263

© 2000 UICEEGlobal J. of Engng. Educ., Vol.4, No.3Published in Australia

INTRODUCTION

The UNESCO International Centre for EngineeringEducation (UICEE) at Monash University, Melbourne,Australia, and the Department of Infrastructure of theState Government of Victoria in Australia are jointlydeveloping the Urban Design and EducationProgramme (UDEP). At this stage, the programmemainly concentrates on issues of importance to theAustralian state of Victoria.

The specific focus of the programme’s activities ison the following:

• Education.• Research and development of improved prac-

tices.• Advice to government.• Promotion and public awareness.• Demonstration projects.

Urban Design Studios: an Effective Method in theEducation of Urban Designers*

Andrew OlszewskiTheadora Kouremenos

Zenon J. PudlowskiUNESCO International Centre for Engineering Education (UICEE)

Faculty of Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia

A new educational approach, the so-called design studios, based upon problem-based learning, inthe education of professionals involved in the urban design process has been developed through theUrban Design and Education Programme (UDEP). The design studio is an activity that stimulatescreativity and problem solving, and is an effective technique used to resolve difficult urban designand management problems. The development of this method is one of a number of activities under-taken by the recently established UDEP. This programme is a joint enterprise established by theUNESCO International Centre for Engineering Education (UICEE) and the Department of Infra-structure within the Victorian State Government in Australia. Two case studies are presented ingreat detail in order to illustrate the educational features of the design studios, which have beenrecently carried out in Melbourne, with the third currently under development. These three cases ofdifficult urban design problems should provide comprehensive information as to the efficiency ofthis technique.

*A revised and expanded version of a keynote addresspresented at the 2nd Global Congress on EngineeringEducation, held at Hochschule Wismar, Wismar, Germany,from 2 to 7 July 2000.

The programme is comprised of five projects thataddress issues of critical importance and developingtools relevant to the project’s objectives. These UDEPprojects are:

• Design Assessment Criteria and Methods forPerformance Oriented Planning.

• Design Mediation and Community Consultation.• Urban Design Tools.• International Urban Design Fellowship

Programme.• Urban Design Training Courses.

It should be emphasised that each one of theprojects contains some elements concerning education.However, most of the education effort is beingconcentrated in the Urban Design Training Coursesproject.

UDEP maintains a commitment to promotingbest international practice in urban planning, designand sustainable development [1]. This commitment tobest practice has led to the International VisitingFellowship Programme, where recognised leadersin urban design and development are invited to

A. Olszewski, T. Kouremenos & Z.J. Pudlowski264

work with local professionals on key Victorianprojects.

Visiting Fellows undertake a number of activitiesduring their visit, including public forums, conferences,lectures and design studios. Of these activities, it isprobably the design studios that present the mostexciting opportunities for the interaction of ideas andpeople. As the most notorious and difficult sites areselected for exploration, energy and motivation remainhigh and is further spurred on by a healthy level ofcompetition among participants.

The Global Context

The establishment of the UICEE-UDEP has to beseen and considered in a global context, and is aresponse to the following challenges:

• Urbanisation is one of the most significantchallenges that the global population must face.

• Many regions, such as South-East Asia, areundergoing a paradigm change with profoundsocial effects on economic and socialsustainability.

• Successful urbanisation can create healthy, attrac-tive, safe and productive environments for urbanpopulations.

• There is a need around the world for governmentsand private organisations to develop and applyurban management practices that achievesustainable economies and communities.

• South-East Asia is experiencing a particularly fastand difficult urbanisation process, with the growthof mega-cities. The success or failure of thisprocess will have major implications for theglobal community.

• Australia, with its widely recognised success inurban design and development, and acclaimedfor its liveable cities, is in the best position toassist others in the development of urban centres[2].

Urban centres in the age of globalisation can nolonger expect natural, locally based economic devel-opment and resources to drive prosperity. Globalisationis both a cause and a consequence of the informationrevolution. It is driven by dramatic improvements intelecommunications, exponential increases in comput-ing power coupled with lower costs, and the develop-ment of electronic communications and informationnetworks such as the Internet [3]. These are helpingto overcome the barriers of physical distance.

The process of globalisation has a profound andoften negative effect on small regional centres every-where. The traditional ways in which economicactivities were conducted in the past have changed

with globalisation. This usually leaves regionalcentres with greatly diminished roles, resulting in thedeterioration of the employment market. This situa-tion often forces regions to accept unsustainableeconomic activities and environmental deterioration.

The process of change limits locally based busi-ness opportunities, causing potential leaders andenterprising individuals to migrate to the main cities.Diminishing community services and educationalfacilities often exacerbate this situation further. Whenthe economic strength of local communities is weak-ened, it is difficult for them to maintain or improvetheir urban environments.

Human settlements, and in particular urbansystems such as towns and cities, are the greatestthreats to ecological sustainability. Urban planning anddesign, therefore, offers a great potential to bettercoordinate various ecological initiatives such as theuse of solar energy, waste minimisation and energyefficient transport, as well as social, cultural andeconomic aspects of urban development [4].

Fighting the combined effect of these kinds ofchanges is usually well beyond the capacity of mostregional communities as the solution lies in fundamentalstructural adjustments and finding a specialist niche atthe state, national or even international level (such asthe production of ecological food or advanced manu-facturing).

In an increasingly competitive world, it is the town,city and region that are becoming the points ofcomparison. The design quality of urban areas affectsour ability to attract investment and to generate wealthin two ways; firstly through the efficiency of thesystem and the ability to avoid unnecessary waste;and secondly through the image that is projected fromboth the built environment and the culture that isassociated with it [5].

The Re-Positioning of Urban Centres

The process of urban development involves a widerange of participants and stakeholders, who, ideally,are working towards the same agreed direction. Inreality, however, this is rarely the case. Interdiscipli-nary friction, complex political agendas and poorcoordination between the public and private sectorsoften lead to unsatisfactory urban environments thatoccasionally are dysfunctional, unsafe or unsustainable.

These poor environments could be described asblack holes in the city. They tend to be dominated byinfrastructure such as road interchanges and whilethey successfully meet infrastructure objectives, theyare destructive in relation to other aspects of city lifesuch as pedestrian and functional connectivity, legibility

Urban Design Studios... 265

and visual appropriateness and comfort. Such blackholes are often considered as being beyond repair withlittle intrinsic value.

The usual maintenance or artificial improvementsare totally inadequate in dealing with problem areasof such a nature. Places that have become largely orwholly irrelevant to the future of the city orregion and are considered by the community asliabilities require re-positioning and not just improve-ment.

Re-positioning means a fundamental adjustment inwhich the subject urban environment is made to workfor present and future community needs. The actionsrequired may include, amongst others:

• Changing public perception.• Re-modelling transport infrastructure.• Repairing the system of pedestrian linkages.• Urban environment changes and improvements.• Changes to the functional programme.• Improved public safety.

The combination of issues affecting these areascould include:

• Lack of perceived or actual value of land.• Complex and often contradicting requirements of

the users.• Damaged natural environment.• De-generated built environment.• Environment dominated by transport related

structures.• Concerns about public safety or undesirable

activities (such as places of drug use).

Training

The existing urban areas of our towns and citiesexperience major social change that manifests itselfin decreasing household sizes. This de-population ofurban centres and the combined ecological andeconomic costs of urban sprawl are behind thegovernment’s policy of urban consolidation and a newperformance-based planning system.

The resulting re-urbanisation of our suburbs requiresa new set of design-based skills from all partiesinvolved in the process. The paramount aim of thisproject is to improve design assessment skills inrelation to development proposals within the existingurban area.

DESIGN STUDIO CONCEPT

Apart from generating exciting design ideas, designstudios also offer an effective model of education.Currently used in architectural and other design based

education, this approach has been formalised inrecent years under the title of problem-basedlearning (PBL). It can be found in disciplines suchas medicine, engineering and mathematics, amongstothers.

The essence of problem-based learning is thesetting of a problem and allowing the student to directtheir own learning through seeking solution to theproblem. They engage in a search for solutions, learningnot only the facts of the situation and the solutions,but also the process [6].

The design studio also introduces the participant tothe social roles that are represented in a typicaldesign process. The student learns that design occursnot in a vacuum but within a broad network of partici-pants, including professionals such as architects,engineers and consultants, as well as non-designprofessions, such as clients, bankers and users [6].The design studio is an activity that stimulatescreativity and problem solving. It can be a particularlyeffective technique when used to resolve difficulturban problems.

Generally, a design studio will be undertaken in ashort period of time focusing intensely on a selectedarea or site. What makes this an effective effort isthat the individuals participating are arranged into multi-disciplinary groups, ensuring that the knowledge andskills required to resolve the issue at hand are presentaround the table. It has been observed that:

…Social, technical as well as other scien-tific and art branches are characterised bytwo controversial problems in this century:a significant professional atomisation, andthrive for interdisciplinary approach tocertain scientific tasks. It also stands for thedevelopment in architecture and urbanplanning [7].

