A Holistic Approach to Strategic Sustainable Development of Urban Voids as Historic Urban Landscapes from the Perspective of Urban Resilience
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- RQ1: How can we approach the planning of urban interventions in a complex urban area from the perspective of sustainable development, resilience, and UN SDGs? What role do or can UN SDGs, resilience, and HUL have in spatial and urban planning from a sustainability and resilience perspective? How do they differ from other concepts in spatial planning?
- RQ2: Why is a particular area best defined as void (or something else), why is a particular area a HUL, why is the definition/description important, what is the usual way of intervening, what are new emphases in urban interventions?
- RQ3: How can a decision support tool for strategic spatial planning of complex urban areas based on HUL and UN SDGs be defined and function?
2. Literature Review
2.1. Complexity 1—Process of Spatial Planning and Its Problems
2.2. Complexity 2—Complex Context
2.3. Complexity 3—Complex Requirements—Resilience and UN SDGs
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Development of the SPUR Model
3.2. Case Study—Evaluation of Alternative Strategic Spatial Planning Proposals
3.2.1. Area of Study—Delta Area, Rijeka
3.2.2. Alternative Scenario Proposals
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Appendix B
Criteria | Guidelines |
---|---|
C1 | Determination of major risks in the area, continuous data gathering and monitoring, information and analysis updating, open access to information, coordination of spatial management activities, empowerment of population Interventions oriented to of risk reduction and prevention, and resilience strengthening Depending on type of risk (in consultation with experts), interventions such as (but not exclusively): Physical interventions oriented to reduction of risk and management of risk: Creation of dykes, ditches, canals, increasing river profile, creation raising the lend level, creation of expansion zones, creating safe communication inside and with outside the area, shelters and community gathering zones Soil reinforcements interventions and anti-desertification infrastructure and measures Building based on earthquake and fire safety codes In-between distance adequate for seismic risk and communication necessities Distances adequate for fire prevention and accesses Healthy buildings and design based on sustainability certificates or evaluations Climate active buildings and urban design (interventions that mitigate UHI and other effects of extreme weather) Ecological network and other green infrastructure (green roofs and facades, ponds…) Conservation of heritage Recycling and production of water and energy, adequate waste management Introduction/renewal of basic services in households Soil strengthening and adequate land-use zoning avoiding the areas that cannot be managed safely Built systems that can function during expected risks Safety equipment located in adequate locations, including mobile infrastructure (ITC, bridges…) Interventions that guarantee access to basic services, in private spaces and especially in public spaces even during risk periods Universal design for all places related to risk management and risk management plans Universal design for all public and workspaces, incentives for private spaces |
C2 | Interventions that do not impact agricultural areas directly or indirectly |
C3 | Area(s) oriented to aid small food producers, in particular vulnerable and indigenous groups, and help sustainable small production and resilience of ecosystems and local animal and plant species Interventions that improve ecosystems, and that strengthen resilience to climate change of the area and possible of nearby areas |
C4 | Interventions that guarantee transport for all potential area users, including vulnerable groups and economic activities. Assure adequate areas and infrastructure for all modes of transport Safety measures as a part of all infrastructure design and management Urban organization based on topo-geographical and morphological analysis and pattern language |
C5 | Healthy buildings Urban design that reduces and recycle pollutants, and increase air, water, and soil quality |
C6 | Interventions that create safe environments (without violence and crimes) and safe access to all accessible areas Urban organization based on topo-geographical morphological analysis and pattern language Adequate infrastructure (ICT, co working hubs…) and universal design approach to allow equal opportunities |
C7 | Urban interventions that collect, recycle, and purify water Building designs that that collect, recycle, and purify water Intervention that reduces water pollution (dumping, chemicals, wastewater…) and help sustainable (including easy and effective) waste management Interventions that implement integrated water resources management (harvesting, desalination, wastewater treatment, recycling and reuse) Interventions that protect and restore water-related ecosystems, both visible and not visible (aquifers) |
C8 | Introduction and renewal of sanitary service both private (through financial and administrative schemes) and public (such as toilets and showers etc., based on universal design) and oriented to optimize water use and recycling |
C9 | Installation of drinking water points in public spaces, resistant to risk and emergencies Improvement of private access to drinking water (through financial and administrative schemes) and water purification Interventions that allow sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater |
C10 | Climate active buildings and urban design (interventions that mitigate UHI and other effects of extreme weather) Buildings and urban spaces that produce energy Energetically partially self-sufficient area (specially in case of emergencies) |
C11 | Monitoring of economic situation and quality of jobs and organizing learning opportunities for reorientation Adequate infrastructure for quality work (such as IT infrastructures, co-working hubs, and universal design approach) Quality urban design and secondary services Policies that promote entrepreneurial culture and aid in formalization of SMEs Policies that promote tourism based on local culture and products and job creation |
C12 | Interventions that allow for diversification of jobs and sectors with a focus on high value-added and labor-intensive sectors Interventions that create safe working environments |
C13 | Adequate infrastructure for quality work (such as IT infrastructures, co-working hubs, and universal design approach) Spaces adaptable for new functions Comfort and healthy buildings Urban design offering well-being in open spaces Universal design for all public and workspaces For areas outside residential areas, intervention promotes inclusive and sustainable industrialization, for centralized areas or local centers, the intervention promotes functions and functional mixes adequate to its location and geographic significance Interventions that promote domestic technology development and innovation in developing countries |
C14 | All mobility needs for the area resolved inside the area |
C15 | Evaluation and choice of urban and building designs in design phases for the CO2 emission Monitoring |
C16 | Mix of uses determined based on the role and position of urban area in regional and local context Determining the need of local population and economic sectors Use or reuse in resilience perspective, and verifying for new complex approaches Implementation of procedures for inclusive urban planning Implementation of procedures for sustainable urban planning Interventions oriented to improve safety and accessibility in public transportation system |
C17 | Intervention of valorization of natural and cultural heritage |
C18 | Universal and inclusive design for public spaces, including green spaces Urban organization based on topo-geographical analysis, morphological analysis and pattern language Public space as a hub and shelter in case of higher impact emergencies |
C19 | Universal and inclusive design for public spaces, including green spaces Urban organization based on topo-geographical analysis, morphological analysis and pattern language |
C20 | Evaluation of interventions during urban design and building design phases |
C21 | Interventions that reduce vibrations and noise from different activities Universal design of public spaces Public transport and resting places every 300 m Public infrastructure planned and design in safety and resilience perspective |
C22 | Urban design based on topo-geographical analysis, morphological analysis, pattern language and universal design |
C23 | Urban design based on topo-geographical analysis, morphological analysis, pattern language, mobility, universal design, and wayfinding |
C24 | Evaluation and choice of visual impact in urban and building design phases |
C25 | Activities of urban planning and design of contact areas in occasion of planning bigger urban area, based on the same principles as the main area |
C26 | Analysis of natural, cultural, and social environment and proposal and evaluation of activities based on existing resources and valorizing existing resources Interventions that define waterfronts |
C27 | Urban design based on evaluation of proposals during urban and infrastructure/building phase, and based on complex spatial approach and topo-geographical analysis (such as to connectivity, visibility, and axial analysis, as well as walkability indexes), pattern language and universal design |
C28 | Green infrastructure planned and design in resilience and universal design perspective and evaluated as such |
C29 | Analysis of natural, cultural, and social environment and proposal and evaluation of recreational activities based on existing resources and valorizing existing resources and allowing all year use and seasonal variation use Interventions that define waterfronts and/or other characteristic spatial elements |
C30 | Definition of adequate limits of gentrification and evaluation of potential gentrification and choice of alternative Interventions that allow for equal use of space and empower and promote inclusion |
