Presidio Fort Scott Creek + Historic Garden

Design + Ecology
In Practice

©2008

Presidio Fort Scott Creek + Historic Garden

©2008
Design + Ecology
In Practice

Presidio Fort Scott Creek + Historic Garden

Produced by EDAW New York Office

 Foreword
On behalf of the Presidio Trust, I would like to express our gratitude for EDAW's
excellent work on the Fort Scott Creek & Historic Gardens project. We were thrilled to
have the Presidio selected as the focus of EDAW's "fusion" initiative for this year, and our
expectations for both the design process and end product were more than exceeded.

As managers of an incredibly complex landscape, we are continually challenged to strike

a balance between competing demands -- from ensuring that the park's environmental
and historic treasures endure to providing memorable opportunities for the public
experience [of] the Presidio. It was refreshing to have such a talented and dedicated
team come to the park and help us creatively explore new opportunities to balance
and achieve these various mandates. It was a rigorous week, and we were all very
impressed by the process and the outcome.

In particular, I want to acknowledge the exceptional team that EDAW sent to the
Presidio including Alma Du Solier, Alex Felson, Leo Edson, Debra Bishop, and Dawn
Cunningham. They were an extremely dedicated and talented group of professionals.
We very much enjoyed working [with] them and I continue to receive positive feedback
from the many people who engaged with them over the course of the week.

We deeply appreciate the contribution EDAW made in helping progress plans for the
Presidio's future, and we look forward to working with your talented staff again.

Sincerely,

Micheal Boland
Director of Planning and Park Projects
Presidio Trust

2 3
Acknowledgements
Thanks to the Presidio Trust
The Team would like to express their
appreciation to the Presidio Trust for the
opportunity to work together to explore
the integration of ecology and design.
We are especially grateful to Michael
Boland (Chief of Planning and Design
at the Presidio Trust) and Allison Stone
(senior environmental planner at Presidio
Trust) as well as all of the workshop
participants. The time dedicated by the
Presidio Trust staff was critical in helping
us understand the value of the existing
resources and the complexity of the
project site.
4 5
Workshop -
EDAW Multiple Office Participation
Preparation and implementation of the
workshop held at the Presidio occurred
through a multi-office collaboration with
the Ecology and Design team including:
Alex Felson (ecologist and landscape
architect, EDAW New York); Alma Du
Solier (landscape architect, EDAW San
Francisco); Leo Edson (wildlife biologist,
EDAW Sacramento); Debra Bishop
(environmental planning and restoration
ecologist, EDAW Sacramento); and
Dawn Cunningham (ecologist, EDAW
Sacramento). Other participants included:
Paul Tuttle, Aki Omi, Michelle Dubin, Curtis
Alling, David Blau, Steven Hanson, Chris
Fitzer, David Lloyd, and Dixi Carillo.
Analysis and Book Production -
New York Office
An interdisciplinary team in the EDAW
New York office completed the post-
workshop analysis and book production.
Alex Felson led the overall effort and
content development, working alongside
environmental planner Brian Goldberg
with contributions from Renee Kaufman
(designer). Anthony Blanco (graphic
designer), led the book layout and graphic
design along with designers Hye Young
Choi, Sean Cheng, Tim Terway, and Jaman
Pablo. Caitrin Higgins (designer) and
Aaron Menkin (economic analyst) provided
additional research support.
Analysis and Book Production -
Other Offices
Fran Hegeler (Development Manager)
provided critical support and ongoing
funding for the production. We wish to
thank the C + P Initiative within EDAW
for selecting our proposal and funding
this project. Other contributors to
the post-workshop analysis and book
production included Leo Edson, Alma du
Solier, Debra Bishop, Curtis Alling, and
Liz Batchelder.
 Table of Contents
Introduction
1.
Client + Practice Initiative: Design and Ecology
p.12-p.27

Setting up the Client + Practice Initiative with the Presidio

Benefits and Possible Outcomes of a Design + Ecology Practice Initiative
Integrating Design and Ecology
Contrasts between the Ecological Science and Design Professions
Integrated Ecology and Design Approach: Opportunities for Fusion

6 7
2. 3.
The Presidio: A Case Study in Integrating Finding a Middle Ground: Discoveries and Broader
Ecology and Design Implications from the Presidio Workshop
p.28-p.75 p.76-p.108

Presidio as a Pilot Study for Ecology and Design Constructing a Middle Ground
Understanding the Presidio at Multiple Scales Alternative Scenarios: Determining a Happy Medium
Interpreting the Presidio Trust Mission Alternative Scenarios: Access: Wildlife Habitat and Public Use
Timeline Illustrating Evolving Land Use Taking Advantage of the Multi-layered Park to Overlap Program and Activities
Existing Conditions: Community Gardens – Applying Historical Methods to Secure New Land Uses Alternative Scenarios: Public Access
Existing Conditions: Restoration Ecology – Providing a Way to Align Stakeholders Alternative Scenarios: Habitat Fragmentation/Wildlife Viewing
Existing Conditions: Historic Forest – an Ecological and Cultural Conundrum Alternative Scenarios: Riparian Corridor
EDAW-Presidio Trust Interdisciplinary Collaboration Alternative Scenarios: Ecological Restoration
Understanding the Stakeholders Rendered Conceptual Plan
Day by Day Schedule Rendered Conceptual Section
Day by Day Overview Conclusion: Facilitating Collaboration between Designers and Ecologists
Lessons Learned: Site Visit
Lessons Learned: Stakeholder Dialogue
Lessons Learned: Design Charrette
Lessons Learned: Design Process
Lessons Learned: Presentation
Insights into Setting Up the Workshop

8 9
 Introduction
In November 2006, a week-long workshop focusing on both ecology and landscape
design was conducted at the Presidio of San Francisco. The goal of the workshop
was to develop conceptual design plans for the Fort Scott Creek + Historic Gardens
project that would bridge the divide between ecology and design, and identify applied
techniques for this approach in the future. We started with the assumption that
designers and ecologists working together could produce better design solutions
than those resulting from more independent work patterns. We discovered that our
underlying disciplinary assumptions, the tendency to rely on what we do best, and
limited opportunities for ecologists to participate in the design process, all create
challenges for fusion among disciplines. At the conclusion of the workshop, the
team was able to identify moments of successful integration as well as missed
opportunities for collaboration and develop a diagram depicting the dynamic. This
book presents findings about ways to facilitate interdisciplinary design and ecology
work, describes the workshop collaboration and outcomes, and analyzes the process
of designers and ecologists working together.

Key Questions
What takes precedence in a historic national park: ecosystem function or
historic preservation?

Can public use and recreation be integrated with both habitat enhancement and
controlled visitation?

What is more valuable in an urban park setting: public access to water or riparian
wildlife habitat preservation and enhancement?

How can one ensure that opposing stakeholders reach a winning consensus rather
than everyone feeling that they have given up too much?

10 11
 BRIDGING CONCEPTS

1. Client + Practice Initiative: ECOLOGY DESIGN

Design + Ecology ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

SUSTAINABILITY LONG TERM PLANNING

WILDLIFE CORRIDORS
LAND USE REAL ESTATE

LEGACY
HISTORY HISTORIC FEATURE
NATIVE COMMUNITY
NICHES
BIODIVERSITY GARDEN
EDAW’s Client + Practice Initiative on Design and Ecology focused on building a
dialogue between practitioners of different disciplines within the firm. After extensive
ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION
discussions on how ecology and design might be integrated (Fig. 1-1), the team
PERCEIVED NATURE SCENERY
sought either a client or a project that provided the right blend of circumstances to
apply an integrative design approach. The team found this blend with the Presidio. PHENOLOGY/SUCCESSION
TEMPORALITY SEASONALITY

DISTURBANCE
PUBLIC USE RECREATION

SUCCESSION
OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
METRICS ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

ECOSYSTEM FUNCTION
AESTHETIC FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION

GEOLOGY
NATURAL HISTORY SITE FEATURES

PATCH DYNAMICS
HETEROGENEITY MULTI USE

Figure 1-1

12 13
Setting up the Client
+ Practice Initiative
with the Presidio

In the summer of 2006, two landscape With the goal of exploring the dilemmas
architects, a wildlife biologist, and a and opportunities of interdisciplinary
restoration ecologist from EDAW teamed design, the team participated in a
together to form an initiative exploring one-week site-based visionary and
the fusion of ecology and design. The consensus-building workshop for the
EDAW team approached the Presidio Trust Fort Scott Creek + Historic Gardens. SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI
in search of a pilot project for the firm’s Collaborating with the Presidio Trust,
Ecology and Design Initiative. EDAW has EDAW sought to achieve a balance
Stakeholders Meeting Design/Ecology Visioning Final Presentation
viewed the fusion of ecology and design between enhancing public uses Kick off Discussion
Define Opportunities Charrette Discussion Collect Feedback
Informal Site Visit
+ Constraints
as a fundamental aspect of its work for and conserving the park’s valuable Landuse Analysis

decades. This funded effort emerged from environmental and historic resources.
conversations between EDAW ecologists
and designers seeking to elevate ecological This partnership with the Presidio Trust
design to a higher level throughout the enabled EDAW to explore the intricacies
firm – a level where meaningful ecological of stakeholder differences and site
function and value is incorporated into the constraints. Applying ecological and Key Initial Scales of Thinking Discussions Discussions How should Lessons
Discussions Discussions Eco-restoration: Ecological ecologists Learned
design on multiple projects. design lenses to the Presidio, the EDAW Ecology/Design To what point in
time? Naturalistic?
Vision and
Design Vision
contribute?

team exposed a number of key challenges Overlaps and

Conflicts
The Presidio Trust’s commitment to in the integration of these two disciplines,
OVERVIEW SCALE RESTORATION SITE / VISION DESIGN PROCESS SYNTHESIS
achieving a balance between the park’s and facilitated a process of exploration for ECOLOGY/DESIGN
environmental and historic treasures, and resolving these conflicts.
its past success in completing projects that
incorporate meaningful restoration ecology A key goal on our part was to facilitate
with public use and design elements. This communication and idea exchange
bridging of ecology and design indicated through planned discussions and
a natural fit for the initiative’s pilot project. informal interactions such as site walks.
For the focus of the workshop, Presidio We organized the week's schedule to DESIGNER

Trust staff proposed the Fort Scott Creek + foster a continual dialogue between
Historic Gardens site. The site is slated to the designers and ecologists (Fig. 1-2, ECOLOGIST
become a future “Center of Engagement” Weekly Plan Chart).
focused on sustainability.
Figure 1-2

14 15
Benefits and Possible
Outcomes of a Design +
Ecology Practice Initiative
EDAW’s Client + Practice Initiative
on Design and Ecology provided an
opportunity for employees to work
towards excellence through innovation,
creativity and collaboration across
disciplines. The EDAW C+P Initiative
identified the following as goals of the
increased integration of the design and
ecology practices at EDAW.
1 Initiate an interdisciplinary team
effort to cross-fertilize design with
ecology and lead to integrated
and comprehensive land-
based solutions
2 Create a forum for discovering
obstacles and opportunities
for facilitating interdisciplinary
communication
3 Flag moments where fusion
could occur
4 Meld science and design to develop
solutions that are educational and
reintegrate ecological processes
into urbanized parkland
16
5 Develop a proposal that responds
best to the many stakeholders, site
constraints, and client demands
6 Produce a case study exploring
fusion of ecology and design into
a specialized niche that positions
EDAW as a leader in providing
integrated services
7 Initiate relationships with the
Presidio Trust to develop the
proposal as a built project
8 Add value to landscape solutions
such that the whole inter-disciplinary
collaboration is greater than the sum
of the individual efforts
9 Further refine our understanding
and application of sustainability on
large park projects
10 Learn about the Presidio's land
use history and current land
management practices
17
Integrating Design
and Ecology
The increasing demand for sustainable
urban designs, green building, and
green infrastructure requires a deeper
ecological understanding of urban
environments. While ecologists currently
contribute to the design and construction
of cities as consultants on design teams,
urban ecology remains a fledgling field
with weak theoretical underpinnings and
a limited shared vocabulary.
Most ecologists today avoid human-
dominated environments, focusing
instead on sites that are not primarily for
human use. Ecologists are happy if they
understand a system, while designers
aim to invent something new. When
ecologists do get involved in design,
such as through restoration ecology,
they typically employ a naturalistic design
aesthetic and work toward hiding any
evidence of the human hand. This
contrasts with the goal of designers, who
often want to make a project visible.
One key issue to address in defining
urban ecology is what role people,
technology, and the political and socio-
economic aspects of human society play.
Most existing quantitative research
investigates ecology in cities, focusing
18
primarily on plant, animal, water and
nutrient flows occurring in urban
settings, while avoiding the challenge
of translating political, cultural, social
and economic actions into ecological
terms. People and the city are viewed in
these cases as external forces affecting
biological conditions.
Ecology of cities takes a more holistic
view of human society and its interface
H N
with biological processes, looking at the
ecological implications of socio-cultural,
political, and economic urban patterns.
Various methods used to measure inputs
and outputs of a city include system
metabolism at a variety of scales:
building, neighborhood, watershed, city,
or region. Urban ecology also examines
the spatial distribution of these scales and
the circulation of people and materials
(Spirn 1984).
Unraveling the ecology of urban
environments and translating people
and culture into ecological terms may
not be so easy. Unlike more natural
environments, cities are the result of
human design rather than the product
of millions of years of evolutionary and
biogeographic processes. Ecologists
Figure1-3 Human-Nature Diagrams
investigating cities face the difficult task
of incorporating the physical, cultural,
economic, and political urban terrain
N into their research and analysis. This
H requires not only grappling with a number
of variables never before dealt with in
ecological research, but also developing a
position on what urban ecology includes
and excludes, and understanding to what
degree human patterns are ecological
(see Fig. 1-3, Human-Nature Diagrams).
Fundamental conceptual questions
remain. Should humans be thought
of (like other biological organisms)
as ecological factors? If so, can we
consider our manufactured systems
H N (such as HVAC or zoning) ecological?
What weight or value should human
and biological influences that shape
urban spaces be given (see fig 1-4
-- Mapping Urban Ecology)? Can natural
areas remain functional as healthy
ecosystems while also allowing
H human uses?
N “Without understanding interactions
and feedbacks between human and
ecological systems, our view of
ecosystem dynamics both at local and
global scales will be limited – as will be
our ability to apply these insights to public
policy and land management.”
(Grimm et al., 2000).
The ambiguity of "ecology" as it occurs
in human-populated environments, and
the lack of terminology or ecological data
describing the ecology of buildings, urban
space, and other human constructed
landscapes thwarts efforts to bridge
disciplines. To help define this fusion
zone, a new vocabulary along with a
series of metrics based on viable empirical
data needs to be developed. Presently,
the lack of definition or documentation
of the new ecological conditions created
in urban environments make it difficult
for designers to absorb ecological
understanding into the design process.
In order to access a greater range of
ecological approaches, designers need
to go beyond environmentalism and
prescriptive design techniques, and take
greater advantage of ecological science.
While green design is becoming
increasingly important to government
agencies, clients, investors, developers, and
designers, all parties are still working with
limited knowledge of what actions will
19
lead to sustainable development. Once
implemented, questions still remain on
how to maintain and operate the systems
to provide prolonged sustainability.
Ecologists also lack extensive, rigorously
tested research about the function
of urban ecosystems -- including
dense urban, suburban, exurban, and
brownfield sites. Often, in the absence
of sufficient information, designers must
make educated guesses. Given the
uncertainty and difficulty of predicting
future outcomes of different strategies,
developing effective sustainable practices
requires testing and monitoring to ensure
accurate information about the success
of systems being implemented. More
rigorous and long-term research of urban
ecological processes and patterns is
necessary to evaluate the ecological
impacts of the various developments
occurring in managed sites.
Ecologists have the potential to make
significant contributions to urban
design practices. They have already been
contributing to the design and construction
of cities through their roles as consultants
(applied or restoration ecologists and
ecological engineers) on design teams.
Still, addressing urban ecology remains a
20
new frontier, not least because current
theories that define cities and human
activities in ecological terms are relatively
rare. Today, ecologists and designers
have an opportunity to bridge the gap
between ecological analysis and urban
design to reorient society towards a more
sustainable future.
Incorporating ecological research
components into urban development is
a crucial part of advancing sustainability.
Not only will it provide opportunities for
a growing population of ecologists to
establish research sites.
A key goal to this fusion effort is to
develop enduring solutions. These
vibrant and long-lasting designs could be
evaluated for performance and adapted
overtime for efficiency.
Figure1-4 Mapping Urban Ecology
21
Contrasts between the
Ecological Science and
Design Professions
While there is growing interest in
bridging the gap between practices
to facilitate green design and urban
ecology, designers and ecologists differ
in significant ways that could slow the
process. Designers and ecologists rely
on different skill sets, approaches, and
techniques to explore and comprehend
complex sites. These differences lead to
a lack of dialogue or to communication
breakdowns. While designers direct a
creative energy towards realizing human
experiences of a landscape, ecologists
typically use a quantitative process for
understanding specific environmental
processes and patterns (Fig. 1-5).
Despite the unique paradigms of these
two distinct professions, today’s land-
based challenges require integrated
approaches and inputs to solve complex
problems. Solutions need to arise not
only from an overlapping of disciplines,
but from a consistently integrated
dialogue between ecologists and
designers. This broadening scope of
opportunities demands new approaches
and input provided by interdisciplinary
teams. In particular, the study of
urban areas and other human-modified
landscapes requires knowledge of
22
ecosystem processes as well as of the
physical, cultural, economic, political, and
ecological complexities of urban systems.
Fig. 1-4 conceptually illustrates how high
design and rigorous science might overlap
to provide a fusion zone. Integration
of these approaches requires a candid
dialogue where differences are exposed
and goals are revealed at the start.
Collaboration and commitment to dialogue
are essential. The fusion zone represents
synergy, wherein all parties participate and
are prepared to discuss concerns or ideas
freely at any point.
Recognizing the need for an understanding
of how to facilitate design and ecology
collaboration, EDAW’s Client + Practice
Initiative has provided support for a
multidisciplinary group to team with a
client and explore novel situations. The
Presidio Trust’s need for consensus-
building among stakeholders provided
a perfect partnership opportunity for
exploring how the synergy of design and
Ecologists have traditionally avoided Designers modify the environment to
ecology could help overcome obstacles to
human-inhabited environments. cater to human needs.
achieving interdisciplinary solutions.
Figure 1-5
23
 and address the hypothesis. Interpretation and environmental scientists are generally designers work. A large project for a
Applied Ecologists’ Approach
and applicability of these findings to other interested in maintaining ecosystem landscape architect may a large-scale project
scenarios requires scientists to step outside function and processes. Traditionally, for an ecologist (Fig. 1-7).
Process
of replicating experiments and to accept a ecosystem health and sustained operation
Grounded in Scientific Method: As a
level of uncertainty. Due to the funding and of plant, wildlife, water, and atmospheric Product
science-based practice, ecologists attempt
time constraints of conducting research, systems has been a defining goal of Representation: Design is a representation-
to adhere to a more objective approach,
ecologists must often predict and render ecological efforts. Increasingly, human based approach, where designers utilize
combining statistics, math, and computer
judgment about likely outcomes systems and behaviors are being integrated various forms of diagramming, sections,
modeling with biology, natural history,
and conclusions. into the ecology process. plans, computer modeling, and model-
Designers Ecologist
experimental research, and observation. Designers Ecologist
making to analyze, explore, develop, and
Form Designers’ Approach build human-related spaces and buildings.
Scale
Driven by Science: Form is based on The exact and definite concept evolves
Individuals to Population or System:
statistical data and efficiency. Experimental Process through the design process into a real form.
From micro-organisms to populations,
Environ- strategies developed over time that identify Making Concepts a Reality: Designs A designer’s ability to adapt a concept to
mentalism
communities, and landscapes, ecologists Aesthetics
boundaries framing complex systems, such emerge through a process of understanding meet the applied challenge is essential.
work at a broad range of scales in seeking
as watersheds. Experiments typically use the site. Through a creative exploration of
to understand ecological dynamics.
inexpensive materials with the simplest potential site experiences, constraints, and Form
Scales are in part determined by where
processes for capturing desired data. Language opportunities, designers produce solutions Art/Design/Dialogue: Form captures
Ecology
ecologists can identify and interpret subjectivity
Restoration ecology is one of the few that are realized in drawings, images, and representative and symbolic interventions
boundaries. The ecologist’s scale of work
examples where ecologists make design montages. Many scientists have difficulty influenced by culture, history, politics,
has traditionally been limited to the extent
decisions. Often the default approach is to understanding the value behind these environment, and social elements of a
of the system or population studied. In
Scientific design in a naturalistic manner. Designers Design design methods, due to the use of site. Form is also driven by a designer’s
Objective
addition, ecologists are often financially Process
tend to view the naturalistic design and subjective language, a focus on aesthetics, education and mentors as well as
constrained or limited by the logistics of
strong environmental stances as obstacles and the design process (Fig. 1-6B). interaction with various design dialogues.
setting up large-scale experiments.
to bridging the divide between the practices.
Also, understanding the latest ecological Scale Function
Product
theories and finding ways of integrating A Parcel, Building, Park, or Regional Area: User Experience: Designers bring a
Findings/Conclusions: The output of the
the scientific objective into design can be The land-based, surficial scale of work is creative energy that is generally directed
scientific method is findings or conclusions
complicated (Fig. 1-6A). dependent on the size and defined boundary towards achieving a desired human
which negate or support a hypothesis
of land to be planned or designed. The experience of a particular landscape.
based on the initial research question.
Function scales at which applied ecologists work Landscapes can also be designed to
Researchers’ conclusions are generally
Ecosystem Health: Applied ecologists can differ widely from the scales at which encourage particular processes.
Figure 1-6A stated to specifically answer the question Figure 1-6B

24 25
Integrated Ecology and
Design Approach:
Opportunities for Fusion
Process
Ecologists are increasingly interested
in experimentation, conservation, and
restoration on urban sites, expanding from
their traditional presence in less human-
L dominated landscapes.
Ecologists are broadening definitions
of ecosystems, and (recognizing that
ecological systems are continually being
L M
influenced by disturbances) revising
traditional vegetation theory to include
multiple processes, human influences,
and spatial heterogeneity. Ecologists have
also moved from considering populations
M S and ecosystems as relatively closed or
Constraints are very often the impetus
for innovation. Obstacles provide
opportunities for designers to facilitate
the progress of a team through design
challenges. Thus, designers fulfill a
fundamental role in building research into
urban sites and into social consciousness.
Scale
As cities become the subject of ecological
research, more opportunities arise for
designers and ecologists to communicate.
There is an increasing need for designers
and ecologists to work at multiple scales
to address the zone of fusion between
cultural, functional, and aesthetic urban
framework. Restoration projects could
benefit from ecologists questioning the
naturalistic design forms that are the
default in most scenarios. Designers
have an opportunity to explore new
forms for research projects, and to
establish diverse aesthetic approaches
to urban environments.
- art driven aesthetic appeal people
- metrics = use and enjoyment
“success is being provocative,
Function
Utilizing designers’ creativity and
understanding of city composition,
evolution, form, and function, ecologists
could begin to grapple with the ecological
implications of urban space and culture
in their research. By unifying traditional
ecological research methods with urban
design, ecologists could take advantage
of designers’ ability to synthesize
multiple complex factors into cohesive
physical forms. This could in turn make
ecological research more public, visible,
and aesthetically ambitious, infusing
experiments with cultural meaning.
- science driven ecological health of
- metrics = natural ecosystem
sustainability
“success is when the hand of

their disciplines. Ecologists understand

profound, memorable”
high fusion high man is not evident”
autonomous systems, independent of their design world ecology world
surroundings, to viewing both populations complex systems, and can provide design zone science
and ecosystems as “open” and strongly multiple levels of analysis for designers.
S influenced by input and output of material Practitioners should search for scales that
and individuals across system borders. complement one another.
- site interpretation - soils
- site design - hydrology

? ?
- grading and - water quality
Landscape architects have begun to take Product drainage - geomorphology
Designer on a larger role in understanding and Integrated projects that incorporate design - planting plan - plant ecology
- visualization innovation restoration - wildlife ecology
developing urban ecological systems. and ecology will be long-lasting, dynamic, - engineering identity
KEY EDAW VALUES
regeneration - human ecology
- plans and specs usability rehabilitation
Ecologist They are beginning to appreciate an and intimately tied to human society. - cost estimates adaptability enhancement
-construction form create enduring solutions preservation
ecological process-based understanding management function seek cultural and environmental fit management
foster positive change
of landscapes and environmental concerns, Form advocate collaborative exchange of ideas

and learning to access and incorporate A designer’s creativity and exploration

ecological knowledge into their design plays a unique and critical role in situating
processes (See Fig. 1-8). ecological research and analysis within a
Figure 1-7 Figure 1-8 Adapted from David Blau, 2001

26 27
2. The Presidio: A Case Study in
Integrating Ecology and Design

Through a combination of presentations and site visits, the workshop began with a crash
course in the history and existing conditions of the site. The foundation being set, the
workshop progressed quickly from discussions of interdisciplinary work, site analysis,
visioning with stakeholders, and design charrettes, to the creation of a conceptual
plan. Along the way lessons were learned about the integration of design and ecology,
although some were only apparent with the benefit of hindsight. This chapter seeks to
take readers on our design and ecology integration journey.

