IN PURSUIT OF COMPATIBILITY AS A FUNCTION OF VISUAL CONTINUITY WITH REFERENCE TO THE GROUND RIBBON IN URBAN SPACES

ELSEMARY, YASMEEN

IN PURSUIT OF COMPATIBILITY AS A FUNCTION OF VISUAL CONTINUITY WITH REFERENCE TO THE GROUND RIBBON IN URBAN SPACES

Document Type : Scientific and technological

Author

YASMEEN ELSEMARY

Lecturer Assistant - Modern Academy for Engineering and Technology

Abstract

There has been a growing public dissatisfaction with the visual impact of the built environment in the local Cairene context in the past few decades. There is a quite difference between public taste and the professional scale of measurement. It is argued that this dissatisfaction is a result of the lack of empirical studies that validate urban design controls.
The aim of this paper is to verify local contexts’ visual compatibility levels. A survey is conducted in two different local districts exploring the architectural features leading to visual compatibility from the perspective of the professionals on one hand and the laymen on the other. The compatibility ratings were analyzed by Regression. The results outline factors affecting the visual compatibility in Cairo, highlighting non-homogeneous facades, testing and evaluating the different architectural features and physical attributes which replicate or contrast with the facades. These outcomes may help overcome the problems we are facing nowadays in streets and residential compounds where architects and urban designers dismiss public taste in the design of local urban environments.

Keywords

References

1- Abu-Obeid, N., Malkawi, F. K., Nassar, K., Al-eideh, B., “Cognitive-Mathematical Approaches for Evaluating Architectural Contextual Fit”, pp. 164-167, 2009.

2- Auburn, T. and Barnes, R., “Producing place: A neo-Schutzian perspective on the psychology of place”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, volume 26, www.elsevier.com, pp.38-43, 2006.

3-Brolin, B. C., “Architecture in context: Fitting new buildings with old”, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, p.35, 2002.

4- Groat, L., “Contextual Compatibility in Architecture”, 1988, in D., Canter, M., krumpn, D., Ska (eds), “Environmental Perspectives”, Aldershot, Avebery, pp.224-233, 1988.

5- Groat, L., “Contextual Compatibility in Architecture: an issue of personal taste?” in D., Canter, M., krumpn, D., Ska (eds), “Environmental Perspectives”, Aldershot, Avebery, pp.230-233, 1988.

6- Lynch, K., “The Image of the City”, Harvard College, United States of America, pp.50-80, 1960.

7-Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M., “A Pattern Language: Towns, buildings, construction”, New York, NY: Oxford University, p.10, 1977.

8- Jencks, C., and Kropf, K., “Theories and Manifestoes of Contemporary Architecture”, Academy Editions, Great Britain, pp. 8-19, 1999.

9- Cullen, G., “Townscape”, Springer, pp.100-110, 1991.

10- Cullen, G., “The Concise Townscape”, Routledge, p.77, 2012.