Conserving water considered historically innappropriate

[Roland Beinert]

http://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/xeriscaping-historically-inappropriate-water-challenged-dallas.html

[Trace One]

that article makes my neck hurt. As far as I am concerned, ecology takes precedence over history, always.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21899227

 

that is where we should be using our brains. Yes, history is very important, but to talk about historical sod, in drought starved texas, is like talking about not raising taxes on t he 1%. Completely a  non-starter with me – figure out how to commemorate the lawn without using any water, please – it’s a design constraint.

[Roland Beinert]

Two things occured to me when reading the article:

1). The house is what’s really historically important. The landscape has probably changed a bit with each new homeowner. It’s not as though lawn is a rare plant with historical significance.

2). In my opinion a landscape that uses natives or even just drought tolerant plants is celebraing the region more than a landscape that uses lawn, which is found everywhere.  

[Ernst Glaeser]

The freedom of mind, expression of interest, the freedom of design and other artistic brain farts are one side.
The Client’s wish and vision is another side.
Socio- and other administrative enforced constrains, rules, and regulations are jet another.
Feasibility makes another side of the medal.
Cost- benefit is the side of value engineering.
Landscape Architect’s VISION of the fare away future is the 6th side of this thing what turned out to be a cube now.
However you toss it it’s not black and white. It’s collecting the facts for successful argumentation.
History only allows us to determine how things have changed and developed over a certain period of time, it will only provide information what will happen if we keep on going the way we are doing now.

[Author]

Posts