Between Landschaft and Landskip: Examining the Landscape Urbanism Discourse Through Post-Infrastructural Open Space Projects in

by

Eric Van Dreason

Bachelor of Science Emerson College, 2011

SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF URBAN STUDIES AND PLANNING IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER IN CITY PLANNING

AT THE

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

JUNE 2018

© 2018 Eric Van Dreason. All rights reserved.

The author hereby grants to MIT permissions to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created.

Signature of Author ...... Department of Urban Studies and Planning May 24, 2018

Certified by ...... Marie Law Adams Lecturer of and Planning Thesis Supervisor

Accepted by ...... Professor of the Practice, Ceasar McDowell Chair, MCP Committee Department of Urban Studies and Planning

Between Landschaft and Landskip: Examining the Landscape Urbanism Discourse Through Post-Infrastructural Open Space Projects in Berlin

by

Eric Van Dreason

Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 24, 2018 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master in City Planning

ABSTRACT

This research examines how post-infrastructural open space has been approached in contemporary design practice using three urban parks in Berlin as sites for investigation: , Park am Gleisdreieck, and Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände. These sites are analyzed in juxtaposition with the discourse around “landscape urbanism,” as these projects’ timelines are dispersed across the beginning, rise, and plateau of that movement. First, I have tracked how landscape urbanism has been discussed in the literature since its coinage — what terms are used most frequently within the discourse and in what manner, which projects are most often called upon to illustrate central themes, and what theoretical building blocks are used in support of the concept. I then pull out specific themes prevalent in the literature that help to construct a method for analyzing the three aforementioned open spaces: how the historically dichotomized conceptions of “urban” and “nature” are approached in each space by examining edge conditions in relation to their surrounding urban fabric, how time and process are considered in each site’s staging of new programmatic interventions, and how the sites incorporate elements of previous infrastructural use, including relics and ruins. This section contains a series of drawings, diagrams, and annotated photographs illustrating this analysis, along with experiential observations and timelines describing the development process in each site’s transformation from infrastructure to open space. The critique explores how the theoretical discourse around landscape urbanism has engaged built projects and why such an examination is critical as the larger discipline continues to evolve and reorient.

Thesis Supervisor: Marie Law Adams

Title: Lecturer in Urban Design and Planning Between Landschaft and Landskip:

Examining the Landscape Urbanism Discourse Through Post-Infrastructural Open Space Projects in Berlin

4 Acknowledgements

A great debt is owed to the academics and practitioners referenced, even in passing, in this text; the careful and considered examination of the ideas in your work prompted me to challenge and interrogate ideas of my own. A greater debt is owed to my colleagues and faculty I have learned from here at MIT for not merely introducing me to a great number of these authors, but for challenging me to critically engage with the work and to refine my point of view. You all have helped me to become a more confident student and individual.

To Lauren Jacobi, your thoughtful guidance and critique has been exceptionally helpful to me in steering this work towards a more effective whole. I am so appreciative of your willingness to share your time and energy to help make the project stronger.

To Marie Law Adams, words cannot express how grateful I am to have had the chance to learn from you over the last two years. Thank you for your patience, your kindness, and for being endlessly selfless in sharing every ounce of time and wisdom you have granted me.

To my friends and especially my family, the support of whom I could not have done this without, the greatest thanks and love is owed.

5 Table of Contents

1. Introduction: Impetus, Questions, Methodology 7 Impetus 7 Research Questions 9 Methodology 10

2. Context: Meanings in German Landscape 14 Landschaft and Landskip 14 The German Forest: Early Conceptions of Nature, Modernity, and Identity 15 The City in the City: Ungers & Koolhaas 17

3. Literature: Landscape Urbanism 18 What is Landscape Urbanism? 18 Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Practice 19 Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape 24 The Landscape Urbanism Reader 27 Landscape as Urbanism: A General Theory 31 Extending Ian Thompson’s Ten Tenets 34 The Landscape Urbanism Discourse: In Summary 41

4. Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände 44 Development Timeline 45 Introduction 46 Discussion: Edge, Program, Relic 46 Site Synthesis 51 Diagrams 54

5. Tempelhofer Feld 55 Development Timeline 56 Introduction 57 Discussion: Edge, Program, Relic 58 Site Synthesis 62 Diagrams 64

6. Park am Gleisdreieck 65 Development Timeline 66 Introduction 67 Discussion: Edge, Program, Relic 68 Site Synthesis 73 Diagrams 76

7. Conclusion 78 Landscape Urbanism: What’s Left Unrecovered? 78 What’s Been Learned 79

Bibliography 82

6 Introduction “action and speech could be recorded Public open spaces in urban areas are and transformed into stories, where every often the spaces which contain the lowest citizen could be a witness and thereby barriers to entry across the city, particularly a potential narrator,” (d’Entreves 2016) for those fortunate enough to live in thus establishing a space of “organized relatively close proximity. Increasingly, remembrance.” (d’Entreves 2016) the urban dweller’s presence in the world is justified through transaction and While Arendt’s action has the potential commodity; we earn the space we occupy to arise regardless of the material through monetary means. Public open considerations of the spaces people space provides an example of one of the inhabit, we know that space is both last remaining places in the city where conditioned by those who occupy it and an expectation of a purchase does not that a given space can, in turn, act as a forcibly precede the occupation of space. conditioning force upon those who find Therefore, there is great potential for these themselves within it. As Henri Lefebvre spaces to serve the important function of and others after have argued, space is not holding and constituting the formation of a merely a neutral container, but is socially certain kind of community. constructed. (Lefebvre 1991) Given that people themselves are instrumental in In The Human Condition, Hannah Arendt constructing space, one might argue that describes her theory of action; she defines the design of public space can have an action as “the only activity that goes effect on the ways in which action may on directly between men without the arise in it. A careful line must be drawn, intermediary of things or matter,” which then, to distinguish between what Lefebvre “corresponds to the human condition of calls “the illusion of transparency,” a space plurality.” (Arendt 1958, 7) Action, she lending “miraculous quality to thought, states, is primarily symbolic in character, becoming incarnate by means of a design as “the web of human relationships is (in both senses of the word)” (Lefebvre sustained by communicative interaction.” 1991, 26-27) and the design which might So, to act is to speak; to share, to learn, to lend clarity to socio-cultural context. In communicate. Arendt specifically makes Lefebvre’s conception of designed space, use of the metaphor of the Greek polis to the mediator that is design produces a describe what she refers to as the “space false transparency, a filmic overlay that of appearance,” where, for example, “I disguises the degree to which social appear to others as others appear to me, space is an active conditioning agent where men exist not merely like other rather than innocent, passive vacancy. living or inanimate things…” (Arendt 1958, Naturally, a public space has the power to 198) She describes the Greek polis as a attract people to it simply through good, place that established a framework where engaging design by making it transform

7 into a destination, somewhere to go, see, largely been accumulated in the name of and experience for those both distant and the “common good,” the designed post- near. But a public space also has the power infrastructural space has the potential to to prompt a deeper collective recalling remind anyone who finds themselves within of past action that has transpired there. it that its current existence as a place of Even, as Arendt suggests, “organized leisure was made possible by its former remembrance” (d’Entreves 2016) happens existence as one of labor, movement, and through the stories we tell, a well- even violence. designed, “constructed” environment has the ability to provoke the recounting of The discourse around “landscape stories that may not be our own but are urbanism” has provided a provocative meaningful to our identity, both collectively way of understanding the potentials for and as individuals. designed landscapes in the contemporary context, informing both theory and Of the various forms that public open practice and perhaps contributing to a shift space can take, the reclamation of space in how the larger discipline of landscape that has formerly held transportation is perceived by practitioners. infrastructure carries a significant amount of Landscape urbanism, an idea born in the cultural value. Most obviously, infrastructure early- to mid-1990s, suggests the ways is a key feature of the industrial age, landscape can (and in the opinion of its facilitating the movement of material many adherents, should) supplant the and goods that provided for the massive more traditional form-giving disciplines amounts of wealth (and by extension, of architecture, urban design, and urban geo-political power) accumulated by a planning and dictate that it “become the select handful of Western nation-states. basic building block of contemporary Everyday labor, human capital, made that urbanism.” (Waldheim 2006c) Whether accumulation possible. Post-infrastructural intentional or not, the previous two spaces are hence inherently political, and decades of practice therefore lend themselves well to the kind has gravitated towards many of the of gathering Arendt describes because principles embedded in the landscape of the history embedded in them. People urbanism idea. Given that the discourse are drawn to spaces with rich histories; we seems to now exist decidedly in the past have an innate desire to understand the tense, (Duany 2010) the current moment past and how we relate to it, especially provides an opportune time to dissect how when it’s taught to us through physical the theory within the discourse translates space, perhaps because history feels most to the realities of built projects from an accessible when we feel like we can reach objective standpoint. Determining how out and touch it. Even for those who might the practice has been influenced by the suggest that the wealth of nations has discourse and vice versa feels essential to

8 informing landscape architecture’s future formulated requires a closer look at the evolvement and direction as a discipline full discourse as well as the projects that and its relation to the other building arts. incorporate some the discourses’ central tenets. Arendt is not referenced by those who partake in the discussion of landscape From here, two questions emerge: urbanism, but philosophical sources of inspiration come from a varied pool How do the central tenets that are regardless, including works by Gilles considered ingrained in the landscape Deleuze and Felix Guattari (rhizomatic urbanism idea manifest across built “image of thought”), Michel Foucault examples of contemporary projects for (governmental rationality), Henri Lefebvre public open space? (the production of space), David Harvey (accumulation by dispossession), What might these findings suggest in terms Bruno Latour (actor-network), Jacques of how future theoretical discourse evolves Derrida (deconstruction), and Jürgen within the greater discipline of landscape Habermas (communicative action). These architecture, particularly in its intersections philosophical ideas are primarily used to with ? advance the agenda of the landscape urbanist (one might argue to varying degrees of success) and to suggest the tools at the landscape urbanist’s disposal. However, only some corroborate the necessity of landscape serving as public space and expound upon the ways it is produced, upheld, and threatened. In the landscape urbanist discourse, landscapes are described as “social and political agents;” (Mostafavi 2003) landscape purportedly possesses the ability to enact models of urbanism “that are open to, and encourage, participation by all citizens”; (Mostafavi 2003) and also has the potential to “stage the ground” for uncertain futures, new conditions, and relational structuring. (Marot 1999) Whether these are merely ideas that express desire for landscape’s potential or can be evidenced in the way contemporary projects have been

9 Methodology industrial sites considered symbolic and valued as such in terms of their status as 1. A selection of sites based a pre-defined former sites of labor (Langhorst 2014), set of criteria: sites of hard infrastructure should be regarded. This is alluded to in the work of A conscious decision was made to select Manuel Castells beginning in the late 1980s one element present within each potential and Saskia Sassen today, (Castells 2003; site that would be representative of the Sassen 2006) but their primary concerns challenges contemporary practitioners face are around anticipating and articulating today, as well as a symptom of urbanization the local impacts of politico-economic that is often considered more broadly alignments in the movement of global within the larger literature of planning and capital across trans-national boundaries on landscape: contemporary urban space.

The choice to focus on post-infrastructural 1a. Based in one urban area space was made for three reasons. One, the cultural meaning and significance Berlin was chosen as the sole city within of these spaces is not something that is which cases would be selected for a few typically dissected analytically as much specific reasons. as other, more “contested” spaces of urban transformation, such as the First, the decision to choose only one city decommissioning of bases or in which cases would be compared was the vacant spaces that crop up following both for practical and analytical reasons. a city’s economic downturn (Detroit). Analytically, comparing across different Modern infrastructure has not only shaped urban contexts, rife with the social, cultural, the contemporary city in numerous ways, political, and economic complexity held but has also been a key driver in the within a given metropolitan area, would accumulation of wealth that has enabled prove difficult to analyze. Therefore, this countries in the Western world to maintain thesis’s findings are not meant to apply political and economic dominance over broadly across all urban/metro areas. other states and territories that have not Rather, this is intended to be a specific yet industrialized or done so at a slower look into one urban area where open space clip. On a more local scale, the sites projects of the nature described here have of these infrastructures are important been common over the last twenty years. not simply because of the materials Readers can choose to see this text as a they transported, but the people who starting point in beginning to consider how constructed and maintained their presence other urban areas might be impacted by for the larger part of the twentieth century. the design literature discussed here and the Though it is common to see defunct type of projects it uses to demonstrate its

10 main points, as these projects will continue from the ideas propagated by landscape even after the literature’s influence has urbanism, allowing for as objective an waned entirely. approach as possible.

More practically speaking, this thesis 2. Site visits, photography, field notes and was devised and executed under a short sketches of site conditions and observed timeline and with a limited amount of socio-spatial dynamics resources. Given these constraints and the strong desire to discuss only sites Photography is represented within this experienced first-hand, the thesis focuses thesis as a method towards capturing the upon three projects in one urban area. experiential qualities of the sites studied. The justification for this method comes in Given that post-infrastructural space part from scholars of the School was determined as a criterion by which like Walter Benjamin (see quotation, page sites would be selected, the number of 12). cities with a sampling of designed post- infrastructural projects to choose from was 3. Through the close reading and fairly limited. analysis of four chosen “canonical” texts within what’s considered to be part of In addition, taking into consideration or influential to the landscape urbanism the literature’s focus areas and projects discourse, there are two outcomes typically referenced, a conscious effort was anticipated: made to avoid cities that appear muse-like to the most prominent landscape urbanists, Distillation of the discourse into thematic including places like Detroit, , and groupings, each of which will be assessed . for applicability toward the aforementioned sites selected for analysis. Lastly, while landscape urbanism’s influence has been large, some argue it remains an A number of scholars have reference insufficiently interrogated set of ideas. landscape urbanism’s applicability to Therefore, an effort was made to pair North America but express reservations analysis of the discourse with a place where when applying its thinking elsewhere. not only built projects enshrining its core Is landscape urbanism purely a North tenets existed, but also a place where a American phenomenon? In 2016, Waldheim rich, pluralistic analysis of the city’s social, admits that “the early promise of landscape cultural, and political context could be urbanist discourse was buoyed by built threaded together from scholars across the work in western Europe.” (Waldheim 2016, social sciences. This would theoretically 55) Yet many still perceive the landscape enable a separation of a city’s rich history urbanist discourse as aimed at (and thereby

11 only applicable to) a North American Architecture Department at Harvard’s context. (Thompson 2012; Vicenzotti 2017) Graduate School of Design in 2009, a position he held upon the release of Notes on scope: Why these texts? Landscape as Urbanism in 2016, his own set of essays devoted entirely to furthering the A note on how those texts were chosen: discourse’s reach and cementing its core These texts were chosen based on an ideals. Notably, he has been succeeded assessment of the survey of literature as Chair of the Department of Landscape pertaining to topics considered within the Architecture at the Harvard Graduate discourse of “landscape urbanism.” Factors School of Design by Anita Berrizbeita, considered in the narrowing down of the though he still retains his position as a breadth of work to these four texts, which faculty member there. I would argue as the four most seminal to the discourse, include the author or editor’s Mohsen Mostafavi, the person responsible demonstrated attachment to the material for appointing Waldheim Chair as Harvard’s over the long term. This is considered in current Dean of the Graduate School of terms of publication / scholarly output as Design (GSD), is another central figure to well as influence within respective schools the discourse. Before becoming Dean, of thought as measured by symposia or Mostafavi trained at the Architectural exhibition curation and the positioning of Association School of Architecture in academic curricula. From this, three figures London (AA), where he returned as head emerge: from 1995 to 2004. There, he co-founded with Ciro Najle the AA’s Department Charles Waldheim, who officially coined of Landscape Urbanism, going on to the term in 1997, has arguably been most publish under the school’s moniker the invested in the development of the idea title Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for for two decades. His displacement of the Machinic Landscape. For Mostafavi, from its own academic developing the idea of landscape urbanism foothold at Harvard is documented in is consistent with previous work which Andres Duany’s infamous recounting centered around how the temporal, of the 2009 “Ecological Urbanism” cultural, and social qualities of the built conference hosted there. (Duany 2010) environment should inform how designers Waldheim edited a collection of essays approach these disciplines, as evidenced published in 2006, the Landscape Urbanism by the theses of his other publications, Reader, widely considered to have made 1993’s On Weathering and 2002’s Surface a substantial impact on the “building Architecture. arts” disciplines (see Thompson 2012, Sordi 2015, Vicenzotti 2017). Waldheim Finally, James Corner has been highly eventually became Chair of the Landscape influential in the development of the

12 ideals that landscape urbanism is founded 5. Synthesis: given what is learned by upon. Both in Mostafavi and Waldheim’s analyzing the physical characteristics of the separate anthologies, Corner not only acts sites examined, along with their cultural as a central contributor, but his work in context and the temporal considerations Recovering Landscape, published before inherent in their development, how do both in 1999, serves as an intellectual these projects exemplify or break with template for how the many ideas landscape the various arguments made within the urbanism is concerned with can work in discourse of landscape urbanism? concert. Corner orchestrated conferences in the early 1990s after graduating from the University of Pennsylvania with a degree in Landscape Architecture in 1986 and receiving a position on the faculty there two years later. These conference events served as the foundation for his later text, “By close-ups of the things around us, by planting the seed of an idea amongst focusing on hidden details of familiar colleagues in the field and accomplishing objects, by exploring commonplace the networking needed to catalyze the milieus under the ingenious guidance discourse’s momentum thereafter. Corner of the camera, the film, on the one became Chair of the Department of hand, extends our comprehension of Landscape Architecture at the University the nessities which rule our lives; on of Pennsylvania in 2000, and his firm the other hand, it manages to assure James Corner Field Operations (initially us of an immense and unexpected established in collaboration with architect field of action. Our taverns and our Stan Allen simply as “Field Operations”) is metropolitan streets, our offices and responsible for a keystone contemporary furnished rooms, our railroad stations project both for landscape urbanism and and our factories appeared to have us for the building arts in general: The High locked up hopelessly. Then came the Line, which opened in in film and burst this prisonworld asunder 2009. by the dynamite of the tenth of a second, so that now, in the midst of its 4. A more thorough analysis of each site far-flung ruins and debris, we calmly and and their relationship to one another adventurously go traveling. through a set of drawings, some of which are presented here. This is based not only on the concepts of landscape urbanism Walter Benjamin, 1968 that apply to each site but also how each Art in the Age of Mechanical site relates to one another. Reproduction, p. 236-7

13 Chapter 2: Landschaft from another, but the scenic Meanings in German Landscape aspects that are now so closely associated with landscape were not in any sense To provide context for the sites analyzed primary to the meaning of the German in this thesis, a selection of three critical concept and its cognates elsewhere in historical moments, which intersect northwestern Europe.” (Cosgrove 2004, 61) landscape conception and practice with the development and history of Cosgrove discusses “landscape’s authority” and Berlin, are roughly sketched out here derived from what Stephens Daniels as relational vignettes. First, discussion of refers to as its “duplicity,” (Daniels in the etymological origins of “landscape;” Cosgrove 2004, 68) or “its capacity to second, meanings of the German forest veil historically specific social relations around the turn of the twentieth century; behind the smooth and often aesthetic and third, the post-war fascination with appearance of ‘nature.’…Landscape acts to Berlin by the larger design culture, ‘naturalize’ what is deeply cultural.” This, specifically within the building arts, with at least partially, is identified by Corner particular attention paid to Rem Koolhaas in 1999’s Recovering Landscape, serving Green and O.M. Ungers’ concept for a as the project’s inspiration. In a similar Archipelago in . discussion of the difference between landschaft and the Old English landskip, LANDSCHAFT AND LANDSKIP Corner argues that the designer’s role is not merely to project an image, but to In a work from 2004, Denis Cosgrove, project an idea through imaging activities: a contributor to James Corner’s earlier “While theorists and historians focus on Recovering Landscape (1999), focuses on the object or the idea, designers focus on the geographical and historical disciplines’ the activities of creativity, with the ‘doing’ connection to landscape through the and with the often bewildering effects of German landschaft. Cosgrove, relying on bodying forth things neither foreseen nor the work of Kenneth Olwig, describes predetermined.” (Corner 1999a, 160) This landschaft as having meaning at different difference extends to (or is derived from) scales, but functioning as a polity rather landschaft and landskip; while landskip than a territory of a certain size. (Cosgrove concerns the process of image-making, 2004) These polities were defined by landschaft concerns a deeper “formation custom and culture rather than the physical of synesthetic, cognitive images” which qualities of the land which they occupied. “forge a collective sense of place and Eventually, however, the word “landscape” relationship evolved through work.” emerged as tied specifically to scenery. “It (Corner 1999a, 161) The “work” Corner is logical that over time, the combination is referencing here stems from how he of community, custom, and territory would defines landschaft, as an “occupied milieu, give rise to visible distinction of one

14 the effects and significance of which accrue enshrined symbol for “Germandom,” and through tactility, use, and engagement argues the many sets of actors attempting over time.” (Corner 1999a, 154) This ties to mobilize it for their own ends commonly back with Cosgrove’s use of the word sought to use the forest to “adapt to an polity, as forged collectively through industrializing and urbanizing society;” utilitarian demands. Thus, for Corner in this varied group included “landowners, his early work, landschaft represents the hunters, timber-producers, peasant-rights ideal that has been lost, an ideal he wishes activists, hikers, charitable organizations, to “recover.” “Is it possible to realign the and state officials.” (Wilson 2016, 5) landscape architectural project toward the Additionally, Wilson points out that both productive and participatory phenomena of the nation and the landscape are human the everyday, working landscape?... neither constructions; he cites Anthony Smith, who to agrarian existence nor to functionalist has made the case that landscapes play an practices but rather to emphasize the important part in the imagination of the experiential intimacies of engagement, nation, with communities deriving meaning participation, and use over time, and to from the space that surrounds them, tying place geometrical and formal concerns in their fates to the physical land as they the service of human economy.” (Corner contribute to the construction of a national 1999a, 158) identity. (Wilson 2016) This ideological combination, Wilson points out, was made important by the nineteenth century THE GERMAN FOREST: EARLY CONCEPTIONS scholars who sought to craft a German OF NATURE, MODERNITY, AND IDENTITY historiography. The German forest, thus, is a “modern invention…a product of the era In Jeffrey K. Wilson’s book entitled The of nation states.” (Wilson 2016, 11) German Forest: Nature, Identity, and the Contestation of a National Symbol, 1871- Wilson relies on two cultural geographers 1914, Wilson challenges the dominant to drive home the impetus for his own interpretation that German connections to project: W.T.J Mitchell and Raymond nature were based in agrarian romanticism Williams, both of whom have also rather than efforts at modernization. been cited by the landscape urbanists. (Wilson 2016) The all-encompassing Mitchell discusses the cultural power of “German forest” is referenced time and landscapes, insisting we not focus on time again since Reformation and is used what landscape “is” or “means” but how by authors discussing everything from it works as a cultural practice. (Mitchell the firs on the Alps, copses of beech in Wilson 2016, 10) Williams echoes this trees in the Baltic, to the pines of Eastern point, but sharpens it in The Country . (Wilson 2016, 3) Wilson outlines and the City: “It is possible and useful to the reasons why the forest became an trace the internal histories of landscape

15 painting, and landscape writing, landscape island that had become Western Berlin, a gardening and landscape architecture, but political enclave with an incomplete urban in any final analysis we must relate these fabric, a shrinking population, and a war- histories to the common history of a land torn quality. (Ryan 2017, 109) Out of the and its society.” (Williams in Wilson 2016, workshop came a project called “The City 10) Williams argues that by turning our in the City: Berlin, a Green Archipelago,” attention away from the few prominent which proposed a Berlin composed of a individuals who enforce a certain history of “federation of urban entities with different ideas to construct a dominant narrative and structures, developed in a deliberately towards the “sentiments and activities of antithetic manner.” (Ryan 2017, 109) These those at the local level,” (Wilson 2016, 10) architectural islands applied consistently an image of the land comes into focus that across the landscape but remained distinct is otherwise less easy to locate historically. from one another typologically – whether based on works from early modernism or based on previous settlement patterns was THE CITY IN THE CITY: UNGERS & a matter of debate between Ungers and KOOLHAAS Koolhaas.

“In fact, in narrowly architectural terms, In 2017’s The Largest Art, Brent Ryan the Wall was not an object but an argues that the project’s power is also its erasure, a freshly created absence. For downfall. That the architectural content me, it was a first demonstration of the did not matter, Ryan argues, meant the capacity of the void – of nothingness project could be exploratory for Koolhaas – to ‘function’ with more efficiency, and that a certain flexibility was baked subtlety, and flexibility than any object into the concept. However, the scheme you could imagine in its place. It was a showed weakness at the urban scale; warning that – in architecture – absence by “isolating discrete chunks of the city would always win a contest with fabric and placing them into building- presence.” like entities subject to architectural

- Rem Koolhaas control” the concept does not constitute “Field Trip: A(A) Memoir,” in S,M,L,XL a “beautiful, ordered, or comprehensible urban fabric.” (Ryan 2017, 110) Ultimately, The “problem” of a post-war Berlin argues Ryan, the project did not seem provided Koolhaas with an ideological interested “in making their architectural playground upon which to play out ideas assemblages cohere into something more centered on architecture, landscape, than a collection of parts…the archipelago and urbanism in the 1970s. With Oswald failed to recognize that pluralism in urban Mathias Ungers, Koolhaas endeavored on a design could transcend an assemblage of workshop in 1977 aimed at addressing the monuments.”

16 The Green Archipelago serves as foreshadowing for some of the formalist tendencies masked by concepts which purport a certain flexibility in their spatial or processual organization within the landscape urbanist discourse. Koolhaas, perhaps the architect most repeatedly referenced by the landscape urbanists, evidences a desire to organize and remediate the ravaged landscape through formal design intervention at the urban scale. The conditions of the war “staged the ground” for the proposal of this sort of intervention, much like certain landscape urbanists point to Detroit and argue for landscape interventions there to serve a remediating role against the exploitative effects riven by Fordist modes of production and extraction. This perhaps misses what both Wilson uncovers in challenging the relationship between the symbol of the German forest and country’s national identity, and the landschaft Corner seeks to recover in his initial essay in 1999. From these three pieces, one can deduce that the specificities embedded in local culture not only richly informs theories of place, but that design’s greater aim must corroborate such theories in seeking to recover the “productive and participatory phenomena of the everyday, working landscape.”

17 Chapter 3: its built form, and not simply ecological Examining the Landscape Urbanism and infrastructural exceptions to its Discourse architectonic structure.” (Waldheim 2016, 4) And in terms of what this shift in focus WHAT IS LANDSCAPE URBANISM? might do for the landscape architect’s

knowledge, Waldheim says landscape The following section endeavors to outline urbanism “Allows a more synthetic how it has been defined by the authors understanding of the shape of the city, who reference it, beginning with he who understood in relation to its performance coined the term himself: Charles Waldheim. in social, ecological, and economic terms.” Waldheim, who has perhaps had the most (Waldheim 2016, 4) at stake in the term’s development over These suggestions are echoed amongst time, has always maintained landscape landscape urbanism’s adherents, as well, urbanism as “a theory for thinking the though perhaps to a less vociferous degree city through the medium of landscape.” than by Waldheim himself. Stan Allen, in (Waldheim 2016, i) In 2006, he remarks 2001, was an early adopter of the concept, something similar, with the claim that borrowing language from Waldheim to “For many, across a range of disciplines, claim that “Increasingly, landscape is landscape has become both the lens emerging as a model for urbanism.” (Allen through which the contemporary city is in Waldheim 2016, 13) In his essay in 2003’s represented and the medium through Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the which it is constructed.” (Waldheim 2006c, Machinic Landscape, Christopher Hight 11) This is reinforced again in his 2016 suggests that landscape urbanism requires book’s opening chapter: “Since the turn of “a type of ethos… suggest[ing] neither a the century landscape has been claimed new formalism nor a renewed emphasis as a model for contemporary urbanism,” on landscape in the city; not a theory of following that claim with another design, but promises to innovate at the suggesting this has led to the discipline’s level of design practice.” (Hight 2003, “intellectual and cultural renewal.” 23) Kelly Shannon agrees, citing Hight in (Waldheim 2016, 14) Waldheim argues her Landscape Urbanism Reader essay that the grand renewal for the discipline (Shannon 2006a, 146) while in another entry has implications for the practitioner as in the Landscape Urbanism Reader, Linda well, stating “the potential for landscape Pollak states that “Landscape urbanism as a medium and model for the city as has the potential to engage architecture a collective spatial project… In its most in a way that urban design and landscape ambitious formulation, this suggests the do not, by challenging architectural potentials for the landscape architect conventions of closure and control, which as urbanist of our age…assum[ing] implicitly disavow knowledge of the various responsibility for the shape of the city,

18 incommensurable dimensions of urban as “a speculative thickening of the world of reality.” (Pollak 2006, 177) Christophe Girot possibilities.” (Corner 2006, 21) echoes the break with past attempts at ordering the built environment, beginning The use of thickening here is interesting his essay by starting that landscape as it comes from anthropological and urbanism is “the reactive child of all the sociological methods used to understand teachings of our rationalist, functionalist, human behavior. Clifford Geertz described and positivist forefathers.” (Girot 2006, the practice of thick description “Believing, 89) Despite offering differing potentials with Max Weber, that man is an animal depending upon who is defining the term, suspended in webs of significance he landscape urbanism is often described himself has spun, I take culture to be as an innovation, either in terms of its those webs, and the analysis of it to be reconceptualization of former models therefore not an experimental science in of city formation or its usefulness in search of law but an interpretive one in application to design practice. This is search of meaning. It is explication I am particularly evident in how each author after, construing social expressions on their seeks to distance it from the disciplines it surface enigmatical.” (1973, 5) If landscape was born out of. urbanism, as a discourse or practice, is the medium by which Corner’s imagined Even Corner, certainly an originator of the “speculative thickening” of possibilities discourse in some respects even if he was is indeed in the vein of Geertz’ definition, not the first to use the term, has defined it then this might suggest Corner sees the similarly over its life in the discourse. In the discourse principally aimed at a cultural introduction to his 1999 book, Recovering shift. Whether Corner seeks to define Landscape as a Critical Cultural Practice, landscape urbanism in terms of its influence he states, “Because of its bigness, in on constructed, engineered landscapes both scale and scope, landscape serves at the hands of the designer (landscape as metaphor for inclusive multiplicity and urbanist) or on its larger influence on pluralism – synthetic ‘overview’ enabling reality and the imaginary, with landscape differences to play out.” (Corner 1999c, 2) serving as a “cultural way of seeing,” In 2003’s Landscape Urbanism: A Manual (Corner 1999c, x) is explored in the for the Machinic Landscape, he also following summaries of the seminal texts of agrees with Hight, suggesting, “Landscape landscape urbanism. urbanism is more than a singular image or style: it is an ethos, an attitude, a way Recovering Landscape: Essays in of thinking and acting.” (Corner 2003, Contemporary Practice 58) Later still, in his essay for the 2006 Landscape Urbanism Reader, “Terra In 1999, James Corner published Fluxus,” he describes landscape urbanism Recovering Landscape: Essays in

19 Contemporary Practice through Princeton look to for inspiration? Despite expressed Architectural Press as the culmination concern for the restitution of landscape’s of various symposia and conferences cultural dimension, Corner skips over that had taken place over the previous the radical landscape activists of the decade. As the book’s editor, he introduces 1960s and the landform art movement the text in the first of two of his own of the 1970s in favor of five young post- contributions, “Recovering Landscape modern architects whom characterized the as a Critical Cultural Practice.” In it, he discipline’s star-power in the 1980s. He provides the text’s raison d’être, stating compliments Zaha Hadid’s deconstructivist he seeks to recover landscape both in drawing style, containing “imploded terms of “recollection” and “invention,” fragments of building matter settling or alternatively the “landscape idea” and into immense hillsides and regionally “landscape agency,” respectively (Corner scaled infrastructures.” (Corner 1999c, 1999c, 4-5) Corner’s focus is undoubtedly 16–17) Rem Koolhaas, with OMA, is said situated upon the design and construction to consider the synthesis of “building, of landscapes, but also their cultural value. landscape, and region” in “every project.” He asserts the landscape architect’s role (Corner 1999c, 17) Peter Eisenman, often is not merely meant to reflect modern in collaboration with Laurie Olin, is noted culture, but to shape it. Most importantly, for his “folded, single-surface ground while Corner pays homage to the planes.” (Corner 1999c, 17) Lastly, Bernard “naturalistic” and “phenomenological” Tschumi’s Parc de la Villette is heralded for experience designed landscapes have “reversing the traditional role of nature in engendered in the past, he states its the city, bringing the density, congestion, “full efficacy is extended to that of a and richness of the city to the park.” synthetic and strategic art form, one (Corner 1999c, 17) that aligns diverse and competing forces (social constituencies, political desires, With this, Corner has established a new ecological processes, program demands, frame with which to view and assess etc.) into newly liberating and interactive landscape anew, with a set of precedents alliances.” (Corner 1999c, 2) He blames a taken largely from a different discipline, combination of nostalgia and consumerism thereby establishing architecture’s claim for landscape practice’s complacent over the emergent reformulation of satisfaction with the simple preservation landscape. The book then sets out on of space rather than pursuing execution its three established trajectories (“Part of visionary, innovative projects. (Corner One: Reclaiming Place and Time,” “Part 1999c, 2) Two: Constructing and Representing Landscape,” and “Part Three: Urbanizing Where can those seeking to engage with Landscape”), but the essays are more Corner’s idealized landscape practice easily divided in terms of how Corner

20 1997

waldheim coins the term 1999 2003 ‘landscape urbanism’ treib nature recalled

marot the reclaiming of sites

girot four trace concepts in landscape architecture

hoyer things take time and time takes things: the danish landscape

descombes shifting sirens: the swiss way, geneva

balfour octagon: the persistence of the ideal

cosgrove liminal geometry and elemental landscape: construction and representation

waldheim aerial representation and the recovery of landscape

fung mutuality and the cultures of landscape architecture

corner eidetic operations and new landscapes leatherbarrow leveling the land

berrizbeita the amsterdam bos: the modern public park and the construction of collective experience

mathur neither wilderness nor home: the indian maiden

cosgrove / landscape

wall programming the urban surface

lootsma the dutch landscape toward a second modernity

figure 1: essays and authors contained in corner’s recovering landscape

21 defines landscape’s recovery: redefining urban environment based on attachments the landscape idea and discussing its to the past. (Balfour 1999, 87) Across agency. Christophe Girot bemoans a lack these four essays, the “landscape of landscape theory that helps to separate idea” is demonstrated to encompass more distinctly ideas of nature and culture, political, social, economic, and ecological introducing four “trace concepts” that seek conceptions of place. to examine a site and reveal its hidden aspects. (Girot 1999) Some focus on the When Corner references “landscape landscape idea as it has been formulated agency,” he’s meaning to suggest in terms of national identity; for Steen A.B. landscape’s performative capacity and the Høyer, Denmark is too content to preserve ways in which a designer might unleash rather than transform its landscape a site’s working potential as opposed to because pressures of urbanization have cultivating its aesthetic. By extension, dislocated the functionality inherent agency is also granted to the designer in agricultural practice. (Høyer 1999) in how interventions are formulated and Georges Descombes follows by expressed, particularly in terms of graphic describing his project, “The Swiss Way,” representation. In this vein, Sébastien which was commissioned by the national Marot discusses a shift in attention government to help mark the 700th year towards interstitial spaces that envelope of the Confederation of Switzerland in the increasingly densifying urban core 1991. After suggesting that landscape’s amidst processes of urbanization. Setting recovery requires a shift in expectation or out against the previously common call point of view, he describes the project’s for landscape to act as a palliative sieve main strategy as “amplify[ing] what’s for the industrial city, Marot describes already there” to “clarify the landscape,” four principles which seek to inform which in turn would serve to allow those investigation of the “sub-urban frontier”: inhabiting the space to interpret it as they anamnesis, preparation, three-dimension see fit while “amplifying the potentials of sequencing, and relational structuring. The the space.” (Descombes 1999, 82) Alan sub-urban suggests both a reorientation Balfour is perhaps the most cautionary of planning processes as originating from when describing the landscape idea as it the outside and moving inwards, as well applies to the “Octagon,” which comprises as an effort to “dig below the surface… to Leipziger Plats and in reclaim hidden and latent phenomena of Berlin’s historic city center. In tracing the places.” (Marot 1999, 56) Describing the site’s jarring transfigurations – “some historic Amsterdam Bos, Anita Berrizbeita intended, some created by catastrophe, describes the set of techniques its some the byproducts of expediency,” designers used to break from traditional Balfour cautions against a recovery of conceptions of the “nineteenth-century landscape that offers an ordering of the bourgeois park,” instead embracing

