ShareThisIs Landscape Urbanism a Threat?
 |
Many Earth Advantage stakeholders are familiar with the term “new urbanism.” I generally describe new urbanism as a planning framework that encourages walkable neighborhoods, dense housing patterns, and proximity between residential and non-residential uses. But have you heard of the term “landscape urbanism”? Until last year, that was a new one for me as well.
Landscape urbanism is a planning/design approach that puts an emphasis on landscape and exterior elements of a project. Charles Waldheim is a leading figure in discussions surrounding landscape urbanism. He defines the term as “a theory … arguing that landscape, rather than architecture, is more capable of organizing the city and enhancing the urban experience” in his book, The Landscape Urbanism Reader.
Waldheim is the Chair of Landscape Architecture at the Harvard School of Design. In the Fall 2010 issue of Architecture Boston he states that a strength of landscape urbanism stems from its ability to use landscape, rather than buildings, as urban design’s fundamental building blocks. He goes on to state that new urbanist form is out of touch with US reality. He points to the fact that many US cities are shrinking. “If you have a culture that is automobile-based, then an urban model that is anti-automobile is counterintuitive at best.” He adds that if a model for urban form depends upon aggregating buildings for spatial framework, them “it is problematic that most of us live in the suburbs.”
If Waldheim may be considered a spokesperson for landscape urbanism, then Andre Duany would be his opponent, standing in the corner across the ring and speaking for new urbanism. In fall 2010, Duany called a meeting of architects, urban planners and policy allies. The purpose of the meeting: to discuss the impact of landscape urbanism and to share ideas for countering its advances in planning schools and cities across the country.
There is no shortage of critics of Waldheim’s planning approach. Author Michael Mehafy describes landscape urbanists as “free market defenders of urban sprawl,” professionals who do not understand or ignore the policy choices and market forces that cemented the auto-based US urban reality. He believes that the Congress for New Urbanism, mixed-used publicly funded projects, main street redevelopment, and other efforts, have helped to combat sprawl and revitalize local neighborhoods.
 |
Others argue that while landscape and site ecology in general, are of fundamental importance, one needs the buildings, the hardscape, to have an urban fabric. Landscape architect John Olsen says “Landscape is (no) substitute for good quality architecture in enhancing the urban experience, however, it is a tremendous companion.” If you’re ready for a good chuckle, and want to be overtly critical, I direct you to the landscape urbanism bull**** generator for a good dose of over-the-top architecture-speak.
Both landscape urbanism and new urbanism claim to be more closely aligned to the goals of sustainable urban development. I was getting ready to launch my opinion and give three cheers to new urbanism. However, upon further reflection, I have concluded that the proponents of each discipline are really talking about apples and oranges. New urbanism uses the tools of public policy and transportation planning to create communities that support reduced driving and denser form. Landscape urbanism relies on broad-based strokes, design choices that create “flow” and connection to outdoor spaces. Am I missing something? It seems to me that the two approaches don’t have to be mutually exclusive. I invite your comments.
References
Mehafy, Michael. (October 4, 2010). Landscape Urbanism: Sprawl in a Pretty Green Dress? Retrieved from http://www.planetizen.com/node/46262.
Neyfak, Leon. (January 31, 2011). Green building - A fight grows in urban planning, with Harvard at the center. Retrieved from http://www.boston.com/yourtown/cambridge/articles/2011/01/30/green_building/?page=2.
Olson, John. (May 13, 2010). Landscape Urbanism: A Critique from a CNU Cardholder and Landscape Architect. Retrieved from http://evstudio.info/landscape-urbanism-a-critique-from-a-cnu-cardholder-and-landscape-architect/.
Stein, Jeff. (Fall 2010). Groundswell: The Rise of Landscape Urbanism. Retrieved from http://architectureboston.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/fall10_interview_web.pdf.
Turner, Tom. (February 27, 2010). What is Landscape Urbanism? Retrieved from http://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/2010/02/27/what-is-landscape-urbanism/.
About the Author
I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment Ann. I am currently in school getting my masters degree in the built environment and have spent the past month reading some of the landmark Landscape Urbanism as well as New Urbanism readings. After doing my own due diligence the rhetoric from both sides seems preposterous. Pitting one side against the other as to who is correct seems to miss the point on both sides. It shouldn’t be one over/or the other, and quite frankly I think neither will really stand the test of time as a whole. Both offer great insight into the new built environment. For New Urbanism when in the city the need for transportation oriented infrastructure is key, more walkable neighborhoods/ cities, increased living density, less of an energy strain on the environment, the benefits are clear. For Landscape Urbanism integrating local ecology into living environments is great where it can be done. Using old de-industrialized pockets are a great starting point, but Waldheim’s thoughts of shrinking cities is kind of crazy, and adapting to an oil intensive infrastructure because that is what the people want is a little tongue and cheek(y) if you ask me.