i walked it last night, after dark. it was an experiential-design-acid-trip. amazingly brilliant subtle design moves that allow you to feel the directional shifts in the tracks because the paving always remains north/south. one minute your in dense planting, the next, you're being reoriented back into the city. and the moment under The Standard is orgasmic; the planting completely opens into a low prairie and the space between the ground plane and the bottom of the hotel is expansive, not to mention being able to see from horizon to horizon (city horizons, of course).
Just walked it yesterday. Its a very successful project with alot of smart design moves that will make it an active public space for the rest of its lifetime. I was also stunned by how nice all the finishes where on everything and overall the project felt very well bolted together and money well spent, HOWEVER I do have one major gripe, but this is just me.
My gripe is that the landscape design itself is a very pale imitation of the cacophony of flora that used to occupy the highline. One of the things that has always appealed to me about the highline project was the focus on "keeping it wild" but they totally erased all signs of previous life on the high line only to replant it with the same scrubby weeds that used to occupy it. I felt personally that this was pretty stupid because if they were intending all along of erasing all the old plants and grasses that had been growing wild they might as well have planted, dare i say, more attractive plants. The wildflowers are nice but everything is just organized in this seemingly random way when its obvious the whole thing was planned. Its a planned garden of weeds, which is nowhere nearly as attractive to me as the natural garden of weeds it replaced.
In the spirit of healthy debate, I would like to challenge your 'gripe' about the planting on the high line.
Firstly, the new planting is in no way the same scrubby weeds that previously occupied the high line. If you take a close look at the plants that were there before, you'll see that, as a whole, they were lesser contributing and productive plants (i.e. pollination potential, habitat-including edible fruits and dense branching, aesthetic-increased bloom time, and diversity as a whole). Of the plants that existed before, very few were even blooming (therefore pollinators). If you look closely at the new plant selection, you'll notice that they and their planting design mimic some of the more productive natural ecosystems (woodland edges, prairie, and mesic prairie).
No where else in New York City does a design project provide this amount and diversity of native flora.
So, in these respects, it is a 'planned garden of weeds' as you suggest, but one that creates more dynamic potential but somehow, quite brilliantly, still has a certain edge of 'design'.
As far as which type of 'weeds' are more attractive to you, I'm not sure what factors your opinion is based on.
Apu- from what I've heard, they had to remove all existing vegetation/soil for the site abatement of the asbestos/heavy metals/oils that were present in the soil and on the structure.
creating habitat is different then allowing for opportunistic colonization of a disturbed site. There were some noxious weeds up there that were best removed.
It's rare but wonderful to see the finished product live up to the schematics. I remember reading about this project years ago and thinking - wow wouldn't that be cool if it actually happened. A great precedent to illustrate the value of mixing the natural landscape with the urban context. Can't wait to walk the high line next time I'm in town!
Interesting article talkitect. The first paragraph is bang on - I have always assumed this is the collective result of the landscape architecture profession being entrenched and trapped in the picturesque.
I do have one question about your article: "horizontal beacon of life in a vertical landscape of desperation and anxiety". Really? Is the Meatpacking district really a landscape of desperation and anxiety? Or are you referring to all of NYC?
What I find so refreshing about landscape urbanism as a new theory (and had many of us holding our breathe for Corner's first big hurrah with The High Line) is that it attempts to cease pitting man versus nature, city versus natural, bad versus good, anxious versus peaceful. And to me, when I'm on The High Line, I feel more a part of the city than I do down on the street.
The article was actually written by Uriel Ortega, an architect living in NYC. So I can't be completely sure about her meaning behind the statement in question. However, I would assume she is referring to the vertical lifestyle many people find themselves in when living in large cities. When living and working in High rises quite often our lives become compartmentalized, isolating us from meaningful interaction with other people and the natural environment. I would think this is what she is referring to as the "vertical landscape of desperation and anxiety."
Jul 7, 09 4:36 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
On the High Line
Sometimes improbable things actually get done....
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/arts/design/10high.html
Have any of you NYC 'nectors walked it yet?
I haven't yet, but I'm dying to. It just opened today to the public, so I'm sure it's really crowded. Will report back once I check it out!
i cant wait to get up there on my next trip to nyc!
someone report back with some first hand thoughts!
