ABSTRACT 
 
 
 
 
Title of Thesis: DESIGNING THROUGH THE LENS OF 
LANDSCAPE URBANISM  
  
 Maria Jose Espinoza, Master of Landscape 
Architecture Degree, 2020 
  
Thesis Directed By: Dr. Christopher Ellis, Associate Professor, 
LARC Director, Department of Plant 
Science and Landscape Architecture 
 
 
Cities of the 21st century are impacted by uniquely modern 
phenomena such as sea-level rise, urban flooding, and decentralization. As 
environmental impacts and urban dynamics change, we are forced to view 
urban spaces differently than we have in the past.  
Landscape Urbanism developed in the early 1990s as a response to 
this need, turning to the landscape as a foundation for viewing, constructing, 
and rehabilitating urban spaces. Although Landscape Urbanism theory does 
provide a platform to determine what sites are ideal for development and how 
to design with environmental and ecological systems on a site, the abstract 
nature of the literature of Landscape Urbanism creates challenges in practice. 
This thesis combines investigation into Landscape Urbanism theory 
with research on the methodologies of Sustainable Urbanism, Smart Growth, 
and Ecological Urbanism to create a framework for the application of 
  
Landscape Urbanism to site design. This framework is then tested in the 
conceptual redevelopment of a former industrial site in Baltimore, Maryland. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
DESIGNING THROUGH THE LENS OF LANDSCAPE URBANISM 
 
 
 
by 
 
 
Maria Jose Espinoza 
 
 
 
 
 
Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the  
University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment 
of the requirements for the degree of 
Master of Landscape 
Architecture  
2020 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Advisory Committee: 
Dr. Christopher Ellis, Chair 
Dr. Byoung-Suk Kweon 
Dr. Peter May 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
? Copyright by 
Maria Jose Espinoza 
2020 
  
 
Dedication 
 
I dedicate this thesis work to my family. To my loving daughter Mia for 
keeping my spirits up and lighting up my days. Mia, you push me to be a 
better person and make me keep my promises and goals.   
 
 And my beautiful parents Mario Espinoza and Sonia Alvarez, for their 
endless support with this thesis and all avenues of life. A special feeling of 
gratitude to my mother for staying up with me, helping with my daughter, and 
providing encouraging words along the way. 
 
ii 
 
 
 
Acknowledgements 
 
Special thank you to Dr. Christopher Ellis for serving as my thesis committee 
chair and guiding me through this process. 
 
 Thank you to Dr. Byoung-Suk Kweon and Dr. Peter May for helping guide my 
work and serving on my thesis committee.  
 
And finally, thank you to my daughter, mother, father, brothers, and close 
family friends for supporting my work and me during my time at the University 
of Maryland. I want to thank Jorah Reinstein and Jen Ren for helping with 
edits and keeping me on track with this thesis project and life.  
iii 
 
 
 
Table of Contents 
 
 
Dedication .................................................................................................................... ii 
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... iii 
List of Figures ............................................................................................................ vi 
Chapter 1: Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 
Chapter 2: Literature Review .................................................................................... 5 
2.1: Landscape Urbanism Theory ............................................................................. 5 
2.1.2: Central Themes Chosen to Develop a Practical Application Framework ...... 7 
2.1.2.1: Drosscapes ............................................................................................... 8 
2.1.2.2:  Terra Fluxus ........................................................................................... 9 
2.1.2.3:  Landscape of Infrastructure ................................................................. 12 
2.2: Drawing Design Criteria from the Theory ....................................................... 13 
2.2.1: Drosscapes Theme Summary ........................................................................ 14 
2.2.1.1: Guidance in Application ? The 3 R?s ..................................................... 14 
2.2.1.2: Drosscapes Design Criteria .................................................................. 15 
2.2.2: Terra Fluxus Theme Summary ..................................................................... 16 
2.2.2.1: Guidance in Application ? Ecological Urbanism .................................. 17 
2.2.2.2: Terra Fluxus Design Criteria ................................................................ 20 
2.2.3: Landscapes of Infrastructure Theme Summary ............................................ 21 
2.2.3.1: Guidance in Application ? Sustainable Urbanism and Smart Growth . 21 
2.2.3.2: Landscapes of Infrastructure Design Criteria ....................................... 24 
Chapter 3: Methodology .......................................................................................... 25 
3.1: Case Studies ..................................................................................................... 26 
3.1.1: FreshKills Park, Staten Island, NY ........................................................... 26 
3.1.2: Gas Works Park, Seattle, WA ................................................................... 29 
3.1.3: Harbor Point, Baltimore City, MD ........................................................... 31 
3.1.4: Hazelwood Green, Pittsburgh, PA ........................................................... 35 
3.1.5: Major Case Studies Takeaways ................................................................ 37 
3.2: Site Selection ................................................................................................... 37 
3.3: Methodology Across Scales from Framework to Application ........................ 39 
3.3.1: Master Plan Scale ..................................................................................... 40 
3.3.2: Town Plan Scale ....................................................................................... 41 
3.3.3: Neighborhood Scale ................................................................................. 42 
Chapter 4: Sparrow?s Point ..................................................................................... 44 
4.1: General Overview ............................................................................................ 44 
4.2: Historic Use ..................................................................................................... 45 
4.3: A Legacy of Pollution ...................................................................................... 50 
4.4: Present Use ...................................................................................................... 51 
4.5: Defining Features in the Landscape ................................................................. 52 
Chapter 5:  Design ................................................................................................... 53 
5.1: Site Analysis .................................................................................................... 54 
5.1.1: Hydrology ................................................................................................. 55 
5.1.2: Contamination .......................................................................................... 56 
5.1.3: Vegetation ................................................................................................. 58 
iv 
 
 
 
5.1.4: Existing Transportation Infrastructure .................................................... 59 
5.2: Master Plan ...................................................................................................... 59 
5.2.1: From Design Criteria to Application ....................................................... 60 
5.3: Town of Sparrow?s Nest .................................................................................. 67 
5.3.1: From Design Criteria to Application ....................................................... 67 
5.3.2: Sparrow?s Nest Design ............................................................................. 68 
5.4: Sparrow?s Nest Neighborhood Plan ................................................................ 71 
5.4.1: From Design Criteria to Application ....................................................... 71 
5.4.2: Sparrow?s Nest Neighborhood Design ..................................................... 74 
5.4.3: Population Density ................................................................................... 79 
5.4.4: Transit Supportive Densities .................................................................... 82 
5.4.5: Designing Through the Landscape ........................................................... 83 
Chapter 6:  Reflection ................................................................................................. 89 
6.1: Master Plan ...................................................................................................... 91 
6.2: Neighborhood Plan .......................................................................................... 93 
Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 96 
v 
 
 
 
List of Figures 
Figure 1: Landscape Urbanism Themes (Espinoza, 2018) .............................. 7 
Figure 2 :Landscape of Infrastructure factors are Interconnected (Espinoza, 
2018) .............................................................................................................. 13 
Figure 3: Ecological Framwork (Desimini, 2013) ............................................ 19 
Figure 4: Clarence Perry Unit (Farr, 2008) ..................................................... 22 
Figure 5: Sparrows Point, Baltimore, MD proximity to Baltimore City 30-
minute drive (Hairston, 2012; Espinoza,2018) ............................................... 39 
Figure 6: Peach Farm on Sparrows Point, (Berry, 2017) ............................... 46 
Figure 7: Row Homes on Sparrows Point (Berry, 2017) ................................ 47 
Figure 8: Shipyard in Sparrows Point (Berry, 2017) ....................................... 49 
Figure 9: Sparrows Point Steel Mill Community (Berry, 2017) ....................... 50 
Figure 10: Sparrows Point becomes a Drosscape (Davis, 2015) ................... 51 
Figure 11: Sea-Level Rise Impact (Espinoza, 2018) ...................................... 56 
Figure 12: High Priority Areas (Espinoza, 2018) ............................................ 58 
Figure 13: Existing Transportation Networks (Espinoza, 2018) ..................... 59 
Figure 14: Master Plan of Sparrows Point (Espinoza, 2018) ......................... 63 
Figure 15: Sea Level Rise Impacts (Espinoza, 2018) .................................... 64 
Figure 16: Ecological Patterns (Espinoza, 2018) ........................................... 65 
Figure 17: Human Development (Espinoza, 2018) ........................................ 66 
Figure 18: Landscape Typology of Sparrow's Nest (Espinoza, 2018) ............ 69 
Figure 19: Land-Use of Town (Espinoza, 2018) ............................................. 70 
Figure 20: Landscape Classification (Espinoza, 2018) .................................. 72 
Figure 21: Neighborhood Scale Design (Espinoza, 2018) ............................. 75 
Figure 22: Neighborhood Scale Design (Espinoza, 2018) ............................. 75 
Figure 23: Systems (Espinoza, 2018) ............................................................ 76 
Figure 24: Interconnected Site Systems (Espinoza, 2018) ............................ 78 
Figure 25: System Gradient (Espinoza,2018) ................................................ 79 
Figure 26:Sparrows Nest Urban Areas (Espinoza, 2018) .............................. 81 
Figure 27; Sparrow's Neighborhood Modes of Transit (Espinoza, 2018) ....... 82 
Figure 29: Hybrid Fields Landscape (Espinoza, 2018) .................................. 87 
Figure 28: Urban Landscapes (Espinoza, 2018) ............................................ 87 
Figure 31: Hybrid Natural Landscapes (Espinoza, 2018) ............................... 88 
Figure 30: Production Landscape (Espinoza, 2018) ...................................... 88 
Figure 32: Natural Landscape (Espinoza, 2018) ............................................ 89 
   
vi 
 
 
 
Chapter 1: Introduction  
 
Today, our cities face many challenges caused by heightened natural 
phenomenon such as sea-level rise impacts, urban flooding, and shrinking 
cities (Blanco, Alberti, Olshansky, et al., 2009; Gornitz, et al., 2009). Also, we 
are facing tension and changes in our economic and political climate globally. 
Each of these challenges impacts the 21st-century city by causing 
infrastructure problems, abandoned properties, and the migration of additional 
people (Waldheim, 2006, 2016). These social and environmental issues bring 
on new conflicts between our built environment and social norms.  
Regrettably, many of the problem?s cities face today were caused by 
practitioners planning and designing cities without a complete understanding 
of the natural and built environment (Waldheim, 2006, 2016). Practitioners, in 
many cases, forced developments and communities upon unsuitable natural 
areas leaving future generations with many problems.  
Now we must learn from the past and face the massive changes in 
both the natural and built environment.  We need to start viewing cities 
differently, especially if we want to prevent our current problems from 
manifesting into more significant issues. As a result, there is a call for a 
multidisciplinary approach to design our 21st Century Cities. Practitioners in 
Planning, Landscape Architecture, Architecture, and Engineering come 
together to analyze the problems in our cities while achieving good city form. 
1 
 
 
 
As the dynamics of urban cities and the impacts of our environment 
change our minds; practitioners look to the past in order to design our future 
cities, and we are forced to alter our views of urban spaces.  For example, in 
the past, practitioners planned our cities in low lying areas; replaced and 
dissected neighborhoods with highways and forgot about the people living in 
these communities (Waldheim, 2006, 2016; Duany, 2013; Thompson, 2012). 
We placed factories in our city and pushed people out because of the 
unhealthy living conditions while developing neoliberal urban planning views 
that resulted in urban sprawl. Unfortunately, urban sprawl produced more 
environmental impacts and altered how people lived and made them 
dependent on automobiles. As people move back to cities, we now value how 
people interact, with the built and natural environment. As policies and our 
economic market change our lives, we need to adapt to these changes as 
well as understand how everything is impacted. Most importantly, each 
planning and design theory era has left us with lessons on how to improve our 
well-being and overall future.   
In the late 20th Century practitioners across disciplines developed 
Landscape Urbanism. Landscape Urbanism is an urban planning and 
landscape architecture theory that emerged as a response to the 
postmodernist failings of New Urbanism and as a shift from comprehensive 
planning. It emerged from the shortcomings of the traditional cities and the 
failings of New Urbanism and was viewed as a solution to neoliberal urban 
planning thinking and architecture (Duany, 2013; Thompson, 2012). These 
2 
 
 
 
schools of thought primarily ignored the landscape and overall green 
infrastructure within the urban environment. However, the landscape urbanist 
had different views; they proposed that civic design should be organized 
around the city?s landscape. Thus, the landscape itself becomes the lens for 
which cities are designed. It-becomes the medium and building block to 
construct urban spaces (Waldheim, 2006, 2016). The landscape urbanists 
sought to find solutions to urban challenges by interweaving both cultural and 
ecological systems. 
The design principles and the theoretical framework of Landscape 
Urbanism can still be seen in the contemporary cities of today in projects like 
Fresh Kills Park on Staten Island, New York, and Gas Works Park, in Seattle, 
Washington.  
Each of these projects restored ecosystems, bolstered human 
interaction and uncovered the site's natural beauty. These sites were 
deteriorating because of past choices however designers used engineered 
ways to restore the site while also paying attention to the ecological context 
and how people should use the space.  
Most Importantly, the literature review and case studies below reveal a 
limitation within the Landscape Urbanism theoretical framework. The 
limitation found was that the discourse offers theoretical guidance, however it 
is difficult to apply directly to site design at various scales.  Landscape 
Urbanism provides design suggestions but never implementations, policy, or 
guidelines. Therefore, the theory is ideal for regional and master scale plan 
3 
 
 
 
but harder for site-specific design such as a neighborhood block or 
streetscape.  
In order to develop a framework for the application of landscape 
urbanism principles to site design, two primary goals were established. The 
first was to understand Landscape Urbanism both in theory and in practice. 
The second was to define a set of design criteria that would translate into 
application in site design.  
The four central questions that guided the investigation were: 
1. How can design principles of Landscape Urbanism be balanced 
harmoniously with each other, while achieving functional landscapes 
for both social needs and the ecological systems?  
2. How can we design through the lens of Landscape Urbanism theory to 
plan and create cities? 
3. What limitations are there? 
4. How can we overcome the limitations? 
The literature review of Landscape Urbanism theory and practice helped 
determine design criteria, which aided in both the site selection and the 
implementation of the design principles for this thesis. The Landscape 
Urbanism discourse provided three theoretical themes that guided the design 
process of this thesis project. They provided the thesis project with explicit 
goals to determine the success of the Landscape Urbanism theory 
framework.  
 
4 
 
 
 
Chapter 2: Literature Review  
 
This section will cover the Landscape Urbanism theory, the central 
themes chosen for application of the theory to a site, and the design criteria 
created from the theoretical framework. The three central themes selected 
were Drosscapes, Terra Fluxus, and Landscape of Infrastructure. Although 
these three themes helped develop a framework for practical application, they 
had limitations when applying to a test site. Therefore, exploring other 
theories was needed to jump from theory to practice. The supportive theories 
are the three Rs, Ecological and Sustainable Urbanism. 
2.1: Landscape Urbanism Theory 
The term ?landscape urbanism? was coined by architect and academic 
theorist Charles Waldheim (Waldheim, 2006). In his books The Landscape 
Urbanism Reader (2006) and Landscape as Urbanism: A General Theory 
(2016), Waldheim assembled a collection of essays from top practitioners in 
the fields of planning, architecture, landscape architecture, and engineering 
(Waldheim,2006,2016). Waldheim?s work crystallized the essence of the 
movement, capturing the origins, the contemporary environment, and the 
aspirations of Landscape Urbanism. 
In essence, Landscape Urbanism is an urban planning and landscape 
architecture theory that advocates the organization of cities through the 
design of the landscape rather than the design of its buildings. Landscape 
5 
 
 
 
urbanists seek to find a balance between social and natural systems. For 
example, urban design should not only be visually pleasing but should also 
have functionality within the bigger ecosystem of the city. 
Landscape Urbanism introduces indeterminacy as the design process 
that includes programming spaces with some flexibility to address unknown 
future conditions.  Also, it views the natural landscape and designed urban 
areas similar to parts of a machine. That should work together and coexist as 
one gigantic organism (Waldheim, 2006, 20016; Thompson, 2011).  
The theory of Landscape Urbanism embraces the ecological 
processes. It employs ecological terminology, such as shifting populations, 
succession, dynamic systems, and self-organization for designing both 
natural and urban spaces (Thompson, 2011). To design urban areas, the 
framework advocates for the understanding of all dynamic forces that shape a 
city. Understanding the overall context of a site is important including all the 
forms that comprise the landscape, such as built elements, natural, and 
social, are crucial to designing the site (Thompson, 2011).  Additionally, the 
following nine characteristics were found within the Landscape Urbanism 
discourse to aid in identifying and applying the theory both in academia and 
practice (Waldheim, 2006). 
The nine characteristics of Landscape Urbanism (LU) are: 
?  Scale Context- the project should be handled across scales  
? The landscape is intermixed with architecture and civil engineering 
6 
 
 
 
? The landscape is seen as a binding element that connects all 
components like a machine 
? LU projects increase social interactions between ecology and the 
urban fabric by using the landscape 
? The function of a landscape is more important over the beauty of it  
? The Landscape Urbanist uncovers and learns all opportunities and 
potentials in a landscape 
? Infrastructure is highlighted 
? Projects develop interrelationships between natural and engineered 
systems 
? The Landscape Urbanist brakes boundaries and organizes the city and 
landscape as one. 
2.1.2: Central Themes Chosen to Develop a Practical Application Framework  
To develop a framework for site application, three themes were 
identified from the theoretical 
Drosscape discourse. "Drosscapes," termed by 
Alan Berger, emphasizes the 
revitalization of waste spaces 
Landscape 
Urbanism (Berger, 2006). James Corner's 
Landscapes of 
Infrastructure Terra Fluxus concept of "Terra Fluxus," focuses on 
designing the landscape across 
Figure 1: Landscape Urbanism Themes 
(Espinoza, 2018) scales of space and time (Waldheim, 
2006). "Landscapes of infrastructure," 
7 
 
 
 
identified by Elisabeth Mossop and Kelly Shannon wherein cultural, 
ecological, and built infrastructure are interlaced through design (Waldheim, 
2006). 
2.1.2.1: Drosscapes  
Alan M. Berger introduced the concept of Drosscapes to the 
Landscape Urbanism discourse. Alan M. Berger is an academic and currently 
teaches at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and is a Professor of 
Landscape Architecture and Urban Design. Before his time at MIT, Berger 
was a professor at Harvard-GSD, 2002-2008. Berger has many publications 
and awards winning books that support his theory such as:   
? Reclaiming the American West (2002) 
? Drosscape: Wasting Land in Urban America (2006) 
? Designing the Reclaimed Landscape (2007) 
Berger's primary research focus is to understand the link between humans' 
consumption of natural resources and the waste and destruction of 
landscape. To help better understand how to redesign around our wasteful 
lifestyles that will create more intelligent designs.  
Berger emphasizes the importance of remediating the abandoned, 
toxic, and social pathologies left behind by the industrial era through 
reclamation, repurposing, and reuse. He argues that the redevelopment of 
abandoned and leftover spaces in our cities rather than continued green 
8 
 
 
 
development is a critical element in reducing ecological problems related to 
urban environments. "Drosscapes," as Berger defines them, are unused 
spaces in urban settings that have become neglected and abandoned in the 
wake of deindustrialization and urban sprawl. These may be industrial sites, 
remnant road system geometries, buried rivers, and landfills (Berger, 2006; 
Waldheim, 2006, 2016), or they may be vacant lots, roofs, alleys, parking lots, 
and sidewalks (Berger, 2006). 
Berger argues that our design challenge is to elegantly reincorporate 
these spaces into the urban fabric into efficient, aesthetically pleasing, and 
functional spaces. Berger terms this approach, "drossless urbanization." He 
states that once wasted space is identified, it needs to be reused, resurfaced, 
and reprogrammed these areas for both humans and ecological services.  For 
example, when a river or stream is daylighted, the designer provides an 
opportunity for both renewing and promoting social interaction like in the case 
of Cheonggyecheon, Seoul, or SawMill River in Downtown Yonkers, NY. Both 
projects are rivers that were daylighted to aid in flooding issues, improve 
water quality, and provide an economic and social simulation to an area.  
2.1.2.2:  Terra Fluxus 
?Terra Fluxus? is a term coined by James Corner to describe ?the 
shifting processes coursing through and across the urban field (Corner, 
2006).?James Corner is the Founder and principal of the landscape 
architecture and design firm James Corner Field Operations, as well as a 
9 
 
 
 
professor of landscape architecture at the University of Pennsylvania?s 
Weitzman School of Design. He is known for projects such as the High Line in 
Manhattan; a former elevated railway turned linear park, and Freshkills Park 
on Staten Island, a landfill site, turned into a park. Additionally, Corner also 
has many publications on landscape architectural design and urbanism that 
complement both his technique and theoretical methods. Conner books that 
cover his Terra Fluxus research are:  
? Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape 
Architecture (1997) 
? The Landscape Imagination: The Collected Essays of James Corner 
1990?2010  
Corner?s Terra Fluxus research provides four principles that organize the 
emerging landscape Urbanist practice and help translate the theory into the 
practice of the theory. 
The Four Terra Fluxus Principles are: 
? The ecological and urban process over time designs needs to 
anticipate future changes and respect the natural process. 
? Designing cities horizontally first by understanding the landscape forms 
and constraints found on a site. 
? The operational or working method of the landscape and urban 
environment should be designed like a machine where all parts work 
together and simultaneously. 
10 
 
 
 
? Imagination plays an important role when re-envisioning the new 
cityscape. 
Corner asserts that designs should start in the landscape by understanding 
the landforms of the land. Leading to the acknowledgment that the landscape 
has fluctuations and it is dynamic rather than designing as if the world were 
flat and unchanging. 
Designs start within the ?Field,? or the ground planned, and the urban 
infrastructure connects to the landscape instead of merely placing buildings 
everywhere. Also, Landscape Urbanist needs to be able to imagine beyond 
what exists in the present to make connections across scale and time. When 
designing stationery places, landscapes need to be thought of more broadly 
and how this one place is part of a more massive environmental machine 
because the urban environment is interconnected with natural systems and 
should function together.  
Ultimately, there is value in indeterminacy that creates spaces capable 
of adapting to unknown future conditions. To make this possible, Corner calls 
for interdisciplinary collaboration within architecture, urban design, landscape 
architecture, and planning to create a hybrid practice. Lastly, he reflects the 
overall value nature has in our cities (Corner, 2006; Waldheim, 2006).  
11 
 
 
 
2.1.2.3:  Landscape of Infrastructure   
The theme "Landscapes of Infrastructure" incorporates the ideas of 
two design theorists who advocate for hybridity between natural and 
engineered systems (Thompson, 2011). The two theorists are Elisabeth 
Mossop, a founding director of the design firm Spackman Mossop Michaels 
and dean of Australia's University of Technology's School of Design, and 
Kelly Shannon, international practitioner and director of the Graduate 
Program of Landscape Architecture and Urbanism at the University of 
Southern California. 
Mossop's work explores the various relationships between urban 
infrastructure and landscape. "If we think of landscape as an infrastructure 
which underlies other urban systems, rather than equating it with nature or 
ecology, we have a much more workable conceptual framework for designing 
urban systems (Mossop, 2006)." Mossop writes, "There should be a 
relationship between the underlying structures of topography and hydrology 
and the major structuring elements of urban form, such as the use of 
catchments as the basis for physical planning and regulation (Mossop, 2006). 
Kelly Shannon argues that in order to make the jump from design 
theory to practice, there is a need to understand all the infrastructure at play, 
and the infrastructural role the landscape can play. "Landscape is increasingly 
referenced regarding infrastructure, ecology, urban de-densification, and 
sprawl, wherein traditional urban design proves costly, slow, and inflexible 
12 
 
 
 
(Shannon, 2006)." In Shannon's view, Landscape Urbanism connects layers 
of infrastructure across different realms.  Shannon argues that by stabilizing 
the ecological realm, using recycled and relic materials, and incorporation of 
cultural and social pathologies, balanced landscapes can be created. Social 
and cultural pathologies should be anticipated before they become a problem, 
social factors are poverty, crime, and old age, that should be anticipated.   
Additionally, Shannon states that "Together landscape and 
infrastructure frame and create new possible sites for urban activities both 
built and unbuilt projects (Shannon, 2006). Therefore, the Landscapes of 
Infrastructure theme seeks not only to stop creating problems but create 
opportunities as well. Recognizing flooding and stormwater must be managed 
and that they can be managed in a creative way that provides public 
amenities. This approach 
Ecology Recycled  also calls for a balance 
 Stabilized  Materials 
through reuse, referencing 
Balanced  
Landscapes history, building complete 
cycles, both physical and 
Reuse 
Relic Cultural  social.  
Figure 2 :Landscape of Infrastructure factors are Interconnected (Espinoza, 2018) 
2.2: Drawing Design Criteria from the Theory 
In the following section, the three themes will be summarized and 
explained. There was a need to explore other theories Since the Landscape 
Urbanism framework had limitations when trying to apply it to a site. This 
13 
 
 
 
section will discuss three different theories that offered guidance to apply the 
theory. Lastly, the design criteria created for each theme will be provided. 
2.2.1: Drosscapes Theme Summary 
Drosscapes need to be understood in the context of the real world and 
how to include them into the designed urban environment. Through 
Landscape Urbanism principles to produce new ways and uses of public 
spaces but also nature and ecosystem services. In urban environments, 
drosscapes are inevitable. The urban fabric should reintroduce wasted 
spaces into efficient functional spaces to fix the problem. 
2.2.1.1: Guidance in Application ? The 3 R?s 
In order to apply the Drosscape theme, contaminated sites need to be 
understood. After all, these kinds of sites are complicated and have different 
levels of toxicity. Researching this process applies to the application of 
Landscape Urbanism theory on a site because the test site is a Drosscape. 
By learning how to handle contaminated sites influences the final design 
criteria for this theme. Moreover, how it is translated to the design of the test 
site. 
 There are different ways to remove toxicity levels from a site known as 
the 3 Rs. The 3 R?s are reclamation, remediation, and reforestation. 
Reclamation is the process of returning disturbed land to its former use or the 
most productive use. Remediation is the process of removing pollutants or 
14 
 
 
 
contaminants from water and soil found in brownfields and superfund sites. 
Furthermore, the reforestation refers to the reestablishment of trees (forest 
areas) on non-treed land. 
In our previous discussion, drosscapes were identified as a central 
theme to apply the Landscape Urbanism framework to the practical 
application on a site. Therefore, understanding the remediation process and 
how to deal with different levels of contaminants is important to apply the 
theory to a site. The remediation process helps build the design criteria for 
this theme. 
2.2.1.2: Drosscapes Design Criteria 
The criteria developed for the drosscapes theme is the 
following                           
? Locate wasted landscapes 
? Reclaim and repurpose underutilized contaminated sites 
? Clean and restore ecological systems degraded due to toxic 
waste 
? Reintroduce ecosystem services 
? Conserve Greenfields for ecological and recreational use 
? Provide opportunities for new landscapes that enrich people?s lives by 
promoting social interactions 
15 
 
 
 
The drosscape design criteria help translate the theory of this theme to site 
application. The criteria transform wasted urban spaces into the functional 
landscape by restoring and reclaiming them. These spaces can serve as 
recreational opportunities for people and ecological services. Also, cities can 
be planned on these sites and prevent greenfield development.  
2.2.2: Terra Fluxus Theme Summary 
The Landscape Urbanist needs to understand all the ecological and 
cultural processes at work on a site to design spaces that function across 
space and time. The Terra Fluxus theme provides a practical lens to view the 
theory and how to translate it into a design solution for a project site. Under 
this theme, the landscape becomes a medium that can be layered, flexible, 
strategic, and non-hierarchical. It constructs a horizontal field of infrastructure 
that accommodates all kinds of urban activities planned and unplanned, 
imagined, and unimagined (Corner, 2006). 
The framework introduces indeterminacy as part of the design process 
that includes programming flexible spaces that address unknown future 
conditions. Most importantly, the Landscape Urbanist pays attention to 
context and how the landscape is included in all forms, built, vernacular, 
natural, and social to understand the forces that shape a project. However, 
none of Corner?s writing provided a design approach, so other theories were 
explored to aid in the application process. 
16 
 
 
 
2.2.2.1: Guidance in Application ? Ecological Urbanism 
The Terra Fluxus theme had some limitations when trying to apply the 
theme to a test site. Therefore, other theoretical frameworks were studied to 
guide the application of this theme. It was discovered that exploring the 
Ecological Urbanism framework will facilitate the application of this theme. To 
design a site, the ecological process needed by both humans and the 
landscape need to be understood. The term 'ecology' has evolved since it first 
emerged in the 19th century and its relation to biological sciences. It has 
expanded into the city or urban environment with an increasing focus on 
landscapes and urban regions. Ecological Urbanism has two dimensions: 
landscape ecology and urban ecology. 
Landscape ecology aims to understand the landscape and how it is 
shaped its originality and the dynamics that create a landscape. It is defined 
as viewing the landscape as a structural and functional element within a 
greater matrix that can be designed. Comprehending how line corridors, strip 
corridors, stream corridors, networks are major structural characteristics of 
landscapes that are interconnected (Steiner, 2011, 336; Forman and Godron, 
1981, 733). How the landscape is viewed in this theoretical framework relates 
to the Terra Fluxus theme because it fully focuses on understanding the 
organizing factors within a landscape. Furthermore, this theoretical framework 
provides a toolset on how to organize the landscape ecology. For example, 
17 
 
 
 
knowing how hydrological systems move through a landscape from major 
bodies of water to minor bodies to channels.   
Urban ecology is the study of the ecological processes and how its 
patterns change over time, space, and scales within the city, resulting in an 
urban-based environmental study of the city. This new field emphasizes an 
interdisciplinary approach to understand the urban environment and the 
urbanizing landscape. It analyzes the patterns, drivers, processes, and 
outcomes of a city. "Urban ecosystems as complex coupled human-natural 
systems where people are the dominant modifiers of ecosystems, thus 
producing hybrid social-ecological landscape patterns and processes 
(Steiner, 2011, 336; Alberti, 2008)." For example, the benefits people receive 
from nature, such as "food, water, and energy. This includes regulatory 
services, such as purification of water, carbon sequestration, and climate 
regulation. As well as waste decomposition and detoxification, crop 
pollination, and pest and disease control (Steiner, 2011)." After analyzing the 
Ecological Urbanism framework, a design criteria was created to facilitate in 
the design approach.  
The Ecological Urbanism Criteria 
? Balance human systems with ecological services 
? Facilitate ecosystem services (Green Fabric) 
? Creating wildlife habitat 
? Preserving ecological areas 
18 
 
