Brett Lezon

I really enjoyed this article….and all of the great visuals. Looking @ the very first graphic…..I’m just wondering “why” the bike path isn’t curved throughout? I can see some slight turns in the bike path with “angles”…….just feel “curves” would work best for biking.

Hello Angus…….That’s all well and good; However, part of the role of the Landscape Architect on EVERY design project is to give good “guidance” to the client. I would have simply explained to the neighborhood committee….that people walking, jogging and biking move more easily through a space…..when the pathways are “curved”. I’m all for pleasing the clients on a given project….but, in this case, IMO, the Landscape Architect’s dropped the ball. The “curved” solution is much more “logical”.

Really, the Earth is expected to have almost 10 Billion People by the year 2050??? According to AOC in the U.S. House of Representatives here in the U.S……if we don’t solve the problem of “CLIMATE CHANGE”…..there will be ZERO people on this Planet.
So, if she’s correct, that invalidates your article.

I’m really happy for “Tampere, Finland”. If the United States did NOT provide over $50 Billion in Foreign Aid to so many Nations around the World……..just maybe, the U.S. could spend more of our GDP towards our infrastructure and internal problems. The U.S. even provides Foreign Aid to China, Russia & Cuba. I’m wondering if Finland provides ANY financial assistance to other Nations???

The U.S. Foreign Aid includes a wide variety of assistance….financial, military protection, trade, humanitarian aid and more.

I just read an article that stated the U.S. just signed a “Military Pact” with Finland…..to provide Finland with any necessary Military support they may need…..as Finland has been growing concerned about Russia. So, there are MORE of our U.S. Tax Dollars going to a foreign Nation…..finances that we could really use for OUR Nation.

Many Nations….including Finland would not fair so well without the assistance of the United States!

J. Robert (Bob) Wainner

Hi Bob,
Thanks for your comment. The investment has come from a mixture of local and international business and the local city council, so not directly national. We’re not economists, so we cannot comment directly on foreign aid, but some quick googling found that as a % of GDP the US gives a large amount (total as GDP 1.67% in 2013). As a percentage of gros national income, Finland gives 0.55% and the US 0.19% of their respective incomes (OECD, 2013: https://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/documentupload/ODA%202013%20Tables%20and%20Charts%20En.pdf).

And who’s paying for this – China?

Who comes up with these LAME theories anyway??? Liberal Professors and Liberal Landscape Architecture Students……who rely on ridiculous unproven theories instead of looking seriously at the “science”.

This whole notion that one of the major roles of Landscape Architects is to “SAVE THE PLANET” is getting really old people. Of course our Planet has “Climate Change”, it has from the beginning of time and always will. Mankind has absolutely ZERO control of the EARTH’s climate.

The recent idea by some of the Democratic Party Presidential Candidates suggesting the U.S. spend $3 to $30 Trillion dollars to “Change our .Climate” is not only ridiculous but, completely laughable!

CLIMATE (and air pollution – water pollution) are GLOBAL issue, NOT just an issue here in the United States. The U.S. has made major improvements in improving our Air Pollution problems…..but, take a close look at the rest of the Nations on our Planet…..they could care less. China, Russia, India, South Korea, Iran, Pakistan, Mexico….on and on will not and can not be made to reduce their Carbon Emissions. Really, WHO is going to make them stop???

Legitimate Environmental Scientists have clearly stated…..that MANKIND can not and does not have ANY control over the CLIMATE CHANGES on our Planet. If there is anyone or any organization or Nation who truly believes THEY can alter the CLIMATE CHANGES on Earth……I would love to meet them….because, they just don’t exist.

Just a last note. Satellite images of the EARTH show that the Planet is GREENER now that it has been in past 100 years. So, a TON of Oxygen is being released into our environment.

Please LAND 8…..stop publishing these very LIBERAL articles that suggest Landscape Architect’s should spend their “design careers” in an effort to SAVE the PLANET. IMO, a vast majority of Landscape Architects are doing well just trying to make a descent living in this profession.

Great article Win, and excellent work by Richard and his team. I saw this when he first presented the material at a conference in 2018 and it was certainly compelling then and remains so now. Thank you for the article and for sharing.

Great summary, and this is an excellent topic for LA’s to be engaged in. With licensure constantly under attack right now anything that focuses on Health, Welfare, and Safety is huge. Good stuff.

Another Liberal “design concept”. I saw nothing about the COSTS involved to create new urban city life. This article, to me, advocates we build more cities like HONG KONG, CHINA, where people are literally living on top of each other in 400 to 500 sq. ft. apartments. No thanks. I have lived in at least a dozen different Apartment Communities in the U.S….a couple were actually very nice, but the best was in the North Dallas area and it cost me $1,600.00 per month (plus, electricity, cable TV, etc.)…and it wasn’t downtown, it was in the suburbs. I think being creative and innovative is a positive thing….but sorry, this article isn’t very sensible to me.

Just once…………….I’d really like to see a “Conservative, realistic” approach to design solutions where Landscape Architects could have a direct and positive impact.

J. Robert (Bob) Wainner

Hi Bob,

Thank you for your comments. When it comes to costs it can be very difficult to compare true like for like internationally, not to mention the issue of the projects representing different types of future housing from block design to residential and mixed-use building right down to single-family dwellings. I’m not sure what value costs would really add to the article.

Perhaps you could write that article about a conservative approach to design solutions that has a positive impact on the issues raised. I would be interested in reading it.

Best regards,
Ashley

I enjoyed and appreciated this article. But, while I have not been involved in designing any exceptionally large (Billion dollar projects or resorts)…I have designed (or assisted in the designing) of close to 600 various types of projects during my career. And, I believe that “my approach” to Landscape Architect has always been a mirror image of this Author’s approach….for most of the 40 years I have been practicing Landscape Architecture. Every Landscape Architect should approach all of their design projects as this Author has so elegantly described!

Sincerely,

J. Robert (Bob) Wainner Plano, Texas

I’m definitely NOT an expert on Far Eastern Nation’s environmental issues……but, IMO, any efforts to “green” up large Asian cities could very well be a “waste of…..time and money”.

Because, the most critical environmental issue (in my mind) in those large Asian Cities…..Beijing, Hong Kong, Seoul (South Korea), Tokyo & yes, even Bangkok…and several other cities in this part of the World….is “Air Pollution” due to excessive CO2 emissions! This issue should be their #1 priority. But, with their city populations continuing to grow by the thousands every year, the CO2 problem can only get worse. In Seoul, South Korea (for example)…the Government shut down (650) downtown parking garages/lots…due to the high CO2/Air Pollution problems…forcing thousands of workers to use “mass transit” to get to and from work.

So, adding City Parks & other green spaces in Bangkok and other Southeast Cities seems like a GREAT idea, but, it’s my “understanding”….maybe I’m wrong…that they are more interested in “financial interests” by building more and more skyscrapers & industry, than improving the quality of their lives.

J. Robert (Bob) Wainner – Plano, Texas USA

Thank you for this very interesting article.
Although they are useful, I see Pocket Parks more as a cruel defect of public authorities (and private) investment in large public spaces.
Better Pocket Parks than nothing at all but let’s not forget that it’s a patch on a lack of commitment and decision-making.

Love the bulbous form–it looks like it was made from Silly Putty. Curious about the color–seems toned down. Was there a reason for this? Also curious about the material–fiberglass or some kind of resin-based material? Last, how does the rain drain out?