The architecture of rebuilding: construction, industry and infrastructure

Within ten years, the reconstruction could be considered substantially complete. Speaking at the conference ‘1976-1986: The Reconstruction of Friuli’, architectural historian and critic Francesco Tentori was indeed able to present a comprehensive evaluation. He said that the Friulian reconstruction had to be judged as an extraordinary achievement: «Positive in how it managed to blend and engage the most diverse forces, positive for the speed of the results, and positive for the overall average quality it achieved».

Given the results obtained in such a short time, especially compared to the ongoing ‘reconstruction with no end’ in the Belìce area, no other conclusion seems possible. In Friuli, approximately 75,000 houses were repaired, and 16,000 were rebuilt at an impressive rate. For buildings that had suffered light damage, reconditioning took only three years, at a rate of around 10,000 dwellings per year. However, the average rate for repairs was 5,000 buildings per year and 1,500 for new dwellings.

This extraordinary result was made possible by an interconnected system of administrative, regulatory and socio-cultural factors operating simultaneously, which has become known as the ‘Friuli Model’. From a strictly reconstructive perspective, the standardisation of procedures and practices proved fundamental: the assessment of damage and costs, design based on the Technical Documents, and building technologies that could also be implemented by small firms, thereby making it possible to accelerate the process. The objective was undoubtedly achieved, even if, according to architecture scholars, at the cost of an ‘anonymous reconstruction’ that in fact reproduced the pre-existing, at least in its visible forms. While praising the results, Tentori himself observed that in the Friulian reconstruction, the modern in architecture «emerged thoroughly defeated by the false-traditional [language]».

In the earthquake-stricken region of Friuli, modern architectural language is now reflected above all in the symbols of the community: the town hall and the church. However, restoration or faithful reconstruction of existing religious buildings was not the preferred approach; such solutions were adopted even in cases where the buildings were not extraordinary works of art, such as the Cathedrals of Gemona or Venzone.

Data on the reconstruction of the 1,192 churches in the Archdiocese of Udine provide a significant illustration of the impact of the earthquake: 114 churches were destroyed, and a further 234 were seriously damaged. An additional 484 places of worship sustained minor damage. During that period, 41 bell towers were demolished, and another 119 sustained more serious damage than the 164 that were impacted only to a minor extent.

However, the result was not always convincing among the new religious buildings; a case in point is the fleeting expressionism on display in the Church of Santi Pietro e Paolo in Majano. However, there were many examples of fine ecclesiastical architecture, including the Church of Sant'Elena in Montenars, designed by Augusto Romano Burelli and Paola Gennaro; the Church of Portis Nuova, designed by Emilio and Simonetta Daffarra; and the Church of San Giorgio in Lusevera, designed by Gianni, Elena and Giulio Avon.

New architectural trends were more evident in the renovation or refurbishment of town halls; of the 45 municipal buildings damaged in the disaster, 23 were rebuilt, two more than the 21 that were repaired. In some cases, historic town halls were extended and transformed, and even in these instances, the projects designed by the architects Roberto Pirzio Biroli in Venzone and Giovanni Pietro Nimis in Gemona, which were not without their critics, are still cited as benchmarks to this day.

In new constructions, the languages of modernism and postmodernism prevailed. The town halls of Cercivento and Montenars, designed by Augusto Romano Burelli, whom Tentori would later award the «Oscar for reconstruction», are among the most successful projects. Another notable example is the town hall of Clauzetto, designed by Giuseppe Davanzo, which is integrated into the historical fabric of the town at various altimetric levels. According to Tentori, the designs for the town halls in Buja by Giovanni Caprioglio and Alessandro Pertoldeo and in Osoppo by Luciano Semerani, Gigetta Tamaro and Adalberto Burelli were less successful. The scholar also gave a negative review of the new town hall in Artegna, but did not comment on the extension to the town hall in Sutrio, designed by Gino Valle, or the new town hall in Trasaghis, designed by Arnaldo Zuccato. Both projects had been completed in the years preceding the earthquake.

The reconstruction of industrial plants was likewise impressive. In Majano, the office building of the Snaidero company, considered one of the symbols of Friulian ‘modernism’, required some structural modifications. At the time of the earthquakes, the building was still under construction and lacked the famous portholes for which it is known today, but it continues to be a notable feature in photographs chronicling Majano after the destruction. In just two years, two new buildings with metal structures were converted into an exhibition and social services centre in the same industrial area. These buildings were also designed by Angelo Mangiarotti. Another exhibition building was designed by Alessandro Vittorio, who used distinctive geometric forms to ensure it was eye-catching for passing motorists. While the earthquake spared the service and office centre designed by Gino Valle at the Fantoni factory in Rivoli di Osoppo, which was completed in 1975, it destroyed the ‘Manifatture’ plant in Gemona. This was rebuilt in just one year following a rational design signed by Udine-based architect Emilio Mattioni that distinguished the production units from the service ones. The metal lattice structures, alongside those in reinforced concrete, made the space extremely flexible and easily expandable in the future.

The reconstruction of Friuli was conceived by the lawmakers as a means of development. The process was also characterised by the architecture of the viaducts on the Udine-Tarvisio section of the motorway and the infrastructure on state highways 13 and 251. These were designed by Silvano Zorzi, one of the most renowned structural engineers in Italy.

As part of the modernisation of the Pontebbana railway, which was partly elevated to eliminate level crossings, in the 1990s, Alberto Antonelli designed the new passenger building at the station in Gemona.

It was in this context that the aid guaranteed by the Vice President of the United States, Nelson Rockefeller III, following his visit to Friuli, came into play. In a short time, the US Congress allocated $25 million, approximately 21 billion lire, disbursed by the United States Agency for International Development, USAID. Between late May and early June, the programme director, Arturo Giovanni Costantino, arrived in Friuli with a group of American experts and technicians to utilise the funds. One million US dollars was allocated for the purchase of medicines and emergency supplies, while the remaining $24 million was earmarked for the construction of schools and elderly care facilities. Initially, the planning of the projects involved the nursing homes in San Daniele, Majano, Osoppo and Magnano in Riviera, and schools in Buja, Faedis, Gemona, Maniago, Osoppo, San Daniele, Travesio and Majano.

Following the earthquakes in September, the US Congress allocated a further $25 million, to which it added an additional $3 million to compensate for damage in the province of Pordenone, home to the US air base at Aviano. The second programme, funded by the $55 million allocated by the United States, equivalent to around €200 million today, involved constructing five schools in Aviano, Cividale, Maniago, Sacile and Spilimbergo; three centres for the elderly in Buja, Pordenone and Villa Santina; and a student residence in San Pietro al Natisone. The US authorities decided that the funds would be allocated directly to the National Alpini Association (Associazione Nazionale Alpini - ANA) for management, while the construction work would be entrusted to the Italian branch of the American engineering firm The Austin Company.

All of the projects, which were assigned to Italian and US professionals, had to adhere to the «most recent American anti-seismic design concepts». The selection process was highly competitive, with the firms Mitchell/Giurgola (Romaldo Giurgola in association with Ehrman B. Mitchell) and Renato Severino with Sergio Alessiani being chosen. Other professionals invited to submit proposals included Gianni Avon, the only professional from Friuli, and architects Marco Zanuso, Giancarlo De Carlo, Fausto Colombo, Vico Magistretti, Umberto Riva and Luisa Anversa, all from Milan. Although the designers were granted maximum freedom, they were asked to adopt a traditional style that was respectful of Friulian architecture.

Among the notable architectural projects, the works of Gino Valle deserve recognition, particularly the social housing district in Buja, financed by the Industrialists' Association, and the reconstruction of the urban landscape in Santo Stefano di Buja and Gemona. Across from the district designed by Valle in Gemona stand the Banca Popolare offices, which were initially designed by Carlo Scarpa and later completed following his death by Luciano Gemin. Although Scarpa was originally commissioned to rebuild the bank on a larger site, he was nevertheless not constrained by any limitations. He decided to restore the original structure of the destroyed Pontotti Palace, complete with its pitched roof, and complement it by adjoining a structure characterised by large skylights.