Ecological Urbanism - Introduction Part 1

'Ecological Urbanism' (640 pages, Lars Müller Publishers; 1 edition (May 1, 2010) edited by Mohsen Mostafavi with Gareth Doherty) literally arrived with a thud last week, the 650 page brick like tome touching down on the front step of the house with much anticipation. Tempted as I was, a number of deadlines made me hold back a few days before cracking it open.



A bit of background... The previous 2009 conference at the GSD kicked off the overall dialogue in April of last year - I was really bummed not to be able to attend, but happy that they have access to proceedings of which are captured here in a number of informative podcasts a few months later which really captured the essence of the conference in the actual words. The book was eagerly awaited, and rumors of it's massive size and breadth were floating around prior to it's actual release. A preliminary snapshot from the back cover:

"While climate change, sustainable architecture, and green technologies have become increasingly topics, issues surrounding the sustainability of the city are much less developed. The premise of this book is that an ecological approach is urgently needed as an imaginative and practical method for addressing existing as well as new cities.

Ecological urbanism considers the city with multiple instruments and with a worldview that is fluid in scale and disciplinary focus. Design provides the synthetic key to connect ecology with an urbanism that is not in contradiction with its environment. ... with the goal of providing a multilayered, diverse, and nuanced understanding of ecological urbanism and what it might be in the future. The promise is nothing short of a new ethics and aesthetics of the urban."

While book jackets are supposed to strive for hyperbole, 'a new ethics and aesthetics of the urban' is quite a goal, even for a book of this size. The book didn't however disappoint with a list of contributors too numerous to list in total - but spanning a range of disciplines from landscape architecture, architecture, urban design, planning, engineering, ecology, science, economics and social science to name a few. The marked mix of academic and non-academic voices was also evident and welcome - as this wasn't just another heady treatise from the ivory tower but a combination of application spanning theory and practice.

So in this introductory post on the book I wanted to focus on the early chapter by Mohsen Mostafavi to delve into the specifics that define Ecological Urbanism. I plan on tackling some of the other portions of the book in subsequent posts, but wanted to use this as a general review of the content and introductory material. Look forward to subsequent posts loosely based on the sections of the book: Anticipate, Collaborate, Sense, Curate, Produce, Interact, Mobilize, Measure, Adapt, and Incubate... stay tuned.

Why Ecological Urbanism? Why Now?
Mohsen Mostafavi

This introductory chapter addresses the question at hand that most people think of in relation to this or any other method of urbanism. What is it, and why is it the answer. Mostafavi adds the term 'why now?' which maybe is an indication of the evolutionary chain of the urban (picking up on threads of landscape urbanism and ecological design in a more meaningful and applied way perhaps?)

One aspect of the argument is the somewhat dubious claim that sustainable architecture lacks sophistication and requires a lifestyle change to accompany poor design. This may have been true in the fledgling sustainability of the 1970s and 80s, but the last 15 years, with apologies to Mr. Gehry's latest rant, has made significant contribution to better move design aware from pure art to a more balanced approach. That said, LEED and sustainability for all of it's good - has probably been detrimental to design as a pure form, but again - we're not creating disassociated works of art, but places for people that must exist within our ecological reality.

The second point, and the more important, is the question of scale. The scope of impacts of singular buildings limits the impact and a realization of urbanism and infrastructure becomes more vital links to true sustainability. As Mostafavi points out, "...there is a need to find alternative design approaches that will enable us to consider the large scale differently than we have done in the past." (p.13) Apart from a building, urbanism requires work within different and complex economic, political, social, and cultural frameworks. Additionally, true integration of ecological systems requires a necessary adjustment of scale (beyond the site) and strategies (interdisciplinary) to accommodate the larger contextual framework in which they operate.


:: Extreme Weather Events: Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, 2005 - image via The Canary Project

The integration of ecology requires one to define what they mean - in order to understand it's connection to the urban. Mostafavi points of the inherent difference between city and ecology - but also misses a key element in modern ecology by referring to as correctly, "...an emphasis on the interrelationship of organisms and the environment..." but using an antiquated notion of the concept by mentioning that this includes, "... an emphasis that invariably excludes human intervention." (p.17)

It is unlikely that any ecological science is still rooted in the purely non-human, as ecology seems to have embraced the need to look contextually at the impacts from humans as one of the organism within these complex relationships. While we may isolate interactions to more pure forms of biological focus, any applied ecology - in order to be considered relevant - has included humans as actors in the study for many years, such as called on by Paul Sears - and not just those subsets such as Human Ecology but discipline-wide to study and provide information to deal with human impacts on the ecosystems. In this case, perhaps ecology is even more of an appropriate vehicle, as it's changing ideology to include the human, and work within the environments humans occupy, make ecological urbanism much more viable of a strategy.


