Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

NAP, Environmental Policy Review, DESIGN REVIEW PANEL, Criteria 2:…

- - - - ↓
- - - - ↓
  - - - ↓
- - - - How to align finance, tax, subsidies, and regulation with design quality.
      - Built environment quality is a cultural good and public asset.
      - Capturing the "premium" of good architecture as public or private benefit.
      - Making the value Periti Arkiteti deliver recognisable on the market
        
        to include real incentives for our engagement and our ability to mantain high value staff
    - - Direct subsidies for design quality.
      - Tax incentives for high-quality building and renovation.
      - Density or development rights bonuses (Singapore)
      - Levies or charges penalising unwanted activity, poor design, or underperformance.
      - Procurement conditionality - e.g. public funding tied to design criteria.
      - Performance-based schemes tied to long-term outcomes.
      - Taxes on land speculation or plot hoarding.
      - fines also for aesthetic noncompliance
      - Bonds or guarantees with financial penalties.
      - Subsidies available for Public flagship or demonstration projects
      - Financing Instituion Incentives
      - Permitting Gatekeeping
    - - Study System to Increase Market Value of Protected Properties
      - Independent design review panels
        
        to peg obvious alignent between design review and planning process advantage (e.g. timing or fees)
        
        Aesthetic Compliance Certification as part of Peer Design Reviewed Projects
        
        Loan Incentives Linked Also to Such Certification
      - Preferential loans or financing
        
        For Green Projects
        
        For for Baukultur-compliant projects.
        
        For projects that pass through a (possibly different) peer review channel
      - Architectural competitions and competitive design selection set as mandatory for given typologies (e.g. public buildings)
        SWISS Model
      - SET UP BASIC PROTECTED AREAS FOR PERITI ARKITETTI
        
        e.g
        
        Applications in UCA Need a PARK
        
        Projects with a Facade Longer Than 15m need a PARK
        
        Projects above a scale treshold need a PARK
        
        All Public Projects need a PARK
    - - Position
      - Propositions
      - Visibility
    - - realign the hidden incentives shaping built environment
      - Assume that system will be aused or spirit corrupted
        
        Include review structures and ability to re-align incentives employed to date
    - - SWIZERLAND
        
        Competition Rules and Structure
      - SINGAPORE
        
        Development Bonus Linked to Design-Quality
        
        Long Term Assesment and Bond Retention based on real performance
- - - - Meaningful - Togetherness - the fundamentals as human beings to live together, communicate, and interact
        
        Criteria 7: Sense of Place
        
        [2] Vision
        
        belonging- what gives you sense of place- familairity- relations / relationships
        
        sense of belonging
        
        community / human experience / sense of belonging / rooom to get your enenrgy to the system / contribute for future use/ a place i would like to see my children grow up/ connection to the land and reality/
        
        Tools
        
        [1] Analysis
        
        Loss of identity
        
        Incapability of a strong contemporary identity
        
        senseless/lack of touch - Mediterranean Climate
        
        form driven by ownership, Sanitary LN / maximizing on policy
        
        lack of form that reflects climate/environment
        
        lack of use of local material / contextual
        
        material selection > market driven
        
        cultural aspect > cheapest + less maintenance
        
        out of scale / height > no sense of urban holistic approach- skyline issues
        
        lack of sensitivity between public vs nature
        
        example lawns are there to be watched not experienced...
        
        will always give a sense of place
        
        lack of sensitivity between public vs public spaces- tables & chairs and their structures
        
        lack of sensitivity with existing buildings - no sense of resuse and re adapt / rigid policies not adaptable too
        
        infrastructure...defn lack of climatizing...
        
        Criteria 6: Context
      - dignity
  - - - Design Review Panels
        
        how to chose ppl for this
        
        Incentives- Tax + interest gains
        
        Design / Conservative (maybe representing SCH) / urbanists on board
      - peer-reviewed competitions (procurement)
    - - MCAST
      - UoM
      - Commercial Research
    - - education (from young age)
      - case studies
      - best practice / craft
    - - Awards eg: Premju Galizia
      - Campaigns
  - - - Tax rebates for good-quality architecture
      - Faster planning process by allowing the subjective parts to be discussed/ decided by comptent individuals
      - green loans
    - - Local Plans
        
        introduce buffer zones (thicker lines)
        
        UCA / Development Zone / ODZ
        
        sight lines - eg: is there a church?
        
        maximum does not mean automatically approved
        
        update based on context/ actual state on the ground (eg: mriehel is currently a warehousing zone on plan but office/retail in practice)
        
        Multi layered / high resolution plans/zoning
        
        Context based: eg - follow topography. a 'parametric' building height
      - Design and Policy Guidance
        
        give more weighting to Guidance
        
        emphasise context based
        
        remove the 1m opramorta - it is making penthouses look top heavy
      - Building Regulations