3 ms·
The submersion of (historical) buildings/villages is all about "how much they are valued?/how much does it cost to save them?" and "are we ready to spend that k
by jaclaz 5y ago
The submersion of (historical) buildings/villages is all about "how much they are valued?/how much does it cost to save them?" and "are we ready to spend that klnd of money?".
The latter example is a different thing, it is "health" related, just like the norms amd Laws about houses, specifying the the minimal requirements to be able to call a house "habitable", or suitable for humans to live in, that evolved during the years and nowadays are in Italy among - believe - the strictest ones, see this old post of mine that lists some of the base requirements:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21178607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21178607
at least compared to some other EU countries.
- frostburg 5y agoMatera was an example of extraordinarily old dwellings even for Italy, not of the decision making process (sorry, that was a bit unclear). The decision was in part health-and-safety related and in part a political issue of "people technically living in caverns makes us look bad" - the idea of fixing the living conditions in the Sassi instead of moving people in newly built houses was far from the sensibilities of the time.