[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: year 4, Issue 13 (11-2020) ::
Parseh J Archaeol Stud 2020, 4(13): 207-223 Back to browse issues page
Explanation to the Concept of Rehabilitation in Historic Buildings by Comparative Study of Different Functional Interventions
Afrooz Tahmasebi1, Shahriar Nasekhian 2
1- PhD Candidate, Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, Isfahan University of Arts, Isfahan, Iran.
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Conservation and Restoration Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, Isfahan University of Arts, Isfahan, Iran , s.nasekhian@aui.ac.ir
Abstract:   (353 Views)
Abstract
Interventions related to the use of historic buildings, in addition of rehabilitation, are known in other different terms including revitalization, empowerment, adaptive reuse, etc. However, so far, ther is no research has been done on these terms of interventions by Iranian academics, and this multiplicity of intervention terms and, at the same time, lack of clarity in the concepts, differences between them and their international equivalent terms, has caused confusion among the researchers. The purpose of this paper is to analyze these concepts and other concepts related to reuse historic assets and to determine their relation to each other. In this regard, while studying prerequisites and requirements of functional interventions, different approaches to the subject at the international and national levels are surveyed and the different types of functional interventions in these buildings are analyzed and compared. In order to do the abovementioned, the analytical-descriptive method was used in the first part. In the next section of the article, a comparative study based on logical reasoning has been used to examine the relationship between different reuse interventions. From the findings of this study, it can be noted that the major differences between the various terms in the scope of reuse interventions are due to two major issues of “different word formation in translation” and “belonging to different time and place coordinates”, while they have common underlying concepts and all emphasize on the “role of existence a use in a building in its sustainable conservation”, “the necessity of adapting new uses with cultural significance, values and authenticity of the historic monuments” and “adequately meet to the needs of contemporary life in these buildings.
Keywords: Compatible, Resuscitation, Rehabilitation, Empowerment, Compatible Reuse.

Introduction
So far, few studies have been done on this topic in domestic research in Iran, so that there is no consensus in many of issues in this field especially on terms. Thus, we certainly need to do extensive and in-depth research in this regard, but its prerequisite is to study on the basic concepts of the subject; Knowing that what issues have been considered in the interventions in international literature?
The main purpose of this article is to explain the concepts of this field, in this regard, addressing the reasons and requirements of functional interventions by looking at international documents and charters is on the agenda; Then the different approaches in this field in international and domestic literature are explained and finally the main field of the article is to identify the types of functional interventions through comparative comparison.
Addressing this issue, in addition to the fact that the existence of function in a building ensures the survival and conservation of the building, is also important in terms of sustainable development and environmental issues. Also, considering that while functional interventions can provide protection for the historic building, it may also cause irreversible damage to them, it is vital to determine the necessities and sensitivities for the conservation of historic buildings in this process.
The present article specifically seeks to answer the questions about concepts of different types of functional interventions, their relationship between each other and their different uses. Also, it is going to clarify what is the relationship between the domestic terms of interventions and their international equivalents?
The present article is a basic research that seeks to expand the knowledge on the subject of “rehabilitation” by explaining and analyzing some of the concepts, resulting from library studies. In this regard, first the different aspects of functional interventions have been explained by “analytical-descriptive” method and then by using “comparative comparison” method, the different types of domestic and international definitions provided for functional interventions have been defined and compared.

Conclusion
The following results are obtained from reviewing and comparing the definitions provided for functional interventions and based on studies:
Despite the fact that in most translated literature, the term “Rehabilitation” is equated with “Tavanbakhshi” or “tavanmandsazi”, but considering the common use of the word “Ehya” in Iranian academic and professional circles for this type of intervention, it should be accepted that the term “Ehya” is the proper translation for this kind of intervention; but it seems that because “Ehya” has been used for the urban intervention of “revitalization” at the same time in many academic papers, it made some scholars to find out a new equivalent for the “rehabilitation”. Overall, it can be said that although in recent years translating the term “rehabilitation” into different equivalents has caused confusion and has produced different literature; but comparing the definitions reveals that all these terms are different equivalents for the term “rehabilitation”.
Regarding the relationship of “rehabilitation” and “adaptive reuse”, some such as “Deathridge” (2012: 5) argue that in “adaptive reuse” the use of the buildings definitely change to new uses, while a “building may be rehabilitated to its former purpose or adapted to a new use”, therefore “all adaptive reuse is rehabilitation, but not all rehabilitation is adaptive reuse.” However, not all researchers believe this, and a comparison of the definitions provided for these terms, which despite all their differences, all have the same concepts which emphasizes “adaptation of buildings to appropriate and compatible use”, shows that these measures are no different but they simply belong to different times and places.
Regarding other relevant interventions, it can be said that changing the term does not necessarily change the action; as “Douglas” (2006: 1) believed “There are many other different terms that are used to describe interventions to a building that go beyond maintenance. Words such as ‘refurbishment’ or ‘rehabilitation’ and ‘renovation’ or ‘restoration’ are occasionally taken as being synonymous with one another, even by some in the construction industry.” Also in this case “Markus” (1979) noted that “in the world of building the terms “rehabilitation”, “conversion”, “remodelling”, “restoration”, “reinstatement” and so forth are unhappily confused.” (ibid) In addition, Wilkinson (2014: 4) confirms this claim and adds terms such as ‘retrofitting’, ‘modernisation’, ‘re-lifing’, and ‘recycling’ to the abovementioned.
Some of these words in different places are considered equivalent to a specific concept due to their common use; “Refurbishment”, for example, has gained widespread use in the UK as the most popular term to describe a wide range of adaptation work; however in the USA “Remodelling” is commonly employed as an all-encompassing expression for these works. Also “occasionally some ‘building adaptation’ terms are used together. Certain construction companies, for example, advertise their services as ‘specializing in renovating and refurbishing old homes’. Other contractors use the expression ‘extensions and renovations’.” (Douglas, 2006: 1-2).
Overall, as mentioned, there is several terms for functional interventions in historic assets in Iran, which although the multiplicity of these terms has confused researchers, but further study of their meanings shows that the focus of all these measures is on adapting the buildings to the appropriate and compatible use regarding to cultural significance, authenticity and values of the building; and the formation of different terms has been more due to the two issues of “different word choice in translation” and “belonging to different spatial and temporal situations”. In this regard, it can be said that in domestic literature in Iran, “Ehya”, which is equivalent to “Rehabilitation”, is the main keyword on which the specialized literature is based, but “adaptive reuse” is also a newer term which originates from the USA and Canada and gradually has spread around the world and today is one of the main keywords in this field. “Adaptation” is also a term which includes all interventions related to the functional interventions of historic buildings. In general, it seems that the agreement of the scientific and executive community of the country on the term “Ehya” and the formation of institutions and documents on the basis of this term, requires that focusing on this concept, handle the disagreements to be able to expand its aspects and essentials in the future researches.
Keywords: Compatible, Resuscitation, Rehabilitation, Empowerment, Compatible Reuse.
Full-Text [PDF 552 kb]   (101 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Interdisciplinary
Received: 2019/12/17 | Accepted: 2020/04/15 | Published: 2020/11/30
References
1. - اخترکاوان، مهدی، (1389). «راهکارهای بازبه‌کارگیری سازگار بناهای تاریخی ایران». رسالۀ دکتری معماری، دانشگاه علم و صنعت (منتشر‌نشده).
2. - اولیاء، محمدرضا، (1389). «میراث در اغماء». مجموعه مقالات نخستین همایش ملی شناخت و معرفی مزیت‌ها و ظرفیت‌های احیاء و بهره‌برداری از اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، تهران: صندوق احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، صص: 84-71.
3. - ایزدی، محمد‌سعید، (1389). «مروری بر سیر تکامل اندیشه‌ها، رویکردها و برنامه‌های نوین حفاظت و باززنده‌سازی اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی در جهان». مجموعه مقالات نخستین همایش ملی شناخت و معرفی مزیت‌ها و ظرفیت‌های احیاء و بهره‌برداری از اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، تهران: صندوق احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، صص: 96-85.
4. - ایزدی، محمد‌سعید؛ و امیری، نگین، (1395). «توسعۀ درونی، الگویی متوازن، متعادل و پایدار برای توسعه و ارتقاء کیفی شهر: برنامه‌ریزی برای توسعۀ مجدد اراضی نظامی درون‌شهری». باغ نظر، شمارۀ 41، صص: 46-35.
5. - باشتنی، پریسا‌سادات، (1391). «معیارهای طرح باززنده‌سازی عمارت مسعودیه و طراحی کاربری جدید به‌عنوان مرکز رویدادهای هنری». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی‌ارشد، دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید‌رجایی (منتشر‌نشده).
6. - بنیادی، ناصر، (1391). «سیر تحول در اندیشه مرمت شهری». هویت شهر، شمارۀ 10. صص: 78-67.
7. - پندیدن، علی (1388). «ارائۀ مدلی برای مدیریت پروژه‌های اعطای کاربری به بناهای تاریخی». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی‌ارشد دانشگاه شهید‌بهشتی (منتشر‌نشده).