22 “processes of the industrialized city around in Kenneth Frampton’s seminal “Towards it.” (Berrizbeita 1999, 188) Berrizbeita uses a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Michel Foucault’s concept of “exteriority” Architecture of Resistance.” While the to assert that those experiencing the latter interprets Paul Ricouer’s suggestion Bos are able to engage with its external that technology was a homogenizing force productive capacity rather than meaning towards a singular monoculture, (Shannon hidden in aestheticized forms. (Berrizbeita 2006a) Lootsma is less cynical, describing 1999) strategies that ultimately seek to fulfill Ulrich Beck’s vision of individuals forming In “Programming the Urban Surface,” Alex a society in which they achieve greater Wall foreshadows the popular format many personal agency as well as a stronger future essayists concerned with describing sense of collective identity. Through landscape urbanism’s capabilities will multi-disciplinary collaboration along with adopt, rifling through a series of precedent innovations in mapping and information projects. In this case, the projects are all visualization, Lootsma argues for designers’ European examples which fall between engagement with the “real world of “the traditional categories of landscape market democracy and global forces” but and urbanism.” (Wall 1999, 233) After to use their “critical and creative capacity describing the ways the contemporary to realign those conditions toward more metropolis is shifting away from forms socially enriching ends.” (Lootsma 1999, that characterize urban space towards the 273) processes and networks that have drawn attention to new surfaces, Wall presents Jeannette Sordi, who wrote about the strategies for enhancing these spaces: landscape urbanism phenomenon in 2015, thickening (solves technical problems like wrote that Recovering Landscape “clearly drainage and utilities while multiplying framed the field of action of the discipline the range of uses), folding (or cutting, in relation to the emerging landscapes of wrapping to form seamless geology urbanization … [t]he book soon became between interiors and exteriors), new one of the most important references for materials (“bring[ing] welcome diversity to landscape urbanists.” (Sordi 2015, 10) the public realm), non-programmed use Coner’s later work with Stan Allen through (surface with services and furnishings to be his office, Field Operations, became appropriated and modified), impermanence reference points in and of themselves for (program and function being the most those discussing landscape urbanism to changeable aspects of the city), and point to in underscoring the landscape movement (reworking of corridors to urbanist’s capabilities. embrace collective urban life). (Wall 1999, 244-246) Finally, Bart Lootsma’s essay seems to respond to the concerns raised

23 Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape Machinic Landscape. The text combined essays by a number of architects, both James Corner solicited the help of practicing and in academia, along with Architectural Association (AA) chairman student work from the AA that illustrated Alan Balfour in a few critical ways before the concepts. Recovering Landscape was published. In addition to writing two of the essays in While Corner’s earlier text attempted to the book, Balfour provided the platform make a stark shift away from reverence for Corner, who had been teaching for five amongst his contemporaries for the years at the University of Pennsylvania in pastoral and scenic, Mostafavi begins the Landscape Architecture Department, his text with an attempt to meet Corner for the second of two major symposia that three quarters of the way. He does began to establish landscape urbanism as indeed argue that “urbanism relies as a full-fledged movement. Corner makes much on the construction of surfaces and reference to these conferences in the voids as it does on the construction of opening acknowledgments of Recovering buildings,” therefore necessitating the Landscape, crediting them for providing use of landscape as a “material device.” the foundational groundwork for the book (Mostafavi 2003, 7) Calling the methods to curate “an ambitious manifesto for of landscape urbanism “operative,” he landscape practice.” (Corner 1999d, x) The suggests the shift from an “image-based essays of Marc Terib, Georges Descombes, planning process” to something more Christophe Girot, and Denis Cosgrove all machinic represents a move “from the originated here. picturesque to the productive operations of agricultural territory.” (Mostafavi Balfour, Chairman of the AA in London 2003, 8) Thus, designers are forced to from 1991-1995, was succeeded by conceive of challenges pertaining to the Mohsen Mostafavi, who carried these timescales inherent in landscape in a less ideas forward in his own future work. In implicit, linear fashion. However, he also 1999, he along with Ciro Najle founded argues against a completely utilitarian the AA’s Master of Landscape Urbanism conception of urbanism in terms of program. The program’s aim, according networks and infrastructure. “Networks to Jeannette Sordi, was “to focus on the and infrastructure of a larger landscape construction of landscapes and processes should not only bring to bear…(railways, through architecture and digital design, roads, pavements), but their reflective exploring the potential of transferring and pleasurable responsibilities (scenery, tools and practices typical of landscape driving, walking).”(Mostafavi 2003, 9) architecture to urban design.” (Sordi 2015, 11) In 2003, Mostafavi and Najle published Themes centered upon time, process,

24 and scale are carried throughout the gardens.” The increasing complexity of text by a variety of its authors, with a geometries in landscape practice, first by concentrated eye on those in the field the English landscape designers of the whom have put into practice the strategies eighteenth century, ultimately led the discussed. Christopher Hight considers discipline astray, he argues. Instead of the ethos of landscape, conceiving of imitating the picturesque, he states that landscape urbanism less as a theory of designers ought to “exploit complexity design and more as a way to innovate through coherence and consistency,” giving at the level of design practice, making his own firm as an example in their design reference to the ordering properties for Downsview Park in Toronto. Detlef discussed in Alex Wall’s aforementioned Mertins also uses the Downsview Park essay, “Programming the Urban Surface.” competition as a reference point, marking (Hight 2003) In a similar vein, Lawrence a shift in the design of urban landscapes Barth takes aim at the urban plan and that embraces the “artificial” as much as it the planners who construct them: “The does the “natural.” He uses theory derived plan is not the expression of a subject – it the study of self-organization to posit that marks the occasion for thought rather processes that constitute dynamic systems than its distillation. Neither does the plan must be understood and embraced to stand as the representation of knowledge, inform more strategic design decisions. however much it is obliged to incorporate Following this, Keller Easterling embarks and display the strata of knowledge. Plans on a lexicological redefinition of “error” are of necessity diagrammatic rather than to make the case for the architectural representational.” (Barth 2003, 33) Barth project, instead of “making its own world seeks to “discover a heightened political of data territories,” enter and engage and analytical significance for diagrammatic the world where space “plays a pivotal architecture” as it “moves more role in global politics” and “leverages aggressively onto the terrain of urbanism.” organizations of labour, natural resources (Barth 2003, 33) This cannot occur on and patterns of consumption.” (Easterling “a single axis in which the plan leads 2003, 156) Ciro Najle concludes the book inexorably to the built,” but must instead by asserting that landscape urbanism is draw out questions that ask how the city is a cultural product, that architecture has built and governed. (Barth 2003, 38) acquired its “voluptuous” properties through a “convolutedness,” or “a serene In “On Landscape,” Alejandro Zaera-Polo state of continuous agitation,” (Najle circles back to Mostafavi’s conflation of 2003, 161) and that architecture is at the “machinic” with the agricultural, yet risk of remaining a “subset of history… draws out how landscape has developed renouncing its innovative potential and cultural and symbolic significance in parallel confusing its condition as a ‘vehicle of through cultivation of “monuments and modernization’ with a mere desperation

25 1999 2003 2006

mostafavi landscapes of urbanism portraying the urban landscape: landscape in architectural criticism and theory, hight 1960- present barth diagram, dispersal, region

abalos & herreros journey through the picturesque (a notebook)

corner landscape urbanism designing the rug and not the picnic: paju landscape script, paju book city, seoul, beigel & christou korea davoine & desvigne in conversation with michel desvigne: intermediate landscapes

reiser & umemoto in conversation with rur: on material logics in architecture, landscape and urbanism

hensel ocean north -- surface ecologies

zaera-polo on landscape

mertins landscapeurbanismhappensintime

easterling error

najle convolutedness*

figure 2: essays and authors contained in mostafavi/najle’s manual for the machinic landscape

26 for stimulating modernity through the real world data territories and networks image.” (Najle 2003, 172) Notable, Najle by looking outside the “operations and foretells the direction of architecture’s organizational logics that accompany not eventual progression, suggesting its need just the space of geometries and building to “interfere actively with performance… envelopes but larger fields of deployment.” to intensify its exchanges with vaster (Easterling 2003, 156-157) Thus, Machinic ecologies and become itself ecological…to Landscape further draws closer the embrace dynamics beyond and before the practices of architecture and landscape, human.” (Najle 2003, 173) with the architect (like Koolhaas) described as not merely possessing the tools in how One of the more interesting aspects of to approach landscape design, but also Manual for the Machinic Landscape is its as holder of the representational methods commitment to defining representational that are able to slow down the translation methods to be associated with landscape of drawing to building, suggesting a urbanism. This is characterized not more complex drawing will engender just by the student projects illustrated a more thoughtfully constructed urban throughout, but also in the essays written environment. Whether this is true or not, by contributors. Barth, for instance, in this argument places time in the architect’s his discussion of the failings of the plan hands, rather than a setting or a more and the planners that use it, suggests nebulous “process.” architecture’s “pursuit of the diagram focuses largely upon its capacity to The Landscape Urbanism Reader postpone or perturb the movement from drawing to building.” (Barth 2003, 33) In 2006, landscape urbanism seemed to This recalls Lootsma’s essay in Recovering reach the height of its influence upon the Landscape, wherein he describes Rem publishing of the Landscape Urbanism Koolhaas’s fascination with a quote said Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim. by the architect of New York’s Rockefeller Waldheim, who made an appearance in Center, Raymond Hood: “The plan is most Corner’s Recovering Landscape, actually significant because all of man’s activities debuted the term “landscape urbanism” take place on the ground.” (Hood in himself in 1997. Upon graduating three Lootsma 1999, 263) Koolhaas extends this years after Corner from the University of to understand a functionalist architecture Pennsylvania in 1989, Waldheim quickly not obsessed with form, but rather using rose through the ranks in academia. He the building as a frame for a repeated made the jump from adjunct to Assistant ground plane, or stack of floors, which Professor of Architecture at the University structure human activity. (Lootsma 1999) of Illinois at Chicago, where in 1997 he Easterling continues this logic, stating curated and exhibited the Landscape that field of architecture can influence Urbanism Exhibition from April to June

27 with support from the Graham Foundation. the discourse emerged, underscoring its The exhibition moved to the Storefront growing significance. In “Terra Fluxus,” for Art and Architecture in New York City James Corner covers a lot of ground, in September of the same year. A review summarizing the infrastructural, ecological, for the exhibition appeared in Landscape temporal, and cultural aspects of landscape Architecture Magazine by Paul Bennett he and others have touched on previously. the following spring, entitled, “The He talks simultaneously of landscape as Urban Landscape Gets its Due.” (Bennett a potential driver of the process of city 1998) The exhibit also made its way to formation (Corner 2006) while making Waldheim’s former stomping grounds reference to David Harvey’s condemnation of U. Penn. in 1997, three years before of New Urbanism and modernism’s Corner became chair of the Department of deterministic attempts to “control Landscape Architecture there. history and process.” (Corner 2006) He asserts that the “failure of planning” can The Landscape Urbanism Reader separates be attributed to the “impoverishment itself from the approach taken by Mostafavi of the imagination,” while suggesting and Najle’s. Whereas the latter seems public spaces are “firstly the containers interested in justifying the discourse of collective memory and desire” before through referencing a broad array of they are “secondly…places for geographic philosophical texts paired with drawing and social imagination to extend new techniques, Waldheim seems interested relationships and sets of possibilities.” in developing the case for how landscape (Corner 2006, 32) Richard Weller brings urbanism can transform the urban up a similar desired parallel in “An Art environment based on interpretations of of Instrumentality: Thinking Through the discourse’s core tenets embodied in Landscape Urbanism,” which argues for completed projects of the past. Sordi refers conceiving landscape architecture as “a to the process of ex post facto justification holistic enterprise” rather than relying for addressing the discourse’s central too heavily on the sciences in order to concerns as constituting a “retroactive be taken seriously. (Weller 2006, 71) manifesto,” (Sordi 2015, 11) which Grahame Shane points out that landscape Waldheim develops further in the text of urbanism’s largest triumphs lie in its unbuilt his own to follow. precedents, (Shane 2006, 62) contending that the discourse does not yet begin to At the outset, James Corner, Grahame address the issue of “urban morphologies Shane, Richard Weller, and Waldheim or the emergence of settlement over time,” himself all speak to how landscape instead focusing on their “disappearance urbanism is situated amongst its familial and erasure.” (Shane 2006, 63) disciplinary forerunners. The essays together serve as a crash course in how Towards the middle of the text, writers

28 2006 2016

corner terra fluxus waldheim landscape as urbanism

shane the emergence of landscape urbanism

weller an art of instrumentality: thinking through landscape urbanism

girot vision in motion: representing landscape in time

czerniak looking back at landscape urbanism: speculations on site

pollak constructed ground: questions of scale

shannon from theory to resistance: landscape urbanism in europe

mossop landscapes of infrastructure

tatom urban highways and the reluctant public realm

berger drosscape

lyster landscapes of exchange: re-articulating site

belanger synthetic surfaces

reed public works practice

figure 3: essays and authors contained in waldheim’s landscape urbanism reader

29 begin to focus on the ways in which with the social and cultural concerns practicing designers might begin to apply embedded in the ecological focus brought the concepts central to landscape urbanism to light by the likes of Michael Hough within their own work. Christophe Girot and Anne Whiston Spirn. (Mossop 2006) posits a way to break with the picturesque, Linda Pollak presents a set of dichotomies previously responsible for “forward[ing] (figure/ground, architecture/landscape, an understanding of landscape where object/space, culture/nature, work/site) and movement was absent,” according to suggests that the first in each paired set of Michael Conan. (Conan in Girot 2006, terms is what’s foregrounded in our minds 99) Girot suggests using representational as the more critical consideration. (2006) methods that capture landscape change The latter terms, that which she deems over time, which he teaches within his own “environmental,” must involve a critical program at ETH Zurich. Julia Czerniak, look at scale, the maintenance of which Linda Pollack, Elizabeth Mossop, and Pollak asserts is a “cultural construction Clare Lyster each approach questions identified exclusively with the measurable of site and scale to illustrate the ways in and known.” (Pollak 2006, 135) which landscape urbanism can perform operatively and promote the formulation The remaining essays take a systems of spaces that constitute the many moving approach at analyzing logistical networks parts that make up the urban environment. and flows, including Clare Lyster, Alan Julia Czerniak discusses site’s “specific Berger, Pierre Bélanger, and Chris Reed. organizational systems, performative Alan Berger discusses the materials agendas, formal languages, material produced as byproducts of the processes palettes, and signifying content” of the of urbanization and the spatial formations most critical value when pursuing a new necessitated by them, arguing that design. (Czerniak 2006, 107) Elizabeth the urban landscape demands a new Mossop discusses the regional planning conception of “public space” that work of Ian McHarg, a critical figure for incorporates “the complexities of the landscape architecture and landscape exchange process.” (Berger 2006, 235). urbanism, noting his ideology’s fixation on Pierre Bélanger takes a different approach natural systems – geology, topography, in looking at materiality, choosing to focus hydrology, and climatic. Given that upon asphalt, from its historical uses and McHarg’s work presented strategies at the production to the current systems of its regional scale while landscape design often movement and management that form tends to be site-specific, Mossop articulates its own distribution of sites across vast ways in which hybridity can be achieved regional territories (Bélanger 2006). Chris between the two, echoing Weller’s idea Reed ends the collection by discussing of art and instrumentality, mediating the a role for practitioners that sees them process-oriented methodology of McHarg embracing practicality and pragmatism in

30 working with municipal bodies towards the publication of the Landscape Urbanism redefining the public realm, casting the Reader, a number of the contributing designer as an “urbanistic systems-builder,” authors found themselves publishing their forced to consider research, framing, and own edited collections or authored texts, implementation along with design (Reed some for the first time. These include Alan 2006, 283). Berger (Drosscape, 2006); Julia Czerniak (Large Parks, 2007); Chris Reed (Projective The Landscape Urbanism Reader makes Ecologies, 2014); Clare Lyster (Learning the jump away from a fascination with from Logistics, 2016) and Pierre Belanger representational methods towards (Landscapes of Infrastructure, 2016). consideration of what thinking through landscape urbanism means when Waldheim sets out to define landscape conceptualizing the array of challenges urbanism in a monographic account presented by real projects. Corner with help from the precedents he and somewhat embodies the role of the his colleagues have historically relied holdout here, positing in “Terra Fluxus” upon, as referenced by his previous essay that landscape urbanism must involve introducing the Landscape Urbanism the “landscape imaginary,” though this Reader: “A Reference Manifesto.” Vera is discussed last in his list of themes he Vicenzotti has pointed out that Waldheim uses to describe landscape urbanism. himself has argued that the “construction The previous three themes (ecological, of a useful history” (Waldheim 2016, 6) temporal, infrastructural) are given far has always been a “flank of the landscape greater attention by both Corner and the urbanist agenda;” (Waldheim in Vicenzotti other essayists in the collection. Thus, what 2017, 77) hence, Waldheim seeks to might be argued as the primary interest construct this history through weaving for Corner in Recovering Landscape is together projects of the past with forward- placed on the backburner here, as the looking pronouncements about the agency more productive, “machinic” qualities of of the designer (acting as landscape landscape are venerated over what their urbanist). productive capabilities might mean for the people inhabiting spaces where designed In the book’s introduction, Waldheim projects are constructed. makes the case for the project’s existence: “In constructing a general theory for Landscape as Urbanism rethinking the urban, this volume assembles a thick description of cases and conditions, Ten years after the Landscape Urbanism sites and subjects… Taken together, these Reader was published came Charles materials presuppose the ongoing act of Waldheim’s intellectual follow-up, theory making as a necessary element of Landscape as Urbanism. In the decade after disciplinary formation and reformation.”

31 (Waldheim 2016, 7) He continues, “The urbanism,” when his design entitled term ‘general theory’ in the subtitle “Decamping Detroit” was showcased in signals the aspiration to offer a coherent 2001’s Stalking Detroit. (Shannon 2003) and broadminded, if not comprehensive, The fixation on Detroit as a forbearer of monograph-book-length account of a shrinking cities transition to a study of subject that has been previously examined the work of Ludwig Hilberseimer, where through journal articles or occasional distinctions between city and countryside anthologies of shorter, more episodic, were blurred. Aerial representation projects and texts.” (Waldheim 2016, 7) is considered, another former topic of interest for Waldheim dating back Thus, Waldheim charts territory that has to his essay in Corner’s Recovering been charted before, by himself and Landscape. In one of the final chapters, his colleagues across two decades of Waldheim argues that “the very origins of landscape urbanist discourse, to formulate landscape architecture reside in projects the all-in-one-place reference guide on of city building through infrastructure his own terms. He starts with “Claiming and ecological function” beginning with Landscape as Urbanism,” which begins Olmstead’s planning of Manhattan above with the post-modern critiques of planning 155th street in the 19th century. (Waldheim in the 1970s and 1980s. (Waldheim 2016, 11) Finally, Waldheim concludes 2016) He further reflects on the influence with a nod to “ecological urbanism,” of the post-modernists in his second his project’s “more precise” successor. chapter, “Autonomy, Indeterminacy, Self- (Waldheim 2016, 12) Organization,” working in “concepts of criticality through problematized authorship.“ (Waldheim 2016, 8) Waldheim discusses planning’s alienation from design culture and landscape’s embrace of ecology in the following chapter, before zooming out to the logistical landscapes of the post-Fordist era, where he leans on the work of social justice theoretician David Harvey to explain landscape urbanism’s relation to the “economic structure of contemporary urbanization.” (Waldheim 2016, 9)

Waldheim then focuses on the example of Detroit, a city that has held his interest since his coinage of the term “landscape

32 2016 waldheim claiming landscape as urbanism

autonomy, indeterminacy, self-organization

planning, ecology, and the emergence of landscape

post-fordist economies and the logistics landscape

urban crisis and the origins of landscape

urban order and structural change

agrarian urbanism and the aerial subject

aerial representation and airport landscape

claiming landscape as architecture

from landscape to ecology

figure 4: chapters contained in waldheim’s landscape as urbanism

33 Extending Thompson’s Ten Tenets Thompson’s Ten Tenets

As Vera Vicenzotti has pointed out, a 1. LANDSCAPE URBANISM REJECTS THE number of writers have attempted to BINARY OPPOSITION BETWEEN CITY AND distill down the central thematic elements LANDSCAPE that illuminate the ideas embedded in landscape urbanism, including Julia In discussing how the landscape urbanists Czerniak in her essay in the Landscape frame this axiom, Thompson suggests that, Urbanism Reader, Richard Weller in an “…the inclusion of some Romanticized article in Landscape Journal appearing nature within the city is at best an in 2008, and by Ian H. Thompson in irrelevance, at worst a kind of camouflage Landscape Research in 2012. (Vicenzotti or deceit which obscures the real 2017, 76) Thompson in particular most conditions.” (Thompson 2012, 9) helpfully breaks down the discourse into “ten tenets” that organize the thoughts of As Elizabeth Mossop points out in her Landscape Urbanism Reader its many contributors. Thompson used two essay in the , of the texts discussed here, the Landscape this distinction was most clearly defined City Form Urbanism Reader and Landscape Urbanism: in two texts, Michael Hough’s The Granite Garden, A Manual for the Machinic Landscape, in and Anne Spirn’s addition to two journal issues dedicated neither of which many of the main figures in full to the topic of landscape urbanism, of landscape urbanism typically reference. Kerb (no. 15) and Topos (no. 71). However, in both texts the authors have Thompson coded and collected recurrent tried to “synthesize the ecological systems themes from these four texts, using them approach with urbanism,” according as the basis for identifying the following to Mossop, by articulating a “more ten tenets. As an extension of Thompson’s sophisticated conceptualization of cities methodology and findings, the ten tenets and urban processes” and projecting onto are incorporated here, quoting some of that a more nuanced understanding of Thompson’s relevant commentary where ecology and natural processes. (Mossop it is most incisive. However, in order to 2006, 169-170) corroborate these tenets with the four texts that serve as the basis for the analysis James Corner’s initial project, entitled in this thesis, the excerpts and exposition Recovering Landscape, is centered around below are an attempt to expand and the idea of promoting a more expansive critically deepen Thompson’s initial work. conceptualization of how the more commonly conceived images of landscape (the Romantic, the pastoral) must be combined with infrastructure, urbanism, and strategic planning in order to promote

34 a more relevant and socially-engaged explicit. In a full-page spread depicting a discipline. The first step in such a process is densely populated and heavily engineered breaking down these notions that nature, urban landscape (where Barcelona’s and by extension landscape, exist outside Ronda de Dalt meets Parc de la Trinitat), of the realm of the “urban.” Waldheim Waldheim places what could perhaps points out that this theme emerges from be considered his introduction’s thesis Corner’s being influenced by Ian McHarg’s statement in large text to the right of the Design with Nature as both a student page: “Landscape Urbanism describes a and faculty colleague, yet “rejected the disciplinary realignment currently underway opposition of nature and city implied in in which landscape replaces architecture as McHarg’s regionally scaled environmental the basic building block of contemporary planning practice.” (Waldheim 2006d, 38) urbanism. For many across a range of disciplines, landscape has become both the The breaking down of this dichotomy is lens through which the contemporary city part of the landscape urbanism project is represented and the medium through all the way up through Waldheim’s 2016 which it is constructed.” (Waldheim 2006a) effort, Landscape as Urbanism. Waldheim takes inspiration from Hilberseimer’s Graham Shane follows both Corner and drawings for idealized regional networks, Waldheim in the same text with the where settlement patterns are dictated not opening line of his own essay: “Over the by a pre-formulated grid, but the natural past decade landscape has emerged environment’s topography, hydrology, and as a model for contemporary urbanism, climate instead. (Waldheim 2016, 116) one uniquely capable of describing the conditions for radically decentralized 2. LANDSCAPE REPLACES ARCHITECTURE urbanization, especially in the context AS THE BASIC BUILDING BLOCK OF CITIES. of complex natural environments.” COROLLARY: LANDSCAPE URBANISM (Shane 2006) Shane has not only traced INVOLVES THE COLLAPSE, OR THE landscape’s emergent influence to the RADICAL REALIGNMENT, OF TRADITIONAL exact year landscape urbanism was DISCIPLINARY BOUNDARIES coined as a term, but has also positioned landscape as the unique field capable of Referenced in Thompson’s own article, tackling the problems often discussed Corner states that “Landscape urbanism [is] amongst architecture, urban design, and … a response to the failure of traditional planning. (Shane 2006) urban design and planning to operate effectively in the contemporary city.” 3. LANDSCAPE URBANISM ENGAGES WITH (Corner 2003) VAST SCALES—BOTH IN TIME AND SPACE

Landscape Urbanism Reader In the , Richard Weller suggests the vastness with Charles Waldheim makes this even more

35 which landscape urbanism is considered “landscape is not only a formal model when he says “Landscape architecture’s for urbanism today, but perhaps more potential power is vested in the grand importantly, a model for process.” And narrative of reconciling modernity to at the beginning of Waldheim’s 1999 place; but the contemporary city is no collection of essays, he places an epigraph longer bounded, and therefore landscape by J.B. Jackson: “A landscape is a space architecture must track it to the ends of deliberately created to speed up or slow the earth.” (Weller 2006) He continues, down the process of nature. As Eliade “Landscape urbanism is therefore not just expresses it, it represents man taking about high-density urban areas and civic upon himself the role of time.” (Jackson in spaces, it is about the entire landscape off Corner 1999d) which the contemporary global metropolis feeds and into which it has ravenously 4. LANDSCAPE URBANISM PREPARES sent its rhizomatic roots.”(Weller 2006) FIELDS FOR ACTION AND STAGES FOR He adds to this that the technology PERFORMANCE enabling aerial and satellite imagery helped to expand the imaginations of Thompson again points out Corner’s words Terra Fluxus those thinking across regional territories here to exemplify this point. In , towards landscape’s creative capabilities. Corner suggests the work of a landscape Waldheim argues a similar point in his architect should entail “the tactical work essay in Corner’s Recovering Landscape, of choreography, a choreography of Aerial Representation and the Recovery of elements and materials in time that extends Landscape (Waldheim 1999) new networks, new linkages, and new opportunities” (Corner 2006, 31) Waldheim reinforces what James Corner, Stan Allen, and others have said before In some of Corner’s initial writing that led him, remarking in A Reference Manifesto to the eventual development of landscape that “landscape is a medium uniquely urbanism, he discusses the work of J.B. capable of responding to temporal Jackson and John Stilgoe and their landscape change, transformation, adaptation, and interest in where the term is succession. These qualities recommend derived. The contrast between the Old landskip landschaft landscape as an analog to contemporary German terms and is processes of urbanization and as a medium slight, but meaningful, argues the three Landschaft uniquely suited to the open-endedness, authors. comprises a “deep indeterminacy, and change demanded and intimate mode of relationship not by contemporary urban conditions” only among buildings and fields but also (Waldheim 2006d) among patterns of occupation, activity, and space,” related to the German gemeinschaft Waldheim quotes Stan Allen as saying, , which “refers to those forms

36 and ideas that structure society in general.” are launched and filtered, not made.” (Corner 1999a, 154) (Kwinter 1998, 59)

In the same essay, Corner arrives at the 5. LANDSCAPE URBANISM IS LESS crux of his argument: “I am arguing for CONCERNED WITH WHAT THINGS LOOK the thinking through a program – not a LIKE, MORE WITH WHAT THEY DO description – that outlines the performative dimensions of a project’s unfolding.” Thompson points to two essays in the Landscape Urbanism Reader (Corner 1999a, 165-166) Here he cites here: Weller’s Sanford Kwinter, who argued that “while essay, where he states that the landscape diagrams themselves do not produce form, urbanist project advocates for “an ecology they emit formative and organizational free of Romanticism and aesthetics” influence.” (Kwinter 1998 in Corner (Weller in Thompson 2012, 12) and Julia 1999a) This point is heavily reinforced Czerniak’s contribution, in which she by the representational modes used discusses the Eisenman/Olin collaboration by the post-modernists Corner favors; for Rebstockpark (1991). Czerniak praises Koolhaas, Tschumi, Eisenman, Hadid, and the “agricultural landscape typologies, such Libeskind. It is worth noting that Corner as drainage swales, fields and hedgerows, does not go into the deeper theoretical delivered a range of benefits including territory explored by Kwinter, who jumps the conservation of rainfall, the cleaning between Kant, Hume, Foucault, Deleuze of waste effluents, the improvement of air and Guattari, and others in explaining his quality and microclimate and support for advocacy for the diagram as an explanatory wildlife diversity” of the project. (Czerniak design method. Rather than point to 2006, 115; Thompson 2012, 12) other architects as examples, Kwinter favors those whom have “approached 6. LANDSCAPE URBANISM SEES THE LANDSCAPE AS MACHINIC the incorporeal” with “very-little self- consciousness and sweeping brilliance,” Thompson’s own analysis is especially including László Moholy-Nagy, filmmakers helpful here. He points out that Mostafavi like Sergei Eisenstein and Stanley Kubrick, and Najle have avoided the words Buckminster Fuller, and Robert Smithson. ‘mechanical’ and ‘mechanistic’, both of (Kwinter 1998, 59) Of these figures, Kwinter which may present negative connotations. indicates what signified their brilliance was (Thompson 2012, 12) The “machinic” their ability to understand their role as evokes Deleuze and Guattari’s A Thousand intermediaries, with a “clear intuition of the Plateaus, wherein the metaphor of the interstitial space that they had to occupy machine is used in a number of unique in order to become diagrammatists…the ways. (Thompson 2012) As mentioned space at once of synthesis, integration, and previously, Kwinter has also made reference catastrophe…the space from which forms to Deleuze and Guattari, discussing the

37 machinic metaphor as an elaboration of landscape still wanting analysis, it is equally Foucault’s Discipline and Punish (1975), clear Foucault’s work on governmental where the diagram can be separated from reason has opened a broad avenue of the concrete events it generates by existing enquiry for such an investigation.” (Barth in a class of phenomena called “abstract 2003, 37) Barth points out that “the point machines.” (Kwinter 1998, 59) This of Foucault’s analysis of the panopticon was speaks to the landscape urbanists’ desire not to derogate the prison but to question to conceive of landscape as a system, how our individualization had become a “machinic” in the sense that an assemblage practicable political goal.” (Barth 2003, 37) of working parts provides functionality. For He goes on to advocate for the diagram example, if one piece of the larger system as a mobilizing force for a “lateral field of is ‘broken,’ as was the case in the damming governmental reason, and which at the of Boston’s Muddy River that destroyed same time generates the punctual tactics of the estuarial qualities of Olmsted’s initial function and spatiality in well-defined areas design, then the entire system becomes of knowledge and practice.” (Barth 2003, compromised. 37)

The word “machinic” appears to be a 7. LANDSCAPE URBANISM MAKES THE term born out of the landscape urbanist INVISIBLE VISIBLE discourse itself. First appearing in the title and text of Mostafavi and Najle’s 2003 According to Waldheim: “Contemporary collection of essays, Mostafavi describes practices of landscape urbanism reject what’s meant by the term in his essay the camouflaging of ecological systems “Landscapes of Urbanism,” “the rules of within pastoral images of ‘nature.’ the operative system incorporate both Rather, contemporary landscape material and immaterial logics, affected by urbanism practices recommend the use the network of forces both near and far, of infrastructural systems and the public both local and global.” (Mostafavi 2003, landscapes they engender as the very 9) Instead of taking aim at the landscape ordering mechanisms of the urban field urbanists’ most common targets, Mostafavi itself, shaping and shifting the organization instead seeks to target Jacobsian advocacy of urban settlement and its inevitably for local knowledge and understanding as indeterminate economic, political, and the principles by which cities are designed, social futures.” (Waldheim 2006b, 39) suggesting much broader systems are at work above the hyper-local. (2003) As Thompson mentions, Czerniak “advocates for the opening up of culverted Barth, in Diagram, Dispersal, Region, rivers so that the hidden hydrology of the circles back to Foucault and Deleuze: “If it city can be restored to legibility”, citing as is clear that the urban presents a machinic an example Hargreaves Associates’ project

38 for the Guadalupe River in San Jose, but also because it places cultural systems California. (Czerniak in Thompson 2012, 14) within the epic narrative of evolution.” (Weller 2006, 74) This leads to questions 8. LANDSCAPE URBANISM EMBRACES of meaning and value, questions of art, ECOLOGY AND COMPLEXITY according to Weller. (74)

Julia Cerniak embraces the “ecological” 9. LANDSCAPE URBANISM ENCOURAGES metaphorically, quoted in Waldheim’s 2016 HYBRIDITY BETWEEN NATURAL AND work as stating that “Ecology…provides ENGINEERED SYSTEMS a useful analogy for the complexity and diversity of urban processes.” (Czerniak in Thompson points to Elizabeth Mossop Waldheim 2016, 50) here; in Landscapes of Infrastructure, she suggests that “there should be a Waldheim uses Czerniak’s quote to begin relationship between the underlying his chapter entitled “Planning, Ecology, and structures of topography and hydrology the Emergence of Landscape.“ He states and the major structuring elements of that if landscape is thought of as the impact urban form,” such as the use of catchments of post-modernism, “modernist positivist as the basis for physical planning and discourse of the natural sciences has been regulation. (Mossop in Thompson 2012, 15) supplanted, if not made redundant, by the notion of nature as a cultural construct. In Hybridity is discussed through projects of that formulation, landscape architecture the past that seek to recover the true intent moves from a position of positivist certainty of historical designs, including Olmsted’s over the mechanisms of ecological function Emerald Necklace, which functioned as a to a culturally relativist position of ecology naturally engineered system. as a model for understanding the complex interactions between nature and culture.” In “Liminal Geography and Elemental (Waldheim 2016, 50) Landscape: Construction and Representation,” Denis Cosgrove At an earlier time in the discourse, Richard concludes by saying that “Today, in Weller details a conceptual shift brought landscape, as in every other field, on by ecology, “synonymous with new and intellectual and practical, the most more sophisticated models of universal intriguing questions lie precisely at the (dis)order such as chaos and complexity boundary – which is, of course, no longer theory…Ecology is profoundly important a boundary – at the very point where not only because by progressing science such interactions and transitions occur: in from the measurement of mechanical nature at the ecotone, in society along the objects to the mapping of non-linear transgressive lines where identities merge systems it moves science closer to life, and hybridity rules.” (Cosgrove 1999, 118)

39 Cosgrove is writing as the opening essay commodification of our man-made in the second section of Corner’s book, world.” (Frampton in Shannon 2006a) Recovering Landscape, where he goes on to suggest a “postmodern cosmography” may play a similar role to the premodern cosmography which provided the geometrical language through which landscapes were initially constructed. (1999)

10. LANDSCAPE URBANISM RECOGNIZES THE REMEDIAL POSSIBILITIES INHERENT IN THE LANDSCAPE

Waldheim speaks to OMA and James Corner Field Operations’ commissions for Downsview Park (2000) and Fresh Kills Park (2001), respectively: “…the body or work produced for Downsview and Fresh Kills represents an emerging consensus that designers of the built environment, across disciplines, would do well to examine landscape as the medium through which to conceive the renovation of the post- industrial city.” (Waldheim 2006b, 48)

Kelly Shannon, in discussing Kenneth Frampton’s concept for “Critical Regionalism,” ties together Frampton’s concept with Peter Rowe’s earlier advocacy for site-specific landscape as “an intermediary between built form and otherwise placeless surfaces of urbanization.” (Shannon 2006a, 144) She quotes Frampton, who says of Rowe, “… I would submit that… we need to conceive of a remedial landscape that is capable of playing a critical and compensatory role in relation to the ongoing, destructive

40 The Landscape Urbanism Discourse: instrumental creative, constructing In Summary the idea of landscape through both science and art. Having traced Thompson’s footsteps and forged a path across the literature with Across a wide range of opinions and visions some additional channels added and for how landscape urbanism can shape the followed, there are three main takeaways built environment and how that shape can that emerge concerning what the discourse be influenced by those practicing its ideals, of landscape urbanism seems to hold these are the themes that emerge most closest: prominently. In the next phase of research, these condensed tenets will be applied as - The landscape urbanist is opposed separate streams of inquiry, which together to the construction of orderly will comprise each site’s comprehensive binaries, favoring complexity. analysis. This will serve two functions: it - The landscape urbanist is concerned will allow for the study and understanding with a multi-scalar conception of of each site on its own merits, while also process and time. allowing the discourse a way into the - The landscape urbanists’ landscape sites that is tied strictly to how the sites acts; its activation is constructed, developed, regardless of the influence of visible, and/or remediating. the discourse.

All of these points speak to the ways in which landscape is meant to be conceived as part of a number of broader systems, according to the landscape urbanists.

In addition, there are ways in which the landscape urbanist’s practices and methods are informed by the principles above.

- The landscape urbanist acts as stage manager, priming sites for action and setting scenes for change over time; - The landscape urbanist acts as diagrammatist to illustrate process and to reject the linear, seemingly- objective truths; and - The landscape urbanist acts as

41 figure 5: yorckstrasse bridges, park am gleisdreieck. source: © a.savin, wikimedia commons

42 RIVER

PARK AM GLEISDREIECK 35 HECTARES LANDWEHR CANAL

TEMPELHOFER FELD 303 HECTARES

NATUR-PARK SCHÖNEBERGER SÜDGELÄNDE 18 HECTARES

BRITZER VERBINDUNGSKANAL

figure 6: analyzed sites in context: site juxtaposition. data source: openstreetmap

figure 7: analyzed sites in context: built form and existing rail lines. data source: openstreetmap

43 figure 9: shunting yard plan figure 10: natur-park schöneberger südgelände plan source: http://hovamegyavonat.blog.hu/2014/02/11/elhagyott_palyaudvarbol_termeszetvedelmi_ter- source: http://www.max-ley.de/zoos/zoo_51.htm ulet_a_berlini_sudgel_nde

44 figure 8: development timeline, natur-park schöneberger südgelände

45 Chapter 4: nature park as a compensatory measure Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände for new railyards in the inner-city area. Grün Berlin Park und Garten GmbH INTRODUCTION / DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE commissioned planning group ÖkoCon & Planland with the park’s design. (Kowarik Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände and Langer 2005) The masterplan took into was once part of the much larger account two main conflicts: conversation Rangierbahnhof bei Tempelhof, a railyard versus recreation, and the challenge of built between 1880-1890, consisting of wilderness versus biodiversity. Thus, the many parallel tracks for both inner-city plan aims to accomplish varying goals that express and long-distance trains alike. sometimes seem at odds: uncontrolled (Kowarik and Langer 2005) The site is development of new wilderness is allowed approximately 18 hectares, the smallest simultaneously alongside maintained open of the three sites of study, and lies on landscapes, particularly where rare species the southern border of inner-city Berlin in are present. Accordingly, visitor access is the Schöneberg-Tempelhof district. With restricted to raised pathways 50cm above train service discontinued in 1952, the site the landscapes in certain areas, while was abandoned all but for a large hall for allowing free movement in other areas. train car repair. (Kowarik and Langer 2005) Ramps and underpasses once serving the This allowed for the development of a railroad tracks establish the path system on quasi-wilderness to spring forth from the three different horizontal planes through untouched nature of the site, including a the park. Sculptural works and functional “richly structured mosaic of dry grasslands, steel elements of the park such as the tall herbs, shrub vegetation and individual raised pathway were the works of artists’ woodlands” (Kowarik and Langer 2005, group ODIOUS. (Kowarik and Langer 2005) 288) Though much of the vegetation is The park was opened to the public in May typical of what is traditionally found within 2000. cities, a number of rare species can be found primarily within the dry grasslands, HOW IT’S DISCUSSED IN THE LITERATURE with over 366 vascular plants, 28 breeding birds, 49 variants of macrofungi, and 208 Given that the park has been established variants of wild bees and wasps. (Kowarik the longest out of the three sites, it has and Langer 2005, 290) had more time to receive attention and reflection from those within the discipline After much deliberation and debate who’ve noted it’s unique development between public actors amidst a protest timeline and approach to preservation campaign to secure the site as a and integration with the city. In “Eulogy conservation area, it was determined that of the Void,” Christophe Girot (previously the site was to be set aside to create a a contributor to the landscape urbanist discourse) wrote about the park along with

46 some of Berlin’s other void spaces that ‘formalist Berlin’ landscape designers.” were experiencing a renaissance in the (Girot 2004, 38) He commends the space aughts. Girot starts with a question: “Are and the planning process for working with the challenges of landscape architecture in the “slowness and patience of ecological the city of Berlin comparable to any other time.” (Girot 2004, 37) European metropolis?” (Girot 2004, 35) He Separately, German Ecologists Andreas compares the site to that of a time capsule, Langer and Ingo Kowarik have also “deliver[ing] its treasures only after several both written extensively on the topic of decades of gestation.” (Girot 2004, 38) He post-infrastructural space and emergent also makes mention of the park’s entrance ecologies that spring forth from these fee, which stands at one Euro and exists for spaces. Their work informs all of the site ecological purposes; “While Schöneberg analysis detailed in the following chapters. Sügelände became the first public park in Berlin to charge an entry fee in order EDGE / MOVEMENT to limit access, ecological constraints determined and generated the entire The most logical entrance to the park space design and use.” (Girot 2004, 37) is the southern entrance, through the He speaks to the romantic image conjured Priesterweg S-Bahn Station. It is the only by the nature that developed there, a rich entrance that is accessible to those with biodiversity emerging in part because the physical disabilities, as the other entrances trains previously traveling through the are accessed by a tall set of stairs. Those space carried with them a diverse species taking the S-Bahn to this location have two set, forming an “ecological postcard of the options when they exit, right or left; to European post-industrial era extending the left is the immediate entrance to the all the way to the steppes of Russia and park, while to the right there are bicycle Siberia.” (Girot 2004, 37) Also, “the shear racks and a parking lot. There is a bus strength of spontaneous plants and trees stop located just off the parking lot on offered a seductive romantic mélange full Prellerweg. of past and present connotations.” (Girot 2004, 37) “This ‘non-designed’ project The park is bordered on all sides by gradually acquired a strength and an functional infrastructure. To the south, the identity of its own,” comparing the process Prellerweg highway is four to five lanes to that of nearby . (Girot 2004, across, become wider as it turns to the 38) Girot considers the park a “resounding north and becomes divided by a planted success,” stating that while it offers a rich median strip running down the center. diversity in terms of history, ecology, and To the east of the park are three or four public control, it also exemplifies “the regional Intercity-Express rail lines that most eloquent argument of the ‘laissez- connect Berlin to the rest of Germany fair’ Berlin landscape ecologists over the running in the north-south direction,

47 while to the west are the metro lines that are on the elevated natural path that runs form the network within the city. At each along the center of the site, or in some of entrance there is a ticket machine, which the lookout spaces dispersed throughout, visitors must deposit one Euro into in can they see trains passing, and this is order to receive a paper receipt as proof typically through dense tree plantings. To of purchase. There are apparently staff the eastern side of the site is a clearing, which check that visitors have paid, though which is part of the nature conservation in experience detailed here, this was not area in the center of the site, and some the case for the few trips made. In fact, cleared space to the north as well, which the gate to the north of the park was left allows visitors to see some of the urban open, seeming to suggest that payment fabric the lies beyond the site’s bounds was not necessary to enter, though signs (an IKEA is a distinct landmark visible to were there to indicate that, in fact, it was. the northeast that springs to mind). To the This northern gate leads to a set of stairs north, the park’s bound is the gate that which are part of a bridge over the metro connects the site to the Hans Baluschek lines to the western Hans Baluschek Park, Park; everything to the north of this point is created in the 2000s, which contains play, made inaccessible by a tall wire fence. picnic, and sport areas and are mainly cleared of any vegetation. Just to the west The site’s movement throughout is mainly of this park are more than 2,500 allotment restricted to the footpaths and elevated parcels, grouped in 26 different colonies, walkways provided by site’s design. This the largest allotment grounds in Berlin. design decision was made for the sake of This is down from the number originally the preservation of the site’s biodiversity, there at the beginning of the 20th century which is discussed in the following section. there, when 8,000 small plots existed, The elevated walk is approximately six feet chipped away over time from various urban wide and about a half to three quarters development projects. (District Office of a foot from the ground. The elevated Tempelhof-Schöneberg 2018) path sometimes diverts away from trees that would’ve had to have been cut if For the most part, the dense tree lines the path were to move linearly. It exists block sight of the rail lines and the highway, in the center of the park over the nature the latter of which the park is elevated conservation area. The rest of the park is above. The rail lines to the west of the park deemed a landscape conservation area, have trains running on them with quite a and foot traffic is encouraged to remain on bit of frequency, yet these are often heard the path network. Some of these paths are and not seen because of a berm that acts a bit wider or a bit narrower, ranging from as a visual barrier between the rail lines three to nine feet in width depending on and the less elevated nature path on the where you are; the northwestern path is the western side of the site. Only when visitors widest, while the path in the center of the

48 park that connects the tops of the two rail of the path network are made explicit, tunnels is the narrowest. so despite the site’s size of 18 hectares, the space feels much smaller because PROGRAM of the tree canopy and the restrictions around free movement – the longer route The park’s program principally revolves is around 2.7 kilometers long, while the around three things: the consumption shorter, wheelchair-accessible route is of the image of nature, the preservation 1km long. (Grün Berlin, n.d.) There are of the landscape’s ecology, and the benches, clearings, elevated platforms representation of the site’s history. and places to rest and observe all along each kind of path, inviting the spectator to The program manifests as “the take in the sights. The long path connects consumption of the image of nature” the two lawn clearings in the site, which in terms of the way the landscape is are the only spaces where movement is represented, maintained, and how the unrestricted, making ideal, small areas for experience is curated to position the visitor picnics or lounging. as that of a voyeur, an onlooker being invited to witness something supposedly The preservation of the biodiversity on simple, yet remarkable: the untouched. the site is a form of program that does not In fact, what’s made clear through the much involve the visitors of the site. Of development of the site is that the way the course, the vast breadth in terms of the landscape is expressed now is the result plant and animal species which call the site of a great many decisions preceding its home are an attraction to visitors, but aside current state, between ecologists studying from an educated eye that’s able to identify the site, city staff determining the site’s some of the visible variety, the 30 species future use, the various publics around of breeding birds, 57 spider species, 95 the site resisting its return to rail, and the wild bee species, 15 grasshopper species, infrastructure that had laid atop the site more than 350 plan and 49 mushroom before its uses were being considered species inhabiting the space are known anew. Thus, the park represents the image more to the site’s staff than the casual of a “return to nature,” or what has been onlooker. (Grün Berlin n.d.) Nevertheless, described as “fourth nature,” or a type of the space features rows of placards, as new wilderness defined by Ingo Kowarik as seen in figure 11, which discuss the site’s “woodland succession on urban industrial biodiversity and speculates upon the routes sites.” (Kowarik and Langer 2005, 287) these species might have taken to arrive in The existence of this image of nature is the Natur-Park. A moss garden exists below the program itself; it’s meant to be taken an elevated path on the southern-most part in, photographed, walked amongst – but of the site. in a highly controlled manner. The rules

49 The representation of the site’s history is right, giving form to the human need for then mainly relegated to objects that have creative expression in a place that forces been maintained from its previous use as a number of restrictions upon those who a railyard, but there are really two ways find themselves there, acting as the invited in which the site’s history is evoked. The guests of the species inhabiting the space. second are the site’s sculptural elements, created for the site in conjunction with RELICS ÖkoCon/planland’s site plan for the project by the artist’s group ODIOUS. These There are a number of relics on the site, sculptures, including an “accelerator some featured prominently, while others tube,” a staircase, a Belvedere, elevated seem to be given less attention. Examples lookouts, and the elevated walkway of the latter include a few signal towers itself, all contribute to a certain aesthetic which have fallen into ruins; it seems that experience, with the rusted steel and their level of decay is indicative of an ethos specific, angular geometries contributing to that governs the entire space: let things the park feeling as though it is a space that lie as they are and develop or devolve is sourcing imagery from a few different as they will. This could also represent an era; comprising not one time capsule, as aestheticizing of the “return to nature” Girot suggested, but many. While these rather than a commitment to let the signal objects will be discussed in slightly more towers simply fall apart. detail in the following section, there is one that’s worth noting here. On the site’s One of the more prominently featured western edge is the Tälchenweg, which relics is a locomotive, to the left of the runs along an old railroad route and is park’s main entryway lawn and placards. lower than the rest of the site, makes for a There’s a large amount of gravel on the shaded walk and runs underneath what is footpath here, allowing visitors to take left of the constructed tunnel that the rail in the site of the train in its full glory, line previously ran through. The tunnel and presenting as larger than one might its adjacent retaining walls, constructed expect it to be. According to the site’s of large concrete bricks, have provided informational placards, the “water cranes, surface for a large amount of graffiti, with lampposts, and sections of track provide artists spraying every surface imaginable. a nostalgic touch.” The most obvious This is allowed, but the spraying of plants structures are the largest, including the is strictly forbidden, and some of the artists two rail tunnels on the site, both of which defend this rule in their art. The walls are present the opportunity for visitors to stand expressive of a kind of history of a different atop them and take in the surrounding variety from the kind curated by the rest views; the former locomotive hall, housing of the park, with layers of paint suggesting a rotating set of exhibitions and which an accumulation of “history” in its own stands next to a 50-meter-high water

50 tower. The Brückenmeisterei building is dwarfed by the size of the locomotive hall but is located nearby, currently outfitted as space for the administrative offices on site. Finally, the turntable is one of the oldest in Germany, and is put into action on a formal tour of the site.

SYNTHESIS

In Recovering Landscape, Alex Wall points out in his introduction that European park examples have begun to fall between the traditional categories of landscape and urbanism, suggesting certain designs began to “signal a shift of emphasis from the design of enclosed objects to the design and manipulation of larger urban surfaces.” (Wall 1999) He also remarks upon the increased presence of “instrumentality” appearing in designed landscapes, something Richard Weller bases his own essay upon in the Landscape Urbanism Reader. (Wall 1999; Weller 2006) To Wall, this instrumentality is indicated by the landscape functioning as “connective tissue,” organizing the dynamic processes and events that take place upon them, supporting “new relationships and interactions.” This is all to describe the urban park as moving away from projecting the image of the pastoral and moving towards enabling function, drawing a parallel to the “dynamic agricultural field.”

Wall is not alone in this suggestion. Agriculture is referenced and favored over the pastoral across the landscape figure 10: triptych / natur-park edge urbanist literature; Corner admonishes photographs by author

51 the latter in the preface of the same text, citing it as the very thing he seeks to recover the landscape idea from invoking (Corner 1999c). In “Recovering Landscape as a Critical Cultural Practice,” he calls it “passive.” (Corner 1999b)

Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände complicates the simple division between the pastoral and the engineered. On the one hand, it presents “nature” as scenery, to be consumed in a rather simplistic fashion by the onlooker, who is meant to take in the surroundings in dazzling wonderment. Yet the landscape is “worked,” as well, in the sense that is decidedly maintained by a human presence for the purpose of preservation. The idea of preservation is appealing to the visitor and was a clear objective from the communities which advocated for the space to be dedicated to nature, but the ramifications of this decision cannot be seen by the naked eye in all of its complexity and intricacy; thus it exists in idea form for the human onlookers and those aware of the space’s existence, but the space exists for all of the other species present as natural habitat. In this sense, too, the site is “worked” by the species which find themselves there, by the biotope itself, on (mostly) its own terms.

figure 11: triptych / natur-park program photographs by author

52 figure 12: natur-park relics photographs by author

53 figure 13: diagram / natur-park schöneberger südgelände program mix

figure 14: diagram / natur-park schöneberger südgelände edge

54 figure 15: tempelhof airport, july 1945 figure 16: plan: tempelhofer feld, may 2016 source: dod/mil-airfields.de source: grun berlin tempelhofer feld entwicklungs-und pflegeplan

55 figure 17: development timeline, tempelhofer feld

56 Chapter 5: Beginning in September of 2007, Tempelhofer Feld conversations were coordinated by Berlin’s government as to the future INTRODUCTION / DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE: use of the space. Following this was a design competition, which the design Tempelhofer Feld has lived many lives over firm Raumlabor won in 2010, that saw the course of Germany’s history. Once an the opening of the space as a park space airfield for the likes of pioneering aviators with “pioneer” groups piloting projects, like Orville Wright, the 300-hectare site all as part of a campaign to imagine has wavered between infrastructural use future uses for the site. On March 6, 2013, and open space since. A small airport was the “Masterplan Tempelhofer Freiheit,” constructed over a period of four years in developed by the architecture group the 1920s as a place for an estimated four ASTOC and the landscape architecture firm million passengers to pass through per GROSS.MAX was presented at a public year, a staggering amount for the time. conference in Berlin. The city-sponsored (Grün Berlin n.d.) During the time of Nazi plan included housing around the occupation of Germany and its surrounding perimeter of the site (leaving the central territories, plans for a monumental airport park space in tact) and was voted upon in to replace the smaller structure began a referendum by the residents of Berlin in to come to fruition, overseen by Albert 2014. The residents of Berlin passed the Speer, the Nazis’ head architect. (Copley referendum that forbade development on 2017, 702) While construction was halted the site, in effect rejecting the plans for during WWII, the space also played the housing, and embarrassing politicians and role of Gestapo prison (Columbia House developers alike and potentially costing on adjacent property) and a forced labor the city millions. The referendum states camp up until the conclusion of the war. that the park will remain as is for at least The U.S. Air Force assumed control of ten years, at which point another vote the airport once Berlin was split between may be possible. From September 2014 soviets and the allied countries and to May 2016, Berliners worked together coordinated the 1948’s air lift in response with the Senate Department for Urban to a Soviet blockade. Eventually, the field Development and the Environment became an airport once again, and in 1995, and Grün Berlin GmbH to draw up a the building was classified as a historic development and conservation plan for the monument. (Grün Berlin n.d.) The airport park. (Grün Berlin n.d.) ceased operations in 2008 mainly due to technical issues and long-term plans to HOW IT’S DISCUSSED IN THE LITERATURE close all three of Berlin’s in favor of a large airport that is still in the process of Tempelhof has long been the fascination being completed. for many landscape architects and has

57 found its way into the landscape urbanists’ conception of the operational airfield as gaze as well. a landscape in its own right.” (Waldheim 2016, 154) In his 2016 effort, Charles Waldheim dedicates an entire chapter to the In 2013, The Harvard Graduate School of investigation of “Aerial Representation Design held a conference and exhibition, and Airport Landscape,” in which he curated by Charles Waldheim and makes reference to Tempelhof: “Since Sonja Dümpelmann, entitled “Airport the canonical case of Downsview, Landscape,” aimed at presenting practices international design competitions have through projects “for the ecological invited landscape and urbanism proposals enhancement of operating airfields and for a host of redundant airport sites in the conversion of abandoned airfields.” cities around the world. Recent projects (Harvard Graduate School of Design 2013) for airport conversions in Berlin, Germany The conference provided a platform for (2012); Reykjavik, Iceland (2013); Quito, Eelco Hooftman of GROSS.MAX to present Ecuador (2011); Caracas, Venezuela his lecture about the design for Tempelhof, (2012); Casablanca, Morocco (2007); and entitled “Tempelhofer Freiheit: A Prairie Taichung, Taiwan (2011) are indicative of for the Contemporary Urban Cowboy.” this tendency. In each of these cases, the (Harvard Graduate School of Design 2014) finalist projects collectively embodied The project was not realized, voted down the aspirations of landscape urbanist by Berlin residents less than a year later. practice. Eelco Hooftman / Gross.Max.’s competition-winning project for the EDGE / MOVEMENT conversion of Berlin’s Tempelhof Airport; Henri Bava / Agence Ter’s proposal for Like Natur-Park Südgelände, Tempelhof Casablanca; Luis Callejas’s proposals is bounded by operational infrastructure for Quito and Caracas; and Chris Reed on nearly all sides. The site has three / Stoss Landscape Urbanism’s proposal sets of two points of entry: two to the for Taichung Gateway Park are notable west (Tempelhofer Damm), two to the evidence of the fecundity of landscape east (Oderstraße), and two to the north urbanist practices for the abandoned (Columbiadamm). The former airport airfield.” (Waldheim 2016, 154) building stands as the recognizable icon associated with the newly-founded park, Despite this, Waldheim continues by but entrances to the park are located saying that “while the redevelopment of on either side of the building, with none abandoned airfields as large landscape allowing access directly through the projects is clearly relevant to the projective building itself. Given that the building potentials of landscape urbanism, the itself is the largest structure in Europe much more challenging project is for the by surface area, this can make entry to

58 the park feel like a journey unto itself, particularly if a visitor misses a helpful sign. The areas surrounding the site include of a Signage is placed in strategic locations, variety of types of businesses, housing, and such as outside of the hangar at the exit open space. The western side of the sites from at least one of the U-Bahn stops includes offices to the north, and a mix of (Paradestraße), to direct visitors to the businesses to the south of the street as one nearest entrance. One might imagine such approaches Banhof Tempelhof, including a huge space – Tempelhof clocking in at restaurants, beauty and hair salons, florists, an estimated 386 hectares – as having and newsstands. is a green a more porous boundary. But given its space to the northwest of Tempelhof former status as a site of infrastructure, past the Platz der Luftbrücke and borders particularly one that previously held military Park am Gleisdreieck, the last site which operations, barriers including tall fencing, will be investigated here. To the north of walls, and other obstructions remain. To the the site sits a theater space in the U.S. south of the site is a rail line, connecting constructed Columbiahalle, followed by two stations, Banhof Tempelhof (which some housing, allotment gardens, and borders the park on its southwest corner) a private sporting facility. At the eastern and Hermannstraße. A metro station end of Columbiadamm is the Volkspark is on the other side of the Schillerkiez Hasenheide, as well as the Somerbad neighborhood to the park’s east, U Neukölln public swimming pool. The Leinestraße. Schillerkiez neighborhood is to the east of the site, which contains housing and Unlike the Natur-Park Südgelände, some bars and restaurants closer to Tempelhof’s path network provides for a Hermannstraße to the east. number of different ways to move about the site. Though some areas restrict PROGRAM movement (three fenced-in dog runs, the fenced off area outside of the hangar, The park’s program comprises a massive and the starling preservation areas) amount of activities, many of which are skateboarding, in-line skating and bicycling, dictated or guided by very few traces or jogging are allowed and encouraged on of physical form across the site’s vast the paved paths; there is a six-kilometer landscape. Program is dictated by a path which encircles the site expressly for number of temporary projects, a number these purposes. The park is open from of suggested ways to use the space via the sunrise to sunset, when gates presumably site’s signage, and the historical elements block access. Most of the fields themselves that seek to educate the average park are available to move about freely within, visitor about the historical significance with a four-kilometer space for dogs about the site’s variety of uses for over walking outside of the dog run areas. a century. Some of the prescribed uses

59 include various sporting activities, which are made possible at the northern edge of the site with table tennis tables, a soccer field, basketball courts, tennis courts, and baseball fields, and a skate park / granite sculpture. Suggested uses, according to the Tempelhofer Feld’s site plan include: cycling, skating, wind sports (kitelandboarding and kitebuggy), lawn bowling, and model cars. Additionally, the site offers both year-round refreshments and temporary/mobile refreshment stations, along with barbeque areas. There are observation points around the perimeter of the site as well, often directly adjacent to the entrances.

The park is divided programmatically into two distinct areas: the central meadow area and an outer programmatic ring. The central area comprises two thirds of the total area of the site, 202 hectares, bordered on either side by the taxiways. The outer meadow ring, the remaining 101 hectares, contains some preservation area, but can be used for recreational purposes – kite flying, picnics, barbecue, et cetera. In addition, the outer ring is intended for temporary uses, civic initiatives, and other park-like programs.

An “Information trail” marks 20 commemorative and memorial sites with texts and historic pictures that explain eras in Tempelhofer Feld’s history to visitors. The trail’s placards are mostly clustered around the northwestern edge of the park, but all remain situated around the figure 18: triptych / tempelhof edge photographs by author perimeter of the site.

60 According to the informational material provided at the site: temporary projects were chosen by a jury made up of members from the fields of politics, administration and civil society. In a two-phase process around 38 projects were initially chosen in the areas of gardening, education, art and culture, sport and the neighborhood were selected from around 270 applications. There are currently a total of 19 projects on Tempelhofer Feld. Some of these are represented in figure 20.

The temporary housing of refugees and asylum seekers occurs on site on either side of the airport hangar in sealed areas complete with mobile facilities, made possible through a refugee accommodation law on February 4, 2016.

RELICS

The relics have, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, received little attention from formal planning documents since the 2014 referendum. The relics include a former shooting range, a former ammunition bunker, former air traffic control stations, an old plant nursery, a generator hall, a former DVOR system, and former weather stations, and an old airplane bomber used during World War II. Some relics are tied to the U.S. military occupation of the site as a training grounds and for coordinating operations like the historic after World War II. Others commemorate the site’s long history as an airport. All of these figure 19: triptych / tempelhof program relics have a chain link fence surrounding photographs by author

61 them, some of which extend far beyond 2017) Skepticism towards process may have the relic itself, with a pink sign demarcating led residents toward the sentiment that what the relic is. According to reports they were “giving an inch” and the city was from Grün Berlin GmbH published in “taking a mile,” while also feeling that the early 2015, there are some relics which city would not be well-equipped to realize constitute brownfield sites, including the such grand plans for the space, considering former shooting range, a site containing the struggles making headlines over tank storage for , and a waste the airport meant to replace Tempelhof incineration plant. A priority for planners elsewhere in the city. (Julien 2017) in future discussions is to identify a plan for how to remediate certain sites which Process is embraced by the landscape contain damaged grounds or soil pollution. urbanists, particularly when represented (Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung diagrammatically. This presentation of und Umwelt und der Grün Berlin GmbH how processes might expect to evolve, 2016) especially in consideration of ecological processes (Corner 1999b; Waldheim SYNTHESIS 2016) or bureaucratic management and coordination, (Lyster 2006; Reed 2006) is Tempelhof has been a space that has been purportedly meant to advise all those who dictated by time and process for the last are to be informed of a design’s intern that decade. Perhaps due to its enormous such processes were accounted for in the scale, communities living within Berlin likely design. A thin line, however, separates the imagined an impossible cultural loss were diagram as a decoration merely suggestive they to allow over 300 hectares of space in of a project’s complexity from something the center of their city be divided up and that truly informs those reading documents distributed amongst the city’s stakeholders in attempts to ascertain valuable according to their interests. The city, on the information in the form of concrete next one hand, is seeing the city’s needs and steps. If landscape is meant to supplant representing its interests by suggesting planning and architecture as the discipline affordable housing be placed on the site most equipped to structure the future’s (4,700 homes), with a large section of urban development, can the practice rely recreational open space remaining for at on simple evocations? Exactly how much least the near-future. But the prospect of processual complexity is the right amount an initial loss is perhaps what convinced to make evident in a space’s design? And local communities to act so forcefully for what timescale is most appropriate for such keeping the space as is, as represented an effort – when does projecting far into by the “100% Tempelhofer Feld” citizens the future begin to cross into speculative movement that rose up against developing fiction instead over informed estimation? atop the decommissioned airport. (Shead

62 HISTORY TRAIL

TEMPELHOF AIRPORT TEMPELHOFER FELD AS A DAY-TRIP DESTINATION ISLAMIC CEMETERY CULTURAL LANDSCAPE CIVILIAN AIRPORT NEU-TEMPELHOF GARDEN CITY 1 5 9 13 16 19 The airport buildings were built during the Nazi period. As an From the late 18th century Tempelhofer Feld was a popular desti- At the foot of the mosque lies Germany’s oldest Islamic cemetery. The name “Tempelhofer Feld” goes back to the Knights Templar, Tempelhof was a divided airport in divided Berlin, used both for An English-style suburban housing estate with public green spaces, “international airport” it was designed to demonstrate the Nazi nation for excursions. Only the creation of the oval airfield for the Ali Aziz Efendi, the first “permanent envoy of the Sublime Porte” who founded an order in what is now Alt-Tempelhof around 1200. military purposes by the American Army Aviation Detachment and kitchen gardens and community facilities was built here from 1920 regime’s power and provide all the necessary facilities of a modern new airport during the Nazi regime put an end to the recreational in Prussia was buried in 1798 on the Tempelhof Feldmark and In the 13th century their territory extended from Marienfelde to as a civilian airport for Berliners. Until its first closure in 1975, to 1928. Later during the Nazi period, the “garden city” was given building. activities of day trippers. later reinterred here. what is now Mehringplatz. locals regarded it as their “gateway to the world”. the name “Pilots’ quarter” and its streets named after pilots.

AMERICAN AIR FORCE BASE AND THE BEGINNINGS OF CIVIL AVIATION SPORTS FIELD AIRLIFT OF DPS PARADE GROUND OF THE BERLIN GARRISON ESCAPE VIA TEMPELHOFER FELD 2 6 10 14 17 20 Tempelhof airport was an American air force base until the As a military parade and training area, Tempelhofer Feld was the What was at the time the most important horse racing track for During the in 1948/49, Airlift aircraft flew From 1722 Tempelhofer Feld was used for military parades and Every month between 1950 and 1961 several thousand people Allies withdrew. Its site and buildings were divided between the setting for early attempts at flight. Military build-up before the First Berlin and the surrounding area was here from 1830 to 1867. 5,536 Jewish men, women and children who had been living as manoeuvres. After Germany’s defeat in the First World War and arrived in West Berlin from East Berlin and the GDR. Most of them American military base and the civilian airport. World War brought with it vital progress for civil aviation and for Tempelhofer Feld was also the training and match venue for “Displaced Persons” in the American Sector to Frankfurt am Main. the resulting arms limitations imposed on the country the field left the city shortly afterwards, flying out from Tempelhof airport Tempelhofer Feld. Berlin’s first football club in the 1880s. lost its function as military parade ground. to Frankfurt am Main.

COLUMBIA HAUS THE FIRST AIRPORT SPORTPARK NEUKÖLLN MASS RALLIES 3 7 11 15 THE BLOCKADE AND AIRLIFT, 1948/49 18 The former Prussian military prison became a Gestapo prison in The first airport opened here in 1923 and quickly became an air The Sportpark Neukölln was in the green space along Oderstrasse. When the blockaded West Berlin the Allies reacted On the 1st of May 1933 the Nazi regime celebrated a “Day of 1933 and from 1934 to 1936 was Berlin’s only official concentration traffic hub, handling the largest volume of passengers in Europe. The stadium, hockey, football, track and field training ground, by organising an airlift. More than 2.1 million tonnes of goods national labour” on Tempelhofer Feld, one of its first and biggest camp. It held more than 8,000 political prisoners, many of whom During the Second World War it was used in armaments production. and children’s playground was very popular in what was then the were transported on over 278,000 flights to West Berlin to keep its mass rallies. The next day the independent unions were attacked were subjected to terrible tortures. It was demolished in the 1950s. working-class district of Neukölln. population supplied. and destroyed.

FORCED LABOURERS’ CAMP GARRISON CEMETERY THE “CHILDREN’S AIRLIFT” 4 8 12 In 1944 around 2,400 forced labourers lived here in a barrack in the The garrison cemetery was on the north-eastern edge of Tempelhofer The “children’s airlift”, initiated by German aid organisations, flew worst possible conditions. They were put to work in armaments pro- Feld. It was laid out in 1861 at what was then the gateway to the city. approximately ten thousand children from needy families across 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 duction in the airport’s halls and hangars or repairing fighter plans. In later years it was extended several times and monumental war Germany for holidays with host families or in children’s homes LEGENDE memorials were added to the site. from 1953 to 1957. Info-Box

PROJECTS Information pavillion / Information about Vo l ksp a r k Field Development H a s e n h e i d e STADTACKER STADTTEILGARTEN SCHILLERKIEZ PLATTENVEREINIGUNG PLATZ DER 1 6 12 E LUFTBRÜCKE FRIESENSTRASSE Park Supervision / Service The Stadtacker project is an exhibition project with a wide range of The Schillerkiez local community garden seeks to inspire critical This building is made of elements recycled from eastern and west PLATZ DER 104 T 030 70 09 06-88 participants that uses an artists’ garden to create a link between dialogue. The project creates an open field structure that offers the German tower blocks. The “historically unique” recycled building LUFTBRÜCKE 104 GOLSSENER STRASSE 2 3 the city and nature. The project explores issues based around the neighbourhood a space for self-organised and creative activities. provides a forum for discussions on sustainable urban develop- 1 104 COLUMBIADAMM Observation Point fundamental principles of urban farming, the transition town and Themed evenings, round table discussions and cultural events round ment and a project space for events, workshops and pioneering F permaculture. out the range of activities held in the garden. projects. COLUMBIADAMM WC Albatros gemeinnützige Gesellschaft für soziale und gesundheitliche Dienstleistungen Teilhabe e. V. zukunftsgeraeusche GbR 4 P www.stadtacker.com, [email protected] www.schillerkiez.blogsport.de, [email protected] www.plattenvereinigung.de, [email protected] G 104 1 Handicapped accessible WC FRIEDHÖFE NUTURE MINI ART GOLF RÜBEZAHL GEMEINSCHAFTSGARTEN COLUMBIADAMM 2 7 2 Year-Round Refreshments The nuture Mini ART Golf art project involved 18 artists creating in- The Rübezahl community garden pioneers have created a place where 104 teractive works of art on Tempelhofer Feld based on ideas such as people from the Neukölln neighbourhood can meet on Tempelhofer H WC SOMMERBAD 5 NEUKÖLLN ecological issues and our future reactions to nature. Here everyone Feld. This community garden is also a green classroom, a fruit and Temporary / start Mobile Refreshments can “get into the game”, in the truest sense of the term. vegetable garden, a meeting place for the neighbourhood and a 7 U8 playground for children. BODDINSTRASSE nuture ART GbR www.nuture-art.de, [email protected] I 6 Sea of meadows – Tempelhofer Rübezahl Gemeinschaftsgarten gemeinnütziger e. V. 8 Feld is an important habitat 9 4 for animals and plants. www.ruebezahl-tempelhof.de, [email protected] 20 3

GEMEINSCHAFTSGARTEN ALLMENDE-KONTOR E. V. J U6 5 Dog exercise area 8 PARADESTRASSE 16 WC ODERSTRASSE More than 500 horticulturists design nearly 300 raised beds and BBQ area bring the experience of communal use to life. Founded in 2011 on HERRFURTHPLATZ TEMPELHOFER DAMM TEMPELHOFER 17 18 P 5,000 sq. m2 as part of Allmende-Kontor, a networking centre for K LICHTENRADERSTRASSE community gardens and urban agriculture, the thriving community Plattenvereinigung Skate park / garden is one of the largest and has become a lively place of encoun- Granite sculpture 19 start ter and recreation in Neukölln, Berlin and beyond. VOGELFREIHEIT ODERSTRASSE 9 13 14 Wind sports area for Gemeinschaftsgarten Allmende-Kontor e. V. L 15 This spot is a new centre for urban sports culture and a meeting 6 8 10 kitelandboarding and www.allmende-kontor.de, [email protected] kitebuggy place for skateboarders, dancers, artists, BMXers, etc. The idea of 7 11 making a granite sculpture out of slabs recycled from the “Palast (MOBILE) BICYCLE REPAIR SHOP 9 der Republik” emerged out of an online dialogue in 2007 and was M Cycling nuture Mini ART Golf The educational project RadWerkstatt THF offers professional implemented in 2012, partly in construction workshops involving 14 young people. guidance to young people at the transition from school to work 15 Skating as they learn the trade of manual bicycle repair and prepare 16 TREFFPUNKT RELIGION UND GESELLSCHAFT Grün Berlin GmbH TEMPELHOFER 17 3 for vocational training in the field of bicycle technology. Park www.gruen-berlin.de, [email protected] N DAMM U8 The installation by the interreligious Treffpunkt Religion und 18 LEINESTRASSE Soccer field visitors can borrow tools and do their own bike repairs for a small 10 11 Gesellschaft e. V. association invites visitors to “Come together, start donation. The project promoter offers schools and other educa- a dialogue, and continue on together”. It consists of 7 rows of 7 12 tional institutions individually tailored workshops in the areas of 13 Basketball seats placed in two concentric circles designed to promote dialogue. O WC sustainability, environmental protection and renewable energies. start Treffpunkt Religion und Gesellschaft e. V. TEMPELHOF Table tennis die Taschengeldfirma e. V. www.religion-gesellschaft.de, [email protected] www.taschengeldfirma.net, [email protected] U6 WC TEMPELHOF P Lawn bowling FORSCHERZELT FREILANDLABOR BRITZ 4 This open air laboratory offers school and kindergarten groups and 12 Model cars other visitors environmental education on nature on Tempelhofer RINGBAHNSTRASSE 13 Feld, providing tours exploring its flora and fauna, investigating Q Entrance aspects such as “Climate and Weather” and observing “Flight in Nature”. Handicapped accessible Freilandlabor Britz e. V. – Förderverein zur Naturerziehung im R entrance www.freilandlabor-britz.de, [email protected] Vogelfreiheit

Handicapped accessible JUGGER THEATER DER WELTEN – KULTURGATE parking 5 14 S U6 This sport’s players make their own “Pompfen” and “Juggs”. The KULTURGate is an educational art project for people on stage or ALT TEMPELHOF 0 150 300 Jugger e. V. association maintains the world’s first official Jugger behind it. KULTURGate is a forum, a meeting place, a workshop 450m Former airport runways and landing strips ca. 2 km field here as a meeting point and training and competition centre. for cultures and different languages, for anyone interested and The association is open to all those interested in Jugger and anyone 9. figure 20Mobile: Fahrradwerkstattplan: tempelhoferfor experts, young and old, feld a space for creativity, may that seeks 2016 to can take part in its public training sessions. promote understanding among people. Ring path ca. 6 km Jugger e. V. LERNORT NATUR KULTURGate Tempelhof e. V. www.jugger-berlin.de, [email protected] source10 : tempelhof projekt gmbh andwww.kulturgate.de, © [email protected]ün berlin gmbh Why is the sky blue? In the Lernort Natur children and their parents, kindergartens and schools can explore natural phenomena. TEUBERT – PEDAL-CARS AND BIKES The transparent “Bauhaus re use Pavillon” classroom encour- DINGADU-TALENTESCHULE 17 15 Mobilcenter Berlin rents pedal-cars, pedal-karts, go-karts and ages children to experiment and interact creatively with natural DINGADU-TALENTESCHULE is a unicycling and circus school with bicycles on Tempelhofer Feld. More than 70 seats are available on materials. a balance parcours, which offers various courses and projects for pedal-cars and comfortable bikes and tandems for exploring the children and adults, individuals and groups (e. g. school groups Die Globale e. V. Field and its 45-metre-wide runways. www.dieglobale.org, [email protected] or corporate events). Those interested in participating can do so right away at the school or make a date to do so. Marko Teubert, Mobilcenter Berlin www.mobilcenterberlin.de, [email protected] M.I.N.T. GRÜNES KLASSENZIMMER DINGADU-TALENTESCHULE 11 www.dingadu.de, [email protected] Supported by the Peter-Petersen-Schule Neukölln Förderverein, children and teenagers from cooperating primary and secondary NORDISCH AKTIV-COURSE AND RENTAL CENTRE schools are offered science classes outdoors and in the “Bauhaus STECKDOSE – ELECTRIC MOBILITY/SEGWAYS 18 16 The German Ski Association (Deutscher Skiverband) Nordic re use Pavillon” all year round. Steckdose Kreuzberg enables visitors to experience electric-powered sports centre is a port of call for Nordic sports fans all year Verein der Eltern, Freunde und Förderer der Peter-Petersen-Grundschule e. V. mobility on Tempelhofer Feld. People aged ten and over can try out Electric mobility/Segways round on Tempelhof Field. It serves as a location for courses and www.mintgruenesklassenzimmer.tumblr.com, [email protected] this new form of transport and ride Segways and electric scooters Nordisch aktiv – Kurs- und Verleihzentrum Jugger training, and a service and rental centre for Nordic roller sport over the Field’s wide open spaces. equipment in summer and langlauf skiing in winter.

Steckdose Kreuzberg UG & Co. KG Nordisch aktiv GbR www.steckdose-berlin.de, [email protected] www.nordisch-aktiv.de, [email protected]

figure 21: tempelhof relics photographs by author

63 figure 22: diagram / tempelhofer feld program mix

figure 22: diagram / tempelhofer feld edge + relic

64 figure 24: gleisdreieck railyard, 1943 figure 25: plan: park am gleisdreieck, 2014 source: © land berlin source: © atelier loidl link: http://www.publicspace.org/en/works/g047-park-am-gleisdreieck link: http://www.publicspace.org/en/works/g047-park-am-gleisdreieck

65 figure 26: development timeline, park am gleisdreieck

66 Chapter 6: programmatic elements woven throughout Park am Gleisdreieck the space. Leonard Grosch, the chief designer behind Gleisdreieck for Atelier INTRODUCTION / DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE: Loidl, has discussed the importance of collective memory and how spaces must In comparison to Tempelhof, Gleisdreieck function as “heterotopias” in order to has had a much more gradual transition construct narratives effectively. (Grosch from infrastructure to open space, and Petrow 2015) In addition, Grosch cites though the transformation has not Edward O. Wilson’s concept of “biophilia” been seamless. Similar to Schöneberger in stating that humans have an innate Südgelände, the area was first contained need for connection to all living things, a functional railyard. In the decades which the park aims to provide through after World War II, the land was used curation of a variety of “natures”: second as a trash heap for approximately three nature (its allotment gardens), third nature decades; this preceded another few (landscaped areas), and fourth nature decades of negotiations about what the (vegetation on fallow lands). (Grosch and site would ultimately become. First there Petrow 2015) The park’s programming was a proposed motorway in the 1970s, includes relics of past uses and the followed by environmental assessments introduction of new elements, with a focus and a request from the public to convert on atmosphere and legibility in each sub- the space into a nature preserve in 1992. space. That same year, the space was needed for logistical concerns related to the rebuilding HOW IT’S DISCUSSED IN THE LITERATURE of Potsdamer Platz. Between 1999-2005, negotiations between municipal agencies, The designer himself, Leonard Grosch, real estate and community groups wrote a book with Constanze Petrow occurred, culminating in surveys being detailing the design intention, a retroactive conducted within a 20-minute walking history of the thought processes that went distance of the park, with a 25% response into the formation of the park entitled rate. After a series of public charrettes, the Designing Parks. Grosch summarizes his firm Atelier Loidl won the right to design overarching design goals as follows: “I the space in 2006. Construction began … undertake to create spatially distinct, in 2010, with the park opening in phases socially exciting open spaces that remain thereafter: Ostpark in 2011, Westpark in flexible over time and are atmospherically 2013, and the Bottleneck Connector in concentrated and clear in form.” (Grosch 2014. and Petrow 2015, 14) In the text, Grosch adopts a number of principles from across The park’s design attempts to support a the urban design literature, including wide range of uses through the variety of Jane Jacobs (on variety in cities), William

67 H. Whyte (on program variety and as artefacts of the former railway facilities triangulation), Rachel and Stephen Kaplan and, especially at Gleisdreieck, views of the (on the need for understanding and urban landscape. At Südgelände the park discovery in the landscape), Jan Gehl (on was mostly there, so there was no need for ground rules for lively spaces), Edward O. a competitive process. The planning work Wilson (on the concept of “biophilia”), and was based on what was already there, a Elizabeth K. Meyer (on nature’s presence in matter of providing access for people and urban landscapes leading to mindfulness). designing guidelines for the management (Grosch and Petrow 2015) Whether this of vegetation and the protection of acts as a strategy to convince the reader of cultural relics The multi-stage competitive the author’s pluralistic approach, Groch’s procedures for Gleisdreieck Park were … book frames the development process more extensive and, in combination with according to how the designer himself the participation processes, unique to wishes this history to be represented. date.” (Kowarik 2015, 220)

Though not in response to Grosch’s EDGE / MOVEMENT text, another book about the park’s development process and results was Grosch states that integration with the published by Andra Lichtenstein and Flavia city is one of the park’s core tenets. He Alice Mameli in 2015, containing essays states in his book, “what is characteristic and interviews concerning how the park’s of parks in the twenty-first century is how transition from infrastructure to park space intensively they are interwoven with the impacted themselves or the residents of surrounding urban space. Instead of the the city around them. In one of the essays self-reference that was inherent in many contained in the book, the Head of the parks of the nineteenth and first half of Department for Ecosystems and Plant the twentieth century, parks today are no Ecology at the Institute of Ecology at longer the “other” in the city but rather Technische Universität Berlin, Ingo Kowarik, urban locations with spatial openness and weighs in on how urban wilderness multifaceted relationships to the urban became possible in the park. Kowarik, surroundings.” (Grosch and Petrow 2015, who has written on all three of the spaces 182) As mentioned, Grosch calls upon discussed in this thesis, poses the question: respected urban designers and planners “ls Gleisdreieck Park merely a Berlin of the past to underscore his points; in this oddity… or a park concept indicative of the case, he mentions Jane Jacobs’ concept of future?”(Kowarik 2015, 216) He concludes border vacuums, Jan Gehl’s discussion of his chapter by stating that in the planning soft edges, and Richard Sennett’s advocacy processes specific to Gleisdreieck and for permeable borders as animating forces Natur-Park Südgelände, “The genius loci for how to conceive of the oddly shaped counted. This included wild nature as much park’s edge. (Grosch and Petrow 2015)

68 The park’s edge is splintered along its three separate geometries, which form a cumulative whole but provide for a variety of edge conditions around the perimeter of the space. The park is bordered on its northern edge by Landwehr Canal, which separates the park from Tilla-Durieux- Park, a stretch of green that leads to nearby Potsdamer Platz. This northern section of the park is bordered to the right by Flottswellstraße, with housing complexes directly adjacent to the park’s green space, making sighting somewhat difficult from the neighborhoods on the other side. The northern part of the park narrows as it moves northward, creating a small outcropping for the northern edge’s entrance, cause it to be rather inconspicuous. To the northeast is a large parking garage, which blocks sight lines to the east. The center of the northern Westpark contains entrances along its western edge, with entrances set back amidst the tall housing blocks bordering either side at Kurfürstenstraße, Pohlstraße, and Lützowstraße. There is one entrance on the eastern edge of Westpark from Luckenwalder Strasse, but the entrance is just beyond a highway viaduct and takes a turn such that the park is essentially impossible to see from the street.

The border on the eastern edge of Westpark and the eastern edge of Ostpark is a line of active rail that moved underground at the midway point of the Westpark; thus, this is where the connect figure 27: triptych / gleisdreieck edge photographs by author between the two parks is forced to occur.

69 The connection doubles as an access road, with some adjacent sites still empty voids. The road is fairly narrow along the edge of Westpark but winds and widens somewhat upon approaching Ostpark from the north. The road is used by cyclists, rollerbladers, runners, walkers, dog walkers, skateboarders, and the like, some of whom are using the through road on longer journeys while others circle around the park itself, which maintains a frenetic energy along the corridor. The park seems to partially embrace its closeness to the running rail line, with visibility reduced only by a chain fence that is almost startlingly close to the lines. This road extends down and connects the Bottleneck Connecter (Flaschenhalspark) farther to the south. Shooting out to the east of this path are a number of the trails leading to the path network structuring Ostpark. The Ostpark’s northern edge also points to the Landwehr Canal but does not quite reach it, with the Deutsches Technikmuseum acting as an adjacent northern barrier. There are three points of entry to the east of Ostpark, one to the north, and one to the south. The entrance points east are more easily visible to the street than those on the western edge of Westpark because the urban fabric continues on the opposite side of the street (Möckernstraße) rather than directly atop the park itself. The Yorkstraße entrances seek to form a kind of plaza space with two large openings inviting passersby into the park with two sets of stairs on either side of the street along with long, gently sloped ramps. Because of the grade change, the figure 28: triptych / gleisdreieck program photographs by author park is only visible because of the touches

70 made to this space, which also contends with the Yorckbrücken bridges overhead and a busy Yorkstraße street full of cars and without a nearby crosswalk. The sidewalks leading to the plaza-like concrete rectangular cutouts are rather narrow, allowing a visitor to take stock of where they are only upon their being directly in front of them.

Flaschenhalspark’s only other entrance is its southernmost point, at the intersection of Monumentstraße and Am Lockdepot, which intersects above the park space itself. A ramp and set of stairs make the park accessible from this point. The western side of the Flaschenhalspark is bordered by the north-south line of rail that ran along the western side of the Ostpark, while the eastern side of Flaschenhalspark is bordered by a discount store, a supermarket, and an auto repair shop.

PROGRAM

The sheer breadth of programming offerings on the site rivals that of Tempelhofer Feld, but are largely formalized across the park’s environment rather than existing as resident-led initiatives. In Grosch’s text, he differentiates the different areas according to their thematic grouping: formalized play, including playgrounds, table tennis, bocce; sports, including formal (beach volleyball, basketball, soccer, and the skater bowl), informal (certain paved areas with markings, sandy open space) and figure 29: triptych / gleisdreieck program photographs by author in between (the play topography in the

71 Westpark) spaces; sports fields; a fitness southern tip, which includes a basketball park with equipment geared towards the court underneath the highway running elderly; and various types of open green perpendicular to the park. These spaces space not fit for sports activities: a dog run, seem to consider the teenager’s need community gardens, allotment gardens, to have gathering spaces that are and forested green space. (Grosch and somewhat secluded from the prying eyes Petrow 2015) In addition, there are set of adults and children alike, a space to pairs of oversized swings throughout the be themselves amidst the awkwardness park. that accompanies this stage of youth. The skater bowl and sporting courts provide Curating spaces for all ages seems to this space for some, but the adjoining wall have been a thoughtful consideration has been donated to graffiti artists as well, throughout the park’s design. There perhaps in the hopes that if a space is are different types of playgrounds with provided on site for such activity, spraying different unique elements specific to each won’t occur elsewhere for fear of disturbing space and curated for different ages: the choreographed aesthetic schema. “Nest,” in the north of Westpark, is geared towards small children up to six years in The park’s main north-south and east- age, along with the “Children’s Room,” to west axes provide a diversity of views the north of Ostpark. South of this space and activities for passersby, which seems in the Ostpark is the “Forest of Poles,” a to be a primary way in which the park is playground aimed at children aged 6-12. utilized. Given its odd shape and central There are also spaces for “experiencing location in the city, it’s easy to imagine nature,” according to Grosch (165), which the space either providing a scenic detour are formalized in the sense that they or a convenient throughway for many are fenced off areas containing natural Berliners on their way somewhere else. In elements that could be made into play either case, runners and cyclists can race tools with a bit of imagination, such as alongside the trains heading in the north- pieces of wood, stone, and other elements. south direction, or can take in the vast (Grosch and Petrow 2015) The “Wooden lawn spaces and forested wilderness and Shack,” on the Westpark’s western edge, allotment areas running east-west. contains a play area for infants up through children aged twelve. These are all located RELIC in close proximity to food stands, taking into account that parents with children may Relics are kept to a minimum on the site, wish to have such services near where their but the design seems as though it wants children are likeliest to play. In the center of to make strategic reference to them in a the park is a place designed for teenagers, select few locations. The running rail lines along with the Flaschenhalspark’s serve as an aesthetic supplement to the

72 park’s curation of a number of different etc.)“ (Marot 1999) Interestingly, this surface and path treatments; in some cases seems to express an alignment with rail lines are left as they were, in others ideas expressed throughout the rest of they are filled in with concrete with only the landscape urbanism discourse while the top of the rail itself exposed, lying breaking with it simultaneously. On the smooth with the fill. There are pieces of one hand, Marot is suggesting here that a track distributed about, many near the single authority could not possibly dictate path network, and are positioned in such what occurs within a specific site nor what a way that they seem to be sculptural in transpires around it. Though this seems quality, placed there for effect, rather than to be an obvious statement, others within in an attempt to replicate authenticity of the discourse seem to take up a position where lines had previously ran. However, that runs counter; Charles Waldheim, in one line runs from the Flaschenhalspark up particular, conceives of the landscape through the Ostpark, and visitors can still architect becoming the urbanists of our see the connection over the Yorkstraße, time, (Waldheim 2016, 205) It has become pointing to the bridges’ previous function. conventional to think of urbanism and A certain kind of ‘relic’ that is seemingly landscape as opposing one another--or maintained from the site’s previous use to think of landscape as merely providing are the retaining walls surrounding the temporary relief from urban life as shaped site’s perimeter. There was seemingly by buildings and infrastructure. But, little effort to flatten the site’s topography driven in part by environmental concerns, (which had likely been altered previously landscape has recently emerged as a to accommodate its former infrastructure), model and medium for the city, with some thus necessitating the maintenance of the theorists arguing that landscape architects retaining walls, which keeps the entirety are the urbanists of our age. In Landscape of the site at a different grade from the as Urbanism, one of the field’s pioneers surrounding street network. presents a powerful case for rethinking the city through landscape. Charles SYNTHESIS Waldheim traces the roots of landscape as a form of urbanism from its origins in the In Sebastien Marot’s discussion of Renaissance through the twentieth century. sub-urbanism in Corner’s Recovering Growing out of progressive architectural Landscape, he states, “That landscape culture and populist environmentalism, as a larger milieu is rarely subject to the the concept was further informed by the control of a single authority means that the nineteenth-century invention of landscape forms of relational structuring cannot be so architecture as a ”new art” charged with formal as they are vehicles for negotiation reconciling the design of the industrial city and mediation (among neighboring with its ecological and social conditions. constituencies, management authorities, In the late twentieth and early twenty-

73 first centuries, as urban planning shifted Both of these remarks suggest the difficulty from design to social science, and as not just faced by Grosch and Atelier Lloidl urban design committed to neotraditional in the establishment of a place with a models of town planning, landscape variety of formal programmatic elements urbanism emerged to fill a void at the that seek to activate the space, but for heart of the contemporary urban project. the landscape urbanists as well. Can a Generously illustrated, Landscape as theoretical formlessness apply to spaces Urbanism examines works from around the where a great many interested stakeholders world by designers ranging from Ludwig wish to see themselves and their interests Hilberseimer, Andrea Branzi, and Frank represented within the space? Is a Lloyd Wright to James Corner, Adriaan site, particularly one adopted from an Geuze, and Michael Van Valkenburgh. infrastructural use, at risk of fostering the The result is the definitive account of an border vacuum condition Jacobs speaks emerging field that is likely to influence of? How much does the establishment of the design of cities for decades to come certain forms deemed necessary begin (Waldheim 2016) suggesting a power to dictate the design of a site’s overall akin to that of the architect during program? In other words, is it possible modernism’s deterministic approach to the to appease one audience through formal built environment. This power, however, interventions, and not others? inspires an entirely different reaction when it manifests in, say, New Urbanism. (Waldheim 2006b)