28 29
Presidio as a Pilot Study
for Ecology and Design
The Presidio of San Francisco, a 1,490-acre
park located at the Golden Gate Bridge,
provides a rich context for exploring the
collaboration between designers and
ecologists. The Presidio is a distinct park
site located at the center of the world's
largest urban national park, Golden Gate
National Recreation Area (75,500 acres).
The Presidio’s mixture of land uses and
competing stakeholder demands within
an urban area has created a variety of
obstacles to reaching consensus on land
use decisions.
In use as an active military post from
1776 to 1994, the Presidio was folded into
the boundaries of Golden Gate National
Recreation Area in 1972 after being
designated a National Historic Landmark
District in 1962. Congress established The
Presidio Trust in 1996 as a leadership body,
and charged the Trust with preserving and
enhancing the Presidio as an "enduring
resource for the American public."
The park’s 300-acre Historic Forest is a
designated historic landmark. The forest is
recognized by many as a cultural landscape,
shaped by the U.S. Army more than 100
years ago, that significantly contributes to
the Presidio’s historic identity. Others view
the forest as a created, artificial community
30
with limited diversity that replaced native
dunes, coastal prairie, and coastal scrub
communities. A highly charged discussion
on this topic has been ongoing for years.
Located in a highly urbanized center, the
vast green spaces at the Presidio seem to
be prime opportunities for diverse public
uses. However, historic designations
and stakeholders' interests often create
opposing demands. For example, the
Presidio's buildings encompass 6 million
square feet. Many of the houses that
were once occupied by military families
are now occupied by civilian families; there
are nearly 3,000 people currently living in
these homes. These long-term site users
comprise a group of private stakeholders
inhabiting space within a public park.
Additional issues at the Presidio arise in
relation to other land management visions,
such as environmental restoration. These
projects prompt a series of questions.
What is the goal of restoration projects in
an urban context? Which is more important:
to restore a land’s native ecosystem, or to
cater to human needs and try to allow for
some environmental value as well? In the
case of the Presidio, there are a number of
examples where restoration ecology proved
a useful tool in bringing dissenting voices
together towards a common cause.
The Presidio Trust envisions the project
site becoming an important destination for
park visitors. Ultimately, the nearby historic
PUBLIC USE buildings may be used for conferences
and other events that could draw people
with a common interest in addressing
environmental and social issues. Historic
DESIGN ECOLOGY
structures and artifacts, many of which
are yet to be restored, are common in and
around adjacent historic gardens. From
the gardens, a small spring-fed creek
A. Initial Framework emerges and meanders along a valley that
is itself being restored to provide important
ecological functions and values. Planned
native plant restoration will enhance
opportunities for park visitors to view
wildlife along Fort Scott Creek.
PUBLIC USE
The Presidio Trust challenged EDAW to work
in a collaborative fashion with their technical
DESIGN HISTORY
experts to develop a conceptual design
plan, which enhances, interprets, and
integrates the unique features of the project
ECOLOGY
site. The initiative was originally focused on
developing designs that incorporate ecology
and design into public use, education
B. Outcomes: History emerges and interpretation (Fig. 2-1A). As EDAW
as a Key Component. prepared and participated in the charrette,
it became increasingly apparent that
historic factors were a major influence. The
Figure 2-1 working model was expanded to integrate
ecology, design, and history with public
space (Fig. 2-1B).
Key Requests from Client:
1. Develop a 21st-century approach that
is sustainable, integrates state-of-the-art
technology, and is respectful of the site’s
historic character.
2. Develop the restoration of Fort Scott
Creek and determine what role it might
play in relation to other riparian corridors,
as well as the historic landscapes.
3. Knit the district together, and tie the
historic garden and community garden to
the ideas of sustainability and stewardship.
4. Create an educational landscape with
evolving experiences.
5. Develop a landscape design that solves
issues and creates opportunities for
people moving through the site.
6. Children’s activities are key. Make this
a place where children in the Bay Area can
enjoy a meaningful outdoor experience.
7. Get people close to natural resources
throughout the site to provide a sense of
contact and intimacy with nature.
31
Understanding the
Presidio at Multiple Scales

The Presidio functions at multiple scales:

as part of Golden Gate National Recreation
Area, and as a local park for San
Francisco urbanites.

Regional Scale City Scale Overall Site Scale Detailed Site Scale Detailed Site Scale

Golden Gate National San Francisco The Presidio Fort Scott Dragonfly Creek
Recreation Area Park connection 1,490 acre urban parkland combines a mix Former officer’s quarters Stewardship and sustainability Center
Historic sites of land uses typical to a public park in a of Engagement
High-end real estate users small city Existing plant nursery
Tying the San Francisco Bay together Pre-existing freshwater creek
Population of 12 million in Bay Area Long history of military use Future tactical retreat center
World's largest national park in an Linkages from park to city Historic forest and historic garden
urban area Native American inhabitation Historic buildings and landscapes

Land use plan

Historic forest

Figure 2-2

32 33
Interpreting the
Presidio Trust Mission
Created by Congress in 1996, the Presidio
Trust’s mission is to preserve and enhance
the Presidio as an enduring resource for
the American people. Six presidential
appointees and the Secretary of the
“To preserve and enhance
Interior, or his/her designee, sit on the
the natural, cultural, scenic,
Board of Directors and set the direction
and recreational resources of
and policies for the ongoing transformation
the Presidio for public use.
of this historic military post.
These efforts encompass the
natural areas, wildlife, and
The Trust is charged with making the
native habitats of the park, as
Presidio financially self-sustaining. After
well as the historic structures
2012, the Trust will not receive annual
and designed landscapes
historic preservation, recreation, and
environmental restoration.
PARK
The Presidio Trust’s mission (Fig. 2-3)
illustrates the inherent challenges of
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNED
planning, programming, and designing the
site. “Natural areas, wildlife, and native
habitat” are identified as key resources
of the site which should be preserved
PRESERVE NATURAL AREAS HISTORIC STRUCTURE
and enhanced for public use. “Historic
structures” and “designed landscapes”
are also considered key resources to be MAINTAIN WILDLIFE DESIGNED LANDSCAPES
preserved for the public. Ideally there

ENT
appropriations, and is required to fund the will be diversity in the types of locations ENHANCE NATIVE HABITATS + PLANTS RECREATIONAL
that make the park a National
Presidio’s operations, maintenance, and preserved at Presidio: both natural areas

NCEM
Historic Landmark District. The
ongoing upgrades with income earned and designed landscapes. However, a EDUCATIONAL
Presidio Trust is dedicated to SCENERY
from rehabilitating and reusing the park’s process for reaching consensus is required
ensuring that visitors to this

N HA
buildings. The Presidio is sustaining itself for to achieve this delicate balance.
spectacular place will have the CULTURAL
like every healthy community – earning, Given site constraints, accommodating

DE
opportunity to gain a broader
saving, and investing in the future. This stakeholder demands will be challenging.

AN
understanding of the Presidio, HISTORIC FOREST
simple economy generates the capital

N
its place in American history,

IO
that is making the Presidio a great national Figure 2-4 illustrates the overlapping and
and the plants and wildlife

AT
which once thrived throughout
park and will ensure its preservation. competing interests in the Presidio as a
E RV
national urban park. In particular, the role ES
the region.”
As the largest urban national park in of preservation is embedded. PR

SE
the world, nested within the Bay Area

U
(population 12 million), the Presidio C
requires a unique resource management BLI
model, which blends competing local P U
interests and needs with the broader,
national constituencies supporting
Figure 2-3 Figure 2-4

34 35
Timeline Illustrating
Evolving Land Use
A military presence can be traced to the
Presidio as early as 1776. In spite of this
human occupation of the site, until the
early 1800s the Presidio featured extensive
sand dunes and coastal scrub extending
across the coastal bluffs (see Fig. 2-5).
Parts of the Presidio were also grazed
especially during the Spanish occupation,
leading to erosion and wind-blown sand,
which was carried and deposited across
the site. The US Army established a parkland with non-military residents. These
military post at the Presidio in 1846. changes have had profound effects on the
In the 1890s, a decision was made to types of uses stakeholders seek from the
modify the existing landscape in order to Presidio Land.
mitigate harsh winds, stabilize shifting
sands, and complement the natural In particular, the transfer of the Presidio
beauty of the land. from military to public parkland
management has led to an increased
Over time, the demands on the land have demand from Presidio residents and
evolved with the site’s transformation adjacent homeowners for access to
from a military base into a public national lands for gardening.

c.700 1776 1822 1846 1850 1883 1962 1972 1994 2002

The U.S. Sixth Army

Native Condition of Coastal Scrub
Dune Scrub and Serpentine
Grassland with early inhabitants
including Native Americans
Figure 2-5
Spanish Army
Spanish colonists from northern
Mexican frontier outpost Mexico
establish El Presidio, a frontier fort,
and build the first structure on the
site of the Officers’ Club.
Mexican Army U.S. Army
Forested
Mexican frontier outpost President Millard Fillmore reserves
the Presidio for the U.S. Army. Large variety of evergreen and
deciduous trees and shrubs.
Blue gum eucalyptus, Monterey pine,
Monterey cypress, and blackwood
acacia are planted as part of the
management plan.
Designated as a National Historic
Landmark District
departs and the Presidio
officially transfers to the
National Park Service (NPS).
Congress mandates that
Incorporated within the Golden Gate The Presidio Trust manage New Forest
National Recreation Area the site. ManagementPlan
is adopted by
The Presidio Trust

36 37
Existing Conditions:
Community Gardens
Community Gardens: Applying
Historical Methods to Secure
New Land Uses
The debates surrounding community
gardens at the Presidio are an apt
illustration of the conflicting demands and
expectations placed on the land.
The Presidio’s role as a community where
people live and work, as a national park
at the edge of a highly urbanized area,
and its designation as a National Historic
Landmark District lead to inevitable
conflicts. While community gardens are
uncommon in national parks, they are a
wonderful public use component of many
urban parklands. They provide a venue
for community members to invest in the
land, they create habitat for insects and
birds, and they can provide a means for
maintaining the land (although management
requirements may increase). The National
Park System acts as a stakeholder at the
Presidio, often finding its agenda in conflict
with the surrounding homeowners, Presidio
inhabitants, and historic preservationists.
Historically, the site was established
as a pleasure garden for officers and
their wives along with the Fort Scott
Creek area. Other gardens existed at
the Presidio during its military period,
38
including a victory garden and agricultural
gardens used to grow food for the war
effort. The community gardens available
at the Presidio today include one historic
garden covering roughly a one-acre parcel
of land. The well-established Presidio
Native Plant Nursery also employs a
significant number of volunteers, providing
avenue for community members to work
the land. The limited community garden
space at the Presidio does not satisfy
existing public demand. There is a long
waiting list for users seeking garden plots.
Opportunities to expand the amount
of space for cultivation by community
gardeners are constrained by strict
guidelines and controls on the number of
gardens allowed to ensure maintenance of
an historic character. A variety of factors
including the Presidio’s historic district
designation which governs landscape
changes contribute to the limited gardens.
Competing land uses and the limited
availability of non-forested level land are
also factors.
Figure 2-6 Aerial Photographs, 1948
of the historic garden which has been
transformed into a community garden
39
In spite of these constraints, the
development of the current community
garden in the mid 1990s is a great
example of a way to move forward in
spite of stakeholder conflict. Eager to
establish garden plots, the community
gardeners became historians by digging
out old aerials and images from the
historical library to identify possible
locations across the Presidio that had
once been used as pleasure gardens.
The original gardens within Fort Scott
were identified so that they could be
revived as gardens for the public.
40
Historic preservation of the landscape
makes increased public access and
public gardening interests difficult to
achieve. Some might view the lack of
community gardens as a lost public
benefit. Historic preservation limits
the realization of what many view as
an optimal land use allocation for public
involvement. The Presidio Native Plant
Nursery does provide some volunteer
opportunities to actively restore sites.
In several cases, the restoration
approaches may circumnavigate historic
preservation in order to both satisfy
recreational needs and achieve a
beautiful landscape. The nursery’s role
in providing land use opportunities,
which satisfy urban residents’ demands
for community gardening while meeting
historic preservation constraints, is an
example of programming that can enable
additional public accessibility to the site.
Figure 2-7A (right): historical garden at Fort
Scott Creek, circa 1944.
Figure 2-7B-D (below): historical
photograph with bridge, current garden.
41

Existing Conditions:
Restoration Ecology
Restoration Ecology: Providing a Way
to Align Stakeholders
Multiple restoration projects have been
undertaken since the U.S. Army’s
closure of the Presidio base in 1994. A
review of these projects reveals the
planning and design challenges posed by
conflicting and incompatible land uses,
precedent land management decisions,
evolving disciplinary, preservation, and
conservation approaches.
In 1994, The Army transferred the land
to the National Park Service, and with its
mission of “preserving unimpaired the
natural and cultural resources and values
of the National Park System,” the Park
Service began a fairly broad restoration
effort (Fig. 2-8). In 1996, approximately
80% of the Presidio was transferred
to the Presidio Trust. Restoration can
be viewed as a fundamental tool for
satisfying both the National Park System’s
and the Presidio’s mission of enhancing
natural areas as enduring resources for
the public. The Natural Areas Program is
a program designed to preserve, restore,
and enhance San Francisco’s natural
ecology and to develop community-
based site stewardship. The purposes of
Natural Areas stewardship are ecological,
42
Fort Scott Creek Crissy Field Marsh
The creek is a natural spring Crissy Field is a former salt marsh and subsequent
targeted for restoration
military airfield/Restoration Background:
Initiatives:
Extensive debates on the importance of public access versus
Riparian initiative habitat value related to marsh creation
Site of native plant center
Planned sustainability center
historical, educational, aesthetic,
and spiritual.
Restoration ecology at the Presidio reveals
the challenges posed by conflicting
Coastal
interests and incompatible uses. It
20 miles of
raises the question: how can ecologically “social trails”
appropriate restoration be compatible with Restoration
cultural and historic preservation interests? initiative to replace
these with one
In addition, it can be difficult to change beautiful public trail
prevailing public perceptions of ecological
restoration. The public often views
Neighborhood Tennessee Hollow
restoration as replacing a park-like setting Restoration
The Hollow is the largest
with a less user-friendly environment. Restoration watershed in the Presidio,
Mature trees are understandably a much- initiatives have supporting a valuable
included: wildlife habitat
loved component of parks, and restoring
Replacing lawn Restoration initiatives
areas of mature parkland to coast scrub or w/ native habitat have included:
grasslands, for example, may not always Phasing plan w/ Daylighting the buried creek
mesh with the desires of urban residents in buildings to be
Creating a new
removed
need of respite. creek-side trail
The establishment of the Presidio Native
Plant Nursery provides a way for Presidio
Restored Lake Scale 1:12000
Trust, community volunteer and ecological 0 500 1000 1500 2000
Restoration initiatives have included:
goals to align. The Presidio Native Plant
Development as a passive recreation area Inspiration Point
Nursery supports habitat restoration,
Site of Chinese religious ceremony -- release of invasive Asian turtles, Site consists of rare native serpentine grassland. In
creates a connection between the resulting in carp die-out; outcry and response with restoration the 1880s the Army planted, adjacent to this bluff,
park and the community, and helps non-native Monterey pines as a windbreak
Removal of trail down to the water to reduce foot traffic
people understand the importance of Used restoration as a tool to convince public to
Public participation in restoration effort, more than 2,000 volunteer hours support the removal of the pines and the
environmental sustainability, restoration, spent in 2005 for removal of non-native plants and underbrush clearance reintroduction of historically dominant
and parklands stewardship. Staff and serpentine grasslands
Figure 2-8 Background on ecological restoration projects at the Presidio
43
volunteers grow 60,000 native plants
annually for habitat and forest restoration
projects throughout the Presidio, collect
seeds, care for plants, and construct
compost piles. There also exists in our
society a general lack of public knowledge
about the ecological merit of various
landscapes. Together these historic and
cultural factors position some stakeholders
against ecological restoration. The Presidio’s
highly urban context results in significant
social demands on the land: for example,
residents want jogging trails and desirable
views from houses. From a different
perspective, historians value the Presidio
landscape as historical documentation of
the past military presence.
Still, many environmentalists are calling
for the complete removal of the non-
native Historic Forest planted on site and
its replacement with what was originally
there, including sand dunes, coastal scrub
communities, and riparian habitats. The
riparian habitat restoration has more
easily garnered public acceptance, and
indeed there are now several successful
examples of Presidio restoration projects
that include coastal wetlands and creek
daylighting. The Presidio Trust also sees
value in ecological restoration as a strategy
44
to uphold its mission of providing resources
for public use. Extensive participation
by volunteers in restoration projects is
further evidence of public acceptance of
ecological restoration.
Restoration at the Presidio provides an
interesting case study of the intersection of
planning, design, public use, ecology, and
history. In several cases at the Presidio,
ecological restoration circumnavigated
historic preservation to satisfy recreational
criteria and public use. For the community
garden and other restoration sites,
gardeners and ecologists act as historians
or geographers, teasing apart the history
of the site through local knowledge, old
photographs, maps and knowledge of
what was once in the area. Ecologists
mine the evolutionary past to identify
a prior landscape condition deemed
appropriate for restoration. Because of
the urban nature of the park, the resultant
built product may be a compromise
between an early landscape condition
and the needs of the present.
The battles at the Presidio reveal a larger
issue linked to environmental restoration:
what is the goal of a restoration project
in an urban context? Should one aim to
restore a land’s native ecosystem? Or can often be driven more by a desire maintained are naturalistic as opposed to such projects more difficult to fund.
is it more essential to cater to human to establish historical conditions than to geometric in form. Additionally, because much of the projects'
needs, and allow for some environmental instate a biological system that functions systems are hidden, opportunities to
value gained through public access to under current conditions. What form Somewhat predictably, ecologists and educate the public about the site
natural areas? In the case of the Presidio, should a restoration project take? designers have divergent views on are curtailed.
there are a number of examples where Ecologists typically view nature as a model the forms that restoration should take.
restoration ecology brought dissenting for developing restoration projects, and yet Generally, ecologists want to create Because this approach minimizes the role
voices together towards a common cause. the process of construction, maintenance, something that looks like nature and does of visible design, it discourages many
and even the locations of many of these not stand out, whereas designers want designers from exploring configurations
Establishing restoration projects on-site projects are far from natural. Naturalistic to reveal the human hand. Naturalistic and approaches that might have greater
attracts a substantial volunteer contingent design approaches may also be more design, by definition, brings little attention ecosystem function. An approach to the
to help demolish, grade, and re-plant the expensive. Many building materials are to itself. As a result, the public tends not built forms of restoration ecology that does
landscape. Public acceptance of and sold in geometric units; construction and to recognize restoration projects, and not always default to the naturalistic would
participation in restoration projects can also maintenance can consume more time and not to understand their place in human- promote a more dynamic relationship
generate a sense of community ownership money when the forms to be created and constructed environments. This can make between designers and ecologists.
and investment. While many restoration
projects at the Presidio have concentrated
on providing habitat for endangered plant
species such as Clarkia franciscana and
Arabis blepharophylla, provisions have also
been made for public use, access, and
viewsheds. Thus, restoration has benefited
diverse interests, including historic
preservation, the natural environment, and
public access.
There are a number of concerns about
restoration ecology as an applied science.
How does a practitioner decide which
historical landscape is most appropriate
to reconstruct? The goals of restoration
45
Existing Condition:
Historic Forest
The Historic Forest: an Ecological and of species with the planned thinning
Cultural Conundrum of stands to encourage diversity and
The 300-acre Historic Forest is composed re-growth. Unfortunately, this follow-up
primarily of single-species groves did not occur, and the forest matured
(eucalyptus trees, Monterey cypress,
and Monterey pine) planted in regiments A Foredune
across the landscape. Today, this planted
forest has matured, creating a dense B Dune Scrub
canopy that inhibits the emergence of
A
understory vegetation. C Bluff Scrub, Coastal Scrub,
and Serpentine Scrub H F
C
A deeper understanding of the forest and its
D Coastal Prairie and Coastal Scrub D
history illustrates how it has been shaped
by preceding land management decisions
E Coastal Prairie
and historical preservation. New ecological
ideas are being explored and tested to
C
F Coastal Salt Marsh D
possibly retrofit or enhance the Historic
D
Forest for improved ecosystem function. Serpentine Grassland G D
G and Serpentine Scrub
I
Major William A. Jones’ “Plan for the
H Freshwater E
Cultivation of Trees upon the Presidio Marsh

Reservation” (1883), one of the largest

I Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest
landscape plans of its time, called for and Live Oak Riparian Forest

thousands of eucalyptus, pine, and

B E J
A D
cypress groves to be planted in rows,
J Live Oak Woodland and Coastal Scrub G
representative of military order. The
K Open Water G B
plantings were envisioned to accentuate
the post’s size and create a clear visual I
distinction from the surrounding city. The Scale 1:12000
0 500 1000 1500 2000
plan, based on contemporary ecological
K
understanding, called for a mixture
Figure 2-9 ecosystems at Presidio

46 47
into a dense canopy with little sunlight or
space for understory vegetation -- Jones’
original vision never fully materialized.
Forest plantings were initiated on the
dunes in the 1890s and mostly completed
by 1906, but continued sporadically
over a 55-year period, ending in the early
1940s. The straight rows of trees planted
in groups have created a unique forest
of mature single-species growth with
a high canopy and minimal understory.
This planted forest is celebrated as a
cultural symbol of the Presidio’s military
past. The high canopy, which allows
extended views across the shaded forest
floor, is championed by pedestrians,
recreationists, and dog-walkers. Even
some environmentalists view the forest
as a special place, a green respite within
the city. The National Historic Landmark
District designation granted to the Presidio
in 1996 solidified the Historic Forest as a
key landscape feature.
Despite the intentions of the Army and
Major Jones to use the forest plantation as
an environmental management technique,
many ecologists and environmentalists
currently argue that the forest is a symbol
of an invasive and manipulated Presidio
48
landscape that has supplanted the native native, diverse plantings (see Fig. 2-10).
habitats. They note that any ecological Further discussion of reforestation can
value the Historic Forest might have is be found in the “Restoration Ecology”
diminished by the fact that only 10 percent section of Chapter 3.
of the Presidio’s land supports the native
HISTORIC FOREST
plant community that existed prior to (18% of total area
approx. 247 acres)
landscape modifications. Over time, the
planting of non-native, limited-species tree Preserve and rehabilitate the historic
forest to the historic boundary
stands has resulted in significant native Remove nonnative plants and
restore native vegetation
habitat and wildlife losses. Consequently,
many ecologists and environmentalists are NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES
ZONE
calling for portions of the Historic Forest to (36% of total area
approx. 501 acres)
be modified and converted into a
Preserve and enhance existing native
native landscape. plant communities
Remove nonnative plants and restore
native vegetation
Nonetheless, the existing forest does
have some significant ecological merit, LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT ZONES
(46% of total area
as it supports nearly 200 bird species and approx. 652 acres)
contains a few mixed tree species stands. Preserve and rehabilitate
historic landscape vegetation
It is also notable that a significant portion Ensure conformance of new plantings
of public users view this forest as a natural
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT ZONES
respite in the city. This perception, and the (4% of total area
value that people find within the woods as approx. 56 acres)
a natural amenity, gives the Historic Forest Areas requiring further assessment.
Area is under consideration for
inherent worth regardless of its actual value designation by the USFWS
as an ecosystem.
Boundary
A 2001 vegetation management plan called
Scale 1:12000
for changes to portions of the Forest by
0 500 1000 1500 2000
removing some mature stands in danger
of wind-fall and replacing the stands with
Figure 2-10 Landscape Management
49
EDAW - Presidio Trust
Interdisciplinary
Collaboration
EDAW teamed with the Presidio The week-long workshop was
Trust in a collaborative workshop to organized as an ongoing dialogue
repurpose the Presidio’s Fort Scott Creek between the designers and ecologists.
EDAW EDAW
PRESIDIO
Area. The interdisciplinary exchange Facilitating exchange, both in planned DESIGNER ECOLOGIST DESIGNER ECOLOGIST
TRUST

brought together EDAW's technical discussions and through informal

experts with multiple stakeholders
working with and/or within the
Presidio Trust. As the diagram (Fig.
2-11) illustrates, there were several
exchanges required for successful
collaboration. First, the EDAW team
members needed to communicate
internally; second, the Presidio Trust
and EDAW team needed to work
together; and third, this larger team
needed to understand and respond
to stakeholder viewpoints and concerns.
interactions such as site walks, was a
key goal. We created many situations
for interdisciplinary communication,
including evening events, lunchtime
discussions, and hands-on activities
to promote dialogue and to reveal the
underlying goals and intentions of the
individual group members.
A B

The EDAW team built an initial

relationship with the Presidio Trust
PRESIDIO
through conference calls and planning. DESIGNER ECOLOGIST
TRUST
Together, EDAW and the Presidio Trust
devised the workshop schedule. This
initial collaboration led to discussing
and highlighting shared goals. The
resultant shared goals helped build
trust, and led to an exchange of critical
information. The Presidio Trust provided C D

guidance throughout the event, helping to

orient the team and enhance the results.

