174
The Municipality of Rimini, in 2006, introduced a series of incentives for
the sustainability of new actions and restructuring works in its building regulations. This document calls them “Biobuilding actions”, and they introduce
the issue of the use of green on façades and in covers. In the chapter “Quality
of life”, under the entries “Urban quality” and “Architectural quality”, green
actions which benefit from incentives are listed (for instance, a reduction of
up to 50 % of secondary urbanization charges).
These procedures are a concrete approach which has been taken into consideration in the planning of buildings for years, promoting their environmental sustainability. In particular, the indexes or procedures designed by these administrations
highlight the issues which may affect the environmental quality most: the implementation of actions which enhance the quality of buildings and the application of
procedures which promote their completion.
Briefly, the favourable features of the indexes or procedures analysed so far are
the following.
Actions
• Building of green areas, namely yards with green areas, green roofs (RIE) or
green walls (BAF, GSF, GF).
• Building of permeable grounds (BAF, GSF, GF, RIE).
• Planting of trees and bushes (GSF, GF, RIE).
• Reuse/collection of rainwater (BAF, GSF, GF, RIE).
Procedures
• Implementation of incentives such as to promote high-performance actions (RIE,
Municipalities of Brescia, Florence, Rimini).
• Implementation of procedures such as to highlight the quality/price ratio of each
type of action (GF).
• Implementation of bonuses relative to actions which increase the quality of the
visible landscape (GF).
• Integration of the indexes with a list of actions which describes, from a qualitative point of view, how to manage specific issues, providing planners with a
series of potential solutions (Green Points, GSF).
An analysis of the indexes, in addition to these positive features, also shows
some limits. As already mentioned, the indexes analysed show various approaches,
relative to the specific urban contexts they are applied to. These indexes are structured in such a way as to promote the implementation of actions with a particular
environmental value, but in some cases no solutions which would be equally profitable are envisaged, as summarized in the table below.
S. Zauli Sajani et al.
The Municipality of Rimini, in 2006, introduced a series of incentives for
the sustainability of new actions and restructuring works in its building regulations. This document calls them “Biobuilding actions”, and they introduce
the issue of the use of green on façades and in covers. In the chapter “Quality
of life”, under the entries “Urban quality” and “Architectural quality”, green
actions which benefit from incentives are listed (for instance, a reduction of
up to 50 % of secondary urbanization charges).
These procedures are a concrete approach which has been taken into consideration in the planning of buildings for years, promoting their environmental sustainability. In particular, the indexes or procedures designed by these administrations
highlight the issues which may affect the environmental quality most: the implementation of actions which enhance the quality of buildings and the application of
procedures which promote their completion.
Briefly, the favourable features of the indexes or procedures analysed so far are
the following.
Actions
• Building of green areas, namely yards with green areas, green roofs (RIE) or
green walls (BAF, GSF, GF).
• Building of permeable grounds (BAF, GSF, GF, RIE).
• Planting of trees and bushes (GSF, GF, RIE).
• Reuse/collection of rainwater (BAF, GSF, GF, RIE).
Procedures
• Implementation of incentives such as to promote high-performance actions (RIE,
Municipalities of Brescia, Florence, Rimini).
• Implementation of procedures such as to highlight the quality/price ratio of each
type of action (GF).
• Implementation of bonuses relative to actions which increase the quality of the
visible landscape (GF).
• Integration of the indexes with a list of actions which describes, from a qualitative point of view, how to manage specific issues, providing planners with a
series of potential solutions (Green Points, GSF).
An analysis of the indexes, in addition to these positive features, also shows
some limits. As already mentioned, the indexes analysed show various approaches,
relative to the specific urban contexts they are applied to. These indexes are structured in such a way as to promote the implementation of actions with a particular
environmental value, but in some cases no solutions which would be equally profitable are envisaged, as summarized in the table below.
S. Zauli Sajani et al.