41 thoughts on “Biomimicry and Landscape Architecture

  1. When I first heard biomimicry I thought it was so, making everything better my copying nature so genius! We can make Machines, vehicles, weapons bad medicine simply by mimicking natural resources.

  2. These are interesting proposals with advanced technology and some ecological aspects but not biomimicry. And I miss traffic solutions other than highways for private cars.

  3. Es mala idea traer la naturaleza a la ciudad. Debemos compactar nuestras ciudades y así devolverle su espacio a la naturaleza. Crear ciudades eficientes. Not a bad idea to bring nature to the city. We must compact our cities and thus restore its space to nature. Create efficient cities.

  4. I looked up Lace Hill (Armenia) and EDITT Tower (Singapore) and discovert that there not really build.

    Why type "date – ongoing"? It gave me false hope ;(

  5. Biomimicry is cool, marrying landscape and architecture is cool, but not a single one of the designs presented in this video seem to be utilizing biomimicry. They are just utilizing green space…

  6. This is Green Design Architecture for habitable spaces. Not "landscape architecture" – outdoor landscaping. It has quite good content and is inspirational nonetheless. But landscape architects don't focus on this type of green design hahaha

  7. "design with nature" IAN McHARG might be a good start to recognize the relationships and the consequences of our evolution that we might  appreciate the elegant options nature has to offer .

  8. Great video Mr. Harrison i honestly just watched the video for the first time and i really enjoyed the visual display and information.

  9. I like this video so much. I am just beginning of studying landscape architecture in US. you video motivate me to study hard. Thank you .

  10. Good video, but the title is a little misleading. Landscape architecture is the design of out door public spaces, not a sustainable zero (almost zero) carbon building with plants all over it.
    Glenn Murcutt is a great Australian Architect  that designs sensibly to the surrounding landscape, to make us remember that we're apart of nature

  11. This is great for revolution, such an inspiring video.  However I live in a part of the world where evolution rather than revolution is likely to be the process that changes how people live.  With a huge heritage of old and 'bog standard estate' housing stock, much privately owned, there is no simple central organising authority (whether government or large developer).  The issue we face is how to evolve thousands of existing small houses, and the minds of those who own them, into something more environmentally friendly.   I'd love to see a similarly inspiring video that dealt with that (probably more realistic) scenario, which probably has to be bottom up people driven.  We've been trying of course for generations, but the typical best we seem to get is a bit of double glazing and the odd solar panel.  Maybe the idea should be for large developers to make their new developments so incredible (like in the video) that people are willing to abandon their existing 'culture' and give them a try.  The challenge is to overcome is the failure of so many in the past to do that (if you remember Le Corbusier etc) and the awful legacy of good intention that we are left with.

  12. What we do and what we use everyday needs to change before we will be ready to truly participate with this planet in the most integrated way possible. We do not know who, let alone what, we are. Most of this is just green lip service. Covering a huge concrete and steel parking structure with grass does not erase the environmental devastation caused by the industry maintained in the realization of such a structure. An "illusion", indeed!
    BTW, at the beginning it is stated, "…and sustain the growth of our population…". This is absurd and probably should say, "..and sustain our growing population…".

  13. Not accounting for areas without available topsoil such as deserts, and forests, with 7 billion people and 150million km^2 of land, the planet would leave each individual with an exaggerated 20m^2 surface area , or 60m^3 volume of top soil for which to live and have their food needs met. I prefer the schemes where the natural contour is lifted, and the built program is nested beneath such as Hadid's, and Ito's schemes.

  14. I like the look of the MVRD project and the landscape analogy of contours used in the design. As a solution for sustainable development I have my reservations, especially with regards to piling topsoil into highrises, as many schemes seem to be doing.

  15. Permaculture is a useful framework for landscape architects to evaluate their designs on the principals of nature. I strongly suggest checking it out.

  16. Hey Jacob, Sorry for the delayed response. Life has been keeping me pretty busy. I think that even though we might not be able to completely replicate the virgin landscape, we should still strive to replicate as many of the naturally existing systems as possible. I hope that all site designers see the value in at least attempting to design in a more sustainable way. Thanks for the comment!

  17. Just a thought pop in my head after i finished this awsome video. So what do you think of this, Chris?

    Jacob

  18. That is a pretty awesome approach for future architecture. I love the idea and always passionate about it. However, there is a big problem for that. We can take over a natural area and build a "environmental friendly" building on it, plant lots of trees and vegetation on the wall, but we cannot actually bring the original habitat back on the building for other species. Put in another way, we may still continuing losing diversity and nature, lying to ourselves by saying we are saving the earth.

  19. Essentially, plants on buildings shaped like hills. It's pretty, but I hope they aren't saying this is a good method for environmental progress- you'd do better spending the money replanting the rainforest.

  20. Thanks for the info Chris,will be taking some classes with it to see what I can and can't do,just started using Keyshot which I can't recommend enough and I hope to get CS6 and Adobe illustrator to help with custom fonts and decals,I'm on GRABCAD so it would give you an idea what I'm trying to teach myself,I'm happy enough as only turned on a PC for the first time 18 months ago so ill get there at some point,always been creative with art and most things so it's a natural step for me.Regards bud

  21. Hey James, I apologize for the late response. Elements is for basic photo finishing and Premier is for video editing. You should be using Photoshop CS6 if you can get it. I would also encourage you to look into rendering utilities such as Shaderlight and Artlantis:

    Best,

    Chris

  22. Hi Chris – a great piece of work – have been a fan of Ian McHarg – "Design with Nature" for many years … really liked the ending …

  23. Hey James,

    Thank for the compliment. I was using CS5 and am not sure about the differences. I'm sure you can google it. I'm moving toward rendering engines such as Shaderlight or Podium for rendering my site plans. I really feel this is the future and enables you to focus on the details and 3D building of your design. Best of Luck!

  24. Hi Chris just found one of your vids and really love your work,I've never used photoshop but I have a question for you.I'm training myself in AutoCAD and Autodesk Inventor but on my laptop it came installed with Adobe photoshop elements 9 and premier elements 9,what can I do with this software as I have no idea what you can or can't do with it,the reason I ask is I know there are different type's of photoshop and as I've never used it I'm sort of in the dark?Thanks Chris….James

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *