The economic downturn, that has affected most European cities, is also having effects on the processes of urban transformation and urban regeneration. More and more often we see cases of “big” projects abandoned, delayed or lapsed, so for the difficulties encountered by operators, as for the exponential delay of the times for approval or implementation or, as in most of the recent cases, by the supervening unsustainability of the costs of realization.
In the light of recent experiences, it is clear today that this approach to urban design, characterized by the great works, long lead times and very high costs, is questioned and seems in crisis.
Urban regeneration is still an emergency but it requires more measured interventions, more quickly, more widespread and less expensive.
Is no more the time for great interventions, projected over the long term and needy of huge capitals, it is necessary to improve the quality of urban life with small actions, fast, flexibles, low cost and low or zero impact, in the places of everyday life: in the spaces of real life.
There is a need for projects that sink in an extensive and widespread way the territory and this requires coordinated measures and systemic micro projects, sufficiently flexible, and above all, in a modus operandi different from that developed in the past season of the great urban project. Even given the increasing role of the private in the care, management and implementation of the actions for the regeneration of urban space.
The school asks at the scholars participants (urban planners, architects, designers, sociologists, geographers, etc.) at the local community and at the public administration, a contribution on the real perspectives of the urban regeneration projects, in a perspective of ephemeral design, temporary, transitory, reversible, low-cost and flexible to the required changes. It will explore what are the practices capable of transforming the borderline between public and private space in an approach that also raises problems of interpretation methodological, juridical, of management and of strategic planning.
In this sense, the application experience should be construed as a restitution of a sample picture of how it could be regenerated a given place if it had implemented the project thought for that place; helping, as a prototype, to understand what results you could achieve in the reality.
The “sharing” becomes a device for the re-appropriation of open urban space and is intended as practice for an aware co-use of spaces by the urban population. It may generate unanticipated uses and a high density and intensity of living in different paths. Becoming a practice that can change the meaning itself of both public space and private space, to restore a balance between built spaces and void spaces, between natural soils and artificial soils.
The interventions of ephemeral architecture was seen, then, in the key of potential activators of shared forms of urban regeneration, will be proposed in the final stage with a sequence of temporary installations capable of conferring to the spaces, even if temporarily. A “meta-real” aspect of the effects of that virtual urban transformation that you want to get into the drawn project.
By establishing, thereby, with the city a true moment of local awareness and animation, fleeting but realistic, that can trigger interest and generate a collective activism; so to aspire in activating of a virtuous process of re-appropriation of space and restatement of the missing functions.