Tema. Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment (University of Naples)
Not a member yet
806 research outputs found
Sort by
I treni e l’unificazione d’Italia: l’epoca delle costruzioni ferroviarie
No full textThe physical construction of modern Italy began in 1861, with the foundation of the Kingdom of Italy. The historical period coincided with the early industrial development of north-western Italy, and so the new infrastructure system developed in response, on the one hand, to the need to join together all the fragmentary pieces that formed the country and, on the other, to the general tendency to strengthen those areas that were economically and industrially stronger even before unification. The system that was being created in the 1860s by the Italian State before unification suffered continuous interruptions and was substantially without transverse connections, those with more difficult construction caused by the need to cross the Apennines. Within five years, from 1861 to 1866, the size of the railway system doubled, going from little more than 2,000 km to more than 4,000. The management of railway was entrusted to limited companies. The government guaranteed the company a contribution for each kilometer of railway built. In 1863 the tracks extended down the Adriatic coast as far as Brindisi, in order to attract the transit of the India Mail London- Brindisi-Bombay, the most important trade of the world. In 1863 Rome was linked to Naples, in 1864 the line from Bologna to Florence via Pistoia was opened, in 1866 Rome was linked to Florence and Ancona and in 1867 with Pisa. In 1874 the Genoa-Pisa line were completed as far as the frontier with France; later, in 1879 the Naples-Foggia line went into operation. In the same period some of the longer tunnels were opened. Those of Fréjus was realised between 1857 and 1871. The Gottardo tunnel came into being in 1882 and the Sempione tunnel in 1906. The opening of the alpine passes effectively permitted the connection of Italy to central Europe, flinging open the doors to more and more easily reachable markets. In last twenty years of the 19th century, in Italy began the strong development of the secondary railways, with a generalised movement to promote the branching out of the railway, as an instrument of progress. With the completion of the main lines, the outlying centers began to clamor for the trains that, in an agricultural society without for the moment the automobile, seemed the only tie with civilised life capable of bringing economic development and political and social modernisation. Italy was a country with an ancient infrastructure and numerous lively towns. These towns were often, in their municipal activity, the protagonists of the completion and management of a secondary railway system on the peninsula. The development of narrow gauge technology, that allowed narrower curves and steeper slopes thereby reducing the need for great engineering works, and the achievement of particular gripping systems like the rack railway, made it possible to link by rail the many small towns and villages located in the hills and on the slopes of mountains.Se si rileggono i testi dei patrioti del Risorgimento, si trovano frequenti accenni alle “strade ferrate”, come allora si chiamavano, ritenute indispensabili per collegare gli Italiani, divisi fra i diversi Stati preunitari. Abolizione dei dazi, libertà del commercio, circolazione delle idee furono associati all’idea di nazione italiana, trovando la realizzazione “fisica” nelle ferrovie, che dovevano unire il territorio della penisola dalle Alpi alla Puglia e alla Calabria. Al momento dell’unità d’Italia, non esisteva una rete ferroviaria nazionale, sebbene il Piemonte di Cavour avesse sviluppato un cospicuo reticolo di strade ferrate, che misuravano 850 km. Seguivano, per l’estensione dei binari, il Lombardo-Veneto con 607 km, il Granducato di Toscana con 323 km, lo Stato Pontificio con 132 km, il Regno delle Due Sicilie con 128 km, il Ducato di Parma con 99 km, il Ducato di Modena con 50 km. Molti tratti erano in corso di costruzione, ma non si aveva una rete interstatale, perché gli Stati preunitari avevano operato separatamente l’uno dall’altro. Con l’eccezione della tratta da Torino a Bologna, in corso di completamanto nel 1860, per il resto le reti erano state pensate per servizi interni a ciascuno Stato. Per mettere in comunicazione gli Italiani delle diverse regioni e creare un mercato nazionale, i governi post-unitari dedicarono dunque alle ferrovie i maggiori investimenti per lavori pubblici. Nell’arco di un decennio, si completò l’ossatura fondamentale della rete, con 6.600 km nel 1871, anno in cui fu anche inaugurata la galleria del Fréjus di 13,6 km, la più lunga del mondo, che poneva l’Italia sulla rotta della “Valigia delle Indie”, il più intenso traffico mondiale di merci fra l’Inghilterra e la popolosa colonia delle Indie britanniche. Negli anni ’70 furono estesi i collegamenti e nel 1879 fu approvata la legge sulle ferrovie complementari - destinate a completare la rete della penisola e delle isole maggiori - che aprì un cinquantennio di costruzione di ferrovie secondarie, con la ramificazione della rete. Allo stesso tempo, fu estesa la rete delle strade ordinarie, che dovevano servire soprattutto a collegare i centri minori con le stazioni ferroviarie, trasformando le mulattiere in carreggiabili.
Il “Crazy Project” - Canale di Istanbul
Get PDFIt was late April 2011 when “the Crazy Project - Canal Istanbul” was proposed by the Prime Minister of Turkey, during his election campaign. Although the idea of an artificial canal is not new, since it is initiated without any consensus between the people and institutions in Istanbul, the project immediately set a large number of debates. These vary from the legitimacy of decentralization of governance, to potential impacts of the canal on international politics, economy, environment and urban life. Regarding past infrastructure projects in Istanbul, such large scale investments have caused extensive acceleration in construction sector in one hand and social and economic shifts on the other. In this paper, the Canal Istanbul Project is evaluated according to basic motivations and claims of the PM, multi-perspective view through challenges and limitation that the project is likely to face with and speculations on implementation approach. The final discussion on the project is based on benefits/losses of Istanbul once the project will be implemented.It was late April 2011 when “the Crazy Project - Canal Istanbul” was proposed by the Prime Minister of Turkey, during his election campaign. The proposed project consisted of construction of an entirely new city, an airport, a seaport and recreational areas. But the most important and striking element was a new maritime transportation canal which is to be constructed as an alternative to the Bosphorus Strait. Although the idea of an artificial canal is not new, since it has been initiated without any consensus between the people and institutions in Istanbul, and no scientific or technical study about the feasibility and environmental impacts of such a project has been presented, the “crazy” project immediately set a large number of debates among scholars and professionals. These vary from the legitimacy of decentralization of governance, to technological and legal possibilities for construction, feasibility of the canal in operational terms, potential impacts of the canal on international politics, economy, environment, international relations and urban life. Since the only information about the project was a digital animation, presented in the election speech of the Prime Minister, there is little information about the scope of the project. Such large scale investments in Istanbul have caused extensive acceleration in construction sector on one hand and social and economic shifts on the other. The “crazy” project initiated by the ruling party which is known to be ambitious in real estate projects has therefore raised hot debates across scholars and professionals. A variety of articles were produced in response, discussing the scope of the project and its potential impacts on the environment, the city of Istanbul, Turkey’s international relations and the economy of Turkey. However, these articles often focused only on the fictional “Canal”, and neglected the full scope of the project. Since the project is ambitious, large, but little is known about its exact location and land use pattern, it deserves an evaluation with a wider perspective than current articles that may be found in popular science magazines or daily newspapers. In this paper, the Canal Istanbul Project is evaluated mostly according to the speech of the PM, which provides basic motivations and claims for the project. The second group of sources is the past ideas and projects of an artificial canal initiated almost 500 years ago. The third group of sources consists of scientific and journal articles published in the Turkish media after the speech. We try to describe challenges and limitations which the project is likely to face by implying a multi-perspective view. Then we speculate on the implementation approach, basing on the current planning experience and the recently approved Master Plan of Istanbul. The final discussion on the project is based on benefits/losses of Istanbul once the project will be implemented
Confronto Creativo: l’altra democrazia, quella che funziona nelle società complesse
