Journals_Bethany Morris and Nathan Oliver
1. Boake, Terri Meyer and Caroline Prochazka. 2004, ‘LEED - a primer: an overview of sustainable design issues in the LEED context’, Canadian architect, vol.49, no.1, p.30-33.
2. Bronson, Susan D. 2005, ‘The philosophy of sustainable design’, APT Bulletin, vol.36, no.4, p.56.
3. Forman, Richard T. T. 1993, ‘Ecologically sustainable landscapes: the role of spatial configuration’, GSD news, vol. 1, p19.
4. Laurian, Lucie. 2008, 'Designing Greenways: Sustainable Landscapes for Nature and People. Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 74 no. 1, p145-145.
-Lucie Laurian found Designing Greenways to be valuable for its three scientific chapters. However, she criticized it for oversimplifying complex social processes. The authors’ method of posing questions for seven pages without offering any means of finding the answers was more frustrating than provocative.
5. Lindsey, Greg. 2008, 'Designing Greenways: Sustainable Landscapes for Nature and People', Journal of Planning Literature, May2008, vol. 22 no. 4, p360.
-Greg Lindsey favorably reviewed the book Designing Greenways: Sustainable Landscapes for Nature and People. The book is not intended to be a practical manual for cookie-cutter solutions to design problems. The book is instead a reference for a more general understanding of landscape ecology.
6. Maxman, Susan. 1995, ‘Reviewing the State of Sustainable Design’, Architectural Record, vol.183, p23.
-Susan Maxmann read and reviewed Gray World, Green Heart and Futures by Design simultaneously. Maxmann accessed Gray World, Green Heart was a “call to arms” for design professionals. Future by Design is a “book that has been created to be used”. It is a guide of sorts that has collected the works of many around the world.
7. Mazza, Ronald. 2007, ‘Sustainable design has changed building design’, Journal of green building, vol.2, no.3, p.12-17.
8. O'Connell, Kim. 2007, ‘Sustainable Landscapes Make the Grade’, Architect. vol.96 no. 13, p18.
- The ASLA, U.S. Botanic Garden and the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center are jointly working on a new rating system called the Sustainable Site Initiative. The US Green Building Council has agreed to incorporate the new system with future versions on the LEED rating systems. As the current rating systems are building centered, the goal was to generate a system to quantify sustainable design specific to landscapes.
9. Rajgor, Gail. 2004, 'Masters of sustainable design', Refocus, vol. 5 no. 5, p60-612p.
10. Shelton, Ted May 2007, ‘Greening the White House’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 31-38.
This article focuses on the various policies and methodologies of sustainability and sustainable design that past presidents and vice presidents of the United States from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush have implemented at the White House. The article also looks at how some of the presidents have involved citizens by encouraging them to participate in programs, like energy reduction in homes, which resulted in their support; as well as how Presidents like Reagan, who had the solar panels removed from the White House, with no question of citizen opinion and in turn did not reap the benefits of having their support. It discusses in detail how the White House not only suggested that Americans reduce energy consumption at their own homes, but also provided an example by practicing what was preached at the White House with solar panel initiatives for example. After President Carter and his solar and energy initiatives, it would be several administrations before another green effort was seen. This effort would show it’s face again during the Clinton and Gore administration where soon after he took office he would lay out the environmental goals of his administration, some of those goals being an energy and environmental audit of the White House, addressing climate change, and sustainable development. The Clinton administration would not focus much of its attention on solar panels as Carter did but would turn much of it’s attention to comprehensiveness and integrated thinking in terms of the environment and energy use. Lastly the article discusses the Bush Administration and future actions for the White House. Solar panels are back on the White House to provide hot water and for the first time photovoltaic panels are installed. However Bush and his administration did not prompt the installation of the solar panels but instead the National Park Service, which shares authority of the White House Grounds, took on the project. The article also compares the advances in technology from the solar panels installed by Carter to the new solar panels installed under Bush. These advances showed how the expense, efficiency, reliability, and aesthetics of the solar panels improved over the years thus providing less room for people to criticize the solar panels themselves and the installation. Looking to the future, the article addresses issues that will have to be addressed for the White House to remain an example for everyone else without being a vulgar display of wealth. In addition it will be a challenge to keep the gap between what has been demonstrated at the White House and what the intentioned home owner can accomplish close and not let the White House grow too fast without the support and accompaniment of Americans. As the author stated, “With sustainability, the White House has the possibility of being both a megaphone and message.” This article is a great resource that outlines sustainable practices that have been implemented, and at least once removed, by different administrations over time as well as challenges that they had to face.
11. ‘Students Plant a Green Future for the Environment & Economy’ Professional Safety, 2006, vol. 51 no. 12, p51-52.
-Forty-two student design teams received grants from the Environmental Protection Agency to research and develop sustainable environmental solutions. The competition entitled People, Prosperity and the Planet (P3) started in 2004. The intention of the designs is to prove that protecting the planet and economic prosperity are compatible.
12. Taecker, Matt. 2002, ‘Designing sustainable communities: learning from Village Homes’, Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 68, no.2, p.217-219.
-In the article “Separation” is viewed as the nemesis of sustainable design. It has led to urban sprawl and waste. Buildings themselves are divided and inefficient. Both books reviewed by Matt Taecker, HOK Guidebook to Sustainable Design and Designing Sustainable Communities, supported integrated approaches for achieving sustainable designs and offered methods to impliment these innovative ideas.
13. Thayer, Robert L. 1989, ‘The experience of sustainable landscapes’, Landscape journal, vol.8, no.2, p.101-110.
14. Woolliams, Jessica, 2007, ‘A LEED of faith’, Canadian architect, vol.52, no.5, p.60-62.
- Woolliams contends “green” design is not mainstream. Only 5%-10% qualifies as sustainable design. The LEED program has been influential over the last decade by making the topic of green building mainstream. Cities in the United States and Canada have adopted all or portions of the LEED system as standards for municipal development. A new tool called Living Building Challenge has emerged to be beyond LEED and “move toward true sustainability”. The Living Building Challenge does not reward credits. It consists of only NetZero prerequisites. Its simplification of the rating makes it both harder to achieve and have a more positive impact on the environment.
15. Baird, Stephen L. Dec/Jan 2008, ‘Sustainable Design: The Next Industrial Revolution?’, Technology Teacher, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 11-15.
This paper is written as a means of education for people of all ages to learn about sustainability and sustainable design, and as the author, Stephen Baird, states “We (as Americans) are paying little attention to the practice of sustainable design.” He begins the paper by discussing definitions of sustainability, for instance, he uses Wikipedia(2007) as a source to define sustainability as a characteristic of a process or state that can be maintained at a certain level indefinitely (Wikipedia, 2007). After defining sustainability he moves on to say that it is the responsibility of all individuals, communities, businesses, and governments worldwide to be good stewards of sustainable design, and the pursuit of a sustainable lifestyle today is of paramount importance for future generations.
After Baird establishes an understanding of sustainability he explains how sustainable design, a component of sustainability, is becoming the next industrial revolution. Baird describes that the next industrial revolution is the emerging transformation of human industry from a system that takes, makes, and wastes to one that celebrates natural, economic, and cultural abundance. It is up to us as individuals as well as landscape designers to take charge of what is to happen in the future and change the current trends in building and manufacturing to methods that are more sustainable in process and design.
Establishing an understanding of sustainability and what needs to happen in the future to be more sustainable is explained in the first part of this paper. In the next part of this paper he explains how sustainable design works in relation to building design. A large portion of this paper is sustainable building design and addressing topics such as the site, energy, on-site energy, passive soar, solar electricity, materials, indoor quality, and finally water and wastewater. It goes into detail on how each of these aspects of sustainable design, in the majority of this case building design, can benefit the environment and the specific aspects of a design project where they can be applied. Each topic gives current facts to help explain the relevance of that topic. For example, the section on site design tells us that a north-south orientation provides a more effective solar control, and with little to no extra cost a building can be oriented so that the building orientation creates energy savings without changing the design. This article is great especially for people trying get a better grasp on sustainability and sustainable design. It can be used as an educational resource for the everyday person or as an education tool in the classroom. The author makes a statement that concludes this paper very well, “Sustainable design doesn’t violate or compromise conventional design goals and objectives, but refines them to produce innovative solutions that can be justified economically as well as ecologically.”
16. Bert, Ray Dec. 2007, ‘The Designer’s Role of Sustainability: Charting the Conceptual Landscape through Economy, Ecology, and Culture’, Civil Engineering, vol. 77, Issue 12, pp. 69.
This article is by Ray Bert summarizes the book The Designer’s Atlas of Sustainability: Charting the Conceptual Landscape through Economy, Ecology, and Culture. It tells us what the book is about and what the author, Anne Thorpe discusses. Thorpe begins by telling us why she chose the word ‘atlas’ for the title and that the main idea of her book is to answer the question, What is Sustainability? She elaborates by explaining that many standard texts have failed to ‘click’ and identify with designers when it comes to defining the topic of sustainability. In her atlas, she attempts to click with designers by explaining sustainability. She accomplishes this through examples of sustainability from around the world, the aspect of an atlas, and stating that her book’s perspective is largely design in the industrialized world. She further explains sustainability in three primary sections of her book ecology, economy, and culture. The last section connects the three main sections above in an attempt to drive home her definition of sustainability and to click with the reader. Thorpe ends with a great message: designers are well positioned in the world to change it for the better.
17. Ozdemir, A. ‘Preventing Natural Hazard Risks through Sustainable Site Design’. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 457-462.
This paper addresses sustainable site design as a method to prevent natural hazard risks such as landslides and erosion. This paper focuses on how to prevent this issue from the initial stages of the design process, site design and by understanding the principles behind it. The author explains that with proper site analysis, and by using eleven principles that she explains, preventing natural hazard risks can be accomplished.
The eleven principles that the author uses to address sustainable site design are site selection, blending with existing topography, defining the use of existing vegetation, planting design for site prevention and engineering, understanding topographic conditions, structural and ecological engineering solutions, stormwater management, on-site water management, minimizing disruption to landforms and drainage patterns, minimizing paved areas and finally sustainable siting requirements. Each of these sections are relatively short but explain current issues that should be addressed at the initial stages of site design. By learning and understanding site design and the principles that encompass it landscape designers can achieve the principle component of sustainable site design: “to harmonize the relationship between humans and buildings, between buildings and the environment, especially natural landforms.” As the author states, “comprehensive management and site planning can play a role in reducing the risk of disasters and to mitigate the consequences if they should nevertheless occur-both on human lives and on the broader ecology.” After reading this paper, the reader comes away with a better understanding of how applying principles of site design and doing so at the initial stages of planning, can prevent natural hazards and simultaneously design a sustainable site.
18. Roy, Martin September 2006, 'Sustainable Design For Circus Big Top'. ASHRAE Journal, pp 77-81.
19. Cranz, Galen and Boland, Michael February 2004, ‘Defining the Sustainable Park: A Fifth Model for Urban Parks’, Landscape Journal, no. 23, pp. 102-120.
Defining the Sustainable Park: A fifth Model for Urban Parks looks at the historical design of urban parks and spaces and how urban park design is shifting towards a fifth model-sustainable design. The paper goes through an appealing history of parks and the design types that parks have progressed through over the last 150 years. The authors, Cranz and Boland, use a classic study of urban parks by Cranz 1982, to describe the four types of parks: the Pleasure Ground (1850-1900), the Reform Park (1900-1932), the Recreation Facility (1930-1965) and the Open Space System (1965-?). They explain the shifting of park types from era to era due to the social purposes that they served and the corresponding variations in designed form and how they evolved from the pressing social problems of that time. The paper continues by discussing specific traits that would define a new fifth model, Sustainable Parks. Some of those traits are increasing ecological performance, native plants, restoration of streams and other natural systems, wildlife habitat, integrating appropriate technologies and infrastructure, recycling, and sustainable construction and maintenance practices. The majority, if not all of these traits are concerned around ecological values; however the authors also realize the need for a social value in place as well. Another tool the authors use is analyzing the parks from journals and other publications to get an idea of percentages of parks that fall into the five categories of parks. The results showing Open Space with the highest (46%) and Sustainable Park being second (23%); however most (86%) of the parks showed traits of being sustainable. After analyzing the trends, Cranz and Boland move into policy implications of sustainable urban parks, breaking them into Principles I and II, resource self-sufficiency and the larger urban system, respectively. Principle I explains in detail that Sustainable Parks differ greatly from other urban park models by emphasizing internal self sufficiency with material resource and by implementing strategies to reduce the need for resources and increase self sufficiency, for example funding cuts, recreation demands, on-site recycling in the construction phase and onward through the life of the park, native plantings, and building orientation. Principle II moves on to explain how to incorporate the Sustainable Park into the larger metropolis. The authors have identified several ways that urban parks are used: to address poor air quality, provide access to sunlight, provide opportunities for exercise, and improve other problems associated with close urban quarters. In addition they have distinguished four broad categories that environmental urban problems can be classified into as to how Sustainable Parks could address them: infrastructure, reclamation, health, and social well-being. The authors conclude by explaining how to begin this process as a parks department trying to implement Sustainable Parks. They provide a very real-life explanations, start at the biggest, most expensive, and most troublesome problem, maintenance. Improve and radically rethink maintenance practices, focus on resource efficiency and develop a new aesthetic from that focus. Maintenance is the biggest problem in most cities because it is the biggest expense. This paper does a great job in describing, in detail, the history of urban parks and the possible future for the fifth model of urban parks, Sustainable Parks.
20. Ellis, David February 2001, ‘Driving forward sustainable design’, Landscape Design Journal, no. 297, pp. 32-33.
Driving forward sustainable design focuses on a large-scale re-master planning project of General Motor’s research and development campus in Detroit, MI. This site represents one of the largest campus sites operated by GM. The project involved consultants from San Francisco that determined requirements for project in terms of sustainable design. Some of those requirements were: state of the art sustainable design for site and building, a site design that enables the campus to be highly innovative and creative-maximizing the potential for technological development, maintaining a high level of flexibility and longevity in the original design, and a beautiful external environment which in compatible with emerging 21st century technologies. The existing site came with many preexisting issues including large masses of employee commuting, development on a flood plain, a re-engineered river, no on-site surface water retention, lakes that were unattractive and served no purpose and finally intensive management to maintain the grounds.
To meet the identified requirements and introduce sustainable design, the re-masterplan focused on sustainable building development and re-development of many existing site facilities. Re-working the river back to its natural state, creating a wetland, and altering the lakes to now serve an aesthetic and functional purpose were all strategies of the re-master planning project.
To rate the success of these projects, a sustainable assessment was created to benchmark the project on its sustainability of the built and external environment. The site was divided into twenty spatial areas to enable an environmental evaluation of the 645-acre site. As of 2001, 35% of the detailed design work was complete. This article was written in 2001 before the master planning projects were complete. However, it demonstrates a remarkable initiative for sustainable design. What happens between 2001 and completion will be a direct reflection of GM’s commitment to sustainable design.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Executive Summary_Journal Articles: Bethany Morris and Nathan Oliver
Sustainable Design Compendium
Executive Summary
Journal Articles
Nathan Oliver
The objective of the project is to establish a snap shot of the contemporary understanding of sustainable design. The concept of sustainability is broad with varied depths. The graduate student team responsible for researching academic journals divided the vast task by searching the University of Tennessee library databases for “sustainable design” in both the title and content fields. An initial search for “sustainability” in the title resulted in five hundred forty possible articles. Individually, I conducted a text search using Academic Search Premier. The first search of Sustainable Design, in the text field, performed on October 30, 2008, resulted in 491 items. The search was then narrowed by Sustainable Design in the subject field and yielded 39 items with nine relevant to sustainable landscape. Six articles were selected for analysis.
The first group of articles focuses on sustainable design of the site and principles and methodologies that can be applied to the site. Architects, engineers of all types and landscape architects are all part of the design profession that must incorporate site design into their field of design to provide a complete design. When one reads about sustainable design they can read about building, mechanical, and landscape design applications, and how awareness of energy efficiency, material selection, resource efficiency and water use can greatly impact a project’s sustainability. Furthermore, the idea of sustainable site design can be applied to prevent natural hazard risks through principles of site selection, topographic conditions, siting requirements, vegetation, planting design, structural and ecological engineering solutions, stormwater management, and water management in the form of drainage patterns and paved areas. Having knowledge of these principles and practices is crucial for a designer to understand and be able to apply them to site design, landforms and building design in both a mechanical and preventative design function.
Concepts of site design are explored and explained in two articles: Sustainable Design: The Next Industrial Revolution by Stephen Baird (2008) and Preventing Natural Hazard Risks through Sustainable Site Design by A. Ozdemir (2008), respectively. Ozdemir discusses in her article the use of existing features and natural resources of the project to design the site with less environmental impact and a more efficient use of resources in a way that helps prevent natural hazard risks like landslides and erosion. While these are natural processes, they are often influenced and indirectly caused by man’s influence on the site. They might be driven by water and gravity but often times could be prevented if designers were conscious and aware of on-site resources before beginning the site design process.
Ozdemir also discusses the benefit of selecting urban redevelopment sites and environmentally damaged sites. The principles of site design would shift from a “doing less” to prevent natural hazards to a “doing more” to naturalize the site to implement the principles stated below. These principles attempt to restore the site to a state that prevents natural hazard risks through sustainable site design. Ozdemir uses and discusses eleven sustainable site design principles:
• Assessing Site Resources
• Blend with the existing topography
• Defining the use of existing vegetation
• Planting design for site prevention and engineering
• Understanding topographic conditions of the site to avoid cut and fill
• Structural and ecological engineering solutions
• Stormwater management
• Providing responsible on-site water management
• Minimize disruption to landforms and drainage patterns
• Minimizing paved areas
• Sustainable siting requirements.
Each of these eleven principles is centered around sustainability and are briefly explained so that designers can take and apply them to a site to prevent natural hazards. However, these principles can be applied to all site designs. They are intended to prevent natural hazards but would greatly benefit the design of any site. The short summaries on each principle are valuable because they provide a brief and to the point explanation of the validity of each topic in relation to site design; however, the summaries are not complete enough to take and design a site solely by the information given.
Ozdemir finishes her article with a statement that caught my attention, “the principle component of sustainable site design is to harmonize the relationship between humans and buildings, between buildings and the environment, especially natural landforms.” This should be the goal of every designer and should begin at the site level. This is a great way to describe the overall goal and collaborative effort of designers-- landscape, architectural, and engineering alike.
Stephen Baird approaches sustainable design from a different but similar approach compared to Ozdemir. He focuses his attention to the future meaning and development of sustainable design then takes his view of it and relates it to eight principles of sustainable building design. Baird chooses to use a definition from Wikipedia (2007) to define sustainability as a characteristic of a process or state that can be maintained at a certain level indefinitely. It is interesting that he chose this definition because it defines sustainable design as a characteristic or process of design as compared to other definitions that define it as not compromising the needs of future generations. He later defines sustainable design as being the next industrial revolution as the emerging transformation of human industry from a system that takes, makes and wastes to one that celebrates natural, economic and cultural abundance. He looks at sustainable design in the future as a whole entity involving natural, economic and cultural aspects, and using and designing with them in a way that creates abundance instead of using diminishing raw materials that will lead to scarcity.
He moves into sustainable building design and eight principles he associates with it:
• Site
• Energy
• On-site energy
• Passive Solar
• Materials
• Indoor air quality
• Water and wastewater
Baird discusses each topic and addresses how it can be incorporated into a design that would make a building sustainable in the areas of site, energy, materials, indoor quality, and water. He addresses the site on the level of sitting and orientation, energy consumption, landscaping, native plants, stormwater management and wastewater treatment. He additionally includes a quote from greenerbuildings.com that brings this back to a landscape perspective, “...consideration has to be given to the overall lifecycle of the materials and of the facility and building site as a whole.” This solidifies the importance of evaluating all aspects of design, in this case site design, and how each one relates and directly impacts the other. Baird describes each topic and how it relates it to sustainable building design; however, I found it greatly beneficial to read his thoughts and see how I could relate them to my interest of landscape architecture.
The next article is a category in itself, sustainable parks. Defining the Sustainable Park: A fifth Model for Urban Parks by Galen Cranz and Michael Boland (2004) looks at the historical design of urban parks and how urban park design is shifting to a fifth model of sustainable design. The article goes through a fascinating history of parks and the design types parks have progressed through over a time period of 150 years. The authors use a classic study of urban parks by Cranz 1982, to describe the progression of parks through time.
Four Types of Parks
Park Type Time Frame
Pleasure Ground 1850 - 1900
Reform Park 1900 - 1930
Recreation Facility 1930 - 1965
the Open Space System 1965 - ?
They explain the shifting of types from era to era due to the social purposes that the parks served and the corresponding variations in design form and how they have evolved from the pressing social problems of that time. This is very interesting because they later define their fifth model as Sustainable Parks implying that the social purposes and urban social problems are shifting towards a sustainable nature. From studying sustainable design in urban contexts I would make the statement that over the last 10-15 years a large number of peiple, especially urban populations, are thinking more sustainably when living their everyday lives and choosing places like parks to spend their past times. This could be due to the enhanced knowledge and education of the positive benefits of living sustainable, or the pressing financial time that the majority of the public is facing that has caused them to consider and take on sustainable practices of energy reduction and recycling. This thought could prove more accurate after more time has elapsed and data has been collected.
Moving on, the authors discuss traits that would define this new fifth model of Sustainable Parks.
• Increasing ecological performance
• Native plants
• Restoration of streams and other natural systems
• Wildlife habitat
• Integrating appropriate technologies and infrastructure
• Recycling
• Sustainable construction and maintenance practices
While these traits define more ecological values, the authors also realized the need for a social value in place too, “after all, sustainability is ultimately a social concept rather than a technical or biological one because humans are responsible for the ecological crisis today”(Cranz and Boland, 2004). The authors analyzed parks from journals and publications to get an idea of percentages of parks that fell into the five categories, Open Space being the highest (46%) and Sustainable Park being second (23%). However most (86%) of the parks exhibited traits of being sustainable. Cranz and Boland analyze the trends and move into policy implications of sustainable urban parks then into Principles I and II.
Principle I
o How Sustainable Parks differ greatly from other urban park models by emphasizing internal self sufficiency with material resource
o Strategies to reduce the need for resources and increase self sufficiency
• Funding cuts
• Recreation demands
• On-site recycling
• Native plantings
• Building orientation
Principle II
o How to incorporate the Sustainable Parks into the larger metropolis
o Ways urban parks are used to address urban problems
• Address poor air quality
• Access to sunlight
• Opportunities for exercise
• Improve other problems associated with close urban quarters
In addition, they have distinguished four broad categories that environmental urban problems can be classified into as to how Sustainable Parks could address them: infrastructure, reclamation, health, and social well-being. The article explains each of these in great detail and how Sustainable Parks address them.
After extensive discussion on the four categories, the authors conclude with how to begin this process as a parks department trying to implement Sustainable Parks. They provide a very practical answer as they have throughout the entire article, start at the biggest, most expensive, and most troublesome problem-- maintenance. Improve and radically rethink maintenance practices, focus on resource efficiency and developing a new aesthetic from that focus. Maintenance is the biggest problem in most cities, and I very much agree, because it is the biggest expense. The parks departments I have worked and collaborated with, do not have the resources, money, manpower, skills, etc. to manage a park or park system that requires an intensive management program. This is a fascinating article that describes in detail the history of urban parks and the possible future for the fifth model of urban parks, Sustainable Parks.
The next set of articles provides a case study approach to sustainable design. Greening the Whitehouse: Executive Mansion as Symbol of Sustainability by Ted Shelton (2007) and Driving Forward Sustainable Design by David Ellis (2001) both look at implementation of sustainable designs.
Shelton analyzes the policies and practices that past presidents and vice presidents from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush have implemented or have been involved with while at the White House. Shelton discusses the timeline of sustainable practices that have been both implemented, and at least once removed, such as solar panels, photovoltaic lighting and heating with captured solar energy. The article explains how certain presidents like Carter called the effort needed to confront the country’s energy issues “the moral equivalent of war” and showed his concern by installing solar panels on the roof of the White House to heat water; however, on the opposite spectrum you have presidents like Reagan who had the solar panels removed and put in surplus storage later to be used to heat water by Unity College cafeteria in Maine. Issues like this took place throughout history; Carter’s administration implemented energy policies while Reagan put it on the back burner.
Shelton moves on to the Clinton and Gore administration and their focus on energy efficiency and environmental goals. Clinton was different from Carter in the way he focused not only on energy like Carter but also on environmental concerns, and responsible design, construction and maintenance. Finally you have Bush in office. Solar panels were installed on the White House ancillary buildings through the initiative the initiative National Park Service, not the White House. The advances in technology of the 21 century can be seen from the energy efficiency, aesthetic appeal, and energy capturing ability of the new solar panels. Yet publicity and recognition of the re-installed solar panels was minimal.
This article helps to show a portion of history that has dealt with sustainable design practices involved with the leader of our country and how sustainable programs have progressed and changed, sometimes not for the better.
Driving forward sustainable design focuses on a large-scale re-master planning project of General Motor’s research and development campus in Detroit, MI. The project involved consultants from San Francisco that determined requirements for projects in terms of sustainable design:
• State of the art sustainable design for site and building
• A site design that enables the campus to be highly innovative and creative-maximizing the potential for technological development,
• Maintaining a high level of flexibility and longevity
• Beautiful external environment which is compatible with emerging 21st century technologies
Pre-existing issues of the site:
• Large masses of employee commuting
• Original site was developed on a flood plain
• Existing river was re-engineered
• No surface water retention on site
• Lakes that were not environmentally helpful
• Grounds were being managed intensively
The intense management can be directly related back to the article on parks that identified maintenance as being an outstanding issue as well. To meet the identified requirements and introduce sustainable design, the re-masterplan focused on sustainable building development and re-development of many existing site facilities. Re-working the river back to its original state, creating a wetland, and altering the lakes to now serve an aesthetic and functional purpose were all strategies of the master plan. To rate the success of these ideas, the site was divided into twenty spatial areas and a sustainable assessment was created to benchmark the project in terms of sustainability involving the built and external environment. This article was written prior to the completion of the master plan yet it demonstrates a remarkable initiative for sustainable design.
While these two project examples, the White House and the GM campus, are on a drastically different scale it provides the reader an opportunity to see two very different aspects and examples of sustainable design. The GM project focuses on a large master plan and how to make the site more sustainable as a whole. The White House focuses more on sustainable energy practices and implementing policies that include the public support, they both relay valuable information on sustainable design and how you as a designer can make it work for your project.
Sustainable design can be defined and interpreted many different ways. In a summary of The Designer’s Atlas to Sustainability: Charting the Conceptual Landscape through Economy, Ecology, and Culture Bert Ray (2007), the author Anne Thorpe (2007) notes that “standard” texts addressing the topic of sustainability have failed to click with designers who are such a key element to the concept. If professionals were asked to give a definition of sustainable design, they probably would not give you a textbook definition because textbooks do not “click” with everyone’s working world concept, meaning, and application of sustainable design. Each landscape designer has their own meaning and interpretation and how it applies to them. Frazer Osment (2002) in the article Sustainability? Just do it. explains “…designers do not just need a definition of sustainability… but instead need to adopt a visionary and confident approach to change, guided by an ethos of social and environmental responsibility.” It is about linking people and their local environment in a strong relationship through design. Osment (2002) like Cranz and Boland (2004) discuss the opportunity for work in the future with communities and the urban environment and how it is linked strongly to solving social and environmental problems through design solutions. Sustainability will not be achieved overnight but instead will evolve chaotically as a result of responses to social, environmental and economic problems of a particular place (Osment 2002). The summary on Thorpe’s book concludes by saying “designers are well positioned to change the world for the better.” I could not agree more with this statement. At the same moment, each of us as landscape designers, need to take time to educate ourselves on explanations, applications and our own meaning of sustainable design.
To conclude, there are many articles that discuss sustainable design including landscape, building, and mechanical areas. However this summary focuses on the area of landscape design with a brief discussion of building design. Each article discussed, relates to an area of sustainable design for the landscape from site, urban parks, master plans, and defining sustainable design. There is good explanation about methods to make any project more sustainable through topography, hydrology, and vegetation, to name a few, but also in the relationships that exist in the landscape between people, the natural and ecological environment and social goals of projects. As is the case with many contentious issues with many different meanings and interpretations, the idea of sustainable design will not be a consensus among designers and will need further research. However these articles take a brief look at sustainable design and present their information well with thorough research and explanation. No matter what your project area of focus, these articles can provide valuable information on how to apply sustainable design in your practice as well as how it has worked in others.
Sited Sources
- Baird, Stephen L. Dec/Jan 2008, ‘Sustainable Design: The Next Industrial Revolution?’, Technology Teacher, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 11-15.
- Bert, Ray Dec. 2007, ‘The Designer’s Role of Sustainability: Charting the Conceptual Landscape through Economy, Ecology, and Culture’, Civil Engineering, vol. 77, Issue 12, pp. 69.
- Cranz, Galen and Boland, Michael February 2004, ‘Defining the Sustainable Park: A Fifth Model for Urban Parks’, Landscape Journal, no. 23, pp. 102-120.
