3 Buildings Total Property 4 floors each-PIP Buildings in Total Property with 4 floors each and divisions susceptible to independent use with PIP approved with construction increase in about 1,410 square meters to enlarge, about 2,144.70 to rebuild with about 40 garage spaces planned. Description of Buildings: Buildings in Total Property with 4 floors each and divisions susceptible to independent use. Areas: Building 1 Total Land Area - 370 m2 Building Implantation Area - 224 m2 Total Gross Area - 488 m2 Fraction Integral Area - 146 m2 Building 2 Total Land Area - 315 m2 Deployment Area building - 196 m2 Total Private Gross Area - 492 m2 Fraction Integral Area - 119 m2 Building 3 Total Land Area - 315 m2 Building Implantation Area - 196 m2 Total Private Gross Area - 492 m2 Fraction Integral Area - 119m2 Framework with the MIP
Framework of the proposal with the MIP in force: Land Use Qualification Letter: "Continuous urban front area in consolidation"; Conditioning Plant (dynamic): Noise - Mixed Zone; Heritage Charter: Not applicable; Road Network Hierarchy Charter: Not applicable. Project framework with the proposal for revision of the MIP: Land Use Qualification Letter: Type II Continuous Urban Front Area | Central Spaces; Spaces in consolidation; Charter of the Municipal Ecological Structure: Not applicable; Natural Risk Letter: Not applicable; Acoustic Zone chart: Mixed Zone; Heritage Charter I - urban and architectural heritage and natural heritage: Not applicable; Heritage Charter II - archaeological heritage: Not applicable; Road structure and parking chart: Not applicable; General Conditioning Plant (dynamic): Not applicable; Suitability of the proposal with the MIP regulation in force Use: Compatible with the provisions of Article 19; Buildingability : The proposal now conforms to the provisions of Art. 20.
The height of the façade is shown according to point f) of article 1 (1) of Art. 20, since there is a punctual widening of the street in this section near the intervention. Depending on paragraph 2(a), the cércea should be admitted to the remaining urban front on the basis of a more wide-conditioned profile. However, taking into account the existence of the gable of the existing building to the north and since the proposal has been reformulated now seeking to establish a transition of cérceas that is closer to the development of the street to the south, it is considered to consider the application of the provisions of paragraph 3 of Art. 20, justifying this solution for reasons of shooting and urban integration. In any case, the height of the platibanda should not exceed that of the platibanda of the building bordering on the north, i.e. the façade plane should align with the façade plane of the existing building. Adequacy of the project with the proposal to review the MDP Use: Compatible with the provisions of Article 16; Buildingability: The proposal conforms to the provisions of Art. 26;5.1. The circle is shown according to point (g) of article 20(1), since there is a punctual widening of the street in this section near the intervention. Depending on paragraph 2(a), the cércea should be admitted to the remaining urban front on the basis of a more wide-conditioned profile. However, taking into account the existence of the gable of the existing building to the north and since the proposal has been reformulated now seeking to establish a transition of cérceas that is closer to the development of the street to the south, it is considered to consider the application of the provisions of paragraph 4 of Art. 26, justifying this solution for reasons of shooting and urban integration in the building set where the parcel is located.
In any case, the height of the platibanda should not exceed that of the platibanda of the building bordering on the north, i.e. the façade plane should align with the façade plane of the existing building.
As for the street, although it is expected to worsen the situation in terms of soil permeability, while the proposal still falls short of the maximum waterproofing index, in the form of leave, the provisions of Article 27(1) should be taken into account, i.e. the patio should preferably be occupied by permeable vegetable cover; PRAG GROUP ® "Leave everything to us!"
Framework of the proposal with the MIP in force: Land Use Qualification Letter: "Continuous urban front area in consolidation"; Conditioning Plant (dynamic): Noise - Mixed Zone; Heritage Charter: Not applicable; Road Network Hierarchy Charter: Not applicable. Project framework with the proposal for revision of the MIP: Land Use Qualification Letter: Type II Continuous Urban Front Area | Central Spaces; Spaces in consolidation; Charter of the Municipal Ecological Structure: Not applicable; Natural Risk Letter: Not applicable; Acoustic Zone chart: Mixed Zone; Heritage Charter I - urban and architectural heritage and natural heritage: Not applicable; Heritage Charter II - archaeological heritage: Not applicable; Road structure and parking chart: Not applicable; General Conditioning Plant (dynamic): Not applicable; Suitability of the proposal with the MIP regulation in force Use: Compatible with the provisions of Article 19; Buildingability : The proposal now conforms to the provisions of Art. 20.
The height of the façade is shown according to point f) of article 1 (1) of Art. 20, since there is a punctual widening of the street in this section near the intervention. Depending on paragraph 2(a), the cércea should be admitted to the remaining urban front on the basis of a more wide-conditioned profile. However, taking into account the existence of the gable of the existing building to the north and since the proposal has been reformulated now seeking to establish a transition of cérceas that is closer to the development of the street to the south, it is considered to consider the application of the provisions of paragraph 3 of Art. 20, justifying this solution for reasons of shooting and urban integration. In any case, the height of the platibanda should not exceed that of the platibanda of the building bordering on the north, i.e. the façade plane should align with the façade plane of the existing building. Adequacy of the project with the proposal to review the MDP Use: Compatible with the provisions of Article 16; Buildingability: The proposal conforms to the provisions of Art. 26;5.1. The circle is shown according to point (g) of article 20(1), since there is a punctual widening of the street in this section near the intervention. Depending on paragraph 2(a), the cércea should be admitted to the remaining urban front on the basis of a more wide-conditioned profile. However, taking into account the existence of the gable of the existing building to the north and since the proposal has been reformulated now seeking to establish a transition of cérceas that is closer to the development of the street to the south, it is considered to consider the application of the provisions of paragraph 4 of Art. 26, justifying this solution for reasons of shooting and urban integration in the building set where the parcel is located.
In any case, the height of the platibanda should not exceed that of the platibanda of the building bordering on the north, i.e. the façade plane should align with the façade plane of the existing building.
As for the street, although it is expected to worsen the situation in terms of soil permeability, while the proposal still falls short of the maximum waterproofing index, in the form of leave, the provisions of Article 27(1) should be taken into account, i.e. the patio should preferably be occupied by permeable vegetable cover; PRAG GROUP ® "Leave everything to us!"