The “City and Territory” Studio introduces students to additional explorations of architectural design in relationships with the city, its different dimensions and meanings. Via coordinated disciplinary contributions of ‘Architectural and Urban Design’, ‘Urban Planning’ and ‘Probability and Statistics’, the studio intends to overcome the notion of spatial design as made of independent architectural objects. The studio’s aim is to unfold the relationships between design and its related context, as well as to establish linkages between theoretical, technical and practical spheres in the built space. The studio revolves around: ways of reading and interpreting space; potential of handling and using quantitative data, and their conventional visualization; tensions between prescriptive visions based on land uses and morphological codes.

Following on the first year experience, the City and Territory Studio enriches the student's personal toolbox with additional reasoning on design references, the basic competence in regulatory techniques, and skills in defining spatial layouts at different dimensions and in different scales. The expected learning outcomes concern specifically the ability to work, individually and in teams, developing: - an integrated approach to spatial design and programmes: how urban agglomerations may be critically analyzed and interpreted with reference to broader understanding of the contemporary city and urbanization processes; - multifaceted competences in the morphological analysis of settlements: how to critically understand settlement’s functioning and spatial models, instrumental to elaboration and discussion of design ideas; - skills in handling quantitative tools to understand design opportunities: how to use statistical-quantitative indicators and operate critically with any parameters incorporated in the existing regulations (such as density and conventional urban standards), instrumental to urban design; - skills in recognizing, by means of design, the relationships between topography and the constituent elements of landscape; - an attitude to synthesize critical reasoning through urban design, intended as a moment of reconfiguration of what exists.

The studio builds upon the skills that students gained in the first year "Instructions" programme. In particular, the studio assumes that students have acquired: the basic critical understanding and design knowledge of the first year Architecture Design Studio; the analytical tools to understand and elaborate on the contemporary city developed in the first year Urban Planning course, together with the knowledge of elements of urban planning technique. The studio also requires that students possess the fundamentals of linear algebra, differential and integral calculus acquired during the Calculus course.

Key topics: -exploring strategies for the regeneration, maintenance, and transformation of modernist collective housing estates within the existing urban fabric. -mapping, defining, and addressing urban/territorial challenges. -investigating urban scenarios for the “adaptive city” (i.e., that can react and adapt to continuous changing of socio-economic and environmental conditions). The City and Territory Design Studio B takes collective living as a field of experimentation, exploring how large-scale modernist housing estates—key urban legacies of the twentieth century—can be re-imagined through adaptive strategies. The Studio addresses the urban legacies of twentieth‑century modernist urbanization as a pervasive condition across Europe and beyond, and as the ground from which to envision the city’s future. It asks students to rethink existing infrastructures, building stocks, and open spaces as central resources, and to develop strategies that transform these inherited fabrics into adaptable environments for contemporary collective living. New Belgrade is taken as an open and flexible design laboratory. An ambitious modernist project grounded in socialist ideals, it is also a contested landscape confronting the intertwined pressures of densification, erosion of green infrastructure, congestion, and market-driven transformations. Its scale and complexity make it a compelling case for exploring how socialist‑modernist housing estates can be critically re‑imagined and adapted to future urban life. The aim of the Studio is threefold: 1) to develop design processes specific to existing urban environments; 2) to approach sites and strategies with critical attention to context and emerging challenges; 3) to test flexible urban patterns for the “adaptive city”, able to respond to ongoing demographic, environmental, and technological transitions. Throughout the Studio, students will gain the competencies and critical tools required for addressing urban design proposals. This includes interpreting the existing agglomerations of activities and inhabitants, handling and using quantitative data, visualizing and communicating coherent spatial layouts, and exploring tensions between prescriptive visions based on land uses and morphological codes. Through the integration of Architectural and Urban Design, Urban Planning, and Probability and Statistics, students will gain practical experience in the interplay between qualitative and quantitative tools in urban design practice.

