The river and the city. Resilience and resistence of the river landscape in one territory section in the Sarno Valley.

(1)

❞

UNISCAPE En-Route - a. I - n. 3 - 2016

Uniscape en-Route

a. i - n. 3 - 2016 issn 2281-3195 Naples _Sarno Baronissi

Departure from Naples , Palazzo Gravina to Baronissi/Sarno Guided tour of the area

Mee�ng with local administrators and stakeholders

Lunch

Workshop

Departure from Baronissi/Sarno to Naples

óÄÝù 30ã«_{ÝÖãÃÙ 2015} 09.00 - 10.00_ThemaƟc session R�� A21_�. G�� : P�� D'AGOSTINO, S�� PALMENTIERI ��: J�� PALERM A��:

R�� A21_C�� : F�� D�� MOCCIA 11.45-12.30 E�� COSTA PINTO 12.30-13.00 ��

Lunch

R�� A21

14.30-16.30_Workshop reports: criƟcal issues

V�� CAPPIELLO (S�� )|A�� SGOBBO (I�� ) 16.30-18.00 _Round table and Conclusions

��: F�� D�� MOCCIA ��:

F�� BONAVITACOLA, A�� 'A�� M�� MERCEDE, E�� P�� B�� S�� S�� SORVINO, A�� C�� C�� G�� GRIMALDI, A�� C�� S��

L�� MAGGI,S�� M�B�� C�� F�� TUCCILLO, P�� ACEN

A�� PREZIOSO, P�� U�� I�� A�� SETARO, C�� B�� S�� G�� VALIANTE, S�� C�� B��

OÙ¦Ä®Ýã®ÊÄ

UNISCAPE EN-ROUTE INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR Scien�c commitee

Jordi BELLMUNT, Vito CAPPIELLO, Eduardo COSTA PINTO, Pierpaolo D’AGOST-INO, Barbara DELLE DONNE, Dora FRANCESE, Carlos LLOP, Bianca Gioia MARINO, Francesco Domenico MOCCIA, Juan Manuel PALERM,Stefania PALMENTIERI, Elvira PETRONCELLI, Marialuce STANGANELLI, Rossana VALEN-TI, Francesco VIOLA

Organisa�onal commitee

Gilda BERRUTI (Coordinator), Marina D'AMBROSIO, Emanuela ADAMO, Antonia ARENA, Sabrina COPPOLA, Emanuela DE MARCO, Angela ESPOSITO, Francesca FASANINO, Nicole�a FASANINO, Carlo GERUNDO, Rocco LAFRATTA, Francesco PEPE, Maria Chiara RAPALO, Anna TERRACCIANO

CÊÄããÝ

Gilda Berru�, Marina d’Ambrosio: infouniscape@unina.it +39 081 7682322 h�p://www.uniscape.unina.it/Uniscape En-Route 2015/seminar.html

TçÝù 29ã« _{ÝÖãÃÙ 2015_WÊÙ»Ý«ÊÖ}

Two design workshops will be organized, in which to crea�vely interact star�ng from the observa�on of concrete cases: the Sarno plain; the Irno valley.

A eld trip will be arranged, inves�ga�ng places at diﬀerent levels, from landsca-pes’ understanding to iconography and literature inspira�ons, to ques�ons regar-ding the recovery of river landscapes, to the solu�ons carried out so far. During the focused visit it will be possible to discuss with the involved actors, to examine convergent urban policies and their eﬀects on landscapes, to immerse in values of local culture, to suggest projects of landscape re-appropria�on from which to learn, to collec�vely work in order to interpret river landscapes and propo-se design solu�ons.

Groups of par�cipants will produce design concepts on the future of the sites that will be reported in the nal session of the conference.

The registra�on at UNISCAPE en-route conference allows to receive a dropbox link to share useful materials in order to deepen knowledge on the selected sites.