8. - حبیبی، سید‌محسن؛ و مقصودی، ملیحه، (1386). مرمت شهری. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، چاپ سوم.
9. - رحیم‌زاده، محمدرضا؛ و نجفی، مهنام، (1389). «جایگاه درک ارزش‌های ماهوی اثر تاریخی در روند احیای آن». مجموعه مقالات نخستین همایش ملی شناخت و معرفی مزیت‌ها و ظرفیت‌های احیاء و بهره‌برداری از اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، تهران: صندوق احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، صص: 272-241.
10. - سهرابی، مجید؛ مندگاری، کاظم؛ و کوششگران، سید‌علی‌اکبر، (1389). «احیای کارخانۀ اقبال یزد در روند تبدیل به مکان». مجموعه مقالات نخستین همایش ملی شناخت و معرفی مزیت‌ها و ظرفیت‌های احیاء و بهره‌برداری از اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، تهران: صندوق احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، صص: 526-513.
11. - صمدی‌رندی، یونس، (1389). «احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی-فرهنگی در چشم‌انداز آینده». مجموعه مقالات نخستین همایش ملی شناخت و معرفی مزیت‌ها و ظرفیت‌های احیاء و بهره‌برداری از اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، تهران: صندوق احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی، صص: 364-355.
12. - صندوق احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی-‌فرهنگی (1388الف). «سند احیاء و بهره‌برداری از اماکن تاریخی و فرهنگی».
13. - صندوق احیاء و بهره‌برداری از بناها و اماکن تاریخی-‌فرهنگی (1388ب). «ماتریس کاربری‌های قابل‌اعطاء به اماکن تاریخی-فرهنگی».
14. - غفاری، غلامرضا، (1388). «منطق پژوهش تطبیقی». مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، دورۀ 3، شمارۀ 4، صص: 92-76.
15. - فخاری‌تهرانی، فرهاد؛ اصغریان‌جدی، احمد؛ و قدیری، بهرام، (1372). «احیاء: اعطاء عملکرد جدید به بناهای قدیمی». صفه، شمارۀ 11 و 12. صص: 23-6.
16. - فرای، هیلد برند، (1383). طراحی شهر: به‌سوی یک شکل پایدارتر شهر. ترجمۀ حسین بحرینی، چاپ اول، تهران: شرکت پردازش و برنامه‌ریزی شهری.
17. - فلامکی، محمدمنصور، (1384). سیری در تجارب مرمت شهری از ونیز تا شیراز. تهران: انتشارات فضا، چاپ دوم.
18. - فیلدن، برنارد ملکیور، (1394). حفاظت از بناهای تاریخی. ترجمۀ محمدمهدی هوشیاری، تهران: انتشارات طحان.
19. - کاویان، مجتبی، (1387). «امکان‌سنجی ایده‌های ترکیبی احیاء در کاروانسراهای نواحی گرم‌وخشک برپایۀ ویژگی‌های کالبدی و سازمان فضایی آن‌ها». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی‌ارشد، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان (منتشر‌نشده).
20. - کوششگران، سید‌علی، (1390). «فرصت‌های احیاء در سیر تحول بنای تاریخی از زمان خلق تا زوال اثر». شهر و معماری بومی، شمارۀ 1، صص: 82-67.
21. - محمودکلایه، سعید، (1387). «مجموعه منشورهای بین‌المللی ایکوموس». تهران: معاونت حفظ و احیاء سازمان میراث فرهنگی کشور، (منتشرنشده).
22. - مندگاری، کاظم؛ و محمدی، محسن؛ (1391). «نقش معنا در تعیین ویژگی‌های کارکرد سازگار با بقایای تاریخی». شهر و معماری بومی، شمارۀ 2، صص: 110-99.
23. - میرجانی، حمید، (1389). «استدلال منطقی به‌مثابۀ روش پژوهش». صفه، شمارۀ 50، صص: 50-35.
24. - وانگ، دیوید، (1384). «استدلال منطقی»، روش‌های تحقیق در معماری، لیندا گروت و دیوید وانگ. ترجمۀ علیرضا عینی‌فر، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، صص: 340-301.
25. - یوکیلهتو، یوکا (1386). تاریخ حفاظت معماری. ترجمۀ محمدحسن طالبیان و خشایار بهاری، تهران: انتشارات روزنه.
27. - Brooker, G. & Stone, S., (2010). What is interior design? Mies: Rotovision.
28. - Cantacuzino, S., (1989). Re/Architecture: Old buildings/New uses. London: Thames and Hudson.
