都市更新條例-修正公布第 十九、十九條之一、二十九～三十、三十二、三十六條條文20050515

修正公布第 十九、十九條之一、二十九～三十、三十二、三十六條條文

第十九條　都市更新事業計畫由實施者擬訂，送由當地直轄巿、縣（巿）主管機關審議通過後核定發布實施；其屬依第七條第二項規定辦理之都市更新事業，得逕送中央主管機關審議通過後核定發布實施。並即公告三十日及通知更新單元範圍內土地、合法建築物所有權人、他項權利人、囑託限制登記機關及預告登記請求權人；變更時，亦同。
擬訂或變更都市更新事業計畫期間，應舉辦公聽會，聽取民眾意見。
都市更新事業計畫擬訂或變更後，送各級主管機關審議前，應於各該直轄市、縣（市）政府或鄉（鎮、市）公所公開展覽三十日，並舉辦公聽會；實施者已取得更新單元內全體私有土地及私有合法建築物所有權人同意者，公開展覽期間得縮短為十五日。
前二項公開展覽、公聽會之日期及地點，應登報周知，並通知更新單元範圍內土地、合法建築物所有權人、他項權利人、囑託限制登記機關及預告登記請求權人；任何人民或團體得於公開展覽期間內，以書面載明姓名或名稱及地址，向各級主管機關提出意見，由各級主管機關予以參考審議。
經各級主管機關審議修正者，免再公開展覽。
依第七條規定劃定之都市更新地區或採整建、維護方式辦理之更新單元，實施者已取得更新單元內全體私有土地及私有合法建築物所有權人之同意者，於擬訂或變更都市更新事業計畫時，得免舉辦公開展覽及公聽會，不受前三項規定之限制。

第十九條之一　都市更新事業計畫之變更，得採下列簡化作業程序辦理：

一、有下列情形之一而辦理變更者，得逕由各級主管機關核定發布實施之，免依前條規定舉辦公開展覽、公聽會及審議：

（一）第二十一條第二款所定事項之變更，於依第二十二條規定徵求同意，並經原實施者與新實施者辦理公證。

（二）第二十一條第十一款所定事項之變更，經全體土地及合法建築物所有權人同意。

二、第二十一條第七款至第十款所定事項之變更，經各級主管機關認定不影響原核定之都市更新事業計畫者，免舉辦公開展覽、公聽會及依第二十二條規定徵求同意。

第四章　權利變換

第二十九條　以權利變換方式實施都市更新時，實施者應於都市更新事業計畫核定發布實施後擬具權利變換計畫，依第十九條規定程序辦理審議、公開展覽、核定及發布實施等事項；變更時，亦同。但必要時，權利變換計畫之擬訂報核，得與都市更新事業計畫一併辦理。
實施者為擬訂或變更權利變換計畫，須進入權利變換範圍內公、私有土地或建築物實施調查或測量時，準用第二十三條規定辦理。
權利變換計畫應表明之事項及權利變換實施辦法，由中央主管機關定之。