8:00 9:30 - 11:00 11:00 - 12:00 13:00 - 19:00

19:00

Coordinator: Elvira PETRONCELLI

Group of Members: Francesca BRUNI, Paolo BUDETTA, Vito CAPPIELLO, Emanuela COPPOLA, Iso�a CORTESI, Pierpaolo D'AGOSTINO, Barbara DELLE DONNE, Daniela DUCCI, Anna Maria FRALLICCIARDI, Dora FRANCESE, Marina FUMO, Claudio GRIMELLINI, Bianca Gioia MARINO, Francesco Domenico MOCCIA, Stefania PALMENTIERI, Lia Maria PAPA, Maria Ines PASCARIELLO, Antonio PASSARO, Daniela PISCOPO, Maria RONZA, Valen�na RUSSO, Mari sa SQUILLANTE, Marialuce STANGANELLI, Rossana VALENTI, Francesco VIOLA, Valeria VIPARELLI

UÄ®ÝÖ ÄÖ½Ý

UNISCAPE EN-ROUTE INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR

RECOVERING RIVER LANDSCAPES

UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES ‘FEDERICO II’_ 28-30/09/2015

The Seminar aims to invesƟgate the issue of the re-appropriaƟon and the recovery of river landscapes, oŌen compromised and degraded as a result of human or natural changes, starƟng from the case of the Campania region, which sets out as a laboratory where it is possible to test the combi naƟon of appropriate methods and technics to acƟvely plan river landscapes.

In this framework, adopƟng a landscape restoraƟon approach might suggest useful hints to return landscapes to their natural condiƟons, coun-Ɵng on resilience, if specic condiƟons of sites make it possible. At the same Ɵme, the conference highlights the importance of enhancing local communiƟes’ resources in order to reinterpret and redene landscapes.

The seminar is divided into two parts, intertwining in three study days: - paper presentaƟons, in which to discuss internaƟonal interesƟng cases;

- in situ acƟviƟes, in which to get in touch with territories (places and relevant actors) and to exchange ideas and experiences.

Seminar acƟviƟes will be structured according to the main branches of the UNISCAPE network: didacƟcs, researches, landscape projects, landscape observatories.

The University of Naples Federico II is one of the founding members of UNISCAPE (the Network of UniversiƟes dedicated to the implementaƟon of the European Landscape ConvenƟon, www.uniscape.unina.it). It includes 52 European Universi-Ɵes and its aim is to support and reinforce the interdisciplinary co-operaƟon within Europe on landscape issues.

For their nature, landscape contents can have an interdisciplinary approach given both by scienƟ c and humanisƟc disciplines and research methodologies. Also in the  eld of literary studies it has been recognized the importance of the analysis of the cultural and literary component of a land in order to aƩest its history and integrate its percepƟon. Indeed places are not lifeless containers of bonds and feelings, but on the contrary are social and cultural structures produced constant-ly by their inhabitants.

In full accordance with the arƟculated conguraƟon of the issues of the landsca-pes, the invesƟgaƟon group of the Naples Federico II University is characterized by its interdisciplinarity and involves four of the 26 Departments (DiparƟmento di ArchiteƩura, DiparƟmento d’Ingegneria Civile, Edile ed Ambientale, DiparƟmento di Scienze PoliƟche, DiparƟmento di Studi UmanisƟci).

The group is engaged in study and training on topics related to landscape in general and on the landscapes of the Campania Region in parƟcular.

ÃÊÄù 28ã«_{ÝÖãÃÙ 2015} RÊÊÃ A21 09.00_R¦®ÝãÙã®ÊÄ 09.30 - 10.00_GÙã®Ä¦Ý Ä Ê¥¥®®½ ÊÖÄ®Ä¦ «®Ù: E½ò®Ù PETRONCELLI GãÄÊ MANFREDI, C«Ä½½ÊÙ Ê¥ FÙ®Ê II UÄ®òÙÝ®ãù Ê¥ NÖ½Ý MÙ®Ê LOSASSO, DÄ Ê¥ ã« DÖÙãÃÄã Ê¥ AÙ«®ããçÙ MçÙ®þ®Ê GIUGNI, DÄ Ê¥ ã« DÖÙãÃÄã Ê¥ C®ò®½, AÙ«®ããçÙ½ Ä EÄò®ÙÊÄÃÄã½ EÄ¦®ÄÙ®Ä¦ Introducing lectures 10.00 - 10.40_ JçÄ MÄç½ PALERM 10.40 - 11.20_ CÙÊ½®Ä GONZÁLEZ VIVES 14.30 - 18.00_ThemaƟc sessions RÊÊÃ A21_. CÊÄÝÙòã®ÊÄ Ä ãÙÄÝ¥ÊÙÃã®ÊÄÝ Ê¥ ùÄÃ® ½ÄÝÖÝ «®Ù: B®Ä G®Ê® MARINO, RÊÝÝÄ VALENTI ®ÝçÝÝÄã: JçÄ MÄç½ PALERM Açã«ÊÙÝ:

ÙÊÊÃ A24_. RÝ®½®Äã ÝÖÝ Ê¥ Ù®òÙ ¥Ùç®ã®ÊÄ

«®Ù: V®ãÊ CAPPIELLO, MÙ®½ç STANGANELLI ®ÝçÝÝÄã: EÊÙÊ COSTA PINTO Açã«ÊÙÝ:

(2)

❝

Uniscape en-Route - a. i - n. 3 - 2016

summary

Elvira Petroncelli, Recovering Landscape p. 4

Francesco Domenico Moccia, River Landscape in Urban Settings » 9

Juan Manuel Palerm Salazar, Imagination Versus Landscape Project » 15

Carolina González, Vives Fluid Urbanism and Hydrophilic Architecture: Reconsidering the Flow of Water Through Urban Environments » 23

Session A: Conservation and Transformations of Dynamic Landscapes _{» 36}

Bianca Gioia Marino, Dynamic Landscapes: an Approach for the Conservation and Valorization of the River Landscapes » 36

Aldo Aveta, Conservation and Enhancement of Riverscapes and Historical Bridges in Campania: Site Transformations and Permanence of Significance » 40

Renato Bocchi, A Recycling Attitude for the Landscape Design? » 47

Marco Carpiceci, Fabio Colonnese, Gaspar Van Wittel and the Visual Model of Rome by the Tiber » 50

Fabrizio De Cesaris, The “Ponte dell’arcobaleno” in Vulci: its History, Restoration and Current Problematic Issues » 56

Luca Renato Fauzia, Antonella Versaci, Ancient Watermills in Central Sicily. Musealization Hypothesis for the Recovery and the Conservation » 63

Bianca Gioia Marino, Amanda Piezzo, Sarno River Landscape: Traces, Memories and Identity » 71

Emanuele Morezzi, The Landscape of the Ganges River in Varanasi. The Asymmetric Contradiction of Non-Restoration » 77

Renata Picone, Luigi Veronese, Built Heritage and Water Resources in the Historical Tanneries of Solofra. Restoration and Enhancement » 83

Maria Chiara Rapalo, Dendermonde, a City on Two Rivers: Reflections About the Projects d’amenagement After the First World War » 88

Emanuele Romeo, Historical Value of the Po River: Preservation of Memory and Development of Potential Use » 93

Riccardo Rudiero, The Water System of Pinerolo: Reading an Industrial Landscape Through Unpublished Documents » 99

Valentina Russo, Stefania Pollone, A Cistercian Landscape to Safeguard: the Abbey of Santa Maria di Realvalle in Sarno Plain » 105

Catherine Szántó, Yann Nussaume, Between Natural and Artificial: Development and Maintenance of the Kamo River in Kyoto » 113

Session B: Resilient Spaces of River Fruition _{» 119}

Gilda Berruti, Bringing River Landscapes Back to Life. Notes From a Survey on the Sarno River » 119

Giulia Boller, Landscape as Infrastructure. The Adige Park in Trento » 127

Emanuela Braì, EcoWebRiver Pescara: Environmental-Landscape Regeneration of the River Area in Chieti, in Prospect of the Design of Urban Auto-Balanced Eco-Districts » 134

Francesca Bruni, The River and the City. Resilience and Resistance of the River Landscape in One Territory Section in the Sarno Valley » 140

Francesca Fasanino, Nicoletta Fasanino, Recycle: an Innovative Approach for a Sustainable and Resilient Design of River Parks » 147

Vincenzo Gioffrè, Natalie De Giacomo, Between Identity and New Tracks: the Project of the River Landscape » 152

Mariya Komarova, The Simbirka River as the Protagonist in the Reconstruction Project of the Historic City Center of Ulyanovsk in Russia » 158

Ou Yapeng, Restoration or Destruction: Landscape Crises and Restoration of Suburban Rivers, a Case Study on the Meixian County Section of the Wei River » 164

Anna Laura Palazzo, Biancamaria Rizzo, Resilient Landscapes: the Case of the Aniene River Between Roma and Tivoli » 171

Laura Pellegrino, The Recovery of the Natural Capital of the River Irno Fluvial Landscape Through the Payment for Eco-Systemic Services » 177

Andrea Santarelli, Donato di Ludovico, A New Resilient Mobility for the City of L’aquila. The Case Study of the Aterno River » 184

Alessandro Sgobbo, Francesco Abbamonte, Planning With Water: From End of Pipe Investment to Operating on Needs » 191

Jincheng Weng, Yiwan Li, Ecological Renovation and Landscapes Recovery of Futian River in Shenzhen China » 197

Session C: Geographical Approaches and Visual Interactive Strategies for River Landscapes _{» 202}

Pierpaolo D’Agostino, Digital Tools to Visualize Landscapes. Scenarios and Considerations » 202

Caterina Anastasia, Habitability Through Historical Canals as a Resource: the Lower Course of the Ter River in Catalonia – Spain » 209

Giuseppe Antuono, The Waterways. The (Re) Design of River Isclero’s Landscape » 216

(3)

❞

Giovanni Maria Bagordo, A Forgotten Resource for the Campania: the Aqueduct Carolino » 223

Anna Rosa Candura, Emanuele Poli, River Secchia Valley: Areas and Activities Continuously Evolving » 228 Maria Cerreta, Pasquale Inglese, Maria Luigia Manzi, Shared Values in Practice: a Multi-Methodological Approach

for River Landscapes » 238 Emanuela Chiavoni, Francesca Porfiri, Drawing and Urban Transformations. The Music Bridge Over the Tiber in Rome » 245 Emanuela Coppola, Alessandro Sgobbo, The Tourist Development of Pompeii: Resilient Solutions to Rebuild a Dialogue

Between Fluvial Landscape and Urban Spaces » 252 Barbara Delle Donne, Stefania Palmentieri, Maria Ronza, River Landscape Transformation in Campania Region:

Representative Cases of the Sarno and the Volturno Rivers » 259 Francesca Nocca, Antonia Gravagnuolo, Making Society an Active Participant in Water Management Strategies: ICT and

Participative / Collaborative Mapping Tools » 266 Anna Terracciano, Emanuela De Marco, Recycling Network. Experiences and Perspectives for Sarno Plain Territories » 272

Session D: Water and Land in the Landscape Project » 279 Francesco Viola, Dora Francese, River Landscape and Their Enhancement: Study Approaches » 279 Giulia Cavallari, Cecilia Furlan, Paola Viganò, “Vuoti a Perdere”? The river Sile Natural Park, Guardian of Refused Landscapes » 281 Tullia V. Di Giacomo, Tools and Methods to Reclaim the Value of Water Resources in Peripheral Areas » 289 Angela Esposito, River-City System: Configurational Measures to Assess the Urban Structure » 294

Fatima Melis, The Stream of Quirra: Criticalities and Opportunities » 302

Rita Occhiuto, River Talks Behind the Urban Wall » 306

Andrea Oldani, River Recycling: an Urban and Landscape Opportunity » 313

Claudia Parenti, A New Role for a “Hidden” River » 319

Andrea Santacroce, From Borbonic Royal Gunpowder to Mouth of the River Sarno: a Redevelopment Project Architectural

and Landscape » 327

Giovanni Zucchi, Through New Urban Riverscapes: the Study Cases in Madrid and Lisbon » 334

Annex 1: Poster Presentation » 341 Guglielmo Avallone, From Shape to Image. From Structure to Form. Landscaping as a Re-Design Issue » 353 Sabrina Coppola, A Particular River Landscape: Castelnuovo di Porto Between Enhancement and Conservation » 358 R. Gerundo, I. Fasolino, M. Grimaldi, C. Eboli, I. Lodato, D. Signorelli, Land Use Suitability Approach for Design

of Green Infrastructure. The Case of Irno Basin » 361 Claudio Grimellini, Giuseppina Crisci, City of Sannicandro: Landscape Reconfiguration of Vallone Creek’s Water Course » 365 Francesco Domenico Moccia, Alessandro Sgobbo, Antonio Nigro, Fruition and Landscape Promotion Strategies

on Dragon’s Plain » 369 Maria Chiara Rapalo, Waterways and Historical Fabric: Transformation Projects of Termonde Urban Landscape in the

First Postwar Period » 373

Call for Papers » 382

Scientific Committee: Elvira Petroncelli (Università di Napoli Federico II), Francesco Domenico Moccia (Università di Napoli Federico II), Jordi Bellmunt (B2B Arquitectes), Vito Cappiello (Università di Napoli Federico II), Eduardo Costa Pinto (PROAP), Pierpaolo D’Agostino (Università di Napoli Federico II), Barbara Delle Donne (Università di Napoli Federico II), Dora Francese (Università di Napoli Federico II), Carolina González Vives (Ojo de Pez Arquitectura), Carlos Llop (Polytechnic University of Cata-lonia), Bianca Gioia Marino (Università di Napoli Federico II), Juan Manuel Palerm (UNISCAPE), Stefania Palmentieri (Università di Napoli Federico II), Marialuce Stanganelli (Università di Napoli Federico II), Rossana Valenti (Università di Napoli Federico II), Francesco Viola (Università di Napoli Federico II