:: Alberta Oil Sands - image via Encyclopedia of Earth

This distinction of what we mean by ecology is important - particularly when used as a the foundation for a concept. Like other 'urbanisms' that get appended with a modifier, the definition of the modifier in this context important, as a word like ecology is fraught with misconceptions that could minimize the impact (like sustainable urbanism, or landscape urbanism for instance). You either make the concept impossible to define, or able to define anything.

The key to Mostafavi's definition is the idea of action and opportunity which I think is the root of the concept, as he mentions "...we need to view the fragility of the planet and its resources as an opportunity for speculative design innovations rather than a form of technical legitimation for promoting conventional solutions... Imagining an urbanism that is other than the status quo requires a new sensibility - one that has the capacity to incorporate and accommodate the inherent conflictual conditions between ecology and urbanism. This is the territory of ecological urbanism." (p.17)


:: Wheatfield - A Confrontation (Agnes Denes) - image via greg.org

Building on this idea of human ecology, the conversation drifts to 'ecosophy' including environment, social relations, and human subjectivity, with an "...emphasis on the role that humans play in relation to ecological practices." (p.22) No where is this more important to realize than in the design professions, making human significance, both the individual and the collective, a necessary component that should be at the heart of all design. Mostafavi concludes:

"Such a radical approach, if applied to the urban domain, would result in a form of ecological design practice that does not simply take account of the fragility of the ecosystem and the limits on resources but considers such conditions the essential basis for a new form of creative imagining." (p.22,26)

Rather than frame this concept as all new (thankfully) it does acknowledge a combination approach of old and new practices working in tandem, "...providing a set of sensibilities and practices that can enhance our approaches to urban development..." working towards "...a cross-disciplinary and collaborative approach toward urbanism developed through the lens of ecology." (p.26)

This brings to bear the idea of retrofitting, displayed by the Promenade Plantee in Paris, which was one of the major precedents to the modern incarnation of the High Line. Rather than demolish and replace, the retention of this is both ecological and strategic... "Given the undulating topography of the city, the promenade affords an ever-changing sectional relationship to its surroundings. As a result, the park produces a different experiences of the city compared, for example, to that of a Parisian boulevard." (p.26,28) As an adjunct, the High Line could be even more ecological, taking the same approach but adding dimensions of more appropriate, non-ornamental vegetation that pulls from the opportunistic vegetation that colonized the derelict elevated line prior to redevelopment.


:: Promenade Plantee - image via AmericinParis

The work of rehabilitation in sides can span from building scale (such as the Caixa Forum Madrid seen below) to the more expansive post-industrial development of sites such as the fabulous Duisburg-Nord Landscape Park by Peter Latz. Mostafavi mentions "...the site acts as mnemonic device for the making of the new. The result is a type of relational approach between the terrain, the built, and the viewer's participatory experiences." (p. 28) Which sounds to me, a bit like an human ecological urban approach.


:: Caixa Forum Madrid - image via David Grajal

The methods of taking on these sites draw from a number of examples with have been predominately featured in landscape urbanism literature, such as competitions for Downsview Park and the OMA submittal for the Parc de la Villette competition (won by Tshcumi) - both of which feature the idea of 'programmed surfaces' as opposed to deterministic design. The Downsview submittals, along with the much more prominent Fresh Kills Park competition entries - venture more towards the ecological, but the OMA submission for la Villette proposal was one of the best examples of interdisciplinary alignment of architecture, landscape architecture and urbanism that led to a re-emergence of landscape and ecology in the conceptual framework of designers.


:: OMA - Parc de la Villette - image via a spatial choreography of motion

The blurring of interdiscplinary lines, at least for some of us in landscape architecture & urbanism is long-overdue, and I don't think it will mean the breakdown of discipline-specific knowledge, but rather a better outcome for these projects. Mostafavi mentions this, but concludes the necessity versus working in isolation: "While a collaborative mode of working among various areas of design expertise is mandatory in thinking about the contemporary and future city, the transdisciplinary approach of ecological urbanism gives designers a potentially more fertile means of addressing the challenges facing the urban environment." (p. 29) I'd take this a step further to include a much broader interdisciplinary grouping that includes not just traditional design and planning professionals, but representatives from ecological, cultural, and social sciences as core members of any team.