 
 
? Capture and cleaning stormwater 
? Improve human Networks (Gray Fabric) 
? Creating new social opportunities like trails along the waterfront 
? Enhance cultural history and diversity 
? Unite humans to nature  
Figure 3: Ecological Framework (Desimini, 2013) 
This design criteria clarifies all the system and services humans and the 
surrounding ecology need. It addresses each system to create resilient 
designs with new networks and services seen in Figure 3: Ecological 
Framework.  
19 
 
 
 
2.2.2.2: Terra Fluxus Design Criteria 
The following criteria combine elements from the Terra Fluxus theme 
and Ecological Urbanism. The following criteria was used in the final design of 
this thesis project in order to apply the design elements in practice.  
Final Terra Fluxus design criteria: 
? Explore the ecological and urban processes across a site 
? Improve how networks are designed such as roads, trails, and 
neighborhoods to include ecological spaces while creating 
habitats that preserve ecological areas 
? Repair and Improve natural systems 
? While creating new social opportunities within ecological areas 
like trails and passive areas 
? Creating Resilient designs 
? Reduce future flooding impacts   
? Capture and clean stormwater 
The Terra Fluxus design criteria translate the theory of this theme to the 
application of it on a site. The criteria facilitate the design of both urban and 
ecological spaces and improves both spaces that are viewed and planned. 
For example, road networks designed should include spaces for people to 
walk and bike and provide forested areas.  
20 
 
 
 
Designs must repair and improve any existing natural systems like rivers and 
forested areas. These types of landscapes can serve as passive recreational 
opportunities for people while providing ecological services. Cities can also 
plan for future flooding impacts and reduce stormwater pollutes to reduce 
climatic impacts down the line. 
2.2.3: Landscapes of Infrastructure Theme Summary 
Landscapes of Infrastructure aims to balance both urban and natural 
infrastructure. It is essential to note how systems are interconnected in the 
urban landscape and the natural landscape. For example, how we manage 
flood events and treat stormwater runoff can also provide recreational 
opportunities and serve human needs. Under this theme, the Landscape 
Urbanist needs to create a balanced landscape that can only be achieved by 
balancing and incorporating four factors. These factors are ecology, recycled 
materials, cultural ties of a site, and historical reuse, or the reuse of relics 
within the landscape. Landscape Urbanism projects should include and plan 
for all the natural and urban infrastructure to create functional hybrid 
landscapes both in the urban and the natural areas. 
2.2.3.1: Guidance in Application ? Sustainable Urbanism and Smart Growth 
Sustainable Urbanism and Smart Growth principles support the 
application of the Landscape of Infrastructure theme on the test site. 
Sustainable Urbanism offers a straightforward design toolset to help plan built 
areas as well as green infrastructure within urban areas. Sustainable 
21 
 
 
 
Urbanism fits under the Landscape of Infrastructure theme because it 
provides environmentally conscious designs that count for both green and 
urban infrastructure.  
Sustainable Urbanism is the practice of designing urban areas that use 
sustainable and resilient principles to design, plan, and administrate cities or 
urban areas (Sharifi, 2016).  Sustainable Urbanism?s objective is to eliminate 
how urban developments impact the environment. The overarching goal is to 
make the town or city self-sufficient by bringing necessities such as electricity 
and food resources close to the urban development.   
Sustainable Urbanism 
and Smart Growth practices 
provide specific and helpful 
implementing tools and 
guidelines on how 
developments should be 
planned and designed. For 
instance, Smart Growth 
principles contain urban 
sprawl by using compact 
development patterns, 
utilizing existing urban 
Figure 4: Clarence Perry Unit (Farr, 2008) 
infrastructure, providing 
22 
 
 
 
adequate public facilities and services. The principles also provided a network 
of transportation services that will not only connect a city but eliminate global 
warming emissions. Resulting in a mixed-use, high-density town that is 
interconnected by streets that use different modes of transportations (Sharifi, 
2016; Freilich, 2011). While Sustainable Urbanism uses most of the compact 
development ideology, it also intermixes green infrastructure with social and 
economic stimulation. Furthermore, the Sustainable Urbanism theory 
provides a neighborhood unit model in order to design neighborhoods that 
should be used while designing the urbanscape. As can be seen in Figure 4: 
Clarence Perry Unit. The framework also includes a neighborhood center with 
shopping centers and anchoring mix-use areas (Farr, 2007).  
The following design criteria were created for the Sustainable urbanism 
agenda 
? Compact mix-use developments 
? Provide Alternative Modes of Transportations 
? Create wildlife and transportation corridors 
?  Planned Public Facilities and Services 
? Promote Biophilia within the city 
? High-performance buildings 
? High-performance Infrastructure 
By applying these design criteria, development areas can be designed to 
promote healthier lifestyles while eliminating the impact on the environment 
23 
 
 
 
2.2.3.2: Landscapes of Infrastructure Design Criteria 
The following criteria combine Landscapes of Infrastructure and 
Sustainable Urbanism (and smart growth) guidelines into one list. The criteria 
created was based on the design elements applied to the final design. 
 The Final Landscape of Infrastructure Design Criteria: 
? Organizing the urban environment around the landscape   
? Design compact mix-use developments with different housing 
styles such as apartments, townhouses, and single-family 
homes. 
? Managing and treating stormwater that will count for future flood 
events 
? Provide recreational spaces that are culturally stimulating 
? Create and stabilize ecological and hydrological systems by planning 
for the natural and urban fabric 
? Organize the urban environment around the landscape features 
? Promote biodiversity by creating wildlife and transportation 
corridors. 
? Provide alternative modes of transportation and shared infrastructure 
to promote more ecological systems. 
The Landscape of Infrastructure theme is very complex to apply. Therefore, 
the criteria above provide a workable framework that simplified the application 
24 
 
 
 
of the theme. Under this theme both urban and ecological forms are designed 
by organizing the infrastructure. This can be achieved by maximizing 
ecological areas and planning for compact development that responds to the 
surrounding landscape features. Emphasizing the need for balanced 
landscape designs should also stabilize both urban and natural systems. 
Balanced landscape should organize the urban environment around the 
landscape and promote biodiversity. In this framework, forest areas, 
shorelines, and streams should be kept protected. These spaces can serve 
as recreational opportunities that will culturally stimulate people. Landscapes 
of Infrastructure offers a holistic approach to designing urban, landscape and 
natural features by interconnecting all these systems together.  
Chapter 3: Methodology  
 
The methodology section will discuss four case studies, the site 
selection process, and how the methodology created was applied across 
scales. In the case studies, section examples of landscape urbanism projects 
were selected to develop a sense of scale and how to illustrate the theoretical 
application to the project site. The site selection section describes how the 
test site for this thesis was selected and why the selected site was an ideal 
choice to test the application of the Landscape Urbanism framework. Lastly, 
the design approach is described for the different scales the test site was 
examined. 
25 
 
 
 
3.1: Case Studies 
The following section explains and critiques four case studies under 
the Landscape Urbanism theory lens. The four projects are FreshKills Park, 
Gas Works Park, Harbor Point, and Hazelwood Green. These four projects 
were chosen because they are drosscapes and use infrastructure to 
remediate the site. Additionally, these four case studies helped choose a test 
site and aided the design process of the thesis test site.   
3.1.1: FreshKills Park, Staten Island, NY 
             FreshKills Park is located on Staten Island, New York, and is roughly 
2,200 acres. Once the world's largest landfill, the site served as the primary 
depository for New York City's household garbage for nearly fifty years, from 
its establishment in 1948 to its decommissioning in 2001. The landfill area 
before the development of Staten Island was primarily composed of tidal 
creeks and coastal marshland. During its peak years of 1986-87, Fresh Kills 
received nearly 29,000 tons of trash per day. The four garbage mounds on 
the site today are made up of almost 150 million tons of solid waste (NYC 
Parks, 2006).  
Fresh Kills Landfill was established in 1948, before the development of 
Staten Island. By the 20th century, many of the newer landfills located within 
the city were closed because of new environmental regulations. Fresh Kills 
remained open because the owners worked closely with the State and City 
government to retrofit and meet new regulation standards. As of 1991, Fresh 
Kills was the only operating landfill for NYC. In 1996, environmental concerns 
26 
 
 
 
and state politics pushed Mayor Rudy Giuliani and New York Governor 
George Pataki to a mandate to close the site (Bliss, 2017). The State of New 
York passed a new law in 1996 requiring the landfill to stop operations by 
December 31st, 2001. In 1997, two of the four landfill mounds were capped 
and on March 22nd, 2001 the landfill received its last garbage. However, 
despite the landfill being decommissioned, the site was used to dispose of the 
materials from the World Trade Center attacks on September 11th, 2001. 
Debris from the attacks was cleaned, scanned, and examined on the site and 
it took roughly ten-month to complete the process. 
In 2001, NYC led by the Department of Planning conducted a two-
stage international design competition for a master plan development of the 
site. The competition's end goal was to attract ideas and innovative park 
designs that would meet the needs of the city's communities and respond to 
the natural and constructed history of the site while taking advantage of the 
Freshkills site potential.        
James Corner Field Operation?s design was chosen. The firm re-
imagined FreshKills by featuring many activities for humans and habitats for 
wildlife. The design included waterfront recreation areas, sports fields, 
educational areas, event spaces, and artwork display spaces, as well as 
meadows, wetlands, and creeks with pedestrian trails, scenic overlooks, and 
spaces for picnicking, fishing and birdwatching. Design elements also 
honored the recovery efforts of September 11th first responders. 
27 
 
 
 
The redesign of FreshKills Park required thoughtful planning and 
handling of the hazardous material left behind from the landfill. Some 
pollutants found were led, arsenic, petroleum products, and pesticides.   
            The FreshKills Park remediation process included capping the landfill 
mounds, water purification systems, gas harvesting, and phytoremediation of 
the contaminated soils. However, the landfill mounds had to be stabilized 
before they were capped.  The mounds were stabilized by layering soil, 
geotextiles, and a geomembrane that separates the waste from the 
environment and park visitors. The capped areas required close monitoring 
because they produced two by-products - methane gas and leachate. The 
gases were harvested by the department of sanitation and sold to the 
National Energy Grid, generating roughly $12 million a year in revenue (NYC 
Parks, 2006).  
The new park design addresses potential leachate risk by purifying 
runoff into both pipes and water treatment facilities. Stormwater runoff is 
treated through a series of swales, down chutes, and detention basins that 
move and treat stormwater along with the site. Also, the mounds themselves 
are graded and sloped to facilitate drainage. Since there is a concern that 
polluted runoff will reach the river, 238 groundwater monitoring wells were 
installed to monitor water quality to ensure the system is working correctly. 
Veru-Tek Technologies and environmental remediation company used 
two different phytoremediation techniques on the Freshkills. They used both 
plants and petroleum by-products to turn toxic waste into nontoxic 
28 
 
 
 
compounds.  (NYC Parks, 2006). Veru-Tek Technologies also injected 
biodegradable substances like corn or coconut oil into the soil in order to 
break down pollutants into harmless by-products. 
Field Operations conducted a suitability analysis to understand the site 
thoroughly. They examined the site's past, present, and future to determine 
the site's potential and how it changed over time. The firm determined that the 
Freshkill site should be turned into a natural park since it used to be a 
forested area with wetlands. The design respects the natural process by 
phasing and adapting the project and by restoring lost ecological corridors 
and the waters' edge. The design scheme shows how the site will change 
over time especially as the landscape matures and more wildlife is 
introduced. The design aims to connect humans to ecological systems by 
including passive and active spaces that plan out where humans and 
ecological services intersect.  
The design does a good job balancing the infrastructure needed to 
maintain the site clean and restores cultural connections to the site by 
incorporating site histories throughout the park design. All in all, FreshKills 
Park did fulfill many of the Landscape Urbanism theory requirements and 
restored this lost landscape into a usable park that not only restores ecology 
but connects humans to nature.   
3.1.2: Gas Works Park, Seattle, WA 
Gas Work Park is a 20-acre park located in Seattle, WA. The site 
formally was a coal gasification plant along with Lake Union. The plant burned 
29 
 
 
 
city garbage in the early 1900s and later used to extract gas from coal.  In 
1956 it was disbanded because gas plants became obsolete and the United 
States started importing natural gas. The site remained abandoned until the 
city acquired it in 1965 for parkland. Soon after, Richard Haag Associates 
was commissioned to prepare concept and master plans for the site, and it 
opened to the public ten years later as a park that would soon become a 
source of great community pride (The Cultural Landscape Foundation, 2016; 
Dunne, Kammer, Schanz, & Walter, 2014; Gonzalez, 2014; Radmer, 2014).  
            The park design includes several of the old gas plant buildings as 
ruins and also repurposes old plant components within the park. Although the 
park does not feature programmed sports fields, it provides areas for 
unprogrammed sports like archery, kitting, frisbeeing, and much more. The 
park's design has many open lawn spaces with fantastic waterfront views and 
views of downtown Seattle. 
 The process of coal burning can form more than 100 chemicals; 
however, the two primary chemicals are Benzene and PAHS. The Gas Works 
site also has Xenobiotic chemicals such as solvents, pesticides, heavy 
metals, and hydrocarbons. All these chemicals have health impacts if direct 
exposure happens either via gas exposure or through indirect sources like 
water pollution. This exposure can cause cancer, neurological damage, 
kidney, skeletal, muscular diseases (Dunne, Kammer, Schanz, & Walter, 
2014).  
30 
 
 
 
  The park design incorporated different remediation techniques to clean 
the soils and any runoff throughout the project site.  Richard and Haag 
Associates included bioremediation techniques and phytoremediation to 
sequester contaminants on the site. They used vegetation and 
microorganisms as forms of bioremediation. Using bioremediation techniques 
ensures the safety of the public and surrounding communities because it 
removes pollutants from the site.  The use of microorganisms required 
monitoring, cultivating, and demobilizing heavy metals found in contaminated 
soils. A combination of layers of clay and grasses were used to prevent wind-
blown dust, minimize soil erosion, and reduce contamination. 
Bioaugementation, the use of non-native strains and species, was also used 
to treat the site. Lastly, they used topo-remediation, or earthworks techniques 
to form hills and swales to help dilute rainfall contaminates into the river 
(Dunne, Kammer, Schanz, & Walter, 2014). 
Unfortunately, all these remediation efforts were not enough and air 
sparging was introduced. Air sparging pumps air into the ground where 
contaminants enter the vapor stage and then are extracted to the surface 
where they can be treated or burned off (Dunne, Kammer, Schanz, & Walter, 
2014).  
3.1.3: Harbor Point, Baltimore City, MD 
 Harbor Point is a 27- acres waterfront property located in 
Baltimore City, MD, also known as the Honeywell Baltimore Site.  It was 
31 
 
 
 
formerly a chrome processing and manufacturing facility and has undergone 
a remediation and redevelopment process.  
In the 1980s, as the first environmental investigations were conducted, 
the (EPA) detected a large amount of chromium being released into Baltimore 
Harbor. Despite the findings, the plant continued to remain open until 1986 
when it shut down because of economic conditions and overseas competition. 
As the site was decommissioned, additional studies on the site's toxicity 
levels were conducted, concluding in the EPA completing a $110 million 
clean-up.  By 1989, the EPA, US Department of Justice, and the Maryland 
Department of the Environment entered a Consent Decree to dismantle the 
existing plant?s infrastructure.  
The primary contaminant at Harbor Point is chromium in the soil and 
groundwater. The Consent Decree also provided two performance standards. 
The surface water performance standard demands that chromium is reduced 
to standards surface water performance and groundwater gradient 
performance 50 parts per billion ("PPB") for each surface water sample 
location. Meaning the concentration of chromium needs to be dissolved to 
that level. The groundwater gradient performance standard expects the 
groundwater inside the containment structure is lower than the water level 
outside of it by 0.01 feet. This will be measured hourly and averaged over 30 
days (EPA, "Hazardous Waste Cleanup: Honeywell Baltimore Inner Harbor in 
Baltimore, Maryland," 2018).  
32 
 
 
 
  As Harbor Point underwent the remediation process, it remained 
abandoned until 2003 when the Harbor East Development Ground signed a 
lease with Honeywell and Harbor Point Development. In 2004, 1.8 million 
square feet of development was approved on the site. 
The Harbor Point RCRA Redevelopment project plan has two phases, 
and it is designed at the master plan scale. The plan was negotiated between 
Harbor East Development Ground, the EPA, and the Maryland Department of 
the Environment (MDE). Phase 1 included the reopening of the site, an office 
building (the Thames Street Warf Building), and the Exelon building. The 
Exelon building includes a 65,000square foot trading floor, 39,000 square feet 
of street-level retail,103 residential units, and a 750-car parking garage.  
Phase two includes an 18,000 square feet Apartment building and two office 
buildings totaling 326,940 square feet. The third phase includes a 222,000 
square foot hotel, another 438,199 square foot office building and a 346,000-
square foot apartment tower which all include street-level retail. 
The total buildout of the Harbor Point RCRA project will include office, 
residential, retail, and hotel building and 9.5 acres of parks and open space. 
The design includes a waterfront promenade (EPA, 2018).  Additionally, the 
site has 18 acres of waterfront property that is close to Baltimore's Inner 
Harbor (EPA, "Hazardous Waste Cleanup: Honeywell Baltimore Inner Harbor 
in Baltimore, Maryland," 2018).    
The Harbor Point redesign prioritizes the urban and social 
environments for humans. The redevelopment plans include hotels, offices, 
33 
 
 
 
retail space to residential units that capitalize on both social and economic 
boundaries. However, the plans and designs fall short on the ecological and 
cultural realm. The designers failed to connect the redevelopment to the 
history revolving around this site. Simple design decisions like traditional 
building materials and names to understand the context of the site and tying 
the design back to surrounding neighborhoods would reinforce any of the 
cultural components of the Landscape Urbanism discourse.   
In the ecological realm, the design falls short because the designers 
did not prioritize habitat creation. Missed opportunities in adding more green 
spaces such as parks, green roofs, and naturalizing at least one of the edges 
to help aid the ecological process. Even the park included could have been 
designed to be more functional for both social needs and environmental 
services. This would make the design functional and productive, thus fulfilling 
another Landscape Urbanism component. Lastly, the design does not 
embrace the process of time by adapting to future needs that would create 
more dynamic spaces that people will enjoy and want to live in and visit. 
Harbor Points' current design lacks uniqueness and placemaking even 
though there is a lot of history on the site and a mature urban fabric to tie 
back to like Fells Point, a neighboring community. The current design plans 
do not differ from other urban projects happening in the cities because the 
same building language is being applied, and little consideration is given to 
the ecological services needed.  Although the Landscape Urbanism discourse 
is not perfect, it does provide a feasible framework that cities like Baltimore 
34 
 
 
 
should apply because the basic principles will make spaces more dynamic 
and functional landscapes. 
3.1.4: Hazelwood Green, Pittsburgh, PA 
Hazelwood Green is a 178 acres plot located in Pittsburgh, PA along 
the Monongahela River. This site is one of the last urban brownfields in the 
city of Pittsburgh. It was a steel mill that will be transformed into a mix-use 
development with retail, offices, housing, research, public open spaces, and 
trails. 
The plant opened up for business in 1883 by Jones and Laughlin Steel 
Company that wanted to capitalize on the Monongahela River and created an 
industrial hub along the river. During its prime years in the 1960s, the plant 
had 12,000 workers and caused an increase of residents in nearby 
Hazelwood neighborhoods. By 1974, marked by the decline of steel, the 
plants only employed 3,600 workers. The site was purchased by Ling-
TemcoVought Incorporation (LTV). But the plant remained open for two more 
decades. By 1998, the Hazelwood community only had 6,000 residents and 
was in decline (Almono LLC). Between the years 2002 to 2015, the site went 
through the environmental remediation and the Site Prep Process to be in 
accordance with Act II, known as Pennsylvania?s Land Recycling and 
Environmental Remediation Standards Act compliance and clean-up 
requirements. Currently, the site owner is moving forward to finalize the 
master plan and zoning of the area.   
35 
 
 
 
Hazelwood Green owners have reported a few contaminants found on-
site and how they have addressed them. The Contaminants found were 
Petroleum/Petroleum Products and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). 
They have stated they are going through the environmental process to be in 
compliance with Act 2. The owners and designers have not been as 
transparent as other case studies. In particular, they are not providing 
information on the measures and controls they are taking as they move 
forward with development. The site will be capped; however, more 
remediation process may be needed in Area B where the Mill Building and 
Coke Ovens were, however, very little has been said about the process and 
how they will be addressed. 
Almono LLC (the developer of the site) conducted many studies that 
produced different neighborhood plans and visions while the site was being 
remediated. In 2013, the city finally approved the Preliminary Land 
Development Plan (PLDP). This plan states that the site will be a Specially 
Planned (SP) district with zoning type SP-10 Zoning Text.  
The vision for the Hazelwood Green incorporates the public realm throughout 
the site by reserving 20% of the total acres for public spaces. The site 
developers are prioritizing pedestrian access and safety to and within site by 
providing bicycle routes and pedestrian walkways and transit options. The 
transit options include bus, rail, aerial gondola, and rideshare. By prioritizing 
the public realm in the site design, it will be meeting conditions in the LEED 
for Neighborhood Development Plan, which simply plans spaces while 
36 
 
 
 
keeping the entire community in mind. Almono LLC aims to create a network 
of well-connected neighborhoods that are safe to all users while meeting 
sustainability standards. They also want to think about the communities and 
the kinds of amenities they need, such as walking trails, parks, playgrounds, 
and event spaces. Currently, the site is divided into three districts: The River 
District, Mill District, and Flats Districts; however, there is limited information 
on the details of each district 
3.1.5: Major Case Studies Takeaways 
The potential site should include wasted urban space (drosscapes), 
where ecological systems can be uncovered in the existing urban 
environment. The site should have opportunities for combining engineering 
infrastructure, landscape design, and urban strategies for functional human 
and ecological spaces that consider the landscape form. It should have 
opportunities to respond to flooding issues, treat stormwater, and provide 
recreational opportunities while enhancing biodiversity. Ideally, a site in a city 
would be better suited for the Landscape Urbanism dialogue because human 
ecology and ecosystem services should be interwoven with the existing city 
form. 
3.2: Site Selection 
During the site selection process, drosscapes helped determine 
potential sites using Google Earth and web searches of neglected areas in 
37 
 
 
 
Baltimore, Maryland. Once several of these were identified, they were 
evaluated by examining: 
? How does the site connect to existing urban infrastructure?  
? What potential and current environmental opportunities, such as 
the sea-level rise and flooding impacts the site may have? 
? What kind of social impacts and interaction does the site have 
compared to other potential sites?  
? Does the site of any existing community ties? 
?  Can existing or potential community services be 
improved such as waterfronts, parks, buildings, and 
gathering spaces.   
?  Does the site of any economic and equality value if it were 
developed especially for a community? 
? How much history is available on the site?  
? By conducting a quick search of any published books and 
online sites 
Ultimately, after reviewing three sites, Sparrows Point in Baltimore, 
Maryland, was chosen because it met all of the items listed above. Sparrows 
Point is a 3,100-acre abandoned site. It is only twelve miles from Baltimore 
City and on the Patapsco River near the Chesapeake Bay junction (Simmons, 
2016; Bethlehem Steel Company, 2000). 
38 
 
 
 
Sparrows Point is a mega drosscape; it officially closed its last Mill in 2012. 
The site has extreme sea-level rise and storm surge patterns. The predictions 
indicate that most of the sites will inundate, especially along the shorelines. 
The site?s close proximity to Baltimore city and access to the Patapsco River 
can lead to potential connections to the inner city via different modes of 
transit, like boating and water taxis seen in Figure 5: Sparrows Point, 
Figure 5: Sparrows Point, Baltimore, MD proximity to Baltimore City 30-minute drive (Hairston, 2012; 
Espinoza,2018) 
Baltimore, MD. Sparrows Point also has a rich history and an active 
community of former company town residents. All these factors make 
Sparrows Point the ideal site to test the boundaries of Landscape Urbanism 
and how the theory can drive a design project. 
3.3: Methodology Across Scales from Framework to Application 
In order to apply the Landscape Urbanism framework to the redesign 
of Sparrows Point, the design criteria were broken down into three application 
39 
 
 
 
scales: Master Plan, Town Scale, and Neighborhood Scale. The exploration 
through various scales ensured that the theoretical framework could be fully 
explored because different site constraints and opportunities are revealed 
within each scale. Also, the Landscape Urbanism framework states that 
designs should be designed across scales.   
3.3.1: Master Plan Scale  
In order to design the master plan of Sparrows Point, a design criteria 
was created to help apply the theoretical framework. Moreover, the criteria 
allowed the designer to create a list of features to fulfill the Landscape 
Urbanism framework. The following Master Plan Criteria were created: 
1.    Infrastructure 
?  Existing Ecology 
?  Potential Resilience efforts  
? Existing roadways, buildings and other urban 
infrastructure like utilities 
2.    Culture (History)  
3.    Social impact and interaction (Human Ecology) 
4.    Abandoned ? wasted space  
At the Master Plan Scale, the landscape urbanist must understand the 
infrastructure of a site such as the existing road networks, ecological 
corridors, and if the project site has any resiliency potential or future impacts 
such as flooding, and sea-level rise. Sparrows Point ranked high in this 
category because it has existing road networks and potential waterway 
40 
 
 
 
connections. Also, the site has existing ecological network works such as 
streams, channels, wetlands, and some forested areas. 
The landscape urbanist has to understand the site?s existing culture 
and history. They need to know what is happening on the site and what has 
happened in order to create meaningful designs for the people that will use 
the area. It is very important to understand Sparrows Point's rich history and 
the culture surrounding steel mills and company towns. And translate that 
information into the redesign of the area. For example, in the Hazelwood 
Green case study, the master plan included three districts that were named 
after the previous steel mill on the site. This same logic was used on the 
Sparrows Point redesign of road networks and towns.   
At the master plan, the criteria developed tells us to acknowledge any 
social impacts and interactions between human environments and the 
ecology. Therefore, avoiding heavy urban development needs near streams 
and the water edge is important. While providing opportunities for human use. 
Lastly, new development should happen on drosscapes versus developing 
green fields.  
3.3.2: Town Plan Scale  
At the town scale, the Master Plan Criteria used above was used to 
design the town scale. The Landscape Urbanism framework becomes difficult 
to apply using the master plan scale criteria.  
At the town scale, the landscape urbanist must understand the existing 
infrastructure and what the future infrastructure might look like.  They are 
41 
 
 
 
concerned with where to place roads, streams, wetlands, and buildings. At 
the town scale, it is needed to protect the water?s edge by place building and 
road networks away from the edge. Also avoiding any resiliency issues like 
flooding or sea-level rise. Include forested areas and plan to start thinking 
about stormwater and how it will be treated. This fulfills the infrastructure 
component of the criteria.    
As mentioned above, Sparrows Point history and culture is used in the 
redesign by naming each town and road after that history and start to think 
about the building typologies, and materials at this scale and the urban form. 
In order to fulfill the third item which is social impact and interaction, the 
framework tells us to plan parks, trails, and forested areas and how people 
will use these spaces within their communities. 
 For example, within the town?s community, parks are planned, but 
within riparian areas, implementing a more passive design approach like trails 
that would allow the conservation of the areas. Lastly, the landscape urbanist 
has to avoid creating drosscapes in the new development areas and try to 
create a functional landscape within these wasted areas. The framework 
plans for roadsides, gaps between developments, and underpasses. 
3.3.3: Neighborhood Scale 
In order to apply the Landscape Urbanism framework at the 
neighborhood scale, the master plan criteria had to be expanded on because 
the original criteria were too broad. The following criteria were established for 
the neighborhood scale of this thesis project:  
42 
 
 
 
1.    Restore and Reclaim Drosscapes into active landscapes 
2.    Create Landscape Infrastructure 
? By reviving any cultural elements (History) 
? Restore Ecological Services 
? Create designs that are Resilient and adapt over time 
? Combine systems that balance engineered spaces and 
allows for the organic process to occur 
? Reclaim any natural and hidden systems 
3.    Rebuild lost ecological and social communities 
?  By repairing and Improving natural systems, while 
drawing out meaningful and poetic landscape elements 
? Create Active and passive spaces and maintaining social 
interaction in these spaces 
At the neighborhood scale, the urban form and how it impacts spaces 
that are created become a designing factor. For example, it is not just about 
finding and recognizing drosscape, but reclaiming these spaces into 
functional areas. Therefore, any leftover spaces become community parks, 
nurseries, and stormwater treatment areas at this scale. The landscape 
urbanist starts thinking about the details within the neighborhoods and how 
drosscapes, infrastructure, and historical ties shape a neighborhood.  
To meet the infrastructure criteria within the neighborhood scale, 
systems are combined to allow engineered spaces and natural areas to 
coexist together without causing conflict. Natural areas should self-
43 
 
 
 
organization and never be hidden while urban areas will naturally have more 
utilities and infrastructure but should still include green infrastructure. 
Additionally, development areas will have some of the architectural elements 
found in Sparrows Point.  
Like the previous scales, urban spaces are organized and designed 
around ecological services and resilient factors. However, it becomes 
essential to rebuild and balance both ecological and social communities 
within natural areas by planning both active and passive spaces in 
appropriate areas.  
Chapter 4: Sparrow?s Point 
In the following section, we will discuss Sparrows Point's essential 
Landscape features used for this thesis project. The features are history, 
pollution legacy, and present use as well as essential Landscape features 
used for this thesis project. These factors have to be acknowledged and 
incorporated into a design to apply the Landscape Urbanism framework to the 
site.  
4.1: General Overview 
Sparrows Point is a massive site left underutilized and abandoned for eight 
years. On the one hand, the site?s pass steel mill activity has caused high 
contamination levels rendering the site a public hazard. On the other hand, 
the site has many potentials, such as its extensive shoreline, proximity to 
Baltimore city, and surrounding Dundalk community. Redeveloping parts of 
44 
 
