The Interpretation of Landscape

Strategies Towards Smarter Cities

Ioanna Fakiri

Department of Architecture, N.T.U.A., Athens, Greece

Κeywords: Landscape, Urbanism, Planning, Conduits, Surface, System, Matrix, Receivers, Indicator, Process, Coding,

Synthesis.

Abstract: In recent years we have seen a gradually increasing concern for the urban landscape and the way it is

designed and evaluated. This concern, a result of the emergence of digital technologies and convergence of

different scientific disciplines, is based on the ability of design tools to support and reinforce the discussion

on urban landscape as an open process for action. But, how do we design a new urban space employing

these design tools? So far the discussion on the design and form of the city placed emphasis on the creation

of a communication platform that functions either through the development of interpersonal and interactive

relationships of the users, or as an entity for configuring and displaying visual messages and communication

to society. The term "smart city", has been linked with digital applications, sensors, and software to produce

the city of the future. However, the real challenge is to develop a "smart city," that starts from the city of

today and enables the combination of these smart practices by activating infrastructure that may reform the

spatial structure of the urban morphology. This paper will introduce a "reformer," the natural landscape,

based on which a new methodological approach shall be established, in order to manage the urban

landscape. This will help create a "smarter city," which may find applications in various fields that start

from today’s city, instead of trying to compose an ideal image of the city of tomorrow, that can bridge the

gap between digital, natural and urban environment. The main theme of this paper is part of the extended

scope of Landscape Urbanism, according to which the urban landscape can be redefined / designed through

the remedial procedures of the urban landscape.

1 A BRIEF INTRODUCTION ON

SMART CITIES AND

INNOVATIVE ENVIRONMENTS

Before tackling the main issue of the research

presented in this paper, it is necessary to present the

broader context of this research, as this constitutes

the basis, which feeds the research interests,

produces general questions and directs research

methods. This research is being conducted at a time

when the focus of architectural activity shifts from

its perception as a form or (and) operational

organisation, which responds to a given architectural

program, to its perception as composition of

elements, their properties and relationships. At the

dawn of our late capitalist era, we are witnessing a

paradigm shift that encourages a new relationship

between design and object, which, according to

Michael Hays (Hays, 1998) is nothing other than the

passage from a "critical history" to a "theory" of

architecture.

To this end, the term "smart city" was

introduced, which covers a wide spectrum of

research and development applications. The concept

of smart city involves an emerging market, therefore

identifying and examining the term "smart" is still

going on. Consideration of the particular

characteristics of the smart city is best understood by

interpreting its main conceptual features (Vianna et

al., 2004; Hollands, 2008). Accordingly "Smart

cities" are created by the convergence of two major

currents: on the one hand, the redefinition of the city

through its communication technologies, digital

networking and representation, and, on the other

hand, through the understanding of the city as an

environment of creativity and innovation. Despite

the clear link between society of creativity and

information society, the concept of "smart city" is

still controversial. This occurred because term

Fakiri, I.

The Interpretation of Landscape - Strategies Towards Smarter Cities.

In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems (SMARTGREENS 2016), pages 111-116

ISBN: 978-989-758-184-7

111

"smart" is often associated with digital functions,

and the terms "digital city" and "cyber city"

(Mitchell, 2006) are used alternatively and

equivalently. However, it is certain that, providing a

digital platform or a digital representation of the city

does not adequately justify the description of an

urban system as innovative.

In the following

sections, the main framework of the research

presented in this paper elaborates on the above

questions and proposes a new method for a smarter

city.

1.1 Research Framework

Digital applications, sensors, and software often

interact towards the creation of the city of the future.

However, the real challenge in contemporary reality

is to develop a "smart city", which starts from the

city of today and enables the combination of smart

practices. As part of this research that attempts to

define the concept of a smarter city that is based on

the structure of an existing city, the parameter of the

natural landscape is introduced, which, in the

proposed method acts as a key reformer of the urban

fabric.