Shifting to scale, the idea of ecology, much like what has been posited in landscape urbanism, is that it is a much more appropriate mode of inquiry to multi-scalar investigations as opposed to singular building architecture. Urbanism in it many forms seems to embrace this, and ecology, along with a range of human-centered studies, gives us the ability to understand and "...ultimately provide the most synthetic and valuable material for alternative multi-scalar design strategies." (p.30)

Mostafavi mentions the work of Andrea Branzi (Archizoom) and different modes of looking at urbanism, particularly one that is less based on planning determinism but on "...the fluidity of the city, its capacity to be diffuse and enzymatic in character." (p.30) This symbiotic urbanism looks at art, agriculture, and network culture, with a focus on "...its capacity to be reversible, evolving, and provisory." (p.30) which feeds into the idea of ecological indeterminacy in many concrete ways.


:: No Stop City (Archizoom) - image via Design History Lab

The strategic implementation of ecological urbanism is the action-oriented mode of practice - referenced in the text similarly to urban acupuncture, where: "...the interventions in and transformations of an area often have a significant impact beyond the percieved physical limits." While ecology is one frame work, there are myriad cultural and political systems that must be incorporated - and if not purely ecological in nature - can be organized and communicated in design through the use of ecological methods. "One of the major challenges of ecological urbanism is therefore to define the conditions of governance under which it could operate that would result in a more cohesive regional planning model." (p.30)

By taking on the specifics of urbanism (real, ugly, dirty urbanism) - requires a different idea of design. Affordable housing, use of vacant lots, code-rewriting, traffic, trash, obesity, funding, and all other issues that tend to be dismissed in Utopian ideals (or even our modern city planning proposals). We give this to municipal maintenance and operations to be dealt with, rather than thinking of these flows as systems to be accommodated during design and planning. Ecological urbanism ensures that the flows in and out of materials are addressed - and planned for in meaningful ways, building on the somewhat shallow sustainability policies that have emerged in many cities worldwide.


:: Naples Garbage Strike - image via Fire Earth

It is vital that we have examples of this working, such as those discussed in Banham's Los Angeles: The Architecture of Four Ecologies, which takes on the city not in relation to what we should create, but rather celebrates the opportunistic methods (good and bad) that led to the creation of the metropolis. This includes understanding and expressing the flows in our cities as opportunities for cultural expression. As Mostafavi mentions the ideas of water features historic role in connecting city to water, but "... on the whole we underutilize the unexpected opportunities afforded by ecological practice as well as the location." (p.36) I'd posit that a variety of ecological designers have been doing just this for years, but as singular sites or installations, and rarely as large scale public works (although Dreiseitl, Wenk, and others may be precedents we can explore).


:: Growing Vine Street (Buster Simpson) - image via Happy Hotelier

This introductory review is continued in Part 2.

Green Engines

I stumbled upon the site for Green Engines, a project of StudioMEB, which is a "... research platform that explores the potentialities of productive landscapes to generate a self-sustainable territory." I was immediately struck by their notion of productive landscapes and the focus of the research on landscape urbanism principles.



The interest in defining productive landscapes has grown (pun emphasized) and focused on agriculture - a reframing of the notion of 'productivity' in this context is of vital importance to a discussion of sustainability and ecological urbanism. The integration of a wider ideology of productivity (beyond mere economics) is at the root of these explorations. In the philosophy on the site, the concept involves a number of key features, which are summarized below:

:: belongs to a cultural construction, which adapts to the cultural landscape and the local environment
:: must be multifunctional within an integrated system of different actors involved in the same space
:: takes into account social participation
:: values the phenomenological qualities of the space
:: considers new models of mobility


:: image via Green Engines

The above fits a methodology that focuses on the central tenets of landscape urbanism, eschewing the static object oriented approach and involving a multi-disciplinary approach that looks at flexibility vs. determinacy in resulting form:

"The environment is not an object that can be designed, but a complex system of elements that create a network of interactions between them. The aim of the research of each case study is not to reach a predictable urban form or planning prototype. A new alternative future for the territory is based on planning strategies that take into account flexible dynamics, scenario thinking and processes over time, which relate with changes and re-adaptation. The selection of a specific scenario reflects choices and processes, among the possible options (policies, planning decisions, hypothetical events and plots) which generate the complexity of a new landscape for the future."

As a mode of operation, the team uses case studies with a specific approach that includes analysis, strategy, tactics, and actions. By incorporating a wide view of investigations, incorporating time as a critical factor, and interactions between elements as critical factors, providing a good methodology for landscape urbanism theory in practice by reinforcing their notion that. "landscape urbanism anticipates strategic scenarios and operational logics through a wide range of scale."


:: image via Green Engines

As a follow-up to their 2009 Workshop in Barcelona in the city of there is an upcoming workshop in Covilhã studying the rural-urban interface within the lens of productive landscape. Look forward to seeing more work from this group.

you hold the gun!

A call from submissions for a student-run architecture journal KTISMA from the University of Oregon,with a focus on the temporal, changing, and dynamic nature of architecture, landscape and urbanism.



ktisma
κτίσμα
ktis’-mah: thing founded; thing created

a publication edited by graduate students at the university of oregon’s department of architecture. a focused forum of discussion about environments; how they are created, imagined, interpreted, presented, and questioned.

each issue of KTISMA is a platform for the conversations within the school to provoke a discourse at large.

issue #1: “you hold the gun!”

” . . . he wanted to arrest the flight of a gull so as to be able to see in a fixed format every single successive freeze-frame of a continuous flow of flight, the mechanism of which had eluded all observers until his invention. What we need is the reverse: the problem with buildings is that they look desperately static. It seems almost impossible to grasp them as movement, as flight, as a series of transformations . . . ” -Bruno Latour, Albena Yaneva

motivated by Bruno Latour’s 2008 article “Give me a Gun and I Will Make All Buildings Move: An ANT’S View Of Architecture.” KTISMA asks for projects, of any printable media, that:

• approach the environment as a “moving project”–beyond its imaging as something fixed and static
• expand notions of communication (drawing, writing, photography, etc…) as an instrument of demonstration rather than representation
• resolve the breach between linear representation to complex manifestation
• demonstrate the multi-faceted and dynamic culture of architectural proposals
• anticipate time-based properties of the built environment: decay, growth, modification, transformation, durations, and intervals

submissions date:
6/2010

publication date:
9/2010

ktismajournal.com
ktismajournal@gmail.com

Landcast by Christian Barnard

Dubbed with simple terms as 'the voice of contemporary landscape culture' - LANDCAST is a new series of podcasts from fellow landscape architect and blogger Christian Barnard that approaches landscape media in a brand new way. With the help of radio documentarian Adrien Sala, the podcasts aim to be an irreverent and informative way to discuss landscape, architecture, nature and development.



The first episode featured Debra Guenther Landscape Architect and Principal at Mithun from Seattle - in a varied and engaging exploration of Living Buildings, vertical farms, the future of cities, and other cutting edge sustainable strategies the firm is working on worldwide.

I have yet to hear episode 2 - which should emerge around May 6th and features what (to me) is a familiar voice... but to others may register as a nasally drone... but don't let it turn you off... check it out.

An Experimental Landscape Architecture

Coverage of some of Alan Berger's work with P-REX on the Pontine Marshes has appeared on mammoth, the most refreshingly non-architectural of architecture blogs, borrowing a note from BLDGBLOG and Pruned in their fascination with the large-scale landscape infrastructural interventions that don't seem to make the pages of all but a few 'landscape architecture' media outlets.



The most interesting aspect of this project isn't necessarily the function of big-infrastructure or the ability to use plants to purify polluted waters. It's the re-framing of these projects from engineering-scale solutions to designed ecological solutions - which rarely seems to happen in typical practice. From MIT News: "The conventional way of tackling the problem would be to build a series of large water-treatment plants in the area, which covers about 300 square miles. But Alan Berger...has another idea. Because some plants absorb pollutants as water flows by them, carefully designed wetlands can clean up the countryside while preserving its natural feel and providing public park space."



This isn't new thinking, as there are plenty of innovative ideas using natural systems approaches for water purification from wastes and pollution at a variety of scales. The beauty is the shift from a engineering-led solution - i.e. thinking about this as an engineered product and using natural systems as machines, with landscape as container - to one of a design ecology solution - i.e. using landscape fields and incorporating natural elements and systems by adapting them to the inherent machinic function of nature with the inclusion of civil engineering expertise. They can inherently be design problems in need of a scientific and engineering back-up - which is a much more fruitful interdisciplinary strategy.

Make it a science or engineering solution - and rationalism will trump all. While we do use natural engineering and have been for years, rarely do we take a landscape architectural approach to these projects by infusing cultural and form-making aspects intertwined with physical composition.



Landscape architects often get pushed to the side when dealing with complex engineering challenges, due to the idea of technological rigor lacking in professional practice. To be honest, this is probably one of our professional failings - and one that will take time to mend as we gain in knowledge, but more importantly increase credibility as technically proficient professionals from our scientific and engineering peers.

While the recent push-back from designers to become more fluent in systems thinking and engineering has led to some interesting hybridization of projects, there is still significant silos in real practice regimes - and big infrastructure is still typically 'designed' by big engineering. So, do we need to become engineers to gain the professional foothold in these projects, or will projects like Berger's work lead to an expansion of the professional breadth of practice? I sure hope so - but it's going to take a professional movement, not a few projects and designers to achieve this. We need to forget the tired art v. science dilemma that has held us back and embrace both aspects equally - maybe spending a bit more time on the science to play a bit of catchup.