C31 | All year possible use of public spaces and activities based on universal design Primary all year use and secondary uses depending on seasons for public spaces and activities Reservation of a determined percentage of private activities that guarantee all year use and seasonal variation use Interventions that provide universal and safe access to green and public spaces |
C32 | Definition of various uses context, with predominantly public use and resilience-oriented infrastructure |
C33 | Creation of safe spaces that can be used as emergency meeting and waiting places, equipped with necessary aids and resources for primary needs, including water, food, and medicine according to preventive information and evaluation, a with basic emergency specialized equipment, and with particular attention to crime prevention during emergencies and secure alternative access to and from the area and safe places Communications protected from risks (elevated paths, resilient ICT, etc.) Creation of shelters for defined area of interest (it can be bigger than the area in question), equipped according to standard regulation and universal design Interventions to diminish risks of disasters, especially water related, but also other natural disasters such as seismic or fire (as in C1 guidelines) |
C34 | Urban building design that allows for sustainable waste management (in easy and efficient way, considering also vulnerable population) and defined adequate areas and technologies Evaluation of urban and building designs for the issue of waste management |
C35 | Urban and building design that reduce noise, vibrations, glow, and light pollution (choice of illumination, walls and window, orientation, green and other screening and absorption elements, etc.) |
C36 | Evaluation and choice of urban and building design for ecological network efficiency Urban design that aids in air, water, and soil purification |
C37 | (Percentage of green areas:) Definition of minimum limit, recommended 15% Safe, accessible, and universal |
C38 | (Percentage of sport and recreation areas:) Definition of minimum limit, recommended 15% Safe, accessible, and universal |
C39 | (Percentage of other public areas:) Definition of minimum limit, recommended 10% Safe, accessible, and universal |
C40 | Improvement of natural areas and green infrastructure inside and optionally outside the area Interventions that allow long-term sustainable use of resources, especially energy and materials |
C41 | Urban design based on long-term circular economy principles Building design improving circularity of construction Public procurement that promotes sustainable development Urban design and spatial management that helps with information on sustainable lifestyles |
C42 | Analysis of natural, cultural, and social environment and proposal and evaluation of touristic activities based on existing resources and valorizing existing resources, respecting and complementing local population demand and offer Evaluation and choice of touristic activities that complement and enhance local offer |
C43 | Interventions that strengthen resilience and mitigate climate change effects, including temperature, wind, overexposure to sun, humidity, sea level rising, river drying, extreme rain and weather in general, and desertification Combination of low and high technologies for the resilience Interventions in C1 and others based on expected risks |
C44 | Interventions that reduce marine and coast pollution Requalification of marine and coastal ecosystems with hard and soft interventions to achieve their maximum resilience Depending on location, intervention of conservation of coastal and marine areas |
C45 | Infrastructure for equality access to marine resources Accessible markets—physically, economically, and administratively |
C46 | Definition of local needs and designation of adequate area at seaside and sea for local community and their activities |
C47 | Planning, evaluation and choice of planning and management options that best preserve and restore terrestrial ecosystems and habitats and connect them in the ecological network, and the optimal organization of ecological network in defined area Punctual interventions of preservation and restoring of ecosystems and habitats Management plan of sustainable use of terrestrial resources in the area Intervention of soil restoration and anti-desertification |
C48 | Urban and building design based of safety principles including urban design organization based on topo-geographical analysis, morphological analysis and pattern language Transparent public procurement methods in all phases—in planning, design, construction, and utilization phases Opportunity for public participation in planning and design |
C49 | Analysis and evaluation of different/multiple financial sources potential Process with multi-stakeholders organization with knowledge and skills exchange Cost-benefit analysis of urban and building design base on multicriteria evaluations for sustainability goals (for socio-cultural, ecological, and economic sphere) Analysis of different partnership opportunities and portfolio building |
References
- United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1, 25 September 2015); United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Available online: https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?sym-bol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E (accessed on 25 July 2022).
- Avrami, E.; Mason, R.; De la Torre, M. editors. Values and Heritage Conservation: Research Report; Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2000; Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10020/gci_pubs/values_heritage_research_report (accessed on 27 August 2022).
- UN/MAP. Mediterranean Quality Status Report. Mediterranean Action Plan Barcelona Conv. 2017, p. 539. Available online: https://www.medqsr.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/2017MedQSR_Online_0.pdf (accessed on 27 August 2022).
- Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean. Carta del Mediterraneo; Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean: Principato di Monaco. 2008; pp. 1–15. Available online: https://www.isnitti.edu.it/stdoc/pam_carta.pdf (accessed on 25 July 2022).
- Viganò, P. Extreme cities and bad places. Int. J. Disaster Risk Sci. 2012, 3, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- UNESCO. Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2011; pp. 1–64. [Google Scholar]
- Pickard, R.; De Thyse, M. The Management of Historic Centres: Towards a Common Goal. In Management of Historic Centres; Pickard, R., Ed.; Spoon Press: London, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Throsby, D. Economics and Culture; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Mason, R. (Ed.) Economics and Heritage Conservation: Concepts, Values and Agendas for Research, in Economics and Heritage Conservation, a Meeting Organized by the Getty Conservation Institute; Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- UNESCO, Centre UWH. The UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape, Report of the Second Consultation on Its Implementation by Member States; UNESCO Centre UWH: Paris, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Lagopoulos, A. Land-Use Planning Methodology and Middle-Ground Planning Theories. Urban Sci. 2018, 2, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lagopoulos, A. Clarifying Theoretical and Applied Land-Use Planning Concepts. Urban Sci. 2018, 2, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mrak, I. Locally based development-tools for identifying opportunities and evaluating port area strategies of Rijeka. Sustainability 2013, 5, 4024–4056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Berger, P.L.; Luckmann, T. The Social Construction of Reality; Doubleday and Co.: Garden City, NY, USA, 1966. [Google Scholar]
- Đorđević, D.; Dabović, T. Seven models of planning. Glas. Srp. Geogr. Drus. 2009, 89, 3–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watson, V. “The planned city sweeps the poor away...”: Urban planning and 21st century urbanisation. Prog Plann. 2009, 72, 151–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watson, V. Down to earth: Linking planning theory and practice in the “metropole” and beyond. Int. Plan Stud. 2008, 13, 223–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mrak, I. Evaluation methods in the protection of built heritage. Gradjevinar 2014, 66, 127–138. [Google Scholar]
- Elster, J. The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory. In Deliberative Democracy. Essays on Reason and Politics; Bohman, J., Rehg, W., Eds.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1997; pp. 14–15. [Google Scholar]
- Mrak, I.; Matan, C. Can You Access Culture? an Evaluation Model for the Accessibility of Cultural Locations. Electron. J. Fac. Civ. Eng. 2022, 13, 32–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watson, V. Planning and Development. Int. Encycl. Soc. Behav. Sci. Second Ed. 2015, 25, 180–186. [Google Scholar]
- Stagl, S. The role of the participative multicriteria evaluation in energy planning (In Italian: Il Ruolo Della Valutazione Multicriteria Partecipata Nella Pianificazione Energetica). In Energy, Beauty, Participation: Sustainability Challenge. Evaluations Integrative between Conservation and Development (In Italian: Energia, Bellezza, Partecipazione: La Sfida Della Sostenibilità. Valutazioni Integrate Tra Conservazione e Sviluppo; Fusco Girard, L., Nijkamp, P., Eds.; FrancoAngeli: Milano, Italy, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Bohman, J.; Rehg, W. Deliberative Democracy. Essays on Reason and Politics; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1997; p. 23. [Google Scholar]
- Rafieian, M.; Ghazaie, M. Examining the Causes of Crisis in Urban Planning, with an Emphasis on Radical Planning Theory. Int. J. Arch. Eng. Urban Plan 2020, 30, 212–221. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344582849 (accessed on 20 August 2022).
- Salingaros, N.A. Unified Architectural Theory: Form, Language, Complexity, 2nd ed.; Vajra Booksz: Kathmandu, Nepal, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Harrison, H.; Birks, M.; Franklin, R.; Mills, J. Case study research: Foundations and methodological orientations. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research; Freie University: Berlin, Germany, 2017; p. 18. [Google Scholar]
- Dabović, T.; Đorđević, D. Towards the reconstruction of planning theory/Ka rekonstrukciji teorije planiranja. Glas. Srp. Geogr. Drus. 2008, 88, 37–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maricchiolo, L. The modern appropriation of urban space through Mediterranean medinas. In Proceedings of the Regionalism, Nationalism & Modern Architecture Conference Proceedings, Porto, Portugal, 25–27 October 2018; Pimentel, J.C., Trevisan, A., Cardoso, A., Eds.; CEAA: Porto, Portugal, 2018; pp. 221–236. [Google Scholar]
- Capasso, M. Hypothesis of livability and development in a Mediterranean Medina with antique center (In Italian: Ipotesi di vivibilità e sviluppo di una Medina mediterranea dal cuore antico). In Charm of the Old Center (In Italian: Il Fascino del Centro Antico); Arcidiacono, C., Ed.; Magma Edizioni: Nalpes, Italy, 2004; pp. 125–137. [Google Scholar]
- Salvati, L. Identity, Change and Sustainability: Towards Post-Mediterranean Cities? Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 2014, 4, 34–41. [Google Scholar]
- Đorđević, D.; Dabović, T. The crisis of European spatial development policy/Krize evropske politike prostornog razvoja. Glasnik Srpskog Geogr. Drus. 2005, 85, 111–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katurić, I.; Šmit, K.; Hajdinjak, I.; Kranjec, K. Development Strategiesas Key Factors for Sustainable Urban Development. Comparative Analysis of Antwerpen, Bratislava, Krakow and Zagreb. (In Croatian: Razvojne strategije kao čimbenik održivog razvoja gradova, komparativna analiza Antwerpena, Bratislave, Krakowa i Zagreba). Prost. Znan. Časopis Za Arhit. I Urban. 2019, 27, 79–87. [Google Scholar]
- Šećerov, V. Strategic Planning of the City (2012) (In Serbian: Strateško Planiranje Grada (2012)); University of Belgrade—Faculty of Geography, Serbian Spatial Planning Association: Beograd, Republic of Serbia, 2012; pp. 222–227. [Google Scholar]
- Muminović, E.; Radosavljević, U.; Beganović, D. Strategic planning and management model for the regeneration of historic urban landscapes: The case of historic center of Novi Pazar in Serbia. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Olesen, K. Transforming the Geography of the Welfare State through Neoliberal Spatial Strategies: The Case of Denmark. In Handbook on the Changing Geographies of the State; Mosio, S., Koch, N., Jonas, A.E.G., Lizotte, C., Luukkonen, J., Eds.; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Krasilnikova, E.; Klimov, D. Design principles of hybrid spaces in terms of urban planning regeneration. Wit Trans Built Environ. 2020, 193, 89–100. [Google Scholar]
- Vicenzotti, V. The landscape of landscape urbanism. Landsc. J. 2017, 36, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahul, P. Landscape urbanism. Landscape 2011, 31, 27–31. [Google Scholar]
- Cermasi, O. Contemporary landscape urbanism principles as innovative methodologies: The design of an armature of public spaces for the revitalisation of a shrinking city. J. Public Sp. 2017, 2, 111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- North, A.; Waldheim, C. Landscape Urbanism: A North American Perspective. In Resilience in Ecology and Urban Design. Linking Theory and Practice for Sustainable Cities; Pickett, S.T.A., Cadenasso, M.L., McGarth, B., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2013; pp. 391–406. [Google Scholar]
- Zeleny, M. Multiple Criteria Decision Making; McGraw-Hill Book Company: New York, NY, USA, 1982. [Google Scholar]
- Nocca, F. The role of cultural heritage in sustainable development: Multidimensional indicators as decision-making tool. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gómez-Villarino, M.T.; Gómez Villarino, M.; Ruiz-Garcia, L. Implementation of urban green infrastructures in peri-urban areas: A case study of climate change mitigation in madrid. Agronomy 2021, 11, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coaffee, J.; Bosher, L. Integrating counter-terrorist resilience into sustainability. Proc Inst. Civ. Eng.—Urban Des. Plan. 2008, 161, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ran, J.; Nedovic-Budic, Z. Integrating spatial planning and flood risk management: A new conceptual framework for the spatially integrated policy infrastructure. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. [Internet] 2016, 57, 68–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hemmati, M.; Mahmoud, H.N.; Ellingwood, B.R.; Crooks, A.T. Shaping urbanization to achieve communities resilient to floods. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 094033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yiannakou, A.; Salata, K.-D. Adaptation to Climate Change through Spatial Planning in Compact Urban Areas: A Case Study in the City of Thessaloniki. Sustainability 2017, 9, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lukić, B.; Šećerov, V. Planning at the Local Level—Organization, Management, Development (2017) (In Serbian: Planiranje na Lokalnom nivou—Organizacija, Upravljanje, Razvoj (2017)); University of Belgrade—Faculty of Geography: Beograd, Republic of Serbia, 2017; pp. 18–128. [Google Scholar]
- Ambruš, D. The Mechanical City (2020) (In Croatian: Mehanički Grad (2020)); Sustainable Urban Society Association—STRAND: Beograd, Republic of Serbia, 2020; pp. 122–137. [Google Scholar]
- Friel, S.; Akerman, M.; Hancock, T.; Kumaresan, J.; Marmot, M.; Melin, T.; Vlahov, D. Addressing the social and environmental determinants of urban health equity: Evidence for action and a research agenda. J. Urban Health 2011, 88, 860–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mrak, I. A Methodological Framework Based on the Dynamic-Evolutionary View of Heritage. Sustainability 2013, 5, 3992–4023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carta, M. The Cultural Armour of the Territory. Cultural Heritage as an Identity Matrix and Development Tool (In Italian: L’armatura Culturale del Territorio. Il Patrimonio Culturale Come Matrice di Identità e Strumento di Sviluppo); FrancoAngeli: Milano, Italy, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Campeol, G.; Pizzinato, C. Methodology for evaluating archaeological impact (In Italian: Metodologia per la valutazione dell’impatto archeologico). Archeol. E Calc. 2007, 18, 273–292. [Google Scholar]
- Fusco, G.L.; Nijkamp, P. The evaluation in the tactical and implementation/management level of sustainable development (In Italian: La valutazione nel livello tattico edattuativo/gestionale dello sviluppo sostenibile). In Assessments for the Sustainable Development of the City and the Territory (In Italian: Le Valutazioni per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile Della Città e del Territorio); Fusco Girard, L., Nijkamp, P., Eds.; FrancoAngeli: Milano, Italy, 1997; pp. 98–122. [Google Scholar]
- Polèse, M.; Stren, R. (Eds.) The Social Sustainability of Cities: Diversity and the Management of Change; University of Toronto Press Incorporated: Toronto, ON, Canada; Buffalo, NY, USA; London, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Mela, A.; Belloni, M.C.; Davico, L. Sociology and Territorial Planning (In Italian: Sociologia e Progettazione del Territorio); Carocci: Rome, Italy, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Greffe, X. Culture and Local Development (In Italian: Cultura e Sviluppo Locale); OECD, Provincia Autonoma di Trento: Nicolodi, Trento, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Greffe, X. Management of Cultural Heritage (In Italian: La Gestione del Patrimonio Culturale); Franco Angeli: Milano, Italy, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Giucastro, F.G.S.; Giordano, D. Et(h)nic Architecture in Mediterranean Area. Energy Procedia 2016, 96, 868–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fusco Girard, L.; Gravagnuolo, A.; Nocca, F.; Angrisano, M.; Bosone, M. Towards An Economic Impact Assessment. BDC. Boll. Cent. Calza Bini 2015, 2, 265–293. Available online: http://www.serena.unina.it/index.php/bdc/article/view/4061 (accessed on 1 September 2022).
- European Landscape Convention and Explanatory Report Document by the Secretary General Established by the General Directorate of Education. In Culture, Sport and Youth, and Environment; Council of the European Union: Brussels, Belgium, 2000.
- The Australia ICOMOS. Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance; The Australia ICOMOS: Burwood, Austrailia, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Harvey, D.C. Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and scope of heritage studies. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2001, 7, 319–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lichfield, N. Economics in Urban Conservation; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Venanzoni, G.; Carlucci, M.; Salvati, L. Latent sprawl patterns and the spatial distribution of businesses in a southern European city. Cities 2017, 62, 50–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zitti, M.; Ferrara, C.; Perini, L.; Carlucci, M.; Salvati, L. Long-Term Urban Growth and Land Use Efficiency in Southern Europe: Implications for Sustainable Land Management. Sustainability 2015, 7, 3359–3385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Martino, R.; Foglia, L. The city borders: New opportunities for the Mediterranean city. In Less More Architecture Design Landscape. Le vie dei Mercanti X Forum Internazionale di Studi Gambardella; Gambardella, C., Ed.; La Scuola di Pitagora: Naples, Italy, 2012; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- De Rosa, F.; Di Palma, M. Historic Urban Landscape Approach and Port Cities Regeneration: Naples between Identity and Outlook. Sustainability 2013, 5, 4268–4287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fiorini, L.; Zullo, F.; Marucci, A.; Di Dato, C.; Romano, B. Planning Tool Mosaic (PTM): A Platform for Italy, a Country Without a Strategic Framework. Land 2021, 10, 279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahmann, H.; Jonas, M.; Rahman Jonas, M. Urban Voids: The Hidden Dimension of Temporary Vacant Spaces in Rapidly Growing Cities 2011. 2011, pp. 1–11. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260094708_Urban_Voids_The_hidden_dimension_of_temporary_vacant_spaces_in_rapidly_growing_cities (accessed on 25 August 2022).
- Hashem, O.M.; Wahba, S.M.E.; Nasr-Eldin, T.I. Urban voids: Identifying and optimizing urban voids potential as a revitalization source in enhancing developing countries’ city income. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2022, 69, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sbacchi, M. Landscape Urbanism and Architecture of the Voids. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2017, 37, 667–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uzelac, M. Urban Spaces, Non-Places and Bad Places: Intersections Between Theory and Fiction in the Writings of Aldous Huxley and Michel Houellebecq. Metacritic J. Comp. Stud. Theory 2020, 6, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feleki, E.; Achillas, C.; Vlachokostas, C.; Michailidou, A.V.; Ortega, L.; Moussiopoulos, N. Preservation of the Mediterranean Identity: An Intra-City Analysis Towards a Macro-Regional Approach for the Characterisation of Urban Sustainability. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mravunac Sužnjević, I.; Šmit, K. Defining the City Skyline; Urban and Architectural Approach Between 1960 and 2020 (2020) (In Croatian: Pojmovno određenje identitetske siluete grada; Urbanističko-arhitektonski pristup od 1960. do 2020. godine. (2020)). Prostor 2020, 28, 390–401. [Google Scholar]
- Ambruš, D. Post-Industrial Cities (2021) (In Croatian: Postindustrijski gradovi (2021)); Sustainable Urban Society Association–STRAND: Beograd, Republic of Serbia, 2021; pp. 56–131. [Google Scholar]
- Hillier, B. Space Is the Machine, 2nd ed.; Space Syntax: London, UK, 2007; pp. 124–137. Available online: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/3881/1/SITM.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2022).
- Hakim, B. Mediterranean urban and building codes: Origins, content, impact, and lessons. Urban Des. Int. 2008, 13, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hakim, B. Generative processes for revitalizing historic towns or heritage districts. Urban Des. Int. 2007, 12, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexander, C.; Ishikawa, S.; Silverstein, M.; Jacobson, M.; Fiksdahl-King, I.; Angel, S.A. Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction; Center for Environmental Structure Series; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- A New Pattern Language for Growing Regions: Places, Networks, Processes Website. Available online: https://patterns.architexturez.net/doc/az-cf-193137 (accessed on 15 October 2022).