No full text“Quality of life and governance are more and more related. The Consensus Building method is the “other” democracy, the one which works in complex societies. This approach has old roots, but its current success born in the last years due to two phenomenon’s; the great crisis in traditional governance in particular in western societies from 70’s until nowadays, and the inadequate local answers to this problems. On one hand some governments try to solve it with more restrict places of power, that take decisions on their own, on the other hand or they try to solve it with naïve participation, open new moments of decision without specific methods, thinking that differences could be solve with “good will” and voting. (From the introduction“Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati” Lawrence Susskind- Marianella Sclavi 2011)On September 2011 Lawrence Susskind came to Italy in order to presents his book “Confronto Creativo, dal diritto di parola al diritto di essere ascoltati”, wrote with Marianella Sclavi. This book has been published in more than 20 countries, from China, to Japan. The authors underline the idea that globalization is, in certain way, helping the born of a different governance, which makes democracy and new ways of participation been closer than in the past. This interview tries to answer some questions of participatory urban planning in Italy nowadays. As for example; can consensus building help to deal with complex cities nowadays? Who should promote consensus building approach: governments, citizens, private entrepreneurships? Which are the obstacles, and the methodologies to solve them? Once urban planners finish their work, who implement the projects? What are the new languages that urban planning should find in order to create local processes?“Qualità della convivenza e governance sono sempre più strettamente intrecciate. Il Confronto Creativo è l’altra democrazia, quella che funziona nelle società complesse. Questo approccio ha radici lontane, ma la sua fortuna crescente negli ultimi decenni nasce da due tipi di constatazioni: la crisi di governabilità che colpisce le società occidentali dalla fine degli anni’70 in poi e l'inadeguatezza dei due rimedi opposti ai quali si ricorre: il decisionismo, il prendere decisioni in sedi sempre più ristrette ed esclusive, e l'afflato verso la partecipazione ingenua, l’allargare gli spazi decisionali con spirito assembleare, pensando che il supplemento di esigenze e punti di vista divergenti ai quali si riconosce così cittadinanza sia risolvibile con la “buona volontà” e il voto a maggioranza. (Dell’introduzione “Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati” Lawrence Susskind- Marianella Sclavi)Nel settembre 2011 Lawrence Susskind arriva a Roma per presentare il libro “Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati”, scritto insieme a Marianella Sclavi. Questo libro è stato pubblicato in più di 20 paesi dalla Cina, al Giappone, l’autore sostiene che la globalizzazione sta aiutando a contaminare l’idea di una forma di governance diversa, che avvicina la democrazia a nuove forme partecipative di prendere delle decisioni. L’intervista cerca di rispondere alle grandi domande che l’urbanistica partecipativa si pone in questo momento in Italia; può il confronto creativo affrontare gli scenari complessi delle città contemporanee? Chi sono gli attori che devono promuovere questo approccio: i governi, i gruppi della società civile, le imprese?Quagli sono gli ostacoli e le metodologie per superarli? Quando i gruppi di urbanisti lasciano i territori, chi deve implementare i progetti? Quale sono le nuove modalità e linguaggi che deve trovare l’urbanistica per tradurre questo approccio in narrazione locale
Consenso tecnico e integrazione trasporti-territorio: il Progetto Bagnoli
Get PDFThe paper wants to analyze a highly operative aspect of the interventions related to the Bagnoli Project and the extension of the subway line nr. 6 to Bagnoli. The two projects strictly integrate the urban transformation projects in the implementation of the mobility system. The two societies that realize the project are Bagnolifutura SpA Urban Transformation Society, and Ansaldo STS SpA. The first has the task to act the executive urban plan of Bagnoli-Coroglio; the latter is one of the main company in the global railway & mass transit transportation systems and it is licenseed for design and construction of the line nr 6. The paper, in the whole complex process, wants to analyze particularly the long coordination process among the subjects responsible for the various design and construction phases and the equally hard work necessary for the granting of approvals. In other words, the paper wants to show that the expected and/or obtained results in terms of land-transport integration come not only from a rigorous design process, but mainly from a structured, long and often difficult activity of technical consensus building. For this result many meetings are necessary , field tests, surveys, expert analysis, but also the definite time for closing the significant phases of the procedure, avoiding the risk of indefinite times