作者：保狄夫?蘭巴

“通過使設(shè)計和開發(fā)實踐與健康生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的功能相一致，可持續(xù)場所倡議TM（SITES?）認(rèn)為，設(shè)計師、開發(fā)商、業(yè)主和其他人都能夠保護(hù)甚至改進(jìn)場所提供生態(tài)系統(tǒng)服務(wù)的初始價值。SITES?花了數(shù)年的時間來制定景觀設(shè)計、施工與維護(hù)的指南和基準(zhǔn)，這些指南和基準(zhǔn)以嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)目茖W(xué)依據(jù)為基礎(chǔ)，且可應(yīng)用于每一個場所。SITES?工具承認(rèn)，在全美（或全世界）的不同區(qū)域內(nèi)設(shè)計要求以及計劃目標(biāo)各不相同，因此，應(yīng)把績效水平包括在內(nèi)，才能實現(xiàn)靈活性和創(chuàng)新性?！?/p>

—可持續(xù)場所倡議總監(jiān)丹尼爾?皮拉努奇

可持續(xù)發(fā)展的變革

可持續(xù)發(fā)展概念主張平衡發(fā)展所帶來的環(huán)境、經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會的影響，以滿足當(dāng)代人和后代的需求和愿望。聯(lián)合國世界環(huán)境與發(fā)展委員會在《我們的共同未來》（1987年）中首次闡明，鑒于環(huán)境退化已經(jīng)危及到許多物種（包括人類）的生命，可持續(xù)發(fā)展概念可視為應(yīng)對全球?qū)Νh(huán)境退化問題的一種途徑。繼1992年里約熱內(nèi)盧地球高峰會議之后，可持續(xù)發(fā)展的概念順勢而上，引發(fā)了當(dāng)前全面發(fā)展的全球可持續(xù)發(fā)展運動，令人不禁回想起20世紀(jì)60年代的環(huán)境運動。來自于可持續(xù)發(fā)展概念的相關(guān)壓力和政治活動正重新界定我們社會和文化生活的方方面面。不過，對可持續(xù)發(fā)展的追求一直都是支離破碎的，因為對于如何定義、實現(xiàn)或衡量“可持續(xù)性”尚未達(dá)成真正的共識。隨著對可持續(xù)發(fā)展實踐在許多不同行方面的需求日益增多，設(shè)計實踐的方式正在改變，更重要的是，設(shè)計績效衡量的方式也正發(fā)生改變。

對已經(jīng)過驗證的景觀績效日益增加的關(guān)注度已經(jīng)逐漸成為當(dāng)今景觀建筑行業(yè)面臨的最大挑戰(zhàn)。這種模式的轉(zhuǎn)變要求提升景觀建筑實踐的技術(shù)能力和研究能力。關(guān)于景觀建筑行業(yè)如何定義把行業(yè)的藝術(shù)性與科學(xué)性融為一體的可持續(xù)發(fā)展的概念，目前尚有爭議。這可以看作我們以環(huán)境管理關(guān)系為行業(yè)根基的一種進(jìn)化過程，這種將生態(tài)、社會和文化價值引入景觀設(shè)計的環(huán)境管理關(guān)系可以追溯到該行業(yè)在美國的創(chuàng)始人弗雷德里克?奧姆斯特德所奠定的設(shè)計哲學(xué)?，F(xiàn)在，我們必須以某種方式對這些價值予以衡量。

可持續(xù)發(fā)展的指標(biāo)、測量和評級

設(shè)計師們正面臨著挑戰(zhàn)，他們既要遵循1990年歐洲建筑研究所環(huán)境評估法（BREAM）制定的建筑可持續(xù)發(fā)展指標(biāo)和措施，還必須達(dá)到各項績效評估標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。美國綠色建筑委員會（USGBC）于2000年開發(fā)的能源與環(huán)境設(shè)計先導(dǎo)（LEED?）綠色建筑評級系統(tǒng)提供了環(huán)境可持續(xù)發(fā)展設(shè)計、施工和維護(hù)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，且該標(biāo)準(zhǔn)已成為最被廣泛認(rèn)可并使用的綠色建筑評估工具。由于在經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展方面取得的巨大成就以及建筑項目的持續(xù)增加，中華人民共和國正利用LEED?認(rèn)證來證明其致力于可持續(xù)發(fā)展的決心并吸引多國的住戶。例如，斯蒂文?霍爾建筑事務(wù)所設(shè)計的北京聯(lián)接復(fù)合體獲得了LEED?黃金認(rèn)證。LEED?引發(fā)了地域、區(qū)域和全球?qū)用娴牡臋C(jī)構(gòu)和市政對可持續(xù)發(fā)展評級系統(tǒng)和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的大探索。評級系統(tǒng)目前正朝著以目標(biāo)為導(dǎo)向的設(shè)計結(jié)果發(fā)展，將在建筑、景觀、社區(qū)，區(qū)域甚至更大的層面上解決都市農(nóng)業(yè)、擴(kuò)張控制、生態(tài)水流和凈零能源等問題。

在美國景觀建筑師協(xié)會、德州大學(xué)奧斯汀分校的伯德?約翰遜夫人野花中心和美國植物園的引領(lǐng)下，可持續(xù)場所倡議TM（SITES?）評級系統(tǒng)用來為那些有或者沒有建筑物的景觀項目提供解決場地現(xiàn)狀的處理方法和和機(jī)會。SITES?評級系統(tǒng)于2009年正式推出，并在一項兩年試點計劃中予以檢驗，代表著景觀建筑實踐與研究實現(xiàn)卓越基準(zhǔn)的生態(tài)學(xué)和自然科學(xué)的基本一致性。DesignWorkshop在德克薩斯州奧斯汀設(shè)計的BlueHole區(qū)域公園就是SITESTM試點項目的參與者，這個項目在2013年八月獲得了SITESTM的認(rèn)證。SITES?、LEED?、BREAM、生存建筑挑戰(zhàn)等評價系統(tǒng)重新定義了設(shè)計與開發(fā)的過程，把對資料記錄的把詳盡和而周密提升到了前所未有的高度，這些系統(tǒng)在改變著與設(shè)計相關(guān)的信息生成、保存和記錄的方式。

景觀建筑基金會（LAF）啟動的景觀績效系列（LPS）計劃旨在開發(fā)網(wǎng)絡(luò)資源交互集成，以促進(jìn)、衡量和評估設(shè)計出來的景觀績效。該計劃以案例研究、有益工具包、信息速查系統(tǒng)和學(xué)術(shù)著作的形式將研究活動、專業(yè)實踐和學(xué)生作品的信息與創(chuàng)新融合在一起，作為數(shù)據(jù)和知識資源，為專業(yè)人士提供可促進(jìn)景觀可持續(xù)發(fā)展的工具。

實踐研究二分法

評級系統(tǒng)、監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)和強(qiáng)制性法規(guī)實施要求設(shè)計方案可預(yù)測而且站得住腳。把度量指標(biāo)和可靠數(shù)據(jù)納入景觀評估日益成為景觀建筑師、規(guī)劃師和建筑師的設(shè)計過程中一個不可或缺的部分。21世紀(jì)隨著設(shè)計價值觀和設(shè)計敏感度的日新月異，不切實際的創(chuàng)意和未經(jīng)證實而提出的概念已無法吸引客戶和公眾的關(guān)注并滿足其價值觀。隨著設(shè)計行業(yè)從猜測設(shè)計產(chǎn)生的環(huán)境和社會影響轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)轭A(yù)測和量化此類影響，設(shè)計過程的直觀性和藝術(shù)性必須盡最大的可能以自然科學(xué)和社會科學(xué)的結(jié)構(gòu)和原理為基礎(chǔ)。雖然制定能量流和水流的定量措施已取得了很大的進(jìn)展，但是，許多從業(yè)者仍然密切關(guān)注的是，關(guān)于衡量景觀建筑的難以切實測量但同樣重要的質(zhì)量上、視覺上以及生理和社會效益上的研究依然缺乏。這些有點模棱兩可的經(jīng)驗鼓勵使用者尊重和關(guān)注文化景觀，以提高關(guān)鍵公眾對長期可持續(xù)發(fā)展的公眾支持。雖然要應(yīng)對這些挑戰(zhàn)要求增強(qiáng)能力的同時增加生成研究證據(jù)的資源量以支持設(shè)計判斷，但是，我們還是面臨著研究與設(shè)計之間長期存在且不斷深化的分歧，引申開來，這種分歧其實是作為研究生產(chǎn)者的學(xué)者與作為研究成果的初級消費層的實踐者之間的分歧。然而，在過去30年里開展的大部分學(xué)術(shù)研究幾乎都與實踐無關(guān)，因此，在很大程度上，從業(yè)者并沒有把學(xué)術(shù)界視為專業(yè)應(yīng)用型研究的可用來源。從20世紀(jì)50年代至今，受人尊敬的學(xué)者（包括：歐文?茱比、羅伯特?萊利和伊麗莎白?邁耶）和實踐引領(lǐng)者（包括：加勒特??？瞬?、佐佐木英夫、肯?史密斯、OLIN事務(wù)所、安德羅伯根、米撒恩和DesignWorkshop）一直都在實行并倡導(dǎo)實踐與研究一體化，以使我們這個行業(yè)具有重大意義、具備強(qiáng)大競爭力且不斷發(fā)展。雖然尚未全面實現(xiàn)，但是，當(dāng)可持續(xù)性的衡量指標(biāo)需求出現(xiàn)時，這一概念感受到了全新的時代緊迫感。

了解并超越藝術(shù)領(lǐng)域與科學(xué)領(lǐng)域之間（引申開來，是設(shè)計人員與研究人員之間、從業(yè)者與學(xué)者之間）的歷史張力和二分法思維方式，對于解決21世紀(jì)與建成環(huán)境有關(guān)的日益復(fù)雜的環(huán)境和社會問題的整體方法是至關(guān)重要的。

