The structure of the city is the focus of the laboratory; it is understood as a complex system of relations within which the design of public space takes shape. The program has the objective to compare students with a complex design theme and multi scale, divided into three main stages:
1_The study of the territory and planning instruments.
2_The project for the regeneration of a neighbourhood.
3_The architectural project.
1_The study of the territory and planning instruments.
2_The project for the regeneration of a neighbourhood.
3_The architectural project.
Canali
teacher profile teaching materials
To deal with a complex and delicate subject, such as the Central Archaeological Area (CAA) in Rome, needs to come to grips with the antinomy permanence-change: Antiquity is challenged by itself and by the projections of Modernity.
The course will go through the debate on the destiny of the area, from the Napoleonic era onwards.
From the previous treatment as a monumental area, accessible to the public as proposed by Berthault, current idea of everyday landscape seems to weaken the reasons for the protection in favor of a conscious use: the Archaeological Park of the Colosseum (2017) goes in this direction. This issue, subject of hot debates, is still open, calling into question sustainability and compatibility matters and ultimately also the need for a buffer zone designed to accommodate services and facilities for tourists and citizens.
However, the sense of place and its material experience should keep intact its aura, giving the community a lively awareness of the current time and welcoming the sense of memories in a problematic, allusive and enigmatic way.
• Insolera, I., Roma moderna, Einaudi, Torino, 1962.
• Clementi, A., Perego, F. (a cura di), La metropoli “spontanea”. Il caso di Roma, Roma, 1983.
• Aymonino, C., Progettare Roma capitale, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1990.
• Palazzo, A.L. (a cura di), Campagne urbane. Paesaggi in trasformazione nell’area romana, Gangemi, Roma, 2005.
Programme
To deal with a complex and delicate subject, such as the Central Archaeological Area (CAA) in Rome, needs to come to grips with the antinomy permanence-change: Antiquity is challenged by itself and by the projections of Modernity.
The course will go through the debate on the destiny of the area, from the Napoleonic era onwards.
From the previous treatment as a monumental area, accessible to the public as proposed by Berthault, current idea of everyday landscape seems to weaken the reasons for the protection in favor of a conscious use: the Archaeological Park of the Colosseum (2017) goes in this direction. This issue, subject of hot debates, is still open, calling into question sustainability and compatibility matters and ultimately also the need for a buffer zone designed to accommodate services and facilities for tourists and citizens.
However, the sense of place and its material experience should keep intact its aura, giving the community a lively awareness of the current time and welcoming the sense of memories in a problematic, allusive and enigmatic way.
Core Documentation
• Insolera, I., Roma moderna, Einaudi, Torino, 1962.
• Clementi, A., Perego, F. (a cura di), La metropoli “spontanea”. Il caso di Roma, Roma, 1983.
• Aymonino, C., Progettare Roma capitale, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1990.
• Palazzo, A.L. (a cura di), Campagne urbane. Paesaggi in trasformazione nell’area romana, Gangemi, Roma, 2005.
Reference Bibliography
Testi di approfondimento • Aa.Vv., La Zona monumentale di Roma e l’opera della Commissione Reale, Unione Editrice, 1914. • Aa.Vv., Lo studio delle arti e il genio dell’Europa. Scritti di Quatrémère de Quincy e Pio VII Chiaromonti, Nuova Alfa, 1989. • Benevolo, L., (a cura di). Studio per la sistemazione della zona archeologia centrale, Laterza, 1985. • Benevolo, L., Scoppola, F., (a cura di), Roma. L’area archeologica centrale e la città moderna, De Luca, 1988. • Benevolo, L., Roma dal 1870 al 1990, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1992. • Boyer, F., La conservation des monuments antiques à Rome sous Napoléon. In: Comptes rendus des séances de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 87e année, n. 1: 101-108, 1943. • Caliari, P.F., Il Piranesi Prix de Rome e la call per Via de Fori Imperiali, “AR”, n. 116, 2017. • Caracciolo, C., Roma Capitale, Editori Riuniti, Roma, 1956. • Castagnoli, F., Cecchelli, C., Giovannoni G., Zocca, M., Topografia e urbanistica di Roma, Cappelli, Bologna, 1958. • Cederna, A., Mussolini urbanista. Lo sventramento di Roma negli anni del consenso, Laterza, 1980. • Comitato dei Ministri della Cultura e dell'Ambiente del Consiglio d'Europa (2000), Convenzione europea del paesaggio. • Cuccia, G., Urbanistica, edilizia, infrastrutture di Roma capitale 1870-1990, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1991. • De Carolis, M., Fuina, D. (1986). Area archeologica centrale e città: criteri per la definizione di un quadro preliminare di indirizzi per la trasformazione e la valorizzazione dell’area archeologica centrale di Roma, Palombi. • “EcoWebTown, n. 18, 2018. • Fazzio, F., Gli spazi dell’archeologia. Temi per il progetto urbanistico, Officina, 2005. • Filippi, F., Ricostruire l’Antico prima del virtuale. Italo Gismondi. Un architetto per l’archeologia (1887-1974), Quasar, 2007. • Francovich, R., Manacorda, D. (a cura di). Dizionario di Archeologia, Voce ‘Archeologia Urbana’, Laterza, 2000. • Insolera, I., Perego, F., Storia moderna dei Fori di Roma: archeologia e città, Laterza, 1983. • INU Lazio, Il ruolo del Parco Archeologico Centrale Fori Appia-Antica rispetto a Roma di oggi e di domani, Atti del Convegno, Roma 25 giugno, 1986. • Lanciani, R. Forma urbis Romae, Tipografia Salomoni, 1901. • Longobardi, G., Piccinato, G, Quilici, V. (a cura di), Campagne romane, Firenze, Alinea, 2009. • Manieri Elia, M., Topos e Progetto, Gangemi, 1998. • Marcelloni, M., Pensare la città contemporanea – Il nuovo piano regolatore di Roma, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2003. • Tocci, W., (2011) “Utopie ed eterotopie dell’accessibilità”, in R. Secchi, a cura di, “Future GRA”, Prospettive, Roma; reperibile al link http://archivio.eddyburg.it/article/articleview/16953/0/124/ • MIBACT, Roma Capitale. Commissione paritetica MiBACT-Roma Capitale per l’elaborazione di uno studio per un Piano strategico per la sistemazione e lo sviluppo dell’Area archeologica centrale di Roma, 2014. • Muñoz, A., L’isolamento del Colle Capitolino, Palombi, 1943. • Palazzo, A.L., L’intervento nelle aree con presenze archeologiche, in Colarossi P., Latini A.P., La progettazione urbana. Declinazioni e strumenti, Edizioni del Sole 24 ore, 2008, pp. 209-222. • Palombi, D., Rodolfo Lanciani: l'archeologia a Roma tra Ottocento e Novecento, L’Erma di Bretschneider, 2006. • Panella, R., Roma Città e Foro. Questioni di progettazione del Centro archeologico monumentale della Capitale, Officina, 1989. • Panella, R., Roma la città dei Fori. Progetto di sistemazione dell'area archeologica tra piazza Venezia e il Colosseo, Prospettive, 2013. • Panella, R., Via dei Fori Imperiali 1/ Al suo posto, un viadotto alla stessa quota con appoggi discreti, “Il Giornale dell’Architettura”, 2014. • “Romacentro”, fascicoli da 1 a 8, Palombi, Roma, 1986. • Tintori, S., Piano e pianificatori dall’età napoleonica al fascismo, Angeli, 1985. • “Urbanistica”: n. 28-29, 1959; n. 40, 1964; n. 46-47, 1966; n. 106, 1996; n. 110, 1998; n. 116, 2002.Type of delivery of the course
Microsoft TeamsAttendance
Attendance is required for at least 75% of the lessonsType of evaluation
The final evaluation is related to the results achieved through the activities carried out during the year and to the ability to argue theoretical and methodological contents, with reference to exercises and seminars held during the year and to the recommended bibliography. teacher profile teaching materials
Students will be expected to:
• Gain knowledge on the site by direct experiences and urban survey;
• Narrate the city by means of thematic maps;
• Meet the communities and understand participatory practices;
• Make use of the traditional urban analysis and urban framework;
• Operate with micro urban interventions and urban actions in the territory.
The course will focus on urban space as a strategic element for contemporary urban requalification and especially PUBLIC SPACE, as crucial element capable to structure the urban fabric, bring identity. Build relationships and opportunities for environmental and functional issues at a major scale.
The course’s aim is to experiment. Such objective will involve new considerations for the everyday life spaces and the public realm. The final objective is to find and propose a form for the “good living” convinced that it’s achievement is the undeniable and structural priority of any urban strategy.
Obiettivi
The course aims at developing a critical, analytic and planning sensibility for the reading of an urban context and for the urban planning processes capable of obtaining the following objectives:
• Provide students a wide knowledge in urban planning theoretical inputs and urban problems;
• Provide students the instruments needed to develop a creative capability and critical sense in the design process of urban transformation;
• Provide students the instruments for an understanding of the urban context through the urban exploration and direct survey; also instruments for the urban planning design and a proper process of urban renewal.
Nigro G. (1986). Storia e natura: punti fermi per un progetto per l’area romana. Urbanistica 84.
AA.VV. (2001). Urbanistica 116. Numero monografico dedicato a “Il nuovo piano di Roma”.
Gabellini P. (2001). Tecniche urbanistiche. Carocci editore.
Piccinato G (2002). Un mondo di città, (Prefazione e Capitolo I°), Edizioni di Comunità.
Programme
An experimental workshop to activate new methods of urban and social regeneration of public space through the redefinition of the spaces followed by the realization of a bike route. Starting from this to explore new means to observe, narrate, imagine the city.Students will be expected to:
• Gain knowledge on the site by direct experiences and urban survey;
• Narrate the city by means of thematic maps;
• Meet the communities and understand participatory practices;
• Make use of the traditional urban analysis and urban framework;
• Operate with micro urban interventions and urban actions in the territory.
The course will focus on urban space as a strategic element for contemporary urban requalification and especially PUBLIC SPACE, as crucial element capable to structure the urban fabric, bring identity. Build relationships and opportunities for environmental and functional issues at a major scale.
The course’s aim is to experiment. Such objective will involve new considerations for the everyday life spaces and the public realm. The final objective is to find and propose a form for the “good living” convinced that it’s achievement is the undeniable and structural priority of any urban strategy.
Obiettivi
The course aims at developing a critical, analytic and planning sensibility for the reading of an urban context and for the urban planning processes capable of obtaining the following objectives:
• Provide students a wide knowledge in urban planning theoretical inputs and urban problems;
• Provide students the instruments needed to develop a creative capability and critical sense in the design process of urban transformation;
• Provide students the instruments for an understanding of the urban context through the urban exploration and direct survey; also instruments for the urban planning design and a proper process of urban renewal.
Core Documentation
Insolera I. (1962). Roma Moderna. Einaudi (Nona edizione).Nigro G. (1986). Storia e natura: punti fermi per un progetto per l’area romana. Urbanistica 84.
AA.VV. (2001). Urbanistica 116. Numero monografico dedicato a “Il nuovo piano di Roma”.
Gabellini P. (2001). Tecniche urbanistiche. Carocci editore.
Piccinato G (2002). Un mondo di città, (Prefazione e Capitolo I°), Edizioni di Comunità.
Reference Bibliography
Marcelloni M. (2003). Pensare la città contemporanea. Il nuovo piano regolatore di Roma. Laterza. Ricci L. (2008). Piano locale e…, Franco Angeli. Gabellini P. (2010). Fare urbanistica. Carocci editore. PPS/UN-Habitat (2012). Placemaking and the Future of Cities. INU (2013). Carta dello Spazio Pubblico. Secchi B. (2013). La città dei ricchi e la città dei poveri. Laterza. PPS (2014). Ten Strategies for Transforming Cities and Public Spaces through Placemaking. Oliva F. (2014). L’urbanistica italiana e la città europea. Urbanistica 152. UN-Habitat (2015). Global Public Space Toolkit. Caudo G. (2015). Roma Prossima, in: AA.VV. Roma 20-25 Nuovi cicli di vita della metropoli, p. 18-31. Quodlibet.Type of delivery of the course
The course is based on lessons, seminars and worshops on urban planning and urban renewal at the different scales. External contribution of experts is foreseen. The lessons will be integrated and alternated also by cultural inputs, media and other collaborations with multidisciplinary seminars. During the course, class work and studies on site are foreseen.Attendance
Attendance is required for at least 75% of the lessonsType of evaluation
The exam is individual and has an oral part and an evaluation of the exercises and drawings for the exam made by the working group during the semester. The following will be considered for the evaluation: ability to communicate the design structure and the coherence among analysis, objectives and design options which refer to the theoretical and practical concepts developed during the semester. A periodical check on the work in progress is foreseen together with tests on both individual and group work. The exam drawing will be tables at the urban scale (1:25.000/50.000) and project scale (1:5.000 e 1:10.000).