Of the parks we saw today, at least the habitable ones, they are all irrefutably successful for one reason or another. What each of them had in common was a ground plane that responded to their respective urban context. It would seem that fluctuation in ground plane, no matter how subtle or how dynamic, plays a significant role in the language that each park conveys.
The East River Waterfront, although mostly flat throughout its length except for the planters and ‘dunes’ does in fact raise off the ground at the portion of the pier. On the ground level, the pier lowers at the end so that occupants lounging on the deck have an unobstructed view of the water, meanwhile, on the upper deck, the occupiable roof is quite dynamic and allows visitors to view onto the top deck of ported ships. Furthermore, the occupiable grassy areas on the roof of the structure provide a space for picnicking and lounging that feels much further from the street than it actually is.
The High Line displays great fluctuations in elevation change. Not only is it already raised about thirty feet from street level, which innately provides an escape from traffic, but it also utilizes its own false ground plane to create a dynamic mile-long experience that could otherwise be quite monotonous. At portions with interesting street conditions, it might dip down and allow visitors to watch traffic drive by, and at other times, it raises up off of the typical plane of foot traffic to become somewhat of a land-bridge. This formal move offers an altered perspective as pedestrians walk above the vegetation instead of beside it. Exactly why this alteration occurs is unclear—perhaps it relates to specific vegetation or adjacent buildings or views—but at the very least it activates the pathway in a manner which offers pecific identifiable portions of the path.
Bryant Park’s elevational changes were done much more subtly, however that is all that is necessary for such a large field of a park such as this one. The paved portion around the grass field is simply raised off of street level just a few feet, and then dropped another few feet in the middle grassy area. What this offers is a deviation from the street, that is, someone laying on the grass does not have clear-cut views of automobile traffic.
Paley Park makes a similar formal move to elevate itself from the street just a few feet, however, what is more interesting about Paley than its sectional height is its width. It pours out into the street, and the entrance therefore becomes ambiguous, while the subtle change in height informs one’s definitive occupancy of the park.
Roosevelt Park utilizes ground plane as an effective way of surprising the viewer. Upon arrival, visitors are only aware of a large granite staircase, however, a pleasantly unexpected surprise awaits once the threshold of that staircase is broken. At the top, visitors are suddenly fully aware of the large triangular field flanked by two rows of trees on each side. The field ever so gradually slopes downward towards the southern tip of the island and aims viewers directly at the monument and the waterfront.
It appears that the grade and elevation of the park has a much greater effect on the park than any other factor, and much more than I had expected. Surely it commands much thought and attention during a projects design phase. The ground plane of the park can certainly make or break a landscape design project, and I suspect that the main reason why each park we visited today is so successful as a public space is because the ground planes were handled quite critically.
The East River Waterfront, although mostly flat throughout its length except for the planters and ‘dunes’ does in fact raise off the ground at the portion of the pier. On the ground level, the pier lowers at the end so that occupants lounging on the deck have an unobstructed view of the water, meanwhile, on the upper deck, the occupiable roof is quite dynamic and allows visitors to view onto the top deck of ported ships. Furthermore, the occupiable grassy areas on the roof of the structure provide a space for picnicking and lounging that feels much further from the street than it actually is.
The High Line displays great fluctuations in elevation change. Not only is it already raised about thirty feet from street level, which innately provides an escape from traffic, but it also utilizes its own false ground plane to create a dynamic mile-long experience that could otherwise be quite monotonous. At portions with interesting street conditions, it might dip down and allow visitors to watch traffic drive by, and at other times, it raises up off of the typical plane of foot traffic to become somewhat of a land-bridge. This formal move offers an altered perspective as pedestrians walk above the vegetation instead of beside it. Exactly why this alteration occurs is unclear—perhaps it relates to specific vegetation or adjacent buildings or views—but at the very least it activates the pathway in a manner which offers pecific identifiable portions of the path.
Bryant Park’s elevational changes were done much more subtly, however that is all that is necessary for such a large field of a park such as this one. The paved portion around the grass field is simply raised off of street level just a few feet, and then dropped another few feet in the middle grassy area. What this offers is a deviation from the street, that is, someone laying on the grass does not have clear-cut views of automobile traffic.
Paley Park makes a similar formal move to elevate itself from the street just a few feet, however, what is more interesting about Paley than its sectional height is its width. It pours out into the street, and the entrance therefore becomes ambiguous, while the subtle change in height informs one’s definitive occupancy of the park.
Roosevelt Park utilizes ground plane as an effective way of surprising the viewer. Upon arrival, visitors are only aware of a large granite staircase, however, a pleasantly unexpected surprise awaits once the threshold of that staircase is broken. At the top, visitors are suddenly fully aware of the large triangular field flanked by two rows of trees on each side. The field ever so gradually slopes downward towards the southern tip of the island and aims viewers directly at the monument and the waterfront.
It appears that the grade and elevation of the park has a much greater effect on the park than any other factor, and much more than I had expected. Surely it commands much thought and attention during a projects design phase. The ground plane of the park can certainly make or break a landscape design project, and I suspect that the main reason why each park we visited today is so successful as a public space is because the ground planes were handled quite critically.
