Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Management in the Built Environment, TU Delft, Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands
Dr. Hilde Remøy
Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Management in the Built Environment, TU Delft, Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands
One way of adapting and reusing vacant office buildings is conversion into housing. Former research has shown possibilities for this type of conversion, and has delivered instruments for determining the conversion potential of vacant offices. Although adaptation and renovation of outdated offices can prove to be a successful property (real estate) strategy, conversions into housing still only occur on a small scale. There are several reasons for this, including uncertainty about financial feasibility and little knowledge about the opportunities and risks of building conversions. A meta-study of the conversion of 15 office buildings into housing in the Netherlands is used to reveal the drivers for office-to-housing conversions as well as the opportunities and risks that arise in the conversion process. The findings show that various legal, financial, technical, functional and architectonic issues define the opportunities and risks of building conversions. These insights can be used to support the decision-making processes for dealing with vacant office buildings in order to minimize the risks and increase the opportunities.
Resource consumption and related waste production are still rapidly increasing all over the world, leading to social and environmental challenges and to the production of the so-called ‘wastescapes’. Peri-urban areas—in-between urban and rural territories—are particularly vulnerable and prone to develop into wastescapes because they are generally characterised by mixed functions and/or monofunctional settlements, as well as by fragmentation in a low-density territory that is often crossed by large infrastructure networks. Moreover, peri-urban areas are generally the selected locations for the development of plants for waste management. In this way, they are crossed by waste flows of a different nature, in a landscape of operational infrastructures and wasted landscapes. Implementing Circular Economy (CE) principles, interpreting waste and wastescapes as resources, is a way to significantly reduce raw material and (soil) resource consumption, improving cities’ metabolism. A circular approach can positively affect the spatial, social and environmental performances of peri-urban areas. However, the transition towards a CE presents many challenges. This article outlines an approach to address these challenges, presenting a co-creation process among researchers, experts and stakeholders within Living Labs (LLs) processes. LLs are physical and virtual spaces, aiming at the co-creation of site-specific eco-innovative solutions (EIS) and strategies. In the LLs, public–private–people partnerships are developed by applying an iterative methodology consisting of five phases: Co-Exploring, Co-Design, Co-Production, Co-Decision, and Co-Governance. This article presents a case study approach, analysing the co-creation methodology applied in two peri-urban living labs, located in the Metropolitan Areas of Naples (Italy) and Amsterdam (The Netherlands), within REPAiR Horizon2020 research project.
17 May 2022 in International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation
Purpose: Adaptability is an inherent quality in building circularity, as adaptability can physically facilitate the reversibility of materials in a closed-reversible chain, also called “loops”. Nevertheless, positioning adaptability in circularity-oriented models could overlook some of the contextual considerations that contribute to the utility for the built environment. This paper reconceptualises building adaptability to incorporate circularity, in order to facilitate for the resource loops whilst preserving the long-lasting functionality in buildings.Design/methodology/approach: An integrative literature review on adaptability and circularity of buildings was conducted using systematic search approach. From the initial database of 4631 publications, 104 publications were included for the final analysis. A comparative analysis of definitions and determinants of both concepts was conducted to reconceptualise circular building adaptability.Findings: The findings of the literature study show that incorporating circularity and adaptability is possible through 10 design and operation determinants, namely configuration flexibility, product dismantlability, asset multi-usability, design regularity, functional convertibility, material reversibility, building maintainability, resource recovery, volume scalability, and asset refit-ability. The study concludes that considering the defined determinants in a holistic manner could simultaneously facilitate: building resilience to contextual changes, creation of asset value, and elimination of waste generation.Originality/value: This paper expands the relevant bodies of literature by providing a novel way of perceiving building adaptability, incorporating circularity. The practical value of this paper lies in the discussion of potential strategies that can be proactively or reactively employed to operationalise circular building adaptability.