Walking the Roman Street: An Assessment of Rome's Walkability- May 2012

WALKING

The Roman Street: An Assessment of Rome’s Walkability CRP 4160

Charles Bailey Emily Gould Spenser Gruenenfelder Michelle Kim

Cornell in Rome

Spring 2012

Walkability is the extent to which the built environment accommodates the presence of people and enables pedestrians to utilize the street as a resource. This study evaluates walkability in Rome by identifying and examining four street types: the Medieval Street, the Post-Unification Secondary Road, the Post-Unification Artery, and the Ancient Consular Road. Case studies of Via della Lungaretta, Corso Vittorio Emanuele, Via Principe Amadeo, and Via Prenestina were used as subjects by which to assess a number of criteria shown in the literature to impact street aesthetics and functionality.

It was found that each subject street, as a representative of a type, satisfied some of these criteria to varying degrees. The study concludes with policy suggestions for place-makers to consider in addressing the walkability of Rome.

Table of Contents Introducing Walkability

6

The Four Roman Streets

11

Evaluating Rome’s Streets

36

Policy Suggestions

42

Introducing Walkability Defining Walkability

W

alkability characterizes the pedestrian’s experience of moving about a city. Whether walkers aim to reach a specific destination or are simply on a leisurely stroll, a host of factors affect the ease or pleasure associated with their experiences. Most of these factors fall within one of two categories: 1) The aesthetic qualities of the street encompass properties of appearance, such as building heights, enclosure, pavement type, maintenance, lighting, and cleanliness.

2) The functionality of the street encompasses how the street is utilized by pedestrians and includes proximity to gathering spaces, availability of transportation routes, the presence of nearby landmarks, and access to goods and services.

We propose that although there is no single ideal combination of these factors, it is both possible and useful to identify trends in what makes a place more or less walkable. Walkability is important for the functioning of an urban space for many reasons, and we highlight a few below.

Environmental Benefits. In 2000, Urbanistica reported that most urban areas have evolved from small “pedestrian cities” with dense centers into more sprawling entities that are best labeled as “automobile cities.”1 Since this transition from “urban concentration” to “urban decentralization”2 has correlated with an increased carbon footprint, walkability has become an

increasingly important issue in discussions of sustainable transportation.

Today, traffic is responsible for about 50% of atmospheric pollution in cities such as Rome.3 Just as reducing traffic congestion and pollution on a street improves its walkability, choosing walking as an alternative to driving reduces pollution levels.4 Further, if designers and builders keep in mind the needs of walkers, the act of building new roads does not necessarily harm the natural environment. A road conducive to walking promotes good air quality, the balance of the water cycle, reclamation of polluted land, and general biodiversity.5 Moreover, studying walkability can tease out issues of environmental justice. For instance, one study that aimed to Walking and cycling distances in selected European countries and determine a “walkability score” for the United States expressed in kilometers traveled per person per Source: European Commission’s Directorate-General Vancouver used residential density, yearforin 2000.

Energy and Transport, the Danish Ministry of Transport, and United States Department of Transportation. intersection density, retail floor-area, and land-use mix found a relation between income trends, walkability, and air pollution.6 In many areas, a lack of walkability may be an important warning indicator of other more egregious flaws in the urban setting, like the presence of caustic substances.

11

Public Health Benefits. Making urban spaces more walkable could ameliorate the obesity crisis. In 2008, a study published in the Journal of Physical Activity and Health found that countries with the highest levels of active

transportation (walking included) had the lowest obesity rates.7 Italy had a 9.8% obesity rate in 2005, a figure that contrasts markedly with the 33.9% obesity rate in the U.S. reported in 2006.8 Although correlation does not imply causation, in the United States, health problems have been repeatedly associated with suburban sprawl. For instance, a 2007 issue of Science News told the story of Lawrence Frank, who moved from Atlanta, Georgia to Vancouver and noted how the multitude of destination stores, restaurants, and museums in Vancouver encouraged physical activity. (His former home in Atlanta had been near to only one restaurant.)9 In Europe, restrictions on car use, more convenient facilities for walking, and bike stations that coordinate transit with walking encourage active transportation,10 which may contribute to these differences.

Cultural Benefits. Walking is a particularly essential component of Italian culture. The Italian tradition of the passeggiata has roots in medieval times, when families would go outside on Sundays for a stroll in the park or a lap down a long via. Doing so demonstrated status and showed off the family wealth to acquaintances and friends. The Italian notion of walkability therefore encompasses the use of the street as a space for social interaction and activity, not just for transport on foot. Today, Italian youth are increasingly less likely to engage in these sorts of walks – especially as the periphery is built with few walkable features, with long distances between destinations and many roads that do not lead anywhere directly.12 The historic nature of the city center’s urban landscape is hence linked to the practice of the leisurely passeggiata.

The Challenge of Planning Rome: A Context for Walkability

Rome’s ancient roots have long clashed with the perceived need to modernize the city. On one hand, the city is an archaeological haven, and urban developers respect it as a cultural artifact: a proposal approved by Rome’s administration on 20 October, 2000 noted that Rome’s structure should speak to the “values of history and nature as inspiration for contributing to creating identity.”13 On the other hand, because the urban landscape in the center evolved in a largely unplanned manner during the Middle Ages, it renders many modern activities difficult – a frustration that has inspired efforts to completely ‘gut’ parts of the historic center, such as Mussolini’s sventramenti clearance projects (literally, “disemboweling”).14 This conflict between the ancient and the modern is perhaps more pronounced in Rome than in other European cities because Rome occupies and administers 129,000 hectares, an area greater than that of all the other large metropolitan cities of Italy combined (Milan, Genoa, Venice, Bologna, Naples, Bari, Catania, and Palermo).15 Such a grand scale exaggerates infrastructural inefficiency.

Because Rome’s population boom occurred well after the booms of cities like London and Paris, Rome was subject to a different set of approaches to planning than were its European counterparts. When the city became the capital of the Italian State in 1870 after the Risorgimento (unification), it still only had 200,000 residents, so a complete spatial restructuring was not necessary.16 By 1900, when the population finally soared, the dominant philosophy in urban planning was that developers

7

should focus on the periphery instead of reshaping the center. Thus, Rome’s center was never re-ordered into a grid-like or otherwise more modern layout.17 The two predominant types of planning regimes it underwent were the Umbertine and Fascist. The Umbertine practice was to clear areas around the Capitoline Hill to create the Victor Emmanuel II Monument and Via Cavour, and the Fascist attitude was to clear the area around the Imperial Forums, excavate ruins, evict residents, and build EUR.18

According to Urbanistica, this relatively late growth led to the “‘genetic anomaly’” of Italian cities: because they grew after the railroad boom of the 19th century, rail networks did not support growth, and people instead relied more heavily on highways for mobility.19 Rome’s first subway only went into operation in 1955, and today Rome has a very high zona traffico limitato traffic regulation. rate of automobile ownership (over 700 cars per 21 1,000 persons). The ZTL (limtied traffic zone), which restricts automobile access to residents of given areas, was established to reduce congestion; nonetheless, in recent planning discussions, streamlining the “mobility system” has been given top priority.22 Overall, Rome’s urban landscape can be called “polycentric,”23 implying that there is a distinct disconnect between activities in the periphery and in the center. The prominence of road-based transit means that the relationship between pedestrians and cars is an indispensable focal point for studying Rome’s walkability, and the distant relationship between the periphery and the center suggests that walkability is experienced very differently in each setting.

Walkability in the Literature

A number of prior works framed our approach to investigating walkability in Rome. Kevin Lynch’s The Invisible City provided context for the street’s function in fostering urban identity. Interviews with citizens of Boston, Los Angeles, and Jersey City indicated that the paths on which one travels are one of the most important tools that citizens use to conceptualize and order an urban space.24 A path may become special for a number of reasons: frequency of use for commute to a destination,25 concentration of special uses along the path (such as a concentration of shops),26 distinctive characteristics of building facades, proximity to important points in the city, intersections with other streets,27 and directionality created by features such as curvature.28 If a city has no major paths, or if those major paths are not distinctive, the walking citizen can become confused by his surroundings.29 Thus, the urban artery is important in that it enables pedestrians to anchor their journey through the street system.

Because walkability is about studying how pedestrians perceive their surroundings, also of note are analyses of the process of vision.

Lynch defines the “environmental image” as a combination of “identity” (recognizing objects as separate entities), “structure,” (discerning how the object relates to other objects), and “meaning” (assigning a significance to the object in the urban context).30 Similarly, Lise Bek’s description of vision as a process, rather than a visual snapshot, discusses it as a “reception of meaning” rather than a “perception of form.”31 It is not enough for a street to be aesthetically pleasing for it to be walkable, because the walker’s

perception of his surroundings involves more than taking a visual snapshot of the vista before him. Rather, there must be a dialogue between the street’s aesthetic and its functionality that enables pedestrians to assign it significance in their life.

Many works have aimed to identify criteria that can make a place more walkable. One such endeavor is a paper with guidelines for the Pedestrian Environment Review System, which identified the following five “C”’s to explain walkability:

Convenience – routes should facilitate the desired journey without undue deviation or difficulty

Connectivity – routes should link origins and destinations

Conviviality – they should be pleasant to use

Coherence – routes should be continuous

Conspicuity – their design should allow the user to be seen by, and to see, other pedestrians and vehicles to promote personal security and road safety.32

These criteria serve as helpful overarching guidelines. The Via dei Fori Imperiali in Rome, for instance, could be deemed convenient, connective, coherent, and conspicuous, but its conviviality is dubious – walking amongst crowds of tourists and being heckled by street vendors can be an unpleasant experience. However, a framework identifying even more specific features would be even more effective in devising criteria for walkability.

Much of what makes a street’s walkability difficult to define is the

fact that streets are about social encounters and public access, not just utility.33 In Great Streets, Allan B. Jacobs emphasized the fact that the street is a political space whose “goodness” is determined more by its social and economic qualities than its physical design.34 Not only should a great street help facilitate seeing and meeting all diverse kinds of people,35 but it should also encourage citizen participation to stop to talk, sit, and watch the goings-on in the neighborhood.36 An example of one such space in Rome might be the streets surrounding Piazza Vittorio Emanuele, where there is immense interaction among different immigrant groups. According to Mario Spada, the former director of participatory planning at the Comune di Roma, the space can be used as the population sees fit and enable all kinds of exchanges because it is flexible, not because of any particular architectural feature.37

As Mr. Spada mentioned, however, a poorly designed space will almost certainly inhibit walkability.38 In Rome, design can be extremely problematic at the interface between pedestrian and automobile traffic. In 2006, pedestrian fatalities comprised 14% of all deaths caused by road traffic in 14 European countries.39 To study this trend, in 2010, a study in European Transportation “crossing safety index” flowchart for evaluating local pedestrian safety. Courtesy European Transportation Review.

9

Review devised an index for “crossing safety� to assess the ease of pedestrian crossing.40 Safety was defined in terms of four categories: Spatial and Temporal Design, Day-time Visibility, Night-time Visibility, and Accessibility.41 Night-time visibility was given the greatest weight (41%), and the methodology was used to evaluate 215 pedestrian crossings in 17 European cities. The flowchart on the previous page shows a scheme representing their findings. Safety was distilled into factors of spatial and temporal design, day- and night-time visibility, and accessibility; and each of these factors were subdivided into specific components. This type of framework serves as a model for the more holistic framework of walkability that our study compiles.

characterized by their narrow width, abundance of storefronts at street level, and uniform building architecture.

3) The Medieval Street: after a period of grid-like planning inspired

by Hellenistic influence during the 2nd century, Rome in the Middle Ages saw a period of unplanned growth where winding streets and asymmetrical marketplaces were the norm. The medieval street is the vestigial product of this development.

Methodology

4) The Ancient Consular Road: This type of street is comprised of the main surface roads which lead into Rome from the periphery. Dating from ancient times, these streets are now home to the products of the residential building boom of the 1960s.

Four principal street types were constructed to more easily classify most streets in Rome. While not a comprehensive typology, these kinds of streets were chosen for study because of their frequency within the city and their vastly different levels of walkability.

1) The Post-Unification Artery: This is the wide, straight thoroughfare cut through the city’s medieval fabric once Rome ascended as capital of the new nation of Italy. This street type has evolved to comprise some of the fastest and busiest vehicle routes through central Rome today.

2) The Post-Unification Secondary Road: Laid out in a gridlike pattern, streets of this type feed into their larger arterial brothers. They are

The map opposite depicts the streets chosen for closer analysis in the following sections. The dimmed streets represent a small sampling of analogous streets to help contextualize each street type.

The Four Roman Streets

Via io Fab sim Mas

Prati

o

el ia d

ne

o Trit

Termini Station

Historic Center

l Wa

Via

y

de

iG

N

Pap a

via

Vi a

the

az

io na

le

V

PR

IN

CI

PE

corso VITTORIO EMANUELE II

iub

bo

na

ri

TINA

NES a PRE

vi

AM

AD

EO Pigneto

via della LUNGARETTA

Tr a

ste

ve re

Via

Cas

ilina

Prenestino

io

c ac

t

s Te

Via

a

ss

Ale

ro

d an

lt Vo

Medieval Street subject of study analogous street 19th-Century Secondary Road subject of study analogous street 19th-Century Artery subject of study analogous street

0

1 mi.

Ancient Consular Road subject of study analogous street

Colli Albani Via

Tu s

co

lan

a

via della LUNGARETTA

The Medieval Street

Via Della Lungaretta

One of the best examples of the transformation of a street from ancient to medieval to modern is Via della Lungaretta, which began as an imperial intraurban highway.

Originally entitled Via Aurelia Verus, it was renamed Via Transtiberina in the fifteenth century, and then again renamed Via della Lungaretta. Before Viale di Trastevere was formed as the main thoroughfare in Trastevere, this street was considered one of the primary arterials in the neighborhood and went in a straight west-to-east line from the bottom of the Janiculum

Hill to the Tiber River.46 The street is primarily a route for pedestrians and a limited amount of local vehicles.

Aesthetics Via della Lungaretta’s charming nature is reminiscent of small street in a Tuscan town, with its narrow, cobblestone path and light streaming into the street from above low-rise buildings. This street is full of pedestrians, many tourists, at all hours. The stretch that was studied was approximately 630 meters from west to east and reached from Piazza di Santa Maria in Trastevere, across Viale di Trastevere all the way to Piazza in Piscinula near the Ponte Palatino.

The section on the eastern flank of Via Trastevere was also included to examine any differences between the two parts of the streets that was once a continuous, uninterrupted length of street.

The narrow width of the Via della Lungaretta does not impede the walker’s ability to move along the street. With a large portion of the street designated solely for pedestrians by concrete barriers, the pace of the street is much slower than that of a street intended for vehicle traffic. Crossing the larger Viale di Trastevere is facilitated by a well-marked crosswalk and stop light, enabling pedestrians to access both sides of the street with ease.

As in its ancient past, this street is mostly straight with a small degree of curvature to it at each end of the observation area. Few streets intersect

The classic curvilinear medieval street layout. Courtesy Michelle Kim.

Vehicle barriers. Courtesy Michelle Kim.

The Medieval Street has its origin in ancient Roman times and was periodically modified by construction after the fall of the Roman Empire. As a result of their more organically formed network than those of other street types in Rome, these streets have a curvilinear and disorderly configuration that remains today. Via dei Giubbonari and Via del Governo Vecchio in the Field of Mars are some examples of streets that originate from ancient times and appear as they do today as a result of intermittent construction over time. Many of these streets exist near the historic center of Rome, as this is the only area in Rome that was consistently inhabited throughout history from ancient times.

The Medieval Street

15

Via della Lungaretta to transit. Viale di Trastevere, its bisector, has a number 8 tram line running its length from the city center to Casaletto and facilitates pedestrian traffic from Trastevere in and out of the historic center. Though the tram cuts through the middle of Viale di Trastevere, there is an adequate crosswalk and stop light to facilitate movement across the street from one side of Via della Lungaretta to the other.

Overall, the street appears well-kept, with planters and vines lining buildings, despite the poor maintenance of a number of buildings on both the eastern and western sections of the street. Although this street is merely two blocks from the high-traffic Lungotevere Raffaello Sanzio and also intersects the busy Viale di Trastevere, vehicle noise on the street is limited and makes the street refreshingly detached from the bustle of the city.

In addition to the many restaurants and cafes that line the streets, there are fairly limited services on the western part of the street besides a pharmacy and a bookstore. However, all the services necessary to residents are located in close proximity to Via della Lungaretta. On the eastern portion of the street, there are far fewer restaurants and more small clothing and gift boutiques, as well as some produce stands used by locals. Although the eastern side has a more diverse set of services, there is less space to sit and relax, indicating that this portion of the street is not viewed as a destination, like the western side, but more as a thoroughfare.

Functionality

Although Via della Lungaretta is considered a small street, its role as a connector from busier areas to its primary landmark, Chiesa di Santa Maria in Trastevere, allows it access Poor maintenance stands out amidst medieval charm. Courtesy Michelle Kim.

One of many commercial outlets catering to tourists. Courtesy Michelle Kim.

Via della Lungaretta, and those that do are extremely narrow vicoli; they do not visually direct the pedestrian off the course of the street. Moving into the large Piazza di Santa Maria in Trastevere, pedestrians are immediately drawn into the center near the fountain, because the seating for two restaurants that abut the piazza redirect pedestrian traffic into the piazza.

Many small piazzas with vehicle parking and some restaurants frame the street at various intervals, allowing gathering space and light to flow more freely into the street. This is a highly active street, with a large number of pedestrians utilizing the street as a destination rather than as a mere path.

Many stop at different restaurants and boutiques, and a number of tourists stop to look at trinkets from street vendors.

The Medieval Street

46’

17’ Perspective, Via della Lungaretta looking west near Piazza di San Rufina.

17

via PRINCIPE AMADEO

The Post-Unification Secondary Road

Via Principe Amadeo

Via Principe Amadeo, two blocks west of Termini Station, is an especially notable example of this street type. Its 1.16-kilometer span is straight for its entirety, ending at Via del Viminale to the northwest and Via Cairoli to the southeast. It also has two major bisecting streets, Via Cavour and Via Gioberti.

Because of its proximity to Termini, the northern end is lined with hotels serving the major transportation hub of the city. To the south, the buildings become increasingly more residential and the street eventually ends parallel to Piazza Vittorio Emanuele. Toward the center of the street is the Piazza Manfredi Fanti, a rectangular wooded piazza defined as “an interruption of the fabric mesh of isolati of the new quartiere; a gap in the geometric checkerboard design, no different from that which determines the other squares of the neighborhood, Piazza Vittorio Emanuele, Piazza Dante, and Piazza Guglielmo Pepe.�47 These are all examples of piazzas that signify breaks into the geometric pattern of street and edifices.

Aesthetics Engaged storefronts on a sidewalk with multiple programs. Courtesy Spenser Gruenenfelder.

Post-Unification Seondary Roads were often laid out as parallel streets to major contemporary arteries and thoroughfares. Constructed during a period of large urban development in Rome, these streets are built on a gridded system, as opposed to the meandering medieval street types found around the Field of Mars. This more orderly street structure allows for easy access and wayfinding, with each end of each street ending at a major arterial. Streets of this type include Via Aldo Manuzio and Via Alessandro Volta in Testaccio, Via Angelo Poliziano on the Esquiline Hill, and Via Fabio Massimo in Prati.

As part of a gridded street system there is a clear directionality to the layout of the street. The buildings are mid-rise, ranging around seven to eight floors on both sides of the street. The buildings seem high, but there is much street engagement on the ground level with shops, hotel entrances, and restaurants at the north end. Via Principe Amadeo is a one-way street that alternates direction at each subsequent intersection, further emphasizing its use as a secondary street in which a car is not expected to stay on it across its entire length.

The sidewalks are wide, at eight feet, and give ample space for pedestrian traffic. There are also many tents along the sidewalk for the outdoor seating areas of hotels, restaurants, and other cafes.

During the day, there are many people along the sidewalks, although vehicular traffic is not as common, with the street primarily used for parking off the main arteries of Via del Viminale, Via Cavour, Via Gioberti, and Via Cairoli. Most of the moving vehicular traffic is along these streets.

There are many opportunities to cross the street at designated pedestrian crosswalks or in other places with little traffic along the one-way lanes.

There are often double-parked cars, which makes it difficult to get across the street at undesignated crosswalks.

The Post-Unification Secondary Road 21

Via Principe Amadeo

Via Principe Amadeo’s position on a grid eases wayfinding, especially to nearby landmarks and services. In terms of security features, there are overhead street lights across the length of the road as well as many lights outside the hotels and shops along the street. There is always a presence of people on the street coming from the hotels, heading to such landmarks as Termini Station, sitting at the outdoor seating in front of the restaurants, or just strolling.

The upkeep of the area is very good at the north end with the many hotels keeping the area in good physical repair. The only permanent greenery is found at the Piazza Manfredi Fanti and in two courtyards of adjacent apartment complexes. This is mostly due to Transit lines pass easily through the gridded streets of Postthe limited width of the street and Unification Rome. Courtesy Spenser Gruenenfelder. sidewalks preveting easy installation of plantings. The restaurants and hotels make up for any lack of street trees by having planting beds by the doors and along the outdoor seating.

Functionality

Via Principe Amadeo is in a very central location near Termini Station, allowing for much access to public transportation, by walking two blocks to Termini, a major transportation hub. Augmenting the trains and trams

are many bus routes along Via Cavour, Via Gioberti, and Via Napoleone III that intersect or are directly parallel to Via Principe Amadeo. Also in the neighborhood are the Repubblica, Termini, and Vittorio Emanuele metro stops on the A line.

It is in close proximity to other landmarks as well such as the Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore, Piazza Vittorio Emanuele, Piazza della Repubblica, and the Teatro dell’Opera. Accessing these landmarks of the neighborhood is very simple due to the gridded street system. There is also easy access to important goods and services along Via Principe Amadeo, including to stores, shops, social services, and the green space of Piazza Manfredi Fanti. Other services are easily found along close adjacent streets.

The Post-Unification Secondary Road

85’

8’

25’

8’

Perspective, Via Principe Amadeo looking northeast near Via Cavour.

23

corso VITTORIO EMANUELE II

The Post-Unification Artery

Corso Vittorio Emanuele II

Post-Unification Arteries were built, naturally, after the unification of Italy in 1861. With Rome as the capital of the newly established nation, there was an anticipation of increased pedestrian and carriage traffic through the city’s historic center. The construction of roads such as Corso Vittorio Emanuele II, Via Nazionale, Via Tritone, and Via Cavour required the demolition, modification, or relocation of thousands of buildings, some of which dated back to medieval times, in the roads’ intended paths. The more cultural or historic value the building was deemed to have, the more care was taken in preserving it during the construction of the arteries.48

Numerous examples of this kind of preservation occur on Corso Vittorio Emanuele, the subject for the study of this major street type. This particular street is the principal east-west thoroughfare through the Field of Mars, the historic heart of Rome where most of the city’s tourist sites are found and the only continuously occupied area of the historic center of the city. The four lanes of Corso V. Emanuele connect Piazza Venezia in the east with the Vatican in the west. The road is a principal route for public and private buses, taxis, and private automobiles through central Rome.

Aesthetics

Corso Vittorio Emanuele II’s loud, bright intensity contrasts sharply with the tranquility of its narrow medieval neighbors. Its appearance remains consistent for its entire length, with imposing Renaissance- and Baroqueera palaces and churches pushing seemingly to its very edge. It is one of very few streets of such carrying capacity in the Field of Mars, and as

such it receives a tremendous amount of vehicle and pedestrian traffic. The portion observed for the purposes of this study was a half-mile (sevenhundred meter) stretch from Largo Argentina in the east to the Chiesa Nuova in the west.

The Corso’s width diminishes the sense of enclosure that would normally come from walking between buildings averaging around a hundred feet tall. The east-west orientation of the street, and the lack of significant interruptions in the building fabric on either side, means that the street sits in either intense sun or deep shade, depending on the time of day and side of the street. Whether it is cold and windy or hot and bright, the pedestrian on this street will feel it more strongly on the Corso than on a narrower, more curvilinear street.

The street is designed, first and foremost, for easy and fast vehicle travel. This characteristic manifests itself in a number of ways and has direct implications for the walking experience. The narrow medieval cross streets, with few traffic controls necessary for pedestrian safety, make walking along one side of the Corso a simpler affair than crossing it. Sidewalks are of smooth asphalt, but are too narrow for the amount of pedestrian traffic they receive.

At many points along the street, a historic façade juts into the sidewalk, Tourists spill off of Corso V.E. II’s crowded sidewalks. Courtesy Charles Bailey.

The Post-Unification Artery

27

Corso Vittorio Emanuele II narrowing it further or eliminating it altogether. Crossing the street is a tense and unwelcome experience. The street’s width, the speed of its traffic, and its dearth of crosswalks forces pedestrians to crowd around just a few signalized intersections. The narrow sidewalk width means that they pour into the street while waiting to cross, making a stressful situation dangerous.

Despite its issues with pedestrian movement, actual navigation of the Corso is simple, especially to a walker remotely familiar with Rome.

Signage directs visitors to nearby landmarks, and often the only possible directions in which to walk are east and west if on the street, and north and south if walking on a perpendicular street.

The ambiguously accessible spaces commonly found on other Roman street types are absent on the Corso: if there is a wall, the path is blocked, and if not, This palace facade, preserved during the road’s construction, the path is open. narrows its adjacent sidewalk to roughly two feet. Courtesy C. B.

Corso Vittorio Emanuele’s high levels of traffic of all types makes it a hub of activity. Even late at night, most pedestrians would feel as though other eyes are present on the street, if not from buildings then from other street users. Lamps, hung from wires strung over the street between buildings, add to the street’s security. A drawback is the lack of engagement of the street from the many businesses that line it. On Sundays and late at

95’

4’ 6”

47’

7’

Perspective, Corso V. Emanuele II looking west at the Palazzo della Cancelleria.

The Post-Unification Artery

In the ancient streets of central Rome, plantings or green spaces of any type are at a remarkably high premium. This holds true on the Corso. The only plant life to be found in the half-mile stretch walked for study was the few trees lining the Piazza della Chiesa Nuova. The rest of the street’s materials consists of asphalt, travertine, and other concrete-like surfaces. The façades of the many palaces lining the Corso are severe, thick, and heavy. The lack of windows at eye level creates a sterile and uninviting environment for the pedestrian. While eyesores such as graffiti and litter are few on the Corso, the pollution-stained monolithic palace façades seem almost as visually unpleasant.

Excellent transit access comes at the price of packed sidewalks. Courtesy C. B.

night, many of them shut their doors, turning storefronts into disconcerting metallic walls.

its length, offering access to the trains, subways, trams, and other buses which circulate throughout the city and connect it to the rest of Italy. An abundance of bars, restaurants, and travel agencies lines the street, serving tourists’ needs more than adequately. Innumerable landmarks line and surround the Corso, making it a destination in its own right. The services city residents need for daily life, however, such as groceries, post offices, and other goods stores, are much harder to find, suggesting that this corner of Rome has few Romans actually living in it. There is almost nowhere to stop, relax, and enjoy the city.

Functionality

As the main street of the Field of Mars, Corso Vittorio Emanuele benefits from excellent connectivity to its vicinity and the rest of Rome.

Much of the street’s high traffic comes from the many bus lines that run

29

via PRENESTINA

The Ancient Consular Road

Via Prenestina

An exemplary street of the consular type, Via Prenestina, constitutes an east-west axis that begins at Porta Maggiore and continues for approximately twenty miles to the city of Palestrina (in ancient times, Praeneste).50 Via Prenestina was originally named for the road head Praeneste, and it is the modern form of the ancient Via Praenestina that linked the Tiber to the eastern hills. Notable ruins, such as the Torrione Prenestino tumulus tomb, Columbarium in Largo Preneste, the Villa dei Gordiani, and the necropolis at Osteria dell’Osa51 contribute a historic feel that coexists with the modern, sometimes-industrial architecture. Nearest Rome’s center, Via Prenestina constitutes the northern border of Pigneto and Centocelle; it falls south of the Portonaccio and Tiburtina areas.

Aesthetics

moving eastward from the city center.

Where the street begins in the west, buildings are constructed close together with an urban, industrial feel. Moving eastward, edifices become more interspersed with open space and countryside, and the street assumes the ambiance of a scenic highway. The juxtaposition of mid20th century architecture with the various ruins is a unique experience of the Roman periphery.

Building heights are relatively low, and most structures have a maximum of eight stories. The street itself is wide, such that during daylight hours, the sun beats down to pedestrian level and illuminates the space.

The width also prevents interplay between both sides of the street, as it is not possible to walk on one side and observe the activities or potential destinations on the other. Pedestrian walkways line both sides of the street and vary in width, but most are wide enough for the comfortable passage of walkers in both directions simultaneously.

Via Prenestina combines a modern architectural aesthetic with a sense of open space and timelessness. The street changes dramatically

The presence of greenery along Via Prenestina increases Wide streets with impenetrable barriers make cross-street interaction impossible. Courtesy Emily Gould.

Via Prenestina’s midcentury apartment blocks and wide intersections at night. Courtesy E. Gould.

Streets of the Ancient Consular Route type were historically transport arteries from Rome to nearby towns, and they continue to serve as important throughways. They are wide, are linked to public transport by tram or metro, and have well-maintained, concrete pavement suited to automobiles. Often, they serve as landmarks in that they bound a neighborhood or enable mass transport through its center, and nearby housing is typically apartmentstyle and modern. Via Aurelia, Via Cassia, Via Flaminia, Via Salaria, Via Nomentana, Via Tiburtina, Via Casalina, Via Appia, Via Ardeatina, and Via Ostiense are some examples.49

The Ancient Consular Road

33

Via Prenestina Construction walls block pedestrian paths. Courtesy E. Gould.

clearly signal for cars to stop and change frequently enough to permit stress-free crossing across the width of the Via. At others, especially when major streets feed onto Prenestina, the tram constitutes a barrier, and the lack of lights necessitates waiting a long time for an opening in the through traffic. These major intersections often serve as the dominant focal points of the vista along the street, so the pedestrian can use them as landmarks.

In various areas, there are bouts of fenced-off construction that interrupt the continuity of the walking space. Banisters offset the trafficked street from the pedestrian walkway, and parked cars create a barrier between the walkway and the street. In some stretches, cars are parked such that they protrude from the curb perpendicularly, so they increase the sense of distance between the walkway and the opposite side of the street. They also increase the separation between the walker and the heavy flow of traffic that moves along the Via.

Pavement is concrete, well-maintained, and suited to automobile flow; signage is occasionally difficult to locate due to the street width; and the street is generally straight. At night, lamps are scarce, and graffiti that could be considered decorative during the light of day takes on a more menacing character. Dumpsters are found along the street in some areas, and litter is not a significant presence. Many housing projects line the street. The ground stories of buildings are occupied by small cafĂŠs and boutiques. The street serves as a commercial hub for the residential areas that flank it. There are also a number of gas stations and supermarkets.

Functionality

Ease of crossing the street varies depending on the intersection.

At designated points, traffic lights

The 5, 4, and 19 trams follow Via Prenestina together until Tor de’ Schiavi, at which point the 5 and 19 veer southward into Centocelle while Wide crosswalks facilitate movement. Courtesy Emily Gould.

Wide open strecthes of pavement at intersections are daunting to approach. Courtesy E. Gould.

moving eastward. Nearest Porta Maggiore, trees are landscaped intermittently along the tram route at the center of the street, and umbrella pines are increasingly present along the street continuing past Via Tor de’ Schiavi. These pines contribute to the highway ambiance but also gave the sense that this street leads somewhere important, referencing the passage of time and the rich history of the route.

The Ancient Consular Road the 14 continues to Togliatti. These trams provide accessibility, but they also pose an obstacle to street crossing as they are, in places, offset from each half of the street by a metal barrier. A number of buses also run along sections of Via Prenestina, and parking spaces are widely available. Thus, the street is tailored to be a quick path from starting point to destination.

There are not many features inviting the pedestrian to turn off of Via Prenestina to the smaller streets that border it. Boutiques and coffee shops continue to line streets to the north and south, but the walker must generally have a destination in mind, as these places are not clearly identifiable. Adjacent green spaces, such as the Villa Giordini, add to the presence of natural features, and there are numerous supermarkets and gas stations.

Via Prenestina also has a very diverse pedestrian demographic. People of all ages can be observed out and about around 5 pm, and ethnicities are varied. Although there are not many stopping points along the street that are designed for gathering, passersby are able to pause and interact when necessary. For the most part, however, walkers are out for the purpose of reaching a destination, such as returning home from grocery shopping.

85’

Perspective, Via Prenestina looking east near Viale della Serenissima.

8’

95’

12’

35

Evaluating Rome’s Streets

One significant challenge in determining a particular site’s walkability is the subjectivity of the definition of walkability itself -- there is no one formula to make a street walkable. A street may be designed according to specific guidelines to be “walkable,” but it may still be an unpleasant place to walk. This study has attempted to identify a number of industry standards with which to assess walkability, with the goal of producing recommendations for policy changes in the city of Rome. The following section dissects poignant characteristics of each of the streets chosen for study and uses these standards to assess their walkability.

Via della Lungaretta

A pedestrian on Via della Lugnaretta is conspicuous. Courtesy Michelle Kim.

Via Principe Amadeo

With wide sidewalks along primarily one-way and one-lane streets, Via Principe Amadeo is designed to be pedestrian-friendly. Its placement within a grid system means that it is entirely straight, with many crossing perpendicular streets for easy access to nearby landmarks and parallel streets. As a secondary street, its main use is for parking and accessing the hotels and residences along it. Because of its secondary use for vehicular traffic, it allows more and safer uses for pedestrians. Its proximity to Termini Station provides easy access to many forms of public transportation, including local buses, tram lines, metro lines, and train lines to the outskirts of Rome and other cities.

A strong benefit to the walkability of Via Principe Amadeo is the large number of tents lining the sidewalk for outdoor seating from the hotel restaurants

Hotels, cafes, and commuters coincide peacefully on Via P. Amadeo. Courtesy S. Gruenenfelder.

Via della Lungaretta is largely geared towards pedestrian traffic and is more a social space than a pathway. Both eastern and western portions of the street begin and end with piazzas, and several other piazzas branch off in between. These piazzas formally serve as gathering spaces that are fused with the street. With a slow pace to the street and an abundance of restaurants, cafes and street vendors, pedestrians are not pressured to rush along the street and are more likely to interact with their environment.

In the context of the disorderly medieval street system, these streets have no consistent pattern and are thus seemingly difficult to navigate from inside a vehicle.

However, according to Mario Spada, the former director of participatory planning at the Comune di Roma, Romans still prefer to drive these streets than attempt to navigate them on foot. However, these medieval streets are generally walkable, because they are lined with various interesting destinations and services that promote activity along the street.

and cafes. They divide the pedestrian uses from the street, are aesthetically pleasing, and in good weather are always active.

Many streets in Rome are of Via Principe Amadeo’s type. From Testaccio to Prati to San Lorenzo, these streets are home to much of central Rome’s population. Their geometric simplicity, narrow width, and clear delineation of pedestrian and vehicular uses allow them to meet many of the established standards of walkability. There is some variation within the Post-Unification Secondary Road type in terms of states of upkeep and number of services and amenities. The basic design of this street type, however, is consistent throughout the places in Rome where it is applied.

Corso Vittorio Emanuele

An ideally walkable street is both a path and a destination. Corso Vittorio Emanuele is an excellent path, but a poor destination. Functionally, its transit connections, continuity, and traffic capacity fully satisfy the standards for walkability established in the study. Pedestrians pack its sidewalks, and its bus stops facilitate travel all over the city. Hundreds of famous landmarks lie within easy walking distance, as do the many other services that cater to tourists, such as restaurants and bars.

Corso’s utility, however, comes at the steep price of aesthetics.

Heavy, dark facades, impossibly narrow sidewalks in proportion to the large volume of pedestrians, loud traffic noise, and difficult crossings make the experience of using this path through the Field of Mars one to be dreaded.

The nineteenth-century practice of carving through the medieval urban fabric may have worked in an age of horses and carriages, but the automobile’s

size and noise fit the same spaces awkwardly today. The same walkability issues that plague Corso Vittorio Emanuele also affect other streets of its type.

These streets are the ones that welcome many visitors to Rome; the Via Nazionale, Via Cavour, and Via Labicana all connect to Termini Station. They all share the transit connectivity and access to goods, services, and landmarks afforded

by Corso Vittorio Emanuele, but fail to meet the basic aesthetic standards for ideal walkability.

It is regrettable that these roads, This heavy facade hides the fact that at least five businesses open some of the most traveled in the onto the sidewalk of this building on C.V. Emanuele. Courtesy C.B. city, provide such a stressful walking experience and thus a poor first impression for the visitor.

Via Prenestina

Via Prenestina has abundant transit access and has wide sidewalks for pedestrians, but it ultimately lacks the intimacy of the most walkable of streets -- largely because the tram, parked cars, and large street width form a barricade between the pedestrian and the features across the way.

Elements of the street architecture are largely nondescript as well, which

37

gives the street a more developerbuilt and impersonal feel. The street serves to provide the space for trams and buses and filter traffic in from outside of Rome, and enables people to travel from origin to destination efficiently, but for the leisurely stroll, it is not ideal.

The majority of the Ancient Consular Routes are similar to Via Prenestina in that they are mostly wide boulevards with high traffic densities that lead into and out of Rome. They are primarily Consular Roads like Via Prenestina accomodate high levels of walked out of the necessity to Ancient all forms of traffic. Courtesy Emily Gould. reach a destination, like the grocery store or a tram stop. They are paved with concrete and lined with modern architecture, especially as they radiate outward from the city center toward the periphery. Thus, while they are efficient and house a diverse population, they are not designed to create visual focal points that provoke a dialogue between the pedestrian and the urban landscape.

As urbanist Allan Jacobs noted in Great Streets,52 the most

pleasant streets to walk are ultimately those that serve as social spaces and provoke a dialogue between the pedestrian and his environment -- not those that simply enable people to walk from their starting point to their destination. Each walkable street achieves this effect in a different manner.

The following diagram distills what this paper has defined as “walkability” into its various components, providing a framework for evaluating any given street. This framework breaks down what qualities form the duality of aesthetics and functionality.

The following are sub-components of aesthetics: Enclosure is the sense of feeling “indoors.” Building heights have great impact on enclosure because, for instance, a narrow street with towering buildings that block the sunlight can be claustrophobic for the pedestrian, whereas a narrow street with low buildings can feel open and expansive. A wide street can be overbearing and lead to a lack of intimacy between the pedestrian and his surroundings, but width can also be advantageous if it contributes to a sense of wilderness and light. If trees are planted along the street, their maintenance and spacing has vast impact: a street with only a few token trees can seem very industrial, and to the other extreme, streets with overgrown greenery can seem under-maintained. Variations in building heights, widths, and presence of greenery can create focal points that make the street interesting to walk, as long as architectural cohesion is maintained.

Distilling Walkability

A flowchart developed to conceptually frame and classify the factors affecting walkability.

Courtesy Emily Gould, drawn from multiple sources.

39

Distilling Walkability Navigability can be assessed in terms of mobility - the ability to physically move from point A to point B on the street with ease - and wayfinding, or the ability to navigate the street without frustration or disorientation.

Mobility: The ease of moving up and down and the ease of crossing are affected by specific design features such as parking sign placement, the number of streets that intersect at a given point, and traffic light functionality.

If pavement is poorly maintained, for instance, surface cracks can make the act of moving slow and dangerous.

