Natural conformity of a campus as a result of modelling its layout
https://doi.org/10.21285/2227-2917-2023-1-101-118
Abstract
In this work, we investigate the layout and architecture of campuses in terms of the role of natural landscapes in their space. Campus structures are considered as spatial grids in the context of their interaction with natural landscapes and their components. We studied the experience of designing a botanical garden in Columbia in a hot humid climate, the Polytechnic University in Ben Guerir in the climate of the Western Sahara and the Russian Far Eastern Federal University on Russky Island near Vladivostok. An analysis of the existing layout and development of the campus of the Irkutsk National Research Technical University was carried out. Scientific foundations for arranging interaction between campuses and environmental conditions were determined, referred to as natural conformity principles. Architectural and planning grids are the spatial basis for campus organization. The cells of planning grids are the courtyards of buildings of various purposes, squares and other public spaces. Pedestrian boulevards (malls) connect the cells and the campus as a whole. The natural conformity of the campus depends on the consistency of cells, connections and boundaries of its architectural and spatial structure with the relief, groups and arrays of plantations, as well as with the climate, light and water bodies – landscape spaces. Another important factor is orientation of the building layout to natural attractors, i.e., the most attractive natural landscapes.
About the Author
A. G. Bol'shakov
Irkutsk National Research Technical University
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Andrey G. Bol'shakov - Doctor of Architecture, Professor, Head of the Department of Architectural Design.
83 Lermontov St., Irkutsk 664074
Competing Interests:
The author declare no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article
References
1. Bolshakov A. Lessons of respect for the landscape drawn from Tulun experience. Proekt Baikal = Project Baikal. 2021;18(67):130-137. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.51461/projectbaikal.67.1767.
2. Bolshakov A.G. The culture of spatial lattices in urban planning and architecture. Irkutsk: Irkutsk National Research Technical University; 2021. 260 p.
3. Pavlova V.A., Goloshubin V.S. Nature-equivalent architecture in modern creative concepts. Arkhitektura i sovremennye informatsionnye tekhnologii = Architecture and Modern Information Technologies. 2019;1:340-355. (In Russ.).
4. Gabrichevskii A.G. Morphology of art. Moscow: Agraf; 2002. 864 p.
5. Khazanov D.B. Module in architecture. In: Questions of the theory of architectural composition. Under the general editorship of N.P. Bylinkin, D.B. Khazanov, A.G. Tsires, G.A. Shemyakin. Moscow: Stroiizdat; 1955-1958. p. 3-26.
6. Pavlov N.L. Orthogonal net as mean of forming of the material structure and as the sense of architectural space. Arkhitektura i sovremennye informatsionnye tekhnologii = Architecture and modern information technologies. 2015;S:12. (In Russ.).
7. Corbusier L. Modulor. MOD 1. MOD 2. Per. from fr. J.S. Rosenbaum, 1976. M: Stroiizdat, 1976. 237 p.
8. Duany A., Talen E. Transect planning. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2002;68(3):245266. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360208976271.
9. Hiller B., Hanson J. The social logic of space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984. 275 p.
10. Kristaller V. Theory of central places. Moya biblioteka. Available from: httpsmybiblioteka.su/944726.html [26th October 2021] (In Russ.).
11. Katz P. The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. New York: McGraw Hill Professional; 2014. 288 p.
12. Krasheninnikov A.V. Cognitive urbanism: archetypes and prototypes of the urban environment. Moscow: KURS; 2020. 210 p.
13. Yankovskaya Yu.S., Polyantseva E.R. Restricted availability areas: some aspects of architectural typology. Arkhitektura i sovremennye informatsionnye tekhnologii = Architecture and Modern Information Technologies. 2016;4:116-126. (In Russ.).
14. Bolshakov A.G. Urban topology of university campus. New Technologies and Special-Purpose Devel-opment Priorities: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2019;667(1):012014. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757899X/667/1/012014.
15. Matveev A. Interaction of cultures for the multiplication of knowledge: the campus of the Polytechnic University of Mohammed VI in Morocco from the Ricardo Bofill Bureau. Synergy in the square. Available from: https://archi.ru/world/73153/sinergiya-vkvadrate [26th October 2021] (In Russ.).
16. Moor V. Universal Space of Far Eastern Federal University. Proekt Baikal = Project Baikal. 2015;12(44):128-129. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.7480/projectbaikal.44.844.
17. Bolshakov A.G. Strategy for Irkutsk National Research Technical University (INRTU) campus development. Izvestiya vuzov. Investitsii. Stroitel'stvo. Nedvizhimost' = Proceedings of Universities. Investment. Construction. Real estate. 2019;9(2):396-407. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21285/2227-2917-2019-2-396-407.
Review
For citations:
Bol'shakov A.G. Natural conformity of a campus as a result of modelling its layout. Izvestiya vuzov. Investitsii. Stroitelstvo. Nedvizhimost. 2023;13(1):101-118. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21285/2227-2917-2023-1-101-118
Views:
118
Email this article 