 
 
this site could lead to both economic and social equity for those willing to 
invest in the property. Most importantly, remediating and reclaiming this lost 
landscape has many benefits. Like improving surrounding people?s quality of 
life and health. To the overall environment because less pollution would be 
runoff into the river.  
4.2: Historic Use 
Native American tribes lived on Sparrows Point marshlands for over 
8,000 years until 1652, when 400 acres were granted to Thomas Sparrow by 
Cecil Calvert. During this timeframe, Calvert was trying to attract settlers to 
this area known as "the great northern woods (Barry, 2017)." A proprietary 
land granted Thomas Sparrow Sr. 600 acres more acres of land (Barry, 
2017). Sparrow senior never lived on the property, but his son Solomon 
Sparrow built a home in 1664 on the property and called it "Sparrow's Nest." 
By the 1700s, more families moved into the area and built homes, hunting 
lodges, and farmed as well as raised crops.                                                                              
In the 1860s, Fitzell's family-owned 385 acres that they used to raise 
peaches and renamed the area "Sparrows Point." Eventually, in 1887 the 
Fitzell's family sold their land to the Pennsylvania Steel Company for its 
subsidiary, Maryland Steel Company. Pennsylvania Steel was interested in 
the site because of its ideal location, which allowed the importing of raw 
45 
 
 
 
Figure 6: Peach Farm on Sparrows Point, (Berry, 2017) 
materials such as iron ore from Cuba efficiently.    Maryland Steel Company 
opened in 1887; Sparrows Point soon housed not only a steel company with 
large mills but also a company town with over 3,000 people living within the 
city. The company town had its hospitals, schools, and banks. In 1888, the 
steel company was given total control over the city by the state of Maryland. 
The Maryland Steel Company could hire teachers for the local schools, 
manage the collection of garbage, and enforce laws. On July 27th, 1891, the 
plant separated into a subsidiary, and it became the Maryland Steel Company 
of Baltimore County with Frederick Wood as president and Rufus Wood as a 
general agent. Soon after, a shipbuilding division was added because Wood 
wanted to improve the plant's technical side. By 1889, the company needed 
46 
 
 
 
to expand and added more blast furnaces because it was producing pig iron. 
Additionally, Maryland Steel was known for creating high-quality rails on its 
rail mills.                                                                                                                      
By 1893, Maryland Steel 
had built more homes, 
hospitals, schools, and 
training grounds within 
Sparrows Point. The 
town offered different 
Figure 7: Row Homes on Sparrows Point (Berry, 2017) 
housing types from 
townhomes to detached homes. Historical records indicate that the Sparrows 
Point community was on the North Western side of the site along J, I, H, E, F, 
and C Streets.                                                                                                      
During WWI, there was a higher demand for workers in the steel mill 
because more ships needed to be constructed for the war, and they were 
made of steel. Resulting in an increasing demand for labor, which led to the 
migration of African Americans within the area (Barry, 2017). Maryland Steel 
Company provided these steelworkers a barracks quarter within Sparrows 
Point. The company town offered them temporary housing until they secured 
a family home within the company town. Additionally, the African American 
community formed a town in Dundalk just seven miles away from Sparrows 
Point around Turner Station. The town included schools, churches, grocery 
47 
 
 
 
stores, fraternal organizations, restaurants, barber and beauty shops, doctors, 
dentists, gas stations, liquor stores, and employment office and clothing 
stores. Later, Turner Station was bought by Maryland Steel CO. in the 1880s 
from J.M. Turner. Trains passed through Turner Station to get to Sparrows 
Point from Baltimore City (Dundalk Patapsco Neck Historical Society & 
Museum, 2017), which made it an ideal place to build a town for steelworkers.                                            
Schooling played an essential role in the company town, and it was 
incorporated into the organization of the town layout. Sparrows Point 
Company Town introduced the first kindergarten school south of the Mason 
Dixon Line in 1892 (Berry, 2017). The company town also had a training 
school quarter. By 1908, the town opened a High School and seven years 
later opened Bragg Elementary School for Africa-America children that lived 
in Sparrows Point and surrounding communities (Berry, 2017). The first 
streetcar arrived in 1903, and it granted Sparrows Point residents? access to 
Baltimore City. Residents of Sparrows Point took pride in their town and were 
very happy to live in it. In 1916, the steel plant was sold to Bethlehem Steel, 
and it was announced they would spend 50 million dollars on expanding the 
steel plant. In 1920, Bethlehem Steel company added 12 hot mills for the new 
sheet and tin plate plant. By 1925, they said 12 more hot mills, and two years 
later, they said 12 more mills, resulting in 48 active mills with a capacity of 
4,250,000 case boxes or 210,000 tons annually (Barry, 2017).                                                                                                                                
48 
 
 
 
In 1917, the president of Roland Park Company, a known 
neighborhood developer in Baltimore, MD, teamed with Bethlehem Steel to 
plan and build a community within Dundalk. The Dundalk Community was 
intended to house the projected increase of steelworkers coming home from 
Figure 8: Shipyard in Sparrows Point (Berry, 2017) 
the First World War.  Bethlehem Steel provided ships, tanks, and ammunition 
for both World War I and World War II, along with the introduction of a pipe 
mill in the 1950s, which was demolished in the late 1960s. To accommodate 
a "K" blast furnace, No. 4 Open Heath, No. 12 Coke Oven battery, 45" X 90" 
slab mill, 160-inch plate mill, and the 48- inch cold tandem mill, resulting in a 
peak of 33,000 workers in 1959 (Berry, 2017). Sadly, as Bethlehem Steel 
expanded, they tore down homes in blocks C through F street to add an Open 
Hearth for the production of steel furnaces, and by 1972 the entire town was 
demolished to make room for a massive "L" blast furnace. However, the Steel 
business was still booming, and people still had jobs even though most 
steelworks lost their homes.  
49 
 
 
 
4.3: A Legacy of Pollution  
As deindustrialization occurred throughout the United States and the 
steel business dwindled because of shared manufacturing and decreased 
earnings and employment rates, many steel companies fell into 
disappearance (Rowthorn and Ramaswamy, 1997; Berry, 2017). As well as 
new health policies and innovations in the steel making process, caused steal 
plants like Sparrows Point to end production. Bethlehem Steel Company was 
forced to fire several people and move its operations overseas, like many 
other companies (Berry, 2017). Bethlehem Steel Company sold the property 
to Baltimore Marine Industries Inc., a subsidiary of Veritas Capital. As an 
unsuccessful restricting attempt, Baltimore Marine operated the facility that 
had a shipyard that repaired and refurbished ships until 2003.                                                                                   
As the Steel business dwindled and ownership of the Steel Mill was 
passed from 
auctions to 
owners, the 
plant finally 
closed in 2012. 
When the Steel 
Mill finally 
Figure 9: Sparrows Point Steel Mill Community (Berry, 2017) closed, 
Sparrows Point became a drosscape with it taking people's jobs, homes, and 
50 
 
 
 
way of life. Sparrows Point has remained a drosscape since 2012 with very 
little human and ecological activity because of its toxicity levels.  
4.4: Present Use 
At present, human use of Sparrow Point is sparse. The steel mill 
plant's inventory of 
existing infrastructure 
reports still having two 
landfills, one mega 
shipyard, one coke 
plant (that included 
Figure 10: Sparrows Point becomes a Drosscape (Davis, 2015) coke ovens, and 
landfill), Tin Mills, Tin Mill Canal, Rod and Wire Mill Sludge, Finishing Mills. 
Currently, all the buildings of the steel plant's glory days have been 
demolished and removed from the site to eradicate off-site and point source 
pollution.  
Presently, Sparrows Point is owned by Tradepoint Atlantic, which is 
owned by Chicago-based Hilco Global and Hanover-based Redwood Capital 
Investments LLC. In 2014, these investors bought the steel mill property out 
of bankruptcy for $1 million because the plant had been closed for two years. 
Upon purchasing, Tradepoint Atlantic worked up a plan for the site, 
envisioning an international trade hub. Economic impact studies concluded 
that Sparrows Point's new use would lead to $2.9 Billion of economic activity 
51 
 
 
 
and growth for the region. The project will provide roughly 9,500 permanent 
jobs on Sparrows Point and about 17,000 indirect jobs (Simmons, 2016).                                 
While the company undergoes demolitions and the environmental 
remediation process, they have started leasing to new tenants. These tenants 
include FedEx Ground, Harley Davidson, Under Armour, and Pasha 
Automotive Services. In May of 2016, Tradepoint Atlantic announced they 
would develop a 130-acre retail hub called The Shoppers at Tradepoint 
Atlantic, which will be just off of Interstate 695. Additionally, they plan to 
connect 100 miles of private railroad tracks to CSX and Norfolk Southern 
railroads (Simmons, 2016). 
4.5: Defining Features in the Landscape 
To apply the Landscape Urbanism framework, we have to learn to 
define features in the landscape. That will help determine opportunities and 
constraints for any future redevelopment of the site. Some landscape features 
are contaminated areas, transportation accessibility, hydrologic fluctuations, 
and areas subjected to sea-level rise. Sparrows Point has many landscape 
features that were defined while conducting a suitability analysis. 
The site has strong existing infrastructural bones for future 
developments because the existing and proposed road systems can connect 
to existing road networks like I695, Route 157 and Route 151, and develop a 
water taxi or ferry route into the inner harbor in Baltimore City. Additionally, 
the site still has the existing town road systems that can be reused in the 
52 
 
 
 
development of a master plan. As the site is developed, sea-level rise impacts 
need to be addressed in the early stages of development to avoid any future 
risk to residents. Since sea-level rise projections profoundly impact most of 
the site by making informed decisions early in the design and planning 
process vital.    
Most importantly, the site needs to be remediated and reforested for 
any real future development. It is essential to phase the remediation and 
reclamation process to successfully clean the site but also to gain the public's 
trust in this wasted site (EPA, 2017, 2018; EA Engineering, Science, and 
Technology, Inc., PBC, 2016). Sparrows Point has the potential to reconnect 
Baltimore County residents with nature and the historical importance of this 
site by restoring the water's edge and reintroducing forested areas and 
teaching the people about the steel mill glory days. All in all, the site has 
excellent potential for both future ecological and human systems. 
Chapter 5:  Design 
 
In the next sections, the site analysis process and how that led to the 
design of Sparrows Point will be discussed. The theoretical framework was 
examined at three different scales in order to apply the theory to a project 
site. The three scales are master plan, town, and neighborhood scale. It was 
found that scale plays a necessary part when translating the theoretical 
framework.  
53 
 
 
 
5.1: Site Analysis 
To design the site through the Landscape Urbanism lens, the 
landscape needs to be understood. The first step was to conduct a site 
analysis of the site, followed by a land suitability analysis. The site analysis 
provided initial site information in the broader context, such as locating bodies 
of waters and forested areas. Some other questions asked during the initial 
site analysis were the following:  
? What kinds of human interactions and infrastructure are on the 
site? 
? How can a designer connect to them?  
? Does the site have any sea-level rise or storm surge impacts 
since it is a peninsula?  
? What kind of pollution hazards are at Sparrows Point?   
To fully understand the landscape, a land suitability analysis was 
conducted.  The land suitability analysis determines the fitness of a given 
area of land to define uses (Hopkins, 1977; Steiner, 1983; Steiner, Mcsherry, 
& Cohen, 2000). This tool is a more holistic approach to understanding the 
spatial factors within a given site. Therefore, fitting into the Landscape 
Urbanism discourse by allowing us to understand the landscape. 
By conducting a land suitability analysis, the goal is to understand the 
past, current, and future uses of the landscape. The land suitability analysis 
helped identify potential development and conservation areas on Sparrows 
Point, producing a more holistic design. The land suitability analysis leaded to 
54 
 
 
 
the zoning of the site.  Six zones were identified based on natural systems, 
contamination levels, and sea-level rise patterns. For example, Zone F is 
naturally a peninsula, and it becomes its own area.  
Next, the findings of the site analysis will be discussed, which 
concluded in four factors examined hydrology, contamination, vegetation, and 
existing transportation of the Sparrows Point.   
5.1.1: Hydrology 
Sparrows Point has four on-site water sources that look 
unhealthy.  Two ponds located on Bear Creek and Coke Point are heavily 
polluted and unhealthy, as shown in the image. The unhealthy conditions are 
reported in the Corrective Action Final Decision for Sparrows Point LLC-
Tradepoint Atlantic Parcel B-16 (Tin Mill Canal) in the Sparrows Point Report. 
The other two water sources are channelized streams that also need to be 
cleaned up due to their unhealthy appearance and past use. Phase I Offshore 
Investigation Report for the Sparrows Point Site and a public meeting held on 
June 20th, 2017 Sparrows Point Steel Mill Environmental Cleanup report 
offshore pollution caused by runoff and pollution seeping into the groundwater 
systems. These reports also state that the entire shoreline at Sparrows Point 
is at risk, and it is advised not to fish, swim around the area (EPA, 2018)  
Additionally, Sea Level Rise projections show us most of the site is at 
risk to flood.  Most of the inner parts of the site and all of the shorelines will 
inundate seen in Figure 11: Sea Level Rise Impacts. Therefore, about half of 
55 
 
 
 
the site will experience 
flooded areas as sea 
levels rise. Future 
developments 
designed around sea 
level rise areas must 
estimate for this 
change. Ideally 
development areas 
should avoid these 
flooding areas and 
adequately planning 
for flooding issues, 
especially since Trade 
Figure 11: Sea-Level Rise Impact (Espinoza, 2018) Atlantic has not 
released any masterplans. 
5.1.2: Contamination 
Sparrows Point faced many pollution hazards due to decades of steel 
making shown on photos, maps and images. An Environmental Site 
Assessment conducted by the EPA found around twenty-five contaminates on 
the site. "Contaminants include antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, 
copper, iron, lead, manganese, nickel, tin, zinc, ammonia, benzene, cyanide, 
ethylbenzene, naphthalene, PAHs, toluene, xylene, coal tar, oils, lime sludge, 
56 
 
 
 
sulfuric acid, waste alkaline rinses, mill scale, and shipyard wastes (EPA, 
2018)." 
The substantial activity at the sheet and tin plant in Sparrows Point 
contaminated Bear Creek because of all the discharged wastewater from the 
Tin Mill into the creek. The EPA's environmental assessments stated that 
most hazard contamination is in Bear Creek because pollutants are still 
washed down into the creek, and decades later, the aftermath is still present 
in Sparrows Point and the surrounding areas. 
In 1997, the EPA, Maryland Department of the Environment and 
Bethlehem Steel, signed a Multimedia Consent Decree outlining 
contaminated areas and action plans. Since then, annual consent decrees 
have been approved to highlight contaminated areas and the process made 
on the site. However, little work has been done to clean up the area since 
1997, and the surrounding community members and business owners are 
extremely concerned (Chesapeake Bay Foundation; Berry, 2017). Sparrows 
Points owners have faced numerous complaints because they failed to follow 
environmental laws. Additionally, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation has 
highlighted five priority areas of interest that are causing pollution problems 
near the shorelines of Sparrows Point seen in Figure 12: High Priority Areas. 
57 
 
