From Civilization Cradle with Rural Character to Value Based Urbanization Spectrums: Bursa-İznik Urban Design Studio Course

Year 2018, Volume: 31 Issue: 1, 29 - 61, 01.06.2018

Ersan Koç

https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.450035

Abstract

This study was carried out in order to evaluate the findings of the studio "Studio upm+T: urban/public/mixed use + Transformation" which was carried out by the author in autumn and spring semesters of 2016-2017, together with the participants in the attached file and the contributors in the process of Kocaeli University Faculty of Architecture and Design. The aim of this study is to develop urban design and transformation projects with the aim of bringing high public values in the middle and long term to the city by considering urban design Bursa-İznik City as a workshop. The focus of the workshop is on identifying, evaluating, analyzing, synthesizing, developing the theme and developing the "Public Space" and "Common Area" and adding "Value" to the Iznik City Image.   The examination of the workshop was coordinated among topics: " a. cultural and historical basis, b-natural and environmental resources, environmental planning and design, c- social and economic formation and dynamics, and d-spatial structure: settlement texture and settlement plan. Throughout the İznik Urban Design Workshop, 5 sociospatial concepts that feed the whole process were handled and it was aimed to feed the development and urban development opportunities that stand out for İznik. These concepts have been evaluated as "use value, change value, design value, memory-space and contrast-harmony. Furthermore, the approaches to be followed in order to get acquainted with new identities and to pass the visions to the practice have been determined by giving the 3 cities and regional vision "agriculture city, tourism city and culture city" concept.  The gola of the paper is to portray a set of urban design schemes, which aimed to develop spatial contexts that will positively serve and contribute to the quality of life of the city within the practice of urban design known as a common professional practice area of Urban and Regional Planning, Architecture and Landscape Architecture.

Keywords

Design Education, Urban Design, Public Space, Value

Kırsal Kimlikli Medeniyetler Beşiğinden Değer Temelli Kentleşme Açılımlarına: Bursa-İznik Kentsel Tasarım Stüdyosu Dersi

Abstract

Bu çalışma Kocaeli Üniversitesi Mimarlık ve Tasarım Fakültesi Mimarlık Bölümü bünyesinde ekli dosyada katılımcıları ve süreç içerisinde katkı verenler ile birlikte 2016-2017 Güz ve Bahar dönemlerinde makalenin yazarı tarafından yürütülmüş olan “Atölye 3KD: Kentsel – Kamusal – Karma Dönüşüm” stüdyo dersinin bulgularını değerlendirmek amacıyla kaleme alınmıştır. Bu çalışma; kentsel tasarıma Bursa-İznik Şehrini bir atölye kapsamında ele alarak, kente orta ve uzun vadede yüksek kamusal değerler katma hedefi ile uygulanabilir kentsel tasarım ve dönüşüm projeleri geliştirmeyi hedeflemektedir. Atölyenin tespit, değerlendirme, analiz, sentez, tema geliştirme ve tasarım süreci “Kamusal Mekân” ve “Ortak Alan” geliştirme ve İznik Şehir İmgesine “Değer” katma hedefine odaklanmıştır.   Atölyenin yürütülme yöntemi saha çalışması ve tasarıma yönelik mekân programı geliştirme olup; kültürel ve tarihsel temel, doğal ve çevresel kaynaklar, çevresel planlama ve tasarım, sosyal ve ekonomik oluşum ve dinamikleri ve mekânsal yapı: yerleşme dokusu ve yapılaşma düzeni konularını kapsamıştır.  İznik Kentsel Tasarım Atölyesinde tüm süreci besleyen 5 sosyal/mekânsal kavram ele alınmış ve İznik için öne çıkan kalkınma ve kentsel gelişim olanaklarını beslemesi hedeflenmiştir. Bu kavramlar “kullanım değeri, değişim değeri, tasarım değeri, bellek-mekân ve zıtlık-uyum olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Ayrıca ele alınan 3 Kent ve Bölge geniş görüşlülüğü “tarım kenti, turizm kenti ve kültür kenti“ kavramı üzerinden hâkim kimliği tarım kenti olan İznik’in tarımsal üretim olanaklarına zarar vereden yeni kimlikler ile nasıl tanıştırılabileceği ve vizyonların uygulamaya geçmesi için takip edilmesi gereken yaklaşımlar belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışma Şehir ve Bölge Planlama, Mimarlık ve Peyzaj Mimarlığı alanlarının ortak profesyonel pratik sahası olan “kentsel tasarım projeleri” ile şehrin yaşam kalitesine olumlu hizmet edecek ve değer katacak mekânsal bağlamlar geliştirmeyi hedeflemektedir. 

