SWA | IDEAS | Page 5

When we talk about a great rooftop space, what’s the first thing that comes to mind? A green roof with a comfortable dining area? A crowded bar? Or, a swimming pool with great city views? Think outside the sandbox: Two rooftop playgrounds show that there are many creative ways to utilize the roof spaces, and… Read more »

Housed in the 10-story, 600,000-square foot former International Shoe Company, the sprawling City Museum, in St. Louis, contains quite possibly the ultimate urban playground. The first time I visited was on a hot summer day, in July. But even the heat couldn’t stop people coming to this unique place. The building itself is fulfilled with wonderful adventures such as slides and tunnels that go from floor to floor. The most popular part of the museum, however, is the rooftop area, which was filled with children of different ages climbing, laughing, and screaming. The rooftop playground was developed vertically, with a sky-high jungle gym making use of two repurposed airplanes, multi-floor slides, a 30-foot-high Ferris wheel, and a cantilevered school bus that juts out beyond the roof’s edge. Making full use of the space above at different heights, and also considering spaces around the rooftop area, offers a totally new way to play, and to see the city.

Although the City Museum in St. Louis is a great example of an urban rooftop playground, a 30-foot-high Ferris wheel is not always possible on other rooftop spaces, and not always necessary either. Another example of playground, in Tiantai County, China, presents an option for how a rooftop playground can help improve students’ lives when schools in cities have been surrounded by high-rise buildings, with the activity space for children becoming smaller and smaller.

In September of 2014, this elementary school’s rooftop oval athletic track officially opened, with students running and playing on the elevated space for the first time. This running track fulfills the educational activity needs of 1,600 to 1,800 students. The design represented China in the 14th Architectural Biennale in Venice. Critics insist that design like this cannot offer the students a real functional playground site because a rooftop playground does not provide a safe place during an emergency situation. Nonetheless, compared to a concrete rooftop with no amenities, this rooftop playground brings many health benefits and joy to students studying there.

These two cases are very different: one is artistic and whimsical, while the other is a simple, highly functional design. And both create new possibilities for the utilization of rooftop spaces in urban environments. With imagination leading the design process, more rooftop playgrounds may show up in the future, contributing to the vitality of urban neighborhoods.

Miao Yu is a designer in the Laguna Beach studio. Photo of MonstroCity by Patrick Giblan.

Collapse post

Leave a Reply to Durp

Cancel

Posted by Miao Yu
in Arts and Culture, Social Impact
on 5 August, 2016

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

This post is the second installation covering the Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture (CELA) conference last March. Where will future generations of landscape architects be trained? Will universities, the brick-and-mortar temples of learning, give way to more fluid forums for teaching in our digital age? What consequences might that have for the profession? This… Read more »

This post is the second installation covering the Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture (CELA) conference last March.

Where will future generations of landscape architects be trained? Will universities, the brick-and-mortar temples of learning, give way to more fluid forums for teaching in our digital age? What consequences might that have for the profession? This was another topic that stirred up emotions among the CELA attendees.

Caren Yglesias, of UC Berkeley, teaches landscape architecture courses online, and elaborated on the benefits of this approach. First and foremost, the format offers greater flexibility for students that work, have families, or cannot live in proximity to campus. Yglesias stressed that the courses do require continuous engagement in online discussions from both students and teachers, but she also noted how the “delay” between exercises and the required responses allow students more time to process experiences and organize their thoughts – something that benefits especially shy and non-native speakers who may otherwise avoid participation. Similarly, she argued that the absence of physical appearances, gender, age, or other defining features contributes to a more equal platform for communication and learning online.

Flexible schedules, delayed responses, and anonymous interaction. While these characteristics of online courses can make students’ lives easier, it can be questioned how well they prepare them for work in a field that is deadline-driven, fast-paced, and team-oriented. But whether we like it or not (and indeed, Yglesias received much pushback from the audience), there is no doubt that the premise of education is changing. Not only are modes of teaching shifting, but also the ways in which university programs are structured and degrees assigned. An increasing number of universities are offering different kinds of certificates as alternatives for students who don’t have the desire or means to pursue a full MLA, or who wish to build upon studies in other fields towards a career in landscape architecture.