for discussion, never compatible with the timing of the funding. The definition of the trackwork, for example, is a synthesis moment of many requirements that must be met; their acceptance is never immediate, but it is verified only after a recursive process that assembles one after the other the pieces of a mosaic. It is a team effort involving multiple disciplines and a large number of professionals; they must work in close contact, making sure that the information’s flow in the right way, that the taken decisions are transparent, clear, and that are known to all; everyone must have the availability to revise some of the own work or, in extreme cases, to restart the process. A necessary first step of comparison has involved the layout of the railway line and the level of the track. During several meetings, audits, and technical evaluation stages, a series of design alternatives are studied, and are discarded all the hypotheses of trenches or close to the ground parts. The only possible choice was the creation of a tunnel starting from Campegna, that continues along the Sport Park, reaches Steel Mill, Science City and the Park Gate, serving the nodal points in the area. Among others, two engineering aspects are faced in the project’s development: the provision of electricity and water for the metro line, and the interference of the line with a large sewer pipe in the area. Another aspect is the integration between the architecture and the landscape as regards the stations and the gateways, with particular attention to the industrial archeology buildings.Il contributo proposto, partendo dal Progetto Bagnoli e dall’ampliamento della linea 6 della Metropolitana verso Bagnoli, vuole analizzare un aspetto fortemente operativo di tali interventi. Si tratta, nel complesso, di progetti in cui la trasformazione urbana in atto è fortemente integrata all’implementazione del sistema della mobilità. Due i soggetti attuatori, Bagnolifutura SpA Società di Trasformazione Urbana cui è demandata l’attuazione del Piano Urbanistico Esecutivo di Bagnoli-Coroglio e Ansaldo STS SpA, azienda leader nel settore del Trasporto ferroviario e metropolitano e concessionario per la progettazione e realizzazione della linea 6. Dell’intero processo si vuole fare particolare riferimento al lungo lavoro di coordinamento tra i soggetti preposti alle diverse fasi progettuali e realizzative e all’altrettanto lungo lavoro necessario per il rilascio delle autorizzazioni di legge. In altre parole si vuole dimostrare come i risultati attesi e/o ottenuti anche in tema di integrazione trasporti-territorio derivano non solo da un rigoroso iter progettuale, ma soprattutto da una articolata, lunga e spesso difficile attività di costruzione del consenso tecnico. Sono necessari più incontri, verifiche sul campo, rilievi, analisi specialistiche, ma anche di un tempo certo di chiusura di fasi significative del procedimento, scongiurando il rischio di un tempo infinito di discussione che non è mai compatibile con i tempi del finanziamento. La definizione del tracciato, ad esempio, è un momento di sintesi di molteplici istanze che devono essere accolte, che non trovano mai risoluzione immediata, ma solo dopo un iter ricorsivo che mette a posto prima i tasselli più grandi e via via quelli più piccoli del mosaico che si va a comporre. È un lavoro di squadra che coinvolge molteplici discipline e un gran numero di professionisti, che devono lavorare in stretto contatto, avendo cura che le informazioni circolino nella maniera corretta, che ci sia trasparenza e chiarezza nelle decisioni che man mano vengono adottate e che queste determinazioni siano note a tutti; tutti devono avere la disponibilità a rivedere parte del proprio lavoro o in casi estremi a ripartire daccapo. Una prima necessaria fase di confronto ha riguardato il tracciato planimetrico e la quota del ferro. Nel corso di numerosi incontri, verifiche e fasi di valutazione tecnica, vengono studiate alternative di progetto, scartate tutte le ipotesi di tratti in trincea e a raso, scelta la sola realizzazione in galleria che partendo da Campegna prosegue lungo il Parco dello sport, raggiunge Acciaieria, Città della Scienza e Porta del Parco servendo di fatto i punti nodali dell’area. Tra i tanti, due aspetti ingegneristici sono affrontati nel corso del progetto: la fornitura di energia elettrica e di acqua per la metropolitana, le interferenze del tracciato con grossi collettori fognari presenti nella zona. A raso, invece di rilievo l’integrazione architettonico-paesaggistica delle uscite e delle stazioni con particolare attenzione alle emergenze di archeologia industriale
