BOX 3

IJPP ­ Italian Journal of Planning Practice 1Vol. III, issue 1 ­ 2013

Margherita Giuffré

ISSN: 2239­267X

Architect, PhD in Urban Planning
Dipartimento Design, Tecnologia dell’Architettura, Territorio e Ambiente ­ Sapienza Università di

Italian historic centers ­ mostly composed of grouping of buildings of different
dimensions and shapes ­ showed a marked weakness in most recent earthquakes,
firstly in the L’Aquila area in 2009 and also in the Emilia area in 2012.
From analyzing the effects of earthquakes occurred at the end of the last
century, and in particular in Umbria and in Marche regions in 1997, the
difficulties of a vision focused on a single buiding emerges ­ when operating
on historical building fabrics – regarding the damages description, the safety
controls and the intervention they needed.
This Box examines some versions of the national anti­seismic technical
regulations, starting from 1996, with the explicit purpose of highlighting how
attention moves from the single building to its surrounding, until focus is
given to groupings of buildings ­ the “aggregate edilizi” ­ making this central
to the rules that regulate post­seismic reconstruction.
Until 2003, the technical regulations requiring the analysis of buildings
affected by seismic occurrences in order to define improvement interventions
and mitigation of seismic vulnerability referred only to single buildings.

THE ANALYSIS OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS
A brief survey on technical regulations and their effects on
urban planning



IJPP ­ Italian Journal of Planning Practice 2Vol. III, issue 1 ­ 2013

Giuffrè ­ Box 3: Analysis of hisotircal buildings

Following the San Giuliano earthquake in 2002 this regulation was reviewed
and, especially in relation to the problem of historic buildings, an profound
change was introduced with important implications for urban planning. In
fact, the Ordinance of the Cabinet’s President (OPCM 3274/03) introduces
issues concerning the wider building fabric and the characteristics of the
urban and historic contexts. These were subsequently modified in the 2008
revision. Since 1998, following the earthquake in Umbria and Marche regions,
the Law 61 on reconstruction had already introduced the concept of “unitary
intervention” within the "Piani di recupero" (Recovery programs), a planning
tool addressed to mitigate vulnerability, while restoring the built environment.
The use of this instrument enabled targeted interventions for improving
seismic safety and for reducing the seismic vulnerability of historic buildings.
At the same time, this significantly contributed to the preservation and
recovery of buildings of historical­monumental interest, through complex
recovery interventions carried out through unitary projects involving both
public and private agencies, which pay attention also to public spaces, paths,
escape routes.
Considering the anti­seismic normative as an evolving matter both from a
technical and an administrative point of view, it is rather clear that it is the
"aggregato edilizio" which represents the reference unit, thereby addressing it
during the post­seismic recovery studies. This operation should cause analysis
and interventions as well as the planning and management of historic
settlements that could be read as a form of prevention within the ordinary
town planning activity.



IJPP ­ Italian Journal of Planning Practice 3Vol. III, issue 1 ­ 2013

Giuffrè ­ Box 3: Analysis of hisotircal buildings