The constitutionality or otherwise of the building bonuses of the New Building Regulation (NOK) will be judged by the legal “arsenal” prepared by the Ministry of Environment and Energy for the final round of the confrontation in the Council of State (StE).
This is the study that documents the arguments in favor of the need to maintain the “benefits” that give extra…boys and square footage to the buildings and answers the objections of the other side, that is the municipalities, scientific bodies and citizens, in the big trial that is being held in Plenary session of the Supreme Court of Cassation, the most important of the last decades for the future of Greek cities.
The aim is for the chief justices to have the full facts on the case before issuing their decision, which is expected before the end of the year. In the trial, four appeal cases against building permits that were issued using the incentives of the NOK have been consolidated, in which the 5th Section of the Supreme Court raised issues of unconstitutionality but, due to their seriousness, referred them to the Plenary Session of the Court.
The study
In the 506-page study-report of the Ministry of Environment and Energy (YPEN) submitted last Monday to the CoE, the 15-member interdisciplinary team argues that the building “incentives” offered by the NOK respond to the city’s current challenges of adapting to climate change and need for an energy transition, as did the previous four regulations (1929, 1955, 1973, 1985) for the time they were in force.
What new did NOK bring in 2012? Through a series of provisions, it was given, in the form of an incentive, the possibility of increasing the square footage and the height of the buildings while simultaneously retiring old energy-intensive buildings to create climate-neutral cities and reducing land cover to release land surface by rendering privately owned land to public use . The report of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – implemented following a demand by the Council of Ministers – supports the NOK’s “bonuses”, while at the same time expressing reservations regarding the combined use of certain incentives which may alter the character of a neighborhood, a position which is also an argument of the other side.
Building bonus: Incentives for low energy buildings
First of all, the members of the interdisciplinary team of the Ministry of the Interior are in favor of the incentives given for the construction of low energy buildings (article 25 of the NOK). This is because in order to receive the “bonus” of a 10% increase in the building factor, as they point out, a 66% reduction in primary energy consumption must be achieved in the building. From the results of the comparison of the energy consumption, presented by the team of the Ministry of the Interior, between a new building that meets the minimum requirements of the existing Regulation on the Energy Performance of Buildings (KENAK) and another particularly high energy efficiency (as required by Article 25) it is clear that significant energy and environmental benefit.
In particular, depending on the climate zone of each area and the building’s heating system, the savings range from 22 kilowatt-hours to 47.7 kilowatt-hours per square meter per year. That is, for a 1,000-square-meter apartment building, the primary energy savings for the coldest climate zone (D’) is calculated at 39,900 kilowatt-hours, which roughly corresponds to the energy that a 28-kilowatt photovoltaic system would produce. As for the reduction in carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, it would be approximately 12.2 tons per year, which is equivalent to the amount absorbed by approximately 483 trees or the annual emissions of approximately 12 new technology cars.
The battle for “bonuses”
The NOK also gives the right to extra building or height in exchange for reducing the building coverage (Article 10) by increasing the common space in the dense urban fabric and outdoor zones between neighboring buildings. In addition, as the researchers argue, the construction of a planted roof or roof, on the largest part of the surface of the buildings, contributes to the improvement of the urban environment, while the use of 50% of the ground floor of a building or semi-outdoor space for vehicle parking (Article 15) in the decongestion of of roads.
However, the conclusion of the scientific team of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is of particular interest regarding the combined use of articles 10 and 15. As pointed out in the study, it should be strictly controlled and, if deemed appropriate, limited by the Administration and by special regulations implementation instructions content.
“The audit should examine in detail whether the planning proposals are consistent with the physiognomy and character of the area in which the building will be constructed, and whether they may lead to extreme variation in the height and volume of the building thus strongly altering the image of the city and burdening the livelihood of the residents”, it is reported.
Also, the authors of the report draw attention to the use of the basement and its extensions under the greenery for parking spaces (Article 17) and suggest that the instructions to the competent authorities be systematized so as not to limit the possibility of planting large trees and to consider whether it is preferable to place water features in the front garden in relation to the ground surface that is lost, which absorbs rainwater.
For its part, the Central Union of Municipalities of Greece (KEDE) in its memorandum to the CoE, states that NOK incentives are constantly used by engineers and private individuals as a result of the “unprecedented burden on the living conditions of the citizens of the country and the residential environment due to the building, in clear deviation from the special urban planning regimes that apply throughout the territory”. In fact, they make a special reference to the big program “Kon. Dioxiadis” who is running around the country for the completion of urban planning, pointing out that “the effort will be greatly distorted by the construction, in the meantime, of the planned building volumes, by virtue of the controversial provisions of the NOK”.
Arrangements for architectural freedom
With regard to article 11 of the NOK, which excludes closed balconies (bay windows), architectural ledges, lofts, attics, etc. from the measured surfaces in the building factor, the experts of the Ministry of Interior point out that the specific elements strengthen the architectural creation, while especially for the non calculation in the construction of the staircases underline that “it enables the creation of quality spaces of larger dimensions, not just functional spaces that cover the minimum required dimensions”.
In any case, the scientific team of the ministry points out that “the Administration must identify, at regular intervals, probably over a period of five years, weaknesses in the system, if any, after studying the appearing “unfortunate” examples of the application of the law and to improves the application guidelines and specifications process’.
However, as highlighted in the study by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, horizontal incentive arrangements for environmental and energy upgrades of buildings also apply in other European countries (Germany, France, Austria, Spain, Switzerland and parts of Italy). The deviations introduced in the building conditions in the examples of other states examined reach 30%, while in exceptional cases up to 50% (eg in combination with social housing as in France).
Source: ot.gr
#Building #Bonuses #Battle #Regulations
