FACADE RE-DESIGN
A VISUAL EXPERIMENT
Arch. Francesca RICCARDO PhD
TU Delft, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Real Estate & Housing
Dr. Clarine VAN OEL Department of Real Estate & Housing, Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft Ing. Peter DE JONG Department of Real Estate & Housing, Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft
In cooperation with Ir. Paul DE RUITER Department of Building Technology - Design Informatics, Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft
2
CONTENT
1) Introduction
2) Questions and methodology
3) Facade characteristics tested & simulations
4) Results: expected vs. actual preferences
5) Next steps & challenges
3
1) INTRODUCTION
4
Would you say the open sewer is more beautiful than the wild river?*
Wohlwill in ‘What belongs where’, 1979
Theory of aesthetics of the built environment
• We judge sharing common structures
• Beauty is (NOT) in the eye of the beholder
• Aesthetics is NOT a matter of personal taste/data driven
• Aesthetic preferences of buildings can be predicted
Bottino et al., 2009; Gifford, 2000, Stamps, 1999 and 2000; Groat, 1988
6
•If high aesthetics, demolition is no option •If no demolition, longer life and less waste
buildings more environmental friendly
7
• YES Old buildings
• YES Curved, grooved and decorated surface
• NO atypical - modern style
• NL: bricks - traditional exteriors very appreciated
Facade Preferences from research
(van den Berkhof, 2008; Thissen, 2007; Herzog and Shier, 2000; Gifford, 2002; Stamps and Nasar, 1997; Stamps, 1999,)
8
WHY FACADES REDESIGN?
- Postwar Housing: poor energy efficiency e.g. insulation (27% EU energy consumption - EU targets 2020 < 20%)
- Postwar Housing: poor aesthetics, livability
(no identity, dissatisfaction, vandalism)
- Envelopes 80% of European building decay
EC, 2007; Cecodhas, 2007; van der Flier and Thomsen, 2006; Koopman, 2007; Brunoro and Andeweg, 2007
9EC, 2007; Cecodhas, 2007; van der Flier and Thomsen, 2006; Koopman, 2007; Brunoro and Andeweg, 2007
For energy efficiency, decay and livability problems NOT ONLY technical aspects
BUT ALSO preferences for architectural aesthetics
10
AIM of this study
recommend housing associations and/or municipalities
how to manage decay - livability problems of postwar neighborhoods
to be renewed
11
1.To what extent are tenants willing to pay higher rent?
2.To what extent willingness of people to pay higher rent depends on characteristics of facade with combined effect on the energy efficiency and aesthetics for building?
van Eck et.al., 2008
2) QUESTIONS & METHODOLOGY
12
Methodology
WHAT: post-war multifamily blocks (47% EU) hallway-access flats
HOW: Discrete Choice Method by on-line questionnaire
Tenants express preference for hypothetical buildings
differing on facade characteristics
National Board of Housing Sweden, 2005; Bogerd et al., 2009
13
3) FACADE CHARACTERISTICS TESTED and SIMULATIONS
Related to current Dutch renovation practice (NRP)
Are innovative (bio-shading, living walls)
6 are appropriated for visual experiments
5 with combined effectEnergy efficiency & Aesthetics
1 non facade characteristic Willingness pay higher rent
14
Procedure
STEP 1 3 levels per characteristic
STEP 2 receipt for combination of characteristics (SAS)
STEP 3 3D imaging techniques to simulate characteristics
STEP 4 production 36 paired simulations - questionnaire structure
15
16
17
4) RESULTS: EXPECTED vs ACTUAL PREFERENCES
- PREF. for medium to high complexity
YES but pref. medium levels (small difference with high)
YES articulation and sustainable character (50% to 100% moss)
exception window design full size window
- PREF. for traditional solutions
NO pref. 50% moss tiles over no tiles
NO pref. bio-shading over venetians (small diff. venetians, screens)
- PREF. for complexity in colors
NO pref. 1 very dark color (small difference 2 colors medium-dark)
- Willingness to pay a higher rent
YES no difference 575 and 600, but 550 preferred over 600
18
5) NEXT STEPS & CHALLENGES
SHORT RUN STEPS
• Run Dutch housing associations
• Recommendations
LONG RUN STEPS
• Run Italian housing associations
international research cooperation
• Other countries (e.g. Japan)
demographic and cultural stability
• Other facade characteristics
(e.g. random design, green)
19
CHALLENGES
TECHNIQUES
• Test challenging simulation techniques (e.g. gyroscopic, virtual reality)
• Test interaction observer – built environment (exploration – change)
www.360cities.net (visited, June, 2010)
20
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION!!
Questions for discussion are very welcomed
Top Related