Urbanscape Emanation in the Heritage Layers of the Urbanarchipelago UNESCO World Heritage Sites as Core Attractors in Split Urbanarchipelago
The city of Split is the second largest city in Croatia. Historic urban landscape of the Split region is a proof of the 25 cen- turies urban tradition. The first Greek colonisation in the 4th century BC is a new heritage layer on the Illyrian proto-ur- ban settlements Salona: Tragurion, Epetion and Pharos. Five projects represent concept of connecting heritage sites and local neighbourhoods creating balance between econo- my of tourism and public places for inhabitants. The projects Salona in Solin were developed by master students at the Faculty of Archi- tecture in Zagreb on the Landscape Architecture Workshop entitled Urbanscape Emanation and Master Thesis under the Kaštela mentorship of Prof.dr.sc. Bojana Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci: Iva Batina (Kaštela), Tamara Marić (Split), Nera Nejašmić (Brač), Trogir Maja Šurjak (Hvar) and Ana Topić (Imotski).
Split
Tragurion Imotski
Makarska
Brač
Diocletian’s Palace
SPLIT - linear urban landscape connecting Marjan park- forest and archaeological park Salona in Solin KAŠTELA - Citadel Promenade along the coast through Hvar seven settlements IMOTSKI - connecting hinterland with coastal areas BRAČ - Vista Promenade connections HVAR - connected settlements around the Ager Pharensis
natural and cultural heritage
Pharos - Ager Pharensis project proposals
Split Urbanarchipelago patterns 5 km
Prof.dr.sc. Bojana Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci and Tamara Marić
The University of Zagreb, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Urban Planning, Spatial Planning and Landscape Architecture Research project Heritage Urbanism - Urban and Spatial Planning Models for Revival and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage (HERU HRZZ-2032) [email protected] and [email protected] Design Innovation in Archaeological Contexts The construction of the limit as a synthesis between ethics and semiotics in new architectures
Vincenzo P. Bagnato
Department of Civil Engineering and Architectural Sciences (DICAR - Bari, Italy) International Research Group on Architecture and Society (GIRAS - Barcelona, Spain) [email protected] An excursion into the Cultural Landscape along the Peloponnesian Railways
The train as a “backbone” mechanism along the cultural landscape of Peloponnese!
ORMENIO
THESSALONIKI
PATRAS 1. Ancient Olympia ATHENS
1
Potential as UNESCO’s World heritage site Integral transport system (potential) Touristic arrival gates Problem 1: airports/ports a) Instead of several Administrative borders 2. Chranoi railway bridge sections, the rest of the Normal gauge/double line/electr. network which illustrates Normal gauge/single line/electr. potenial as railway Normal gauge/double line/electr. heritage and touristic Normal gauge/double line/electr. routes is inactive. Inactive/ meter gauge b) For all travellers from Meter gauge/ diesel Athens to the touristic UNESCO’ s World heritage sites hotposts of Peloponnese public transport remains 3. Ancient theater of Epidaurus uncompetitive comparing Anc.Olympia to private transport. Anc.Olympia (long-time trips, poor Mycines Mycines passenger services, inefcient transitions). Athens Athens airport airport 3.5 hrs 3.5 hrs Isochrone diagrams for basic 7 hrs 7 hrs touristic routes comparing indicative public transport and private journeys Public transport (train & bus) Private transport 4. Mystras (Byzantine Despotate of Moreas, 14th-15th cent.) What happens around important railway nodes?
Problem 2: R.S Anc.Olympia R.S. Kaifas R.S. Nafplio R.S. Patras a) There is no a strategic plan for future railway and tourist development along the network and mainly around transport hubs improving accessibility and services. b) There is no railway culture but a strong tension to keep railway Archaelogical site of Ancient Thermal baths and protected First capital of Greece after The Western gateway to Olympia (UNESCO). wet land (“Strofilia” forest) by Ottoman empire , neoclassic Europe and the biggest city of stations out of the Poor conditions around RS. Natura 2000. architecture. Peloponnese. historic centres. Non integration of RS in the Industrial heritage. historic center. Actors’ conflict for rail integration in the city.
Railway station (R.S), existing If the railway line is a) Classification and enhancement of significant railway stations Railway station (R.S), new/ reactivated/ improved, a b) Synergies of other public transport networks and slow mobility networks (pedestrian, bicycle) under discussion spatial strategy is needed c) Analysis of inner development potential before urban sprawl Railway line toward: d) Combined conventional and/or touristic passenger services Historic centre e) Exploration of the tourist market area in balance with the cultural landscape Collaboration at any cost! Shared market risk vs. hierachical mandates and bureaucratic entitlement
Problem 3: IN-FORMAL PLANNING Projects 1. Railway reactivation 2. Railway as part of a) Combine the various and Tourism Unesco Word Heritage site interests between cultural heritage National/ Ministry of Transportation Ministry of Culture management and regional/ Mediator Regions of Western Greece and Peloponnese sustainable tourism. local Independent Political Several prefectures and municipalities team or person b) There are bureacratic OSE (Hellenic Railways Organisation) numerous involved bodies toward a rational 1 stakeholders in each - GAIAOSE (Asset Management) collaborative part of the network - TRAINOSE (or another operator) with limited culture of Port authorities procedure collaboration. International WTO/WTTC (international) UNESCO, ICOMOS, ICOM c) The spatial planning /National EOT (Hellenic Tourism (international) political Organisation) system of Greece 2 orientates to a strong bodies/NGO’s Collaborative procedure : 1. Rhytm (preparatory steps top-down approach. Other SETE (Greek Tourism Various cultural groups and main procedure, meta- stakeholders Confederation) cooperatives Friends of Railway strategies) Business groups, local 2. Problem and solution cooperatives etc. oriented Key stakeholders for tourism and cultural heritage management in the 3. Interaction on local, case of Peloponnese regional and national level References: (1) Innes, J,, Booher, D. (2010) Planning with complexity, Oxon, New York: Routledge 4. Acceptance from all (2) Scholl, B.,Staub, B, Vinzens, M. eds (2013) Test-Planning, A method with future. Zurich: vdf Verlag Map/Diagram sources: Authors, Image sources: 1. http://www.ert.gr/exerevnontas-ton-mystra/ , 2. Guest lecture T.Theofanopoulos 29.09.2015 , various stakeholders 3. http://laterranostra.gr/index.php/mikines/, 4. http://www.panoramio.com/user/5953156?with_photo_id=83960068
Theodora Papamichail, Dr.Ana Peric
PhD candidate, Chair of Spatial Development, ETH Zurich Lecturer and PostDoc Fellow, Chair of Spatial Development, ETH Zurich [email protected], [email protected] Assessing urban management policies: An application of an innovative assessment framework on Florence (Italy) as a case study
INTRODUCTION 2nd Phase: Linking theory to practice: an original policy assessment framework The conservation and management of historic urban environments is one of the most urgent tasks of our time. The recent definition of the The second methodological step focused on the definition of an original UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape approach and the adoption of policy assessment framework. After a literature review, six existing its related recommendation in 2011 represents one of the most recent assessment frameworks related to policy document analysis in the international contribution in the identification of a new holistic urban field of tourism planning (Simpson, 2001; Ruhanen, 2004), World management framework for reconciling heritage conservation with Heritage site management (Landorf, 2009; World Heritage Centre, urban development. It exemplifies the international recognition 2008; SITI, 2012) and Historic Urban Landscapes (Veldpaus, 2015), were that a new paradigm for urban conservation and management considered the most relevant in relation to the research scope and field. has gradually taken shape since the beginning of the 21st century. However, while relevant for some aspects, none of them was completely adequate This research started from the assumption that in order to implement this to the research scope and an innovative assessment framework was designed. new paradigm of urban conservation toward a better integration with A literature review carried out by the author identified four main principles development, there is a need to assess how existing urban management as characteristic elements of the international approach (“the new frameworks currently operate as well as to develop systematic assessment paradigm”) to urban heritage conservation and management. These key methodologies for an adequate consideration of the gap between concepts were transformed into four specific sections of the assessment cultural heritage management and sustainable urban development. framework developed by the author, working as initial coding categories for carrying out the assessment. Then, four (section 1,2 and 4) or five (section 5) OBJECTIVE qualitative coding items have been associated to each of these sections to delineate specific operational parameters to be considered during the analysis. The objective of this poster is to propose a way to develop a critical assessment of local urban management policies in order AN ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORKS to evaluate if the new paradigm’s principles have been already incorporated into local urban management policies and how. With this objective, it presents the assessment framework developed by the author that allows to evaluate and compare diferent kind and levels of regulatory and planning tools involved in a (or more) urban management system(s). It presents the results of its application on the case study of Florence (Italy).
METHODS AND MATERIALS
1st Phase: Definition of a sample urban management policies to be assessed Considering that the purpose of this research is not an exhaustive assessment of all the policies involved in the urban management system (including infrastructure and mobility, education, environment, pollution, garbage, culture and sport, etc.), but the evaluation of those policies directly and currently involved in the conservation, management and development of Florence’s historic urban landscape, only a selection of the most recent and publicly available plans and specific regulations of these three sectors was carried out. They were selected according to a multi-sectorial and a multi-scalar perspective: multi-sectorial because they refer to the research sectors of interest (heritage conservation, heritage management, urban and territorial planning and socio-economic development) and multi-scalar because they belong to the four levels involved in the urban management system (regional, provincial, local and World Heritage). Moreover, the data collected from the text-based sources were supplemented and validated by semi-structured interviews carried out with relevant local stakeholders (policy makers, officers, academics and professional experts) involved in the definition and implementation of these documents.
RESULTS
Francesca Giliberto Politecnico di Torino (Italy) and Univerisity of Kent (UK) PhD candidate jointly supervised (co-tutelle) [email protected] The importance of the role of the Municipality in the implementation of the Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape. The case of Cuenca, Ecuador
This study is conceived as a new This project also aims to ela- Specific product: elaboration way to approach the conserva- The Committee inscribed the borate a avant guard proposal tion and intervention of Cuenca of a methodology proposal ba- site on the World Heritage List to base the future develop- sed on the HUL approach, as a City, taking into account that its on the basis of criteria (ii), (iv) ment of Cuenca City accor- historic centre was included in model for heritage conserva- and (v). ding to its cultural values. the World Heritage List (WHL) in tion in other cities of Ecuador. 1999. © Sebastian Astudillo © Sebastian Astudillo © Sebastian Astudillo © Sebastian Astudillo Questions gentrification socioeconomic Geography Besides the ones included in the Decla- changes Environment ration, which are the heritage values of extreme urban architecture Other elements of the Historic Centre of Cuenca? development nature Which are the elements that threat or benefit the conservation of the cultu- lack of ral heritage in Cuenca City? tourism Why it was it necessary to implement HUL approach in maintenance + How the cultural heritage of the city Cuenca? Urban can become a resource for the sustai- threatened heritage (Urban Morphology/ nable development of the Cuenca? mobility buildings Citizens’ perceptions/ and trafc How to understand in a collective way social processes) Cuenca’s cultural heritage values and conservation challenges ? real estate investment emigration and Which are the strategies of the local immigration government that allow the sustainable = abandoned modern HERITAGE VALUES management of the the cultural and natural heritage of the city in a sustai- heritage in “El Ejido” proliferation of poor © PUH_C Team © Karina Rivera nable way? contemporary Project: Reassessment of the Cultural and Natural Heritage of the city of Cuenca Goals Six steps for implemeting Historic urban landscape from the strategies of sustainable development supported in the Recommendation approach on the Historic Urban Landscape (PUH_C). Building a research methodology for: MAP RESOURCES: natural, economic and human
-New Patrimonial view (HUL city as a whole) 1.Asses the state of conservation of the city REACH CONSENSUS ON WHAT TO -Interdisciplinary PROTECT: values and atributes -Role of the citizen Multidisciplinary Perspective 2.Identify the cultural values of the city (besides the ones acknowledge by the 1999 ASSES VULNERABILITIES to 1. Anthropology change and development 2. Citizen participation 3.Identify the urban impacts that afect the cultural he- INTEGRATE THESE ELEMENTS in 3. Geology ritage values of the city. the development plan of the city 4. Aarchitecture 4.Elaborate strategic guide for cultural heritage 5. Environment intervention in Cuenca PRIORITIZE ACTIONS for conservation and 6. Economy development 7. Archaeology 5.Urban indicators ESTABLISH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS and normative © Fausto Cardoso (UNESCO, 2011; Veldpaus and management framework et al, 2013)
METHODOLOGY PHASES: PHASE 2: IDENTIFICATION OF CULTURAL VALUES AND ATTRIBUTES:
ANALYSIS: STEP 2: REACH CONSENSUS OUR IDEA FORCE IS: “We want a heritage, PHASE 1: alive, habitable and aware Cuenca” STEP 3: ASSESS VULNERABILITY STEP 1: MAP RESOURCES What elements of the Historic Urban Landscape are being afected, specially in the field of design and ar- 1. Territorial and urban character chitectural heritage? -Geomorphological analysis
-Environmental analysis ąŗ*ŗ'/ -)/$1 ŗ(*$'$/4ŗąŗ.. ..( )/ŗ*!ŗ-#$/ - -Normative analysis, /0-'ŗ*% /ŗąŗ &ŗ*!ŗ&)*2' " ŗąŗ*ŗ()" ( )/ŗ -Historical-cartographic analysis (* '.ŗąŗ**-ŗ- '/$*).ŗ2$/#ŗ"- )ŗ.+ ŗąŗ &ŗ*!ŗ -Density of occupation and use analysis 2- ) ..ŗąŗ*)*($ŗ- .*0- 2. Heritage character © PUH_C Team
-Anthropological analysis STEP 4:INTEGRATE IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT -Archaeological analysis FRAMEWORK and STEP 5: PRIORITIZE -Economic activities ACTIONS, RETURN OF INFORMATION TO THE -Architectural typologies analysis COMMUNITY. VISIONING CONFERENCE 3. Perceptions © PUH_C Team Socioeconomic Architecture Environment Normative Culture -Image review Proposals V Proposals V Proposals V Proposals V Proposals V -Citien participation Historical Centre pe- 25 Promotion of housing in 18 Transport (mobility):- 20 Establish a compre- 19 The revitalization of 17 destrian the historic center Quality public trans- hensive, inclusive public space through port, alternative trans- and interdisciplinary the difusion and so- © PUH_C Team port, reduced space normative that is cialization of cultural for car continually asses- heritage activities Despite the efort displayed sed, updated and during the execution of the PHASE 3: IDENTIFICATION OF LANDSCAPE massively dissemi- UNITS AND ELABORATION OF LANDSCAPE FILES nated Project, the lack of continuity Holistic territorial 15 Strengthen and create 13 BIOLOGICAL PLAN- 17 Policies for Educa- 18 To Develop clear he- 13 ASSESSMENT planning. Citizen par- spaces of social inclu- NING (nurseries, bio- tion: Formal, Orga- ritage management from the Municipality as well ticipation.Environ- sion with cultural activi- logical cadastre, citi- nizations, Church, policies, that allow to as the scarce follow-up of ac- mental protection. ties zen action, inclusion Business, Strategic document and to ac- Organization residen- and increase of green Partners company the herita- tions, constitutes the main ris- tial use. areas) ge processes making ks. To allow a permanence, The them viable but never encapsulating them Municipality as the institution Architecture takes 4 Integration design with 15 Alternative energy im- 6 Culture as an axis 10 Generation of syste- 3 in charge of heritage manage- advantage of climatic nature plementation for development.In- matic and technical conditions terdisciplinary Dialo- processes for the ment in Cuenca should guaran- gues.Social partici- registration of intan- tee the application of the Re- pation.Research and gible heritage. Documentation commendation and, in specific Profitability and social 3 Raise awareness of chil- 13 Industrial sector con- 5 Propose new stages 2 the actions resulted during the diversity. Priority of dren trol of study in the city to local resources integrate archaeologi- Visionary Conference as the cal sites Recognition and 1 Conservation and reco- 9 Take advantage of the 2 result of the participatory pro- © PUH_C Team strengthening (ur- very of typologies, in- resources ofered by cess. Likewise, it is Municipa- ban-rural) troducing new materials archaeological sites.