Figure 2-11

50 51
Understanding the
Stakeholders
HISTORY The Presidio Trust’s practice of planning and
design strives to balance the competing
interests of public use and access (P),
natural areas/restoration needs (N), and
H historical preservation (H). (see Fig.
2-12). These three types of land uses are
essential to the Presidio Trust’s mission, its
cultural identity, and its role as a public
parkland within an urban area. Each of
these drivers has shaped the Presidio up
until the present day.
Figure 2-13 illustrates the diversity of
stakeholders that one might find within
each category. This variety of users
presents a primary challenge in reaching
decisions on planning, programming, and
PRESIDIO
TRUST
design at Presidio. Throughout the site’s
history, there have been times when
the needs of historic preservationists,
restoration ecologists, and the public
have opposed each other; yet on
occasion, these interests have fallen
into alignment.
At the heart of this challenge is the
need to explore how these different
interests can be brought together. In
addition to the multiple stakeholder
views, the designers and ecologists also
bring varying perspectives to the table.
To create meaningful urban spaces,
designers, ecologists, the client, and the
stakeholders need to understand that
public use, natural areas, and historic
designs need not be physically separate.
In fact, the meaning of space intensifies
as its layers of use increase. An urban
park is the apotheosis of this synergy.
The Presidio is exactly this type of space,
combining ecological systems of plants,
water cycles, and nutrient exchanges with
the human framework of walking trails,
historic preservation, community gardens,
playing fields, and picnic areas.
Our hope was that collaboration between
stakeholders could be used as a catalyst
for integrating the public use of natural
areas into an urbanized setting.

RECREATIONISTS OUTDOOR HISTORIANS

ENTHUSIASTS

ADJACENT
RESEARCHERS ARCHAEOLOGISTS
LANDOWNERS

P N P SCHOOL GROUPS
N BIRDERS H
RESTORATION
ECOLOGISTS

VISITORS HISTORIC
SCHOOL GROUPS LANDSCAPE
(TOURISTS)

PUBLIC-USE / NATURAL AREAS / REAL ESTATE HISTORIC

NATURALISTS
HISTORY RESTORATION (INHABITANTS) STRUCTURES

Figure 2-12 Figure 2-13

52 53
Day by Day Schedule

Site Visit Stakeholder Interviews Ecology and Design Charrette Design Process, Plan Development Final Presentation

Time Monday Day 1 11.27.06 Tuesday Day 2 11.28.06 Wednesday Day 3 11.29.06 Thursday Day 4 11.30.06 Friday Day 5 12.01.06

Kick-Off, Day’s Agenda Refine Proposal(s) Welcome

800 AM Welcome + Introductions Kick-Off, Day’s Agenda
Review Day 2 Results Ecologists - designers
Landscape History Slide Show Review Day 1 Results
Initial Visioning internal discussion and design Project Presentation
900 AM Site Tour: Visit other key sites throughout Stakeholder Groups Interview
(Facilitated Session, Full Group) charette
the Presidio including Inspiration Point, a GROUP 1: Historic Preservation
Break Out Sessions Q+A
1000 AM restored pond, neighborhoods, Nursery, GROUP 2: Volunteer Groups
GROUP 3: Ecological Restoration Developing final plan proposal Feedback Session, Group Discussion
and the bluffs. 1) Ecology 2) Historic Restoration
1100 AM 3) Recreation 4) Education Wrap-Up + Next Steps
Site Tour: Fort Scott and Fort Scott Creek
1200 PM
Adjourn-END OF WORKSHOP

100 PM LUNCH LUNCH LUNCH LUNCH with client LUNCH

sharing integrated concepts
200 PM Site Tour: Continue site tour at Fort Scott GROUP 4: Architects present site models Present/Discuss Presentation Preparation EDAW Coordination +
and develop mapping exercises. for the Sustainability Center. Design Proposals continued dialogue and effort Initiative’s Next Steps Meeting
300 PM GROUP 5: Maintenance and Operations towards fusion
Initial Visioning
400 PM (Facilitated Session, Full Group)
Wrap-Up
500 PM Site Visits Download Discussion
(Pictures + Notes) Scale/Areas of overlap and issues from
600 PM Discussion the day DINNER and Discussion with Client
First Impressions, Ecological / Design Going over the process so far and our
Figure 2-14 700 PM DINNER DINNER observations or concerns DINNER

54 55
Day by Day Overview
Day 1
Site Visit
Intent
Our goal for the site visit was to interpret
the land from an integrated ecological
and design angle. The team intended to
discuss and plan the visit thoroughly with
an effort to integrate typical site analysis
strategies that ecologists use with designer
approaches. A brief initial slide show on
land-use history and site conditions helped
establish a shared baseline understanding.
A visit to key locations across the Presidio
allowed the team to experience the
landscape and assess its ecological
functioning. We planned to document the
site together through mapping and analysis.
56
Day 2
Stakeholder Interviews
Intent
The convening of stakeholders was
intended as a rapid outreach approach to
understand constraints, learn about site
uses, and discuss potential opportunities.
The team hoped to appreciate the
stakeholders' multiple viewpoints and
develop a deeper understanding of
stakeholder needs. By the end of the
day, we planned to generate a list of
stakeholder goals and objectives for Fort
Scott Creek and synthesize these goals
into an overall approach.
Day 3
Design Charrette
Intent
We planned to bring in a large group of
stakeholders for a second day to conduct
a full-day charrette, with the intention of
bringing conflicting desires to the surface.
The goal of this session was to begin to
translate goals and visions into a physical
layout plan. Ideally, we would develop
some alternative approaches and facilitate
discussion to identify key problems and
their potential.
Day 4
Conceptual Plan Development
and Summary
Intent
The day was planned as a collaborative
work session to clarify a few options
and then refine the vision concepts
into a proposal for Fort Scott Creek and
Fort Scott. Beforehand, we discussed
ways of working together to develop a
process to complete the work tasks.
The goal of the process was to facilitate
the development of a final presentation
to the public that would capture the
experiences of the week, laying out the
solutions and compromises.
Day 5
Final Presentation
Intent
Our goal here was to present our process,
conceptual plan, and ecological design
strategies. We attempted to get feedback
from the invited guests on how they felt
the process went and the quality of the
outcomes produced. We tried to evaluate
how the public stakeholders responded
to the final product of a collaborative
process. We wanted to hear concerns
expressed and alternative ideas offered.
57
Lessons Learned
from the Presidio
The Presidio workshop yielded many
lessons about the viability of combining
ecology, public use, and history through
design. The process also exposed
the multitude of planning and design
challenges in addressing the Historic
Forest, community gardens, and
ecological restoration activities. A
deeper exploration of these challenges,
presented in the following pages of
analysis, reveals a number of themes
influencing planning and design at the
Presidio. These included: conflicting
and incompatible land uses; precedent
land management decisions; evolving
ecological and historical disciplinary
approaches; and various preservation and
conservation approaches. The following
pages aim to introduce the Presidio
site studied within the C + P Initiative,
and to educate ecology and design
practitioners about the challenges
of moving toward consensus for land
planning in an urban park.

58 59
Site Visit
Objective
Our goal was to work collaboratively,
utilizing skills as designers and ecologists to
analyze the Presidio and to experience and
interpret the Fort Scott Creek project area.
Process
The group toured the Presidio with multiple
experts to understand existing land use
patterns and to see firsthand how the
Presidio Trust has been implementing
its missions of land stewardship. Michael
Boland and Allison Stone of the Presidio
Trust led the tour, which included a number
of destinations exhibiting site restoration or
native habitats. These included Inspiration
Point; the Mountain Lake restoration;
multiple neighborhoods; coastal bluffs;
a plant nursery; historic and community
gardens; Fort Scott; and the Creek. Other
participants included Betty Young, Mark Frey,
Laura Castellini, Damien Raffa, Barb Coff;
Johna Maeck, and Jean Koch.
After a long debate, we voted to rely on our
individual expertise and typical practices as
designers and ecologists. This differed from
our original idea to pair an ecologist with a
designer in the field and encourage dialogue
on-site. The idea was that using the methods
we would employ on any other project would
give the client the best results.
60
Outcome Coastal Bluff and Golden Gate Bridge Nursery, Historic Forest + Fort Scott Creek Highway 101
Participants learned about the larger vision
of the Presidio and saw examples of other
projects that had successfully navigated
politics and found solutions through
compromise. The tour of the Presidio
was especially useful because questions
came from space ecological and design
perspectives, so the team became more WPA Steps Leading Down to Historic Gardens Historic Palms as Seen From Warehouses Historic Garden
educated as a whole.
The visit to Fort Scott Creek allowed us to
familiarize ourselves with the site and to
document it through hand mapping and GIS.
The high points were the moments when
an ecologist and designer walked together
WPA Staircase in Historic Garden Adjacent to Tennis Courts View of Bioswale at the Botanical Garden Nursery Shade Structures at the Botanical Gardens
and discussed ideas from both perspectives
about that particular area.
While executing the site visit with a mix of
ecologists and designers generated trust
across disciplines, the site visit needed
more direction, with specific activities
to facilitate communication. An early View Looking Down on Fort Scott Creek and Forest View of Parking Lot and Pollarded Trees by Old Officers’ Club View of Fort Scott Parade Ground
concept that we explored in depth was
to develop a physical intervention as an
artistic gesture and scientific experiment
(see Fig. 2-17). For example. we discussed
ways of mapping ecology physically on the
landscape to make it more visible.
Historic Forest By Fort Scott Creek Historical Forest with Highway 101 in Background View of Community Gardens on Historic Garden Site
61
Stakeholder Dialogue
Objective
The goal of the stakeholder meetings
was to learn about the various visions
for the Fort Scott area and creek. This
was achieved through a process of public
engagement that focused on stewardship
and sustainability. The team interacted
with the volunteer groups, historic
preservationists, restoration ecologists,
the maintenance and operations group,
and the architects working on the
sustainability building for the center.
Process
The EDAW/Presidio Trust team worked
together to establish a clear workshop
schedule (Fig. 2-14).
The Presidio Trust organized stakeholder
groups for the EDAW team to interview.
Each group met independently with
the EDAW team, allowing the team to
efficiently and concisely understand
the concerns and desires expressed by
each group (Fig. 2-14). Key players from
each stakeholder group were invited to
participate in a wrap-up strategy session
to develop goals and objectives.
62
Outcome
The stakeholder meetings were a Cultural Historic Resources CULTURAL/HISTORIC STEWARDSHIP/PUBLIC Stewardship/Public Use/
RESOURCES USE/SUSTAINABILITY sustainability
formative part of the workshop. The Preservation of Landscape
Public Access
perspectives shared during the meetings Architectural and Military History
Programming Activities
exposed the dynamic, complex, and Limit change to landscape identity
Education and Demonstration
pluralistic nature of the Presidio. The all- Respect the past
day dialogue proved to be a tremendous
success for both the EDAW team and the
Presidio. The EDAW Team built trust with
stakeholder groups through the dialogue
process, and clarified a working set of
goals and objectives.
THE PRESIDIO TRUST ECOLOGICAL DESIGN TEAM
Michael Boland; Allison Stone Alma Du Solier; Leo Edson;
In part, this exercise was valuable for Alex Felson; Debra Bishop
the stakeholder groups and Presidio
Trust because the workshop brought
some stakeholders together for the
first time. This event gave them an
opportunity to learn more about each
other, to recognize opposing positions,
and to conceive of ways to move
forward in alignment.
The multidisciplinary discussion steered
MAINTENANCE + Maintenance and Operations
the energy of all participants toward a Creek Restoration CREEK RESTORATION
OPERATIONS
Reduce maintenance requirements
common vision. The goals articulated and Ecological Habitat Value
Allow vehicular/fire truck access
agreed to by the stakeholder groups built Wildlife Corridor/Refuge
Keep it simple no complicated parts
on the Presidio Trust’s mission: to balance Watershed Planning
historic preservation with sustained
ecological systems while fostering public
engagement. It is this attempt to satisfy
Figure 2-15
63
three potentially incompatible interests that
creates perhaps the greatest challenge
for future design and ecology collaboration
previously expressed. The disclosure of
contradictory perspectives enriched the
dialogues by revealing the site's core
At the close of the stakeholder meetings,
THE PRESIDIO TRUST A. MAINTENANCE + OPS B. CULTURAL/HISTORIC RESOURCES
our team realized that we were missing
the cultural/historical perspective. The Michael Boland Associate Director of Presidio Trust Historian

+
Allison Stone Landscape Maintenance Ric Borjes
at the Presidio. planning challenges. landscape’s cultural symbolism proved to Bob Carlsen Randy Delehanty
Director of Operations Senior Preservation Specialist
be a critical stakeholder concern. ECOLOGICAL DESIGN TEAM Steve Potts Michael Lamb
The Presidio Trust's inclusive approach to The pre-workshop planning served us well Director of Utilities Sannie Osborn
Mark Hurley Chandler McCoy
stakeholders meetings facilitated a deep in ensuring that every stakeholder voice Designer
Chandler McCoy Amy Deck
Alma Du Solier
understanding of their concerns within was represented within the design team. Designer/Ecologist
Christina Wallace
Historic Architect
the EDAW team. EDAW’s multidisciplinary It proved important to have someone Alex Felson
Rob Wallace
Wildlife Biologist
approach led to questions being asked that on the team that people felt "carried the Leo Edson
Historic Compliance Coordinator
Robert Thomas
enabled stakeholders to raise issues not Restoration Ecologist
torch" for them. Debra Bishop
GIS Specialist/Cultural Resources
Hans Barnaal

C. CREEK RESTORATION D. STEWARDSHIP/PUBLIC USE/SUSTAINABILITY

Presidio Trust Forester Sustainability Manager - Presidio Trust

Damien Raffa Damien Raffa
Mark Frey Michael Boland
Terri Thomas Michael Lamb
Amy Deck Chandler McCoy
Laura Castellini Terri Thomas
Peter Ehrlich Amy Deck
Presidio Trust Natural Resource Planner Barb Corff
Tania Pollak John Maeck
Betty Young
Aimee Vincent
Education/Outreach Coordinator Presidio Nursery
Adam Sharron
Presidio Nursery
Kirra Swenerton
Presidio Nursery
Brittany Schaefer
Director of Crissy Field Center (GGNPC)
Christa Rocca

Figure 2-16 Stakeholder Diagram

64 65
Design Charrette
Objective
The team goal was to work in small
groups to develop design strategies
that would achieve balance between
four key areas: 1) Historic Preservation, 2)
Recreation, 3) Education, 4) Environment.
Process
Four teams were formed, each including
ecologists, biologists and designers. Four
alternative strategies were developed.
Each strategy was presented, while
a central note-taker synthesized the
discussions, captured the comments, and
brainstormed through notes and sketches.
The design charrette explored new
organizing concepts for Fort Scott
Creek. Groups were organized to include
representation from each stakeholder group
including ecology, historic preservation,
and public access. (Post-workshop analysis
reveals that the stakeholders’ ideas
addressed the three common Presidio
themes.) While some of the groups
focused exclusively on one theme, others
attempted to integrate all three.
Through a process of public engagement
that focused on stewardship and
sustainability, history, and restoration,
66
we hoped to generate a fusion of design
and ecology.
Outcome
The charrette revealed countless
insights into the concerns of and the
areas of conflict between stakeholders.
The process proved to be a valuable
opportunity for stakeholders and the
design team to suggest alternative
strategies for discussion.
Through a full day of drawing and
discussions, the group worked through
many disagreements. We learned that
history is a dominant factor defining
the Presidio's land uses, both past
and present.
A strong discussion centered around
rehabilitating the historic landscape and
and revitalizing the historic character of
Fort Scott and its surroundings. A second
key focus area centered around what role
ecology should play on the site. Should
the area be partitioned off and made into
a refuge? Public access and the ability
to get down to the water was a concern
to many, and it seemed that enhancing
the ecological function and wildlife
value of the riparian corridor had to be
balanced with public access. In addition, Key Themes Arising from the Charrette:
maintenance and durability were raised a. Historic rehabilitation
as concerns.
b. Highlight historical heritage
Several distinct concepts were developed
as diagrams by each group: 1) Water as c. Provide public use
Organizer, 2) Walk through Time, 3) Multi-
Faceted Gradations. d. Engage park users and create
cultural stewardship
The concepts attempt to incorporate
ecology, history, and public use. “Water e. Encourage education and
as Organizer” relies on ecological demonstration
systems while “Walk through Time” is
framed by a public circulation network f. Enhance habitat value
celebrating historic features. “Multi-
Faceted Gradations” responds to g. Focus on water and green
topography, with levels of public use infrastructure
shared with ecological system.
h. Trails and habitat corridors
The three proposals are compromise
scenarios that attempt to integrate
all three themes. These compromises
typically emphasize, though not
exclusively, a particular conflict area such
as ecology, history, and public use. For the
next charrette, we suggest the discussion
should focus on four to five key questions
about each conflict area, inviting each
group to state clear positions.
67
 Plan 1
Water as Organizer of Public Space
Develop the site as a treatment system
and freshwater resource for the Fort Scott
area. Develop a stormwater capture
system with bioswale and storage tanks
for irrigation use. Under this plan, Fort
Scott Creek would include a system
of culverts to create ponds for
habitat restoration.
The open space and upland landscape
strategies would double as the
stormwater treatment system. The
system would include environmental
signage and site interpretation.
68
Plan 2 Plan 3
Walk through Time Multi-Faceted Gradations
Channel pedestrian circulation within the Integrate topography with function and
Fort Scott Creek area along the perimeter. public use. The multi-faceted gradations
A circuit located around the top of the plan gives the site a larger, more
Creek would connect local centers of meaningful aesthetic that frames ecology,
engagement, including the sustainability history, and public use.
and stewardship center, cultural
stewardship center, and community
gardens, providing vantage points for
creek views.
A narrow pedestrian bridge would cross
the park perpendicular to the creek,
providing ideal wildlife viewing and site
history interpretation.
69
Design Process
Objective
The goal for Thursday was to provide time
and space for the ecologists and designers
to debate big conceptual ideas and discuss
areas of conflict.
Process
We organized a morning design session
and strategy meeting with the client, and
production in the afternoon. The intent
was to facilitate ecologists and designers
working through a design process together,
and to discover ways to synthesize the
site visit and stakeholder meetings into a
cohesive interpretation.
Outcome
A conceptual framework was clarified
and representation ideas were shared. A
presentation and plan were then prepared,
including a conceptual framework (Fig. 2-17).
Montages were also prepared, but elicited
contentious debates within the group and
from the client.
The effort to produce a cohesive design
proposal within a week was ambitious.
Processing, absorbing, and synthesizing
different perspectives for developing
the concept plans required more time.
Thursday became a production day in order
to complete the work we had set out to
70
accomplish, and this limited the opportunity
for communication between ecologists and
designers. We discovered that ecologists
and designers tended to operate on
different work schedules. Of note was that
the ecologists also had strong opinions but
did not express them openly, and in the end
had no clear venue to voice their concerns.
Thus, they felt somewhat left out and
unable to impact the design direction. While
the ecologists had valuable information
to share, the designer held the pen and
ultimately had more influence on the
plan representation.
Both designers and ecologists also fell
back into their comfort zones as a default
response to the intensity of the work and
time constraints. This was unfortunate,
because fusion opportunities were missed.
It suggests that a more rigorous approach
is needed for teasing out key concerns and
Visual Anchor Pedestrian Circuit - “A Walk
advancing solutions. Targeting areas of Through Time”
Local Centers of Engagement sustainability
debate, and recognizing where the different + stewardship
Cultural Center center
disciplines alternately obstruct and facilitate Dragonfly Creek
development of concept plans, would Historic Forest
Cultural Stewardship Center
Runoff Collection + Filtration system
provide essential direction. In the future, we Nursery + Reuse Center community
Historic Drainage Structures gardens
recommend establishing a set of process-
Historic Community Gardens
oriented exercises, creative reviews, and/ Elevated Pedestrian Crossings
or design charrettes so that ecologists and Historic Field
Program overlaps within Dragonfly Creek.
designers have ample opportunities to
express their opinions.
Figure 2-17 Conceptual Plan
71
Presentation
Objective
The final presentation was intended to
articulate ecological design concepts for
the vision, activities/program, circulation,
hydrology, historic forest restoration, and
wildlife habitat/viewing.
Process
On the last day, we presented our
proposal to the Presidio Trust stakeholders
and the general public. While the
designers were deeply invested in the
final presentation, the ecologists did not
feel as strong a sense of ownership. In
addition, the ecologists were somewhat
72
uncomfortable "selling" their ideas to
the audience and client, which resulted
in the ecological components of the
project being less well represented. The
conclusion we reached was that it is part
of the designers' role to represent the
ecological vision.
The ecological aspects of the presentation
did add value. Leo Edson used bird calls
and images to prompt the audience
to imagine the proposed refuge and
restoration. The entire audience listened
attentively to the evocative and peaceful
sounds, and there was a long pause
afterwards. A number of people referenced
these calls as an indication that the team
was thinking seriously about the habitat.
This part of the presentation was a way
of making a case for a particular stance
on habitats versus public use.
Outcome
The presentation capped a very successful
week long stakeholder outreach exercise.
Questions during the presentation
suggested some concerns over the
proposal to control access and to transform
the site into a refuge. Concerns were also
raised over the future of the historic features
of the site, and how these were being
brought into our plans. Finally, discussion
touched on our representation of the bridge
montage, revealing skepticism that what
we were proposing would be adequate
for public space and private moments
(see Fig. 2-18).
The bridge montage debate exposed the
difficulty of arriving at consensus about a
key compromise. The bridge needed to
be large enough to allow public access,
but still fit into the natural area and not
dominate it. The stakeholders felt that the
scale of bridge proposed was too small.
For future presentations of this sort,
we have two recommendations. First,
encourage ecologists and designers to
explain the plan or some overlapping
element from their different perspectives.
Second, create a survey or suggestions
page that participants can fill out during
or after the event to solicit further
comments from people who may not
want to share their thoughts publicly.
Figure 2-18 and 2-19 Brdige Options
Showing the designers montage (left)
and ecologists suggested style (right).
73
Insights into Setting Up
the Workshop
The final Ecology and Design Collaboration
deliverables produced at the Presidio
included a presentation of a plan and
section of the Fort Scott Creek area.
Organizing and participating in the
workshop yielded valuable discoveries
about the logistics of bridging disciplines,
and about which tools and practices
can best facilitate collaboration among
designers and ecologists.
Organizing the Team
Selecting team members is a critical first
step for setting up an effective dynamic
between ecologists and designers. During
our planning effort, we sought people who
were expert in their focus area but also
sympathetic to the integration of ecology
and design. A group of practitioners less
familiar with this type of integration could
be seen as a more typical representation
from the firm, but might have been less
productive for this initial attempt.
The team spent the early part of the
initiative exploring how and where to
work together. This internal EDAW
process strengthened the team’s working
relationship, and allowed it to act as a more
effective unit when collaborating with the
Presidio Trust.
74
While our approach was to develop the scenario where both ecologists and
team without a clear hierarchy to avoid designers were forced to acknowledge the
favoring design or ecology, in retrospect, site history. In the end, for our team the
it would have been helpful to have had historic significance became a stumbling
a leadership/facilitator. This facilitation was block instead of a condition to build on.
most needed when participants turned The lesson we took from this is that the
back to what they were most comfortable approach to the project needs to cater to
with in the design process or ecological site-specific factors.
assessment. Participants need to be
more willing to “try on” new ideas; to
take criticism; and to reflect on underlying
ideologies and beliefs.
Choosing the Site and the Client
Many of our early discussions were about
how to choose the site and the client. The
decision to focus on a specific area can
inherently complicate the effort to facilitate
collaboration. In the end, we felt extremely
lucky to have secured the Presidio, a site
that embodies the juxtaposition of natural
resource management and preservation
with public use.
The tremendous importance placed
on historic preservation at the Presidio
created a clear identity and set of powerful
constraints on the area we were designing.
While this made it difficult to think freely
about the pure integration of ecology and
design, it created a complex and realistic
75
3. Finding a Middle Ground: Discoveries and
Broader Implications from the Presidio Workshop

Michael Boland- Wrap up interview 12.01.06:

“When this opportunity came up for EDAW to come and collaborate with us
on the design of the area near Fort Scott, one of the things that we were really
struck by was the team fusion idea, the mix of designers and ecologists. The
struggles that the team seemed to be tangling with were theoretical, in terms
of rethinking the role of design and the way design happens. This seemed
very consistent with the struggles that we have encountered in thinking about
repurposing the Presidio. So there seemed to be a natural link between the
issues that we’re struggling with and the issues that EDAW was struggling with,
which we thought could create a fruitful collaboration.”

