Saying “Yes” to Thomas Woltz

Thomas Woltz’ exuberant personality is wildly contagious. From his fashioned suit to his elegant words, his presence is greatly reflective of his personal and business success. After his life’s overview, three things stuck out from his speech: saying yes, transparency, and generalism.

Saying “Yes!”, is such a loaded demand. In the field of design, where nothing is certain, the act of accepting challenges and taking less travelled paths can be frighteningly daunting. But to hear Woltz describe that his tuning as a landscape architect was a result of saying “yes” to the uncertain–such as when he started under Warren Byrd’s sole reign–told us that it is ok to be uncertain about a designer’s path.

Secondly, he describes a necessity for transparency within landscape architecture. From his own firm, he believes that NBW stands for something unique, and because of that, its clients know what they are getting. To Woltz, transparency stands for its openness of mission statement and permeability of skills and employees within the office. As he describes, his firm is “one big happy family.”

Lastly, a transparency within NBW leads to his attraction to generalism. As important as a highly specialized professional can be, the ability to research and understand something at a breadth of levels is crucial in design. Between the historical deep-dive of a site and maintaining intentional relationships with clients, there needs to be an awareness and understanding of context in both realms.

Sasaki Chat

Learning about Sasaki’s history and office culture from Laura Marett provided an introduction to the dynamics of a larger, multi-departmental office. What tethers the divisions in the office, such as the research and project sides, is the collaborative  framework laid by Hideo Sasaki when starting the firm over 60 years ago. As Sasaki quoted, “we do nothing alone”, I found to be particularly resonating in my attraction to the field. By allowing intentional collaboration across divisions, a sense of medium specificity is avoided within the firm. Moreover, while Marett was drawn to a particular project by Sasaki when deciding to work there, she also stated a similarity in the collaborative nature of the firm to that of the culture during her graduate schooling at the GSD.

Considering Sasaki’s big focus on campus development, it ties into the collaborative ethos of the firm. Working with academic institutions echoes and structuralizes the firm’s desire for socially permeable landscapes. Not just in a project development form, but that collaborative ethos is seen in Marett’s own work as an adjunct at various universities while maintaining status at Sasaki. How Sasaki has created a bridge between academical and practice cultures shows that a symbiotic relationship between the two can yield great benefits in the struggle for landscape architectural relevancy.

Nicholas de Monchaux – Church Lecture

Although presented at an accelerated rate, Monchaux’s breathless lecture portrayed his knowledge and work in an appropriate fashion. The first part of the lecture Monchaux presented the exhibit that he has recently become notable for, “Local Code”. Looking at San Francisco’s unaccepted / undocumented streets, the resurfacing of  unseen or forgotten nodes in San Francsico produced a thought-provoking exhibit that coincedentally helped give clarity to my current studio work. Moreover, Monchaux’s “Local Code” demonstrates a shift in the field of [landscape] architecture toward an awareness and understanding of emerging technologies. Specifically, as parametric modeling and GIS software is becoming more efficient than existing practices, “Local Code” demonstrates the positive applicability that these new technologies can accomplish, such as understanding space and quantifying vast, individual activities across sites into a singular database.

In the second half of the lecture, Monchaux thoroughly investigates the influences of today’s parametrics by investigating the life and work of Gordon Matta Clark. Although initially difficult to understand how the extensive recap connected to Monchaux’s own work in “Local Code”, I think that Matta Clark’s notion of being the “anti-architect” opened the field of architecture to an unconventional way of thinking about form and space. Thus, through this evolution in architecture brought forth by Matta Clark, eventually the way architects began to physically formalize these ideas give rise and prominence to the ways parametrics can effectively engage and answer these ideas/questions.

Brad Collett – Church Lecture

A realm of academia that is seldom discussed is the history of a professor. Moreover, how and why a professor got to be where they are today seems to evade the discourse between faculty and student. One thing that I related to in the lecture was Collett’s initial interest in the built environment as an experience of positive engagement.  Moreover, Collett’s lecture reached out past the classic sense of design by engaging the unseen facets of a landscape architect. This was explicitly demonstrated in the courses and projects that Collett has been involved in at the University of Tennessee. Whether it’s engaging  various communities and agencies along the Tennessee River in his River Studio or engaging other professionals in the practice of landscape architecture in his Professional Practice class, one thing that remains at the core of Collett’s pedagogy is an iawarenss for improving environmental quality and how various outlets can achieve that goal. Collett’s involvement with publications, such as “Hydro Lit”, echoes his passion for increasing environmental quality – in this case by means of an East Tennessee water study – and how this extension of research can be developed into a real-world application. Collet’s consideration of the macro and micro of landscape architecture enriches the field and strengthens the quality of curriculum and students at UT.

PWP Reflect

Talking with PWP was initially intimidating. As designers of the 9/11 Memorial, my perception of how the conservation was going to go consisted of a recap of their high reputation and notable projects. However, their insight into practice and professionalism provided a sense of intimacy through the direct dialogue from Monica and Eustacia to our class.

Although they succinctly detail the process and complexity of their project, Barangaroo, what stuck out to me during the conversation was their opinions on practice. Particularly, why they pursue the projects they do. While harkening back to Garza’s attention to community engagement, PWP reflects those imperatives of project pursuits by seeking to achieve sustainability while also creating powerful places. This notion of the performative and aesthetic poetry of site in concert with each other appeals to my sensibilities. As design begins to operate more in the postmodern world, I think this agenda at the core of PWP will continue to garner them more projects and recognition as innovators in the field.

Secondly, an unexpected direction of the conversation discussed the process of application for interns/future employees. A firm as notable as PWP, I was surprised to be given blatant information about the dos and donts of applying. As a first year, their advice about creating a narrative in your portfolio as well as selling your story in an interview informed me about a realm of practice in design that I did not know about. Moreover, as cliche as it may sound, hearing them directly tell us to be inspiring in the display of our work and personal story shed some previous anxiety I had about the formalities of which to present myself in the design world.

REALM Reflect

In the reflection of how REALM got to be where they are today is a particularly inspiring story. As landscape architects with prior careers at respectable firms, taking a leap of faith by starting a boutique firm shows that it is never too late to drastically change the focus of landscape architecture. What I found to be evident in their motivation to start REALM was how they saw an untapped market in the midwest. SInce most of the notable landscape architecture firms in the Columbus/Ohio/Midwest region are rather large firms, they saw an opportunity to bring the benefits of a boutique firm to the area. They justified how REALM is different because they think at the small-scale, which gives them an edge since they can  provide undivided, intimate care for projects. Additionally, I think they will be a successful firm since they are forward-thinking in terms of emerging technologies and practices. As they pointed out, there is not much exceptional landscape architecture happening in Ohio, so utilizing the ever-evolving design strategies in landscape architecture will probably benefit them amongst the peers they may perceive to be as stagnant. Moreover, I think their success comes from their ability to stay relevant, be proactive in engaging projects, and building a network.

Kimberly Garza (AtlasLab) Recap

Meeting with Kimberly Garza from AtlasLab expanded my library of insight into landscape architecture’s many career paths. Similar to Shawn Balon’s own trajectory, Garza had a yearning for additional education into landscape architecture after working in the field post-undergrad. Her pursuit of a master’s degree speaks volumes to her passion for the discipline.  Although we have had many exceptional speakers talk to us in Professional Practices, Garza stood out to me because of her grassroots approach to design. Specifically, her career path from large-scale thinking at large-scale firms to the small-scale sites in the maturation of her career demonstrates her  love for community engagement that I am particularly attracted. For example, even though she was not contracted to map the hills of San Francisco, her passion for design and community pushed her to find a way to catalyze that data into a small-scale geoform intervention in San Francisco for pedestrians to engage. Garza presents herself as an unofficial explorer of her community–by finding and amplifying the hidden histories of the locale.

A piece of her advice about design that resonated with me was when she told us to “think big, start small.” I found this to be particularly comforting as an emerging designer wanting to make a big impact, but not knowing where to start. So hearing her story and how many of her completed projects resulted from an initial solo venture gives me hope that impact through design can come in all shapes and sizes.

