We now have out of the way the sentiment that we should 'think' about how we are going to 'think' about this project.
a) We want to approach it from all scales
b) This should come out of direct contact with the site.
c) Our method / process should be... yet to be decided. Let me start a dialogue about this. It seems that the approach to this project is like this... "our society / country has some dysfunction because of (among many reasons) our built infrastructure, at a moment when we need to take on massive infrastructure building projects we should think about how we invest in it and what its social implications are." The assumption seems to be that infrastructure has a small part in determining peoples behavior/lifestyles, which I believe holds some truth. This is what I inferred from the text... the have it stated in the positive "We encourage projects that explore the value of infrastructure not only as an engineering endeavor, but as a robust design opportunity to strengthen communities and revitalize cities."
With this idea is the approach that our city infrastructure acts as a healing process between the relationship of man and environment.
There are many angles we could look at this, as stated in the brief "This notion of infrastructural systems is intentionally broad, including but not limited to parks, schools, open space, vehicle storage, sewers, roads, transportation, storm water, waste, food systems, recreation, local economies, 'green' infrastructure, fire prevention, markets, landfills, energy-generating facilities, cemeteries, and smart utilities."
*This is a quick thought I had at the end of the email* I think we should look at current scales in which people approach our infustructure, and create an arguement for an approach at a different scale... smaller, more human, more connections... a more human scale of the relationships of these infustructure networks. This would be conducive to work in a way that Stan Allen would be proud of *End of flash thought*
I really haven't done a ton of reading, i've been briefed on Stan Allens work, which seems like it has more emphasis on the physical / quantitative which precedes before value / qualitative judgments. Either way... it inherently needs reference to an actual place.
Meaning, lets figure out our method... and lets start getting into specifics... lets generate some shit, I've got a baby on the way, its not going to wait... let go!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Will,
ReplyDeleteYour sentiment about the scale of infrastructure is important and very interesting. I think it is important to remember the awe we are held in by grand acts of infrastructure, they are a wonder to behold and we take great pleasure in their size and grandeur. They greatly help to create identity and imageability for a place. Think of the Golden Gate Bridge, or The Great Wall of China. But yes at the same time it is important to keep in mind how the individual inhabits, relates to, and engages with the civil within the piece of infrastructure. They are highly political space which contain a great deal of meaning for the future. The Modernist methodology of engaging infrastructures idealized them as pure feats of engineering often writ large in grand swaths of concrete. I think the current engagement with ecology and complexity necessitates a smaller scale that maintains humanity. I believe no scale is to be ignored in any project, from the global to the way the door pull feels in your hand and down to the algae spawning on the surface of the collection pools. Go look at PORT's WPA entry "Urban Algae". I think that is a good example of a giant piece of infrastructure (pedestrian bridge between Red Hook and Battery Par) which maintains an attitude about small scale human interactivity and joy.
Nico,
ReplyDeleteAwesome... exactly what I had in mind! Do we want to start narrowing down what issues we'd like to address specifically with our site? I think we should zoom into specifics without making any commitments, then maybe we can look to these professional projects once we have an idea of how we actually engage our site.
I like specifics. Meeting time? At the goat?