Kelly Shannon also outlines Marcel Smets’ concept of uncertainty and advocacy for a different set of instruments towards urbanism at the landscape architect’s disposal. With these instruments, (the grid, casco, clearing, and montage) Smets preferences not a lack of clarity but an indeterminacy in regards to how future development might articulate itself. (Shannon 2006a, 146) Shannon describes what Smets is getting at here with her suggestion that, “minimal interventions seek to render more evident what is already there and incorporates the particular site into its larger setting.” (Shannon 2006a, 146)

74 figure 30: gleisdreieck relics photographs by author

75 figure 31: diagram / park am gleisdreieck program mix

figure 32: diagram / park am gleisdreieck relic + edge

76 77 Chapter 7: through invocation of Fredric Jameson, Conclusion where Berrizbeita suggests design must work to foreground “the organization of LANDSCAPE URBANISM: WHAT’S LEFT UNRECOVERED? the means themselves over any particular aesthetic end.” (Berrizbeita 1999, 197) She This research sought to outline what then poses the question: “Who is, then, landscape urbanism has come to mean, the subject that the modern park seeks to in theory and in practice, by examining its address?” (Berrizbeita 1999, 197) central tenets as encapsulated by a set of built projects. However, there is time worth Berrizbeita ultimately lands on the dual spent on what landscape urbanism did not function the Bos Park serves in allowing for become, what was left on the table by those the cultivation of individuality “as by the contributing to the discourse with threads requisites of the new collective nature of that were left unsewn into the larger project. modern life,” where the private individual exists in a dialectical relationship with the Anita Berrizbeita asks a simple yet social.” (Berrizbeita 1999, 198) It is the provocative question towards the end of park’s productive capacity that allows the her discussion of the Amsterdam Bos Park subject to straddle these two worlds and in Corner’s 1999 collection, Recovering enjoy the fruits of both in simultaneity. Landscape. Berrizbeita makes the case Whether or not the Amsterdam Bos lives for shifting towards consideration of up to the author’s projected potential is not landscape as “system of production,” what’s been studied here, but the way in focusing on the way it works rather than its which Berrizbeita discusses the objective scenic qualities. This is a theme presented of the designer is unique. The designer is repeatedly within the discourse and is not foregrounded in the design’s end but not revolutionary in and of itself, but embedded in its means, present neither Berrizbeita then veers into territory more through formal programmatic elements seldomly considered by the landscape nor a diagrammed scheme detailing the urbanists. In a section entitled Object/ designer’s near-clairvoyant command of Subject, she states “A reconceptualization processual knowledge. Rather, the park of the landscape object is, by necessity, is made meaningful through its use, its accompanied by a reconceptualization of significance becoming activated by the ways the subject with which it is engaged…the in which it strives towards constituting a reunification of formal composition in favor collective identity amongst its communities of an emphasis on the system of production of users. induces a change in the relations between the designer and the work and between Mohsen Mostafavi, though one of the the perceiving subject and the park.” few major contributors to the discourse (Berrizbeita 1999, 196) This is reiterated with an edited volume of essays that

78 expanded the discourse’s reach, also holds recovery of landscape do not seem to a unique position amidst the landscape integrate seamlessly with the ways in which urbanists. Mostafavi’s main appearance landscape urbanism’s trajectory has been in the discourse’s literature is in his own realized by the discourse’s successive essay for Machinic Landscape, which authors. Corner held onto the idea of differs significantly from the rest of the the landscape imaginary through his text despite serving as its introduction. contribution to 2006’s Landscape Urbanism Whereas the essays in Machinic Landscape Reader, suggesting public spaces are offer a mix of bold theoretical connections “firstly the containers of collective memory tethered to discussion and examples of and desire” before they are “secondly… representational methods, Mostafavi himself places for geographic and social is much more interested in exploring the imagination to extend new relationships landscape urbanism idea which is not and sets of possibilities.” (Corner 2006, 32) steeped in theory, but rather remains Here, the planner is blamed for the lack of accessible to those who regularly consider imagination that has stifled the productive the experiential qualities of urban space. design of public space, which is a line of “Instead of a nostalgic yearning for lost argument many others throughout the models of public space, monuments, discourse pick up. piazzas, we should imagine, support, and construct alternative models of What role does the planner play in issues urbanism that are open to, and encourage, relating to design of public open space? participation by all citizens.” (Mostafavi Some answers reside with the analysis of 2003, 9) The reference to democratized the post-infrastructural sites dissected space is more than a throwaway phrase, for previously, through which a handful of Mostafavi restates and reinforces his exact important themes emerge. meaning in the conclusion to the essay, “Landscape urbanism will in future, with WHAT’S BEEN LEARNED its temporal and political characteristics, set the scene (albeit momentary) for First, the conditions inherited by the democracy in action.” (Mostafavi 2003, 9) analyzed projects are reinforced through In discussion of materiality, Mostafavi nods their reconceptualization. The airport is towards the importance of both the physical still fenced in; the railyard still elevated vs. the conceptual and the permanent or sunken, depending on the course the vs. ephemeral qualities that structure track took; and sites are splintered or urban space, which in turn “provide new enveloped by still-functional infrastructure opportunities for the redefinition of the woven into the surrounding urban fabric. public sphere.” (Mostafavi 2003, 9) These conditions speak to a larger pattern inherent across projects that seek Finally, Corner’s initial ambitions for the to transform sites that previously held

79 infrastructure, industry, or otherwise require closely to the requests made by the public. remediation. In all of these cases, planning Tempelhof, going the opposite route not only acts as an intermediary between in presenting the un-designed, 100% the various publics these newly constituted Tempelhof that offers little in the way of open spaces will potentially abut, but formality and instead favors a rotating cast also ushers along the process by which of ‘pioneer projects,’ is also the result of remediation and operationalization are a separate protracted debate, preceded resolved over time. by those of Gleisdreick and Natur-Park. Both of those processes had sewn enough Second, with any space comes a certain distrust amongst residents against the amount of contestation. Claims over the ambitions of the local government that by rightful use or ownership of space often the time a referendum vote took place, the are made long before the involvement public will had mobilized quite forcefully of a designer. Consequently, with spatial against any city-driven attempts to carve contestation comes the need for planning. up the space. Ultimately, however, planning By zeroing in on the designer’s influence on prevailed in the establishment of an constructed projects, the landscape urbanist ongoing process that decides the site’s use discourse does a disservice to the larger collectively through continual participation process involved in their formation, despite and democratic input. Design is mobilized paying lip-service to the complexity and in small doses, with creativity embedded flexibility that is characteristic of landscape in impermanence, as landscape urbanism urbanist projects. Only so much flexibility often suggests as an ideal but rarely can be etched into the diagram, and only conceives as a viable option. so much detail can originate from a single source before a design scheme falls victim Finally, across each site, what history to the same sort of formal determinism does the relic tell? In What Time is This that has been weaponized by planners and Place, Kevin Lynch problematizes the relic. architects of the past, a point oft-cited by “Ancient things seem most impressive in the landscape urbanists. one of two contexts: either quite isolated, in some wild and lonely place, hidden or high, Gleisdrieck, an example of a space or in intimate contact with contemporary attempting to accommodate the vast needs life, embedded at the center.” (Lynch 1976, of varying publics through a formalized 170) The latter would seem to be a better program set, is the result of a long public match for the three parks, but oddly in debate that dictated some of the criteria each case, relics have the quality of being used to choose the winning scheme for “hidden in plain sight,” with Tempelhof’s the site’s design competition. Ultimately, scale creating a vast discovery landscape, the winning design by Atelier Llodl was while Gleisdreieck and Natur-Park mostly the one that appeared to adhere most embed their ‘ruin’ fragments within the

80 heavily forested “wilderness” of each site. underpinnings and offer a critical position on its larger aims as a discourse, especially Undoubtedly, however, each site’s as these aims are transmuted through location in Central Berlin allows the relics new iterations of the same discussions to brush up against “contemporary life, concerning landscape theory and practice. embedded at the center.” With this, Lynch Perhaps landscape urbanism’s most critical continues: “There are many engaging error is that its reflection on past projects structures in which an older framework tends to consider designed solutions as was remodeled for contemporary use too much the product of the designer and esthetic advantage was taken of themselves, rather than illustrating the the resulting contrast of form… This impact the combination of the conditions approach is not preservation, although it inherent within sites mixed with the social implies attention to history. It may mean conditions that enabled a designer’s destruction, and certainly modification. It involvement have on completed projects. requires an interpretation of history that Each of these realities are essential roles may be in error and may change from for the planner, perhaps the role most generation to generation. The selection of suited for the complex aspects of time the remains whose visual presence should ingrained in sites which experience similar be amplified is a consequence of that transformations. It is conceivable that the interpretation.” (Lynch 1976, 170–171) The planner and designer, rather than remain impact of such decisions indeed presents at odds, make greater strides towards daunting consequences, with Lynch offering facilitating spaces that help remind us of our a suggestion for how to approach the collective identity, working together to trace problem. “Near-future hopes and fears near-future hopes and fears on present should be traced on present surfaces. surfaces. Venice should be seen to be sinking… The signs of past and future would be material for esthetic contrast and coherence. Expecting the cyclical return, Yeats rebuilt the tower at Ballylee, and then he wrote on it: ‘…and may these characters remain, when all is ruin once again.’”

Ultimately, the aims of landscape urbanism are commendable. This research has meant to provide a perspective from a “sympathetic skeptic” (Vicenzotti, 2017, 75) in order to both strengthen its theoretical

81 Bibliography

Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition. Charles R. Walgreen Foundation Lectures. University of Chicago Press. https://books.google.com/books?id=fGLrswEACAAJ.

Balfour, Alan. 1999. “Octagon: The Persistence of the Ideal.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 87–101. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Barth, Lawrence. 2003. “Diagram, Dispersal, Region.” In Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape, 33–39.

Bélanger, Pierre. 2006. “Synthetic Surfaces.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Bennett, Paul. 1998. “The Urban Landscape Gets Its Due,” in Landscape Architecture Magazine (Vol. 88, No. 3, March 1998): 26, 28.” Landscape Architecture Magazine 88 (No. 3): 26–28.

Berger, Alan. 2006. “Drosscape.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 197–218. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Berrizbeita, Anita. 1999. “The Amsterdam Bos: The Modern Public Park and the Construction of Collective Experience.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Castells, Manuel. 2003. “Urbanism in the Information Age.” In The Cybercities Reader, 464. Routledge Urban Reader Series. Routledge.

Copley, Clare. 2017. “Curating Tempelhof: Negotiating the Multiple Histories of Berlin’s ‘Symbol of Freedom.’” Urban History 44 (04): 698–717. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0963926816000869.

Corner, James. 1999a. “Eidetic Operations and New Landscapes.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 153–69. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

———. 1999b. “Introduction: Recovering Landscape as a Critical Cultural Practice.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture. Princeton Architectural Press.

———. , ed. 1999c. “Recovering Landscape as a Critical Cultural Practice.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture. Princeton Architectural Press.

———. , ed. 1999d. Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

82 ———. 2003. “Landscape Urbanism.” In Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape, 58–63.

———. 2006. “Terra Fluxus.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 21–34. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Cosgrove, Denis. 1999. “Liminal Geometry and Elemental Landscape.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 103–20. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

———. 2004. “Landscape and Landschaft.” German Historical Institute Bulletin 35 (Fall): 57– 71.

Czerniak, Julia. 2006. “Looking Back at Landscape Urbanism: Speculations on Site.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 105–24. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Descombes, Georges. 1999. “Shifting Sites: The Swiss Way, Geneva.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 79–86. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

District Office Tempelhof-Schöneberg. 2018. “Vom Grazer Platz über den Dürer Platz zum Breslauer Platz.” February 21, 2018. https://www.berlin.de/ba-tempelhof-schoeneberg/ ueber-den-bezirk/spaziergaenge/2018/artikel.671989.php.

Duany, Andres. 2010. “Andres Duany vs Harvard GSD.” Metropolis (blog). November 3, 2010. http://www.metropolismag.com/cities/landscape/duany-vs-harvard-gsd/.

Easterling, Keller. 2003. “Error.” In Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape, 154–59.

Entreves, Maurizio Passerin d’. 2016. “Hannah Arendt.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Winter 2016. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/arendt/.

Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. 1st edition. Basic Books. New York: Basic Books.

Girot, Christophe. 1999. “Four Trace Concepts in Landscape Architecture.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 59–78. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

———. 2004. “Eulogy of the Void: The Lost Power of Berlin Landscapes After the Wall.” disP – The Planning Review 40 (156): 35–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2004.1055686 9.

———. 2006. “Vision in Motion: Representing Landscape in Time.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 87–104. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

83 Grosch, Leonard, and Constanze A. Petrow. 2015. Designing Parks: Berlin’s Park Am Gleisdreieck or the Art of Creating Lively Places. Jovis.

Grün Berlin. n.d. “Nature Park Schöneberger Südgelände.” Accessed May 10, 2018a. https://gruen-berlin.de/natur-park-suedgelaende.

———. n.d. “Tempelhofer Feld (Tempelhof Field) | visitBerlin.de.” Accessed May 13, 2018b. /en/tempelhofer-feld-tempelhof-field.

———. n.d. “Wegeplan: Natur-Park Südgelände.” https://gruen- berlin.de/sites/default/files/downloads/wegeplan_natur-park_suedgelaende.pdf.

Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Harvard Graduate School of Design. 2013. “Airport Landscape Exhibition at the Harvard Graduate School of Design.” Issuu. December 30, 2013. https://issuu.com/sienascarff/ docs/airportlandscape_exhibition.

———. 2014. “Airport Landscape Catalog | Harvard Graduate School of Design.” Issuu. September 29, 2014. https://issuu.com/sienascarff/docs/airportlandscapecatalogfinal.

Hight, Christopher. 2003. “Portraying the Urban Landscape: Landscape in Architectural Criticism and Theory, 1960 - Present.” In Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape, 22–32.

Høyer, Steen A.B. 1999. “Things Take Time and Time Takes Things: The Danish Landscape.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 69–78. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Julien, Marie. 2017. “The Never-Ending Story: How BER Airport Became the Laughing Stock of Berlin.” Thelocal.de. June 1, 2017. https://www.thelocal.de/20170601/the-never- ending-story-how-ber-airport-became-the-laughing-stock-of-berlin.

Kowarik, Ingo. 2015. “Gleisdreieck: How Urban Wilderness Became Possible in the New Park.” In Gleisdreieck/Park Life Berlin, 216–21.

Kowarik, Ingo, and Andreas Langer. 2005. “Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.” In Wild Urban Woodlands, 287–99. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

Kwinter, Sanford. 1998. “The Genealogy of Models: The Hammer and the Song.” ANY: Architecture New York, no. No. 23, Diagram Work: ATA MECHANICS FOR A TOPOLOGICAL AGE: pp. 57–62.

Langhorst, Joern. 2014. “Re-Presenting Transgressive Ecologies: Post-Industrial Sites as Contested Terrains.” Local Environment 19 (10): 1110–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2014.928813.

84 Lefebvre, Henri. 1991. The Production of Space. Oxford, OX, UK ; Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell.

Lootsma, Bart. 1999. “Synthetic Regionalization: The Dutch Landscape Toward a Second Modernity.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 251–74. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Lynch, Kevin. 1976. What Time Is This Place? Nachdr. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Lyster, Clare. 2006. “Landscapes of Exchange: Re-Articulating Site.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 219–38. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Marot, Sébastien. 1999. “The Reclaiming of Sites.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 45–58. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Mossop, Elizabeth. 2006. “Landscapes of Infrastructure.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 163–78. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Mostafavi, Mohsen. 2003. “Landscapes of Urbanism.” In Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape, 4–9. London: Architectural Association.

Najle, Ciro. 2003. “Convolutedness*.” In Landscape Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape, 160–74. Pollak, Linda. 2006. “Constructed Ground: Questions of Scale.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 125–40. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Reed, Chris. 2006. “Public Works Practice.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 267–87. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Ryan, Brent. 2017. The Largest Art: A Measured Manifesto for a Plural Urbanism. MIT Press.

Sassen, Saskia. 2006. “Cities and Communities in the Global Economy.” In The Global Cities Reader, edited by Neil Brenner and Keil. New York, NY: Routledge.

Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt und der Grün Berlin GmbH. 2016. “Tempelhofer Feld: Entwicklungs- und Pflegeplan.” Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt. https://mein.berlin.de/projects/entwicklungs-und- pflegeplan/.

Shane, Grahame. 2006. “The Emergence of Landscape Urbanism.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 55–68. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Shannon, Kelly. 2003. “STALKING DETROIT by Georgia Daskalakis, Charles Waldheim and

85 Jason Young.” Landscape Journal 22 (1-03): 67–69.

———. 2006a. “From Theory to Resistance: Landscape Urbanism in Europe.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 141–62. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Shead, Sam. 2017. “The Story of Berlin’s WWII Tempelhof Airport Which Is Now Germany’s Largest Refugee Shelter.” News. The Independent. June 20, 2017. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-history/the-story-of--wwii- tempelhof-airport-which-is-now-germanys-largest-refugee-shelter-a7799296.html.

Sordi, Jeannette. 2015. “Beyond Urbanism.” In Beyond Urbanism, 218. List.

Thompson, Ian Hamilton. 2012. “Ten Tenets and Six Questions for Landscape Urbanism.” Landscape Research 37 (1): 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2011.632081.

Vicenzotti, Vera. 2017. “The Landscape of Landscape Urbanism.” Landscape Journal 36 (1): 75–86.

Waldheim, Charles. 1999. “Aerial Representation and the Recovery of Landscape.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 121–40. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

———. 2006a. “Introduction.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 13–20. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

———. 2006b. “Landscape as Urbanism.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 35–54. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

———. , ed. 2006c. The Landscape Urbanism Reader. 1. ed. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

———. 2006d. “Landscape as Urbanism.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader. Chronicle Books.

———. 2016. Landscape as Urbanism: A General Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Wall, Alex. 1999. “Programming the Urban Surface.” In Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, edited by James Corner, 233–50. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Weller, Richard. 2006. “An Art of Instrumentality: Thinking Through Landscape Urbanism.” In The Landscape Urbanism Reader, edited by Charles Waldheim, 1. ed, 69–87. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Wilson, Jeffrey K. 2016. The German Forest: Nature, Identity, and the Contestation of a National Symbol: 1871-1914. German and European Studies. Toronto Buffalo London: University of Toronto Press.

86