This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Christopher James Lidy Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Landscape Architecture
Professor Benjamin C. Johnson, Committee Chair Professor Brian Katen Professor Caren Yglesias, Ph.D. March 22, 2006 Alexandria, Virginia Keywords: Landscape Architecture, Design Methods, Design Theory
Copyright, 2006, Chris Lidy
A Study of Landscape Architecture Design Methods
Christopher James Lidy
How do different methods employed by landscape architects impact the design outcome? This paper identifies and defines design methods in landscape architecture that may be classified as part of four internal and external connections and structures categories. Methods are further examined through two design exercises. In the first design exercise, the identified methods are individually applied to the same simple design which is used as a control. The only variable changed is the method used to design. The resulting designs are shown and analyzed. In the second design exercise, three different methods are applied to a complex design. Similar to the first design exercise, all variables are held constant except for the design methods. The resulting design outcomes are shown and analyzed. One conclusion from this work recommends landscape architecture designers use at least one method in each of four categories: 1) Modeling Systems, 2) Interrelationship and Dependencies, 3) Incorporation and Adadaption, and 4) Structure Problems in order to explore complex design issues more thoroughly.
Table of Contents
Title Page Abstract Table of Contents List of Multimedia Object List of Multimedia Object Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review Chapter 3 Methodology Chapter 4 Design Exercise Chapter 5 Conclusion Bibliography Vita page page page page page page page page page page page page i ii iii iv v 1 2 7 8 33 36 40
Lists of Multimedia Objects*
Figure 2-1 Design Loop Figure 4-1 Crowd Figure 4-2 Tidal Flow Figure 4-3 Environmental Heating Figure 4-4 Anthropometric Figure 4-5 Flower Figure 4-6 Design Figure 4-7 Support Structure Figure 4-8 Bridge Design Figure 4-9 Egg Shell Roof Figure 4-10 Brain Storming Figure 4-11 Stage Figure 4-12 No Access Figure 4-13 Unlimited Access Figure 4-14 Sketch Figure 4-15 Design Figure 4-16 Small Town Figure 4-17 Parisian Cafe Figure 4-18 Cafe, Washington, D.C. Figure 4-19 Steeple Figure 4-20 Pattern Language Figure 4-21 Andersonville Prison Figure 4-22 Round/Square Peg Figure 4-23 Optimization Figure 4-24 Disaggregation Figure 4-25 Site Plan Mowed Lawn Figure 4-26 Site Plan Prairie Figure 4-27 Rain Garden Figure 4-28 Beaver Dam Figure 4-29 Site Plan Figure 4-30 Section Figure 4-31 Site Plan Figure 4-32 Section Figure 4-33 Site Plan Figure 4-34 Section Figure 4-35 Site Plan Figure 4-36 Section page 3 page 8 page 8 page 8 page 9 page 9 page 9 page 10 page 10 page 10 page 11 page 11 page 12 page 12 page 12 page 12 page 13 page 13 page 13 page 14 page 14 page 15 page 15 page 16 page 16 page 17 page 17 page 18 page 18 page 19 page 19 page 19 page 19 page 20 page 20 page 20 page 20
*Note: Unless otherwise noted, all multimedia created by the author. iv
Lists of Multimedia Objects* Figure 4-37 Site Plan Figure 4-38 Section Figure 4-39 Site Plan Figure 4-40 Section Figure 4-41 Site Plan Figure 4-42 Section Figure 4-43 Site Plan Figure 4-44 Section Figure 4-45 Site Plan Figure 4-46 Section Figure 4-47 Site Plan Figure 4-48 Section Figure 4-49 Site Plan Figure 4-50 Section Figure 4-51 Site Map Figure 4-52 Site Map Figure 4-53 Design 1 Beginning Figure 4-54 Design 1 Middle Figure 4-55 Design 1 End Figure 4-56 Summary and Analysis Figure 4-57 Design 2 Beginning Figure 4-58 Design 2 Middle Figure 4-59 Design 2 End Figure 4-60 Summary and Analysis Figure 4-61 Design 3 Beginning Figure 4-62 Design 3 Middle Figure 4-63 Design 3 End Figure 4-64 Design 3 Sections Figure 4-65 Summary and Analysis page 21 page 21 page 21 page 21 page 22 page 22 page 22 page 22 page 23 page 23 page 23 page 23 page 24 page 24 page 25 page 25 page 26 page 26 page 26 page 27 page 28 page 28 page 28 page 29 page 30 page 30 page 30 page 31 page 32 *Note: Unless otherwise noted. all multimedia created by the author. v .
As a result. 270) While many variables shape landscape architecture design. they establish the structure of and connections in a design. (Rowe. if one can gather all available information. Under this assumption. However. (Polk. First. In order to examine the role methods play in landscape architecture design eighteen methods are identified. 18) Third. The body of this paper consists of the analysis and implications of this analysis. only one variable is easily changeable at the moment of design: the choice of methods. (Jones. (Winner. the mental processes of landscape architecture design merit continual study given the expanding field. 46) This is not true. First. From the information generated by application of each method to a simple design. Second. (Jones. the increase in computerization and information technologies can lead to a flawed confidence that any problem can be solved if one has enough information or data points. So the methods influence on the design should match the design intent. Each method is applied to a simple design problem and the results are shown and discussed. understanding the methods in the design process allows a landscape architect to evaluate the end result of his or her design and to quickly construct changes in the design by applying different methods. many times the choice of methodology is not given much thought. perceptions or cognitive abilities. 28. 75) Fourth. and categorized. such as experiences. are not readily changeable at the moment one starts a design. (Lynch. three diverse methods are applied to a complex landscape design problem. causing confusion and frustration for students not able to understand where in the design process they might have gone off course. discussed. knowing the eighteen methods and their effects on the design outcome allows a landscape architect to choose a method that is most compatible with the designer’s end vision or design strategy. Finally. they have a direct determination on the design result. 2429) Methods influence three elements in design. xxvi) Second. the process of design and how methods fit into this process is not understood. Conner. Other components. 1 . which should be a conscious choice of methods to achieve a desired result. The nonlinear and inherently human nature of landscape architecture demands an incorporation of a heuristic approach to landscape architecture.Chapter 1 Introduction This thesis centers on the key question: What effect do different design methods employed by landscape architects have on the design outcome? One component of the design process in landscape architecture is methodology. they serve as reference points and road maps from the abstract world of design to the concrete world in which the design is placed. The designer chooses a methodology that she or he is comfortable with or has used in the past with no little or no thought on how this choice meshes with the objective of the design. Four points summarize the key reasons for studying methods of landscape architecture design. the answer will be readily apparent and will be the only way to solve the problem.
270-271) Lynch and Hack identify the following twelve methods used in landscape architecture: 1) Learning Probes. 2) Subconscious Suggestion. they concentrate on the identification and definitions of the methods. Design is not restricted to genius. He states. Lynch and Hack do not talk about process or design theory. Lynch and Hack address methods of landscape architecture directly. design is a mystery. and they learn to receive them by following the example of other men of genius. 11) Optimizing the Essential Function. A second influential publication is Peter G. Some ways are new. 10) Structure of the Problem.” The Journal of Enterprise Architecture. which are created to achieve certain purposes and are complete with the instructions for making them. 6) Focus on the Means. and 12) Disaggregation. and each is relevant to a particular situation. Rather. All of them include the generation and evaluation of new possibilities. 7) Incremental Improvement. Rowe takes a very different tack and views methods as part of a generic design process. But most of the new systematic techniques now used for problem solving do not seem very useful either. 3) Brainstorming. 36/1 (Fall. but identifies forms of reasoning which are analogous to Lynch and Hack’s methods. some quite old. They are trained to design in one set way. Rowe does not identifies methods per se. a lightning flash. Common account is correct: there is a mystery in design.” (Lynch. 4) Evaluation Criteria. Men of genius receive these flashes. as there is in all human thought. then design is practiced by many people and in many different ways. which they apply to every occasion.2. nor is it distinct from practicality or detail. Rowe’s “A Priori Knowledge and Heuristic Reasoning in Architectural Design published in.Chapter 2 Literature Review What methods are used in landscape architecture design and how do these methods affect its out- come? A significant book address landscape architect design methods: Kevin Lynch and Gary Hack’s Site Planning 1. The one way is often clumsy and wasteful. 9) Behavior Settings. After the revelation. nor is it a uniform or simple process.3. 8) Incremental Adaption. 5) Well Spaced Alternatives. but they also half believe in the lightning flash. 2 . But these are separate problems. They justify the study of methods the following way: “By common account. 1982). If design is the imaginative creation of possible forms (of environment in this case). since site planning is so open-ended a process. whether one thinks of them as grubby nuisances or as the overriding issues of practicality. there are details to develop and the work of carrying out the revealed solution. But the account is otherwise wrong. Practicing designers are aware of its convolutions. Let us begin with a descriptive inventory of the known methods of generation and selecting form possibilities. first published in 1984 currently in its revised and expanded third edition.
the use of heuristic reasoning.“Design is often guided by heuristic reasoning involving solution images. analogies.” always more than one plausible explanation. 18) Though Rowe is an architect and constructs his arguments from an architect’s viewpoint. The output is then reviewed and feedback is generated. the exercise of some provisional set of rules. he approaches the subject of design methods in a generic manner adaptable to any design effort and not confined simply to architectural or landscape design. what it should be like. Rowe’s methods are readily adaptable to landscape architecture. As a result design appears to be essentially an emergent phenomenon where new information about a problem is generated.” (Rowe. In the latter kind. 6) Figure 2-1 Design Loop (Polk. 18) Rowe defines a design process loop where input is subjected to some type of process. which in turn generates output. or restricted sets of form-giving rules that partially and provisionally define the “end” or solution state of a problem. Tackling a problem of this type requires some initial insight. 13) 3 . inference. Rowe’s model is rather crude compared to Col. John Boyd’s loop model OODA (Observe-Orient-Decide-Act) (Polk. and that their solutions cannot be strictly correct or false. i.e.” (Rowe. “During the course of designing one mode of heuristic reasoning may be found to be unproductive and give way to other kinds. no explicit “stopping rule. 18) Rowe places his methods in the context of a design process. “A distinction can be made in the world of problems between those that are well defined and those that are ill defined. and solution strategies amended accordingly. Architectural design problems can also be referred to as being “wicked problems” in that they have no definitive formulation. in other words. or plausible strategy. that includes most architectural design problems. The adaptability of Rowe’s methods to other design disciplines is described by his opening statement. co-mingling may even occur.” (Rowe. evaluated together with a priori knowledge. both the “ends” and the “means” are unknown at first and one has to define the problem. In solving the former kind the “ends” are known and one has to find the “means”. which is helpful for illustrating where and how methods are involved as one designs. a problem formulation that corresponds to a solution and vice versa. The output then become the new input and the cycle continues.