Usually, the professional background of studioparticipants include:

• Transport/infrastructure engineers• Architects and landscape designers• Urban planners and designers• Economists• Social planners

Apart from their professional background, partici-pants also tend to represent important stakeholders inthe urban development process such as:

• Local and State Governments• Infrastructure providers• Politicians• Private developers

A. Olszewski, T. Kouremenos & Z.J. Pudlowski266

URBAN DESIGN STUDIO – UDEPGENERAL PROCESS

Design studios undertaken through UDEP generallyinclude three phases. These are:

• Pre-studio• In-studio• Post-studio

Pre-studio

Pre-studio activities occur in preparation for thedesign studio itself. A broad analysis of the selectednode and its urban context is undertaken with keystakeholders. Following the analysis, a studio agendaand brief are formulated to provide information andparameters for the exercise.

In-studio

The in-studio phase is made up of a number of distinctactivities. Firstly, multi-disciplinary groups are formu-lated and briefed. Group work commences, witheach group undertaking a design analysis and devel-oping design options. Groups will present their workto an audience consisting of state and local govern-ment representatives, stakeholders and privateindustry.

For the benefit of invited guests, Visiting Fellowsmay also present highlights from their internationalprojects.

Post-studio

The post-studio stage usually includes the productionof a report or publication of the studio results and someform of public and professional debate. The studiocould also result in great community interest leadingto more detailed work such as establishing a publicbrief (a functional and design expression of communityaspirations for the given urban node), as well as urbanmarketing process preparing for the project’simplementation.

The design studio allows a transfer of informationand expertise at a number of important levels inthe planning and development process. This transferhelps to:

• Change public perceptions about the area.• Inform decision-makers about the possible oppor-

tunities.• Build interdisciplinary skills amongst participants.• Develop design skills.• Contribute to continuing education.

The design studios are selected to address the mostchallenging urban nodes and ultimately to assist withtheir re-positioning within the urban fabric.

The design studio model developed underUDEP aims to achieve the following:

• Develop design concepts for selected urban nodespresenting opportunities for successful interven-tion and potential re-positioning.

• Support the development of public briefs (suchas St Kilda Junction or Footscray Station).

• Establish a multi-disciplinary approach to urbandesign projects.

• Transfer skills and methods used by the leadinginternational designers to local professionals.

• Enhance public debate about the urban designagenda.

Design studios, while stimulating creativity andideas, also provide the grounds for hands-on experi-ence, helping to educate participants in areas such as:

• Vision setting;• Urban management;• Urban design;• Economic feasibility;• Ecological sustainability.

CASE STUDIES

UDEP has undertaken two design studios since theprogramme commenced in June 1999. The firststudio was titled Reinventing St Kilda Junction, whilethe second studio was titled Young DesignersExplore the Future of Melbourne’s West. Thesedesign studios provide useful case studies in highlightingtheir educational and problem solving potential.

The case studies provide a point of comparison.Although aiming to achieve similar objectives(re-positioning an urban area), the approach andfocus of each was slightly different.

St Kilda Junction

The key elements of this design studio included:

• One international Visiting Fellow leading threedesign teams.

• Design teams formed by high calibre professionalsand respected local design leaders.

• Three teams focusing on one hypothetical designproject.

• The educational objective was to elevate the levelof understanding and broaden the expectations ofkey stakeholders and decision-makers responsiblefor the St Kilda Junction area.

Urban Design Studios... 267

Melbourne’s West

The key elements of this design studio included:

• Four international Visiting Fellows led four designteams.

• Design teams were formed from young designersfrom the most respected architecture and urbandesign practices.

• Teams focused on different sites with actualprojects that are currently under consideration.

• Information technology was used as the keycommunication and design tool.

• The educational objective was to expand theknowledge and experience of young participantsin urban design processes and international bestpractice.

CASE STUDY 1: RE-INVENTING STKILDA JUNCTION

St Kilda Junction is an example of an urban node thatholds importance for the centre of Melbourne but isdominated by a single infrastructure role: a roadjunction. The road works that transformed this areainto its current form produced a number of impacts:separating pedestrian and visual connections toimportant activity nodes, creating poor accessibilityto public transport and a poor entrance and image toMelbourne [8].

