NEW YORKNEWYORKNEW YORKNEW YORKNEW YORKNEW

NEW YORKURBANISMIDENTITY &DESIGNSteven HarfieldChristopher RaddatzUTS MA ARCH

Money, Movement & Music - NYC.

Ask an American where they’re from and they’ll tell you they’re American. Unless they’re from New York.

This paper is a follow up. One which takes a more acute look at the contemporary than the one which preceded it. The previous essay titled ‘Reflections on a Genius Loci in a 21st Century Reality’ investigated the concepts discussed by Christian Norberg Schulz of a ‘Genius Loci’ and his writings relevance in the 21st century, it sought to highlight theories of his which remained applicable and those that perhaps required a refreshment in the context of the 21st Century as much had changed in the thirty-five following years since it was first written.At the heart of Schulz’ writings he evokes a dismay at the lack of character and identity held by the modern settlement, viewing it as a ‘placeless place’, without an identifiable ‘genius’ or spirit. Cities to him become large conglomerations of identities and cultures with a lack of one clear notable logic or sense of collectivism.

Enter New York. Perhaps the pinnacle of a ‘culture clash’, a mishmash tangle of traditions, beliefs, lifestyles and economies, boasting one of the most diverse set of demographic figures ever to be found in one place. New York is a mess. However within its worshiped chaos, a logic can be found, a spirit exists, a sense of dwelling as Schulz would describe is undoubtedly apparent, alive and well. Why? What are the mechanisms which permit this phenomenon to occur? Where do they come from? Are they architectural? Are they psychological? Can we analyse the city in contrast to other modern settlements to understand its genius? These are the questions and themes taking centre stage in this essay. Identity, meaning, belonging, themes Schulz highlights as absent from our present, post regionalist modern Metropoli are the notions these writings intend to investigate. They are those notions which allow us a glimpse towards understanding how we can better design our modern contemporary cities whilst not forgetting our inherent human nature and need, as Heidegger would put it, to ‘dwell’.

NEW YORKURBANISMIDENTITY &DESIGN.

Chinatown-NYC

CIVIC IDENTITY

New York City, home to over eight million inhabitants with more than twenty-one million residing in the greater metropolitan area, it boasts over eight hundred spoken languages, thirty-six percent of its population were born overseas, it holds five separate china towns in the city proper and its greater population is comprised by representatives from almost every country in the world. The term ‘melting pot’ was coined specifically because of the ethnic diversity that was evident in the densely populated Lower East side of New York in the late nineteenth century. It is without doubt the epitome of demographic diversity. And while demographics highlight the difference in cultures, the physical manifestations of that cultural diversity can be seen everywhere from its architecture to its street art, from its sights to its sounds and then to its smells, the sensual palette is incredibly complex.

With so much dissimilarity, so many moving parts, what is the gravity which keeps it together? While any New Yorker may self describe themselves as of caucasian, latin, african or asian heritage they all fall under the civic identity of the cities name. A form of urban citizenship which to is to be granted to anyone instantaneously as famed American journalist and author Tom Wolfe quips, “One belongs to New York instantly, one belongs as much to it in five minutes as in five years” (Spoken).

One of the earliest examples of a city or civilisation which best highlights the notion of civic identity was ancient Rome, an example also noted by Schulz as having an unambiguous sense of architectural character, structure and image. “Rome is generally known as the ‘eternal city’. Obviously this name indicates something more than a very long history. To be ‘eternal’ implies that the city has always conserved its identity”. (Schulz p138). This concept of civic identity is key to finding a point of departure into our discussions regarding identity and meaning with relation to architecture in the twenty-first century. Before we descend to an architectural scale, we must first understand the notion of what it means to be a part of something civic.

As ancient Rome, expanded its distant territories, the issue of control and order beyond the Rubicon and its outer limits grew ever more pressing. As greater populations of varying ethnic customs and traditions joined its ranks by being themselves conquered, the issue of universal identity in the face of revolt was pertinent. Professor of ancient studies at Illinois University Ralph W Mathisen writes “It may be, in fact, that the closest the world ever came to implementing a form of world citizenship was during the later Roman Empire. Beginning in the early third century, the Roman government worked to maximize the number of persons to whom Roman ius civile, the law of Roman citizens, applied” (Mathisen p1013)

The administering of a civic identity in the form of citizenship which was then afforded to all those residing within the territories of the Roman Empire, provides one of the earliest clear examples of a legislated, organised notion of a ‘belonging to something’, becoming a part of something collective, something larger.

Rustavi, Georgia. Object in a Field.

Civic identity had transcended ethnic identity, and the groundwork for a mechanism of settlement which was able to operate outside the regional parameters of pre mass-migratory human settlements was realised. The extension of Roman citizenship to non-citizens was, at the time and for a centuries to follow, an unquestionable strategic success. As the Greek orator Aristides proclaimed in the mid-second century, “Neither sea nor intervening continent are bars to citizenship. No one worthy of rule or trust remains an alien, but a civil community of the World has been established as a FreeRepublic” (Mathisen p1013)

Fast forward to the mid nineteenth century and an antithesis of Roman conquest was taking place on the shores of the Hudson as masses from around the globe (and they are still coming) came to lay claim to their place within the worlds largest urban laboratory, New York. Ellis island, the gateway to the gilded grail that New York was claimed to be was one of the busiest places on earth, stamping citizenship and a sense of arrival into the hearts of all who came.

“Give me your tired, your poor,Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

-The New Colossus, American poet Emma Lazarus 1888.

Yet it was not, and still isn’t the stamp in the passport or the nod from the customs officer which grants an inhabitant of New York their civil identity, their means to dwell. It is ones tolerance to accept and to enjoy the differences of the individual next to him which makes true a persons sense of belonging in New York. Tolerance, and the ability to physically articulate ones culture and to have the means to do it presents the genius, if you will of New York as place and hints, in part, to some the ingredients required to help realise successful global cities of the future.

THE GRID

“Most modern buildings exist in a ‘nowhere’; they are not related to landscape and not to a coherent, urban whole”. (Schulz, p151). If you had ever wandered through a post Soviet era town, a landscape of ‘scattered objects in a field’ all of which expressed a ruthless efficiency designed to meet the statistical needs of a human settlement in the northern latitudes… You might well agree with Schulz. But thankfully this fate did not befall all modern settlements though they do highlight the contrast to be found between the overly functional and the eclectic mix of urban architectures that often comprise the cities of today and without doubt, New York.

This commentary begins to talk about the structure of place and of an urban scale of design thinking and its importance to a city’s success.

NYC Grid. mid 20th Century.

Schulz’ in his comments towards ‘man-made’ place similarly signals to the importance of considered and intelligent methods of articulating our place on the map, “The cultural importance of defining an area which is qualitatively different from the surrounds, cannot be overstated” (Schulz p58). The city grid, carved through New York’s dense urban jungle is immediately apparent at a glance of the city’s plan, simple, clear and rigid. Rem Koolhaas describes its formation “Twelve Avenues running north-south and 155 Streets running east-west. With that simple action they describe a city of 13 x 156 = 2028 blocks (excluding topographical accidents): a matrix that captures, at the same time, all remaining territory and all future activity on the island. The Manhattan Grid. (Koolhaas, p18) What role does this seemingly rigid mechanism play in the identity and function of such a dynamic city?

For one, it is, within the confines of Manhattan, universal. Each block a uniform canvas onto which inhabitants can occupy, dwell, build, play, experiment. It favours none over the other and lends to the city, a sense of egalitarianism but more-so it acts as a tool of identity unique to the city. At a finer grain the city grid and its individual block holds the potential to be carved up into parts and adapted as its occupants see fit. The fine grain interpretation of the grid stand as a supple and less autocratic division of space which may permit thoroughfare or forbid it. On one hand the grid at a macro scale unites the city with a common structural vernacular, on the other, it acts as a coping mechanism or more aptly, provides an urban tolerance to move with the character and culture, material qualities and financial abilities… the diverse and varied intent of its inhabitants.

Margret Crawford in her work on the concept of ‘Everyday Urbanism’ sheds light on the need for cities to afford highly fluid and adaptable spaces to their inhabitants. Crawford cites her term ‘Everyday Urbanism’ as “an approach to urbanism that finds its meaning in everyday life” (Crawford p18). To be more specific it is the urban landscapes spontaneous adaptation by its citizens to serve new and ever changing requirements, think pop-up bars, short-term markets, garage sales, ad-hoc events etc… It is an excellent way to read the current situation, needs or attitudes of an environment. New York’s fine grain epitomises this quality with its smaller laneways and interstitial spaces which exist in the grey zone of legal consequence, they provide spaces which are able to be temporarily redesigned by citizens to meet the needs or reflect the attitudes, the flavour if you will of the city.

