INU - Italian National Institute for Town
Planning
INTERNATIONAL IDEAS COMPETITION
AIMED AT DEFINING A RESPONSE
PLAN TO RECOVER, REDEVELOP AND
ENHANCE THE OLD CITY OF TARANTO
INU
Istituto Nazionale
di Urbanistica
SUPPLEMENTARY
METHODOLOGICAL NOTES:
AN ACCESSIBLE AND
CONTEMPORARY CITY EUROPEAN URBAN STANDARDS
Founded in 1930, INU (Italian National Institute for Town Planning) promotes building and
town planning studies, disseminates principles of urban development and regional planning
(Presid. decr. 1114/49) and protects the environment (Ministerial Decree 162/1997)
MAY 2016
1
INU
Founded in 1930, the Italian National Institute for Town Planning is a
“Legally recognised public-law body ... for humanities and technical
coordination“ (art. 1 of the Italian Statute, Presid. Decr. 21.11.1949) and
it has been recognised by the Ministry of the Environment since 1997 as
an environmental protection association (Law 389/86); it has been on the
European Council of Town Planners since 1997.
As a non-profit organisation, Inu engages in cultural activities and
supports local authorities by carrying out various research work in the
sectors of town planning, by promoting cultural events and producing
journals and other publications, by constantly staying abreast of
and contributing to developments in town planning culture and
techniques and by disseminating social culture relating to the city, land,
environment and cultural heritage.
Inu is spread throughout Italy with nineteen regional Divisions; its head
office is in Rome, Via Ravenna 9/b.
Its associate bodies are Local Regional Government, Provincial
Government, Municipalities, private and public-sector economical
bodies, University Departments, Professional Orders and Associations,
enterprise, cooperatives and their associations, research institutes,
professional firms and cultural associations.
The standing members and paying members are university researchers
and professors, professionals, students and engineers and directors and
officials of public-sector authorities.
The diverse background and broad professional experience of its
members makes INU fertile ground for comparing points of view and
exchanging information. Indeed, its members hail from a wide spectrum
of work sectors, including academic, scientific research, technical and
professional fields as well as public administration areas.
2
Contents
Supplementary Methodological Notes
INTRODUCTION TO
AN ACCESSIBLE AND
CONTEMPORARY CITY
LIFTING THE VEIL FROM
COMPLEXITY
Urban solidarity
Urban ecology and adaptation
The historical city centre, the focal point of urban landscape
Urban spaces and safety
Conservation versus transformation
Opportunity and change
Quality and participation
4
12
13
14
15
16
16
17
17
BIBLIOGRAPHY
for more details, please consult our website
www.opentaranto.invitalia.it or www.invitaliafornitori.it
The following documents are available for you to consult:
APPENDICE 1 (IT):
STRATEGIES, THOUGHTS
AND STUDIES
APPENDICE 2 (IT):
INU’S CHARTERS
The Charter of Public Space
The Charter of Participation
3
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION TO
AN ACCESSIBLE AND
COMTEMPORARY CITY
Silvia Viviani
We are constantly surrounded by change, whether it is happening to us or whether we are looking
for it. Town planning is no exception to this rule. Town planning is a constantly growing applied
science which seems to be rigidly encased in a series of apparently unyielding precepts, teeming
with theoretical ideas, instruments and informative models; time and time again, the world
demands that this exact science take an about-turn. In order for this to occur, we must bring our
cultural and ethical core to the fore, because it is this which will have to find it in itself to plan
and manage the process. If we are to restore our cities and landscapes to their rightful glory, we
must also polish up our moral standards because it will prove necessary to renew legislation,
geographical surrounds, institutional and regional systems and to overhaul prior knowledge. Our
right to city life, which includes social integration, access to services, environmental harmony,
urban cleanliness and safety, hinges on public morality. It is not only a question of research. To
use Cicero’s words in his essay on communication techniques: “between talent and will, there is
little space left for theory: it can only point us in the direction of the sources which contain the
material we need. All else stems from commitment, mental concentration, attention, constancy
and work... to compact all these virtues into one single word... from self-will“1. Today, good
communication skills are highly coveted, but if we can agree on the fact that teaching good
communication skills to the dishonest and the rash will not only not lead to creating orators, but
will actually place “weapons in the hands of madmen“2, then the connection between morality
and eloquence will become clear to us.
