SURVEY
The aim of this survey was to gather the opinions of a variety of people on questions relating to the reuse off architecture and its different approaches. The survey was distributed through email and social media (Linkedin & Facebook) and email in order to attract responses from professionals and non-professionals.
The survey gathered 34 responses which were analysed to make comparisons with secondary research,
SURVEY ANALYSIS:
1: Do you have an interest in the built environment or have you studied in this field?
SURVEY AIM:
Objective: To see if the respondant had an interest in the built environment and if this influenced their answers.
2: In what order would you rank these buildings based on appearance with 1 being your favourite?
Objective: To see if respondants prefered old buildings or more contemporary buildings and to see if there was a correlation between results.
Results show that the majority of the respondent have an interest in the built environment. This does not mean that the results will be bias, but more informed.
On reflection, this question would be changed to ask respondants whether they had studied in this field or not, as it would be natural to assume they had an interest in the field. This would then enable 'educated' responses to be distingued from those who have had no education into the topic and offer a comparison between their responses.
3: In three words, how would you describe the building you voted as your favourite above?
Objective: To understand what respondants like about paticular buildings.
Building A:
Building B:
Building C:
Building D:
The words used by respondents to describe this building are all positive. Words relating to the character, timelessness and traditional aspect of the building were very common. This shows an awareness and appreciation of the heritage of the building and why it was voted as favourite by many of the resondents.
Building E was not ranked in first position by any of the respondents.
4: How would you feel if your favourite building was demolished? Why?
Objective: To assess respondents sentimentality towards their favourite building.
Building A:
Building B:
Building C:
Building D:
Building E:
"Such a waste, re-use it in a different way and adapt the spaces"
Res 5
"I think it would be a shame to the community as it is an old building and iconic to the place - it is an example of traditional architecture and adds history to a place. It is a nice contrast against all the modern buildings - you wouldn't want a place of just glass and steel, they lack a certain character that the building has and is no long present in many buildings built today"
Res 32
"It would be like having a chapter of history deleted. We need to keep these characteristic buildings to keep a link with the past."
Res 5
"Robbed of an iconic building that against modern designs has stood the test of time and remained."
Res 12
"Very upset, because if I like it, probably others like it too, and more often than not today, it seems that nice buildings are replaced with less nice ones, though I appreciate that there are exceptions. .. With a building going, also goes a certain amount of local history too, and if that history is a part of my history, then I feel as if a part of me has been demolished too."
Res 31
"Disappointed, as you cannot recreate the same look, atmosphere and impact if it was demolished. Shows the style and life of that time."
Res 33
"sad, wont be able to have the spatial experience."
Res 30
"It seems to be a new building so it would be upsetting to see it demolished so soon after it was built."
Res 28
"It would be a shame because it would be a very recognisable building and something unique to the area."
Res 23
Respondent 12 recognised that some old buildings were built many years ago and have stood the test of time.
Respondents 31 and 33 both recognised the unique nature of a building. They both also regonised the historical links architecture; how a building is a project of its time how this can personally effects them. By mentioning a personal attachment, respondent 31 connotes the concept of memory that architecture can create.
"Sad, the building looks to have history and the loss of that would mean that the feeling a place can bring would be lost for many people."
Res 29
The respondents recognise that a building is unique to a place and the link a building has to the past. Repondent 29 recognised the relationship a building has to place and the feelings this can evoke in many people. Respodent 32 acknowledged the character of older buildings which modern buildings are often devoid of. They also recognised the contrast of new and old buildings in a town.
All respondents would react negatively to this building being demolished. Respondant 28 mentioned that it would be upsetting to see it demolished as it is a relitavly new building whereas 30 and 23 refered to its unique form and spatial qualities being reasond for it being a negative reason for it being demolished,
No respondents chose this building as their favourite.
5: It is important to have a range of styles of buildings in towns and cities: ..Why?
Objective: To assess whether respondents feel that this concept is important.
This graph shows how many respondants answered with each option.
Results show that respondents all think that having a range of architectural styles in a town or city. Those who answered 'neutral' gave reasons such as:
"Too much of a range in styles can result in a town losing its image, although the appearance of a city centre or town centre is important in marketing the area."
