Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Reusing rumours: a review of research citing barriers to adaptive reuse stemming from building code|
|Citation:||Proceedings of the AASA 2016 9th International Conference: Project to practice: innovating architecture, 2016|
|Conference Name:||AASA 9th International Conference (AASA 2016) (30 Sep 2016 - 01 Oct 2016 : University of Technology, Sydney)|
|Abstract:||There is a growing body of research both internationally and within Australia advocating the adoption of adaptive reuse strategies for re-developing existing buildings. Adaptive Reuse (AR) can be described as a building refurbishment which involves a change of use and typically involves redundant buildings. AR represents one helpful path to address the social, environmental and economic challenges inherent in sustainable urban development. The benefits of AR are reported in research spaning the fields of: heritage and preservation; sustainable building design; and also urban regeneration. Studies in Australia identify the perception by those involved in AR that building regulation in its constitution and/or enforcement is a major inhibitor of conversion. In Australia, if projects involve a change of use, new design proposals are required to comply to all current standards of the National Construction Code (NCC). However, much of the published literature does not identify which codes are problematic beyond anecdotal references. The lack of subsequent analysis of stakeholder evidence is problematic in understanding the implications for policy. It is also possible that negative perception of building regulation by construction professionals, CPD trainers and higher education teachers may itself play a significant role shaping professional reasoning and therefore limit the uptake of adaptive reuse strategies. This paper reports on initial findings of a systematic review of recent research in this field, which reference stakeholder views about barriers to AR from building regulation. Analysis of stakeholders’ perceptions will be related to wider debates about building regulation. A key aim of this paper is to offer informed consideration of research surveyed and to specifically evaluate the idea that building regulation is a significant inhibitor of AR. As research reported is ongoing, conclusions drawn are necessarily tentative. Implications and possibilities for future research are also outlined, including plans to progress the reported study.|
|Keywords:||Adaptive reuse; building regulation; perception; professional reasoning|
|Description:||Session 7b - Innovation in-situ|
|Rights:||Copyright status unknown|
|Appears in Collections:||Architecture publications|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.