propose today an initiative that moves in parallel with that of the composition of the TMP, but absolutely present and linked to the revision of the Urban Plan.
The Building Regulations is a regulatory tool is necessary for the achievement of all building work. Trafficking of usability standards, sanitary, morphological until the procedures provided for interventions.
The discipline of living spaces and their quality is closely related to this Part, and left to the initiative of the designers or assessment of fees (eg the Building Commission or landscape).
The proposal for the PGT today that he sees the request for adoption of a Sustainable Building Regulations, for brevity RES below.
No instrument similar in the past has never directed toward the criteria of sustainable construction, and I refer to reality padernese.
Over 10 years I have specialized all'ANAB, the National Association of Architecture Bioecological, and in 2000 were studied interventions, innovative facilities, and architectural solutions for sustainable building, looking at what has been achieved in last decades of the nineteenth century. Today it feels (right) talk about sustainability, but with increasing interest of the public, and spent another decade.
are increasingly requiring customers specifically in the study of their houses to introduce, with due attention to these issues, the solutions to help reduce energy consumption, or water, for the use of materials that are not harmful in the home, such as the use of lead-free paint, and more. All I propose solutions that currently but it is significant that there is this feeling of collective consciousness.
And this is an issue which concerns not only more environmentally aware and sensitive individuals, but is a requirement, I would say emergency widespread.
There is awareness to cause damage to the environment and for the containment of resources, are not infinite, and for the real need to make ends meet, that contain energy costs in managing the activities of living (hence the attention that is not reflected is only related to the comfort of private homes, and the theme is also extended to the quality of the workplace).
padernese do not know if the administration has already thought of and want to promote or adopt some incentive mechanism at the local level because they do not yet know the principles by which the Plan will be drafted.
In this regard now describe this proposal to the PGT. I hope
that the commissioner take action to that effect, and not to leave anything to chance, so I will open my proposals observatory pgt be registered by February 28, 2011. RES
This would be a new draft of which the Building Regulations could also start right away, without any further steps and inspections on PGT (not an upgrade would be subject to SEA), as for example whether the municipality of Milan. RES
This should then deal with all building projects (private and public) supporting characters who are of higher quality while respecting the principles of eco-efficiency and environmental compatibility.
I will not go into particular and bore you with too much technical information, then the principle is, so the contents will then be divided and who will be affected will be able to evaluate them below.
One goal, which I think may be the heart of this proposal.
There is a rewarding mechanism of incentives (which provides a discount on charges of urbanization), which demonstrated a guaranteed energy savings (governed by regional standards), for example, can not count the cabinet in the SLP (SURFACE gross floor ).
Why do not we adopt a mechanism even more virtuous?
Today the building is classified according to the energy class, as is the case for years for appliances.
This system allows us to understand what a consumer product, if the appliance is a finished product, in the case of a building is a product yet to be realized.
reduce consumption and operating costs by adopting such systems for building envelopes of greater or lesser quality means to reduce or increase the consumption of fossil fuels and the resulting greater or lesser environmental pollution, and then work for a common good.
However, I wonder what today will agree to invest (with higher direct costs during construction) with a situation of market values \u200b\u200brather than critical, if not achieving the minimum necessary?
This is what happens every day.
My proposal is to adopt a progressive gaming system of rewards.
Translate: polluter pays, who does not pollute, does not pay.
And I propose an example, if a house came to improvements in certificates of containment of losses 40% lower than that prescribed by the rules, you could cut down on the construction of the contribution of -40%.
If the house was "passive", that is totally independent, with clear improvements in certified 100% content of the resource could not be reduced by up to 100% contribution of construction?
Perhaps it is too little for municipalities that are virtuous budgets on infrastructure costs, when they should use this money just to urbanize the city, but something similar could imagine.
The four levels of study and qualification which I suggest would be:
1. environmentally friendly (as compared to the place)
2. the eco-efficiency energy (as compared to the system of global resources)
3. the comfort (quality of private space)
4. the protection of public health (general interest) The
would apply to both private and public initiatives.
Today regulations, in the case of public buildings or collective functions also allow exemptions from the rules in force, unorthodox ideas in the twenty-first century.
If the administration did not arise in the first place to lead by example and encourage the adoption processes as virtuous can think of to address the question of the environment and depletion of resources, requiring only private actors?
Let's try with the Building Regulations for Sustainability.
0 comments:
Post a Comment