Selection of Indicators of Urban Sustainability and Quality of Life of City Inhabitants

Abstract

The quality of European landscapes and the quality of life of city inhabitants are closely related to economic, social, and cultural aspects that are manifest in time and space. This connection, interacting with the local economy, responds to the recreational, emotional, and spiritual needs and the sense of identity of the community, as the Mercer survey and Eurobarometer have highlighted. If our cities are unsustainable, as often happens, the urban landscape could/should become the litmus paper that allows the state of places to be synthetically interpreted and supports the delineation of indications to solve the problems (Benson and Roe 2007). When following this road, it is necessary to consider the technical aspects of sustainability policies—such as energy savings, recycling, environmental management, etc.—and non-technical aspects such as social behaviours and spatial organization. All of these aspects together, in addition to the way in which they interact, contribute to determining the characteristics of a given urban landscape and the quality of life of city inhabitants. The continuous “feedback” between sustainability and quality of the urban landscape and their interaction with the quality of life of city inhabitants have been the subject of numerous studies and reflections in the contemporary scientific panorama. In this respect, the 2010 book by Claudia Dinep and Kristin Schwab Sustainable Site Design Criteria, Process, and Case Studies for Integrating Site and Region in Landscape Design highlights how “…urban sustainability is fundamentally the sustainability of the urban landscape as a whole”. In a 2004 essay, MacKendrick and Parkins maintained that the sustainability of the urban landscape could be defined as the capacity of a landscape system to generate and maintain conditions for a safe, harmonious, and adequate environment of life that respects ecosystems (MacKendrick and Parkins 2004).

Appendices

Annex A: Distinctive and Pleasant

CAT.	Indicator	Reference system	Description	Required data	Calculation method	Unit	Threshold
1.1. Landscape ecology, green spaces, physical morphology	1. Permeability	BCN	Level of impervious surfaces and their impact on the occupied territory	IP = index of permeability; Ft = surface-type factor; At = area of the type of surface; S = surface of reference	IP = [S(Ft × At) (m2)/At (m2)] 100 (*) (*) of the analyzed area	%	Min. 30%
	2. Presence of trees in public space divided by built surface area	BCN	Quantity of trees present per unit of area analyzed	Da = presence of trees; n = number of trees; Sc = built surface area	Da = n/Sc	n/m2	Min 1/20 m2
	3. Tree-lined boulevards	BCN	Length of tree-lined boulevards in relation to the length of the streets	Va = tree-lined boulevards; Lc = length of green corridors; Ls = length of street section	Va = [Lc/Ls] · 100	%	Va ≥ 20%
	4. Citizen accessibility to green spaces	BCN	Measures the area served by green spaces in relation to their extent	AccV = accessibility to green spaces; Ai = distance of influence of green spaces; AV = area served by green spaces; Atot = total area	AccV = (AV/Atot) · 100	%	Green space >1000 m2 at <200 m (on foot) Green space >5000 m2 at <750 m (on foot) Green space <1 ha at <2 km (by bike) Green space >10 ha at <4 km (public transport)
	5. Proximity to green urban corridors	BCN	Measures proximity of the area to a green urban corridor	Sections of street with access to the green urban corridor (linear metres)/100 linear metres	(linear metres)/100 linear metres	m	Up to 600 m
	6. Morphological structures with landscape importance that can influence the quality of spaces	PRIN	Assesses pertinence or contiguity of the site to a system of geomorphological interest typical of the specific place	Landscape assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence throughout the site with positive influence GOOD: Concentrated presence within the site with positive influence SUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence within the site but uninfluential INSUFFICIENT: Presence throughout the site with negative effects
	7. Presence of areas for landscape/environmental use	PRIN	Assesses the quality of a place according to the presence of routes of architectural and landscape value	Landscape assessment of the projects	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence with high interest GOOD: Concentrated presence with high interest SUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with medium interest INSUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with low or no interest
	8. Presence of areas with natural or landscape interest	PRIN	Assesses the presence and extent of areas of natural or non-anthropized landscape interest	Landscape assessment of the projects; SIC; ZPS; Agenda 21	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence with high interest GOOD: Concentrated presence with high interest SUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with medium interest INSUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with low or no interest
	9. Presence of environmental islands	PRIN	Assesses the presence and quality of urban environmental islands, i.e., areas with a unique architectural and urban-planning design aimed at optimizing the use of spaces for biking and walking	Landscape assessment of the projects; Agenda 21, etc	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence over >40% of the site GOOD: Widespread presence over 30–40% of the site SUFFICIENT: Widespread presence over 20–30% of the site INSUFFICIENT: Low, concentrated presence over <20% of the site or complete absence
	10. Presence of ecological areas (green permeable agricultural areas)	PRIN	In this case reference is made to the presence of agricultural areas in peri-urban bands around the city. The presence of such areas is a parameter of quality since the landscape is viewed as a vector to create new identities and forms of appropriating the places	Landscape assessment of the projects; Agenda 21, etc	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence of ecological areas over >20% of the site GOOD: Widespread presence of ecological areas over 15–20% of the site SUFFICIENT: Widespread presence of ecological areas over 10–15% of the site INSUFFICIENT: Total absence of ecological areas
	11.Presence of plant species that can influence the living quality of the area	PRIN	Assesses the presence of plant species that stimulate or activate the senses (through shape, scent, or colour) to arouse a sense of recognizability in users	Vegetation quality around social buildings—18 indicator system for CGSP and choice of demolition or renovation	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Consistent presence of numerous plant species with high recognizability/variety GOOD: Presence of numerous plant species but in limited, circumscribed places SUFFICIENT: Presence of widespread plant species but lacking recognizability/variety INSUFFICIENT: Absence of plant species
	12. Fragmentation	URGE	Measures the fragmentation of green spaces. Relationship between the area of patches divided by their circumference or perimeter	AP = Area of patches C o P = circumference or perimeter	F = AP/C o P	Scale from lacking to good	<0.07 Lacking 0.07–0.10 Average >0.10 Good
	13. Isolation of urban green areas	URGE	Measures the level of isolation of green areas in the city	D = Average distance between patches (inter-patch distance)	m	Scale from scarce to good	Good: <500 m Moderate: 500–1000 m Scarce: >1 km
	14. Connectivity	URGE	Assesses the capacity of the green urban system to increase the migration of species between green patches	C = Number of existing connections	No.	Scale from none to optimal	No connectivity: 0 Modest connectivity: 1–2 Good connectivity: 3–5 Optimal connectivity: >5
	15. RIE—Index of building impact reduction	SAAD—City of Bolzano	An index of environmental quality that certifies the quality of the building intervention with respect to land permeability and green areas	Svi = ith surface area that is permeable, impermeable, or marked “treated as green” Sij = jth surface area that is permeable, impermeable, or marked “not treated as green” ψi = ith outflow coefficient ψj = jth outflow coefficient Se = Equivalent tree-covered surface area	$\frac{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n SVi\frac{1}{\varPsi_{\mathrm{i}}}+(Se)}{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n SVi+\sum \limits_{j=1}^m{S}_{ij}{\varPsi}_j}$		Limiting values for surface areas: https://www.comune.bolzano.it/UploadDocs/3180_Nuove_Schede_superfici_RIE_Ital.pdf
	16. Territorial Biopotential (BTC)	SAAD—Arpa	An indicator of the state of energy metabolism of vegetation systems. Represents the capacity of an ecosystem to conserve and maximize energy use, capable of identifying the evolution/involution of the landscape in relation to the degree of conservation, recovery, or transformation of the environmental mosaic	Land-use map	Calculation of the surface area for individual areas in m2	Mcal/m2 of territory for each type of use	A (low) Prevalence of systems with energy subsidies (industries and infrastructure, built areas) or with low metastability (bare areas, rocky outcrops) ≪ 0.5 B (average-low) Prevalence of agricultural/technological systems (pasture or arable land, sparse building), natural degraded biotopes or those with average resilience (wild grasses, sparse shrubs, treeless riverbanks) 0.5–1.5 C (average) Prevalence of seminatural agricultural systems (arable land, grasslands, orchards, vineyards, hedges) with average metastability 1.5–2.5 D (average-high) Prevalence of natural biotopes with average resistance and metastability (climate-adapted shrubs, pioneer species, rows of plants, urban green areas, reforestation, tree farms, poplar plantations) 2.5–3.5 E (high) Prevalence of biotopes without energy subsidies, seminatural (forests, copses) or natural areas with high resistance and metastability (low plain and foothill forests, humid zones) ≫ 3.5
1.2. Landscape perception	1. Presence of areas of landscape/environmental use	PRIN	Assesses the quality of a place according to the presence of routes of architectural and landscape value	Landscape assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence with high interest GOOD: Concentrated presence with high interest SUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with medium interest INSUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with low or no interest
	2. Presence in panoramic views	PRIN	Assesses the quality of the landscape perceived from residences present in the study area	Landscape assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence in important panoramic areas, presence of panoramic sites of particular interest GOOD: Presence in panoramic areas with a limited number of views, but interesting for their originality SUFFICIENT: Presence in panoramic areas that are interesting but compromised by careless human intervention on the landscape INSUFFICIENT: Presence in panoramic areas of low landscape interest
	3. Presence of elements that impact the visual quality of the study area (perception of the site)	PRIN	Assesses the weight of elements that negatively influence the value of the landscape containing the study area, e.g., viaducts or general infrastructures lacking adequate landscape insertion, oversized buildings, decommissioned areas, etc	Landscape assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Total absence of detracting elements GOOD: Presence of detracting elements that can be circumscribed and partially mitigated and which, due to their location and/or size, can be overlooked in the view SUFFICIENT: Presence of a few small detracting elements INSUFFICIENT: Consistent presence of detracting elements
	4. Presence of elements that detract from the visual relationship with the context (obstructions, perception from the site)	PRIN	Assesses the weight of elements found outside the study area that are perceived as factors detracting from the landscape quality of the site	Landscape assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Total absence of detracting elements GOOD: Irrelevant presence of detracting elements that can be overlooked in the viewing impact due to location and/or size SUFFICIENT: Presence of a few small detracting elements INSUFFICIENT: In this case the presence of detracting elements is numerically important, such that they cannot be overlooked, even if they are small
	5. Perceptibility of the site from streets	PRIN	Assesses the visibility and therefore the recognizability of places such as streets and railways from which the perception of the study area should be immediate given the speed of travel	Landscape assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Clear recognizability of the set of distinctive elements within the site, with resulting well-being due to the user’s optimum orientation GOOD: Clear recognizability of some distinctive elements within the site, with resulting well-being due to the user’s optimum orientation SUFFICIENT: Recognizability compromised by multiple signs but still present INSUFFICIENT: Recognizability compromised by multiple signs that cause user disorientation
1.3. Urban form and identity	1. Building density	SAAD Meta Berghauser Pont and Per Haupt (2011)	Describes the building intensity. Relates the amount of built surface area to the total surface area considered	De = building density; Slp = gross paved surface area; St = territorial surface area	De = Slp/St	m2/m2	–
	2. Settlement mix	PRIN	Assesses the distribution uniformity of different functions present within the study site	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: 30% of the site destined for functional mixing; historical centres with widespread commerce and services, zones with complex, multi-functional urban restoration, parks and villas of historical/environmental interest where tourist, residential, or service designations are permitted; former urban industrial areas converted into commercial areas. Traffic in the areas is well organized in a hierarchical network of streets GOOD: 20–30% of the site destined for functional mixing; historical centres with widespread commerce and services, zones with multi-functional urban restoration, parks and villas of historical/environmental interest where tourist, residential, or service designations are permitted; former urban industrial areas partially converted into commercial areas. Traffic in the areas is well organized in a hierarchical network of streets SUFFICIENT: 10–20% of the site destined for functional mixing; historical centres with limited areas for commerce and services concentrated in a few dedicated structures, residential areas being completed or expanding with limited, concentrated parts destined for services. Traffic in the areas is limited, even if the road network is not completely hierarchical INSUFFICIENT: 0–10% of the site destined for functional mixing; settlement mix with reduced non-residential functions and/or concentrated in limited structures on the site. Congested traffic concentrated near the structures
	3. Elements of the historical settlement structure and consistency of the historical/monumental heritage	PRIN	Assesses the presence and importance of elements of the historical/architectural heritage to the territory in question	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of historical/monumental heritage and persistence of traces or plans, or persistence of traces or plans GOOD: Presence of historical/monumental heritage, without persistence of traces or plans SUFFICIENT: Presence of historical/monumental heritage with prevalence of minor works, without traces or plans INSUFFICIENT: Absence of historical/monumental heritage
	4.Skyline: recognizability and symbolic value	PRIN	Assesses the quality of a place as a function of the recognizability of its formal structures	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from sufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: High architectural quality of the individual elements that define the skyline, as well as the entire skyline, which provides a clear, formally recognizable image of the settlement GOOD: High architectural quality of the individual elements that strongly characterize the city but which are not strongly represented in the city as a whole SUFFICIENT: Recognizability of the urban landscape readable as a whole. In this case, the urban landscape arouses a sense of belonging due to the visual relationships and architectural quality of the individual cases inserted within a fabric that however lacks an identity
	5. Presence of buildings characterized by particularly prestigious architectural solutions (e.g., lesser architecture) or qualifying contemporary architectural elements for the urban context of reference	PRIN	Assesses the presence within the site of places or recognizable elements. High construction prestige for the architectural solutions used	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from irrelevant to optimal	OPTIMAL: Consistent presence (>20% architectural heritage) GOOD: Discrete presence (10–20% architectural heritage) SUFFICIENT: Reduced presence (5–10% architectural heritage) IRRELEVANT: Irrelevant presence (<5% architectural heritage) or absent
	6. Presence of structures with architectural characteristics that are inappropriate for the urban context—detracting elements from the language point of view	PRIN	Assesses the negative influence that elements with architectural/construction characteristics inappropriate for the context have on the area in question	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from irrelevant to optimal	OPTIMAL: Absence of detracting buildings or irrelevant presence (<5% architectural heritage) GOOD: Reduced presence (5–10% architectural heritage) SUFFICIENT: Discrete presence (10–20% architectural heritage) IRRELEVANT: Consistent presence (>20% architectural heritage)
	7. State of housing conservation—degree of global maintenance of buildings and the historical/cultural heritage	PRIN	Assesses the state of conservation of structures present within the site in question	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Functional buildings in optimal state of conservation, new construction, or recently restored/recovered buildings GOOD: Functional buildings in good state of conservation excluding new constructions or those recently restored/recovered SUFFICIENT: Functional buildings without important superficial instabilities and with localized, reduced presence (<5% architectural heritage) of buildings requiring recovery/restoration INSUFFICIENT: Functionally obsolete buildings, but which can still be used with exclusively superficial instabilities; functionally unusable or abandoned buildings with superficial and structural instabilities
	8. Overall colour impact, identification of façade colour with local tradition, and overall building harmony (materials, paving, openings, proportions)	PRIN	Assesses the quality of a site in reference to the pertinence of finishing materials to the building tradition of the place in which they are used (colour and type of materials)	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Optimal overall harmony of buildings that enhances the compositional characteristics and urban decor of individual buildings and their combination, protection of the material and colour qualities of traditional materials and techniques, use of archival colours compatible with the urban and environmental context; building façades that are organically uniform for their type and construction chronology from a chromatic point of view, free of differences between treated and non-treated parts with the use of adequate similar hue scales; non-uniform building façades pertaining to structures that are not organically consolidated, chromatically distinct but with similar historical and constructive characteristics, but free of excessive light and dark or colour contrasts Correlation between buildings without excessive chromatic uniformity, gaudy differentiation, or interruptions with showy chromatic incidences in the hierarchy between serial and monumental buildings GOOD: Good overall harmony of buildings that protects the material and colour quality of traditional materials and techniques with the use of colours that are not necessarily archival, but compatible with the urban and environmental context Correlation between buildings without excessive chromatic uniformity, gaudy differentiation, or interruptions with showy chromatic incidences in the hierarchy between serial and monumental buildings SUFFICIENT: Average overall harmony of buildings that protects the material and colour quality of traditional materials and techniques but with a widespread presence of chromatic uniformity or a localized, limited presence of excessive light and dark or colour contrasts INSUFFICIENT: Absence of enhancement of the compositional characteristics and urban decor of individual buildings and their combination for showy differentiation, excessive chromatic uniformity, or incidences of showy colours with the use of colours incompatible with the urban and environmental context
	9. Architectural quality (street furniture, presence of artistic installations) and degree of maintenance of public spaces in relation to open spaces	PRIN	Assesses the quality and presence of street furniture	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Most outdoor gathering spaces (>70%) present quality street furniture and/or art installations. They are also well maintained, accessible, and functional GOOD: A good part of outdoor gathering spaces (>50%) present quality street furniture and/or art installations. The maintenance, accessibility, safety, and functionality do not present negative elements SUFFICIENT: Some outdoor gathering spaces (>30%) present quality street furniture. Maintenance is not constant or distributed uniformly, but this does not influence the accessibility or functionality INSUFFICIENT: Low presence of quality elements, or existing ones are not easily accessible, not functional, or unsafe
	10. Presence of decommissioned or very degraded areas	PRIN	Assesses the quantity of decommissioned areas and the influence they have on the interpretation and quality of life within the site in question	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas <5% of site surface area GOOD: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas between 5 and 10% of site surface area SUFFICIENT: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas between 10 and 20% of site surface area INSUFFICIENT: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas >20% of site surface area
	11. Unused spaces (residence or service)	PRIN	Identifies unused existing or future areas or buildings, even if in good condition	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Volume of unused areas <5% of overall built volume of the site GOOD: Volume of unused areas between 5 and 10% of overall built volume of the site SUFFICIENT: Volume of unused areas between 10 and 20% of overall built volume of the site INSUFFICIENT: Volume of unused areas >20% of overall built volume of the site
1.4. Gathering places	1. Presence of spaces for meeting and socialization	PRIN	Assesses the presence and usability of meeting and socializing places present in the site under study	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread places for gathering and socializing rooted in the territory (both public and private), daytime and night-time use, differentiated by type of use (elderly or young people, sports, children, etc.) GOOD: Numerous gathering places, even if not completely uniform with respect to the functions, category of use, or daytime or night-time use SUFFICIENT: Gathering places present even if inuniform with respect to the use (daytime/night-time, public/private management) or unbalanced use between daytime and night-time functions INSUFFICIENT: Few gathering places present in the territory, or strongly unbalanced with respect to user and use
	2. Presence of open public places used by the population	PRIN	Assesses the presence and usability of public open spaces present in the study site	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Numerous widespread public spaces creating a system of connections even to areas outside the area in question. Functions and uses integrated with the territory GOOD: Significant presence of public open spaces, not used uniformly SUFFICIENT: Public spaces present, but inuniform throughout the territory or little used INSUFFICIENT: Lack of public spaces, with strong repercussions for their use
	3. Presence and use of buildings of social interest	PRIN	Assesses the presence and usability of functions of social interest present in the study area	Assessment of the current and designed states. Structures of social interest can be distinguished as follows: – Social-assistance structures and services for youths and elderly people – Social/educational structures and services – Social-assistance structures and services for disabled people – Social-assistance structures and services for poor people – Social-assistance structures and services to support large families and pregnant women – Emergency structures and services	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence on the site of more than 6 types of structures, with pedestrian access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, with total absence of architectural barriers and hills, public pedestrian areas free of disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate usability of the structures GOOD: Presence on the site of 4–6 types of structures, with pedestrian access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, with absence of architectural barriers and minimal hills, public pedestrian areas with irrelevant disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate usability of the structures SUFFICIENT: Presence on the site of 2–3 types of structures, with pedestrian access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, with absence of architectural barriers. Presence of hills, public pedestrian areas with some disconnections, limited presence of devices to facilitate usability of the structures INSUFFICIENT: Presence on the site of 1 type of structure, with pedestrian access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, with presence of architectural barriers and hills, public pedestrian areas with disconnections, absence of devices to facilitate usability of the structures. Total absence or presence on the site of non-functional structures or with accessibility more than 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop
	4. Quality of community areas in public housing	PRIN	Measures the architectural quality and degree of maintenance of community areas present within low-cost public housing areas	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of design solutions that allow for a ratio between the outdoor walkable permeable surface area and the outdoor surface area pertaining to the site of >50%. Presence of street furniture spread throughout functional spaces, safe, with elevated sunlight that can be shaded, appropriate night-time illumination. Prevalence of functional open and green spaces in optimal state of conservation, newly constructed, or the object of recent architectural restoration GOOD: Presence of design solutions that allow for a ratio between the outdoor walkable permeable surface area and the outdoor surface area pertaining to the site of 30–50%. Presence of street furniture spread throughout functional spaces, safe, with elevated sunlight that cannot be shaded completely, appropriate night-time illumination. Prevalence of functional open and green spaces in good state of conservation, excluding new constructions or recent architectural restorations SUFFICIENT: Presence of design solutions that allow for a ratio between the outdoor walkable permeable surface area and the outdoor surface area pertaining to the site of 20–30%. Presence of street furniture spread throughout functional spaces, relatively safe, with average sunlight or elevated sunlight that cannot be shaded, reduced night-time illumination. Prevalence of relatively functional open and green spaces, presence of localized superficial imbalances and zones requiring architectural restoration INSUFFICIENT: Presence of design solutions that allow for a ratio between the outdoor walkable permeable surface area and the outdoor surface area pertaining to the site of <20%. Absence of street furniture. Absence of green spaces or prevalence of functionally obsolete open and green spaces that are unsafe or unusable

Annex B: Efficient and Nice

CAT.	Indicator	Reference system	Description	Required data	Calculation method	Unit	Threshold
2.1. Uses and forms of the city	1. Ratio of land coverage	SAAD Meta Berghauser Pont and Per Haupt (2011)	Describes the ratio of surface area covered by buildings to the total surface area considered	Rc = ratio of coverage; Sc = covered surface area; St = territorial surface area	Rc = Sc/St	%	25% < Rc < 30%
	2. Living density of the study area	PRIN	Indicates the living density of the site in terms of inhabitants/km2. Expressed for considerations referring to whether the settlement characteristics of the site pertain to those of a typical Italian city	Assesses the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Density between 2000 and 2500 inhabitants/km2 GOOD: Density between 2500 and 3000 inhabitants/km2 or between 1000 and 2000 inhabitants/km2 SUFFICIENT: Density between 3000 and 5000 inhabitants/km2 or between 500 and 1000 inhabitants/km2 INSUFFICIENT: Density greater than 5000 inhabitants/km2 or less than 500 inhabitants/km2
	3. Average building height	SAAD Meta Berghauser Pont and Per Haupt (2011)	Describes the impact of the morphology of the area anayzed within the context	Am = average height; Ve = built volume; Sc = covered surface; n_ed = number of buildings	Am = [(Ve/Sc)/n_ed)]	m	Am ≥ 11.15 m
	4. Degree of privacy (living and associated spaces)	PRIN	Qualitatively assesses the level according to which the living and associated spaces guarantee resident privacy	Assesses the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Greater than 15 m GOOD: Between 10 and 15 m SUFFICIENT: Between 5 and 9 m INSUFFICIENT: Less than 5 m or greater than 50 m
	5. Settlement mix	PRIN	Assesses the distribution uniformity of the different functions present within the study site	Assesses the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: 30% of the site destined for functional mixing; historical centres with widespread commerce and services, zones with complex, multi-functional urban restoration, parks and villas of historical/environmental interest where tourist, residential, or service designations are permitted; former urban industrial areas converted into commercial areas. Traffic in the areas is well organized in a hierarchical network of streets GOOD: 20–30% of the site destined for functional mixing; historical centres with widespread commerce and services, zones with multi-functional urban restoration, parks and villas of historical/environmental interest where tourist, residential, or service designations are permitted; former urban industrial areas partially converted into commercial areas. Traffic in the areas is well organized in a hierarchical network of streets SUFFICIENT: 10–20% of the site destined for functional mixing; historical centres with limited areas for commerce and services concentrated in a few dedicated structures, residential areas being completed or expanding with limited, concentrated parts destined for services. Traffic in the areas is limited, even if in a road network that is not completely hierarchical INSUFFICIENT: 0–10% of the site destined for functional mixing; settlement mix with reduced non-residential functions and/or concentrated in limited structures on the site. Congested traffic concentrated near these structures
	6. Corrected compactness	BCN	Measures the pressure exerted by the built area on the pedestrian public space (pedestrian streets, pedestrian tree-lined boulevards, parks and gardens, internal courtyards, areas of local use, squares > 1000 m2; surfaces do not include streets for public and private transport, parking areas, and surfaces of length less than 2.50 m)	Cc = corrected compactness; Ve = built volume in the urban mesh considered; Sp.a. = pedestrian public space	Cc = Ve/Sp.a	m3/m2	–
	7. Diversity of building type	BCN	Measures the entropy of building types in the radius of influence (400 m)	Dt = diversity of types; fi = building type; n = number of building types	Dt = Sni = fi log(fi)/log(n)	–	Reference values
	8. Percentage of conservation of existing buildings	BCN	Defines the degree of sensitivity towards conserving the building heritage and therefore the energy encompassed in existing structures	%Ce = existing conservation; SLPc = Gross surface area of conserved pavement; SLPtot = Gross surface area of total pavement	%Ce = SLPc/SLPtot	%	Ce ≥ 60%
	9. Urban complexity	CAT	Provides information regarding the diversity of combinations of uses and services, which represents one of the axes of the model of the compact, complex Mediterranean city	n = the number of different activity types (species richness); Pi = the relative abundance of each species, the proportion of entities of a given species or activity type to the total number of activities existing; Log2(Pi) = the logarithm of the relative abundance of each species	$-\sum \limits_{i=1}^n\mathrm{Pi}\times {\mathrm{Log}}_2\left(\mathrm{Pi}\right)\mid$	Entropy (Shannon index H)	Desired level between 4 and 6 starting from where the urban structure presents a sufficient level of urban complexity and diversity
2.2. Metabolism and urban comfort	1. Ratio of surface area to volume	SAAD Baker and Steemers (1992)	Describes the ratio of surface area to volume and represents the form factor of the building; changes with the building dimensions	Si = Building surface area; Ve = Building volume	Sv = Si/Ve	m2/m3	Sv ≥ 0
	2. South-facing vertical surfaces	SAAD Baker and Steemers (1992)	Represents the possibility for good energy savings due to the possibility of using light and heat from the Sun	% Svs = % of south-facing vertical surfaces; Svs = south-facing vertical surfaces; Sv = vertical surfaces	%Svs = (Svs/Sv)%	%	–
	3. Southeast- and southwest-facing vertical surfaces	SAAD Baker and Steemers (1992)	Represents the possibility for good energy savings due to the possibility of using light and heat from the Sun	% Svs-e = % of southeast- and southwest-facing vertical surfaces; Svs-e = southeast- and southwest-facing vertical surfaces; Sv = vertical surfaces	%Svs-e = (Svs-e/Sv)%	%	–
	4. Ratio of passive to non-passive zones	SAAD Baker and Steemers (1992)	Highlights the possibility of decreasing energy demands for lighting and heating	Zp = ratio of passive zones; Ap = passive area; Anp = non-passive area	Zp = Ap/Anp	–	Zp ≥ 100%
	5. Sky-view factor (SVF)	SAAD Morello and Ratti (2009)	Expresses the portion of sky visible from each point of the study area. Calculation is independent of the Sun’s path in that the SVF depends solely on the urban geometry	SVF = sky-view factor; A.a. = area of analysis; So = obstructed area	SVF = Aa − So	–	–
	6. Green areas on the ground	SAAD Morello and Ratti (2009)	Calculates the form, position, and size of breathable green areas present per unit of surface area	Ic = heat island; Sv = green spaces on the ground; Stot = reference surface area	Ic = (Sv/Stot) · 100	%	–
	7. Percentage of shade per hour generated in open spaces on the summer and winter solstices	SAAD Morello and Ratti (2009)	Calculates the effective solar radiation received by urban surfaces	Ca = comfort of open spaces; So = shaded surface area; h = hour	Ca = So/h	m2/h	–
	8. Percentage of permanently shaded open spaces on the summer and winter solstices	SAAD Morello and Ratti (2009)	Calculates the effective solar radiation received by urban surfaces, giving an energy quality to the original concept of solar envelope (Ralph L. Knowles, 1981–2003)	Ca = comfort of open spaces; So = shaded surface area; Sa = total surface area of open spaces	Ca = (So/Sa) · 100	%	–
	9. Degree of winter radiation and level of natural lighting in the buildings	PRIN	Describes the number of hours of sunlight reaching the living room in the housing unit. The type of housing in winter, in which the inclination of solar rays is lowest during the year. The goal is to assess whether the prevalent exposition of the building on a site produces a healthy and therefore better-quality environment for users	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Housing with high degree of winter radiation >370 h/sole and optimal direct solar lighting GOOD: Housing with winter radiation of about 370 h/sole and good direct solar lighting SUFFICIENT: Housing with winter radiation <370 h/sole and sufficient direct solar lighting INSUFFICIENT: Housing with winter radiation much less than 370 h/sole and no direct solar lighting
	10. Possibility of effective natural ventilation as a function of the building distribution (e.g., absence of obstructions)	PRIN	Measures the effectiveness of natural ventilation in residential buildings	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative/quantitative judgement The unit of measurement is the percentage of accommodations in which ventilation is guaranteed	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Total absence of obstructions with optimal settlement distribution GOOD: Presence of obstructions that affect natural ventilation and good settlement distribution SUFFICIENT: Presence of obstructions or settlement distribution that affect natural ventilation INSUFFICIENT: Consistent presence of obstructions or poor settlement distribution that negatively affect natural ventilation
	11. Average distance between buildings	PRIN	Assesses the average distance between buildings, dividing it into 4 classes. Thresholds are identified to define the best quality perceived by an inhabitant of the site	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: >15 m GOOD: 10–15 m SUFFICIENT: 5–9 m INSUFFICIENT: <5 m or >50 m
	12. Adaptation of the building type and architectural character to the local climate	PRIN	Assesses the presence of buildings with architectural characteristics that are adapted to the climate present in the site under investigation. Highlights whether a building belongs to the typical constructive traditions of the place relative to the typological elements related to the climate aspects of the zone	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Cold zone: square floor plan (L/L = 1:1–1.3, optimum = 1.1) and compact shape. Temperature region: free floor plan and elongated shape (L/L = 1:1–2.4, optimum = 1.6) along the EW axis. Hot, dry region: square floor plan (L/L = 1:1–1.6, optimum = 1.3) and compact shape, with a shaded patio. Hot, humid region: free floor plan, narrow elongated shape (L/L = 1:1–3, optimum = 1.7), pilotis, porticoes, and shading systems. Optimal coherence of the architectural type with the local climate with respect to roof type and related materials, attachment to the ground, profiles, building alignment, ratio between openings to solid surfaces, accessories (balconies, loggias, shading systems), façade finishing GOOD: Cold zone: slightly elongated floor plan and compact shape. Temperate region: free floor plan and slightly elongated shape with main exposition along the EW axis. Hot, dry region: slightly elongated floor plan and compact shape, with shaded patio. Hot, humid region: free floor plan and slightly elongated shape, pilotis, porticoes and shading systems. Good coherence of the architectural type with the local climate with respect to roof type and related materials, attachment to the ground, profiles, building alignment, ratio between openings to solid surfaces, accessories (balconies, loggias, shading systems), façade finishing SUFFICIENT: Cold zone: elongated floor plan but compact shape. Temperate region: free floor plan and slightly elongated shape with main exposition slightly off the EW axis. Hot, dry region: slightly elongated floor plan and compact shape, with shaded patio. Hot, humid region: free floor plan and slightly elongated shape, pilotis, porticoes and shading systems. Average coherence of the architectural type with the local climate with respect to roof type and related materials, attachment to the ground, profiles, building alignment, ratio between openings to solid surfaces, accessories (balconies, loggias, shading systems), façade finishing INSUFFICIENT: Cold zone: elongated floor plan and shape (1 > L/L > 1.3). Temperate region: free floor plan and compact shape (1 > L/L > 2.4), main alignment along the NS axis. Cold, dry region: elongated floor plan and shape (1 > L/L > 1.6). Hot, humid region: free floor plan and narrow, elongated shape (1 > L/L > 3). Indifference to or lacking coherence between the architectural character and local climate in the type of roof and related materials, attachment to the ground, profiles, building alignment, ratio between openings and solid surfaces, accessories (balconies, loggias, shading systems), façade finishing
2.3. Degradation and land consumption	1. Presence of decommissioned or very degraded areas	PRIN	Assesses the quantity of and influence that decommissioned areas have on the interpretation and quality of life within the site	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas <5% of site surface area GOOD: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas between 5 and 10% of site surface area SUFFICIENT: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas between 10 and 20% of site surface area INSUFFICIENT: Surface area occupied by decommissioned or degraded areas >20% of site surface area
	2. Unused volumes (residence or service)	PRIN	Identifies new or existing unused areas or buildings, even if well maintained	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Volume of unused spaces <5% of overall built volume of the site GOOD: Volume of unused spaces between 5 and 10% of overall built volume of the site SUFFICIENT: Volume of unused spaces between 10 and 20% of overall built volume of the site INSUFFICIENT: Volume of unused spaces >20% of overall built volume of the site
	3. Percentage of conservation of existing buildings	SAAD Puerari (2011)	Defines the degree of sensitivity towards conserving the building heritage and therefore the energy encompassed in existing structures	%Ce = existing conservation; SLPc = Gross surface area of conserved pavement; SLPtot = Gross surface area of total pavement	%Ce = SLPc/SLPtot	%	Ce ≥ 60%
2.4. Social and economic aspects	1. Population density	CAT	Number of inhabitants per hectare. Gives an approximate idea of the configuration of the city and the related territorial organization. Yields an initial idea of the level of urban expansion in the territory and helps to define more organized urban planning	Georeferenced population census	Population density = (Number of inhabitants)/(Urban surface area)	Inhabitants/ha	Population density per hectare can vary significantly as a function of the typical or historical characteristics that configure the city territory. Determining an optimal value for the population density of a city is therefore not easy because there is a strong dependence on the predominant urban model in the city or its historical configuration, as well as the influence of certain economic or social aspects, migratory processes, or the presence of economic imbalances. However, for a city with an average surface area of public space and green zones, a minimum density of 120 inhabitants/ha is recommended for the set of Mediterranean cities participating in the project
	2. Employment and unemployment rates	CAT	Measures the percentage of the working-age population employed or unemployed and in search of work. The unemployment rate is the percentage of the unemployed active population	Statistics related to the active and population and unemployment	Percentage of active population = (Number of active people)/(Number of working-age people) · 100 Unemployment rate = (Number of unemployed people)/(Number of active people) · 100	%	A percentage less than 10% is desired for the set of Mediterranean cities
	3. Average family income	CAT	Average income indicates the tenor of life in a territory	Statistical data	Average income declared per unit of consumption	Euro	Scale of reference: Malaga: €13,128 Marseilles: €15,811 Agglomeration Community of Pays d’Aix: €21,470
	4. Poverty threshold	CAT	The poverty rate indicates the percentage of families below the poverty threshold. The threshold corresponds to 50% of the average national family income	Statistical data	(Population below the poverty threshold)/(Total population) · 100	%	Scale of reference: Malaga: 21.25% Marseilles: 25.30% Agglomeration Community of Pays d’Aix: 15.88%
	5. Income inequality	CAT	Highlights the difference between the maximum and minimum in the distribution. Higher values represent greater income inequalities in the population. Allows income disparity per consumption unit to be studied in a determined zone, but also between different zones	Statistical data	(Income of the 10% richest)/(Income of the 10% poorest)	Not applicable	Scale of reference: Marseilles: 14.1 Agglomeration Community of Pays d’Aix: 4.7
	6. Evolution of tourist frequency	CAT	Measures the evolution of tourist frequency in relation to the number of tourists and nights booked per year and the level of tourism seasonality	Number of tourists and nights booked per year. Amount of seasonality per month	Degree of seasonality (tourists) = (Number of tourists per month)/(Total number of tourists) · 100 Degree of seasonality = (Number of booked rooms per month)/(Number of total nights) · 100	Number of tourists and booked rooms per month and per year. % seasonality per month	Intervals of percentages of tourists and booked rooms per month between 6 and 11% is recommended for the set of Mediterranean cities
2.5. Usability, accessibility, public transport	1. Accessibility to street-level public transport stops	BCN	Measures the area served by different public transport stops by calculating the radius of influence (400 m)	Accts = Accessibility of the public transport stop; Ai = distance of influence of the public transport stop; Ats = area served by street-level public transport; Atot = total area	Accts = (Ats/Stot) · 100	%	Dist. < 400 m = 1 min by bike = 5 min on foot
	2. Accessibility to the network of biking paths	BCN	Measures the area served by different public transport stops by calculating the radius of influence (400 m)	Accc = Accessibility of the public transport stop; Ai= distance of influence of the biking path; Apc = area served by the biking path; Stot = surface area of reference	Accc = (Ac/Atot) · 100	%	Dist. < 400 m = 1 min by bike = 5 min on foot
	3. Accessibility to green spaces	BCN	Measures the area served by green spaces in relation to their extent	AccV = Accessibility to green spaces; Ai= distance of influence of the green spaces; AV = area served by the green spaces; Atot = total area	AccV = (AV/Atot) · 100	%	Green spaces > 1000 m2 dist. < 200 m Green spaces > 5000 m2 dist. < 750 m Green spaces < 1 ha and to a green corridor at a distance of <2 km green space > 10 ha at a dist. < 4 km
	4. Provision of neighbourhood services	SAAD LEED 2009 for neighbourhood development	Calculates the mix and diversity of services present in the neighbourhood	Ai = area affected by the service (between a range of 300 and 400 m); n = number of services considered; A.a. = surface area analyzed	Ds = Si Ai/n	%	Ic ≥ 100%
	5. Diversity of functions	SAAD LEED 2009 for neighbourhood development	Measures the entropy of functions within new urban fabrics	Df = functional mix; fi = functions; n = number of functions	Df = Sni = fi log(fi)/log(n)
	6. Presence of primary roads in the site	PRIN	Assesses the presence of primary roads near the site as added value in that it forms part of a large-scale system necessary for the mobility of those who live in the study area	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of primary roads at a distance between 300 m and 1 km GOOD: Presence of primary roads at a distance of 2 km SUFFICIENT: Presence of primary roads at a distance of 4 km INSUFFICIENT: Presence of primary roads at a distance less than 300 m or greater than 4 km
	7. Quality of connections between main roads in the site and flow between neighbourhoods	PRIN	Assesses the intelligibility and degree of safety of connections between the main roadway network within the site and the secondary network that accesses the different sub-environments or housing units (local or inter-neighbourhood network)	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Smooth traffic throughout the day, clear markings for the street, direction, and flow, dangerous intersections are well regulated if present BUONO: Often smooth traffic even with imperfect markings, irrelevant presence of dangerous intersections, and most of those are well regulated SUFFICIENT: Smooth traffic except for some particular times of the day, presence of sufficiently regulated dangerous intersections, in at least half of cases INSUFFICIENT: Often heavy traffic, presence of dangerous intersections that are not always sufficiently regulated, unclear markings
	8. Accessibility of the site on the urban level	PRIN	Describes the degree of accessibility of the study site under as a function of the urban context	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Site accessible from a high number of local, uncongested, safe roads BUONO: Site accessible from local roads with smooth, safe traffic SUFFICIENT: Site accessible from local roads that are safe but congested at rush hour INSUFFICIENT: Site accessible from local, congested, dangerous roads
	9. Density of biking paths (length/surface area or length/inhabitant)	PRIN	Considers the degree of accessibility of the study area to a non-polluting mode of transport	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Ratio of biking path length to number of inhabitants is >0.7 m/inhabitant GOOD: Ratio of biking path length to number of inhabitants is 0.54–0.7 m/inhabitant SUFFICIENT: Ratio of biking path length to number of inhabitants is 0.36–0.53 m/inhabitant INSUFFICIENT: Ratio of biking path length to number of inhabitants is 0.18–0.35 m/inhabitant
	10. Linear urban density of public transport	PRIN	Assesses the distance of public transport in terms of maximum length a resident can walk to a stop relative to the site in question	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	Unit of measurement: linear km/100 km2 Reference values OPTIMAL: >500 km/100 km2 (e.g., Torino, Cagliari, Frosinone) GOOD: 300–500 km/100 km2 (e.g., Milan) SUFFICIENT: 200–300 km/100 km2 INSUFFICIENT: <200 km/100 km2
	11. Effectiveness and quality of public transport	PRIN	Synthetically analyzes the effectiveness of public transport in terms of number of routes/day, coverage of rush hour, and type of connection (urban and suburban)	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of public transport stops at a distance <200 m, with high frequency for the type of transport GOOD: Presence of public transport stops at a distance <300 m, with high frequency for the type of transport SUFFICIENT: Presence of public transport stops at a distance <300 m, with varying or non-uniform frequency throughout the day or during the heaviest hours INSUFFICIENT: Absence of public transport lines within a distance of <300 m, with gaps in frequency
	12. Percentage of residents with walking access to areas of collective interest within 300 m (5 min) of green areas. Maximum walking distance to collective spaces and/or services	PRIN	Describes the accessibility (walking or public transport) to places in which collective life occurs, such as parks, recreation, culture, and information exchange centres	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	Accessibility is described by establishing an optimal balance in a maximum distance of 300 m, which can be walked in an average time of 5 min OPTIMAL: Accessibility for 70% of residents of the site in question GOOD: Accessibility for 50–70% of residents of the site in question SUFFICIENT: Accessibility for 30–50% of residents of the site in question INSUFFICIENT: Accessibility for <30% of residents of the site in question
	13. Availability of pedestrian zones and restricted traffic zones per inhabitant in m2	PRIN	Defines a hierarchy between cars and pedestrians, establishing a high quality of life in urban contexts where clear value is added to the availability of places limited entirely or partially to pedestrians	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from very bad to optimal	Places should be easy to access and, for an optimal ratio of proximity to the number of residents, be found within 400 m (equal to about 5 min walking) OPTIMAL: Number of pedestrian zones greater than 2 m2/inhabitant. Number of restricted traffic zones greater than 20 m2/inhabitant GOOD: Number of pedestrian zones 1.2–2 m2/inhabitant. Number of restricted traffic zones 12–20 m2/inhabitant SUFFICIENT: Number of pedestrian zones 0.4–1.2 m2/inhabitant. Number of restricted traffic zones 4–12 m2/inhabitant VERY BAD: Number of pedestrian zones less than 0.4 m2/inhabitant. Number of restricted traffic zones less than 4 m2/inhabitant
	14. Maximum walking distance to school for children	PRIN	Represents high quality if nursery and primary schools can be reached by walking less than 150 m	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Maximum distance to reach nursery and/or primary schools less than 150 m GOOD: Maximum distance to reach nursery and/or primary schools between 150 and 200 m SUFFICIENT: Maximum distance to reach nursery and/or primary schools between 200 and 300 m INSUFFICIENT: Maximum distance to reach nursery and/or primary schools greater than 300 m
	15. Degree of accessibility for disabled and elderly people	PRIN	Establishes the importance of building cities that can be used independently by weak subjects such as disabled or elderly people	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Total absence of architectural barriers and hills, well-built walking surfaces free of disconnections, presence of devices to ease use by disabled and elderly people GOOD: Absence of architectural barriers, presence of small disconnections on walking surfaces, presence of devices to ease use SUFFICIENT: Absence of architectural barriers, presence of inadequately resolved hills, walking surfaces with some disconnections, presence of devices to ease use INSUFFICIENT: Presence of architectural barriers and inadequately resolved hills, walking surfaces with significant disconnections, absence of devices to ease use
	16. Presence and usability of public functions	PRIN	Assesses the presence and use of public functions present within the study site. Structures with public functions can be divided as follows: – Public safety (police headquarters, Carabinieri, local police station, etc.) – Municipal offices – Sports centres and gyms – Non-commercial services (banks, public offices, etc.) – Newsstands	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of 5 different types of functional structures with walking access within 100 m from the closest public transport station/stop, total absence of architectural barriers and hills, walking surfaces free of disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures GOOD: Presence of 4 different types of functional structures with walking access within 100–200 m from the closest public transport station/stop, structures without architectural barriers, minimal hills, public walking surfaces with irrelevant disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures SUFFICIENT: Presence of 2–3 different types of functional structures with walking access within 200–300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, absence of architectural barriers, presence of hills, public walking surfaces with some disconnections, limited presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures INSUFFICIENT: Presence of 1 type of functional structures with walking access within 300–500 m from the closest public transport station/stop, presence of architectural barriers and hills, public walking surfaces with disconnections, absence of devices to facilitate use of the structures. Total absence or presence of non-functional structures or with walking access greater than 500 m from the closest public transport station/stop
	17. Presence and use of community functions	PRIN	Assesses the presence and use of community buildings within the study site. Community structures can be divided as follows: – Structures for childhood and required education (day care, nursery schools, primary and middle schools, etc.) – Structures for secondary schools and universities – Multi-purpose halls and theatres – Structures for local and supra-local bodies and associations to protect, enhance, and develop the local cultural heritage – Libraries – Museums/exhibit halls—Student residences – Religious services	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of more than 6 different types of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, total absence of architectural barriers and hills, public walking surfaces free of disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures GOOD: Presence of 4–6 different types of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, absence of architectural barriers, minimal hills, public walking surfaces with irrelevant disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures SUFFICIENT: Presence of 2–3 different types of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, absence of architectural barriers, presence of hills, public walking surfaces with some disconnections, limited presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures INSUFFICIENT: Presence of 1 type of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, presence of architectural barriers and hills, public walking surfaces with disconnections, total absence or presence of non-functional structures or with walking access within a distance greater than 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop
	18. Presence/use of basic health services	PRIN	Assesses the presence/use of health services within the study site. These include: – Basic medical offices – Paediatricians – Specialized medical offices according to the specialization – Pharmacies – Outpatient clinics – Protected residences – Assisted health residences – Retirement homes	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of 5 types of services with walking access within 100 m from the closest public transport station/stop GOOD: Presence of 4 types of services with walking access within 100–200 m from the closest public transport station/stop SUFFICIENT: Presence of 2–3 types of services with walking access within 200–300 m from the closest public transport station/stop INSUFFICIENT: Presence of 1 type of service with walking access within 300–500 m from the closest public transport station/stop. Presence of non-functional structures or with walking access more than 500 m from the closest public transport station/stop
	19. Presence/use of social buildings	PRIN	Assesses the presence/use of social functions present on the study site. These can be subdivided as follows: – Social assistance structures and services for minors and elderly people – Social/educational structures and services – Social assistance structures and services for disabled and invalid people – Social assistance structures and services for poor people – Social assistance structures and services to support large families and pregnant women – Emergency structures and services	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of more than 6 different types of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, total absence of architectural barriers and hills, public walking surfaces free of disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures GOOD: Presence of 4–6 different types of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, absence of architectural barriers, minimal hills, public walking surfaces with irrelevant disconnections, presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures SUFFICIENT: Presence of 2–3 different types of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, absence of architectural barriers, presence of hills, public walking surfaces with some disconnections, limited presence of devices to facilitate use of the structures INSUFFICIENT: Presence of 1 type of functional structures with walking access within 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop, presence of architectural barriers and hills, public walking surfaces with disconnections, total absence or presence of non-functional structures or with walking access within a distance greater than 300 m from the closest public transport station/stop
	20. Commercial surface area per inhabitant and proximity	PRIN	Assesses the presence and use of commercial structures within the study area	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Optimal presence and distance of necessary shops <100 m GOOD: Good presence and distance of necessary shops between 100 and 150 m SUFFICIENT: Sufficient presence and distance of necessary shops between 200 and 300 m INSUFFICIENT: Low presence and distance of necessary shops >300 m
	21. Commercial façades present in the city fabric	PRIN	Assesses the presence, use, and quality of commercial façades within the study area	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence and ease of accessibility GOOD: Widespread presence but not always good accessibility SUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence only in particular areas but with good accessibility INSUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence only in particular areas and often-poor accessibility
	22. Quality and degree of parking area maintenance	PRIN	Assesses the architectural and urban measures to minimize the impact of parking areas on the context	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Significant presence of underground public parking with spaces with well-designed surface area GOOD: Ground-level parking with good use of greenery and materials and correct insertion in the morphological fabric of the site SUFFICIENT: Ground-level parking with good insertion in the morphological fabric but created with sometimes inadequate materials INSUFFICIENT: Ground-level parking with clear lack of mitigation elements and absence of maintenance
	23. Presence of areas for unexpected, unregulated stops	PRIN	Assesses the presence of areas throughout the site in which an unexpected, unregulated vehicle stop occurs, creating problems for traffic flow (double parking), which also compromises the safety of the street network	Assessment of the current state	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Total absence or irrelevant presence GOOD: Presence that slightly influences traffic flow SUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence in some portions of the road network which influences traffic flow INSUFFICIENT: Widespread presence in the site’s road network
	24. Assessment of parking presence in busy areas	PRIN	Analyzes the number of public parking spaces in busy areas	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Number of parking spaces always appropriate for the number of users GOOD: Number of parking spaces inadequate only during particular events SUFFICIENT: Number of parking spaces inadequate at least one day per week INSUFFICIENT: Number of parking spaces very inadequate
	25. Public kerbside parking spaces per inhabitant	PRIN	Analyzes the number of public parking spots in order to assess eventual shortages that can negatively influence the perceived urban quality and traffic safety	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	Taking an average of ISTAT data referring to the Italian cities with the best quality of life, a reference value equal to the number of parking spaces per 100 inhabitants is equal to 2.3 OPTIMAL: Number of spaces >2.3 per 100 inhabitants GOOD: Number of spaces between 1.8 and 2.3 per 100 inhabitants SUFFICIENT: Number of spaces between 1.3 and 1.8 per 100 inhabitants INSUFFICIENT: Number of spaces <1.3 per 100 inhabitants
	26. Private parking spaces per inhabitant	PRIN	Analyzes the number of private parking spaces in order to evaluate possible shortages that can negatively influence urban quality as perceived by residents	Assessment of the current and designed states	Quantitative assessment	Scale from insufficient to optimal	Taking an average of ISTAT data referring to the Italian cities with the best quality of life, a reference value equal to the number of parking spaces per 100 inhabitants is equal to 1.4 OTTIMO: Number of spaces >1.4 per 100 inhabitants GOOD: Number of spaces between 1.2 and 1.4 per 100 inhabitants SUFFICIENT: Number of spaces between 1.0 and 1.2 per 100 inhabitants INSUFFICIENT: Number of spaces <1.0 per 100 inhabitants
2.6. Quality of spaces and public services	1. Quality and degree of walking and cycling path maintenance	PRIN	Assesses the architecture, maintenance, and coherence of walking and biking paths in reference to the overall design of the study area. Possible criteria for evaluation include: quality, accessibility, and condition. Maintenance should be constant	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: High, uniform quality throughout the territory, constant maintenance GOOD: Good quality, even if not completely uniform. Maintenance is uniform, even if not exemplary, but does not affect the integrity of the paths SUFFICIENT: Non-uniform quality of paths, but overall sufficient and/or spotty maintenance INSUFFICIENT: Poor quality of paths and/or maintenance
	2. Quality of lighting in open spaces and buildings during the day and at night	PRIN	Assesses systems for solar shading during the day both in open spaces and buildings, as well as night-time illumination	Assessment of the current state	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Sunny spaces throughout the day, with elements for protection during the day and efficient illumination systems at night GOOD: Sunny spaces a good part of the day, with shading elements and uniformly present night-time illumination SUFFICIENT: Sunny spaces at some points of the day, with somewhat ineffective shading elements and night-time illumination INSUFFICIENT: Scarce sunlight during the day, without shading or night-time illumination (e.g., suburban neighbourhoods with tall, close-set houses, little greenery, and poor lighting)
	3. Architectural quality (street furniture, presence of art installations) and degree of public open-space maintenance	PRIN	Assesses the quality and presence of street furniture	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Most outdoor gathering spaces (>70%) have quality street furniture and/or art installations. Also well maintained, accessible, functional GOOD: Many outdoor gathering spaces (>50%) have quality street furniture and/or art installations. Maintenance, accessibility, safety, functionality have no negative elements SUFFICIENT: Some outdoor gathering spaces (>30%) have quality street furniture. Maintenance is constant or uniform, but does not influence accessibility or functionality INSUFFICIENT: Lacks quality street furniture or it is not easily accessible, non-functional, or unsafe
	4. Quality and degree of parking maintenance	PRIN	Assesses the architectural and urban measures to minimize the impact of parking areas on the context	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Significant presence of underground public parking with spaces with well-designed surface area GOOD: Ground-level parking with good use of greenery and materials and correct insertion in the morphological fabric of the site SUFFICIENT: Ground-level parking with good insertion in the morphological fabric but created with sometimes inadequate materials INSUFFICIENT: Ground-level parking with clear lack of mitigation elements and absence of maintenance
	5. Quality of community areas in public housing	PRIN	Measures the architectural quality and degree of maintenance of community areas present within low-cost public housing settlements	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative/quantitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of design solutions that allow a ratio of exterior permeable walkable surface area and the exterior area of the site >50%. Presence of street furniture widespread in functional, safe spaces, with ample but shaded sunlight, appropriate night-time illumination. Prevalence of functional open and green spaces in an excellent state of conservation, newly constructed, or recently restored GOOD: Presence of design solutions that allow a ratio of exterior permeable walkable surface area and the exterior area of the site between 30 and 50%. Presence of street furniture widespread in functional, safe spaces, with ample but not completely shaded sunlight, appropriate night-time illumination. Prevalence of functional open and green spaces in a good state of conservation, excluding new or recently restored areas SUFFICIENT: Presence of design solutions that allow a ratio of exterior permeable walkable surface area and the exterior area of the site between 20 and 30%. Presence of street furniture widespread in functional, relatively safe spaces, with average or high, unshaded sunlight, low-intensity night-time illumination. Prevalence of relatively functional open and green spaces with localized surface instabilities and zones that require architectural restoration INSUFFICIENT: Presence of design solutions that allow a ratio of exterior permeable walkable surface area and the exterior area of the site <20%. Absence of street furniture. Absence of green spaces or prevalence of open and green spaces that are functionally obsolete and unsafe or unusable
	6. Quality and level of maintenance of public-housing buildings	PRIN	Measures the architectural quality and degree of maintenance of low-cost public housing buildings	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Buildings that satisfy more than 60% of the following requirements: modification and qualification of consolidated and/or degraded fabrics, conservation and enhancement of historical fabrics, modification with functional integration, renovation of the urban space, bioarchitecture and urban ecology, resource savings, improvement of environmental quality, accessibility, visibility and adaptability (DM 236/89), flexibility, new modes of life and housing use, weak social users. State of maintenance: functional buildings in optimal state of conservation, newly constructed, or the object of recent restoration GOOD: Buildings that satisfy 40–60% of the following requirements: modification and qualification of consolidated and/or degraded fabrics, conservation and enhancement of historical fabrics, modification with functional integration, renovation of the urban space, bioarchitecture and urban ecology, resource savings, improvement of environmental quality, accessibility, visibility and adaptability (DM 236/89), flexibility, new modes of life and housing use, weak social users. State of maintenance: functional buildings in good state of conservation that do not require outstanding maintenance, recovery/restoration; excludes new constructions, or the objects of recent restoration SUFFICIENT: Buildings that satisfy 30–40% of the following requirements: modification and qualification of consolidated and/or degraded fabrics, conservation and enhancement of historical fabrics, modification with functional integration, renovation of the urban space, bioarchitecture and urban ecology, resource savings, improvement of environmental quality, accessibility, visibility and adaptability (DM 236/89), flexibility, new modes of life and housing use, weak social users. State of maintenance: no functional buildings with significant superficial instabilities or buildings that require outstanding maintenance or recovery/restoration INSUFFICIENT: Buildings that satisfy <30% of the following requirements: modification and qualification of consolidated and/or degraded fabrics, conservation and enhancement of historical fabrics, modification with functional integration, renovation of the urban space, bioarchitecture and urban ecology, resource savings, improvement of environmental quality, accessibility, visibility and adaptability (DM 236/89), flexibility, new modes of life and housing use, weak social users. State of maintenance: functionally obsolete buildings with exclusively superficial instabilities or functionally unusable or abandoned buildings with superficial and structural instabilities
	7. Degree of maintenance and quality of public green spaces	PRIN	Assesses attention to the design and maintenance of public green spaces	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of parks and gardens with great architectural/landscape quality, realized with compositional, botanical coherence and a richness of natural elements, where the greenery is correctly maintained GOOD: Presence of parks and gardens designed to consider aesthetic factors and where the greenery is correctly maintained SUFFICIENT: Presence of parks and gardens with sufficient attention to architectural/landscape aspects and sufficient maintenance INSUFFICIENT: Absence of architectural quality and unmaintained greenery
	8. Degree of maintenance and quality of green spaces in mostly residential and public city blocks	PRIN	Assesses the quality, presence, and maintenance of green areas found within mainly residential city blocks. Index is extrapolated from previous indicators due to the particularity of the physical/socioeconomic context that characterizes these neighbourhoods	Assessment of the current and designed states	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Presence of well-designed, well-maintained green areas that are often used GOOD: Presence of green but unused areas SUFFICIENT: Partial presence of unusable green areas (trees, hedges) INSUFFICIENT: Total absence of green areas

Annex C: Clean and Healthy

CAT.	Indicator	Reference system	Description	Required data	Calculation method	Unit	Threshold
3.1. Biodiversity and natural resource management	1. Territorial biopotential (BTC)	SAAD—Arpa	Indicates the state of energy metabolism of vegetation systems and represents the capability of an ecosystem to conserve and maximize the use of energy, capable of identifying the evolution/involution of the landscape in relation to the degree of conservation, recovery, or transformation of the environmental mosaic	Land-use map	Calculation of the surface area for individual areas in m2	Mcal/m2 of territory for each type of use	A (low) Prevalence of systems with energy subsidies (industries and infrastructure, built areas) or with low metastability (bare areas, rocky outcrops) ≪ 0.5 B (average-low) Prevalence of agricultural/technological systems (pasture or arable land, sparse building), natural degraded biotopes or those with average resilience (wild grasses, sparse shrubs, treeless riverbanks) 0.5–1.5 C (average) Prevalence of seminatural agricultural systems (arable land, grasslands, orchards, vineyards, hedges) with average metastability resistance 1.5–2.5 D (average-high) Prevalence of natural biotopes with average resistance and metastability (climate-adapted shrubs, pioneer species, rows of plants, urban green areas, reforestation, tree farms, poplar plantations) 2.5–3.5 E (high) Prevalence of biotopes without energy subsidies, seminatural (forests, copses) or natural areas with high resistance and metastability (low plain and foothill forests, humid zones) ≫ 3.5
	2. Presence of ecological areas (agricultural, green permeable)	PRIN	Presence of agricultural areas in peri-urban bands around the city. These areas are often part of ecological networks that allow a network of green areas protected on the supra-local scale to be constructed. In addition, the maintenance of green areas is guaranteed by agricultural workers, with minimum expenses for public administrations	Surface area of agricultural/ecological areas	(Σ ecolog. and agric. areas)/(Σ total area)	%	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence of ecological areas over >20% of the site GOOD: Widespread presence of ecological areas over in 15–20% of the site SUFFICIENT: Widespread presence of ecological areas over 10–15% of the site INSUFFICIENT: Total absence of ecological areas
	3. Presence of areas of natural or landscape interest	PRIN	Assesses the presence and extent over the site of areas of natural or non-anthropized landscape interest	Landscape assessment of the projects; SIC; ZPS; Agenda 21	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Widespread presence with high interest GOOD: Concentrated presence with high interest SUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with medium interest INSUFFICIENT: Concentrated presence with low or no interest
	4. Permeability	BCN	Level of waterproofing of the land and its impact on the occupied territory	IP = index of permeability; Ft = surface-type factor; At = area of the type of surface; S = surface of reference	IP = [S(Ft × At) (m2)/At (m2)] · 100 (*) (*) of the analyzed area	%	Min. 30%
	5. Fragmentation	Urge	Measures the fragmentation of green spaces. Ratio between the extent of patches and their circumference/perimeter	AP = Area of patches C o P = circumference or perimeter	F= AP/C o P	Scale from lacking to good	<0.07 Lacking 0.07 < 0.10 Average >0.10 Good
	6. Isolation of urban green areas	Urge	Measures the level of isolation of green areas in the city	D = Average distance between patches (inter-patch distance)	m	Scale from scarce to good	Good: 500 m Moderate: 500 < 1000 m Scarce: >1 km
	7. Connectivity	Urge	Assesses the capacity of the green urban system to increase the migration of species between green patches	C = Number of existing connections	No.	Scale from none to optimal	No connectivity: 0 connections Modest connectivity: 1–2 connections Good connectivity: 3–5 connections Optimal connectivity: >5 connections
	8. RIE—Index of building impact reduction	SAAD—City of Bolzano	An index of environmental quality that certifies the quality of the building intervention with respect to land permeability and green areas	Svi = ith surface area that is permeable, impermeable, or marked “treated as green” Sij = jth surface area that is permeable, impermeable, or marked “not treated as green” ψi = ith outflow coefficient ψj = jth outflow coefficient Se = Equivalent tree-covered surface area	$\frac{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n SVi\frac{1}{\varPsi_{\mathrm{i}}}+(Se)}{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n SVi+\sum \limits_{j=1}^m{S}_{ij}{\varPsi}_j}$		Limiting values for surface areas: https://www.comune.bolzano.it/UploadDocs/3180_Nuove_Schede_superfici_RIE_Ital.pdf
3.2. Air and water quality and management, energy consumption	1. Presence of congested intersections and streets that influence the smells and sounds of the site	PRIN	Monitors the level of noise and air pollution at rush hour on the main roads within the study area, with effects on traffic-planning and public-transport policies	Current and designed state	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Absence of intersections and roads with intense traffic (>1500 vehicles/h) GOOD: Presence of intersections and roads with intense traffic that does not influence the senses SUFFICIENT: Presence of intersections and roads with intense traffic and perception of smells or sounds INSUFFICIENT: Presence of intersections and roads with intense traffic and perception of smells and sounds
	2. Deficient sections of the sewer system	PRIN	Assesses the presence and spread of deficient sections of the sewer network, which can influence the smell of a site	Current state	Qualitative judgement	Scale from insufficient to optimal	OPTIMAL: Absence of deficient sections GOOD: Instances of limited deficiency in the sewer network in case of rare/exceptional events SUFFICIENT: Occasional events related to deficient sections without significant discomfort related to flow, hygiene, and direct or indirect damage INSUFFICIENT: Presence of deficient sections
	3. CO2 emissions	CAT	Measures the CO2 equivalent emissions produced within the local area	Air-quality data	This indicator corresponds to European Common Indicator 2: local contribution to global climate change. This considers local activities that entail the use of fossil fuels (carbon, petroleum, natural gas) for energy (including transport) and waste management. Methods and calculation available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/urbana/common_indicadors.htm	Tons per year	As with other indicators, the indicator of CO2 emissions per inhabitant generated in a city depends on various factors, such as the level of economic or industrial development, but also on other questions such as the degree of business competitiveness, inefficiencies in energy consumption, or transport systems Following the proposals established by the European Commission in the energy/climate package, the desired reduction can be fixed at 20%/inhabitant/year by 2020 Examples of reference: Malaga: Emissions of CO2 (tons/year) = 2,156,399 Emissions per inhabitant = 3.74 Marseilles: Emissions of CO2 (tons/year) = 2,666,000 Emissions per inhabitant = 3.17 Turin: Emissions of CO2 (tons/year) = 5,079,607 Emissions per inhabitant = 5.59
	4. Energy consumption	CAT	This indicator estimated urban energy consumption per inhabitant, considering both energy consumption and fuel consumption	– Data related to annual energy consumption (electricity, natural gas, hydrocarbons, and LPG) – Population census (number of inhabitants)	(Electricity + Natural gas + Hydrocarbons + LPG consumption)/(No. of inhabitants)	Toe (tons of oil equivalent) per inhabitant per year	As with the previous indicator, a desired reduction can be fixed at 20% by 2020
	5. Water consumption	CAT	This indicator measures the daily amount of water consumed by a city inhabitant	– Information regarding annual consumption of domestic and total water – Population census (number of inhabitants)	(Volume of domestic water consumed)/(No. of inhabitants · 365)	Litres per person per day	Following recommendations from the WHO, a desired reference level can be set at 100 L per person per day for domestic water consumption for Mediterranean cities participating in the project
	6. Waste collection and management	CAT	This indicator measures the volume of urban solid waste generated daily per inhabitant and the percentage of waste that is recycled	– Total volume of urban solid waste generated – Volume of recycled urban waste – Population census (number of inhabitants)	Volume of urban solid waste (Total volume of urban solid waste per year)/(No. of inhabitants · 365) % of recycled material = (Volume of recycled waste · 100)/(Total volume of urban solid waste)	Kilograms per inhabitant per day Percentage of recycled waste	Ranges of 1.2–1.4 kg per inhabitant per day are established, along with a desired level of recycling of about 50% in the set of Mediterranean cities participating in this project
	7. Air quality	CAT	This indicator represents the number of days per year in which poor air quality was registered, considering the most important pollutants	Data recorded for each pollutant (SO2, CO, NOx, O3, PM10)	SO2: Number of days in which the 125 μg/m3 limit is exceeded CO: Number of days in which the 10 mg/m3 limit is exceeded NOx: Number of days in which the 50 μg/m3 limit is exceeded O3: Number of days in which the 120 μg/m3 limit is exceeded PM10: Number of days in which the 50 μg/m3 limit is exceeded	Number of days per year in which the level is exceeded	Desired levels in this set of indicators are defined on the European level: SO2: Daily limit: 125 μg/m3, which should not be exceeded more than 3 times per year CO: Daily limit: 10 mg/m3, which should never be exceeded NOx: Hourly limit: 200 mg/m3, which should not be exceeded more than 18 times per year. Annual limit: 40 mg/m3 O3: Daily limit: 120 mg/m3, which should not be exceeded more than 25 times per year PM10: Daily limit: 50 μg/m3, which should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year
	8. Quality of drinking water	SAAD Efficient cities	European Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption			%
	9. Quality of silence	CAT	Percentage of the population exposed to unrecommended high noise levels, considering noise during both the day and night	– Georeferenced noise map – Georeferenced city street map – Georeferenced population census	Quality of silence (day) = (Number of people exposed to more than 65 dB during the day)/(Total number of inhabitants) · 100 Quality of silence (night) = (Number of people exposed to more than 55 dB at night)/(Total number of inhabitants) · 100	Percentage of population	Desired levels of about 25% of the population during the day and about 15% at night in the set of Mediterranean cities participating in this project
	10. Coastal erosion	SUS	Evolution of the coastline	% of eroded coastline
	11. Percentage of artificially protected coastline	SUS	Measures works for coastal protection (embankments, dams, breakwaters, or other stable structures)	% of coastline with stable defences
3.3. Natural and manmade risks	1. Presence of at-risk activities	PRIN	Assesses the presence and spread of these activities within the study site	Census of at-risk activities	Qualitative and quantitative index	Number of at-risk activities per surface area	OPTIMAL: No at-risk activities in the area in question, or <1/100 km2 GOOD: Limited presence of at-risk activities, but without interfering with the remaining area, or between 1 and 2 per 100 km2 SUFFICIENT: Presence of multiple at-risk activities that interfere only occasionally with the study area, or between 2 and 3 per 100 km2 INSUFFICIENT: Presence of at-risk activities that interfere with the remaining area, or >4/100 km2
	2. Presence of areas at risk of flooding	PRIN	Assesses the presence and degree of danger and the presence of areas subject to flooding within the site, in reference to the indications given in the current PAI (Hydrological Plan) of the area	Census of floodplains	Qualitative and quantitative index	Scale from insufficient to optimal	For Italy: OPTIMAL: Not included in areas of possible flooding GOOD: Project area partially included in areas of band C SUFFICIENT: Project area partially included in areas of band B INSUFFICIENT: Project area partially included in areas of band A
	3. Light pollution	PRIN	Defined as any form of artificial light that spreads outside its functionally dedicated areas and, particularly, if oriented above the horizon	Current and designed state	Lombardy Regional Law no. 17 of 27/03/2000 “Misure urgenti in tema di risparmio energetico ad uso di illuminazione esterna e di lotta all’inquinamento luminoso” [Urgent measures regarding energy savings related to external lighting and combating light pollution], and the specific “VISUAL” directive, implementation regulation of LR 17/00		With respect to the viewpoint, the project should be inserted in the landscape in order to favour its perception from within and from outside, avoiding elements with negative visual impact but not renouncing its recognizability, promoting areas of landscape/environmental use The project is judged positively if placed in continuity with the contextual ecological network, completing and implementing it through plantings and the creation of green spaces. It should focus particularly on the geomorphological characteristics of the area where it is inserted, characterized by agriculture, and placed in continuity in the design of open spaces. Finally, it should avoid becoming a point of discontinuity with respect to areas of natural or landscape interest
3.4. Waste collection and management	1. Density of urban waste bins per inhabitant	PRIN	Assesses the density of containers for waste collection, the frequency of emptying, the uniformity of container distribution in the study area, the presence of systems to collect various materials and recycling, and at-home collection	Statistical data according to municipality	Qualitative and quantitative index	Number of containers (recycling + regular waste) per km2 of municipal surface area	OPTIMAL: Uniform, widespread presence in the territory (>300/km2). Correct management and maintenance GOOD: Widespread presence in the territory, even if not always uniform (>200/km2). Correct management and maintenance SUFFICIENT: Non-uniform presence in the territory (>100/km2). Management and maintenance with occasional instances of degradation INSUFFICIENT: Low presence in the territory (<100/km2) or evident instances of degradation in management and maintenance
	2. Percentage of landfilled urban waste	SAAD	Yields the percentage of landfilled urban waste	Eurostat sources		%	In the 28 states of the EU, 28% of managed urban waste is recycled (average of 131 kg/inhabitant/year) and 15% is composted (71 kg/inhabitant/year), while 26% (122 kg/inhabitant/year) and 31% (147 kg/inhabitant/year) is incinerated or landfilled, respectively. While the European average is 204 kg/inhabitant/year for landfilled waste, there are percentages less than 1% in Belgium, Germany, and Sweden, while another three countries (Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands) landfill less than 5% The Italian Waste Prevention Program, implemented under the Ministry of the Environment and the Protection of Land and Sea with decree no. 2 from 7 October 2013, identifies the production of urban waste per unit GDP as one of the parameters to be monitored to evaluate the effectiveness of various measures taken. For this parameter, a reduction of 5% from the 2010 level was fixed for 2020
	3. Percentage of recycled urban waste	SAAD	Yields the percentage of recycled urban waste	Eurostat sources		%	Data from European references: Recycling and composting (which includes both aerobic and anaerobic treatment of the biodegradable fraction) is more widespread in older member states (152 and 84 kg/inhabitant/year for recycling and composting, respectively) than in newer member states (47 and 19 kg/inhabitant/year, respectively)
3.5. Safety	1. Safety of the road network (vehicular traffic)	PRIN	Considers the dangerousness of the road network due to vehicular traffic and regarding weak users	Current state	The ratio of the number of annual accidents (total number, with wounded, with victims) involving vehicles or motorcycles per km of road and the ratio between the number of annual accidents involving pedestrians or bicycles per km of road		OPTIMAL: Optimal roadway maintenance, numerous clear, well-located signs GOOD: Good roadway maintenance, signs are clear and well located SUFFICIENT: Sufficient roadway maintenance, signs are sufficiently clear and well located INSUFFICIENT: Roadway maintenance scarce, signs are unclear and not always well located
	2. Safety of the road network (pedestrian and bike paths)	PRIN	Assesses the safety of pedestrian and biking paths through the presence of fixed devices, borders, or street signs that can protect walkers and bikers from traffic	Current state	Qualitative and quantitative assessment including the number of devices to protect pedestrians and also their effectiveness		OPTIMAL: Constant presence of signs and protection at critical points and along the path GOOD: Widespread but incomplete presence of horizontal and vertical signs and protection (e.g., at intersections and not along straight paths) SUFFICIENT: Protective elements present only at some very critical points, non-uniform markings (e.g., lacking horizontal or vertical signs, pedestrian and biking paths not differentiated) INSUFFICIENT: Scarce, wrong, or excessive markings (e.g., unclear signs, conflicting indications). Presence of protective elements
	3. Quality and degree of maintenance of pedestrian and bike paths	PRIN	Assesses the architecture, maintenance, and coherence in reference to the overall design of biking and walking paths in the study area. Possible evaluation criteria include: quality, state, and accessibility. Maintenance should maintain a constant level of perceived quality on the paths, in their material and chromatic integrity	Current state			OPTIMAL: High quality and uniform throughout the territory, constant maintenance GOOD: Good quality, even if not completely uniform. Uniform maintenance, even if not perfect, but does not influence path integrity SUFFICIENT: Non-uniform quality, but sufficient overall and/or inconstant maintenance INSUFFICIENT: Low quality and/or lacking maintenance
	4. Quality of lighting in open spaces and buildings (both daytime and night-time)	PRIN	Assesses the solar shading systems during the day both in open spaces and buildings, as well as night-time illumination	Current and designed state	Qualitative assessment that considers, in addition to the sunlighting characteristics during the day (the more sunlight, the higher the score), the possibility of shading buildings and open spaces with street furniture or plants (like for sunlighting, the score is higher for systems that offer the best protection). For night-time illumination, the presence of artificial lighting systems and their effectiveness is evaluated		OPTIMAL: Sunlit spaces throughout the day, with daytime shading elements and effective night-time illumination GOOD: Sunlit spaces a good part of the day, with shading systems and uniform night-time illumination SUFFICIENT: Sunlight spaces in some parts of the day, with not completely effective shading or night-time illumination INSUFFICIENT: Scarce daytime sunlighting, low possibility of shading or scarce night-time illumination (e.g., peripheral neighbourhoods with tall, close-set houses, few green areas and lack of lighting)