- Ellis, David February 2001, ‘Driving forward sustainable design’, Landscape Design Journal, no. 297, pp. 32-33.
- Osment, Frazer September 2002, ‘Sustainability? Just do it.’, Landscape Design Journal, vol. 313, no. 19.
- Ozdemir, A. February 2008, ‘Preventing Natural Hazard Risks through Sustainable Site Design’. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 457-462.
- Shelton, Ted May 2007, ‘Greening the White House: Executive Mansion as Symbol of Sustainability’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 31-38.
Bethany Morris
The objective of the project was to establish a snap shot of the contemporary understanding of sustainable design. The concept of sustainability is broad with varied depths. The graduate student team responsible for researching academic journals divided the vast task by searching the University of Tennessee library databases for “sustainable design” in both the title and content fields. An initial search for “sustainability” in the title resulted in five hundred forty hits. This search served as the barometer for subsequent searches. Individually, I conducted title searches using Academic Search Premier and Avery Index. The first search, performed on September 28, 2008, resulted in 21 hits ranging from 1995 to September 2008. Five articles were selected for in depth analysis. The database provided options to narrow the search further by fields: architects, houses, green design, environmental aspects, energy consumption and biotic communities. These represent other perspectives within the discussion on sustainable design. Additional searches for ‘sustainable landscapes’ provided nine sources and a search for ‘sustainable design’ + ‘landscapes’ resulted in two, 'Designing Greenways: Sustainable Landscapes for Nature and People’ and ‘The experience of sustainable landscapes’. A challenge faced by the researchers was locating the full text articles. Abstracts of the published journal articles were readily available, but it was important to the integrity of the research to study and critic the articles in full and with context. For this reason, only the full text articles are included in the Executive Summary. The articles that found with abstracts are included in the works cited portion of the research.
Due to the nature of academic journals the scope of the readings was often limited to the academic arena. The authors of five articles chosen for analysis have ties to United States universities. Based on the readings, the discussion of ‘sustainable design’ centers around critiquing literature written on sustainable design. In the previously mentioned articles, the authors are reviewing books to be used either as college texts or guides to practioners. However, the remaining two articles (Woolliams, Thayer) found via searching ‘sustainable landscapes’ and ‘sustainable design’+’landscapes’ focused on quantifying sustainable design within the building industry. By juxtaposing an article meant for a scholar and one meant for the practicing professional, the chasm between school and the field is clearly defined.
Schools are concerned more with a general understanding of concepts over the implementation of specifics. Lucie Laurian and Greg Lindsey separately wrote reviews of Landscapes for Nature and People for Journal of Planning Literature in 2008. Laurian found the book to be valuable for its three scientific chapters, chapters five, six and seven. They were concise and readily applicable. However, she criticized the authors’ method of posing questions without offering any means to find the answers and for oversimplifying complex social processes (Laurian 2008). Lindsey, likewise, favorably reviewed the book. He held it as a valuable course text and not a practical manual for design problems. The book is a reference for a more general understanding of landscape ecology (Lindsey). Understanding of a topic on a surface level is an elementary but important step. Problems arise with text such as Landscapes for Nature and People when it is used at the inappropriate time. It is helpful for guiding design on a schematic level and not in the construction phase.
Gray World, Green Heart and Futures by Design were reviewed simultaneously by Susan Maxmann for Architectural Record. By studying the books side by side, the reader could better appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of each. Maxmann called Gray World, Green Heart a ‘call to arms’ for design professionals. It is a provocative piece meant to stir the conscience of the design community. Futures by Design is more of a guide than a manifesto. It is a collection of built sustainable designs around the world. Based solely on Maxmann’s review, both books would be helpful to students and professionals (Maxmann). I infer their strength is increased by reading them in tandem. Gray World, Green Heart provides the motivation to be environmentally conscious. It places responsibility on the designer to be sustainable. Futures by Design then provides the resources to achieve the goal. It lists real case studies that the designer can draw upon for help in his or her own endeavors. Also the publication of such a list is proof to the jaded architect or landscape architect that sustainable design is attainable.
The mediating article between theoretical and practical is “Students Plant a Green Future for the Environment and Economy” published in Professional Safety (2006). Forty-two student teams received grants from the Environmental Protection Agency to research and develop sustainable environmental solutions. The competition was entitled People, Prosperity and the Planet (P3) and intents to prove that protecting the environment prosperity are compatible (Professional Safety). I support a contest of this nature because it is attempting to bridge the gap between a hypothetical collegiate project and a real world design circumstance. It is not naïve enough to assume that good, efficient landscapes and buildings will be constructed simply because that is the moral thing to do. Economics cannot be ignored if success is to be obtained. Furthermore, explicit economic feasibility must be proven for an idea (sustainability or otherwise) to be supported by a financial backer.
The lag between supporting the idea of sustainable design and seeing its methods brought to fruition are present in the next article, “ A LEED of faith” by Jessica Woolliams (2007). She contends that while the topic of sustainable design is commonplace “green” design itself is not mainstream. Only five to ten percent of building nationwide qualifies as sustainable. The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) developed by the US Green Building Council has been influential over the last decade by making the topic of sustainable design more visible. A new tool called Living Building Challenge has emerged to be beyond LEED and “move toward true sustainability”. This new system differs from LEED in that it does not award credits. It consists only of ‘NetZero’ prerequisites, such as one hundred percent rainwater reuse. Its simplification makes it both easier to understand and harder to attain (Woolliams). Since sustainable design can be such an intangible concept, sustainability rating systems are necessary to measure the quality of the design. The current LEED standard is daunting to the designer and owner due to its complex format combine with a lengthy submittal and judging process. A streamlined system, such as Living Building Challenge would negate some of the inherent obstacles of the LEED system. However, it would have to contend with the recognizability of LEED and its ability to award degrees of achievement. The Living Building Challenge’s intent is for a single LBC building to be more sustainable than any single LEED rated building. I understand the goal of making each project as sustainable as possible, but I am wary of setting inaccessible benchmarks. Setting an inflexible and unattainable standard could discourage an already skeptical audience from trying to be more environmentally conscious. If given the choice of a single structure that is completely self-sustaining or several that are more efficient than the industry standard, the decision of which is more beneficial to the environment would be difficult.
An overlooked aspect in the sustainable design discussion is the landscape. Currently, there is no rating system to guide the design of landscapes. Kim O’Connell outlined the development of guidelines in Architect. The American Society of Landscape Architects, U.S. Botanic Garden and the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center are jointly working on a new rating system called the Sustainable Site Initiative. The US Green Building Council has agreed to incorporate the new system with future versions on the LEED rating systems. As the current rating systems are building centered, the goal was to generate a system to quantify sustainable design specific to landscapes (O’Connell). Building upon an established rating system is favorable over generating a new independent one. A stumbling block for sustainable design is the confusion of information and a lack of communication. If the information is dispersed across a number of agencies and entities, no one will be able to benefit from all of it. A power struggle in the hierarchy of which system is better will distract from the common goal of sustainable design.
Ultimately, a holistic approach is the solution to attaining sustainability. No part, whether design, materials, economic or public relation can be accessed individually. Nothing exists in a vacuum. The content of the article must be interfaced with the volume in which it is published and with consideration for the background of the author. The motives of the author likewise cannot be assumed or ignored. Academic journals are less allied with commercialism, however, the author may have reason to maximize one view while minimizing another. Also, the designer must try to understand what is the status of the building industry and what is currently being presented in the schools. Each facet of the discussion influences another. It is impossible to critique one source alone. The content of its contemporaries provides the knowledge base for analysis.
