Town and country planning/urbanistics and the "state of the art": A practical yet alternative approach. To urban rehabilitation

Abstract

The paper takes it as given that there is both a need and the possibilty to change and better the present legal framework for urban rehabilitation in keeping with administrative efficiency and opportunity and the Law as it stands. Any rehabilitation, it is here argued, should be an integrated process. Public and private action should be co-ordinated and thus carried out at the same time. Rehabilitation, it is stated, is a Public responsibility and be in no was subject to the wish to rehabilitate of a private owner. Likewise it should be undertaken as a project for the city as a whole and this gradually, the city 's administrative authorities deciding upon the purpose to be given to each building in question. Any subsidies offered should go to such owners of buildings as accept the purpose ascribed to their property by the city authorities. The author holds it but common sense that all monies for rehabilitation in private benefit must also, even though it be indirectly, also contribute to the public interest. The author 's suggestions are aimed at avoiding that inherent contradiction and bad governance that putting down public monies for a project the likes of conserving a building when this is of no benefit to the public as such who would spend it better on other initiatives that might well include the demolition of said building or its being brought into line with its zone's norms.