實踐文化

一直以來，從奧姆斯特德開始的從業(yè)者的作品都在成為提高和生成設(shè)計行業(yè)知識的主要來源。在職業(yè)道德和環(huán)境道德的驅(qū)動下，設(shè)計師再次出現(xiàn)在尋找將設(shè)計敏感度帶進(jìn)當(dāng)代可持續(xù)發(fā)展概念中的創(chuàng)意和創(chuàng)新方式的最前沿。

在與行業(yè)實踐的領(lǐng)先者進(jìn)行的交流中顯示出他們越來越領(lǐng)悟到研究型實踐的重要性。在客戶對以研究為基礎(chǔ)的可量化成果有更大需求的情況下，從業(yè)者必須履行其專業(yè)職責(zé)。專業(yè)服務(wù)的費用結(jié)構(gòu)通常不需要像可持續(xù)發(fā)展評級系統(tǒng)那樣嚴(yán)格的、耗時的文件資料。在經(jīng)濟(jì)緊縮和專業(yè)人士之間的競爭日益劇烈的情況下，一旦涉及到附加費用（也許是計劃外的開支），所謂對環(huán)境負(fù)責(zé)任的開發(fā)和保護(hù)如果僅能預(yù)見到感知上的利益和價值對客戶而言是很難推廣的。此外，從業(yè)者還面臨著普遍缺乏可用及適用研究來支持他們的設(shè)計決策的難題。盡管真心希望可以提升探索的水平，但是，研究相比“實際工作”而言通常被看做是次要的，因為在大多數(shù)情況下，研究工作需要花費的時間和資金需要較長的時間才會有回報，因此許多從業(yè)者都表示這使得他們很難將其劃入項目預(yù)算中。

實踐領(lǐng)域，被視為以項目為中心的應(yīng)用實踐，包含大量原始的但具有潛在價值的且多半未開發(fā)的寶貴創(chuàng)新方法和知識，這些創(chuàng)新和知識的意義遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不只是為項目開發(fā)應(yīng)用而已。從業(yè)者基本上每日都在從事研究，因為他們在不斷地測試，從不同的項目學(xué)到不同的知識。但是，此類研究以及實踐生成的知識往往是插曲式的，缺乏學(xué)術(shù)研究方案；此外，此類研究和知識缺乏詳細(xì)的記錄，也很少被保存下來共享或發(fā)表。從業(yè)者也關(guān)注來源于其工作的專有資料的分享，這些資料被客戶視為保密資料。有時，專項研究可以為公司提供競爭優(yōu)勢。即使有許多限制條件，實踐還是創(chuàng)造了很多知識，這些知識可以也應(yīng)當(dāng)被管理起來用以造福整個行業(yè)。一些有高度積極性的從業(yè)者意識到實踐與研究之間橋接的重要性，尤其對在可持續(xù)發(fā)展度量指標(biāo)的新需求方面，他們通過發(fā)表文章和演說的形式為所設(shè)計出來的景觀項目的設(shè)計、記錄、施工和監(jiān)控的重新界定做出了重大的貢獻(xiàn)。

DesignWorkshop——反思性實踐模式

DesignWorkshop一直在探索一條研究與設(shè)計之間更具包容性、綜合性和協(xié)作性的道路，這主要體現(xiàn)在其設(shè)計理念、組織結(jié)構(gòu)和工作體系中。由于其學(xué)術(shù)根底，DesignWorkshop的文化包括通過批判性地檢驗其實踐工作的方方面面來不斷進(jìn)行學(xué)習(xí)。如斯肯所言，這種定義為“反思性從業(yè)者”的典型特征將這類實踐定位為設(shè)計行業(yè)的主要影響因素。公司把每個項目視為一項實驗，以便獲得更深刻的見解、有創(chuàng)意的學(xué)問以及非傳統(tǒng)的思維方式，為未來開拓新視覺和新方向。此外，DesignWorkshop致力于與學(xué)術(shù)界進(jìn)行長期會話，這實際上重新定義了景觀建筑師的作用和工作范圍，使DesignWorkshop在多學(xué)科交叉的團(tuán)隊中居于領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位。此類實踐模式應(yīng)該用于服務(wù)下一代的客戶，并采用以指標(biāo)和績效為基礎(chǔ)的理念體系，提供設(shè)計專業(yè)人士的科學(xué)責(zé)任心。

在探索前瞻性和創(chuàng)造性方法來應(yīng)對圍繞可持續(xù)發(fā)展主題以及傳統(tǒng)設(shè)計范式向績效型轉(zhuǎn)變所面臨的挑戰(zhàn)中，DesignWorkshop起到了重要的作用。直覺與推理、自然科學(xué)與社會科學(xué)、從業(yè)者與學(xué)者、教學(xué)與實踐以及知識與行動的緊密及系統(tǒng)性合成滲透到公司組織結(jié)構(gòu)的每一個層面。DesignWorkshop對可持續(xù)發(fā)展的整體理解體現(xiàn)在公司把環(huán)境、經(jīng)濟(jì)、藝術(shù)和社區(qū)這四大范疇整合到每一個項目的設(shè)計理念中。由于意識到使用經(jīng)濟(jì)論證來支持設(shè)計決策的至關(guān)重要性，DesignWorkshop為客戶創(chuàng)建了開發(fā)服務(wù)小組，開展與土地開發(fā)與規(guī)劃有關(guān)的市場研究和分析。

社區(qū)、環(huán)境和藝術(shù)/審美主題也是設(shè)計會話的一部分，公司的設(shè)計過程和項目目標(biāo)的設(shè)定（在該出版物的另一個部分提及）表明公司旨在確保員工認(rèn)識到并仔細(xì)考慮可持續(xù)發(fā)展的四大范疇的重要性。通過可持續(xù)發(fā)展的四大范疇對每個項目進(jìn)行檢驗，以了解現(xiàn)有的狀況，設(shè)定清晰、可衡量的目標(biāo)，制定明確的度量指標(biāo)并監(jiān)控項目結(jié)果，從而判定項目的績效。

已被廣泛認(rèn)可的LEED?方法以及新近的SITES?景觀建筑評級系統(tǒng)力求提升其在可持續(xù)實踐和產(chǎn)品中的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位。評級系統(tǒng)作為當(dāng)前充分的可靠標(biāo)準(zhǔn)被專業(yè)人員廣泛的認(rèn)可及應(yīng)用，但是其仍必須改進(jìn)并不斷接受評估，才能為未來可持續(xù)發(fā)展目標(biāo)提供更為全面的措施。通過內(nèi)部教學(xué)和學(xué)習(xí)，在這些評級系統(tǒng)的基礎(chǔ)之上，DesignWorkshop開發(fā)出了自己獨有的一套模型指標(biāo)和方法論，可建立并追蹤其可持續(xù)發(fā)展目標(biāo)，制定項目的研究議程，并可將結(jié)果在公司內(nèi)部甚至外部進(jìn)行共享。這一進(jìn)化形成了專業(yè)的挑戰(zhàn)，在對捕捉、組織、分析和記錄定量和定性結(jié)果的系統(tǒng)方式方法更加關(guān)注的前提下，要求對設(shè)計過程中的每一個方面進(jìn)行重新審核和構(gòu)建。DesignWorkshop的設(shè)計過程超越了傳統(tǒng)的設(shè)計到施工的范圍，他們的設(shè)計過程往往還包括方案后的反思，并通過寫作、出版和演講以及為未來研究確定主題等形式表現(xiàn)出來。

與學(xué)術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)的持續(xù)對話是DesignWorkshop實踐中的一個不可或缺的部分。這種投入包括在全國各大學(xué)術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)開展公司著名的跨學(xué)科“設(shè)計周”，指導(dǎo)學(xué)生論文、提供實習(xí)機(jī)會并進(jìn)行輔助教學(xué)。DesignWorkshop最近因其“設(shè)計周”的倡議而被美國景觀建筑師協(xié)會（ASLA）授予2012年“景觀建筑卓越獎”。與學(xué)術(shù)界的合作還包括在DesignWorkshop舉辦駐院老師計劃，使員工可以接觸到該領(lǐng)域的學(xué)術(shù)專家，同時也可使學(xué)者熟悉現(xiàn)行實踐項目的學(xué)術(shù)進(jìn)展，從而為隨后的學(xué)術(shù)指導(dǎo)提供基礎(chǔ)。與學(xué)術(shù)界的聯(lián)系形成了一種更為嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)难芯糠椒ǚ椒ㄕ?，可用以支持該領(lǐng)域的創(chuàng)新工作，并通過出版使其廣為人知。

DesignWorkshop也還一直積極參與最近推出的由景觀建筑基金會（LAF）發(fā)起的“案例研究調(diào)查（CSI）”計劃。這是一項由師生團(tuán)隊與領(lǐng)先從業(yè)者合作進(jìn)行的獨特研究，以記錄整理一些示范性的高績效景觀項目可帶來的實際效益。團(tuán)隊制定了量化環(huán)境效益、經(jīng)濟(jì)效益和社會效益的方法，并為LAF景觀績效系列提供“案例研究摘要”。DesignWorkshop早期參與這項倡議時進(jìn)行的工作包括由同行評議的案例研究和方法論，以及試驗階段的項目參與，隨后，公司有10個項目被選入該計劃。這種與學(xué)術(shù)界同事的合作涉及方法論和基準(zhǔn)線條件方面更深入、更穩(wěn)健的研究，為未來的工作提供了批判性的反饋信息。LAF網(wǎng)站上有關(guān)于案例研究的專題，以便其他相關(guān)行業(yè)和公眾進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的了解。

盡管DesignWorkshop的研究建立在某一個特定項目背景的基礎(chǔ)上，但并非每個項目都必須從零開始。將集體知識在公司內(nèi)部門戶網(wǎng)路上共享，這就把DesignWorkshop的六大辦事處連接在了一起，使每個辦事處的員工無論在哪兒都能夠像在一個公司里一樣工作。公司中的眾多類似項目通過多次應(yīng)用為項目提供了比較研究的機(jī)會，其中所學(xué)到的理論和經(jīng)驗要么是受到挑戰(zhàn)的，要么是得到肯定的。此類知識還可以通過邀請外部專家作為計劃和活動的特邀發(fā)言人來進(jìn)行補(bǔ)充。受邀的專家還會被邀請在全公司范圍內(nèi)對不同辦事處類似項目開展的設(shè)計評議活動上提供反饋信息和新鮮觀點。此外，DesignWorkshop還與私營企業(yè)客戶建立了合作關(guān)系，對于一些與客戶相關(guān)的重要課題，這些客戶愿意承擔(dān)相關(guān)學(xué)術(shù)研究的費用，從而開發(fā)了與學(xué)術(shù)界進(jìn)行合作的額外機(jī)會。這代表著景觀建筑行業(yè)的較新發(fā)展，即為研究提供了迫切需要的資源。

DesignWorkshop起源于學(xué)術(shù)界，其知識共享的公司文化在其出版的四大書籍中得到了進(jìn)一步的強(qiáng)化：《美國西部的新園林》（2003年）、《面對遺產(chǎn)》（2007年）、《園林遺產(chǎn)》（2010年）和《品質(zhì)恒久的景觀》（2013年）。這些書籍充滿了關(guān)于思維，構(gòu)思和設(shè)計理念進(jìn)化演變的激勵人心的故事。知識傳播也包括在專業(yè)雜志上發(fā)表的大量文章、會議演講、成功登上同行評議雜志及努力追求達(dá)到與高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的的實踐并行的學(xué)術(shù)研究的最高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。

DesignWorkshop的創(chuàng)造性工作獲得了包括美國景觀建筑師協(xié)會（ASLA）、美國規(guī)劃協(xié)會和城市用地學(xué)會在內(nèi)的各大機(jī)構(gòu)授予的250多項獎項，充分證明了其項目所涉及的范圍之廣泛以及質(zhì)量之卓越?！白吭浇值莱h”是公司在密蘇里州圣路易斯規(guī)劃的一項街道景觀復(fù)興計劃，最近獲得了ASLA的“分析與規(guī)劃范疇的專業(yè)獎”，以獎勵其嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)难芯亢蜏y量所帶動的卓越的規(guī)劃和設(shè)計過程。該計劃制定了40多項指標(biāo)（包括步行出行、就業(yè)、城市野生動植物和財政回報率等），用于評估設(shè)計的成敗。這個項目中用于量化街道景觀設(shè)計效益的方法可以應(yīng)用于類似的其他項目中。

隨著當(dāng)代對為文化景觀提供明確的績效測量的需求日益增加，在朝著此方向進(jìn)化演變的過程中，這些倡議在DesignWorkshop中占據(jù)中心位置。公司的設(shè)計過程既有利于自然，也有利于社會，這一過程一直在反復(fù)強(qiáng)調(diào)并推動著自我們行業(yè)建立之初便確定的經(jīng)久不衰的愿景。在關(guān)于研究者與從業(yè)者如何共同合作以更好地推動設(shè)計行業(yè)的進(jìn)步與發(fā)展，并擴(kuò)展其知識體系和提升景觀建筑行業(yè)在未來的影響范圍方面，公司提供了很多切實的案例。

案例研究——路易斯安那州新奧爾良拉斐特綠道+廊道復(fù)興項目

應(yīng)用研究實踐

在理想的實踐中，以往用于創(chuàng)造性和藝術(shù)性設(shè)計的經(jīng)驗型智慧要與科學(xué)知識和理論相一致，從而能夠以可靠、可檢驗的方式支持設(shè)計。設(shè)計過程涉及理性推測和直覺推測，基于可靠的基準(zhǔn)數(shù)據(jù)和進(jìn)一步研究資料的特性這兩者的可用性，這兩種推測在“提出”和“處理”替代方案之間交互作用，從而將推測轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榭梢员蛔C明的績效。而要想為全面的可持續(xù)性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)生成可靠的基準(zhǔn)數(shù)據(jù)則需要在項目建成后進(jìn)行績效測量，這使得實踐面臨著艱巨的挑戰(zhàn)。

在拉斐特綠道項目中，DesignWorkshop的團(tuán)隊檢驗了景觀建筑以及大量的各種相關(guān)學(xué)科的知識體系，以便指導(dǎo)設(shè)計過程并預(yù)測和衡量該項目的績效指標(biāo)?；谧C據(jù)的設(shè)計方法論涉及到30多種測量指標(biāo)包括環(huán)境問題、社區(qū)問題、經(jīng)濟(jì)問題和藝術(shù)問題。該項目以LEED?和SITESTM的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為基準(zhǔn)，但實際上比這些框架走得更遠(yuǎn)，其實際確定的可持續(xù)設(shè)計標(biāo)準(zhǔn)更為全面。被納入考慮的因素如下：雨洪管理；城市熱島效應(yīng)；城市野生動植物；原生植物的利用；循環(huán)回收材料；公共衛(wèi)生；就業(yè)；稅收；房產(chǎn)價值；犯罪率以及安全上學(xué)路線。該項目探索的問題、使用的方法和預(yù)測的結(jié)果有助于重新定義設(shè)計景觀的設(shè)計、施工和監(jiān)控，以應(yīng)對為項目制定的可持續(xù)發(fā)展目標(biāo)所帶來的挑戰(zhàn)。

項目概況

拉斐特廊道位于路易斯安那州新奧爾良的中心，廊道面積為1375英畝，長度為3.1英里，包括65英畝拉斐特綠道，集居住、商業(yè)和輕工業(yè)于一體。拉斐特綠道先前是一條淺運河，也是把龐恰特雷恩湖和圣約翰河連接到VieuxCarré的鐵路通道用地。拉斐特廊道從新奧爾良著名的法國區(qū)開始，穿過城市的九大歷史社區(qū)，橫穿整個城市，囊括了200年以來的包括從VieuxCarré殖民時代到20世紀(jì)中期Lakeview城郊的各種社區(qū)形態(tài)（參看圖1和2）。在20世紀(jì)早期，運河被填平，而毗鄰運河的CarondeletWalk則成為拉斐特大街。沿著這個位址有一條鐵路線一直運營到20世紀(jì)50年代，時至今日，仍然有一部分還在使用中。在20世紀(jì)前半葉，沿著拉斐特廊道建造了不少公共住房和工業(yè)廠房，重新形成了居民區(qū)的城市肌理。20世紀(jì)80年代末，由于商業(yè)活動缺乏、土地用途變更、工業(yè)用途被遺棄，導(dǎo)致拉斐特廊道的商業(yè)活動大幅減少。近年來，盡管沿著拉斐特廊道仍有一些還未被利用的工業(yè)廠房，但是有一些空置的工業(yè)廠房已經(jīng)開始被重建為住宅與商業(yè)投資混合用地。目前有13,583名居民居住在拉斐特廊道，這里的社會經(jīng)濟(jì)條件和人種構(gòu)成差異很大，這意味著創(chuàng)造社區(qū)的互動將極具挑戰(zhàn)性。其中一些居民區(qū)的犯罪率很高，因此必須對安全防范和犯罪預(yù)防具有敏感度并給予特別關(guān)注。

圖2 (fig.2)CREDIT:DesignWorkshopTheLafitteGreenwayisa3.1mile-longright-of-waythatwasonceusedforthetransportationofgoodsalongarailcorridor.Itiscurrentlyenvisionedasamulti-modaltransportationcorridorlinkingresidentstotheheartoftheFrenchQuarter.拉斐特綠道是一條3.1英里長的公路用地，先前是一條用于運送貨物的鐵路走廊，現(xiàn)在作為一條多模式的交通走廊，將居民與法國區(qū)的中心聯(lián)系在一起。

圖3 (fig.3)CREDIT:DesignWorkshopTheLafitteCorridortraversesninehistoricNewOrleansneighborhoodsthatmakeupdiverseculturalandsocioeconomicbackgrounds.拉菲特走廊穿過新奧爾良的九大歷史社區(qū)，囊括了各種文化和社會經(jīng)濟(jì)背景。

拉斐特綠道和廊道的歷史展示了其在連接各大居民區(qū)和商業(yè)樞紐以及為社區(qū)娛樂提供開放空間方面起到的重要作用。長期以來周圍的社區(qū)就想把這條通道用地轉(zhuǎn)換為一條方便公眾進(jìn)入的集開放空間、娛樂場所和其它便利設(shè)施于一體的綠道。

項目范圍和目標(biāo)

拉斐特廊道之友（FOLC）是一個倡導(dǎo)鄰里關(guān)系的組織，其主張把拉斐特廊道變成帶狀公園并在“愿景計劃”中首先提出了該項目的概念。這項愿景計劃是由當(dāng)?shù)匾患揖坝^建筑事務(wù)所——布朗?達(dá)諾思土地設(shè)計有限公司——通過ASLA與國家公園管理局之間簽訂的合作協(xié)議無償完成的，該文件在社區(qū)建設(shè)中起到至關(guān)重要的作用，它將當(dāng)選官員、代理商和綠道贊助商連接到了一起。受綠道互助組的委任，瓦戈納?波爾建筑師有限公司（瓦戈納+波爾，“拉斐特綠道：可持續(xù)水景設(shè)計”）開展了第二項研究，提出了一項綠道雨洪管理策略。

DesignWorkshop被新奧爾良市選中成為一個多學(xué)科團(tuán)隊的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，該團(tuán)隊既有建筑師、土木工程師、生態(tài)學(xué)家和經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家，也有公園管理和運營專家以及通過環(huán)境設(shè)計預(yù)防犯罪的專家。DesignWorkshop之所以被選中，是由于他們提出了拉斐特廊道建造的可靠方案以及綜合型規(guī)劃和設(shè)計的可持續(xù)發(fā)展方法，融合了可持續(xù)發(fā)展范疇的“四重盈余”，即環(huán)境、社區(qū)、藝術(shù)和經(jīng)濟(jì)（稱之為DWLegacyDesign?）。該項目于2009年春季啟動，于2013年8月份開始施工。

拉斐特廊道項目的工作范圍包括：總體規(guī)劃和設(shè)計過程、現(xiàn)有的條件與分析、社區(qū)參與、采用適用于拉斐特綠道的項目策劃、拉斐特綠道設(shè)計以及日后運營和維護(hù)拉斐特綠道所需的大致步驟。此外，拉斐特廊道復(fù)興計劃勾勒出了與兼容性的用地規(guī)劃和城市設(shè)計相關(guān)的廣泛策略，以及經(jīng)濟(jì)開發(fā)戰(zhàn)略和交通連接。在更為詳細(xì)的建議中還包括關(guān)于土地用途、分區(qū)、城市設(shè)計、社會公平、公私合伙企業(yè)、資本投資、私營市場力量、經(jīng)濟(jì)開發(fā)、基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施、公園與娛樂及交通等議題。設(shè)計團(tuán)隊遵循嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)难芯?、?guī)劃和設(shè)計過程，目的是記錄和分析現(xiàn)有場地的基線數(shù)據(jù)、建立績效基準(zhǔn)和制定設(shè)計成敗衡量策略。

可持續(xù)發(fā)展的目標(biāo)和績效指標(biāo)

對可持續(xù)發(fā)展的“四重盈余”（環(huán)境、社區(qū)、藝術(shù)和經(jīng)濟(jì)）的了解和應(yīng)用涉及到開展并協(xié)調(diào)橫跨三個學(xué)習(xí)分支的多學(xué)科研究：1）自然科學(xué)；2）社會科學(xué)；3）藝術(shù)和人文科學(xué)。鑒于第一個分支的定量性、客觀性和有形性，在解決可持續(xù)發(fā)展的環(huán)境問題方面，它可能會比其它分支更有助于建立績效指標(biāo)和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。而第二和第三個分支則是定性的、主觀的、無形的、受信念所驅(qū)使的，因此不利于建立標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的績效指標(biāo)。由于意識到有必要將這三個分支的研究和知識融合在一起來解決拉斐特廊道項目所表現(xiàn)出來的復(fù)雜環(huán)境和社區(qū)相關(guān)問題，DesignWorkshop的實踐模式包括將與多學(xué)科團(tuán)隊以及學(xué)者和研究機(jī)構(gòu)進(jìn)行合作。為了解決項目所面臨的各種問題，設(shè)計團(tuán)隊在從各學(xué)習(xí)分支內(nèi)部尋求研究可適用性的知識方面進(jìn)行了大量投入。

基于廣泛的研究資源，如LEED?中的鄰里設(shè)計評分系統(tǒng)和美國森林協(xié)會以及社區(qū)的參與，設(shè)計團(tuán)隊制定了一系列的明確目標(biāo)、績效指標(biāo)、基準(zhǔn)以及針對環(huán)境、社區(qū)、經(jīng)濟(jì)和美學(xué)每個范疇的策略，以便對設(shè)計備選方案和項目結(jié)果進(jìn)行評估。在新奧爾良，拉斐特綠道將成為第一個創(chuàng)造了可衡量結(jié)果的項目，這些可衡量結(jié)果旨在減少城市熱島效應(yīng)，并提高雨洪管理能力。該項目還大量使用了綠色基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和原生植物。

研究與知識的來源

設(shè)計團(tuán)隊利用大量的作品、研究和以往經(jīng)驗，為設(shè)計過程和研究方法論提供信息。學(xué)者、作家和從業(yè)者諸如帕特里克?戈德斯、伊恩?麥克哈格、安?惠斯頓?史必恩、邁克爾?霍夫、達(dá)尼洛?帕拉特塞爾和弗雷德里克?斯坦納等所提出的景觀建筑生態(tài)學(xué)方法和城市設(shè)計與規(guī)劃概念為該項目提供了理論框架。

社會科學(xué)的研究，包括勞倫斯?弗蘭克、彼得?恩戈爾克和托馬斯?施密德以及蒂莫西?克羅和戴安娜?扎姆等完成的研究，為社區(qū)設(shè)計與人類福祉之間關(guān)系提供了證據(jù)。奧斯卡?紐曼早期的成果以及其他通過環(huán)境設(shè)計預(yù)防犯罪的知識表明，通過創(chuàng)建社區(qū)能“擁有的”并為之自豪的開放空間，社區(qū)能夠控制犯罪率。這一方面已經(jīng)吸引了杜蘭公共衛(wèi)生學(xué)院的關(guān)注，該學(xué)院很有興趣追蹤拉斐特廊道項目的開發(fā)對促進(jìn)社區(qū)體育活動方面的影響，并表示有可能參與到研究中來。值得注意的是，杜蘭公共衛(wèi)生學(xué)院曾幫助召開后來成為“拉斐特廊道之友”這個組織的第一次會議，該社區(qū)組織的成立旨在把拉斐特廊道創(chuàng)建成一個綠色空間。

與拉斐特廊道復(fù)興有關(guān)的許多問題都可歸根于社會和經(jīng)濟(jì)問題，如：貧困、房地產(chǎn)貶值、犯罪、娛樂資源缺乏和營養(yǎng)不良。在經(jīng)濟(jì)方面，擬定的綠道設(shè)計可以提升毗鄰房地產(chǎn)的價值，這個概念在很大程度上得到包括“衡量城市公園系統(tǒng)的經(jīng)濟(jì)價值”在內(nèi)的經(jīng)驗研究證據(jù)的支持。經(jīng)驗證據(jù)還表明了紐約市歷史悠久的中央公園和新建的布萊恩特公園帶來的社會和經(jīng)濟(jì)效益。另一方面，一個有問題的公園或年久失修的公園則會使房產(chǎn)價值下降達(dá)五個百分點。這一點在當(dāng)今的拉斐特綠道體現(xiàn)得淋漓盡致。在現(xiàn)在以及在拉斐特綠道實施后分別追蹤拉斐特綠道周圍的房地產(chǎn)價值以判斷是升值還是貶值，將會為日后的研究可提供定量數(shù)據(jù)用以證明公園的價值。

設(shè)計愿景與設(shè)計理念

拉斐特綠道的愿景是提供一個安全的、公眾可進(jìn)入的開放空間，使其體現(xiàn)出周圍居民區(qū)的需求和愿望以及更大背景下的自然和文化歷史。這種愿景在總體設(shè)計理念上有所體現(xiàn)，該設(shè)計理念以歷史生態(tài)學(xué)原理為基礎(chǔ)，建立在該區(qū)域歷史的豐富層次基礎(chǔ)之上，同時也將社區(qū)的投入和先前計劃考慮在內(nèi)。從拉斐特綠道的歷史用途或潛在未來用途上總結(jié)出四個初始概念——工業(yè)用途和商業(yè)用途【鐵路效應(yīng)】；雨洪管理【與水生活】；把社區(qū)拼接在一起【拼接圖】；鄰里與拉斐特綠道的關(guān)系【前門廊】，而這些概念則被發(fā)展成了拉斐特綠道的總體設(shè)計理念（參看圖3）。

空間項目的策劃是從周圍社區(qū)成員和其他利益相關(guān)者的愿望中直接提煉出來的。該設(shè)計在現(xiàn)有的社區(qū)設(shè)施與拉斐特綠道的設(shè)計元素之間創(chuàng)造了一種協(xié)同效應(yīng)，為正式的和非正式的活動提供了開放空間（參看圖4）。如早期的地圖所示，18世紀(jì)的Carondelet運河與CarondeletWalk的標(biāo)志為一英里長的落羽杉（Taxodiumdistichum）樹叢，而項目方案對此歷史特征的呼應(yīng)則是將曾經(jīng)覆蓋在場地上的柏樹林重新喚醒，找回人們對這一地帶的回憶。這條新的用壓碎的和回收的磚塊建成的CarondeletWalk在公園內(nèi)部形成了一條次級通道和一條壯觀的散步長廊，很像200年前的原型。如果恢復(fù)歷史上的柏樹林樹冠面積，可以使拉斐特綠道的樹冠覆蓋范圍增加46%。在十年一遇的暴風(fēng)雨期間，落到這一帶的雨水100%都會被截流并滯留在場地內(nèi)，并慢慢滲回地下，而無需使用任何排水設(shè)施，隨著時間的推移，泥土沉降對這一系統(tǒng)的影響也會大幅降低（參看圖5和6）。

在這片小柏樹林里面有是一個種滿原生路易斯安那州鳶尾花的臨時性雨水花園。當(dāng)穿過這片小柏樹林，銹跡斑斑的鐵路可以將你帶到火車軌道的所在處。種植設(shè)計充分體現(xiàn)出南路易斯安那州的天然植被格局，沿著拉斐特綠道的一端爬升到梅泰里山脊而另一端延生到密西西比河的自然水域，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)濕生植物景觀逐漸轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榈讓幽颈局脖痪坝^進(jìn)而演替為山地植物群落。完全采用原生植物材料原料后，隨著時間的流逝，野生動植物和鳥類的數(shù)量將會翻兩番。

開發(fā)拉斐特綠道并復(fù)興拉斐特廊道的發(fā)展方案回應(yīng)了周邊社區(qū)的需求，同時也傳揚(yáng)了這一帶的豐富的歷史底蘊(yùn)，把這一片貧瘠的土地改造成了生態(tài)結(jié)構(gòu)豐富、社會多元化、視覺上能喚起回憶的可持續(xù)發(fā)展區(qū)域（參看圖7和8）。

結(jié)論、挑戰(zhàn)與前景

該項目贊成實踐與研究一體化，這是許多學(xué)者與從業(yè)者50多年來所提倡的，并被認(rèn)為對我們行業(yè)的發(fā)展至關(guān)重要。通過制定并檢驗綜合的研究型定量和定性目標(biāo)及績效指標(biāo)，該項目所應(yīng)用的模型在推動可持續(xù)發(fā)展范式的應(yīng)用方面做出了巨大的貢獻(xiàn)。此外，設(shè)計過程要協(xié)調(diào)各種相互矛盾的、有時相互排斥的環(huán)境、社會和經(jīng)濟(jì)目標(biāo)，這些目標(biāo)往往是項目所期望的或者在實現(xiàn)最高水平的可持續(xù)發(fā)展范式方面被認(rèn)為是最佳的。在達(dá)成這些不同目標(biāo)的過程中所涉及的延展機(jī)會和限制條件又為研究提供了一塊潛在領(lǐng)域。

在生成、記錄和共享知識的過程中所采用的系統(tǒng)方法，作為當(dāng)前實踐中一個最令人期待但是大部分情況下都未能實現(xiàn)的目標(biāo)，可以成為一種可用知識的來源。該項目也是一個測試案例，明確了那些仍需解決的挑戰(zhàn)以及建立研究合作關(guān)系的機(jī)遇。例如，與新奧爾良大學(xué)的鳥類學(xué)家合作為拉斐特綠道提供了鳥類數(shù)量數(shù)據(jù)的基線。杜蘭大學(xué)公共衛(wèi)生系的研究通過拉斐特廊道的居民測量了現(xiàn)有的體育活動水平，與設(shè)計團(tuán)隊的研究成果形成互補(bǔ)。這些獨立的資源提供了寶貴的基線數(shù)據(jù)，可用于衡量設(shè)計的績效。

圖4 (fig.4)CREDIT:DesignWorkshopThepreferreddesignalternativeisbuiltuponmarkingandhonoringlayersofnaturalandculturalhistorywhilemeetingtheneedsofthesurroundingcommunities.設(shè)計在協(xié)調(diào)和尊重自然和文化歷史的同時，滿足了周圍社區(qū)的需要。

不過，可用于拉斐特廊道項目的犯罪統(tǒng)計資料還不充分，因此難以評估整條廊道改造的娛樂空間和開放空間在安全方面所產(chǎn)生的影響。

這項案例研究調(diào)查的范圍非常廣泛，它表明了未來最大程度地提升研究型實踐的潛在效益的關(guān)鍵一步。從根本上講，景觀建筑設(shè)計實踐一直以來從那些有思想深度的從業(yè)者和學(xué)者（如：奧姆斯特德、勞倫斯?哈普林和麥克哈格）經(jīng)久不衰的作品和言語中收益頗深。在過去20年里，我們在自然體系、城市廢置景觀和高度融合的景觀方面的知識在不斷拓展，人類的信念與價值觀也在不斷演變，使我們不得不對長期以來堅持的信念和實踐重新檢驗，從而創(chuàng)造一套全新的理論。在這方面的一個重要的范例是在《設(shè)計結(jié)合自然》（1969年）出版后，生態(tài)學(xué)的研究和理論一直在持續(xù)的演進(jìn)。這本書采用的穩(wěn)定與平衡的概念是定義健康生態(tài)系統(tǒng)最具爭議的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之一。近期的有關(guān)生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的概念包括生態(tài)回復(fù)力、生態(tài)繁衍和生態(tài)干預(yù)等概念，開始在一些從業(yè)者的作品中出現(xiàn)，具體反映在沃爾克?格林姆、埃里克?施密特、克里斯蒂安?威塞爾、斯圖爾特?皮科特、彼得?懷特和克里斯多夫?法斯梯等的作品中。保持對理論發(fā)展動態(tài)的了解是一項挑戰(zhàn)，需要把系統(tǒng)性的評估以及對不斷發(fā)展的研究進(jìn)行應(yīng)用作為實踐的一個不可分割的部分進(jìn)行持續(xù)投資。像DesignWorkshop這樣的領(lǐng)先從業(yè)者已合理定位，引入了更高級別的詳細(xì)性和學(xué)術(shù)方案對研究應(yīng)用進(jìn)行檢驗，這是一個持續(xù)的過程，涉及到設(shè)定清晰的假設(shè)、通過行動對這些假設(shè)進(jìn)行檢驗、記錄結(jié)果并明確實踐面臨的挑戰(zhàn)，這些步驟對于把設(shè)計想法轉(zhuǎn)化為實際應(yīng)用是十分必要的。

另一個實踐問題則糾結(jié)在這樣的一個事實上：景觀項目在施工結(jié)束時的績效水平其實是最低的，之后，景觀會以期望的或不期望的方式不斷演變。在施工后進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)性的長期監(jiān)控和評估，可以產(chǎn)生大量的數(shù)據(jù)和知識，這些數(shù)據(jù)和知識對特定項目極其有益，對未來的項目也大有幫助。許多在拉斐特綠道項目竣工后所預(yù)期的經(jīng)過研究的且理由充分的結(jié)果都需要一個長期監(jiān)控的系統(tǒng)追蹤項目的實際影響。

績效指標(biāo)的應(yīng)用需要大量的基線數(shù)據(jù)和使用后的長期監(jiān)控，這種后期監(jiān)控需要來自多個學(xué)科通過大量學(xué)科特定方案來進(jìn)行操作。這些尚未成為傳統(tǒng)專業(yè)服務(wù)范圍和費用結(jié)構(gòu)的一個重要部分，而且還需要額外的專業(yè)知識和時間才能實現(xiàn)。制定收集基線數(shù)據(jù)的方法和使用后的長期監(jiān)控模型（包括利用環(huán)境遙感突破性技術(shù)）必將成為未來研究的一個方面，并無疑將成為學(xué)術(shù)界與實踐者之間新的合作空間。同樣地，神經(jīng)科學(xué)研究的發(fā)展，并隨著人類對空間模式和其它環(huán)境屬性在行為上和心理上的反應(yīng)的進(jìn)一步了解，為新的研究領(lǐng)域提供了廣闊的前景，從而創(chuàng)造出更令人滿意、更具可預(yù)見性的人生體驗。

拉斐特廊道和綠道項目是一個令人矚目的模型，可以指導(dǎo)未來日益增多的研究型和多學(xué)科景觀建筑實踐。美國景觀建筑師協(xié)會（ASLA）授予的“2013年分析與規(guī)劃范疇的卓越獎”和ASLA德克薩斯州分會授予的“2012年分析與規(guī)劃范疇的榮譽(yù)獎”，均表明該項目已獲得了專業(yè)的認(rèn)可。利用合作實踐的經(jīng)營模式，DesignWorkshop的不斷發(fā)展的實踐，為拓展學(xué)術(shù)研究和推動研究型設(shè)計與規(guī)劃的范式提供了機(jī)遇。

作為一名教育工作者和從業(yè)者，保狄夫?蘭巴以其研究與創(chuàng)造性工作體現(xiàn)出設(shè)計與研究的一體化，并特別強(qiáng)調(diào)可持續(xù)發(fā)展的指標(biāo)與措施。蘭巴是賓夕法尼亞州費城天普大學(xué)的景觀建筑副教授，因其在設(shè)計和教育方面的出色表現(xiàn)而獲得景觀建筑教育者理事會（CELA）授予的“2012年研究與創(chuàng)造性工作卓越獎”。蘭巴及其同伴在景觀建筑行業(yè)的獲獎項目包括：位于哥倫比亞區(qū)華盛頓國家廣場上的第一夫人水景園和賓夕法尼亞州費城賓夕法尼亞園藝協(xié)會彈出式花園，后者還被當(dāng)選為意大利威尼斯第13屆國際威尼斯建筑雙年展的美國官方代表項目。

圖5 (fig.5)CREDIT:DesignWorkshopThehistoricalignmentoftheCanalisretrofittedasaraingardenwith100-percentnativeplantmaterial.Thedesignachievesenvironmentalsustainabilitybyrestoringthenativeecologyandincreasinghabitatforwildlife,whileprovidingessentialrecreationspaceforthecommunity.水渠的歷史定位是改造為百分之百原生植物材料的雨水花園。設(shè)計用恢復(fù)當(dāng)?shù)氐纳鷳B(tài)和增加野生動物棲息地實現(xiàn)環(huán)境的可持續(xù)發(fā)展，同時為社區(qū)提供必要的休閑空間。

The Sustainability Revolution

Concepts of sustainability advocate a balance among environmental, economic,and social impacts of development in meeting current and future human needs and aspirations. First enunciated in the Our Common Futures report (1987)by the United Nation’s World Commission on Environment and Development, concepts of sustainability were seen as a way to address global concerns about a deteriorating environment that threatened the lives of many species, including human. These concepts gained momentum following the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit in 1992, leading to the current full-blown global sustainability movement, reminiscent of the environmental movement of the 1960s. The pressures and politics associated with the concepts of sustainability are re-defining every aspect of our society and culture. However, the pursuit of sustainability has been fragmented, as there is no real consensus about how“sustainability” is def ned, realized or measured. Increasing demand for the application of sustainability practices, in their many manifestations, is altering how design is practiced, and, more importantly, how its performance is measured.

The increasing focus on proven performance is the greatest emerging challenge facing landscape architects today. And it's a paradigm shift that calls for increased technical and research capacity for the practice of landscape architecture. There is current debate around how landscape architects de f ne concepts of sustainability that integrate the artistic as well as the scientif c aspects of our profession. This can be seen as an evolution of our profession’s roots of environmental stewardship that bring ecological, social and cultural values into our designed landscapes, a design philosophy that goes back to the profession’s founder in America, Frederick Law Olmsted. Now these values must somehow be measured.

Metrics, Measures and Ratings of Sustainability

Designers are being challenged to meet various performance rubrics which follow the metrics and measures of sustainability for architecture lead by BREAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method)in Europe in 1990.The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED?)Green Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)in 2000,provides the standard for environmentally sustainable design, construction, and maintenance, and this standard has become the most widely recognized and used green building assessment tool. With an impressive record of economic growth and building projects, the People's Republic of China is using the LEED?certif cation to demonstrate its commitment to sustainability and to attract multinational tenants.For example, the Linked Hybrid complex in Beijing by Steven Holl Architects was designed to qualify for a LEED?Gold certif cation. LEED?has inspired an explosion of numerous sustainability rating systems and standards at the local, regional and global levels of organizations and municipalities. Rating systems are moving towards goal-oriented outcomes of designs that address issues such as urban agriculture, limits to growth, ecological water f ow, and net zero energy for a range of applications including buildings, landscapes, communities, regions, and beyond.