With the participation of: Università di Napoli Federico II, DICEA, DiARC, Autorità di Bacino Campania Centrale, Autorità di Bacino Campania Sud, Sustainable Mediterranean Construction

Organisation: Tommaso Zanaica (UNISCAPE) en-route@uniscape.eu, Marina d’Ambrosio (Università di Napoli Federico II) infouniscape@unina.it

(4)

❝

❝140 141❞

The River and the City. Resilience and Resistance of the

River Landscape in One Territory Section in the Sarno

Valley

Francesca Bruni

Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, University of Naples Federico II, Italy - bruni@unina.it

KEyworDs: urban spaces, river spaces, requalification

The relationship between the city and the river is a cyclical story of closeness and distancing. The river starts as a defining element in the structure of the countryside and as the actual reason for the birth of the settlement itself as its economic resource. It then becomes a threat for flooding or pollution, thus becoming in many cases a multiplier of the ecological disaster in the area and resulting disconnected from the new settling thinking. when the city moves away from the river, then the river attracts factories and mills, resulting in residual and derelict spaces. when the city finally wants to return to the river to re-appropriate it, it finds a different morphological condition made of discontinuous fragments. These are new infrastructures that the logic of growth in this area has created without any order or hierarchy. Hence, reasoning today on the redevelopment of river landscapes within urbanized territories means confronting ourselves with a new state of fragmentation and heterogeneity of areas in which the reintroduction of nature can only occur in a discontinuous way. The “resilience”, meaning the ability to return to the original natural condition after a damage, is associated with a state of “resistance” to the transformation of some parts of the river area still present as empty spaces. In a polycentric and disarticulated system like the sarno valley, the system of open spaces and natural elements which contribute to the structure of the project become central. These are visible only in sections which outline strategic areas to be connected to the river and the water. In particular, scafati is one of the few municipalities in the valley who founded its historical roots on the river water. The area of the Mills and the Bourbon Paper Mill is a strategic hub for the redevelopment of the urban landscape with important consequences: it is an empty area in the heart of the city, crossed from East to west by a bundle of multiple infrastructures. The area sees an overlap at different altitudes of more linear infrastructures - river and canal, railroad, highway viaduct - and is characterized by a rather compact urban fabric. The urban design of this area must be able to grasp the hydraulic capacity of the project to establish itself as a chance to enhance the built environment. Here elements to prevent the risk of flooding can become elements of the design of urban water gardens. The techniques for the redevelopment of the city-river system can be synthesized in three parts: a “punctual” one with architectures that can contain, protect, divert water tanks with overflow and storage; a “linear” one, transversal through inhabited bridges that reconnect and reintegrate the parts of territory and a longitudinal one with interventions on the banks; finally a component of “areas” identifying surfaces designed by greenery and water.

☞ ✔

(5)

❞

This contribution aims to reflect on the potential design of an area in the urban dynamics which is marginal but strategic for a future structure. Such area is located on either side of a stretch of the river Sarno. This is taken as a model to operate a redesign of the ground that finds in the river its spine and is an incubator for new relationships with the urban system.

The transformation of the fluvial landscapes

Classic fluvial topography is based on a vision organized along borders and edges and stands on lines which determine precise conformations, agglomerations of objects, natural or man-made emergencies. Such vision is developed on lines imposed by the navigation of the river and influences the perception of the city and of the region and against which edges act as frame lines or lines of perspective. This vision is thus regulated by a stream of images which is continuous but constantly modified. A real organization of the places situated along the river corresponds to this visual fluidity, both in the outskirts and in the city. The banks open themselves to offer their spaces to new functions, economies and activities of daily living. So <in relation to the necessary reorganization of different urban sectors and their functions in the modern age, significant transformations occur in the architecture, both aesthetic, for what concerns the conception of the façades facing the water, and technological, for what concerns hydraulic equipments, the construction of bridges, the consolidation of the banks, the creation of docks and public spaces>1_.

On the other hand, in the territories of the contemporary city the close relationship between topographical invention and urban image has gradually been lost. The river, considered as mere infrastructure, since the industrialization period has lost its character of fluvial landscape which gave it topographical respect. Waterways have suffered a process of marginalization from the territory and the city and a marked anthropisation of adjunct areas. These are now occupied by industrial estates with their infrastructures, with ducting and concreting of the banks occurring as well. The organization of the places situated along the river is now mainly discontinuous and variable in their uses and takes no account of the landscape that it generates.

Describing the fluvial territories: recognition of the landscape and project theming

When represented on maps the river is a line, a long, sinuous, continuous one that unfolds favoring the geography of the area. This line attracts some elements – production buildings, mills, power plants,fields – while rejecting others. It is a line which is a gap rather than a boundary, a band that affects a wider space and represents a break, in fact, within the geography of the area. As an element of separation, whose linearity suggests homogeneity and continuity in the organization of the landscape, the river can be read as a tool for potential relationships between the parts which it separates; in this sense, a transversal reading that highlights the discontinuity of the territories that the river crosses represents the most appropriate

(6)

water route. It is within these bands that the relationship between the urbanized area and the water occurs. The width of such bands is variable and depends on the elements of the territory that each time one wants to include in the analysis of the fluvial landscape.

The redevelopment of degraded water landscapes is traditionally associated with the theme of the river park, used as a tool to solve various problems accumulated randomly along the river over the years. This often happens without making a specific choice of what to eliminate, what to save and what to create. In addition, there is the illusion of being able to create a varied landscape by adding a variety of new types of activities and associated equipment (a bit of nature spots, sports and leisure facilities, cycle paths). The most successful past and recent experiences instead say that <creating a new landscape requires since the outset a global and comprehensive overview and a design approach that evolves through the selection and interpretation of the fundamental structural elements of a given set>2_{. Therefore, it is necessary to specify the}

original intentions of the project by clearly linking general issues and specific contexts. <The interpretation of the landscape must be able to read the different systems of relationships, it must describe them without making them unrecognizable, it must be able to identify the reticular interconnections that determine new organizational forms (new landscapes) and those prone to be destructive to the capacity of resistance of a particular landscape>.3

Therefore, designing means tiding up and the disorder of the contemporary city can be seen as “order-to-be guessed” (Edmond Gilliard). Hence, each level of planning needs topological sensitivity and recognition of the elements – common or specific to the various realities – which contribute to the creation of a unifying framework bringing coherence to the project. A reference to a work by Richard Serra entitled Shift (1970) is particularly effective to illustrate how the topological sensitivity is the ability to establish a dialectic relationship between the individual overall perception of a place and the territory. This creates a topological space as defined by “two people walking along the sides of the field, remaining in each other’s field of view despite the different heights of their paths “.

A unifying framework, however, is the summary of the main elements of the physical and anthropic structure of a territory and their organization according to a system which forms the thread of the project. A classification of the elements making the unifying framework of a river-related project may include the following categories4_:

- the first connotative element of the project is the “river rut” along with the reticulum of the tributary rivers. These include its morphological characteristics, the riverside vegetation, the “art” which acts as a memento of natural and man-made transformations;

- the external boundary of the project or the “size of the intervention”. This does not coincide with the limits of the river basin but also involves various elements of the area that are chosen as project materials;

- the recognition of intermediate areas of intervention, bands parallel to the river or placed across it, depending on the type of relationship that one wants to establish with the urban-territorial areas;

- reference points placed far away, “visual landscapes” that one wants to highlight in the project, which are significant in the large scale relationship between river and landscape;

❝

(7)

- the “views”, the openings, the connections that condense the relationship river-city-territory: the views may be empty and concave (free areas) or built and convex (buildings, urban centers) or punctiform (routes ends); the openings are the most significant gaps that allow to find a point of contact between the river environment and the natural and urbanized areas; the connections are the network of paths leading to the river, crossing it and surrounding it;

- the “intrusions” include the most diverse negative presences for size and nature: highways, railways, warehouses, industrial areas.

A synthetic design that takes account of these elements can be an effective framework for the project starting with a description that is a personal interpretation of the place and its potential.

