Introduction
In the last decades, we started paying more attention to the impact construction work has against the environment. While the first half of the 20th century marked the beginning of obsolescence in architecture, later on architects were more preoccupied with reusing existing buildings. Former factories, warehouses and office buildings, deemed unusable, transform in shape, size and functionality. They become something else, better suited for the current immediate urban environment. This is when we start noticing terms such as adaptable and adaptive architecture.
This transformation is sometimes referred to as adaptive reuse. Also, buildings that are adaptable are buildings that maintain relevance with the passing of time.
So, what’s the difference between the adaptable and adaptive architecture?
Adaptable architecture
What is architecture adaptability?
To put it simply, architecture adaptability is the ability of a building to adapt. When we use the term “adapt” we’re referring to the building undergoing a series of transformations. These can be of several types. Here are the most common:
1. Interior adaptation
This implies the overall change of floorplans. It is a more substantial transformation than just moving furniture around. Walls get torn down, levels appear or disappear, changes also affect the facade layout. When a building’s interior is easily transformed without having to make drastic changes in the technical layout of a building, we call this trait flexibility.
Flexibility is most common in office buildings as renters must have the ability to easily change the space with minimum additional costs. Recently we’ve started seeing flexible architecture in homes as well, especially following the Covid-19 pandemic. But this is a subject for a separate article.
2. Exterior adaptation
Exterior adaptations are transformations of the building’s general volume, its shape, its shell. It’s not uncommon for exterior adaptations to imply expansion or even shrinkage to the overall size of the building. Not only does the shape change, but also access layouts, circulation and sometimes even surrounding infrastructure.
Exterior adaptations make the intervention obvious and, as such, there are certain situations in which we cannot use this rehabilitation strategy – the case of class A type monuments. Otherwise, when it is used, the distinction between the original parts and the intervention is a more honest approach to rehabilitation. The old and the new work together as the past and the present shape today’s cities.
3. Functional adaptation
It is not uncommon for buildings to become obsolete because of changes in the surrounding environment. Cities expand beyond their previous borders and encapsulate places that were originally built on their periphery. Factories become office buildings, airports become leisure spots such as parks or event halls. These are examples of functional adaptation.
What makes architecture adaptable?
There are several aspects of a building that make it adaptable. Some of them are pragmatic, easily quantifiable while others are a little more subjective. These aspects give different levels of value to a building which we can separate into two main categories:
- Condition value – given by the overall state of the building, regarding structure, technical installations and a building’s functionality
- Affiliation value – given by historical relevance of the building, how it is perceived by both local and global community, its landmark potential
In all honesty, during my research I’ve noticed that a building’s potential to become a landmark is more dependent on contemporary perception than on historical comparison. Meaning is given, not discovered. As such, the condition of a building becomes less important. All buildings are adaptable if there is a strong enough willingness to rehabilitate it.
Adaptive architecture
What is adaptive architecture?
This is where things get a little more interesting. If adaptability is a building’s predisposition of accepting transformation, when architecture is adaptive is when it is already undergoing transformation.
The most common use of the term is in “adaptive reuse”. Adaptive reuse in architecture used to be called architectural conversion and described a drastic change in a building’s functionality. Conversion projects extend the life of buildings that otherwise would become obsolete. As such, this is a type of sustainable architecture because we reuse buildings in different ways, similar to upcycling or repurposing.
Moreover, if a building has already gone through a series of transformations, what’s stopping it from undergoing other transformations in the future?
Well nothing, hence the more suited term adaptive reuse.
I’m a little hesitant in slapping the term “adaptive reuse” on all transformations I come across. I feel the word “reuse” describes a transformation in functionality. Sometimes buildings are adapted to better suit the same use they were given in the first place. The building is not reused, it’s just… still used. A suitable term for buildings that have been transformed to better fit the initial functionality is just, plainly, adaptive architecture. Architecture we can expand or shrink in order for it to fit our current needs.
Hot take on adaptable and adaptive architecture
In comparing adaptable and adaptive architecture, I’ve mentioned that functional transformations are usually caused by the surroundings. The city’s constant metamorphosis pushes buildings in and out of obsolescence every 10, 20, 30 years. It’s to be expected. However, fundamentally, these needs are decided by economic growth which are not the same as a community’s needs.
I’ll give you a common example. Let’s take a city neighborhood that, over a certain period of time, has become less populated. Reasons can be economical (too expensive to rehabilitate), political (I’m looking at you, racist segregation), social (when young people move out and never return). It doesn’t matter why, you just end up with a large chunk of a city that’s uninhabited.
What happens is that, first, young, creative individuals start taking advantage of the low rent and slowly rehabilitate in an attractive manner. Then come the overpriced coffee shops. Rents go up, value goes up. This fluctuation is picked up by real estate investors who start rebuilding. Infrastructure consolidates, further raising value. The original inhabitants get driven out and now we have a specific type of architecture for a specific type of people. This process is more commonly known as gentrification. And again, this as well is the subject of a separate article.
Conclusion
When discussing adaptable and adaptive architecture, we notice something important. A building’s behavior over time must be accounted for every time an architect intervenes in the built environment, regardless if it’s a new building or an adapted one. All buildings are adaptable because meaning is synthetic and, well, many times you have to tear it down anyway. When they first start being transformed, they become adaptive, because someone decided that it’s worth transforming and not demolishing.