RBC: Mumbai on My Mind | Bhabha

Mumbai on My Mind: Some Thoughts on Sustainability   |  Homi Bhabha

:: Mumbai Slum - image via Lost & Found

“It is always too early, or too late, to talk of the ‘cities of the future.’ (78)

Bhabha uses this essay to frame the idea of sustainability and innovation, mentioning that “Any claim to newness, any proposal that we are ‘at the turning point’ of history, urbanity, or ecology, is at once a historical commitment and a tendentious and transitional proposition.” (78)

When we shift this new 'newness' towards the ecological, and the shift from old ideas of succession and stability - those that now naively “take courage from texts that seem to stress the crucial importance of ‘momentary equilibrium’ in ecological thinking…"  and evolving to the 'eco-logic in Guattari’s The Three Ecologies, which is "...defined as a ‘process, which I here oppose to system or to structure, [and which] strives to capture existence in the very act of its constitution, definition, and deterritorialisation.” (79)

To discuss process, we much include more than the spatial.  And while the overall issue of sustainability is inherently spatial, Bhabha expands this notion to focus instead on the ideas of temporality and the role that it plays in the agency of the ecologist.

“The most prosaic, dictionary definition of sustainability suggests that it is a city designed or landscaped in such a way as to ensure that continued conservation of natural resources and the surrounding built environment while providing the cultural, social, and economic base needed to support its inhabitants.  It seems natural that the normative ‘measures’ of the discourses of ecology or sustainability are spatial.  However, in that innocent-sounding phrase ‘to ensure the continued conservation,’ we move from territoriality or ‘ground’ – landscape, city, forest, industrial park – to an ecological temporality – the continued conservation  - that supports or ‘houses’ the agency and ethical activity of the ecologist.” (79)

Thus spatial components never existing in a vacuum, but are managed by the ideas of agency/activism in this context is:  “to intervene in the urban existence in the present tense: in the very act of its constitution, its being fixed-into-being.” (80)  

There is the added complexity then to "calculate the ‘time’ of environmental intervention.  Not ‘time’ is not as abstract a quantity, as discussions of temporality sometimes suggest.  When time becomes the medium of agency or the vehicle of urban ecological interventions, then… temporality becomes intimately connected to governmental policy and bureaucratic decree – code, site, and practice.” (80)  This is time in a more premeditated temporality, again, not relying on 'nature' to continue on its linear road towards a stable equilibrium, but shaped by the agency of the various actors working for (or against) it.  It makes one think of this agency as substituting for 'disturbance' in modern ecological thinking as a generator of change.

The notions then of spatiality, coupled with temporality and agency, enable an ecological urbanism to transcend the static models and become process oriented in the model of its ecological origins.

(from Ecological Urbanism, Mostafavi & Doherty, eds. 2010, p.78-83)

RBC: Zeekracht (OMA)

Zeekracht | OMA

A related follow-up to the essay by Koolhaas, this short essay explores Zeekracht, a master plan for the North Sea, driven by it's "high wind and consistent wind speeds and shallow waters..." making it "...arguably the world's most suitable area for large-scale wind farming."  The project master plan (below) outlines the strategy.  "Rather than a fixed spatial plan, proposes a system of catalytic elements, that, although intendted for the present, are optimized for long-term sustainability." (72)

From an ecological perspective the proposal looks to incorporate elements call 'Reefs' which are described as "simulated marine ecologies reinforcing the natural ecosystems (and eco-productivity) of the sea." (72)

 

The local implementation is "...designed to be sited, programmed, and phased to meet the evolving demands and plans of North Sea regional development," fulfilling the potential of the area as "...a major player in global energy production and trade through wind power alone." Aside from the energy potential, there is the idea thinking of this in tandem with ecological restoration, as "Farms developed along ecological zones and around existing decomissioned platforms create marine remediation areas, new recreational parks, and recreational sea routes." (72)



The project offers the example mentioned by Koolhaas as a "combination of politics and engineering" (71) that is essential to attain and ecological urbanism, attaining both productivity and remediation: 

images via OMA website
more from the official Zeekracht site


(from Ecological Urbanism, Mostafavi & Doherty, eds. 2010, p.72-77)

The Red Brick Chronicles - 'Advancement verus Apocalypse' by Rem Koolhaas

As I mentioned in the recent reckoning of the L+U blog, I wanted to focus on a number of recent texts that I've had the chance to delve into (by disconnecting myself from the nefarious teat of the RSS feeder)  Of significance is finally getting around to expanding on the initial readings of the book Ecological Urbanism (check out Intro by Mohsen Mostafavi, 'Why Ecological Urbanism?  Why Now?, in two parts here and here) which although gigantic, dense and brick-like, is also yielding some engaging content.


Thus in lieu of another option for a book with over 100+ essays and snippets from various authors, I'm going to chronologically post on each one on a mostly, time permitting, daily basis - in some cases just a fragment or two worthy of discussion - sometimes in more length.  Hope you enjoy.  Here's the first installment - follow by regular installments with the moniker RBC.

________________________________________________________

Advancement versus Apocalypse |  Rem Koolhaas

In this essay, which I gather is a short-form version of a presentation, Koolhaas provides a hybrid chronology of modern progress, focusing on  “…the coexistence of modernity and endlessly improvised, spontaneous conditions that don’t consume much energy or material. For me, a hybrid condition is the condition of the day.” (56)   Through searching history in the framework of ecological urbanism, he finds some precedents in the early indigenous knowledge of people, noting that over 2000 years ago, the basic tents of ecology were known, expressed in the vernacular, utilitarian architecture where people would “…build to be economical, logical, and beautiful.” (57)  This concept and focus on the site and siting of cities was echoed in the Ten Books of Vitruvius, through the Renaissance, and to the Enlightenment, which."...had a phenomenal effect on reason, in terms of triggering the apparatus of modernity in a surprisingly short time.” (58)

Thus along with the science and technology of modernity can the apocalyptic baggage best expressed by Malthus in the late 18th Century, and continued in more modern times through authors like Paul Ehrlich in the 1970s (Population Bomb) and even into today's discussions of peak oil and environmental degredation, referenced by James Lovelock (The Revenge of Gaia).

 :: Amazon Burning - image via expertsure

Koolhaas mentions an earlier formative experience with the ecological in the late 1960s, mentioning instructors working with tropical architecture that instilled a “respect for the landscape” and the ability to “look at other cities to see how they work , and to look at seemingly nonarchitectural environments.” (60) and expressed in attempts at the time to combine design and science such as Ian McHarg's 'Design with Nature' referred to as “...one of the most subtle manifestos on how culture and nature could coexist.” (62)

Koolhaas expands this with a quote from Frederick Steiner in‘The Ghost of Ian McHarg: 

“Almost 40 years ago, Ian McHarg proposed a bold theory and a set of ecologically related planning methods in Design with Nature (1969). While the proatical measures he proposed have been incorporated into subsequent design and planning practices, the theoretical implications have not yet been fully realized. Present-date forms of the model include the amalgam ‘landscape urbanism,’ with its focus on infrastructure an\d urban ecology, a hybrid discipline arguably indebted to McHarg while distinct in its avoidance of the more strenuous effects of his project.” (62)

In addition to McHarg the text mentions contemporary Buckminster Fuller's focus on the "...combination of nature and network...” expressed in this network diagram of global high voltage transmission networks (62) and also the work of the Club of Rome – Limits to Growth in 1972 (strangely enough a notable reason in Jonathan Franzen's recent book 'Freedom').

:: High Voltage Transmission Network diagram - image via GENI

The environmental intelligence of the 1970s was soon quashed by the market economy, as Koolhaas mentions, “...had a devastating effect on the knowledge that had accumulated at this point.” (65)  The current situation of economics gain over ecological approaches has continued since the 1970s.

Shifting gears a bit, the current focus on ecological urbanism is the role of technology, specifically indicative of the engineering/technology will save us paradigm epitomized by Freeman Dyson – quoted in the NY Times: “...proposed that whatever inflammations that climate was experiencing might be a good thing because carbon dioxide helps plants of all kinds to grow. Then he added the caveat that if CO2 levels soared too high, they could be soothed by the mass cultivation of specially bred ‘carbon-eating trees’…” (66)


In addition to noting these radical technological fixes, Koolhaas also bemoans the current trend of boutique green-was expressed in the application of greenery to buildings, mentioning that, "Embarrassingly, we have been equating responsibility with literal greening." (69), mentioning specifically the Ann Demeulemeester store in Seoul, the work of Ken Yeang and the recent Renzo Piano design for the California Academy of Sciences building as examples of this travesty of architecture.

 :: Ann Demeulemeester Store in Seoul - image via Style Frizz

 This confuses me, as while I am not as excited about the green application of vegetation, the inclusion of the specifically bioclimatic architecture of Yeang seems misplaced, as it seems an expression of ecological urbanism.  Instead, Koolhaas finds merit in building new eco-cities in the desert, mentioning Norman Foster’s Masdar zero-carbon city as "serious", and a step forward from the boutique natural interventions of Yeang and Piano, mentioning:  “...we need to step out of this amalgamation of good intentions and branding in a political direction and a direction of engineering.” (70)

:: Masdar City - image via Menainfra

While a somewhat interesting exploration, it is somewhat circuitous and peppered with Koolhaas' self-professed doubt in the overall project, mentioning in the intro "I did not assume that anyone in the academic world would ask a practicing architect in the twenty-first century, given the architecture that we collectively produce, to participate in a volume on ecological urbanism..." (56)  This perhaps colors the text somewhat away from individual buildings and more towards the massive, techno-centric solutions from Koolhaas/OMA - such as the large-scale wind energy project in the North Sea mentioned in the end of the essay.

It's obvious therein lies a distancing from the individual ecological building in the context of these bigger, more significant infrastructural interventions - which marks a distinction, notably with the architecture of Koolhaas being rigorously programmatic, urban-engaged, but typically non-ecological.  Maybe the realization that one building here or there isn't going to be the solution is valid and worthy of discussion?  Is ecological urbanism about large-scale ecocities or infrastructure, or the aggregation of interventions at a variety of scales - maybe even including buildings?

(from Ecological Urbanism, Mostafavi & Doherty, eds. 2010, p.56-71)

Reading the Landscape: A Reference Manifesto

As mentioned previously we are fully engaged in a group reading of the Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, and as promised, are providing some brief synopses of what transpired in the previous weeks dialogue are regular intervals.  Our first week was a soft launch, allowing folks to introduce themselves to the group, and then to comment on the Introduction by Waldheim, "A Reference Manifesto".

BACKGROUND: THE GROUP
For starters, I wanted to give a brief overview of our group members - so you have a feel for the who and what of this diverse array of contributors.  It's exciting to see the diversity (geographical, disciplinary, age, background, gender, and more) of the group as well as to have folks relatively new to LU theory and those with some experience.  A rough breakdown of two key metrics gives a snapshot of the group dynamics and global community made possible through our digital opportunities:

Disciplines:
Landscape Architecture/Design, Architecture, Real Estate Development, Planning, Civil Engineering, Graphic Design, Marketing, Sustainability Consulting, History and includes focus from Academia (both students and professors) and from a range of firms, universities, and experiences.

Locations:  
Shanghai, China; Portland, Oregon; Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; Washington, D.C.; Nashville, Tennessee; Boston, Massachusetts;  Guelph, Ontario, Canada; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Seoul, Korea; Charlottesville, Virginia; Austin, Texas; Somerville, Massachusetts; Los Angeles, California; Salida, California; London, UK; Manchester, UK; Rougemont, Switzerland;

WEEK ONE:  A REFERENCE MANIFESTO (Waldheim)
This is sort of a preliminary overview and snapshot of what's in the book - so it typically left the group with more questions than answers.  There was some good dialogue that referenced the distinction between those new to Landscape Urbanism and those with some background - as well as a few surprises from people that had initially read the book but were now revisiting it after some time.  The frontispiece included an image from Andrea Branzi - particularly his

The intro also includes the controversial and provocative excerpt from the text - outlining the 'discinplinary realignment' that places landscape in a more prominent position in terms of conceptualizing and production of urban space.

As a relatively open-ended intro, there were many perspectives - including some of those mentioned within the text such as global capital, de-industrialization and changes in the modes of economic production, increased importance of public infrastructure, decreased density & decentralization (surburbanization), cities as themed environments for tourism, commodification and homogeneity of form, waste & toxic landscapes, social pathologies, and prevalence of the automobile/paved surfaces, and the integration of ecological processes.