Traditional landscape and streetscape treat-ments would not be effective in resolving theproblems created by the extent and type of engi-neering road works, and the need to maintain trafficflows.

This studio explored the development of designoptions beyond the traditional approach. By examiningSt Kilda Junction, the studio will also become relevantfor other important areas, and provide an example ofa design approach that effectively integrates infra-structure with other city functions.

Studio Objectives

The objectives of the studio were to:

• Develop functional and design ideas.• Demonstrate an inter-disciplinary urban design

approach.• Integrate infrastructure with other city functions.• Expose local leading professionals to international

practice.• Help change professional and public perceptions

about difficult urban sites.

Training Methodology

The following method was adopted for this case study:

Briefing Session

The briefing session highlighted the context andissues affecting St Kilda Junction. Local and StateGovernment representatives presented an analysis ofthe site.

Group Work

Three multi-disciplinary groups were formed. Eachgroup was to focus on the same site and to worktowards its resolution. Two recognised local designexperts were nominated to head each group.

The responsibility for providing direction andassistance to the groups rested with Prof. Wolf Prix(Visiting Fellow), initially suggesting the design direc-tion that each group should follow and then workedwith them to refine concepts.

Presentation of Previous Work by VisitingFellow

For the benefit of invited guests (mainly stakeholdersin the project and local area) who arrived to see thestudio results, Professor Prix presented highlights andexplained the concepts behind his internationalprojects.

Presentation of Concepts by Each Group

Group leaders presented their designs and conceptshighlighting opportunities to stakeholders.

Design Critique by Visiting Fellow

The Visiting Fellow accented the strengths and weak-nesses of each proposal and summed up the activitiesof the day.

General Discussion

Stakeholders were given the opportunity to providecomments and engage with Professor Prix, as well asthe group leaders.

Educational Model

The educational model includes the following:

• Multi-disciplinary interaction and cooperation.• Leadership provided by Visiting Fellow.

A. Olszewski, T. Kouremenos & Z.J. Pudlowski268

• Local professional headed groups.• International exchange of ideas.• International best practice.• All teams work on the same project.

Proposals Developed

One of the three groups proposed a large roundaboutthat takes in all the streets apart from the underpass.Three quarters of the roundabout would be surroundedby a circus of buildings. The centre would be publicspace and have a symbolic pi-shaped building.

Another suggestion was to place a superstructureover Dandenong Road. This space would be utilisedfor car parking, retail, entertainment and residentialdevelopments.

The final proposal kept the primary focus on StKilda Road and created an architectural gateway withbuildings defining the junction. Figure 1 shows an exam-ple of a junction design developed during the studio.

Observations

The multi-disciplinary nature of the groups meant thatmuch of the required expertise needed to the resolvevarious urban issues was available around the table.

Participants were able to think beyond their ownprofessional boundaries and consider the conse-quences of their proposals from new perspectives.They were also able to experience the benefits of amulti-disciplinary approach, something they mayconsider implementing in their own practices.

The high level of experience and local knowledgeenabled the professionals participating in this studio todevelop credible concepts in a short time.

Stakeholders where supportive of the concepts asthey were able to better understand the issues havingthemselves participated in the process. An importantcomponent of the studio is being able to communicateproposals effectively, especially to stakeholders whomay not have a background in urban design processesand concepts before. These skills need also to be avail-able to each group.

Although nominating two design leaders for eachgroup allowed for rapid concept production, it wasdifficult for them to compromise their aesthetic styles.

The presence and input from the Visiting Fellowhelped to encourage higher standards, as did thecompetitive nature of three groups working on thesame site, each hoping to produce the best scheme.

The studio outcomes proved that this important nodecould be re-modelled and re-vitalised without losingits current infrastructure capacity. The eventualredevelopment of this area would become an examplefor other areas of urban blight in Victoria.

CASE STUDY 2: YOUNG DESIGNERSEXPLORE THE FUTURE OFMELBOURNE’S WEST

This second design studio turned to the western partof Melbourne, and in particular three key infrastructurenodes. The studio was titled: Young DesignersExplore the Future of Melbourne’s West, andfocused on the younger generation of designers andthe use of digital information and graphics.

The studio participants were divided into four groupswith each led by an international architect. Two groupsfocused on the Footscray modal interchange and theother two groups on intersections along the WesternRing Road.

The results of the studio were exciting and stimu-lating, and approaches varied dramatically. Theseranged from using new processes and informationin resolving urban challenges, re-populatingand reinventing an area through architecture anddesign, to new applications for computer technologyas well as innovative remodelling of road infrastructure[9].

