Activity #2

Jennifer Rios

Activity #2

For people who have lived in cities their entire life, it is very difficult to break away from the usual sightings of buildings, traffic, and mass amounts of people. Although there are parks scattered around many cities, they usually contain gates around the perimeter or have an entrance fee, as if intentionally attempting to seclude parks from people. I was told by a classmate to visit the New York Botanical Garden, which I thought would be a great place to experience the scents and sights of grass, trees, and plants that are unusual to me, since “new developments spreading beyond the cities are reducing cities and countryside alike” (Jacobs, 6). On my way to the garden, I felt as if I was not going to have a valuable experience since I believed that there was nothing I could possibly appreciate from a large amount of grass, trees, and plants on display. I even considered not going to the garden and choosing another place to visit for this activity instead. Once I got to the garden, I had to pay in order to be able to enter the World of Plants exhibition. Through this display, I was able to see vegetation from tropical rainforests, the African deserts, and aquatic plants as well. After spending some time and analyzing everything that was on display, I realized that I would have regretted not going to the New York Botanical Garden because after an hour of walking around this exhibition, I was able to learn and see other forms of life that I would not otherwise see in the city. I believe that places such as this garden should be promoted more often and should also be free to the public. If free entrance to this attraction is not an option, the entrance price should definitely be lowered so that a larger number of people would be able to benefit and learn from this experience.

In terms of Jane Jacobs, I do not feel that the New York Botanical Garden reflects her perspective of “Mixed-Use Development” because of the fact that the garden is fenced and an entrance fee is in place. These restrictions can cause limitations to many people who would like to experience the Botanical Garden but are not able to as a result of the entry price, causing the garden to contradict the idea of it being used by a variety of people for different services. Therefore, as a lack of Mixed-Use Development, Jacobs’s principle of “The Case for Higher Density” is also affected since these restrictions cause a lack of high density of people to take place and experience the garden. In regards to the “Bottom-Up Community Planning“, I do not believe that the Botanical Garden supports this idea because of the fact that this principle and the garden are not relevant in the sense that the garden was not built by the community. Instead, this garden was built by the judgment of outside experts who decided that “mush like this must be good for us, as long as it comes bedded with grass” (Jacobs, 7). Therefore, it is believed that as long as cities have scattered patches of grass, it would be beneficial for the community, which coincides with “Cities as Ecosystems” principle. I believe that such open areas as the Botanical Garden are necessary elements of a city since it helps provide a balance between the city life and life surrounded by mother nature. Also, I feel that this supports the fact that some form of vegetation would be beneficial for people in cities, in order to get away from the routines of the city life.