Sunday, June 09, 2019

Highbar installation

Posted for the benefit of the City Parks and Recreation Department. View it after the jump.

Saturday, June 01, 2019

A new calisthenics park for the East River Park?

The city will be redesigning the East River Park, including the little outdoor calisthenics area near the 6th Street overpass. The Parks Department has in the past made a variety of missteps and poor choices in buying and installing outdoor equipment. It's hard to fault them -- the only people who have genuine expertise in outdoor equipment are the people who use it a lot. Indirect research, statistical analysis, for example, is likely to mislead unless the right questions are being asked, and knowing what to ask again requires hands-on experience. There's no Ph.D. in outdoor equipment, so consultants will be just as likely to ask the wrong questions. The unfortunate results are evident in too many parks across the city. In the case of outdoor fitness equipment, there really is no substitute for experience.

The city has an opportunity to create a world-class calisthenics area and I am confident that the Parks Department is fully capable of rising to the challenge -- if it has good information and advice. I sent the Parks Department a presentation on how to design the new area for maximum public value. I've posted it below (it starts with the "Quick summary"). If the Department follows four basic principles, they can't go wrong:

  1. A calisthenics park is not a gym!!
  2. Optimize functionality and versatility.
  3. Versatility requires simplicity.
  4. Height matters.

In other words, outdoor equipment fails when it mimics gym equipment by being too complex and specific -- or too low -- to accommodate free, innovative, imaginative movement, which is exactly what distinguishes outdoor fitness from a gym. Low bars have their place, especially for those with disabilities, but low bars are no replacement for high ones.

1. OUTDOOR FITNESS IS NOT A GYM!! A calisthenics park couldn't be more unlike a gym. Gyms are unpleasant spaces for discipline, primarily in the service of narcissistic goals of body image, focusing on repetitive training for individual body parts. The equipment is mostly one-use one-user.
  Outdoor calisthenics areas are fun, open, social spaces for imaginative, innovative movement and the sharing of innovations with others. A gym stands to an outdoor calisthenics area as an office cubicle does to a basketball game. Much of gym equipment is complexly engineered to fit some single purpose. Outdoor equipment must be maximally simple to allow multiple, imaginative, innovative movements.

2. All elements should be functional. For example, the supports of a high bar should be poles that people -- including and especially kids -- can climb and grasp for a variety of movements. If the supports are squared posts, they can't be grasped, so they are non functional.

3. Keep it simple. There is no end to the list of possible movements on a simple high bar. The more complicated the equipment, the fewer the possible movements. Here's what the Parks Department installed this year at McCarren Park -- high bars with handles that restrict any movement over the bar. It looks new and cool and 'improved', but it limits the possibilities of movement, in other words, it's largely non functional.

Notice also that both sets of the parallel bars are too low for an adult. These are great for the disabled and anyone who has trouble walking. The Parks Department should be applauded for serving the alternatively abled and the infirm. It's wonderful and inclusive and simply right. We should all be pleased about that. But the Parks Department did not include a functional set of high bars for those who want to try the dozens and dozens of moves that cannot be done on these low bars. There's no excuse for leaving out ordinary adults. Equipment is not a zero sum game. We can have both high and low. Including only low and lower makes no sense at all.

That brings us to the fourth principle:

4. Height matters. Most of the high bars in city parks are too low for most adults. I hear this complaint constantly. Since the high bar is the most used outdoor equipment, the Department should include as many high bars of as many heights as they can. There are a lot of ways to set up high bars, but the right-angle set-up at McCarren is inefficient. Using the fourth pole, we could have had four high bars with two sets facing each other which would have allowed four different heights and swinging from one bar to the facing one.

These basic principles have been employed all over the world -- except in the US, of course.

Here's the presentation:

More -- much more -- after the jump

Thursday, February 18, 2016

History of the tenement: complete series

Here is the complete list of posts, in order, in the series on The History of the Tenement in New York (I've included the popular A history of the slums of New York post that complements the tenement history):

    Preface: A history of the slums of New York

Why are tenements so diverse?

Anti-Catholic town, Anti-Catholic architecture
How architecture began in NYC

    (an outlier hypothesis)
    A digression

Banks, Romans, fashion-mongerers and modernism
What Roman architecture tells us about our notion of time and fashion, progress, and our cultural personality

Ghetto real estate
How and why the slums -- and the apartment building -- began

The inverse law of ghetto real estate
The economics of exploitation

External vs internal
A summary so far of the divergent purposes of design

Political history
Clarifying the origins of our two political parties and their significance for the immigrant labor ghetto

What's a tenement?
Law and changing perceptions

A market lesson in brick
The oldest and tallest tenement, and how it got that way

New Law, Old Law, Pre-Law, lawless
Quick history of housing laws and how to identify tenement periods

Don't believe what you read
...or see on a cornice or on a NYC gov't document

Don't trust historians
How the limits of professionalism can mislead

And ignore the know-it-alls
Know their bias and agenda

Personality, humor and taste
in tenement design of the 1880's and 90's

From the depths of Schopenhauer and Wagner to the surfaces of Nietzsche and Wilde
Romanticism and aestheticism merge in a tenement on Madison Street

The last hurrah of wealth and privilege

The law of unintended consequences
What conduces to freedom, expression and innovation?

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

The law of unintended consequences

Garbage transformed New York forever. It preserved the old and turned the new into the spectacular and grandiose. How? Here's the story.

Social reformers in the 19th century replaced the eugenics explanation for poverty -- that the poor were poor because they were genetically defective, incapable of civilization by their very nature -- with a socio-economic explanation: substandard living quarters. The tenement's core defect was the airshaft, the space between two tenements in the interior of the lot. Its purpose was to bring natural light and fresh air into interior rooms, but it turned into a permanent mulch for garbage instead. Dug to the foundation, and without easy access or egress, garbage once thrown into it, stayed there. It was unsanitary. When it burned, the airshaft acted as a flue to spread the fire. The airshaft caused many deaths during its twenty-two year reign.

Reform came with the New Law and its requirement that every multiple dwelling have a large courtyard for garbage storage-and-removal. The courtyard prevented redevelopment on single lots -- if you had a four story building covering 80% of the lot, redeveloping it to six stories but with a large courtyard would lose rental space not gain it. As a result, only landlords or developers owning multiple adjacent lots could redevelop a building. Owners of single lots were out of luck. They had to sit with their property as is forever. Historical preservation was not the intention of the New Law, but that was its consequence.

The exception was the corner lot, of which the law allowed nearly 100% lot coverage. So you'll see four and five story tenements all in a row in the East Village on 2nd Avenue, for example, between spectacular New Law tenements on the corners like bookends.

The New Law tenements, despite being constructed along distinguished, elegant principles of the Academie des Beaux Arts, and are impressively grand, harmonious, and dignified, are actually repetitive, largely unimaginative and full of mass-produced ornaments. They look like impressive mansions of the wealthy, but they are not particularly interesting. Once you've seen a few different styles, you've seen them all. Ironically, people view them as special because they are expensive looking, while the Old Law tenements, original, wild, unique, distinctive, are viewed as cheap, mass-produced and without design.
Two New Laws, about as distinct as New Laws get
The invention is limited by the narrow range of ornaments available and the structural elements in which they can be arranged. Occasionally you'll see unusual and subtly distinct solutions to structural design, but more often you find easy iterations of the familiar. This little mini-frieze ornament can be found all across the city without any alteration:
The gryphon frieze on Avenue B
not to mention all those corner stones, pediments, broken pediments, scrolling pediments, every one of them imitations of models two thousand years old. They are beautiful...and stifling. The age of wild invention, of personal design was ended by academic principles of superior right and correct standards. 

Garbage and the law of unintended consequences.