To contrast this notion of guerrilla urban design, another school of contemporary urban thinking, ‘Post Urbanism’ demonstrates within the trial and error landscape of New York’s built fabric the ability for its Manhattan Grid to handle much larger, sensational, and overbearing urban moves. Douglas Kelbaugh, Dean of Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning describes Post Urbanism as “In some sense, anti-Modern, just as postmodernism was anti-Modern…It attempts to wow an increasingly sophisticated clientele and public with provocative and audacious architecture and urbanism” (Kelbaugh. p9). The suite of new buildings which site themselves atop the former World Trade Centre stand as examples to this kind of architecture whose scale flirts with that of a masterplan, a hybrid of architecture and XL urbane structure.

Canberra ACT, city plan / Axis of Authority and Power..

To better understand the dynamic of New York’s Manhattan Grid let us contrast its rigidity with the urban grid which defines the Capital city of Australia, Canberra. The city itself plays host to a range of governmental and cultural housings which situate themselves amid a set of simple built geometries. Composed primarily of a series of concentric rings, the city is simultaneously intersected by diagonal paths of movement. While the logic is clear, the figure ground unmistakable, and its identity unanimous, the city’s ability to foster any semblance of fine-grain urban activation remains yet to be seen. It remains entirely Post Urbanist without any inclusion of other urban scales. Its division of spaces seems to be unforgivingly autocratic, dictating allotment sizes and shapes without any mechanism for tolerance or variation, its program defined by large scale national institutions which exist always at arms length from the public’s physical and often visual access. The centring effect of ‘Capital Hill’ anchors the display of power and hierarchy amid the urban plan which is then reinforced along a spine of significant national programs which ultimately unites itself with the landscape along the symmetries lent and concretised by Mount Ainslie. The overall result is an environment that makes one feel so oppressed and controlled that if one were to sneeze it would bring about a raft legislative repercussion. Simply put, to organise a successful urban plan, is no simple feat highlighting that rather than a reliance on an overarching and highly evident Post-Urban logic, it should exercise a degree of malleability, able to be bent to the requirements and ideas of those whom occupy it, the city citizens. “Maybe that’s what Everyday Urbanism is actually about: an attitude toward the city that can have a number of different formal outcomes. Everyday Urbanism is a shake-shifting kind of activity that changes in all kinds of circumstances… The point of it is, in fact, its multiplicity, its heterogenous quality”. (Crawford p45)

Barcelona’s Cerdá plan stands as another example of an identifiable urban composition, one which unites its inhabitants whilst simultaneously affording them the amenity to adapt the urban structure around them. Melbourne achieves this in part too whereas Sydney, its twin city and often understood rival does not.

Landscape has been challenging for Sydney. Gifted with beautiful beaches and a temperate climate its landscape remains dramatic, ringed by low mountains and punctuated with aquatic inlets and harbours, Sydney demonstrates a range of physical criteria that must be considered in urban planning. Its topography and its period of growth have impacted largely on its development into a series of zones or cliques. All too often one hears of the postcode rivalry which dictates where in the social order one ‘fits in’. These lines delineating an individuals place within the city however are not of a cadastral variety, rather, it is the landscape which highlights and demarcates where one tribe’s territory ends and the neighbouring tribe’s begins.

Comparing New York to Sydney is apples to oranges in many ways however the diverse multicultural composition of both cities is of significant strength on the world scale. It is seemingly evident however to understand New York as the city with the more resolute concept of a civic identity. While Sydney may be drawn together by the waters egalitarian edge (a notion that stands as a civic institution) its ability to afford its inhabitants a unified sense of collective dwelling remains patchy and perhaps in a sense, micro-regional.

The Cliques of Sydney.

