Petition against the central document repository
The following publication of the petition asked us what we ourselves also entirely agree with this. It is unfortunate that once again this is not a private action and the Hungarian Chamber of Architects office manages.
Petition to the Government of the Republic of Hungary
I, the undersigned, demand the Hungarian architects responsible for the construction plans required documentation center providing 277/2008. (XI 24th) Government Regulation immediate withdrawal!
The regulation
- ill-considered, since the implementation plan as detailed data involved in construction, so the plans would also capita than other actors do not need;
- copyright infringement if the plans are collected - not defined in the Regulation - person actually released, because the intellectual work of architects and consultants are not reproduced without their consent;
- infeasible in many cases, because if the builder does not készítteti the export plan, the architect can not give it;
- offending against the architect, as services performed by architects, the building has no intention to do, in burdens belong to the promoter. The required documentations impose an intolerable financial burden on them, why do not receive compensation, in addition to the consultants' plan is to document the pages within their remit and responsibilities;
- unrealistic as it requires the pdf format, which is not susceptible of any design program, not even certain that the future is simple matter to then. The storage plan of creating a single purpose may be that the documentation for future use should be, this contradicts the prescribed format only impossible to edit archiving;
- threatening the builder, operator, used for humans or animals, as submitted, very detailed technical plans, including electric, gas, alarm system design, allowing unauthorized persons, even criminals, terrorists insight.
We invite all architects to why the provided design services will only start if the plan is copyright right VÁTI signed a contract with him, in which each designer enter into a user fee többszörözésért, the current chamber design award at least 10% of per use. And tie to the project repository, as an interested, search for the builder, who contributes to the tervmásoláshoz, data release.
We call on the government to commence immediately after the withdrawal of regulation of professional consultation, which is the central repository plan to create the conditions for the relevant forms together with you!
We call the government to the construction of legislation in matters of current and past - such as the National Fire Protection Regulations also - history of serious professional errors as soon as possible to avoid creating Building Department is responsible!
Furthermore, we demand that all the regulations and legislation affecting the building must involve the preparation of architectural and engineering chambers of veto, to comply with the principle of subsidiarity, the European Union!
Done in Budapest, 2009. on March 15
the petition site and who have already signed
If you liked this writing, sign up for email értesítőnkre
Author: Nicholas Koos | 2009. in March. 17th | 851 reads
Category: Call | legal
Tags: 277-2008 , Hungarian Chamber of Architects , petition
Related Sites
Recommended sites
9 posts in "Petition against the central document library"
Leave a
Loading ... 
For the sake of fairness (source: http://www.mek.hu ):
"MÉK Board decisions:
The documentation center of recording 277/2008. (XI.24.) No. Gov. No connection
2/2009. (1.30). No. MÉK Bureau decision
The Board authorizes the President MÉK to 277/2008. (XI.24.) No. Government Regulation of the Minister promptly contact. If short notice is no withdrawal of the regulation, the constitutional court.
Bureau of the MEK to 2/2009. (1.30). No. decision on the basis set out in the 2009th March 5, has sent a letter to the minister, as well as information on the Chief Secretary and architect. If not done within 30 days of the withdrawal of regulation, then the MEK, the Constitutional Court. "
Reviewed by the Chamber in advance and approved it, as George Hartmann, EF-en summoned docs from the previous contributions showed.
koos.hu - Petition against the central document library ...
277-2008, legislation, Hungarian Chamber of Architects ...
The initiative is good, an impressive list of signatories, but argue with one or two sentences:
"The required documentations impose an intolerable financial burden on them, why not get compensation '
"Unrealistic, since it requires the pdf format, which is not susceptible of any design program, not even certain that the future is simple matter to then."
They are simply not true:
Of the export plan would also be prepared, copied, is that this can also be sent, it is not allowed to 'unbearable' burden, also obvious that these additional costs to be passed on to the building roof, if it does not work, then do not have to undertake the work;
Of the pdf from:
, Both quasi-standard, Microsoft has a nyögvenyelős attempt to replace, but I think even on the merits megszorongatás not going to go, that is simple matter to irrelevant, because the use is expected for decades features remain (in dwf, dwg formats may well have been true in the arguments);
Work-in software, which is standard (windows) there is no print output, the more I think sucks, as if we do everything by hand; standard printer can be installed as pdf-writer is also available free of charge also has a dozen;
Sokszorosítással of the plan dealing with entrepreneurs almost everywhere it is possible to scan the plan, largely by default has a pdf output (plus the costs in the beginning I wrote);
The above amatőrizmusok, easy lesöpörhető arguments I think is completely superfluous to the petition, even without these points very compelling argument would have been (completely unnecessary ammunition to the opposite side of such stupidity with - a serious chance that these weak arguments kipícézésével will 'counter attack').
And that is another matter, whether it should be left out in the cases out of the chamber, respectively. appropriateness of a parallel case to do it? And of course, is not to say that the chamber is good, doing everything right, just tactical expediency, operability am worried about.
the chamber would have a minimum of three months to bring the matter before the appropriate forum (since November). Now the second half of March is ...
If someone is jumping, you have the standard answer is that the MEK is not advocacy.
by the way the individual claims of agree with you, because the "PDF documentation" of the most mystifying, who is not familiar.
The pdf "print" is not his own CAD software, but anything can be slow to make a PDF for FREE.
Anyone who is a 2,000 square meter hall A0 drawings szkenneltesse to be, because I still work with pen tube, it is worth.
I enjoyed the most likely, my younger colleagues' posts. One of the fun factor was that an eye is not quite well látatóan probléba sense the essence.
The most "important" private citizen to private buildings there any public body, can not be anything to do with the regulation as suggested!!
BUT: the design of public buildings built in the post is very eminent public access (used to be: the economy!) Interest!
Any further questions of detail to be around it to rotate. This includes the fact that - as in R is not a word about the designer (note: the only designer R. know. But who is the designer???), Must be given to the total export, (realization) documentation, even if it is not ready, or not fully completed. So, the damage it alerted anyone to the state it wants to force the designer to additional costs (except for prev. Preparation and central archiváltatásra), which are outside the scope of interest. That is not because it is impossible to ab ovo, it can not compel anyone and anything!
The additional point (s). not a loser, "create" law who than can more clearly visible, or even their lives are not designed for a single building, and either do not know the construction process (though often changed) hierarchy köteleményrendszerét by several decades of practice already established ...), not heard the private - public ownership and about the differences between the theoretical (unless the building was oszt.vez. grandpa spiky morgolódásaiból ..).
Respectfully recommend all those interested should remember that the ántivilágban existed (although a completely different situation, ...) is an Investment Code, which covers all matters related to the building, and coordinated law contained, and into which a prominent politico pofáztak not included .. (Although they continued to do, but it was natural enough, it used to be said paraszteszük common sense), because they knew the beef trade issues of power so it is difficult to arrange, especially if you have not even logical ...
So, the new regulation, but only and exclusively state funds realized for installations!
Laszlo Bakos (71)
cert. architect
Veszprem
dear Laszlo
thanks for the véleményedért, but would like to draw your attention to the http://tervlap.hu/peticio/forum launched a forum site, where it would be worth to you to enter your opinion about the above
[...] Many people remember - mostly professionals - the early years of protest, which started as a petition, and which could connect via the Internet. Quote: [...] the petition [...]