UNIDAD 4 Ámbito territorial _ Unidad 4 and construction techni-
A AN NTON O TONIO IO VE R VEG G E A A MU MUÑO ÑOZ D Z AN R CARACTERÍSTICAS DE PARTIDA TONIO V O EGA M UÑ C OZ A A S ± ÑSIMBOLOGÍA I Ñ A lity’s responsibility to use the A U ± P P L S S E E 1 . V. V ± E - A A L Límite Unidad de Paisaje L 2 A
E C C ques A LL L G E A C G A L SPAR A C S SP AN A AR SA Deslinde Predial A GURI NG A MA P URIM C G A P C A S A ALLE B PAR SA A NG URIM C O A
C L -
Infracciones - A A V AV A . HU A . M R H N UR TAD N TA Y O D O D Y O L E Infring e normativa A D N M M L E E L E A L A M M RIS U ND E E G E E C A U O U N R I A IS D L H Z U C U L A A O U AM H N L L ZA M G A . I A A R M E G G R G . I A I S V I R I C Deterioro de inmueble B A L M V J O A M M M SE
L A . AM A O O R O O N N N N Publicidad en fachada A A A H
. M M M M E A R S R R Rethinking a mobility 3 S IM J IS R C E O E A E N S L J O E B O R O H S H Implantaciones radioeléctricas LIV P E L R A third and fourth tool proposed H A R R MA E R O R T
R L
O Incumple CUF A A
B R C E E
R U O N I P R H RE E S I IDEN A T N OcPuREpación de vía pública E VI C C SID U G EN EN G R TE TE V V A ROC O IC N A EN A FU TE R G E C ER T OCA OLO TE F A U U ERTE A M MB G N A IA RA G V C N R E S A C A V N E O Demolición de bien Patrimonial Z C R L A O E O E M LO O U B M D IA U B G IA N Ñ C A R S C I A M O P I O A N SI B O M R D O O O V L system that allows con- N SIMBOLOGÍA IV Normativa R A N BO A R - LIV N A O A R M I
A I S S AN R R FR A A Ordenanza para la gestión y NC A A LímISCite Unidad de Paisaje O M M
M O conservación de áreas históricas y Escarpe fluvial T patrimoniales del cantón Cuenca SIMBOLOGÍA AV A Zona de Influencia de fallas: 500m SIMO . GO by UNESCO, - Regulatory sys- V. GO N BO NZALE NZ LIV Z SU ALEZ S AR AREZ Ordenanza que determiUnAaRE Zy Red hídrica Límite Unidad de Paisaje MA RISC MAR SAN AL S ISCA BLA U L S C CRE regula el uso y ocupación del Curvas de Nivel C/5m ANTO N A necting the center with IO Estado regular JO P SE S U A suelo en el área de El Ejido CRE Vías históricas C
- Valoración Patrimonial (Área de influencia y zona A MAR MAR r ISCA N ISC Arboles Patrimoniales L A A Y L NTO SUCR N A E tampón del Centro Histórico) IO JO A SE U Ambiental O L SU I CR H Margen de Protección_50m E R 0 V . E S 8 A V N A TA R E TE A Reforma, actualización y RE D R SA L Emergente Espacios públicos y áreas verdes L A O
A B G C codificación de la ordenanza E A O A I Geología V Negativo G L N G E E E the rest of the city wi- 1 que sanciona el Plan de O V U V E T
Z L C N L Z L N E MAacizos de muy baja resistencia L E E L O A E Sin Valor L O J A A Ñ U Ordenamiento Territorial del E R U A Ñ U N M L R E J A C N A PR tems and Financial- in order O R R E A E N M SID O G D IL E A R L N D A O TE A Macizos de baja resistenR cia C D cantón Cuenca. R O R R M Valor Arquitectonico A D R O OV M O A O O C B
S Determinaciones para el uso S S I O A Macizos de alta y media resistencia I A U Valor Arquitectonico B L N M M y ocupación del suelo P O O S JE T O T . 3 T D N JU JU E N AN J AN B. 0 O 75 150 300 m A AR STHI PR VIE AMI ELE PRE ESID MB LLO SIDE ENTE RE NTE C COR 0 62,5 125 250 m ORD thout harming structu- DO OV 0 50 100 200 m - VA A to implement step 6 form the Percepción ciudadana _ Unidad 4 res and visuals