Thursday, December 1, 2016

A Framework for the Design of Our Cities



Green.  Smart.  Sustainable.  Resilient.  TOD.  TND.  New Urbanism.

These words and other similar en vogue phrases describe our current practices in Urban Design.  Each carry specific meanings, all of which overlap, all of which we struggle to remember the respective associated principles which define them.

What I want to focus on are the two words that describe the overall framework for which we strive to apply to the design of our cities:  Sustainable and Resilient.

Sustainability has been a concept that has had time to be accepted and thrown around at anything that seems somewhat desired and forward-thinking.  Simply stated in a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "sustainable development seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability to meet those of the future” (Brundtland, 1987, p. 39).

‘Resilient’ is a relatively new buzz word.  Resiliency speaks of a highly dynamic system that evolves through cycles of growth, accumulation, crisis and renewal.  Its aim is to recognize vulnerabilities in our communities in order to be able to prepare for, respond to and recover from impacts of our changing environment.

To compare the two, Zolli of The New York Times wrote, “Where sustainability aims to put the world back into balance, resilience looks for ways to manage in an imbalanced world” (2012).  He goes on to argue that the equilibrium that sustainability seeks to achieve is in fact unachievable.


Blackout in Lower Manhattan after Hurricane Sandy (picture from http://projourno.org/2013/01/sustainability-vs-resilience-dont-give-up-yet/).  The area was rebuilt after 9/11 to be sustainable with the largest collection of LEED-certified buildings in the world, but was not built to be resilient, as exemplified by a lack of redundant power systems (Zolli 2012).









Fleming has a similar response in his 2016 article in the Landscape Journal.  He argues that a shift is occurring away from the utopian ideal of sustainability and toward a more pragmatic concept of resilience.

Beginning in the late twentieth century, the cutting edge of ecological theory understood the natural world as a realm capable of a steady-state, utopian balance through the proper design, planning, and management of the environment. Put another way, the prevailing wisdom of ecology during the late twentieth century envisioned sustainability as both an admirable and attainable goal. Landscape architects and planners followed suit, but nearly a half-century into the pursuit of sustainability the planet’s CO2 emissions are still increasing, the planet’s development patterns are still sprawling into and consuming valuable and high-functioning landscapes, and the ecological crisis decried by McHarg and others still continues largely unabated (pp. 28-29).

These sentiments are understandable given the state of our cities, environment and even our economies.  Farr stated in his 2009 lecture, Sustainable Urbanism: Urban Design with Nature, that the American lifestyle currently inhabits 4 ½ ecological footprints, meaning it would take 4 ½ earths to sustain our current way of living. 

However, Farr is not one to argue against striving for sustainability.  In fact, while some feel it is imperative that a shift in thought from sustainability to resilience occur in the planning of our cities, others adamantly support the need for both—an essential relationship that compensates for flaws that may exist when locked in just one school of thought.  McPhearson at the New School in New York City opines that,

. . . [R]esilience needs to be linked to sustainability so that the resilience we are trying to plan and design for actually helps us move towards desired future sustainable systems states, and not undesirable ones. Current resilience planning and management efforts may just as likely be locking our urban systems into undesirable trajectories, away from sustainability (2014). 

Personally, I support this latter response.  I also believe strongly in one of the conclusions Farr came to in working toward sustainable cities: we need to realign our values and change our conduct as a society.  As designers, our power to stimulate change lies in our knowledge of how to create community—fostering aspects such as safety, attractiveness, social interactions, diversity, and efficiency.  What we need to strive for is to find ways to promote a restructuring of thought in regard to our lifestyles, whether that be through a lens of sustainability, resiliency or both. 





A resilient, sustainable solution for Miami-Dade County which faces a rising water table as sea levels rise.  The design replaces single family homes with increased density housing with rooftop gardens.  This allows for increased areas for open space which can be used for water storage.  The lower picture depicts housing in Amsterdam from which designers drew inspiration for their plan (McKay, 2014).













 
 
 
 
 
Brundtland, Gro Harlem. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: "Our Common Future." New York: United Nations, 1987. Print.




Farr, Douglas. "Sustainable Urbanism: Urban Design with Nature." Richard N. Campen Lecture in Architecture and Sculpture. Lecture.



Fleming, Ian.  “Lost in Translation: The Authorship and Argumentation of Resilience Theory.” Landscape Journal 35:1 (2016) 23-36.

McKay, Henry. "Climate Resiliency: Turning a Threat into an Asset in Suburban Miami-Dade County." Institute for Sustainable Communities Climate Resiliency Turning a Threat into an Asset in Suburban MiamiDade County Comments. N.p., 21 Aug. 2014. http://www.iscvt.org/climate-resiliency-turning-threat-asset-suburban-miami-dade-county/.



McPhearson, Timon. "The Rise of Resilience: Linking Resilience and Sustainability in City Planning." The Nature of Cities. N.p., 8 June 2014. http://www.thenatureofcities.com/2014/06/08/the-rise-of-resilience-linking-resilience-and-sustainability-in-city-planning/.


Zolli, Andrew. "Learning to Bounce Back." The New York Times. N.p., 2 Nov. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/opinion/forget-sustainability-its-about-resilience.html.

3 comments:

  1. Well written. I agree that we need to realign our values and promote positive change. To add on to that, I would say that we need to get the community involved in the design process and spread an understanding of how urban space impacts the environment. How might you apply sustainability and resilience into your own design work?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am currently working on my graduate project that uses available low temperature geothermal resources to heat walkways, sports facilities, and greenhouses within a small town. It is a clean, sustainable resource that, with the application to greenhouses, has potential to diversify the economy of the town and attract other business, thereby increasing the town's resiliency—along with providing fresh, local food to the community.

      I recently went to a fellow student's graduate defense which was about TODs and green infrastructure. Another graduate project focused on the restoration of abandoned gold mine sites. I believe that the profession of landscape architecture has a history of designing on a scale comparable to that looked at in urban design, and inherently has a focus on the natural environment. It makes the concepts of sustainability and resiliency especially relevant to LA work.

      Delete
  2. I really liked your take on explaining sustainability and resiliency. It gave a very clear picture on your understanding and view point on those ideas. I dont think we need to fully rethink our thought processes and the way we live. I think we just need to find better ways to educate our communities and involve them in some sort of way.

    ReplyDelete