Rehabilitation of the habitat of modern cities in Syria
https://doi.org/10.22227/1997-0935.2024.11.1735-1745
Abstract
Introduction. Cities of Syria have a dual structure of building organization: a traditional carpet-built dwelling with a conservative lifestyle of the inhabitants and the “European city” that developed during the periods of colonization — each of which focuses on a separate rehabilitation method. The subject of the study is the restoration of the destroyed cities of Syria. The aim is to present the hypothesis of updating the rehabilitation paradigm, integrating the methodology of urbanism and volumetric construction by introducing programmes for the fractal distribution of patterns of urban life support.
Materials and methods. To form the prerequisites for the reconstruction of the “background” development and the “European city”, the established socio-ethnic parameters of the inhabitants of Syrian cities of different historical morphogenesis, the typology of housing were studied using available literary sources and natural objects. The background building is accepted as the basic object of restoration work based on the simplest universal system of fractal distribution of life support patterns. An explanation of the essence of this system, which temporarily replaces the standard methods and sequence of urban reconstruction, is given.
Results. The models of “carpet” building reconstruction and the specifics of the conceptual approach to the use of architecture as a means of preventing migration, preserving the national identity of the image of the city are described.
Conclusions. There are concerns about the fate of Syrian cities, the destruction of which threatens to disintegrate the culture of this ancient country, the salvation of which largely depends on a competent architectural strategy for restoring the habitat.
About the Authors
A. AasemRussian Federation
Ammar Aasem — postgraduate student of the Department of Architecture of the Institute of Architecture and Urban Planning
26 Yaroslavskoe shosse, Moscow, 129337
V. N. Tkachev
Russian Federation
Valentin N. Tkachev — Doctor of Architecture, Professor of the Department of Architecture of the Institute of Architecture and Urban Planning
26 Yaroslavskoe shosse, Moscow, 129337
References
1. Musurmankulov F.U. Mahalla is an important subject of self-government of citizens. Young Scientist. 2013; 7:351-353. EDN OSIMSA. (rus.).
2. Azizkhanov A.T., Efimova A.P. Theory and practice of building a democratic society in Uzbekistan. Tashkent, National University of Uzbekistan, 2005. (rus.).
3. Yuldasheva R.K. The structure of the mahalla and its role in residential development historical cities of Uzbekistan. Problems of Modern Science and Education. 2022; 1(170):121-124. EDN RQYEKL. (rus.).
4. Ardalan N., Bakhtiar L. The sense of Unity: The Sufi Tradition in Persian Architecture. Chicago, London, Тhe University of Chicago Press, 1973.
5. و عياش، عبد الإله لنمو و التخطيط الحضري في دول الخليج العربي / اسحق يعقوب القطب، عبد الاله أبو عياش. المطبوعات،. 1980; 328. [Ishak Yaqoub Katb, Abdel Al Abbas. Agricultural Development and Planning in the Countries of the Arabian Peninsula. Matbua Publishing House, 1980; 328.]. URL: https://lib.mcy.gov.ae/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=50795
6. Notkin I.I. Architectural and spatial formation of historically formed cities of Uzbekistan : dis. ... doc. architecture. Tashkent, 1980; 1:418. (rus.).
7. Mankovskaya L.Yu. Typological foundations of architecture in Central Asia (IX – early XX centuries). Tashkent, Fan, 1980; 183. (rus.).
8. Smolina N.I. Traditions of symmetry in architecture. Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1990; 344. (rus.).
9. Masson M.E. On the historical topography of Herat in the XV century. Great Uzbek poet. 1948. (rus.).
10. Pugachenkova G.A. Architecture of Central Asia, XV century. Tashkent, 1976; 115. (rus.).
11. Yargina Z.N. City aesthetics. Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1991; 365. (rus.).
12. Lynch K. Perfect form in urban planning. Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1986; 264. (rus.).
13. Le Corbusier S. Architecture of the 20th century. Moscow, Progress, 1970; 304. (rus.).
14. Gutnov A.E. The evolution of urban planning. Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1984; 256. (rus.).
15. Tange K. Architecture of Japan: tradition and modernity. Moscow, Progress, 1975; 239. (rus.).
16. Kositsky Ya.V. Architectural and planning development of cities. Moscow, Architecture-S, 2005; 648. (rus.).
17. Vladimirov V.V. Settlement and environment. Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1982; 228. (rus.).
18. Merlen P. City. Quantitative research methods. Moscow, Progress, 1977; 262. (rus.).
19. Lavrov V.A. Development of the planning structure of historical cities. Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1977; 176. (rus.).
20. Gutnov A.E. The city as an object of systemic research. Questions of the theory of architecture : collection of articles. 1976; 101-114. (rus.).
21. Maturana U. Biology of Cognition. Language and Intelligence. Moscow, Progress, 1995. (rus.).
22. Tkachev V.N., Sarvut T.O. Experience of translation of the mechanism of the theory of fractals to the principles of the development of the environment of the habitation of Siberia and Polarians. Architecture and Construction of Russia. 2019; 2(230):48-57. EDN GCYBIO. (rus.).
Review
For citations:
Aasem A., Tkachev V.N. Rehabilitation of the habitat of modern cities in Syria. Vestnik MGSU. 2024;19(11):1735-1745. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22227/1997-0935.2024.11.1735-1745