Landscape | IDEAS

Over the past decade programmers and developers have made monumental steps to deliver a digitally fabricated experience that simulates what we can comprehend, a three-dimensional environment that can be observed and manipulated through our input. My own experiences with the medium, however, have only underscored the fact that the simulation of a digital interface is fundamentally different than its real counterpart. This became abundantly clear during a walkable VR demonstration where the visual representation of a barrier did not restrict my movement. I could walk through objects and out the opposite side. This kind of disconnect means that although we can see and occasionally hear these new simulated realms, we are ultimately limited to being observers rather than occupants.

Technology cannot currently allow us to touch what we see and hear, and I wonder if it ever will. To experience physical objects with all of our senses could potentially lead to violent ends. Given the current parameters of visual and auditory experience, we can interact with digital worlds but they cannot interact with us. This condition is exemplified by how we view ourselves in these digital environments. From the user’s perspective, a digital representation of his or her body is not visible. Without being able to see relative objects, such as looking down one’s arms or glimpsing one’s torso, virtual space and digital realms exist as a disembodied and existential state.

Psychologically, these conditions are foreign to the human experience as we know it. Because the sensory input of touch is manifested throughout the body, why should digital environments recreate a body if it is not linked to your physical one? Without seeing one’s self, this current iteration of virtual spaces inherently creates a metaphysical experience that is not connected to the body and exists purely in the mind. Apart from dreams, this is the first instance that the human condition can operate independently from the body, from the reality of touch. What if we were to view such implementations as liberating, that we can create and inhabitant an entirely new reality, one that follows its own logic, instead of simulating ours?

Much of what we can rationalize is based around its relative size to that of the human body. The scale of objects and landscapes is how we gain understanding of a place or use. Navigating a digital environment without a representational body is navigating a world without scale, as there is nothing to make associations with. Remember Alice’s confusion when she fell down the rabbit hole and entered a “Wonderland” where her body could no longer be relied on to orient her? Virtual landscapes are devoid of physical sensorial input and endlessly fractal due to not having a relative scale.

As more applications such as VRchat allow for VR communication and landscapes, how might we begin to understand the implications of these environments and design to their specific conditions, specifically ones that recognize the separation of the mind and body? Disassociation from the body can allow the manifestation of bizarre and spectacular landscapes, but may also allow for a variety of people to connect and communicate through a shared experience regardless of physical limitations. These digital landscapes will create environments where voice and thought are predominant rather than the physical realm. Landscape architects could become prominent figures in how the spatial qualities of these digital environments are assembled. These spaces might not be physical environments at all, but may have the ability to be developed into new, habitable spaces that organically develop over time.

Evan Lee is a designer in the Laguna Beach studio.

Imagery from Shigeto: “Hovering” by 79 Ancestors, part of Territories VR episodes. To view full video, please visit its website at: http://bit.ly/2Ecm1sp

Collapse post

Cancel

Posted by Evan Lee
in Arts and Culture, Education
on 9 February, 2018

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

Increasingly, the influence of social media and the popularity of iconic imagery determines how, when, and where one should travel. The more an image is shared, viewed, or liked the more credibility a destination has. Yet, standards based solely on a photograph don’t consider the essence of the place. It’s human nature to want to… Read more »

Aware of these trends, Norway has invested more than $250 million toward the re-development of 18 National Tourist Routes in order to contest the present-day loss of nature-filled charm. Commissioned by the Norwegian Public Roads Administration, the 15-year project focuses on re-evaluating the concept of tourism by redefining these previously far-reaching spaces. Along the 1,025-mile expedition are 250 rest stops, picnic areas, and observation decks that seek to highlight the cultural, historical, and natural beauty of the spaces that many otherwise find themselves passing through. Each space exhibits an artistic or architectural intervention from an ever-growing list of noteworthy designers who do not pursue creating design spectacles, but more importantly seek to draw visitors outward, under, across, and within his or her surroundings. These projects epitomize the power of design to highlight the natural environment. Each project tells a story about the place and focuses on subtly complementing the surroundings in which they exist in order to allow for naturally occurring singularities to take center stage. In this way, these spaces begin to pull visitors further from their sometimes narrow, driven mindset toward one that allows them to construct their own awareness and interpretations within the spaces they inhabit. It is from these interpretations and experiences that we create our own unique spirit of places—the connections, moments, and individual identifications within a space that keep us returning.

As my graduation approached last year I decided to take the advice of many to invest in traveling. Three months, multiple countries, and countless peanut butter-and-jelly sandwiches later, I found myself accessing many of the roadways along the Western regions of Norway. Regarded as one of the most beautiful roads in the world, the Trollstiegen Visitor Centre is one of 5 architectural projects along the 66-mile Geiranger-Trollstigen tourist route and was a high point of my trip. Trollstiegen, translated as the Trolls Path, was designed by Norway-based architects Reiulf Ramstad Architects with one goal: to highlight the uniqueness of the surrounding landscape. The team focused on delicate interjections as a means to more effectively present nature without trying to change it. These interjections manifested in the creation of form and also materiality, seeking to erase the barrier between man and nature. Perched overlooking a fjord, the 15-hectare site places visitors over the cliff’s edge and connects them more directly within with the mountains, river, and sky. To many, this project’s success lies in the harmonious display of dynamic and static elements that highlight the pure and captivating beauty of the site’s surroundings.

Although the project celebrated 60 percent completion this year, its impact is already speaking volumes. The National Tourist Routes governmental initiative has inspired smaller collections of foundations, national parks, and private concerns to invest in the progress of other equally inspirational nature-focused commissions across Norway and has also stimulated the development of tourist-related businesses within these regions to meet the growing interests from both local and foreign visitors. According to the World Tourism Organization Yearbook of Tourism Statistics, visitation has risen from 2.8 million travelers in 1995 to 4.8 million in 2015. Another recent study conducted by Innovations Norway states that the highest volume of visitor interest lies in “experiencing nature.” To that end, one thing remains clear: these places must be visited to be experienced, something I can confidently recommend.

Chris Anderson is a designer in the Laguna Beach studio.

Collapse post

Cancel

Posted by Christopher Anderson
in Arts and Culture, Ecology
on 27 March, 2017

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

At last month’s 53rd World Congress of the International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA), in Turin, Italy, I had the privilege of discussing landscape architecture as a tool for urban/rural renewal in China. Together with two Chinese practitioners, I co-presented a talk designed to augment the conference theme of Tasting the Landscape: “Restore the Recipe: Old Core and Rural Renewal in China” focused on three significant issues, namely that the human scale of a place, its historical context, and the celebration of open space are pivotal to its success.

China has a rich history of creating a highly complex and functional urban fabric, and as the Chinese lifestyles continue to shift, there is an opportunity to evolve planning policies that create cities that are both reinvented from their past while also projecting toward something new. Municipalities and developers are gradually paying more attention to urban heritages and their transformations, especially in old cores. When the large-scale construction comes to an end, the effort of improving the finer grain may just be beginning.

While China continues its drastic urbanization process, rural China has been largely overlooked in the international/national media. It’s an issue of rural regions too often suffering from poor socio-economic capital and mismanagement of their tremendously valuable heritages. In recent years, the government has been attempting to improve the urban-rural relationship through measures such as reforming of property rights, reorganizing land use, securing food production, and re-establishing social infrastructure.

The nostalgia of an idyllic slow lifestyle has become more and more appealing to the wealthy urban middle class. Enabled by a more interconnected high-speed railway network, domestic tourism also flourishes in several countryside destinations. Add to this the reality that with fewer opportunities and more competitions in urban areas, developers and municipalities have started to look at the rural areas for alternative investment. From resorts to experimental farms, it appears that there are more creative, systematic design challenges to be had in combining rural life with rural preservation.