76 77
Constructing a Middle
Ground
Objective
The goal of the week-long session was to
create an integrative design process, where
the EDAW team worked in collaboration
with the Presidio Trust and with the
multiple stakeholders involved. Of greatest
importance was the integration of ideas and
the development of solutions that brought
multiple perspectives towards a fruitful
middle ground.
Process
The team collaborated with the client to
come up with a meaningful and efficient
workshop strategy that would ensure the
best results for both the Presidio Trust and
the C + P design and ecology initiative.
Working with the client, we were able to
arrange several high quality sessions with
a wide participatory audience from the
Presidio Trust and associated stakeholders.
In the relatively short time span of one
week, the team was sufficiently cohesive
to grasp a very complex site and to make
valuable contributions.
The workshop planning discussions among
EDAW and the Presidio Trust solidified this
central, collaborative team for effectively
facilitating broader communication with
Figure 3-1
78
stakeholders. This internal EDAW process
also strengthened the working relationship
of the team.
Outcome
The multiple activities allowed designers
and ecologists different opportunities for
showcasing their strengths. The mutually
agreed upon workshop goals (to develop a
conceptual design for the Fort Scott Creek
Area, to facilitate discussion between
stakeholders for the Presidio Trust,
and to create a platform for ecologists
and designers to interact and discover
obstacles and solutions for EDAW)
allowed team members to focus on their
own incentives as well as the project.
As an urban national park, the Presidio
proved to be an excellent case study
in terms of ecological, public use, and
historical demands. The EDAW team
was inserted directly into a contentious
debate with a variety of potential solutions.
Public parks are a universally valued
urban resource; as such they must satisfy
demands that often seem irreconcilably
divergent. Yet public parks possess the
ability to accommodate the physical
necessities of seemingly disparate uses in
one space. The Presidio can and does fold
ecological requirements, visitor desires,
and historical integrity into its daily fabric.
Sometimes the messier areas, where
needs and desires overlap, are also where
the richest landscapes develop. Much
of the Presidio’s value, and that of many
other urban parks, lies in its flexible ability
to satisfy the plethora of demands placed
upon it.
The design process, we discovered, can
serve as a catalyst to bring these complex
and overlapping factors together into a
cohesive proposal.
We discovered through this process that
solutions that aim for compromise are not
always better. Compromises in each area
– ecology, public use, and history –
required each area to give up some of
its strength, weakening all three. This
calls attention to a pitfall of compromise –
solutions that attempt to integrate multiple
themes may fail to realize the full potential
for a site. Instead, a concept that
strongly advances an ecological approach
or an historical approach may foster a
more engaging, sustainable, or historically
preserved site.
79
Alternative Scenarios:
Determining a
Happy Medium
The following pages include proposed
concepts for Fort Scott Creek showing
site circulation, treatment of the riparian
corridor, ecological restoration plans ,and
creek pedestrian experience plans. Each
layer explores the mixture of ecology,
public access, and historic preservation,
with some layers emphasizing one
element over the others while other
layers explore integration of the three Wildlife Refuge Working Nursery Park with Historic Identity
driving themes. The site could be developed as a refuge The Creek could be utilized as a large- Fort Scott Creek could be designed as
for species such as the violet green scale nursery landscape with multiple an accessible public park with benches,
These three alternative visions on the swallow or varied thrush. With its natural paths running through it for planting, open space, ponds, and other amenities.
right for Fort Scott Creek – refuge, freshwater spring, the site provides a maintenance, tours, and education. This strategy could build on the historic
nursery, and park – represent a gradient significant wildlife attractant. Working Aquatic zones could be enlarged and features of the site to create a colorful
of visions, ranging from the ecological- with the Native Plant Center, the site other plant zones could be clearly defined, experience for Fort Scott inhabitants and
driven approach of “the sanctuary” to could be restored with high-value food both for education and for growing plants visitors. The park could complement the
the mixed-use approach of “the park,” and nesting plants. While this proposal for restoration projects on Fort Scott. future Sustainability Center with native
which balances public access, historical has significant value for restoration and This operational landscape would evolve plants, xeriscaping, and educational
preservation, and ecology. wildlife, it reduces public access. Given seasonally depending on what is being signage and demonstrations. The Park
its location surrounded by housing, along grown for planting. Habitat quality might concept reduces habitat potential on
with the future plans for Fort Scott, the be diminished because of the continuous the site in part because of the number
site lacks the isolation ideal for a refuge. disturbances of plant removal and of visitors, but also because of the
Nonetheless, it could provide public space replacement, and of visitors and workers hardscape and open space components
opportunities for a diverse audience. moving through the site. that would be required.

Scale Approximately 1:400

0 400 800 1200 1600

80 81
Alternative Scenarios: Wildlife Enhancement
Access: Wildlife Habitat
Public Use
and Public Use

Alternative 1 preserves the creek, but the

WILDLIFE NO HUMAN
human experience and opportunities for HABITAT ACCESS
contact with nature are minimized.

Alternative 2 facilitates more public access

WILDLIFE CONTROLLED
and experience with urban natural areas,
VIEWING ACCESS
but imposes potential significant impacts
to the natural area.

Alternative 3 brings public experience into INTEGRATED OPEN ACCESS

the natural area by maximizing public contact PARK
with urban natural systems. However, this
alternative imposes direct human impacts on Stewardship + Fort Scott Creek Historic Forest Historic Garden +
Sustainability Center Ecological Restoration Community Garden
the creek that are difficult to control.

82 83
Taking Advantage of the
Multi-layered Park
to Overlap Program
and Activities

Legend
Existing Buildings
Stewardship + Sustainability Center
Fort Scott Creek Tactical Retreat Center
Historic Retreat

Botanical/Community and
Stewardship and Sustainability Tactical Retreat Center Historic Gardens
The SSC is planned for the northern Linking the site to Fort Scott, the area Building on the historic identity of
Forts Scott Tactical Retreat edge of Fort Scott Creek. A series of serves visiting groups by providing the site, its current use as a native
Sustainability + Stewardship center offices
linked public spaces and active learning meeting spaces, outdoor classrooms, plant center, and community gardens,
Native plant nursery centers would tie the ridgeline together walking loops, views, and a historic Fort Scott Creek could become a
(public areas)
with views out to the Creek. The current garden, where order and upkeep would conglomeration of working and historic
Convenience
Native Plant Center would be incorporated provide a tranquil environment for gardens. Historic features could be
store
and enhanced. Fort Scott Creek itself meetings and strolling. integrated with formal and informal
Urban youth would become part of the identity of the paths and water features related to
Transit Wildlife center
education center center as a wildlife habitat, with a focus the Creek. The history of the site itself
center
Cafe
on sustainable management practices. could be woven in. The community
The goal would be to provide an education gardens and plots of vegetables would
Redwood overlook
destination point for Presidio visitors. provide color, scent, and seasonality.

Tactical Cultural stewardship center/

retreat Community center/
center Cafe

Community
Gardens tool shed /
Interpretation kiosk

Scale Approximately 1:12000

0 500 1000 1500 2000

84 85
Alternative Scenarios:
Public Access

Perimeter Nature Trails Seasonal Trails Permanent Accessible Pathways

Relegating pathways to the perimeter of
the site would limit human disturbance
within the riparian zone, providing a refuge
for wildlife but limiting the opportunity for
people to enjoy the site's many qualities. The
perimeter path could provide vantage points
for the best views of the creek and the rest
of the park beyond.
Narrow seasonal trails, in addition to the
perimeter walk, would provide controlled
access to the site. This would limit wildlife
disturbance and minimize site grading.
At specific times, guided tours organized
by the Stewardship Center’s staff would
be conducted along the seasonal trails.
During these tours, visitors and volunteers
would have an opportunity to view the
creek, touch the water, and experience
the entirety of the site.
This approach prioritizes public use
and access over wildlife enhancement.
Existing trails, pathways, and sidewalks
connecting Fort Scott Creek’s core with
other site features – such as Fort Scott’s
meadow, the community gardens, or the
Presidio Promenade – would provide easy
access and logical routes to and around
the site. Interpretive signage and/or
subtle markers could be added along
these existing connectors to unify them
and to highlight Fort Scott’s character.

* ADA
* Historic
* Regulated
* Wildlife disturbance

Scale Approximately 1:400

0 400 800 1200 1600

86 87
Alternative Scenarios:
Habitat Fragmentation/
Wildlife Viewing
Contiguous Un-Fragmented
The No Path Alternative maintains the
largest patch of contiguous wildlife habitat.
Implementation of this alternative would
enhance wildlife habitat by reducing
human disturbance. Compared to existing
conditions, the abundance and diversity
of resident and migratory wildlife species
would be expected to increase under this
alternative. Wildlife viewing opportunities
would be enhanced with the increase in
habitat value, but visibility would be limited
due to restricted access. Wildlife along the
edges of the habitat area could be easily
viewed. Planned treks could occur to take
advantage of preserved areas. The Creek,
where wildlife diversity is expected to be
highest, would be largely inaccessible.
Scale Approximately 1:400
0 400 800 1200 1600
88
Limited Fragmentation
The One Path + Bridge Alternative would
protect much of the area designated
a wildlife habitat while allowing
opportunities for visitors to observe birds
and other wildlife. Limiting access within
Fort Scott Creek exclusively to a bridge
would minimize the potential to affect
sensitive riparian and wetland habitat
along the creek. The bridge would provide
outstanding birding opportunities at
eye-level. Although the patch of wildlife
habitat would be more fragmented than
under the No Path Alternative, sufficient
habitat would be present to allow animals
to find refuge. As a result, wildlife diversity
and abundance would be balanced with
public access.
Fragmented Habitats
The Multiple Paths + Bridges Alternative
would fragment the habitat with trails
and visitor disturbances, and therefore
reduce both wildlife diversity and any
resultant viewing opportunities. The area
would be less attractive as a destination
for birdwatchers and other visitors hoping
to see some of the rare wildlife species
found at the Presidio. However, greater
public access would provide more
opportunities to explore and interface
with the site. The potential for habitat
degradation from visitor use (e.g. trampling
of vegetation) would be higher under this
alternative when compared to a bridge or
raised boardwalk.
89
Alternative Scenarios:
Riparian Corridor
Ecological Restoration
Fort Scott Creek is currently somewhat
degraded, primarily due to non-native
invasive vegetation. Nonetheless, the
creek’s perennial water flow provides
ecological value. Enhancement actions
based upon the current hydrological regime
might focus on replacing the non-native
vegetation with a native community. A
native community would be designed to
maximize ecological values for wildlife
(particularly native songbirds) while restoring
historical aesthetic qualities.
Scale Approximately 1:400
0 400 800 1200 1600
90
Water Quality Enhancement
Features would be incorporated into the
overall design to capture stormwater
runoff into small treatment wetlands. In
addition, flat areas such as the parking
area could be transformed into a large
treatment wetland. Creek flows would
also course through a carbon filter
with ripples and pools to facilitate
denitrification. This strategy would
increase habitat values at the site while
providing improved water quality.
Water as Design Elements/ Features
The spring at the headwaters of Fort
Scott Creek is a natural gathering point for
residents of and visitors to the Presidio.
In its current condition, it is difficult to
appreciate its value. With removal of the
overgrown non-native vegetation, the
spring would be enhanced with grading
and the creation of fountains with native
plantings to restore its original aesthetic
value. Along the entire corridor of the
creek, structures, trails, and other facilities
would be sited using the creek as a focal
point of design.
91
 01 02 03

Alternative Scenarios:
Ecological Restoration
In this alternative, the Historic Forest is Three Restoration Alternatives:
prioritized by maintaining the similarly 01 Leave As-Is
aged trees and limited understory. Thus 02 Transform Understory
alternatives need to be defined. 03 Selectively Remove and Replace
Canopy Species

In this alternative, the forest is maintained

as-is and the Eucalyptus is allowed
to regrow.

