1. Addressing and improving the riverfront condition in front of Penn Lincoln Parkway and the Incline by pedestrian friendly programs.
2. The major means of accessing the downtown area is by vehicle, and most views of downtown are limited to pedestrians, especially across the Monongahela river where the steep terrain offers spectacular views of downtown. Considering the unique geography of Pittsburgh, it is inevitable to address the way in which Pittsburgh is conceived, and this site offers a plethora of opportunities to address such issues.
3. Currently, the site is an under-utilized area where the majority of the space is abandoned parking space which not many prefer to access. Also, with Fort Pitt Bridge hovering over the site, it breaches the integrity of the continuum of space. The hill juxtaposing the site creates tension among the unique site conditions, and the site acts as a mediator between the river and the hilltop. Aside the natural terrain, a series of manmade infrastructure divides the connectivity of the riverfront to the hills. Such isolation should be re-stitched and resolved to celebrate the characteristics of downtown Pittsburgh by foot.
4. The Incline does not seem to have proper connections to the context and is a stand-alone program on the hill. To further ground this program properly into its context, and to further make it more accessible, it is necessary to redevelop the site. The site is also adjacent to Station Square, and offers opportunities for this program to expand. The site also is a part of the Great Allegheny Passage, a trail system that allows more people to engage the waterfront. With such favorable neighboring conditions, the site has potential to be transformed into a proper entryway to Pittsburgh.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
"The Muses Are Not Amused" response
This article hits the spot on many subjects regarding architecture that I have not been acquainted enough to articulate in my own words. The one regret I have as of now is that the circumstances involved in this reading was not voluntary, which I think has not allowed me to fully want to absorb what the author's message was due to pending deadlines, and secondly, that I have not been exposed to this earlier. As in the case of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, I initially hated reading the book when I was forced, but with the right combination of Steve Lee gradually dropping the requirement over time, and the book starting to delve into ideas which sparked my interest, I eventually grew to embrace the book and took off to finish it, although it was not required. I would like to thank Steve for exposing us to such a book, for I have never thought that those inchoate feelings and observations I have developed over time could so wonderfully become crafted into words. It was the first book I "clicked" with and seemed to have made an impact in my life.
As with this week's reading, although it has not made an impact at such magnitude, I appreciate the rigor and analysis the author portrays. The diagrams were helpful, almost to a point as if they were created for the sole purpose of aiding this article, and precise to deter one from straying. The section where the author, Jorge Silvetti, discusses in ways which we can deploy blob architecture captivated my interests. Not necessarily that I agree with him, but the subject is a gray field which I take a cynical stance. He speaks of the advantages of blobs but also states that it is simply another phase we experience. Eventually he concludes that we have "stuffed" it with meaning and, from that point on, it has evolved into a new entity that reflects the contemporary culture in the field of architecture. I find this statement disturbing but at the same time, because of his word choice, i.e. "stuffed," I receive the impression that he too is grudginly succumbing to the status quo of the blob. I feel that "stuffed," the act of filling by force, is an excellent word choice to hint his degree of discontent with the situation, if there were any. I do not endorse the art of blobs, because to me it seems like a sculpture that had meanings forcefully shoved up its rear. It is an artist trying to imitate the role of an architect; it is an artist trying to establish self-esteem by adding unnecessary meaning; it is a con-artist.
Anyways, I disagree that blob architecture itself has evolved into an advanced creature with an identity of its own.
My cynical attitude towards the contemporary field is best reflected in the next category of trends in "Literalism." In it Silvetti quotes "Perhaps it is time to accept that metaphor in architecture is useful as a sparkle, as a starter, as a guide, or as a shadow, but that it becomes a dangerous game every tme it leaves its comfortable abode in language and poetry for excursions into other media, a fact that we know well at least since baroque times, when it was widely used, under control, but always treading on dangerous borderlines between the sublime and the ridiculous." To me these phenomena occur because the profession seems to over panegyrize its secluded field. I remember Jon Folan talking about how the profession today has fell to lower standards, and that the miscommunication and lack of collaboration with other fields (a state of isolation) has somehow made the profession an amalgamation of intractable narcissists (i.e. Daniel Libeskind). I think all this embellished eulogy involved in the profession, and its detrimental optimism has aided this profession to grow out of control as it is today.
I appreciate Silvetti trying to strike equilibrium in his arguments, and carefully crafted criticism to alleviate the intensity of his article, but to me his stance seems rather pessimistic.
As with this week's reading, although it has not made an impact at such magnitude, I appreciate the rigor and analysis the author portrays. The diagrams were helpful, almost to a point as if they were created for the sole purpose of aiding this article, and precise to deter one from straying. The section where the author, Jorge Silvetti, discusses in ways which we can deploy blob architecture captivated my interests. Not necessarily that I agree with him, but the subject is a gray field which I take a cynical stance. He speaks of the advantages of blobs but also states that it is simply another phase we experience. Eventually he concludes that we have "stuffed" it with meaning and, from that point on, it has evolved into a new entity that reflects the contemporary culture in the field of architecture. I find this statement disturbing but at the same time, because of his word choice, i.e. "stuffed," I receive the impression that he too is grudginly succumbing to the status quo of the blob. I feel that "stuffed," the act of filling by force, is an excellent word choice to hint his degree of discontent with the situation, if there were any. I do not endorse the art of blobs, because to me it seems like a sculpture that had meanings forcefully shoved up its rear. It is an artist trying to imitate the role of an architect; it is an artist trying to establish self-esteem by adding unnecessary meaning; it is a con-artist.
Anyways, I disagree that blob architecture itself has evolved into an advanced creature with an identity of its own.
My cynical attitude towards the contemporary field is best reflected in the next category of trends in "Literalism." In it Silvetti quotes "Perhaps it is time to accept that metaphor in architecture is useful as a sparkle, as a starter, as a guide, or as a shadow, but that it becomes a dangerous game every tme it leaves its comfortable abode in language and poetry for excursions into other media, a fact that we know well at least since baroque times, when it was widely used, under control, but always treading on dangerous borderlines between the sublime and the ridiculous." To me these phenomena occur because the profession seems to over panegyrize its secluded field. I remember Jon Folan talking about how the profession today has fell to lower standards, and that the miscommunication and lack of collaboration with other fields (a state of isolation) has somehow made the profession an amalgamation of intractable narcissists (i.e. Daniel Libeskind). I think all this embellished eulogy involved in the profession, and its detrimental optimism has aided this profession to grow out of control as it is today.
I appreciate Silvetti trying to strike equilibrium in his arguments, and carefully crafted criticism to alleviate the intensity of his article, but to me his stance seems rather pessimistic.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
13
13. Urban settings(cities) require public spaces to maintain equanimity.
12. Cities are highly condensed lands in many terms, but specifically population.
11. Such concentration will necessitate a dispersion of clustering.
10. Public spaces serve as vital components that assuage the amalgamation both at the individual's level and the city level by means of comfort, aesthetics, and composition.
9. A city may be a culmination of businesses and industries, but serves as a home to many as well; these residents also desire a space to unwind and gather.
8. Many cities that have once flourished are degenerating now, or have already done so. This is due to a progressive diffusion of residents moving out to the suburbs. Could this have any direct relation to the city's public space?
7. Central Park is a paragon in regards to public space in an urban setting.
6. A reason Manhattan continues to grow, amongst various reasons, is the city's increased interest in reforming/shifting the infrastructure - formerly a traffic oriented commercial city, into a more pedestrian friendly setting.
5. Public spaces, plazas, and parks are the liberation of human scale in an overwhelming setting; it provides a contrast from skyscrapers and allows one to readjust the scale to that of the human level.
4. Public spaces such as parks and plazas allow for a deviation from the patterned city by interjecting breaks in the skylines and in streetscapes; such anomaly can also be appreciated in an urban design point of view.
