پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,230 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,764 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,152,258 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,910,613 |
تبیین مدل ارزیابی استفاده مجدد سازگار از خانه‌های میراثی تهران (با استفاده از روش F’ANP) | ||
| نشریه هنرهای زیبا: معماری و شهرسازی | ||
| دوره 26، شماره 3، آذر 1400، صفحه 5-19 اصل مقاله (1.68 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jfaup.2022.316189.672568 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| پیروز حناچی* 1؛ یلدا شاه تیموری2 | ||
| 1عضو هیات علمی ( استاد) داﻧﺸﮑﺪه ﻣﻌﻤﺎری، ﭘﺮدﯾﺲ ﻫﻨﺮﻫﺎی زﯾﺒﺎ، داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﻬﺮان . | ||
| 2دانشجوی دکتری مرمت دانشکده معماری، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| امروزه استفاده مجدد سازگار به عنوان یکی از راهبردهای اصلی برای حفظ میراث معماری محسوب می‌شود. این فرآیند عموماً به حفاظت از بناهای میراثیِ بدون استفاده از طریق تبدیل آنها برای استفاده‌های جدید و عملکردهای مناسب‌تر، ضمن حفظ ساختار، شخصیت، و هویت اصلی آنها برای نسل‌های آینده اشاره دارد. نیاز به یادگیری از تجارب گذشته و ارزیابی اشتباهات و موفقیت‌ها پس از استفاده مجدد همواره وجود دارد؛ و به دلیل اهمیت داشتن رویکردی یکپارچه در ارزیابی پروژه‌های استفاده مجدد، تعیین شاخص‌هایی جامع که دارای وزن میباشند، ضرورت می‌یابد. در مقاله حاضر ابتدا شاخص‌های استفاده مجدد سازگار با بررسی متون نظری و اسناد بین‌المللی این حوزه تعیین، و سپس با وزن‌دهی آنها به روش F’ANP مدل ارزیابی استفاده مجدد سازگار از خانه‌های میراثی تهران ارائه می‌گردد. نتیجه حاصل از این بررسی نشان می‌دهد که 4 معیار «ارتقاء ساختار اقتصادی»، «توسعه فرهنگی- اجتماعی»، «پایداری کالبدی»، و «ملاحظات محیطی» بیشترین تأثیر را بر استفاده مجدد سازگار از خانه‌های میراثی تهران داشته‌اند و شاخص «توجه به ویژگی‌های منطقه» با بالاترین وزن نهایی، بیشترین اهمیت را در ارزیابی دارد. پس از سه شاخص ملاحظات محیطی، شاخص‌های پتانسیل کالبدی تغییر عملکردی، ایجاد فرصت‌های شغلی، اقدامات حفاظتی، توسعه گردشگری، و تداوم منزلت فرهنگی در اولویت‌های بعدی میباشند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| استفاده مجدد سازگار؛ شاخص ارزیابی؛ خانه های میراثی تهران؛ مدل F&rsquo؛ ANP | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Explaining the Evaluation Model for Adaptive Reuse of Tehran Heritage Houses (by F’ANP Model) | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| pirooz hanachi1؛ yalda shahteimouri2 | ||
| 1Faculty Member (Professor) School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, Tehran University | ||
| 2PhD Student in Restoration and Revitalization of Historic Buildings and Fabrics, School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| In a world where change is both permanent and inevitable, it is very important to adapt heritage buildings to today’s functions within the context of conservation methods in order to ensure their continuity. Buildings that are considered to be part of cultural heritage often undergo functional and physical changes over time with regards to their status and appearance. In case these buildings become unable to meet their original use over time, or in cases their relevant function becomes inappropriate in the current situation, it becomes necessary to make spatial changes within their structure. Towards revitalizing and generating sustainable values of these buildings, many heritage buildings of cultural and historic significance are being adapted and reused rather than being demolished. To ensure the conservation of cultural properties, cultural heritages, and their historical, cultural, and aesthetic values, as well as to ensure the continuity of the cultural link between the past and the future, it is important to consider their potential new uses and functions. Today, the adaptive reuse is considered as one of the main strategies for conserving architectural heritage in theoretical and practical discussions of conservation. This process generally refers to conservation of heritage buildings without transforming them for new uses and more appropriate functions, while keeping their original structure, character, and identity for future generations. Adaptive reuse is an important aspect of preservation and conservation, and involves the reintegration of a historical structure into daily life through a new function. Using buildings outside of their original intended purpose, and benefiting from these buildings by providing them with new functions through which they can service society, contributes to the interaction between individuals, the buildings and society. Adaptive reuse can provide the added benefit of regenerating an area in a sustainable manner. However, it is also necessary to find the proper balance between the preservation of a cultural property and the change of its functions. There is always a need for learning from past experiences, evaluating the mistakes and successes after adaptation and reuse; and