Randy Weatherly, president of CLARB, noted that while this development makes it easier for some people to enter into the profession, it can also create confusion as to what kind of degree or certificate represents what kind of knowledge. Greater variation within landscape architecture education might increase the need for professional assessment, leading to expansions or alterations of the current licensure standards.

Despite the clear divide between digital advocates and defenders of academic traditions at CELA, the future of landscape architecture education can hardly be debated as a matter of either/or. While academic and professional standards need to be maintained, there is no purpose in funneling all aspiring landscape architecture students down an identical educational path. With different routes toward practice, individuals with diverse experiences, skill sets, and perspectives can help increase our profession’s ability to address the complex and cross-disciplinary issues of our times.

Lovisa Kjerrgren, a designer in the Laguna Beach studio, presented her winning entry for the 2015 Wayne Grace Memorial Student Competition, “Pretty Heroic,” as part of the conference Film track at the CELA conference.

Collapse post

Leave a Reply to Durp

Cancel

Posted by Lovisa Kjerrgren
in Education
on 28 June, 2016

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

In mid-March the annual conference for the Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture (CELA) brought teachers, researchers, and design professionals together in Utah to present and discuss various topics related to landscape architecture education, research, and practice. Two of the topics questioned will be discussed separately in this two-part blog post: 1) The usefulness of… Read more »

Research – What, Where, and for Whom?

Is academic research in landscape architecture of any real use to the profession? Or is most of it merely the theorization and quantification of common sense, structured to be quickly conducted and packaged to be easily publishable in peer-reviewed journals?

These questions were brought to scrutiny and debate with both humor and urgency by Marc Treib, professor emeritus of architecture at UC Berkeley. Half-jokingly comparing landscape architecture academia to a medieval guild, “creating a sense of its own importance but remaining marginal to practice,” he criticized a culture of learning that ranks the word above the act, and creates a rift rather than a bridge between theory and practice.

By and large, researchers at universities are required to consistently publish results in peer-reviewed journals in order to advance their academic careers. While this “publish or perish” principle fuels many academic initiatives, it does not inherently promote practically useful research. Indeed, Treib argued that studies often “succeed” by eliminating so many contingent factors that they become inapplicable to the complexity of the real world. Further, there is little incentive to publish findings and ideas in forums accessible to the broader profession since trade magazines and blogs – while often having substantially larger readership – lack academic recognition.

It is certainly not the case that all research is useless or all practice void of scientific underpinning. The problem is a system that holds the publication of results as an end goal in itself – valued over the potential application of the findings – and thereby diminishes opportunities to influence real change. While theoretical knowledge can be incredibly useful, and even highly abstracted ideas can challenge and inspire our way of thinking and designing in constructive ways, we must ultimately test ideas in real-life projects in order to evaluate their potential.

But in contrast to Treib’s harsh assessment of the academic contribution to practice – and, symptomatically perhaps, not addressed during this particular discussion – an increasing number of design firms are launching their own research initiatives, exploring everything from new materials and technologies to ecological and social processes. As Anya Domlesky highlighted in her 2015 Patrick Curran Fellowship project – itself being an example of such an in-house effort – this represents a growing trend across multiple design industries.

The traditional boundaries between research and practice are shifting and blurring. While the discussion at CELA used broad strokes to paint this complex situation, the conference itself offered many examples of highly useful academic research projects. The question that lingers is how different kinds of research efforts can be closer integrated, and better linked, to practice. Landscape architects of our day are facing increasingly complex contexts of work, and in response to new issues both researchers and designers need to draw upon each other’s knowledge and expertise, and work to establish new interfaces between academia and practice, new paths from idea to implementation. Ultimately, as Treib reminded us, the underlying concern in landscape architecture both as a profession and as a discipline should be one and the same – careful consideration of how design responds to and can improve upon the human condition.