While Waldheim specifically frames these issues within the predominant themes of North American cities, many question the overall potential scope of LU - particularly in being able to address rapidly growing cities, density, and whether it is specifically oriented towards looking at suburbs instead of the city per se.  It echoes trends from a number of critics that the theory ignores specific existing conditions of growing cities and the rapidly changing nature of cities - folding into that concept the distinction of what is considered 'urban' today as densities, edge cities, and other non-central city agglomerations change our perceptions of the city.  There was also thinking about the different nature of deindustrialization between the ideas of Rust-Belt shrinking cities versus changes in the nature of production (a shift to the service economy) in cities that are still growing but changing in less physical and more social/economic ways.

Others mentioned questions related to the ideas of horizontality, the role of the car within, how is landscape defined within this context, the role of ecology, positions on capitalism, origins in postmodernism, and the role of nature (and our historical/cultural perspectives of it)...bringing in ideas from Leo Marx to William Cronon - as well as the role of Olmstedian designed pastoral scenery from the 19th Century.   Marx was brought up in terms of the concept of the triad of primitive, progressive, and pastoral views - specifically relating to the American viewpoint of its relationship with land derived from the frontier ethic and movement westward - which is a truly American phenomenon that has taken root in other locales that didn't experience the same relationship. This was mentioned as a source for some of the confusion related to LU theory - as it does focus on the progressive in that it acknowledges the technological and economic reality that influences our modern world (infrastructure, cars, decentralization).  The resulting view then is that by default, acknowledgment is akin to support.

Much attention was given to the concept of the 'horizontal field' as merely a "uni-directional urbanism" or in a broader viewpoint of a "multi-directional" schema capturing fluctuations of people, capital, communication.  Others   One reference connected this to Peter Walker's minimalist themes of flatness, seriality, and gesture - which provides a connection to postmodernism at least from the design perspectives of the 1980s. Even taking in the context of a field of operations, the horizontal field seems to be ambiguous, leading to questions of scale, how does agriculture fit in, is it relevant to the city or just the suburb, and ambivalence towards sprawl.  Others took a different reading of horizontality, seeing the references as "not to me so much a call to build cities this way but rather, an acknowledgment that they exist in this form." or that the views of horizontality are not limited to terrestrial or territorial expansion, but encompasses the surfaces at a variety of scales of rooftops and other urban spaces.  It is also important to mention that many point to the fact that Waldheim, although the originator of the term, does not speak for the movement as a whole - and others may have a more expansive viewpoint.

The idea of a new prominence for landscape architecture, a theme admired by many of the LAs in the group was also mentioned - whether as a "shot across the bow of the other design professions" or a true path to interdisciplinary methods with landscape architects as the synthesizing leaders of these teams.  Building on this idea is a broader viewpoint of landscape as a more holistic conceptual framework (not specifically applying to a discipline) that including the broad range of landscape elements, as well as the urban landscape that includes people and buildings as parts.  This distinction beyond 'greenery' to a broader view of landscape is vital - as there is a good amount of ambiguity in the word landscape that seems to stir up the already muddied theoretical waters - which definitely need to be addressed in LU as well as ecological urbanism and environmentalism in general.

Many offered ideas for ways of placing LU within larger theoretical frameworks such as New Urbanism, the work of Kevin Lynch (Image of the City), Aldo Leopold (A Sand County Almanac), Ian McHarg (Design with Nature), to a sprawling commentary (which I cannot begin to paraphrase in a meaningful way) covering foundations in philosophy from Aristotle & Plato, Copernicus & Aquinas, and Wittgenstein & Merleau-Ponty - attempting to place the concept and utility of themes in search of a Good Maxim in which to direct us. 

Many were and are intrigued by concepts within LU that attract many to the dialogue, such as process & systems thinking, catalyzation and staging, ecological thinking, focus on infrastructure, as well as interdisciplinary synthesis.  An overall theme however, which is the point of the reading and will provide some clarification, is that there are still a lot of questions and frustration about specifically what LU is proposing.  People mentioned: "...beyond simply describing urban processes as one-dimensional fields, LU theory would be better served by formulating a working framework for also analyzing the character of those phenomena." or "ways that these concepts can be applied for more useful ends that promote urban density and vibrancy rather than fetishizing their demise" or simply a desire to find "the positive side" of LU.

There was a strong desire for specific viewpoints on things like specific urban issues, a search perhaps for a working methodology of landscape urbanism. While some of these answers may be found in the text - there will also, like this chapter, result in more questions than answers... but then again, isn't that the point of urbanism?

Obviously this is a vast paraphrased oversimplification of many of the multivalent discussions at play  (even for a chapter so utterly lacking in real content) - so apologies for misrepresenting or missing any key points - so participants feel free to shoot an email or comment to clarify or expand on any of these points.

Next Steps...
We're currently wrapping up week 2, where we discussed Terra Fluxus (Corner) and Landscape as Urbanism (Waldheim) - so an update on both of these will be coming soon by members of the group.  Stay tuned for more.

Ecologies of Gold

Brilliant study of the meshing of urbanization and gold mining in Johannesburg, South Africa by Dorothy Tang and Andrew Watkins (on Design Observer).  As mentioned in the article and accompanying photo essay;  " In particular, the 80-kilometer mining belt between the two cities is riddled by deep-shaft mines, where companies built an extensive network of underground tunnels and moved large amounts of earth to the surface. These operations have weakened geological strata, disrupted natural drainage patterns and altered ecological habitat. The original semi-arid grasslands ecology is now converted to an urban forest, and sediment from mining waste has blocked natural waterways, unexpectedly creating wetlands with rich bird habitat."

 :: images via Design Observer

While mining and urban areas is not necessarily a different scenario (the many sand and gravel pits around cities have a similar pattern) - the cyanide-extraction method of gold mines makes them especially toxic neighbors - especially when coupled with adjacent areas of poverty.  The overall urban pattern that emerges pairs the informal settlements with gold mining particularly on the fringes of the urban area.

  :: image via Design Observer

 Some of the diagrams show the processes of mining on a macro and site specific scale - which is helpful for understanding the complexities of the process.

