Unlocking Landscape Urbanism

Right before I took off on my travels, the brand new Landscape Urbanism website launched with its first issue.  Due to the rigors of travel (you know, scenic vistas, wine, great food, etc.) I was not able to dig into the content before I left - but finally did manage to get all of it absorbed. And there's a ton of great content, as founder and editor-in-chief Sarah Kathleen Peck has assembled a wonderful group of editors, advisors, and amassed a great initial take on LU on this issue.

A bit about the overall concept of the site.

"Landscape urbanism (dot) com is a website for and about landscape, architecture, and urbanism—a resource and ongoing publication for people interested in cities, landscape, and design.  Landscape urbanism is an idea that process matters in design, that collaboration between disciplines is critical, and that complexity should be embraced as part of urbanism and landscape architecture. While many have argued that the ideas of landscape urbanism are too undefined or complicated, we think that through this publication and website, we can better explain and explore the ideas of landscape urbanism."

I think the key to this site, and perhaps it's most engaging idea, is the concept of a forum for understanding the concepts around landscape urbanism.  The ongoing debate varies widely, and to date there hasn't been an attempt to collect and more importantly engage with some of the key issues that make up the foundations of LU theory and practice.  It has the potential to provide a more systematic methodology (than a singularly authored blog) - proposing to explain all of the varying modes of thinking and the connections within - rather than to promote a particular ideology.  It also has the ability for ongoing dialogue and debate (not possible in print media).  The multiplicity of voices, some not typically heard until now, is another strength, in addition to the inclusive approach and interactivity - seen in this initial offering that is definitely exciting.

The focus of Issue #1 is fundamental to understanding of landscape urbanism, talking the concepts of indeterminacy and multiplicity, with a wide range of contributors including "...Christopher Gray and Shanti Levy illuminating the antecedents and legacies of landscape urbanism, SWA president Gerdo Aquino calls for more built works to bolster its role. Editor Eliza Valk haunts New York City’s parks puzzling terms and definitions, while Laura Tepper scurries across Dutch highways wondering what happened to a West 8 installation. Finally, website founder Sarah Peck interviews longtime blogger and landscape advocate Jason King; while further south, architects Thom Mayne and Karen Lohrmann and a UCLA design studio examine the future of America’s regional cities." 


In addition to the issues and an on-going blog, another aspect of the site in its initial phase is the section on 'Strategies' which aims to amass "a collection of built projects + conceptual work advancing the ideas and practice of landscape architecture and landscape urbanism."    The realization of work related to landscape urbanism has definitely been an ongoing topic of conversation, and a collection and critical dialogue related to works, if they do in fact exist, is long overdue.

I will provide some review of the content (maybe even a somewhat self-referential meta-review of my own interview on the site) in subsequent posts, so check out the articles and be ready with comments - as it is some thought-provoking stuff.

To everyone involved - a well-deserved thank you and congratulations!

Know Thy Annotations...

I'm really pleased to be able to present a snapshot of the bibliographical evidence related to the existing literature.  While not a complete and total view, this gives hints into some of the theoretical unpinnings of the theory of Landscape Urbanism, which could aid many of the discussions and dispel (or reinforce) some of the misconceptions flying about regarding what LU is, what it has accomplished, and where it is going.  Call it a public service, at the very least, it summarizes the points of view and offer a point of debate and discussion (versus uninformed knee-jerk reactions and snarky pot-shots) related to the panoply of  "Urbanisms" out there.  We're all in this discussion, and it's not about being right, it's about moving forward.  Thoughts, comments, ideas - welcome.


This list and summary was compiled by a couple of my friends and colleagues here in Portland - Allison Duncan (PhD Candidate, Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning, Portland State University, nacnudnosilla@gmail.com) and Ethan Seltzer (Professor, Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning, Portland State University, seltzere@pdx.edu)  Thanks to them both for letting me share this great resource that was completed in June of 2010.


:: Download a PDF of the full Annotated Bibliography - (100 Kb File)

What is Landscape Urbanism?


Observations:

• Landscape urbanism is a response to the limited understanding or portrayal of project and site context currently employed by both architects and landscape architects. It is also a notion put forth strategically by landscape architects as a means for differentiating their profession among the design professions, particularly architecture, and in response to the superficial role landscape architects increasingly find themselves in.
• Paradoxically, landscape architects have not generally latched on to this movement as strongly as architects.
• Landscape urbanism is a catch phrase for a range of concepts all reflecting a desire for more flexibility and ecological sensibility than is currently incorporated in design and planning.
• Landscape urbanism appears, at heart, to have a fondness for infrastructure and a desire to incorporate this infrastructure into design without resorting to superficially “shrub it up”.\
• The theory and language are in some cases intentionally vague such that the concept serves as a thought exercise instead of something which is actually implementable.
• There is value in arguing the theoretical niceties of landscape urbanism — this dialog digs into the role exterior spaces play in connecting urban fabric while countering the dominant role architecture has played for many years in defining and structuring urban design.
• Many authors define it as a shift from the urban “building block” of architecture to the “structuring medium” of landscape.
• Possibly one of the most fascinating aspects of landscape urbanism is its inclusion of indeterminacy into the design process. Spaces can be too programmed and attempting to leave some flexibility in a design is both interesting and potentially pragmatic in the face of uncertainty.
• Landscape urbanism fundamentally draws attention to context. More to the point, what it demands is the inclusion of landscape in all its forms – built, vernacular, natural, etc. – as the basis for understanding the forces shaping projects and to which projects must respond. In this respect, landscape urbanism promotes an understanding of places and projects based on an ecology that includes people and what they do and have done in the same frame as a comprehensive view of the natural world.

Thought leaders:
People who actively write about the theories of landscape urbanism—not those who are cited as writing the foundational pieces which contribute to the theory of landscape urbanism:

• James Corner
• Stan Allen
• Alex Wall
• Charles Waldheim

People who have contributed the most descriptive and actionable/practicable writings about landscape urbanism:

• Chris Reed
• Christopher Gray
• Peter Connolly
• Richard Weller
• Jusick Koh

Unlocking LU 2: The Re-Representation of Urbanism

Continuing the thread of review for the new landscape urbanism website, I'm discussing 'The Re-Representation of Urbanism' by Gerdo Aquino, SWA Principal as well as educator and author of the book 'Landscape Infrastructure' (see L+U review here).  As a fundamental opening to his essay, Aquino mentions the major shift that has taken place towards urbanization and linking it to Odum's ecological idea of the 'carrying capacity' as these areas continually add more people.  It's interesting to think in these terms in numbers we can related to, so the example of the resource base for Los Angeles being about to support 1% of the current population is troubling - as it is a case in point (and a poignant example) of us living well above our means.

:: Los Angeles - image via City Photos

The other major theme mentioned is the use of adjectival modifiers of urbanism - ecological, new, everyday, combinatory, to name a few of the many.  The question isn't which of these is most appropriate, or 'right' but do they address the complexities of the city in meaningful ways and do they lead to appropriate actions.  In our search for solutions we tend to choose a dominant paradigm and stretch it to fit, rather than asking whether it is the right tool for a particular job.  As Aquino mentions:

"The study of cities needs to include many points of view in order to move beyond outmoded planning diagrams that no longer describe how to improve our cities. Despite so many variables, each of these terms argues for an ideas-rich platform for public debate, competition, and academic research in which the specificity of a particular factor can be magnified, examined, and explored in context."

Which is another way of saying a phrase I just heard again for the first time - "If you have a hammer, every thing looks like a nail".  So no self-respecting carpenter would carry one tool, but a box (or truck) full of potential solutions that work at varying scales.  Not to oversimplify cities - but you get the idea.  One of the most interesting ideas that landscape urbanism brings to the discussion, mentioned by Aquino in the article is that of a new relationship to graphic methods and imagery.  Many of the formative theories of LU look closely at mapping, representation, and as Aquino mentions:  "The collective visualization of our world..." which "...is even more important in influencing how we understand and think about urbanism and landscape."

The representation within disciplines is very important but sometimes missed as a key part of the discussion.  A softly rendered static watercolor perspective suffices for a view of a product, primarily because it is easier to convey than the complexity of urban systems and their dynamic properties.  The integration of science, particularly landscape ecology, chaos theory, and social dynamics, ramps up the number of urban variables to a degree where traditional representation crumbles.  Is the solution to retreat back to what is known and understandable (or more importantly, easy to convey as simplification to clients and others)?  Or do we take on the challenge of this, in Aquino's words - re-representation?

In this regard the essay references a 1997 article "Design by re-representation: a model of visual reasoning in design" by Rivka Oxman [link to PDF here] which Aquino summarizes below:

"...understanding design proposals requires both cognitive knowledge and visual literacy. Oxman’s research explores how emergence, or the way complex systems arise out of relatively simple connections, informs creativity and, particularly, the process of design. Design then can be understood as a culmination of thousands of decisions—and each representation offers a layer of meaning behind these complex ideas."

