Abstract
This study aims to open a discussion on the concept of cultural sustainability in architectural design. We asked the question of whether spatial planning has a role in cultural sustainability and in which terms cultural sustainability could be considered or discussed in the design process. We started with a presupposition of an example that achieved cultural sustainability in time. We exemplified a holiday resort village designed in 1970, which is still in use with inconsiderable transformations. Social engineering was a necessity for the architects, Altuğ and Behruz Çinici, and their design approach was to achieve sustainable living considering financial, ecological, environmental, and cultural dimensions. Behruz Çinici and his wife, Altuğ Çinici, were influential architects of their time. For an understanding of Çinici’s design concepts, we first looked at the inspiration sources mentioned in his conferences. After studying their village projects, we suggested four spatial concepts for reading projects from the perspective of cultural sustainability. We analyzed their three resort villages, which were designed in the same decade, through the criteria we have suggested. In the evaluation, the distinguished features of Çinici’s resort projects are discussed in relation to the concept of cultural sustainability. In conclusion, we aim to open a discussion for the criteria we proposed for cultural sustainability in spatial planning, and to emphasize the importance of cultural practices for housing policies for regional identity in a global world.
Highlights
The concept of sustainability has been a topic in architectural circles since the mid-1990s [1], but cultural sustainability is a rather new issue for architects
These concerns are inadequate without the social and cultural dimensions of sustainability, as the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) declares that no development is sustainable without including the “culture” and “full integration of culture into sustainable development policies” [4]
We have to account for the technology of the day, force majeure of the natural environment, and the sanction power of the authority of this reflection. Because all these data sets play a role in the production of the built environment and its cultural reflections, on which subjects should we focus to understand the relationship between spatial planning and cultural sustainability? It is necessary to give definitions of the terms culture and cultural sustainability before we make connections with spatial planning
Summary
The concept of sustainability has been a topic in architectural circles since the mid-1990s [1], but cultural sustainability is a rather new issue for architects. Architecture as a social discipline is influenced by the economic, technical, and political developments of society, and is concerned with almost all dimensions of sustainable development, including the cultural sustainability. The ecological dimension of sustainable development is the main concern of architects and urban designers who consider renewable sources in the formation of the built environment. These concerns are inadequate without the social and cultural dimensions of sustainability, as the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) declares that no development is sustainable without including the “culture” and “full integration of culture into sustainable development policies” [4]. Cultural sustainability is considered to be the fourth pillar of sustainable development, together with the economic, environmental, and social dimensions [5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