  :: images via Design Observer

 In addition to analysis, there is thought of opportunities and solutions that take advantage of these new ecologies that have emerged - as Tang & Watkins propose: "While Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni face grave environmental challenges, including contaminated soils, acid mine drainage, undermined land and scarce water resources, it is also important to recognize the possibilities found in the existing regional infrastructure of pipelines and the large quantities of land being released for use. Currently operating gold mining companies recognize the environmental challenges they face and are actively pursuing more sustainable mining practices. Informal settlements are finding productive political strategies and are maintaining a positive entrepreneurial nature. The scarce water resources of the Witwatersrand are a critical entry point for landscape interventions, especially in relation to the provision of sanitation and the remediation of acid mine drainage. Can gold mining and informal settlements, two seemingly disparate players in the region, provide solutions for the future development of the “Ridge of White Waters”?

 
 :: image via Design Observer

Read much more and see the entire slideshow here.

Some LU Definitions

A great resource for those looking for clarification on some of the terminology around Landscape Urbanism on the New Urban News.  A number of key terms and concepts (as well as their originating authors) are included, including:

"Analog Ecologies: Projects that attempt to model, analogously, the responsive behaviors of living systems in nonliving constructions or processes."

"Emergent Landscape: The urban form emerges from the interaction of complex systems (ecological, political, social, economic, etc) that make up cities and human settlement; urban form is the product of a complex confluence of a potentially endless set of factors."

"Invisible Infrastructure: Invisible infrastructure generally refers to non-tangible infrastructure such as wireless communications. More broadly, the term can refer to all forms infrastructure, such as power transmission lines, that often go unnoticed. A general tendency in development has been to make infrastructure more invisible and remote, even as it becomes more individualized and less communal. Landscape urbanism argues that this invisible infrastructure escapes the attention of the masses and that there is a need to make it visible for the masses to appreciate it."

"Radical Horizontal Urbanism: A vast mat-like field where scattered pockets of density are knitted together by high-speed, high-volume roads. Coined by Pierre Belanger."

"Structured Ecologies: The strategy of working with or alongside the substance and processes of dynamic ecologies: plants, waters, wildlife, etc."

"Void Framework: The voids of figure-ground diagrams are protected from “contamination by the city.” Open spaces, or voids, in a cityscape are desirable."

Also included is a key concept of Landscape, Landschaft, and Landskip - which I think is a key determinant that many folks miss in thinking about landscape in a purely North American was as 'open space greenery' and derived from the scenic viewpoint of "Landskip" and not in more broadly European terms as a unit of habitation  "Landschaft" that includes a more culturally inclusive concept.

Good food for thought (or discussion), so check out the entire list here.

The Urbanism Wars: AD v. CW

Turns out you have to read and write a bit in doctoral studies - which sometimes cuts down on the time for blogging... who knew?  But glean and collect I still do, and lots of good reading since the last dispatch on the ongoing dispute/feud/discussion/turf-war on who controls urbanism - aka the LU/NU debates (which should actually be the AD/CW debates for Mr. Duany and Mr. Waldheim). 

My google alert for landscape urbanism has literally blown up in the last couple of weeks - mostly due to the debate emerging from some more mainstream media - which is an interesting twist... bringing a smallish academic squabble out into the open.

:: image via Boston Globe

I make my bias clear as a landscape architect, I find much of LU compelling in both the potential to expand the practice of landscape architecture (process over product) and in larger ideas of dealing with modern cities (flexibility in responding to rapid change).  I like the concept of NU, but also take issue with some tenets (level of control for instance, determinism, generic transects, equity issues) feeling it's a great formula for a certain problem type that will continue to be relevant, but in it's present form is ill-equipped to handle many urban issues that need to be addressed.  Both will evolve through discussion, not through 'swallowing up' or destroying the other.  Others think differently - and dialogue is the generator of new ideas and solutions.  Unfortunately, we are not witnessing or participating in a dialogue, and  neither Waldheim or Duany is the prophet to lead us out of this. 

LU comes from an academic base, and is attempting to refine the inherent conversation (or add to it) by recognizing the need to acknowledge (i.e. accept, not promote) that cities are different, people are different, there is sprawl, there are lots of roads and cars, some people don't like density, the line between 'city' and suburb is not longer clear, etc.  Right now it is theory and discovery (i call that urbanism in the true defintion which should come from academia) that is trying to expand a conversation.  Thus there is not charter, and there are no rules or regulations in which to critique at this point, and there are few built works to evaluate as well.  This may come, or more likely it will assimilate into professional practice in a number of disciplines - not emerge as either a professional position (i.e. I am a landscape urbanist) or become codified into a system (such as NU).

NU comes from an established professional base that has a body of work and a well-tended methodology that produces good results for walkable, mixed use, community plans.  The successes and limitations are well documented, and the proponents have much sway of many types of developments (and many vocal adherents).  So, the questions are:   Does it have a wider relevance in cities, retrofitting suburbs, attacking rapidly expanding global mega-cities?  Can it apply to a wider demographic?  Can it adapt a transect model based on a monocentric model to the reality of messy, polycentric cities?   What it is is method and application (i call that planning, urban design, architecture) resulting in work but in need of new, wider discussion about how to deal with our changing cities and spaces.  How does this discussion take place if the response to any new idea is to hunker down and fight.

That said, neither is a panacea, and believe there is much to be found in a dialogue.  The conversation and media has been mostly to misrepresent the LU agenda (i'm sorry but that's what it is, plain and simple - hint - despite Waldheim's claims, there isn't an agenda).  Thus the reaction is not to reality and disagreement with a position, but knee-jerk, uninformed reactions to a constructed version by people feeling threatened by a different (note I didn't say opposing) viewpoint and wanting to tear it down.  The similar practice is done and has been for a while by those in opposition to NU (i am as guilty as anyone else of this) - oversimplification of complex issues.  This need to stop on both sides.  Criticism is one thing.  Uninformed criticism is useless, or worse, moves the discussion backward instead of forwards.  

Sidebar:  Can any other LU proponent beyond Waldheim out there (i know you are there, now hiding behind 'ecological urbanism') step up to this conversation, or are ya'll all too busy now getting high profile commissions?   Conversely, can we get some response from the West Coast school of NU, particularly from Calthorpe et. al?