” (Polk. While Lynch and Hack do not recognize this issue. the classification is one of practical convenience for grouping and discussing observations. Act: To implement the decision. 4 . Brain Storming is a way of welling up Subconscious Suggestions that are then further defined with the help of others in a Brain Storming session. The designer must avoid using the familiar paradigms that do not reflect the current reality. and 5) the use of formal “languages”. Before the designer brings together linked elements of the observation. 19) In this case. presence. An example is Brain Storming and Subconscious Suggestion. 18) Combining the work of Lynch and Hack and Rowe generates seventeen methods. “Five classes of heuristics can be identified largely according to the kind of subject matter involved. Rather. So one destroys the observed or starting reality so that the influences perceived or real of the starting reality are reduced. 2) the use of literal analogies. 16-21) • • Returning to Rowe. This raises the question of whether all possible methods have been identified. Rowe classifies his methods into five branches of heuristic reasoning. there is no over lap between Lynch’s and Rowe’s methods. Decide: To make choices of how to reach the desired state. it must be pointed out that Rowe recognizes that the dividing line between classifications are not absolute and instead are used for convenience. They are: 1) the use of anthropometric analogies. mixed with some speculation. the designer is able to understand the present state and visualize in what direction or directions--either narrowly or broadly defined-. the chaotic world is the design. their methods are also prone to blurred classification lines. One interesting note is that while the methods overlap.the design should move. These classes were based on protocol analysis of architectural designers at work. Each class is by no means exclusive of the characteristics of others. The intent is best captured by Polk: “(Destruction of a domain or breaking the whole into its respective constituent elements) before he” (in this case the designer) “can collect linking elements to recreate a new and improved observation creation of a new perceptions of reality through specific to general induction. (Polk. In this stage the designer observes him or herself. In this stage. It must be noted that Boyd stresses the importance of creating a new reality during this stage of the design loop. he or she must destruct the existing whole. 3) the use of environmental relations. the site and its surrounding. and integration of common qualities or attributes found in the chaotic world. or fact of.” (Rowe. nor totally inclusive of the range of possible heuristics. break it into it elements. to discover or determine the existence. • • Observe: To gather information and evidence. However. and then create a new perspective of reality by constructing from the specific to the general. This involves the selection of methodologies and course of action. 4) the use of typologies. and the design’s objective.Polk defines the following key terms. Orient: To construct a mental model that allows the designer to understand the reality of the present situation and the desired state. synthesis. Rowe’s five methods have characteristics crossing classification categories. Here Brain Storming crosses classification into the Subconscious Suggestion method.
science. However. how many students could answer the question “What is your design strategy?” Another area of concern is that only two authors have researched and written about architecture design methods. neural networks in the brain that produce intelligence and consciousness. nonlinear models. as well as economies. This process of emergence of the need for new. a designer has a roadmap for moving from the general starting area to the desired end. more researchers might result in a more diverse. Having a design strategy allows others to have a common framework to discuss. management and construction of a complex system. Evidence of this conclusion may be found by looking at the essays’ Simon Swaffield included in his Reader: Theory of Landscape Architecture. 221) “Almost all interesting processes in nature are highly cross linked. all but one of the methods used in these field could in fit into one of the seventeen methods identified by Lynch and Rowe. (2002) After Lynch and Hack’s essay excerpt. the next most recent and single scholar is Bernard Lassus. social insect colonies. hardly a main stream theoretical voice. out-of equilibrium descriptions and computer simulations. and methods but blur their distinctions. collaborate. Given the dramatic increases in technology in the landscape architectural field since the early 1980s. and understand the working design. and possibly more complete. the designer generally understands the current situation and has a general or specific end result in mind. processes. we can distinguish a set of fundamental building blocks. While the work of Lynch and Rowe has represented essential first steps. I expanded my research to include other design disciplines. This thesis makes the following distinctions. modes of description is known as hierarchical self-organization. In many systems. which to them become the design process. Methodology is not design process nor is design process a method. immune networks that preserve the identity of organisms. It involves the study.” (Richards. Examples of these systems are gene networks that direct developmental processes.” (Rocha. Methodology is involved in the action phase of the design process. such as arts. Methodology is the application of methods to solve a design. 1) 5 . the understanding of which requires the development. With a methodology.Many authors discuss design process. During a critique. One of the reasons there is so much confusion about design process. 192-199) The one method not identified by Lynch and Rowe is complex system modeling. This is a design strategy. body of work on the study of design methods in landscape architecture design. and telecommunication systems. social networks comprised of transportation. which interact nonlinearly to form compound structures or functions with an identity that requires more explanatory devices than those used to explain the building blocks. complementary. or the use of. which is defined as: “A system comprised of a (usually large) number of (usually strongly) interacting entities. and computer sciences. and systems that observe this characteristic are defined as complex (2). methodology and methods is that many designers use one method. while methods are the structured systematic approaches to problem solving. utilities. the designer then makes a conscious choice of a method or combination of methods which becomes the designer’s methodology. this time-centric research may be dated. These essay talk more of process then methods. At this point. however. The design process is considered the generic thought process of a designer as she or he designs. ecological networks. new scientific tools. or agents. methodology. (Jones. Compounding this concern is the fact that both authors completed their work around the same period of time--the early 1980s. Based on this desired end result. engineering.
3) Anthropometric Analogies. manage. 8) Subconscious Suggestion.Landscape architects study. Therefore landscape architects need a method to deal with complex systems. and 18) Disaggregation. 10) Evaluation Criteria. 9) Brainstorming. 4) Literal Analogies. System modeling can be defined as “concerned with basic and applied research on simulations and analysis of complex systems. control. 11) Well Spaced Alternatives. 15) Behavior Settings. 17) Optimizing the Essential Function. 12) Focus on the Means. 7) Learning Probes. 14) Incremental Adaption. 13) Incremental Improvement. 2) Environmental Relation. as well as development of applications to understand and control such systems. 16) Structure of the Problem.” (Rocha. Very rarely do landscape architects deal with systems that are not complex by nature. 1) In summation. construct and interact with complex systems. there are eighteen types of methods used by landscape architects during a design process: 1) System Modeling. That method is complex system modeling or system modeling. 6 .
methods applicable to landscape architecture are identified through a literature review. Each identified method then is defined and a visual representation of the method is developed. The second design exercise examines whether a single method can be used in a complex design fairly typical of a real world design problem and whether different methods will result in a different design outcomes. and the results are analyzed. Established comparative strengths and weaknesses of each method. The design exercises involve two parts. Reviewing these strengths and weaknesses might suggest another approach or design strategy based on identified design goals. The resulting designs are analyzed and discussed. Each method is applied to the design problem. 7 . First. The design is simplistic to facilitate keeping all variables constant except for the method used.Chapter 3 Methodology The methodology used in this study is as follows. The first deals with the investigation of how different methods effects the outcome of a simple control design. Three different methods are selected for their diversity and minimal overlap in characteristics.
Figure 4-1 Crowd 2. In the following example. 1. only methodologies are readily changeable.Chapter 4 Design Exercise Of the four components of the process involved in the design loop. Scholars have identified the following eighteen distinct design methods. System Modeling System modeling solves a design by looking at a system. The following diagram shows the intent to use environmental heating to control the structure’s internal temperature. For example. landscape architects incorporate native plants into their designs to repair or minimize the environmental impact of a project. placing the system in the design context and substituting design elements for function and stimuli. the crowd could be thought of as water moving with a tide and managed by the same means as one controls water movement. Environmental Relations Environmental relations incorporates the proper relation between man and the environment and includes considerations of how materials interact with the environment. Figure 4-2 Tidal Flow Figure 4-3 Environmental Heating 8 . In the landscape architecture design context. when designing a plaza. understanding its function and stimuli. the movement of the crowd is similar to the movement of the tide.
In the landscape architecture design context. Figure 4-5 Flower Figure 4-6 Design 9 . is the bench too big and uncomfortable? Can one see over the wall if standing next to it. The following example shows how one form influences the design. 10 feet away or 50 feet away? Figure 4-4 Anthropometric 4. it is very important to incorporate how humans relate to the site. When designing a plaza. if one is designing a path to a reptile exhibit.3. For example. and these solutions are then used to develop the design to completion. The program elements are solved. The following diagrams center on the baseline relationship of the human body to the design. Anthropometric Analogies Anthropometric analogies focus on the human body and its relationship to the design goal. the path could be modeled after a snake moving along the ground. Literal Analogies Literal analogies use an existing form or construct to generate the solution for the design.
Figure 4-9 Egg Shell Roof 10 .5. Figure 4-7 Support Structure Figure 4-8 Bridge Design 6. strong yet thin. The example starts with what known in its most basic form—what type of structure is needed to support the bridge. In the following example. Many find this method hit or miss and unreliable. Learning Probes Learning probes start without a comprehensive understanding of all issues relating to the design. Subconscious Suggestion Subconscious suggestion brings forth the processing power of the subconscious to solve a design. the roof structure takes the form of an egg shell. The design generates information used to explore the issues and understand the interplay of elements. The information is used to “play” with the various elements of the structure and evaluate the results and effects within the design.
Brain storming Brain storming relies on a group or collective effort to generate solutions for the design. The following diagrams the brain storming process. the criteria is for the last row to hear a pin drop on stage. In this example.7. Evaluation criteria Evaluation criteria sets the criteria and subordinates all other design elements to this criteria. Figure 4-10 Brain Storming 8. Landscape architects commonly use a criteria for site run and design to that goal. Figure 4-11 Stage 11 .
Figure 4-14 Sketch Figure 4-15 Design 12 .9. access is unlimited by car. Well Spaced Alternatives Well spaced alternatives bracket a design solution by the use of extreme alternatives. access is restricted by car. Here the designer uses free-moving sketches to develop a roof design. Figure 4-12 No Access Figure 4-13 Unlimited Access 10. Neither alternative is the design solution. rather than focusing on the problem or object of the design. In one of the following photos. but they bracket the solution. and in the alternative. The solution is found somewhere between these two alternatives. Means-focus Means-focus plays with forms or means to generate a solution.
A case study tries to understand the system being studied and apply it to a new situation.11. 13 . the designer tries to understand the feel of a small town and convey this to a new development. at the same time improving parts that will not diminish the feeling of a small town. making small improvements.C. Washington. D. D. In the following sketch. Figure 4-16 Small Town 12. Incremental adaption Incremental adaption applies a successful design to a similar situation.C. Incremental improvement Incremental improvement enhances a design gradually. Figure 4-17 Parisian Cafe Figure 4-18 Cafe. The following sketch shows how a Parisian cafe is copied in Washington. Many times this is done by the use of case studies.
Typologies Typologies are past solutions whose principles are considered constant and invariable within cultural contexts. Pattern languages Pattern languages are the rules representing the order and correct function of the relationship between man and his environment. The following images show the underlining pattern and relationship of three different towns. designing an amusement park. Figure 4-19 Steeple 14. Figure 4-20 Pattern Language 14 . As the following example illustrates.13. one or a combination of these layouts might be useful. For example. in the western culture. These relationships or patterns can be applied to different designs by increasing or decreasing the scale. steeples are generally associated with houses of worship. This is what the design intends to communicate by the use of a type form.
Figure 4-21 Andersonville Prison 16. the design falls into place. food preparation. In the landscape architecture context. etc. the key problem could be how to maximize and preserve a great view. or filtration for run off. Meanwhile.15. The square peg is the unique or key problem that must be addressed before the design is complete. Structure-of-the-Problem The structure-of-the-problem method focuses on the key problem. the round pegs represent standard design problems. common behaviors would include parking. For example. Once a solution is developed for this problem. In landscape architecture design. a prison has areas designed to address certain behaviors. Behavioral Setting Behavioral setting design identifies behavior patterns that are independent and stable. Figure 4-22 Round/Square Peg 15 . gathering areas. such as containment. hygiene. In the following example. standard design problems include issues such as what material to use in constructing a walkway and what type of plants to use in the design.
Figure 4-24 Disaggregation 16 . and these solutions are used to develop the design to completion. In the landscape architecture context. solves for each subset and then combines the solutions of each subset to form a solution. Figure 4-23 Optimization 18. each function is separated into program elements. solving each as if it were the most important function.17. In the following example. each piece of the game must be separately solved before the game is complete. Optimization Essential Function Optimization identifies the key functions of the design and works through each function. such as topography and site run off. Disaggregation Disaggregation divides a problem into subsets. each piece represents a design problem. The program elements are then solved. Each problem must be solved separately and then combined to complete the design. In the following example. The information gathered is used to better understand how each function will fit into the design.
The work is organized by: the name of the method type. Figure 4-25 Site Plan Mowed Lawn Figure 4-26 Site Plan Prairie 17 . while methods are the structured systematic approaches to problem solving. The design problem is kept simple and all variables except method type are kept constant. The processing capacity of some part of the natural system must be increased to accommodate the change in run off from the parking lot. and methods but blur their distinctions. and filtration of run off. The limitation of the design problem resulted in some method types not being applicable to the design. Many authors discuss design process. and the resulting design. The prairie planting offsets the increased run off of the parking lot by increasing holding capacity. System Modeling: The design is based on the functions of natural hydrologic system. Plantings on the site are changed from mowed lawn to tall grass prairie. absorption. This thesis makes the following distinctions.Design Methods Applied to Simple Designs The following is the work generated by applying each method to the problem of run off from a parking lot. Second. Where this happens. First. a brief description of how the method is applied. methodology. another design example is used. the design process is considered the generic thought process of a designer as she or he designs. methodology is the application of methods to solve a design.
Figure 4-27 Rain Garden Anthropometric Analogies The method is difficult to use as a sole method to solve this design problem. Beavers are encouraged to settle on the site and dam the small stream. such as how big should a manhold should be or how a person would walk from their car to the building to generate the shape and path of the sidewalks. The method can be used to solve smaller problems within the site. The water is held in a pond on site Figure 4-28 Beaver Dam 18 .Environmental Relation Rain garden design transitions the man-made area into the large environment and minimizes the ecological damage. Literal Analogies The design uses a beaver dam to control the hydrology of the site.
the method cannot be used. Then one could have a diverse brain storming session with each group bringing a different element to the session and building on each others’ ideas. In this case. Since the author is the only person involved in the design. the designers and the developers. a solution becomes apparent. 19 . raising the parking lot and allowing vegetation to grow under the structure solves the run off problem. If one were to use this method. Figure 4-31 Site Plan Figure 4-32 Section Brain Storming The brain storming method requires more than one person. one would assemble a group that included end users of both the parking lot and the stream in which the run off flows into.Learning Probes As one plays with the design form. Figure 4-29 Site Plan Figure 4-30 Section Subconscious Suggestion The structure of the roof is taken from a partial picture of a suspension bridge.
Evaluation Criteria The criteria is set as a maximum amount over time of water leaving the site. Figure 4-33 Site Plan Figure 4-34 Section Well Spaced Alternatives One design raises the parking lot. to use the water to raise a control gate. to retain the water and to slowly release it. The solution is between the two. meeting the stated criteria. The other design sinks the parking lot. The design is constructed to gather the run off from the parking lot. Figure 4-36 Section Figure 4-35 Site Plan 20 .
Figure 4-37 Site Plan Figure 4-38 Section Incremental Improvement Here a standard design used for controlling run off is improved by changing the design of a sidewalk to capture. retain.Focus on the Means The form of the roof is generated by the exploration of form through the use of free-style sketches. Figure 4-40 Section Figure 4-39 Site Plan 21 . and filter run off.
retaining. but it is applicable to the way the cars enter and leave the site. and dispersing water are identified as behavioral settings and are incorporated into the design. Figure 4-43 Site Plan Figure 4-44 Section 22 .Incremental Adaption A rain garden is adapted to a parking lot design. this should be incorporated into the parking lot design. Pattern Languages The pattern language may not be applicable to the run off from this site. Behavior Setting Slowing run off. Maybe in a few years. Americans drive on the right side of the road. and as a result. the inclusion of a rain garden will identify the building project as being enviromentally friendly or green. Figure 4-42 Section Figure 4-41 Site Plan Typologies Typologies are not directly applicable to this design problem. filtering.
Figure 4-45 Site Plan Figure 4-46 Section Optimizing the Essential Function The optimal parking lot in this case is to have preamble pavement with a filtration system under the parking lot. A green roof is constructed over the parking lot that mimics the pre-development hydrology. Figure 4-48 Section Figure 4-47 Site Plan 23 .Structure of the Problem The key problem is rain running off the parking lot.
Figure 4-49 Site Plan Figure 4-50 Section 24 . and infiltrating the rain water. The design solves the problems by using heavy vegetation to hold rain where it falls and sand-filled holes to capture and infiltrate rain water.Disaggregation: The design is broken into two problems: holding the rain where it falls.
• • • • • • • 1. The methods when applied to a standard landscape design problem.Three Methods Applied to a Complex Design Simple designs do not fully test the methods in a landscape architecture application. and all the remaining land in the area is held by developers with plans to build. Figure 4-51 Site Map Figure 4-52 Site Map 25 . The proposed use of the site is as follows: Program elements: Site is 5.8 acres near the new baseball stadium in Southwest Washington. The city is building a baseball stadium next to the site on the west. Three diverse methods are selected and applied to a common landscape architecture design of normal complexity.000 square foot office 36.1 million square foot project 3 buildings 600.000 square foot retail 160 residential units 235 room hotel Two underground levels of parking with 1.087 spaces The goals of the design are to: 1) integrate the public and private space of the plaza. The river is polluted and environmentally degraded. DC. DC. The design problem selected is the development of the Florida Rock location in Washington. Currently the site is occupied by a concrete plant and has about 900 feet of river front on the tidal portion of the Anacostia River. The area around the site is undergoing massive redevelopment. and 2) incorporate the new stadium and surrounding proposed development. while making the area attractive and desirable when baseball is not played.
Final Form. 26 . The design develops into an amalgamation of parts.Method 1 Disaggregation Figure 4-53 Design 1 Beginning Site Organization Figure 4-54 Design 1 Middle Constructed Layers Figure 4-55 Design 1 End.
Figure 4-56 Summary and Analysis 27 .
The design has external connections. 28 . but the internal connections and internal and external structure needs to be developed.Method 2 Focus on the Means Figure 4-57 Design 2 Beginning Morphology Figure 4-58 Design 2 Middle Site Development Figure 4-59 Design 2 End.
Figure 4-60 Summary and Analysis 29 .
Completing the design requires more external connections and internal and external structure. 30 . The design connects internally.Method 3 Learning Probes Figure 4-61 Design 3 Beginning Start with basics Figure 4-62 Design 3 Middle Play with connection between elements Figure 4-63 Design 3 End.
Figure 4-64 Design 3 Sections 31 .
Figure 4-65 Summary and Analysis 32 .
Can they be categorized by function? Using different methods changes the outcome of the simple design and they are fairly complete. Focus on the Means 3) Incorporation and adaption —These methods deal with external existing structures which can be thought of as a framework or skeleton on which designers build connections. Within the design loop. These categories are defined by the methods effects on the outcome of the design. The use of one method distorts the design and makes it not relevant. These external structures must be incorporated into the design. An examination of the methods allows one to place the eighteen methods into categories. Brain Storming 8. System Modeling 2. The design does not exist by itself and these methods help place the design in context of the larger world. Design by Behavior Setting 33 . Design by Evaluation Criteria 9. only the choice of methods are outside the personal reality of the designer. 11. the following questions are generated. Pattern Languages 15. Therefore. 1.Chapter 5 Conclusion Reviewing the effects of methods on the simple and complex designs. The design must transition from the design to the world outside of the design. Incremental Improvement 12. Subconscious Suggestion 7. Anthropometric Analogies 4. Well Spaced Alternatives 10. What is the relevance of this? Some methods identified are closely related. Incremental Adaptation 13. The complex designs are not complete. a combination of methods must be used. These eighteen methods can be classified into four categories: 1) Modeling systems—These methods develop external connections to the design. Literal Analogies 2) Interrelationships and dependencies—These methods develop internal connections which must be developed in order to avoid running the risk that a design ends up as just a sum of its parts. Environmental Relation 3. Learning Probes 6. 5. Typologies 14.
then every other element in the design is subordinate to the lake. Otherwise the design is a amalgamation of parts with no synergy. it causes problems for those in the design and those entering the design. • Internal structure: Internal structure establishes an order and weight of the design elements within the design. such as connecting to infrastructure and community. For example. If this well understood convention is changed. Applying different methods to the same design project will result in different designs with different connections and structures. Methodologies/methods are important for many reasons. By referencing internal and external connections and structure.4) Structure problems—These methods develop internal structures. 34 • • . if all four categories are addressed during a design process. If all four categories are not used in a design. American cars drive on the right side of the road. which moves the end result closer to the goal of adaptive or sustainable design. Disaggregation Using all four of these categories in any design is important for two basic reasons. The second reason it is important to use all four categories of methods is because it helps designers navigate a vast. • • 1) Methods give structure to the path way between the current situation and the desired state by establishing a priority and weighting the design elements and programs or a design strategy. interconnections and interdependencies within the design system. more connections are generated. Different methods address different types and ways of constructing connections in a design. 16. While using all four does not guarantee the design will be adaptive and sustainable. The methods are akin to the “tetra space” coordinate system in which four axis are needed to reference or fix a point in space. methods determine how design elements connect. it runs the risk of become irrelevant. • Internal connections: Elements within a design must have some connections. 4) Methods also shape the output of a design. must be addressed. it will have internal and external structure and connect internally and externally. it will greatly increase the chances of this happening. If a broad range of methods are incorporated into the process. The results should create redundancies. Structure of the Problem 17. A design must prioritize and weight its design elements and programs in order to create a framework on which to build. the process must incorporate all four categories of methods. the design is more easily understood and relevant to the people using the design. 1) Referencing a solution in terms of known elements or coordinates anchors the abstract world of the designer to the concrete world. • External structure: External structure incorporates existing conventions into the design. 2) In addition to establishing structure. When the design incorporates methods from all four categories. (Hasslberger. almost infinite solution space to find a solution. Optimizing the Essential Function 18. the design may fail because it will lack one or more of the following: • External connections: If a design is not connected to the surrounding area. The external connections. 3) In landscape architecture design. If the most important element is a lake. the design will have a greater chance of reaching a critical mass of necessary connections and redundancies to ensure a substainable design able to adapt to the ever-changing world. First.
The variables in landscape architecture design are methods. the use of all four categories of methods in a design is essential to achieve the ultimate goal of landscape architecture: the creation of a design that is adaptive. For others to understand a design. A designer always runs the risk of getting lost in his or her own constructed reality. and relevant or a complex system. they must be able to see or sense connections. sustainable. interrelationships/dependencies. Each method or combination of methods increases the number of design alternatives for any given design problem. Certainly no cookbook or formula exists for design because too many variables exist within the design process. the design may not be complete and may need to be reworked to address the lacking categories. cognitive abilities and perceptions—and the “real” world. By changing the methods employed. What cognitive abilities are used in landscape architecture design? Can cognitive ability be improved or taught. and connect the design to their perception of reality or the “real” world. the four categories—system modeling. A single method does not address all the structures and connections needed to generate a relevant design. as demonstrated by the application of the eighteen methods to a simple design. The conscious choice of methods changes the results of a design. However. incorporation/adaption and structure problems—ensure that the necessary connections and redundancies exist to create a design that adapts to the ever-changing world. Unfortunately I was unable to identify or analyze these potential sources. Instead. Moving between these four categories during a design and reinforcing one or more that was not present ensures a more comprehensive design result. If a single method is exclusively used in a design that has the complexity normally found in a landscape architect design. a designer may construct different connections and structures resulting in changed designs. A landscape architect should be familiar with all eighteen methods.• 5) Methods are the way to establish a connection between the personal elements of the design process—experiences. If the design lacks one or more of these categories. the design will most likely fail. Possible other methods may have been explored and published in languages other than English. Changing methods may help a designer remove mental blocks. Each method affects the design differently in terms of building connections and structure. Together. how should it be done? Should studio include a formal lecture component where methods are taught and cognitive abilities improved? 35 . experiences. If all four methods are used. a design is more likely to be referenced and fixed in the concrete world. the four categories of methods are not limiting. allowing a landscape architect to select from a large design solution set. Finally. Future research questions generated from this work include more research into the design process model and the cognitive side of design. Limiting the process to a cookbook or formulaic approach restricts the solution set and fails to allow for a better solution based on different combinations and types of methods. and perceptions with the real world in which the design must exist. methods connect outsiders to the designer’s abstract personal reality and to the design. break out of design ruts in which designs look similar and improve design results. Another complication in my research was due to the fact that I was limited to researching English-only studies and research. The categorization of the methods allows a designer to check the design in terms of internal and external connections and structures. Methods connect a designer’s cognitive abilities. and if so.
gov/documents/albus/6201. 2005.” Child Develop ment. New York: Oxford. Jared. Linked: The New Science of Networks. Cullina. 2002. September. Intelligent Systems Division. New York: Three River Press. Being There: Putting Brain. May. 1988. Key Centre of Design Computing. Radical Landscapes. Marjorie Elliott. Frank J. Shrubs & Vines. 1997.pdf.isd. “ A Case Study Method For Landscape Architecture. Jane. MA: MIT Press. 1 (Mar. New York: Thames & Hudson Inc.” Landscape Architecture Foundation. CT: Lyon Press. Dick. 2001.su.edu. 36 . and Evolution in Design”. “Implementing the OODPM Methodology in a Large Computer Company.> Gero.> Amidon. John S.usyd. and Serbin. Diamond. “The Engineering of Mind. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Body. Bevlin. Andy. William.. Mark. Offer. and Tipler. The American Woodland Garden. Clark. Norman F. 1978).L. A. MD: Recorded Books.il/~offerd/papers/drori102001.arch. University of Sydney.au. 2002.edu/~sede/pdf/LAFcasestudy. 2006 < http://www. Mark. No. Why Things Break. In the Wake of the Plague. Connor. “Creativity.” SHAAM – Information Systems. Schackman. 1 November 1998. Cambridge. Jane Marantz. and World Together Again. 2003. 1999. May.pdf. Brown. 2002. MD 20895. Drori. Cantor. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem May. Calpoly. 1990. John D. Guildford. Portland: Timber Press.ac. 24-29. New York: Perseus Publishing. Native Trees. Barrow. Collapse. 2002.mel. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. 2006< http://www.Bibliography Albus. Fly Fishing For Bonefish. Vol 49. 2003.huji. Design Through Discovery. 2006 < http://shum. pdf. NSW 2006 Australia john@arch. James S. May. Emergence.” National Institute of Standards and Technology. Department of Architectural and Design Science..edu.calpoly. 2006 < http://www. Francis. Barabasi.> Eberhart. Rick. Darke. “Sex-related Differences in Response to Practice on a Visual-Spatial Test and Generalization to a Related Test. Maxine. Prince Frederick. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. LLC.pdf>. New York: Penguin Books.nist. Lisa A.au/~john/publications/1996/ 96GeroCreativity. Gaithersburg.
“Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema For Design” Design Computing Unit.” Journal of Philosophy.N. 1994) 34-37.” Christian Science Monitor. 2004.gsia. “Thinking Technology. html> Haeberlin. Kauffman. Stuart . September 15.ssc. “Left Unmowed. Revised November 1992 May.htm> Hauser. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Psychology and Scientific Methods. 543-550.edu/afs/andrew. “Is Design Theory Possible?” Graduate School of Industrial Administration. 2006 < http://hci. Addison Wesley. 2006 <http://www. London: Thames and Hudson. Robert M.csmonitor.ps. “Meritocracy. Aki. Pittsburgh. 1998.” Bringing Design to Software. Lives of North American Birds. how adaption builds complexity. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.> Jellicoe. 2006 May. Hidden Order. Jonathon.org/digra2005/papers/a3cf c140882acffefb860e6ecbdoc. New York: Halix Books. The Landscape Of Man. 2006 < http://www. Josef. “A Software Design Manifesto.html> Goudarzi.com/2005/0915/p14s01-sten. 2005 Edition. search for the laws of self organization and complexity.com/phy/phy_6. (April. Design Methods. Hooker. John S.” Educational Technology.edu. J.stanford. The University of WisconsinMadison August 17. 2006 < http://www.edu/bds/1-kapor. May. 20 (Sep. October 1991. University of Sydney. . Richard. Department of Sociology. “John Koza has Built an Invention Machine” Popular Science.cmu.edu/~hauser/merit_01_081502_com plete. 1996. arhunkierros 4. PA. Bloedel Reserve and Gas Works Park. Geoffrey and Susan.hasslberger. New 37 York: Oxford University Press. Hasslberger. 1975. Johnson. Haag. Steven. 1917). New York: Scribner. “Theory as Game: Designing the GamegameOffer” Veikkaus the Finnish Ational Lottery. 2006. “The Concept of the Unconscious. Cognitive Ability. 27. Jossassen. 1995. “Tetra Space Co-ordinates” May 2006 <http://www. 2006 < http://www. Toward a Constructivist Design Model. Center for Demography and Ecology. Carnegie Mellon University. John H. 14. Sara.edu/gsia/jh38/design3. May. John Chris. 2006 < http://www. Vol. Keats. Järvinen. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 1996.usyd. At home in the universe. 1996.wisc. Herman K. 1992. Emergence. David H. Kenn.au/~john/publica tions/ger-prototypes/ger-aimag.Gero.arch. May. May. Mitchell.pdf> Holland. Kapor.cmu.gamesconference.> Jones. 2002 May. Power-line Land Might Suite Bees. No. and the Sources of Occupational Success”.html> Kaufman.
2002. New York: Oxford. New York: Houghton Mif flin Company. and Johnson. < http://aect-members. William J. Parkinson. 1993. 2005. Polk. U. MA: MIT Press.) Moore. and Education. New York: Oxford University Press. Berkeley: University of California Press. Jr. (1998. J. George A.K. Randall and Malisa. Marta Iris. Lynch. Hummingbird-sapsucker Associations in Northern Climates.” Journal of Zoology/Revue Canadienne de Zoologie. Mark. Handbook of Terminology. Stuart. Reno. The Lyrical Landscape.A. Eastern Forests. Research. K. (1983) 1540-1546. A Sand County Almanac. Aldo. William. Roberto Burle Marx. 1968. S. 1984. Issue 2 ( March. 1988. Catherine. Moore. John and Morrison. (Spring. The Poetics of Gardens.. 1999.html> Pavel. 221-236.> Kricher.Kauffman. “U.uk/orgs/nellalex/adtvi suospatial. 2001. and W. A Critique of the Boyd Theory. Simon.Translation Bureau.rmplc. MA: MIT Press. 61.co.” Advances in Complex Systems. Helen.” Journal of Architecture. Catalogue No S53-28/2001. Nero. Charles W. no. Mitchell. 7.org. 1988. D. McKay. 2000. Cambridge. Site Planning. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Petrides. Eastern Trees. 2003. ZOOL. “Collective choice and mutual knowledge structures. RS. Vol. Gordon. 2006 <http://www.E. Vol. “Philosophy. Petre. [CAN. Innovative Visual-spatial Powers in Dyslexics: A New Perspective?” Art Dyslexia Trust.Is It Releveant to the Army? Fort Leavenworth. Volume 27. Richards. and Turnbull. “Complexity Through Combination: An Account of Knitwear Design. Volume 8. and Wehr. Kansas: United States Army Command and General Staff Collage.]. Public Works and Government Services Canada.” aect-members. Diane. 1996 . Investitgations. Jeffrey. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. 2001. Janet. Swaffield. Miller. 2006) 183-222. Montero. Marian. Cambridge. B. J. Major Robert B.” Design Studies. Richards. Canadian. Koetting. Leopold. “RW.. “Overlooking the visual. Kevin and Gary Hack. Sharp. Silvia and Nolet. Theory in Landscape Architecture. 1) pp. 38 . University of Nevada.org/m/research_handbook/Chapters/37. 3 Nov. Peterson Fields Guides. pdf.D. Ed. May.
Number 4. “Giftedness vs Creativity in the visual arts. 54-65. Williamson. Volume 27. 2001.” Design Studies. 24. 2001.G. A Framework for Design Methodology” Proceedings of the SEFI-CDWG Seminar Design in Engineering Education. Robert. Peter. May. Otto and Haaf. Hummingbirds of North America.ac. 39 . 2003 <http://informatics. Vol. 2006) 167-181. Issue 2 (March. West. (1999) 349-377. Sargent. Wouterten.htm> Wellman. Gu.” Marine Core Gazette (August. University of Manchester. Sibley. May. Ellen. 2006< http://www. (August. “What is Design. Rocha.indiana. Part I: Formulation and Formalization of Design Process.” Poetics.isec2000. Sheri L. P. The Sibley Guide to Bird Life & Behavior. Luis “Complex Systems Modeling: Using Metaphors From Nature in Simulation and Scientific Models” Los Alamos National Laboratory. 1999. 1993. “Wittgenstein and the Egocentric Predicament. T. 1959) 223-233.Contemporary Drawing Research.Activities from atoms to bits.” HK J Paediatr (new series) (2005) 10:153-158 Y. 6. May. From Concept to Form in Landscape Design. Denmark. David Allen.uk/abstracts/papers_w/wiskow_1. “Fighting in the Fog: Dealing with Battlefield Uncertainty. New York: John Wiley. 1982).edu/rocha/ complex/> Rompelman.” Mind. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.lboro. “A Science-based Approach to Product Design Theory. 22-24 October 1998. “Mathetics For Dyslexics . Andrew. 2006 < http://www. Margaret. 2006.Ried. 97-101. “The Gifts of Dyslexia: Talents Among Dyslexics and Their Families. Grant W. 2000. Gary Klien.” December. “Cognitive Styles and Student Progression in Architectural Design Education. Schmitt. Rowe. 1999) (12) 341-352. Carl.” Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. New York: Knopf. 68. 1996). 270 (Apr.” ISEC 2000.. “Ruby-throated Hummingbird (Archilochus colubris).” The Journal of Enterprise Architecture. “A Priori Knowledge and Heuristic Reasoning in Architectural Design. Volume 15. Loughborough University. New Series. No. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Leaflet. Wiskow. 36/1 (Fall.uk/departments/ac/tracey/> Winner. Roberts. Tracey. Number 14. Major John and Dr. Zeng.org. Odense.
conditions and prices with contractors. targeted and constructed strategies to close large commercial accounts with multiple locations and service demands. Senior Account Executive. VA. Outside Sales Representative. Accounts included utilities. George Washington University. administrative and logistical support to customers and sales representatives. Tulane University. negotiating terms. Staples 2000 to 2001 Developed new business. New Orleans. Virginia Tech. masonry. determining client needs. Identified. 1989 • EXPERIENCE Owner. technical. accounts receivable and payable. carpentry. GA) 1989 to 1990 Infantry and leadership training. Managed inside commercial sales. property management companies. Sherwin-Williams 1990 to 1994 Developed new sales territory by prospecting and generating new accounts. Grew territory from $0 to $250. Business Development Associate. irrigation and lighting contractors. generated and qualified prospects. Blacksburg. Products sold included banners. Washington. identifying and developing budgets. renewing contracts and cross selling.000 in a year. 40 .CHRISTOPHER JAMES LIDY EDUCATION Master of Landscape Architecture. General Management. Responsibilities include: meeting with the clients and prospects. 1997-1996: closed 4 of the top 10 regional accounts. manufacturing plants and regional distribution facilities. 1998: generated new account growth of 19 percent. developing design from site survey and construction of base map to client presentations. estimating costs.com 2001 to 2002 Marketed advertising for online jobs board. retaining accounts. led groups of 2 to 40 lieutenants in simulated combat exercises. 1997: achieved new account growth rate of 22 percent and awarded regional sales award. and day-to-day management of the commercial center. 2007 • Certificate of Landscape Design. Natural Designs 2002 to present Own and manage a residential and small commercial landscape design and installation company emphasizing the use of native plants. 1995: promoted from sales representative to account executive nine months after joining company Professional Coatings Representative. hospital groups. Washingtonpost. 1996: generated new account growth of 19 percent. Achievements 1999: closed the top two accounts in the division and promoted to senior account executive. Benning. and overseeing contractors in field. assessed prospects’ needs and developed strategic procurement programs designed to meet the specific objectives of the client. Waste Management 1995 to 2000 Developed a territory by generating new business. soliciting bids and RFPs from nursery. growing and maintaining customer base. Operations Manager. LA. Infantry Officer’s Basic Course (Ft.S. virtual career fairs and resume database searches. DC 2005 • B.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.