## 3 Results  
### Land Use-Cover Maps Analysis and GIS Processing  
The following intermediate outputs were further processed:  
* Four LU maps of the whole study-area, with a common reclassified legend (Figure 5). * Four LU maps, three of them devoted to each time step considered (1817, 1907, 1960) and clipped on the urban class recognizable in the subsequent time step (1907, 1960, 2009, respectively); a fourth land use map was clipped with the buffer areas of 100 m around the urban areas of the 2009 map (Figure 6). All maps were georeferenced by means of a first order polynomial transformation and more than 100 points of correspondence for each one. The average RMS was between 20 m (1907 map) and 50 m (1817). The error associated with the transformation was calculated as the RMS sum of all the residuals of link points and showed a good assessment of the transformation's accuracy [41]. Then, the MapAnalyst calculations, used for the assessment of visual accuracy, showed a root mean position error of between 14 and 18 m, highlighting the high accuracy level of the transformation process. The resulting maps can be considered as intermediate outputs because they were the basis for subsequent analysis, both in terms of landscape configuration and composition, as well as LU structure changes. Regarding the analysis of the whole study area, Figure 5 shows the distribution of the reclassified land uses in the four time steps. A greater compactness in the perimeters of the different types of land use in the maps of 1817, 1907 and 1960 can be observed (Table 3). On the other hand, the map of 2009 definitely presents a more articulated spatial configuration, both in terms of a greater detail of representation and in terms of the effect of urban expansion. Each map is significant for determining driving forces, pressures and trends with respect to each historical phase. Specifically:  
* the LU map of 1817 is characterized by the dominant presence of forests;
* the LU map of 1907 is characterized by the rapid and constant growth of vineyards and sparse vegetation;
* the LU map of 1960 is characterized by an initial reduction in vineyards;
* finally, the LU map of 2009, is characterized by significant anthropogenic pressure and urban sprawl and the almost total disappearance of vineyards. Figure 5: Land use maps of the time steps 1817–1907–1960–2009. Figure 7 shows the trend in the amount of areas expressed in ha with reference to each LU type for the whole period of the analysis (from 1817 to 2009). While almost all the LU classes show discontinuous trends over time, the urban class is the only one in constant growth, even when assuming an exponential growth rate since 1960. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c} \hline \hline  & **1817** & **1907** & **1960** & **2009 s** \\
**Label** & **\% of the** & **\% of the** & **\% of the** & **\% of the** & **\% of the** \\  & **Total Area** & **Total Area** & **Total Area** & **Total Area** \\ \hline Urban & 3\% & 5\% & 6\% & 24\% \\ Agricultural areas & 43\% & 3\% & 36\% & 36\% \\ Vineyard & 21\% & 59\% & 27\% & 0\% \\ Forest & 32\% & 13\% & 15\% & 20\% \\ Sparse vegetation & 1\% & 21\% & 16\% & 20\% \\ \hline TOTAL & 100\% & 100\% & 100\% & 100\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Percentage of land cover classes of the total study area for the different time steps. Figure 6: Land use classes inside urban areas in the following time steps: 1817–1907–1960–2009. Regarding LU trend analysis in urban/peri-urban areas (Figure 8), the comparison was performed by considering each time step map in relation to the year 2009 and each time step map in relation to the subsequent one. The comparison of the LU map of 2009 with the 1817 one shows that urban expansion has principally affected agricultural areas (72% of which have disappeared, including vineyards in this class), but also a significant amount (10%) of forests have been lost.