The Return of the Architect-Planner?

Manley, Sandra; Parnaby, Richard

doi:10.1080/713691896

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One participant noted,``if you're not dealing with the building, you're dealing with planning issues'' (personal communication, 2000). Similar challenges have sparked debate about expanding the role, education, and expertise of planning and design professionals, and even calling for the`return of the architect planner' (de Schiller and Evans, 1996;Manley and Parnaby, 2000). Some participants believed that the architect and the planner were responsible for negotiating an agreement between the owner and the city about which party pays for features such as street lighting, and therefore, that they should be responsible for promoting features of climate responsive design.…”

Section: Structural Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Barriers to Incorporating Climate Responsive Design in Commercial Redevelopment

Ryser

Halseth

2008

Environ Plann B Plann Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For decades the literature on the winter cities and on urban design has explored the implications of poorly designed urban spaces on pedestrian mobility during various seasons. In Canada, however, practice in using climate responsive design principles tends to be the exception. Using a case study methodology, this paper explores the application of climate responsive design principles in the commercial redevelopment process in Prince George, British Columbia. Findings indicate that, despite expressed interest in winter city development, professionals and decision makers involved in the development permit process do not possess sufficient knowledge about climate responsive design to apply these principles to everyday practice. More importantly, knowledge about climate responsive design did not appear to be a major consideration in creating or evaluating commercial redevelopment projects. A range of educational, attitudinal, regulatory, structural, and political barriers impede the development of an institutional framework to support the implementation of climate responsive design.

show abstract

Section: Structural Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Barriers to Incorporating Climate Responsive Design in Commercial Redevelopment

Ryser

Halseth

2008

Environ Plann B Plann Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Planning students are expected to learn how to make plans of various scales and diverse functions, as well as to obtain the skills required to produce these plans such as data analysis, production of graphics, and writing. With the increasing criticism towards environmental determinism and blueprint planning in the field of spatial planning since the 1960s, many planning educators reject the term design studio, as planning is perceived as an inter-or multidisciplinary field interlinking architecture, landscape architecture and urban design to both social and political sciences (Long, 2012;Manley & Parnaby, 2000). Furthermore, planning education needs to accommodate the fact that planning often deals with long-term developments, which are taking place in a future that cannot be predicted or forecasted (Purkarthofer & Mäntysalo, 2022).…”

Section: Studio Education In Architecture and Spatial Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

A tale of four studios: Evolving planning and architecture education towards mixed modality in a post-pandemic world

Hewidy,

Purkarthofer,

Eräranta

2023

Educ Inf Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic imposed urgent challenges for educational institutions. The sudden shift from on-site teaching to online distance learning offered the possibility to examine new settings of the studio, a core element of planning and architecture education. Although the pandemic is now over, online learning has secured a fixed place in university education, and consequently, educational institutions need to reconsider studio education based on the lessons learned during the pandemic. Through studying four studios taught at Aalto University, Finland, in 2020 and 2021, this article examines student-teacher experiences, and proposes opportunities for evolving studio education. The findings show that distance learning has in general sustained the objectives of studio education. However, challenges remain especially regarding the social aspects of learning. The degree of success of online teaching varied greatly depending on the tasks and the orientation of the studio (design or strategy). Technological aids and devices also had an influence on fulfilling the pedagogical objectives of learning. Professional socialization was highly affected by the online environment both in design and planning studios and the architectural representation witnessed difficulties specifically in design studios. To evolve the studio setting, the article suggests a mixed modality model supporting the social dimension of studio teaching by combining on-site and online learning activities to enrich the learning process. Such a model can harmonize the intended learning objectives and activities with the teaching methods and modality, thus improving the social dimension of studio teaching.

show abstract

“…Given the contextual nature of spatial planning -this could proof problematic in a variety of ways including access to professional societies via accredited degrees. b. Fuzzier boundaries in terms of subjects/field of study Spatial planning from early on has been categorized as inter-or multidisciplinary (Schuster 1950), for example, between social and political sciences, engineering, landscape architecture, and urban design and architecture (e.g., Manley and Parnaby 2000). Spatial planners may also benefit from greater understanding of public health (e.g., Ford 1981), computer science and data management, biology and ecology.…”

Section: A Fuzzier Boundaries In Delivery Modesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Higher Education Futures?

Frank

2021

TrAESOP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predicting the future is a difficult and inexact business and, generally, humans are more prone to focus on immediate problems and short-term problem-solving rather than long-range planning. In fact, long-range forecasts are tricky and often rendered wrong due to catalytic events. The dramatic changes in teaching, learning, and conducting research that have seemingly catapulted Higher Education (HE) institutions into a new modus operandi over the past 24 months are a case in point. Who would have predicted that higher education would be conducted by a great many institutions almost entirely virtually and over sustained amounts of time? That academics would teach from their homes lecturing to a screen of black boxes and images? That students would do fieldwork virtually via video, embedded questions and tasks, and that the practice of research teams discussing progress and findings in person would practically vanish?

show abstract

The Return of the Architect-Planner?

Cited by 8 publications

References 2 publications

Institutional Barriers to Incorporating Climate Responsive Design in Commercial Redevelopment

Institutional Barriers to Incorporating Climate Responsive Design in Commercial Redevelopment

A tale of four studios: Evolving planning and architecture education towards mixed modality in a post-pandemic world

Higher Education Futures?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About