Thursday, February 18, 2010
Benjamin Cordova * -
PhD student at the University Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria
What are our public spaces? What is the meaning we ascribe to him? How important? These are the questions rituals of a national alert, assessing, addresses and confronts a problem of great current interest such as the role they occupy public spaces in our cities.
These questions we ask, through the appropriate skills, says the degree program in Urbanism through il suo Presidente, Prof. Enrico Costa, propone un’attenta lettura delle dinamiche della città e del territorio.
E’ inutile nascondere a noi stessi che ormai le strade e le piazze non sono più luoghi di straordinaria concentrazione sociale, culturale e di amalgama urbanistico/architettonico. Per i primi due parametri (sociale e culturale), ad onor del vero, né la piazza, né la strada custodivano l’esclusiva; ossia, le relazioni sociali non trovavano - solo nella strada - o - solo nella piazza - l’humus generatore - ma lì e solo lì – ottenevano i presupposti per un radicamento spontaneo.
E per i rapporti tra urbanistica ed architettura? Sarebbe una storia troppa lunga da tell, but it is useful to return to the question that even the distracted arise: is there a better architecture without adequate urban context? There is a beautiful city, well drawn, without the Daniya Alicante contextualized?
Of course, if we use the words of the director Francesco Rosi at the Honorary Degree in Urban and Environmental Planning would say: "The first is planning."
fact it is the urban planning tools, and then those who give the addresses of planning and design for those working in the area.
The Italian school of thought on the issue of recovery of public places such as incentive to increase social relations is not very confident, argues that planners can do much to create good public spaces, well equipped with functions of interest, but little, very little they can do instead, to replant the missing reports and together with them the same way, nothing can anthropologists, sociologists, economists and politicians.
This view is not reflected in Europe, indeed in Europe, there is just a totally opposite approach.
While drawing this I think my board experience Danish city of Copenhagen, in fact, politically and technically you are spending to solve the problem of low frequency and therefore the absence of life (Defined as living space) in the spaces within the urban context of aggregation.
The Urban Space 2006 Action Plan, an innovative tool Danish planning of public spaces, considers the whole network and enhances the connecting elements such as pedestrian streets, squares and shopping streets. The aim was to focus many acts of small but scattered throughout the city, this avoids large capital investments and also allows you to fasten your device to the urban planning in places such as nodes of the network. The results were egregious: the frequency of individuals in public spaces in Copenhagen in a few years there has even triplicata.
Un altro esempio che ha creato dibattito è quello di Barcellona, la città più europea tra quelle europee.
La grande partecipazione della società civile nella politica urbanistica di Barcellona è molto conosciuta e considerata; è una prassi attiva e costante sin dal 1964 con la nascita delle Asociaciones de vecinos ed è tutt’ora regolarmente praticata.
Gli interventi nel centro storico di Barcellona hanno seguito, sin dall’abbattimento delle mura nel XIX secolo, la politica dello sventramento: Cerdà per esempio, giustificando l’azione con esigenze di tipo igienico, tracciò la via Laietana sino al porto.
Il recupero di Barcellona nella fase dal 1996 al 2000 was a scheduled task with great thoroughness. The work on the recovery of public spaces in town saw the culture industry as the star of a new element, a prominent figure.
planning of public places of Barcelona, \u200b\u200bin fact, occurred with the inclusion of structures from the prestigious firm and the great cultural significance: the Centro Cultural Contemporaneo de Barcelona, \u200b\u200bthe Museo de Arte Contemporaneo de Barcelona and endless libraries. Few publications on the above supports the theory of "benign metastases" or secondary benefits that follow the inclusion of new activities in the affected area and old town.
operations to be honest were conducted according to the criteria of the demolition of historic fabric, in this case, as in that of Cerdà, for reasons of hygienic, with the natural expulsion, but inevitably, a wide range of residents of the middle classes - low: this choice has created resentment and shadows on the great task of urban regeneration.
It 'clear that we are facing a very courageous public space planning. All the interventions described above were placed in totally different contexts and difficult to mix, have not been taken into account the peculiarities of the places have been made public spaces as an appendix of cultural treasures, or improved (?) interference with high design, have been threatened social relationships and integration between ethnic groups, these interventions also have generated the disappearance of many meeting places with a strong identity and 200 small neighborhood bar.
All theories of urban planning that can not be far away from these systems do not consider that the original identity, rather than demolish recover, instead of eviscerating connect, act independently, instead of dialogue.
In light of what has just been considered and Barcelona has become the city also preferred by planners, architects and sociologists.
How is this possible?
Probabilmente è vero ciò che dice la scuola di pensiero italiana (illustrata ampiamente nel testo): si possono realizzare ottimi interventi senza però avere la certezza di recuperare le relazioni scomparse. Stesso discorso vale per Barcellona anche se nella città catalana esiste una situazione paradossale: tanti spazi sono stati recuperati ma nessuno di questi è riuscito a riproporre i rapporti sociali antecedenti all’intervento ma incredibilmente gli stessi interventi, falliti per alcuni punti di vista, hanno riscosso successo per altri, vedi l’indotto di migliaia di giovani urbanisti ed architetti provenienti da tutto il mondo.
