Milestones in developing an integrated analytical model to assess the typological structure of the Don River coastal area within Rostov region on the example of stanitsa Starocherkasskaya
https://doi.org/10.21285/2227-2917-2021-3-500-509
Abstract
The paper examines the analytical stage (stage 2) performed during the formation of an integrated analytical model to assess the typological structure of the Don River coastal area within the Rostov region. An evaluation method for coastal territories within their structural characteristics is proposed. The substantiation stage (stage 1) of the complex analytical model allowed the goals and objectives of the coastal area analysis to bedefined. The existing problems in the coastal area of the Don River within the stanitsa Strocherkasskaya were identified. The object and subject of investigation were defined in the complex analytical model. The research object is the coastal area of the Don River located in the stanitsa Starocherkasskaya between Beregovaya and Malosadovaya streets. The research subject is the architectural and structural patterns of the coastal area development from the 1930s up to the present. A complex coastal area analysis comprises dividing all its phases into two levels: global and local. Ultimately, by applying this method, the current state can be investigated and an analytical model built for a coastal area to provide recommendations for its preservation and improvement.
About the Author
A. V. Bergman
Saint-Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anastasia V. Bergman, Post-graduate student
4 Vtoraya Krasnoarmeiskaya St., Saint Petersburg, 190005, Russia
References
1. Akristiniy V, Dikova E. The visual-landscape analysis during the integration of high-rise buildings within the historic urban environment. E3S Web of Conferences. 2018;33:01044. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20183301044.
2. Ptichnikova G. New century high risers in the core areas of historic cities in Russia. Procedia Engineering. 2016;165:1903-1910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.940.
3. Gutnov АE. Urban planning evolution. Moscow: Stroyizdat; 1984. 256 р. (In Russ.).
4. Juntti M, Lundy L. A mixed methods approach to urban ecosystem services: Experienced environmental quality and its role in ecosystem assessment within an inner-city estate. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2017;161:10-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.01.002.
5. Dossche R, Rogge E, Eetvelde VV. Detecting people’s and landscape’s identity in a changing mountain landscape. An example from the northern Apennines. Landscape Research. 2016;41:934-949. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2016.1187266.
6. Bachmayer T, Malinovich RD, Karakulova EE, Wolfarth MA, Fadel S, Gonzalez D. City and river: face to face. Izvestiya vuzov. Investitsii. Stroitelstvo. Nedvizhimost' = Proceedings of Universities. Investment. Construction. Real estate. 2017;7(2):84-90.
7. Tveit M, Ode A, Fry G. Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landscape Research. 2006;31:229-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390600783269.
8. Watts G, Marafa L. Validation of the Tranquillity Rating Prediction Tool (TRAPT): Comparative studies in UK and Hong Kong. Noise Mapping. 2017;4:67-74. https://doi.org/10.1515/noise-20170005.
9. Wright-Wendel HE, Zarger RK, Mihelcic JR. Accessibility and usability: Green space preferences, perceptions, and barriers in a rapidly urbanizing city in Latin America. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2012;107:272-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.003.
10. Carnevale E, Lombardi L, Zanchi L. Wind and solar energy: a comparison of costs and environmental impacts. Advances in Energy Research. 2016;4(2):121-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.12989/eri.2016.4.2.121.
11. Llewellyn D, Rohse M, Bere J, Lewis K, Fyfe H. Transforming landscapes and identities in the south Wales valleys. Landscape Research. 2017;44:804-821. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142 6397.2017.1336208.
12. Palmer JF. The contribution of key observation point evaluation to a scientifically rigorous approach to visual impact assessment. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2019;183:100-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.11.001.
13. Kaminski J, Benson AM, Arnold D. Contemporary issues in cultural heritage tourism. Abingdon: Routledge; 2014. 256 р.
14. Ramos IL, Bernardo F, Ribeiro SC, Eetvelde VV. Landscape identity: Implications for policy making. Land Use Policy. 2016;53:36-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.030.
15. Baharak A, Kloos М, Neugebauer С. Heritage Impact Assessment, beyond an Assessment Tool: A comparative analysis of urban development impact on visual integrity in four UNESCO World Heritage Properties. Journal of Cultural Heritage. 2021;47:199-207.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2020.08.002.
16. Wheeler R. Mining memories in a rural community: Landscape, temporality and place identity. Journal of Rural Studies. 2014;36:22-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.06.005.
17. Foo K, Gallagher E, Bishop I, Kim A. Critical landscape visualization: Introduction to LAND SI “Critical Approaches to Landscape Visualization”. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2015;142:80-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.07.014.
18. Oh K. Visual threshold carrying capacity (VTCC) in urban landscape management: A case study of Seoul, Korea. Landscape and Urban Planning. 1998;39:283-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00085-6.
19. Aras E. Effects of multiple dam projects on river ecology and climate change: Çoruh River Ba-sin, Turkey. Advances in Environmental Research. 2018;7(2):121-138. https://doi.org/10.12989/aer.2018.7.2.121.
20. Tieskens KF, Zanten BTV, Schulp CJE, Verburg PH. Aesthetic appreciation of the cultural land-scape through social media: An analysis of revealed preference in the Dutch river landscape. Land-scape and Urban Planning. 2018;177:128-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.002.
Review
For citations:
Bergman A.V. Milestones in developing an integrated analytical model to assess the typological structure of the Don River coastal area within Rostov region on the example of stanitsa Starocherkasskaya. Izvestiya vuzov. Investitsii. Stroitelstvo. Nedvizhimost. 2021;11(3):500-509. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21285/2227-2917-2021-3-500-509
Views:
85
Email this article 