第二十九條之一　權利變換計畫之變更，得採下列簡化作業程序辦理：

一、有下列情形之一而辦理變更者，得逕由各級主管機關核定發布實施之，免依第十九條規定舉辦公開展覽、公聽會及審議：

（一）計畫內容有誤寫、誤算或其他類此之顯然錯誤之更正。

（二）參與分配人或實施者，其分配單元或停車位變動，經變動雙方同意。

（三）依第十三條辦理時之信託登記。

（四）權利變換期間辦理土地及建築物之移轉、分割、設定負擔及抵押權、典權、限制登記之塗銷。

（五）依地政機關地籍測量或建築物測量結果釐正圖冊。

（六）第二十一條第二款所定事項之變更，經原實施者與新實施者辦理公證。

二、有下列情形之一而辦理變更者，得逕由各級主管機關核定發布實施之，免依第十九條規定舉辦公開展覽及公聽會：

（一）原參與分配人表明不願繼續參與分配，或原不願意參與分配者表明參與分配，經主管機關認定不影響其他權利人之權益。

（二）第二十一條第七款至第十款所定事項之變更，經各級主管機關認定不影響原核定之權利變換計畫。

第三十條　實施權利變換時，權利變換範圍內供公共使用之道路、溝渠、兒童遊樂場、鄰里公園、廣場、綠地、停車場等七項用地，除以各該原有公共設施用地、未登記地及得無償撥用取得之公有道路、溝渠、河川等公有土地抵充外，其不足土地與工程費用、權利變換費用、貸款利息、稅捐、管理費用及都市更新事業計畫載明之都市計畫變更負擔、申請各項建築容積獎勵及容積移轉所支付之費用，經各級主管機關核定後，由權利變換範圍內之土地所有權人按其權利價值比例共同負擔，並以權利變換後應分配之土地及建築物折價抵付；其應分配之土地及建築物因折價抵付致未達最小分配面積單元時，得改以現金繳納。
前項權利變換範圍內，土地所有權人應共同負擔之比例，由各級主管機關考量實際情形定之。
權利變換範圍內未列為第一項共同負擔之公共設施，於土地及建築物分配時，除原有土地所有權人提出申請分配者外，以原公有土地應分配部分，優先指配；其仍有不足時，以折價抵付共同負擔之土地及建築物指配之。
但公有土地及建築物管理機關（構）或實施者得要求該公共設施管理機構負擔所需經費。
第一項最小分配面積單元基準，由直轄市、縣（市）主管機關定之。

第三十二條　權利變換計畫書核定發布實施後二個月內，土地所有權人對其權利價值有異議時，應以書面敘明理由，向各級主管機關提出，各級主管機關應於受理異議後三個月內審議核復。但因情形特殊，經各級主管機關認有委託專業團體或機構協助作技術性諮商之必要者，得延長審議核復期限三個月。
當事人對審議核復結果不服者，得依法提請行政救濟。
前項異議處理或行政救濟期間，實施者非經主管機關核准，不得停止都市更新事業之進行。
前二項異議處理或行政救濟結果與原評定價值有差額部分，由當事人以現金相互找補。
第一項審議核復期限，應扣除各級主管機關委託專業團體或機構協助作技術性諮商及實施者委託專業團體或機構重新查估權利價值之時間。

第三十六條　權利變換範圍內應行拆除遷移之土地改良物，由實施者公告之，並通知其所有權人、管理人或使用人，限期三十日內自行拆除或遷移；屆期不拆除或遷移者，實施者得予代為或請求當地直轄市、縣（市）主管機關代為之，直轄市、縣（市）主管機關有代為拆除或遷移之義務；直轄市、縣（市）主管機關並應訂定期限辦理強制拆除或遷移，期限以六個月為限。其因情形特殊有正當理由者，得報經中央主管機關核准延長六個月，並以二次為限。但應拆除或遷移之土地改良物為政府代管或法院強制執行者，實施者應於拆除或遷移前，通知代管機關或執行法院為必要之處理。
前項因權利變換而拆除或遷移之土地改良物，應補償其價值或建築物之殘餘價值，其補償金額由實施者查定之，代為拆除或遷移費用在應領補償金額內扣回；對補償金額有異議時，由直轄市、縣（市）主管機關核定之。

The 2nd Annual Architect 50 - Business, Architects - Architect Magazine 20100514

The 2nd Annual Architect 50 - Business, Architects - Architect Magazine

The 2nd Annual Architect 50

By:

Amanda Kolson Hurley

• Related Articles
• Save / Share
• 
• 

Last year, this magazine launched the Architect 50, our twist on a top firms ranking—one that recognizes ecological commitment and design quality as much as profitability when measuring the country’s very best A, AE, and AEC firms. And what a year we chose for the debut.

Esteemed firms—including, but not limited to, the global “alphabets”—had seen their revenues fall sharply and responded with layoffs. Capital was scarce; new projects were exceptionally tough to win, and pencils-down orders on projects in hand became all too common. Somehow, though, we were able to produce a robust ranking our first time out. It helped that firms were being assessed on their revenues from 2008, a year that a lot of firms started (at least) with a backlog.

Embarking on our research for the second annual ranking, we were not sure what to expect. Would firms want to take part in a year when competition is especially fierce? Would partners worry about revealing weak financials, or that the ranking would just yield more bad news? In the end, some firms did decline to participate—but not many. Firm leaders had been enthusiastic about the architect 50 on its launch, and most seemed eager to repeat the experiment.

The differences between last year’s ranking and this year’s are not dramatic. Three of our top five firms (overall) are holdovers. Some commercially focused firms that were prominent last year have dropped off the list; conversely, this year’s biggest upward movers tend to be those with a bedrock of public-sector and infrastructural projects, like Denver’s Fentress Architects and Chicago’s Epstein.

