I have been asked to consider putting
forth my ideas on the state of downtown Lexington's parking. That is
taking some research and maybe a little history as to how we got to
where we are. I am feeling something in the wind and hope that it is
not some “lets solve our problem like name a city did it”,
because I always find that we only go about half way and then look
for better things. Until then I am continuing to think about urban
walkability.
One of the most common complaints about
Lexington, and its downtown in particular, is the blandness of the
architecture since the 1960s. We do have our share of windowless,
rough concrete panels or tinted windows hiding who knows what from
the passing public. These building may be right up on the sidewalk
but they do not engage the public or any pedestrians – they do not
help in creating any sense of street life. Even the ones
which set back and have their semi-public plaza spaces are not
relieved of guilt.
My main objection to the downtown CVS
project was not the location but the design of the face which they
chose to show to the street and the public. The Board of Adjustment
had already cast their lot against the pharmacy drive thru before it
became a controversial subject and that opened the subject of facade
design. We need no more dead walls looking out on our streets.
If there is one more thing that we
should have learned ,since we began to reverse the trend from bland
Brutalist architecture, is that the typical pedestrian needs to also
be entertained on their walk. One of the common jokes in my family
was that we were taking the kids on a “march through the Sahara”
whenever we went on walks – and especially through uninteresting
areas. Long stretches of treeless streets were quite stressing for
us and them - because there was just nothing mildly entertaining
about it.
The mildly entertaining aspect of
downtown pedestrian life, historically, was the ever changing facades
and display windows of the buildings there. Every 16 to 20 feet,
certainly no more than 40, there was an apparent change or difference
in the periphery of ones vision. It was these changes and
differences which gave the pedestrian reference points as to the
distance traveled or an estimation of how much farther it is to go.
The blind can still use the sounds and smells which usually accompany
these changes for the same reference points. Long stretches of dead
walls or open expanses of empty parking leave very few of these
points.
I have begun to understand the concept
put forward in Walkable City about the need for porous and deep edges
between our public (pedestrian) space and the private (commercial)
space. Jeff Speck's definition of porous refers to the number
and size of the windows and doors which allow proper lighting and
otherwise engage the two spaces in a lively relationship. The idea of
depth is simply the degree to which edge allows for the space
to blend or blur area of the said relationship of activity. These
opportunities can include; awnings, ledges, columns, recessed
doorways, etc. All the things that our older stores had in
abundance.
Too few doors or windows, such as the
backs and sides of commercial buildings, give absolutely no chance
for any relationship – lively or otherwise. Likewise the distance
setback from the sidewalk, anything in excess of a few small steps,
allows no blurring or blending to occur at all. Does it make sense
that developments at our sidewalk edges tend to repel the pedestrian
these days rather than encourage them?
It seems possible that, from what I
have put forward, a formula could be devised and refined with which
to rate our commercial streets as to the potential of pedestrian
activity. A residential formula may also be created with similar or
adjusted values applied. I really want to see how the “stand
alone” re-figuring of Rupp Arena would fare in this “urban
sidewalk porosity” rating for lack of a better moniker. It would
be my hope that this is something which could be included in the
Design Excellence Guidelines whenever they are written.
2 comments:
One possible strategy to evaluate downtown parking: http://brokensidewalk.com/2011/08/03/downtown-doesnt-need-anymore-parking/
I do not believe that Lexington has anything like the situation in Louisville, but a grandiose plan is being discussed for the near future. Stay tuned.
Post a Comment