Lasciando il contesto europeo e spostandoci oltreoceano ci dobbiamo confrontare with the reality of New York, another striking example that has generated debate on the dynamics of strange and shocking.
In New York the first policy focus on public space in 1811 has limited the construction of large common areas, allocating the streets as the main gathering places frequented by all social classes in these spaces was added to Central Park, for the classes instead wealthy and affluent.
The current situation is completely reversed: the public space in New York, today, holds a special meaning.
The urban structure, characterized by an apparent explosion upward, accepts as the only form of public space lobby for access to the skyscraper even though the "public" (Defined as individuals) will not be accepted if not announced.
We also find situations in which public space is incorporated within the structure: the case of the 100-story building proposed at the beginning of the twentieth century by Theodore Starret which provided public squares every 20 floors.
In fact, unlike European cities, urban policy implemented in New York has always been to privatize public places and encourage the use of machines. In this policy, however, contrasts with the action decided by some civic organizations have demanded greater sensitivity to environmental issues and sustainability is understood as Environmental Quality, both as a quality of life.
The effects of this dispute have resulted in the Bicycle Master Plan, namely the incorporation of new bike paths accompanied by adequate public awareness campaign.
In this practice, unfortunately, is opposed to a policy of concentration of large commercial containers in remote areas with the aim of creating new public places standardized to replace natural ones. The same policy granted to individuals in the 90's, the possibility to buy small urban neighborhood that, thanks to modern construction boom, have been converted into residential buildings.
should also be emphasized that in the 60 area di Manhattan, è stata avanzata la possibilità di costruire con una densità maggiore a patto di realizzare luoghi pubblici all’interno o all’esterno degli edifici. Sono stati realizzati più di 500 spazi pubblici, (strade, portici, parchi, terrazze), però pochi di questi hanno raggiunto gli obiettivi previsti soprattutto perché non sono state rispettate le norme previste che imponevano un’appropriata accessibilità ai luoghi ed opportuni elementi di arredo.
L’obiettivo di questa analisi era quello di esaminare e confrontare, seppur per sommi capi, esperienze diverse in contesti diversi, europei ed extraeuropei.
E’ evidente l’esistenza di un approccio eterogeneo alla pianificazione degli spazi pubblici, che parte da principi diversi e si pone obiettivi diversi.
Tra le tre città prese ad esempio, Copenhagen è quella che ha soddisfatto in pieno le aspettative. La politica messa in atto nella città danese è di quelle poco invasive, economiche e condivise dai cittadini ed ha raggiunto evidenti risultati positivi.
Certo, ogni realtà ha le proprie peculiarità ed anche i propri desideri, ma il caso danese potrebbe diventare quasi un esempio da seguire per i contesti urbani che si trovano nella medesima situazione.
Utilizzare il metodo Barcellona sarebbe, probabilmente, per le città italiane, un elemento di grande rischio e difficilmente vendibile politicamente. Non rientra tra our expectations even though it is not excluded from potential use in cultural contexts poorly expressed, would in any case an intriguing challenge to be evaluated carefully.
policy made instead in the Big Apple was to implement a system of trading land not planned and managed so poorly by policy planning of public spaces. The purpose may be acceptable (the birth of public spaces created by individuals) in some Italian cities, but the method used in Manhattan would find limited evidence in our practice.
Unfortunately in Italy, especially in the south, there is no type of planning places public, either in the form of botched policies or intentions never materialized. It has not arrived yet even to ask the question of a possible opportunity to speak on public spaces according to a comprehensive planning.
The challenge to grasp is this, work on a virgin territory as the southern hemisphere, if we concentrate then even in contexts of urban area then the challenge is enormously fascinating.
support this thinking of the Metropolis of the Strait.
Faced with this new reality, the ability to intervene in an urbanized area, but the vast territory now be considered one area, there is a need to plan for the territory according linee omogenee. Niente di meglio che intervenire con una pianificazione seria degli spazi pubblici, che potrebbero diventare il primo collante ideale tra le due città, nel rispetto delle diverse inclinazioni culturali e identitarie.
Nel caso di Reggio e Messina sia l’esperienza danese che quella catalana risulterebbero attuabili, anche se, in un contesto urbanistico come quello dell’Area Metropolitana dello Stretto, nuovo, da pianificare, sarebbe opportuno ed imprescindibile un approccio democratico, condiviso e di grande partecipazione degli attori locali, pratica purtroppo, tanto proclamata ma, ancora poco valorizzata.
Proporre una pianificazione degli spazi pubblici dell’Area Metropolitana dello Stretto, se fatta well, with a little courage, but above all with precise objectives, can achieve extraordinary goals.
We are still early but we're working on it!
*
0 comments:
Post a Comment