City Comforts, the blog

Newspaper Articles so bereft of context drive me crazy

(Then again, it's the New York Times.)

The article is Whole Foods Faces Decisive Vote in Brooklyn. Fascinating story except for one thing: it's a story about design, about buildings, about neighborhood and how they are arranged on a site. So the story makes little sense and raises more questions than it answers. Since the issue is a real one, before City decision-makers, I'd like to know more.

Does the story show a site plan? No.

Does it explain the plan and why/how Whole Foods uses a 
• 4.2 acres site (aprox 183,000 square feet) with 
• a "52,000-square-foot, two-story store" -- that's a footprint of 26,000 square feet;
• with 248 spaces (approx 300 SF per car) yielding about 75,000 SF;
• giving a total of about 100,000 SF of unaccounted-for ground?

So what happened to the rest of the site? Is this part of a larger project? Is is credible that the current zoning allows only a 10,000 sf building on a 183,000 sf site? ("Whole Foods’ proposed 52,000-square-foot...more than five times bigger than the zoning regulations currently allow.")

The story is so confusing that only a design-illiterate would write it and design-illiterate people would read it without offering the dog look. The site is on the Gowanus Canal — is access to the canal allowed? desirable? part of the project? It would seem that the "waterfront" issue might be germane.

Apparent there are artists living nearby --- and "Bradford Reed, a musician with a studio across the street from the Whole Foods site, said he was resigned to change, but would prefer a park to a supermarket." Is that a credible statement? You gotta tell me more. Maybe this article is part of a continuing series and the Times has already covered it. Well then, give me the links. This

(Note: I am a bit perplexed about why anyone would not want a Whole Foods there but I take no definite position. It may be that some opponents indeed want Whole Foods to do a more urbane store. See the fascinating alternative plan at www.gowanusmade.org. That Whole Foods would object to alternatives surprises me slightly. But my commentary is mostly on yet another example of sub-par design/environmental reporting, not the project itself.)

 For some context, here the neighborhood, with the Whole Foods site to the right:

Update to "Redesigning High School Cafeterias"

Don't misunderstand: Redesigning High School Cafeterias is a great idea and might influence eating habits etc etc.

What concerns me is that I don't see a research process to help structure the work of the the young high school designers. No architect is able to launch on redesigning any use without significant discussion by the client — technical needs, financial abilities, and so forth. A good architect will look and watch and talk to the users of any facility before s/he starts design.

I didn't catch that the students are asked to embark on that process. Or given the background data. Or did I miss it?

Redesigning High School Cafeterias

Design Challenge Brief

The challenge is to redesign your high school cafeteria with both indoor and outdoor seating areas, creating spaces and options that encourage healthy eating.  You may redesign the interior of the existing cafeteria space, expand on the existing space, or design a completely new addition on to your school building.

Your design should contain all the spaces and functions required for a typical school cafeteria – a variety of seating options for students, as well as kitchen with food prep, storage, serving, and clean up areas.  The redesigned cafeteria should include outdoor access for student seating, as well as food deliveries and waste.  You should also consider sustainability issues and the environmental impact of your design.

via discoverdesign.org

I love the intent of the program (sponsored by the Chicago Architecture Foundation) and I wonder if a typical student knows enough about a kitchen — much less a commercial kitchen — to critique and redesign one? Familiar-enough with the distinctions which might be needed (I have no idea, personally) if modifying a kitchen to use more vegetables? (I assume that fresh vegetables are more sustainable than whatever else is found in most high school kitchens.) About storage and prep space? I can understand that students may have useful perceptions about the public areas — seating and so forth. But the behind-the-scene spaces? Well I don't know — and that is a sincere question. It will be interesting to follow the results in later this year.