The paper investigates the “pressures specific to the twentieth
century that combination of program imposes on architecture and
urban form” (Holl, 2011).
Financial crisis (2007-2008) and its consequences – not just in terms
of urban development – have still not been absorbed/metabolized from
urban settlements, also because of still un-solved causes that generated
the problem (in terms of economic tools, financial rules, real estate
procedures, etc) (Rossi, G. 2011).
Large post-industrial sites’ reuse, under used districts for offices
and services, housing districts and urban peripheries represent the
result of last decades’ globalization processes, real estate and finance
driven processes, property speculation, etc
The complexity of contemporary society implies the creation of new
categories of spaces in which design processes are reversed: social
forms and communities’ needs provide reason and meaning to
architectural transformations.
Participation procedures, contractual communities, reappropriation
processes are some of the tools that through different
disciplines could have strong impact on architectural figures and forms.
Design tools and procedure are also rapidly changing: on the
contrary of what traditional design processes prescribe, the managing
of project scales is changed: the approach "from large to small scale"
could be substituted by iterative processes, and urban links or
connections derive both from territorial approach and interior spaces’
definition. Urban analysis and design tools should be updated: sections
and three of four dimensional design take precedent over plan layouts.
Process reveals itself as more important than mere shapes, and
architecture show again its being a science in strong relationship with
society