- Ambruš, D.; Dusparić, V. Architectural form as a Construction (2014) (In Croatian: Arhitektonska forma kao struktura (2014.)). In Returning the City (In Croatian: Vraćanje Grada); Sustainable Urban Society Association–STRAND: Beograd, Republic of Serbia, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Marović, I.; Završki, I.; Jajac, N. Ranking zones model—A multicriterial approach to the spatial management of urban areas. Croat. Oper. Res. Rev. 2015, 29, 91–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cellamare, C. Cultures and Territorial Design (In Italian: Culture e Progetto del Territorio); Franco Angeli: Milano, Italy, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Representing Places: Methods and Techniques; Magnaghi, A. (Ed.) Alinea: Firenze, Italy, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Hastaoglou-Martinidis, V. Urban aesthetics and national identity: The refashioning of Eastern Mediterranean cities between 1900 and 1940. Plan. Perspect. 2011, 26, 153–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dieleman, F.; Kloosterman, R.C. Room to Manoeuvre: Governance, the Post-Industrial Economy, and Housing Provision in Rotterdam. In The Social Sustainability of Cities: Diversity and the Management of Change; Polèse, M., Stren, R., Eds.; University of Toronto Press Incorporated: Toronto, ON, Canada; Buffalo, NY, USA; London, UK, 2000; pp. 175–201. [Google Scholar]
- Hanak, T.; Marović, I.; Aigel, P. Perception of residential environment in cities: A comparative study. Procedia Eng. 2015, 117, 500–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Donella, H.; Meadows, D.H.; Meadows, D.L.; Randers, J.; Behrens, W.W., III. The Limits to Growth of the Club of Rome; Universe Books, United States of America: New York, NY, USA, 1972. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future (Brundtland Report); United Nations: Paris, France, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Munasinghe, M. Environmental Macroeconomics—Basic Principles, Online Ecological Economics Encyclopedia (OEEE), International Society for Ecological Economics (ISEE). 2004. Available online: https://isecoeco.org/pdf/environmental_macroeconomics.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2022).
- Marović, I.; Mrak, I.; Ambruš, D.; Krstičević, J. Building Interventions in Mediterranean Towns—Developing a Framework for Selecting the Optimal Spatial Organization and Construction Technology from a Sustainable Development Perspective. Buildings 2022, 12, 1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNISDR. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2017. Available online: http://www.unisdr.org/we/coordinate/sendai-framework (accessed on 22 July 2022).
- Chahardowli, M.; Sajadzadeh, H.; Aram, F.; Mosavi, A. Survey of sustainable regeneration of historic and cultural cores of cities. Energies 2020, 13, 2708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krvavica, N.; Ružić, I. Assessment of sea-level rise impacts on salt-wedge intrusion in idealized and Neretva River Estuary. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2020, 234, 106638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ružić, I.; Dugonjić Jovančević, S.; Benac, Č.; Krvavica, N. Assessment of the Coastal Vulnerability Index in an Area of Complex Geological Conditions on the Krk Island, Northeast Adriatic Sea. Geosci. 2019, 5, 219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaker, R.R.; Rybarczyk, G.; Brown, C.; Papp, V.; Alkins, S. (Re)emphasizing Urban Infrastructure Resilience via Scoping Review and Content Analysis. Urban Sci. 2019, 3, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tayebi, S.; Mohammadi, H.; Shamsipoor, A.; Tayebi, S.; Alavi, S.A.; Hoseinioun, S. Analysis of land surface temperature trend and climate resilience challenges in Tehran. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 16, 8585–8594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amico, A.D.; Currà, E. The Role of Urban Built Heritage in Qualify and Quantify Resilience. Specific Issues in Mediterranean City. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2014, 18, 181–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Desouza, K.C.; Flanery, T.H. Designing, planning, and managing resilient cities: A conceptual framework. Cities 2013, 35, 89–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mrak, I.; Campisi, T.; Tesoriere, G.; Canale, A.; Cindrić, M. The role of urban and social factors in the accessibility of urban areas for people with motor and visual disabilities. Aip Conf. Proc. 2019, 2186, 160008. [Google Scholar]
- Centre for Excellence in Universal Design, the 7 Principles. Available online: http://universaldesign.ie/What-is-Universal-Design/The-7-Principles/ (accessed on 17 November 2020).
- Campisi, T.; Basbas, S.; Tesoriere, G.; Trouva, M.; Papas, T.; Mrak, I. How to Create Walking Friendly Cities. A Multi-Criteria Analysis of the Central Open Market Area of Rijeka. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abastante, F.; Lami, I.M.; La Riccia, L.; Gaballo, M. Supporting resilient urban planning through walkability assessment. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopez, L. The urban reality of a Mediterranean city: Bari (Italy). In New Trends in the Renewal of the City; Piñeira Mantiñán, M.J., Moore, N., Eds.; Instituto Universitario de Estudios e Desenvolvemento de Galicia: Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 2011; pp. 87–103. [Google Scholar]
- Fazio, M.; Giuffrida, N.; Le Pira, M.; Inturri, G.; Ignaccolo, M. Planning Suitable Transport Networks for E-Scooters to Foster Micromobility Spreading. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campisi, T.; Mrak, I.; Errigo, M.F.; Tesoriere, G. Participatory planning for better inclusive urbanism: Some consideration about infrastructural obstacles for people with different motor abilities. Aip Conf. Proc. 2021, 2343, 090006. [Google Scholar]
- Mariano, C.; Marino, M. Public space and climate change. Innovative planning approaches for the urban regeneration of coastal cities. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Changing Cities IV, Spatial, Design, Landscape & Socioeconomics Dimensions; Gospodini, A., Ed.; University of Thessaly, Department of Planning and Regional Development, Laboratory of Urban Morphology & Design: Volos, Greece, 2019; pp. 1772–1783. [Google Scholar]
- Kostrenčić, A.; Jukić, T. Approaches to Urban Design in the Beginning of the 21st Century. Prost. Znan. Časopis Za Arhit. I Urban. 2020, 28, 154–165. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, H.; Campbell, E.; Campbell, D.E.; Wang, C.; Ren, H. Assessment of green infrastructure performance through an urban resilience lens. Atmos Environ. 2017, 23, 248–258. [Google Scholar]
- Larrinaga, F.; Pérez, A.; Aldalur, I.; Hernández, J.L.; Izkara, J.L.; De Viteri, P.S. A holistic and interoperable approach towards the implementation of services for the digital transformation of smart cities: The case of Vitoria-Gasteiz (Spain). Sensors 2021, 21, 8061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Deng, D.; Zhao, Y.; Zhou, X. Smart city planning under the climate change condition. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2017, 81, 012091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ma, Y.; Li, G.; Xie, H.; Zhang, H. City profile: Using smart data to create digital urban spaces. Isprs Ann. Photogramm Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2018, 4, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prakash, M.; Ramage, S.; Kavvada, A.; Goodman, S. Open Earth Observations for Sustainable Urban Development. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Juhász-Horváth, L.; Pedde, S.; Pinter, L.; Rounsevell, M.; Harrison, P. Integrated modelling of urban spatial development under uncertain climate futures: A case study in Hungary. Environ Model Softw. 2017, 96, 251–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Iturriza, M.; Hernantes, J.; Abdelgawad, A.A.; Labaka, L. Are Cities Aware Enough? A Framework for Developing City Awareness to Climate Change. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sgobbo, A. Resilience and regeneration: Water sensitive urban planning approach as a sustainable urban strategy (In Italian: Resilienza e rigenerazione: L’approccio water sensitive urban planning come strategia di sostenibilità urbana). BDC Boll. Del Cent. Calza Bini 2018, 18, 105–125. Available online: http://www.serena.unina.it/index.php/bdc/article/view/6061/7239 (accessed on 17 August 2022).
- Bocca, A. Public space and 15-minute city. TeMA—J. Land Use Mobil. Environ. 2021, 14, 395–410. Available online: http://www.serena.unina.it/index.php/tema/article/view/8062 (accessed on 8 September 2022).
- Deluka-Tibljaš, A.; Cuculić, M.; Šurdonja, S.; Babić, S. Analysis of pavement surface heating in urban areas. J. Croat. Assoc. Civ. Eng. 2012, 64, 127–134. [Google Scholar]
- Androjić, I.; Dimter, S.; Marović, I. The contribution to the urban heat islands exploration: Underpasses and their elements. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 2020, 5, 608–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santamouris, M.; Paolini, R.; Haddad, S.; Synnefa, A.; Garshasbi, S.; Hatvani-Kovacs, G.; Gobakis, K.; Yenneti, K.; Vasilakopoulou, K.; Feng, J.; et al. Heat mitigation technologies can improve sustainability in cities. An holistic experimental and numerical impact assessment of urban overheating and related heat mitigation strategies on energy consumption, indoor comfort, vulnerability and heat-related mortality and morbidity in cities. Energy Build. 2020, 217, 110002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, Q.; Huang, Y.; Ran, B.; Zeng, G.; Van Rompaey, A.; Shi, M. Coordination conflicts between urban resilience and urban land evolution in Chinese hilly city of Mianyang. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 4887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandes, J.; Dabaieh, M.; Mateus, R.; Bragança, L. The influence of the Mediterranean climate on vernacular architecture: A comparative analysis between the vernacular responsive architecture of southern Portugal and north of Egypt. In Proceedings of the World Sustainable Buildings 2014 Barcelona Conference, Madrid, Spain, 28–30 October 2014; Green Building Council Espana: Madrid, Spain, 2014; pp. 264–270. [Google Scholar]
- Salvati, A.; Coch, H.; Morganti, M. Effects of urban compactness on the building energy performance in Mediterranean climate. Energy Procedia 2017, 122, 499–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moretti, A. Destination Management and the Reuse of Cultural Artistic Heritage. In Economia del Patrimonio Monumentale; Mossetto, G., Vecco, M., Eds.; FrancoAngeli: Milano, Italy, 2001; pp. 60–82. [Google Scholar]
- Mossetto, G. The Economy of Art Cities. Comparison of Development Models, Policies and Intervention Tools (In Italian: L’economia delle Città d’arte. Modelli di Sviluppo a Confronto, Politiche e Strumenti di Intervento); EtasLibri: Milano, Italy, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Šmit, K.; Mravunac, I. Thematic areas of management plans as indicators of contemporary issues in urban planning Mediterranean cities-Dubrovnik, Venice, Corfu/Tematska područja Planova upravljanja kao indikator suvremenih urbanističkih problema. Mediteranski gradovi-Dubrovnik, Venecija, Krf. Prostor 2018, 26, 296–307. [Google Scholar]
- Yiota, T. Cultural heritage as a means for local development in Mediterranean historic cities—The need for an urban policy. Heritage 2020, 3, 152–175. [Google Scholar]
- Costa, C. An emerging tourism planning paradigm? A comparative analysis between town and tourism planning. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2001, 3, 425–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, J. Circular Cities: What Are the Benefits of Circular Development? Sustainability 2021, 13, 5725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrà, N.; Pultrone, G. Cultural heritage for the construction of social capital in the agenda 2030 territorialization process. ArcHistoR 2019, 12, 330–339. [Google Scholar]
- Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. VOS: A new method for visualizing similarities between objects. In Advances in Data Analysis: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the German Classification Society; Lenz, H.-J., Decker, R., Eds.; Springer: Heidelberg/Berlin, Germany, 2007; pp. 299–306. [Google Scholar]
- Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. VOSviewer Manual. Manual for VOSviewer Version 1. 6.18 [Internet]; Universiteit Leiden: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2022; Available online: https://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.18.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2022).
- Brans, J.-P.; De Smet, Y. Promethee Methods: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Brans, J.P.; Mareschal, B.; Vincke, P.H. Promethee—A New Family of Outranking Methods in Multicriteria Analysis. Operational Research IFORS 84; Brans, J.P., Ed.; North Holland: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984; pp. 477–490. [Google Scholar]
- Brans, J.P.; Vincke, P.H. A preference ranking organization method, the PROMETHEE method for MCDM. Manag. Sci. 1985, 31, 647–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Behzadian, M.; Kazemzadeh, R.B.; Albadvi, A.; Aghdasi, M. PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2010, 200, 198–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- VisualPROMETHEE. Available online: http://www.promethee-gaia.net/software.html (accessed on 25 August 2022).
- Marović, I.; Perić, M.; Hanak, T. A multi-criteria decision support concept for selecting optimal contractor. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 1660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marović, I.; Car-Pušić, D.; Hrvatin, Z. Establishing a model to evaluate public administration projects. Electron. J. Fac. Civ. Eng. Osijek E Gfos 2014, 5, 56–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jajac, N.; Bilić, I.; Mladineo, M. Application of multicriteria methods to planning of investment projects in the field of civil engineering. Croat. Oper. Res. Rev. 2012, 3, 113–124. [Google Scholar]
- Jajac, N.; Marović, I.; Baučić, M. Decision support concept for managing the maintenance of city parking facilities. Electron. J. Fac. Civ. Eng. Osijek E Gfos 2014, 9, 60–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jajac, N.; Marović, I.; Mladineo, M. Planning support concept to implementation of sustainable parking development projects in ancient Mediterranean cities. Croat. Oper. Res. Rev. 2014, 5, 345–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jajac, N.; Kilić, J.; Rogulj, K. An integral approach to sustainable decision-making within maritime spatial planning—A DSC for the planning of anchorages on the island of Šolta, Croatia. Sustainability 2018, 11, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kilić Pamuković, J.; Rogulj, K.; Dumanić, D.; Jajac, N. A sustainable approach for the maintenance of asphalt pavement construction. Sustainability 2021, 13, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kilić Pamuković, J.; Rogulj, K.; Jajac, N. Assessing the Bonitet of Cadastral Parcels for Land Reallocation in Urban Consolidation. Land 2021, 10, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strategy of City of Rijeka Development for the Period 2014–2020 (In Croatian: Strategija Razvoja Grada Rijeke za Razdoblje 2014–2020. Godine), Rijeka: Grad Rijeka. 2013. Available online: https://www.rijeka.hr/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/strategija-razvoja-2014-2020.pdf (accessed on 10 September 2022).
- Strategy of Urban Agglomeration Rijeka Development, for the Period 2016–2020 (In Croatian: Strategija Razvoja Urbane Aglomeracije Rijeka za Razdoblje 2016–2020. Godine). Rijeka: Grad Rijeka. Available online: https://www.rijeka.hr/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/strategija-urbane-aglomeracije-rijeka.pdf (accessed on 10 September 2022).
- Census ’21. Create Together the Image of Croatia (In Croatian: Popis ’21. Stvorimo Zajedno Sluku Hrvatske) Website. Available online: https://popis2021.hr/ (accessed on 10 September 2022).
- Public, International, Open, in One-Degree, Anonymous, Conceptual Competition for Realization of Conceptual Urbanistic-Architectonic Proposal for the Regulation of Delta Area and Baros Portual Area in Rijeka; Port Authority and City of Rijeka, 2013 (In Croatian: Javni, Međunarodni, Otvoreni, u Jednom Stupnju, Anonimni, Anketni Natječaj za Izradu Idejnog Urbanističkog-Arhitektonskog Rješenja za Uređenja Područja Delte i Luke Baroš u Rijeci; Lučka uprava i Grad Rijeka, 2013). Društvo arhitekata Rijeka Website. Available online: https://d-a-r.hr/preuzimanje-natjecajnih-podloga/ (accessed on 25 August 2022).
- Urlich, A.; Vasiljević, B. General regulation plan of the cities Sušak—Rijeka, 1948 (In Croatian: Direktivna regulaciona osnova gradova Sušak—Rijeka, 1948). Arhitektura 1949, 18–22, 47–51. [Google Scholar]
- Turina, V. Combined swimming pool Rijeka—Sušak (In Croatian: Kombinirano plivalište Rijeka—Sušak). Arhitektura 1950, 7–8, 37–45. [Google Scholar]
- GUP—General Urbanistic Plan of the City of Rijeka (In Croatian: GUP—Generalni Urbanistički Plan Grada Rijeke), City of Rijeka. 2007. Available online: https://www.rijeka.hr/teme-za-gradane/stanovanje-i-gradnja/urbanisticko-planiranje/prostorni-planovi/generalni-urbanisticki-plan-grada-rijeke/ (accessed on 15 July 2022).
- SRP—Spatial Regulatory Plan of City of Rijeka (In Croatian: PPU—Prostorni plan uređenja Grada Rijeke). Official Newspaper SN PGŽ 31/03, 26/05). Available online: https://www.rijeka.hr/teme-za-gradane/stanovanje-i-gradnja/urbanisticko-planiranje/prostorni-planovi/prostorni-plan-uredenja-grada-rijeke/ (accessed on 15 July 2022).
- DPR—Detail Plan of Regulation of Delta Central City Park (In Croatian: DPU—Detaljni PLAN Uređenja Središnjeg Gradskog Parka Delta). 2012. Available online: https://www.rijeka.hr/teme-za-gradane/stanovanje-i-gradnja/urbanisticko-planiranje/prostorni-planovi/detaljni-planovi-uredenja/dpu-sredisnjeg-gradskog-parka-delta/ (accessed on 15 July 2022).
- European Commission, Urban Agenda for the EU. Multi-Level Governance in Action. Brussels, European Commission. 2019. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/brochure/urban_agenda_eu_en.pdf (accessed on 10 September 2022).
- Hanna, E.; Comín, F.A. Urban green infrastructure and sustainable development: A review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nations, UN-Habitat, The New Urban Agenda. Nairobi, Kenya. 2020. Available online: https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2020/12/nua_handbook_14dec2020_2.pdf (accessed on 10 September 2022).
- German Sustainable Building Council (In German: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen) Website. Available online: https://www.dgnb.de/en/ (accessed on 10 September 2022).
- BREEAM Website. Available online: https://bregroup.com/products/breeam/ (accessed on 10 September 2022).
- Claver, J.; García-Domínguez, A.; Sebastián, M.A. Multicriteria decision tool for sustainable reuse of industrial heritage into its urban and social environment. Case studies. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Innovative and Responsible Public Procurement in Cities. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/eu-regional-and-urban-development/topics/cities-and-urban-development/priority-themes-eu-cities/innovative-and-responsible-public-procurement-cities_en (accessed on 25 July 2022).
Points of Complexity | Can a Decision-Aid Model Be of Help | Comments on Model Functioning—What It Should Be Like |
---|---|---|
Lack of analytical phase before the decision on planning activity and decision on planning activity and goal forming | Yes | Public procurement for analytical phase and decision on planning Defined in terms of sustainable development Strategic planning—on its own, or supported by a model adequate for spatial scale Involvement of stakeholders and general public—model should be presented to allow easy and transparent communication |
Definition of scenarios | Yes | Public procurement for planning procedure based on defined goals and sustainable development goals The model could give guidelines or be a guideline for alternative scenario creation Model based on sustainable development goals clearly defined |
Evaluation of scenarios | Yes | Criteria based on sustainable development scenarios Definition of values and limit values of the criteria based on good practiced (expert opinion) Easy to communicate with different publics |
Choice of alternative or improvement of alternative | Yes | Ranking and verification of minimal values for criteria |
Integration of sectors | Yes | Model verifies the strategies and plans for every sector in integrative way |
Public participation | Yes | Model allows for easy understanding and communication |
Points of Complexity | Can a Decision-Aid Model Be of Help | Comments on Model Functioning—What It Should Be Like |
---|---|---|
Complex environment | Yes | The model reflects social, environmental, and economical characteristics of landscapes based on sustainable goals Strategic planning—on its own, or supported by a model adequate for spatial scale |
Points of Complexity | Can a Decision-Aid Model Be of Help | Comments on Model Functioning—What It Should Be Like |
---|---|---|
Complex approaches | Yes | The model based on sustainable goals and resilience Strategic planning—on its own, or supported by a model adequate for spatial scale |
Search Query | Construction of Query |
---|---|
Part 1 | “Decision support” OR “Decision-aid” OR “Spatial management” OR “Urban management” OR “Investment planning” OR “Spatial planning” OR “Urban planning” OR “Evaluation of heritage” OR “Heritage evaluation” OR “Spatial evaluation” |
Part 2 | “Sustainable develop *” OR “UN SDG *” OR “United Nations Sustainable development goal *” OR “Sustainable development goal *” OR “Sustainability” OR “Durable development” OR “Resilien *” |
Part 3 | “Historic * urban landscape” OR “Urban landscape” OR “Landscape *” OR “Urban void*” OR “Ex-industrial site *” OR “Brownfield *” OR “Export * cit *” OR “Port *-city” OR “Waterfront” OR “Infrastructure” OR “Mobility” OR “Accessibility” OR “Walkability” OR “Green Ecoservices” OR “Urban ecosystem *” OR “Green roof *” OR “Green façad*” OR “Smart cit *” OR “Public space *” OR “Universal design” OR “Inclusive design”) |
Part 4 | “Risk” OR “Hazard” OR “Uncertaint *” OR “Climate change” |
Final query | Part 1 AND Part 2 AND Part 3 AND Part 4 |
Criteria n. | SDG [1] | Criteria | Direction |
---|---|---|---|
C1 | Goal 1 | Intervention to diminish risk to persons, and communities, especially poor, health, heritage, socioeconomic assets and ecosystems, hazard exposure and vulnerability to disaster (such as water related, seismic, fire, landslides etc.), and increase preparedness for response and recovery | Max |
C2 | Goal 2 | Interventions that do not impact agricultural areas | Min |
C3 | Intervention that positively impacts the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, particularly of vulnerable and indigenous groups, and help sustainable small production and resilience of ecosystems and local animal and plant species | Max | |
C4 | Goal 3 | Interventions to ensure all needs, accessibility, and safety in transport, including public transport | Max |
C5 | Interventions that do not pollute or improve the quality of air, water, and soil (as gasses and articles or ionic and non-ionic radiation, or dust) | Max | |
C6 | Goal 5 | Interventions that promote the use of technologies that allow for equal work and opportunities for everyone | Max |
