% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@PHDTHESIS{Kruschwitz:64060,
author = {Kruschwitz, Claudia},
othercontributors = {Wachten, Kunibert},
title = {{U}niversität und {S}tadt : bauliche {G}enese von
{U}niversitätstypen und deren {B}edeutung im {S}tadtraum},
address = {Aachen},
publisher = {Publikationsserver der RWTH Aachen University},
reportid = {RWTH-CONV-125421},
pages = {245 S. : Ill., graph. Darst., Kt.},
year = {2011},
note = {Zsfassung in dt. und engl. Sprache; Aachen, Techn.
Hochsch., Diss., 2011},
abstract = {Based on the current structural and spatial transformations
of especially European universities, the paper studies the
various dimensions of the relationship between university
and city in a predominantly qualitative urban research in
texts and pictures in order to define the relevance of
university sites for the townscape. As a result, starting
points for planning activities are given. In a first
investigation the universities’ development of building
typologies and programmatic structure is being followed in
their communal and urban environment, whereas the second
investigation presents the current situation in respect to
the institutions’ symbolic significance and internal
activities by exploring different types of urban locations
and spatial structures. Both rely on selected examples,
which are uniformly presented. Starting with the prototypes
of college and assembly hall, the genesis shows the
development of representative ‘university palaces’,
ensembles, and campuses paralleling the institution’s
integration into the state apparatus. While the
‘university palaces’ resemble other representative
buildings of the time, the campus can be regarded as an
independent spatial form. Campuses can be found in the
following constellations: in compact composition (central,
dominant buildings with surrounding open spaces; main road),
spacious composition (central, dominant open space with
spaciously arranged surrounding buildings; ring road), and
laminar composition (mixed areas of buildings and open
spaces; road grid). Accordingly, three types of urban
settings can be defined: the seldom found fragmented,
integrated-urban setting in mostly inner-city locations, the
generally dominating, distinguishable affiliated-urban
setting in inner-city or suburban locations, and the
self-sufficient setting in mostly rural locations, which was
especially employed in the 20th century. Covering the
spectrum of mentioned types, the second investigation
studies functionally and spatially concise elements as well
as sites of movement, sojourn and representation at four
universities: at the RWTH Aachen University (D), at the
Universitet Århus (DK), at the UNAM in Mexico City (MEX),
and at the University of East Anglia in Norwich (UK). As a
result, today’s university is more closely connected to
the city as before by means of its programmatic structure
(offers to diverse population groups), by urban and regional
planning (joint or complementary building projects and
marketing), although the institutions’ area sizes and
building typologies bring forward a general introversion.
Therefore, it is essential to counteract the latter by a
good integration into the urban traffic system and into the
surrounding townscape. The investigations show, that
universities’ public spaces are strongly demanded for
activities of sojourn and representation by internal users.
Attractively designed spots, functional and spatial
hierarchies as well as a functional heterogeneity (central
and teaching/research facilities, catering and leisure
facilities) increase activities of sojourn while considering
the specifics of the university lifestyle of offering both
spots of discourse and spots of seclusion. The
institution’s representation relies on spots of collective
events and on symbolic buildings and elements. Among the
symbols are the per se representative historic main
buildings, the historic central buildings along with the
main open space of campuses and selected modern central
buildings. Yet, the latter require a more striking
appearance to become a unique solitary structure than the
classical main buildings. Especially extra-curricular events
taking place in central university spots as well as symbolic
buildings play a role for townsfolk and therefore have the
potential to strengthen the connection between university
and city. Provided this partnership should be intensified a
need for planning action arises particularly in the boundary
areas of university sites: by an orchestration of symbolic
buildings and by a stimulation of university’s and
city’s public spaces along intersections by means of
inviting buildings/façades, catering and leisure facilities
as well as by attractive spots of sojourn. As a result, the
paper shows that in addition to partnerships with the
economy especially building and spatial typologies have the
potential to sharpen a university’s profile and to
contribute to the identification of its members and
townsfolk with the institution.},
keywords = {Städtebau (SWD) / Architektur (SWD) / Universität (SWD) /
Öffentlicher Raum (SWD) / Stadtplanung (SWD)},
cin = {212410},
ddc = {720},
cid = {$I:(DE-82)212410_20140620$},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)11},
urn = {urn:nbn:de:hbz:82-opus-36305},
url = {https://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/64060},
}
guest ::