent, according to Dykers, is to make the space seem larger and less cluttered. NYC’s Department of Design and Construction hopes to get started next fall with a completion date of 2014. Check out more of the coverage from DNAinfo and the A|N Blog.

WEEKENDS WITH VIGNELLI
The Vignelli map is back. In 1972, graphic designer Massimo Vignelli created a subway map for New York City that was a favorite of designers but, because it eschewed geographic faithfulness for legibility, was deemed too geographically inaccurate by some. With the release of the MTA’s new Weekender website, the MTA has brought the Vignelli map back into use. The Weekender is a website devoted to helping people plan their weekend subway trips with ease despite service changes. The site features a trip planner, so that the MTA can “do the navigating for you – around any service change”, tabs to look up service by station, line or borough, and visual navigation through an interactive version of the iconic map.

fasttrash.org

FASTTRASH.ORG
Fast Trash is now a website! Last year we spoke with architecture, writer and curator Juliette Spertus about the exhibition of Fast Trash, an exploration of Roosevelt Island’s pneumatic trash collection system and her ongoing project to expose and document complex infrastructural systems. Now the exhibition has become a website that gives readers access to Spertus’ research and documentation of the exhibition and provides a space for discussion of larger questions of how we can radically rethink how garbage is moved through our city. Check it out at fasttrash.org.

EVENTS and TO DOs

VELONOTTE NYC
How do you “turn cities into nocturnal open air museums experienced on a bike”? Velonotte! On Saturday, October 1, the Storefront for Art and Architecture will host the kickoff of VELONIGHT NYC. In the early hours of Sunday, October 2, from midnight until 5:30am, a bicycle tour of the urban and cultural history of New York City will take cyclists to 20 planned stops throughout the city. An audio guide led by architects, architectural historians and cultural historians will be broadcast live over a proprietary radio frequency straight into participants’ headphones. Contributors to the tour include Jean Louis Cohen, Peter Eisenman, Ken Jackson, Rem Koolhas and Guy Nordenson, among others. Read more about the kickoff event here, and more about the tour here.

The Archtober Calendar

ARCHTOBER
What day is it tomorrow? Why, it’s Archtober 1st. New York’s Architecture and Design Month — Archtober — is a month-long festival of architectural design activities, programs and exhibitions that kicks off tomorrow. The initiative was spearheaded by the AIA NY Chapter, openhousenewyork and the Architecture & Design Film Festival, and plenty of cultural institutions from across the city are participating, including us here at the Architectural League and familiar faces like the BMW Guggenheim Lab, the Design Trust for Public Space, Friends of the High Line, the Institute for Urban Design, MoMA, Storefront, Van Alen and many more. Find out more about the dozens and dozens of events taking place over the next 31 days here and start planning your month around celebrating all things architecture and design.

Freshkills Park+ in action

FRESHKILLS PARK+
This Sunday, October 2, from 11am to 4pm, Freshkills Park will be open for the second annual Sneak Peak, complete with kayak tours, walking tours, biking, kite flying and making, a craft market, live music, public art, games and food trucks. This year’s event also marks the release of Freshkills Park+, a new augmented reality application. Because of the landfill infrastructure that lies beneath the park, signage can’t be installed. The Freshkills Park+ app allows visitors to learn more about projects under construction, nearby activities or surrounding natural environments and serves as a wayfinding tool throughout the 2,200-acre site.  Read more about the app here, the event here or check out photos of last year’s event here.

.
The Roundup keeps you up to date with topics we’ve featured and other things we think are worth knowing about.

Delancey Underground | image via nymag.com

LES LOW LINE
The Lower East Side might be getting a new park. The proposed project, the Delancey Underground, would repurpose the the abandoned underground Williamsburg Bridge Railway Terminal in an effort to inject some green space into one of the least green neighborhoods in the city and to join the ranks of the High Line in reimagining disused infrastructure. The subterranean wonderland lit by “remote skylights” would provide a green space “nearly the size of Gramercy Park” at the base of the bridge. The project, conceived by architect James Ramsey, PopTech executive Dan Barasch and money manager R. Boykin Curry IV, was presented to Community Board 3 on Wednesday evening. According to DNAInfo, the presentation “wowed” the packed audience. According to Curbed, skepticism abounded, despite the seductive renderings, about keeping the park safe and well lit, how it would be funded, or how the space would be programmed to best serve the community. Check out more renderings on Architizer and read more in New York Magazine.