The western suburbs of Melbourne have notdeveloped to the same quality and extent as those inthe south-east. This leaves metropolitan Melbourneconurbation severely uneven and presents majorinfrastructure, environmental and social issues.

In the past, the residential function of the westernquarter of Melbourne was undermined by theenvironmental impact of heavy industry. The techno-logical revolution over the past two decades is changingthe character of new industries, making them more

Figure 1: An example of a junction design developedduring the Studio.

Urban Design Studios... 269

environmentally friendly. In addition, the strategic roleof the western region is increasing due to:

• The increasing importance of the airport to theVictorian economy.

• The development of the Melbourne Docklands.• The growth in Melbourne and Geelong port

activities.• Major road infrastructure developments such as:

- City Link- Western Ring Road- Improvements to Geelong Road.

An urban design strategy is needed to develop anappropriate urban structure and image of key urbannodes of the western quarter. As a contribution to this,the design studio focused attention on the future ofthe western region by developing hypothetical designsfor key infrastructure related nodes:

• Footscray railway interchange.• Western Ring Road/Geelong Road/Princess

Freeway.• Western Ring Road/Western Highway.

The studio explored issues to do with the futurefunction and shape of these areas led by four emerginginternational architects working with local designers,planners and engineers.

Studio Objectives

The objectives of the studio were to:

• Explore the potential for better integration ofinfrastructure with the surrounding land uses.

• Develop skills in young professionals.• Use information technology to help resolve

difficult problems.• Demonstrate an interdisciplinary urban design

approach.• Analyse the role of the selected nodes within the

city structure.

Methodology

The following method was adopted for this designstudio:

Site Visit

All participants in the design studio including theVisiting Fellows were required to attend a site visitand bus tour of the selected nodes for this exercise.Groups for the studio had not been disclosed so thoseindividuals would equally consider all the information

presented. The briefing emphasised the importanceof the sites as a system rather than as individualprojects.

Group Work

Four multi-disciplinary groups were formed, two groupsfocused on the railway interchange and the other twoon road interchanges. Each group was headed by aVisiting Fellow and a local professional.

The Role of Information Technology

Each group had access to electronic base material, acomputer terminal and software operators. Informationtechnology, and in particular the CADD system, playeda large role in exploring ideas and communicating thecomplex concepts to the audience.

Presentation of Concepts by Each Group

All the groups presented their ideas, with most groupmembers taking part in presenting to the audience.This was an opportunity to promote their achievementsand was not left up to the group leaders.

General Discussion

Stakeholders in the audience were given the opportunityto provide comments and engage with the youngprofessionals and their schemes. In some instances,private developers and local councils offered tosupport participants to further resolve their ideas.

Education Model

• Leadership provided by Visiting Fellows and localprofessionals.

• Multi-disciplinary interaction and cooperation.• International exchange of ideas.• All groups worked at both the macro strategic level

by looking at the whole urban system of the westernsuburbs, and at the micro level in developingactual concepts for the site.

Value Adding

Young professionals who participated in this designstudio were exposed to an integrated approach tourban development that took into account technical,functional and aesthetic considerations.

Complex urban challenges, when considered in thetraditional, linear (subsequent) manner, are often seenas too difficult to resolve. But when individualswith all the relevant skills are participating in a

A. Olszewski, T. Kouremenos & Z.J. Pudlowski270

concentrated effort, outcomes that satisfy manycontexts can be produced. Design studios can formpart of young professional’s continuing educationprogramme. The concepts that were producedare being considered by local authorities, whichhad indicated an interest in redeveloping the selectedsites.

The main objective of the International VisitingFellowship Programme is to create access forAustralian professionals to the cutting edge of inter-national urban design practice. The secondarybenefits include:

• Generating greater interest in the future of theircities for the general public.

• Initiation and delivery of an actual urban devel-opment project.

The educational values of an urban design studioinclude:

• Exposing leading local professionals and educa-tors to the methods used by a Visiting Fellow intheir current practice overseas.

• Dialogue between the Visiting Fellow and thelocal participants and critique of local practicebased on best international examples. Manyexamples used by our recent Visiting Fellows werenot yet published, giving the local participants privi-leged access to that information.

• A large multiplying effect stemming from theinvolvement of educators in the process.

• Involvement of students from planning, engineeringand design fields in group activities.

• Lessons from the studio processes are being usedas case studies for the training undertaken byUDEP.

• Post-studio presentations offer a wide range ofprofessionals an opportunity to update their knowl-edge in the urban design field as an element ofcontinuing education.

• All participants in the studio benefit from practicalmulti-disciplinary cooperation.

• Public awareness and understanding is enhancedthrough presentations and ultimately publicationof the studio results.

Observations

In this model, group members had a greater opportu-nity to interact with the international visitors anddevelop a group dynamic that included them. Ratherthan advising, Visiting Fellows were active groupmembers. Young professionals who participated in thisdesign studio were exposed to an integrated approach

to urban development something that would be rarelyexperienced in their everyday work.

Participants in this studio had less experience andlocal knowledge but most groups were able toproduce interesting concepts that could be developedfurther. Participants needed to quickly come to termswith the urban issues presented to them as well asunderstand opportunities and limitations presented byother professionals in their group.

Although approaches varied dramatically theresults of the studio were exciting and stimulating,Information technology played an important rolein exploring ideas and communicating complexconcepts to the audience. The concepts used newprocesses and information to resolve urban challenges,re-population and redesigning areas through architec-ture, created new applications for computer tech-nology and innovatively remodelled road infra-structure [9].

It becomes clear that design studios can form partof young professional’s continuing educationprogramme.

NEW MODEL: DEVELOPING CASESTUDY 3

UDEP is developing a third design studio modelthat will be tested as a case study, and is scheduledfor 21-23 November 2000, with a Seminar to follow.This third design studio is intended to consider theredevelopment potential of Richmond Station, one ofMelbourne’s busiest train stations located adjacent tothe city’s Sports and Entertainment Precinct.

The strategic importance of the station relates toits role as a major transport gateway to the centralarea of Melbourne and Sports and EntertainmentPrecinct. A very large volume of visitors, in particularsports fans as well as people employed in the centralarea of Melbourne and the CBD use the station. Whileits transport role is relatively effective, it fails toannounce the city and inform the traveller about thedestination choices. Poor legibility and disorganisedsurrounding environments create confusion for usersand an undesirable image for the whole city. Notorioustraffic jams affect the whole Central Melbournetraffic system.

The present problems created by the narrow, 1960s’traffic engineering solution should not overshadow theopportunity for major improvement. This potentialcentre of activity could act as an important linkbetween the surrounding areas.

The 2006 Commonwealth Games in Melbournecould offer a great opportunity and are a trigger forthe project. The city anticipates a very large tourism

Urban Design Studios... 271

push associated with this event, which will alsoinclude a significant arts and culture component.Improved linkages with the rest of Melbourne in timefor the event would benefit Melbourne in the wayurban design projects have helped other cities toestablish their global presence (including Sydney,Barcelona, Bilbao, etc).

Studio Objectives

The key objectives are to:

• Improve the process of design and developmentinitiated by the Department of Infrastructure.

• Elevate public and government awareness of thebenefits that may flow from the review of differentoptions of the redevelopment of RichmondStation.

• Achieve a high level of public support, interestand expectations.

• Develop functional and design ideas.• Demonstrate an interdisciplinary urban design

approach.• Integrate infrastructure with other city functions.• Expose local leading professionals to international

practice.

The Richmond Station project is much moreadvanced than the subjects of the previous studios. Itis intended to be constructed for the 2006 Common-wealth Games.

This studio is intended to integrated into theprocess of brief development for this precinct. Aninternational architect and an experienced designer ofsimilar developments will lead it. It will extendover three days of intensive work in the studio inMelbourne.

CONCLUSIONS

The development and introduction of design studiosinto the UDEP, and in particular the engagement ofinternational Visiting Fellows, has proven to be anexcellent vehicle for the transfer of knowledge andskills, as well as for the promotion of best practice inurban design and management.

Both of the studios received a high degree ofsupport from Local Government, and are seen as acatalyst for further action.

The design studio technique, demonstrated in twocase studies, has shown to be an efficient method inthe education and training of urban designers andplanners. The UDEP intends to develop thiseducational method further as it demonstrates severaladvantages.

REFERENCES

1. Olszewski, A., Kourmenos, D. and Pudlowski,Z.J., Repositioning cities for a sustainable future.Proc 3rd Baltic Region Seminar on Engng.Educ., Göteborg, Sweden, 50-54 (1999).

