TEMPORAL
SCALE
SPATIAL
SCALE
METRO
SITE
DIVERSITY
REDUNDANCY
CONNECTIVITY
PLANNING
SOCIAL
ECOLOGICAL
ECONOMIC
SOCIAL
ECOLOGICAL
ECONOMIC
SPATIAL
SOCIAL
ECOLOGICAL
ECONOMIC
SPATIAL
SOCIAL
ECOLOGICAL
ECONOMIC
ECOLOGICAL
ECONOMIC
5 Y
10 Y
50 Y
100 Y
150+ Y
2.3
Analysis Matrix
These spatial scales are flexible depending on the project. Generally the case studies are within an urban environment, so the regional scale looks at how the city fits into the context within a network of cities, the metro scale is associated with the city itself, and the site scale is anything from a single acre to approximately 30 acres. It was not considered to be of great importance to define these spatial scales with specific dimensions because of the variety of project type within the case studies. What is more important is understanding what the focus of the project was, whether the primary objective was to create solutions at large scales, small scales, or somewhere in between. The project as a whole is identified on one time scale—how long is the plan, research, project supposed to last or what was the extent of the time scale addressed in the case study.
The systems analyzed are generally social, ecological, and economic with a few exceptions. The redundancy and diversity categories have a spatial component because it was important to differentiate whether the methods were focused primarily on socio-ecological systems (in terms of diversity this might be demographics or habitat type) or spatial (creating a spatial hierarchy or size of infrastructure). The connectivity category does not have a spatial component because it inherently embodies the idea of space in terms of social, ecological, and economic systems. Adaptive planning and management does not have a social component because it became apparent that all of the planning/management strategies are socially based, but either have an ecological or an economic focus which is the main differentiator here.
Analysis
Each case study was analyzed for the aforementioned methods in terms of scales and systems. The documents and information provided was read thoroughly and as a method was identified, it was plugged into the appropriate cell within the matrix. Some cells have multiple methods that fit that category, system, and scale. The matrix allows for a clear visualization of which systems, scales, and methods were emphasized more or less in each case study. This analysis is subjective based upon the author’s previous knowledge and understanding of design and resilience theory. It is simply a way to create some formal organization to generate a base knowledge to move future research efforts forward. After the analysis was completed, the extracted methods were used in an application to another projective design experiment.
Gerald D. Hines/Urban Land Institute Projective Design
The Gerald D. Hines/ULI Student Urban Design Competition is an annual graduate-level design competition that facilitates interdisciplinary collaboration. The design competition focuses on large-scale, real urban sites that are typical of current urban design practice. Each team develops an urban masterplan and financial feasibility study of the site, which requires close collaboration between the design and financial disciplines. The teams are made up of five students, with three disciplines represented including one from a non-design field (typically finance or real estate). Over a period of two weeks, each team generates drawings, diagrams, and other visual explanation of the design. After this first round, the jury chooses four finalist teams who work for another month on a refined submission that may include other criteria the finalist brief calls for. The finalist round culminates in each team presenting their submissions to the jury in the selected city, where one winning entry is chosen (http://www.uli.org/programs/awards-competitions/ hines-student-design-competition/).
The competition represents a truly interdisciplinary approach to design and development problems: academia meets the professional world; design meets economic viability; architects, landscape architects, urban planners, financiers, and developers come together. This presents a prime opportunity to test the application of resilience theory to urban design, especially in regards to working with a diverse group of disciplines. Interdisciplinary collaboration is an important component in much of the literature that is reviewed as a part of this thesis. “… ecologists, social scientists, planners, and designers will need to work collaboratively to develop interdisciplinary approaches for understanding the effects of long-term changes in urban spatial patterns, landscapes, and environmental quality. Landscape architects, urban planners, and urban designers will need to be able to utilize such interdisciplinary information in the development of sustainable human settlements” (Musacchio and Wu 2004, 175). An important point that is missing from Musacchio and Wu in their commentary on emerging trends in urban design is the inclusion of economics, which is a main component of the ULI/ Hines Competition. Generally speaking, urban design competitions are design-centric and do not contain a component that assesses the financial feasibility for the project to actually get built. This is especially true in student competitions. What the ULI/Hines Competition facilitates is an exploration of the nexus between social, ecological, and economic systems within a single site.
Mohsen Mostafavi echoes this growing need for multiple disciplines coming together to create holistic urban design solutions: “This is not to imply that ecological urbanism is a totally new and singular mode of design practice. Rather, it utilizes a multiplicity of old and new methods, tools, and techniques in a cross-disciplinary and collaborative approach toward urbanism developed through the lens of ecology. These practices must address the retrofitting of existing urban conditions as well as our plans for the cities of the future” (Mostafavi 2010, 26). The application of resilience theory as a framework for engaging urban design is perhaps one of the “new methods” that Mostafavi is looking for. The competition itself serves as a testing ground for his call in addressing the complexity of urban conditions in order to create “cities of the future.” Resilience theory takes Mostafavi’s concept of a “lens of ecology” much further, and provides a framework for understanding the dynamic interaction of the multiple disciplines taking part in the competition.
The extracted methods from the case study analysis provided the theoretical framework for the approach to the 2013 ULI/Hines Competition entry by Team 1155. This team consists of three Master of Landscape Architecture students from Kansas State University (Kevin Cunningham, Derek Hoetmer, and Kylie Harper), a Master of Architecture student from the University of Kansas (Lauren Brown) and a Master of Business Administration student from the University of Missouri – Kansas City (Tyler Knott). Team 1155 is a diverse group of individuals, with multiple schools, backgrounds, genders, ages, and professions being represented.
The purpose of participating in the ULI/Hines Competition was to test the identified methods for promoting resilience in urban design practice through a multi-disciplinary approach. It combined the theory with a grounded application through financial feasibility, which tested the identified methods to see how effective they are. The intent was to see if resilience theory provides a well-defined and viable approach that holistically understands the complex systems and issues inherent to the competition site and result in an effective design. The interdisciplinary nature of the team mimicked the design team structure of real-world situations, and served as a case study for future endeavors into resilience research.