11181 Landscape Architecture Studio 5: Infrastructures
Warning: The information on this page is indicative. The subject outline for a
particular session, location and mode of offering is the authoritative source
of all information about the subject for that offering. Required texts, recommended texts and references in particular are likely to change. Students will be provided with a subject outline once they enrol in the subject.
Subject handbook information prior to 2020 is available in the Archives.
Credit points: 6 cp
Result type: Grade and marks
Requisite(s): 11175 Landscape Architecture Studio 3: Grounding AND 11186c Landscape Infrastructure AND 11178 Landscape Architecture Studio 4: Civic
The lower case 'c' after the subject code indicates that the subject is a corequisite. See definitions for details.
These requisites may not apply to students in certain courses.
There are course requisites for this subject. See access conditions.
Description
Infrastructure supports life. Water, transport and electricity are all examples of closed system infrastructure 'machines', designed and managed to operate as efficient, engineered networks traditionally acting as a 'life support' for urban development. But this kind of infrastructure has a downside: it's efficient rather than flexible, designed to support but not necessarily to engage with landscape or stimulate public life, and it focuses quite narrowly on the problem at hand, solving one problem while creating others along the way. And because it's often large scale and centrally controlled, the nuances of the local scale are often ignored.
Rather than an invisible infrastructure 'machine' with a single system focus, how can infrastructure be holistic, with a more productive relationship to the underlying land and the social and cultural life it is meant to support? This project explores landscape, its overlay of urban infrastructure and the potential unrealised productive interactions between them. Students are asked to engage at a local scale with a regional site via the tools and processes of landscape infrastructure with the aim of devising new hybrid infrastructures that are flexible, decentralised, multifunctional and catalytic in nature.
Subject learning objectives (SLOs)
On successful completion of this subject, students should be able to:
| 1. | Develop site analysis skills to an advanced level to inform design process. |
|---|---|
| 2. | Creatively employ and experiment with a range of different design methods and techniques |
| 3. | Confidently work with complex landscapes and infrastructures at a range of scales |
| 4. | Produce environmentally, ethically, socially and politically responsive designs |
| 5. | Effectively communicate a design proposal |
Course intended learning outcomes (CILOs)
This subject also contributes to the following Course Intended Learning Outcomes:
- Apply an informed, ethical position towards social, technical and environmental issues and practices. (A.1)
- Create designs that respond to their context in formally or conceptually innovative ways. (I.1)
- Advance ideas through an exploratory and iterative design process. (I.2)
- Develop advanced skills for the production, presentation and documentation of work. (P.1)
- Generate solutions to complex problems through an exploratory and iterative design process. (P.2)
Teaching and learning strategies
Modes of learning
This subject involves students adopting two different approaches to learning: flipped and active.Flipped learning refers to the activities students undertake prior to class to ensure their preparedness for participation in class. Activities are varied but could include completing a series of assigned readings and/or the completion of a structured exercise. Active learning takes place in class and relies on the successful completion of flipped learning activities. These are varied and may involve both individual and group activity.
This subject will operate as a design studio. Students are required to bring ongoing work into the class. A studio teaching environment is flexible and open ended. It involves both group and individual work.
On site investigation and analysis will require students to visit the sites both within the studio teaching hours and in their own time. This subject requires students to engage with sites at multiple scales necessitating site investigation processes that include group work. Local case study sites will be included as learning tools in this subject. For site investigation and case study visits that are scheduled during studio hours, student will be required to travel to and from sites in their own time.
The skills required for this subject will include physical model making. All students are required to undertake a workshop induction in order to access the UTS DAB Fabrication Workshop.
Feedback: when, where and how. Students will have several opportunities to receive feedback during the subject. The feedback provided will vary in form, purpose and in its degree of formality:
Formative feedback will be provided during the learning process, when an assessment item is in production. It will address the content of work and a student's approach to learning, both in general and more specific ‘assessment orientated’ terms. It is designed to help students improve their performance in time for the submission of an assessment item. For this to occur students need to respond constructively to the feedback provided. This involves critically reflecting on advice given and in response altering the approach taken to a given assessment.
Formative feedback will typically be provided verbally by the subject's teaching staff, but will also, on occasion, be provided by other students. It is delivered informally, either in conversation during a tutorial or in the course of discussion at the scale of the whole class. Students should keep a written record of the feedback they receive. If a student is confused about a point of feedback, they should seek clarification from the teaching team. Ideally this should be done when feedback is being delivered. Alternatively, clarification can be sought in person at the end of class or after class via email.
Summative feedback focuses on assessment outcomes. It is used to indicate how successfully a student has performed in terms of specific assessment criteria. It is provided in written form with all assessed work. It is published along with indicative grades online at UTS REVIEW. The content of summative feedback serves a number of purposes. It is intended to provide an explanation for the grade issued, reflecting on the quality of the work submitted and the student’s performance leading up to submission. Students are also provided with recommended strategies for improving aspects needing improvement, or worthy of advancement. Students should direct any queries about summative feedback to their subject co-ordinator. In the first instance this should be done by email.
