[Emily Struthers]

Thanks for the info! Really, I’m just starting to consider working abroad and figuring out what sort of opportunities might exist for me. At this point, I’m open to anything.

[Emily Struthers]

Thanks for the response! So it sounds like my BLA would be the same as the 3year degree? And therefore, I wouldn’t qualify for a job requiring post grad. The reason I was looking at the U.K. was because I saw a posting through a large international firm that had an opening in the U.K. but not in the U.S. A few months ago I looked up jobs in Australia but did not have any luck finding openings. Do you know of any good resources for finding LA/ Urban Design entry level jobs in Australia or NZ? That would be awesome.

[Emily Struthers]

Thank you for trying to rationalize my proposals. Yes, some of them are a little off the wall but, simply by considering them it brings us to more questions. I’m a fan of questions, they sometimes lead to answers.

I guess what I’m doing with this whole post thread here, is trying to figure out what other questions can be asked about culture today and in the future. And maybe even come closer to an answer or two. I was definitely hoping this thread could bring up a bit more than “how can we accommodate their love of gadgets”. In my original post I asked about how people experience technology, and as it seems to be enjoyable by many, how can that experience translate to a physical one. And other various tangents of thoughts.

You say, “outdoor spaces are too damn important and increasingly rare to be pushed into reinvention by whatever people are currently carrying in their pockets”. I agree in part. Yes, landscapes are damn important and increasingly rare. Why are they increasingly rare? Maybe in part because they are generally less valued? there is less of a perceived need? they don’t feel as safe because they are less understood? I think some link between technology and outdoor spaces could help reintroduce outdoor spaces to the public. Yes, it’s necessary to be wary of fads but, technology use isn’t a fad. Particular aspects of it may be, but over all I feel quite solid saying technology is not about to go away.

And on your sarcastic rationality attempt labeled #9: gadgets can be useful towards sustainability if they provide information that allows one to monitor and change energy/resource use (cough, LEED, cough), can direct you to the most efficient route, encourage use of alternative transit, captivate young people to educate them on such initiatives, etc. etc. etc.

I’ll add that I’d love to know more about your botanic garden visitor center project, please share! How all did you use data technology? what did you want to accomplish?

[Emily Struthers]

Oh sorry, did my curiosity about the changing needs of people get in the way of your copy/paste design?

[Emily Struthers]

I know the theory, but now I see what your thought process was with the modernization bit there. Gotcha. I’d say it makes at least some sense. I should revisit the whole theory anyways and since, as mauiBob has so kindly pointed out, I have too much time, I’ll look for it in the library, thanks! go wolfpack.

[Emily Struthers]

I’d like to reply to you as well with a link from today’s ASLA’s The Dirt http://dirt.asla.org/2012/08/14/a-natural-wi-fi-station-in-paris/ . The most interesting point of the article is that “Five minutes after it was set up, people were using the map, sitting and making calls.” Proof that there is a need and a desire for such accommodations that has for the most part gone unacknowledged. 

[Emily Struthers]

Sorry you haven’t figured out my point. This article in today’s ASLA’s The Dirt http://dirt.asla.org/2012/08/14/a-natural-wi-fi-station-in-paris/ an obvious embodiment of the possibilities. The article points out that in the 19th century the flâneur had particular needs, and today’s flâneur has a new set of needs. It’s ok if you keep designing for past centuries, but I’d like to move forward. 

[Emily Struthers]

A digital wall, that’s cool! Maybe something like that would become a focal feature of a modern park. Long ago, fountains used in gardens were a showcase of technology. Today, we all get more-or-less how a pump works. What could be the next ‘fountain’?

[Emily Struthers]

yes yes yes. I love the idea of a revisit to The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. In the Late 70s/ early 80s people go out to public places to read books and talk to each other and drink coffee. That part hasn’t changed, but add on to that cell phone conversations, laptop use, texting, gps use, e-readers, tablet devices, and cameras in every pocket. Now we need seating that lets you talk on the phone and not piss off the people who are on their laptops. Laptops need adequate shade so the screen is easily readable. It’d be nice if the place had something so identifiable about it that an instagram photo that pops up on a facebook feed could help to promote the public space. Maybe we could tie in more information about the place itself, mark out coordinates to get the geo-nerds excited and educate people about these fascinating systems. You can scan a bar code that’s placed on anything and be directed to internet based information. Slap one of those somewhere and read about the entire history of the space you are standing in.  And wayfinding: check out this project (by a fellow NC State grad) http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cityfabric/walk-your-city.

A better link between technology and community would provide a way for people to get involved without going out of their way, it could educate, build support, provide an open forum, connect users to designers and policy makers.

I think the opportunities here are endless, we just have to start thinking about them as part of the process. Even if it isn’t traditional. Even if our client doesn’t come out and say, hey, “I want this place to be tech-friendly”. It’s our job as designers to be forward thinking and innovative. Maybe it’s exactly what they want, they just hadn’t imagined it as possible.

Matt, I followed (and applauded) you up to the prospect vs. refuge reference. Can you explain more what your thinking was with that part?

[Emily Struthers]

Good point, I was certainly addressing a larger scale than residential design. I was thinking more about public spaces and AER. And then beyond that into how they can share, navigate to, and be encouraged to use. And then a little bit of dreaming about what more could happen there.

I’ve made such an extreme categorization of people to prove a point that technology is part of an entire culture. I get that people are more than labels and all that jazz, but when you zoom out enough, it’s beneficial to start categorizing to realize trends and markets and opportunities in response to such.

[Emily Struthers]

Than before the crash sure, but it’s still been a general decline, correlating to increase in technology based recreation. An article, though written in 2006, still has some value and a point: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479706000491

Yes those those thrifty/outdoorsy means of recreation are rising. But that doesn’t mean it’s the only thing on the rise.

What I’m trying to point out here is a serioius opportunity that I feel is being blatantly ignored by our profession. I never said drop what you’re doing and totally change course. Please don’t stop designing what you’ve been able to still find money to design. But, do give innovation some mind. The world is changing and I think the possibilities of landscape architecture should include embracing those other silos. We can’t just design for people that already appreciate us (the few that there are). I think landscape architecture could benefit from a more agressive marketing scheme, a larger target audience. And it seems to be that the trends are pointing towards the tech inclined crowd as a good place to start. After all, there are a lot of them, and they’re pretty smart, and seem to have some change in their pockets.

[Emily Struthers]

I’d like to look at your focus on who is developing the land, or rather, who has money and growth to be able to even fathom developing land. Healthcare, obviously, you nailed it. But what else? Where else is there potential? Social networking, technology, internet based operations. These are and are continuing to get huge. And that changes the way people live. And the spaces they need. There’s got to be something going on in response to that. Unless we want to keep grabbing the trickle of obvious opportunities, I think landscape architecture needs to consider adding in a bit more innovation to the mix. People have information sitting in their pocket. They have maps and cameras and communication attached to them at all times. It’s not the same culture that existed 5 years ago. What are we going to do about it?

[Emily Struthers]

Perhaps–that is, if the ‘wildlife bridge’ served to fill more than just a gap in space. What I’m saying here, is that on each side of the bridge you have some pretty established vegetation, it would help for there to be some sort of continuity between the existing ‘wildlife’ and the engineered bridge. This would encourage squirrels, birds, insects, and other smaller animals to cross this bridge and form a more complete system.

But then again, that all also depends on what sort of habitats we are working with. 

And, on the other hand, it’d be expensive, there would be maintenance, tunnels can be dangerous and slow down traffic.

But, I’m an optimist as long as you can find some funding.

[Author]

Posts