Accordingly in this work the notion of "natural"

is no longer defined as an external feature and a

representational structure but participates and

supports the urban fabric and becomes part of the

broader approach to urban technology that combines

artificial and natural systems (Νeuman, 2006). This

synergy between natural systems and urban

infrastructure systems, in this paper, will be the basis

of a new methodological approach to design with

emphasis on the landscaping component.

2 THE STATE OF THE ART

2.1 The Science of Landscape

Urbanism

Landscape Urbanism is a neologism, introduced in

1996 by Charles Waldheim that attempts to describe

the landscape as an urban phenomenon, on an effort

to reduce the conflicts between the man-made and

natural environment of the cities. Landscape

Urbanism is today a thriving interdisciplinary

practice that emerges as a renewed perception for

recording, dealing with, and strategically examining,

or designing, towards contemporary problems of the

structure of the urban landscape.

Waldheim, through a presentation of two projects

from the 1930’s and 40’s, presents the early

emergence of an "organic urbanism" which can be

viewed as early versions of landscape urbanist

principles. His account in these projects becomes

the basis for a brief look into the rise of this organic

way of thinking – that is the rise of landscape

urbanism.

The Universities of Pennsylvania, Harvard and

Toronto between 1999 and 2010 functioned as

vibrant workshops studying and researching

applications of this interdisciplinary field.

Proponents of Landscape Urbanism agree that

traditional dichotomies between the urban and

natural landscape are now powerless in the face of

today’s urban reality. The new strategic design

enhances the participation of the natural factor

focusing on the specific dynamic processes and

changes inherent in a place. Temporality, variation,

gradual evolution and adaptation to ecological

parameters, are derivatives of a renewed

understanding of the correlation between urban

environment and natural space at a conceptual level.

At this point, it is worth-mentioning some

additional definitions of Landscape Urbanism.

According to Waldheim (Waldheim, 2006)

Landscape Urbanism appears to describe a

disciplinary re-alignment, in which landscape

replaces architecture as the basic building block of

contemporary urbanism. For many

researchers and

theoreticians across a range of disciplines, landscape

has become both the lens through which the

contemporary city is represented and the medium

through which it is constructed. Discussions

regarding Landscape Urbanism as a synthesis of

natural and social processes, which are contained

within the broader context of the urban component,

gives rise to a new urbanism grounded in ecological

literacy, where even people are viewed as part of

nature (Steiner, 2006).

Another interesting conception of landscape

urbanism is Corner’s three surface strategies, namely

"open-ended," "indeterminate," and "catalytic,"

which suggest as a way of developing design

strategies, as opposed to formal compositions and

master plans (Corner, 2003). These three surface

strategies refer to his perception of the contemporary

city as a horizontal surface constructed in three

layers: construction surface, infrastructure, and

affiliation. As Corner states: "Land division,"

"allocation," "demarcation" and the "construction of

surfaces" constitute the first act in staking out

ground; the second is to establish services and

pathways across the surface to support future

programmes; and the third is ensuring permeability

SMARTGREENS 2016 - 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems

112

to allow for future permutation, affiliation and

adaptation (Corner, 2003). This framework

integrates both conceptual approaches and research

proposals, with potential real world applications.

This generally stems from a conviction that

landscape is emerging as a model for urbanism.

In the same framework, Stan Allen, states that

"Landscape has traditionally been defined as the art

of organising horizontal surfaces". Departing from

this observation, he elaborates saying that landscape

bears an obvious relationship to the extended field of

the contemporary city, as well as to the newly

emerging interest in topological surfaces. By paying

careful attention to surface conditions, including or

involving, not only configuration, but also

materiality and performance, designers can activate

space and produce urban effects without "the

weighty apparatus of traditional space making."

