The longer I look at this one-page summary statement, the more important and intimidating it becomes. Aside from the primarily visual representations on the three boards, this statement is our only chance to really explain our concepts, intentions, and goals. We have a lot of ideas out there, that can and have worked cohesively, but I've got to admit that writing about it is challenging - it's forcing me to confront every "conceptual gap," if that makes sense. So...I've got some questions to throw out there, for clarification:

- How will our "ecotones" really foster a better understanding of natural systems and processes?

- Because phasing is required in our proposal, and considering Parrish's comment (that first phase includes what you actually intend to build, while second and third phases will most likely will never get built) what is the itemized breakdown of phases? In other words, what are we building immediately, and what are we suggesting (nicely rendered examples)?

- Do we have specific information on how the community garden would operate, that I could use for elaboration?

I'd appreciate it if everyone weighed in on this. Appreciate it.

1 comment:

ddewane said...

One thing that has to be gotten out in the open and explained is the notion of the project title. It is important to have a project title to give yourself identity in the minds of the jurors. I selected ECOTONE in part because it was one thing we were focused on highlighting in our design, but mostly because it is a word that is mysterious and cool sounding. I am up for changing the title, but we have to have one. It is also a good convention to have a one word title with a sentence after that offers a little more information. For example: Rachel and I did a hotel competition based on a path that took the guest on a path of mental discovery by gradually stripping away modern conveniences in an effort to heighten an individuals sense of awareness…the title was : ‘CROSSING: juxtaposing notions of comfort and habitation.’ So maybe we could go with ECOTONE: yada yada yada…..

Speaking of ecotones and how they will foster a better understanding of natural systems and processes, I think the key word here is didactic (a adjective meaning ‘intended for instruction; instructive: ie fables are didactic stories that teach people moral lessons). Our paths run through the ecosystems and ecotones equally, but everywhere the paths are meant to be didactic. The paths are the teaching tool that allows people to appreciate the unique moments of the site. Again, I think there was a breakthrough point in the meeting when we brought up the comparison of experiencing the site by way of one homogenious concrete sidewalk vs. a set of paths that respond to the immediate environment. The concrete is not heightening the experience – bet a rich and varied path system could. Now the question is WHERE are these magical teaching paths going. The answer, as I see it, is that they run in two places: through ecosystems (i.e. through the forest, through the grassland) or between two ecosystems (ie treeline between forest and grassland). They are different experiences. It might be worth considering having symmetrical paths for running through ecosystems and asymmetrical paths for the ecotones. Regardless, bottom line and BIG IDEA is to use variety in paths to bring attention to variety in the natural environment.

Also, in an abstract sense the park itself is a natural ecosystem nested in the city, a urban ecosystem. On this mega scale, our paths really are the ecotone between the natural and the manmade.

In answer to the second question, I think the things we propose building immediately are the paths, garden, zocalo, and a couple basic recreational program requirements. Phase two is filled in by overflow from phase I and other programmatic elements wanted by the community. Phase three is in the either.

I have no specifics on the community garden. We could pull that off the web or talk to somebody quick. Sunshine gardens would be the people.

That is all I got time for now……..