Collapse post

Leave a Reply to Durp

Cancel

Posted by Lovisa Kjerrgren
in Education
on 10 June, 2016

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

Music, movies, T.V. shows, social media, instant messaging, restaurant reviews and recommendations, shopping, breaking news: The dynamics of my daily activities have one thing in common—dependency on the Internet. Not including work, I’m connected three hours a day. A majority of my recreational time includes streaming music on my commute, winding down with a Netflix binge, and constantly refreshing my Instagram feed. For years I imagined that sending messages, uploading comments on social media apps, and streaming music occurred via some imaginary gust of wind that transmitted my commands from my device to those I was trying to reach.

Delving a little deeper I discovered an intricate system of infrastructure and energy required to make these commands work. One major component is Data Centers, or Sever Farms, which are large-sized buildings that hold a certain amount of servers for designated websites—up to 10 acres for one Google site. Data Centers receive information that is processed or sent through the Internet to its host site, and then rebounds back to the Internet user. Imagine how many times that process occurs in even one minute.

Although there is certainly a move toward creating greener server farms, many companies, Apple among them, are still connected to local grids that run off of coal and other fossil fuels. Carbon emissions emitted from worldwide Internet use currently exceed those of air travel. Every search, Facebook comment, video download, or article browsed requires information to be transmitted to the data center and then returned back to our devices. It is estimated that one Google search releases from 0.2 to 7 grams of CO2 into the atmosphere. That means that the pollution contributed by one Google search is equivalent to that of driving my car anywhere from 3 inches to 52 feet.

Although Google is one of my most frequently visited sites, much of my Internet time is directed elsewhere. It is estimated that every second one person spends on the Internet will generate 20 milligrams of CO2, equivalent to 70grams of CO2 an hour. Those documentaries I stream on Netflix could be costing up to 150grams of CO2 per view. My roughly three hours a day, every day, generates 1,500 grams of CO2 by the end of the week!

As difficult as those figures may be for us to absorb, we clearly should find ways to mitigate our impact. One change requiring minimal effort is to delete old junk email accounts, or unsubscribe from email newsletters we never read. On average, each email sent and read produces 0.3-4 grams of C02. We can also stream less by watching movies using a DVD player or playing music from the iTunes library. Limiting our overall Internet use would also make a big difference—reduced greenhouse gases and improved quality of life by connecting instead back into the physical world.

Jessica Reyes is an assistant in the Los Angeles studio. Image of Facebook server hall in Sweden courtesy of Wikimedia.

Collapse post

Leave a Reply to Durp

Cancel

Posted by Jessica Reyes
in Ecology
on 27 May, 2016

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

Landscape Architecture as an aesthetic discipline may at times seem irrelevant in the face of such pressing problems as global warming, social inequity, resource depletion, and habitat loss. But there is a fundamental aspect of what we do that tackles these issues, with landscape architects a part of interdisciplinary teams. This movement, if you will,… Read more »

This movement, if you will, can encompass the specification of recycled content and the parametric modeling of coastal revetments. We participate whenever we push our projects, clients, and communities to consider data as part of the design, when we reach out to large groups through social media to contribute to democratic design processes, and when we collaborate with horizontally structured interdisciplinary teams. In return, we experience a growing sense of empowerment and capacity; we’re part of an idealistic and values-driven practice that at once ignites a designer’s passion and adds a touch of whimsy to our work. We are the Neo-Victorians.

Like Olmsted and Downing, we have the benefit of following a cresting wave of innovation in tangentially related industries. Olmsted first used asphalt, patented in 1870, to reduce noise from carriages in Central Park; Portland Cement was invented in the 1850s; the Bessemer process was patented in 1856. The first reinforced concrete bridge was built in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park in 1889. The Victorians were inventing urban parks with new high-tech tools developed during the industrial revolution. Neo-Victorians have the information revolution as our wave. We came into practice after the hard work of adapting computer technology to design occurred; we expect open access to information, and using CAD, 3D modeling, GIS and cloud-based collaborative tools to enable precision, processing, and systems analysis.