In the case of the Pontine project, which has been covered many places over the past few years, the idea of scientific experimentation is at the heart of this recent post showing small scale models to test design strategies. While mockups and small scale modeling of formal qualities is still relatively common - how much of that is science-based in a way that informs design solutions?


:: image via mammoth

This is an obvious gap in landscape architecture practice in need of some serious- one of the ways we as a profession can proactively approach to the problems of science fused with design. The need to reframe practice as more close to the definition (engaging in an activity again and again, for the purpose of improving or mastering it) versus the idea of merely doing work, is necessary. But we also need to engage different partners such as research institutions and universities - much in the same way theory needs to inform practice, science also needs to inform, and be informed by design.

In the case of the experiments for Pontine, some explanation on the plans from Berger that take advantage of the university setting to incorporate ways of testing before installation. Via mammoth: "Berger’s solution is to have the water move through an S-shaped course that slows it down to a speed well under one mile per hour. The Italian engineers of the 1930s built perfectly straight canals, since they were simply concerned with transporting water efficiently. But forcing water to meander through winding channels in a wetlands gives more water molecules the best chance of being purified. ”Inefficiency is how environmental systems work,” says Berger."

As mammoth points out, the experiments based on the above design goals allow for preemptive discourse about the final product. This is a different tack for landscape architecture, which either operates on a notion of applied scientific theory (use science to inform design) or on post-occupancy testing (use science to - but rarely doing scientific experimentation of actual design solutions - even those with high levels of ecological rigor: "This is an experimental landscape architecture. Not experimental in the usual sense within architectural disciplines — where it is more or less a synonym for radically avant-garde (though this is by no means a condemnation of such architecture) — but experimental in the scientific sense, rigorously testing the performance of various forms, to design a landscape which incrementally advances away from its predecessors. If we’re going to move beyond talking about designing post-natural ecologies towards actively constructing them, then developing modes of practice that incorporate experimentation will be essential. (Next: peer-reviewed landscape architecture.)"

I'd posit there is more of this going on than we know of, perhaps in the design/science firms that are blending landscape architects with ecologists and other scientists. But rarely if ever is the scientific inquiry part of the design process - and I love the idea of peer-reviewed project work where folks can interject into the success or failure of project components. Perhaps this is the new dimension of landscape architecture criticism.

Can we seriously undertake ecosystem design, even that which is based on existing science, without a methodology of experimentation to prove-out these new design solutions. Much of what we are designing and installing simply just doesn't work. We need to be better informed before and during design processes, and do a better job of incorporating scientific testing afterwords if we truly want to become leaders, and not reactive followers to engineers and ecologists, to the scientific dimensions of our profession.

Coverage of the project in more detail is found at MIT News, along with a link to a video of the installation:

Urban Crossings - Los Angeles

Picking up on the threads of the Vegitecture post on 'Crossings', a post on The Dirt made mention of the plans to cap a number of freeways throughout Southern California. "According to The Architect’s Newspaper, there are four separate projects being considered across L.A.: one in Hollywood, one in downtown LA, and two in Santa Monica. “Hollywood Central Park would be built atop the 101 Freeway on a proposed 44-acre site between Santa Monica Boulevard and Bronson Avenue. Park 101 would be built atop the ‘Big Trench’ over the 101 Freeway downtown. Santa Monica is hoping to cap portions of the 10 Freeway between Ocean Avenue and 4th Street, and between 14th and 17th streets, creating five- and seven-acre parks.”


:: image via Architect's Newspaper

One project in this mix with some real traction is the Hollywood Freeway Central Park - which in 2008 developed a initial feasibility study with AECOM as the consultant. The report goes through a mix of analysis and exploration, along with a public involvement process. The idea of knitting the fabric of two severed neighborhoods with elevated park space drives the significant cost for capping projects - aiming to fix some of the damage done in the initial freeway routing.


:: image via AECOM

A range of graphics include some typical analysis - as I'm always interested in seeing the old chestnuts like figure-ground analysis in urban design studies. I'm a fan of the figure ground as a tool, and this case in point reinforces the power of this tool to 'detach' from a system and make key connections.

:: image via AECOM

In this case, most of these retain some of the key crossings... but take advantage of the ability to reorient circulation to create interesting spaces and maximize connectivity.


:: image via AECOM

A range of precedent studies included notable capping projects like Millennium Park (Chicago), Big Dig Park (Boston), Olympic Sculpture Park (Seattle), and others showing examples of spanning roadways to connect disparate portions of the urban fabric.


:: image via AECOM

Another graphic that seems to be in vogue (drawing from some of the scalar diagrams of the book Large Parks) - giving a sense of size and proportion to other established large urban park spaces.