Res 17
"I think it depends on the location and historical context of the town/city For example London has some beautiful architecture ranging over hundreds of years, where has other towns such as Chesterfield are made up of very old buildings and a post-modern building wouldnt look right there"
Res 13
These responses show an awareness of the balance and suitablility of certain architectural styles within different contexts. Though the results show that respondants all agreed that range is important, many responses gave further insight into their answers:
"Although buildings can vary it is good to have a range of buildings from different times/historical periods. Although I maybe favour modern buildings, they would be nothing if not complimented by other styles."
Res 3
"It makes places more interesting. Heritage should be conserved but new buildings should have their own identity."
Res 4
"Even Unesco cities benefit form a modern element, for example in-between the museums its nice to retune to the modern world in place of reset where you can reflect on history. Or for visual relief. A sleek glass addition to a spa town like Bath speaks of modernity working alongside and not against its history, it provides a continuim of time. Both are applicable and relevant, neither is better or fighting against each other. And, finally different typologies show the decades of developments and tell a story."
Res 7
"It makes it more interesting and organic. Buildings don't have to have the same style/language for the city landscape to look well planned and attractive."
Res 8
"Diversity is important as everyone has differing likes but it is important that the differing styles compliment each other and don't either overpower or stand out as eyesores.."
Res 12
"I believe its nice to see how a place has developed over time , it gives the town a story and a heritage as we constantly evolve in building styles."
Res 27
"For aesthetic, functional and all other purposes. If all towns and cities did not have a range of buildings, they would all be the same... rather boring. Local buildings are a part of local history."
Res 31
"Yes i do believe it shows how a city has progressed though time by the variety of architecture. However cites with a distinct design style such as Dubrovnik medieval city would lose its overall impact if diluted with a range of architectural styles."
Res 33
"A variety of buildings adds interest, character and atmosphere."
Res 4
The respondents commented on the importance of creating history for a town or city through having examples of different typologies which show development. Respondent 27 mentioned how they liked to see how a place has developed over time and how this gives a town a "story and a heritage".
A common comment was the need for different architectural styles to compliment and enhance eachother. Respondent 3 mentioned how modern buildings "would be nothing if not complimented by other styles" with respondent 7 stating how modern buildings allow you to "reflect on history". They go on to say how modern architecture provides a "continum of time" when it works alongside the old architecture.
Respondent 33 mentions how the introduction of a variety of styles could actually be detrimental to cities such as Dubrovnik where the strong vernacular would loose its impact if it was "diluted with a range of architectural styles".
This question was really successful in gathering the views of respondants towards having a range of architecture in a town or city. Asking 'why?' was very successful as it gathered some very informed and interesting responses.
6: We should reuse old buildings rather than replace it with a new one: ..Why?
Objective: To assess whether respondents feel that this concept is important.
This graph shows how respondants answered this question:
The most common response for this question was 'It Depends' with no one questioned disagreeing with this statement.
Respondents mentioned the positive and negative reasons for reusing a building which is why they chose a neutrail response:
"Where the building can be reused and fulfill a function it is worth reusing, but sometimes we have to move on."
Res 4
"If the building has a particular history or is beautiful it should be kept but if its insignificant, dangerous and decrepit it should be replaced with a beautiful new building."
Res 11
"If the building does not function well at all with numerous technical faults then I think it should be replaced, but under any other circumstance a solution can nearly always be carried out.."
Res 13
"I'm all for keeping old buildings but they must be 'fit for purpose' ie. Will a new hospital building be better for patient care and treatment?."
Res 15
"That would depend on the state a current building is in. If it wasn't financially viable to repair an old building then I can agree with replacing it. However if it is financially viable then old building should be restored or converted."
Res 21
"Some old buildings others have a high value to the community and general history of the location, therefore they should be maintained and reused; whereas in other cases the cost of maintenance out-weighs the cost to the community were it to be replaced.."
Res 22
"Why should a building be knocked down, that building has stood the test of time and will probably be better built than anything that will be put in its place. Plus we need to preserve our architectural heritage not just replace it when no one no longer has use for it, our imagination need to be used in order to give the building a new lease of life so it can meet todays needs."
Res 27
"This statement is correct to a degree but it depends on whether the old building would be fit for the intended purpose."
Res 30
"When possible we should, but in some instances, the Shard, the Beyeler in Basel, the new Roche tower in Basel, etc it is not possible to re-use the old building, so a new one has to be built.... but in instances like the Preston bus station, this should be re-used, if at all possible within cost contraints... because its a part of the town, and the towns social history."
Res 31
"Old buildings tend to have a lot more character and charm so as long as the funds are available I would always have them sympathetically converted for modern use.."
Res 34
"It depends on the building and its proposals."
Res 7
Most of these answers demonstrate a very rational approach towards this topic. With the most common answer for the question being "It depends" and many of the answers giving positive reasons to reuse a building for cultural and heritage reasons and its role in the identity of a town.
Many of the answers gave reasons for why a building shound not be reused, such as for financial reasons and whether a building could be made be fit for purpose. Respondant 15 made an interesting point about how a new hospital building could actually be more fit for use by allowing for better patient care.
This question has given some very interesting responses to the topic of whether a building should be reused or rebuilt with repondants giving very rational answers.
7: When a building is redeveloped, which approach do you prefer? Please rank these images with 1 being your favourite.
Objective: To see how respondents view the three different styles of regeneration discussed in the main body of research.
8: In three words, how would you describe the style you voted as your favourite above?
Objective: To see in more detail what respondents opinions on the approaches are.
This graph displays the results in rank order:
This graph shows how many times each building was given each rank position:
The results show a divide between favouring old and contemporary buildings when considering which buildings were ranked in first position. Building A recieved the most votes with 18, with building D recieving 10 votes. Building B then recieved the highest number of rankings for second position with 19 rankings, with D only recieving 5.
This shows that respondants generally pefer older buildings to the contemporary options.
This question was very successful in gathering the opionions of respondents towards different buildings.
This graphs allows the popularity of each building to be easily viewed and compaired:
The graph shows that building A was the most popular building as it was ranked 'number 1' by over half of the respondants. The number of votes decreased as the ranking position got lower showing that this building was liked by the majority of respondants.
Building B was only ranked in first position by two respondents. 19 people then ranked this building as their second favourite building. The number of results then decline as the rank positions get lower.
Building C only recieved two votes for both first and second position. Ranking this building 4th was the most popular position. This shows that this building wasn't very highly regarded by the respondants.
The most contemporary building, building D recieved the second highest number of votes for first position with 10 votes. This means that just under a third of resondents ranked it as their favourite. The number of results dip for second place before rising for thrid position and declining as the results get lower.
Building E was the least popular building withno respondents ranking this building as their favourite. The number of votes increase as the ranking positions get lower with over half of respondents ranking this building as their least favourite.
This shows a dislike towards Brutalist architecture from the respondants.
The respondants who chose building B as their favourite also used many words relating o the building's history, character and classic style. This shows a cultural awareness towards the building and that its style is still greatly appreciated by many of the resondents.
Words used to describe this building relate to its strong and simplisitic form.
This building was describes possitively with many respondents making reference to its modern form.
F
G
H
This graph shows how many times each building was given each rank position:
This graph displays the results in rank order:
The results show that approach G, which sympathetically combines new and old was the resondents favourite, with 31, almost all, ranking this building in first position.
The results show that the resondants prefer the approach where new is sympathetically combined with the existing.
Approach F was mostly ranked in 2nd position with only two people ranking it in first position.
Respondents prefer the approaches that are more sympathetic to the existing structure.
Approach H was the least favoured option with only 1 respondant ranking this as their favourite and the majority putting it in third place.
The results show a clear dislike towards an extreme approach of reuing architecture.
This question was very successful in gathering the opinions of people towards different approaches of reusing architecture.
Approach G:
This approach had a range of descriptions, with most describing the approach as being 'complimentary' or 'respectful'.
This shows a mixed view towards this approach with some respondents describing it as 'complimenting' and others as 'odd'.
Approach F:
Approach F:
This approach revieved positive descriptions.