Native

Non-Native
In this alternative, there is a transformation
Scale Approximately 1:400
0 400 800 1200 1600
from Eucalyptus to native forest. Time

92 93
Rendered
Conceptual Plan
Though the open design process did as a destination, providing educational
satisfy multiple stakeholders' goals and opportunities for users of diverse
allowed the design to progress, we felt that interests and ages.
it also constrained the design process 03 04
and led to less-than-ideal compromises on While the plan does address conflicting
the proposal. The plan produced at the stakeholder demands on this urban 02
workshop (see plan on the opposite page) public park, the resultant design controls 07
exhibits the challenges of collaboration access into the riparian corridor and does 06
across disciplines. not allow direct access to the water. 01 12
Stakeholders raised concerns over 11 16
09
The conceptual design allows the Creek this compromise. 05 10
to incorporate overlapping programmatic
08
elements desired by designers, ecologists,
15 18
historians, and recreation advocates.
In order to balance wildlife viewing 19
opportunities with habitat preservation/ 14
01 Transit Center (bus station, bike rental)
enhancement, there is only limited access 02 Bioswales 13
03 Stewardship and Sustainability Center
provided to the riparian corridor. Much of
04 Nursery Areas 17
the access is visual from a bridge that cuts 05 Cafe Overlook 21
06 Wildlife Center
through the pocket of high value habitat. A
07 Treatment Wetlands
trail system through the adjacent Historic 08 Pond/Spring/Fountain
Forest provides a way to avoid the higher- 09 Upland Scrub Shrub Planting
10 Riparian Corridor 20
value riparian habitat while still allowing 11 Meandering Streams Threading through
some access. Landscape
12 Bridge (pedestrian with vehicular access)
13 Potential Tactical Retreat Center
The bridge ties the historic community 14 Parking with Water Storage
15 Redwood Grove
garden area with an active cultural 16 Wet Meadow
edge along the ridgeline overlooking 17 Historic Garden
18 Raised Boardwalk
the Creek. This maximizes the views 19 Path and Drainage Channel
from the existing hilly topography. An 20 Historic and Community Garden
21 Historic Forest
overall goal was to establish Fort Scott 22 Fort Scott

94 95
Rendered
Conceptual Section
The section through the site indicates
the topographic changes and variety of
proposed garden types. Concept planning
for Fort Scott forced the charrette team to
find compromises between approaches that
emphasized ecological value and those
focused on public access.

96 97
Conclusion: Facilitating
Collaboration between
Designers and Ecologists
Fostering Interdisciplinary
Collaboration
There are a multitude of influences on
urban environments, ranging from the
economic to the ecological, from the
physical to the political, and from the
cultural to the biological. This multiplicity
creates both opportunities and challenges
for applying integrated approaches
to urban space design. Combining
widely differing practice fields into one
process means not only must different
disciplines work together, but also the
design process must adeptly incorporate
disparate stakeholder interests. In order
to be successful, the design process
must adhere to reliable strategies and
yet avoid repressing open exchange
and creativity.
In this case study, EDAW’s C + PI
nitiative brought together ecologists and
designers for a rigorous exploration of
interdisciplinary collaboration for the
Fort Scott Creek project at the Presidio
in San Francisco. The challenges the
Presidio Trust faces with any decision to
alter the landscape, given the constraints
of public expectations for a national
park within an urban context, provided
the incentive for hosting an innovative
workshop. The Presidio Trust's goal was
98
to create a venue where contentious
topics could be discussed openly with an
interdisciplinary group of practitioners and
decision-makers.
The purpose of the Presidio workshop
was to facilitate collaboration between
designers and ecologists, and to foster
a more effective negotiation process
between stakeholders. In probing the
various ecology and design issues of
the project, participants were able to
identify opportunities for collaboration
amongst stakeholders. Each stage
of the accelerated schematic design
process – the site visits, stakeholder
and client meetings, charrette and
internal design process, as well as the
presentation – provided new avenues for
exploring communication and its intrinsic
barriers. The goal of this publication is to
document strategies that evolved through
the process, to better enable dialogue
between ecologists and designers, and to
demonstrate the benefits of collaborative
interface in design.
The Dialogue
Dialogue is a tool for reaching across
disciplines, sharing ideas and interests,
recognizing differences, and reaching
agreement. As such, for the purposes of
this exercise, the discussions themselves
were as important as achieving agreement.
A significant lesson learned from the
project is the need to think more deeply
about how to foster dialogue at key
intervals of the design process in a way
that enables sustained communication
and integrated approaches to design.
In our exercise, stakeholder dialogues,
meetings before and during the charrette,
and site visits presented opportunities
for the exchange and cross fertilization of
ideas. The stakeholder dialogues produced
an agreed-upon set of goals and objectives
for Fort Scott. At the stage of site analysis,
designers and ecologists discussed the
underlying assumptions behind design
choices and ecological reasoning. Site
visits, which provided moments for ad
hoc interactions, were likewise fruitful for
opening channels of communication and
informing the design process.
Identifying Common Ground
Early in the process our team realized that
for this effort to be successful it would
be important to identify common ground
between designers and ecologists that
would allow the team to work from a
shared base.
The Presidio's rich history provided the
necessary foundation for us to build upon.
Land use history proved to be a unifying
force for design and ecology during the
workshop. The military history of the
site emerged as a factor of importance
equal to the ecological and design angles.
The comprehensive presentation of the
natural and human history of the site
included the often changing needs of the
public, the diversity of visitor experience,
the evolution of vegetation, and remnant
ecological community preservation.
These diverse historic themes exposed
design opportunities but also challenged
the potential of ecology and design
interventions in the face of history.
Front-loading this historic perspective
established a common baseline of
information. This early establishment
of commonality facilitated subsequent
dialogues, the outcomes of which were
dependent on integrated design and
ecology perspectives.
Scale discussions also served as ways
of interfacing ecological perspectives
with planning and design. The project’s
small scale was an initial topic that the
team discussed at length. From the
ecological perspective, smaller sites
were not desirable because the very goal
of ecology is to impact large areas that
encompass as much of the “natural”
world as possible. For designers, scale
is usually related to the human body or
to vehicles, houses, and other human-
constructed environments, and can
range tremendously without impact on
a project's "importance." Since the goal
of designers is usually to create the best
possible human user experience, a small
site can be just as, if not more, interesting
and rewarding as a larger site.
Collaboration in Design
Different roles played by ecologists
and designers emerged spontaneously
throughout the workshop. These efforts
revealed how the different roles can
facilitate comprehensive resolutions
(Fig. 3-2).
The collaboration of ecologists and
designers in the design process
exposed the complementary roles of the
practitioners and the value of integrated
approaches in design. Addressing
regulations provides an example where
complementary roles can become
valuable. The design team discussed
the often negative impacts of regulations
on the design process. Ecologists, on
99
 d f e project approach in their respective fields
time »

typical scope evaluation design construction post-occupancy

team formation rfp response research analysis co sd dd cd site preparation implementation 1yr 2yr 5yr 10+yr

Ecologists and designers typically craft
their own scopes, neglecting to use each
other's expertise.
Ecologists are typically involved in rigorous
front-end analyses and evaluation.
Ecologists currently struggle to add effective The role of ecologists and designers is Designers typically have limited
input during the design process. While typically reduced during construction. post-occupancy maintenance plans.
designers can incorporate ecology into
design, ecologists cannot perform design
tasks as easily.

ecology
design
mean

time »

ideal scope evaluation design construction post-occupancy

team formation rfp response research analysis co sd dd cd site preparation implementation 1yr 2yr 5yr 10+yr

Ecologists should rigorously monitor design

projects to assess performance over time and
educate designers to integrate lessons learned.
This will create knowledge building feedback
loops for future projects.
ecology value added to project
design through collaboration

mean

Collaboration on scope definition is

essential to define means of interaction
throughout project life cycle. This will
maximize knowledge transfer through
collaboratively defined tasks, leading to a
Figure 3-2 stronger overall product.
Designers can increase their understanding of Therefore, the designer should facilitate Communication during the construction period will
sites through an integrated approach, ultimately ecologists involvement in order to more maximize efficiency and accountability in following
improving on ecological analyses with strong rigorously address key issues. Still, the ecologist the established planning and design goals.
information representation skills. needs to permit the designer “room to breathe.”

100 101
the other hand, embrace and respond to
regulations as a fundamental part of their
work. Design innovation, coupled with
knowledge of regulatory frameworks,
can lead to improved strategies and can
suggest alternative solutions, relieving
some of the regulations' constraints.
Addressing Form, Function,
and Aesthetics
In early discussions, the team avoided
confronting key issues such as naturalistic
design or the role of high design in
influencing ecological restoration. As it
turned out, these topics were unavoidable
and simply reappeared later.
The idea of form and function requires
further resolution in ecology, and an
improved understanding of how it
translates to design. Ecologists who act
as designers, through restoration ecology
for example, tend to apply a naturalistic
design language to their work. In fact,
the underlying ideologies of the fields
of ecology and design differ greatly.
Ecologists tend to avoid human-dominated
landscapes, and to prefer to see natural
environments over human-modified ones.
Designers, on the other hand, direct their
efforts at human experience. Landscape
architects specifically look for ways of
102
putting their individual and creative mark
on the land. This fundamental difference
in attitudes can lead to an adversarial
relationship between designers and
ecologists, with ecologists defending
their interests (and underlying aesthetic
agenda) and designers reluctant to allow
ecologists into the design process.
Landscape architects often fear that
ecologists will impose a naturalistic style
on the design.
Naturalistic design, while perhaps viewed
by ecologists as being neutral in meaning
because it imitates nature, in fact carries
a number of significant implications. First
and foremost, it challenges the notion
that "form follows function." Naturalistic
design is more difficult and expensive
to accomplish approach because by its
aesthetic nature it cannot be constructed
of the mass-produced modules typical of
construction practice.
Additionally, creating a naturalistic design
diminishes society’s recognition of the site
as man-made and misleads people into
thinking that sites are entirely "natural."
Restoration is costly and requires upkeep
and interventions. Raising the visibility of
design can encourage people to continue
to support these efforts.
The Role of the Ecologist in the
Design Process
Realizing the value of ecology in design
requires targeted efforts to incorporate
ecologists into the design process in
meaningful ways. One production goal
of the team was to synthesize conceptual
ideas into plans and montage drawings
for presentation to the stakeholders. The
team’s attempt to refine concepts for
the proposed pedestrian bridge over Fort
Scott Creek provided a critical opportunity
to create a site feature that satisfied
multiple parties. The bridge, which would
provide public access looking down to
the riparian habitat and creek below, was
an idea that emerged from the charrette
with the Presidio Trust director, Michael
Boland, and others. Unfortunately,
there was little open dialogue among
designers and ecologists about the form
and scale of the bridge. Although the
ecologists had strong opinions about
the environmental education value and
about minimizing the structure's size
to reduce environmental impact, they
did not have a venue to convey these
concerns. Instead, the bridge idea was
quickly represented by the designers,
and minimally informed by the ecologists
(see Fig. 2-19). This visualization process
missed an opportunity to convert
103
concepts about a bridge into tangible
representations for reaching consensus
amongst stakeholders.
On other occasions, the designer and
ecologist roles were less divided -- though
sometimes less fruitful. On the site tour,
designers and ecologists realized the
most benefit when they allowed their
roles to blur. Touring the site together
allowed designers to interpret ecological
features while ecologists interpreted
experiential qualities and public use
characteristics. The two groups were
not nearly as successful at collaborating
when it came to the design process. It
became apparent that ecologists need
to determine ways in which they can
better interface with designers. Often,
ecologists internalized frustration while
designers were more assertive.
The role of the ecologist in design
is an area of tension for designers.
Many prefer the perceived freedom of
integrating environmental issues with
a variety of other opportunities and
constraints, and with various design
styles. The designers expressed a
preference for ecologists to provide
ideas and insights early on, and then
remove themselves during the design
104
process. However, this approach limits
ecologists’ opportunities to impact
the design.
Teamwork
As important as it is to find common
ground, understanding differences in
approach is fundamental to building
trust, deconstructing barriers, and finding
innovative solutions. The integrated team
approach created the right environment
for stakeholders to reveal conflicting
concerns and to discover opportunities for
synergy. An integrated approach to design
necessitated finding balance among these
various influences and interests. This is
clearly illustrated with approaches towards
the historic forest. Ecological restoration
and greater public benefit have been realized
through selected-area forest removal. At
the same time, historic preservation of key
tree stands has enabled the forest to retain
the symbolic, cultural influence of the site’s
military history.
Many issues became most apparent
during the more detailed development of
the design by the EDAW team after the
workshop. The clarity that we now have
on these differences of opinion would have
been useful to discuss during the process,
and to share with stakeholders.
Building Trust and Breaking
Down Barriers
The Presidio reveals ways in which historic
preservation, ecological restoration, and
public use have guided land management
decisions for one truly unique site. An
integrated approach to design necessitated
balancing these various influences
and interests.
EDAW's over arching goal at this land
planning and design workshop was to
develop methods that foster collaboration
between ecologists and designers. In
this case, dialogue between the two
disciplines led to some innovative means
of accommodating the physical, cultural,
economic, political, and ecological
complexities of an urban park. The effort
led to a deeper understanding of the two
disciplines' perspectives, and an awareness
of the likely obstacles and opportunities
associated with interdisciplinary practice.
In the end, individual practitioners need
to reach across the divide between their
professions by talking openly about differing
goals and ideologies. Our experience at the
Presidio revealed that trust and openness
are instrumental to success in creating the
kind of synergistic relationship that results in
vital solutions to complex sites.
105