Enhancing Interpretation of Open Spaces

The open spaces along 14th Street and Union Square are a distinctive characteristic of the Study Area, and they act as a positive draw in terms of cultural identity and potential for economic development. Because of its strategic location as the dividing line between “uptown” and “downtown,” 14th Street, and especially Union Square Park, served as the city’s spiritual gathering place in the aftermath of the attacks on the World Trade Center; this is just one example of the latent cultural meaning of 14th Street’s open spaces.

Spaces like the Hudson River Park, Piers 56 and 57, and the eastern terminus of 14th Street once had industrial uses. However, as these uses gave way to commercial and residential use, and availability of open space decreased, these spaces found new uses as recreational parks; some were owned by the city and some belonged to private planned communities. Conversely, Union Square Park has functioned as an open space as long as residents have inhabited its perimeters, though it too has changed greatly in appearance. Regardless of their history as long-standing open spaces or adapted open spaces, these parks tell the history of the street, function as place markers, and create a sense of place for visitors and residents alike.

Previous plans for the design of many of these spaces have tended to respond more to land use issues and traffic concerns, and have neglected their story-telling ability. These spaces, despite general success as urban attractions, have failed to address the unique histories that enhance their meaning. Two such examples are Pier 56 and Union Square Park. In both cases, design techniques can be used as a tool to improve accessibility and enhance historical interpretation.

Example: Pier 56

Pier 56 was once a pier used for the Cunard White Star Lines and was the dock for ocean liners of such stature as the Titanic. As steamship travel became less popular in the early-twentieth century, Pier 56 fell into disuse, as did many other Cunard White Star Line piers. Its neglect was compounded by the construction of the Miller Elevated Highway in 1931, which effectively cut off the unused pier area from the remainder of 14th Street. The reconstruction of the West Side Highway at grade (which resulted from its collapse in 1973), and the addition of the Hudson River Park brought new attention and activity to the pier. The pier can now be viewed by anyone traveling down the foot path in the Hudson River Park. However, the pier is still partially inaccessible as a result of the fast moving traffic along the West Side Highway that divides the Hudson River Park and 14th Street.

We propose to use design as a way to physically bridge the Pier 56 area with the High Line. The addition of a footbridge from the pier to the High Line would encourage and increase pedestrian traffic and thus increase the acknowledgement of this important historic resource. Secondly, the pier’s history should be recognized and interpreted in the redevelopment of the site. We have created a design that interprets the pier as both the unused place of the twentieth century by keeping it as an archaeological ruin, and as the important thriving pier of the late-nineteenth century by the installation of historic plaques (Figure 18). Our proposal intervenes in a minimal way with the physical remains of the pier by adding a pedestrian ramp on which informational panels are located. These panels reveals images and facts pertaining to the history of the pier.

Increasing recognition of the intrinsic design value of industrial sites, and the rich history they possess, has led cities around the country, and even around the world, to reclaim abandoned industrial sites for public parks. New York City has demonstrated its willingness to reinvest in its own industrial past with the High Line Park project, and Pier 56 presents a natural extension of this effort.

Example: Union Square Park

Union Square is the most important and most highly used open space on 14th Street. Its long history, connected with the development of the area, further emphasizes its importance to the study area. However, its history—both in the evolution of the park’s design and in the square’s relationship to the labor movement and surrounding buildings—has not been clearly expressed to the public.

Though the park’s plans have changed many times throughout its one hundred fifty year history, the use has remained generally the same within the park; it is the activity and circulation patterns on the park’s perimeter that have seen the most change. Historically, the northern end of the park was used for public gatherings and demonstrations; however since the renovation of the south end in the 1980s, and with the Greenmarket in the north end, the stepped plaza has become the popular spot for gatherings today.

After analysis of the current design, it was decided that the design proposals would focus on four objectives: first, that Union Square should be a place primarily for people, not for cars; second, that the evolution of the park’s designs need to be expressed to the public; third, that the park connect to its building context and concurrent labor history; and fourth, that the park have a means of conveying its use as a political gathering space, in the past, and for current and future use.

