LAF News Blog
Stay up to date on LAF!
LAF announces opportunities for sponsorship of its 28th Annual Benefit in Boston on November 15 during ASLA’s Annual Meeting & Expo. The Annual Benefit draws over 300 guests from the design, building, and sustainability industries.
Sponsors at the $5,000 level or higher who commit early will receive an invitation for the Board of Directors to an exclusive dinner reception in Washington, DC in May as well as a private reception the night before the Annual Benefit in Boston. These private events provide unique opportunities for sponsors to interact in a small-group setting with members of the LAF Board of Directors, who are leaders in practice, academia, and industry.
The LAF Board of Directors hosted this year’s Annual reception at the beautiful facility of Kornegay Design in Phoenix. Sponsors enjoyed live music and catered food provided by Kornegay Design. See photos from the memorable evening here.
What have this year’s sponsors said about supporting LAF’s Annual Benefit?
“The LAF event puts me in direct contact with the principals of many large firms and is a great bang for my buck!”
“The receptions are a great opportunity to network with leading landscape architects from around the country.”
“Supporting LAF was the best decision our company ever made!”
LAF’s 2012 Annual Benefit raised over $160,000 to support LAF’s research and scholarship programs. With your support, 2013 will be an even greater success! To take advantage of this special opportunity, download a Sponsor Registration Form or contact Matt Alcide at firstname.lastname@example.org or 202-331-7070 x13.
The 2012-2013 LAF Board of Directors began its term on September 28 at LAF’s Annual Board Meeting in Phoenix. Bill Main, Hon. ASLA of Landscape Forms took the reins as President, succeeding Lucinda Sanders, FASLA of OLIN, whose leadership was essential in helping the Foundation plan strategically for future growth. Jacinta McCann, FAILA of AECOM became President-Elect.
Nate Cormier, ASLA of SvR assumed a new role as Vice President of Communications with the four other officers continuing in their positions on the the leadership team:
- Vice President of Finance:
Mark Dawson, FASLA, Sasaki Associates
- Vice President of Development:
Gregg Sutton, ASLA, EDSA
- Vice President of Communication:
Nate Cormier, ASLA, SvR Design Company
- Vice President of Education:
Kristina Hill, PhD, Aff. ASLA, University of Virginia
- Vice President of Research:
Forster Ndubisi, PhD, ASLA, Texas A&M University
Kathy Garcia, FASLA of the City of Del Mar retired off the Board after five years of service, including a term as President in 2011 and two years as Vice President of Finance. Her legacy includes leading the organization during a time of significant restructuring and growth. Glenn Walters, ASLA of Design Workshop also left the Board after five years, and Jonathan Mueller, FASLA rotated off after twice serving in an Ex Officio capacity as an ASLA Representative.
Nine new Directors joined the LAF Board, bringing experience and insights from design firms, industry and academia. David Malda, LAF’s 2009 National Olmsted Scholar, was selected for the second of two recently created Director positions for past Olmsted Scholars. The Board also created a new Ex Officio position for the Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture (CELA) Vice President of Research, currently held by Ming-Han Li. Welcome to the new Board members:
- Paul Bambauer, Ironsmith, Inc
- Ignacio Bunster-Ossa, FASLA, Wallace Roberts & Todd
- Christopher Fannin, HOK Planning Group
- Adam Greenspan, ASLA, PWP Landscape Architecture
- Ming-Han Li, PhD PE, PLA, Texas A&M University
- Susan Hatchell, FASLA, Susan Hatchell Landscape Architecture
- David Malda, Gustafson Guthrie Nichol
- Allyson Mendenhall, PLA, Design Workshop
- Laura Solano, ASLA, Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates
Through their vision, leadership, passion, and active engagement, Board members are directly responsible for the health and impact of LAF and its programs. Thanks to all for your commitment to serve and contributions toward achieving LAF’s mission!
Ashley Brenden of Phoenix, Arizona has won the one-of-a-kind trip for two to New York City in LAF’s Fourth Annual Sustainable Destination Sweepstakes. Ashley’s name was selected from the 178 entrants whose donations helped raise nearly $12,000 to support LAF’s research and scholarship programs. The prize package features a day of private tours led by Michael Van Valkenburgh and staff to five MVVA-designed sustainable landscape projects: Jacob Javits Plaza, Teardrop Park, Hudson River Park (Segment 5), Union Square Park, and Brooklyn Bridge Park.
