OVERVIEW

The design studio deals with the development of integrated urban planning and landscape design projects by understanding the morphologies of exchanges, flows and the way in which contemporary urban space is built, by cycles of transformation, reuse and regeneration. The nature of these landscapes, places of cohabitation or diffusion of a mix of users and activities prompts us questioning on the form and nature of the city, on the principles of urban design intervention, on the economic realities, social practices and future challenges.

Discussing about 'landscape' in a wider sense offers the opportunity to design on a larger scale and, at the same time, introducing a series of evolving concepts. Moving from the theoretical and methodological framework of Landscape Urbanism approach, the design studio aims to develop knowledge on the relationship among infrastructures, architecture and public space from a semantic, environmental and performative point of view.

AIMS AND CONTENT

LEARNING OUTCOMES

The Urban planning design studio, developed through a research-by-design methodology dealing with a conceptual and strategic planning approach, aims to train students to understand the structural elements, policies and transformation programs of the city and the territory. The aim is to provide analytical and design tools to outline interventions based on urban regeneration and the enhancement of existing heritage; architectural and functional qualities in relation to environmental performances; and socio-economic sustainability of the development process.

The qualifying learning outcomes are:

• the acquisition of analytical techniques to evaluate the structural elements of contexts, settlement conditions, cultural background and socio-economic trends in order to define a reference logical framework for the project;
• the acquisition of design sensitivity to verify the opportunity and sustainability of the project according to site-specific conditions;
• the ability to define the dimension of the project according to current urban planning regulations and to assess the evolution of community needs, existing urban facilities, technological accessibility and future societal challenges;
• the ability to identify the appropriate design references, through a significant collection of best-practices developed both at national and international level.

AIMS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

The design studio is aimed at learning and experimenting with methods of analysis and design techniques related urban planning and landscape urbanism, in order to develop interventions for the transformation of the urban space. The course aims to train students through critical readings and interpretation of contextual elements in relation to the themes of urban planning, the system of networks and infrastructures, as well as the design of projects that contribute to the ecological transition of the territory.

Through the urban design experimentation, the students will acquire the ability to critically interpret the morphology of urban space and open spaces in a multi-scalar dimension (macro-urban scale > design zooms) with a specific focus on sustainable planning and urban regeneration processes. The learning outcomes to be achieved during the design studio are:

1. Interpretative survey: acquiring the ability to critically read the context elements (sense of places), analysing settlement transformations and contemporary landscapes, by the use of direct and indirect survey techniques, in order to map and digitally represents the main spatial components on which defining the project proposal;
2. Project methodology: defining the functional programme, localization and characteristics of the urban design proposal, by using also reference projects to formulate basic design principles (research-by-design) and checking the feasibility of the interventions, according to the current urban planning framework and site-specific conditions (potentials and constraints);
3. Concept of the proposal: defining the design masterplan and its quality though functional and dimensional characteristics of volumes, urban services, mobility networks and open spaces, by representing the proposal’s spatial structure with a concise diagram (concept); 
4. Development process: visualizing correctly the main typological and architectural qualities of the proposal (visioning) by means of different graphic techniques (collage, render, axonometries, exploded views, bird's eye views), taking into account the sustainable development goals, as well as identifying the main phases, actors and resources for the realisation of the proposal-.

PREREQUISITES

The prior attendance of the course of Fundamentals of Urban Planning (or similar) and of the course of Fundamentals of Computer-Aided Design and principles and practices of info-graphic for the project is required.

TEACHING METHODS

The annual design studio is organised according to an in-presence teaching method by means of ex-cathedra lectures and groups desk reviews in which students are called upon to actively participate. In-depth seminars held by external experts may also be held online on Teams. Attendance at mid-term reviews and hand-in of deliverables is considered mandatory.

The projects will be developed by the students in groups of 2/3 people (2 architects + 1 landscape architect). The progress stages will be organized according to a monthly sequence of deliverables, while ex-tempore exercises will be dispensed to deepen the notion developed during the main lectures. In parallel, each working group will have to develop independently a desk-research edited in 3 design readings (territorial/urban/local scale) as mentioned in the course Syllabus. These integrative activities will help students to expand their knowledge regarding international best practices to be used as reference material for the urban design interventions.

The teaching will be carried out with lectures by the mentor, theory lectures with ex-tempore exercises, presentation of significant case studies (readings) by students, seminars by guests and visiting-experts, desk reviews on a weekly basis, and two general reviews (Interim Review and Final Review). The materials to be examined are divided into 4 subsequent step of elaboration (4 Panels DIN A1 Vertical - 84.1 x 59.4 cm)

SYLLABUS/CONTENT

At the beginning of the 21st century the “infrastructural myth” seems to have lost its validity and the paradigm of landscape as infrastructure has become a primary interpretive key to read the complexity of contemporary urban systems. In this framework, the theoretical and methodological positions of Infrastructural Urbanism (Allen, Shannon 2011) and Landscape Urbanism (Waldheim, Mostafavi 2016) emerge, claiming themes such as mobility and integrated transportation management in the scope of design disciplines in order to explore in a spatial sense an architectural approach to urbanism.

From this point of view, the development of new multimodal infrastructures, whose primary objective is the integration of systems for people’s mobility, brings out a concept of dynamic public space, which can also innovate the use of consolidated and promoting regeneration interventions in a sustainable key to reconcile the housing quality at the neighbourhood scale and the needs of citizens (active public spaces). It is not surprising, therefore, if in terms of theory and design the growing attention devoted to sustainable mobility issues is a theme that connects sector policies and spatial planning tools toward the Post-Car City.

The rediscovery of the bike, in these last years, takes on a peculiar character: a symbol of the green revolution, a driver of activism and urban transformation, capable of influencing public action. The infrastructure, from a functional space can thus become a place of relationships, an opportunity for overall landscape reorganization on the principle of urban proximity as proposed by the Mayor of Paris Anne Hidalgo (2020), with the model of "15 minutes City", where all residents can reach on foot or by bicycle all the services they need.

The educational program of the urban design studio, thus combines the challenge of developing multimodal TPL networks capable of supporting a wider range of mobility and services, replacing the "destination" with the "route" as new landscapes-oriented urbanization pattern. Starting from the structural invariants of the ASPI sub-port tunnel project, the studio theme will focus on the development of 3 axes of urban transformation of the Genoa metropolitan area (Sampierdarena, Centro, Foce).

RECOMMENDED READING/BIBLIOGRAPHY

Urban planning

• Rossi A. (1966) L’Architettura della Città. Marsilio, Venezia
• Lynch K. (1969) L’immagine della città. Marsilio, Venezia
• Jacobs J. (1992) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage, London
• Secchi B. (2000) Prima lezione di Urbanistica. Universale Laterza, Roma-Bari
• Gabellini G. (2001) Tecniche urbanistiche. Carocci, Roma 2001
• Gausa M. et al. (2003) The Metapolis Dictionary of Advanced Architecture. Actar, Barcelona.
• Wolfrum S., Nerdinger W. (2008) Multiple City. Urban Concepts 1908-2008. Jovis, Berlin
• Solà-Morales M. (2008) A Matter of Things. Nai010, Amsterdam
• Mostafavi M., Doherty G. (2010) Ecological Urbanism. Lars Müller, Zürich
• Schröder J., Weigert K. (2010) Landraum: beyond rural design. Jovis, Berlin
• Ciorra P., Marini S. (2011) Recycle. Strategie per l’architettura, la città e il pianeta. Electa, Milano
• Ricci M. (2012) New Paradigms. List, Trento-Barcelona
• Baum M., Christiaanse K. (2013) City as Loft: Adaptive Reuse. ETH Honggerberg, Zürich
• Carta M. (2017) The Augmented City. A paradigm shift. List, Trento-Barcelona
• Mareggi M. (2020) Spazi aperti. Ragioni, progetti e piani urbanistici. Planum, Roma-Milano.
• Ricci M., Ferretti M. (2022) Custom Made. Senso e metodo nel progetto di architettura. Listlab, Barcelona
• Russo M., Montedoro (2022) Fare urbanistica oggi. Le culture del progetto. Donzelli, Roma

Infrastructures / Landscape

• Corboz A. (1983) ‘Le territoire comme palimpseste’ in Diogene, n. 121, pp. 14-35
• Allen S. (1999) ‘Infrastructural Urbanism’ in Points and Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City. Princeton UniPress, New York.
• Corner J., Balfour A. (1999) Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture.
• Princeton UniPress, New York, pp. 48-57.
• Donadieu P. (2002) La società paysagiste. Actes Sud, Paris
• Lanzani A. (2003) ‘Le trasformazioni insediative e paesistiche dell’Italia’, in Paesaggi italiani. Meltemi, Roma, pp. 9-202
• Dennis K., Urry J. (2009) After the Car. John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken
• Hauck T., Keller R. (2011) Infrastructural Urbanism. Addressing the In-between. DOM Publishers, Berlin
• De Meulder B., Cattor B. (2011) Figures, Infrastructures. An Atlas of roads and railways. SUN Architecture
• Ferlenga A., Biraghi M., Benno A. (2012) L’architettura del mondo. Infrastrutture, mobilità nuovi paesaggi, Editrice Compositori, Bologna.
• Reed C, Lister N.M. (2014) Projective Ecologies. Actar, New York.
• Sordi J. (2014) Beyond Urbanism, List, Trento.
• Sommariva E. (2014) Creating City. Agricoltura Urbana. Strategie per la città resiliente. List, Barcelona.
• Favargiotti S. (2016) Airports on hold. Towards resilient infrastructures. List, Barcelona.
• Doherty G., Waldheim C. (2016) Is Landscape…? Princeton Architectural Press, New York
• Waldheim C. (2016) Landscape as Urbanism: a general theory. Princeton UniPress, New York
• Martens K. (2017) Transport Justice: Designing Fair Transportation Systems. Routledge, New York
• Coppola P.L., Pucci P., Pirlo G. (2022) Urban@IT Mobilità & Città: la Post-Car city. Il Mulino, Bologna
• Cortesi I. (2022) Paesaggio al Centro. Realtà e interpretazione. Lettera Ventidue, Siracusa

Bicycle Urbanism

• Augè M. (2008) Il bello della bicicletta. Bollati Boringhieri, Torino
• Tira M., Zazzi M. (2008) Pianificare le reti ciclabili territoriali. Gangemi Editore, Roma
• Pucher J., Buehler R. (2012) City Cycling. MIT Press,Cambridge
• Lorenz F., Bufton S. (2012) ‘Beijing’s pedal-based livelihoods as a muse for bicycle urbanism’, in Zoll+, n. 19
• Bendiks S., Degros A. (2013) Cycle Infrastructure. nai010 Publishers, Rotterdam
• Gehl J., Svarre B. (2013) How to study public life. Island press, Washington.
• Bozzato S., Ceschin F.M., Ferrara G. (2017) Del viaggio lento e della mobilità sostenibile: Itinerari, paesaggi, territori, esperienze. Exòrma edizioni, Roma
• Colville-Andersen M. (2018) Copenhagenize: Guide to Bicycle Urbanism. Island Press, Washington
• Gruppo VENTO (2018) Ciclabili e cammini per narrare territori. Arte design e bellezza. Ediciclo. Portogruaro
• Sommariva E. (2018) Bicycle Culture for Urban Design. La riscoperta della mobilità lenta per il futuro di Copenhagen. AREA ‘nextGen infrastructure’, n. 158/2018, pp. 18-25
• Dorato E., Massari M. (2019) ‘Dal ciclo-attivismo alle politiche per la mobilità attiva’, atti XXI Conferenza SIU ‘Confini, movimenti, luoghi’. in Planum Publisher, Roma-Milano
• Moreno C. (2020) Droit de cité: De la "ville-monde" à la "ville du quart d'heure".Observatoire, Paris
• Dorato E. (2020) Preventive Urbanism. The Role of Health in Designing Active Cities. Quodlibet: Macerata

TEACHERS AND EXAM BOARD

Exam Board

EMANUELE SOMMARIVA (President)

VINCENZO ARIU

NICOLA VALENTINO CANESSA

LESSONS

LESSONS START

Yearly course

• I semester  _ September 18, 2023 - December 15, 2023
• II semester _ February 19, 2024 - May 24, 2024

Class schedule

The timetable for this course is available here: Portale EasyAcademy

EXAMS

EXAM DESCRIPTION

During the design studio, a project proposal will be developed according to four design development steps (graphic panels, layout DIN A1 portrait), ex-tempore exercises related to the topics addressed in the theory lessons, a research of best-practices, (3 design readings), that will constitute the final delivery materials (DIN A5 vertical booklet layout).

Guest critics and lecturers will participate during the weekly reviews and, in particular, during the Interim Review and the Final Review, formulating positions and comments useful for the development and the improvement of the project. The final mark will be established during a final presentation at the end of the summer term and will take into account the active participation of the students, the delivery of all the required materials, the attendance at classes and the quality of the work produced as a whole.

The evaluation of the projects will be based to the clarity of the proposal and its presentation, the spatial quality of the design and the graphic accuracy, the sustainability of the interventions, including their economic feasibility, as well as the student's learning process.

The final delivery of the design studio, in order to access the exam, is a project presented through the following materials:

• 4 graphics panels DIN A1 portrait (84.1 x 59.4 cm);
• booklet of readings design references DIN A5 portrait (21,0 x 14,8 cm).

ASSESSMENT METHODS

The development of the design process is based on a research-by-design methodology articulated in laboratory activities among the groups and moments of individual research by each student. The progress of the work and the assessment of students' knowledge is verified weekly. The elaboration of the graphic tables is defined as an open process that can be continuously implemented throughout the year. The dates scheduled in the calendar for intermediate deliveries represent a useful tool for students for managing the workload independently.

Interim and Final Review are two important moments in the overall assessment process of students' knowledge and in particular: at the stage of defining the urban concept and at the end of the visioning process that demonstrates the spatial and architectural quality of the intervention. The ability to effectively communicate the design proposal, to synthetically elaborate graphics, mappings and project diagrams will be tested through oral presentations and open questions in group reviews up to the exam session. The student must be able to connect and integrate the knowledge acquired during the design studio activities with those acquired during lectures.

Exam schedule