…but something about the tone of this article ‘Landscaping as a Seductive First Step’, from the NY Times Blog is a bit off-putting. Not sure if it was the reference to ‘landscaping’ in the title (it’s kind of nit-picky but a gross simplification), the reference to Weiss/Manfredi as landscape architects (no disrespect meant at, I love their stuff, but it rings of the DS+R as lead thing with the High Line), or the reference to the site as a ‘nice wedding photo-op’ (literally referencing landscaping as decoration or icing on the cake that is the city).
:: image via NY Times
Nice try at least, and an indication of landscape as the armature and incentive for future development its laudable. In the scope of ‘no bad press’ I think it’s a throwaway – neutral at best. But I’d love to hear what others think – bold statement for landscape architecture, or puff piece that misses the point?
Poor uses in terminology but suggests the growing interest in the importance of site being shown in both architects and developers.
Good for us.
Peculiar credits — it sounds as if Weiss/Manfredi is the project’s prime consultant, with Thomas Balsley a sub, and it also sounds as if W/M is advertising in a slow economy with whatever means at their disposal, which in this case means site work (even if the actual landscape architectural design is being done by another firm). The article raises the visibility of site, but connects it more closely with architects than with LAs. Good for awareness of landscape, at least, if not for raising public awareness of landscape architecture as a creditable profession.
Likely poor reporting. Unless Michael or Marion have recently received their LA Licensure, it is misleading. Charles Anderson – Landscape Architect for Olympic Sculpture Park – has removed his name from all future press due to WMA’s lack of recognition of dialogue b/w LA of Record and Site Design. WMA have a skill in integrally articulating architecture into site but that does not make them successful Landscape Urbanists by any stretch.