In addition to market-driven trends, there is another bottom-up force in play. Early immigrants and volunteers are reinvesting in their hometowns, or simply returning for greater opportunities away from the city. With their education, skillsets, and awareness, these people’s homecoming strengthens their connections to their roots, allowing them to grow even deeper. This condition has impacted the richness of not only the physical environment, but the people themselves. The recently founded NGO Rural Culture Renewal Volunteers Association (RCRA) is a good example of a platform that integrates such energy. It coordinates communication, volunteering, local participation, business incubation, and even crowdsourcing for various local infrastructure construction events.

In fact, the current economic slowdown offers practitioners a moment to recalibrate the existing “growth model” and redefine the role of landscape architects in such developing contexts. Most of the landscape professionals in China were trained during a market characterized by a sheer demand in construction; but the profession can contribute far more than manufacturing drawings in its capability to define meaningful connections. At the very least, it’s a vast kitchen with enough chefs working on restoring lost recipes. People and their land are simply inseparable: While China offers opportunities in landscape planning and design, it also calls for responsibility from landscape professionals who witness such unprecedented changes to advocate for, and enrich, the built environment on a human scale.

Check out the 2016 IFLA conference content.

Rendering of the proposed growth model by SWA for the Sanyanjing District, an historic neighborhood in Nanchang.
Chih-Wei G.V. Chang is a designer in the Sausalito studio.

Collapse post

Cancel

Posted by IDEASWA
in Landscape Urbanism, Restoration
on 2 May, 2016

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

As a professional designer, I sometimes forget how much I can contribute as a citizen to making my community vital. Working with City Farm Share outside my work has encouraged me to engage and work more with local citizen groups directly. City Farm Share (CFS) was formed by a group of Oakland, California, citizens who… Read more »

City Farm Share (CFS) was formed by a group of Oakland, California, citizens who aspire to promote urban agriculture. It aims to addresses two urban demands: gaining access to vacant lands and starting more community gardens. It works in partnership with the Oakland Community Land Trust (OakCLT) to provide administrative support, technical assistance, and access to resources for everyone who wants to grow their own food locally.

According to CFS’s own research, Oakland has far fewer community garden plots per capita when compared to other cities of its size. Almost all existing community gardens have a long waiting list. There’s a high demand, as yet unmet, for land to grow one’s own food.

The CFS vison states that community gardening and urban agriculture are a form of expressive civic democracy, a means by which everyone can engage in community building by reclaiming land, providing employment and education,

and producing local, fresh organic food. It hopes to protect and expand urban agriculture and strengthen community-government links. Three diverse models—community managed farms, membership-based community gardens and urban agriculture incubators—will be implemented to assure broad participation of citizens and to benefit the whole city socially, economically, and environmentally.

Besides various positive impacts, CFS has another ambitious goal—to systematically improve the overall urban landscape and quality of life. It is the main reason I was drawn to join this advocacy. For many landscape architects, creating a better environment for the whole society is the ultimate goal as well as the motivation. Whereas Sir Ebenezer Howard’s garden city eventually triggered suburbs, CFS’s garden city vision is trying to turn urban vacant lands into community gardens.

It might be too early to say what can ultimately be achieved through CFS, yet I do have some initial reflections on my participation.

1. Learning local needs. Most CFS members are closely connected with different local citizen groups such as development NPOs, organic community farming groups, restaurant entrepreneurs, public health groups, social workers, and schools. Through frequent discussion and sharing in numerous meetings, I learned what the local community really needs as well as all kinds of local development issues.

2. Working with so many disciplines brings a broader perspective. Members with different backgrounds share their own knowledge on urban farming and vacant lands; their various perspectives have given me a multi-level understanding of these city-wide issues.

3. I am not just a designer. As a young professional, I sometimes forget that I am also a citizen and can be a vital part of my community. There are a lot of ways to make a positive impact on society.

