For this public realm study, I analyzed what makes a public place to sit desirable. I broke my analysis down into three main focuses: hostile architecture, age friendliness, and place making. When looking at these topics, and the places to sit I found around the city, I found that Kansas City is lacking in effective, desirable places to sit.
For my first board, I included perspective views of the benches and seating options. For This board, I just wanted to have clear images of the seating so the viewer and interpret how they feel about each of the seats. The board is organized so that the best practices are at the top of the board and the worst examples are on the bottom. The best examples I found were from the Troost Lake Shelter, and the Oppenstein Brothers Memorial Park in downtown Kansas City. Though these two examples appear very different, they share the organic, natural flow and variety in seating options that I found to make the seating most successful.
I wanted to make my plan diagrams as simple as possible so that the viewer can determine what are the important factors when it comes to public seating. I saw shade and trees as being the most important elements to successful seating. For most people, finding a shady spot to sit is most desirable on a warm day. The trees can also provide a sense of privacy and protection. They help create space around the seating that makes it inviting and pleasant. I felt as though lacking in trees made the seating options less desirable . For the most successful examples, #1 and #2, there is plenty of trees for shade and the trees create a sense of space.
Finally, when creating my theory board I thought of the best ways to diagram why the different seating is successful. The first example of best practice, the Troost Lake Shelter, is in a very interesting location. There aren’t many lakes in Kansas City, this makes the lake shelter more appealing for people to come and make their own. In the circulation diagram you can see that the flow of pedestrians through the space is very organic and there is a lot of variety in how you can approach sitting there. I also included a drawing of the type of seating I liked most from the example, the picnic table. I like this option because there is almost endless possibility in how you can use this seating. It is great for eating, sitting and even laying down. The second example a urban park is very different in its setting, but is still successful for all the same reasons. It is an organic space, with a wide variety of seating types. From movable chairs and tables to walls and park benches there is a great variety. Both of these examples do not use hostile architecture. The benches are welcoming and comfortable and the movable chairs and tables couldn’t be more inviting. The spaces were both accessible for elderly and handicapped individuals and they both really are distinctive in their sense of place.
