![Sample our Built Environment journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5926/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Built-Environment.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The paper examines theoretical and analytical premises for developing a systematic characterisation of spatial heritage in the urban landscape. Spatial heritage is proposed as alternative and active link between material and immaterial agencies in the formation of the cultural landscape over time. We probe the application of interdisciplinary research at the interface of spatial history, urban heritage, and space syntax studies to expand heritage definitions and understand the role of diachronic spatial elements in urban sustainability. With the use of space syntax analytical methods, we test quantitative descriptions of typological definition of ‘gateway-pathways’ in the urban landscape. The term refers to routes that historically connected peripheral settlements to the urban core of contemporary cities. The typology was developed during on-going research by the first author at the University of Zagreb as a part of Heritage Urbanism project with reference to a sample of 18 Central European cities that were formerly provincial capital cities of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. This paper looks at the city of Zagreb, Croatia and assesses its historic pathway typologies via syntactical analysis using the transect method established by Bill Hillier. Results give a quantitative validation of the spatial significance of some historical urban pathways over others.
Acknowledgments
Syntactic research was conducted by Tamara Zaninović as guest researcher at The Bartlett School of Architecture in UCL, in 2016. The research was partially supported by the Croatian Science Foundation under the project ‘Heritage Urbanism – Spatial and Urban Models for Revival and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage’ (HERU HRZZ-2032; head of the project Prof.dr.sc. Mladen Obad Šćitaroci; 2014-2018) and University of Zagreb founding under the research called ‘Urbanscape Emanation’ (head of the project Prof.dr.sc. Bojana Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci, 2014-2016).
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. Rodwell, ‘Sustainability and the holistic approach’; and Tweed, and Sutherland, Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development.
2. Pendlebury, ‘Conservation values, the authorised heritage discourse and the conservation-planning assemblage’; and Fredheim and Khalaf, ‘The significance of values’.
3. Guzmán et al., ‘Measuring links between cultural heritage management and sustainable urban development’.
4. Specifically, it draws on research undertaken by the first author on the project sub-theme of street heritage in Central European context.
5. Taylor and Lennon, ‘Cultural landscapes’, 538.
6. Hillier and Vaughan, ‘The city as one thing’.
7. Hillier, ‘The architecture of the urban object’.
8. Hillier, ‘Space is the machine’.
9. ibid., 125–27.
10. Harvey, Social justice and the city; Hillier and Leaman, ‘The man-environment paradigm and its paradoxes’; and Lefebvre, The Production of Space.
11. Griffiths, ‘Persistence and change in the spatio-temporal description of Sheffield parish’.
12.. Tweed and Sutherland, ‘Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development’.
13.. Smith, Uses of Heritage.
14.. Harvey, ‘Heritage pasts and heritage presents’; and Taylor, ‘Cultural landscapes and Asia’.
15.. Harvey, ‘Heritage pasts and heritage presents’.
16. Hillier, ‘Spatial sustainability in cities’.
17. Soini and Birkeland, ‘Exploring the scientific discourse on cultural sustainability’.
18. Tunbridge, ‘Whose Heritage To Conserve?’; Lennon, ‘Cultural heritage management’ Pendlebury, ‘Conservation values, the authorised heritage discourse and the conservation-planning assemblage’; and Torre, ‘Values and heritage conservation’.
19. Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, Gehl, Cities for People; and Thomas, Placemaking.
20. Jacobs, Great Streets; and Griffiths, ‘Spatial culture, processional culture’.
21. Hillier and Hanson, The Social Logic of Space; and Hillier, ‘Space is the machine’.
22. See note 8 above.
23. Hillier and Hanson, The Social Logic of Space, 14, 147.
24. Griffiths, ‘The high street as morphological event’.
25. Griffiths, and Lünen, ‘Spatial cultures’.
26. Schlüter, ‘Bemerkungen zur Siedlungsgeogra phie’.
27. Taylor, ‘Cultural landscapes and Asia’.
28. Taylor and Lennon, ‘Cultural landscapes’.
29. Harvey and Waterton, ‘Editorial: Landscapes of Heritage and Heritage Landscapes’.
30. Bandarin and van Oers, The Historic Urban Landscape; and Bandarin and van Oers, Reconnecting the city.
31. Page 3 in the ‘Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape’ by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization from Paris, 10 November 2011 https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-638-98.pdf [Accessed: 24 July 2018].
32. Palaiologou and Griffiths, ‘The Uses of Space Syntax Historical Research’.
33. See note 11 above.
34. Griffiths, ‘The use of space syntax in historical research’.
35. Rodwell, ‘Sustainability and the holistic approach’; and Guzmán, et al., Measuring links between cultural heritage management.
36. Veldpaus, et al. ‘Urban heritage’.
37. Marić, et al. ‘Gateway-pathway Heritage and Urban Growth’.
38. Biszak et al. ‘Cartographic heritage’.
39. Ibid.
40. Taylor, ‘Cultural landscapes and Asia’, 14.
41. Marić and Nataša, ‘Petrinjska Street in Zagreb’; and Marić et al., ‘Recreating Human Scaled Streets’.
42. See note 33 above.
43. See note 11 above.
44. See note 36 above
45. See note 33 above.
46. Vaughan et al. ‘Beyond the suburban high street cliché’; Törmä et al., ‘High street changeability’.
47. Palaiologou, ‘High street transactions and interactions’.
48. Hillier, ‘Centrality as a process’.
49. Ibid.
50. Hillier, ‘Space is the machine’; and Hillier, ‘Centrality as a process’.
51. Skalamera et al. Zagreb na geodetsko-katastarskim zemljovidima i u zemljišnim knjigama, exhibition catalogue.
52. Milić, Razvoj grada kroz stoljeća II; Milić, Razvoj grada kroz stoljeća III; Jukić, ‘Strukturalne promjene rubnih dijelova grada’; and Marić, et al. ‘Gateway-pathway Heritage and Urban Growth’.
