Search results

Existing old building stock needs retrofit of structures and performance upgrading. Retrofit is often neglected, either lacking understanding of maintenance importance or to keep living costs low. Retrofit is inevitable. Depending on a buildings geographical location, condition or expected time of use; demolition of building or increment space is worth considering. This study looks at the economics about which is the best option: renovation and energy efficient upgrading of existing building or replacement of existing building.

Research method is case study. The same case building – size, age, existing performance as well as renovation and new performance – studied at different regions. These are (1) growing city, (2) stable city and (3) shrinking city. Life cycle cost analysis bases on payback periods. The most important input data are the rent and occupancy rate on each area.

In growing cities, both renovation and replacement of existing buildings are feasible options. In other two areas, payback periods of renovations are rather long and acceptable only if building is in own use. Often retrofit is necessary because of the poor condition of the building.

This study looks at the subject only from building owners economical point of view and ties building to its location. Life cycle assessment (energy use and greenhouse gas emissions) has analysed earlier (Nippala and Heljo, 2010).

Analysis gives the most feasible option to different regions.

This study raises the debate on how realistic it is to expect the building stock to meet the EU’s energy saving and greenhouse cut targets.

Changes in the physical environments of health care settings have become increasingly common to meet the evolving needs of the health care marketplace, new technologies, and infrastructure demands. Physical environment change takes many forms including new build construction, renovation of existing space, and relocation of units with little to no construction customization. The interrelated nature of the complex socio-technical health care system suggests that even small environmental modifications can result in system-level changes. Environmental modifications can lead to unintended consequences and introduce the potential for latent safety threats. Engaging users throughout the change lifecycle allows for iterative design and testing of system modifications. This chapter introduces a flexible process model, PROcess for the Design of User-Centered Environments (PRODUCE), designed to guide system change. The model was developed and refined across a series of real-world renovations and relocations in a large multihospital health care system. Utilizing the principles of user-centered design, human factors, and in-situ simulation, the model engages users in the planning, testing, and implementation of physical environment change. Case studies presented here offer exemplars of how to modify the model to support individual project objectives and outcomes to assess at each stage of the project.

This paper aims to address one of the fundamental issues of gathering existing knowledge/solutions from projects for re-use in other projects, that is, contextual elements that are integrated with the knowledge. Contextual elements that are associated/integrated with knowledge do not often taken into consideration adequately during knowledge transfer. Hence, this can lead to undesirable consequences, for example, unnecessary use of time and resources. This paper will increase the awareness of (and lead to finding appropriate ways to) dealing adequately with contextual elements in knowledge transferring processes.

Qualitative method: narrative literature study.

This paper provides a conceptual understanding of dealing with contextual elements in knowledge transferring processes from the sense making perspective.

This paper, which is connected to a research and development (R&D) project that has recently started, uses this paper to emphasize the importance of addressing contextual elements adequately in knowledge transferring processes. This emphasis is important as this R&D project deals with, among other things, collecting lessons learned on energy efficient solutions from building and renovation projects for re-use in other renovation projects.

This paper will contribute to replicate knowledge / lessons learned effectively and to increase the application of energy efficient solutions in building renovation projects.

This paper attempts to point out and increase our understanding on how acquisition of knowledge at an earlier point of time can influence transferring of that knowledge at a later point of time. In general, there is inadequate focus and awareness on this issue in construction projects.

The aim of this study is to develop a framework that incorporates social aspects of housing refurbishment when evaluating the sustainability of refurbishment projects. The research examined whether the German Sustainable Building Council (DGNB) certification yields a holistic approach to social sustainability.

A framework for social sustainability was established from values identified through reviews of certification systems, published literature and from interviews. The target is to better assess and value holistic and soft parameters like social sustainability when assessing the overall value creation of projects.

The result was a more transparent and systematic structure, which revealed that the DGNB certification had shortcomings in a holistic approach to social sustainability. Counteractions for these shortcomings are discussed.

Researchers are still discussing how to include more soft aspects like social aspects with the more hard measures like energy consumption and initial cost in the same equation for addressing sustainability in a more holistic framework. This research contributes to this.

Considering the current climate situation and the amount and the state of existing European building stock, sustainable renovation is inevitable. In Europe, the DGNB certification is one of the most applied certification systems of sustainability. It approaches all parts of sustainability. Yet, social sustainability has been criticised for being neglected.

A review of literature concerning the concept suggests that it is a concept in chaos. There have been a number of attempts to impose some order to this; however, the attempts have all been made differently and with limited success.

This chapter compares programmes for urban housing regeneration in France and England, showing how ideological similarities reflected in policy ideas and programmes played out differently in significantly different contexts.

The chapter draws on results of several major research programmes, including in-depth extensive fieldwork in a number of cities and regions in France and England. Field research included participant observation in participatory planning events, interviews, home visits, guided walks in the districts, etc. These enabled a multi-site and multi-perspective understanding of urban housing renewal at different sites.