 I blame the word 'landscape' which is just too loaded with preconceptions for people to get over the fact that we're not talking about sprawling density with green spaces and parsley in the urban sphere (just look at the image from the Boston Globe article - buildings and cars draped in greenery.  People think of landscape as landscaping, not the opposite of building.  Thus in looking at a fundamentally different way of approaching cities in an 'un-architectural' manner the word landscape detracts from what is fundamental (an un-architecturally driven urbanism).  This doesn't preclude buildings and density, and sidewalks and people - but rather isn't driven by building and then filling in the spaces in between.  Ecological urbanism, I daresay, is an even worse title.  Then again, the oxymoronic use of 'new' in New Urbanism has shown much success by focusing on the exact opposite of their name... so maybe there's hope. 

Or wait.  Better yet, let's all take a time out for a sec. 

Let's sit down and read each other's stuff rather than making stuff up. 

Or, rather than perpetuate this dueling - perhaps we can look at the larger issues of urbanism that could draw from many urbanisms, rather than the drama of a cat fight. 

Then again, our culture of reality TV and polarizing politics seems to appreciate a cat fight and drama over an informed conversation... on that note...  or your reading pleasure:

Recent Dialogue

Green Building by Leon Neyfakh (Boston Globe) with the sidebar Where its Happening
(yields another class Duany quote... that really gets to the heart of the debate)...

"“What you’re seeing is the New Urbanism about to swallow the landscape urbanists,” Duany said. His plan now, he said, is to systematically “assimilate” the language and strategies that have made his opponents such a white-hot brand. “We’re trying to upgrade ourselves. I’m not gonna say, ‘We’re gonna flick ’em off the table because they’re a bunch of lawn apologists.’ I’m gonna say, ‘For God’s sake, these guys took over Harvard!’ ”

A actually had a really great email exchange with Mr. Neyfakh prior to and after publication about some aspects of landscape urbanism, which is echoed in a follow-up piece discussing the historical development of the Back Bay Fens by Olmsted as a prototype for modern LU:  'Boston's long history with landscape urbanism'


A Tire in the Park  by Emily Talen (The New Urban Network)



Landscape Urbanism: sometimes an enemy is good to have by David Sucher (City Comforts)


James Howard Kunstler on Landscape Urbanism by Sam Newberg (CNU)
I can't find the actual article on Orion so if anyone has a link... anyway per this quote he's just parroting what others are saying in his 'clusterfuck' lens... for what it's worth.


The War Over 'Landscape Urbanism'   by Tim Halbur (Planetizen)

New Urbanism, Landscape Urbanism and the Future of Settlements by Christopher Ryan (Post Carbon Institute)

Landscape Urbanism vs. The New Urbanists (Brookline Perspective)

Discussion on Cyburbia from the Boston Globe Article

Isms, Ideology, & Landscape: Boston Globe Edition (Eric Papetti)
(a landscape architect's perspective)

Landscape Urbanism, New Urbanism, and the Future of Cities (Alex Steffen)

As you see, these aren't all anti- or pro- positions - but are reacting more to the war than the point of the war... which I think will happen with time.  Next year's CNU conference may be the biggest ever due to Waldheim & Duany there together.  Good for ratings.


Post-script:
Along a similar timeline, the Minneapolis Riverfront competition is definitely infused with a landscape urbanist perspective with teams from Ken Smith Workshop, Stoss Landscape Urbanism, Tom Leader Studio and Turenscape as mentioned by Archinect - 3-1/2 of the proposals hint at landscape urbanism. 

Another article from the WSJ talks with Adriaan Geuze of West8, making ample references to LU...


There's also some great dialogue about the concept of urbanism and the role of urban design in the book 'Urban Design' by Krieger and Saunders - a look back at the origins and development of modern urban design since 1956, and well worth exploring (stay tuned for a book review here) and giving some perspective on our constant ability to disagree, which will continue well past this debate and others... 

A related but not specific to LU story on Slate by Witold Rybczynski entitled: "A Discourse on Emerging Tectonic Visualization and the Effects of Materiality on Praxis: Or an essay on the ridiculous way architects talk"  revisits the tired metaphor of professional language to exclude, given the fact that most of this language emerges (yes i said it) from academic discourse (said that too) and not from praxis (again, guilty!).   Any journalism that uses Ted Mosby as an architectural model is suspect.

Upcoming:

Also we kick off Reading the Landscape with timely discussions of 'The Landscape Urbanism Reader' later in February, which is sure to yield some great discussion from a diverse group of folks from all backgrounds, regions, and discplines... entry for the group is closed, but there will be dispatches at points to capture the conversation... stay tuned.

More Hidden Rivers - NYC

An interesting post from Urban Omnibus from earlier in January entitled 'Grey vs. Green: Daylighting the Saw Mill River' is less intriguing in design concept that in larger idea of envisioning the expression of the variety of waterways that are hidden/buried/forgotten within our urban areas.  As referenced by Eric Sanderson through  his work on the fabulous Mannahatta project "The movement of water is universal. What takes it out of the ordinary is the infrastructure we have built around and in spite of it. Mannahatta notes that there were once 34.9 miles of “rocky headwater stream communities” and 14.2 miles of “marsh headwater stream communities” on our island, in addition to numerous springs, ponds, and intermittent streams."


The idea of  a more artistic expression comes out in the great image from the article.  The idea, as mentioned in the caption: "Spanning the corridor between the 42nd Street/Bryant Park BDFV station and the 5 Av 7 station, Samm Kunce’s mosaic “Under Bryant Park” is an evocative imagining of the root and water paths behind the tiled walls. ."

:: image  via Urban Omnibus - Photo by Zach Youngerman

The design concepts seem pretty standard fare visually, although the are made up of highly artificial and engineered system.  The authentic expression of 'system' seems an interesting challenge for designers, similar to restoration processes for the LA River which has elicited terms like 'Freakology' to describe the hybridized ecological system.

City Concealed: Staten Island

I previously featured a video from the online video series "The City Concealed" produced by Thirteen, a project of New York station WNET.  The series offers glimpses into some of the terrain vague of the metropolis by: "...exploring the unseen corners of New York. Visit the places you don’t know exist, locations you can’t get into, or maybe don’t even want to. Each installment unearths New York’s rich history in the city’s hidden remains and overlooked spaces." 

The alerted me to a recent video on the Staten Island Greenbelt, which is 2,800 acres of passive natural area and more traditional parkland, a short distance from Manhattan.

The City Concealed: Staten Island Greenbelt from Thirteen.org on Vimeo.

A bit of context from a location map shows the full extent of this agglomerated green zone slicing through the center of the island.

