Urban Flexibility and Dynamicity to achieve multiadaptative and multiresilient public spaces

In current territories, it is increasingly happening that crises of different types occur simultaneously. The coexistence of more than one risk determines further difficulties in resolving because commonly, since the risks are sudden and unexpected, we tend to treat the last risk more carefully, leaving out the previous one even if it is equally important, and very often without taking into account the positive or negative example of the event that previously occurred in another place, also for reasons due to different or non-integrated regional legislation (Sepe, 2023; Bohland et al., 2019) Traditional approaches to spatial planning often do not take adaptive behaviour as a starting point, believing that urban interventions can be decided on the basis of facts and estimates that are available at the time of decision-making. This form of planning is based on a static perspective, which assumes a transformation according to predictable patterns, whose starting points are "actual, desired and potential” (De Roo, Porter, 2007). While it is true that unforeseen events occur suddenly, it is also true that adaptive and dynamic planning can better support the creation of a new equilibrium trough the identification of flexible spaces (Davoudi et al., 2013; Zolli, Healey, 2012) Accordingly, flexible planning makes possible to use local peculiarities as a starting point for the redevelopment project, resulting in lower investment costs, shorter construction times and greater support from stakeholders. The various design possibilities that can be realized with respect to the existing situation are identified through quantitative and qualitative analyses, of which the latter determine the implementation of flexible planning (De Roo, Porter, 2007). However, most of the methodologies used to analyse areas affected by different risks are aimed at focusing in particular on seismic risks without considering those relating to intangible aspects linked to the identity of the places or aspects related to urban health and liveability. And, more in general, in relation to design aspects, urban methodologies do not consider all the results of the analyses, maybe for the difficulty deriving from translate the complexity of collected data in project interventions. Starting from these premises, this study – carried out in the framework of the research project PRIN 2020 SUMMA within the ISMed-CNR Unit (with the author’s responsibility) and the relative agreement between Sapienza Università di Roma and ISMed-CNR - is devoted to define multiresilience and multiadaptation concepts, illustrate an analysis and design methodology of the urban space to be applied to areas characterized by multiple risks which require integrated and flexible interventions and define guide-lines for post-event reconstruction/regeneration/enhancement strategies.