Design task: building workers' hostels and guesthouses in the district one of Budapest's work area. The design is surrounded by empty lots are just one little plot there is a run-down apartment building and sufnisor.

The basic design of the building "L"-shaped design was one half of the board, the other half of the working horse fiber, the two main entrances.

In May 2008, after consultation with several chief architect of the plan was submitted to the Building Authority and the tervzsűrire. The artist has repeatedly asked for information about summer status of the procedure, the anticipated date of the license, he said that without a positive resolution tervzsűris start of the procedure (notice initiating the procedure, we can not fill a gap).

The plan is carried into the end of August tervzsűrire (notice we did not get on that date). The design jury's resolution of 28 September we received a fax. In rethinking the plan was requested.

The plan was revised several times been proposed, which is then always also been revised. (The building has only one main entrance, a hall to host, uniform façade design is given, the dissociation of the hotel and guest house, etc.).

2009th January. Repeatedly been declared at the beginning of zsűriztetés purposes.

2009th February 4 on the jury is less proposal for recasting the plan approval procedure found to be suitable.

2009th February 16 On request of the jury of the plan has been revised plan, which we presented the construction team leader, who said that the plan may be input.

2009th Building Authority in mid-February, the revised plan was submitted. Since May, the case is pending, was not eliminating, has not been rejected.

The artist finally sent to the administration for resolution, so we thought out 'of the plan on track'.

In mid-May (almost 3 months) were informed by telephone that the Planning Council resolutions submitted a construction plan and the plans are asked to send in digital form.

I did not understand a thing, because we have a plan for a positive resolution of our jury why another one.

I spoke by telephone with the rapporteur, who said that the plan is terminated jury, and the 2009th Since January the Planning Council, criticized the plans, and to reassure himself he thought that he shall send to the planned building.

The main architect personally made up for:

We told you that we do not understand why you need to plan, plan to take council, at the 2009th February Fourth on the plan has been judged by the jury plan and building permit process less átdolgozásokkal judged to be suitable.

The Main Contractor shall inform the builders and designers of the following:

1. Except as required by the January 1 of the plan to council resolution to give the plans. Jury in February of the plan was not legitimate.

2. The plan proposed council resolution only, not binding authority for the building.

3. The plan of the Council resolution called for the building authority, so they must be considered.

In this context, several observations and questions arose in us:

1. Since last year, an ongoing process of how the legislation adopted in January?
2. If the design jury in February was not legitimate, then how can we stamp, signed in the positive resolution of our plan, Jury?
3. Not at all how can you criticize a plan is not a legitimate plan, jury, and to take part in a chamber is safe?
4. Why does the administration plan, after almost three months do you think of the construction authority that the council should plan to bring this plan (plan for the Council meeting had been six)?

Now the new tervzsűris members of the plan can begin to think about, we can work over again, probably several times, although the design jury finding is not binding authority for the building (because it not only a recommendation).

We know that even a small family house on the same plot, same concept and design parameters, can be designed in many ways very well. Not to mention such a large building.

We also know that where there are two architects have two different views is the same building. Where a number of architects, there is increasing.

I'm not saying that a super-high building was designed, a simple and a workers' pensions (not five star hotel), the builder needs can easily be built, a high roof. Since then builders have operated for 10 years and workers' pensions, so he knew perfectly what needs are, how much room you are creating.

Then, the underdog of the week we participated in the tranquility of the Planning Council meeting. The plan of the Council meeting, the following objections were raised against the plan:

• Everyone agreed (except for investors planning) to land on the same zoning allows for hotel function, but this site is not suitable for this function is not optimal.

• If the hotel building is constructed and future 5-10 years from now all the adjacent land will be incorporated into the work area may be located, workshops or other buildings can be disturbing to guests.

• The pension and hostel functions must be separated better, especially in the receiving area.

• Part of the hostel to hostel in appearance, the pension board will be looking, not a single building that create an effect (although the whole of a building).

Summary: recommend (although it was not spoken directly) to start rethinking the whole thing, but of course this is only a 'recommendation'.

The minutes will receive a week, and we will be looking forward to the resolution described in a new body of highly qualified people about the building, from which another, like a panel of highly qualified people have recommended approval of the plan once.

the architect's name and address

The conclusions to be drawn once again to leave it to readers.

Stay tuned for further reports can be read.

related materials
252/2006. (XII.07.) Gov. order. advice about the plan
Design Tips | History of: VET, EVM, CMP
Design Tips | How do they work?
Design Tips | What (or who) is tested?
Design Tips | How to live a builder?
Planning Advice | an illegitimate? Plan Board's decision

If you have any advice on the design history / about juries, municipal cases, the Chamber, abusive, objectionable procedures and their opposite, you want to share with readers, please send it to us (not the posts). The most interesting, most instructive cases publish (of course, name, municipality, without naming the design jury because justice is not our goal, but the sharing of expertise).

I need advice on this plan?

• so, in its present form
• so, a wider remit than at present, as the authority
• yes, but much more stringent conditions
• Yes, but only in special cases would be justified
• not as a hotbed of corruption
• not because of something that will be tested, not the moderators
• not because the pay zsűroroknak lenses and therefore can not be
• not because of the existence of offensive specialist when he horse

Results

Loading ...

If you liked this writing, sign up for email értesítőnkre

9 posts in "Design Council | an illegitimate? Plan Board "