A close up shows some of the detail of the connected areas and the juxtaposition of the active and passive elements.

The proximity to Fresh Kills Park is obviously not lost on the potential for expanded greenbelt potential, connecting the southwestern portions to the new park, extending to the western shore of the island.

A quick tour of the recent videos has some great finds, including this one exploring the abandoned Hincliffe Stadium in Paterson, New Jersey and how it is slowly being enveloped by vegetation, and efforts to save this historic resource.

The City Concealed: Hinchliffe Stadium from Thirteen.org on Vimeo.

The City Concealed video series explores historical locations around New York City that are either off-limits to the general public, or are otherwise difficult or impossible to see. The City Concealed, now in its third season, is part of THIRTEEN.ORG’s original online video offerings for New Yorkers.

Destinations of the nine upcoming episodes include New York's last Greek Synagogue in the LES; the decommissioned Ridgewood Reservoir; the abandoned Ft. Tilden in The Rockaways; the closed-off High Bridge, plus a few more.

THIRTEEN is owned by the New York public media company WNET.ORG.

Aquifers not Aquitards

From the recent post on watershed boundaries, a reader mentioned the concept of underground aquifers and their relation to geographical boundaries and .  My title is in jest (sort of) referring to 'Aquitards' which according to Wikipedia is "a zone within the earth that restricts the flow of groundwater from one aquifer to another", but I thought an apt metaphor for our overuse and depletion of these amazing resources.  So in a crude analysis, the map of US aquifers is pretty amazing (here's a comparison of 'watersheds' and 'aquifers' in two maps with some context of states and cities (images from National Atlas mapping tool)

aquifers

watersheds

While many aquifers develop in tandem with surface waterways, others are disconnected from these sources giving them different patterns.  Ancient sources are often tapped, with draw-down causing these to be depleted much faster than they are recharged.  One of the most familiar, the 10 million+ year old Ogallala Aquifer (synonymous with 'High Plains Aquifer') that supplies water to the agricultural bread-basket of the world - centered in Nebraska and spreading from the southern tip of South Dakota into the northern panhandle of Texas.  

:: image via Wikipedia

I hadn't considered the number of aquifers and their distribution (another great tool is an online mapping application from National Atlas, found here), but it's interesting to see the difference between more broadly based, central aquifers (not specifically linked to a river) like the Ogallala, or in Oregon the Pacific Northwest Basaltic rock aquifers (unlike the Columbia River based systems to the north.  These more agriculturally oriented aquifers can be compared to small scale aquifers like the Biscayne which supplies drinking water to much of Central Florida.

:: image via USGS

The interactive mapper allows you to zoom in on state & county boundaries, as well as locations of significant cities, to see the relationship of urban agglomeration to aquifers, for instance a closer look at the area centered on Chicago (mapped from the National Atlas).

The cause and effect of cities and aquifers is probably more significant in the impacts of urbanization on water supplies (both through depletion and pollution) and the delicate interaction between surface and subsurface conditions.

:: image via Wikipedia

While subsurface conditions do exist separate from visible surface conditions, there are impacts as many rivers as charged with these underground sources, and depletion (and diversion) has caused some rivers to no longer reach the oceans - such as the Rio Grande and the Colorado (anyone guess the reasons) or the filling of traditionally large reservoirs like Lake Mead and Powell - creating significant water scarcity issues in certain metropolitan regions.  Another great lens to look at cities, so more on this to come... seems the hydrological cycle is tied to everything we do.

:: image via EDRO

Environmental Urbanism Panel Discussion

As an addenda to the previous post, on Chris Reed's lecture, a round-about summary of the panel discussion that followed.

Panel Discussion - Environmental Urbanism: 

Ecological Design for Healthy Cities

The panel was moderated by Peter Steinbrueck, with Reed joined by additional panelists including Randy Hester (who lectured the previous evening on Design for Ecological Democracy) and Frumkin (newly installed as Dean of the UW School of Public Health).  Definitely a diverse group which ranged into ecological democracy and public health, paired with Reed's landscape urbanist approach - which offered a potentially interesting exchange of ideas, the result was less than satisfying.  A summary of some of the highlights.

The Potential for Public Health (HF)

Dr. Frumkin has written quite a bit recently about Biophilia and it's usage in a wider arena of public health, and started the discussion with a summary.  The evolutions from Environmental health (dealing with Toxicity), Urban health (focused on the urban poor), and Health Promotion (typically behavioral changes) could be married to create a new approach to urban environmental health.

The key concepts necessary for this were response to equity, considering differing health disparities, and the development of a viable body of evidence-based design strategies (proven through scientific methods) that achieved the dual public health goals of efficacy and safety.  He mentioned that design, although backed with some new environmental science, is not evidence-based, and this would make it difficult to convince public health officials of its worth, due to lack of scientific data.  While Frumkin's ideas of expanding the realm of biophilic design and evidence-based concepts to cities was interesting, a quick reading of some of his reading work shows that a mere translation of site-scale biophilic concepts to public scale is difficult.  The other issue is that there is a definite problem with balancing the cultural aspects of design with the scientific models - to avoid a overtly deterministic reading and application of ideas.

Design for Ecological Democracy (RH)

Not having a chance to hear Hester's talk from the previous evening (and only having skimmed his new book) it's difficult to capture the essence of his idea, but as he mentioned - it involves design that supports values, specifically democracy, equity, access to nature.  As he mentioned, in this context, place matters, and he outlined 3 approaches:

1. The Uniqueness of Place matters to our health (there are different flavors of democracy, much like there are different systems of ecology.

2. Awareness of Personal Ecology: Design and form matters

3. Applying Democracy and Ecology - both can be informed by key principles but are influenced by external forces (for instance free-markets) which augment their level of success.

Our typical mode of operation currently, in an age of consumerism, is that we get democracy, but rarely give back to it - and similar factors are at work in our relationship with ecology.  Take but no give.

Natural Processes & Community (RH)

Requires understanding through experience, ecology of knowledge which leads to stewardship. access to wild nature, but innately this has little evidence (other than anecdotal study - nature=good).  Connecting this back to design, Hester mentions that access to constructed nature, we want to experience nature, but also appreciate the mentorship of the designers intervention - teaching through design.  In this way, we can connect something simple, like a species of bird, to a much larger process of ecological function.