The elements of the project: the water, the bridge and the garden

The identification of the “vocation” of the river area to transform itself concerns an analysis of the specific case and of its elements. However, a methodological reflection on the topic of the river and its areas of transformation concerns also some considerations that can be a guide for design choices:

Water architectures.The dynamic character of the river can become one of the elements of

the project. This involves continuous remodeling of the border water-land thanks to its ability to change its margins as a result of changes in the water flow. Hence, the water becomes a material for the project, which is dynamic and variable. Adjusted for a new design of its tanks, water can characterize the intervention and its flexibility with passing time and seasons or even be elevated to a didactic and research element with respect to its multiple shapes and properties. Numerous projects on the topic of the river investigate the potential of this theme: the project for the river park of Olhao in Portugal by PROAP of 2010, uses the design of the tides and the excavations made for the drainage lines in muddy areas, as traces, expressions of a dynamic movement of the river. Differently, the project for the experimental gardens in the Parc du Chateau Mery-sur-Oise by Cribier and Guibert, located in the vicinity of a filtering plant and of a pumping station to the North-West of Paris, transforms the area into a science and technology park for the study of plant species. It also provides a water-related theme for the gardens: the dynamism - with water features between walls-; the mineralization - with six large basins with plants that need water of varying degrees of mineralization; water temperatures, ranging from twelve to twenty-five degrees - with plants from glacial, temperate and sub-tropical areas. Again, the recovery of the riverside of the river Gallego, in Zuera in Spain in 2001, regulates the flooding of the park by creating changes in water levels that draws each time different landscapes.

Inhabited bridges. The bridge soars “light and powerful” above the river. Not only does it connect

❞

(8)

❝144 145❞

Heidegger5_{. Of course, even before the bridge is introduced, there are many areas along the}

river that can be occupied by something. One of them becomes at some point a place, and this is by virtue of the bridge. Hence, the bridge does not stand in a place that was already there, but instead the place originates from the bridge. Thus, the bridge is not just a simple road built above the water but instead is, as defined by Palladio, “that line which aims to its purpose.”

The inhabited bridge6_{, which also acts as a recovery element for the urban space, is ultimately}

a project of reconstruction which can isolate and define an urban space. Where the contemporary city offers a deconstruction of meaning, the inhabited bridge seems to answer with an overlap, primarily as an element of communication. It provides a juxtaposition of signs layered in history or in the metaphoric values that accompany the very idea of bridge. Architecture of the green spaces. The big change in the design of green spaces that happens with the “manifesto of the third landscape” by Gilles Clement, identifies in the garden the place for possible inventions. The project of the urban park designed in the manner of Olmsted, changes its rules and uses a design technique for the urban garden as an expression of a structured thinking. The open public space aims to clean up parts of the district which had been deconstructed and to organize the city and the countryside as a part of a larger whole. This assumes its own formal autonomy from the surroundings so that it can be designed “artistically”. With gardens in motion, whose existence is not inscribed in any form, such as the parc Citroen in Paris in 1992, Clement himself defines the choice to follow the natural flow of the plants as his objective. This follows the biological current that drives the place and orients it. While elsewhere in the park nature is domesticated into areas and rooms by means of approaches that are typically architectural.

A different way to design the ground very widespread in recent projects is the urban vegetable garden, which marks a return to the earth as a strategy for the redevelopment of the open space. The hypothesis of an integration between the house and the place of food production recalls the desire expressed at the end of the 90s by Pierre Donadieu to associate the agricultural “emptiness “ and the built “fulness” in a project that “unites them forever”. The example of Sociopolis in Catalonia, as well as that of Agropolis in Monaco, reformulate the principles of architectural and urban design in response to a new need for interaction between urban and rural areas in order to create new productive landscapes. In the same way, the project for Forlani park in Milan, by PROAP and Nugnes, redesigns a space of great territorial complexity, crossed by major roads and where degraded functions coexist. In doing so the project defines an area of landscape with different characteristics compared to the degree of naturalness and use, where natural and agricultural areas blend together.

The Sarno river and the territorial section near Scafati: a garden across the river park.

Scafati is one of the few municipalities in the Sarno valley which founded its historical roots on the river water. In particular, the area between the Mills and the Bourbon Paper Mill is

(9)

a historic and strategic node for the redevelopment of the urban landscape with strong repercussions.

Residential development of the area was established on the crossing of the so-called Scafati “cross”, a complex node where the old road towards Pompeii and the river-channel system meet and overlap. While the urban fabric of the “cross” is spread northwards into the interior of the plain to grow then along the axis towards Pompeii, the river and the channel run parallel to each other to the Southwest. From this point they grow increasingly wide apart and create a characteristic morphological system of “islands” punctuated by crossing roads connecting with the territory. This morphological system was characterized functionally during the Bourbon era when the river was adjusted. It included green spaces and factories - mill, gunpowder factory, real tobacco institution, paper mill- and became an autonomous system with respect to form and use, connected in its interior by a network of paths mainly parallel to the river. The introduction in the twentieth century of the infrastructural strip running parallel to the river north of the canal Bottaro – a rail first and then the highway NA-SA - and of a system of industrial fences on the South bank along the Ripuaria road, resulted in the isolation of the system of islands from the territory. This, which represented a potential central space, has become increasingly peripheral and degraded. In addition, with time the channel Bottaro has dried up and the banks of the river have been let to degrade. In particular, at the point where the infrastructural strip crosses the river superimposing itself to an area of the island, a condition of great territorial complexity occurs, where residual empty spaces, pieces of arable fields and degraded functions coexist.