(Silvia Viviani, Notions on Urban Planning 255)
This is a SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE to the “ideas competition aimed at
defining a response plan to recover, redevelop and enhance the old city
of Taranto“. It contains objectives and underlying meanings relating to
the modern debate on the city. It explains the importance of this event
and includes passages and texts produced by Inu and made available
to this competition, which is of great purport to the various initiatives
organised with the Institutional Development Contracts for the Taranto
area. This competition is of great purport because a city devoid of ideas
has no future. Today’s quality of life does not automatically guarantee a
community’s quality of life in the future. Planning, a wise use of common
assets, the ability to coordinate intentions and actions, exploitation of
the technological revolution to generate wholesome and economical
behaviour patterns are all challenges that must be met if we are to
project today’s desires into tomorrow’s world.
1 Cicero, The art of rhetoric, P. Marsich, published by Oscar Mondadori, 2007, page 35
4
2 ibid page 89
Furthermore, these are the proposed international guidelines in which
urban cohabitation models have been given a new slant. HABITAT III,
which will be taking place at Quito in October 2016 in preparation for
the New Urban Agenda which will reach a comprehensive solution,
believes that city development and housing supply for the impoverished
are two problems which can be faced and resolved in a single swoop by
making a large investment in planning. The reference model is a densely
inhabited city abounding in services. In Europe such a city has proven
to have an efficient functional layout, whilst, especially in its historically
developed areas, it has also brought with it exceptional levels of physical
and psychological wellbeing; this, in turn, has had a positive influence on
society’s behavioural patterns.
Therefore, integrated urban planning seems to offer a viable solution. It
can be no coincidence if the European Union has strongly encouraged
complex projects over the past twenty years, involving both the private
and public sector. The goal was to counteract the continuing decline of
derelict areas, and this relates not only to the suburbs and outskirts, but
also to forsaken historical areas, such as the old city of Taranto.
If we are to devise ways to revive a forsaken city, we must bear in
mind that:
• cities serve as gateways since they provide access to both tangible
and non-tangible services from city and regional economies and
they compete on a level which goes beyond their local placement;
• we have witnessed the downturn of vast urban and regional
systems which could turn into platforms offering a whole
spectrum of investment opportunities , but creating income and
employment is intrinsically linked to congestion, pollution and
multi-ethnic cohabitation;
• a highly concrete and innovative smart planning concept is taking
shape - a new international word which encapsulates the concept
of intelligent and sustainable planning, something which involves
various disciplines and is also endorsed and proposed by the EU;
• digital technology is radically modifying the production and
exchange of services in the area of tourism, transport, welfare,
design, services to enterprise and urban logistics;
• usage of highly organised and sociable big data and software
(knowledge components of the sharing economy) leads us to
believe that part of the settlement structure will be more pliable
and easier to re-use in the future;
• the production process is undergoing changes as a result of new
forms of cooperation and urban farming and circular economy are
gaining in popularity;
• bringing this settlement transformation to pass within an existing
urban reality without encroaching on more terrain is the ultimate
objective of these urban regeneration and historical enhancement
schemes;
• cities can make an essential contribution to this shifting economic
and social model as it moves towards sustainable development
in accordance with the Sustainable Developments Goals – SDGs
(http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/) laid down by the
United Nations Agenda 2030 (http://www.unric.org/it/agenda-2030
) - in which Italy, alongside other countries, participates.
5
6
Harnessing ideas to drive progress
By means of the institutional development contract (CIS), the ideas
competition for the old city of Taranto operatively applies the Italian
national development strategy for the area of Taranto which ascribes
key importance to reviving the historical city heart.
The applicants will be required to carry out a complex piece of work;
they will have to come up with ideas each of which reconnects to the
same strategic vision which must serve as a genuinely functional basis
for the redevelopment response plan. This is, therefore, a project
which must not limit itself to recovering buildings and the city itself, but
must pioneer a way to rekindle the ancient urban fabric, interpreting it
not only a cultural heritage to be preserved and enhanced, but actual
chunks of a living city.
The old city of Taranto is not your usual historical centre. It has some
extraordinary features: it rises on an island circled by the sea - or to be
precise by the seas - a big sea and a little sea - which meet up through
two canals; a historical land of opposites with complex surrounds; an
ancient city heart revealing many layers of history where new buildings
have sprung up, playing a decisive both in terms of quantity and quality.
Its problems are no less unusual: environmental data regarding the
disquieting effects of commercial enterprise on inhabitants and actual
surrounds, including on water areas; functional specialisation which
have led to a divide between the water and the land, government
real estate, occupying a substantial amount of space and sprawling
throughout the city, meaning it is difficult to pinpoint ideal solutions
and forcing the designer to find a happy medium between vision and
feasibility; fragmented ownership; usage that over time has proved to
be increasingly restrictive; a mixture of historical buildings and recent
buildings which do not fit into their surrounds; a general state of
disrepair which, in some cases, has reached a point of no return.