53. https://www.zagreb.hr/odluka-o-donosenju-generalnoga-urbanistickog-plana/89158 [Accessed: 24 July 2018].
54. Mrak-Taritaš, ‘Urban Development Plan’, 232
55. Hillier and Hanson, The Social Logic of Space; and Penn, ‘Space syntax and spatial cognition’.
56. City Office for the Strategic Planning and Development of the City / Gradski ured za strategijsko planiranje i razvoj Grada, Sektor za strategijske informacije i istrazivanja.
57. These are: Maksimir park, with the zoo area; Bundek park near River Sava, with the lake and the hippodrome area; and finally, Jarun park area which is the main recreational area of the city.
58. Dino et al, ‘Informality of sprawl?’; Dino et al, ‘Autocratic planning systems challenged by unregulated urbanisation’; and Dino et al., ‘The post-socialist urban transformation of Tirana in historical perspective’, analyse urban transformations of Tirana (Albania) in terms of urban morphology by looking at built form and street networks during two different political ruling and planning authorities. Shpuza, Evolution of street networks in Adriatic and Ionian coastal cities 1769-2007; and Shpuza, ‘Allometry in the syntax of street networks’ gives detailed syntactic comparison of the spatial configurations of Adriatic and Ionian cities.
59. Hillier et al., ‘Normalising least angle choice’, 155.
60. Hillier and Iida, ‘Network effects and psychological effects’.
61. Turner, ‘Depthmap’.
62. Hillier, ‘Centrality as a process’; and Hillier, et al., ‘Normalising least angle choice’, 155
63. Timár et al., ‘Digitized maps of the Habsburg Empire’.
64. Ibid.
65. Ibid.
66. Ibid.
67. Hillier, ‘Centrality as a process’.
68. See note 48 above.
69. Pinho and Oliveira, ‘Cartographic analysis in urban morphology’; and Dhanani, ‘Suburban built form and street network development in London’.
70. Griffiths, ‘The high street as morphological event’; and Palaiologou, ‘High street transactions and interactions’.
71. Ashworth, ‘From history to heritage’, 16.
72. See note 51 above
73. Vaughan et al. ‘Beyond the suburban high street cliché’.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Tamara Zaninović
Tamara Zaninović, M.Arch. (born Marić in 1986), is a research and teaching assistant at the Department of Urban Planning, Spatial Planning and Landscape Architecture at the Faculty of Architecture, the University of Zagreb where her research is a part the project ‘Heritage Urbanism’ (HERU HRZZ 2032). She is a PhD Student at Vienna University of Technology (TU Wien), supervisors: O. Univ. Prof. Richard Stiles, PhD (TU Wien) and Prof. Bojana Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci, PhD (Univ. of Zagreb). She was a guest PhD student in London in 2016 at the Space Syntax Laboratory, the Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL, supervisors: Sam Griffiths, PhD and Garyfalia Palaiologou, PhD. Area of research: urban landscape, streets, heritage, walkspaces and space syntax. [email protected]
Garyfalia Palaiologou
Garyfalia Palaiologou is a Lecturer in Architecture and Urban Studies at Loughborough University, UK. Earlier she was Research Fellow at the UCL Bartlett School of Architecture at the Space Syntax Laboratory, funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). She holds a PhD in Architectural and Urban Morphology, and a Master’s in Advanced Architectural Studies from UCL. Her PhD research investigated the 20th century urban transformation of London terraced houses and Manhattan row houses, focusing on street micromorphology and street liveability. Her post-doctoral research looked at the use of space syntax methods in delimitation practices for UNESCO historic urban landscapes. In 2017, she co-organised the Historic Urban Landscape Forum (hulforum.org) networking initiative, under UNESCO patronage. ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2000-1081; twitter: @falli_p
Sam Griffiths
Sam Griffiths studied history at the University of Sheffield and took his doctorate at UCL’s Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment. He is Associate Professor in the Space Syntax Laboratory at the Bartlett School of Architecture. His research is highly interdisciplinary bringing formal spatial morphological methods to questions in urban social history, and historical perspectives to questions of urban design. Recent publications include an edited collection for Routledge Spatial Cultures: towards a new social morphology of cities (2016). He has published widely on the spatial culture of Victorian Sheffield and suburban high streets. He is currently working on a book for Routledge look at the role of architecture in conceiving and writing the urban past.
Bojana Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci
Bojana Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci is a graduate architect and has a PhD in the field of architecture and town planning. She is a professor at the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Zagreb and the Head of the Department of town-planning, spatial planning and landscape architecture. Her teaching subjects are: landscape architecture and town-planning at undergraduate, graduate and doctoral studies. She is author/co-author of scientific books, scientific articles, scientific studies from the field of traditional architecture, landscape architecture, town-plans and studies and designs from the field of garden and landscape architecture. She is a scientific-researcher at European project ‘Smart U Green’ and Croatian research project ‘Heritage Urbanism’. She is a reviewer of scientific-research projects in the field of architecture and town planning. She has taken part at numerous national and international scientific-expert conferences with topics in the field of protection of traditional architecture, cultural heritage and landscape architecture. http://scitaroci.hr/; [email protected]