Dear COA, Why don’t you love me? Sincerely, The south lawn.
guest | October 10th, 2010
[guest = anthony payne ] Last week, gazing out the window past the coffee cart whilst eagerly awaiting my mediterranean turkey and hummus sandwich (toasted thanks), it occurred to me how underutilized the south facing porch and lawn are. On a beautiful fall day, why are we sitting inside a conditioned space (that is frequently freezing) instead of bathing in the shadow patterns of Nader Tehrani’s A Change of State?
As designers, we would think that adding the program of a cafe would activate the adjacent space, but up until now it has killed it. The kitchen blocks off one set of double doors, whilst the other remains locked so as not to disturb the seating arrangement. The space has now become storage for an installation- not the architects original intent and surely not the best adaptive reuse strategy we can hope for.
Whilst some call for a green roof on the east architecture building and a soccer ball is occasionally kicked around the courtyard, our own south facing green space remains deserted. We are aware of its existence, right?
So why do we not use it? Is it simply the awkward access or do we feel exposed/exhibited to those sitting inside (and supervised by ‘the authorities’ on the first floor)?
Could reconfiguring the interior seating layout and an intervention as simple as a table and chairs outside go some way to activating this space? Perhaps the decommissioned sections of the YAF installation could become seating and daybeds scattered across the lawn, or a labyrinth or a play-space! Surely as designers we can come up with ideas for how this space could better be used – I’m just hoping to initiate a conversation (though it would make an excellent space for a game of cricket!)
Quick, before we’re stuck inside for the next 2 months!
[ anthony payne, COA, south lawn, v_02 | i_05 ]
the forgotten spaces provoke the necessity for change. however, could it be a simple as not making the set of double doors dead-bolted all the time. while obviously security might be a concern [i recently had my laptop stolen from studio at 1.39 pm] i dont think that would be a good access point for a potential perpetrator.
having been to the site in cfy to study the plants for an extended blind contour drawing, i can tell you from experience that for whatever reason it is a spawning pool for insects, especially mosquitoes. another locale taken over by mosquitoes is the green space behind skiles to the east side. i did not even know the space existed until studying it for weeks in second year.
is it quite simply a battle of humans vs nature? this could go beyond the necessity for a couple of tables and chairs and the opening of doors [although i think all of that would be most excellent] but perhaps rethinking the plant ecosystems to allow for a more controlled experience [can we experience raw nature? probably no. not willingly anyways]. perhaps this is why the courtyard is such a big success, the mediation of nature with its minimal presence and reassuring control of the human intervention allows for the sensation of being outside under the most manipulated possibilities.
but the article talks about another concern. one which has been neglected for years. the undercurrent of all of the coa. all pervasive and all ignored. is it so difficult to regulate the auditorium to a temperature compatible to human life? i am told there is some kind of sophisticated computer system running the whole thing. has it gained a superior intelligence and is now attempting to eradicate the human race? do we have to wait in terror until will smith shows up? thank you anthony for this article which questions the basic premises we all take for granted.