Listen to your Martha

It's not often I hear something that really resonates with the profession of landscape architecture - particularly from one of the major players in the profession. It's definitely less-often I hear this from Martha Schwartz, whom is better known for edgy design and controversial project aesthetics than sustainability. A recent BBC article offers her surprisingly compelling challenge to landscape architects to grab their rightful place as agents of change. It's worth a read.


:: Martha Schwartz - image via Archinect

In summary, via the introduction: "The focus on greening homes and offices is ignoring the wider landscape of our towns and cities, argues Martha Schwartz. In this week's Green Room, she says 21st Century urban spaces must undergo a green revolution." Schwartz goes on to make her case with some poignant commentary. A few choice cuts (but really, read the whole thing, even you LAs that say you don't read):

"...I have found that we lag behind architects when it comes to participating in the conversation around sustainability; in fact, we are often relegated to presiding over green roof technology."

"...The reason for the focus on buildings, as opposed to that of the surrounding landscape, is down to the fact that the uses of resources and energy can be addressed with a degree of simplicity and directness. ...Meanwhile, landscape architects are left outside looking in on the discussion because our professional remit rests outside these technologically oriented and building-focused discussions."

This is a good point, and one that continually comes up in discussions of sustainability and design. A conference I attended yesterday focused so much on sustainable technologies I starting thinking this was the only answer to our problems. The reason - tangible and measurable results. It's hard to measure landscape architectural benefits to sustainability, much less some of the more intangible aspects of landscape. Continuing on, Schwartz outlines a more holistic viewpoint:

"The landscape is the canvas upon which we live our lives, join together as communities and build our cities. ...Embedded and integral to the landscape are the ecological systems that must be understood and respected, as well as the infrastructural systems connecting us all together."

"Landscape architects ought to help to make cities better places for all who live within them through the establishment of good connectivity and open spaces, the promotion of public transportation and, very importantly, ensuring water is used responsibly, with run-off being managed and put back into the ground. ...In addition, landscape architects ought to ensure developers plant as much as possible so that we have an abundance of trees and permeable surfaces."

Ironically, Schwartz uses a project she designed, Manchester Exchange Square - to make the point of this type design that will acheive this end. While an interesting urban space, it has neither the sustainable design credibility, nor the green open space and abundance of trees to really put to fine a point on the argument. My guess is there's probably a project or two in her portfolio that create urban greening with more success than this.


:: Manchester Exchange Square - image via Wikipedia

Schwartz goes on to explain that recent activities from PLAN NYC are a step in the right direction, but still lack a vital role for landscape architecture, and more notably, high-design in this process.

"PLAN NYC is certainly a marvellous commitment to improving the lives of citizens by giving them access to fresh, green, open spaces. But it does not push the envelope quite far enough. It does not advocate the vital commitment to landscapes that reflects the most forward visual thinking, through dynamic, inspirational design, and structured attentiveness to community histories. The role of landscape architecture is once again one of green embellishment, adding parks here and there, rather than sustainability agenda-setting through thought-provoking design."

"For the best examples of this, we have to look to areas like Germany's Duisberg Nord Parc in the Ruhr Valley, or the beautiful green spaces of the Park Andre Citroen in Paris."

:: Duisberg Nord Parc - image via Archidose

:: Park Andre Citroen - image via Wikipedia

Both of these spaces offer a glimpse of the possible iterations, but are very much leaning to the side of edgy design than true ecological sustainability. I appreciate these projects both - particularly the fantastic project in Duisberg by Peter Latz, but again think the project examples are disconnected from the text. The High Line to me might be a better example. Or perhaps the work of Herbert Dreisietl or Bill Wenk.

I very often bemoan the lack of real passionate voices calling for change in the profession. There is a need to fill this role and take our collective place on the soapbox from time-to-time. There is also the need to provide viable options and precedents for the concept - of which Schwartz hints at, but doesn't deliver fully. The point, perhaps not in detail, is in concept, which I think captures part of the real idea behind the story:

"It is therefore vital that landscape architects assert this both in our advocacy and in our actual work; for so long as we trail behind the architects by topping their buildings with green roofs, we are simply fiddling while Rome burns."