“From the Bubble to the Sponge” -Scott Duncan (SOM) Church Lecture

Scott Duncan’s lecture on the “sponge” vs. the “bubble” used interesting lexicon to shed a different perspective into the status of architecture. The subsets of these “sponge” and “bubble” buildings seemed to suggest more interesting ideas than the projects he provided. Amongst these subsets included: Mies bubble, Pierce bubble, urban bubble, landscape as sponge, mediated bubble, sponge in the forest, the Cloud, sponge cube, horizontal sponge, vertical sponge…Although they each packed interesting characteristics, I felt that the power of the lecture could have been more effective if they did not exclusively serve to categorize the projects that SOM has done in the past. Moreover, I think pairing these categorizations with SOM projects would have been a good base for forward-thinking processes and obstacles to engage and overcome within architecture and design.

That being said, the overall concepts of the “sponge” and the “bubble” were thought-provoking. The idea of designing that should be adaptive to its environment (the sponge) and not resistant to it (the bubble) is incredibly applicable to the current social and environmental forces happening today. As urban sprawl rises and temperature and water levels rise, thinking how we design to move with these changes as adapters and purifiers establishes longevity, unlike the temporality of resistance. Duncan eloquently summarized this notion by promoting that these built environments should be set to “allow nature into it.” An impressive example of this was seen with his work on Kuwait’s military academy where areas of importance on the campus were activated by allowing sunlight in.

Although I think Duncan could have steered the “sponge” and “bubble” to establish more clearly projective incorporations in architecture, his lecture provided fodder for personal inquiry in my studio work and overall interest in design.

[CEU credit]

MKSK Recap and Thoughts

Talking with MKSK introduced me to a different sphere of landscape architecture that I had not seen with Shawn Balon or Jane Amidon. Two key differences was the firm’s size and talking with three high-level landscape architects within the firm. The high-budget projects that MKSK has done is reflective of how long they have been around (’88) as well as a long stewardship to their city, Columbus. All affable men, it was encouraging to hear the enthusiasm behind their voices as they explained the various projects they have worked on over the years. Amongst the many projects they have done, I was most surprised by the diversity. Whether it was reviving Columbus’ once dilapidated riverfront or the design of theme parks, they have not limited themselves to designing one kind of landscape.

Something that I have not heard other landscape architects reiterate that much is retaining relevancy and skill with analog. At MKSK, they stated that sketching by hand is still critical in the development of designs at their firm. I found this to be an interesting point to emphasize, especially as analog in design is becoming increasingly defunct against the digital. However, after participating in the Lone Oaks charrette in Chattanooga, I began to appreciate the large quantity of ideas that were generated by sketching.

Another important aspect of landscape architecture that MKSK emphasized was an ability to read the client/public. So much of the time is spent on the perfecting of design, but the relationship with the public or client’s side is seldom discussed. It is apparent that the success of the firm is rooted in a deep consideration for the people that they are serving.

Jane Amidon Lecture

Refreshing. That’s the only word I can think of after hearing Jane Amidon gloss over her impressive, and diverse career in the field of landscape architecture. What stood out particularly was her off the cuff demeanor in the range of inquiries that were asked. In the beginning of telling her background, she brought up the idea of a “liberal arts” mentality in landscape architecture. Meaning, that as landscape architects we cannot pigeonhole ourselves into over-specialization, rather we must delve into the tangential discourses that influence landscape architecture. Examples she gave were partaking in Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture (CELA) conferences or engaging journals of philosophical inquiry, such as “New Geographies”. As she stated, there needs to be a “hybridization of liberal arts thinking with design.” Moreover, I thought her opinion on design being more multifaceted by being more data-driven was particularly interesting. As a student, becoming proficient with emerging technologies and using rich data banks, like GIS, I have seen projected designs become denser and more scaler.

Another sentiment that Amidon highlighted was an awareness to policy. As someone who was initially interested in policy, she highly encouraged that landscape architects stay on the forefront of policy issues that could affect landscape architecture. I think this was very important to hear. because as landscape architects,= we need to think in terms of longevity, and the way that longevity in designs is solidified is by insuring its immutability at a policy level.

As a director of an unaccredited landscape architecture program, Jane Amidon demonstrates the diversity of the profession and how it can–and should–be thought of in varying facets.