“I’m still in a bit of shock that I won this incredible trip to New York City — it is certainly one of the most amazing opportunities presented to me. I look forward to exploring the City, Central Park and also the work of one of our most talented modern-day landscape architects,” said Ashley who is a Site Designer at SmithGroupJJR in Phoenix and an MLA student at Arizona State University. “We plan on going in March to enjoy the wonderful spring weather and to celebrate graduating from the Master’s program — I can’t think of a more perfect way to celebrate joining the field!”
Ashley happened to be nearby in the ASLA EXPO Hall when the sweepstakes drawing took place on Sept 30 in Phoenix. She was brought to the LAF booth, where LAF Board members were onhand to announce the good news. “When I was told I won, I actually thought it was a joke! I thought all the cameras and people were just a prank or that maybe they wanted to ask me questions about why I donated. It took me about 5 minutes to register what the Board members had said.”
Ashley was one of a number of SmithGroupJJR employees who helped LAF by providing on-the-ground assistance and volunteer support for the LAF Annual Benefit and other events in Phoenix. She chose to donate because of the people she met through this experience. “After meeting all these generous and kind LAF staff and board members I knew that contributing to an organization that is doing so much to help the field was important.”
LAF truly appreciates the support of all who participated in the sweepstakes and sends a special thank you to Michael Van Valkenburg and Associates for providing the unique prize package. Stay tuned for information about our 2013 Sustainable Destination Sweepstakes — the location will be announced in February with registration beginning in June.
By Lee Streitz, 2012 University Olmsted Scholar
The renaissance of microbreweries is under way. In the last thirty years, there has been a 1700% increase in the number of independent breweries in the United States. Similar to when the number of wineries and vineyards increased dramatically in the late 1990s, independent brewery growth offers the profession of landscape architecture tremendous opportunities to shape these spaces to ensure that they too become sustainable and choice outdoor destinations.
Unlike wineries though, the growth in the number of independent breweries has not been paired with an increase in sales. This dichotomy means that more breweries are competing for a share of a shrinking market, causing the field to become more competitive.
Because of the increased competition, there appears to be a need for breweries to distinguish themselves from their competitors and build customer loyalty through positive environment- based memories. Research has demonstrated that flagship stores can be valuable tools in strengthening customer relationships and distinguishing one’s brand from competitors (Think of the flagship Apple and REI stores).
While traditional Bavarian biergartens are charming outdoor spaces, which are enjoyed by many, they do little to distinguish themselves from each other. If designed thoughtfully, breweries’ industrial locations could function well as pilgrimage flagship locations, offering a range of dynamic experiences that balance the needs of customers, the environment, and the industrial needs of a brewery.
But why are landscape architects particularly important in shaping brewery locations? Why not charge architects or interior designers with the industry makeover? The quick answer is water.
The brewing industry uses a substantial amount of water in their daily processes. While breweries vary widely in their water efficiency, when calculated liberally, a brewery may produce as much as ten pints of wastewater for every pint of beer. This wastewater has long been considered a nuisance by the brewing industry. Many local water municipalities charge high fees or outright reject brewery wastewater into their systems, as the total suspended solid (TSS) count of particulates may be too high for their system, or the pH levels and temperature may be outside of allowable standards. This means that many breweries have to treat their wastewater onsite through mechanical means prior to sending it down the drain.
With the use of innovative ideas by landscape architects, wastewater can be treated onsite, used to create habitat, and reclaimed to irrigate planted areas on the brewery site, bringing both interest and
sustainability to the space.
Prior to graduation in May, I completed a master’s report at the University of Arizona that examined the use of industrial locations as outdoor amenities for both the brewing industry and their patrons. My project specifically looked at a former gasworks plant in Berlin, Germany to examine its design potential as an industrial adapted reuse project into a brewery, beer garden, community amenity, and dynamic outdoor space. The report also examined the use of constructed wetlands as a means of onsite wastewater treatment that could also create wildlife habitat, and function as a community amenity.
After graduating from the University of Arizona in May 2012 Lee moved to San Francisco where he is working as a design associate for Carducci & Associates near Fisherman’s Wharf. Coincidentally, one of his first projects with the firm was working on the design of a brewery and beer garden associated with a Whole Foods in the Bay Area.
By Peter J. Ellery, 2012 University Olmsted Scholar
One of the most difficult tasks we face as professionals charged with shaping the environment is convincing our clients, and indeed the public at large, of thinking more sustainably. While this argument has ebbed and flowed in response to political and social conscience, it has been mostly moot in influencing any large-scale social change. This is in spite of the consequences now being seen in some areas of the world and scientific forecasts that paint an even bleaker future. So why is this sustainability argument highlighting our self-demise not working?
In response to this issue, art and architectural historian Dr. Rodhri Windsor-Liscombe, suggests, “The arguments for sustainability tend to be excessively technical or technocratic, preoccupied with instrumental or technological solutions, cast in cataclysmic narrative or disconnected from individual behaviour. Each provides opportunities for the average citizen to either detach themselves from the problems and potential solutions, or to expect others, be they corporations or governments, to correct the situation.” If we continue to frame this argument using strategies that emphasize cataclysmic or punishment-based “stick” scenarios to threaten us, is change likely?
We currently use a “pathogenic” or disease management approach when arguing for sustainability and changes to the general public’s behavior. This approach emphasizes the identification and treatment of the problem, along with the consequences we face should the problem continue unresolved. In contrast, a better approach might be to utilize a “salutogenic” perspective to promote sustainable choices and behavior change. This perspective emphasizes environmental choices and behaviors because of the inherent value they provide, rather than what they help us to avoid. Central to this approach is the framing of the sustainability argument so that it falls within the general public’s sense of coherence. This involves presenting the argument to the public in a way that is meaningful, manageable, and comprehensible to them.
For the sustainability argument to be meaningful, it has to allow the public to see the value in making these decisions. For example, rather than using scientific or economic concepts like carbon footprint, or carbon credits, that have little meaningful value to the general public, consider highlighting the positive rewards that result from sustainable choices. This could involve showing how a green roof helps businesses save money in terms of heating and cooling costs, and for some, this might be the right motivation needed to make this choice. However, the general public will also respond to rewards that are intrinsic to the environment as well. For example, the argument for a green roof or space around a building being dedicated to vegetation and trees only, becomes much more compelling if you emphasize the smell of the garden in spring, the view of the garden from overlooking office windows, and the opportunity for those working in nearby areas to have lunch and relax in a shaded, park setting.
Second, the ideas offered in sustainability arguments must be manageable. They have to fit within the public’s life patterns and daily routines. The public is unlikely to walk or ride a bicycle to work in locations where vehicular traffic is a safety issue, the weather is extreme in either heat or cold, or if the distance is excessive. For those required to wear a suit as part of their job, even providing shower and changing facilities at work may not be enough if they do not have the extra time needed for the commute or to bathe and dress in their daily routine. Emphasizing strategies and design features that address these concerns, and yet still fit within the public’s existing lifestyle is essential to successfully arguing for sustainable behaviors.
Finally, we have to consider what the public finds comprehensible to their way of life. For example, it is not that the public is against the idea of wind powered energy systems. As Steffen Danborg of the Danish Wind Industry Association explains, the public in general is very supportive of wind-powered energy. The concern, in many cases, lies in the locating of windmills and windmill farms that generate this energy. It is simply difficult for some people to accept such an intrusive addition to their current understanding of the environment in which they live. As a result, arguments like noise, electro-magnetic interference, and visual eyesore (either real or perceived) are used in the “not in my backyard” counter arguments, which often lead to legal action and delays in wind power development. Interestingly, research shows public opinion changes in a positive and accepting direction, once people become acclimated to the presence of the wind turbines. The moral here is that our sustainability arguments need to consider the amount of change that those involved will need to accommodate (again, either real or perceived), and either introduce the change slowly so that acclimation can occur, or use a less intrusive approach so that change occurs within parameters of our understanding of the world in which we live.
The essential point being made here is that we need to change the way in which the case for sustainable development is presented. It is time to acknowledge that the current cataclysmic threat or “stick” approach to the sustainability argument has provided little motivation for change in public behavior, and instead, more meaningful, manageable and comprehensible strategies are necessary to get this sustainability “mule” moving in the right direction.
Peter Ellery is in his final year of a Master of Landscape Architecture degree at Ball State University. His thesis explores the expansion of educational opportunities through environmental design and looks at how an effectively landscaped environment can both enhance and extend the primary school curriculum of a Building Tomorrow Foundation Primary School in rural Uganda.