:: image via AECOM

The final concept creates somewhat of a linear park corridor, which is really a series of medium sized park periodically bisected with crossroads. The programs run the gamut from passive spaces to sports fields, sculpture gardens to plazas offering a range of uses - connected by pathways and crossings. There seems to be a range of possible options to use this new space that have been explored in many project proposals - from agriculture to mixed use infill - meaning a park is merely one option.

:: image via AECOM

The simple photo-montage graphics show some dramatic before and after shots of the reclaimed space atop what was essentially a dead zone below.



:: images via AECOM

Obviously time and economics will tell if this is a viable strategy to implement in our cities. The experience with the costly and issue-prone Big Dig has soured some on the idea, although the spaces that are emerging atop the depressed roadway is starting to pay dividends for a new public realm. Burying is one thing - spanning and capping is another, taking advantage of the existing configuration of roadway 'canyons' to reconnect spaces. My thought is that it is not the silver bullet, (more like a really expensive band-aid) but necessary (in lieu of freeway removal altogether) to strategically reconnect areas of the urban fabric that have been severed to a degree where health and livability are forever degraded. The expense means a surgical analysis is necessary to determine where to locate these for maximum impact, as well as how to program the spaces appropriately to make use of the space. There has been much renewed talk about this, so I imagine we will see more of these in the not-so-distant-future. And I think that's a good sign.

Download the entire report here for the full story.

[Fill in the Blank] Urbanism

I attended a pow-wow recently - aimed at discussing the state of landscape urbanism theory and it's past, present, and future implications for planning, urban design and landscape architecture. Amongst many other interesting thoughts (more to come on this), one aspect of the conversation that stuck in my brain stuck was the recent (maybe?) upswing in the use of paired terms ending with the term 'urbanism' to describe a range of theoretical positions related to all things urban.



The general definition of urbanism fits a wide range of situations, making it an evocative word with easy addition of a modifier. Via Wikipedia: "Urbanism is a focus on cities and urban areas, their geography, economies, politics, social characteristics, as well as the effects on, and caused by, the built environment."






I was inspired to do a quick Google search and glean all of these pairings - leaving many upcoming MONU titles in the future...

New Urbanism
Ecological Urbanism
Future Urbanism
Green Urbanism
Resilient Urbanism
Infrastructural Urbanism
Sustainable Urbanism
Emergent Urbanism
Participatory Urbanism
Walkable Urbanism
Everyday Urbanism
Real Urbanism
Clean Urbanism
Border Urbanism
Exotic Urbanism
2nd Rate Urbanism
Beautiful Urbanism
Brutal Urbanism
Denied Urbanism
Political Urbanism
Middle Class Urbanism
Paid Urbanism
Post-Traumatic Urbanism
Big Urbanism
Agricultural Urbanism
Open Source Urbanism
Opportunistic Urbanism
Instant Urbanism
Unitary Urbanism
Bricole Urbanism
Slum Urbanism
Networked Urbanism
Bypass Urbanism
Gypsy Urbanism
DIY Urbanism
Integral Urbanism
Inverted Urbanism
Vernacular Urbanism
Pop-Up Urbanism
Nuclear Urbanism
New (Sub)Urbanism
Informal Urbanism
Behavioral Urbanism
Temporary Urbanism
Braided Urbanism
Trace Urbanism
Market Urbanism
Propagative Urbanism
Radical Urbanism
Anti-Urbanism
Disconnected Urbanism
Magical Urbanism
Recombinant Urbanism
Guerilla Urbanism
Dialectical Urbanism
Stereoscopic Urbanism
Holy Urbanism
Retrofuture Urbanism
Digital Urbanism
Micro Urbanism
Parametric Urbanism







I'm sure there are 100s of others - but it's an interesting phenomenon. Have a favorite?

Thickened Waterfront from AALU

An email from Jorge Ayala from the AALU shows off some recent Landscape Urbanism work, in this case an academic workshop with a focus on designing a Contemporary Garden in Xi'an, China. I've included the full text from Jorge, and some of the images of the project that were sent.

Thickened Waterfront
AA Landscape Urbanism Garden Design
Xi’an, China



The parcel has a distinct character but a series of strategies will be applied in order to integrate the Thickened Waterfront into the general design.

WATERSCAPE STRATEGY
Along these lines, artificial topographies, rippled organizations of diverse water features and multiplicity of floating structures will be considered to turn the linear character of the parcel into a multi layered spatial domain. The diagrammatic approach towards the work with the material structures of the mini piers, retaining structures and engineering techniques will help to define a rich spatial condition which will help to add layers of experience to the arrival through the park to the waterfront.





THICKENED WATERFRONT
Spatial and three dimensional experiences: The arrival sequence into the Thickened Waterfront augments the sensations of the pedestrians or focalises the attention into strategically treated micro environments.

