Reply To: The Fun Theory

[Trace One]

It’s a very good topic – I love the piano steps..but why is not Olmsted’s Prospect Park, that paragon of democratic values and passive recreation in the landscape, not part of the ‘fun theory’…? Or is it..
I do not know any other examples, but I am going to strong- arm my fellow LA’s to consider it in their designs..As long as not too energy-expending ..what was the carbon footprint of the piano steps, compared to regular steps?

Now that I think about it, aren’t properly designed steps fun – it is the 7-8″ riser with the short 12″ tread that makes it painful..

I can think of two sets of steps that were fun through design – at U of Penn, the campus design (highly controversial as to who it is attributed to..) has a set of long steps, 3″-4″ risers, 2″ to 4’ treads, where every step is on a different foot – it feels like a back massage..!
and anyone who grew up in Beirut knows the ‘stinky steps ” so called because of their use as a bathroom by men over many decades..But they were 1,000- 2-000 steps that one could just run down, to get to the elementary school..the urine smell adding some element.. hard to say what..
so is ‘fun design’ better done as just ‘good design ‘ – the standard concrete 6-7″ riser and short 12″ tread we have long known to be absolutely wearying..Compare to the lovely steps at Dumbarton Oaks…