On the Go Travel Station | image via popsci.com

TOUCHSCREEN TRAVEL
The MTA has a new magic map trip planner, the first of what they are calling their On-the-Go Travel Stations, now installed at the Bowling Green subway station in Manhattan. The Station is a 47-inch touchscreen that allows riders to access up-to-the-minute service announcements, plan trips and navigate the subway map. The upper portion of the screen is devoted to subway information, with clearly identifiable buttons for Service Status, Elevators, MTA Maps and Key Destinations. Service alerts scroll under the interactive portion, while the lower third of the screen is devoted to advertisements. For more coverage, including a video of the Bowling Green Travel Station, check out Popular Science.

TOOLS AT SCHOOLS
Engaging in a design process taps creativity, communication skills and general understanding of how things work. So why isn’t it introduced to students earlier in their education? That question is the basis for Tools at Schools, a partnership between design firm Aruliden and furniture manufacturer Bernhardt Design. The program asked 44 eighth graders from The School at Columbia University how they would redesign the basic components of classroom furniture: the chair, the desk and the locker. The students went through the entire design process: researching existing products, identifying what they saw as lacking, sketching and modeling their ideas and presenting them to representatives from Bernhardt and Aruliden. The designers took ideas from each team and turned them around into 3D models. From there, the students were invited to the furniture factory in South Carolina to see how designs become realities. The final products were presented at the International Contemporary Furniture Fair earlier this month and an exhibit of the furniture will open at the Museum of Arts and Design on October 6th. Read more of the coverage at Smart Planet.

Solar village, Solar Decathlon 2011 | Photo by Stefano Paltera/U.S. Department of Energy

SOLAR DECATHLON HITS DC
The 2011 Solar Decathlon has hit DC! After designing and building their prototypes on home turf, the nineteen teams began final construction of the houses in West Potomac Park on the 14th. Starting today, the houses are open to the public and judging has already begun. Only a few hours in, Team Maryland is in the lead, though Team New York (one of three New York/New Jersey-area teams participating in the event) has taken an early lead in the People’s Choice category. The houses will be on view through October 2nd. Keep tabs on scores and standings here and, for readers in the DC area, find more information about visiting the installation on the Solar Decathlon website.

EVENTS AND TO-DOs

PROJECT NEON: THE SHOW! In February, Kirsten Hively told us about her ongoing effort to document and celebrate the neon signage of New York City. Now, complete with a fetching new neon sign of its own, Project Neon has been turned into an exhibition, opening tonight, September 23 from 7-10pm, at Brooklyn’s City Reliquary. The show features several dozen of Hively’s photographs and marks the release of her new, free Project Neon iPhone app. For more on Project Neon, revisit our feature about the project, check out the website, or see a preview of the exhibit at the Times’ City Room.

DUMBO ARTS: The annual DUMBO Arts Festival starts tonight! Rain or shine, head towards the Brooklyn waterfront to check out three days of events with over 500 artists. Visit artists’ studios, watch performances by musicians, dancers, poets and circus artists throughout the neighborhood, commune with instrument makers in workshops, listen to tech gurus talk about the latest advances and join walking tours to hear little-known stories of the neighborhood. The festival runs from tonight, Friday, September 23, through Sunday, September 25. Check out the full schedule of events here.

LIVING AS FORM: Also opening tonight is Creative Time’s new project Living as Form, which explores the intersection of socially engaged visual art, architecture, urban design, theater and activism, just to name a few disciplines. Bringing together 25 curators, taking place both in Essex Street Market building and the surrounding neighborhood, the project will feature over 100 socially engaged projects from around the world. An exhibition and related programming will be presented through October 12, all of which will lead up to a book, scheduled for publication in January 2012. Check out the schedule of events, as well as more about Living as Form here.

.
The Roundup keeps you up to date with topics we’ve featured and other things we think are worth knowing about.