Content (topics)
- Urban metabolism: cities and settlements as systems in a reciprocal relationship with landscape
- The design of adaptive hybrid infrastructures at local, urban and regional scales
- Technique: experimenting with technique as a way of understanding site and generating design
Assessment
Assessment task 1: Complex Landscape Systems
| Intent: | Assessment Task 1: Complex Landscape Systems (Wk1-4) In this assessment task students will use a wide range of traditional and experimental techniques to understand, communicate and design with complex landscape systems. Techniques used may include forms of mapping, 3D visualization, GIS, photography, film, drawing and embodied practices such as walking. Students will work in groups and individually to explore in depth the nature of the landscape subject and its political, social, environmental and cultural context and speculate on possible landscape infrastructure futures on a chosen site Outputs: 3 x A1 panels and physical models | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective(s): | This task addresses the following subject learning objectives: 1, 2 and 3 This task also addresses the following course intended learning outcomes that are linked with a code to indicate one of the five CAPRI graduate attribute categories (e.g. C.1, A.3, P.4, etc.): I.1, I.2 and P.1 | ||||||||||||||||
| Type: | Design/drawing/plan/sketch | ||||||||||||||||
| Groupwork: | Group, group and individually assessed | ||||||||||||||||
| Weight: | 20% | ||||||||||||||||
| Criteria linkages: |
SLOs: subject learning objectives CILOs: course intended learning outcomes |
Assessment task 2: Design Process
| Intent: | Assessment Task 2: Design Process (Wk 5-7) In this assessment task students will use an iterative exploratory design process to shift between the preliminary design proposed in Assessment task 1 and targeted analysis, until a resolved design concept emerges which has the potential to catalyse new forms of urbanism and social engagement. Many drawings and models will be produced on a weekly basis during this stage and students are expected to bring their work to class for pin up and discussion. Outputs: Outputs: 2 x A1 panels of process drawings and physical models. 1 x A1 panel showing a resolved concept design | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective(s): | This task addresses the following subject learning objectives: 2, 3 and 4 This task also addresses the following course intended learning outcomes that are linked with a code to indicate one of the five CAPRI graduate attribute categories (e.g. C.1, A.3, P.4, etc.): A.1, I.1 and I.2 | ||||||||||||||||
| Type: | Design/drawing/plan/sketch | ||||||||||||||||
| Groupwork: | Individual | ||||||||||||||||
| Weight: | 30% | ||||||||||||||||
| Criteria linkages: |
SLOs: subject learning objectives CILOs: course intended learning outcomes |
Assessment task 3: Design
| Intent: | Assessment Task 3: Design Resolution (Wk 8-12) In this assessment task students will develop their design at multiple scales, prepare a concise written manifesto outlining the design argument, present this to a panel of design critics for feedback in week 10 and then further refine their work for submission in Week 12 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective(s): | This task addresses the following subject learning objectives: 3, 4 and 5 This task also addresses the following course intended learning outcomes that are linked with a code to indicate one of the five CAPRI graduate attribute categories (e.g. C.1, A.3, P.4, etc.): A.1, P.1 and P.2 | ||||||||||||||||
| Type: | Project | ||||||||||||||||
| Groupwork: | Individual | ||||||||||||||||
| Weight: | 50% | ||||||||||||||||
| Criteria linkages: |
SLOs: subject learning objectives CILOs: course intended learning outcomes |
References
Books
Desvigne, Michel. 2009. Intermediate Natures. Basel: Birkhauser
De Muelder, Brian, and Kelly Shannon. 2008. Water Urbanisms. Amsterdam: IDEA BOOKS
Foxley, Alice 2010. Distance & Engagement: Walking, Thinking and Making Landscape. Vogt Landscape Architects. Baden: Lars Mueller Publishers
Lateral Office 2014. Arctic Adaptations: Canada at the 14th International Architecture Exhibition
Mosbach, Catherine. 2010. Traversées crossing. Warsaw: ICI Publishing
Pamphlet Architecture 30. 2011. Coupling: Strategies for Infrastructural Opportunism. New York: Princeton University Press
Ramirez-Lovering, Diego, 2008. Opportunistic Urbanism. Melbourne: RMIT Press
Raxworthy Julian and Blood Jessica. 2004. The Mesh Book: Landscape/Infrastructure. Melbourne: RMIT Press
Walker, Brian and Salt, David (2006) Resilience Thinking. Washington DC: Island Press
Journal articles
Allan, Penny and Bryant, Martin. 2015. Designing Regional Resilience. Unpublished report for Wellington City Council, NZ
Hindle, Richard and Bhatia, N. 2017. Territory and Technology: A Case Study and Strategy from the
California Delta. The Plan Journal 2 (2). Available at http://www.theplanjournal.com/article/territory-and-technology-case-study-and-strategy-california-delta
Brett Milligan 2015. Landscape Migration: Environmental design in the Anthropocene. Available at https://placesjournal.org/article/landscape-migration/
Websites
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/ag-farm-food/food/publications/foodmap-a-comparative-analysis
Precedents
Metro Cable Caracas: https://www.archdaily.com/429744/metro-cable-caracas-urban-think-tank
Lateral Office website particularly Banking on the Border, Arctic Food network etc
LCLA website eg Lines in water, Baltic Art Park, Airport Landscape: Urban Ecologies in the Aerial Age etc.
Bankside Urban Forest: http://www.betterbankside.co.uk/buf