Ensuring an adequate quality of experience for the users and presenting a pleasant level of aesthetics and style that transcends functionality.
The New European Bauhaus (NEB) paradigm identifies, within the dimension of Beauty, two primary requirements for the built environment: ensuring an adequate quality of experience for the users and presenting a pleasant level of aesthetics and style that transcends functionality. This revisits the principles of Vitruvian tradition, wherein architecture was regarded as a reflection of nature, and where aesthetic quality (venustas), stability (firmitas) and utility (utilitas) stood as its fundamental attributes.
There is a need to draw the attention of designers to issues of beauty in the built environment and to support solutions that go hand in hand with EU policies. Achieving beauty in the built environment should be a conscious pursuit and an explicitly declared objective of place-making, planning or building. This is inherently related to the preservation of cultural heritage, including rediscovery of history of architecture and places that feel familiar, or places that are in harmony with the natural world. The same protection and care should be extended to unique places and forms that appeal to people's creativity and imagination.
Today, various models for the aesthetic quality of architecture and the built environment are identified. This is characterised by the coexistence of traditional architecture and new building styles, depending on the region, available technology, and climatic conditions. As a result, European modern and historical architecture is characterised by a desirable diversity that should be enhanced and protected. At the same time, we are witnessing and contributing to a paradigm shift in the creation of living spaces. The contemporary approach emphasises sustainable design, environmental protection, supporting local communities, and satisfying aesthetics. There is an increasing use of local, natural building materials, greater attention to the material and cultural surroundings, and a concern to perpetuate the heritage for future generations of Europeans. Human beings remain the focus of architects’ and planners’ attention, but modern science is creating new tools to assess their wellbeing, including aesthetics.
Key Performance Indicators
| B.1 | Digitalization in Construction |
The extent to which disruptive technologies are adopted, with a specific focus on the establishment of a collaborative working environment and the integration of digital technologies, premanufacturing and automation. |
| B.2 | Quality of design and delivery |
The extent to which high environmental performance and project quality are ensured through the engagement of actors with relevant experience and competencies, the responsible procurement of certified products, and the optimisation of the quantity of sourced materials. |
| B.3 | Improving building resilience to extreme events |
The extent to which the design considers the different natural and man-made hazards to which the project may be exposed, including the effects of climate change, ensuring that the building and its components are designed to resist them and that preparedness measures are taken to foster more effective emergency management and rapid restoration of project functionality post-disaster. |
| B.4 | Ensuring occupant health, comfort and well-being | |
| B.5 | Improving accessibility of the built environment for everyone | |
| B.6 | Maximising durability and service life | |
| B.7 | Ensuring high level of aesthetic acceptance of buildings and spaces | |
| B.8 | Providing spatial coherence in planning and design | |
| B.9 | Improving preservation of cultural and natural heritage | |
| B.10 | Maintaining genius loci and improving sense of belonging | |
| B.11 | Understanding aesthetic perception of buildings and spaces through comparison to actual 'styles' and tendencies in art and architecture |
Handbook section