Objective 1: Circulation

In order to ease the circulation conflicts throughout Union Square, the focus of the design should be the movement of people throughout the square, not the movement of automobile traffic on the street. Expanding the park’s boundaries to the north and the east solves many of the problems Union Square currently faces. The expansion creates one-way streets at Union Square East and 17th Street, turning the streets around Union Square into a traffic circle and allowing easier and safer pedestrian crossings. The expansion allows more room for people to move around the perimeter of the park and also provides more space for the Greenmarket on three sides of the park. If, historically, the park was the only densely landscaped space in Union Square, new proposals should maintain Olmsted’s intention that the park be a place of repose and isolation in the middle of the square.

Objective 2: Evolution of park designs

The formal plan of the design has evolved over the park’s one hundred fifty year history but there is no evidence left of its origins. To further public understanding of the park’s history, it is important to illustrate the most significant aspects of the previous designs while not disturbing the current function of the park.

The proposal layers the 1872 network of paths that radiate from the historic location of the fountain and connects the 1872 paths to the current ones. Materials for the 1872 paths will be similar to what might have historically been used; grass cellular paving planted throughout will visually distinguish the old from the new, while maintaining the current use of the grassy areas for sitting. The center will be re-established with a flat circle of water, representative of the fountain installed for the 1842 Croton water celebration (Figure 19).

Objective 3: Connection between park and labor history in adjacent buildings

Historic Lot Lines—One of the goals for interpretation of labor history is that the information must have a physical connection with the building context; it must connect the park with its surroundings. Using the 1890’s Sanborn maps as a reference, the mapping of historic lot lines of adjacent buildings starts to denote the historic presence of labor at Union Square and will work in conjunction with the history markers.

History Markers—Union Square’s current interpretive plaques are embedded into the southern perimeter of the park. They depict a timeline of events, arts, culture and historical development connected with Union Square. However, the plaques have no consistent theme, and they are not highly visible due to their placement on the ground. The materials have little contrast with the pavement and the engraving is not easily read.

The proposed history markers will present the relationship of labor history and the surrounding context; only buildings that have a history of involvement with labor will have a history marker. Each four-foot tall marker will start with the Cor-Ten lot line “peeling up” off the ground and ending with a small informative panel (Figure 20). Each panel will have a photograph of the building’s former appearance at its height in labor history, as well as written text that states the building information. The history markers peel at various distances from the building so as to provide the best vantage point appropriate in regards to the historic paragraph, but they will also be placed so as to avoid interrupting circulation and activities around the perimeter of the square. The verticality of the markers succeeds in drawing the eye and grabbing the attention of passerby.

Objective 4: Promote character of demonstration

Union Square Colonnade—The northern end of Union Square was the site of many historic labor demonstrations and public gatherings, but today the smaller southern end is typically used. The purpose of our design solution is to highlight the history of this area of the Square, while facilitating future demonstrations and gatherings in the historic space. Through an analysis of the current circulation patterns of the Square it was determined that the southern end is frequented by small groups of demonstrators, while the northern end is still used for larger gatherings. By studying the historical section of the park at this end, it is apparent that the large gatherings were facilitated by the lack of barriers between the park and the building faces of 17th Street. Today, as well as in the proposal currently planned for the park’s future, there is some type of obstruction present, cutting the circulation space in two.

The proposal narrows the road to one lane, alleviating some of the traffic at the north end and making it more attractive to large gatherings, and eliminating the obstruction between the open space in front of the Pavilion and the street and sidewalk adjacent. We propose building a colonnade in front of the Union Square Pavilion (on the north side) for the display of interpretive panels, cultural advertisements, and protest banners (Figure 21). Calvert Vaux’s redesign for Union Square in 1872 included a lighted colonnade in the same location as the proposed colonnade. The new colonnade is a modern interpretation of Vaux’s original idea proposed for a new era, referencing the past without mimicking, and creating an amenity that will make use of the space for large gatherings more attractive and pointed.