 
 
They include Coke Point 
Landfill, Coke Oven, the 
Shipyards, Tin Canal, 
and Greys Landfill. The 
space between Tin Canal 
and Bear Creek is 
considered a dead zone 
(Chesapeake Bay 
Foundation). "Dead 
Zones" in the 
Chesapeake Bay are 
areas with a low amount 
of oxygen caused by 
excessive nitrogen and 
Figure 12: High Priority Areas (Espinoza, 2018) phosphorus pollution. 
Since there is no oxygen in the water, fish, crabs, oysters, and other aquatic 
animals suffocate. Also, these high nutrient levels create dense algae blooms 
that block sunlight and prevent underwater grasses depleting food supply and 
shelter for waterfowl, blue crabs, and juvenile fish (Chesapeake Bay 
Foundation).  
5.1.3: Vegetation 
Sparrows Point has sparsely vegetated areas that are patchy and 
unhealthy and do not provide suitable habitat. The existing vegetation is also 
58 
 
 
 
most likely degraded since it is growing on contaminated soils. Due to 
Pollution, more than 50% of the site is in disrepair. Sparrows Point has a few 
functioning water systems on-site that need to be improved, such as the Tin 
Canal, the Bear Creek pond system, and the lower southern canal system 
that connects to the most prominent forested patch. The most significant 
system on site is the shoreline - once it is clean up and revitalized, it can be a 
beautiful living shoreline with able ecosystem services. 
5.1.4: Existing Transportation Infrastructure 
Sparrows Point has access to I695, Route 157, and Route 151. It also 
has some leftover roads from the steel mills' glory days. Riverside Dr is a road 
that follows the Patapsco 
River shoreline. It granted 
access to the shipyard, 
landfill, Cold Mills, Tin 
Mills, and Blast furnaces. 
Although most of the 
transportation roads on 
the site are dirt roads, see 
Figure 13: Existing 
Figure 13: Existing Transportation Networks (Espinoza, 2018) 
Transportation Networks.  
5.2: Master Plan 
 
59 
 
 
 
The Landscape Urbanism discourse at the master planning scale helps 
protect and identify ecological corridors, networks, and any environmental 
impacts on a site. Moreover, the urbanist needs to understand the conditions 
of a site, cultural, and social impacts. Thus, spaces can be designed to be 
resilient and increase ecological potential on-site. In doing so, the landscape 
itself becomes the medium in which we design and articulate the relationships 
between urban infrastructure, public events, and uncertain urban futures 
(Waldheim 2006). The landscape becomes a model for the urban 
development process. 
5.2.1: From Design Criteria to Application 
The final master plan of Sparrows Point needs to fulfill each item of the 
master plan criteria created in the methodology section. These criteria 
elements were used to design the master plan by applying each item. The 
following four criteria items will be explained in the next section  
? Infrastructure,  
? Culture (History) 
? Social impact and Interaction 
? Avoid creating drosscapes in the new landscape  
Understand a project site?s Infrastructure: 
The land suitability analysis conducted during the site analysis process 
helped design the master plan and provided a further study of the site's 
infrastructure. The land suitability analysis divided the site into buildable and 
60 
 
 
 
conservation areas based on past usage, existing infrastructure, and future 
conditions. 
For example, exiting stream areas and shorelines should never be 
developed because these areas are protected. Sea-level rise patterns show 
these areas are valuable. Additionally, developing the shoreline will cause 
more problems to the site and the environment over time. Therefore, we have 
to avoid massive urban development near streams and the water edge.  
Additionally, the land suitability analysis identified three development 
areas by avoiding the site's sensitive areas. Sparrows Point has other 
infrastructural elements that are important to the final design, such as existing 
road networks on and off the site. New roads were designed to connect back 
to I695 and Route151. These existing road networks influenced the location 
of the new development areas because it was necessary to connect back to 
them.  
 Research and incorporate the site?s culture and history:  
The site?s cultural and historical context were examined by studying 
photographs, images, and aerials, and the layout of the steel mill found. This 
analysis also found the approximate location of the company town. This rich 
history of Sparrows Point will be included in the final master plan design by 
naming roads and buildings after a moment in history.  
? Sparrows Nest chosen in remembrance of site pre-development state. 
? Sparrows Village remembers the company town.   
61 
 
 
 
? Bethlehem Village, the company, took over Steel Mill before it became 
a drosscape. 
Understand the social impact and interaction humans have on an 
environment (Human Ecology): 
At the master plan scale, the developed criteria acknowledge any 
social impacts and interactions between human environments and the 
ecology.  This was accomplished by preserving natural areas while providing 
opportunities for human activity uses such as trails and passive fields. 
Therefore, the shorelines will not have any developments, but humans can 
still use these areas by providing boat docks or areas for kayaking and scenic 
trails.  
Avoid Drosscapes:  
At the master plan scale, Drosscapes are avoided at all costs. To avoid 
drosscapes all spaces will serve a function, whether it is ecological or urban, 
and by planning development areas to avoid sea-level rise spaces. The urban 
areas will not have undesirable living areas by residents caused by a 
changing landscape and future flooding issues. 
5.2.2: Master Plan Design 
The resulting Master Plan protects and identifies ecological corridors, 
networks while carving out human development areas seen in Figure 14: 
Master Plan of Sparrows Point. By understanding the constraints and any 
opportunities of the test site, the landscape itself becomes the medium of 
design and articulates the relationships between urban and ecological 
62 
 
 
 
infrastructure. By using the landscape as a medium, the landscape becomes 
a model for the urban development process.  
Figure 14: Master Plan of Sparrows Point (Espinoza, 2018) 
63 
 
 
 
The master plan has two ecological zones that will consist of streams, 
wetlands, and forested 
areas. Sea-level rise 
projections and existing 
streams defined these 
areas. Including two 
conservation areas 
provided the site an extra 
measure of defense from 
future climatic events. 
Since the site shows 
central flooding patterns 
on the shoreline and 
upland areas, as seen in 
Figure 15: Sea Level Rise Impacts (Espinoza, 2018) 
Figure 15: Sea Level Rise 
Impacts overlaid on design.  
The difference between zone one and two is the type of forest. Zone one or 
the Conservation Edge will consist of a wetland Forest, meaning it will either 
be permanently or seasonally wet shown in Figure 16: Ecological Patterns. 
Therefore, including an arrangement of both hard and softwood plants. 
Hardwoods are Maples, Ash, and Elms, while softwoods are hemlocks, 
cedars, and spruce. While Zone 2 Upland Forest will have better draining 
soils and, in these areas, should not become saturated with water for 
64 
 
 
 
extended periods of water. These areas will have a combined coverage of 
mature species such 
as oaks and maples 
with some pines. Also, 
the site has two 
existing streams that 
are channelized; both 
streams will be 
naturalized and the 
western edge along 
Bear Creek. All 
streams and 
shorelines will have 
150 buffers to protect 
these sensitive areas Figure 16: Ecological Patterns (Espinoza, 2018) 
further.    
Additionally, the future sea level rise projections help shape and form the 
three development areas on the site. Everything will interact with two major 
road systems that will connect to existing road systems. Thus, everything will 
work together and like a machine because the road systems, developments, 
and ecological areas complement each other seen in Figure 17: Development 
Areas. The development areas will also balance the historical context of the 
site past while giving future communities a cultural identity. As mentioned 
65 
 
 
 
above, the site's past is honored by naming the development areas after a 
specific era in time. 
? Sparrows Nest named after the first settlement to exist  
? Sparrows Village in memory of existing company town  
? Bethlehem village, the company that took over the steel company and 
expanded the steel mill 
The design creates a new network of roads that also ties back to the history 
and existing road infrastructure. 
Sparrows Point Boulevard will be 
a complete street with 
stormwater mitigation and 
bioswales; it will also connect all 
three developments. However, 
Steel Mill Parkway will 
interconnect all the urban and 
natural systems. It will take 
people to various parks and 
scenic drives to allow them to 
Figure 17: Human Development (Espinoza, 2018) connect to nature while 
connecting back to the urban development areas. The parkway will also treat 
stormwater by moving the water via bioswales. 
66 
 
 
 
5.3: Town of Sparrow?s Nest 
The Town of Sparrow?s Nest is a peninsula located along Sparrows 
Point Channel, Patapsco River, and Old Road Bay. This area was selected to 
test the theory at the town scale because it had some sea level rise 
constraints, and a potential development area was identified in the master 
plan. Also, this area had some existing streams and wetlands that would 
make the application of the Landscape Urbanism discourse interesting to test. 
5.3.1: From Design Criteria to Application 
The Town scale used the same criteria as the master plan. Therefore, 
Landscape Urbanist still needs to understand the project site's infrastructure, 
history, and social impacts humans may have and need. Also, drosscapes 
should continue to be avoided. As the site is designed all these factors should 
be considered and how they will impact the final design decision.   
At the town Scale, the landscape Urbanism framework begins to 
become difficult to apply to a site design because the discourse does not 
provide any guidelines or policies on how to design a town or neighborhood. 
The only guidelines given are that the landscape form is the organizing factor 
and that all systems have to be balanced and interconnected. Therefore, 
streams, rivers, and the waterfront edge need to be protected and 
naturalized. The framework tells the landscape urbanist needs to find a 
balance between the natural and the human environment. Since, the 
Landscape Urbanism discourse has many shortcomings at this scale; other 
urban theory was studied. Therefore, both ecological urbanism and 
67 
 
 
 
sustainable urbanism are examined to provide supporting information to the 
theoretical framework of Landscape Urbanism.  
Ecological urbanism creates a new vocabulary and understanding of 
both the landscape and the systems that organize it. Therefore, Community 
open spaces, ecological landscapes, productive landscapes, and blue-green 
infrastructure are introduced to the design of the Sparrows Nest. At this scale, 
it important to understand the relationship between ecological systems and 
services to urban infrastructure and human ecology. As well as understanding 
the different landscape typologies and the kinds of usage that will come from 
each one. The Sustainable Urbanism framework provides a unit model how to 
design urban development?s compactly while including green spaces and 
pedestrian, destinations.  
5.3.2: Sparrow?s Nest Design  
The resulting plan for the Town of Sparrow?s Nest protects the 
shoreline from development and naturalizes the Powerhouse River and 
connects two wetlands. The plan also includes a new network of wetlands 
and streams to capture and treat stormwater from development areas. This 
new system creates a treatment train to prevent polluted water from reaching 
significant bodies of water like the Patapsco River.  
The site design will have both ecological and production landscapes. 
Ecological landscapes are those that serve an ecological service and are 
natural landscapes, while production landscapes are those that serve 
humans, such as plant nurseries, education/test fields, and solar farms. The 
68 
 
 
 
production landscape will not grow food because of the contamination levels 
found on the site. Over time this might change as the site becomes cleaned 
and new remediation technologies are developed.  
Some of the water systems will serve the production areas where 
urban agriculture might happen. The urban agriculture areas will not produce 
food because of the contamination levels on Sparrows Point. Also, a new 
network of interconnected roads will lead people through the three 
development areas and to the natural areas seen in Figure 18: Landscape 
Typology of Sparrow?s Nest.
 
Figure 18: Landscape Typology of Sparrow's Nest (Espinoza, 2018) 
Sustainable urbanism principles played a role at the town scale 
because, at this scale, the urban forms are designed like how many 
neighborhoods the town has and the size of the town center. Sustainable 
69 
 
 
 
urbanism principles influenced the land-use and zoning of the town. For 
Figure 19: Land-Use map of the Town (Espinoza, 2018) 
example, each neighborhood will have neighborhood retail and mix housing 
stock seen in Figure 19: Land-Use Map of the Town. Additionally, the plan will 
include a commercial district with mixed-use development. The Commercial 
District connects to the water?s edge with access to the water. The district can 
have a small harbor with a water taxi that can take people to Baltimore City. 
Lastly, the design plans for different modes of transportation, such as a BRT 
Line, automobile connections, and trails.  The different transit modes will 
interconnect the town center, neighborhoods, and ecological landscapes. 
70 
 
 
 
5.4: Sparrow?s Nest Neighborhood Plan 
The design at the neighborhood scale is located within the Sparrows 
Nest development area. It explores the translation of Landscape, Ecological, 
and Sustainable Urbanism principles in practice. The neighborhood design 
was positioned at this location because it has all the constraints needed to 
test the theories.  
5.4.1: From Design Criteria to Application 
A different criteria was developed for the Neighborhood design of 
Sparrows Nest. The Neighborhood Scale Design Criteria is more detailed 
than the criteria used to design the Master Plan and the Town of Sparrow?s 
Nest. As before, the final design needed to fulfill each item in the criteria. The 
Neighborhood Design Criteria has three items these are (Restore and 
Reclaim Drosscapes into dynamic landscapes, create landscapes 
infrastructure, restore ecological services, and rebuild lost ecological and 
social communities) explained below and how to apply it to the site design at 
this scale. 
Restore and Reclaim Drosscapes into dynamic landscapes: 
At the neighborhood scale, drosscapes are minimized by reclaiming 
these spaces into functional areas that serve both humans and the ecology. 
The final design plans for leftover spaces and makes them part of the design. 
Therefore, spaces between neighborhoods and any voided space will be 
designed into community parks, active fields, nurseries, and stormwater 
71 
 
 
 
Figure 20: Landscape Classification (Espinoza, 2018) 
treatment areas seen in Figure 20: Landscape Classification. Also, these 
spaces can become densely, forested areas that will create more habitats.  
Create Landscape Infrastructure: 
To create balanced landscape infrastructure, five items need to be 
considered per the design criteria. At the Neighborhood Scale, Sparrows 
Point history will be revived and included by using materials and architectural 
styles that mimic the company town. A quick graphic study of how blocks and 
different architectural styles which resulted in picking the different kinds of 
architectural elements needed. It was discovered that keeping buildings at 
three stories and using materials like brick, wood, and steel would provide 
that old town feel. Also, to restore lost ecological services by adding different 
kinds of ecosystems, such as forested, grasslands, and freshwater systems.  
72 
 
 
 
Sparrow?s Nest Neighborhoods are placed to avoid sea-level rise 
projections and other climatic issues by buffering the neighborhoods with 
forested areas and streams. The development areas avoid the shoreline. 
Additionally, the final design features hybrid fields that can adapt over time as 
the site is cleaned from toxins. These flexible spaces can change; for 
example, active fields can become community gardens and 
playgrounds.  Designing fixable spaces allows the design to adapt to 
changing demographics and trends. Lastly, natural areas will self-organization 
and never be hidden. Urban areas will have more utilities and infrastructure 
but should still include green infrastructure and should be mindful of existing 
natural areas. Engineered spaces and natural areas on the site should 
coexist together without causing conflict.   
Rebuild lost ecological and social communities: 
In order to rebuild ecological and social communities, systems need 
repairing and improvements like naturalizing the shoreline and adding 
forested areas. These areas should include active and passive spaces that 
will maintain social interaction in these areas. The site plan included more 
forested areas with some meadows.  
In urban areas, including more green spaces that can serve as 
forested areas and community amenities is essential. Additionally, these 
areas will have interconnected trails that will weave into natural and urban 
areas that can be used for leisure or walking to work. So, the new design will 
provide various forms of transportation trails like biking, walking, and electric 
73 
 