Lead by the American Society of Landscape Architects, the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center at The University of Texas at Austin, and the United States Botanic Garden, the Sustainable Sites Initiative? (SITES?)rating system was created to address the site-specific conditions and opportunities for landscape projects with or without buildings. The SITES? rating system, launched in 2009 and tested in a two-year pilot program, represents a primary alignment of the practice of landscape architecture with ecology and natural sciences in developing the benchmarks of excellence. One of Design W orkshop’s projects, Blue Hole Regional Park in Austin, Texas, was a participant in the pilot program and received certif cation from SITES? in August 2013. Rating systems like SITES?, LEED?,BREAM, Living Building Challenge and others are re-defining the process of design and development to include extensive and thorough documentation to a level not done in the past, and these systems are changing the way design related information is produced, retained and documented.

The Landscape Performance Series (LPS)program started by the Landscape Architecture Foundation (LAF)is designed to develop on-line interactive set of resources to facilitate, measure, and evaluate performance of designed landscapes.It brings together information and innovations from research, professional practice and student work in the form of case studies, bene f ts toolkits, fast fact library, and scholarly works as data and knowledge resources to provide professionals with tools to promote development of sustainable landscapes.

Practice Research Dichotomy

Rating systems, regulating agencies, and code enforcements require predictable and defensible design solutions. Incorporating metrics and credible data for landscape assessment is increasingly seen as an integral part of the design process for landscape architects, planners, and architects. With the changing values and sensibilities of the 21st century, the notion of creative leaps and unsubstantiated assertions no longer satis f es the concerns and values of clients and the public at large. As the design professions move from speculating about the environmental and societal impact of our designs to predicting and quantifying those impacts,intuitive and artistic aspects of the design process need to be grounded in the structures and principles of the physical and social sciences to the greatest extent possible. While much progress has been made in devising quantitative measures for f ows of energy and water many practitioners are deeply concerned about the lack of research on measuring less tangible but equally important qualitative, visual,physiological, and social bene f ts of built landscapes. These somewhat ambiguous experiential qualities infuse users with respect and care for cultural landscapes and generate critical public support for long-term sustainability. While meeting these challenges requires enhanced capacity and resources for generating research based evidence to support design decisions, we are faced with a persistent and growing separation between research and design and, by extension, between academics, considered primary producers of research, and practitioners, assumed to be the primary consumers of research. Yet most of the academic research conducted over the last thirty years has had very little relevance to practice, and, for the most part, practitioners do not consider academia a viable source for applicable professional-based research. From the 1950s to the present, respected scholars,including Ervin Zube, Robert Riley, and Elizabeth Meyer, and leading practitioners including Garrett Eckbo, Hideo Sasaki, Ken Smith, the OLIN office, Andropogon,Mithun, and Design W orkshop, have and are advocating for the integration of practice and research in order to keep our profession relevant, competitive and growing. While not yet fully realized, with the demands of sustainability metrics the notion has acquired a renewed sense of urgency.

Understanding and transcending the historic tensions and the dichotomous ways of thinking between the artistic and the scientific communities (and by extension between designers and researchers; practitioners and academics)is critical for a holistic approach to solve the increasingly complex environmental and social issues related to the built environment of the 21st century.

The Culture of Practice

Works of practitioners going back to Olmsted have served as major sources for the advancement and production of knowledge for our profession. Motivated by their professional and environmental ethics, practitioners are again emerging at the forefront of f nding creative and innovative ways to bringing design sensibilities to the contemporary notions of sustainability in their work.

Interviews with leading practitioners point to increased realization about the importance of research-based practice. Practitioners must carry out their professional responsibilities in the context of greater demands from clients for research-based and quantitative accountability. The stringent time-consuming documentation required to comply with sustainability rating systems is usually not supported by the fee structures for professional services. At this time of economic austerity and increased competition among professionals, the perceived bene f ts and value for environmentally responsible development can be a hard sell for clients when it involves additional and perhaps unexpected expenses. And practitioners are also faced with a general lack of available and applicable research to support their design decisions. In spite of the sincere desire to raise the level of inquiry, research is generally considered secondary to the ‘real work’of practice, and allocating time and streams of funding, with mostly longer-term returns,is proving very diff cult for many practitioners to incorporate into project budgets.

圖7 (fig.7)CREDIT:DesignWorkshopVignettesshowkeyelementsthatusersoftheLafitteGreenwaywillexperienceastheytravelthelengthoftheGreenwaytrail.插圖顯示了拉菲特綠道用戶因為他們穿行于綠道所能體驗的要素。

The world of practice, seen as project-centric applied research, contains a wealth of raw but potentially valuable and mostly untapped innovation and knowledge of great value beyond the singular application of the project for which it was developed. Practitioners are essentially engaged in research on a daily basis as they test things out and learn from project to project. But the nature of this research and the knowledge generated within practice tends to be episodic, lacking in scholarly research protocols; in addition, it is not well documented and is seldom preserved, shared, or published. Practitioners are also concerned about sharing proprietary information derived from their work that is considered confidential by the clients. Sometimes, specialized research gives a firm a competitive edge.Even with the many constraints, practices generate much knowledge that can and should be harnessed for the benef t of the entire profession. Some highly motivated practitioners, recognizing the importance of bridging the divide between practice and research, especially with the new demands of sustainability metrics, are making signif cant contributions, through publications and presentations, to re-de f ning the design, documentation, construction and monitoring of the designed landscapes.

Design Workshop - A Model of Ref ective Practice

Design Workshop has managed to chart a more inclusive, integrated, and collaborative pathway between research and design as represented in its philosophy, organizational structure, and body of work. With its origins in academia,Design Workshop's culture involves continuous learning through critically examining every facet of their practice. This def ning characteristic of "re f ective practitioners,"as described by Sch?ni, has positioned this practice as a leading in f uence in the profession. The f rm approaches each project as an experiment for gaining greater insights, creative learning, and unconventional thinking, unfolding new perspectives and directions for the future. In addition Design Workshop's commitment to engaging in extended dialogue with the academic community is re-def ning the role and scope of work for landscape architects and putting Design W orkshop in a leadership position on multidisciplinary teams. Such models of practice are needed to serve the next generation's clients with a metrics and performance-based mindset, providing scientif c accountability from design professionals.

Design Workshop is playing an important role in exploring pro-active and creative ways to address the challenges surrounding sustainability and the related paradigm shift towards design performance. A seamless and systematic synthesis of intuition and reason, physical and social sciences, practitioners and academics, teaching and practice, and knowledge and action permeates every level of the f rm's organizational structure. Design Workshop's holistic understanding of sustainability is ref ected in the f rm’s design philosophy of creating a synthesis of environmental, economic, artistic and community aspects with every project. Recognizing the paramount importance of making the economic argument to support design decisions, Design W orkshop has initiated for clients a Development Services Group that conducts market research and analysis related to land development and planning.

Community, Environment and Art/Aesthetic topics are also part of the design conversations, and the firm’s process and project goal setting, addressed in the articles that follow, shows its intentions for making sure that staff are being cognizant and deliberate about all four categories of sustainability. Each project is examined through these four lenses of sustainability in understanding existing conditions,setting clear and measureable goals, developing explicit metrics, and monitoring outcomes to determine performance effectiveness.

Widely acknowledged, the LEED?process together with the more recent SITES?rating system for landscape architecture strive to promote leadership in embracing sustainable practices and products. Rating systems, considered adequate standards for the present and generally accepted and followed by professionals,must evolve and be continually evaluated in order to address more comprehensive measures of sustainability goals for the future. Building on these systems through internal teaching and learning, Design W orkshop has developed its own set of matrices and methodologies that establish and track their sustainability goals,formulate the research agenda for the project, and share the results within and even outside of the f rm. This evolution poses professional challenges that require re-examination and re-formulations of every aspect of the design process with increased focus on systematic methods and means for capturing, organizing,analyzing, and documenting quantitative and qualitative outcomes. The design process at Design W orkshop goes beyond the traditional scope from design to construction and often includes follow-up reflection through writing, publications,presentations, and identifying topics for further research.

On-going dialogue with the academy is an integral part of the practice at Design Workshop. This involvement includes conducting the f rm’s well-known interdisciplinary Design Week at institutions around the country along with mentoring thesis students,offering internships, and doing adjunct teaching. Design W orkshop was recently honored with the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA)2012 Landscape Architecture Medal of Excellence for its Design W eek initiative. Collaboration with academia extends to hosting a Faculty-in-Residence program at Design W orkshop which exposes staff to academic experts in the f eld, and, at the same time, acquaints academics with current practice thereby informing subsequent academic instruction.Links with academia bring a more rigorous methodology to support the innovative work happening in the f eld and make it widely known through publications.

Design Workshop has also been actively involved in the recently launched Case Study Investigation (CSI)program, sponsored by the Landscape Architecture Foundation (LAF). It is a unique research collaboration of faculty-student teams working with leading practitioners to document the benefits of exemplary highperforming landscape projects. Teams develop methods to quantify environmental,economic and social bene f ts and produce Case Study Briefs for LAF’s Landscape Performance Series. Design W orkshop's early involvement with this initiative included peer-reviewing case studies and methodologies and participation in the pilot phase, followed with ten of the f rm’s projects selected for this program. This partnership with academic colleagues involves more probing and more robust research about methodologies and baseline conditions and provides critical feedback for future work. The case studies are featured on the LAF website where they are accessible to the wider profession and the public at large.ii

Research at Design W orkshop takes place in the context of individual projects with the idea that not every project should re-invent the wheel. Sharing collective knowledge on an internal web-based portal connects Design W orkshop’s six locations and allows staff, regardless of location, to operate as a single f rm. Similar projects in the firm provide comparative research opportunities through multiple applications where the theories and lessons learned are challenged or con f rmed.This knowledge is supplemented by programs and events with outside experts as guest speakers. Experts are also invited to provide feedback and fresh points of view to the firm-wide design reviews of similar projects in different offices. In addition, Design Workshop has cultivated private sector clients who would be willing to help pay for academic research about things important to the clients, opening additional opportunities for collaborations with the academia. This represents a relatively new development in the profession of landscape architecture that can provide sorely needed resources for research.

Design Workshop's origins in academia and a knowledge-sharing culture is further reinforced by the publications of four books, New Gardens of the American West(2003)iii, Toward Legacy (2007)iv, Garden Legacy (2010)v, and Landscapes of Enduring Quality (2013)vi, with inspiring stories of the evolution of thoughts, ideas and design philosophy. Knowledge dissemination also includes numerous articles in professional magazines, presentations at conferences, breaking into peer-reviewed journals and aspiring to meet the highest standards of academic research that parallels the high standards of their practice.

Design Workshop's creative efforts have been recognized with more than 250 awards from such organizations as the American Society of Landscape Architects(ASLA), the American Planning Association and the Urban Land Institute, testifying to the extraordinary range and excellence of their projects. The recent ASLA Professional Award in the Analysis & Planning category for the Great Streets Initiative, a streetscape revitalization plan in St. Louis, Missouri, recognizes the planning and design process driven by rigorous research and measurement. It involved developing over forty metrics including pedestrian mobility, employment,urban wildlife and f nancial rate-of-return to assess the success of the design. The methodology used to quantify performance bene f ts of this streetscape design can be adapted to similar projects.

All of these initiatives situate Design W orkshop front and center in the evolution toward meeting contemporary demands of providing explicit measures of performance for cultural landscapes. The firm’s design process benefits both nature and society, reasserting and advancing an enduring vision that reaches back to the founding of our profession. The f rm offers many tangible examples of how researchers and practitioners, working together, can better contribute to the progress and growth of our profession, expand its body of knowledge and enhance the landscape architecture profession’s sphere of inf uence into the future.

Case Study - Laf tte Greenway + Revitalization Corridor Project, New Orleans, Louisiana

Practice as Applied Research

Ideally in practice, prior experience-based wisdom used in the creative and artistic appearance of design is reconciled with scientif c knowledge and theories to support design in a credible and veri f able way. The design process involves informed and intuitive projections moving interactively between the "proposing" and "disposing"of alternative scenariosviibased on the availability of reliable base line data and the identification of additional research to move from speculation to proven performance. Generating reliable baseline data for the full spectrum of sustainability criteria needed to measure post construction performance poses a formidable challenge for practice.

In the Laf tte Greenway project, Design Worship’s team tested bodies of knowledge from landscape architecture and numerous related disciplines to direct the design process and to predict and measure the performance metrics established for the project. The design methodology employed an evidence-driven approach that considered over thirty metrics embracing issues of environment, community,economics, and art. The project was benchmarked against the standards of LEED?and SITES?, but it went far beyond these frameworks to establish more holistic standard for sustainable design. Factors considered include the following:stormwater management; effects of urban heat island; urban wildlife; native plant use; recycled content; public health; employment; tax generation; housing values;crime rates; and safe routes to school. The questions probed, the methods used,and the outcomes predicted for this project will contribute to re-de f ning the design,construction and monitoring of designed landscapes that address the challenges posed by the sustainability goals developed for the project.

Project Overview

Located in the heart of New Orleans, Louisiana, the La f tte Corridor is a 1,375-acre,3.1 mile-long district that includes the 65-acre La f tte Greenway and a rich mix of residential, commercial and light industrial uses. The Laf tte Greenway is a former shallow shipping canal and railroad right-of-way that connected Lake Pontchartrain and Bayou St. John to the V ieux Carré. Starting from New Orleans’ famous French Quarter through nine of the city’s historic neighborhoods, the corridor’s right-of-way traverses a cross-section of the city that captures its 200-year settlement pattern,ranging from the colonial-era settlement of the V ieux Carré to the mid-20th-century suburban neighborhood of Lakeview. During the early 20th century, the canal was f lled, and the Carondelet W alk, adjacent the canal, became La f tte Street. A railroad line was active along this site until the 1950s, and there are still portions of the railroad that remain in operation today. During the f rst half of the 20th century,public housing sites and industrial buildings were established along the corridor, redef ning the urban fabric of the neighborhoods. Later in the 1980s, lack of business activity, changing land use, and the abandoning of industrial uses resulting in the decline in the Corridor’s commercial activity. Recently, some vacant industrial buildings have been renovated as mixed residential and commercial investments,although some unused industrial buildings remain along the corridor site. With 13,583 residents, the corridor presently contains a vast spectrum of socio-economic conditions and racial compositions, creating a challenging context for community engagement. High crime rates in some of the neighborhoods required sensitivity to and special focus on safety and crime prevention. (see f g. 1 and f g. 2)

The history of the Lafitte Greenway and Corridor displays the important role the Corridor could have in connecting the various neighborhoods and commercial nodes and in providing open space for community enjoyment. It has long been the objective of the surrounding communities to convert this special right-of-way into a greenway comprised of publicly accessible open space, recreation areas and other amenities.

Project Scope and Objectives

The concept for this project was f rst put forth in a ‘vision plan’ by the Friends of Laf tte Corridor (FOLC), the neighborhood advocacy organization, who advocated for the corridor becoming a linear park. This vision plan was completed, pro bono,by Brown + Danos landdesign, Inc., a local landscape architectural of f ce through a cooperative agreement between the ASLA and the National Park Service, and this document was critical in building community support for the creation of the corridor among elected officials, agencies, and greenway constituencies. A second study by Waggonner + Ball Architects (Waggonner + Ball, ‘Laf tte Greenway: Sustainable Water Design’), commissioned by the greenway’s support group, proposed a stormwater strategy for the Greenway.

Design Workshop was retained by the City of New Orleans to lead a multi-disciplinary team that included architects, civil engineers, ecologists, economists, as well as experts in park management and operations and crime prevention through environmental design. Design Workshop was chosen specifically for their credible proposal for this corridor and for their comprehensive sustainability approach to planning and design incorporating the “quadruple bottom line” of sustainability categories: Environment,Community, Art and Economics, termed DW Legacy Design?. The project started in spring 2009 and the construction began in August 2013.

The scope of work for the La f tte corridor includes addressing the overall planning and design process, existing conditions and analysis, the community engagement,programmatic uses appropriate for the Greenway, the Greenway design, and the general steps needed to operate and maintain the Greenway in the future. In addition, the Lafitte Corridor Revitalization Plan outlines the broader strategies related to compatible land uses and urban design, economic development strategies and transportation connections. Specific recommendations regarding land use,zoning, urban design, social equity, public-private partnerships, capital investments,private market forces, economic development, infrastructure, parks and recreation,and transportation are included.

The design team followed a rigorous research, planning, and design process with the objectives of documenting and analyzing baseline data for the existing site,establishing benchmarks of performance and creating a strategy for measuring the success of the design over time.

Sustainability Goals and Performance Measures

The understanding and application of the “quadruple-bottom-line” of sustainability(Environment, Community, Art and Economics)involves conducting and reconciling multi-disciplinary research spanning the three branches of learning: 1)natural and physical sciences; 2)social sciences; and 3)arts and humanities. The quantitative, objective, and tangible nature of the first branch, addressing the environmental aspect of sustainability, may be more conducive to the establishment of performance metrics and standards than the other branches. The qualitative,descriptive, subjective, intangible value and belief-driven nature of the second and third branches are resistant to the creation of standardized metrics of performance.Recognizing the need for integrating all three branches of research and knowledge to solve the complex environmental and community related problems represented in the Laf tte Corridor, Design Workshop's model of practice included multi-disciplinary teams and partnerships with scholars and institutions. The design team made signif cant investments in researching applicable knowledge from a cross-section of all branches of learning in answering questions posed in the project.

Based by extensive research sources such as LEED?Neighborhood Design and American Forests as well as community involvement, the design team created a system of explicit goals, performance metrics, benchmarks along with strategies for each of the categories of environment, community, economics and aesthetics to evaluate design alternatives and project outcomes. This Greenway will be the first project in New Orleans to create measurable outcomes that aim to reduce urban heat island effects and to increase stormwater management capacity. The project will also employ extensive applications of green infrastructure and native plants.

Sources of Research and Knowledge

The design team drew upon a broad range of writings, research, and previous experience to inform the design process and research methodologies. Ecological approach to landscape architecture, and concepts of urban design and planning advanced by scholars, authors and practitioners, such as Patrick Geddes, Ian McHarg, Ann Whiston Spirn, Michael Hough, Danilo Palazzo, and Frederick Steiner provided the theoretical framework for this project.

Research in social sciences, including work done by Lawrence Frank, Peter Engelke and Thomas Schmid, and by Timothy Crowe and Diane Zahm, provided evidence of the relationship of community design to human well-being.viiiThe early work by Oscar Newmanixand other knowledge of crime prevention through environmental design suggests that by creating an open space that the community can “possess”and feel proud of will reduce crime. This aspect has attracted the attention and possible involvement by the Tulane School for Public Health, which is interested in tracking the impact of the development of this Corridor on physical activity .Signif cantly, Tulane’s School of Public Health was instrumental in convening the f rst meeting of what eventually became the Friends of La f tte Corridor, the community organization formed to advocate for the corridor’s creation as a green space.

Many problems associated with the revitalization Corridor can be contributed to the social and economic issues, such as, poverty, depressed real estate values,crime, lack of recreational resources, and poor nutrition. On the economic front, the proposed greenway design can raise adjacent real estate values, a notion supported to a large degree by empirical research including “Measuring the Economic V alue of a City Park System.”xEmpirical evidence also suggests the social and economic benef ts of historic Central Park, and more recently Bryant Park, in New York City.On the other hand, a park that is problematic or in disrepair has been shown to subtract f ve percent of home value. This is visible in the Greenway today. Tracking the real estate values surrounding the Greenway now and after the Greenway is implemented to determine the increase (or decrease)of fers a venue for future research to provide quantitative data to support the value of parks.