The Manhattan Grid was devised in 1811 as a complete and entire concept which was implemented en-masse. Sydney exhibits a stop-start look at urban planning with no clear overarching principle applied to its greater body. Plans where only ever properly devised as they were needed in line with population growth. Rarely in Sydney does the logic of one urban plan fit snuggly into the intent of the next. Concurrently to this, the bulk of Sydney’s urban growth occurred during the rise of affordable motoring and individual transport. The dream of working in the city and commuting to the idyllic detached garden village had arrived… for a fleeting moment. Half the city was designed for the horse and cart, the other for the motoring satellite/suburban worker. The resulting landscape was of two urban languages which are still today are at odds with one another. Almost any attempt to use one mode of transport to move between these two zones will demonstrate this urban conundrum with maddening effect. The importance of a clear and understood structure is herein evident. As reinforced in the introductory essay preceding this writing, the world is moving only ever towards a more hybridised and composite set of cultures housed within urban configurations. The character and image of cities, both concepts Schulz utilises to arrange and understand urban organisation and the spirit of places, are heavily reliant upon not only the effectiveness of urban structure, but in its ability to perform as a clearly planned yet dynamic framework for a wide ranging set of cultures, programs and events.

INSTITUTIONS

The fact that New York holds a great many art and cultural institutions, may not be of immediate of primary significance. So too does Paris, London, Tokyo. What it does reveal however is the number of formal or recognisable outlets which exist to permit the city to express itself in a more curated and specific way. If Everyday Urbanism highlights the essence of the moment, then New York’s galleries and its suite of cultural stages allow for not only a display of planned artistic intrigue, but also act as a magnate to many other vital organs of the metropolis.

Elizabeth Currid, associate professor at USC’s Sol Price School of Public Policy in her publication How Art and Culture Happen in New York takes a look at the role which civic cultural institutions come to play in the formation of contemporary cities and their importance in considering what assists successful urban planning. Currid looks to analyse the institutional formula, one which New York seems to hold in pure form, and understand why it effects a larger community than simply those who work to support the arts and culture machine. “How do we create places where talented people, who are footloose, capricious and in high demand want to live and work? What sort of place based characteristics do they seek out?” (Currid p454). Jump back to Canberra, the autocratic city whose cultural institutions lay claim to some of the most significant items of national artistic merit is one that continuously struggles to hold and maintain a young and energetic workforce for more than a few years.

NYC - Storefront for Art & Architecture

It is seemingly a cycle in which young graduates complete their studies, move to Canberra to claim experience in a secure, reputable, governmental position for a few years before transitioning to a new privatised role in a city that simply put, exists in an environment which holds a far looser and more dynamic set of civic amenities. A sense of civic identity, an identity that one would want to keep and hold close, Canberra cannot offer. Instead large portions of its workforce seem to remain on rotation like business shirts at a dry-cleaners.

The inner workings of the cultural scene are largely based upon the social nature of its function, the making of connections and collaboration of individuals to coordinate projects comes about largely in part through the social network afforded by the event-like nature which galleries and cultural centers so often host. “Fashion designers, artists, and musicians tend to feel that their own social milieu, creative inspiration, and career trajectory has much in common with that of others in creative fields. Gatekeepers and nightlife proprietors also view creative subgroups as part of a larger cultural economy”. (Currid p459)

Though it isn’t just for the sake of supporting each other that these cultural components of the urban composition remain significant in the sense of modern cities. Their ability to lend interest, attitude, identity and overall a sense of belonging to a community however large and diverse is perhaps its most important quality. It suggests that an agglomeration of cultural components is vital to incubating young, vibrant professionals both those in the creative industries and those outside it. Furthermore in the interest of attempting to plan or ‘design-in’ the role for these vital cultural urban components, the necessitation and importance of active policy which encourages the freedom and financial support allowing these programs to come into fruition, emerges into focus.

If we then agree that, our world is becoming ever less regional and ever more culturally diverse, retaining a diverse and tolerant mix of civic amenities is vital to realising a modern city’s character and spirit. This is then one of (but not the only) the key refreshments that Schulz’ past thinkings on place requires. How then do we set the stage so to speak in encouraging the art and culture machine to properly flourish in our current and future cities? Currid cites Swiss economist Bruno Frey to highlight one method as “ setting property rights for artwork, encouraging international art trade, and promoting a ‘hands-of policy,’ which encourages outside actors (curators, gallery owners, foundations) to take on the role of cultivating creativity. (Currid p463).

