The main question for the TA's design proposal for Russell Square was how in a limited space we can include numerous and sometimes contested activities. To accommodate these activities, the first design gesture was to increase the surface area of the park. Since the park could not be extended horizontally, we folded the ground. These folds in the landscape extended the park vertically and almost doubled its size. In addition, its various levels the "hills" which reach up to 25 metres, the valleys, the plains and the underground spaces offer different environments for activities that demand specific conditions. We believe that as the landscape becomes more heterogeneous, so will the communities that inhabit the square. Acknowledging that some sections of the community might find this fairytale landscape too intimidatingly eerie, the design offers a safety route that is more secure than the current general condition of the square.
Transgressive Architecture's design is positioned, not always comfortably, between two very different approaches. One approach sees the public space almost as a blank canvas on which users act in various unpredictable ways. This approach is demonstrated by Adrian Geuze and West 8's designs, especially their design for Schouwburglein Square in Rotterdam . The other method compartmentalises public space, for various but specific users, as seen in the redevelopment of Tompkins Square Park in New York . In general terms, the first approach advocates "Function follows form" and the latter "form follows function".
However, both these approaches have disadvantages. The categorisation of space that is expressed in the second approach is problematic since it presupposes who the public is and assumes that the public is a fixed entity. It also caters for a recognizable "public" or "community" and might exclude others, and thus erases the possibility of difference . The other approach, that takes its inspiration from the urban "void", Terrain Vague or Dead Zone, (places devoid of a programme and truly open) overlooks the fact that current urban space is highly regimented . The freedom it proposes through designing the public space as an empty stage is limited by the authorities' bylaws which exclude many activities and communities that are deemed transgressive.
While the T.A.'s design for Russell Square offers a specific environment for each section of the square it suggests neither what types of activity occur nor when or where they take place. We hope that the activities will find their place (momentarily) according to the ever changing landscape, which they manipulate and appropriate. These conditions of continuous present , created by the play between the pre-designed space and the urban nomadsą appropriation of it, are spaces of event . It is a truly inclusive and heterogeneous space.
Currently the TA is finalizing the design, which will be submitted as a planning proposal to Camden Council in the near future. We hope that this proposal will generate a healthy discussion with the local residents, urban nomads and the local council. Even if the proposal is rejected we hope that these discussions will generate new ideas about the design of public spaces.
As part of the continuous design research for this project we will be grateful if you could fill in the questionnaire and send it to 66East. The form can also be completed online.
Click here to view the Russell Square page from the exhibition catalogue (PDF 600K)