It's refreshing to see this candid discussion not just within the community and pages of Landscape Architecture, but happening outside in more mainstream media (ok, it's not Fox news...). This reduced focus on building and more on urban fabric is not necessarily cutting edge thinking. In some circles it's called public space design. In others, it's dubbed landscape urbanism. What is missing is not necessarily the fact, but the underlying reason.

Another item of note is what is exactly wrong with doing both... I dare say our focus has been less on actually interfacing with buildings that with dressing them up - and the integration is much needed and much late to the party. The interstitial weaving of green spaces within communities is the foundation of the profession. As we've matured, we have incorporated more appropriate ideas of sustainability and ecology into our work - opening up more the possibility of more significant and regenerative strategies. To mimimize the idea of incorporating vegetation into buildings is self-defeating at this point - as the buildings become an extension to and in the case of facades, a part of, this urban fabric. We should leverage more incorporation of building integrated landscape - along with strengthening our foundations of pure open space design and community building.

And all of these are good points... I say let's transpose these statements into the most recent National ASLA award winners, and try to figure out how these have not focused on greening buildings and have evolved towards re-making urban spaces in this 'green revolution.' Stay tuned for that.

Regional Green

A busy week, and apologies for lack of posting. I'm well under my once-a-day quota for March, but alas - work is hopping with exciting projects in the region. As I mentioned in a previous post, we tend to take for granted the innovative projects that come out of the Pacific Northwest. The recent National ASLA winners notwithstanding (with the exception of couple of residential examples), the PNW continues to provide stellar examples for sustainable design at a variety of scales. This does not mean that there aren't a number great projects worldwide, but sometimes as we push the envelope, we forget the fact that there are groundbreaking designs growing in our own backyards.

A recent small-scale project called The Commons, which is one of a number of projects that is vying to be the elusive first Living Building Challenge project. Covered in the Oregonian, as well as on Brian Libby's Portland Architecture blog - the project has also jumped out into the national spotlight via Jetson Green. Developed by a pair of brothers in Portland, Dustin and Garrett Moon and features a number of green features: green roof, composting toilet, rainwater catchement, fly-ash concrete, and most press-worthy topic by far... dirt floors. (for clarification they are earthenware - as Libby clarified after some 'backlash' about the tongue-in-cheek comment about this feature.




:: images via Jetson Green

While it's gained a lot of attention, the dirt floors are really an earthenware clay, which is an uncommon and sustainable material in typical building circles. There is a groundswell of natural builders throughout Portland with a large following - with mixed results. I liken it to the fact that whatever the material - a good designer will use it well, and the rest... well. Or, as Libby points out, there is a definite conceptual break between the DIY cob-crowd of sustainability and the flashy expensive LEED condos... "When I think of those few conservatives out there who are skeptical about green building, cob benches and dirt floors are to me precisely the kind of stuff they'll ridicule." He later adds: "I just am not fond of the cob and rammed-earth aesthetic, although I certainly can't fault the function and sustainability of these age-old practices."

:: Cob Structure - image via Portland Ground

Another local project with some sustainable features is the Portland City Storage by MulvannyG2, which caught the attention of World Architecture News: "This innovative facility will include dry storage for boats, retail spaces, offices, and amenities including a rooftop pool under a retractable roof. The project integrates an elevated pedestrian walkway providing splendid views of the Willamette River, its bridges, and downtown. Portland City Storage is targeting a USGBC LEED Gold certification and will also generate alternative electrical power thanks to a wind farm located at the top of the building."


:: image via WAN

I have a more substantial post underway about some of this more site-scale wind generation appearing on a number of buildings - and it's an exciting trend to see this evolution. I think it is similar to water movement in the fact that there is a specific visual and physical connection between natural processes and the subsequent sustainable element. Take this a bit further, as tossed around in a project meeting earlier this week, what about taking the idea of rainwater capture and gravity flow through pipes in a building from rooftop to storage - then intervene and tap the energy generating potential by adding microturbines within pipes that could provide additional electricity generation?


:: image via Hydro

This brand of experimentation and techno-innovation is one of the goals of our local Green Investment Fund, which is "...a competitive grant program that awards innovative and comprehensive projects that excel at energy efficiency, on-site storwmater management, water efficiency and waste prevention." Historically providing a catalyst for experimental projects, the GIF has moved more towards leveraging and expanding the sustainable features of large-scale, well-funded projects. While I can't say anything about the quality of projects, from Mercy Corps to Park Avenue West.


:: Mercy Corps (Thomas Hacker Architects) - image via PDC


:: Park Avenue West (TVA Architects) - image via TMT Development

A good number of the projects make me scratch my head regarding the goals of the GIF. Is it to fund project sustainability and transferability, or is it to provide a little increment break for large projects? I wonder why are we dropping a chunk of cash (i.e. $100k or, over a quarter of the total GIF funds on one project) on projects that are multi-million dollar budgets to start out with, and that are really not in as much need of these funds. This is discussed as well on Portland Architecture, with Libby wondering: "Is it right that these projects, many of which seem to come from the city's biggest developers, are the ones getting a lot of the public investment from the GIF?"
On the other hand, this may be the kick to make these projects a reality. The description of One Waterfront Place, via OSD: "When completed in early 2010, One Waterfront Place will be the first speculative office building to achieve Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED(r)) Platinum certification from the U.S. Green Building Council. The 270,000 square foot building and garage built on a former brownfield will use a combination of ecoroofs, rain gardens and planters to treat stormwater on-site and restore wildlife habitat to this now-barren property. Tenants, visitors and community members will be able to view many of the building's green features, including a large solar photovoltaic system, from the Broadway Bridge and the new pedestrian bridge that will connect the Willamette Greenway to the Pearl District."


:: One Waterfront Place (Boora Architects) - image via Portland Architecture

It's a good project and a very good developer. They all are. But is that the point? I think One Waterfront Place and all of these projects would have happened and been plenty green without GIF funding. I personally know of a few innovative small projects that had a GIF funding or nothing element to them... these are all great projects, but when I hear grant-funding I imagine something that can provide that edge to make a vision a reality. There are a couple of smaller scale projects that recieved funding, but I'm guessing based on these previous submittals - it's going to make it less likely that innovative small-scale projects (which could provide an experimental laboratory for larger-scale projects) will even seek funding.

To follow this up, I will post later this week about the Oregon ASLA award winners, which were announced at a celebration last weekend. Stay tuned for more on this. And spinning around to round this back to landscape architecture, congratulations on the announcement of landmark status for Herbert Bayer's fantastic Earthworks (via Something About Maryman). Read more about Bayer at the TLCF website. That's a big win for the good guys!




:: Mill Creek Canyon Earthworks - image via City of Kent

It's an Eco-Planning World

Time to re-engage with the amazing eco-planning happening around the globe. We took a tongue-in-cheek look with the Suburb Eating Robots, as well as a more in depth and serious look at Auroville, a visionary community in southern India. For a great follow-up to this project, read Brice Maryman's first-person account of a design-build trip to Auroville, complete with video documentary that gives a great visual and personal account of the process. Looks like fun.

:: image via Something About Maryman

Taking mass-customization to a greater extend is the very unique ORDOS 100 collaborative project happening in Inner Mongolia. Led my Herzog & de Meuron, the project involved a unique platting of 100 parcels (by FAKE Design), and the subsequent selection by HdM of 100 architects from around the globe to design the individual villas.

:: image via Archidose

An overview from the website: "The scope of the project is to Develop 100 hundred villas in Ordos, Inner Mongolia, China, for the Client, Jiang Yuan Water Engineering Ltd. FAKE Design, Ai Wei Wei studio in Beijing, has developed the masterplan for the 100 parcels of land and will curate the project, while Herzog and de Meuron have selected the 100 architects to participate. The collection of 100 Architects hail from 27 countries around the globe. The project has been divided into 2 phases. The first phase is the development of 28 parcels while the second phase will develop the remaining 72. Each architect is responsible for a 1000 square meter Villa."