This is on the same theme as preliminary writings in 'Recovering Landscape' so again, this isn't really a new idea, but good to reinforce the concept of landscape architecture as a profession well suited for representational experimentation and the ability to capture fluidity and complexity, which is referenced in some of the major graphic convention evolutions during the first decade of this century.  Computers have became a significant tool not just in being able to automate techniques of collage, but also are beginning to aid in crunching significant quantities of data and more specifically, along with video and other media, represent motion and change over time, interrelationship of site actors, and to portray changes that occur on timelines too slow for our comprehension.

The second part of Aquino's essay focuses not on representation, but on actual places and the lack of a modern method of visual vocabulary for landscape architecture.  The profession is still mired in the pictorial scenery in the Olmstedian tradition (especially in North America) and architecture/urban design in the 'Main Street' utopia - so it becomes more difficult to give tangible examples of new ideas when the dominant visual and cultural paradigm is based on powerful, established imagery.  As Aquino mentions, "Landscape architecture... suffers from a poor collective visual vocabulary. The absence of prevalent and progressive design precedents hinders our ability to communicate our ideals for a better urbanism to a broader audience."

Part of the issue is in communication, the other part is more political - in actually convincing people that there is a better urbanism, and that the natural (or native) should not be the proper 'frame' for the ecological.  The debate of cultural frameworks and perceptions will continue to evolve as mentioned as we integrate more ecological thinking and systems into projects - but will they be required to fall into the fate of such techno-ecological marvels as Olmsted's Back Back Fens project - a landscape ecological urbanism in disguise as a natural wetland park?


Aquino then comes to the crux of the solution - and that is to build the work.  As he mentions:  "Educate through practice. Landscape architects, planners, and urbanists need built precedents to demonstrate that a more integrated approach to landscape and urbanism is possible. Policy and planning does not spark a collective re-imagination of our future in the way that tangible, built work does." 

This goes to the heart of the debate about landscape urbanism - and really becomes perhaps the wicked problem that we all face in trying to elaborate a new representational and methodological process.  At this point we have some of the fundamentals we want to achieve... flexibility, adaptability, indeterminacy and multiplicity... driven by ecological principles and woven into complex social and economic milieu - in response to cultural and market conditions.  This is the urbanism parts - the working aspects of cities and systems we want to address.


The problem with implementation - and with re-representation, is that we haven't actually figured out the representation part - so it is a giant leap to building.  While he offers examples - these are good works of urban planning and design, interdisciplinary landscape architecture, and innovative ecological solutions at work - but they aren't built works of landscape urbanism, and they aren't even really physical examples of the representational transformation of the disciplines... which haven't yet matured on the drawing boards, and definitely haven't been realized in the field.

I just don't see the connection between theory and practice being strong enough to justify a new label - and resistance within disciplines to new ideas notwithstanding, perhaps it will just become a natural maturation of all of the above disciplines with infusions of some aspects of new theory from all of the various 'urbanisms'.  It isn't really worthy of a label like 'landscape urbanism' or even 'landscape infrastructure' - although we do love new labels.  Is is okay to modify urbanism as 'study' and keep the disciplinary frameworks of applied methodology intact - so LU can influence and change and expand landscape architecture or architecture or planning without being considered a failed theoretical attempt?  I'd much rather see that than to try to formalize it into a method (ala New Urbanism) or to force projects into a new category of definition as Landscape Urbanism. 

Either way, I'm with Aquino partway, and agree that:  "Over the next decade, as the work communicated in words and pictures transforms into real places in the world, the public understanding of both urbanism and landscape architecture will expand, while new challenges and opportunities emerge for designers to tackle."

What we will call these works... these re-representations and re-implementations... that's the question?

Unlocking LU 1: Indeterminacy & Multiplicity

So as promised, I was planning on posting on some of the great content related to the initial issue on the Landscape Urbanism website.  The introduction by Sarah Kathleen Peck and Eliza Shaw Valk brings up some of the questions around the concept - with a focus on 'indeterminacy' and 'multiplicity' as well as looking at what drives the theory and discussion around landscape urbanism - namely what it is (or can be).

