The aim of the lesson is to explore an urban space by its environmental, physical, economical and social dimension. Also in this lesson politics of intercommunication will be evaluated in local and global scale and basic intercommunication concepts will be discussed.
Prerequisite(s)
Course Code Course Name…
Corequisite(s)
Course Code Course Name…
Special Requisite(s)
The minimum qualifications that are expected from the students who want to attend the course.(Examples: Foreign language level, attendance, known theoretical pre-qualifications, etc.)
Lesson will be taught by examples and visual materials. Student will prepare a presentation and a case study area will be evaluated in the final.
Principle Sources
· APPLEYARD, D., 1981, Livable Streets, Berkeley University of California Press.
· FREUND, P., MARTIN, G., 1996, Otomobilin Ekolojisi, Ayrıntı Yayınları, Istanbul.
· GEHL, J.,GEMZOE, 2004, “Public Spaces Public Life”, Danish Architectural Press, Kopenhag.
· TEKELI İ., 2010, İstanbul ve Ankara İçin Kentiçi Ulaşım Tarihi Yazıları, Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları.
· JACOBS J., 2011, Büyük Amerikan Şehirlerinin Ölümü ve Yaşamı’ , Metis Yayinlari.
· LEFEBVRE, H., 1991, The Production of Space, Çev. N.Smith, Oxford: Blackwell.
· LITMAN, T., 2001 Walking and Bicycle Planning Resources, Victoria Transport Planning Institute, Canada, www.vtpi.org.
· LYNCH, K, 2010, Kent İmgesi, Çeviren: İrem Başaran, İs Bankası Kultur Yayınları.
· SENNET R., 1996, Kamusal İnsanın Çöküşü, Çev; S. Durak ve A. Yılmaz, Ayrıntı, İstanbul.
· SENNETT, R., 1999, Gözün Vicdanı. Kent Tasarımı ve Toplumsal Yaşam, Çev. S.Sertabiboğlu-C.Kurultay, İstanbul, Ayrıntı Yayınları.
- ÜSTÜNDAĞ, K., 2002, İnsan Merkezli Bütünleşik Kentsel Ulaşım Planlama Modeli, Doktora Tezi, MSGSÜ.
Other Sources
· ACAR, İ.H., 1995, ‘Avrupa Kentsel Şartı, Hareketlilik ilkelerinin Türk Kentlerine Uygulanması’ Doktora Tezi, MSGSÜ.
· ACAR, İ.H., 1995, Kentler ve Otomobil, 2. Ulusal Trafikte Güvenlik ve Çağdaş Uygulamalar Sempozyumu, TMMOB Makine Mühendisleri Odası, İstanbul.
· ALEXANDER C., ANNİNOU A, KİNG I., 1980, A New Theory of Urban Design, Oxford.
· ATAUZ A., "Kentler, Yayalık Durumu ve Otomobiller Üzerine Bir Deneme", İnsan Çevre Kent, Dünya Yerel Yönetim ve Demokrasi Akademisi Yayınları, İstanbul 1996.
· BLUMENFELD, H., 1972, The Modern Metropolis, Ed. P. Spreiregen, MIT Press, London.
· BUCHANAN, C., 1981, Bus Priorities in London, Final Report of London Regional Department.
· CARMEN H., 1990, The Pedestrian and City Traffic, Belhaven Press, London and NewYork.
· ÇELIK Z.,FAVRO D., INGERSOLL R., Ç: ALTINOK B., 2007 “Sehirler ve Sokaklar”, Kitap Yayınevi, Ġstanbul.
· COSTA LOBO, M., 2000, Location Guideline, Kentsel Tasarım Sempozyumu, Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
· CROWHURST,S., LENNARD H., 1995, Livable Cities Observed, Gondolier Press Book, California.
· DELEON J., "Bir Tuhaf 'Asansör'", İstanbul, Sayı 7, Ekim 1993.
· Department of Environmental Transportation, 2000, Research Changing The Priorities, London.
· Development in Practice Sustainable Transport, 1996, A World Bank Publication.
· ENGWICHT, D., 1993 , Reclaming our cities & towns: Better Living with Less Traffic, New Society Publishers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
· ERNISH E., HARRISON P., YUVAN J., Transportation Alternatives, 1998, “Streets For People-Traffic Calming In Your Neighborhood”
· European Commission, Directorate-General forthe Environment, 2004 “Reclaiming City Streets For People, Chaos or Quality of Life?”
· FRIEDMAN, S., 1989 , City Moves A Users Guide to Way Cities Work, Mc. Grow Hill, NewYork
· FUNAHASHI, K., 1995 , An Environment – Behavior Studies Perspective on the City, The Wheel Extended, No:3, Japan.
· Gehl Architects& Transport for London, 2003, “London Public Life Survey”, www.gehlarchitects.com
· GRATZ, R., 1994 , The Living City: How America’s Cities Are Being Revitalized by Thinking Small in a Big Way, Washington.
· GÜREL, S., 1995 , Planning and The Science of Human Settlements, Ekistics, July-Aug,Sept-Oct, Now-Dec.
· HAAS-KLAU, C., 1990 , The Pedestrian and The City Planning, Belhaven Press, London-NewYork.
· HAMİLTON, K., HOYLE S., 1992, Moving Cities, Transport Connections Unsettling Cities, Transport Makes and Remakes The City.
· HANS BLUMENFELD, 1996, "Kentsel Ulaşım Sorununun Gerçekleri ve Yalanları", Kent ve Kültürü, Cogito, Sayı 8.
· HOOK, W. Implementig the Kyoto Protokol in the Transport Sector,www.itdp.org/read/KYOTO.doc www.itdp.org/read/KYOTO.doc,
· Institute for Transportation& Development Policy, Gehl Architects, 2010, “Our Cities, Ourselves – 10 Principles for Transport in Urban Life”, New York, http://www.ourcitiesourselves.org/
· JACOBS, J., 1961 , The Death and Life of Great American Cities Random House, New York.
· KANTAR, ÜSTÜNDAĞ, K., 1994 , Bus Priority System in Public Transportation Case Study Topkapı-Aksaray Busway Transit in İstanbul, Master Thesis Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
· KARABAY, H., 1993 , ‘Kentlileşmede Etkin Bir Politika Yayalaştırma ve Araçları’ Kentsel Tasarım Programı,Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İTÜ. İstanbul.
· Kentsel Ulaşım ve Planlama Komisyonu, 2002 , I. İstanbul Kentiçi Ulaşım Şurası İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi.
· KUNTAY, O. 1994 , Yaya Mekanı, Ayıntap Yayıncılık, Ankara, S 53
· KUTLU, K., 1975 , Trafik Tekniği, İTÜ İnşaat Fakültesi, Yollar ve Trafik Kürsüsü Yayınları, İstanbul.
· l. Kentiçi Ulaşım Şurası, birinci 2002 , Kent ve Ulaştırma Planlaması Komisyonu Raporu, İstanbul Büyük Şehir Belediyesi Yayınları, İstanbul
· LASH, S., URRY, J., 1987 , The End of Capitalism, Sage.
· LASH, S., URRY, J., 1994 , Economies of Science and Space, Sage.
· LE CORBUSİER, 2000 , ‘Yol: Doğanın Bağrındaki Plastik Araç’ Cogito, Yapı Kredi Yayınları, Düşünce Dergisi, Sayı 24 Güz, İstanbul.
· LEFEBVRE, H., 1996 , “Right to the City”, Writtings on Cities: Henri Lefebvre, Ed. E.Kofman-E.Lebas, Blackwell Publ.
· LEFEBVRE, H., 1998 Modern Dünyada Gündelik Hayat, Çev. I.Gürbüz, İstanbul, Metis Yayınları.
· LEFEBVRE, H., l991 , The Critique of Everyday Life, ing.Çev.John Moore, Verso.
· LUSHER L.,SEAMAN M., 2008, “Streets to Live By”, Shin-peiTsay, Transalt.org
· LYNCH, K., 1981 , A Theory of A Good City Form, The MIT Press, Cambridge.
· MCNEILL, D., 2000 , “The Concept of Sustainable Development”, Global Sustainable Development in the Twenty First Century, Keekok Lee, Alan Holland, Desmond McNeill Eds Edinburgh University Press.
· MORLOK, E, 1978 Introduction toTransportation Engineering and Planning,Transportation in Society, s,33 Mc Grow Hill
· MUMFORD, L. ‘The Highway and the City’, New York, The New American Library of World Litreature,1964.s.254
· National Consumer Council, A Consumer Review of the Pedestrian Environment, 1987 , What’s Wrong With Walking? Appendix B, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office
· New York City Department of Transportation, 2009, Streets Design Manuel, www.nyc.gov/dot
· New York City Transportation Departmant, Gehl Architect, 2008 “World Class Streets: Remaking New York City’s Public Realm”, New York.
· NYC Streets Renaissance, 2010, Livable Streets- From An Auto- Centric Policy To A City Of Great Streets, www.nycstreets.org
· ORTUZA, J. De D. L., WILLUMSE, G., 1989 , “ Models and Their Role”, Modelling Transport, Wiley, United Kingdom
· Pedestrian Master Plan, 1998 Pedestrian Transportation Program, City of Portland. www.vtpi.org.
· PETERS, D., 1996 , “Habitat II The City Summit; Will it Lead to Sustainable Cities?”, Sustainable Transport, I.T.D.P, Number 6, New York.
· PORTER,C. SUHRBIER,J. SCHWARTZ,W., 1999 , Forecasting Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel; State of the Practice and Research Needs, TRB Annual Meeting www.nas .edu/trb
· Project for Public Spaces, Inc., 2008, Streets as Places- Using Streets to Rebuild Communities, New York.
· PRYKE, M. MASSEY, D. 1999 Unsettling Cities, Routledge, The Open University
· REPLOGLE, M., 1993 , Traffic Cells: A Key To Producing Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Environment, Presented at TRB Annual Meeting.
