Constraint scenic or environmental impact? A discussion idle
No, sorry, on an aesthetic level what you want. Also because I figured, I am neither an architect nor work in the field in person. But your discourse on environmental constraints seems a bit 'rhetoric. It is not only thermal insulation, this project has been classified in class A + for the environmental impact, especially on energy plan. Water cycle, plant to get hot water with the sun, the materials chosen to spend that kind of certification.
So if we talk about environment, I can not follow your criticism, partly because I assure you that the neighborhood is loooong similar architecturally speaking. I mean from an aesthetic all threads can be done, but from the environmental point of view definitely not. Meanwhile, because the context around it is exactly like the pictures you see of these new buildings (residential area is a 'new' compared to the medieval village , of course), but mainly because the decision to build there - and granted permission to do so clearly by the municipality - was dictated by the desire to produce a low environmental impact construction .
Which means, I repeat, that villas certified class A + for energy consumption el ' optimization of resources. We're not talking about the abuse made by a private villa, but that if a company can undertake - even - in the new building oriented to the latest standards that do concern the 'problem' real environment. What is pollution and that reducing consumption is solved, the appearance is quite secondary in this case. Also because I tell you that the surrounding context is basically the same ... then I wonder what the bond you went discussing. Probably some aesthetic choices were imposed by that council, I do not think they could do 'whatever they wanted'.
In fact, the effect is that new houses fit in with the old and already there are no 'do to blows'. And if you do not like country houses of the fifties can also be agreed, for love, I do not even like me. But do not come to make the rhetoric of environmental constraints in this case because I assure you that the opposite is true: it is a medium sized enterprise that normally works in Rome but has chosen to experience the building in the classroom A hinterland just to give a positive signal and innovative compared to Roman builders. For 'chose' I understand that if we want to build say following the directions on energy saving costs a lot and requires continuous updating.
Add
fact that this company - no rain on this - is not an architectural firm and thus probably is not really 'top' in terms of aesthetic choices more or less specific (but I can not judge I personally do another job). They specialize in large shipbuilding (condominiums, renovation of old building), and - when they have occasion to experience in residential construction small size - they have specialists in plant entirely last updated 'cry' in terms of energy savings techniques and environmental savings. That is, did buildings with solar water heater when and practically up to fifteen years ago there were still stable carbon (at least in Rome was like that, and unfortunately I'm not joking at all).
I know firsthand the architect - who obviously have - but it is certainly not their strong point - I can give you this any day of the week. But the environmental sensitivity are ready to spend as you like: the company chose to build in that village only after being hired by the municipality to renovate a wing of the local medieval castle. Now I have no photos of the exterior of the castle Sambuci , but one page that links to you give you an idea of what I say. This company also restructured castles, nor has restructured recently in another Schifanoia - in northern Lazio. Probably in the new housing does not have much imagination or too aesthetic sense, but certainly have environmental sensitivity and certainly do not deserve even a critique in terms of architecture: I imagine that if called to renovate a castle of the thirteenth century are an experienced and reliable than the technical.
Then of course, every yard is a different matter, but I assure you that we are not talking about the speculator who concoct a lot of concrete just to sell two houses. This in terms of civic and professional. On an aesthetic level - I say it once in an absolutely peaceful - I also agree with you, in general, also because my opinion is not the best qualified. But I think - I better inform you - in that area just to landscape have imposed some form and some colors: I could be wrong but just the similarity with the surrounding buildings makes me think that in terms of the arrangement of the exterior could not quite do 'what they wanted'. The project is instead born as 'little experiment' to bring housing and certified 'green' (and if you know how this sector is only a term which then combines aspects of two hundred thousand, on a practical level) to a price actually accessible to an ordinary citizen (who cares if the billionaire does not pollute, the problem is that all homes should limit consumption).
Of course I say this with the utmost respect and only groped to describe a bit 'better' context 'of which we speak, I will not change your mind mica on your aesthetic taste, which probably has every reason in the world. :) But you can not always rely on the environmental constraints on everything, even on subsidized certified low energy! Also because the alternative is to leave everything in the hands of speculators or real abuse, but I assure you that the efforts of medium-sized companies like this are far from being insensitive to the territory and most comprehensive law in relation to their work.
The point is that in Italy building is very complex and not always possible to do everything 'as we would like': But I swear that these are very environmentally conscious and very competent in their field - major restructuring of ALSO vintage buildings and plant a low impact. It 's true that it is a construction company and an architectural firm, so I can not tell if the plan cultural are' aesthetically flawless', but in technical terms are very competitive and reliable company, which works to 80 percent on behalf of government and condominiums - so ALWAYS in compliance with all applicable regulations. Indeed, probably the reason why they can survive economically in the jungle of building speculators there are in Rome is among the few able to follow in detail all the legal and administrative practices necessary for building works of some kind (and in this sense, these houses are a joke compared to a historic building in Rome or a castle). They have a legal department and an administrative office that care practices from A to Z of certified technicians in various fields, do the business for 40 years in a market - the Roman - far from simple.
Well, sorry if I insisted much, but not just because I like the 'havoc' Italian-style, especially those on the landscape and natural resources, I wanted to say that perhaps the appeal to 'environmental constraint' is not necessarily suitable for a case like this.
course we can discuss how we would redesign the aesthetics of our countries, but in practice many countries have Italian architecture 'dated' and continue to build that style (whether we like it or not, but probably just look at the technical departments of municipal the continuity of the landscape, even before the fashionable architectural).
while it is certainly true - and I am sure will agree with me - any effort that a company does - particularly in time of economic crisis - to address its trade and industrial policy towards a more sustainable economy if for no other merits my respect, my praise.
short, uses a flat and 'burn' natural resources by force, but if a manufacturer commits to study the latest techniques to make it better (and have it certified by the state, which should protect and ensure more) and click for investment by one of the most serious problems of the moment, well, that is fine for me.
If anything, the aesthetic problem to be considered bearing in mind the urban stratification of the whole country (And here I mean Italy), which often does not - physically - the introduction of rapid innovation and substantial, even in terms of the urban skyline and the solutions more or less modern. Or at least, from an urban history would say that ours is not a country that is rapidly changing its forms. I live in Rome, of course I know that the situation is complex and full of atavistic problems. But I also know that there are only speculators and building speculators, and especially so in this case is just the opposite.
:)
0 comments:
Post a Comment