The aim of this Document is to provide the designers with a framework
for the distinguishing themes and approaches which relate to urban
regeneration on historical areas, drawing on recent town planning
developments, yet underscoring the contemporary fabric of the project
in its capacity to hit upon ideas as well as establishing rules and checking
that all is going to plan, not only from a building or planning point of
view.
This Document is not (nor could it be) a comprehensive account of what
is happening, but it will provide a key to understanding, as well as a
weighty and descriptive indicator of the most innovative ideas on what
“creating a city“ means today.
Moreover, the opportunity to work on the city of Taranto must be seen
as an opportunity to experiment and grow for the applicants, for the
competition organisers and for all those who will come into contact with
ideas and projects that they will inevitably spawn.
7
The City has always been traditionally associated with the concept of
concentration: population, activities, innovation and accessibility as
opposed to rural areas associated with scarcity and permanency. A
positive connotation of the city can be traced to the usage of the term
“urbanity“ and in the prime definition of “urbanisation“: corrective
steps to increase levels of civilisation, courtesy and fairness (Italian
dictionary Devoto - Oli, 2000-2001). At the same time, the growth
of any city goes hand in hand with negative social phenomena and
ensuing perceptions or behavioural patterns (insecurity, social unease,
unhealthiness and vandalism). These two different views of the city
do not cancel each other out; they fuse into an indivisible whole and
make up our collective image of the city. Nowadays we often talk about
cities driving development. After all, in its entirety the city is a precious
resource, which can be broken down and rebuilt again into its various
different parts. This resource should be seen as a single entity which
can unite the various forms of social cohabitation, urban forms and
all that technological innovation has to offer. The integration that we
want requires us to gain awareness of what an urban life cycle is. Thus,
we can place no separating line between project and management,
technology and innovation, governance and distribution of functions,
training and participation. There can be no doubt that reducing our
consumption of non-reproducible natural resources and improving
the way we use them is central to our success. In order to achieve this
objective, it will be necessary to increase the amount of technology
underlying building and urban efficiency in order to boost services and
put forward different models aimed at meeting individual needs and
maintaining an acceptable level of community values. When we talk
about transport, waste, energy and water, we are not just referring
to areas of activity, but rather to more overarching matters which
encompass accessibility and freedom, cleanliness, health, common
assets, time, fairness and knowledge. The pathways of development
as indicated by the European Union stand firm on the importance of
innovating planning processes and defining regional policies which
enhance spacial relations, shared knowledge, accessibility to data
flows and cognitive capital; all this lays solid foundations for urban and
regional policies in which environmental benefits are included.
Urban regeneration is ever frequently seen as the only way to redevelop
cities whilst ensuring that soil is not overly encroached onto and that
the quality standards of the built-up areas and the open spaces are kept
high.
Regeneration must be seen not only as redevelopment of historical
buildings or a new order for transport or service networks, but
especially as an opportunity to characterise places, injecting them with
vital creativity, marked strategic vision, driving them towards activating
networks of collaboration and circulation of knowledge, an ability to
preserve and enhance the environment so that local development is a
natural consequence and alongside it, social cohesion follows suit. As
part of this, there is one prime issue which regards the public sector: it
relates to the importance of planning and governing on the “right side“
and “smartly“ our contemporary cities. To this end, Europe tells us that
The various layers – environmental, economical, social and cultural - of
urban life are utterly intertwined. This means that any form of positive
urban development may only be achieved by adopting an integrated
approach. All steps relating to tangible urban renewal must be combined
with measures aimed at furthering education, economic development,
social inclusion and environmental protection. Trying to do this without
triggering meaningful relationships between citizens, civil society, local
8
economy and the various administrative levels would be putting the cart
before the horse. Therefore, we must strive to bring together tangible
and intangible processes and actions.
In Italian cities and in the minds of Italian architects and planners, the
idea of re-using existing cities has long been a central theme. This is
because it relates to protecting and enhancing our historical heritage
and the numerous historical centres where not only must adaptation
and maintenance be contemplated during the regeneration process, but
conservation strategies must be particularly factored in.
It should be borne in mind that our city centres are a quintessentially
Italian affair contained within a quintessentially European backdrop
and it is horribly complicated to use smart instruments to get the
blood pumping through the ancient hearts of our old Italian cities.
It takes stoutheartedness to work on a historical city, paving the way to
the future without neglecting centuries of world-famous history, culture
and traditions. A vision of the historical city centre cannot be relegated
to a mere urban plan. There must also be a palpable and shared idea
of the city. An idea which aspires to spread urban quality beyond those
places which are naturally acknowledged as being attractive, bringing
architecture and planning to other public spaces in a bid to improve the
quality of these spaces and encourage citizens to use them.
The historical city requires the construction of an ideal pathway which
connects variegated parts of historical memories and contemporary life
to a single artery, binding them into a single nervous system upon which
to rest the historical centre, the city, architecture and the surrounding
region. Such an accomplishment would thrust new ideas upon the city,
illuminating it with the relationships formed between structures and
their surrounds and causing it to meld the diverse geographical and
historical cultures.
Making a success of the historical city entails taking a different
design approach which ekes out various layers of hidden yet high
urban potential lurking beneath the mask of age; only thus, will it
become a magnet for civic development and a model for sustainable
contemporary cities.
But to get there, our design approach must be flexible and open; we
cannot be stifled by over-specialisation, rather we must etch on our
hearts the idea of a city created for sharing, forming and maintaining
relationships: such a place eludes clear definitions since it can slip on
different skins according to the narrator and it serves a host of different
purposes.
In addition to this, we should also point out how important the channels
along which this message is conveyed are. The expression of this
message is no small part of the project, both in technical and political
terms. In the first instance, the systematisation of contents satisfies
drafting, composition and clarification of the knowledge underlying
the choices, narrating and interpreting the current and planned
circumstances, assessing and checking internal consistency, regulation,
legitimacy and regulatory effectiveness, updating, reproducibility,
transmissibility and communication. It is connected to planning methods
which include knowledge, prefiguration, regulation, activities which
substantiate the usefulness of the plan and its capacity to produce
viable plans and feasible intentions. It also hinges on professionalism,
ethics and planning responsibility.
9
To use Gabellini’s words (2009):
“activities relating to communication-representation-depiction of the plan and the project are
not merely a matter of elegance or grandeur, removed from stated intentions, actions and policies
and those involved on both ends, but rather they should be built into the very issues that are
grappled with and into the process which unravels and smooths out the knots as they come up“.
In the second instance, it relates to the sphere of sharing, debate and
consensus, participation and accessibility.
A thorny and winding path as compared to the straighter
path offered by any project on a contemporary city, but it is a
responsibility which cannot be shirked.
Another weighty point regards the redefinition of urban barriers
using innovative design contents which convince both institutions
and citizens. This is the only way to turn the tables on a situation
whereby many places are inaccessible - due to an incorrect usage of
private and community spaces which makes cities hostile rather than
friendly.
For this, the following will be very useful to refer to:Universal
Design1 - and Design For All2. This holistic and innovation approach
is a creative and moral challenge for all designers, planners,
entrepreneurs, public administrators and political leaders.
1 Universal Design has been defined as “the design of products and
environments which can be inherently used by everyone to the greatest
possible extent, without any need for adaptation or specialisation“. “Center for
Universal Design“ College of Design at North Carolina State University (NCSU) http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/index.htm.
2 Design For All is a design which embraces human diversity and works for
social inclusion and equality (Stockholm Declaration 2004)
10
As far as housing goes, recent innovation has provided us with great
opportunities to physically and socially reconstruct the city. Seeing
a dwelling place as a living facility and not only as just a house is
a watershed in solving this old problem. In particular, the standard
approach of the Social Operator offers a new prototype, which must
however be adapted to its given context.
who is a new figure whose activities consist in providing social promotion services and handling
property on lease. This figures is quite distinct from an ordinary real estate operator because of
the major role played by tenants and the community who both benefit from these services but are
also pro-active in managing them. (Social Housing Foundation - 2010)
Moreover, during the redevelopment process of any small urban fabric,
housing deprivation must also be tackled by adding “home services“ to
the equation. This new vision of things is currently underway and some
positive case scenarios have been experienced.
Another theme worthy of our attention is that of sustainable integrated
mobility. If cities are to generate new adjustment processes and
ecological balances, they must, on the one hand, reduce social conflict
and, on the other, ceaselessly enhance tangible and intangible qualities,
promoted via marketing actions of varying strengths and effectiveness.
An approach infused with urban dynamism therefore champions
the theme of mobility as a decisive factor in locating forms of
environmental, economic and social sustainability and in contributing
to the physical creation of a public city (squares, streets, lighting
systems, fixtures, etc.).
11
FINDING OUR BEARINGS
LIFTING THE VEIL
FROM COMPLEXITY
THE HISTORICAL CITY
CENTRE, THE FOCAL POINT
OF URBAN LANDSCAPE
URBAN SOLIDARITY
URBAN SPACES AND SAFETY
CONSERVATION VERSUS
TRANSFORMATION
OPPORTUNITY AND
CHANGE
URBAN ECOLOGY AND ADAPTATION
QUALITY AND PARTICIPATION
12
URBAN SOLIDARITY
The gradual decline in behavioural patterns and human relations
in cities has replaced the historical mass perception associated
with the terms city and urbanity with a more individualised
definition centred around proximity and usefulness.