C7 | Goal 6 | Interventions oriented towards lowering the pollution or that do not pollute water, but that recycle water, purify water, specially to the point of potability | Max |
C8 | Interventions that introduce or renew sanitary services—private and public (such as toilets and showers etc.) | Max | |
C9 | Interventions that allow better access to drinking water | Max | |
C10 | Goal 7 | Interventions that use substantially the renewable energy (contemporary and advanced sustainable resources of energy) and that allow for improvement of energy efficiency (optimum if at least double) | Max |
C11 | Goal 8 | Interventions that would create medium and high paying jobs (IT, financial, tourism, medicine etc.) | Max |
C12 | Interventions that would open new jobs/medium-high labor intensity | Max | |
C13 | Goal 9 | Interventions to develop and/or improve sustainable and resilient infrastructure, affordable and equitable access for all to public spaces and high-quality jobs (including water, transport, IT infrastructures, co-working hubs, universal design approach etc.) and support economic development and well-being | Max |
C14 | Interventions that allow for additional areas for traffic inside the area, and that do not require additional areas for traffic outside the area | Max | |
C15 | Interventions resulting in technologies and materials with low CO2 emission | Max | |
C16 | Goal 11 | Interventions proposing adequate function for the location (such as construction of affordable housing, basic services, inclusive and sustainable industrialization, mobility, recreation, socialization etc.) and its geographic significance | Max |
C17 | Interventions to protect, safeguard and enhance cultural and natural heritage | Max | |
C18 | Interventions that enhance and provide universal and safe access to social space—closed, open and green | Max | |
C19 | Interventions that enhance the communication for local community | Max | |
C20 | Interventions that do not impact negatively on building construction of existing buildings | Max | |
C21 | Interventions that allow for different functions of public spaces—communication, pauses, discussion, access, infrastructure function | Max | |
C22 | Intervention aimed to define identity of spaces, such are places of rest, communication nodes | Max | |
C23 | Interventions that create or improve connections with surrounding area and that define entrances/exits from the area and to the surrounding area (such as city) | Max | |
C24 | Interventions that allow the preservation of quality urban/natural views and cityscape | Max | |
C25 | Interventions that help to define adjacent areas that need definition | Max | |
C26 | Interventions that propose activities based on natural and cultural resources (for example commercial activities) | Max | |
C27 | Interventions that allow accessibility, walkability, universal design, multimodal infrastructures, smart mobility, micro mobility, public and private mobility | Max | |
C28 | Interventions that enhance green services such as parks, green roofs and/or green facades | Max | |
C29 | Interventions that allow recreation and leisure for all, especially based on spatial characteristics (such as natural and cultural heritage) such as waterfront activities, winter sports, festivals etc. | Max | |
C30 | Interventions that halt gentrification or produce it in the least measure | Max | |
C31 | Interventions that allow all year use and local seasonal patterns of use | Max | |
C32 | Interventions that plan mixed functions | Max | |
C33 | The intervention creates safe spaces and/or emergency sheltering in case of disasters | Max | |
C34 | Interventions that allow sustainable waste management | Max | |
C35 | Interventions that reduce or do not add noise, vibrations, glow and light pollution | Max | |
C36 | Interventions that allow for green infrastructure services such as ecological network | Max | |
C37 | Percentage of green areas | Max | |
C38 | Percentage of sport and recreation areas | Max | |
C39 | Percentage of other public areas | Max | |
C40 | Goal 12 | Interventions that do not require additional spaces in natural areas or that improve green areas outside the area | Max |
C41 | Interventions that allow recycling and reuse of materials or energy | Max | |
C42 | Touristic interventions that create jobs and promotes local culture and products, especially through preservation and valorization of cultural heritage | Max | |
C43 | Goal 13 | Interventions that strengthen resilience and mitigate climate change effects, including temperature, wind, overexposure to sun, humidity, sea level rising, river drying, extreme rain and weather in general, and desertification | Max |
C44 | Goal 14 | Interventions that sustainably manage marine and coastal ecosystems, including reducing sea and coast pollution | Max |
C45 | Depending on location, interventions that provide or aid access for small-scale fishers to resources and markets | Max | |
C46 | Interventions that allow uninterrupted activities at seaside and sea | Max | |
C47 | Goal 15 | Interventions that ensure the protection and restoration, and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, and preserve habitats and biodiversity | Max |
C48 | Goal 16 | Interventions that create safe environments (without violence and crimes) | Max |
C49 | Goal 17 | Interventions that have the potential of raise financial resources from different/multiple sources | Max |
Urban Agenda for the EU. Multi-Level Governance in Action (EUMLG) [156] | SPUR Model Principles |
---|---|
Integration of urban policies | Integrative of variety of urban planning approaches in a holistic landscape and resilience perspective |
Identification of regulatory gaps in urban environment | Identification of gaps in decision-making process in spatial planning allowing for the regulatory adaptation (definition of public procurement for holistic strategic landscape planning) |
Measuring the impact of procurements for sustainable goals, culture and security in public spaces | Model allows for such measurements |
Consideration of functional urban areas as units instead of administrative borders | Model considers a landscape based spatial unit |
Reusing spaces | Model is oriented to reuse of already urbanized landscapes |
Circular economy | Model proposes circular principles for variety of circularities |
Definition of land uses that include renaturalizations | Model evaluates renaturalization, resilience and green infrastructure as basic components of the landscape |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mrak, I.; Ambruš, D.; Marović, I. A Holistic Approach to Strategic Sustainable Development of Urban Voids as Historic Urban Landscapes from the Perspective of Urban Resilience. Buildings 2022, 12, 1852. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12111852
Mrak I, Ambruš D, Marović I. A Holistic Approach to Strategic Sustainable Development of Urban Voids as Historic Urban Landscapes from the Perspective of Urban Resilience. Buildings. 2022; 12(11):1852. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12111852
Chicago/Turabian StyleMrak, Iva, Denis Ambruš, and Ivan Marović. 2022. "A Holistic Approach to Strategic Sustainable Development of Urban Voids as Historic Urban Landscapes from the Perspective of Urban Resilience" Buildings 12, no. 11: 1852. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12111852
APA StyleMrak, I., Ambruš, D., & Marović, I. (2022). A Holistic Approach to Strategic Sustainable Development of Urban Voids as Historic Urban Landscapes from the Perspective of Urban Resilience. Buildings, 12(11), 1852. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12111852