due to the significance of a comprehensive view and an integrated approach in assessing reuse projects, it is necessary to identify comprehensive indices with relative weight and importance. Hence, with a mixed methodological approach, this paper tries to achieve a full understanding of adaptive reuse indices by reviewing literature review and international documents in this field and then provides the evaluation model for adaptive reuse of heritage houses in Tehran. Therefore, 19 indicators derived from adaptive reuse are divided by F’ANP to the forming dimensions and then their relative significance is determined through the network analysis process. The results of this study demonstrate that 4 criteria of "enhancing economic structure", "socio-cultural development", "physical sustainability", and "environmental considerations" have had the greatest impact on adaptive reuse of Tehran heritage buildings and the regional characteristics index is of the highest significance in assessment. Following these indices, the environmental considerations, physical potential for functional change, creating employment opportunities, conservation measures, tourism development, and cultural preservation are the subsequent priorities. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Adaptive Reuse, Evaluation Indicators, Tehran Heritage Houses, F&rsquo, ANP Model | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
زبردست، اسفندیار (1393) کاربرد مدل F’ANP در شهرسازی؛ نشریه هنرهای زیبا- معماری و شهرسازی، دوره 19، شماره 2، تابستان1393، صص23-38.
Agaliotou, C. (2015). Reutilization of industrial buildings and sites in greece can act as a lever for the development of special interest/alternative tourism. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 175, 291-298.
Al-Hagla, K. (2010), “Sustainable urban development in historical areas using the tourist trail approach”, The International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning (CITIES), Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 234-248.
Almeida, C. P., Ramos, A. F., and Silva, J. M. (2018). Sustainability assessment of building rehabilitation actions in old urban centres. Sustainable cities and society, 36, 378-385.
Assefa, G., and Ambler, C. (2017). To demolish or not to demolish: Life cycle consideration of repurposing buildings. Sustainable cities and society, 28, 146-153.
Australia ICOMOS; (1979) The Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (The Burra Charter); Burra, Icomos.
Aydın, D., Yaldız, E., and Sıramkaya, S. B. (2015). Evaluation of Domestic Architecture via the Context of Sustainability: Cases from Konya City Center. ArchNet-IJAR, 9(1).
Bottero, M., D’Alpaos, C., & Oppio, A. (2019). Ranking of adaptive reuse strategies for abandoned industrial heritage in vulnerable contexts: A multiple criteria decision aiding approach. Sustainability, 11(3), 785.
ullen, P.A. and Love, P.E.D. (2010). “The rhetoric of adaptive reuse or reality of demolition: views from the field”, Cities, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 215-24.
Bullen, P. A., and Love, P. E. D. (2011a). Adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. Structural Survey, 29(5), 411–421.
Bullen, P.A. and Love, P.E.D. (2011b). “A new future for the past: a model for adaptive reuse decision-making”, Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 32-44.
Bullen, P.A. and Love, P.E.D. (2011c). “Factors influencing the adaptive reuse of buildings”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 32-46.
Cano, M., Garzon, E., and Sanchez-Soto, P. J. (2013). Historic preservation, GIS, and rural development: The case of Almería province, Spain. Applied Geography, 42, 34-47.
Cercleux, A. L., Merciu, F. C., and Merciu, G. (2012). Models of Technical and Industrial Heritage Re-Usein Romania. Procedia Environmental Sciences. 14: 216–225. Among the 2011 International Conference of Environment-Landscape-European Identity.
Chan, E.H. and Lee, G.K. (2008). “Contribution of Urban design to economic sustainability of Urban renewal projects in Hong Kong”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 353-364.
Chen, C. S., Chiu, Y. H., and Tsai, L. (2018). Evaluating the adaptive reuse of historic buildings through multicriteria decision-making. Habitat International, 81, 12-23.
Conejos, S., Langston, C., and Smith, J. (2011). Improving the implementation ofadaptive reuse strategies for historic buildings. In Le vie dei mercanti S.A.V.E.HERITAGE. Safeguard of architectural, visual, environmental heritage.
Council of Europe (1975) The Declaration of Amsterdam- European Charter of Architectural Heritage; Amesterdam, Council of Europe.
Council of Europe (1985) Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe; Granada, Council of Europe. Council of Europe (2005) Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society; Faro, Council of Europe.