This reading of the fluvial area recovers the degraded part described above by making it part of the system of islands. In addition, given its strategic location, it identifies a possible transformation for it as an element re-connecting transversally with the city center between Pompei and Scafati.

From the morphological reading of the area a strong directionality across the river emerges in the North-South direction. This stems from the scanning of the residential lots which run along the axis Scafati-Pompei and beyond towards the river. Such directionality is interpreted as an element of order for the design of the area to be redeveloped. In particular, it suggests a project of the ground that, moving progressively towards the river, changes from urban vegetable garden to naturalistic garden with natural pools for water collection organized for educational purposes. This reunites different enclaves by means of some architectural landmarks: canals, flush bridges and a bridge-building that develops along the main direction and passes under the motorway viaduct and is the only sign of the new park built across. As a result, the area will be ordered by a transverse band that incorporates built structures. This band organizes the urban design of the voids by articulating them in a system of three gardens with different characteristics: agricultural to the North, using stone to the East and using water to the West. The latter will have to grasp the ability of the hydraulic design to stand as an opportunity for enhancement of the built environment. In such design the elements to prevent the risk of flooding can become elements of the design of urban water

❞

(10)

❝146 147❞

The techniques for the redevelopment of the city-river system can be summarized as three components: a transversal “line” by means of signs and architectures that reconnect and reintegrate the separated parts of the river area and a longitudinal “line” with interventions on the banks; a component of “areas” that identifies drawn surfaces of stone, of greenery and water; a component of “points” which introduces elements that can contain, protect, join paths through the gardens and in some places define pools for flooding and accumulation. The design of an area which is marginal in the urban dynamics but is strategic for a future regional planning can thus become a model for reflection on the ways and means to operate a redesign of the ground. This finds in the river its spine and an incubator for new relationships with the urban system.

Notes

1_{R. Dubbini, Geografie dello sguardo. Visione e paesaggio in età moderna, Einaudi 1994, p.52.}

2_{V. Calzolari, Natura, sito, opera: il caso del parco fluviale, in Il disegno del paesaggio italiano, Casabella n.575-576,}

1991, p.60.

3_{L. Caravaggi, Paesaggi di paesaggi, Meltemi editore, Roma 2002, p.84.} 4_{V. Calzolari, Natura, sito, opera: il caso del parco fluviale, cit.}

5_{Martin Heidegger, Costruire, abitare e pensare, in Saggi e discorsi, Mursia, Milano,1954.} 6_{AA. VV, Ponti abitati, “Rassegna”, n.48, 1991.}

References

AA.VV., 1991, Il disegno del paesaggio italiano, «Casabella» n.575-576.

R.Dubbini, 1994, Geografie dello sguardo. Visione e paesaggio in età moderna, Einaudi.

A.Corboz, 1998, Ordine sparso. Saggi sull’arte, il metodo, la città e il territorio, Franco Angeli, Milano. L.Caravaggi, 2002, Paesaggi di paesaggi, Meltemi editore, Roma.

A.Aymonino, V.P.Mosca, 2006, Spazi pubblici contemporanei. Architetture a volume zero, edizioni Skira, Milano. F.Schiaffonati, E.Mussinelli, 2008, Il tema dell’acqua nella progettazione ambientale, Maggioli editore, Milano. A.Magnaghi, S.Giacomozzi, 2009, Un fiume per il territorio. Indirizzi progettuali per il parco fluviale del Valdarno

empolese, Firenze.

I.White, 2010, Water and city: risk, resilience and planning for a sustainable future, Taylor e Francis, London. M.Agnoletto, M.Guerzoni, 2012, La campagna necessaria. Un’agenda di intervento dopo l’esplosione urbana,

Quodlibet, Macerata.

C.A.Manzo, 2014, Sistemi agrourbani. La città in estensione nella piana del Sarno, Gamgemi editore, Roma.