(Allen, 2002)

2.2 Defining the Idea of a Smarter City

based on the Landscape

As mentioned earlier, the natural landscape, on the

one hand, is the lens through which we can describe

and visualise the smarter city, while on the other

hand, the appreciation of the natural landscape is

linked to a search for the landscapes dynamic

capabilities as a design standard. Therefore, the

landscape comes into the public scene as an

indicator of the sustainable growth of the urban

fabric, and as an indicator of sustainability to the

extent that it can control the delicate dynamic

balance between the natural space and the urban

fabric. This renders landscape an attractive

intervention environment worthy of a smarter city.

In this paper, we will try to outline methods and

strategies that can manage the dynamic conditions of

the natural landscape. Specifically, the aim of the

presented research is to propose a method for

managing the landscape in the form of a diagram,

and an approach, which will be linked with the

concept of a smarter city, that is based and builds on

the city of today.

The notion of the smarter city as a hybrid field

between the natural and the urban fabric permits the

exploration of processes that will lead to the

effective management of the properties of both

systems (natural and urban). According to Herbert

Simon (Simon, 1996), the dominant directions in

landscape management are the following two: a)

prevision and b) the homeostatic and feedback

adjustment. Prevision presupposes understanding the

initial conditions, the selection of appropriate

variables, and decoding of the relations between

them. On the other hand, homeostasis refers to the

flexibility of a system to absorb environmental

changes remaining unchanged, while feedback

presupposes a kind of dynamic adjustment of the

system. Departing from Simon’s approach, we will

try to outline a strategy for the hybrid development

of smarter cities based on these two basic directions.

2.3 What Does the Landscape

Urbanism Means in Practise?

Francois Dagognet referring to Landscape design

strategy, he describes it as a method where one finds

less in it, than through it. But how can landscape

function as a method? Corner admits that landscape

urbanism contains many uncertainties concerning its

practical application. Though he promotes new

concepts and representation techniques and suggests

ways on how these can be applied.

However, Corner believes that the current state

of landscape urbanism is not able to deal with this

complexity. Instead he claims that one should focus

on the development of techniques and methods

(Corner, 2006). The activities listed by Corner are

quite abstract. Thus, in this paper we will try to

describe a design methodology that will lead to the

development of a broad variety of tools and design

process approaches.

3 MEASURING AND MINING

URBAN DATA

3.1 Analysis: A Dual Conduit System

In this section we attempt to define a methodology

in which the urban landscape is shaped through a

complex diagrammatic entity capable of operating

through feedback. The integration of metabolic

processes of the natural landscape, as defined by

Corner, in the production of the urban landscape also

involving material and geometrical parameters,

requires a management. In the proposed

methodology natural landscape is broken down into

two distinct parts.

Each part is functioning as a

conduit that conveys fluxes through it. The use of

the term flux in this paper is based on the following

rational: In the initial meaning of the term "Flux,"

that derives from the Latin word fluxus, both flow

and change are included. This perfectly describes

both a main functionof natural landscape that is able

to convey flows, and the effects that flows have on

The Interpretation of Landscape - Strategies Towards Smarter Cities

113

Figure 1: Fundamental Components of Smarter City.

it, which may cause changes to it. The first conduit

requires reading the landscape as a surface, and the

second conduit as a system.

Hence, landscape,

described as a surface, can be perceived as an

heterogeneous field which functions as a main

infrastructure of the city. Interpreting the landscape

as a system may be used to emphasise the interaction

of historical, cultural, economical and social

processes, as well as to provide an explanation of

their effect on the spatiality of a city over time.

The output of the two conduits, are included in a

matrix, which will be used to further contextualise

the developed strategies. The matrix consists of

multiple receivers. The output data transferred

through the conduits of the matrix are subsequently

organised in different receivers according to set

quality parameters. The receivers can be combined;

and, in this manner, the matrix itself can be read as a

palette of landscape urbanism strategies and can be

adapted to a given instance of an urban landscape.

In other words the matrix facilitates

contextualisation and can serve as a framework for

the application of the proposed landscape urbanism

methodology.