· REPLOGLE, M., 1994 , Integrating Transportation Management Strategies, Presented at TRB Conferanceon TDM.
· REPLOGLE, M., 1995 , Evaluating Travel Behavior Effects of Alternative Transportation, Land Use and Urban Design Project. Washington DC. Region.
· REPLOGLE, M., 1995 , Integrating Pedestrian and Bicycle Factors into Regional Transportation Planning Models, Environmental Defense Fund, Transport Forcasting Model CD, USA.
· RUPPERT, W., 1996 , Bisiklet, Otomobil, Televizyon, Kabalcı, İstanbul.
· SENNET, R., 1996 , The Conscience of the Eye: The Design a Social Life of the Cities.
· TEKELİ İ. , OKYAY, T., 1981, Dolmuşun Öyküsü, Çevre ve Mimarlık Bilimleri Derneği Yayınları, İstanbul.
· TEKELİ, İ., 2001 , Modernite Aşılırken Kent Planlaması, İmge Yayınları, İstanbul.
· TEKELI, I., 2002 “Insan Haklarının Yerlesmeye ve Mekana Iliskin Boyutları Üzerine”, Insan, Çevre, Kent, Demokrasi Kitaplığı, Istanbul.
· TEZER, A. 1997 , Kentsel Ulaşım Planlamasında KUP Arazi Kullanımı Ulaşım Etkileşiminin Modellenmesi: İstanbul Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme, Doktora Tezi, İTÜ, İstanbul.
· The City Repair Project, 2003, “City Repair’s Placemaking Guidebook”, A.B.D.
· The Sustainable Urban Development Reader, Edited by Stephen M. Wheeler and Timothy Beatley, Routledge, U.S.A.
· TMMOB MO/ŞPO, 2007 Kızılay’da Yayalar ve Yaya Ulaşımı: Sorunlar, Sebepler, Süreçler
· Transport Research Board, 1997 , The Role of Transit in Creating Livable Metropolitan Communities, TCRP Report 22, National Academy Press, New York.
· Transportation Alternatives, 2009, “I Walk in My Street- A Guide to Planning Successful Pedestrian Streets in New York City”, New York
Course Schedules
Week
Contents
Learning Methods
1. Week
Concept of intercommunication, planning and designing relation
Presentation – seminar - discussion
2. Week
Relations between intercommunication, traffic, spatial development
Presentation – seminar - discussion
3. Week
Relations between intercommunication and sustainability
Presentation – seminar - discussion
4. Week
Politics and strategies of sustainable intercommunication; Examples from Turkey and world
Presentation – seminar - discussion
5. Week
Spatial examples of sustainable intercommunication
Presentation – seminar - discussion
6. Week
Strategies of planning intercommunication and social consciousness
Strategies of intercommunication and urban development; mix use model, smart cities model, pedestrian access and accessibility
Presentation – seminar - discussion
10. Week
Intercommunication models
Presentation – seminar - discussion
11. Week
Case study and analyses
Technical tour
12. Week
Case study and evaluation
Technical tour
13. Week
Case study and evaluation
Technical tour
14. Week
General discussions and presentations
Presentation – seminar - discussion
15. Week
General discussions and presentations
Presentation – seminar - discussion
16. Week
Evaluating design, management, planning and intercommunication
Discussion - invited participants
17. Week
Final exam
Assessments
Evaluation tools
Quantity
Weight(%)
Program Outcomes
PO-1
To gain knowledge and understand the socio-economical and spatial components and processes which are both the subjects and the outcomes of an urban design project.
PO-2
To gain knowledge and critical awareness about the relations in between urban design and the other disciplines like architecture, urban planning, economy and sociology; and the opportunuties and threats that will arise by these relations.
PO-3
Ability to realize an urban design project or a research on urban design in a multidisciplinary process, using both the theoretical and practical knowledge infrastructure, developing new methods and techniques.
PO-4
Ability to direct socio-economical and spatial components and processes in the urban design process.
PO-5
Ability to make research, to analyse and to criticise in the area of academical knowledge and design processes, using the appropriate techniques, producing original results.
PO-6
To gain competency on conducting an indivudial research or project on urban design.
PO-7
To gain competency on working as a group member and to work out the complicated processes that will occur during the urban design.
PO-8
To gain competency to transfer the knowledge gained using a foreign language, both in verbal and visual way, via contemporary computer programmes and techniques.
PO-9
To gain competancy to produce an original academical/scientific research, to present and to discuss in a dialectical framework.
PO-10
To gain competency on strategical decision making as a component of the urban design project and to produce original solutions considering ethical values.
Learning Outcomes
LO-1
Analyzing and informing intercommunications socio-economic and spatial processes.
LO-2
Have an artifice to team work about intercommunications inter disciplinary dimension.
LO-3
Improving the explanation skill about current dynamics of urban space
LO-4
Having a competence for to evaluate and method improve techniques
LO-5
Gaining holistic perception rather than discrete solutions