What an awesome idea. If only these types of projects could come to fruition more often.
dont we all wish...but its good to know some people are still thinking.
la should make an attempt with the la river and cornfields...
i walked it last night, after dark. it was an experiential-design-acid-trip. amazingly brilliant subtle design moves that allow you to feel the directional shifts in the tracks because the paving always remains north/south. one minute your in dense planting, the next, you're being reoriented back into the city. and the moment under The Standard is orgasmic; the planting completely opens into a low prairie and the space between the ground plane and the bottom of the hotel is expansive, not to mention being able to see from horizon to horizon (city horizons, of course).
very very very very cool. i can't wait to see it first hand. this looks like it could be one of my favorite projects in a long time.
I love what I see.
Now -- are those ramped-concrete-and-wood-slat benches actually meant to invite skateboarders ??
i was there this past weekend. an amazing walk.
Just walked it yesterday. Its a very successful project with alot of smart design moves that will make it an active public space for the rest of its lifetime. I was also stunned by how nice all the finishes where on everything and overall the project felt very well bolted together and money well spent, HOWEVER I do have one major gripe, but this is just me.
My gripe is that the landscape design itself is a very pale imitation of the cacophony of flora that used to occupy the highline. One of the things that has always appealed to me about the highline project was the focus on "keeping it wild" but they totally erased all signs of previous life on the high line only to replant it with the same scrubby weeds that used to occupy it. I felt personally that this was pretty stupid because if they were intending all along of erasing all the old plants and grasses that had been growing wild they might as well have planted, dare i say, more attractive plants. The wildflowers are nice but everything is just organized in this seemingly random way when its obvious the whole thing was planned. Its a planned garden of weeds, which is nowhere nearly as attractive to me as the natural garden of weeds it replaced.
aqua, do you think they will let those gardens go over time and revert to their natural state, or maintain them as a garden of weeds?
hope to visit this fall.
Apurimac -
In the spirit of healthy debate, I would like to challenge your 'gripe' about the planting on the high line.
Firstly, the new planting is in no way the same scrubby weeds that previously occupied the high line. If you take a close look at the plants that were there before, you'll see that, as a whole, they were lesser contributing and productive plants (i.e. pollination potential, habitat-including edible fruits and dense branching, aesthetic-increased bloom time, and diversity as a whole). Of the plants that existed before, very few were even blooming (therefore pollinators). If you look closely at the new plant selection, you'll notice that they and their planting design mimic some of the more productive natural ecosystems (woodland edges, prairie, and mesic prairie).
No where else in New York City does a design project provide this amount and diversity of native flora.
So, in these respects, it is a 'planned garden of weeds' as you suggest, but one that creates more dynamic potential but somehow, quite brilliantly, still has a certain edge of 'design'.
As far as which type of 'weeds' are more attractive to you, I'm not sure what factors your opinion is based on.
Thanks for the descriptions. Wish I could see it for myself.
Now about those skateboard ramps. . .any comment ?
amazing park ...especially right when the sun is setting ...the night time lighting was done very well
Apu- from what I've heard, they had to remove all existing vegetation/soil for the site abatement of the asbestos/heavy metals/oils that were present in the soil and on the structure.
creating habitat is different then allowing for opportunistic colonization of a disturbed site. There were some noxious weeds up there that were best removed.
As the plantings mature, the jungle may return...
I was there last week. The new developments around that erea are very cool, especially the Standard Hotel.
It's rare but wonderful to see the finished product live up to the schematics. I remember reading about this project years ago and thinking - wow wouldn't that be cool if it actually happened. A great precedent to illustrate the value of mixing the natural landscape with the urban context. Can't wait to walk the high line next time I'm in town!
I have an article about it up on my blog <a href="http://www.talkitect.com"</a>. Check it out!
Interesting article talkitect. The first paragraph is bang on - I have always assumed this is the collective result of the landscape architecture profession being entrenched and trapped in the picturesque.
I do have one question about your article: "horizontal beacon of life in a vertical landscape of desperation and anxiety". Really? Is the Meatpacking district really a landscape of desperation and anxiety? Or are you referring to all of NYC?
What I find so refreshing about landscape urbanism as a new theory (and had many of us holding our breathe for Corner's first big hurrah with The High Line) is that it attempts to cease pitting man versus nature, city versus natural, bad versus good, anxious versus peaceful. And to me, when I'm on The High Line, I feel more a part of the city than I do down on the street.
The article was actually written by Uriel Ortega, an architect living in NYC. So I can't be completely sure about her meaning behind the statement in question. However, I would assume she is referring to the vertical lifestyle many people find themselves in when living in large cities. When living and working in High rises quite often our lives become compartmentalized, isolating us from meaningful interaction with other people and the natural environment. I would think this is what she is referring to as the "vertical landscape of desperation and anxiety."
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.