Part One: Foundation (September-October) In this initial part, the Studio introduces students to fundamental topics, articulated in a sequence of three thematic modules. Each module addresses a specific theme: 1) Urbanization Models, 2) Accessibility and Urban Infrastructure, 3) Environmental Challenges for Adaptive Cities. Each module is organized as a workshop, combining theory-based lectures with design exercises. In this phase, activities are directly focused on the Studio’s work area and combine both individual and group tasks. The goal is to explore and become familiar with the case study through design exercises and lectures, some of which are held by invited experts and professors from the University of Belgrade. Part Two: Projection (November) The second part of the course is based on collaborative work, with student teams tackling a site-specific project. Activities are structured around studio work that involves design tasks and collective reviews in class with the guidance of professors and tutors. Building on the preliminary analyses developed in Part One, the design process unfolds as follows: -Urban Detailed Analysis: students advance the exploration of the work area by mapping and visualizing the main urban and environmental structures, refining and expanding the drafts prepared in the first phase. -Definition of Urban Scenarios: students co-create scenarios by applying a co-design-based approach. This activity incorporates scenario visioning tools, role-play, and decision-making instruments. -Progressive Development of Architectural and Urban Design Proposal: this stage focuses on the definition of design strategies for the work area, with particular emphasis on the spatial articulation, the interplay between built and open spaces, and the aggregation of functions as outlined in the program. -Discussion of Design Proposal: the phase concludes with a final daily workshop where students discuss their design proposals, exploring projects’ performativity in alignment with the three main themes of urbanization models, accessibility and urban infrastructure, and environmental challenges for adaptive cities, all at the neighborhood scale. Part Three: Visualization (December-January) In the third and final part, students focus on the finalization and representation of their urban design projects. This section involves collaborative design activities within teams and incorporates practical tutorials to guide students in experimenting with methods for visually and spatially articulating their urban and architectural proposals. Studio work will be carried out by integrating contributions of three disciplines (Architectural and Urban Design, Urban Planning, and Probability and Statistics) with joint reviews between teachers and tutors. Moreover, intermediate and final results will be discussed in collective revisions and presentations, which will include the participation of external critics.

The following list includes fundamental bibliographical references for the course. Further readings will be recommended during the Studio. Students are required to explore critically and independently prominent international architectural and urban journals and magazines (many of them available for consultation at the Architectural Central Library - BCA). -Avermaete T., Gosseye J., 2021. Urban Design in the 20th Century. A History: Gta Verlag. -Bergevoet T., Maarten Van T., 2016. The Flexible City. Sustainable Solutions for a Europe in Transition: Nai010. -Brand S., 1995, How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built. London: Penguin Publishing Group -Gehl J., 1971, Life Between Buildings: Island Press -Hertzberger H., 2016. Lessons for students in architecture. Rotterdam: Nai010. -Kallipoliti L., Histories of Ecological Design. An Unfinished Cyclopedia: Actar. -Mumford, L., 1966, The City in History. Its Origins and Transformations, and its Prospects: Harcourt, Brace and World. -Sim D., 2019, Soft City. Building Density for Everyday Life: Island Press. -Wong L., 2016, Adaptive Reuse. Extending the Lives of Buildings: Birkhäuser Verlag AG

Slides; Libro di testo; Esercitazioni di laboratorio; Strumenti di auto-valutazione; Strumenti di collaborazione tra studenti;

Modalita di esame: Prova orale obbligatoria; Elaborato grafico prodotto in gruppo; Elaborato progettuale individuale; Elaborato progettuale in gruppo;

Exam: Compulsory oral exam; Group graphic design project; Individual project; Group project;

... 1. Throughout the Design Studio, students’ progress will be continuously monitored. Exercises, such as drawings and models, will be reviewed and corrected both individually and in public sessions during classes by the Studio supervisors and external critics. Therefore, regular attendance at lectures and seminars is highly recommended, complemented by active participation in tutorials, individual assignments, and teamwork. 2. The final evaluation of the Studio is one mark to which all three disciplines (Architectural and Urban Design, Urban Planning, and Probability and Statistics) contribute proportionally. The evaluation of each student combines: - individual and team exercises and projects. - oral discussion (during the final exam) to assess the competence of each student in bridging the issues addressed in the Studio. If a student is not adequately prepared, supervisors may address supplementary questions regarding the contents of one or more of the disciplines’ coursework during the oral discussion. Insufficient performance in just one of the three disciplines precludes the possibility of passing the entire exam. Students’ capacity to explain their ideas and proposals, even in verbal form, matters to the overall evaluation. 3. The evaluation will consider the following aspects, assessed on the basis of individual and teamwork outputs, (intermediate and final), weighed in the final evaluation as follows: - critical analysis and interpretation of urban agglomerations with reference to broader understanding of the contemporary city and urbanization processes (30%); - multifaceted competences in the morphological analysis of settlements (20%); - skills in handling quantitative tools to understand design opportunities (20%); - skills in establishing relationships, by means of design, between project proposals and their contexts (10%); - attitude to synthesize critical reasoning through urban design, intended as a moment of reconfiguration of what exists (10%); - clarity and quality of deliverables, with emphasis on correct representation and correct choice of technical terms (10%). 4. Praise will be granted when the highest score is achieved, and a consensus is reached among the teachers from all three disciplines.

Gli studenti e le studentesse con disabilita o con Disturbi Specifici di Apprendimento (DSA), oltre alla segnalazione tramite procedura informatizzata, sono invitati a comunicare anche direttamente al/la docente titolare dell'insegnamento, con un preavviso non inferiore ad una settimana dall'avvio della sessione d'esame, gli strumenti compensativi concordati con l'Unita Special Needs, al fine di permettere al/la docente la declinazione piu idonea in riferimento alla specifica tipologia di esame.