Light Imprint Handbook: Integrating Sustainability and Community Design (review)

I expected to like this book, which is why I volunteered to review it. After all, it’s about integrating environmental and community development issues, a subject that deserves more attention. It’s loaded with specific techniques, the kind of detailed, practical advice of which we need more.

What’s more, it has high production values: a beautiful font with gorgeous color photos and illustrations, including fold-outs. It’s also refreshing that many of the photos are of non-U.S. projects (although 5 of the 6 case studies are Eastern U.S., and all are North American).

If this review were appearing in an architectural, engineering, or sustainability journal, rather than Ecological Restoration, it would be far more positive because Light Imprint Handbook really is a good book. But I noticed only 2 uses of “restoration” in 350 pages. Two sentences on 1 page (C7) mention stream restoration, and a single sentence (p. I17) mentions restorative plans for post-disaster communities.

It’s written by an architect, but there’s an engineering mindset. This book is about the design of the human environment and about manufactured technologies and materials. References to flora are few and far between. If there are any references to fauna, I missed them. There’s a fleeting mention or two of invasive plant removal. A second edition would benefit from a restoration ecologist co-author.

Native and indigenous species were mentioned maybe a dozen times, usually just the same sentence with minor variations. Almost every instance states that the use of natives reduces or eliminates ongoing maintenance (although there are occasional caveats that watering and weeding are initially needed). Examples: “A naturally-occurring wetland needs little or no maintenance” (p. F7); “Green fingers are inexpensive when native species are used” (p. F31).

This will come as news to restoration ecologists, who spend a significant portion of their time (and budgets) fighting invasive species. There’s no caution that native flora is often more vulnerable to native pests and diseases. If eliminating maintenance is one’s primary objective, it’s hard to beat a nasty non-native invasive.

There’s a fair amount of focus on retention ponds and constructed wetlands. When designed with the intent of restoring ecological habitat (even if the location isn’t a historical wetland), such areas can certainly help restore ecological functions. But Light Imprint Handbook doesn’t mention such ecological restoration applications.

The Light Imprint Handbook promotes New Urbanism in general, a traditional neighborhood design concept coined by the founder of DPZ Charlotte (DPZ), an urban planning corporation. Five of the 6 case studies are DPZ projects. My 2002 book, The Restoration Economy, lauded the principles of New Urbanism. They referenced restorative practices such as infill development, reclaiming vacant lots, and restoration/reuse of historic buildings. But my 2008 book, reWealth, decried the chasm between New Urbanist principles and practice.

New Urbanism is often used as a smoke screen for sprawl projects. Even when applied to inner city redevelopment, New Urbanist projects usually take a non-restorative, overly-commercial, tabula rasa approach. This isn’t surprising - it was invented by architects. Most architects want to leave their own mark on the world; a relatively small minority enjoys renovating or restoring the designs of others. This also explains why Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), created by and for architects, insufficiently weights the value of building and site reuse.

Light Imprint is called a “handbook” because it’s more about techniques than ideas. There’s little discussion of strategic or programmatic approaches to watershed restoration or community renewal here. It’s largely a catalog of mechanical techniques and product specifications that reduce the negative impact of development on natural systems.

Improvement of freshwater quality, freshwater quantity, and freshwater flows is the major focus. It could be argued that this is innately restorative. If applied solely to existing developed areas, this would be true. But, aside...