Discovering and Mapping Aspects of Spatial Publicness Observations from an Undergraduate Architecture Studio in Cyprus
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
The value of public spaces and their social function in cities has been the source of numerous writings. The questions posed in our undergraduate architecture studio at the University of Cyprus are: “What core design aspects create successful public places, and how do they constitute conscious design processes?” and “What are core values that create successful public places and how are they consciously integrated in a design process?”. This paper will attempt to address the topic of spatial publicness within a framework of translating observations of the above into design strategies and tools. These aspects have formulated the basis for recent design briefs, tested within an architectural studio context from 2nd year coursework, while at the same time being translated into transferable values, such as diagnostic and synthetic tools, appropriate for an undergraduate architectural studio. They formulate the basis of an ongoing research project tested within the studio context and utilizing case studies from the output of students’ work to draw conclusions that guide the pedagogical approach.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The Authors retain copyright for articles published in The Journal of Public Space, with first publication rights granted to the journal.
Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial Licence (CC-BY-NC) - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
You are free to:
• Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material
Under the following terms:
• Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
• NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
References
Al Maani, D. (2022) Revisiting learning styles and autonomy in the design studio: an undergraduate assessment. Open house international, 47(4), pp. 620-637.
Altrock, U. (2022) Urban liveability in socially disadvantaged neighbourhoods: The experience of the German program “socially integrative city”. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 11(5), pp.783-794.
Appleyard, D. (1981) Livable Streets. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Boeing, G., Church, D., Hubbard, H., Mickens, J. and Rudis, L. (2014) LEED-ND and livability revisited. Berkeley Planning Journal, 27(1), pp. 31-55.
Brighenti, A. (2010) The publicness of public space: On the public domain. University ofTrento.
Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L.G., Stone, A. M. (1992) Public Space, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Cervero, R., Guerra, E. and Al, S. (2017) Beyond mobility: Planning cities for people and places. Island Press.
Chidister, M. (1988) Reconsidering the piazza. Landscape Architecture, 78(1), pp.40-43.
Crucitti, P., Latora, V. and Porta, S. (2006) Centrality in networks of urban streets. Chaos: an interdisciplinary journal of nonlinear science, 16(1).
Evans, C., Undergraduate Studio: CRP 202 Urban Design Studio I (Winter 2018). Instructors: Amir Hajrasouliha and Beate Von Bishopink. An Urban Design for Collaboration and Innovation at Cal Poly. The objectives of this studio are to introduce students to the urban design process and to creating people-friendly environ. Focus, 15, p. 130.
Fróes, I. and Lasthein, M.K. (2020) Co-creating sustainable urban metabolism towards healthier cities. Urban Transformations, 2(1), p. 5.
García, I. (2017) Learning about neighbourhood identity, streets as places, and community engagement in a Chicago studio course. Transformations, 27(2), pp.142-157.
Gehl, J. (2010) Cities for people Island Press. Washington DC.
Gehl, J. (2011) Life between buildings: using public space. Island press.
Herrick, C. (2009) Designing the fit city: public health, active lives, and the (re) instrumentalization of urban space. Environment and Planning A, 41(10), pp.2437-2454.
Holston, J. (1996) Spaces of insurgent citizenship. Architectural Design, 66, pp.54-59.
Hong, J.Y. and Chong, K.H. (2023) Designing Public Soundscapes through Social Architecture and Soundscape Approaches: Reflective Review of Architectural Design Studio. Sustainability, 15(16), p. 12399.
Jacobs, J., (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Modern Library (1993 edition).
Krstikj, A. (2021) Social innovation in the undergraduate architecture studio. Societies, 11(1), p. 26.
Laviolette, P. (2014) The neo-flâneur amongst irresistible decay. Playgrounds and battlefields: critical perspectives of social engagement, pp. 243-71.
Lefebvre, H., Kofman, E. and Lebas, E. (1996) Writings on cities (Vol. 63). Oxford: Blackwell.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. and Banerjee, T. (1998) Urban design downtown: Poetics and politics of form. Univ of California Press.
Low, S. M. (2000) On the Plaza: The Politics of Public Space and Culture. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Marcus, C.C. and Francis, C. (eds.) (1997) People places: design guidelines for urban open space. John Wiley & Sons.
Mitchell, D. (2003) The right to the city: Social justice and the fight for public space. Guilford Press.
Natu, A.S. (2020) Integrating behavioural research in undergraduate design studio in architecture for designing inclusive environments. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 10(2), pp. 209-228.
Nguyen, H. (2019) From Pedestrian Thoroughfare to Public Space: The Social Life of the Esplanade Underpass. Journal for Undergraduate Ethnography, 9(1), pp. 1-17.
Oldenburg, R. (1989) The great good place: Café, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars, hangouts, and how they get you through the day. Paragon House Publishers.
Ozmehmet, E. and Alakavuk, E. (2016) Integration process of theoretical courses with design studios in undergraduate education: Case studies of architecture and interior design studios. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 26, p. 01112). EDP Sciences.
Qian, J. (2014) Public Space in non‐Western Contexts: Practices of Publicness and the Socio‐spatial Entanglement. Geography Compass, 8(11), pp. 834-847.
Remali, A. M., Porta, S., Romice, O., Abudib, H. and Vaughan, L. (2015) Street quality, street life, street centrality. Suburban urbanities: Suburbs and the life of the high street, pp. 104-129.
Rivlin, L. G. (1987) The neighbourhood, personal identity, and group affiliations. In Altman, I. and Wandersman, A. (eds) Neighbourhood and community environments, pp. 1-34. Springer, Boston, MA.
Schuster, J. M. (2001) Ephemera, temporary urbanism and imaging. Imaging the city: Continuing struggles and new directions, pp. 361-396.
Sennett, R. (1977) The fall of public man. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Smith, D.M. (1994) Geography and social justice, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Tester, K. (1994) The Flâneur, London, Routledge.
Thompson, J. B. (2011) Shifting boundaries of public and private life. Theory, culture & society, 28(4), pp. 49-70.
Wang, Y. (2018) A critique of the socio-spatial debate and the publicness of urban space. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift-Norwegian Journal of Geography, 72(3), pp. 161-175.
Whyte, W. H. (1988) City: rediscovering its center, New York, Doubleday.
Zaha Hadid Architects (2017) ‘Walkable London’ proposal. Available at: www.walkablelondon.co.uk