Another method through which policy can be revised to encourage the development of cultural outlets is by paying careful consideration to zoning laws. Residential areas and nightlife zones, (often home to cultural institutions) are often a difficult mix with countless headlines purporting the ignorance and disregard late night revellers hold for the decent, hardworking citizens of the city. Kings Cross, Sydney is no stranger to this sort of conflict and its premise is simple enough though the current situation has come to a head through years of a lack of attention to zoning and area usage. Young people often enjoy living in close proximity to a loud hive of nightlife and urban activity… those needs however often change over time as individuals get older and seek out different environments, a modern city and its populations should not be understood as static.

Civic Identity.

Structure & Tolerance

Cultural Economy

Key Points, NYC, Urban Identity inthe Modern Metropolis.

The ever changing adaptation of urban spaces should be reflected in the policy which governs them.

One last mechanism to mention which is able to lend an assist in realising the success of a cultural economy within cities is through the preservation of real-estate prices in high density, urban areas. These areas are often of cultural exuberance as they simultaneously permit population numbers and the required spaces for a high exposure of artistic work to that population, though are often to caught in the expensive embrace of urban gentrification. “The paradox of artistic and cultural economies is that density and cultural vitality support the social milieu that makes cultural production possible, and yet the same attributes attract nonartists who bid up the cost of living, thus pricing out cultural producers, as happened historically in New York City’s West Village and SoHo” (Currid p463) This same urban cycle has occurred time and time again in Sydney’s Surry Hills, Berlin’s Mitte district, London’s suburb of Shoreditch and the east-End in general. Setting aside affordable living space for artists and non artists alike in cities is an under-valued ingredient in forming diverse and character rich moments within a larger picture of a cities identity. Sydney city’s current policy stipulation on this issue that three percent ‘affordable housing’ will help lend this rich dynamic to the urban fabric is an example of an urban ratio poorly understood and highlights one of the areas most in need of attention and revision.

CONCLUSION

So let us now recapitulate and consolidate what has been discussed. Civic Identity, Structure & Tolerance and the Cultural Economy have framed the key views presented in this attempt to locate and rethink some of the crucial mechanisms which are able to allow a modern metropolis to remain a place with meaning, character and identity in the face of a disappearing regional world, a world Schulz understood as his own. New York as it stands, this paper suggests is perhaps the foremost example of a Global city as other leading urban theorists such as Saskia Sassen have agreed. It presents to us as this paper has discussed, some of the critical elements to which are fundamental to our thinking on urban design with relation to our future cities.Civic Identity is perhaps the most important concept of those here discussed though its ability to shine clear and without confusion, without being fractured into cliques or suppressed through autocratic Post-Urbanistic arrangements is not at all a simple task. Civic Identity is not a concept which is of its own and is the result of a city rich with character, image, and structure. It remains these notions of character, image and structure which Schulz originally set out as vital to the spirit of man and dwelling that continue to be of utmost importance. However is in understanding their quality with respects to a shifting, diverse and polypopulatory world and their method of execution which will allow them to truly concretise the foundations of a Global City clear and confident in its identity.

Eire Canal - Civic Determination.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Norberg-Schulz, Christian. [1980] Genius Loci: Towards a phenomenology of architecture. New York: Rizzoli.

Norberg-Schulz, Christian. [1988] Architecture: Meaning and Place. New York: Electa/Rizzoli.

Kennedy, J. Gerald [1993] Imagining Paris: Exile, Writing, and American Identity. New Haven: Yale University Press; c.f. Introduction.

Lynch, Kevin [1960] The Image of the City. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Derix, Christian [2014] Empathic Space: The computation of Human-centric Architecture. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Currid. Elizabeth. [2007] The Warhol Economy: How Fashion, Art andMusic Drive New York City. Princeton University Press.

Kelbaugh, Douglas. [2001] Three Urbanisms and the Public Realm. 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium

Aureli, P.V. (ed) 2013, The city as a project, Ruby Press, Berlin, pp. 14-38

Koolhaas, Rem. [1994] Delirious New York. The Monacelli Press.

Chase, J. Crawford, M. Kaliski, J. [1999]. Everyday Urbanism. The Monacelli Press.

Jacobs, Jane. [1961]. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House Inc N.Y.

Markus, T. King, A. [1999] Framing Places, mediating Power in Built Form. Routledge Press.

Speaks, M. Crawford M. [2004] Everyday Urbanism, Margret Crawford Vs Michael Speaks. Michigan University Press.

Nesbitt, Kate. [1996] Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture. Princeton Architectural Press.x