Council of Europe (2007) Declaration of Innsbruck, Symposium on Heritage and Modernity; Innsbruck- Austria; Council of Europe.
Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH). (2004) Adaptive Reuse: Preserving Our Past, Building Our Future; Department of Environment and Heritage, Commonwealth of Australia: Parkes, ACT, USA, p. 17.
Department for Culture, Media and Sport (London) (2007) The White Paper– Heritage Protection for the 21st Century; London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
Deloitte (2017) Heritage Works: A toolkit of best practice in heritage regeneration; Deloitte, British Property Federation (BPF), the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), and Historic England.
Dina, A. and Maignan, C. (2012). Revitalization Through Arts and Culture: New Developments for European Industrial Complexes. Central Europe Programme, Project Second Chance, Nurnberg.
Douglas, J. (2006). Building Adaptation, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford and Burlington, MA.
EAHTR (European Association of Historic Towns and Regions) (2005) Declaration of Goteborg, Heritage Led Regeneration- Delivering Good Practice; Goteborg - Sweden; EAHTR.
Ebbe, K. (2009). Infrastructure and Heritage Conservation: Opportunities for Urban Revitilization and Economic Development, in C.H. Group (Ed.), The World Bank-Urban Development Unit World Bank, Washington, DC.
Elsorady, D. A. (2014). Assessment of the compatibility of new uses for heritage buildings: The example of Alexandria National Museum, Alexandria, Egypt. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 15(5), 511-521.
Elzeyadi, I.M. (2001). “Ten palaces tell their stories: environmental quality assessment of offices inside adaptively re-used historical palaces in Cairo, Egypt”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI.
English Heritage (2000) Power of Place: The Future of the Historic Environment; London: English Heritage English Heritage (2008) Conservation Principles: policies And Guidance for the sustainable management of historic environment; London: English Heritage.
English Heritage (2011) English Heritage Corporate Plan 2011/2015; London: English Heritage.
Ferretti, V., Bottero, M., and Mondini, G. (2014). Decision making and cultural heritage: An application of the Multi-Attribute Value Theory for the reuse of historical buildings. Journal of cultural heritage, 15(6), 644-655.
Giuliani, F., De Falco, A., Landi, S., Bevilacqua, M. G., Santini, L., and Pecori, S. (2018). Reusing grain silos from the 1930s in Italy. A multi-criteria decision analysis for the case of Arezzo. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 29, 145-159.
Günçe, K., and Mısırlısoy, D. (2019). Assessment of Adaptive Reuse Practices through User Experiences: Traditional Houses in the Walled City of Nicosia. Sustainability, 11(2), 540.
Haidar, L. A., and Talib, A. (2013). Adaptive Reuse in the Traditional Neighbourhood of the Old City Sana’a-Yemen. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 105, 811-822.
Historic Environment Scotland (2002) Passed to the Future: Sustaining the Historic Environment; Edinburgh: Historic Environment Scotland.
ICOMOS; (1964) International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter); Venice, Icomos.
ICOMOS; (1972a) Recommendation Concerning the Protection, at National Level, of the Cultural and Natural Heritage; Paris, Icomos.
ICOMOS; (1972b) Resolutions of the Symposium on the Introduction of Contemporary Architecture into Ancient Groups of Buildings; Budapest, Icomos.
ICOMOS; (1974) Seminar on the Integration of Modern Architecture in Old Surroundings; Kazimierz Dolny, Poland, Icomos.
ICOMOS- UNESCO (1976) Recommendation adopted at the International Symposium- A New Life for Historic Towns; Prague- Bratislava, Icomos.
ICOMOS (1983) The Appleton Charter for the Protection and Enhancement of the Built Environment; Ottawa, Icomos. ICOMOS (1987) Washington Charter: Conservation of Historic Town; Washington, Icomos.
ICOMOS (2003). Principles for the Analysis, Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage; Zimbabwe, Icomos.
ICOMOS (2010) New Zealand Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value; New Zealand, Icomos. ICOMOS (2011a) The Paris Declaration On heritage as a driver of development; Paris, Icomos.
ICOMOS (2011b) International Scientific Committee on Twentieth Century Heritage Approaches for the conservation of twentieth-century architectural heritage- Madrid Document; Madrid; Icomos.
ICOMOS & TICCIH (2011) Joint ICOMOS – TICCIH Principles for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage Sites , Structures , Areas and Landscapes- The Dublin Principles; Dublin- Ireland; Icomos.
Kee, T. (2014) Adaptive Reuse of Industrial Buildings for Affordable Housing in Hong Kong. J. Des. Built Environ, 14, 1–14.
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., and Seppälä, J. (2018). Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecological economics, 143, 37-46.
Ijla, A., and Broström, T. (2015). The sustainable viability of adaptive reuse of historic buildings: The experiences of two world heritage old cities; Bethlehem in Palestine and Visby in Sweden. International Invention Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 2(4), 52-66.
Kutut, V., Zavadskas, E. K., and Lazauskas, M. (2014). Assessment of priority alternatives for preservation of historic buildings using model based on ARAS and AHP methods. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 14(2), 287-294. Langston, C. (2011). “On archetypes and building adaptive reuse”, The 17th Annual Pacific Rim Real Estate Society (PRRES) Conference, Gold Coast.
Langston, C.; Wong, F.K.W.; Hui, E.C.M.; Shen, L. (2008). Strategic assessment of building adaptive reuse opportunities in Hong Kong. Build. Environ., 43, 1709–1718.
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (2019) Historic Environment- Advises on enhancing and conserving the historic environment; Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
Mısırlısoy, D., and Günçe, K. (2016). Adaptive reuse strategies for heritage buildings: A holistic approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 26, 91-98.
Mohamed, N., and Alauddin, K. (2016). The criteria for decision making in adaptive reuse towards sustainable development. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 66, p. 00092). EDP Sciences.
Othman, A. A. E., and Heba, E. (2018). Adaptive reuse: an innovative approach for generating sustainable values for historic buildings in developing countries. Organization, technology and management in construction: an international journal, 10(1), 1704-1718.
Pinto, M. R., De Medici, S., Senia, C., Fabbricatti, K., and De Toro, P. (2017). Building reuse: multi-criteria assessment for compatible design. Int. J. Des. Sci. Technol, 22, 165-193.
Prat Forga, J. M., and Cànoves Valiente, G. (2017). Cultural change and industrial heritage tourism: material heritage of the industries of food and beverage in Catalonia (Spain). Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 15(3), 265-286.
Ribera, F., Nesticò, A., Cucco, P., and Maselli, G. (2019). A multicriteria approach to identify the Highest and Best Use for historical buildings. Journal of Cultural Heritage.
Sanchez, B., and Haas, C. (2018). A novel selective disassembly sequence planning method for adaptive reuse of buildings. Journal of cleaner production, 183, 998-1010.
Sdrali, D., Goussia-Rizou, M., and Kiourtidou, P. (2015). Residents’ perception of tourism development as a vital step for participatory tourism plan: a research in a Greek protected area. Environment, development and sustainability, 17(4), 923-939.
Shehata, W. T. A., Moustafa, Y., Sherif, L., and Botros, A. (2015). Towards the comprehensive and systematic assessment of the adaptive reuse of Islamic architectural heritage in Cairo: a conceptual framework. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 5(1), 14-29.
Tan, Y.T.; Shen, L.Y.; Langston, C. (2014). A fuzzy approach for adaptive reuse selection of industrial buildings in Hong Kong. Int. J. Strateg. Prop. Manag, 18, 66–76.
Tan, Y., Shuai, C., and Wang, T. (2018). Critical Success Factors (CSFs) for the adaptive reuse of industrial buildings in Hong Kong. International journal of environmental research and public health, 15(7), 1546.
TICCIH (2003) The Nizhny Tagil charter for the industrial heritage; Nizhny Tagil- Russia; TICCIH US ICOMOS (1992) the Preservation Charter for the Historic Towns and Areas of the United States of America; VIRGINIA- USA, Icomos. Vardopoulos, I. (2019). Critical sustainable development factors in the adaptive reuse of urban industrial buildings. A fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 101684.
Wang, H. J., and Zeng, Z. T. (2010). A multi-objective decision-making process for reuse selection of historic buildings. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(2), 1241-1249.
Yap, K.K. (2013). Industrial Building-Exploring Its Potential in Adaptive Reuse in Hong Kong. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Construction and Real Estate Management, Karlsruhe, Germany, 10–11 October; pp. 45–58. Yildirim, M. (2012). Assessment of the decision-making process for re-use of a historical asset: The example of Diyarbakir Hasan Pasha Khan, Turkey. Journal of cultural heritage, 13(4), 379-388.
Yuceer, H., and Vehbi, B. O. (2014). Adaptive reuse of carob warehouses in Northern Cyprus. Open House International, 39(4), 65.
Yung, E. H., and Chan, E. H. (2012). Implementation challenges to the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings: Towards the goals of sustainable, low carbon cities. Habitat International, 36(3), pp. 352-361. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 665 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 443 |
||