The architect 50 survey was administered from early January through mid-March to 161 firms, most of which were invited (a small number applied to the editors; all firms are welcome to). They completed a short entry form, which our research consultant, entered into a database before performing a thorough analysis. Although we tried to be as systematic as possible, the ranking is less than perfectly scientific, and it comes with a couple of caveats:

• We asked firms to indicate a range for number of staff and for revenue. This was meant to allay any worries that firms had about disclosing their exact revenue; it also provides some “wiggle room” to accommodate small fluctuations in staff size. However, this year, employee numbers dropped precipitously at many firms. Readers should bear this in mind.

• Last year, we asked respondents to check boxes indicating which major awards they had won; this year, in order to be more comprehensive, we asked firms to submit full lists of awards and honors. However, this meant that minor recognitions crowded out prestigious awards, even when weighted appropriately. We weighted the scoring strongly in favor of awards that carry national distinction—chief among them, AIA Honor and COTE awards and P/A Awards.

Congratulations to the firms that made the cut.

---

1. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill
New York
Revenue (range): $200–$349.9 million; Employees: 500–999
SOM’s exceptional haul of awards in 2009—including four AIA Honor Awards—
helped launch them into the top spot, despite a dip in revenue.
Scoring: Revenue per employee: 202; Sustainable practices: 232; Awards: 394

2. Perkins+Will
Chicago
Revenue: $350 million or more; Employees: 1,000 or more
Once again, Perkins+Will proves that its blood runs green. Its commitment to sustainability and design chops earn green, too.
Revenue per employee: 187; Sustainable practices: 363; Awards: 271

3. DLR Group
Omaha, Neb.
Revenue: $70–$99.9 million; Employees: 250–499
DLR has parlayed its K–12 and justice expertise into a rising national profile, one enhanced by its recent acquisition of WWCOT.
Revenue per employee: 125; Sustainable practices: 299; Awards: 351

4. Fentress Architects
Denver
Revenue: $100–$199.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Now that government and infrastructure work are the name of the game, few firms are better positioned than Fentress, an aviation and public-sector expert. Revenue per employee: 471; Sustainable practices:232; Awards: 38

5. HOK
St. Louis
Revenue: $350 million or more; Employees: 1,000 or more
Despite the split from its former subsidiary, HOK Sport Venue Event (now Populous), in late 2008, HOK is holding steady in our top five.
Revenue per employee: 187; Sustainable practices: 315; Awards: 224

6. VJAA
Minneapolis
Revenue: $2.5–$4.9 million; Employees: 10–19
Vincent James and colleagues had a terrific 2009, scooping major awards for projects in Beirut, New Orleans, and their home state of Minnesota.
Revenue per employee: 138; Sustainable practices: 115; Awards: 400

7. ZGF Architects
Portland, Ore.
Revenue: $100–$199.9 million; Employees: 250–499
ZGF is as green as its Pacific Northwest roots would suggest, while its strength in healthcare, infrastructure, and government work has kept it chugging through the recession.
Revenue per employee: 220; Sustainable practices: 299; Awards: 133

8. Epstein
Chicago
Revenue: $100–$199.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Employee-owned Epstein rocketed up the list from 63rd place last year.
Revenue per employee: 471; Sustainable practices: 81; Awards: 73

9. Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architects
Chicago
Revenue: $100–$199.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Since hanging their shingle in 2006, SOM veteran Smith and partners Gill and Robert Forest have pushed high-square-footage projects toward greater energy efficiency through technological innovation.
Revenue per employee: 471; Sustainable practices: 95; Awards: 13

10. Gensler
San Francisco
Revenue: $350 million or more; Employees: 1,000 or more
The executive architect of Las Vegas’ CityCenter, 2,000-person-strong Gensler proves more every year that designing interiors is just one of its many diverse talents.
Revenue per employee: 187; Sustainable practices: 278; Awards: 108

11. HKS
Dallas
Revenue: $200–$349.9 million; Employees: 500–999
Revenue per employee: 202; Sustainable practices: 259; Awards: 108

12. NBBJ
Seattle
Revenue: $200–$349.9 million; Employees: 500–999
Revenue per employee: 202; Sustainable practices: 238; Awards: 128

13. Frank Harmon Architect
Raleigh, N.C.
Revenue: $1–$2.4 million; Employees: 2–4
Revenue per employee: 321; Sustainable practices: 121; Awards: 114

14. Mark Cavagnero Associates
San Francisco
Revenue: $5–$9.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 118; Sustainable practices: 174; Awards: 262

15. Payette
Boston
Revenue: $50–$69.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 189; Sustainable practices: 198; Awards: 163

16. Smithgroup
Detroit
Revenue: $100–$199.9 million; Employees: 500–999
Revenue per employee: 110; Sustainable practices: 198; Awards: 235

17. Lord, Aeck & Sargent
Atlanta
Revenue: $30–$39.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 110; Sustainable practices: 254; Awards: 168

18. Tate Snyder Kimsey Architects
Henderson, Nev.
Revenue: $10–$14.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 196; Sustainable practices: 254; Awards: 68

19. Anshen + Allen
San Francisco
Revenue: $50–$69.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 189; Sustainable practices: 302; Awards: 21

20. EHDD Architecture
San Francisco
Revenue: $10–$14.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 92; Sustainable practices: 288; Awards: 125

21. DesignLAB
Boston
Revenue: $2.5–$4.9 million; Employees: 10–19
Revenue per employee: 138; Sustainable practices: 236; Awards: 114

22. EYP Architecture & Engineering
Albany, N.Y.
Revenue: $50–$69.9 million; Employees: 250–499
Revenue per employee: 88; Sustainable practices: 339; Awards: 60

23. Eskew+Dumez+Ripple
New Orleans
Revenue: $10–$14.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 196; Sustainable practices: 142; Awards: 148

24. Cannon Design
Grand Island, N.Y.
Revenue: $100–$199.9 million; Employees: 500–999
Revenue per employee: 110; Sustainable practices: 184; Awards: 187

25. SERA Architects
Portland, Ore.
Revenue: $10–$14.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 92; Sustainable practices: 339; Awards: 44

26. PGAL
Houston
Revenue: $40–$49.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 141; Sustainable practices: 331; Awards: –

27. Goody Clancy
Boston
Revenue: $20–$24.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 165; Sustainable practices: 272; Awards: 36

28. Tsoi/Kobus & Associates
Cambridge, Mass.
Revenue: $20–$24.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 165; Sustainable practices: 230; Awards: 76

29. FXFOWLE Architects
New York
Revenue: $25–$29.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 86; Sustainable practices: 310; Awards: 73

30. RDG Planning & Design
Des Moines, Iowa
Revenue: $25–$29.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 86; Sustainable practices: 190; Awards: 192

31. BRPH
Melbourne, Fla.
Revenue: $50–$69.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 189; Sustainable practices: 278; Awards: –

32. HDR Architecture
Omaha, Neb.
Revenue: $200–$349.9 million; Employees: 1,000 or more
Revenue per employee: 121; Sustainable practices: 259; Awards: 84

33. Weber Thompsom
Seattle
Revenue: $2.5–$4.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 59; Sustainable practices: 262; Awards: 142

34. Cook+Fox Architects
New York
Revenue: $2.5–$4.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 59; Sustainable practices: 318; Awards: 82

35. Gund Partnership
Cambridge, Mass.
Revenue: $5–$9.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 118; Sustainable practices: 264; Awards: 76

36. Ellerbe Becket, an AECOM company*
Minneapolis
Revenue: $100–$199.9 million; Employees: 250–499 (*Ellerbe Becket entered the ranking separately from AECOM, its parent company as of October 2009.)
Revenue per employee: 220; Sustainable practices: 184; Awards: 54

37. Sasaki Associates
Watertown, Mass.
Revenue: $50–$69.9 million; Employees: 250–499
Revenue per employee: 88; Sustainable practices: 190; Awards: 179

38. McLarand Vasquez Emsiek & Partners
Irvine, Calif.
Revenue: $40–$49.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 330; Sustainable practices: 95; Awards: 23

39. CO Architects
Los Angeles
Revenue: $30–$39.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 257; Sustainable practices: 166; Awards: 21

40. Ehrlich Architects
Culver City, Calif.
Revenue: $5–$9.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 118; Sustainable practices: 166; Awards: 159

41. Studios Architecture
San Francisco
Revenue: $30–$39.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 110; Sustainable practices: 198; Awards: 133

42. Ayers/Saint/Gross Architects and Planners
Baltimore
Revenue: $30–$39.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 110; Sustainable practices: 272; Awards: 49

43. Ann Beha Architects
Boston
Revenue: $2.5–$4.9 million; Employees: 10–19
Revenue per employee: 138; Sustainable practices: 134; Awards: 148

44. PageSoutherlandPage
Houston
Revenue: $70–$99.9 million; Employees: 250–499
Revenue per employee: 125; Sustainable practices: 214; Awards: 79

45. Spector Group
Woodbury, N.Y.
Revenue: $20–$24.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 165; Sustainable practices: 160; Awards: 91

46. TRO Jung|Brannen
Boston
Revenue: $40–$49.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 141; Sustainable practices: 224; Awards: 41

47. Goettsch Partners
Chicago
Revenue: $20–$24.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 165; Sustainable practices: 174; Awards: 63

48. Westlake Reed Leskosky
Cleveland
Revenue: $25–$29.9 million; Employees: 100–249
Revenue per employee: 86; Sustainable practices: 192; Awards: 117

49. Hanbury Evans Wright Vlattas & Co.
Norfolk, Va.
Revenue: $20–$24.9 million; Employees: 50–99
Revenue per employee: 165; Sustainable practices: 134; Awards: 97

50. William Rawn Associates
Boston
Revenue: $5–$9.9 million; Employees: 20–49
Revenue per employee: 118; Sustainable practices: 214; Awards: 63

51. Moseley Architects, Richmond, Va.

52. Cooper Carry, Atlanta

53. WWCOT Architects, Santa Monica, Calif.

54. Robert A.M. Stern Architects, New York

55. RBB Architects, Los Angeles

56. AC Martin Partners, Los Angeles

57. Gould Evans, Kansas City, Mo.

58. Siegel & Strain Architects, Oakland, Calif.

59. SORG Architects, Washington, D.C.

60. The Freelon Group | Architects, Durham, N.C.

61. KTGY Group, Irvine, Calif.

62. Beatty•Harvey•Coco Architects, New York

63. NAC|Architecture, Spokane, Wash.

64. RTKL Associates, Baltimore

65. SHW Group, Plano, Texas

66. Corgan Associates, Dallas

67. Ikon.5 Architects, Princeton, N.J.

68. Office dA, Boston

69. John Ronan Architects, Chicago

70. Cunningham | Quill Architects, Washington, D.C.

71. Little, Charlotte, N.C.

72. Cuningham Group Architecture, Minneapolis

73. Ross Barney Architects, Chicago

74. William McDonough + Partners, Charlottesville, Va.

75. BNIM Architects, Kansas City, Mo.

76. Venturi, Scott Brown and Associates, Philadelphia

77. HGA Architects and Engineers, Minneapolis

78. Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, South San Francisco, Calif.

79. Polk Stanley Wilcox Architects, Little Rock, Ark.

80. HMC Architects, Ontario, Calif.

81. 3t Architects, Albany, N.Y.

82. MHTN Architects, Salt Lake City

83. BLT Architects, Philadelphia

84. Perkins Eastman, New York

85. Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz, San Francisco

86. Ratcliff, Emeryville, Calif.

87. Jeffrey M. Kalban and Associates Architecture, Los Angeles

88. Astorino, Pittsburgh

89. Rios Clementi Hale Studios, Los Angeles

90. Shepley Bulfinch Richardson & Abbott, Boston

91. Diller Scofidio + Renfro, New York

92. Flad Architects, Madison, Wis.

93. OZ Architecture, Denver

94. Belay Architecture, Tacoma, Wash.

95. Mackey Mitchell Architects, St. Louis

96. The S/L/A/M Collaborative, Glastonbury, Conn.

97. Wight & Co., Darien, Ill.

98. Gray Organschi Architecture, New Haven, Conn.

99. BWS Architects, Tucson

100. Stevens & Wilkinson, Atlanta

• Save / Share
• 
• 

Home 3D: Architecture and Interior Design on your iPhone and iPad - Appmodo 20100514

Home 3D: Architecture and Interior Design on your iPhone and iPad

Posted by Press Releases on May 9, 2010 at 2:03 am | Comments 0
Filed Under: Press Releases

New York, NY, If you’ve ever stood in a home store, struggling to combine your interior design choices with hastily scrawled floor plan measurements, you’ll have lamented the fact that there is no easy way to pick and choose home decor items that would fit perfectly in your house. Black Mana Studios today is proud to announce the launch of Home 3D for iPhone and iPad, bringing your home plans to life in stunning 3D.

Home 3D puts you in complete control of creating blueprints that match your home exactly, allowing you to add realistic flooring, paint, wallpaper, appliances and furniture. It turns your mobile device into a virtual reality environment as it pushes the limits of the 3D engine. When you choose dollhouse and walkthrough modes, the accurate detail and accessibility of your home layout will make you feel as though you’ve just walked in the front door.

Creators of Home 3D, Black Mana Studios, saw the need for an app that would assist architects, interior designers, and DIY design hobbyists. The combination of floor planning and interior design is unmatched by any other app, and the 3D viewpoint puts it leaps and bounds above the rest. Says Aki Yifrach, founder and creative director of Black Mana Studios, “With more than 150,000 apps on the iTunes app store, we wanted to come up with a home designer that would make users say, ‘Wow, my iPhone can do that?’” Users are clearly impressed, as the Home 3D app became one of the top selling productivity apps after only two days on the iTunes store.

Whether you are waiting to move into your new home and want to start decorating right now, or you are an architect trying to show your clients a real time house plan of a potential home, Home 3D is the home design software you can rely on to get you through the front door long before you have the keys in hand.

Black Mana Studios
Home 3D
Download from iTunes (iPhone)
Download from iTunes (iPad)
Screenshots
App Icon

Based in New York City, Black Mana Studios LLC is no stranger to pushing the mobile developmental envelope. Since its inception in 2008, the company has been on the front line of creative app development. Copyright (C) 2010 Black Mana Studios LLC. All Rights Reserved. Apple, the Apple logo, iPhone, iPod and iPad are registered trademarks of Apple Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries.

IES Releases Revit 2011 Compatible VE Plug-in For Environmental Performance Analysis - MarketWatch 20100514

PRESS RELEASE

May 13, 2010, 11:39 a.m. EDT · Recommend

IES Releases Revit 2011 Compatible VE Plug-in For Environmental Performance Analysis

BOSTON, May 13, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Integrated Environmental Solutions (IES), a provider of integrated performance analysis software and consulting services for sustainable building design, today released an updated version of its VE plug-in to Autodesk Revit Architecture and MEP. The plug-in allows Revit 2011 users to easily export models into any of the IES Virtual Environment (VE) environmental building performance analysis tools; VE-Ware, VE-Toolkits, VE-Gaia and VE-Pro. Removing the need to re-build models, the IES plug-in greatly enhances design workflow and simulation accuracy, bringing comprehensive and integrated analysis options for all design stages to the Building Information Modelling (BIM) process.

This new IES VE plug-in now supports Revit 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011. It offers enhanced model transfer capabilities and can handle challenging and complex geometry, as well as offering users the option to choose the level of geometry detail exported from the basic, to how shading surfaces are handled, to whether curtain wall mullions are counted as shading surfaces. The VE sets no explicit limits on the number of surfaces that it can import. This important capacity gives users ultimate control over geometry detail used for performance analysis and energy modelling within IES tools. Highly detailed curtain walling systems, multi-faceted shading surfaces and mullions, and additional complex shapes and junctions, can all be handled.

The IES VE tools offer a range of powerful performance assessment options suitable for all different design stages and user experience-level, while the integrated nature of the suite allows the interrelationships between energy use, CO2 emissions, solar, lighting, airflow and system design to be taken into account and analysed at a whole building level. Building mass and form, the climate, natural resource availability, occupancy, materials and services can all be taken into account to 'virtually' test the feasibility of different energy saving strategies and low carbon/ renewable technologies.

IES also offers a range of automated tools which assist with the LEED and GreenStar rating systems, and compliance with UK energy reduction and Performance Certificate regulations.

The latest version of the IES VE Revit Plug-in can be downloaded athttp://www.iesve.com/Software/Model-Building/Revit-plug-in

About IES

Integrated Environmental Solutions (IES) is an innovative company at the forefront of the use and development of powerful software simulation tools which help architects, engineers, facilities managers, and all those involved in the development and management of buildings design and maintain truly sustainable properties. IES' mission is to advance the sustainability of the world's buildings through the use of integrated performance modelling technology and conserve natural resources for future generations. IES was established in June 1994 and is headquartered in Glasgow, Scotland, with offices in Dublin, Republic of Ireland; Boston and San Francisco, USA and Melbourne, Australia. IES Consulting is the specialist international environmental performance consultancy division of IES, its expert team of consultants include experienced LEED, BREEAM, Green Star Accredited Professionals and Accredited Energy Assessors, in the UK. IES' services and products aid significantly in the provision of healthier and more energy efficient built environments. For additional information, please visit www.iesve.com.

