This paper was published (on the following websites daily L'Aquila:
http://www.abruzzo24ore.tv/news/Il-terremoto-aquilano-ei- condomini-invisibili/11289.htm
http://www.ilcapoluogo.com
early June 2009, ie much before the decree on the reconstruction of heavy. It focuses on the question: "Adapting the condominiums on the threshold of seismic safety or the safety threshold for condominiums earthquake?". Unfortunately, the decree seems to confirm the validity of certain questions. The risk to the city fabric is a condominium "patched" in the name of a fictional reconstruction.
-----------
Abstract:
The question of condominiums is currently banished from the discourse on the reconstruction of the Eagle, but it covers most at risk of L'Aquila having to live in the future in obsolete buildings, where the collapse of the economic value is related to the lack of seismic safety. Thus it is necessary awareness that can contemplate a specific treatment of the situation and review the parameters of killing.
Earthquake d'Abruzzo is also due to the name they wanted to give this collective disaster (some suspect that this choice is contiguous to the intention of spread the funds to rebuild the entire region) that we forget that the salient features of this event is that it is an urban earthquake, the first in Italy by the tragedy of Messina and Reggio Calabria, the first of modernity. Leaving aside the ambiguities on the magnitude, the fact remains that little is said that the epicenter of the earthquake was right beneath the city, to be considered with regard to this speech as a place characterized by a dualism in which urban planning, buildings in the center of old, abuts a larger peripheral ring consisting almost entirely of buildings (and sometimes with individual houses or terraced houses that form the type of population that has suffered less damage total). This is L'Aquila, and this only makes what happened.
While we can not but admire the stoic efforts of local institutions to foster the rebirth of the old town under the motto "where it was before, as it was before," one can not help but notice that, beyond certain sensationalism, most of the urban population (approximately 80%) did not live in the center (the residents in the old town are about 6000), but in the city outskirts, almost exclusively in condominiums. In short, just pass on the motorway bridge and watch the city, it appears mostly to the eye? A plethora of condominium buildings. The heart of the Eagle is our beloved city center, but the body of the city, the place of the prevailing daily L'Aquila, are condominiums.
Bertolaso \u200b\u200bnell'affollatissimo meeting a few weeks ago with the City Council and citizens, said candidly that "you must be able to find a synergy between the condominiums" on the quantitatively most important part of disaster made landfall on our lives there now, after two months, nor knowledge nor strategy. The walkway has saturated the media with images of the old town and the hapless small Onna, but nothing of condominiums. How are condominiums Aquila after the earthquake? Seeing them is almost all standing, the city's image appears roughly the same as always, but - according to initial estimates of viability - it is almost always palaces variously "heart attack".
Condominiums L'Aquila: reinforced concrete buildings for the most part four-storey, where, after the disaster, see generally the first two apartments inside, sometimes outside, destroyed, often beyond that there is serious doubt or proof that the structures are more or less seriously damaged. The future for owners of apartments in apartment buildings uninhabitable comes loaded with unknowns, and this requires a definition of consciousness, the claim of a right to recognition of the situation. The drama of which is rumored to be as follows: "how do you demolish all buildings with structural damage?", "Would be a huge expenditure", "we will do everything to recover, in extreme cases you must return the property naked, heal and then rebuild from scratch the flats. " Let us ask ourselves: the game worth the candle?
Before groped an answer to this question is to consider another point: how long will it take to really know what is the state in which they pay thousands of buildings? The first tests of viability, which is still in progress, after a month and a half, we have restored an image based on a rough assessment "eye" aimed mostly at a preliminary inventory of the situation. Two hundred teams of engineers for a single hour's duration, two months time. To understand what to expect on the test "serious" for the damage assessment study of the engineers I interviewed Projectdfp [1] . The tests facing the condominiums are technically called non-destructive testing of structural elements, and these include, depending on the situation, up to seven tests (hammer, covermeter, sonic tests and ultrasonic, hammer plates, endoscopy, thermography, testing of pull-out) may require the development view of the structure of the shell, need - based on the damage and size of the building - not less than three days of work, and have a cost that can range from a few thousand to over twenty thousand € €.
The first point of discomfort comes when one senses that, if a test that was little more than a watch, two hundred teams are employing two months, how long will it take to do all this? Who wants to have the first act of his own pocket? So, just to know what are the actual conditions under which pay most of the houses Aquila is part of the legitimate fear that it will take years, and perhaps considerable private expense, at the time, we do not know if it will be refunded.
The second point concerns the parameters of recovery and the question of threshold abbattibilità. Once the damage - explain the engineers - the structure will be returned in condition as when it was built according to earthquake standards that the '74 or 96 (the new rules are more stringent, will not be retroactive). At best, after a very long time and enormous costs to the building is as good as before, that is able to withstand an acceleration of gravity of 0.25g (against 0.35g of the new legislation, against the average of 0.4g to the ground as the earthquake of April 6, compared with 0.69G of Onna, compared with the peak recorded in Pettino 1G). If you fail to return you can rest assured for the future? how can you, after what has happened, to be satisfied with the safety thresholds that are ahead? Yet perhaps the crucial point with regard to safety, the right to security of citizens, is that the parameters to which you are a possible threshold abbattibilità: adapt the buildings to the threshold abbattibilità or adapt the threshold abbattibilità the buildings? That is to say, the policy will guarantee security for the citizens or the need to contain the spent playing on the skin of the people?
The drama of the blocks is essentially the play structures: the engineer tells me. Pellegrini structures that have two stages before the collapse, the elastic and the plastic. When a pillar or column exceeds a certain threshold of stress in the process lose their elasticity and become plastic, which is a stage of no return before the collapse: the "loose", they lose strength, may also be subject to collapse due to stress minimum . Signs on buildings such as crosses between the windows, unusual bulges at the corners, cladding burst, cracking angle between beams and columns, are likely to indicate that a structure who has suffered too much stress, passing the point of no return for the loss of elasticity, entering into the plastic phase. Nearly all the condo buildings have allowed Aquila to save themselves but it seems clear that there is - so to speak - un'antisismicità "recyclable" and a "disposable", there are homes that only allow you to get out alive homes that also allow you to return safely. To take part in many security L'Aquila, L'Aquila most will have to wait years and years, hope to have access to significant financial assistance, and I do not know if they can be sure of having done the right thing.
Back So the first question: the game worth the candle? Let a view to limiting the damage and to ensure safety: they are interrelated perspectives. Compared with the damage control is easy to predict that the housing stock in L'Aquila will see a division between pre-and post-seismic construction, with a noticeable drop in economic value of the first. Within pre-seismic construction is plausible that the condominiums will become the least desirable type of dwelling, and therefore less valuable. To understand it is perhaps useful analogy: to have a condo today in L'Aquila is like having an action after the Parmalat financial crash. So it should be noted that, from an urban point of view, the most important consequences of this earthquake is the obsolescence of the condominium buildings. In this scenario what the future holds the landlord of a condo is the dilemma of whether to spend an amount for which recovery is likely to be higher than the future value of the property. All this brings us to the issue of protecting the security dilemma in the fall, for the future, the risk of recurrence of the tragedy of April 6, after the death has wrapped up those rooms, asking once again for a hand to his fortune. The apartments in condominiums before 6 April will not take any more, because you have the feeling that they are not safe places, because it is certain that they are less safe than other houses.
In any case, even opting for reorganizing the doubts remain. Residents will choose the first plans to redo the interiors of their apartments from scratch? Sell \u200b\u200bthem to speculators? To put it mildly: the last of those planes will return to live in apartment buildings turned into piles? Monthly assemblies will have to decide what to do, usually when you fight for hours already in having to decide whether to change a lightbulb? This is the drama that awaits us in the peculiarities of an urban earthquake. Perhaps it would be to open a discussion on institutional condominiums, to provide a detailed regulations covering differentiation threshold abbattibilità depending on housing types, to reinterpret the motto of the old town "where it was before, as it was before, and with it, for blocks a" different from before, in the safety of later. " What we can not accept the silence of the whole issue is too big to go unnoticed. Of course if the need to regain the center flows from a drive in the cultural, aesthetic, to reclaim the urban outskirts about practical matters related to living in safety, and in the name of this law should provide for strict rules, without half measures.
The architectural and economic challenge of reshaping the entire town - really taking charge of the matter condominium - in genuinely sustainable urban planning from the perspective of the estate seismic, appears, at present, impracticable. The rhetoric of identity recline mostly on the rebirth of the old town, in a speech in which the symbol subsumes the need, the right of everyone to live the future in security. In this tussle communicative L'Aquila L'Aquila is likely to come before, especially if this economic aid will be, as many fear, lower than those promised by the propaganda. All in a worrying scenario in which about 15000 people in emergency shelter already promised plenty seem insufficient as compared with estimates that talk about something close to 40,000 displaced people. There is now talk in order to fill this gap, of vacant houses, which are also probably in condos, will be secure? Statistically, such as earthquakes that struck the city can take up to two years and to provide more replicas of the same intensity as the primary (as was in the Val di Noto and its L'Aquila in early 1700). You can be sure?
The invisibility of condominiums could become a huge part of the invisibility of the urban population. Looms so the specter of a new identity in a city split in two by the earthquake, the citizens "unusable", the population of series B will have to wait at the edge of town, at best for years parked in the emergency housing promised by the Government . For the "obstructing" the perspective is often to do the "cabbage" in blocks of Civil Defense, expelled from the city and planted in rural surroundings, even in the midst of the national park, consuming the time waiting to get back their life.
L'Aquila, 28/05/2009
Antonello Ciccozzi
[1] This is one of the many studios equipped for testing which is discussed in this text.
0 comments:
Post a Comment