Stoss Landscape Urbanism——2010 TOPOS 景观奖得主

Stoss Landscape Urbanism - TOPOS Landscape Award 2010

by Dec 01, 2010
by 风景园林新青年 Dec 01, 2010

Stoss Landscape Urbanism,一所由Chris Reed领衔的设计与规划工作室,赢得了2010年TOPOS景观奖。本文展示了Stoss在推动景观都市主义讨论方面的一些主要作品,以及该工作室的工作理念。

Stoss Landscape Urbanism, a critical design and planning studio headed by Chris Reed operates at the juncture of landscape architecture, urban design and planning, has won the Topos Landscape Award in 2010. Topos recognized Stoss for their theoretical and practical contributions to advancing the development of landscape architecture in dynamic systems, and to encourage discussion on landscape urbanism.

声明:此文为正式授权文章,已征得Stoss Landscape Urbanism同意在风景园林新青年(Youth Landscape Architecture)上发表,严禁转载。
Notice: This article is a reprinted version with the permission of Stoss Landscape Urbanism. Do not copy without permission.

2010 marks the fifth time the Tops Landscape Award has been granted. This time the distinction went to the landscape architecture firm Stoss Landscape Urbanism based in Boston, MA, USA. Topos recognized Stoss for their theoretical and practical contributions to advancing the development of landscape architecture in dynamic systems, and to encourage discussion on landscape urbanism. The critical design and planning studio headed by Chris Reed operates at the juncture of landscape architecture, urban design and planning. Stoss has won national and international recognition for landscape and urbanism projects rooted in infrastructure, functionality and ecology.

Landscape Urbanism In Practive

By Chris Reed

Stoss is at base a practice vehicle for research and experimentation, for testing broader ideas about landscape and the city within the context of the evolving theory on landscape urbanism. How do landscape urbanist ideas and agendas play out when you directly engage the systems, economies, constituencies, materials and media of the real world, the very stuff that forms the underpinnings of and context for the developing the? Or, more projectively, how might this direct engagement with critical design practices help to enrich and inform the theoretical discussions at hand?

Our landscape urbanist approach takes on three core issues of scale, time, and flexibility. We believe projects must be conceived and positioned relative to large-scale geographical, environmental and infrastructural systems, no matter if the site in question is small or large. Projects must tap into the evolving dynamics of ecological and civic or social systems in order to remain healthy and resilient. And projects must set up conditions for a wide range of uses and appropriations, for both those we can imagine now and those we cannot, in order to be viable immediately and for years to come. To achieve these ends, we favor a performance-based approach over one that is primarily physical, spatial, or visual. We are especially interested in how landscapes work: how they function urbanistically, socially, hydrologically, environmentally; how they reinforce existing city frameworks and how they invent new ones; and how they may support a range of complementary and sometimes contradictory civic programs across a multi-faceted, layered, and thickened urban field. Such an approach requires inventive analysis of the performance and programmatic requirements of social spaces and infrastructural or environmental systems: how big? How does it operate? In what configuration or orientation? And in what relation to its various parts? And it invokes wide-ranging, creative brainstorming and research-based methodologies that open up possibilities and potentials and allow for discoveries made along the way.

Such an approach yields new types of open space, landscape, infrastructure, and urbanistic strategies that address multiple functional, fiscal, and social/cultural goals simultaneously. These strategies are grounded in the particularities of local conditions, yet they are inventive and thickly layered in order to tap into broader trends and larger systems. And they privilege a regenerative approach to civic space and urban landscapes as complex, living, and evolving entities that are socially, ecologically, and fiscally sustainable through time. At larger scales, on complex sites, projects engage systems and networks that extend locally, regionally, and globally, and explore new techniques in drawing and representation. Proposals for time-based brownfield recovery strategies, like that at the Silresim Superfund Site in Lowell, Massachusetts, directly engage the technologies and timelines of environmental remediation, suppressed ecologies and diminished hydrologies still at work, and newly activated, dynamic stakeholder networks that can propel the work forward. Invited completion proposals for an ecology-driven urban framework and fabric (River+City+Life/ Lower Don Lands, Toronto, Canada) and for the social, ecological, and cultural re-calibration of 19th century drinking water infrastructures (Staging Mt. Tabor/ Mt. Tabor Reservoirs, Portland, USA) expand these ideas and allow us to test, concepturally, our own formulations of landcape urbanist ideas in large and complex public realms- at least as speculative proposals. At smaller scales, or with limited programs and budgets, projects become opportunities to focus laser-sharp on isolated issues that can collectively inform the broader investigations at hand. Many take the form of simple experiments with the materials and media of landscape. They include vegetal investigations into landscape and ecological succession (Eco-Lab and Bass River Park, both in Massachusetts, USA); mineral displays that measure the effects of wather and time on a field of colorful, textured aggregate piles (Stock-Pile at Radcliffe Yard, Cambridge, USA); synthetic installations that push the physical limits of recycled rubber surfaces (Safe Zone at the International Garden Festival in Quebec, Canada); and hydrologic cycles that integrate stormwater capture, cleansing and irrigation strategies, groundwater re-charge, and steam generation (Erie Street Plaza, Milwaukee, USA). Still others are studies in the ways people interact with open-ended designs, whether with earthen form (Farlin Park, Green Bay, USA and Safe Zone) or with material pattern and texture (Perkins Park, Massachusetts, USA and Erie Plaza). In all of these, extended monitoring and documentation of ecological, social, and/or hydrologic behaviors and effects inform ongoing research and project-making at multiple scales and on complex sites the world over.

