Despite my tirade on masterplans the other day there are some that I do not find entirely objectionable. Take the Clifton Boulevard Enhancement Project as an example.
Granted I haven't seem the presentation documentation but from the description and public comments of the 2007 10.17 presentation I can infer some points that I felt were rather pertinent. The overall proposal is for a definitive median on Clifton Boulevard with some planted and some hardscape areas.
- The planted beds may not be effective as a gateway (if they stretch the entire boulevard course then there would be little to no need for it to act as a gateway, Clifton Boulevard itself isn't really that long and is rather distinguishable).
- The median mimics the proposed Shoreway Boulevard creating a sense of continuity.
- Hardscape areas where medians cannot be installed 'could be replicated in Cleveland'. (This was especially nice as it attempts to emphasis the symbiotic relationship of the REGION).
-Local artists would be used to supply any public art. This is important as it personalizes each area in a subtle manner. Now there can be a neighborhood distinction without the typical olde tymey signage/lamp-post/hanging plant debacle, instead each neighborhood can utilize personal creative stock to differentiate itself. Think of Fremont, Washington (north of Seattle). If that doesn't ring a bell think of the Fremont Troll.
There are more points concerning signage, pedestrian protection, demarcating the residential from commercial zones with different plantings, hardscape types and strategies and most importantly the continuity and consistency of a masterplan and its application.
Something to think about.
No comments:
Post a Comment