Executive Summary
Journal Articles
Nathan Oliver
The objective of the project is to establish a snap shot of the contemporary understanding of sustainable design. The concept of sustainability is broad with varied depths. The graduate student team responsible for researching academic journals divided the vast task by searching the University of Tennessee library databases for “sustainable design” in both the title and content fields. An initial search for “sustainability” in the title resulted in five hundred forty possible articles. Individually, I conducted a text search using Academic Search Premier. The first search of Sustainable Design, in the text field, performed on October 30, 2008, resulted in 491 items. The search was then narrowed by Sustainable Design in the subject field and yielded 39 items with nine relevant to sustainable landscape. Six articles were selected for analysis.
The first group of articles focuses on sustainable design of the site and principles and methodologies that can be applied to the site. Architects, engineers of all types and landscape architects are all part of the design profession that must incorporate site design into their field of design to provide a complete design. When one reads about sustainable design they can read about building, mechanical, and landscape design applications, and how awareness of energy efficiency, material selection, resource efficiency and water use can greatly impact a project’s sustainability. Furthermore, the idea of sustainable site design can be applied to prevent natural hazard risks through principles of site selection, topographic conditions, siting requirements, vegetation, planting design, structural and ecological engineering solutions, stormwater management, and water management in the form of drainage patterns and paved areas. Having knowledge of these principles and practices is crucial for a designer to understand and be able to apply them to site design, landforms and building design in both a mechanical and preventative design function.
Concepts of site design are explored and explained in two articles: Sustainable Design: The Next Industrial Revolution by Stephen Baird (2008) and Preventing Natural Hazard Risks through Sustainable Site Design by A. Ozdemir (2008), respectively. Ozdemir discusses in her article the use of existing features and natural resources of the project to design the site with less environmental impact and a more efficient use of resources in a way that helps prevent natural hazard risks like landslides and erosion. While these are natural processes, they are often influenced and indirectly caused by man’s influence on the site. They might be driven by water and gravity but often times could be prevented if designers were conscious and aware of on-site resources before beginning the site design process.
Ozdemir also discusses the benefit of selecting urban redevelopment sites and environmentally damaged sites. The principles of site design would shift from a “doing less” to prevent natural hazards to a “doing more” to naturalize the site to implement the principles stated below. These principles attempt to restore the site to a state that prevents natural hazard risks through sustainable site design. Ozdemir uses and discusses eleven sustainable site design principles:
• Assessing Site Resources
• Blend with the existing topography
• Defining the use of existing vegetation
• Planting design for site prevention and engineering
• Understanding topographic conditions of the site to avoid cut and fill
• Structural and ecological engineering solutions
• Stormwater management
• Providing responsible on-site water management
• Minimize disruption to landforms and drainage patterns
• Minimizing paved areas
• Sustainable siting requirements.
Each of these eleven principles is centered around sustainability and are briefly explained so that designers can take and apply them to a site to prevent natural hazards. However, these principles can be applied to all site designs. They are intended to prevent natural hazards but would greatly benefit the design of any site. The short summaries on each principle are valuable because they provide a brief and to the point explanation of the validity of each topic in relation to site design; however, the summaries are not complete enough to take and design a site solely by the information given.
Ozdemir finishes her article with a statement that caught my attention, “the principle component of sustainable site design is to harmonize the relationship between humans and buildings, between buildings and the environment, especially natural landforms.” This should be the goal of every designer and should begin at the site level. This is a great way to describe the overall goal and collaborative effort of designers-- landscape, architectural, and engineering alike.
Stephen Baird approaches sustainable design from a different but similar approach compared to Ozdemir. He focuses his attention to the future meaning and development of sustainable design then takes his view of it and relates it to eight principles of sustainable building design. Baird chooses to use a definition from Wikipedia (2007) to define sustainability as a characteristic of a process or state that can be maintained at a certain level indefinitely. It is interesting that he chose this definition because it defines sustainable design as a characteristic or process of design as compared to other definitions that define it as not compromising the needs of future generations. He later defines sustainable design as being the next industrial revolution as the emerging transformation of human industry from a system that takes, makes and wastes to one that celebrates natural, economic and cultural abundance. He looks at sustainable design in the future as a whole entity involving natural, economic and cultural aspects, and using and designing with them in a way that creates abundance instead of using diminishing raw materials that will lead to scarcity.
He moves into sustainable building design and eight principles he associates with it:
• Site
• Energy
• On-site energy
• Passive Solar
• Materials
• Indoor air quality
• Water and wastewater
Baird discusses each topic and addresses how it can be incorporated into a design that would make a building sustainable in the areas of site, energy, materials, indoor quality, and water. He addresses the site on the level of sitting and orientation, energy consumption, landscaping, native plants, stormwater management and wastewater treatment. He additionally includes a quote from greenerbuildings.com that brings this back to a landscape perspective, “...consideration has to be given to the overall lifecycle of the materials and of the facility and building site as a whole.” This solidifies the importance of evaluating all aspects of design, in this case site design, and how each one relates and directly impacts the other. Baird describes each topic and how it relates it to sustainable building design; however, I found it greatly beneficial to read his thoughts and see how I could relate them to my interest of landscape architecture.
The next article is a category in itself, sustainable parks. Defining the Sustainable Park: A fifth Model for Urban Parks by Galen Cranz and Michael Boland (2004) looks at the historical design of urban parks and how urban park design is shifting to a fifth model of sustainable design. The article goes through a fascinating history of parks and the design types parks have progressed through over a time period of 150 years. The authors use a classic study of urban parks by Cranz 1982, to describe the progression of parks through time.
Four Types of Parks
Park Type Time Frame
Pleasure Ground 1850 - 1900
Reform Park 1900 - 1930
Recreation Facility 1930 - 1965
the Open Space System 1965 - ?
They explain the shifting of types from era to era due to the social purposes that the parks served and the corresponding variations in design form and how they have evolved from the pressing social problems of that time. This is very interesting because they later define their fifth model as Sustainable Parks implying that the social purposes and urban social problems are shifting towards a sustainable nature. From studying sustainable design in urban contexts I would make the statement that over the last 10-15 years a large number of peiple, especially urban populations, are thinking more sustainably when living their everyday lives and choosing places like parks to spend their past times. This could be due to the enhanced knowledge and education of the positive benefits of living sustainable, or the pressing financial time that the majority of the public is facing that has caused them to consider and take on sustainable practices of energy reduction and recycling. This thought could prove more accurate after more time has elapsed and data has been collected.
Moving on, the authors discuss traits that would define this new fifth model of Sustainable Parks.
• Increasing ecological performance
• Native plants
• Restoration of streams and other natural systems
• Wildlife habitat
• Integrating appropriate technologies and infrastructure
• Recycling
• Sustainable construction and maintenance practices
While these traits define more ecological values, the authors also realized the need for a social value in place too, “after all, sustainability is ultimately a social concept rather than a technical or biological one because humans are responsible for the ecological crisis today”(Cranz and Boland, 2004). The authors analyzed parks from journals and publications to get an idea of percentages of parks that fell into the five categories, Open Space being the highest (46%) and Sustainable Park being second (23%). However most (86%) of the parks exhibited traits of being sustainable. Cranz and Boland analyze the trends and move into policy implications of sustainable urban parks then into Principles I and II.