New York Next panel (L to R): Guy Nordenson, Rob Rogers, Betty Chen, Richard Olcott and Claire Weisz

Last week, a group of leading New York City designers met to discuss the future of New York City at New York Next: The Future City, hosted by the Architectural League and Architectural Record. The panel consisted of Betty Chen, currently a member of the New York City Planning Commission, formerly the Vice-President for Planning, Design and Preservation for the Trust for Governors Island; Guy Nordenson, of Guy Nordenson and Associates Structural Engineers and Commissioner and Secretary of the New York City Public Design Commission; Richard Olcott, founding partner and design principal at Ennead Architects and former member of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission from 1996 to 2007; Rob Rogers, principal of Rogers Marvel Architects, a firm whose portfolio includes streetscape design for Manhattan’s financial district, and flood mitigation strategies and street furniture for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority; and Claire Weisz, founding partner of WXY Architecture + Urban Design and adjunct professor of planning at the Robert F. Wagner School of Public Service at NYU.

The conversation was organized without a moderator, allowing the panelists to pose questions to one another. Their discussion revolved around questions of the physical city — In what kind of city do we want to live? Who decides what kind of city ours will become? — as well as questions of pacing, framed by their own experience with major redevelopment projects across the city over the last decade. The panel set out to define what constitutes the public realm, as well as the responsibilities of both public and private entities to that public realm.

Guy Nordenson opened up the discussion with the question, “Is privatization a good thing? Or should the public sector take over?” Nordenson situated himself as undecided. He referred to a recent New York Times article that claimed that the government pays more when using private contractors they they do when using government workers, but also noted examples of particularly successful public/private partnerships around the city, such as the Central Park Conservancy. Other answers varied: Richard Olcott cited issues of capital, and the private sector’s ability to raise funds where the public sector can’t. Rob Rogers, speaking specifically about New York City, claimed that the major boon of the last decade of building in New York City was the high skill level of public sector staffs: a high quality client begets a high quality project. Claire Weisz added that New York is the right kind of city, with not just an educated city government, but an educated and involved populace. Ultimately, we hope for a well educated, well meaning, capable government, but we have to be prepared to make design decisions without one.

Betty Chen’s questions — “Is there a way for architects and engineers to play more of a role in setting the public agenda? Are there other opportunities not generated by the traditional client model?” — led the discussion to one of timing and environment. According to Guy Nordenson, new public design ideas need to have a public sector champion to become institutionalized. The consensus of the panel was that the major success of the Bloomberg administration has been its ability to institute long term, visionary planning and policies and to institutionalize progressive ideas about what kind of city New York should be in the future.

Rob Rogers and Richard Olcott asked questions regarding the widespread attention on the public realm that has been generated by the World Trade Center site, whether that has led to a more interested and more involved public and, in a more disciplinary light, how it has changed how architects work. Betty Chen answered with a fear of complacency: New Yorkers are excited about their city, but does that excitement lead to satisfaction with the status quo, and thus a lack of urgency to push the city forward? According to Chen, designers have the training and the imagination, and therefore the responsibility, to look at the urban fabric and show the rest of the city its potential.

A surprising moment of consensus on the future of the city came when the question was asked, “What is the most urgent civic design issue facing New York today?” Across the panel, there was a call for further activation of the city’s waterways, specifically through reinvestment in a ferry network, to engage our “sixth borough” and alleviate our traffic problems.

The panel opened up for questions from the audience. League Executive Director Rosalie Genevro stayed on the topic of city transit by asking about what can be done to resolve the conflicts and frustrations that arise from, as an example, the city’s subways being controlled by a State agency. A State agency is less capable of responding to the needs of the primary users, less able to act nimbly. The question harkened back to Guy Nordenson’s first question, in that it asks how large an active government agency can be before it is no longer able to be responsive to it’s citizenry. Rob Rogers suggested that the need to wrest back control and funding extends beyond the MTA, using education as another prime example. Richard Olcott pointed to the mayors of Los Angeles, Newark and San Francisco as examples of how to think regionally, without looking to their States for help, and suggested that approach as a model for New York City in disentangling itself from the State as much as possible. Claire Weisz seconded the need for regional thinking, citing the US Northwest as leading the way, but also acknowledged that some of the State/City divide is an issue of timing and balance: there was a time when the city was less capable, Battery Park City needed the State to step in, and there are still circumstances in which it makes sense for the State to take control. It is more about how to work within those constraints tactically, using state or federal capabilities when necessary.