The similarities between generations is also aspirational. Olmsted’s generation of urban park designers sought to improve the quality of life for the public. Neo-Victorians come out of school with the desire to change our environment and communities for the better. We are embracing the challenges of an urbanizing world undergoing climate change and the Anthropocene. We are exploring the relationship between design and social justice. Public Architecture’s 1% program, B-Corporations, non-profit design firms, and activist designers all push issues at the front of practice.
Since the 1980s, the growth of concept-based design curriculum has become pervasive. Today, “Draw ‘til it’s beautiful” and problem solving is not sufficient without a strong narrative. In seeking narrative, designers are trained to develop higher levels of awareness around the site, as well as the politics of place and systems. Their interventions are tied, however tenuously, to these networks of ideas and this pedagogy develops the expectation of higher levels of meaning to practice. Concept-based design education has raised a generation of unabashed idealists who see landscape architecture not as a job, but as a lifestyle decision.

When considering how landscape architecture as a discipline will address the world’s future, the answers are already embedded in our collective practice. Neo-Victorians are diverse and pluralistic, unhesitatingly technical and optimistic. This mandates the integration of environmental amenities and infrastructure; community involvement; and an aesthetic whereby digital custom fabrications welcome ornamentation.

Neo-Victorians are everywhere: small research-oriented firms, government, nonprofits, and corporate offices. These different types of practice provide varied channels and support for elevating the discipline. Work such as Kate Orff’s Oyster-Techture or Petrochemical America integrates real data and research methods into design processes, revealing charismatic ideas for intervention and experimentation. Challenging typical funding and business practice, Mass Design Group’s work in Rwanda identified the issue first, and the team applies as much creative process to funding its work as to its physical design. SWA Group’s Landscape Infrastructure practice integrates public space amenities with large-scale infrastructure systems such as the Buffalo Bayou Park and flood control system, in Houston, Texas.

Neo-Victorians have a huge advantage over the Victorians: there are so many more of us, and we come from all over, with every culture and background influencing our inspirations. We practice with the last 150 years of technical advancement, cultural development, and design experimentation at our fingertips. We will develop many strategies to overcome the looming crises of our times. Many will not work, but those that do will inevitably have major implications.

Imagine today’s cities without the benefit of Olmsted and the Victorian designers. Tomorrow’s communities will look back on the Neo-Victorians as igniters of an explosion of ideas who just started to harness the power of the digital age to inform place. As we continue to focus on concept, values, and rigor we can look forward to a future enriched by the romantic belief that we can make a difference, and find nobility in giving our best selves to our work.

Chris Hardy is a landscape architect in the San Francisco studio and the creator of the montage accompanying this post.

Collapse post

One Response to “Who Are the Neo-Victorians?”

Durp

With this good article, a lot of light is shed as to how landscape architecture is the future we need if we have to overcome the current urban problems.
June 28th, 2016 Reply

Leave a Reply to Durp

Cancel

Posted by Chris Hardy
in Landscape Infrastructure, Landscape Urbanism, Urbanism & Planning
on 13 May, 2016

1 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

Leave a Reply to Durp

Cancel

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

Be the first to comment

Share this post
Facebook
Twitter

Posts Tagged: SWA

The Future of Landscape Architecture Education – Many Paths to Practice?

Leave a Reply to Durp

Research and Practice in Landscape Architecture: Is there potential for a productive union?

Leave a Reply to Durp

Internet Use, Data Farms, and Your Carbon Footprint

Leave a Reply to Durp

Who Are the Neo-Victorians?

One Response to “Who Are the Neo-Victorians?”

Durp

Leave a Reply to Durp

Tasting the Landscape of China’s Rural Development

Leave a Reply to Durp