Principle I
o How Sustainable Parks differ greatly from other urban park models by emphasizing internal self sufficiency with material resource
o Strategies to reduce the need for resources and increase self sufficiency
• Funding cuts
• Recreation demands
• On-site recycling
• Native plantings
• Building orientation
Principle II
o How to incorporate the Sustainable Parks into the larger metropolis
o Ways urban parks are used to address urban problems
• Address poor air quality
• Access to sunlight
• Opportunities for exercise
• Improve other problems associated with close urban quarters
In addition, they have distinguished four broad categories that environmental urban problems can be classified into as to how Sustainable Parks could address them: infrastructure, reclamation, health, and social well-being. The article explains each of these in great detail and how Sustainable Parks address them.
After extensive discussion on the four categories, the authors conclude with how to begin this process as a parks department trying to implement Sustainable Parks. They provide a very practical answer as they have throughout the entire article, start at the biggest, most expensive, and most troublesome problem-- maintenance. Improve and radically rethink maintenance practices, focus on resource efficiency and developing a new aesthetic from that focus. Maintenance is the biggest problem in most cities, and I very much agree, because it is the biggest expense. The parks departments I have worked and collaborated with, do not have the resources, money, manpower, skills, etc. to manage a park or park system that requires an intensive management program. This is a fascinating article that describes in detail the history of urban parks and the possible future for the fifth model of urban parks, Sustainable Parks.
The next set of articles provides a case study approach to sustainable design. Greening the Whitehouse: Executive Mansion as Symbol of Sustainability by Ted Shelton (2007) and Driving Forward Sustainable Design by David Ellis (2001) both look at implementation of sustainable designs.
Shelton analyzes the policies and practices that past presidents and vice presidents from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush have implemented or have been involved with while at the White House. Shelton discusses the timeline of sustainable practices that have been both implemented, and at least once removed, such as solar panels, photovoltaic lighting and heating with captured solar energy. The article explains how certain presidents like Carter called the effort needed to confront the country’s energy issues “the moral equivalent of war” and showed his concern by installing solar panels on the roof of the White House to heat water; however, on the opposite spectrum you have presidents like Reagan who had the solar panels removed and put in surplus storage later to be used to heat water by Unity College cafeteria in Maine. Issues like this took place throughout history; Carter’s administration implemented energy policies while Reagan put it on the back burner.
Shelton moves on to the Clinton and Gore administration and their focus on energy efficiency and environmental goals. Clinton was different from Carter in the way he focused not only on energy like Carter but also on environmental concerns, and responsible design, construction and maintenance. Finally you have Bush in office. Solar panels were installed on the White House ancillary buildings through the initiative the initiative National Park Service, not the White House. The advances in technology of the 21 century can be seen from the energy efficiency, aesthetic appeal, and energy capturing ability of the new solar panels. Yet publicity and recognition of the re-installed solar panels was minimal.
This article helps to show a portion of history that has dealt with sustainable design practices involved with the leader of our country and how sustainable programs have progressed and changed, sometimes not for the better.
Driving forward sustainable design focuses on a large-scale re-master planning project of General Motor’s research and development campus in Detroit, MI. The project involved consultants from San Francisco that determined requirements for projects in terms of sustainable design:
• State of the art sustainable design for site and building
• A site design that enables the campus to be highly innovative and creative-maximizing the potential for technological development,
• Maintaining a high level of flexibility and longevity
• Beautiful external environment which is compatible with emerging 21st century technologies
Pre-existing issues of the site:
• Large masses of employee commuting
• Original site was developed on a flood plain
• Existing river was re-engineered
• No surface water retention on site
• Lakes that were not environmentally helpful
• Grounds were being managed intensively
The intense management can be directly related back to the article on parks that identified maintenance as being an outstanding issue as well. To meet the identified requirements and introduce sustainable design, the re-masterplan focused on sustainable building development and re-development of many existing site facilities. Re-working the river back to its original state, creating a wetland, and altering the lakes to now serve an aesthetic and functional purpose were all strategies of the master plan. To rate the success of these ideas, the site was divided into twenty spatial areas and a sustainable assessment was created to benchmark the project in terms of sustainability involving the built and external environment. This article was written prior to the completion of the master plan yet it demonstrates a remarkable initiative for sustainable design.
While these two project examples, the White House and the GM campus, are on a drastically different scale it provides the reader an opportunity to see two very different aspects and examples of sustainable design. The GM project focuses on a large master plan and how to make the site more sustainable as a whole. The White House focuses more on sustainable energy practices and implementing policies that include the public support, they both relay valuable information on sustainable design and how you as a designer can make it work for your project.
Sustainable design can be defined and interpreted many different ways. In a summary of The Designer’s Atlas to Sustainability: Charting the Conceptual Landscape through Economy, Ecology, and Culture Bert Ray (2007), the author Anne Thorpe (2007) notes that “standard” texts addressing the topic of sustainability have failed to click with designers who are such a key element to the concept. If professionals were asked to give a definition of sustainable design, they probably would not give you a textbook definition because textbooks do not “click” with everyone’s working world concept, meaning, and application of sustainable design. Each landscape designer has their own meaning and interpretation and how it applies to them. Frazer Osment (2002) in the article Sustainability? Just do it. explains “…designers do not just need a definition of sustainability… but instead need to adopt a visionary and confident approach to change, guided by an ethos of social and environmental responsibility.” It is about linking people and their local environment in a strong relationship through design. Osment (2002) like Cranz and Boland (2004) discuss the opportunity for work in the future with communities and the urban environment and how it is linked strongly to solving social and environmental problems through design solutions. Sustainability will not be achieved overnight but instead will evolve chaotically as a result of responses to social, environmental and economic problems of a particular place (Osment 2002). The summary on Thorpe’s book concludes by saying “designers are well positioned to change the world for the better.” I could not agree more with this statement. At the same moment, each of us as landscape designers, need to take time to educate ourselves on explanations, applications and our own meaning of sustainable design.
To conclude, there are many articles that discuss sustainable design including landscape, building, and mechanical areas. However this summary focuses on the area of landscape design with a brief discussion of building design. Each article discussed, relates to an area of sustainable design for the landscape from site, urban parks, master plans, and defining sustainable design. There is good explanation about methods to make any project more sustainable through topography, hydrology, and vegetation, to name a few, but also in the relationships that exist in the landscape between people, the natural and ecological environment and social goals of projects. As is the case with many contentious issues with many different meanings and interpretations, the idea of sustainable design will not be a consensus among designers and will need further research. However these articles take a brief look at sustainable design and present their information well with thorough research and explanation. No matter what your project area of focus, these articles can provide valuable information on how to apply sustainable design in your practice as well as how it has worked in others.
Sited Sources
- Baird, Stephen L. Dec/Jan 2008, ‘Sustainable Design: The Next Industrial Revolution?’, Technology Teacher, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 11-15.
- Bert, Ray Dec. 2007, ‘The Designer’s Role of Sustainability: Charting the Conceptual Landscape through Economy, Ecology, and Culture’, Civil Engineering, vol. 77, Issue 12, pp. 69.
- Cranz, Galen and Boland, Michael February 2004, ‘Defining the Sustainable Park: A Fifth Model for Urban Parks’, Landscape Journal, no. 23, pp. 102-120.
- Ellis, David February 2001, ‘Driving forward sustainable design’, Landscape Design Journal, no. 297, pp. 32-33.