2. Prime Minister’s Urban Design Task Force,Urban Design in Australia. Canberra: Common-wealth of Australia (1994).

3. Washington, S., Globalisation: What Challenges andOpportunities for Governments. Report based onissues papers and two OECD meetings for officialsfrom centres of government, Organisation for Eco-nomic Co-operation and Development (1996).

4. Olszewski, A., Kouremenos, D. and Pudlowski,Z.J., Re-urbanisation: a challenge for urbandesign education. Proc. 2nd UICEE Asia-PacificForum on Engng. and Techn. Educ., Sydney,Sydney, Australia, 282-286 (1999).

5. Porter, M.E., Competition of Global Industries.Boston: Harvard Business School Press (1986).

6. Kvan, T., Studio Teaching Without Meeting:Pedago-gical Aspects of a Virtual Design Studio.Department of Architecture, University of HongKong (1997).

7. Spacek, R. and Petransky, L., From engineeringtown to urban democracy. Proc. 3rd UICEEAnnual Conf. on Engng. Educ., Hobart,Australia, 118-122 (2000).

8. Olszewski, A., Kourmenos, D. and Pudlowski,Z.J., Re-positioning urban centres through design:lessons from recent design studios. Proc. 3rd

UICEE Annual Conf. on Engng. Educ., Hobart,Australia, 95-100 (2000).

9. Wegener, M. and Spiekermann, K., Efficient,equitable and ecological urban structures. 7th

World Conf. on Transport Research, Sydney,Australia (1995).

BIOGRAPHIES

Andrew Olszewski receiveda Diploma of Architectureand Master of Science inUrbanism from Cracow,Poland. Currently, he is theProgramme Director of theUrban Design EducationProgramme at theUNESCO InternationalCentre for Engineering Edu-cation (UICEE). He is also

currently registered as an architect in Victoria, Aus-tralia, and has 25 years of experience in architecture,urban planning and urban design. Originally from

A. Olszewski, T. Kouremenos & Z.J. Pudlowski272

Poland, he honed his professional skills in cooperationwith influential European architects and planners fromItaly, France, Finland and Germany.

Until late 1986, Mr Olszewski worked as an archi-tect with one of the leading Australian developmentcompanies on several major commercial projectsincluding shopping centres, offices, private hospitals,and office and tourism developments. Following hissuccess in 1986 in a national design competition calledAdelaide 2000, he joined the Victorian Departmentof Planning and Development where he has promoteda broader European approach to urban planning anddesign. Projects such as Arts Village and DandenongDistrict Centre have helped to re-define the practiceof urban design in Victoria beyond its traditional focuson environmental improvements to include issues oftransport, economic activity, architectural modelling andcommunity building.

He has played a key role in the development ofurban design guidelines for Central Melbourne andmade an important contribution to the Capital CityPolicy. He has continually promoted the idea ofstrategic coordination of land uses with infrastructureprovision as one of the critical conditions of long-termdevelopment sustainability, and has contributed theseideas to projects of state significance such as CityLink, Habitat and, most recently, the SouthbankStructure Plan. His leadership in the field of urbandesign is best illustrated by his involvement in writingthe national urban design policy for Local Governmenttitled Designing Competitive Places (for theCommonwealth Government and Australian LocalGovernment Association). In 1996, he coordinated thework of an Australian Federal Government UrbanPlanning Delegation to China, which developed anurban design framework for the Eastbank precinct ofTianjin’s CBD.

He has several publications and has presentedmany papers at international conferences relating tourban design and place management.

Theodora Kouremenoscompleted a Bachelor ofTown and Regional Planningin 1994 at MelbourneUniversity, with her majorsin environmental planning,and urban planning anddesign. In 1997, she finisheda Postgraduate Diplomain Management fromMelbourne University -

Melbourne Business School.

Ms Kouremenos joined the Department of Infra-structure of the Victorian State Government in 1994as a strategic urban planner working on a Metropoli-tan Strategy for Melbourne, Australia. She joined theUrban Design Unit in 1997 and helped establish thePride of Place Programme that has distributed$12 million across Victoria over four years for urbandesign projects. She was also involved in the UrbanDesign Frameworks policy and in research for theUrban Design Values Project. She was seconded tothe UICEE in 1999/2000 to help in the Urban Designand Education Programme (UDEP), which exploresinnovative ways of involving and educating profes-sionals in the field and has co-authored a number ofresearch papers related to UDEP.

She is currently responsible for coordinating theurban design discussion paper and input into the newMelbourne Metropolitan Strategy, and is also in theprocess of developing a new urban design programfor the Department.

