My Social Life of Small Urban Spaces Pilgrimage
On a recent quick trip to New York, I made a point to visit two places in midtown Manhattan. These spots were part of a design pilgrimage that focused on key architectural masterpieces that had meaning to me and were very formative moment in my development as a designer.
While I was in grad school for architecture, “The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces” was shown in one of my classes. On the TV, was a corny, very 70s, documentary about the analysis of successful public spaces in metropolitan areas. The study was undertaken because cities like New York were letting developers go taller than the building code allowed as long as at public space was given back to the city at street-level. This seems like a good idea, but there was a big problem. These public spaces that were given back to the publics were typically unusable, ill-defined, afterthoughts. So, William Whyte and his team observed key public spaces to learn what worked and what didn’t.
Sitting in that classroom in Eugene, I was hooked. I found the process fascinating and it opened my eyes to a world of possibilities with design research. Two key locations that the team focused on in New York City always remained with me: Paley Park and the plaza in front of the Seagram building.
The two spaces are very different, but have many common themes. Paley Park is a very quiet, out-of-the-way spot to relax, while Seagram Plaza is right in the bustle of the city. What unites the public spaces are seating flexibility, natural elements, sound, food, and interaction with the street.
Flexibility
Paley has light-weight, movable chairs that aren’t bolted down to the ground. On a small scale, an individual can choose how close or far from the table a chair should be positioned. On a larger scale, the seating can be manipulated to suit different sized groups, or be moved from the center of the space to the periphery. Seagram has multiple scales of steps and edges that allow people to recline, sit up, or let their legs dangle.
Natural Elements
Paley has a canopy of trees and a fountain wall at one end, and fearless little birds hopping between the tables. Seagram has trees tucked away on the sides and has two fountains in either corner of the plaza. Additionally, a very narrow walkway creates the edge on one side of the fountains and allows people to sit with their feet at the water.
Sound
The water elements in both locations are a major aspect of what sets these spaces apart. Both locations allow for a private conversation in a public space. At Paley, the water feature is a major element that would create the necessary white noise in a more intimate setting. I was a little disappointed that it was turned off while I was there. Meanwhile, the fountains at Seagram are more of a soothing and welcoming sound in the midst of the bustle of the city. When I stopped by, the fountain was almost able to drown out the sounds of nearby construction.
Food
To make these places successful, it’s also important that people have easy access to food. Paley even has it’s own little spot to get coffee and a breakfast bagel built-in. Seagram isn’t as successful in this regard, but it is certainly a hub for people to bring their lunches to from all the nearby restaurants.
Interaction with the Street
A truly successful public space for the city must seamlessly integrate with the urban fabric. Paley achieves this by creating an interstitial space at the entrance. There is a transition from the bustle of the sidewalk to the clam of the park at the steps. It provides a place for people to meet and either remain there to talk or people-watch before they venture in to sit at a table. Seagram is much more subtle. It provides a natural place to sit, either solitary or in a pair or group. The edge of the plaza provides seating for many in a place that feels natural. It strengthens the plaza while creating a unique opportunity to take a break from the flurry of midtown in an open space that on a good day welcomes people to sit by the water and soak in the sun.
It was quite impactful to visit these incredibly well-designed locations and think back to everything I had studied. They inspired me to conduct post-occupancy evaluations on public spaces in Eugene such as the University of Oregon’s old basketball arena and the Springfield Courthouse. There was so much to learn. It was incredible, but limiting. These buildings were already constructed. Some of the things could be improved were literally impossible to improve given the limitations in play. These findings could be used as precedent studies for future projects, but the information was only gathered after the project was complete.
That is what is so amazing about design research for digital products. We can design, test, learn, and repeat. It is such a powerful element that design researchers can provide. Every time I conduct a usability session, I am able to gather incredible amounts of feedback at just the right time in the design process. To go from those first impressions in a graduate class, to implementing them in my own process, and now to visit the actual locations that William Whyte and his team studied was an edifying experience.