Interaction with Ecology (CR)

Reed mentions that one aspect is that it isn't a duality of nature/city that we need to provide access to, but to provide the same range of interactions to those inside the City... He defines three concepts 1) Wilderness preserve - outside; 2) Central Park - cloistered; 3) interactive ecology - inside and incorporated into the fabric of the urban area.

Landscape Urbanism Theories (CR)

The question posed was how did these connect to public health, but Reed strongly cautioned against a focus on evidence - arguing for the cultural aspects of design that can't be quantified.  In his terms, the concept of health is closely tied to ecological principles of the work - such as survivability and resilience - things found in healthy ecosystem.  Most interactions with nature are anecdotal, and the research should fit within design strategies of diversity and choice for users.

The project work, particularly small scale solutions, involve the testing of theories in metropolitan environments, trying out ideas, innovations, materials, and venues - and experimenting with small-scale ecologies.

The project work, particularly small scale solutions, involve the testing of theories in metropolitan environments, trying out ideas, innovations, materials, and venues - and experimenting with small-scale ecologies.  He mentions the role of the designer changing to accomodate monitoring over time, with landscape architects taking over more roles and responsibilities.

He also mentioned the upcoming ideas of Corner's work on the Seattle Waterfront, an opportunity to apply some landscape urbanism principles (but something developed in context).  The major opportunity is to rethink large scale systems, and redirect existing resources (waste heat, stormwater) in looped systems available in urban agglomerations.  In short, it becomes a wholly economic idea to push an ecological concept because they have value that needs to be quantified (this is where we need evidence)

Unified Field Theory of Public Health, Ecology, and Landscape Urbanism (all)


Frumkin:  Sustainability is a model - 3 legged stool and ability to specify outcomes to acheive prosperity, equity, and social goals.

Hester: The Intention of the System - develop a shared language; there are three different languages that exist: 1) those that are different, 2) those that are words for the same thing (different disciplinary languages - potential for obfuscation), and 3) those that are purposely convoluted (making something simple sound very complex - which leads to it being the next hot thing.

Reed:  Defending language, there are many ways to use it which are all appropriate (public, private, academic) - these different modes have the same principles.  We talk in public in pragmatics (design informed by professional perspectives, using disciplinary language, a different language for structuring projects and frameworks for projects,  They are in competition, but able to co-exist.  Rather than focus on language, Reed sums up the point (in what I think is the best quote of the day):

"The goal should be to use social/ecological dynamics that are flexible for futures we can't imagine."

Planning for these Spaces (CR)

There is the need to determine what we know, and what we can't know - thus the need for open-ended projects.  Some models of determination include preparedness planning - looking 30 to 40 years into the future to plan for spaces.  This will involve working at a wide range of scales - with a range of resources, for the entire lifecyle

Ephemera

• Need to plan for aging populations - loss of ability to drive and less mobility (HF)
• Look at co-benefits of designing for the old, the young, the disabled - all with specific by interrelated needs for space (RH)
• The approach to research/evidence based design requires new ways of working together, identifying which types of issues to accomodate (HF)
• Define the outputs for a range of systems, redirected within the city (CR)

Summary

Honestly, what could have been a really engaging dialogue of disparate (but related ideas) was somewhat handicapped by poor choices of questions from the moderator and audience led to a mishmash of  concepts - rather than a response and relation to the topics offered by Reed (which I guess I was predisposed to want)... the divergence from the original presentation was problematic, and the trying to tackle public health, ecological democracy, and landscape urbanism under a wide banner of 'Environmental Urbanism' left me feeling like in trying to do it all, nothing was accomplished.

While Frumkin had ample time to offer thoughts on public health implications, the focus on evidence based design was not fully discussed, and was divergent from concepts of ecological democracy (at least in this context.  Perhaps an all day exploration would yield results, but a short panel discussion was not enough to even ask, much less discuss, many of the relevant questions.

Ecology.Agency.Urbanism

I warn the reader that my take on the recent NOWurbanism lecture featuring Chris Reed, Randy Hester and Howard Frumkin may be skewed by a really bad cold and the influence of massive doses of cold medicine, along with spilling an entire water bottle inside my bag that literally muddied my notes into a semi-decipherable pulpy mess.  As all histories are individual, this will be my reading of the nights events (and I fear I will not do them justice).  But then again, perhaps this is the perfect storm of dissociation in which to warp and skew the voices into a coherent narrative.

I was really excited to hear from Reed, Principal at Boston-based Stoss Landscape Urbanism and adjunct associate professor of landscape architecture at Harvard GSD.  As recipient of the 2010 Topos International  Landscape Award, "...in recognition of the “theoretical and practical impulses the firm provides to the advancement of landscape architecture and urbanism as dynamic and open-ended systems.”  As a practitioner who embraces the project-oriented aspects of landscape urbanism, I think Reed is unique in straddling the line between theory and praxis - and approach that is often attempted, but rarely done in a legible way.  I was keenly focused on finding out the methods for achieving this balance.

Ecology.Agency.Urbanism

The bulk of Thursday's time was given to Reed's lecture entitled 'Ecology Agency Urbanism' in which he frames landscape and ecology in a context beyond the current concepts of 'sustainability' and 'LEED', arguing for the 'agency of ecology' that is not used as a palliative but as an instigator.  In our search for a positive performative approach, we often rely on the crutches of simple definitions or rating systems, which move towards luke-warm, incremental changes, but not paradigm shifts.

Some History

Reed first frames some of the historical elements of ecology as it relates to planning and design, mentioning Ian McHarg's ecological assessments (inventory, mapping, overlay) and giving value systems to data to use for design and planning-based decision-making.  While acknowledged as important in elevating the discussion, there is also the flip side of criticism's of this objectivty and quantification of processes, alluding to the lack of a cultural lens in which to perform interventions with this information.  The most interesting idea, according to Reed, from McHargian theory was that of 'propinquity', an innate acknowledgement of the proximity, but also the kinship of the environment and it's actors - aligning the needs of the people with that of the surrounding ecological landscape.

:: image via Gardenvisit

He follows this with the next phase of landscape ecology, best expressed in the work of Richard TT. Forman which "catalyze the emergence of urban-region ecology and planning", using the concepts of matrices, interconnections, and networks to express exchange of materials.  The major contribution of this is the visual, using mapping to acknowledge not a static ecological system, but to facilitate flows that observe an active and dynamic nature.   On a practical front, Reed mentions the work of Richard Haag and George Hargreaves as innovative early examples of built projects using these environmental dynamics as generators of form under the mantle of landscape architecture.  The realizations contributed to a conceptual shift of ecology from the static (equilibrium theory) to one that included fluctuations in response to disturbance and change.