A chasm is opening between the city where certain activities
take place in space and time (work, tourism or shopping) and
residential areas where other activities occur (and where most
financial and emotional investment is made as humans strive to
create safe space). This will lead us to the brink of exploitation
and social impoverishment and this is particularly true of
historical cities.
Yet as we see it, the historical city in its myriad forms and sizes,
whether it be an old hamlet or a monumental complex, is first
and foremost of a socially valuable place and a bid must be
made to relaunch these human settlements, turning them into
common assets and precious resources. Pro-active preservation
of that which the world calls “historical districts“ will always be
advantageous to the general population. Projects applied to
historical districts give rise to housing opportunities, foster safety
and demonstrate that history, sustainability, pleasantness and
economical prosperity can move ahead together.
This is not an unfamiliar issue to planning debates, yet it could
be the key to unlocking a solution to the Taranto situation, which
would appear to be a case apart.
To this end, Samonà1’s words are highly pertinent when he
said that the old core of a city has as a peculiarity which is
conventionally known as “urban solidarity“.
Solidarity is a vague term which abounds in meaning and suggests
features of physical cohesiveness but also a tendency to unite
- shared customs and values - by the settled community. This
concept weaves together physical form and habits, observances
and traditions into a single fabric. Such a quality sharply separates
the historical city from other urban forms, which are either
devoid of this solidarity, or if such solidarity exists, it tends to
fragmentation or incongruity.
This state of affairs has been overturned by the old and new cities
of Taranto, and this is our launchpad for its planned resurgence.
“as a whole urban space is made up of two discrete parts: one
includes the man-made spaces of the antique city, entirely made
up and consolidated by a past of pure experience, vesting it with a
sense of stability underpinned by centuries of life; these spaces exude
strong urban solidarity and each street and square is steeped with
a stability, a settled and all-pervading balance; here, we are talking
about special equilibriums made up of open and closed spatial
systems which give us the clear perception that we are living in a
place specially created for urban communities... in this part of the
city space has been fortified by these vital stabilising presences which
form such a solid base for urban morphology. In this old part of the
city, my method is entirely applicable because it acts on continuity
and shared values which, generally speaking, establish the features
of the buildings and structures. On the other hand, in the new part
of the city where the construction system took place at an extremely
critical time of our civilisation (the moment when communities
burgeoned beyond all proportion during the industrial revolution),
the structural relationship between external space and built-up
areas has evolved in a vague and non-permanent fashion... therefore,
in this part of the city, in my opinion, a methodology based on
morphology must take into account factors which are quite distinct
from those of the historical centre, if we are to characterise and place
all those typical features of urban structures in a historical context of
space systems still perturbed by critical issues.“
(Giuseppe Samonà, An empirical approach to urban planning in
historical city centres, 1994)
1 Giuseppe Samonà (Palermo, 8 April 1898 – Rome, 31 October 1983) is
one of the most acclaimed and influential urban planners in Italy of the last
century.
13
FINDING OUR BEARINGS
URBAN ECOLOGY AND ADAPTATION
Adaptation to climate change has been brought to the attention
of cities all over, the idea being to ward off the consequences of
extreme weather events which jeopardise the welfare of more
vulnerable areas. International initiatives (such as Mayors Adapt
launched by the European Commission, Compact of Mayors
promoted by the UN and also “100 resilient cities“ organised by
the Rockfeller Foundation in which Rome takes part) has meant
that this issue has now become of widespread relevance. The
concept of resilience has leaked out of its original sector-specific
location to take root in a broader field of action relating to
planning mechanisms and strategies to adapt our surrounds.
Regenerating cities and their surrounds by getting around shortages
and setting in motion resilient processes is an uncomfortable need
which is beset with difficulties, even though the mainstays of an
ecological city seem to be in place. When combined with environmental
policies, urban planning schemes envision a new development model
and imply quashing a series of deeply-held convictions and tried-andtested methods, some of which are already visibly faltering.
(Patrizia Gabellini, “Urban regeneration as resilience“, 27th INU
Congress, Salerno, 2013)
Today, sustainability is often inextricably linked with resilience.
Indeed, it would seem that in the face of our many modern
challenges such as social inequality, pollution and climate change,
sustainability has thrown in the towel. Sustainability moves to
restore perfect equilibrium, whilst resilience means learning to
handle a permanently imbalanced world.
Therefore, resilience means that natural, ecological and human
systems are able to absorb a shock and reorganise themselves
accordingly whilst change is taking place, maintaining all the
while the same functions, the same structure, the same identity
and the same feedback. The resilient city is an urban system
which does not simply adapt to change, but morphs according
to the circumstances, generating new social, economic and
environmental responses which enable it, in the long term, to
weather the strains and pressures of its surrounds and passing
history. Therefore, it seems clear that today resilience is a
prerequisite for sustainable development, acting, as it does,
from the outset on the organisational and management models
of urban systems. By definition, a sustainable city is a resilient
city. The historical city is a resilient place and the complexity
of urban history is testimony to this. Centuries of change have
tempered our cities, teaching them to absorb, to coalesce and
rearrange a multitude of transitory urban and social cultures
which have occupied, affected and moulded them, and to which
they have invariably reacted (resilience), generating ever-new
and more complex socio-cultural and urban fusions. The real
challenge today is to achieve urban regeneration, by enhancing
existing structures and generating resilient, therefore sustainable,
systems.
14
These resilient cities then become welcoming urban places,
fostering the development of a host of economic activities which
are sensitive to tangible and intangible relational services (spaces,
networks and services) across various parts of the city and this is
precisely what cities need today if they are to drive development
again. In this sense, resilient cities have it in themselves to trigger
significant spin-offs on:
• building a new urban economy linked to green
manufacturing and recycling, to seeking out and producing
high-tech services, to culture and media who demand
new networks (both extremely eco-friendly environmental
networks as well as computerised ones supported by
intangible communication services) and to control and
facilitation;
• social inclusion policies to counteract the growing number of
marginalised segments of the urban population, rethinking
welcome policies inside the new “public city“ (in terms of
resources, extended public management and new urban
alliances).
Generally speaking, the geo-strategic and ecologically-driven
approach relates to a series of specific aspects, such as:
• reclamation and recycling of waters and soil;
• urban farming;
• alternative energy cycles and interaction with urban space,
• new waste cycle;
• increase in green areas, permeability and urban porosity;
• raising microclimatic performance and reducing urban heat
islands;
• lowering CO2 levels by introducing alternative infrastructural
policies to rubber (from developing port, freight terminal and
railway intermodality to soft urban mobility);
• integration between green and blue infrastructure and
activities relating to urban and construction recycling, raising
urban environmental performance levels, environmentalenergy retrofitting and earthquake-proof adjustment on
buildings;
• incentivising neighbourhood eco-services for cluster
management on some resources (water, energy, waste,
recyclable materials or materials with low or no emissions) in
conjunction with regeneration activities on open spaces;
• policies and incentivising devices to encourage adaptation
of existing buildings by upgrading and extending them to
provide them with new functions, including for productive
and innovative purposes;
• development of digital networks and services which are liable
to attract new economic operators and to improve urban
environmental standards (energy consumption, waste cycle,
water consumption and mobility);
• promoting, maintaining and tending to public urban spaces
in their role as nerve centres contributing to the lymph of
cities, perpetuating their quality levels, beauty, ability to
integrate and capacity for social inclusion.
THE HISTORICAL CITY CENTRE, THE FOCAL POINT OF
URBAN LANDSCAPE
Any age-old compact urban centre which is recognisable in its
form and territorial placement qualifies as a historical city centre.
Regardless of their size, historical centres are “cities“ and the
cultural heritage of the community. Nowadays, they are the
ancient heart and indispensable core of the contemporary city.
Schemes to create future cities without this old beating heart have
failed miserably, as a brief look at recent history will confirm. If it
is true, as Kevin Lynch says in his book Good City Form that it is
“commonplace opinion that most urban spaces are unsatisfactory unmanageable, miserable and dull - as if they could be labelled with
such sweeping certainty. Only fragments of these inhabited places
usually escape such a negative judgement: a wealthy suburb, some
pretty parkland and historical city centre, the beating heart of a
metropolis, an ancient rural district. If we could work out why we feel
this way, we would be halfway to bringing about dramatic change.“
(Kevin Lynch, Good City Form, 1996)
There can be no doubt that the historical centre is not only a
territorial pole, but it is its innermost core and characteristic part.
This by no means justifies the fact that the historical city has been
debased to satisfy mass appetites.
The tourists “throng around the market stalls... and then crowd into
quaint trattorias... today, the entire gamut of modern food is on the
menu: hot and spicy fare, the first and most reliable clue that you are
in a foreign country...raw food: a primitive custom which will become
very popular in the third Millennium.“
(Rem Koolhaas, Junkspace, 2006)
If we are to ensure the continuance of this role and benefit from
the intricacy and long life of our historical centres, then we must
seek out to balance their various residential, business and service
functions, we must improve the image of public spaces and make
them functional, carefully embedding cultural and civil systems
and fostering small business networks which are closely linked to
the structure of historical city centres.
