Ársrit Verkfræðingafjelags Íslands - 01.01.1914, Blaðsíða 32

32
more wholesomness and beauty, in connection with
the arrangement of the buildir.g. I mean hereby, that
except in villa-quarters, the best thing would be to
join the houses of every bloc »gable to gable,« then
the pieces of ground belonging to each house would
be behind the houses and seperated from each other
only by a fence. Then all the pieces of ground would
form one continuous area, hedged in by bouses on
all hands. This would very likely give shelter enough
as to allow the growlh of trees 'and other vegetation,
which would add to the beauty and healthfulness of
the place. Circumstances permitting, gardens could be
laid out between the houses and the streets.
The arrangement could of course vary according
lo the different parts of the town. The proportion
between occupied and unoccupied land is of course
different in the middle of the town, or in other parts
where the grounds are most expensive, and in quarters,
where most of the buildings are private dwelling-
houses, it is different in sparselv and in densely
populaled places. In that respect the building regula-
tions now in force do not make any distinction be-
tween the ditlerent parts of the town, and the same
height of houses is allowed everywhere, in reference
to the brealh of the streets and the area to be enclosed.
It would be most natural here as in other countries,
to build the highest houses in the middle of the
town and along Ihe main streets. On the olher hand
it is reasonable, here as elsewhere to keep the height
of houses within certain bounds. It would come to
be seen, that a great height of houses is attended
with more disadvantages than advantages.
In the last years I have procured the newest
building acts of our neighbourcountries. The Swedish
way of settling the question is most after my liking.
1907, a cominittee was appointed, consisting of mayors
and architects from different parts in the country;
Ihe work of this commitlee issued in a treatise: »Be-
tankande med förslag till byggnadsstadga för riket,«
printed in Stockholm 1909. As the tille shows, it
contains building regulations for the kingdom on
whole. I do not know whether this bill lias become
law as yet, hut anyhow, we can learn a good deal
from it. All towns in Sweden are, for instance, classi-
íied according lo the number of their inhabitants and
their likely increase, the lowest group only being al-
lowed to build twostoried houses. Wooden houses
with more than two slories are nowhere allowed.
This seems to me worlhy of imitation. The greater
a town is, the more reasonable is it to make the
population dense and the houses high, and the grealer
is the possibility of procuring íire implements and
life-saving ajiparatus. But there it, of course, makes
a great difference, if the houses are built of a com-
bustible materiat or not. In the building regulations
now in force it is proliibited to build wooden houses
higher than twostoried, or the height of the walls
must not exceed 28 feet, but still habitation is al-
lowed on the third lloor, and garrets are allowed
without any limitations. This has been carried so far,
that the roofs of many twostoried- houses here are
quite set with garrets, which is bolh objeclionable
and ridiculous. These houses are really threestoried,
only more dangerous, more expensive and uglier. As
a matter of course this should be altered in our new
building regulalions, and why should we allow a
greater height of wooden houses, than is allowed in
Sweden, the land of wood.
I suppose opinions will differ as to the height,
which should be allowed to stonehouses. I think it is
unnecessary to allow more than four stories or a
height of 14—15 meters, up to the roof. In foursloried
houses there could be a question of demanding fire-
proof floors, made from reinforced concrete — this
would only be fair, such floors being hardly more ex-
pensive than wooden ones. In stonehouses where more
than two stories are inliabited (the dwellings being
more than for instance 7 meters above the ground)
tlie stairs should be fireproof.
I do not wish to enter into a greater length as
regards the arrangement of building in this town.
Here has atready been built so much, that there
would be many and great difficulties in carrying out
the proposed reforms, but in my opinion, of course
everything possible should tie done to promote a
better arrangement.
Now I liave to mention the concrete and walls
made froin it. In our building regulations there are
no provisions dealing wilh the different substances
which might be used for concrete. Of course it is
dilíicult to make such provisions both plain and un-
niistakable, yet eazy to carry out when followed
strictly. Still one tliing, at least, could be amended,
viz the size of the chips or of the gravel used for
concrete. It is usually too coarse. It should be ord-
ered that the broken stones used for ordinary con-
crete (nol reinforced) miglit not exeeed 5 cm — in
thieker walls 6 cm, the conditions being more closely
defined in the building regulations. The chips used
for reinforced concrete should be of a smaller size;
in piers, for instance, where ironbars are needed,
and in stairs and lloors, the chips should not exceed
2,5—4 cm, according to what was considered most
suitable. There should also be made provisions re-
garding the sand used for concrete and plastering,
the use of sand from stony hills should for instance
be limited, if il did not fulíil certain requirements,
also it should be prohibited to use salt substances