 
 
scooters. This is how ecological and social communities are balanced within 
the neighborhood design of Sparrows Point.  
5.4.2: Sparrow?s Nest Neighborhood Design 
The resulting plan for the Neighborhoods of Sparrow?s Nest is a 
compact development that conserves the shoreline. It enhances the existing 
channelized stream by naturalizing it and adding a 150 feet riparian buffer. 
Additionally, it includes a new stormwater treatment train in the design. A 
series of wetlands and streams will flow into the Patapsco River and Old 
Road Bay that will have trials and passive recreational opportunities for 
residents. By allowing the existing landscape forms and infrastructure to 
inform the design response, the design aims to balance the needs of people 
and ecology. Moreover, by designing urban areas compactly, more ecological 
areas can be added, which will minimize the impact on the environment; see 
Figure 21: Neighborhood Scale Design. Sparrows Nest neighborhood will 
wave together the urban form and the landscape while providing ecological 
opportunities and enhancements.  Additionally, each community will have 
parklands and a system of trails that will connect all of the community 
members with ecological areas, which will bridge the gap between people and 
the ecological area. On the one hand, by allowing these landscapes to 
become functional ecological corridors that provide habitat opportunities and 
that are self-organizing landscapes. On the other, these landscapes can 
serve the community by providing passive and active areas where people 
cannot only connect with nature but play sports. 
74 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 21: Neighborhood Scale Design (Espinoza, 2018) 
 
 
75 
 
 
 
Additionally, the sustainable urbanism framework aided with the 
neighborhoods. The design features a compact development approach and 
will have different housing stock available like single-family, townhouses, and 
duplexes. The neighborhoods will have a town core that will have retail shops 
with walkup apartments. Designing a retail core with medical offices, 
restaurants and clothing boutiques allows residents to walk or bike to nearby 
shop. 
A gradient of the system was developed to aid in the design of the 
neighborhoods seen in Figure 23: Systems, which divides systems into three 
categories that are Urban, Landscapes, and Hydro. These systems were 
analyzed from the macro-level down to a minor system. Also, this table was 
used to understand how systems interact with each and change across 
Figure 23: Systems (Espinoza, 2018) 
76 
 
 
 
scales. The creation of the different systems was inspired by the hydrological 
systems and how water naturally moves through the landscape from one 
body of water to the next. For example, how canals help water move to minor 
bodies of water that move it to major bodies of water such as oceans. The 
table was useful when thinking about urban conditions and how settlement 
typologies impact different transportation modes, which leads to the kinds of 
utilities needed for further developments based on the size of the 
development.  
At the neighborhood scale, understanding and exploring the different 
systems at play within the urban and ecological environment is important. 
Here, ecological urbanism plays an essential role because it makes us 
understand all the services, systems, and needs that both humans and the 
ecological environments require. Figure 24: Interconnected Site Systems 
display the different systems within the neighborhood plan, which are broken 
down by ecological systems and human systems. Each layer represents a 
77 
 
 
 
Figure 24: Interconnected Site Systems (Espinoza, 2018) 
different system and how they are all interconnected to create a balanced 
landscape, where people?s needs, and services are balanced with the 
ecological systems.  
            Additionally, the urbanist must note that everything is interconnected 
to each other by using this logic, a gradient of systems is introduced, which 
can be applied to the design of the neighborhood in Sparrows Nest. Figure 
25: System Gradient, shows a section of the site plan from south to north 
layered with the landscape gradient and stormwater movement. Additionally, 
this figure depicts how there will be more trees in natural areas, and water will 
move freely, unlike the urban areas where stormwater is controlled. In urban 
78 
 
 
 
environments, the landscapes will be very structured, and all stormwater will 
be collected underground.  
Figure 25: System Gradient (Espinoza,2018) 
5.4.3: Population Density 
The Design of Sparrows Nest Neighborhood features a Traditional 
Neighborhood Design (TND) over the conventional suburbs model that was 
derived from the Sustainable Urbanism Neighborhood Unit Model. TND 
communities provide opportunities for residents to walk to shopping stores 
and entertainment areas by implementing a retail center. TND?s retail centers 
are risky to developers because retailers must respond to the changes in 
consumer demands and trends. Nonetheless, TND community retail directly 
impacts the surrounding residential population, therefore, having useful retails 
such as coffee shops, cafes, and food markets can help improve and 
contribute to the quality of life within a neighborhood (Farr, 2007).  
79 
 
 
 
Neighborhood retail can be broken down into three types: Corner 
Stores, Convenience Centers, and Neighborhood Centers. Corner Stores are 
considered the most useful retail type and can range between 1,500 to 3,000 
square feet (Farr, 2007). Densely populated TND communities can support a 
corner store within a neighborhood especially if it is adjacent to community 
buildings and schools. Usually, to support a corner store a community needs 
one thousand households and it needs to be within a five-minute walk from 
residents. However, corner stores that include a gasoline station can support 
themselves (Farr, 2007). 
  Convenience Centers are typically 10,000 and 30,000 square feet, and 
they offer a variety of goods to a community such as specialty food markets 
or pharmacies. Typically, convenience centers have five to eight different 
small businesses which are located within walkable distances to the 
community members. These centers need about two thousand households or 
two TND neighborhoods to support the retail as well as placing them along 
major roads (Farr, 2007).  
Neighborhood Centers generally are arched with supermarkets, 
pharmacies, restaurants and video stores. These centers offer a full range of 
services and range between 60,000 to 80,000 square feet and usually require 
6 to 10 acres of property (Farr, 2007). As well as 6,000 to 8,000 households 
to support the retail (Farr, 2007).  In the next section, the neighborhood 
design of Sparrows Nest will be discussed further and the relationship 
between dwelling density to retail space. Figure 25: Sparrows Nest Urban 
80 
 
 
 
Areas shows the number of acres in the whole town as well as the 
neighborhood acres which is 234.33 this includes all-natural areas, parks, and  
 riparian areas. Therefore, 
Sparrows Nest Town 
 the total urban areas will be 119.65 
 acres which are slightly lower than 
Total Town ~529.57 Ac 
 the preferable area of a 
 neighborhood within the 
Total Neighborhood ~234.33 Ac 
 sustainable urbanism framework 
 which is 160 acres. However, to 
Total Urban Areas  ~119.65 Ac 
 prioritize the conservation areas the 
Figure 26:Sparrows Nest Urban Areas (Espinoza, 
2018) urban parts had to be reduced. As 
well this helps to conserve the town like feeling within the neighborhood.  
Sparrows Nest Neighborhood will have a total of 768 units which will include 
254 single family dwellings, 144 townhouses and 350 apartment dwellings 
with a town center. The Town Center will have 870 square feet of retail space 
and 280 square feet of neighborhood retail nested within neighborhood two. 
This equals a total 1,150 square feet of retail within the neighborhood. 
Although, the Sustainable Urbanism framework calls for more 
dwellings for retail to be supported. It is important to note that studies show 
Americans consume more and need more retail space. Gruen Gruen 
Associates (2005) Land Use/Public Policy Analysts show that in 2009, the 
estimated retail demand and supportable retail space for a resident in 
America was 2,655,00 square feet. This is based on total household income 
81 
 
 
 
of Americans and their potential purchasing power. Gruen Gruen Associates 
(2005), the study also concludes that neighborhood Shopping Centers are 
58,840 square feet, and community shopping centers are 215,753 square feet 
with an average sales per square foot being $314 and $286. Therefore, the 
designed retail space within Sparrows Nest Neighborhood can be supported 
based on the consumer trends of Americans. Additionally, the town center 
and neighborhood retail are programmed to be fixable spaces that change 
over time and adapt to the needs of the community. 
5.4.4: Transit Supportive Densities 
The Design of Sparrows Nest Neighborhood features a BRT line that 
connects all three neighborhoods and the commercial district. The line will 
also run through the 
ecological areas as seen in 
Figure 26: Sparrows 
Neighborhood Modes of 
Transit. The BRT line will 
help connect and give 
community members access 
to the ecological areas as 
well.  Within the Sustainable 
Urbanism agenda, the 
Figure 27; Sparrow's Neighborhood Modes of Transit 
(Espinoza, 2018) 
relationship between 
population density and transit is essential. In particular, its ability to support 
82 
 
 
 
the transit line is important. A rapid system is supported by 12 dwelling units 
per acre which the final design of Sparrow?s Nest neighborhood design does 
meet this requirement (Farr, 2012). Additionally, the rapid system will be 
supported because the line will connect to a commercial district or downtown. 
This line can also unit all of the development areas within all of Sparrows 
Point.  
5.4.5: Designing Through the Landscape 
Urban Landscapes Figure 27: 
            The design exploration starts in the urban environment. Here both the 
landscape and water movement are structured.  In this plaza design, the 
landscape is layered and buffers the street and buildings while cleaning the 
stormwater before it reaches areas where residents can play with the water 
and by strategically placing trees to provide shade and a relaxing effect. The 
hydro systems will move not only above-ground but through pipes and 
cisterns underground. This will create an interconnected cycle between the 
plants and how the water moves. The stormwater will also move through the 
landscape from planter to two planter bogs and move to the middle where the 
water will be rippled to allow it to oxidize naturally. Here children can play with 
the water, or a person can sit on one of the raised planter beds and reflect on 
life. As well as walk by and feel calmed because of the layered plants and 
activities happening in the plaza. Additionally, by applying Landscape 
urbanism principles, dynamic landscapes are created that are functional, thus 
83 
 
 
 
breaking from the transitional urban landscape typology that is static and 
stroke.   
 Hybrid Field Landscapes Figure 28: 
            The hybrid fields landscapes intermix agriculture with active fields like 
a football field and unprogrammed spaces for community gatherings. Since 
Sparrows Point is very contaminated, planting food is not healthy nor 
recommended. Therefore, the agriculture fields are nurseries that will provide 
plants and street trees for the town of Sparrows Nest. By designing these 
transitional landscapes as flexible fields, will allow for them to change with the 
community?s needs. Ideally, the hybrid fields are designed to provide 
recreational opportunities to the residents because they can walk down from 
their homes or the town center along the trails and use this landscape. 
Additionally, the stream is part of a treatment train that will help clean 
stormwater throughout the entire neighborhood. Here the stream serves 
double duty. It not only moves water, but the residents can walk up or along 
the water?s edge, creating a biophilic connection to nature. The settlement 
areas will reflect and use the historical pass by using the building typology 
found in Sparrows Point town. 
 Hybrid Natural Landscapes Figure 29:  
            Hybrid Natural Landscapes will allow residents to enjoy a semi-natural 
environment. In this landscape, the natural systems began to take over and 
residents can still use the area. Here the landscape is designed to organize 
more organically and tapers down to allow the phytoremediation process to 
84 
 
 
 
occur that will allow clean water to flow down to the stream. The edges of the 
stream will be stabilized by adding plantings along the edge. 
            Additionally, to balance both people and ecological usage, the stream 
is designed to allow people to walk up and enjoy the water?s edge. Also, 
people can use the base of the terrace for recreational activities such as 
panic areas and play sports. They can also walk up along the first terraces for 
a more passive experience. Since the neighborhood design features a 
network of trails, residents can walk down from their homes and take 
advantage of this landscape?s passive, active areas as well as scenic 
opportunities. The Hybrid Natural Landscape is a perfect example of how to 
balance all systems into both functional and productive landscapes for all 
users.   
Production Landscapes Figure 30: 
            The shoreline along Patapsco River is designed as a production 
landscape. On the one hand, the landscape will create habitats, stabilize the 
edge, and harvest energy through windmills. On the other, it will treat 
stormwater and provide research and educational opportunities. The edge will 
be stabilized by introducing and allowing dunes to form. Placing the dunes at 
an appropriate distance from the shoreline will account for wave fetch or the 
wave energy produced by the Patapsco River. Understanding wave fetch is 
important because if dunes are designed to close to where waves are 
breaking, plants will not thrive or survive. However, the edge is not designed 
to be an armored edge but a living shore that will have dunes. People can 
85 
 
 
 
walk through the dunes and learn about them or walk up to the research 
facility where they can learn about wind harvesting, stormwater management, 
habitat stabilization. Lastly, they can learn about sea-level rise and how the 
Sparrows Nest Town is designed to be protected.  
The production landscape type balances how people can use the 
space while allowing and giving nature what it needs to be a functional 
landscape that can create habitat opportunities and protect the edge. 
Moreover, people will get the opportunity to learn about feature impacts on 
Sparrows Point while providing a scenic trail that they can use not only to 
connect to nature but to learn about the landscape infrastructure and how it is 
being designed to help future impacts. 
Natural Landscapes Figure 31:  
            The last landscape typology explored are Natural Landscapes. In this 
landscape typology nature is allowed to self-organize, and ecology is the 
priority. Wetlands are allowed to form, and there are different kinds of habitat, 
such as forest and meadows. Ideally, this area will be protected and allowed 
to mature over time so that the Landscape can naturally function.   
Additionally, humans are allowed to use these spaces; however, there 
will only be passive recreational areas. Meaning that there will be no 
programmed spaces for human activities; even the trail will fade away in 
these areas and be less structured because ecology is the primary concern of 
the Landscape Urbanist. Natural Landscapes are important because they 
provide the maximum amount of ecological services within an area. Where 
86 
 
 
 
the other landscapes balance both human and ecological services in this 
landscape design ecology is emphasized and highlighted.  
  
