Landscape | IDEAS

I was honored with an invitation from the Landscape Institute’s Director Paul Lincoln to give the keynote address at the organization’s annual conference. Here is a summary of what I presented. Architecture, industrial design, and engineering are thought of as first tier professions and considered part of the elite design culture by the general public…. Read more »

I was honored with an invitation from the Landscape Institute’s Director Paul Lincoln to give the keynote address at the organization’s annual conference. Here is a summary of what I presented.

Architecture, industrial design, and engineering are thought of as first tier professions and considered part of the elite design culture by the general public. Despite the important role landscape architects play in creating our outdoor and urban environments, even the best designed spaces recede into the background. Landscape architects need to take responsibility for the visibility and recognition of their profession, and address its shortcomings.

It’s unacceptable that we are often willing to let our landscapes disappear as an invisible narrative — letting nature take over as author and authority. If we seek recognition and political capital then there is a responsibility for greater legibility in landscape design work. To secure political capital, landscape architects need to articulate clear and legible ideas.

Nature is dead. There are three types of landscapes: First Nature – Primordial landscape untouched by humans. Second Nature – landscape influenced by humans. And Third Nature – landscapes created by humans.

In the United States, there is still a prevalent cultural belief in Nature as a primordial, untouched, and uninhabited condition. The notion of Primordial landscape is a political myth which has contributed to the confusion in understanding Landscape. As people, we often struggle to see ourselves as a part of Nature and consequently we struggle to take responsibility for it. Second Nature would include places like working farms, fisheries, etc. However, most of the world is Third Nature, yet most people don’t recognize the fact that almost all of our landscapes are created by humans. Even our National Parks System, which has preserved large tracts of the nation’s most beautiful landscape, has been directly affected by the work of landscape architects, politicians, and planners. The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the park boundaries, and the way the roads and trails meander through the open space and coincidentally lead hikers to the best views available, are all examples of Third Nature – Nature, as Americans understand it, is a controlled environment.

Context is both cultural and geographic. Culture plays a significant role in the perception of Landscape. The cultural ideas of landscape can be either valuable or outdated and inappropriate. They are helpful when paying homage to our traditions and history. But the US cultural ideal of a lush lawn is impractical and irresponsible in a desert and recreating an Italian garden in Texas does not relate to its place. Because of these cultural mindsets, well designed landscapes are often invisible landscapes. This is a conundrum for the profession. A landscape that ties in with its surrounding is often appropriate, but we need to still make people aware that they are in a designed environment.

This confusion is aided by the consumer model. One of the negative effects of globalization is a generic pastiche in the landscape where there is complete disconnect between consumer products and the environment they are absorbed into. This global, non-contextual approach contributes to nostalgia about landscape, which quite often does more harm than good. Home Depot, Lowes and the other big box chain retailers that supply landscaping materials and plants sell the same products in Atlanta, Georgia as they do in Reno, Nevada despite radically different climates. This not only propagates the inclusion of thirsty plants like roses and lawns in arid landscapes and discourages water conserving landscapes; it diminishes the value and appreciation of the native species and surroundings.

So what should the profession do? Landscape architects should work in our own time and develop our landscapes based on a culture of ideas reflecting contemporary life. Landscape architecture should be made a commodity and given brand recognition. Landscapes should not shy away from making a statement. Landscapes should be useful. Landscapes should closely identify with Place. Landscapes should be innovative. Above all, Landscapes should be about the big idea.

Have strong ideas and think big.

Collapse post

Comments are closed.

Posted by ReneBihan
in Landscape is the Answer
on 20 January, 2012

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

I had a good talk with Jez Abbot from Horticulture Week about how the British export of its traditional landscape has been so successful that there is little interest in landscapes that are appropriate to its time and space. People are accustomed to boxwood and lush lawns as a designed space, so much that the… Read more »

Posted by ReneBihan
in Landscape is the Answer
on 20 January, 2012

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

In the January issue of Landscape Architecture Magazine, I was fortunate to have my opinion about the state of our profession included on the back page. You can read my essay on the ASLA blog The Dirt. I’m thrilled that the post has spurred a few comments and here is my response to those: While… Read more »

Posted by ReneBihan
in Landscape is the Answer
on 20 January, 2012

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

I recently sat down with Michael Hammond from “This Week” with World Architecture News to talk about the significant role that landscape architecture plays in the urban environment. In cities, our contribution to the public realm is essential to cities that people want to work, socialize, recreate and live in. Landscape is a strong system… Read more »

Posted by ReneBihan
in Landscape is the Answer
on 20 January, 2012

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

This year’s Urban Land Institute (ULI) Fall Meeting was held in Los Angeles and I had the opportunity to speak on a panel titled, “From Eye Sore to a Must See: Creating Urban Parks from Thin Air and Adding Real Estate Value” moderated by Kirk Humphreys of Humphreys Corporation (and former Oklahoma City mayor) and alongside Daniel Biederman of Bryant Park Management Corporation and Biederman Redevelopment Venture Corporation and Vaughn Davies, Principal at AECOM. My presentation focused on what creative solutions can be brought to our aging urban infrastructure.

I shared case studies of SWA projects such as Milton Street Park, the Buffalo Bayou Promenade and Katy Trail to demonstrate how public open space can be integrated into a city’s infrastructure to enhance community use, increase value in adjacent properties and nurture a new, attractive destination in the public realm.

The aim of my talk looked at two questions:

1) Can infrastructure be multi-functional? and

2) Can newly created open space increase land value while solving issues of ecology, programming, safety and access?

In the Buffalo Bayou Promenade example, office building rents dramatically increased in 2006-2007, the same year that the promenade was completed. The rents in these buildings have since stabilized at that rate, despite the downturn in the economy.

Biederman’s focus demonstrated the real value that can be seen in creative programming to revitalize a park. Notably, he shared data on Bryant Park’s transformation in the 90’s having dramatically benefited the adjacent Grace Office Building, which experienced a 114% increase in rents from 1990-2002, versus comparable rents adjacent to times Square rising 67%, Grand Central’s 55% and Rockefeller Center’s 41%.

Davies’ brought to the table the conceptual design of cap parks over freeways and its promise of connectivity and beautification for urban areas, specifically AECOM’s proposal for a linear cap park over the 101 freeway in Los Angeles.

This open forum discussion is another step in furthering the conversation of Landscape Infrastructure and its potential to make our cities better.

[For a CD copy of the presentation, please contact us as mdolejs@swagroup.com.]

Image Gallery:

Collapse post

Comments are closed.

Posted by GerdoAquino
in Landscape Infrastructure
on 20 January, 2012

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

September 2011 marks the three year anniversary of the opening of the new California Academy of Sciences museum. As the project landscape architect — led by John Loomis in our Sausalito office — we look back at the green roof design and its performance. Living Roof Performance Stormwater Capture The 106,500 square foot green roof… Read more »

Living Roof Performance

Stormwater Capture

The 106,500 square foot green roof absorbs 3.5 million gallons of rainwater each year, reduces stormwater runoff by 93%.

Natural Building Ventilation

Cool air runs down the steep slopes of the hills on the roof, funnels it into the open-air plaza and vents warm air from the building through the skylights. Skylights are mounted with sensors that gauge the interior temperatures and automatically open at a given threshold. The roof keeps the interior temperature an average of 10 degrees cooler than a standard roof would and, thanks to the evapo-transporation of the retained moisture on the roof surface, animals and people benefit from its natural cooling effect.

Energy Production

The 60,000 photovoltaic cells that surround the living roof creeate shade for pedestrians below and generate approximately 213,000 kilowatt-hours of energy per year. This prevents the release of 405,000 pounds of greenhouse gas emission into the air.

Public Education

Its role in promoting public awareness of living roofs was part of the reason the project was awarded LEED Platinum certification. The museum expected to see 1.6 million visitors annually, but the actually visitor count has far exceeded those projections.

Native Habitat

The living roof is planted with nine native California plant species including Fragaria chiloensis, Prunella vulgaris, Armeria maritime, Sedum spathulitholium, Layia platyglossa, Lupinus bicolor, Eschscholzia californica, Plantago erecta, and Lasthenia californica. Each native plant attracts a variety of native insects, birds, moths, wasps, bees, and other bugs essential to the bay area ecosystem. We tested, with the help of our ecology consultant Rana Creek, a total of 25 native plant species on site for their resilience within the micro climate of the museums location. Read the California Academy’s living-roof habitat monitoring report.

Heat Island Mitigation

While evidence of heat island mitigation is anecdotal, The museum area is cooler than average surrounding area temperatures, but this could be largely attributed to its location within Golden Gate Park. The fact that the roof is irrigated to keep the plants looking good all year likely contributes to lower termperatures than if the plants were allowed to go dormant during the warmest months. The new building footprint is also 1.5 acres less than the original and these 1.5 acres were returned to the site as green space. On the flip side, arguments can be made that the building itself obstructs cool air movement from the ocean. There are currently no reports that confirm or deny these claims.

Cost Comparison

- The total project cost was $488 million.

- The final construction cost was $258 million.

- The cost of achieving LEED Platinum was 8 percent of the hard cost of the project.

- The cost of the green roof was $19 per square foot.

- The cost of the green roof construction was an additional $9-16 per square foot, yielding a total of $28 – $35 per square foot, approximately 3 to 4 times the cost of traditional roofs (including cool roofs qualifying for LEED solar reflectance credit), which cost approximately $6 to $10 per square foot.

Challenges

- The use of irrigation on the green roof over time is still subject to a debate. While the design intent is to remove irrigation systems and let the green roof run dry during the summer seasons (representative of a native California landscape) – the image of the green roof has become so iconic that the roof is still being maintained – and irrigated – today. The long-term vision is to remove the irrigation system.

- The roof can only be accessed through the elevator to the roof. Unfortunately, the maintenance crew has to use the same elevator – and there is no storage capability for supplies on the roof.

- It remains to be seen how the roof will last over time. Most buildings require long-term weathering and re-waterproofing. In 40- or 60-year’s time, what will be the procedure for updating and maintaining the roof and building, particularly one of innovative and unique construction?

- Deemed a “high maintenance superstar,” by writers such as Linda McIntyre (LAM), the roof is both celebrated and lamented for its high cost in time, money, and energy. While critics state that the cost is excessive and could have been used to implement a greater quantity of green roofs; McIntyre points out the difficulty of quantifying the success of a design that “captures the imaginations of millions of people,” that teaches and educates millions of people, communicating that design and sustainability matters and inspiring dozens of new green designs as a result.

Image Gallery: