**5. Conclusions**

The estimation of the ease with which it is possible to move around the city on foot depends on several factors, some of which are related to the surrounding environment and psychological and perceptual aspects. The conducted analysis has shown with the results obtained that urban planning is much improved when a democratic approach that allows the population to participate in the choices to be made is included [49,83]. This also shows that there is room for a scientific and professional approach based on analysis and evaluation to arrive at the factors that shape our understanding and perception of space and thus influence our well-being. For example, a more in-depth study of the perception of enclosed spaces, such as flyovers or underpasses, could help to create a series of mitigation actions aimed at maximizing people's propensity to use them (light diversification, presence of a controller, more escalators) [84,85] The analysis based on the AHP method has allowed to compare di fferent design solutions implemented in a high pedestrian flow area and therefore it is assumed that this approach can be supported by a micro simulation approach in order to better understand the behavior of pedestrians.

The scientific approach could significantly improve the attention and the understanding of the needs of vulnerable users who are underrepresented not only in the usual policy making process, but also in traditional processes of public participation. In addition, as a professional and scientific tool, the implementation of tactical planning could improve the usability of open spaces (location of street furniture, signage, etc.), allowing for better communication and greater involvement of citizens. This is particularly important because of the growing importance of pedestrian tra ffic in many fields such as transport, climate, walking, economy, and health, and even more so in cities where pedestrian tra ffic allows social distancing, pollution, and congestion abatement.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, T.C. and S.B.; methodology, T.C. and S.B.; software, M.T. and T.P.; validation, M.T. and T.P. and S.B.; formal analysis, M.T. and T.P.; investigation, T.C. and G.T.; resources, T.C. and I.M.; data curation, I.M.; writing—original draft preparation, T.C. and S.B.; writing—review and editing, T.C. and S.B. and I.M.; visualization, I.M.; supervision, S.B. and G.T.; project administration, G.T.; funding acquisition, T.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research work was partially funded by the MIUR (Ministry of Education, Universities and Research [Italy]) through a project entitled WEAKI TRANSIT.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors acknowledge financial support from the MIUR (Ministry of Education, Universities and Research [Italy]) through a project entitled WEAKI TRANSIT: WEAK-demand areas Innovative Transport Shared services for Italian Towns (Project code: 20174ARRHT/CUP Code: J74I19000320008), financed with the PRIN 2017 (Research Projects of National Relevance) program. We authorize the MIUR to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes, notwithstanding any copyright notations thereon. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the MIUR.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
