HOSPEDERO ACCIDENTAL

THRESHOLDS

REGIONAL

TEMPORAL

SCALE

SPATIAL

SCALE

METRO

SITE

DIVERSITY

REDUNDANCY

CONNECTIVITY

PLANNING

SOCIAL

ECOLOGICAL

ECONOMIC

SOCIAL

ECOLOGICAL

ECONOMIC

SPATIAL

SOCIAL

ECOLOGICAL

ECONOMIC

SPATIAL

SOCIAL

ECOLOGICAL

ECONOMIC

ECOLOGICAL

ECONOMIC

5 Y

10 Y

50 Y

100 Y

150+ Y

4.62

ULI Synthesis

Regional thresholds in ecological and economic scales also had a comparatively greater showing than the other four resilience strategies. This is expected because thresholds at larger scales will have significant impacts on smaller scales and systems. It is important to note that the category with the fewest strategies was at the economic site scale. This may seem logical because economic systems tend to operate at somewhat larger scales, but it leaves the question of how small scale economic strategies might inform larger scale resilience to shocks and disturbances.

Few specific thresholds were identified in any of these five case studies, with the exception of flooding, climate change, and the dependence on fossil fuels. It appeared that in most cases strategies were proposed to generally increase adaptivity in the face of unknown future thresholds through such methods as increasing socio-cultural memory, tighten feedback loops in the waste and water cycles, and reestablish human connections with natural systems, to name a few. In the case of the Willamette River case study, that research was focused on one critical threshold which was flooding. Other strategies for resilience to thresholds in this case study were secondary to flooding or were interrelated, such as the increase of social memory through increased recreational opportunities in restored floodplain areas. Conversely, the Albano Resilient Campus case study is an example of a more holistic approach to a masterplan and identified strategies for much more general thresholds such as reducing fossil fuel dependency, and tightening water cycle feedback loops in case of increasing shortages. The Resilient Rangelands case study is similar in providing solutions for a number of different thresholds including drought and an aging rural population.

Findings / Promote Diversity

This category was fairly evenly dispersed among scales and systems. The most frequent was spatial diversity at the metro and site scales. Again, the regional scale was addressed the least and economics were comparatively ignored. In the cases of Albano, Henna, and Emergent Ecologies, economics was not explicitly addressed and the extracted methods were secondary effects of other methods. Similar to other categories, the metro and site scales were emphasized. The Albano Masterplan provided the most extracted methods with a focus on social and ecological systems at the metro and site scales.

The methods for each system and scale were surprisingly similar amongst the case studies, despite the differences in project type. Methods for social diversity were characterized by identity and uniqueness, attracting a range of demographics,

encouraging the interface of cultural influences, and creating a diversity of experiences within the project. It is noteworthy that the two more science-driven case studies, Resilient Rangelands and the Willamette River, had the fewest social diversity methods with the Willamette River having none. Resilient Rangelands was more concerned with demographics and diversifying age structure, and at the large scales. This is of interest because the Resilient Rangelands shares a similar holistic approach as Henna, Albano, and Emergent Ecologies, but is less concerned with social diversity.

Ecological diversity was primarily concerned with habitat and species diversity at a range of scales. Economic diversity was again, limited, but the methods dealt with land use as a way to create a diversity of markets and a range of housing prices. Spatial diversity was a much more complex set of methods than the previous two. The underlying concept with these methods is the nexus of spatial types including land use, spatial size (hierarchy), and land systems (i.e. agriculture, urban, wetlands). Each of these case studies works towards developing spatial diversity as a secondary or complimentary component to social and ecological diversity.

Findings / Develop Redundancies

The redundancy category tends to overlap with the diversity category due to the fact that by definition, they complement each other. The number of methods extracted from the case studies was the most even across scales and systems amongst all categories. Regional redundancies focus on situating the site as a redundant component of the greater context (i.e. a unique component of a regional educational institution network, ecosystem type amongst natural systems). Another common theme was creating redundant connections whether it was between habitats, social connections to features such as waterfronts, or creating multiple connection sources for food/water/energy systems. This category can be summarized as increasing complexity and reducing homogenization. Through the extracted methods, this is achieved evenly across scales by creating a unique but fitting socio-ecological identity based upon the context, and creating multiple connections for a range of systems.

Findings / Create Multi-Scale Networks and Connectivity

This category is unique amongst the others in that the site scale was relatively neglected compared to the regional, with the metro scale having the primary emphasis. This is a significant difference because it demonstrates that regional and contextual connectivity is more important than connections within a site. Generally, social and ecological connectivity had a much greater emphasis than economics, with most economic strategies relating to reducing large scale connectivity to economic systems and refocusing on local resources and land uses.