- Osment, Frazer September 2002, ‘Sustainability? Just do it.’, Landscape Design Journal, vol. 313, no. 19.
- Ozdemir, A. February 2008, ‘Preventing Natural Hazard Risks through Sustainable Site Design’. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 457-462.
- Shelton, Ted May 2007, ‘Greening the White House: Executive Mansion as Symbol of Sustainability’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 31-38.
Bethany Morris
The objective of the project was to establish a snap shot of the contemporary understanding of sustainable design. The concept of sustainability is broad with varied depths. The graduate student team responsible for researching academic journals divided the vast task by searching the University of Tennessee library databases for “sustainable design” in both the title and content fields. An initial search for “sustainability” in the title resulted in five hundred forty hits. This search served as the barometer for subsequent searches. Individually, I conducted title searches using Academic Search Premier and Avery Index. The first search, performed on September 28, 2008, resulted in 21 hits ranging from 1995 to September 2008. Five articles were selected for in depth analysis. The database provided options to narrow the search further by fields: architects, houses, green design, environmental aspects, energy consumption and biotic communities. These represent other perspectives within the discussion on sustainable design. Additional searches for ‘sustainable landscapes’ provided nine sources and a search for ‘sustainable design’ + ‘landscapes’ resulted in two, 'Designing Greenways: Sustainable Landscapes for Nature and People’ and ‘The experience of sustainable landscapes’. A challenge faced by the researchers was locating the full text articles. Abstracts of the published journal articles were readily available, but it was important to the integrity of the research to study and critic the articles in full and with context. For this reason, only the full text articles are included in the Executive Summary. The articles that found with abstracts are included in the works cited portion of the research.
Due to the nature of academic journals the scope of the readings was often limited to the academic arena. The authors of five articles chosen for analysis have ties to United States universities. Based on the readings, the discussion of ‘sustainable design’ centers around critiquing literature written on sustainable design. In the previously mentioned articles, the authors are reviewing books to be used either as college texts or guides to practioners. However, the remaining two articles (Woolliams, Thayer) found via searching ‘sustainable landscapes’ and ‘sustainable design’+’landscapes’ focused on quantifying sustainable design within the building industry. By juxtaposing an article meant for a scholar and one meant for the practicing professional, the chasm between school and the field is clearly defined.
Schools are concerned more with a general understanding of concepts over the implementation of specifics. Lucie Laurian and Greg Lindsey separately wrote reviews of Landscapes for Nature and People for Journal of Planning Literature in 2008. Laurian found the book to be valuable for its three scientific chapters, chapters five, six and seven. They were concise and readily applicable. However, she criticized the authors’ method of posing questions without offering any means to find the answers and for oversimplifying complex social processes (Laurian 2008). Lindsey, likewise, favorably reviewed the book. He held it as a valuable course text and not a practical manual for design problems. The book is a reference for a more general understanding of landscape ecology (Lindsey). Understanding of a topic on a surface level is an elementary but important step. Problems arise with text such as Landscapes for Nature and People when it is used at the inappropriate time. It is helpful for guiding design on a schematic level and not in the construction phase.
Gray World, Green Heart and Futures by Design were reviewed simultaneously by Susan Maxmann for Architectural Record. By studying the books side by side, the reader could better appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of each. Maxmann called Gray World, Green Heart a ‘call to arms’ for design professionals. It is a provocative piece meant to stir the conscience of the design community. Futures by Design is more of a guide than a manifesto. It is a collection of built sustainable designs around the world. Based solely on Maxmann’s review, both books would be helpful to students and professionals (Maxmann). I infer their strength is increased by reading them in tandem. Gray World, Green Heart provides the motivation to be environmentally conscious. It places responsibility on the designer to be sustainable. Futures by Design then provides the resources to achieve the goal. It lists real case studies that the designer can draw upon for help in his or her own endeavors. Also the publication of such a list is proof to the jaded architect or landscape architect that sustainable design is attainable.
The mediating article between theoretical and practical is “Students Plant a Green Future for the Environment and Economy” published in Professional Safety (2006). Forty-two student teams received grants from the Environmental Protection Agency to research and develop sustainable environmental solutions. The competition was entitled People, Prosperity and the Planet (P3) and intents to prove that protecting the environment prosperity are compatible (Professional Safety). I support a contest of this nature because it is attempting to bridge the gap between a hypothetical collegiate project and a real world design circumstance. It is not naïve enough to assume that good, efficient landscapes and buildings will be constructed simply because that is the moral thing to do. Economics cannot be ignored if success is to be obtained. Furthermore, explicit economic feasibility must be proven for an idea (sustainability or otherwise) to be supported by a financial backer.
The lag between supporting the idea of sustainable design and seeing its methods brought to fruition are present in the next article, “ A LEED of faith” by Jessica Woolliams (2007). She contends that while the topic of sustainable design is commonplace “green” design itself is not mainstream. Only five to ten percent of building nationwide qualifies as sustainable. The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) developed by the US Green Building Council has been influential over the last decade by making the topic of sustainable design more visible. A new tool called Living Building Challenge has emerged to be beyond LEED and “move toward true sustainability”. This new system differs from LEED in that it does not award credits. It consists only of ‘NetZero’ prerequisites, such as one hundred percent rainwater reuse. Its simplification makes it both easier to understand and harder to attain (Woolliams). Since sustainable design can be such an intangible concept, sustainability rating systems are necessary to measure the quality of the design. The current LEED standard is daunting to the designer and owner due to its complex format combine with a lengthy submittal and judging process. A streamlined system, such as Living Building Challenge would negate some of the inherent obstacles of the LEED system. However, it would have to contend with the recognizability of LEED and its ability to award degrees of achievement. The Living Building Challenge’s intent is for a single LBC building to be more sustainable than any single LEED rated building. I understand the goal of making each project as sustainable as possible, but I am wary of setting inaccessible benchmarks. Setting an inflexible and unattainable standard could discourage an already skeptical audience from trying to be more environmentally conscious. If given the choice of a single structure that is completely self-sustaining or several that are more efficient than the industry standard, the decision of which is more beneficial to the environment would be difficult.
An overlooked aspect in the sustainable design discussion is the landscape. Currently, there is no rating system to guide the design of landscapes. Kim O’Connell outlined the development of guidelines in Architect. The American Society of Landscape Architects, U.S. Botanic Garden and the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center are jointly working on a new rating system called the Sustainable Site Initiative. The US Green Building Council has agreed to incorporate the new system with future versions on the LEED rating systems. As the current rating systems are building centered, the goal was to generate a system to quantify sustainable design specific to landscapes (O’Connell). Building upon an established rating system is favorable over generating a new independent one. A stumbling block for sustainable design is the confusion of information and a lack of communication. If the information is dispersed across a number of agencies and entities, no one will be able to benefit from all of it. A power struggle in the hierarchy of which system is better will distract from the common goal of sustainable design.
Ultimately, a holistic approach is the solution to attaining sustainability. No part, whether design, materials, economic or public relation can be accessed individually. Nothing exists in a vacuum. The content of the article must be interfaced with the volume in which it is published and with consideration for the background of the author. The motives of the author likewise cannot be assumed or ignored. Academic journals are less allied with commercialism, however, the author may have reason to maximize one view while minimizing another. Also, the designer must try to understand what is the status of the building industry and what is currently being presented in the schools. Each facet of the discussion influences another. It is impossible to critique one source alone. The content of its contemporaries provides the knowledge base for analysis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)