Design Vision and Concept

The vision for the La f tte Greenway is to provide a safe, publicly accessible open space that re f ects the needs and desires of the surrounding neighborhoods as well as the natural and cultural history of the larger context. This vision is ref ected in the overall design concept that draws upon principles of historic ecology and builds upon the rich layers of the site’s history while also taking into account community input and previous plans. Four initial concepts derived from historical or potential future uses of the Greenway – industrial and commercial uses [Railroad Artifacts]; stormwater management [Living with W ater]; stitching communities together [The Quilt]; and the relationship of the neighborhoods to the Greenway [the Front Porch ]– and these were developed as concepts for the Greenway’s overall design. (see f g. 3 and f g. 4)

Programmed spaces were derived directly from the desires of surrounding community members and other stakeholders. The design creates synergies between existing community facilities and designed elements of the Greenway, providing open space for formal and informal activities (Figure 4). The historic alignment of the 18th century Carondelet Canal and Carondelet W alk, marked by a mile-long bosque of bald cypress (T axodium distichum)trees, is evocative of the Cipriére au Bois (Cypress Forest)that once covered the site, as shown on early maps. The new Carondelet Walk of crushed, recycled brick provides a secondary path within the park and a grand promenade, much as the original had done 200 years before.Restoring the historic cypress tree canopy will result in an increase of 46 percent tree canopy coverage in the Greenway, and since 100 percent of the stormwater falling on-site during the ten-year storm will be captured without the use of drainage infrastructure by retaining water on-site and allowing it to slowly percolate back into the ground, the impact of soil subsidence will, over time, be substantially reduced.(see f g. 5 and f g. 6)

Within this cypress grove is an ephemeral rain garden filled with displays of native Louisiana iris. Rust-stained bands of paving trace the location of train tracks once traversing the site. Plantings reflect the natural vegetation patterns of south Louisiana with swamp species that transition to bottomland hardwoods and upland species as the Greenway rises to the Metairie Ridge on one end and natural level of the Mississippi River on the other. Through the total use of native plant material, wildlife and bird populations are projected to quadruple over time.

The proposed development for the Lafitte Greenway and revitalization of the Lafitte Corridor respond to the needs of adjacent communities while celebrating the rich layers of the site’s history in transforming the barren stretch of land into an ecologically rich, socially diverse, visually evocative and sustainable environment.(see f g. 7 and f g. 8)

Conclusions, Challenges and Prospects

This project embraces the integration of practice and research, advocated by many scholars and practitioners for over f fty years and considered critical for the growth of our profession. The model applied to this project makes a signi f cant contribution in advancing the application of the sustainability paradigm through the creation and testing of comprehensive research-based quantitative and qualitative goals and performance measures. The design process also required reconciling many competing, and sometimes mutually exclusive, environmental, social and economic goals desired for the project or considered optimum for achieving the highest levels of the sustainability paradigm. The stretching and straining involved in the resolutions of these divergent goals offer a potential area of research.

The systematic approach used in the generation, documentation, and sharing of the knowledge, a much desired but largely unrealized goal in current practice,contributes to providing an accessible source of knowledge. The project also serves as a test case in identifying challenges that still need to be resolved as well as opportunities for creating research partnerships. For instance, collaboration with ornithologists at the University of New Orleans provided a baseline bird count for the Greenway. Research effort by the Tulane University Department of Public Health measured existing levels of physical activity by residents of the corridor ,supplementing the design team’s efforts. These independent resources provided valuable baseline data against which to measure the performance of the design.However, inadequate crime statistics available for the Lafitte Corridor project will make it diff cult to assess the impact on the safety issues of improved recreational and open space opportunities created along the entire corridor.xi

This wide-ranging case study investigation represents a critical step in identifying future scenarios for maximizing the potential benef ts of research based practice. At the most basic level, practice of landscape architecture has always been in f uenced by the enduring works and words of thoughtful practitioners and scholars, such as Frederick Law Olmsted, Lawrence Halprin and Ian McHarg. Over the last twenty years, our expanding knowledge of natural systems, urban, abandoned and highly compromised landscapes as well as evolving human beliefs and values has resulted in the re-examination of our long held beliefs and practices, creating a whole new set of theories. An important example is the evolution of research and theories of ecology since publication of Design with Nature (1969)xii. The notions of stability and balance, adopted in this book, have been one of the most debated and contested criterions for def ning healthy ecosystems. More recent conceptions of eco-systems that include notions of resilience, regeneration, and disturbance, are just beginning to inform the work of some practitioners, and are re f ected in the works of V olker Grimm, Eric Schmidt and Christian Wissel; Stewart Pickett and Peter White;Christopher Fastie; and others.xiiiStaying informed about theoretical developments is a challenge that will require consistent investment for a systematic evaluation and application of evolving research as an integral part of practice. Leading practitioners,like Design Workshop, are well positioned to bring a greater level of specificity and scholarly protocols to testing research applications, a process that involves formulating clearly def ned hypotheses, testing them through action, documenting results, and identifying practical challenges as an on-going process necessary for translating the ideal into pragmatic applications.

Another practice issue revolves around the fact that landscape projects are at their lowest level of performance at the end of construction, and that they evolve in both expected and unexpected ways. Systematic long-term post-construction monitoring and evaluation can yield a wealth of data and knowledge that can be extremely bene f cial for the specif c project and to support future projects. Many of the well-researched and reasoned outcomes anticipated after the completion of the La f tte Greenway project will require a long-term monitoring system to track the project's true impact.

The application of performance measures requires extensive base-line data and long-term post-occupancy monitoring from multiple disciplines and through numerous discipline-specific protocols. These have not been an important part of traditional professional scopes of services and fee structures, and they require additional expertise and time to accomplish. Developing means for collecting baseline data and models for monitoring long-term post occupancy, including utilizing breakthroughs in environmental sensing technologies, is certainly an area for further research and is clearly a place for cooperation between those in practice and those in the academy. Similarly, advances in the study of neuroscience and the increasing ability to understand human behavior and physiological responses to spatial form and other environmental attributes of fer promising new areas of research for ways to create more desirable and predictable human experiences.

Lafitte Corridor and Greenway project represents a compelling model for the future direction of the increasingly research-based and multi-disciplinary practice of landscape architecture. The 2013 National American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA)Award of Excellence in the Analysis and Planning category and the 2012 ASLA Texas Chapter Honor Award in the Analysis and Planning category underscores the professional recognition for this project. Operating in a collaborative practice model, the growing practice at Design Workshop offers muchneeded opportunities for expanding scholarly inquiry and advancing the paradigm of research-based design and planning.

Notes:

i Donald A. Sch?n, The Ref l ective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York, New York: Basic Books, 1983.

ii http://www.lafoundation.org.

iii Sarah Shaw, New Gardens of the American West: Residential Landscapes of Design Workshop. New York,New York: Watson-Guptill Publications, 2003.

iv Design Workshop, Inc., Toward Legacy. Washington, DC: Grayson Publishing, 2007.

v Design Workshop, Inc., Garden Legacy. Denver, Colorado: Design Workshop, Inc., 2010.

vi Design Workshop, Inc., Landscapes of Enduring Quality: The Landscapes of Design Workshop. Shanghai,China: International New Landscapes, 2013.

vii John Lyle, "The alternating current of design process." Landscape Journal, Vol. 4(1), (1985).

viii Research on the relationship of community design to human well-being is the focus of social scientists,including: Lawrence Frank, Peter Engelke and Thomas Schmid, authors of Health and Community Design: The Impact of the Built Environment on Physical Activity, Washington, DC: Island Press, 2003; and Timothy Crowe and Diane Zahm, authors of "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design." Land Development, (Fall 1994).ix Oscar Newman, Defensible Space: Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. New York, New York: Macmillan Publishers, 1973.

x Peter Harnik and Ben Welle, “Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System.” The Trust for Public Land, (2009).

xi Kurt Culbertson and Mary Martinich, "A Holistic Approach to Sustainability: Lessons from the Laf i tte Greenway Project in New Orleans, Louisiana." Edinburgh Architecture Research, Vol. 33, (2013).

xii Ian McHarg, Design with Nature. New York, New York: American Museum of Natural History/Natural History Press, 1969.

xiii Recent conceptions of eco-systems that include notions of resilience, regeneration, and disturbance, are reflected in the works of: Volker Grimm, Eric Schmidt and Christian Wissel, "On the application of stability concepts in ecology." Ecological Modelling, Vol. 63, (1992); Steward T.A. Pickett and Peter S. White, Eds., The Ecology of Natural Disturbance of Natural Patch Dynamics. Waltham, Massachusetts: Academic Press, 1985;and Christopher Fastie, "Causes and Ecosystem Consequences of Multiple Pathways of Primary Succession at Glacier Bay, Alaska." Ecology, Vol. 76, (1995).

About the author:

As an educator and a practitioner, Baldev Lamba's body of research and creative work re f ects an integration of design and research with special emphasis on metrics and measures of sustainability. An Associate Professor of Landscape Architecture at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Lamba received the 2012 Excellence in Research and Creative W ork Award from the Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture(CELA)in recognition of his long-term excellence as a designer and an educator . The award-winning projects of Lamba Associates, Landscape Architects, include the First Ladies W ater Garden on the National Mall in Washington, DC, and the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society Pop-Up Garden in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,which was also selected for the of f cial United States presentation at the 13th International V enice Architecture Biennale in Venice, Italy.

圖8 (fig.8)CREDIT:DesignWorkshopTheproposeddevelopmentoftheLafitteGreenwaywilltransformthebarrenstretchoflandintoanecologicallyrich,sociallydiverse,andvisuallyevocativeenvironment.拉菲特綠道的開發(fā)方案將貧瘠的土地改造成一個生態(tài)結(jié)構(gòu)豐富、社會多元化、視覺上能喚起回憶的可持續(xù)發(fā)展區(qū)域。