Surprising to many (but not surprising to most) - the goals of LU and many of the questions are not simple.  They are not about supplanting new urbanism, promoting suburban sprawl, evoking a nostalgia for le corbusian mega projects, or the many ill-conceived criticisms that have been thrown about by those threatened or at least too lazy to actually understand what's going on before condemnation.  The LU project, if you could call it that, is very succinctly presented in by Peck and Valk:

"We believe that we are trying to do something different. We are in uncharted territory because we are spinning new narratives. We are taking on new responsibilities, and we are approaching challenges with faceted lenses, recognizing and incorporating—with sense and sensibilities—the vast variety of interests, concerns, investments, and collisions that are the landscape of cities."

The interesting twist in all of this, and the reason for all this speculation - is also the root of most of the criticism of landscape urbanism.  The endeavor is about 'urbanism' as a concept related to study of urban areas, and not about creating solutions to specific problems.  This is old-school scholarship and theorizing - not using those two pathways in order to provide some semblance of a framework on which to hang an operational method.  So LU is criticized for its messiness, it's lack of coherence and clarity, and its willingness to acknowledge some of the ugly truths in our society.  Guess what?  That's what is being studied - so the methods have to match the context.  Cities are messy, they lack coherence and clarity, and often they are ugly both historically and currently - in terms of environmental pollution, social inequity, and as is being made evident in the recent occupation movement, economic disparity.

So we do the one thing we can.  We look, interpret, gauge, measure, hypothesize, and theorize.  As mentioned by Peck and Valk, "We err in the belief that landscape urbanism is a study, with parameters, but not an ideology. One conundrum among many."  Or, simply, we don't know - so we ask.  These are educated inquiries, but are driven by a lack of knowledge, not the knowledge that we have things figured out and want to offer a solution.  I feel that perhaps that is what is missing in the world right now.  The ability to look, and discuss - not in terms of solutions but in terms of asking the right questions and defining the right problems. 

So the issue tackles many of these themes in this vein, as Peck and Valk explain in their introduction, such as landscape urbanism "origins and future potential; its coherencies and incoherencies; and working definitions that hold the seemingly conflicting factors of space, time, indeterminacy, and multiplicity."    These are not just isolated questions about landscape urbanism theory that involves uni-disciplinary verbal masturbation or lionization of "new" methods for solving the worlds problems, but are related, fundamental questions about urbanism in general.  The goal is neither purely theoretical or academic or disconnected from on-the-ground practice, but is also fundamental to a greater understanding and application in the fields of architecture, landscape architecture, planning, and urban design.   The study, not as mentioned by the editors, is not an idealogy.  It is a journey and not a destination.

In subsequent posts I will look at some of this original content on landscape urbanism (the site) and focus on these fundamental questions related to landscape urbanism (the concept)... starting next with Gerdo Aquino's essay on 'the re-representation of landscape'.  Stay tuned.

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.

A Potential Body of Landscape Urbanism - Part 1

My questions about identifying works of landscape urbanism has its first lead.  A reader (and fellow former North Dakotan Brook Meier - an architect now practicing in India) offered some projects worthy of explanation.  He used to work for the firm LA Dallman in Milwaukie, Wisconsin and mentioned the collective Crossroads project, which he succinctly summed up as "A multi-part urban story that links transit-ways and neighborhoods while creating something out of nothing." 

The project consists of three parts, The Marsupial Bridge, The Urban Plaza, and the Brady Street Bus Shelter.  As three distinct projects, the have are solidly formed pieces of landscape architecture, and urban design - with the infrastructure of a bridge thrown in for good measure.

:: images via LA Dallman

These projects were not planned as a cohesive work of landscape urbanism per se, but form an assemblage of projects that start to take on some of the characteristics of landscape urbanism, including providing a diverse connective tissue (Wall, 1999b) of disparate elements, being opportunistic in looking at context to drive design decisions, incorporating a 'civic infrastructure' (Poole, 2004b) and embracing elements of indeterminacy in flexible programming of the central public space, giving what Waldheim would refer to as "imaginatively reordered relationships between ecology and infrastructure." (Weller & Musiatowicz, 2004: p. 66).

A look at the three elements of the project give an idea of the elements.

Project 1. The Marsupial Bridge

"The Marsupial Bridge is a pedestrian walkway that uses the existing Holton Street Viaduct structure as its "host". The bridge weaves through the existing structure that was originally engineered to support trolley cars, a transportation system which was abandoned with increased automobile use in the early 1900s. Hanging opportunistically from the over-structured middle-third of the viaduct, The Marsupial Bridge responds to the changing transportation needs of the city by increasing pedestrian and bicycle connections. The bridge is a "green highway" that activates the unused space beneath the viaduct, encourages alternative forms of transportation, and connects residential neighborhoods to natural amenities, Milwaukee’s downtown, and the Brady Street commercial district. The Marsupial Bridge’s undulate concrete deck offers a counterpoint to the existing steel members of the viaduct, inspired by the notion of weaving a new spine through the structure. Recalling the wood docks along the Milwaukee River, formerly an industrial corridor linking northern territories with the Great Lakes, the concrete deck is finished with wood deck and handrails, and stainless steel stanchions and diaphanous apron. Floor lighting is integrated behind the apron, and precision theatrical fixtures are mounted above to create a localized ribbon of illumination with minimal spill into the riparian landscape below."

Project 2. The Urban Plaza
The most well known of the three, which has been covered in some of the mainstream press, is the Urban Plaza segment, nestled under the end of the bridge abutment.

"The Urban Plaza converts an unsafe underbridge area into a civic gathering space for film festivals, regattas, and other river events. The position of the Urban Plaza within the existing viaduct presented an unusual challenge due to the lack of natural daylight for plant growth. Accordingly, this area could not be defined through landscape design in the conventional sense; rather, concrete benches are set amidst a moonscape of gravel and seating boulders. The benches provide a respite for pedestrians and bicyclists as they make their way across the Marsupial Bridge, and by night the benches are lit from within, transforming the Plaza into a beacon for the neighborhood. This strategy challenges the traditional notion of public space as a “town square,” or “village green,” and provides a site-specific program for the underbridge zone."

Project 3:  Brady Street Bus Shelter

"The Brady Street Bus Shelter serves as a waiting station for city bus passengers, bicyclists and pedestrians, and marks the gateway between lively Brady Street and the new Urban Plaza and Marsupial Bridge. The shelter is set within a platform defined by concrete and stone walls that are shaped and folded to serve as benches, retaining walls, and structural elements. Mahogany benches rest upon interlocking concrete and steel supports, forming an L-shaped plan that invites varied seating positions and protects users from the elements while allowing clear views to approaching buses. Large steel sash glass panels serve to block wind and frame views down the connecting Lift Station Path, and wood wraps the steel elements that come into direct contact with the occupants. The Bus Shelter collects rainwater through a butterfly roof, which drains into a cast concrete basin below."

The 'Assemblage' as Landscape Urbanism?

In sum, although not specifically defined work of LU, there are some compelling elements that shed some light on at least a retroactive definition of this in terms of landscape urbanism.  I think a new typology of non-site specific landscape architecture may be the 'assemblage' of landscape urbanism - the idea of 'terra fluxus' that involves developing "processes over time, the staging of surfaces, the operational or working method, and the imaginary." (Corner, 2006, p.28)   The location amidst existing urban infrastructure brings a contextual approach to the project approach, described as "Hanging opportunistically from the over-structured middle-third of the viaduct" and alludes to the recapturing urban space with a purpose, outlining a "...green highway" that activates the unused space beneath the viaduct" a 'civic infrastructure' system. (Poole, 2004)

Moving on to the Urban Plaza, this project reclaims, in a simple manner, residual urban void space  - the terrain vague (de Sola-Morales, 1995)  that would typically be fenced off or overgrown dross (Berger 2006 & Lerup, 1994), and transforming it into "a civic gathering space for film festivals, regattas, and other river events".  While site specific, the designers admit it's a difficult task that requires a new aesthetic sensibility, as"this area could not be defined through landscape design in the conventional sense".  Rather than treating this with the lens of neo-traditional open space, but "challenges the traditional notion of public space as a “town square,” or “village green,” and provides a site-specific program for the underbridge zone"   

(all above underlined quotes are clipped from the LA Dallman project descriptions quoted earlier) 

The non-traditional nature of the space, echoing a "response to the failure of traditional urban design and planning to operate effectively in the contemporary city" (Corner, 2003, p.58) and the inventive programming as urban theater are compelling, making me think of Reed: "focus is on catalyzing and coordinating"  with a " form may change and develop in response to conditions unforeseen and unknowable”. (Reed, 2006b) and Shermans “sufficient looseness with regard to future scenarios” (Sherman, 2006)

Click to 'activate' the image

The final Bus Shelter node is the most landscape architecturally defined site-specific element, with some stormwater infrastructure, gateway treatment, and greater system connectivity with transit, using a fairly traditional vocabulary of form and materials.  