Figure 29: Urban Landscapes (Espinoza, 2018) 
Figure 28: Hybrid Fields Landscape (Espinoza, 2018) 
87 
 
 
 
 
  
Figure 30: Hybrid Natural Landscapes (Espinoza, 2018) 
Figure 31: Production Landscape (Espinoza, 2018) 
88 
 
 
 
Figure 32: Natural Landscape (Espinoza, 2018) 
 
 
Chapter 6:  Reflection 
 
The practice of Landscape Urbanism has many challenges, 
shortcomings, and benefits resulting in some rewarding outcomes to both 
urban design and landscape architecture practice for this thesis project. While 
Landscape Urbanism presents many promises on how the urban environment 
should be treated, planned, and designed, the theory does not introduce any 
straightforward guidelines or practice policies that apply the theory to site 
design. Therefore, the first step of this thesis was to become familiar with 
what Landscape Urbanism is and to understand the boundaries. From the 
89 
 
 
 
literature review process, a design criterion was created that would aid in both 
the site selection and design process.  
     Initially, it was challenging to design and dissect the Landscape Urbanism 
theory into a workable framework. The framework was abstract, making it 
difficult to apply in any design process. This resulted in breaking the theory 
down into three themes: Landscapes of Infrastructure, Terra Fluxus, and 
Drosscape. In the end, Terra Fluxus and Landscapes of Infrastructure 
principles played a significant role in the design outcome.  
At the Master Plan Scale, the Landscape Urbanism discourse and 
three themes were easily applied to the design process because the ideas 
found in theory were more overarching or big picture concepts. For example, 
at the master plan scale, the Landscape Urbanism discourse exposes 
sensitive ecological areas and corridors and tells us to protect and conserve 
these areas by zoning them into conservation areas. Allowing these areas to 
function and carry out their natural process, is one of the Terra Fluxus 
principles.   
Nevertheless, including other urban and landscape theory at the site-
scale was needed because Landscape Urbanism theory was not sufficient. 
The other urbanism theories explored for the site-scale were Ecological 
Urbanism and Sustainable Urbanism. For instance, when designing towns 
and communities, it was challenging to rely solely on Landscape Urbanism 
theory principles because the theory falls short on urban form and design 
strategies as well as recommendations. 
90 
 
 
 
When designing through the lens of Landscape Urbanism, it was challenging 
to create a design at multiple scales. And the theoretical framework left us 
with many questions that need answers. These questions were: 
?  How could Landscape Urbanism principles be applied at the 
regional scale compared to the neighborhood scale? 
?  How could the theory be applied to a specific site-scale design if 
there are gaps in the theory? 
?  Moreover, how do we apply the theory in practice? If there are no 
practice guidelines.  
The solution was to apply the overarching theoretical principles of Landscape 
Urbanism to the master planning scale and supplement the gaps in the 
Landscape Urbanism discourse with sustainable and ecological urbanism 
theory for the site-scale.    
6.1: Master Plan 
When developing the master plan design of Sparrows Point, the 
Landscape Urbanism theory themes were further examined and broken down 
to create two criteria that would aid in the design. The theory tells us that 
understanding the site constraints as well as cultural elements, is extremely 
important. 
  Six different areas were identified on the site and zoned; according to 
the areas past, present, and future use. After conducting the suitability 
analysis, the site zones were classified as either an ecological zone 
(conservation area) or a mixed area having both ecological areas and human 
91 
 
 
 
development. Future sea-level rise projections played a crucial role in 
establishing the zoning of an area because, under the Landscape Urbanism 
discourse, these areas are sensitive areas that become conservation areas 
with limited human development. Past use is another factor that played a 
fundamental role in the zoning of the site. For example, developing the two 
landfills on the site would not be recommended even if they are waterfront 
properties; instead, they become forested park areas. The suitability analysis 
also led to the overall design of the master plan because it identified suitable 
areas for development.  
The master plan connects to existing road infrastructure; it creates a 
new network of roads with a circulating parkway and a prominent boulevard 
cutting through the site from northwest to southeast. The master plan also 
protects the shoreline and creates biological networks. Additionally, these 
fixed parameters of road infrastructure, shoreline, and biological networks 
help identify the human development areas. Conducting a suitability analysis 
is the most important because the Landscape Urbanism discourse advises 
the urbanist to consider the land and ecological forms first and then the urban 
forms. This simple action allows the landscape to become a medium versus 
an afterthought. Compared to how urban developments were created in the 
past where prioritizing the human needs are more important. Engaging the 
site?s cultural ties by naming streets and towns after its historical past applies 
another landscape of infrastructure principle.  
92 
 
 
 
Applying Landscape Urbanism principles at the master planning scale 
proved to be straightforward because the framework provides an 
understandable design logic that instructs both design and planning 
practitioners to consider the landscape, ecological patterns, and constraints of 
that landscape before developing an area. Additionally, it commands that the 
practitioner consider all cultural ties and revive them when they are lost. In 
this way, the theory is very relevant to the design and planning of regional 
areas.   
6.2: Neighborhood Plan 
Compared to the master planning scale, designing at the neighborhood 
scale proved to be difficult using only the Landscape Urbanism theory lens. 
After understanding and locating the ecological and development areas, there 
were still unanswered questions such as: 
?  Where do we go from here, what is next?   
? How do we plan or design these areas?  
? What characters and identities will these communities have?  
? What guidelines or tools does Landscape Urbanism provide?  
The short answer is none. Landscape Urbanism promises so much but 
delivers very little in the site-specific practice realm. Exploring Sustainable 
and Ecological Urbanism was essential to move forward with the site-specific 
design, and it was concluded that these theories enforce the Landscape 
Urbanism discussion. They provide a practicable toolset that can be easily 
93 
 
 
 
applied to neighborhood design and fit under the Landscape Urbanism 
framework.  
Sustainable Urbanism theory aided the design logic by giving a 
tangible toolset of the ideal urban form and design. It provided an agenda on 
how communities should be designed and laid out by having an 
interconnected community that is walkable and has transit options. The theory 
also protects ecological areas but focuses on the application of how to design 
a neighborhood that will survive time and future economic changes as well as 
the needs of residents. The neighborhood design will feature a community 
core that will have neighborhood-specific retail and a school within each 
community ? connecting all systems with ecological areas, trails, and road 
systems. The cultural and ecological Landscape Urban principles were 
applied by introducing buildings that resemble the existing communities of 
Sparrows Point. The communities will also include various parks within the 
communities and ecological areas that the community can use.       
At this scale, understanding the different ecological systems that shape 
a site and how they impact a design becomes important. Essential questions 
to answer under the Ecological Urbanism Lens were what the human and 
environmental systems are? Where do they connect? Where do they differ? It 
created a gradient of systems within the urban, landscape, and hydrologic 
environments. Translating this to the design of the neighborhood scale was a 
more straightforward task by understanding the difference between urban 
landscapes and natural landscapes and the needs each landscape has. For 
94 
 
 
 
example, water will move differently in urban areas (bio-swales and pipes) 
than in the natural areas (natural infiltration). However, this was derived from 
the ecological theory, while the Landscape discourse states the urbanist must 
design with the landscape but never tells us how.  
Even though at the neighborhood design scale Landscape Urbanism is 
challenging to apply. It still provides a strong base to start any design logic 
from both landscape architecture and planning ideology. If more practitioners 
allowed both the landscape form and ecological needs to inform urban 
development, we would have more sustainable communities that would 
naturally protect themselves from natural forces.  
95 
 
 
 
Bibliography 
 
Alberti, M., 2008. Advances in Urban Ecology. Springer Science, New York.? 
Forman, R.T.T., Godron, M., 1981. Patches and structural components 
for a landscape ecology. Bioscience 31, 733?740.?Forman, R.T.T., 
Godron, M., 1986. Landscape Ecology. John Wiley and Sons, New  
York.? 
Albright, Richard D.(2012). Cleanup of Chemical and Explosive Munitions  
- Locating, Identifying Contaminants, and Planning for Environmental 
Remediation of Land and Sea Military Ranges and Ordnance 
Dumpsites (2nd Edition). Elsevier.  
Almono LLC. Haelwood Green. Retrieved March 10, 2018, 
 from https://www.hazelwoodgreen.com/history/. 
Barry, B. (2017, February 12). The History of Sparrows Point: An 
Epic Civilization. Retrieved March 6, 20018, http://www.hsobc.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/02/Sparrows-Point.pdf. 
Barry, B., (2017, February). The History of Sparrows Point: An  
Epic Civilization. Presented at the Community College of Baltimore 
County-Dundalk Historical Society of Baltimore County Meeting, 
Baltimore, MD.  
Bethlehem Steel Company. (2000). Bethlehem Steel Company  
Sparrows Point Plant. Retrieved March 22, 2018, from 
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-
01333A000300030002-2.pdf. 
Beyard, Michael D., Michael Pawlukiewicz, and Alex Bond. Ten Principles  
for Rebuilding Neigh- borhood Retail. Washington, D.C.: ULI?the 
Urban Land Institute, 2003. 
Blanco, H., Alberti, M., Olshansky, R., Chang, S., Wheeler, S.,  
Randolph, J., Watson, V. (2009). Shaken, shrinking, hot, impoverished 
and informal: Emerging research agendas in planning. Progress in 
Planning, 72(4), 195-250. doi:10.1016/j.progress. 2009.09.001. 
Brownfields and Land Revitalization (U.S. Environmental Protection  
Agency, 2012), http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/basic_info.htm. 
Basic Information, Superfund (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
2012), http://www.epa.gov/superfund/about.htm. 
Chabay, I., Frick, M., & Helgeson, J. (Eds.). (2016). Land 
restoration: Reclaiming landscapes for a sustainable future. 
Amsterdam: Academic Press. 
Chesapeake Bay Foundation. (n.d.). Sparrows Point: Toxic Chemicals 
in Sediment Continue to Affect the Environment. Retrieved from 
http://www.cbf.org/about-cbf/locations/maryland/issues/sparrows-
point.html. 
Collins, m., Steiner, f., & Rushman, m. (2001). Land-Use suitability analysis 
in the united states: Historical development and promising 
technological achievements. Environmental Management: An 
96 
 
 
 
International Journal for Decision Makers, Scientists and 
Environmental Auditors,28(5), 611-621. doi:10.1007/s002670010247. 
McHarg, I. (1992). Design with nature. New York: J. Wiley 
The Cultural Landscape Foundation. (2016). Gas Works Park. 
Retrieved March 10, 2018, from https://tclf.org/landscapes/gas-works-
park. 
Desimini, J. (2017, August 20). Wild Innovation: Stoss in Detroit. Retrieved  
November 12, 2018, from https://scenariojournal.com/article/wild-
innovation/. 
Duany, A. (2013). Landscape urbanism and its discontents. Gabriola, 
 BC: New Society. (2013). Retrieved November 8, 2018 
Dunne, J., Kammer, S., Schanz, S., & Walter, K. (2014).  
Soil Contamination and Remediation. SEFS 507; Autumn Quarter 
2014. University of Washington, Seattle, WA.   
EPA. (2018, September 14). Hazardous Waste Cleanup:  
Sparrows Point Terminal LLC (TradePoint Atlantic) in Sparrows Point, 
Maryland. Retrieved November 11, 2018, from 
https://www.epa.gov/hwcorrectiveaction/hazardous-waste-cleanup-
sparrows-point-llc-sparrows-point-md. 
EPA, ?Hazardous Waste Cleanup: Honeywell Baltimore Inner  
Harbor in Baltimore, Maryland?, 2018). 
Farr, D. (2008). Sustainable urbanism: Urban design with nature. 
Farr, D. (2012). Sustainable urbanism: Urban design with nature  
(A wiley book on sustainable design). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. 
(2012). Retrieved December 11, 2018, from 
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com. 
Gandy, M. (2015). From urban ecology to ecological urbanism: An  
ambiguous trajectory. Area, 47(2), 150-154. doi:10.1111/area.12162 
Green Building Alliance. (n.d.). Brownfield Remediation. Retrieved 
from https://www.go-gba.org/resources/green-building-
methods/brownfield-remediation/. 
Gornitz, V., Couch, S., & Hartig, E. (2002). Impacts of sea level rise in  
the new york city metropolitan area. Global and Planetary Change, 
32(1), 61. 
Gonzalez, S. (2014, April 29). A Brief Overview of the History of Gas  
Works Park. Retrieved from 
https://blogs.uw.edu/gonzalsa/2014/04/29/a-brief-overview-of-the-
history-of-gas-works-park/.  
Gruen G. elles youth correctional facility site. Retrieved 
From https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/resd/surplus_property 
/docs/628_nelles/Retail_Market_Analysis_4.pdf. 
Hamilton, J. (2012). What is environmental remediation? Retrieved May  
15,2018, from https://www.bls.gov/green/environmental_remediation/ 
remediation.htm. 
Hairston, K. (2012, February 23). Retrieved October 29, 2018, from  
https://www.tumblr.com/tagged/the-baltimore-sun 
97 
 
 
 
 
Hazardous Waste Cleanup: Honeywell Baltimore Inner Harbor in Baltimore,  
Maryland. (2018, September 05). Retrieved fromhttps: 
//www.epa.gov/hwcorrectiveaction/hazardous-waste-cleanup-
honeywell-baltimore-inner-harbor-baltimore-md. 
Ian Hamilton Thompson (2011) Ten Tenets and Six Questions 
for Landscape Urbanism, Landscape Research, 37:1, 7-
26, DOI: 10.1080/01426397.2011.632081. 
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2000). 2.2.3. 
Afforestation, Reforestation, and Deforestation. Retrieved March 6, 
2018, from http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/land 
_use/index.php?idp=47. 
King, E. (2014, November 17). What does it mean to be climate resilient?  
Retrieved May 20, 2018, fromhttp://www.climatechang 
enews.com/2014/11/10/what-does-it-mean-to-be-climate-resilient. 
L.D. Hopkins. (1977). Methods for generating land suitability maps: a  
comparative evaluation. J. Am. Inst. Planners, 43 (4), pp. 386-400 
F. Steiner. (1983). Resource suitability: methods for analysis. Environ.  
Manage., 7 (5), pp. 401-420. 
Marten, G. G. (2008). Human ecology: Basic concepts for sustainable  
development. London: Earthscan. 
Ndubisi, F. O. (2015). The Ecological Design and Planning Read.  
Washington, DC: Island Press/Center for Resource Economics. 
NYC Parks. (2006). Freshkills Park. Retrieved from  
https://www.nycgovparks.org/park-features/freshkills-park/about-  
(n.d.). Retrieved September 18, 2018, from 
https://www.harborpointbaltimore.info/history/. 
Powter, Chris (2002). "Glossary of Reclamation and Remediation Terms used  
in Alberta" (PDF). Government of Alberta. ISBN 0-7785-2156-7. 
Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-04-09. Retrieved 2012-04-
01).   
Radmer, Sarah. ?Gas Work Park: Seattle?s strangest park has an equally  
weird history?. City Living ? Seattle. Sept. 22, 2014. 
http://citylivingseattle.com/Content/News/City- News/Article/Gas-
Works-Park-Seattle-s-strangest-park-has-an-equally-weird- 
history/22/167/90414. 
SBER-Harbor Point Development ? Ayers Saint Gross. (n.d.). Retrieved from  
https://asg-architects.com/portfolio/sber-harbor-point-development/ 
SBER-Harbor Point Development ? Ayers Saint Gross. (n.d.). Retrieved  
September 18, 2018, from https://asg-architects.com/portfolio/sber-
harbor-point-development/. 
Simmons, M. (2016, November 3). Sparrows Point redevelopment expected  
to create $2.9B in economic activity, study says. Retrieved March 25, 
2018, from https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2016/11/03/ 
sparrows-point-redevelopment-expected-to-create-2.html. 
Spirn A.W. (2014) Ecological Urbanism: A Framework for the Design 
98 
 
 
 
of Resilient Cities (2014). In: Ndubisi F.O. (eds) The Ecological Design 
and Planning Reader. Island Press, Washington, DC. 
Steiner, F. (2011). Landscape ecological urbanism: Origins  
and trajectories. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100(4), 333-337. 
doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.01.020. 
Steiner, F., McSherry, L., & Cohen, J. (2000). Land suitability analysis for  
the upper gila river watershed. Landscape and Urban Planning, 50(4), 
199-214. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00093-1. 
Stephen M. Wheeler and Timothy Beatley (Eds.), The Sustainable Urban  
Development Reader, Third Edition (New York: Routledge, 2014). 
Thompson, I. (2012). Ten tenets and six questions for landscape urbanism.  
Landscape Research, 37(1), 7-26.doi:10.1080/01426397.2011.632081 
Waldheim, C. (2006). The landscape urbanism reader. New York: Princeton  
Architectural Press. 
Waldheim, C. (2016). Landscape as urbanism: A general theory. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
99