:: Zone B Site Plan - image via ORDOS 100

The most poignant comment about the layout comes via Archidose: "Looks like suburbia in Mongolia to me. Looks like it was designed by the client, not by the artist who collaborated with Herzog & de Meuron on the Bird's Nest, among other projects. It's apparently surrounded by more of the same, but it's disappointing nevertheless. The green space (in grey, running from the body of water on the left to the cluster of darker-grey cultural buildings on the right) attempts to salvage things, though its scale is a bit paltry."

It will be interesting to see how the build-out happens with the forced eclecticism. Also interesting is the concept of exporting the very western idea of suburbia, which is permeating China, Pakistan, Argentina, Europe, and Latin America. As mentioned in the USA Today article: "The suburbs represent, almost like a cliché, the American dream," says New York architect Kevin Kennon, who has worked in China and Pakistan and is the executive director of the Institute for Architecture and Urban Study. "I can own a piece of land, I can have my house on that land. … It allows people to point to something that they own and distinguish it from other houses, even if they look the same."

:: Brownsville or Beijing? - image via USA Today

One project that may offer a glimpse of both what ORDOS 100 will turn up architecturally - and a way of combating the homogenization that seems typical of suburban development is the Next-Gene20 project for the island of Taiwan. Via Archinect: "MVRDV, Kengo Kuma and Julien De Smedt are among the 20 architects designing 20 villas on the island of Taiwan. The Spaniard Fernando Menis, Berlin and LA based Graft, as well as 10 Taiwanese practices are among the other architects taking part."

Some project images via BDonline provide a glimpse of the diversity of this multi-designer approach.

:: Villa by Kengo Kuma - image via BDonline

:: Villa by Halim Suh - image via BDonline

:: Villa by Toshiko Mori - image via BDonline

:: Villa by Julien De Smedt - image via BDonline

:: Villa by Irving Hung-Hui Huang - image via BDonline

This may be the antidote to suburbia that is synonymous with row's of 'ticky-tacky little boxes', but in the economic sphere of development - does this make sense, or is it mere utopian thinking to imagine singular custom designs on a mass scale. It may not be affordable for the masses, whom are relegated to the cookie cutter subdivision and same variety of 3 houses. Perhaps the root of the issue is the pattern of development, so let's take a look at an idea of reinventing the suburban pattern.

:: Tessellated tile pattern - image via Treehugger

Treehugger offers one glimpse of this alternative through the work of Malaysian architect Mazlin Ghazali, who "...notes that "In developing countries only the very rich can afford to live in quarter-acre single-family houses located in a cul-de-sac. How can the cul-de-sac be made affordable for more people and for the environment? Can we have cul-de-sacs without sprawl?" He then builds on traditional Muslim tessilated designs to turn them into honeycombs with duplex, triplex, quadruplex or sextuplex units."

:: images via Treehugger

Or there are those not happy with the status quo who set out to create and live a different lifestyle. This lineage of utopian design and planning has a long and somewhat sordid past. Forbes magazine undertook a study of some of the successes and failures in the 'Utopia' special report. This requires some further posting, but a glimpse of the coverage, starting with successes, see a photo essay of 'Eight Modern Utopias' and the failures 'American Utopias'. Look for more on this report at a later date.

:: Findhorn Community - image via Forbes

:: Drop City Colorado - image via Forbes

When it comes down to it, the success or failure of eco-planning is not a singular question. It does rely on one silver bullet of planning, pattern, policy or design. Nor is it merely a question of lifestyle and utopian visionary thinking. All of these things succeed and fail in equal doses. And as we work to cure this and experiment - we also export our suburban ideaology and illness to other cultures. What makes one or the other concept work is the collective interweaving of good planning, flexible policy, appropriate design, and most importantly - people whom are open to and willing to make this work. I'd posit that our current suburban blight is less a design or planning issue than one of misguided and misunderstood social policy. That's where we will find these solutions... and these will continue to guide the myriad schemes and new ideas flooding our eco-planning world.