Visit to the NY Center for Architecture

              I missed the class where we went to the New York Center for Architecture because I was sick, but I made sure I went when I felt better. The first exhibit I looked at was “Big Ideas, Small Lots”. My initial reaction was that proposals looked intriguing and very idyllic. I believe that it does contribute to the city as an architectural and cultural landscape. All the proposals had some type of greenscape to beautify the minimalist appearance. I’m not quite sure whose interests the proposals serve. I know they are intended for lower income and that is will be financed by the City of New York, but what does that actually mean? None of the proposals discussed the actual price bracket. I’m wondering, does this mean middle class or minimum wage earners. One of the negatives to me is that this doesn’t seem to be aimed at the homeless, which is obviously a big problem in New York City. Some of the positives for me involved how they are supposed to be environmentally friendly, including features such as micro-solar arrays, greywater filtration, stormwater capture, and low carbon footprint impact. Another positive is that the designs are created with replicable strategies in mind, as well as modular components for easy installation. The appearance is very modern, and I have to say, expensive looking. I had a lot of questions while looking at this exhibit. Are they built to last? What is the City’s budget? What corners are being cut to lower the construction cost? Who maintains this? How much would rent be? Affordability is in the eye of the beholder, so I’m wondering who the “affordable” housing is aimed at as it seems ambiguous for who the space is for. 

                 The second exhibit I looked out was “Topiary Tango”. This exhibit didn’t conjure up as many questions and thoughts for me as “Big Ideas, Small Lots.” Topiaries all began with the Romans and have a lot of history in Disney World, the Olympics, and usually found at Manors or Chateu’s. There’s a common theme in that list: wealth. This really only benefits the elite. If you take a drive through the Hamptons, topiaries can be found in front of, and around most of these homes and mansions. The exhibit stated that topiaries often helped satisfy the need for control. A question I had was, “who has time for this?” I’m not knocking topiaries, as much as it may sound like it. They are definitely an art form, and very beautiful. If there was a way they could be implemented in New York City, in possibly the form of rooftop gardens, I think that would be awesome and definitely contribute to the Cityscape. But then again, the upkeep would be very difficult. 

                   When I arrived at the NY Center for Architecture, I learned that the “Mapping Community” exhibit had been taken down, but I decided to do some research about it online. Part of the exhibit discussed what buildings are eligible for capital funding. That is something I haven’t thought about before. This exhibit also explained how public buildings are built in New York City, and also how many parks, bike paths, etc exist. In addition, there was an interactive component where people could drop a little block into a container, basically casting a vote, for what they would want to see in their neighborhood. Some of the options included a rooftop greenhouse at a middle school, a new elementary school library, a security lighting at subway plaza, to renovate a playground in a local park, or to install an accessible ramp at a local hospital. I’m not sure if those are being taken into account for an actual project, or if it is just to get people thinking and discussing. I believe that the “goal” of this exhibit is to make New Yorkers feel empowered and interested in contributing to community-building.