16
/ BUILDING DIALOGUE / DECEMBER 2015
Resilient Design Helps to Plan for the Worst
I
f you’ve grown weary of the ever-expanding
use and interpretation of the word “sustain-
ability,” you may want to add the term “resil-
iency” to your lexicon.
Equally broad and important in its intent, re-
silient design looks beyond energy modeling (and
point-chasing) in favor of what the Resilient De-
sign Institute defines as “the intentional design of
buildings, landscapes, communities, and regions in
response to vulnerabilities to disaster and disrup-
tion of normal life.” Rather than react, resilient de-
sign may be defined as a mode of design thinking
and planning that aims to “anticipate” – for example,
to implement design strategies that aim to alleviate
the impact of disasters and “stresses” before (and, as a
result, after) they occur.
Whether this seems like a “doomsday” approach
to seeing the world or simply common-sense plan-
ning practices, organizations such as the Architects’
Foundation, in partnership with the National Resil-
ience Institute, are helping provide educational and
regional specificity aimed at creating resilience in the
form of “stronger, more liveable cities.”
Launched in 2013 on the heels of the Clinton Global
Initiative, the National Resilient Institute is a part-
nership of academic institutions and organizations
brought together to “build a network of communi-
ty- and university-based design studios dedicated to
sharing best practices about how to help commu-
nities establish built environments that are more
prepared for disasters and more resilient following
shocks and stresses.”
Evident in programming such as Mississippi State
University’s Gulf Coast Community Design Studio
(initially created in response to Hurricane Katrina
and now focused on what it designing for “long-term
recovery”) or the recently established Regional Re-
silience Design Studio at the New Jersey Institute of
Technology’s Center for Resilient Design in Newark,
aspiring architects are being given the valuable op-
portunity to learn to design with both short and long-
term views of the impacts of their design decisions.
Rather than think about an isolated building design,
students must weigh their design decisions through
the lens of what is important in both everyday expe-
rience as well as in rapidly evolving cultures, econ-
omies and climates. For example, course offerings at
the University of Arkansas Community Design Cen-
ter emphasize topical areas that are considered “core
challenges in the built environment.” These “chal-
lenges” are identified but not limited to transit-ori-
ented development, watershed urbanism, low-impact
development, context-sensitive street design, agricul-
tural urbanism and smart growth urbanism.
At a time in history when talks regarding climate
change, aging infrastructure and recent natural di-
sasters continue to compound, the holistic intent of
resilient design as a tool in creating successful urban
environments seems both convincing and plausible.
Does this mean that sustainability-focused programs
such as LEED have become irrelevant and that archi-
tects and engineers should stop counting kilowatts
or adding bike racks to their buildings? No, not at
all! With yet another tool in the toolbox, the design
and real estate community could also benefit from
considering how a project inevitably will contribute
to the bigger, more fantastic urban ecosystem within
which it is built.
\\
Beth R.
Mosenthal
AIA and
LEED AP
BD+C,
Architect,
Anderson
Mason
Dale
Archi-
tecture
Creative Content
Resillient design: the first blossom after spring
