Next Article in Journal
Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Evidence from Pakistani Listed Banks
Previous Article in Journal
Sustainability Indicators in Restaurants: The Development of a Checklist
Previous Article in Special Issue
Spatial–Temporal Evolution and Correlation Analysis of Ecosystem Service Value and Landscape Ecological Risk in Wuhu City
Open AccessArticle

The Fit of Urban Waterfront Interventions: Matters of Size, Money and Function

1
Center for Innovation in Territory, Urbanism, and Architecture (CiTUA), Instituto Superior Técnico, University of Lisbon, 1649-004 Lisboa, Portugal
2
Collegium—Lyon Institut des Etudes Avancées, Université de Lyon, 69008 Lyon, France
3
Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning, College of Environmental Design, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(10), 4079; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104079
Received: 26 December 2019 / Revised: 21 April 2020 / Accepted: 12 May 2020 / Published: 15 May 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human–River Interactions in Cities)
Urban riverfront interventions are ubiquitous throughout the developed world, and increasingly also in the Global South. Many have failed spectacularly. We conducted a systematic review of failed riverfront interventions to draw lessons that could improve future projects. Learning from past mistakes may be more important than observing successes, because successful elements in one city may not be repeatable elsewhere, as the context and opportunity could be specific to that one city. Recognizing what did not work elsewhere may provide clues needed to improve future projects. Our results show that poorly designed riverfront interventions typically fail on several levels: a bad program, with the wrong budget and timing, no concern for local needs or context, results in an unattractive and costly intervention, with reduced to no social or environmental benefit. To create more successful interventions in the future, we should acknowledge the local context, the morphology of the river valley, the time and budget a set of solutions entail, and select uses and functions that work for a diverse crowd and provide multiple benefits, including good flood management performance and the restoration of the rivers’ natural connectivity. View Full-Text
Keywords: urban waterfronts; river restoration; urban rivers; urban redevelopment; project management; connectivity urban waterfronts; river restoration; urban rivers; urban redevelopment; project management; connectivity
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Pinto, P.J.; Kondolf, G.M. The Fit of Urban Waterfront Interventions: Matters of Size, Money and Function. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4079. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104079

AMA Style

Pinto PJ, Kondolf GM. The Fit of Urban Waterfront Interventions: Matters of Size, Money and Function. Sustainability. 2020; 12(10):4079. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104079

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pinto, Pedro J.; Kondolf, G. M. 2020. "The Fit of Urban Waterfront Interventions: Matters of Size, Money and Function" Sustainability 12, no. 10: 4079. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104079

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop