Abstract
Abstract. Three years after the earthquake that struck central Italy, a number of pressing points need to be addressed as part of a far-ranging discussion that seeks to identify the steps to be taken in response, including: the widespread agreement on the need for reconstruction efforts which ensure a high level of security; the importance of preserving the urban fabric of ‘minimal’ population centres that are unquestionably intertwined with their surrounding landscapes; the need to acknowledge the most valuable features of historic downtown areas, including their undeniable fact of their intrinsic fragility in the face of seismic events, even though construction techniques developed and refined over time have provided them with a certain resilience. While use is made of a frankly contemporary idiom, when needed to remedy shortcomings, a reconstruction grounded in a critical understanding of the ‘sense of place’ must guarantee that the identifying features of historic downtown areas remain in place (at least in terms of the lay of the land and spatial relations) while, at the same time, ensuring that the constantly evolving memories which render such areas unique are also preserved, so as to allow the past to play its rightful role in the planning of the future.
Highlights
The rebuilding of ‘minor’ historical constructed assets affected by earthquakes raises an unavoidable underlying issue: namely the antinomy between restoring what has been lost and preserving the original nature of the constructed fabric and the urban layout
In terms of urban memory, an effort should be made to favour a process of rebuilding based primarily on repairing, salvaging and restoring what has survived the earthquake, even if it is no more than the urban layout, while avoiding approaches that call for complete demolition and subsequent reconstruction, with the attendant risk of losing elements that mark the identity of the sites in question
In the specific case of minimal urban structures, it is of fundamental importance that the original site be preserved, though naturally without forgetting that full preservation of the ruins alone could lead, long-term, to their gradual abandonment, due to the inability of the new settlement to reprise the original factors of identity
Summary
The rebuilding of ‘minor’ historical constructed assets affected by earthquakes raises an unavoidable underlying issue: namely the antinomy between restoring what has been lost and preserving the original nature of the constructed fabric and the urban layout. Though a similar undertaking may draw on methodologies of proven effectiveness, it must take into consideration the unique nature of each piece of material evidence of the past, all of which, should receive specific attention and ‘care’. This process is characterised by the fact that, as Giovanni Carbonara aptly notes, “... The role of experience, fully appreciated by Kant (Von den Ursachen der Erdersschutterungen, 1726), contributed to identification of the technical features best suited to improve the resistance of structures and, more generally, of the anti-seismic safeguards which can be found even in the oldest examples of architecture, though there is no evidence that they were recognised as distinct practices within the overall technical culture of the times, and yet anti-seismic features such as buttresses, chains, stays and grips reinforcing masonry eventually became an integral part of construction rules
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