Wayfinding: Ideally, streets should be marked with visible signage that appears often enough to serve as a reference at any moment. Curvature can create a sense of mystery and accessibility, but if a street is too windy it can disorient the walker. Permeability of edges refers to the degree to which a street’s role in the greater urban plan is evident - is it a major street that enables ordering, or is it an accessory connector street? - and how seamlessly it connects to streets that may offshoot, both physically and commercially.

Architecture of a walkable street can come in infinite forms. However, stylistic cohesion is nearly always important, because it creates a sense of intention and care in the urban design. A street with haphazard building heights, widths, materials, and facade features can feel hectic and confused.

Design features such as fountains, benches, and statues are also important in that they create focal points for the walker. Without them, the street may lack intimacy and character.

Security includes lighting of the street at night and community engagement, which encompasses factors of the physical aesthetic that reflect how much respect residents exhibit for the area. For instance, excessive graffiti can create a sense of insecurity for the walker, who may infer that there are undertones of anger among the population that could also be outlet in a more violent manner than street art. In addition to contributing to this sense of care for the neighborhood, litter on the street can also sometimes reflect a lack of a well-functioning system of trash collection or policing.

Transportation to and from the street is extremely important, because it affects pedestrians’ reasons for walking, their ease of arrival at the street, and experience of the space’s goals. For instance, on a street next to a transportation hub, most people may be walking as part of their daily commute to arrive at work or return home; then, the street becomes an important physical path, but not a place for extensive social gathering.

Ideally, transportation is frequent, reliable, and well-connected to the rest of the neighborhood and city; however, if the transportation itself becomes the main focal point of the street, the walker can feel excluded from the

Activity refers to the physical elements of people’s use of the street.

Pedestrian density is relative to sidewalk width. If a street is extremely narrow and has a multitude of pedestrians in a small space, it can appear chaotic and discouragingly crowded; likewise, if a street is wide and has very few pedestrians, it can seem isolated and perilous. Dense, fast-moving vehicle traffic and high noise levels can also detract from the street’s walkability.

The following are sub-components of functionality:

urban setting and must navigate the transportation infrastructure like a physical obstacle.

Commerce and Access describes the kinds of goods and services on the street. Accessibility of goods and services includes (but is not limited to) whether storefronts are set up in an inviting manner, whether a range of goods and services are on offered along the street, and whether these resources are laid out in an easily navigable manner. (For instance, having to cross the street excessively to window shop is an unpleasant experience for the walker.)

Affordability refers to whether the goods and services on offer are suited appropriately for the social demographic of the walking population. A street lined with only high-end outposts can seem sterile and frustrating, and similarly, a street that only has seedy shops selling bootleg handbags can seem crass.

Sociability of the street is defined by aspects of the demographics and physical layout that contribute to the area’s function as a gathering point and place of social exchanges. Ethnic diversity, handicapped accommodation, and socioeconomic diversity foster the notion that a given street has something to offer anyone who chooses to walk along it.

41

Policy Suggestions

As drawn from observations of Roman streets and the authors’ research process, no single physical or functional design of a street can determine whether or not it is walkable. It is imprudent to walk out onto a street with a checklist and tally up the walkable versus non-walkable components to ascertain the degree of its pedestrian-friendliness. This sort of methodology is too systematic and calculated, whereas the issue of walkability is dynamic and heavily contingent upon environmental and historical contexts. It is important to take a step further than reporting and analyzing observations by presenting overarching policy recommendations that place makers, specifically in Rome, should employ to foster truly walkable streets.

One of the most important policy approaches is through zoning.

Zoning regulations for a city can facilitate or severely impede the creation of walkable environments. For instance, minimum street width requirements for certain types of arterials can encroach upon available pedestrian space and cause the narrow sidewalk issues that are present on Corso Vittorio Emanuele II. On the contrary, zoning certain areas as “pedestrian only,” as exists on some small medieval streets within Rome, removes all the barriers to walkability afforded by automobiles. In addition, land use laws that encourage resident involvement in public spaces should be promoted, with uses such as small-scale retail, restaurants, other commercial establishments, bringing citizens out into open public space.

While zoning and land use regulations can put walkability guidelines on paper, such guidelines must also be enforced by those with authority. In too many cases, though, especially in Italy, there are instances of negligent permitting that allow variations in setback from the street, building height,

sidewalk width, an inadequate number of pedestrian provisions, and street lighting. These aberrations to the norm can either make a portion of the street appear disorganized or make the whole street look so fabricated as to be artificial. More importantly, inconsistencies in permitting create safety concerns for pedestrians by not providing adequate physical protection for them, such as sidewalk bollards or street lighting. By strictly enforcing land use laws and construction codes, place-makers can avoid the potential negative effects of atypical building construction, substandard material quality, or inadequately addressing pedestrian needs.

The most obvious and direct policy intervention is through design.

Although the word “design” itself is often used in a largely artistic context, human-centered design is an approach to urban design that puts the behaviors, needs and potential of humans before those of automobiles.

There are many functional design measures that can be quickly and affordably implemented to enhance the pedestrian environment. These include transparent building fronts for free movement between the indoors and outdoors, stratified path materials to delineate pedestrian walkways from vehicle zones, and traffic-calming measures, such as stop lights with complementary crosswalks or sidewalk extensions into the street to make the street narrower to slow down vehicular traffic. Overall, design should actively address pedestrian issues as a priority when planning or modifying a streetscape.

The policy suggestions above call for concrete and measurable improvements. However, building and designing are not the only answers to future problems with walkability in Rome. Italians are a walking, strolling culture, and all the new and existing spaces where they live, work, and play

should reflect this quality. Those in control of Rome’s future development should craft new spaces with a sensitivity toward the Italian passion for walking. This passion sets the country apart from countless other places around the world.

Roman planners should take advantage of their ability to both improve citizens’ quality of life and the quality of the natural environment. Luckily, the application of measures for walkability tackles both issues at once.

Walkable streets have been shown, among many other improvements, to increase citizens’ engagement with their communities, reduce their carbon emissions, make them healthier, and make them spend more locally. This method of transportation, as old as humanity, is efficient and essential for the modern city dweller.

43

Notes 1. Stefano Gori, Marialisa Nigro, and Marco Petrelli, “The impact of land use characteristics for sustainable mobility: the case study of Rome,” European Transportation Review, 14 March 2012, 1.

2. Ibid.

3. Franco Archibugi, Rome: A New Planning Strategy (London: Routledge, 2005), 52.

4. Germana Minesi, ed. Translated by D. Borri and Ilene Steingut. Urbanistica, Jan-June 2001, 262.

5. Ibid.

6. Tanya Tillett, MA, of Durham NC. “You Are Where You Live: The Interrelationship of Air Pollution, Address, and Walkability.” Environmental Health Perspectives, November 2009, 505.

7. David R. Bassett, Jr., John Pucher, Ralph Buehler, Dixie L. Thompson, and Scott E. Crouter. “Walking, Cycling, and Obesity Rates in Europe, North America, and Australia. Journal of Physical Activity and Health no. 5, 2008. This study examined the relationship between active transportation and obesity, and it compiled national surveys from 1994-2006 of travel behavior and health indicators in Europe, the North America, and Australia.

8. Ibid.

9. Ben Harder, “Weighing in on City Planning,” Science News, 20 January 2007, 43.

10. Bassett, 795.

11. Ibid., 808. The average European walked more than the average US citizen (382 versus 140 km per person per year) in 2000.

12. Mario Spada, personal correspondence, 3 May 2012. Mr. Spada worked in the Planning Department of the Rome City Council on the issue

of regeneration of the peripheries. He also organized the INU Biennial of Public Space.

13. Minesi, 222.

14. Zeynep Celik, Diane Favro, and Richard Ingersoll, Streets: Critical Perspectives on Public Space (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), 9.

15. Minesi, 280.

16. Archibugi, 2.

17. Ibid., 3.

18. Ibid., 18.

19. Minesi, 220.

20. Minesi, 217.

21. Gori, 5.

22. Minesi, 217.

23. Ibid., 222.

24. Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1960), 49.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid., 50.

27. Ibid., 51.

28. Ibid., 54.

29. Ibid., 52.

30. Ibid., 8.

31. Beck, Lise in Algreen-Ussing, Gregers, Lise Bek, Steen Bo Frandsen and Jens Schjerup Hansen, ed. Urban Space and Urban Conservation as an Aesthetic Problem: Lectures presented at the international conference in Rome 23rd-26th October 1997. Rome: “L’erma” di Bretschneider, 2000,

60.

32. Stuart Reid, “Pedestrian Environments: A Systematic Review Process.”

Available On-Line at [http://www.walk21.com/papers/Reid.pdf], 4.

33. Allan B. Jacobs, Great Streets (Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1993), 3.

34. Ibid., 6.

35. Ibid., 8.

36. Ibid., 9.

37. Mario Spada, personal correspondence, 3 May 2012.

38. Ibid.

39. Thomas Leitner, Stefan Hoeglinger, George Yannis, Petros Evgenikos, Niels Bos, Martine Reurings, Jeremy Broughton, Brian Lawton, Louise Walter, Manuel Andreu, Jean-Francois Pace, and Jaime Sanmartin, “Traffic Safety Basic Facts 2008: Pedestrians,” European Road Safety Observatory, October 2008, 1.

40. Olga Basile, Luca Persa, and Davide Shingo Usami. “A methodology to assess pedestrian crossing,” European Transportation Res. Rev (2010) 2, 129.

41. Ibid.

42. Ibid., 132.

43. Algreen-Ussing, 50.

44. Ibid., 56.

45. Ibid.

46. Zeynep.

47. http://www.casadellarchitettura.it/stampa/storia.html 48. Agnew, 230.

49. Lenzi, 156.

50. “The Via Prenestina: The Mountain Route to the South.” Provincia di Roma. http://en.tesorintornoroma.it/Itineraries/The-Via-Prenestina.

51. Ibid.

52. Jacobs, 270.

45

Bibliography Agnew, J. (1998). The impossible capital: Monumental Rome under liberal and fascist regimes, 1870-1943. Geografiska Annaler: Series B., Human Geography, 229-240.

Algreen-Ussing, G., Beck, L., Frandsen, S. B., & Hansen, J. S. (2000). Urban Space and Urban Conservation as an Aesthetic Problem: Lectures presented at the international conference

in Rome 23rd-26th October 1997. Rome: “L’erma” di Bretschneider.

Archibugi, F. (2005). Rome: A New Planning Strategy. London: Routledge.

Basile, O., Persa, L., & Usami, D. S. (2010). A methodology to assess pedestrian crossing. European Transportation Res. Rev, 129-137.

Bassett, D. R., Pucher, J., Buehler, R., Thompson, D. L., & Crouter, S. E. (2008). Walking, Cycling, and obesity Rates in Europe, North America, and Australia. Journal of Physical Activity

and Health, 795-814.

Crankshaw, N. (2008). Creating Vibrant Public Spaces: Streetscape Design in Commercial and Historic Districts. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Gori, S., Nigro, M., & Petrelli, M. (2012). The impact of land use characteristics for sustainable mobility: the case study of Rome. European Transportation Review, 1-14.

Harder, B. (2007). Weighing in on City Planning. Science News, 43-45.

Jacobs, A. B. (1993). Great Streets. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Leitner, T, Hoeglinger, S., Yannis, G., Evegnikos, P., Bos, N,. Reurings, M., Broughton, J., Lawton, B., Walter, L., Andreu, M., Pace, J., & Sanmartin, J. (2008). Traffic Safety Basic Facts

2008: Pedestrians. European Road Safety Observatory.

Lenzi, L. (1931). The New Rome. The Town Planning Review, 145-162.

Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Minesi, G., ed. Translated by D. Borri and Ilene Steingut. (2001). Urbanistica, 217-286.

Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS). (2002, December). Retrieved May 3, 2012, from Active Living Research: http://www.activelivingresearch.org/files/NEWS_ Survey_0.pdf Real Time Rome. Retrieved 3 May, 2012, from Massachusetts Institute of Technology SENSEable City Lab: http://senseable.mit.edu/realtimerome/ Reid, S. (n.d.). Pedestrian Environments: A Systematic Review Process. Retrieved May 3, 2012, from Walk 21: http://www.walk21.com/papers/Reid.pdf Roma, P. d. (n.d.). The Via Prenestina: The Mountain Route to the South. Retrieved May 3, 2012, from Tesori: Intorno a Roma: http://en.tesorintornoroma.it/Itineraries/The-Via-Prenestina Sepe, M. (2009). PlaceMaker Method: Planning ‘Walkability’ by Mapping Place Identity. Journal of Urban Design, 463-487.

Southworth, M. (2005). Designing the Walkable City. Journal of Urban Planning, 246-358.

La Storia dell’Acquario Romano. Retreived May 6, 2012, from Casa dell’Architettura: http://www.casadellarchitettura.it/stampa/storia.html Vanderbilt, T. (2012, April 13). America’s Pedestrian Problem. Slate.

Wood, J. & Hughes, J. eds. (2012, April 19). Pedestrian and Walkability Research. Retrieved May 3, 2012, from Reconnecting America: http://reconnectingamerica.org/news-center/ half-mile-circles/2012/pedestrian-and-walkability-research/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Half-mileCirclesArticles+%28Half- Mile+Circles+Articles%29&utm_content=Google+Reader Zeynep, C., Favro D., & Ingersoll, S. (1994). Streets: Critical Perspectives on Public Space. Berkeley: University of California Press.

47