The beginning of the reconstruction phase marked the
first significant moment when the worlds of politics, on the one hand, and
technicians, on the other, were compelled to engage with one another and find
shared solutions in order to move from emergency to reconstruction.
Although the Regional Law enacted immediately after
the first tremor (No. 15 dated May 10 1976) granted the payment of
contributions «for the repair, reconstruction and replacement» of private
dwellings destroyed or seriously damaged in Article 6, the term
‘reconstruction’ disappeared from the subsequent Regional Law No. 17 dated
June 17 1976 (Urgent measures to meet the extraordinary and pressing
housing needs of populations affected by the seismic events of May 1976 in
Friuli Venezia Giulia). In fact, the Regional Council intended to limit
interventions to repairs only, excluding any actions involving structural works
from receiving public funding. The aim was to avoid the regulatory restrictions
imposed by anti-seismic construction legislation, thereby enabling a rapid
transition from tents to repaired houses.
In the heated debate in the Regional Council preceding
the passing of this Law, Councillor Cornelia Puppini, a leading political figure
in the Movimento Friuli Party, reminded attendees that this measure would be
the first of many, and that it aimed to repair houses with minor damage. She
criticised the exclusion of structural interventions, even though these were
expected to be partially funded by the owners. Puppini also drew attention to
the danger posed by large companies and «various types of contractors» who were
already circulating in the municipalities of the earthquake-stricken towns,
eager to «profit from the misfortunes of others».
Francesco De Carli, an elected councillor from
Pordenone who represented the Socialist Party, also remarked that, although the
measure was important, it was «certainly not complete and cannot bear the
entire burden, even for housing reconstruction alone». He added that it would
only cover non-structural repairs and that it would «only be acceptable if it
formed part of a comprehensive reconstruction plan».
During the same session, Franco Comuzzi of the Italian
Communist Party (Partito Comunista Italiano - PCI) stated: «In the Committee,
we were unable to obtain clarification on whether the limit of seven and a half
million lire [per housing unit] refers solely to economic value, or whether
there is also an absolute non-intervention limit for buildings, in order to
avoid activating the enforcement of the restrictive provisions of anti-seismic
laws and, consequently, more complex legislative mechanisms».
It is worth noting that, as prescribed by Italian
Decree Law No. 227 dated May 13 1976 (later amended and converted into Italian
Law No. 336 dated May 29 1976), structural repair work had to comply with the
provisions of Italian Law No. 64 dated February 2 1974 (Measures for
buildings with specific requirements in seismic zones) and its implementing
Decree dated March 3 1975. Regional Law No. 17, therefore, functioned as a
transitional law, regulating immediate repairs while serving as a ‘bridge’ to
the subsequent rebuilding phase. It was understood that this draft law would be
followed by others to guide the entire reconstruction process. However, in June
1976, the priority shifted towards swiftly moving as many homeless citizens as
possible ‘from tents to houses’ within the shortest possible timeframe. This
approach was adopted despite the fact that the technicians in charge of the
work would have preferred to combine the interventions into larger-scale
operations. Ultimately, the final decision was also made out of concern that
implementing large-scale strategies could potentially impose limitations on the
options available to the affected citizens as well as the strategic planning of
the local administrations.
As previously mentioned, the priority for the
technical experts was to avoid major errors and ensure a high level of
consistency in damage assessments carried out under challenging conditions and
within time-critical scenarios. Thus, the Regional Authority adopted a damage
assessment form developed primarily by the engineer Marcello Conti and
the architect Luciano Di Sopra. On this form, surveyors were required to
provide a 'synthetic evaluation' of the condition of each building, classifying
it as ‘destroyed’, ‘not repairable’, or ‘repairable’. In the latter case, they
had to indicate whether the required intervention was total or partial and
whether structural work was necessary.
In order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of
restoration work, the form indicated the estimated value of the building as of
May 5, as well as the estimated cost of the repairs, which was calculated by
adding together the ‘basic unit costs’ relating to the main construction
elements of the building. This established a complex system designed to prevent
the assessment teams performing the surveys from providing any design-related
information. However, it was subsequently decided at the political level that a
sheet containing General guidelines on the technical methods of the
restoration work needed to be added to the assessment report. Each survey
group consisted of three public officials or experts registered with regional
professional orders and associations, joined by colleagues from all over Italy.
The largest number of assessment groups operating simultaneously was 319, with
957 technicians in total.
In November 1976, the Regional Authorities estimated
the total cost of repairs at 210 billion lire, following further damage to
3,000 buildings that had already been repaired in September. Of this amount,
139 billion for Municipalities classified as devastated, 59 billion for those
classified as severely damaged, and 12 billion for those classified as damaged.
This figure corresponds to approximately 4 billion euros in 2025 terms, when
considered as a proportion of Italian GDP at the time.
In the case of buildings with less damage, repair work
often began before the survey team had finished their assessment. In fact, at
the aforementioned session on May 29, it was decided that regional funding
would also be granted for repairs carried out before the survey operations were
finalised. Consequently, it is difficult to quantify the number of dwellings
restored in the summer of 1976. In a study on the Costs of Earthquakes,
Luciano Di Sopra estimated that over 29,000 lightly damaged buildings were repaired
under the provisions of Regional Law No. 17 up until the enactment of Regional
Law No. 30 in June 1977.
The question of how the repairs of the summer of 1976,
some of which were later undone by the seismic activity in September, actually
took place remains. As discussed, rather than public intervention and
aggregated contracts, individuals were left free to take their own initiatives.
Work was therefore carried out either by private individuals or through
cooperatives, often on a self-build basis. Emanuele Chiavola, director of the
Extraordinary General Secretariat, later gave a blunt assessment, saying that it
was «an attempt at reconstruction driven by ‘popular impulse’, in a festive
atmosphere, [...] a kind of fairground of illusions, and above all a false
notion of timing».
Among the most active in the repair effort were the
groups of the National Alpine Association (Associazione Nazionale Alpini -
ANA), which at the time had around 250,000 members, the largest veterans'
association in the country. By bringing together its national sections, by the
end of May, the ANA had opened eleven autonomous and self-sufficient work
sites, which became operational between June 2 and 4. From mid-June to
mid-September, over 15,000 demobilised Alpine troops worked at sites located in
Magnano in Riviera, Attimis, Buja, Gemona, Villa Santina, Majano, Moggio,
Osoppo, Cavazzo, and Pinzano. Added to these was the Vedronza site, managed by
the Udine section of the association. Each work site was entrusted to a group
of sections from the same area, with volunteers alternating on weekly shifts.
By the end of July, the demobilised Alpine troops had repaired 1,097 homes, a
figure that rose to 3,000 by September 11. Through their voluntary work, they
also restored 76 public buildings and 63,000 square metres of roofing, and
carried out environmental restoration work and hydraulic engineering
interventions. That summer, the ANA launched the campaign Working Holidays
of Alpine Fraternity. The slogan was «This year, the Alpine troops’
holidays are in Friuli», and the response was overwhelming. However, when summer ended, the Regional Government and the entire
community were forced to revise their strategies and methods in response to the
new damage caused by the tremors on September 11 and 15.