And it would be pernicious to neglect the extreme importance
of the landscape which encompasses the city and its surrounds
(which is not usually built-up and this is how it should stay);
we must thrust aside a restrictive approach and a tendency to
concentrate on building codes only.
The progressive expansion of our perception of an architectural
and historical asset has moved over to absorb regional areas and
surrounding landscapes and this tends to make us demarcate
our historical centres, in consideration of their perceptive and
functional value and the areas which spotlight their dominant
position.
The historic urban landscape includes the broader urban context and
its geographic setting, which encompasses not only natural elements
(such as morphology) and man-made ones (built environment
and public and private open spaces), but also land use patterns,
spatial organisation and visual relationships, social and cultural
practices, economic processes and intangible dimensions of diversity
and identity. The future of the historic urban landscape calls for
sharing strategies between politicians, town planners, architects,
environmentalists, property owners, investors and active citizens who
must pool their forces to preserve our urban heritage, but at the same
time, they must factor in social modernisation and development
with acute cultural and historical awareness, thus boosting social
cohesion.
(UNESCO Recommendations on urban landscape – 2011)
Today, the historical city is geographically and functionally
placed as an important exchange hub with its own specific
role (environment, culture and research). In many cases, this
placement is not a given, but a objective to be constantly pursued,
a treasure to be cherished by strengthening the system of human
resources, space and urban quality that it needs. We must never
presume that the historical city is invulnerable to contact with
social phenomena deriving from modern urban life.
History and human relations are the essence of our historical
heritage.
15
FINDING OUR BEARINGS
16
URBAN SPACES AND SAFETY
CONSERVATION VERSUS TRANSFORMATION
Urban safety is one of the many, but most pertinent, pointers to
the essential need to raise the quality of government action in
cities.
The idea, perception and need for safety have changed over time;
exacerbated by crime waves and vandalism, the need for safety
is more widespread today and expresses itself in any array of
negative feelings associated with city life. It is common to come
across deep-seated fears triggered by real or imagined risks of
ending up as a victim of violence; lack of maintenance and poor
administration of assets and public spaces or common areas
all lead to feelings of ill-ease; distress caused by unmistakeably
“uncivilised behaviour“ (either directly or indirectly experienced
such as vandalism on things or public spaces/common areas,
ruining them for future use); feelings of insecurity springing from
the sight or knowledge of vandalised places or derelict areas - this
in turn leads to urban marginalisation, placing these areas in the
hands of their destroyers; distress and fear caused by dimly lit
urban spaces where it is tricky to see where you are going, and
so on. Therefore, this desire for safety in urban spaces must be
embraced for what it is, which does not automatically mean a
need for “more policing“ because overreacting and overdelivering
in this sense will only worsen fears and heighten unease. It should
be clear that some forms of defence mechanisms, although they
aim to lower risk and reassure the community, often have the
opposite effect over time:
more often than we like to think, this applies to fences, railings,
iron gratings and barriers in general. This is because they have
the general effect of demarcating and hiding from view common
spaces and with the passage of time, these spaces will be
abandoned by the community. All leftover space, closed areas,
dead spaces are riddled with risk, whether this risk be real or
imagined. An example of this are untended temporary sites,
such as large or small building yards and this is particularly true
if activities have been halted for a long period of time because it
gives the impression of dereliction.
On the other hand, many functions and activities, including those
connected to hospitality, different customs and cultures present
in our contemporary cities, clear pathways, linearity and visible
spaces are all indicators of urban quality including its safety levels
(imagined or real) and this raises the sense of recognisability and
a sense of belonging, boosting integration, encouraging respect
and fostering sound social behaviour patterns.
Pleasant spaces, whether they be for the individual or for society
as a whole, heighten our sense of belonging and lull us into a
sense of security, whilst actually raising safety levels at the same
time. This is how, moreover, we can avoid taking all those steps
that we put in motion after our project comes into existence to
attenuate the negative consequences we did not envisage, and by
this, reference is made to traffic diversions, temporary restrictions
and barriers intended to restore safety and well-being, when
in reality they are more likely to aggravate matters and project
negative feelings.
Protecting our cultural heritage falls under an overarching
European desideratum which directs its energies towards
peaceful cohabitation. This necessarily entails proactive
preservation of our cities, our natural, historical and artistic legacy
and our landscapes.
The link between preservation and Europe’s prevailing values
of justice, secularity, personal freedom, sustainability goals and
inclusion is far from tenuous, and this sagacity has been spun
into the projects for European cities. No planner would strive to
better acquaint himself with resources if he had not first acquired
an awareness of conservation, and by this, we mean the way our
developing culture perceives resources and decides to protect
and transform them.
