Abstract:
Considering different approaches to the reconstruction of cities after earthquakes in recent years, we can outline different degrees of preservation and reconstruction: reconstruction of monuments; reconstruction of the network of public spaces; reconstruction of facades; reconstruction of urban fabric, consolidating and updating typological and constructive characters; provisional reconstruction in another site; ultimate reconstruction in a different site; reconstruction of the landscape or reconstruction of the visible aspects of man-made artifacts in the landscape. After the tragic Italian earthquake in Abruzzo in 2009 there has been a long querelle on how to rebuild L'Aquila: should a new town be built elsewhere, or the old city of L'Aquila be rebuilt on the same site using its own ruins? There are several intermediate solutions between these two extremes. in the case of Venzone different approaches were graded case by case with considerable success. Anastylosis was adopted for main monuments and some facades, the reconstruction of urban fabric using updated building types was accomplished, resulting in the reconstruction of the network of streets and squares “as it was and where it was”. The system of public spaces isn’t the material expression of a single manufacturer, but the highest material and symbolic human collective expression. Today the city of L'Aquila is looking forward to an answer to the debate on its reconstruction. The recent history presents an important example of city reconstruction following a an earthquake, a example well-known in the world but that in Italy seems to be forgotten. Can we find a better model than Venzone for the reconstruction of L’Aquila ?