I'm not offering a position one way or the other, but offering some investigation and context in some work that is compared and contrasted to the very fluid definition of landscape urbanism.  Projects will appear and slide along a continuum from traditional to fantastic and analysis will allow us to place projects within the framwork.  Keep the projects coming, as it is through the collection of this 'body' of landscape urbanism that understanding can be gleaned.  It may be compelling, or at least a form of post-mortem for LU - gathering an actionable set of precedents and strategies moving forward.

Sources:

Refer to the Landscape Urbanism bibliography for references enclosed in parentheses.

Elizabeth Caruthers Park

One on the more recent additions to the park inventory in Portland is the neighborhood park for the South Waterfront Area. (see here and here for more on SoWa). The park is named Elizabeth Caruthers Park (after one of the pioneering founders of Portland - on whose original land claim the park now lies) this new addition offers another iteration of the national firm paired with local for park projects. As this site isn't one of those you 'happen to be near and want to swing by', it's been less on the radar than some other visible additions to the Portland landscape, which I will be showing off soon as well.

I did see this a couple of times during construction, but had an opportunity and some sunny weather this weekend to swing by and snap a few images of the completed park.


:: image (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

The $3.5 million park design was completed by Hargreaves Associates, along with local firm Lango-Hansen and artist Doug Hollis. Finished size is 2 acres, and the design plays off the proximity to the river, high density mixed use buildings, and the potential to be a flexible event space.

:: image via Portland Parks and Recreation

The context of the park is interesting, as the area is now starting to fill up with more buildings, giving some scale to what was previously a flat 2 block area. This makes me think that the scale and design of the park will be much more appropriate given the final build-out of this dense neighborhood. The designers worked a number of elements into the space and I think successfully captured the ability to split the space up into smaller 'rooms' without diminishing the whole. As mentioned on the PP&R website, the park offers a range of uses for this emerging neighborhood. These include:

"Urban Gardens: A community gathering area with movable tables and chairs and a built-in bocce court, a garden retreat area with granite seat walls and a historic marker honoring the site of Portland's first cabin, and an environmental play area with a spray/play stepping stone feature and seating logs.

Naturalized Landscape: Boardwalks, naturalized plantings, undulating topography with stormwater detention, and Song Cycles public art created by Doug Hollis.

Open Lawn: Flexible space, including an 8' tall sloped landform for seating, sunning, and play.

Other Features: A variety of trees and plantings, pathways with benches, park lighting, a festival edge on Bond, electrical infrastructure for events, bicycle racks, a drinking fountain, dog waste bag dispensers, trash receptacles, and streetscape improvements."

The dominant feature of the park is the large open grassy area, which was being used mostly for dog walking. The sculptural mound, obviously is a typical Hargreaves signature, but seems restrained here as a backdrop and tilted plane that could work as amphitheater seating. While maybe 10 feet at it's apex, you don't feel terribly high up due to the flatness of the surrounding landscape. Dare I say the berm needed to be much larger and more dramatic to really have the impact in this sized space.




:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

The individual rooms contain such features as water play, sculpture, and interpretive elements all bordered by waves of plantings defining the spaces while allowing hints of what lies beyond. The water play was interesting as it was surrounded by rubber playground tiles (the slightly darker brown) for safety - and the individual pieces of the feature itself use two different rock textures for an undulating appearance.




:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

The waves of plantings give definition to the space, along with the curving pathways. This layering provides an interesting foreshortening of spaces adding to their comfort and intimacy..


:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

The plantings and pathways also lead to other rooms, for instance this flexible seating area and bocce court. The ability to move furnishings around takes advantage of the user preference for where and in what configuration they sit. These seats surround a simple decomposed granite court (the same d.g. used for secondary pathways) again simply delineated with sparing use of stone.




:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

The remaining perimeters of the park (to the south and west sides) feature a series of low depressions and raised boardwalks, creating a wet, shade garden with Pacific Northwest species mixed with selected non-native ornamentals including groves of multi-stem birch which are a nice touch. The boardwalks cut through these wet zones, and vary from a sinous curving variety here...


:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

... to the much more rigid straight boardwalks weaving through the south section. The shade is predominantly from the building directly south, casting a shadow almost completely within this zone - and giving a very different feel from the heat of the open lawn areas - probably even more so in the height of winter.


:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

The sculptural elements 'Song Cycles' by Doug Hollis are also dotted through this area, making for some visible movement and drawing the eye skyward. I was kind of disappointed with these - essentially an oversized bicycle wheel with some cups to catch the wind and swing them round. From the RACC website, they were "... Inspired by a historic photograph of bicyclists resting at a nearby site, these “Song Cycles” are activated by the wind."


:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

And a quick video of them in action I took...

'Song Cycles' from Jason King on Vimeo.

These areas are definitely shady at mid-day, offering some relief from the heat. They do suffer from a lack of usable seating, as most of the paths are raised above grade with an occasional seat. Obviously meant to be moved through more than to linger, the shade and coolness makes it a refuge worth hanging around for and I wish there would have been a larger space carved out on this end mirroring the more sunny north side. Perhaps one must make due with just hanging your feet over the ipe decking into the water below?


:: images (c) Jason King - Landscape+Urbanism

It was interesting how little you notice the proximity to the interstate from inside the park - it registering just as a low drone in the background. While the context of the park seems cut off from the riverfront (which will hopefully seem more appealing once it is completed), another contextual element that's fascinating is the constant movement of the Portland Aerial Tram nearby the park. The little pill from pill hill kept drawing my eye upwards in fascination (the thing has been in for a couple of years now, and I seem to never tire of watching it)... another short video:

Aerial Tram from Elizabeth Caruthers Park from Jason King on Vimeo.

As a new neighborhood park (in an emerging neighborhood that some still say hasn't emerged) I was expected to see the park completely devoid of people, even on a sunny Saturday. While not teeming, there was a respectable crowd moving through - either hanging out in the seating areas, lounging on the berm, running dogs in the lawn, and grabbing a quick smoke break from a restaurant across the way. All in all I give the park high marks - and it's going to be interesting to see how this space evolves - influenced by new building in the neighborhood, more people residing and working here (like the LEED Platinum OHSU Center for Health and Healing in the distance), and intentional active programming of the spaces. The designers did a great job of incorporating a lot of activity and flexibility into 2 acres, and I'm looking forward to seeing this park mature and thrive. Now about that berm...

Ecological Urbanism: Introduction Part 2

Continuing the investigations of the introduction to the book 'Ecological Urbanism' (read Part 1 here) - we pick up on the concepts of ecological urbanism in the explosion of interest in urban and local food production. Near and dear to my interests, the ability to transform such shrinking cities like Detroit, emulating the lessons and successes of places like Cuba who have created a new pattern of development based on necessity that is counter to the constant globalization we all deem necessary for progress.


:: Cuban Urban Agriculture - image via NEF

Mostafavi posits this could be a reaction to disasters such as Haiti, or the preceding national disaster in the Gulf: "One can also imagine that a city like New Orleans, devastated by Hurricane Katrina and and with little likelihood of major reconstruction any time soon, is ripe for such a project - for an urbanism that can address the vast areas of sparsely populated territory with productive and other forms of biologically diverse urban landscapes just as effectively as it can those areas still populated by a resilient community." (p.39)

Agriculture isn't typically considered in relation to ecology - aside from impacts, but again I think the definition in the book is for an 'ecological approach' versus the standard idea of ecology in pure environmental terms. Thus the idea for shrinking, or rapidly expanding urban areas to tackle the inputs and outputs of flows such as food and waste, using ecological metaphors, as a viable construct for an action-oriented ecological urbanism. This idea draws on and modernizes the regional concepts of Patrick Geddes, Lewis Mumford, and Benton MacKaye, and later revolutionary ecological ideas of Ian McHarg (who makes a cameo in the end of the book). The key is using our collective interdisciplinary intelligence to fill in some of the gaps in these earlier theories and apply them to a variety of global social and geographical situations.


:: Geddes' Valley Section - image via Goodspeed Update

Mostafavi gives an example of the resistance in African urban areas to top-down policies, requiring more integrated and 'participatory' methods that work in a range of cultural contexts. "Ecological urbanism must provide the necessary and emancipatory infrastructures for an alternative form of urbanism, on that brings together the benefits of both bottom-up and top-down approaches to urban planning." (p.40)

The question, I guess, is how? It seems that flexibility is the key, with a radical change in fixed rules in cities to a more adaptable set of criteria to guide development (again hearkening back to LU theory) particularly when Western designers are operating in vastly different cultural circumstances (I'd throw in McDonough working in China as one example). Bateson's 'tightrope walker' is a great one, with the idea of technique bolstered by repetition as an apt metaphor for 'practice'.


:: Olympic Architecture in China - image via Chinese Architecture

And practice is at the heart of any concept, including Ecological Urbanism, to make it less of a theoretical construct and more of a guide for action that is called for early in this chapter. Two examples worthy of exploration: First the theory of Landscape Urbanism is a vibrant terrain forr changing the nature of static, fixed design which has been difficult to realize in built work - making in difficult if not impossible to provide a viable proof-of-concept. Conversely, New Urbanism contains a vibrant set of theories and rules, which have been broadly adapted, with most criticism leveled at the application, which often seems disconnected from what seem like good base principles. Appropriate theory and viable practice will be the touchstone for Ecological Urbanism to prove out (which I'm hoping is illuminated in the remaining essays of the text).

An example is the concept of developing Paris as a sustainable city, at the urging of French President Sarkozy. Instead of the traditional approach of planning, policy, then project - this concept flipped the tables by looking for projects. As Mostafavi concludes: "The early emphasis on projects rather than policies is a recognition of the value of projective possibilities for the physical development of the region. This type of speculative design is a necessary precondition for making radical policies that are embedded in imaginative and anticipatory forms of spatial practice." (p.47)




:: Visions of Paris by Roland Castro - image via France 24

While it is unclear how this project in Paris will play out, the idea of the "...articulation of the interface, the liminal space, between the urban and the political," (p.48) is at the heart of the idea of ecological urbanism within the context of this essay. Similar to the LU Theory, versus the ideas of the City Beautiful or New Urbanism mentioned previously, "...this approach does not rely on the image, nor on social homogeneity and nostalgia, as its primary sources of inspiration, but rather recognizes the importance of the urban as the necessary site of conflictual relations." (p.48)

The idea of conflict is important as a referent to ecology, as it doesn't describe a constructed, false ideology of community but one that is developed based on root instincts and flows of materials. This is embedded in an approach that includes 'social and spatial democracy' (p.50) that would be a result of this new approach. This is even more critical as we confront global economic uncertainty and continual emergence of man-caused 'natural disasters' which will influence larger numbers of people world-wide." Mostafavi concludes:

"In this context, it is now up to use to develop the aesthetic means -- the projects -- that proposal alternative, inspiring, and ductile sensibilities for our ethico-political interactions with the environment. These projects will also provide the stage for the messiness, the unpredictability, and the instability of the urban, and in turn, for more just as well as more pleasurable futures. This is both the challenge and the promise of ecological urbanism." (p.50)

So obviously one cannot make an assessment of the book based on the initial chapter, but I'm heartened by the approach implicit that frames the content, not as an 'answer' as much as a line of critical inquiry that builds on and frames previous explorations of landscape urbanism, ecological design, sustainable planning, and green design in a more interdisciplinary and flexible manner. Thus my take away was this isn't necessarily to see a brave new theory (which was the case when initially reading about landscape urbanism). Rather this seems another name for an interdisciplinary consolidation (perhaps a necessary one) of multiple theories already happening in multivalent pathways.

One doesn't come out with a feeling that 'ecological urbanism' is the answer - much like many of the other 'urbanisms' out there have a focus but not a broad inclusivity. Perhaps it's the baggage of the term 'ecological' that confounds me (much as the baggage of the term 'landscape' shapes LU theory) - as it doesn't seem a coherent enough idea to direct us in any particular direction. It does seem to be able to envelope and shape practice, but again it seems with enough supporting information, it would be easy to look at a range of projects within a lens of Ecological Urbanism, and connect some of the dots.

In summary, I am excited to dig into the rest of the volume (although it is daunting) to explore what ideas are contained within. While this seems a first step on a path towards urbanism that is more inclusive and equitable, this isn't a roadmap. But it just may prove pivotal in changing the mindset of a broad spectrum of professionals and policy-makers, this is the dawn of a 'new ethic s and aesthetics of the urban.' Guess we shall see.

Endnote:

As I mentioned, I plan on tackling some of the other portions of the book in subsequent posts so 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.

There is the trend towards what I recently dubbed 'Fill in the Blank' Urbanism, which is spawned by a deep discussion of the nature and potential of Landscape Urbanism - and is a reaction to the myriad 'urbanisms' that seem to pop up - so look forward to other investigations along these lines in addition to the 'ecological' - particularly two books I'm currently reading on the 'integral' and the 'agricultural' versions of this trend.

Also in the past few weeks, I was further tempted by a series of posts from the past couple of weeks on Urban Tick with a range of contributed posts on the book by Duncan Smith, Luis Suarez, DPR-Barcelona, Annick Labecca, Martin John Callanan, Stanza, Kiril Stanilov. I resisted reading the bulk of these until I got around to the book review - but was not disappointed. Check out the range of posts under the label Ecological Urbanism to get a wide reaction to the books content.