Social and ecological connectivity dealt with entirely physical connections, with the exception of social communication networks assisting in the spread of ideas and memory. Physical connections to socially significant destinations in the regional and metro

context create a viable function for the site. Similarly, physical ecological connections link significant destinations but in terms of natural species movement between habitat patches through corridors. An important concept derived through these case studies is also the creation of multi-modal connections in terms of rapid and slow human transport (i.e. pedestrians, bicycles, and public transport) but also ecological transport. By coupling social and ecological movement with the same physical connections, it establishes a visual interaction of systems across scales that can have a great impact on socio-ecological resilience.

Findings / Adaptive Planning + Management Strategies

Ecological strategies at the metro and site scales were overwhelmingly the most frequent in this category. The specific methods varied widely but have a common theme of allowing smaller scale responses influence adaptation over time in a “safe-to-fail” type of mentality. The general concept of adaptive planning is to learn from the way that systems respond to disturbance in order to more effectively manage the physical components that we can control into a desirable state. Emergent Ecologies completely leaves the physical manifestation of Downsview Park to evolve based upon ecological responses, while the Albano Masterplan calls for a more active governing approach that couples both formal institutions with local, grass-roots groups. The Resilient Rangelands case study takes an approach that allows local observation at smaller scales to inform decision making at the regional level, which also deals with slower processes (i.e. climate change, resource management). All of the case studies seek to achieve greater flexibility with governance so that plans change over time in response to the interactions of systems, rather than attempt to control systems through optimization and rigid approaches.

ULI/Hines Competition Case Study Findings

The ULI/Hines Competition case study overlay reveals an overwhelming focus on site specific strategies, with some emphasis at the mid-range metro scale. The regional scale is almost entirely neglected, and was only a part of the Touch case study. In general, there are limited strategies for promoting resilience in this set of case studies in comparison to the five cast studies coming from the literature. The Panorama Station case study was almost completely devoid of resilience methods and seemed to embody a “business as usual” approach. Buffalo Bayou had more strategies but was almost entirely focused on the site itself. Touch employed a more holistic approach with more regional and metro strategies. This general focus on the site scale is not wholly unexpected, because it is a very site specific design and the competition brief does not explicitly call for analysis and solutions at larger scales. All of the case studies include a ten year plan in accordance with the competition requirements, and there were limited strategies that looked beyond this time span.

Findings / Identify and Respond to Thresholds

The threshold category has a good representation at the site scale, but it is important to point out that most of the proposed strategies dealt with climate change thresholds. These strategies included brown roofs, tightening water cycle feedback loops, flexible building typologies to accommodate future technological advances, and utilizing passive solar techniques in structures. One threshold that was specifically identified in the Panorama Station case study was a shift away from the big box commercial retail model, and how a building would adapt after a change in the economic model.

Findings / Diversity + Redundancy

Diversity and redundancy methods were primarily concerned with creating unique mixed-use urban developments. A diversity of building types and scales, land use, open space program and size, attracting a diverse residential population, and creating a diverse/redundant balance of human experience on site were some of the methods used. It is evident that economic systems feature more prominently in these categories,

especially because economic feasibility is a required component of the competition. There is, however, less of a focus on ecological systems in comparison to the previous five case studies. Most of the ecological diversity and redundancy strategies focus on water and energy rather than flora and fauna.

Connectivity was not evident at the regional scales in any of the case studies, but physical connections beyond the metropolitan area are unnecessary for the competition. Generally, this category was well-covered in terms of creating multi- modal transportation networks that facilitate flows of matter and energy in a hierarchical manner. Touch and Buffalo Bayou both had tertiary strategies for linking hydrological systems and providing corridors that could facilitate species movement, but again habitat networks and biodiversity were not central to any case study.

Findings / Adaptive Planning + Management Strategies

The only adaptive planning/management strategy present was in the Buffalo Bayou case study, which allowed for more flexibility in flooding on site and encouraged

entrepreneurship as a primary economic driver. Management and especially institutional management is not a primary focus of the competition, which explains the absence of strategies in this category.

In general the ULI/Hines Competition case studies have an emphasis on socio-economic systems and not socio-ecological. Site specific strategies are more prevalent than metro and regional scales, which is a product of the requirements of the competition, but it does not demonstrate how cross-scale interactions across systems influence the site and the proposed designs. In comparison to the previous five case studies stemming from the literature, there is an overall lack of a holistic approach to urban design. That is not to say that these competition case studies are not successful or “good” designs, but that they do not inherently embody an approach that parallels the use of resilience theory as a framework for engaging urban design. This finding lends significance to an application of resilience theory to the 2013 ULI/Hines Competition as a projective design for testing a resilience theory framework.

The methods that are identified in each of these case study groups serve as the basis for the projective design experiments. The Drylands Competition was done prior to the case study analysis so the applied framework is not the one shown in this thesis. The ULI/ Hines Competition projective design uses the methods found in the case study analysis through the resilience framework (Fig. 5.1).