:: Louisville Waterfront Park (Hargreaves) - image via Hargreaves Associates

The final phase came in some of the early large scale landscape competitions, such as Downsview Park in 1999, which featured time as part of the design brief.  All of the entires worked time into the solutions, which laid some foundations of modern landscape urbanism theories of indeterminancy.  Not the finalist, but of interest was the proposal from James Corner and Stan Allen, "Emergent Ecologies, which is described on the Downsview site: "The framework consists of an overlay of two complimentary organizational systems: circuit ecologies and throughflow ecologies. These systems seed the site with potential. Others will fill it in over time. We do not predict or determine outcomes; we simply guide or steer flows of matter and information."


Four Tendencies
The next section discussed the 'Four Tendencies' that have emerged into a set of typologies of ecological systems, summarized by Reed here (and hopefully captured in some sense of legibility):

1. Structured Ecologies:  Active habits of plant growth, water movement, habitat use - manipulated over time in response to change, factoring in resiliency and incorporating landscape as a dynamic field.


2. Analog Ecologies: Use ecological elements to achieve non-biological products, epitomized in the work of Ned Kahn and Chuck Hoberman.


3. Hybrid Ecologies:  Responsive design systems that tap into large scale system dynamics, including human and non-human interaction in space.


4. Curated Ecologies:  Structured interactions with dynamics over time, not under specific control, but poked and prodded - designers role shifts as project demands.

The work evolved from the Harvard GSD, particularly the work of Nina-Marie Lister, for a May 2010 event 'Critical Ecologies' which synthesized the historical and current practices of biology, horticulture, and anthropology as antecedents to design.  (need to find out more on what happened here, as it sounds like a great event with some amazing speakers.

Work of StossLU

In the next part, Reed explained some of the work of Stoss, to give a physical reality to some of the ideas of open-endedness and concepts in action. To provide a framework for these approaches, these were intermixed within a number of larger ideas.

Thicken the Surface:
Using the concept of multiple uses and meanings for land, imbued with both form and performance - but not strictly in a sculptural sense.  This best expressed in Riverside Park, in New Bedford, Massachusetts, an eco-park that elaborates the performance aspects of topography, with formal sculptural qualities as a result of the underlying processes.

 

:: Riverside Park - images via stossLU

Draw on Local Practices:  
The project mentioned was the Competition for the Herinneringspark in regional West Flanders, Belgium, which used ephemeral interventions over large spaces for this historical WW II site - specifically focusing on agricultural cycles to highlight specific forms.  (sorry, couldn't track down any pics on this one)

Flexible Spaces for Social Interaction:
Using the Erie Street Plaza in Milwaukee, Wisconsin as an example, mentioning the patterning of materials (lawn and pavement) and the interplay as a randomized surface that allows for a flexibility of uses.  The other aspect of interest was the connection to the water table and the fluctuating levels of moisture and the use of steam to melt portions of the snow for year-round use.

:: Erie Street Plaza - image via Architect's Newspaper

Open Ended Design:
The garden festival in Grand-Metis, Quebec is the example for open-ended design, 'Safe Zone' was designed with simple materials in new forms, for a flexibility of uses... a play area, but not prescriptive, rather a safe and injury free surface for experimentation and adaptable play (one as Reed mentions, kids get intuitively, but adults take time to adapt to)...

:: images via playscapes
(more pics here on L+U)

Civic Scale:
A more expansive explanation included the concepts of civic scale, expanding some of the more ephemeral and small-scale interventions into significant projects in urban areas.  One example Reed noted was the Fox Riverfront in Green Bay, Wisconsin, which is built above a sheetpile walll, and required the manipulations of various surfaces to accomodate a range of spaces.  The stepped benches form seats and chaise lounges, reacting to the different heights of the subsurface conditions.

:: image via Minnesota Public Radio

The overall site also responds to the flooding conditions that come up and over the bulkhead, creating a reactivated civic space while simultaneously incorporating a functional piece of civic infrastructure.

:: image via National Design Awards

Engaging/Recalibrating Infrastructure
The representative project for this concept was the controversial (locally) competition for capping the Mt.Tabor Reservoirs in Portland.  Stoss's concept was one of the more innovative, blending a new ecology while creating a social spaces.

:: image via National Design Awards

An Integrated Project: Lower Don Lands


A larger example of a project was the competition for the Waterfront and Lower Don River area in Toronto, Canada, which Reed explained in a bit more detail.  The concept (the competition eventually won by MVVA) by Stoss offers a chance to provide an integrated approach, with a goal towards both restoration of the Lower Don River and the subsequent urbanization.  This river first, city second does resonate with the landscape urbanism principles of new form-making driven by landscape/ecological processes.

:: image via The Torontoist

The condition of the existing 90 degree bend of the river, and the need for a more modulated river/lake interface required designing a river, which had both a performative and aesthetic requirement.  This involved a couple of what Reed refers to as principles and flexible tactics:

1. Amplify the Interface: between the river ecosystem and the restored estuary
2. Hybridize the Parts: changes between armored and porous materials, restoring the marsh condition and then letting the ecological systems take over, which provides flood control while creating spaces for urban activities.
3. Modify the Harbor Wall:   establishing a vocabulary of marshes and channels, which form courtyards as catalysts with flexible programs.
4. Unique Building Typologies: Flexibility of form, and flow of landscape across spits and islands, then up the faces of the buildings - green machines.

:: image via The Torontoist

:: image via Penn Design

As Reed mentioned, this provides an example of using ecologies as generative forces (agencies), which as seen from the above examples provides a snapshot into the conceptual framework that is applied to projects at a variety of scales.  Be sure to check out the full range of project work on the Stoss website and get more information on some of these projects mentioned.

Stay tuned for a synopsis of the Panel Discussion coming in a separate post.
Thanks to all the great folks at UW, as well as Chris, Howard, Randy, and Peter for the great after lecture discussions and dialogue.

NOTE: Anyone in attendance wanting to clarify, contest, or expand any of these thoughts, feel free to comment.  Look forward to hearing more.