4. Social impact takes time. Advocacy requires a careful process to be impactful. It needs many small steps to make a jump. Patience and passion are needed throughout constant communication and various actions. It is a part of daily life rooted in the community.

Currently, CFS is making efforts to help more people become aware of its vision and hopes to put the advocacy into action in the near future. There is still a long way to go, however I believe with more and more people’s understanding and support, eventually this will bring a very impactful change to this most dynamic and diverse city in the Bay Area.

Graphic courtesy of City Farm Share

Collapse post

Cancel

Posted by Yu-Chung Li
in Community, Urban Agriculture
on 21 November, 2014

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

Last year the San Francisco Office was excited to offer pro-bono design and documentation services to a halfway-house nonprofit residential treatment center. The plan was to solicit material donations and have a volunteer construction day to build therapy gardens for the facility. We collaborated with the organization’s directors and staff to make a survey, conduct soil… Read more »

Unfortunately, the nonprofit didn’t own the property, something our design team was unaware of. When the landlord was shown our plans, they flatly refused any improvements. They no longer wanted the halfway-house as a tenant and had no interest in the grounds being improved for residents. Thus, a couple hundred volunteer hours abruptly culminated in a complete lack of action.

As the informal project manager for this effort, I felt both disappointed and guilty for wasting my team’s time. I should have thought to ask if the organization we were working for owned the facility. Based on the confidence the program director had about the grounds, it never occurred to me that this would be an issue. A hard lesson learned.

Reflecting on this experience, I remembered a document developed by DesignConnect, a volunteer community design organization at Cornell University. Each semester, cities and towns in Upstate New York apply for student teams to study local issues and produce vision documents. Over a number of projects, DesignConnect has gained institutional experience as to what volunteer opportunities are likely to be most productive for the communities and the student teams, and has developed questions to evaluate them. Ask yourself the following three key questions before committing to a pro-bono service so you can avoid traps like the one we encountered in our experience:

Who are you working for, and what is their interest in and capacity for the project?

The “client,” whether a nonprofit organization, community advocate, city agency, or individual, should be clearly identified before dedicating time to a project. As a design firm, many of our pro-bono efforts focus on making physical interventions in the world, although sometimes we are also educators and advocates. For those projects that require physical interventions, it’s vital to have a client who will take ownership of the project and maintain or operate it after the volunteer effort is over. Some clients will request volunteer services for projects they are not particularly passionate about or dedicated to because the services are free. A simple strategy to filter out opportunistic pro-bono clients is to request a nominal fee. In addition to passion, can your client handle their part of the project? With volunteer efforts, your commitment can sometimes extend into developing the social capital behind a program, whether you’re ready for that role or not.

Who are the decision makers for the project?

This was the key question that I should have investigated for the halfway house. Sometimes your client will say they are the only decision maker. You should push them for more information. Who has to provide approvals for the project? Is it a school district, neighborhood group? Who has jurisdiction over the land in question, and who are the owners? Once you determine the decision makers, then you can better understand the scope of your commitment. Engaging all the decision makers at the beginning of the project is important to avoid being blindsided later in the process.

Who will use the project, and why do they merit volunteer work?

As landscape architects and planners, much of our effort is already in the realm of social impact design. But there are many reasons to volunteer: a particular progressive issue that we typically don’t get to work on, a human need in an unfunded situation, an interesting design challenge. There is also strategic volunteerism, where we do pro-bono work for a client or project we are interested in developing a professional relationship with. It is important to identify why you and your team are committing to this project, and who will benefit from the work.

At SWA, our volunteer work is just as valuable as our paid work, and we want to make the most impact with our dedicated time. There are opportunities in pro-bono work for deeply fulfilling work that benefits society, and I encourage everyone to participate in SWA’s commitment to the 1% program. Asking these questions should help other teams avoid pitfalls and be more effective in their volunteer efforts.

Collapse post

One Response to “Social Impact Design Practice: Key Questions to Ask Before Volunteering”

Jon's products

It’s remarkable to pay a visit this site and reading the views of all
friends concerning this piece of writing, while I am also keen of getting familiarity.
August 5th, 2014 Reply

Cancel

Posted by Chris Hardy
in Social Impact
on 5 March, 2014

1 comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

SWA leads an option studio at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Fall Semester 2013 “Essayons!” meaning “Let us try” in French, was the motto first used by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in 1775. The motto has since evolved to “Building Strong,” reflecting its mission to “strengthen the nation’s security,… Read more »

SWA leads an option studio at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Fall Semester 2013

“Essayons!” meaning “Let us try” in French, was the motto first used by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in 1775. The motto has since evolved to “Building Strong,” reflecting its mission to “strengthen the nation’s security, energize the economy, and reduce risks from disasters.” The notion of “Building Soft” presents a new paradigm, arguing that the parameters presented by the Corps could be achieved through a more integrated approach, one which takes into consideration the social, economic, and ecological priorities playing an equal part in the conception and reconstruction of our infrastructural systems.

“Building Soft” was the focus of an immersive Harvard Design Studio led by SWA principals Ying-Yu Hung and Gerdo Aquino. Students were challenged to envision the Los Angeles River playing a pivotal role in transforming the City of Los Angeles, where ecological systems are synchronous with development, infrastructure, and popular culture. As an extension of their recently published book, Landscape Infrastructure: case studies by SWA, Hung and Aquino positioned the studio as an ongoing investigation into the potential of existing and new infrastructure as polyfunctional systems supported by ecological, social, and cultural phenomena. Fourteen disparate sites inextricably linked to the L.A. River infrastructures—flood control channels, power lines, freeways, and rails—were identified by the City of Los Angeles as areas ripe for exploration and research. Through a series of fieldtrips, workshops, and lectures in Los Angeles, students sought opportunities to redefine new open-space typologies, including river-specific recreation venues, habitats for avian and aquatic species, air pollution filtration machines, development scenarios, and infrastructure as spectacle.

Local public agencies and nonprofit groups were also invited to participate in the studio, providing the students with substantial background data and statistics, community input, and historical points of view. In addition, the preferred “Alternative 20,” outlined in the recent Army Corps’ “Los Angeles River Ecosystem Restoration Integrated Feasibility Report,” suggested projects to be undertaken, which provided the students with further proof that the path towards transforming the LA River is close at hand. Estimated to cost in excess of $800 million, “Alternative 20” will provide the City of Los Angeles with the most comprehensive approach toward habitat restoration and will fulfill the city’s need for open space.

To further deepen the students understanding of the river’s potential, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority provided the students with lectures and a rare opportunity to kayak the river and experience its more natural section (soft bottom), known as the Glendale Narrows.

As a repository of creative ideas, the studio environment calls for speculation, risk taking, and challenge against conventional thinking. As a result, the river’s potential is revealed through the lens of those who are unencumbered and devoid of pre-conceptions. Considering that none of the 14 students was from the L.A. area, the range of design proposals was incredibly thoughtful and visionary. Some of the ideas proposed included a migrating bird habitat and a gigantic smog vacuum looming over one of the major highway interchanges—the variety and depth of their explorations complemented the scale and the complexity of the issues at hand for a city of nearly nine million people spanning 500 square miles. The final week culminated with a day-long review of the student work, followed by a mini-symposium where invited guests, faculty, and students shared their collective thoughts on design, ecology, and the latent optimism that surrounds the future of the river and the diverse communities it will undoubtedly serve.

Collapse post

Cancel

Posted by GerdoAquino and Ying-YuHung
in Landscape Infrastructure, News
on 31 January, 2014

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

Posts Tagged: Landscape

Landscapes for the Untethered Body

Leave a Reply

Connecting Tourists to Norway’s Landscapes

Leave a Reply

Tasting the Landscape of China’s Rural Development

Leave a Reply

Jon's products

Building Soft: A new (landscape) infrastructure for Los Angeles

Leave a Reply