Several bands structure the proposal to create the different habitats and will be flexible to adjust to other proposals.



EDGE CONDITION
The work is based on an expanded idea of the edge, turning into a field of distributed spatial experience what otherwise is defined as a line or a rigid boundary of the water edge. The main idea would be to blur the contact of land-water seeking to encroach earth structures into the lagoon while bringing it inland in other areas.



MULTIPLYING EXPERIENCES
The pedestrian should be able to read and perceive a wide variety of material and spatial qualities in a compressed setting.


A series of individual ponds will host a diverse catalogue of conditions of light reflection, water depth, colour, planting, fauna and potentially human interaction (bathing, pudding pool).



These mosaics of water features will provide the medium for further interactions and enriched version of the ecologies within the park, incorporating expanded ideas of performance, spatial experience and environmental qualities.



Credits:
Thickened Waterfront
AA Landscape Urbanism Garden Design
Xi’an, China

Lead by:
AALU Tutors Eduardo Rico, Alfredo Ramirez
AALU Director Eva Castro

Design Team: Jorge Ayala, Hossein Kachabi

More on Digital Media

A follow-up to the interactive interview on Digital Drawing for Landscape Architecture Bradley Cantrell sent me a couple of links to the work he and others are doing in the digitial realm down at Robert Reich School of Landscape Architecture at Louisiana State University.


:: image via reactscape

The first is his own blog, reactscape.visual-logic.com, which primarily focusing on digital media and responsive environments in landscape architecture. From his bio, you get a feel for the topics that Cantrell is interested in:

"His own research and teaching focuses on using digital film and techniques to represent landscape form and phenomenology. This work in digital representation ranges from improving the workflow of digital media in the design process, to providing a methodology for deconstructing landscape through compositing and film editing techniques. Another of his research interests is creating interactive landscapes using devices which express site characteristics through ambient cues. A continuation of work started while he was at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, this research aims to strengthen designers’ analysis and understanding of landscape and the everyday use of space."

Some twitter links lead to thoughts on mechanization of farming and the modeling capacity of legos which set the stage for delving into an interesting mix of technology and the landscape worth exploring. A quick perusal of the rest of the site (if 'quick' is possible with all of the interesting tangents and links) yields a range of interesting work, notably the explorations of 'Ambient Space' (see concept model above), and and exploration of the abandoned Mississippi Basin Model, a large scale analog model for testing performance of strategies in the lower Mississippi detail region. As you see from the model images the systems aren't representational, but rather use materials that simulate functions to test the variety of scenarios.


:: MBM Model - image via reactscape

A more formalized site lab.visual-logic.com features a range of work conducted at LSU around design computing, as well as the research for a fascinating course 'Illustrating Ecologies' is compiled, along with other research and resources.



Without going into too much detail, I will offer the link and an invitation to explore for yourself, and will be posting some interesting finds from the site in the future. The potential explorations should provide some seeds related to new media forms and a reconfiguration of the means of representation in landscape architecture, which is far overdue. The combination of information gleaned from other sources, along with original research is fascinating.

Check out both sites, you won't be disappointed.

On Landscape Criticism

A great ongoing series of posts on Urban Omnibus delves into one of those topics that seems missing from the dialogue in landscape architecture -- that of real criticism regarding the profession. I don't mean the type of mindless carping that happens based on polarities of viewpoint or in response to the profession being declared 'dead'. For the most part, the concept of criticality seems absent from most thought processes, project work, review, engagement, discussion or interaction, save the occasional provocative essay or graduate theory class.

The editorials focus on the big 'A' that has typified design of building objects (i.e. Architecture) rather than more broadly encompassing little 'a' architecture that I feel discusses a wider range of design. As mentioned on the opening part of the discussion by Andrew Blum, 'On Criticism', the key question is scope in terms of that particular professional lens: "Is architecture criticism still architecture criticism? Is it still – if it ever was – about merely architecture? Or do the forces that change the built environment come from a broader toolkit: from urban planning, certainly, but also from the more engineering-heavy realms of infrastructure, or more policy-heavy realms of politics?"

Big 'A' architecture criticism seems to be at a crossroads - wondering in this context: 'Where Next?'. This seems driven by a perceptible shift to a new expanded era of urbanism and infrastructure and a continued disengagement from starchitecture and its inherent lack of depth. This is where the interdiscplinary and less-building-centric 'small 'a' architecture (of which landscape architecture and urbanism exist) is uniquely suited for this scale and scope. Aside from just neo-infrastructural systems or new, better versions of sustainability, this shift offers the opportunity for landscape architecture to insert themselves fully into this arena and fully embrace a dynamic new era of professional relevance. The question is, do we still continue on our current path of tepid critical inquiry, or do we embrace the need for self-consciousness as a way not of marginalizing ourselves but as a method for expanding our reach and relevance.