Keywords

Tasarım Eğitimi, Kentsel Tasarım, Kamusal Mekân, Değer

References

• Arü K. A., 1984, Şehirsel Tasarım Lisansüstü Ders Notları, M.S.Ü. Mimarlık Fakültesi, Şehir ve Bölge Planlama Bölümü, İstanbul
• Bonaiuto M., Aiello A., Perugini M., Bonnes M., and Ercolani AP., 1996. “Multi Dimensional Perception of Residential Environment Quality and Neighbourhood Attachment”, Journal of Environmental Psychology 19(3), 331-351
• Bressi T.W., 1998. “Building a Civic Framework”, Places, Fall-1998, 12(1), 24-25
• Barton H., and Grant M., 2010. Shaping Neighbourhoods: For Local Health and Global Sustainability, (2nd edition) Abingdon, Routledge,
• Bakan. K., 1987. Türkiye'de Kentsel Dış Mekânların Düzenlemesi, TÜBİTAK, Yapı Araştırma Enstitüsü, Yayın No: 4-5, İstanbul
• Chiaradia, A.J.F. and Plimmer, S.S.F., 2016. “Values in urban design: A design studio teaching approach”, Design Studies 49, 66-100 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.10.002
• Cuthbert, A.R., 2006. The Form of Cities, Political Economy and Urban Design, Blackwell Publishing, University Press.
• Çubuk M., 2017. "Kentsel Tasarım Deneyimi: Dünyadaki Gelişimin İzinde Kentsel Tasarımın Türkiye’ye Yansıması ve Gelişmesine Bakış: Kentsel Tasarım Rehberlerinin Hazırlanması Projesi: Arama Konferansı, Ankara http://www.csb.gov.tr/db/mpgm/editordosya/file/Kentsel%20Tasarim/Kents el%20Tasarim%20Rehberleri/ KentselTasarimDeneyimi_20012017.pdf (erişim 09.03.2017)
• Davis J., and Uffer S., 2013. Grosvenor: Evolving Cities, Resilient Urban Form, Governance and the Creation of Long Term Value, The London School of Economics and Political Science Press, London erişim https://lsecities.net/publications/reports/evolving-cities/ (10.02.2016)
• Dorst K., 2011. "The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application", Design Studies. 32(6), 123-142
• Fodor E., 1999. Better NOT Bigger: How to Take Control of Urban Growth and Improve Your Community, Gabriola Island-British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers
• Gehl J. and Gemzoe L., 1998. Public Spaces, Public Life. Copenhagen: The Royal Danish Academy Graeber D., 2001. Toward An Anthropological Theory of Value: The False Coin of Our Own Dreams. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Press
• Groves R. and Niner P., 1998. A Good Investment? The Impact of Urban Renewal on an Inner City Housing Market, Bristol, The Policy Press
• Haas T., and Olsson K. 2014. (Editors) “Emergent Urbanism, Urban Planning & Design in Times of Structural and Systemic Change”, Ahsgate, Farnham
• Hass-Klau C., Crampton G., Dowland C. and Nold I., 1999. Streets as Living Space: Helping Public Places Play Their Proper Role, Good Practice Guidance with Examples from a Town Centre Study of European Pedestrian Behaviour, London: Landor Publishing Ltd
• İnalcık, Halil. 2000. "Osman Gazi'nin İznik (Nicaea) Kuşatması ve Bafeus Savaşı". Öz, Mehmet ve Özel, Oktay. Söğüt'ten İstanbul'a (1.baskı). İmge Kitabevi.
• Jones, P., Roberts M. and Morris L., 2007. Rediscovering Mixed-use Streets the Contribution of Local High Streets to Sustainable Communities, The Policy Press, Bristol
• Jupp B., 1999. Living Together, Community Life on Mixed Tenure Estates.London:DEMOS
• Kluckhohn C., 1951 “Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in definition and classification” in T. Parsons, & E. Shils (Eds.), Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge(MA): Harvard University Press.
• Lennard S.H.C., 1984. Public Life in Urban Places: Social and Architectural Characteristics Conducive to Public Life in European Cities, New York: Gondolier
• Lerner S. and Poole W., 1999. The Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Spaces, San Francisco: The Trust for Public Land Publishers
• Long G., 2012. “State of the Studio: Revisiting the potential of studio pedagogy in U.S. based planning programs”, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32(4), 431–448 LSE Cities Programme, 2013. Local City. Cities Studio Publications, The London School of Economics and Political Science,London (erişimhttp://www.lse.ac.uk/LSECities/citiesProgramme/citiesStudioPublic ations.aspx
• Marshall S., 2015. “Refocusing urban design as an integrative art of place”, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Urban design and Planning, 168(1) (2015), 8–18
• Peiser R. and Schwann G., 1993. “The Private Value of Public Open Space Within Sudivisions”, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 10(2), 91104
• Polat, S., 2015. “Interdisciplinary Approaches and Collaboration in Architectural Education: Urban Creation Workshops in Paris”, Global Built Environment Review. 9(2), 69-92
• Stevenson, A., and Waite, M. (Editors). 2011. Concise Oxford English Dictionary (12th edition.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Strickland R., 2000. Neighbourhoods for Learning Places, Places. 13(1), 92-104
• Terrence C. S. J., 2014. "A theoretical basis for recommending the use of design methodologies as teaching strategies in the design studio", Design Studies, 35(6), November 2014, 632–646
• Wallace, W.L., 1994. A Weberian Theory of Human Society. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.