29. - Cantell, S. F., (2005). “The Adaptive Reuse of Historic Industrial Buildings: Regulation Barriers, Best Practices and Case Studies”. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree Master of Urban and Regional Planning, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
30. - Carswell, A. T., (2011). “Adaptive reuse”. Green cities, An A-to-Z guide. Cohen, N. & Robbins, P. (Eds.). Los Angeles/London/Nes Delhi/Signapore/Washington DC: Pp: 4-7.
31. - Cherry, M., (2007). “Architectural history and conservation”. Understanding historic building conservation, Forsyth, M. (Ed.). Wiley. Pp: 9-25.
32. - Deathridge, K. B., (2012). “From sacred to secular: The adaptive reuse of America’s religious buildings”. Dissertation of Doctor of Philosophy, Advisor: Van West, C. USA: Department of History, Middle Tennessee state university.
33. - Department of the Environment and Heritage. (2004). Adaptive reuse; Preserving our past, Building our future, Astralia: Australian Government.
34. - Douglas, J. (2006). Building adaptation. Second edition. UK: Elsevier Ltd.
35. - Geraedts, R. & Van Der Voordt, T., (2008). “New life for old buildings”. The architectural annual 2006-2007. Netherland: Delft University of Technology.
36. - ICOMOS. (2013). The Burra Charter. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance.
37. - Kincaid, D. (2003). Adapting building for changing uses: Guidelines for change of use refurbishment. London & New York: Taylor and Francis e-Library.
38. - Latham, D. (2000). Creative reuse of buildings: Principles and practice. 2 vols. the University of Michigan, USA: Donhead.
39. - Love, P. & Bullen, P. A., (2009). “Toward the sustainable adaptation of existing facilities”. Facilities, No. 27 (9/10). Pp: 357-367.
40. - Machado, R., (1976). “Old buildings as palimpsest, Toward a theory of remodeling”. Progressive Architecture, No. 11, Pp: 46-49.
41. - McCallum, D., (2007). “Regeneration and the historic environment”. Understanding Historic Building Conservation. Forsyth, M. (Ed.). Wiley. Pp: 37-45.
42. - Perez de Arce, R., (1978). Urban transformations and the architecture of additions. Architectural Design. 4.
43. - Plevoets, B., (2014). “Retail-reuse: An interior view on adaptive reuse of buildings”. PHD Thesis in Architecture. Advisor: Van Cleempoel, K. & Draye, A. Belgium: Faculty of Architecture and Art, University Hasselt.
44. - Plevoets, B. & Van Cleempoel, K., (2011). “Adaptive reuse as a strategy towards conservation of cultural heritage: A literature review”. Structural studies, repairs and maintenance of heritage architecture. Brebbia, C. & Binda, L. (Eds.). Chianciano Terme. Italy: WIT press.
45. - Powell, K., (1999). Architecture reborn: Converting old buildings for new uses. New York: Rizzoli international publications, Inc.
46. - Remøy, H., (2014). “Adaptive reuse”. Sustainable Building Adaptation: Innovations in Decision-Making. Wilkinson, S. J.; Remøy, H. & Langston, C. United Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell. Pp: 93-181.
47. - Remøy, H. & van der Voordt, T., (2007). “A new life: Conversion of vacant office buildings into housing”. Facilities. No. 25, (3/4). Pp: 88-103.
48. - Robert, P., (1989). Adaptations: New uses for old buildings. Paris: Editions du Moniteur.
49. - Rypkema, D. D. & N. T. f. H. P. i. t. U. States. (1994). The economics of historic preservation: A community leader's guide. National Trust for Historic Preservation.
50. - Scott, F., (2008). On altering architecture. London and Newyork: Routledge.
51. - UNESCO. (1972). Recommendation concerning the Protection. at National Level, of the Cultural and Natural Heritage. Paris.
52. - Van Uffelen, C. (2010). Reuse architecture. Braun.
53. - Wilkinson, S. J. (2014). “Building adaptation”. Sustainable Building Adaptation: Innovations in Decision-Making. Wilkinson, S. J., Remøy, H. & Langston, C. United Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell. Pp: 1-92.
54. - Worthing, D. & Bond, S., (2008). Managing built heritage: The role of cultural significance. Blackwell Publishing.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Tahmasebi A, Nasekhian S. Explanation to the Concept of Rehabilitation in Historic Buildings by Comparative Study of Different Functional Interventions. Parseh J Archaeol Stud. 2020; 4 (13) :207-223
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-255-en.html


year 4, Issue 13 (11-2020) Back to browse issues page
فصلنامه مطالعات باستان شناسی پارسه Parseh Journal of Archaeological Studies
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.21 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4263