Interni condivisi

The community today is characterized by multiple diversity within it, each individual is spokesperson of particular cultural synthesis. The crisis of collective values, on which it is structured in the past the design of public spaces, has inspired to a retreat in the private sphere who abandoned the project to purely mercantile logic and image (Bauman 2001). In public space, anyway, people spend most of their existence and this gives great importance to the problem of its quality. The need to respond to the desire of recognizable places through the project, in which the membership experience and find an answer to the need to live in the contemporary manner gives to the small scale approach a privileged sphere of action. The gaze focused on the human scale architecture, understood both physically and culturally, connect the project and space experience, regardless of the end use, as well as its sensory aspects and phenomena that arise from living in places and through the forms in which they are constituted (Borella 2008). The urban space increasingly becomes through small interventions more closely adhering to the demands coming from below, quickly capturing the social changes compared to large-scale projects These actions are able to transform the space perception and even large parts of the city, with a planning unmediated linked to the demands of contemporary living. As it is in interior architecture, the project is based on the awareness of being a step of a continuous transformation process, during which the fundamental theoretical models are mediated by the ability to read and interpret the traces provided by the pre-existence, substantiating proposals immediately given in their material, tectonics and sensitive consistency (Gregotti 1984).The private is not the contradiction of the public and its values, but its unique projection instead. The transformation process that the shared space has undergone in the contemporary, has led to a migration of models and procedures and a fade of margins between typological categories (Gregotti 2006). Among the emerging aspects is evident a process of "domestication" of public spaces, as a result of the processes of democratization of the relationships underlying the tendency to supplant the representativeness and not to focus on more meaning in one place, but also to disseminate it in several places not connected between them (Bauman 2009). If the open space today is the place where every single person exercises similar activities, new types of places are further and otherwise open to the community and sharing: the interior spaces dedicated to loisir, mobility, culture, exchange. In these families of collective spaces the paper aims to examine the ways in which forms embody the changes and demands of the communities that inhabit them (Amendola, 1997).