Z E M C H 2 0 1 2 I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e
380
Conclusions
On the one hand, therefore, there is a firm belief in industrialised building methods and
the “processability” of living, on the other hand; however, attempts have to be made to
react more closely to environmental issue.
Resisting all handed-down, preconceived notions of structure and functions, particularly
in large projects, the concern is much more the creation of the right framework for events
of life: restrictive building and conventions of use deprive us of a process, which brings
life into building, and allow us to really use them.
By being defined in a slightly less specific way, the themes of structure, construction and
environment gain more general validity, not restricted to a particular function, but open
enough to react to possible change. This is, however, not achieved by the kind of
openness that permits a totally free interchange of uses: a plurality of meaning is the
aim, not arbitrariness. “Structures for living” (Steidle 1994) is the concern of architecture
of natural gestures, put before the users. Structures for living are not simply houses, but
include all kind of structures in which various qualities of living form a part; it is a kind of
architecture in which buildings, and not building types are developed, architecture in
search of the specific within the general.
References
ASCHER W., 2001, “Guide to sustainable development and environmental policy”, Duke
University Press
BARUCCO M.A., 2010, “Social housing fra costo, qualità e sostenibilità” in “Il progetto
sostenibilie” 25/2010, Edicom, Monfalcone, pp. 76-79
CAMERA DEI DEPUTATI, VIII COMMISSIONE, 2010, “Indagine conoscitiva sul mercato
immobiliare”
retrieved on June 18, 2012
CECODHAS, 2012, “Housing Europe review”,
<
EN%20web2_1.pdf > retrieved on June 18, 2012
CRESME, 2011, a cura di Eliana Cancelli e Patrizia Colletta, “I driver del cambiamento
del settimo ciclo edilizio in Italia: innovare o sopravvivere?” in “ Il ruolo dell’architetto per
la città sostenibile”, Rome, pp. 38-50
GRECCHI M., 2006, “Riflessioni e proposte in merito al nuovo quadro esigenziale” in
“Nuovi modelli dell’abitare. L’evoluzione dell’edilizia residenziale di fronte alle nuove
esigenze”, Il Sole 24 Ore, Milano
GRECCHI M., CRESPI R., GRISOTTI M., 1993, “Experience and use of domestic space
over its life time span” in “International Congress: Innovative Housing”, Vancouver
LEPIK A., 2011, “Ritorno al sociale – Nuove prospettive nell’architettura del passato” in
Detail 4/2011, pp. 328-334
LEUPEN B., 2006, “Frame and generic space – A study into changeable dwelling
prceeding from the permanent”, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam
