Dr. Mostafa Behzadfar Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development 2008-5079 17 46 2024 06 20 Comparing the Benchmarks of Chapter 19 of National Building Regulations with the Benchmarks of the DGNB Evaluation System to Evaluate Tabriz’s Aseman Residential Complex Comparing the Benchmarks of Chapter 19 of National Building Regulations with the Benchmarks of the DGNB Evaluation System to Evaluate Tabriz’s Aseman Residential Complex 123 142 183835 10.22034/aaud.2023.395698.2784 FA Farhad Ahmadnejad Assistant Professor of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Development, University of Islamic Arts, Tabriz, Iran (Corresponding Author). 0000-0003-1349-1219 Maryam Yekta Hashkvaei Ph.D. Candidate of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Development, Islamic Arts University, Tabriz, Iran. Journal Article 2023 05 03 Sustainability evaluation systems help to evaluate buildings. Given the different circumstances of each country, no single common version can be prescribed for all countries. Recently, Chapter 19 of National Regulations has been focused on Iran as the standard for optimizing building energy consumption. By selecting the German Building Evaluation System of DGNB1, this article aimed to compare its benchmarks with those outlined in Chapter 19 and to identify similarities and differences between the two [systems], which would develop national regulations and achieve a local building evaluation system. This study fell under comparative research and meticulously investigated and compared the two systems to provide a checklist of shared criteria, as noted in Tabriz’s Aseman Residential Complex (Iran). Based on the six qualities prescribed by the suggested Chapter 19 system, technical qualities were more focused, followed by some social-functional criteria and processes, with other qualities discarded. According to Chapter 19, such major subjects as smartization, recycling and recovery, and transportation infrastructure have not received attention. On the other hand, concerning the case study, field observations, maps, and executive documents, as well as interviews with residents and technical assistants of project installations revealed that the quality of the complex tended to be based on architectural design and the site’s quality, as well as the quality of cooling and heating installations.  The benchmarks of both systems in such areas as quality of the external shell, use of natural light, passive systems, and use of new technologies were not addressed. Concerning the easiness of cleaning and recycling and recovery, as raised by the DGNB system, a lack of attention in the design stage was noted. Sustainability evaluation systems help to evaluate buildings. Given the different circumstances of each country, no single common version can be prescribed for all countries. Recently, Chapter 19 of National Regulations has been focused on Iran as the standard for optimizing building energy consumption. By selecting the German Building Evaluation System of DGNB1, this article aimed to compare its benchmarks with those outlined in Chapter 19 and to identify similarities and differences between the two [systems], which would develop national regulations and achieve a local building evaluation system. This study fell under comparative research and meticulously investigated and compared the two systems to provide a checklist of shared criteria, as noted in Tabriz’s Aseman Residential Complex (Iran). Based on the six qualities prescribed by the suggested Chapter 19 system, technical qualities were more focused, followed by some social-functional criteria and processes, with other qualities discarded. According to Chapter 19, such major subjects as smartization, recycling and recovery, and transportation infrastructure have not received attention. On the other hand, concerning the case study, field observations, maps, and executive documents, as well as interviews with residents and technical assistants of project installations revealed that the quality of the complex tended to be based on architectural design and the site’s quality, as well as the quality of cooling and heating installations.  The benchmarks of both systems in such areas as quality of the external shell, use of natural light, passive systems, and use of new technologies were not addressed. Concerning the easiness of cleaning and recycling and recovery, as raised by the DGNB system, a lack of attention in the design stage was noted. https://www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_183835_a31027a31301b64d7a4f3ff14a307ac8.pdf