There was, all around the table, a real sense of apprehension about what could come out of the next administration. When the Bloomberg administration leaves, who will take over? What kind of city will they want New York City to be? And will they be capable of, or even interested in, instituting the kind of long ranging, forward thinking policies that the Bloomberg administration promoted? We’ll have to wait and see. But the panelists agreed, regardless of what’s next, we have to be willing to challenge and reimagine the status quo, drive the conversation and demand quality planning and design in dialogue about our public realm.

Jessica Cronstein is a designer and writer interested in the point at which the social, cultural and physical growth of a city intersect. She has just completed her M.Arch at Rice University and lives in New York City.

Gorton’s involvement with urban issues began in 1999, when he founded OpenPlans, a non-profit devoted to the pursuit of smart planning and civic engagement through media and digital tools. Since then, he has helped launch the New York City Streets Renaissance Campaign, which advocates for a more dynamic use of public space, and the online media outlets Streetsblog, Streetfilms and Gotham Schools.

Last week, Gorton took me on a walk through the Flatiron District to talk about cars, people and the future of New York City. He painted a picture of a New York free from car dependency, in which both policy and the design of our streets give priority to people, social vitality and safety. (Look back at this 2009 Omnibus feature on Ulrich Franzen’s 1969 short film “Street” to see another bold vision of how to reclaim our congested streets.) Read on to hear Gorton’s thoughts about the largely car-free city he has envisioned and how it can come to be. —Alicia Rouault

Mark Gorton | photo by Alicia Rouault

In 1999, you founded OpenPlans, a non-profit organization that uses technology to improve the way that cities and citizens interact. How and when did you start moving towards transportation reform specifically?
Five years ago, nobody was talking about transportation in NYC. It was a non-issue. There was this sense that New York is a big city, it has a lot of traffic, so what?

We consciously launched an agenda to raise awareness of different policy options. We started Streetsblog and Streetfilms. We formed something called the New York City Streets Renaissance Campaign and talked a lot about the potential of Bus Rapid Transit, programs like Summer Streets and bike lanes. We initially focused on leaders at the Department of Transportation (DOT), the mayor and other transportation policymakers, and we were very effective within that circle.

Now, thanks to the work of the DOT, people have seen change on the ground. It’s no longer theoretical. So all the people who couldn’t be bothered for years are taking notice. Whether it’s in The New York Times, The New York Post, on CBS News or amongst people in neighborhoods, there is a citywide debate about what we should do with our streets and people understand that there are policy alternatives.

So now that the current administration is supportive of your work and many of your initiatives have been enacted, how do you engage with transportation reform today?
The main point that I’m trying to make now is that cars are bad for New York and that the incorporation of the automobile into the fabric of the city was a big mistake. I want people to question, at the most fundamental level, the role of the car in the city.

Through both street design and policies, our city is programmed for driving and for maximum automobile throughput. But the needs of people and the needs of the automobile are completely different. The automobile asks for very simple, straight, distraction-free — people-free — places. Activity in a human context, at a human speed, won’t work with cars flying by.

Streets used to be safe places for kids to play, places where neighbors would gather. Now we have this definition of the street that was essentially promulgated by the automobile industry and the oil industry, in which cars dominate and people are considered only when absolutely necessary. It’s been incredibly pathological and as a result we have a much worse city than we could have otherwise. The automobile industry has been happy to tell people that the car is about freedom. It’s not about freedom for me. It’s an oppressive burden on my kids and my family.

Broadway and Houston, Manhattan | photo by Caitlin Blanchfield

Why do you think people are so protective of cars?
There are a number of reasons. First of all, I think there’s just an inherent bias towards the status quo. Most people are inherently resistant to change. Also, our society has been indoctrinated to see cars as exciting, fun and sexy, not dangerous, selfish, rude and annoying. Most people think that if they drive around and don’t crash into somebody, they haven’t done any harm. But much of the damage done by the automobile is social harm, invisible harm that degrades our neighborhoods and makes the city unpleasant and dangerous.

Donald Appleyard, a professor at UC Berkeley, did a series of studies on the societal impact of traffic. He looked at three streets in San Francisco, similar in every way possible except for how much traffic passed through. He found that people who lived on the lightly-trafficked street had more friends than those who lived on the heavily-trafficked street. 3.0 friends per person versus .09. The same went for acquaintances, people in heavily-trafficked areas had fewer. He also tracked where people congregated and how they engaged with their surroundings. He then asked the residents to draw their “home territory.” On the heavily-trafficked street, people drew their apartment building or maybe a piece of the sidewalk in front of their building. On the lightly-trafficked one, people included their entire street. At a certain level, Appleyard showed that traffic destroys people’s social connections with their neighbors and friends. [Watch a Streetfilm on Appleyard's study below. -Ed.]

Streetfilm: Revisiting Donald Appleyard’s Livable Streets

So is the primary challenge to change the discourse? What comes after that?
This is going to be a decades-long process. There are a number of things we have to do. A lot of people assume that the car is important, essential and properly used. Therefore, if there’s not enough space to park, you need to create more parking. If there’s not enough road space, you should create more road space. That’s essentially what the story of the 20th century was. Sidewalks were narrowed, parking was added, the city became more friendly to cars and more hostile to people. But all of those efforts still failed to make the car work in New York City. The automobile does a bad job as a transportation technology in the city because it’s so spatially inefficient.

We want to communicate an alternative vision. We’re talking about changes that will get people out of their cars, that will make it difficult and expensive to drive. Of course, some drivers just don’t want to get out of their cars. And some people don’t want to consider alternatives, because it forces them to question their own behavior, to accept that every time they get in their car, they somehow, in some small way, harm their neighbors and use an unfair share of the scarce public space of the city. They don’t see how change can give us healthier children, improved social activity and a better economy.

What is your alternative vision? Do you want to completely eradicate cars?
I don’t want to eradicate cars, but I think we could reduce them by 90%. The automobile is one of the most significant technologies in this country, but it is fundamentally misused. Capable, healthy people should not be driving within the city at all. Any trip that you make on a regular basis, whether it’s going to school, work or the grocery store, should be possible without driving a car. Automobile trips should be limited to those where people are leaving the city or the occasional trip that requires a vehicle, such as carrying cargo.

The remaining traffic, whether it be automobile or truck, could be concentrated in space and time. Some streets could be fully pedestrianized and some could be auto-oriented. Maybe a street allows traffic from 6am until 10am, but then from 2pm until 5pm, when kids get out of school, auto access is radically reduced. You can concentrate the harm onto the auto-oriented streets and free up more space to be beautiful, peaceful and safe.

I think 20% of the streets in Manhattan alone could be fully pedestrianized, with no cars, buses or bikes. We should have a comprehensive network of pedestrian streets. Broadway, for the whole length of Manhattan, could be fully pedestrianized. On the east side, maybe Lexington Avenue. We could do that.

This is also good for business. Kalverstraat, a fully-pedestrianized street in Amsterdam, has the highest retail rents in all of Holland. Here in New York, the street with the highest retail rents outside of Manhattan is Brooklyn’s Fulton Street on Fulton Mall — which has no cars. No one wants to live on a street that’s choked with a lot of nasty traffic. No one wants to work, shop or eat dinner on a street that’s polluted, loud, dangerous and unpleasant. Automobiles are bad for business.

Property owners are one of the constituencies we want to reach. The easiest way to increase property value in the city is to get rid of cars on the street. When the real estate industry realizes that, we’ll start to see more change.

Of course, the transportation dynamics in Manhattan are different from those in eastern Queens or parts of the Bronx. There are neighborhoods in which getting rid of cars simply doesn’t work. But things can be done in every neighborhood. It’s just a question of engaging the residents and finding how they want their streets to be.

Fulton Mall, Brooklyn | photo by Varick Shute

You say that automobiles are bad for business, but what about car-dependent businesses, necessary truck traffic or the taxi industry?
Yes, I want to be sure to distinguish between truck traffic and automobile traffic, because you certainly need freight delivery, garbage trucks, things like that – though I think with conscious effort we can probably improve efficiency and reduce truck trips by 30-50%.

But there are very few auto-dependent businesses, particularly in Manhattan. Restaurant and store owners worry that their patrons won’t be able to show up without their cars. They will, they’ll just be using different means to get there. The idea that people need to drive to go shopping is simply not true. Only 6% of shopping trips in the central business district of Manhattan are done by car.

That’s not to say there aren’t losers if there are fewer cars – parking garages, auto-parts supply stores, there are businesses directly related to vehicles. But in New York there is always a process of creative destruction in the economy. And the alternative is endangering our children and having an obesity epidemic because people can’t live an active lifestyle.

The taxi industry is more of a grey area. Cabs produce noisy, dangerous traffic. But in some ways taxis complement the public transit system. They make cars available for people who need to use them without relying on private ownership. There are also options like car sharing. We’re not talking about banning cars, we’re talking about making them available for the rare trips where people really need them.

What else needs to be done in order to make your vision a reality?
We need to improve our buses and expand Bus Rapid Transit. Buses are much more spatially efficient than cars. And the surface route infrastructure is mostly there. The select bus service routes that New York City has already put into place have increased bus speeds by 20% and that number can definitely increase. But it takes funding, innovation and willingness to dedicate road space to bus-only lanes.

We also need to take the bicycle seriously as a transportation technology. Other big cities do: in Tokyo, 20% of all trips are carried by bicycle; Osaka 25%; Berlin 13%; Amsterdam 40%; Copenhagen, 37%. Without much difficulty, we could see 20-25% of all trips in New York being taken by bicycle, which would reduce congestion, increase mobility and make the city safer and more livable. But right now, our street network is implicitly hostile to the bicycle. And it’s unreasonable to expect people to take their lives in their hands just to get around, so they’re going to resort to other alternatives. The city has begun to take steps to make our streets safer but we still have a long, long, long way to go.

In some ways this is a generational issue. The automobile used to be a symbol of progress and economic might. But it doesn’t represent the future anymore. Now it’s part of this nasty, mechanized, dystopian world that we have to deal with.

Madison Square, Manhattan | photo by Caitlin Blanchfield

How does your work with participatory planning come in to all of this?
In order to achieve significant change in how the city behaves, you have to engage the public as deeply as possible. People have to understand why this in their own self-interest. I’m talking about creating a process where people come together and decide how they really want their streets to function. Do we want them to be thoroughfares for people outside the neighborhood or places for our children to play?

Do you see a role for the recent crop of web-based, interactive, democratic tools, like ChangeByUs or SeeClickFix, in doing what you’re talking about?
Software and internet tools definitely have a role to play in this participatory democracy, because they can help disseminate information and create a forum in which to build social consensus for change. Each of the tools you mentioned is good for what they do. But to really see change, I think we need more government agencies deploying them. Because the government controls the streets. It doesn’t matter how many people join a group or “like” something on Facebook, that doesn’t change government policy.

But if we can integrate these tools into a public input process and get the DOT to adopt them, there’s significant potential to galvanize communities. A lot of people feel that they aren’t being asked about changes made to their streets. New York is a huge city, and the only mechanism the DOT has to gather input from communities — Do you want a bench here? Do you want to put in a loading zone? Do you want that intersection daylighted? — is to have its staff facilitate tens of thousands of local dialogues, which is impossible. As a result, that happens only in a rare handful of circumstances.

What’s your strategy moving forward? Are you still focusing your advocacy efforts on policymakers?
The strategy now is to try and engage with and talk to the media and the thought leaders in the city. We’ve been faced with a lot of knee-jerk reactions against change. It amazes me how thoughtless a lot of coverage in the media is on this topic. Many reporters who don’t know anything about transportation show up to cover these issues — and much of the media drives around the city as they cover it, which gives them a very windshield-oriented perspective. The Post has been particularly awful. CBS news too. So what I’m trying to do now is to speak more publicly about these things, to reach both the media and a broader audience.

Will you continue to work with smaller groups or do you want to focus on changing the way the big outlets cover the topic?
It’s a combination. We’ve been working through the more niche-oriented media channels for the last five years, and we’ve made great progress. But to take it to the next level and get people all over the city who are now seeing the changes on their street to understand what these changes are for, why they should want them, and why they should ask for more, then we have to talk to them through the media that they’re used to consuming.

A lot of people feel that they aren’t being asked about changes made to their streets. I want people to understand that the automobile is a flawed technology for our city and that we need change. I want them to see the positive things that can happen if they embrace that change. I want my street to be safe for my kids so they can play. And I’m not content to wait for that. I want it to happen now.

Interview conducted by Alicia Rouault.

.