The need for art is not to be downplayed, as it the poetic is just as important as the technical. The difference is that it isn't a binary position as we have seen it, over the past half century slipping into a new versions of the art v. nature debate that has sustained the majority of landscape architecture criticism of thinking. As mentioned in Diana Lind's followup 'On Criticism 2' the dichotomy was best expressed in the broad viewpoints of Herbert Muschamp and Jane Jacobs - both in New York but worlds apart in ideology: "Jane promoted common-sense principles and ideas. You shouldn’t put a highway through the middle of SoHo; a street with broken windows looks unsafe and thus will encourage crime. Herbert, on the other hand, championed risk-taking — in architecture, in writing, in life." Lind expands that point by reinforcing the tomy, particularly in discussion less of building per se (Muschamp; Big 'A') and the idea of context (Jacobs, small 'a'):

"Architecture criticism has become too much of a discussion of form and ability, and not enough about context. We wouldn’t dare call Jane Jacobs an “architecture critic” now — but she wrote about how buildings function in a society. What Jane and Herbert didn’t do was write about architects. They both used the built environment to comment on how it symbolized something more profound about society. As architecture criticism has been pushed further to the outskirts of regular arts coverage, we architecture critics can’t further isolate the discussion by writing solely about an architect’s talent or a particular building’s aesthetics. Maybe it will no longer be a matter of choice. How can we write about singularity in this time of populism and interconnectedness?"

This idea of context, populism, and interconnectedness is the foundation of the landscape idea, so the ability for us to address bigger issues that . While a beautiful project gives us hope and makes us sometimes forget our trouble, does it really do anything in this larger context worthy of our praise. Alec Appelbaum 'On Criticism 3' delves somewhat into the, discussing this lack of context in relation to larger factors like climate change: "You’d expect those of us who “see” urban design to highlight projects that foster dialogue and blunt climatic calamity.Yet too often we acclaim renderings that airbrush conflicts out of urban scenes – like Rem Koolhaas’ mischievous new midrise, or Steven Holl’s constellation-like Shenzen experiment. Who will flag insidious design choices... and challenge them?"

It's interesting that Koolhaas and Holl are pulled into this argument in this particular way. Not that they aren't still significant big 'A' style practitioners, but compared to a Liebskind or Gehry, they represent a more robust side of architecture that is less focused on the building that has expanded into the realm of the urban and contextual. It's also telling that many of the more vocal and articulate writers on the concepts of landscape urbanism seem to be architects (as opposed to planners or landscape architects) many riffing on some of the conceptual terrain laid out by Koolhaas. That isn't to say some voices are out there such as James Corner, Elizabeth Meyer, Richard Weller, and Kristina Hill (to name but a few) are expanding the number of landscape voices out in the media. These and others have laid out a foundation of thought that is slowly starting to find a voice and some application in actual project work. Is this getting addressed in the large discussions (i.e. media) of landscape architecture, beyond fawning over the High Line or parsing the latest graphics from a high-profile design competition? Even our main-stream criticism is relatively hollow, consisting of question of technique over larger questions of relevance.

The stars are aligned an opportunity for the profession to step up and occupy some of this rich terrain. The transformation of the architectural scope beyond building, the focus on urbanism and infrastructure as more appropriate systems for building and growing, and the acknowledgment of the importance of context all lead towards a more expansive role of landscape architecture in the dialogue. While we as LAs seem to content to give more and more ground to others more willing and articulate to map this vision out, perhaps it is time to step up and make ourselves heard. Ten years from now we will look back at this as a critical turning point in the profession, and reflect on our ability to ... Could this be the marking of the end/beginning of an era?

Maybe this means the death of the profession in a traditional sense, but maybe that's not a bad idea?

More essays on Urban Omnibus to discuss, including a landscape-specific installment by faslanyc, so I'll split this into a couple of posts... stay tuned.

Terrain Vague

Via Death by Architecture, a recent call for papers for Terrain Vague: The Interstitial as Site, Concept, Intervention features an opportunity for work to be included in: "This collection of essays will focus on terrain vague—marginal, semi-abandoned space in or along the edge of the city—as abstract concept, specific locale, and subject of literary, architectural, or otherwise artistic intervention."


:: Detroit Urban Void - image via Planetizen

Definitely a topical subject as we investigate shrinking cities and reinvention of urban uses - so a chance to provide some context, whatever you call them: urban voids, landscapes of transgression, strange places, ruined, abandoned, potentials, or terrain vague...

The deadline for abstracts is 1 June 2010.
Completed essays will be due on 1 February 2011.