Venice is a singular city in which its “fragile” heritage is closely linked to the complex ur- ban morphology. In the city, there are a significant number of urban obstacles – such as bridges, differences in level, narrow “calli” and unprotected canal-banks – which might hamper people with mobility problems in moving around. In this particular context, standards and rules for the “elimination of the architectural barriers” are not sufficient to respond to the demand for inclusive accessibility and, there- fore, innovative solutions are needed. In 2004, Venice city council adopted the “Plan for the Elimination of the Architectural Barriers” (PEBA) and experimented many inter- ventions in order to guarantee urban accessibility, and not only for the bridges which represent the most important limitation to pedestrian mobility. The interventions all have to combine both conservation and accessibility in order to preserve the built heritage, but not always this is possible. In fact, in the city, we can distinguish reversible interventions (such as ramps overlapping on the bridge) and trans- formative ones (such as the adaptation of the original steps of the bridge), but there are also certain mechanical systems that are now out of use. The aim of this paper is to underline the importance of the design and social actions needed in Venice to guarantee both the preservation of the built heritage and urban accessibility, and which might also represent an example for other historical contexts.

Accessibilità urbana a Venezia tra conservazione e inclusione = Urban Accessibility in Venice, between Conservation and Inclusion

Valeria Tatano
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
;
Rosaria Revellini
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
2021-01-01

Abstract

Venice is a singular city in which its “fragile” heritage is closely linked to the complex ur- ban morphology. In the city, there are a significant number of urban obstacles – such as bridges, differences in level, narrow “calli” and unprotected canal-banks – which might hamper people with mobility problems in moving around. In this particular context, standards and rules for the “elimination of the architectural barriers” are not sufficient to respond to the demand for inclusive accessibility and, there- fore, innovative solutions are needed. In 2004, Venice city council adopted the “Plan for the Elimination of the Architectural Barriers” (PEBA) and experimented many inter- ventions in order to guarantee urban accessibility, and not only for the bridges which represent the most important limitation to pedestrian mobility. The interventions all have to combine both conservation and accessibility in order to preserve the built heritage, but not always this is possible. In fact, in the city, we can distinguish reversible interventions (such as ramps overlapping on the bridge) and trans- formative ones (such as the adaptation of the original steps of the bridge), but there are also certain mechanical systems that are now out of use. The aim of this paper is to underline the importance of the design and social actions needed in Venice to guarantee both the preservation of the built heritage and urban accessibility, and which might also represent an example for other historical contexts.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
TatanoRevellini.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 4.96 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
4.96 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11578/298738
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact