LITMIR.BIZ

      GIVEN THE CHARACTERIZATION of Hargreaves Associates’ early work, and Hargreaves’s own statements about process, what role does this notion play in the firm’s work in terms of its detailing and construction? The ability to see processes registered on site has as much to do with fixed form as it does with the changing aspects of a landscape; therefore, it is as much concerned with ends as with means. “Resistance” involves the material, construction, and maintenance procedures that uphold the landscape’s structure and appearance over time, whereas “registration” refers to the ability to see change within or against this structure. Both are necessary and they function together. The recognizable figures and compositions in Hargreaves Associates’ work are designed and built to resist the erosive power of water or large crowds, their edges constructed with gabions (rock-filled cages) or concrete or reinforced with geotextiles (subsurface fabrics) or ground-cover planting. In terms of natural processes, Hargreaves Associates’ approach favors addressing a cyclical time frame of daily tides, seasonal color, or seasonal flooding, for example, rather than a linear time frame of succession and growth. These are obviously not exclusive of each other (cyclical events gradually transform the landscape); however, they offer distinct approaches when used as the basis for design. For example, Hargreaves believes that in garnering support from clients and public, complete construction of distinct portions of a project is more effective than treating an entire site evenly or proposing successional landscapes that are presumed to grow in. He acknowledges that some areas have to be “let go,” but only so that the limited financial resources can be focused on other aspects of a project.³⁶ Thus, in most of the work, phasing and zoning assure that a uniformly distributed character does not evolve across the site. There are areas where material processes are highlighted, for example, the break in the river wall in Louisville Waterfront Park, where the registration of water flow is visible because of the debris that collects in the inlets and the gradient of vegetation that results. But it also remains visible because one side of the cut is reinforced to maintain a distinct edge. Even in areas that are not subject to flooding or large volumes of water, many of the earthworks in Hargreaves Associates’ projects are reinforced with geotextiles in order to maintain their distinct forms and resist gradual processes of erosion.

      There are early projects that invoke succession, and it is worth looking at these to see how they have fared in comparison to the later projects that utilize more distinct zones and with higher maintenance budgets. The power of projects such as Candlestick Point Park and Byxbee Park, both of which involved collaborations with artists, derives from the subtle differences between the constructed site and the surrounding landscape of sky and sea, arising from the use of simple incisions that register water levels, or markers that orient the view outward. These parks were restrained by design, but they were also constrained by budget and maintenance, installed for between one and two dollars per square foot. Their locations are peripheral to their city centers (San Francisco and Palo Alto, Calif., respectively) in areas with previous industrial or landfill uses. The site conditions are similar to those that have formed the basis of more recent and well-publicized projects. The questions frequently asked in recent publications are: How much design is enough? How can a master plan be avoided? How do maintenance concerns bear on design? Do investing less up front and being less specific about design result in greater flexibility for future use? It has been over twenty years since Candlestick Point and Byxbee Parks were constructed; therefore, Hargreaves Associates’ work offers interesting case studies to consider these questions.

      Candlestick Point Park is 18 acres of land within the 170-acre Candlestick Point State Recreational Area. Hargreaves Associates’ original intent was a heightened contrast between the irrigated grasses that form the central lawn and the adjacent meadow left to its own cycles of growth and a lack of irrigation.³⁷ The distinction between the two zones is less visible now, as nature has been allowed to take its course because of infrequent maintenance. Though still occasionally mown, the formerly pristine central lawn is dotted with shrubs. The maintenance crews who mow this area maneuver around the shrubs, allowing additional species to colonize the untouched pockets, further eroding the distinction between the lawn and the adjacent ground. Activities originally envisioned for the site have not taken place because the associated building was never funded. The site is sparsely populated, and there are graffiti on the concrete outcroppings by the water’s edge. Part of its appeal, at least to a one-time visitor, is its rough appearance and deserted feeling, which makes the presence of the bay that much more commanding. Located a half-mile walk from the nearest neighborhood, it is surrounded by a sea of asphalt that is the 49ers’ stadium parking lot.

      FIGURE 9. Candlestick Point Park, showing one of the tidal inlets in the foreground soon after construction. The stepped gabion walls that retain the central mown grass figure can be seen.

      FIGURE 10. Candlestick Point Park showing the same inlet in 2004. Photograph by the author.

      FIGURE 11. Aerial view of Candlestick Point Park from 2008 showing the vegetation encroaching on the central figure and the tidal inlets filled with sediment and vegetation. Image courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey.

      There is no question that Candlestick Point Park is a critical project for the discipline of landscape architecture, as it eschewed a verdant nature to which the field had become accustomed; however, the lack of funding and minimal program development are not within the control of the designer, so why would these aspects be celebrated as a desirable or inevitable state of landscape design today, as is evident in the winning scheme for Downs-view Park Toronto by OMA/Bruce Mau?³⁸ Though the proposal appeared to be a brilliant polemic, it is an emergent scheme because design specifics were suppressed in favor of managerial organizations that would eventually evolve the project. Not surprisingly, the plan that inevitably resulted from this process is a very banal and uninspired landscape.

      Designed just after Candlestick Point Park, and located thirty miles south and east of it, is Byxbee Park. Also planted with native grasses, the covered sanitary landfill contrasts seasonally to the marsh below, “swapping” colors during the seasons: when one is green in winter and spring, the other is golden, with the inverse true in the summer. The original species selection was a choice made by Hargreaves Associates based on its survivability without irrigation and the desired visual effects; however, the grasses must be maintained through the removal of colonizing species that would otherwise likely overtake them, even though the colonizing plants are obviously well adapted to the site’s harsh conditions.³⁹ In fact, there has been little success with removal of these plants.⁴⁰ Nor did the processes that were presumably set in motion transpire; for example, where concrete curbs were placed parallel to the ground’s contours to presumably collect water on their upward side and prompt growth of

Скачать книгу