Collectively, these inquiries and experiments are in their infancy- it’s not yet been 15 years since Charles Waldheim’s seminal 1997 conference in Chicago on landscape urbanism (to name but one touchstone), and we at Stoss have barely been at work a full decade. Many questions remain, for us and for others, relative to how landscape urbanism as a set of ideas and practices is played out- and refined, or even reformulated. After all, landscape urbanist thinking- flexible, responsive, adaptable, open-ended- has yet to be fully realized or tested at the scale of the city, in all its complexity. This will come. Just give it, and us, time.

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism

Photo Credit: Stoss Landscape Urbanism



无觅相关文章插件,快速提升流量

风景园林新青年

风景园林新青年

6 discussions
  1. *ff* says:

    什么时候有翻译啊

  2. 蔡小芋 says:

    很喜欢stoss的设计
    最近不是刚拿下了minneapolis的水岸设计嘛!
    在考虑要不要去那里实习

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

风景园林新青年

风景园林新青年

纽约 佛罗里达 Peter Walker 垃圾 文化景观 玛莎·施瓦茨 园博会 西方建筑 贝聿铭 保研 雨洪管理 行业 苏州古典园林 公园 Prof. Jürgen Weidinger 雪铁龙公园 证书 罗马奖 瑠公圳 花园 弗吉尼亚大学 UVa 庭院 SWA 环境效应 场所 绿色屋顶 枯山水 毛细水 北川 香格里拉植物园 棕地 枡野俊明 骑行 Dr. Rosan Chow 2012IFLA亚太区会议 购物中心 学习方法 书评 铺地 迪士尼音乐厅 卡尔维诺 首尔 人居环境 Ruggeri 美术馆 布鲁克林 国际风景园林师高峰论坛 西班牙 河流 教学 巴塞罗那 清华 天津大学 交通节点 土人景观 多伦多 现代主义 盐湖城 数字景观 张唐景观 理论 WEST8 俞昌斌 鹿特丹 华盛顿 太阳能 IFLA 景观都市主义 碛口古镇 Greenway 泰山 水景 跨学科教育 游乐场 预制混凝土 旅游 图解 Gesche Joost 可持续化 矶琦新 西安世园会 机场 职业实践 苗木 流浪汉 夏成钢 Prof. Gesche Joost 教育 京津冀 风景区 博士 湿地 Stoss Landscape Urbanism 展览 视觉文化 张乔松 希望小学 LIM 水文 联谊 Gleisdreieck 非言述性和默会性知识 何巧女 可持续城市 空气污染 如园 生态 铺装 北角公园 设计展 辰山植物园 环境 商业建筑 布法罗河湾散步道 多样性 普渡大学 王劲韬 低能耗 碳补偿林 TAMU 风景园林学会2015年会 概念方案 哈佛 Prof. Wolfgang Jonas 绿墙 历史 深圳前海 绿道 植物园 自然观 散步道 儿童 手绘 美国 国家公园 参数化设计 冯纪忠 视频 论坛 老人 设计未来城市 Media Ship 五角大楼 孟兆祯 创业 TOPOS 马晓暐 实验 设景 建筑 钢笔画 海平面上升 校园 种植 纵向耕作 原子城 James Corner 韩国 刘秀晨 工程 经验 龙安寺 2012IFLA 沃夫岗·哈勃 ASLA学生奖 陈俊愉 城市空间 迪士尼 Disney IGA 北林 野生动物廊道 台湾 地域性景观 反思 方塔园 人文 灾后 朱育帆 纪念性景观 绿色设计 布鲁克林大桥 城市雨水 客座教授 永昌河 加拿大 香港 滨水 沙龙 BIM buffalo 新青年读老经典 区域园林 MLA 技术 上海 挪威 伊利诺伊大学 UIUC 北京 马克 韩炳越 植物 Waterboxx 禅修 宾夕法尼亚大学 古根海姆博物馆 批评 墨西哥 法国 数字图解 Brownfield ARC Prof. Nigel Cross 北欧 步行街 Vista Hermosa 长椅 雕塑 广州市绿化公司 LAM 留学 logo NITA 公共交通 地震 宋晔皓 自然文化资源 便携 竞赛 成范永 地砖 洛阳 意识形态 Michael Van Valkenburgh and Associates 日本设计 公共花园 喷泉 什刹海 新年 GSD 城市景观 广场 铁路 教学元素 风景园林新青年,就在你身边 洪盈玉 设计竞赛 自杀 朱胜萱 英国 裁员 鸟类 Diana Balmori 檀馨 Malden 风景园林 雕塑公园 志愿者 考研 世界风景园林师高峰论坛 风景园林学会2013年会 经典 盆景园 AGER Jack Ahern 低收入住宅 幻觉 银泉市 Silver Spring Juergen Weidinger SANAA 安友丰 纪念碑 年报 德国 就业 翻译 RTD 2013北京园博会 政治 新西兰 Prof. Loidl-Reisch 年会 护栏 鹈鹕湾 维吉尼亚理工大学 LEPC 禅意 中央公园 树屋 数字化 德国市民花园 设计研究 南湖中央公园 绿色基础设施 合作 华南 托马斯·丘奇 沥青 托滕堡公园 Julius Fabos Vertical Greening Systems Mader 清华同衡学术周 王欣 摄影 狼牙山 哈普林 halprin 万科 空间 雨水 Ron Henderson 历史理论 住宅花园 维格兰 城乡 会议 城市建设 休斯顿探索公园 钓鱼岛 Kingston University 几何 开放空间 牛雄 世博 可持续 9.11 城市 欧洲 毕业设计 马萨诸塞大学 UMass 岭南园林 康奈尔大学 安藤忠雄 调查问卷 Hans Joachim Mader 加州花园 Xeritown 种植装置 公益 水盒子 LABash 三倾园 讲座 新加坡 风景园林月 珊瑚礁 ASLA 风景园林学会2011年会 迪拜 青海 日本 风景园林学 保护 居住区 捷得国际