From the Charter of Gubbio (1960) onwards, efforts to safeguard
ancient cities and increasingly assign them space and value
have been on the rise; this must forge ahead until history and
identity are one, as are physical space, regional and cultural
heritage. Criteria and principles for the conservation of historical
city centres, in which protecting assets is closely connected to
its ability to adapt, were established in the Seventies of the last
century and have not greatly changed, except for the fact that
they have expanded out of their application range: from buildings
to surrounds and from urban area to landscape. The revitalisation
of the historical centre has a bearing on town planning, that
sphere which works to safeguard monuments and artistic
creations, environmental and economic systems and mechanisms
to increase social aggregation.
Two essential parts, quite distinct but complementary, combine to
bring these revitalisation projects to fruition:
• the preservation of ancient memories, widespread or
localised, in excellent conditions and physically defined
or filtering through from a collection of customs and
perceptions;
• a transformation process which adapts consolidated urban
form to the needs of an ever-evolving society.
Over time, numerous operations have been initiated to probe
into the various possibilities. A starting point was to carry out
far-reaching and in-depth evaluations and now a consolidated
methodology exists to analyse the structural features and
construction techniques of buildings in ancient city centres. We
have learnt to scrutinise the “physical city“, to inspect it in detail
and deliver our diagnosis. But that is not all.
Historical urban heritage is a social, economic and cultural asset,
defined by the stratification of values generated by ancient,
modern and contemporary cultures.
OPPORTUNITY AND CHANGE
QUALITY AND PARTICIPATION
In historical city centres limited car access, pedestrian zones,
festivals and events, coveted residential areas, a plenitude of
cultural occasions and initiatives, tourism and an expression
of local identity are all the happy outcome of a part of peaceful
living, well-being and safety which belongs to Italian society.
Today, we cannot write off urban complexity by pigeonholing it
with those musty labels of city and countryside, or uptown and
suburbs. Respect for historical urban forms and the values they
express goes hand in hand with rearranging the various city parts,
adapting spaces to a variety of uses and modernising historical
fabric and regional links.
We must move away from the outdated association between
what things are and what we can use them for. What we must
concentrate on is how the various activities express themselves in
a given space, remembering to be aware of how many different
uses the historical city can accommodate.
In the urban environment, nothing must be excluded, rather we
must adapt each activity to the place it occurs in. On the one
hand, this outlook will lead to urban and architectural features
being respected, without forcing them to be what they are not,
whilst on the other hand, it obliges the planner to exercise his
imagination in different ways and hone his creative talent in order
to allow people and their way of life to fit into their surrounds.
This approach requires knowledge and awareness of what Secchi
called “statute of places“, meaning a collection of relations which
have clustered throughout history, imbibing the materials which
make up and form the space; the collection of services which can
be adopted and provided as part of the various social customs as
a result of these relations. In design terms, defining the statute of
places means identifying the kind of work which each place and
material requires so that the cluster of relations can be retained,
adapted, modified or transformed.
What is paramount is to regenerate cities, setting into motion
processes of urban inclusion and implementing (locally and
further out) those socio-cultural processes which create identity.
In this sense, town planning must go back to working on public
spaces, spaces for social relations, urban gaps, symbols assigning
a central role and emblems of local identity.
Open spaces are not a side thought, they are of equal value and
an intrinsic part of the settlement principle and they are deserving
of the same close attention that buildings are assigned in the
restructuring process.
It is methodologically important for the project to have a
performance-oriented outlook. Work on urban systems and
the various types of materials within them must be adjusted
according to their ability and suitability to match the various
requirements.
Information processes and participation must be a key part of
the overall planning process which has already been launched.
Encouraging participation is not only something which aims at
obtaining approval for choices made, but should be genuine
across-the-board involvement, touching on all phases of city
development and management. Therefore, the participation
process cannot only be a collection of expectations, but a way to
sit down with citizens, economic groupings and social and cultural
organisations in order to build up a collective image which must
then be made to materialise.
The dual semantic notion of the verb “to participate“ is a
fascinating one as it means both “to take part“ in a given action or
process, but also “to be part“ of a body, a group or a community.
On the one hand, participation consists in given actions, being
involved in decision making, both in the stricter sense of deciding
on matters but also in the sense of choosing who will occupy
political offices.
On the other hand, participation means active inclusion in a social
and political reality at a whole range of possible levels (solidarity
at a governmental, class, group or party level).
In any case, participation flourishes whenever there is group
learning, genuine transparency and an increment in responsibility.
17
INU
Istituto Nazionale
di Urbanistica
via Ravenna 9b - 00161 Rome | Tel. +39.06.688.011.90 / 688.096.71 |
Fax +39.06.68.214.773 | [email protected] | Certified email address: [email protected] |
Tax code: 80206670582 | VAT N° 02133621009