Zenon Jan Pudlowski gradu-ated Master of ElectricalEngineering from the Acad-emy of Mining and Metal-lurgy (Cracow, Poland), andDoctor of Philosophy fromJagiellonian University (Cra-cow), in 1968 and 1979respectively. From 1969 to1976, he was a lecturer in theInstitute of Technology

within the University of Pedagogy (Cracow). Between1976 and 1979, he was a researcher at the Institute ofVocational Education (Warsaw), and from 1979 to1981, was an Adjunct Professor at the Institute ofPedogogy within Jagiellonian University. From 1981to 1993, he was with the Department of ElectricalEngineering at The University of Sydney where, inrecent years, he was a Senior Lecturer.

He is presently Professor and Director of theUNESCO International Centre for EngineeringEducation (UICEE) in the Faculty of Engineering atMonash University, Clayton, Melbourne, Australia. Hewas Associate Dean (Engineering Education) of theFaculty of Engineering between 1994 and 1998. Hisachievements to date have been published in booksand manuals and in over 250 scientific papers, inrefereed journals and conference proceedings.

In 1992, he was instrumental in establishing anInternational Faculty of Engineering at the TechnicalUniversity of Lodz, Poland, of which he is the Foun-dation Dean and Professor (in absentia) (1992-1999).

Urban Design Studios... 273

He was also appointed Honorary Dean of the EnglishEngineering Faculty at the Donetsk State TechnicalUniversity (DonSTU) in the Ukraine in 1995.

Professor Pudlowski is a Fellow of the Institutionof Engineers, Australia. He is a member of the edito-rial advisory boards of many international journals. Hewas the 1st Vice-President and Executive Director ofthe AAEE and the Editor-in-Chief of the AJEE sinceits inception in 1989 until 1997. Currently he is theEditor-in-Chief of the Global Journal of Engineer-ing Education, and is the Foundation Secretary ofthe International Liaison Group for Engineering Edu-cation (ILG-EE).

Professor Pudlowski has chaired and organisedseveral international conferences and meetings. He

received the inaugural AAEE Medal for DistinguishedContributions to Engineering Education (Australasia)in 1991 and was awarded the Order of the EgyptianSyndicate of Engineers for Contributions to theDevelopment of Engineering Education on bothNational and International Levels in 1994.

In June 1996, Professor Pudlowski received anhonorary doctorate from the Donetsk State TechnicalUniversity in the Ukraine in recognition of his contri-butions to international engineering education, and inJuly 1998 he was awarded an honorary Doctorate ofTechnology from Glasgow Caledonian University,Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom. In 1997, he waselected a member of the Ukrainian Academy ofEngineering Sciences.

A. Olszewski, T. Kouremenos & Z.J. Pudlowski274

Conference Proceedings of the 3rd UICEE Annual Conference on Engineering Education

under the theme: Collaboration in Engineering Education

edited by Zenon J. Pudlowski

Published by the UNESCO International Centre for Engineering Education (UICEE), this volume of Proceedings comprises papers delivered at the 3rd UICEE Annual Conference on Engineering Education. The 15 keynote addresses, 14 lead papers, and 60 regular papers demonstrate the international nature of UICEE meetings and provide readers with valuable insights and experience in engineering education contributed by academics from almost 30 countries worldwide in the global community. The papers tackle topics of vital importance to engineering education. The Conference s theme of Collaboration in Engineering Education seeks to discuss internationalisation, and the opportunities it brings for regional and global networks. Papers have been placed into various groups, with each chapter headed by a lead paper that is felt to be most representative of the topic under discussion:

• Opening and keynote addresses • Social and philosophical aspects of engineering • Innovation in engineering and technology education • Effective methods in engineering education • The impact of new technology on the effective training of engineers and technologists • International collaborative programs and systems • Case studies • Engineering and technology education and training in other countries • Multimedia in engineering education • Promotions of continuing engineering education, distance education and open learning • Academia/industry interaction programs • Development of new curricula • Management of academic engineering institutions All papers have undergone assessment by independent international peer referees. This ensures their high quality and the value of the Proceedings for some time to come. To purchase a copy of the Proceedings, a cheque for $A100 (+ $A10 for postage within Australia, and $A20 for overseas postage) should be made payable to Monash University - UICEE, and sent to: Administrative Officer, UICEE, Faculty of Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia. Tel: +61 3 990-54977 Fax: +61 3 990-51547