Mark Gorton, the founder of a series of innovative financial and technology companies, is a leading advocate for alternative transportation and livable streets. He is the founder of Tower Research Capital LLC, a money management firm specializing in quantitative trading and investment strategies, as well as the founder of Lime Brokerage LLC, Lime Wire LLC, Lime Labs LLC, and OpenPlans. In 2005, Mark founded the New York City Streets Renaissance campaign in partnership with the Project for Public Spaces and Transportation Alternatives. Through his philanthropy, his leadership at OpenPlans, and his public and media appearances, Mark Gorton continues to advocate for alternative transportation, livable streets, and open government.

Mark holds a B.A. in Electrical Engineering from Yale University, a M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Stanford University, and a MBA from Harvard University. He lives on the Upper West Side and bikes regularly to his offices in Lower Manhattan.

Meeting Bowls | via Times Square Alliance

MEET ME IN A BOWL
Times Square is now host to an outdoor urban furniture installation titled “Meeting Bowls,” created in partnership with the Times Square Alliance and design firm mmmm… The Meeting Bowls are three, 8-person, slatted bowls (highly reminiscent of salad spinners), which are meant to offer a place for intimate social experiences in the midst of one of the city’s busiest spaces. The bowls also offer the option to to record dialogue that may take place during your encounter on laptops and smartphones. The installation will be open to the public through September 16th, from 8am to midnight. Read more about the Meeting Bowls from The Architect’s Newspaper and see more on the concept from mmmm…

NYC AT A GLANCE
The 2011 update of NYC At-A-Glance, the New York City Economic Development Corporation’s report on New York City’s economy, covers data on standards of living, length of commute, economic growth and employment statistics. Some of the more compelling stats: 91.7% of New Yorkers live and work within the city (placing us way ahead of the rest of the country, with runner-up Houston coming in at 81%) — though New Yorkers also have the longest commute in the country, as only 33% of us spend less than half an hour en route to work, and a whole quarter of the city have over an hour of commute time. New York’s private sector had the highest average income in the country at $81,800, a reflection of a hugely stratified sector, in which 250,800 people in “Accommodation and Food Services” earned $28,600 per year at the low end, and 161,600 people in “Securities” earned, on average, $361,300 per year. Download the full report here for a detailed look at the state of the city.

NYC Play Street | via Transportation Alternatives

POP-UP PLAYGROUND
Pop-up chapels, pop-up labs for urbanism, pop-up roller rinks — NYC is on a pop-up roll. The latest in imaginative structures to hit New York’s streets are pop-up playgrounds or play-streets designed to combat childhood obesity. Seven civic organizations are leading an effort over the next two months to close streets to traffic and instead use those spaces to accommodate instruction in activities ranging from yoga to rugby to tennis to jump-rope. By re-defining the traditional “play street” in areas where open space and obesity are an issue, these pop-up structures might be as fun as they are good for public health.  Read more in The New York Times.

via Scientific American

ON CITIES: SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
The special September issue of Scientific American is all about cities. There are some heavy hitters in the roster of authors — geographers, economists, sociologists and architectural critics who tackle the idea of “the city” from vantage points of efficiency, livability, scale and geography. Look out for the issue, featuring articles by Edward Glaeser, Anthony Townsend and Mark Lamster, and an interview with William Gibson, at newstands next month, or check it out online.

EVENTS and TO-DOs:

Image via stillspotting nyc

TO A GREAT CITY
Stillspotting nyc (the Guggenheim’s 2-year multidisciplinary installation series) has announced its upcoming exhibit To a Great City, a sound-and-space walking tour of Lower Manhattan that was created in collaboration with Estonian composer Arvo Pärt (known for his compositional style tintinnabuli and his search for an absolute essential sound) and architecture and landscape design firm Snøhetta. Starting in Battery Park and traveling underground and into the private recesses of some of the city’s most famous skyscrapers, the tour will explore five typically inaccessible Manhattan spaces. A ticket buys access for a full day of visiting and revisiting as many times as the experience begs. Tours will run Thursdays through Saturdays, September 15-18 and 22-25. See more from Architizer and on the stillspotting website.

Dialog in the Dark

DIALOG IN THE DARK
This weekend, Dialog in the Dark opens as a new form of exhibition/participatory experience at the South Street Seaport. Led by blind or visually-impaired guides, exhibition-goers will be given canes as they enter a complete and total darkness where they experience simulations of familiar New York places and environments through sound, texture, temperature and smell. See more on the exhibit here and read Edward Rothstein’s review in the Times here.

The Roundup keeps you up to date with topics we’ve featured and other things we think are worth knowing about.