SOURCE: Integrated Environmental Solutions

Registration Opens for Annual Landscape Architecture Convention 20100512

http://www.asla.org/NewsReleaseDetails.aspx?id=26986

Registration Opens for Annual Landscape Architecture Convention

Meeting and exposition to take place in Washington, D.C., September 10-13

WASHINGTON, May 11, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) opened registration for its 2010 Annual Meeting and EXPO -- the largest annual gathering of landscape architecture professionals in the world. The September 10-13 event will take place in the Washington, D.C., Convention Center and attract more than 6,000 attendees.
The theme for the meeting is Earth Air Water Fire DESIGN. Attendees may choose from more than 125 education sessions to earn up to 21 Professional Development Hours. Over 400 product manufacturers and service providers will be featured in the EXPO. Complete registration information is available online at: http://www.asla.org/2010meeting/.
No city in the United States better exemplifies the values and sophisticated craft of the landscape architecture profession than the nation's capital. From the 18th century plan by Pierre Charles L'Enfant, to works by Frederick Law Olmsted and his son, Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., to contemporary designs by Michael Van Valkenburgh and Kathryn Gustafson, the District's landscape architecture legacy will be highlighted throughout the meeting.
View this release online at: http://www.asla.org/NewsReleaseDetails.aspx?id=26986
About ASLA
Founded in 1899, ASLA is the national professional association for landscape architects, representing more than 16,000 members in 48 professional chapters and 68 student chapters. The Society's mission is to lead, to educate and to participate in the careful stewardship, wise planning and artful design of our cultural and natural environments. Members of the Society use their "ASLA" suffix after their names to denote membership and their commitment to the highest ethical standards of the profession. Learn more about landscape architecture online at www.asla.org.
SOURCE: American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA)            

USU Statesman - USU’s Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning Joins College of Agriculture 20100512

USU’s Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning Joins College of Agriculture

Change becomes effective July 1

By

|

Published: Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Updated: Tuesday, May 11, 2010

In a move approved by Utah State University’s Board of Trustees, the university’s Department of Landscape and Environmental Planning (LAEP) will become part of the College of Agriculture, strengthening both the department and college’s commitments to sustainable development.
The change, which will occur July 1, is part of strategic restructuring in the LAEP department’s current administrative home, the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, which is being divided into a college that includes the humanities and social sciences and a new Caine College of the Arts. As part of that split, USU President Stan Albrecht gave the LAEP department faculty and administrators a unique opportunity to evaluate the department’s plans and goals and consider which college could best support them.
“No academic program can be all things to all people nor can LAEP serve every need of our discipline or culture,” Sean Michael, LAEP department head said. “To answer President Albrecht’s charge, our faculty first asked what pressing design and planning problems our department is uniquely positioned to solve. Second, we asked what larger contribution to those problems is USU equipped to address.”
To answer the questions, Michael said the department embarked on a five-month discovery process that included LAEP students, alumni, the department’s advisory board and colleagues at USU and other campuses. Outside experts were solicited, including Patrick Miller, former president of the American Society of Landscape Architects. In addition, deans and department heads from leading design schools at Penn State University, Texas A&M University, and Cal Poly-San Luis Obispo.
“Since its inception as a foundation of the university’s land- grant mission, the College of Agriculture has joined colleagues to address the myriad environmental challenges of our growing society,” Michael said. “The college has historically been a close partner in offering design education and its mission encompasses many of the disciplines that are the basis of sustainability: economy, environment and community.”
USU’s College of Agriculture is led by Dean Noelle Cockett.
“The addition of LAEP to the college’s team will link the disciplines of design and planning in LAEP with colleagues in the college and its affiliates, including the Center for Water Efficient Landscaping, the Utah Climate Center, the Western Rural Development Center, the Utah Botanical Center and Utah House,” Dean Cockett said. “I am particularly excited about the synergy that exists between the faculty and students of LAEP and the Department of Plants, Soils and Climate. This is an exciting move which will strengthen our efforts in sustainable development - an area of research, education and outreach that serves people in Utah and spans the globe.”
—USU Media Relations