Assumption 3: We like our trees.
“sylvan”, “ski lodge”, “a wildlife habitat”, “tucked in the vegetation”, “natural”, “ambient”These are all descriptors of how Krasnow characterizes its building-site relationship. Though we have already alluded to this earlier (refer to July 7 “Trees” post and comments), it is certainly worth declaring formally:
We like our trees.
I have learned that many of you spend the majority of your waking hours (including weekends) at Krasnow. Some of you take walks in the woods on campus trails; some of you can only experience the woods from afar. In each experience, the trees are not only beautiful, but also functional as they provide relief and escape from the intense work and a sterile interior in a way that energizes you to push forward. The view beyond the windows, through the trees, tells stories animated by the family of fox and deer who live here, and the trees as a vertical backdrop serves as an indicator of seasons. I have been told: “the great room is the best part of the building, and it is the trees that make it great”. Whether viewed from the large windows of the great room, or the smaller windows of an office, the line of forest spreads out and wraps the building, acting as a protective membrane which encircles and connects the disparate rooms and people: "It is only 20 – 30 yards of forest, but it is enough".
Clearly there is concern about removing the trees – and, worst case scenario, implementing a “concrete jungle”. Here are some of the related architectural implications you have proposed regarding the construction:
- All offices should take advantage of our natural asset and be awarded a view of the trees.
- If we build higher (more floors), we can reduce the building footprint and save more trees. (The opposing argument is that the greater the number of floors, the more barriers/degrees of separation between floors exist).
- An outside wooded courtyard or patio could take advantage of an exterior experience of our trees.
- Bringing live plants into the building could pull that vegetative connection from exterior to interior.
- There is the potential for a cooperative vegetable/flower garden to be maintained by interested individuals. Since people spend so much time here, it could be like having a piece of “home away from home”.
- The current minimal landscape intervention is successful because it does not compete with natural environment and trees. The new site plan should adopt a similar approach to landscaping.
(We all enjoy reading each others comments – keep them coming!)
posted by Meredith Banasiak, ANFA @ 3:11 PM
1 Comments:
What about the notion of keeping the trees (virtually all of them) but in a more park like environment--say with paved paths and benches?
This relates to the idea of a path that might eventually go, on the diagonal, through the trees from one end of the entire building to the other.
Post a Comment
<< Home