Meeting

[e.so...@ucla.edu]

Hi guys,

Are we going to meet up with Greg tomorrow?

Best,
Eman
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

[Mike Coons]

I really don't think I can make.  I tried to move some things around this afternoon, but I haven't had much luck.  anyone else available?

[陈振羽]

sorry, I can't . I must go to apply the visa for my wife.

Chen

[Emmanuel Soriano]

No prob, Mike. 

I can make it to the the 3:00pm appointment.  And, if necessary, I could probably make it to the 4pm appointment. 

If no one else can make it, I can meet with Greg and then relay the conversation to you all.  I think we have a good idea about where we need to go from here; big beautiful picture.

-Eman

 

Emmanuel Soriano

Student

Master of Urban Planning

School of Public Affairs

UCLA

e.so...@ucla.edu

[Mike Coons]

That's a pretty solid excuse there, Chen.  Good luck.  Eman.  I'll keep trying to move things tomorrow, but I have to work until 2 and then drive my wife to the airport at 3:30, so it's not looking too good.  

I would suggest that these are some of our talking points (and anyone/everyone else should add):

1) return to the original conceit: norwalk as a community dedicated to young disney workers.

2) identify specific areas around the station for development — not exactly what will be there, but what are the areas.  New diagram that has just the areas we see as developable.  Should lead to a further diagram that talks about how the freight lot might be a good initial intervention for housing (perhaps because it creates a link to South Whittier's existing community, while [possibly] retail/entertainment on the other side of Imperial makes a more reasonable connection to 

 

3) initially the typological study may be an investigation of the housing form — is there a unique, dorm-like situation that we can argue for on the basis of the interests, demographics, desires of the twenty-somethings we're allegedly serving?  However ...

3) crucial to our program is the infrastructural element of the bridge/topography connecting those areas we've already highlighted as primed for development.  I've been imagining something like the Ramble in central park (references to the picturesq

[Mike Coons]

Shit, sorry, that send with some random keystroke.  I'm going to finish my thoughts and then send again.

[Mike Coons]

Talking points (anyone/everyone else should add):

1) return to the original conceit: norwalk as a community dedicated to young disney workers.

2) identify specific areas around the station for development — not exactly what will be there, but simply where are the areas.  New, simple diagram that has just the areas we see as developable.  Should lead to a further diagram that talks about how the freight lot might be a good initial intervention for housing (perhaps because it creates a link to South Whittier's existing community, while [possibly] retail/entertainment on the other side of Imperial makes a more reasonable connection to existing amenities ... I'm not sure, but we should be.  One idea: we could argue for a dorm unit based on the dimensions of a shipping container — i know it's being done to death right now, but there's a connection to existing use (fantastical, true, but that seems to be what we're missing ... just spitballing here).

 

3) initially the typological study may be an investigation of the housing form — is there a unique, dorm-like situation that we can argue for on the basis of the interests, demographics, desires of the twenty-somethings we're allegedly serving?  However ... number 4

4) crucial to our program should the infrastructural element of the bridge/topography connecting those areas we've already highlighted as primed for development.  I've been imagining something like the Ramble in central park (references to the picturesque, a precursor, in many ways, to landscape urbanism) — more topologically dynamic than the High Line .  Other references: Tom Sawyer's island at Disneyland — it's the one place that I can remember from going to Disney as a kid that seemed a little wild, a little outside control, even a little sinister.  

5) If we can establish that infrastructural spine (scoliotic ... nothing straight and narrow here), then we can argue that the remaining sites can plug into the topography in myriad ways — even those sites already developed in an early phase may adapt to meet the increased and evolving use of the infrastructural pathway.  Maybe a hotel meets the path above (a la the Standard and the High Line ... although those two don't actually connect), or maybe a kind of subterranean, nocturnal world develops beneath, accessible from above, but indulging the less cartoonish interests of the inhabitants ... maybe both.  This kind of adaptability is part of OMA's Almere project and is the goal of Stan Allen acolytes everywhere.

Just some quick thoughts.  I'll try to add more tonight or tomorrow afternoon.

MC

[Mike Coons]

One last note: the example of OMA's Almere is probably not too strong — Rem had, in many and specific ways, prescribed its entire development cycle.  Still, the scale is right, as is the variability — multiple architects, multiple uses.  

[Dan Caroselli]

I'm going to be at city hall all day................

Thanks, Mike, for pulling some thoughts together. I'll try to add some thoughts before I head out in the morning.

[Emmanuel Soriano]

Yeah, thanks Mike for the points.  I'll go over them before meeting with Greg tomorrow.

Thanks,

Eman

Emmanuel Soriano

soria...@gmail.com