3.2 Landscape as a Surface

The idea of landscape as surface means seeing the

SMARTGREENS 2016 - 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems

114

landscape surface as being active and operational,

rather than as a thin passive board (Allen, 2002). At

this point, the landscape as surface is not understood

as a flat lifeless plane, but rather as a set of

behavioural characteristics. Soil has permeability

and plants have height and growth rate –

characteristics that make the surface a living carrier

of flows and processes. The idea of the surface

includes the performative aspects of the landscapes

surface. Slope, hardness or softness, permeability,

depth, or soil chemistry are all variables that

influence the behaviour of surfaces such as their

tendency to shed or hold water, or their ability to

support traffic, events, or plant life (Wall, 1999).

Thus, the surface of the landscape with its wide

range of properties, can affect program and

organisation, and contribute to the creation of a valid

strategic model for a contemporary urban condition.

In the proposed method, all the first conduit’s

data are transferred to the matrix that incorporates

two distinct receivers: a hydrological receiver and a

geological one.

3.2.1 Hydrological Receiver

The hydrological receiver addresses water as a living

mechanism, which can create a resilient, yet

productive ground, for the social and morphological

prosperity of the landscape. This can generate a

water management system. Accordingly in this

method "water" is not addressed merely as a basic

necessity for everyday life; it becomes a central

element for a new urban social ecology.

In particular, the water receiver may be used to

find out the timings, amount of water, extension, etc.

to find out the problems and the opportunities the

city is facing exactly. Water flows over the surface

and software simulates processes of erosion and

deposition. This finding allows the model to predict

the water dynamics with high resolution.

3.2.2 Geological Receiver

The main purpose of the geological receiver is to

provide an understanding of the influence of various

parameters, such us grain size of the soil vegetation

and slope processes, depth or soil chemistry,

material could influence on the formation of a new

urban social ecology. The receiver is using data from

multiple sources, including data downloaded from

online sources, field-collected data, and published

map data. For this purpose, geological simulation

models can be employed. Such software will help us

analyse, store, manipulate and visualize geological

information on a map.

3.3 Landscape as a System

The landscape as a system involves the interaction

of cultural, social, historical, and economical

conditions and provides an understanding of how

these conditions affect the spatiality over time.

Specifically, landscape as system handles landscape

as a dynamic ecosystem, derived from the

reevaluation of the synthesis of natural and cultural

processes. This interpretation of the system further

means a focus on process, synthesis, resilience and

contingency.

Lister (Lister N-M, 2007), by reference to Sim

Van der Ryn and Cowan, explains that the

description and culture could create new hybrid

models linking cultural activity and natural systems.

To manage the urban fabric, it is not enough to

distinctly address the cultural factor and the natural

element, but those two, must interact through

hybridized forms that are best suited to describe

typologies inherent in the modern city.

Summarizing, the landscape as a surface and the

landscape as a system contribute to the development

of operational strategies aimed at the management of

the landscape as a whole. The establishment of the

double conduits is the first piece of the

methodological tool. The objective of this phase is to

collect data, separate them according to their quality

into the two distinct conduits, and to transform the

data into appropriate forms, vector objects, so as to

be used as data of the next phase. The handling of

the landscape as a combined surface and system

may actively contribute to the dynamics of the city

and aims to develop operational strategies towards

the city redefinition.

4 PROCESS AND SYNTHESIS

The second phase of the methodological tool

introduces specific standards called "indicators".

These "indicators" are quantified data that meet

specific conditions (simplicity, power, data

availability over time, sensitivity to small changes,

validity) and allow the system to legislate and

monitor the quality of the variables managed. At the

point where the "indicators" check the validity of the

previous level’s data, these conduits are charged

with a plus or minus sign. If the sign is minus, the

conduit is understood as meaning, in which case the

system reclassifies the vector objects. If the sign is

plus, the conduit acts as accelerator and facilitates

the encouragement and integration of data.

The third phase of the methodological approach

The Interpretation of Landscape - Strategies Towards Smarter Cities

115

involves the stage of synthesis of the "indicators",

the interaction of vector objects and final evaluation,

based on which the landscape is organized.

In conclusion, this paper proposes a new concept

of smart cities and a new approach to the natural

landscape as reformer of the urban fabric. New

conceptual models and strategies are created to

interpret the landscape as a surface and as a system,

not only as a natural backdrop.

5 EXPECTED PARADIGM SHIFT

To sum up, if today the cultural consideration

changes looking for a smarter city, then design

strategies should move to manufacturing techniques

that manage change through ecological evolving and

developing platforms. On an effort to form a smarter

city, natural landscape should not be a backdrop on

which the urban articulation will be placed, but a

dynamic field of study, management and recovery of

the urban fabric. On this basis the research presented

in this paper a first conceptual approach to a

mechanism that may monitor the transformation of

natural space, fed with data obtained from its

analysis, in order to compose them and redefine the

urban space. It could be said that this mechanism

acts as a filter which not only receives information

but also checks if this information can be changed

and also produces connections and forms supported

by computer generated programs. Unlike traditional

urban fabric design methods, or the digitized form of

smart cities, this mechanism aims to produce a

smarter city through a renewed perception of

convergence of the aspect between man-made

environment and natural space.

This mechanism for the design and data

management of the hybrid field between the natural

and the urban fabric

is in a conceptual stage; the aim

however is the future development of systems that

support its practical operation. Such systems do not

involve new hardware, but are mainly platforms

coupling already existing software in order to gather

real-time data, encode and control the homeostasis

or the feedback. In this direction new methods of

integrating spatial and related databases can be

developed.

REFERENCES

Allen, S., 2002. Mat Urbanism: The Thick 2D. In Sarkis,

Hashim. Case: Le Corbusier’s Venice Hospital and the

Mat building revival. Prestel.

Corner, J. 2003. Landscape Urbanism. In Landscape

Urbanism: A Manual for the Machinic Landscape.

Architectural Association.

Hays, M., 1968. Architecture Theory since, Cambridge

MA: the MIT Press Journal, London, England.

Lister, N-M., 2007. Sustainable Large Parks. In Czerniak,

J. & Hargreaves, G. (ed.) Large Parks. New York:

Princeton Architectural Press.

Macdonald, C., 2006. Machines of Loving Grace. In On

Landscape Urbanism. Austin TX: Center for American

Architecture and Design University of Texas at Austin

School of Architecture.

Maturana, H., Varela, F., 1980. Αutopoiesis and Cognition:

the realization of the living. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

Mitchell, W. J., 2006. Smart City 2020. Metropolis,

April.Availableathttp://www.metropolismag.com/story

/20060320/smart-city- 2020.

Νeuman, M., 2006. Infiltrating infrastructures. Journal of

Urban Technology,131.

Simon, H.A., 1996.The Science of the artificial. MIT

Press: Cambridge, Mass, 3

edition.

Steiner, F. R., 2006. Living Urban Landscapes, In On

Landscape Urbanism. Austin TX: Center for American

Architecture and Design University of Texas at Austin

School of Architecture.

Vianna, M.M.B., Portugal, L.S., Balassiano, R., 2004.

Intelligent transportation systems and parking

management: implementation potential in a Brazilian

city, Cities, 21(2).

Waldheim, Ch., 2006. Landscape as Urbanism. In the

Landscape Urbanism Reader. Princeton Architectural

Press.

Wall, A., 1999b. Programming the Urban Surface. In On

Landscape Urbanism. Austin TX: Center for American

Architecture and Design University of Texas at Austin

School of Architecture.

Weller, R., 2007. Global theory. Local Practice-Landscape

Urbanism and some Recent Design Projects at WA.

Kerb, vol. 15.

SMARTGREENS 2016 - 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems

116