3. Public spaces such as parks and plazas provide a contrasting texture to that of the city by visual, tactile, auditory, and olfactory elements.
2. I don't know what to write anymore,
1. and I want to go to sleep.
12. Cities are highly condensed lands in many terms, but specifically population.
11. Such concentration will necessitate a dispersion of clustering.
10. Public spaces serve as vital components that assuage the amalgamation both at the individual's level and the city level by means of comfort, aesthetics, and composition.
9. A city may be a culmination of businesses and industries, but serves as a home to many as well; these residents also desire a space to unwind and gather.
8. Many cities that have once flourished are degenerating now, or have already done so. This is due to a progressive diffusion of residents moving out to the suburbs. Could this have any direct relation to the city's public space?
7. Central Park is a paragon in regards to public space in an urban setting.
6. A reason Manhattan continues to grow, amongst various reasons, is the city's increased interest in reforming/shifting the infrastructure - formerly a traffic oriented commercial city, into a more pedestrian friendly setting.
5. Public spaces, plazas, and parks are the liberation of human scale in an overwhelming setting; it provides a contrast from skyscrapers and allows one to readjust the scale to that of the human level.
4. Public spaces such as parks and plazas allow for a deviation from the patterned city by interjecting breaks in the skylines and in streetscapes; such anomaly can also be appreciated in an urban design point of view.
3. Public spaces such as parks and plazas provide a contrasting texture to that of the city by visual, tactile, auditory, and olfactory elements.
2. I don't know what to write anymore,
1. and I want to go to sleep.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Sketch of Ideas
This quick sketch captures the idea of a park as an essential element of urban infrastructures. The path weaves through the row of buildings and attempts to tie the seemingly disparate embodiments of nature and industrial.
I am not settled on the idea of developing a park, but I would like the public space to reflect the role as pulling together the urban infrastructure.
Reading Response
As Rami and Art made clear notions in class, "How to Draw up a Project" by Jose Luis Mateo embraces the open-endedness of ways to pick up a project. Mateo's book/article touches upon various elements that channel the vague initial approach to a project into a more concrete entity. Mateo seems to strongly advocate the expedient nature of maquettes - an approach which I agree to a thesis project. The single impression I walked away with from the first meeting of Thesis Prep was to initiate a project with a topic or subject matter that fascinates my interests. According to Mateo, I should come up with a backbone structure that captures the gaseous project.
The thoughts in my head are not fully formed, nor do I have a clear subject that I would like to delve into, but what I do enjoy perennially is the sky, and open space. Taking such interests literally and extrapolating them would lead me to the design of public space such as parks and plazas or large/tall structures. I do have a slight inclination towards the design of public space, especially the notion of a plaza/park. And all this in an urban setting where the park/plaza may take on more modern and drastic compositions seem to intrigue me. Also, designing programs for the public on numerous levels that are actually "open" spaces more than encased structures(buildings) would impose new issues that are not commonly addressed while designing a building and allow one to perceive the urban fabric on a bigger scale.
I must say my visit to Highland Park this past summer has conjured me in making such a decision. Another project done in Canada, which title I cannot recall, has aided in the accumulation of my general interest towards public spaces.
The thoughts in my head are not fully formed, nor do I have a clear subject that I would like to delve into, but what I do enjoy perennially is the sky, and open space. Taking such interests literally and extrapolating them would lead me to the design of public space such as parks and plazas or large/tall structures. I do have a slight inclination towards the design of public space, especially the notion of a plaza/park. And all this in an urban setting where the park/plaza may take on more modern and drastic compositions seem to intrigue me. Also, designing programs for the public on numerous levels that are actually "open" spaces more than encased structures(buildings) would impose new issues that are not commonly addressed while designing a building and allow one to perceive the urban fabric on a bigger scale.
I must say my visit to Highland Park this past summer has conjured me in making such a decision. Another project done in Canada, which title I cannot recall, has aided in the accumulation of my general interest towards public spaces.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)