In both contexts, early promises for participation in housing renewal gave way to an imperative for demolition, justified on purely technical grounds that were not shared with participants. The linking of social mix and demolition for local ‘improvement’ also then appeared to be a contradiction between different policies that few residents could endorse, other than selected beneficiaries. Participation, social mix and demolition thus formed an unholy trinity in urban renewal policies.

Housing renewal requires much greater commitment to the experience of residents, to avoid exacerbating social problems rather than relieving them.

The chapter reflects on a wealth of in-depth research over more than a decade to consider the broader implications and outcomes of housing renewal programmes in two countries. It highlights the different balances of power in the two cases and the trajectories of respective urban social politics, including the overlaps between policy objectives and similarities in the government of housing renewal. It also highlights the determination and commitment among residents to the value of housing that is judged from the outside to be ‘poor’.

The Karmeliterviertel is an inner-city neighborhood in Vienna, which underwent a significant revitalization and renewal. Since the opinions of Viennese urban researchers differ to a large extent whether gentrification occurs in Vienna at all, this chapter examines the question, whether the revitalization of the Karmeliterviertel can be defined as ‘gentrification.’ This question is elaborated in the context of Vienna's overall ‘soft urban renewal’ strategy. Despite the fact that direct displacement of households from the Karmeliterviertel was prevented by the mechanisms of Vienna's strict tenancy law, also the local coordination office played a certain role. As higher-status groups moved in the neighborhood, the infrastructure and the amenities changed and were adjusted to their demands. This cultural redefinition resulted in the replacement of restaurants, cafes, and bars, which served the needs of longtime residents and low-income groups. The revitalization of the Karmeliterviertel thus has to be termed ‘gentrification,’ as their social spaces were displaced and as they are less visible in the neighborhood. This form of displacement develops a similar dynamic as direct displacement, when social relations, bonds, and networks, which provide options, coping strategies, and sources of a place-based identity, are dissolved. As gentrification results in homogeneity, the main challenge for a city is to maintain spaces of different milieus and thus to preserve authentic places, characterized by heterogeneity and urbanity.

The chapter is concerned with the policy led by Paris and London towards the visual artists during the XXth century up to the present day. It examines in detail the evolution of the political system developed in France – as Paris was the center of artistic culture – from philanthropic initiatives, the “cités d’artistes,” to the introduction of painters and sculptors in social lodgings in the 1920s by the City of Paris. This impulse was supported by the Ministry of Culture. The expression of welfare state promoting artists in Paris is opposed to the emergence of “arts infrastructure” in the former industrial buildings of London through various artists’ associations, such as Space and Acme. From an historical research and a sociological analysis concentrated on Paris and its suburbs, our fieldwork, we studied an emblematic example, Montmarte-aux-artists, located in the 18th arrondissement the evolution of the welfare politics concerning artists’ studios in the urban renovation of Paris up to the present day. In contrast, the social support concerning the artists living in London is opposite and the effects on the urban area are different. Our research is inspired from the School of Chicago methodology. The main results of our research underline how the introduction of artists’ studios in social lodgings reveals an utopian dimension linked to the artist. So, the artist is considered as a singular inhabitant who can encourage the empowerment in the social housings or who can contribute to the phenomenon of gentrification in an area. However, the utopian role given to the artists is limited to the social and political system.

In November 2001, Scott Carlson, in the Chronicle of Higher Education wrote an article on library use titled “The deserted library: As students work online, reading rooms empty out—leading some campuses to add Starbucks” (Carlson, 2001). The essence of this chapter is that many librarians, facing dramatic declines in library gate counts resulting from the wealth of electronic resources accessible remotely, were beginning to move away from traditional conceptions of the library as primarily a repository for print collections. Carlson describes the “tough sell” that the Georgia College and State University in Milledgeville had experienced when planning a $19.5 million library addition in the mid-1990s. In response librarians had begun “fighting back” with “plush chairs, double-mocha lattes, book groups, author readings.” Still, no one knew whether these stratagems would enhance learning or bring its readers back.

Library spaces are being reimagined to better fit the needs of today’s and future users. At the Georgia Tech Library, a new library space, currently called the “Library Store,” is being developed as part of the “Library Next” initiative. How can this space best attract users and how can it work to intuit their needs to offer more seamless services? Careful planning and dedicated participation on the part of library management and library staff have set into motion a design for a new space that will meet user needs immediately and will be flexible enough to respond to their ever-changing use patterns.

This chapter explores the relationship between staff needs, user needs, and institutional needs when tasked with creating a library space and services in the 21st century academic library. It explores the development of the “Library Store” as a case study to shed light on the ways in which academic libraries can adapt to the research and learning needs of their users.

The authors provide insight into the complexities of leveraging existing staff skills in order to offer new user services in a space that boasts a new and updated design. They also detail the lessons learned from the initial planning stages of the new space and services.

This chapter considers user and library staff needs from a management perspective when planning a redesign of space and services. This library is one of only a few that has embarked on this specific model of space and service reimagining.