List of figures |
|
xii | |
List of tables |
|
xvii | |
Preface |
|
xix | |
Acknowledgements |
|
xxi | |
Part I Introduction |
|
1 | (8) |
|
1 Motivating observations |
|
|
3 | (6) |
|
1.1 Unravelling the 'what' |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
5 | (2) |
|
|
7 | (2) |
Part II A history of adaptability |
|
9 | (32) |
|
|
11 | (4) |
|
2.1 Prehistoric and pre-modernism |
|
|
11 | (4) |
|
|
15 | (26) |
|
3 Strands of designing for adaptability |
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
|
18 | (4) |
|
|
18 | (2) |
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
|
22 | (10) |
|
Industrialised architecture |
|
|
22 | (3) |
|
|
25 | (3) |
|
|
28 | (3) |
|
Component design and capacity summary |
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
3.3 Building configuration |
|
|
32 | (11) |
|
|
32 | (4) |
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
Building configuration summary |
|
|
38 | (3) |
Part III A theory for adaptability |
|
41 | (124) |
|
|
43 | (8) |
|
|
43 | (2) |
|
|
45 | (2) |
|
4.3 Unpacking change: recognising the demand |
|
|
47 | (1) |
|
4.4 A building: what is it? |
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
4.5 Context: situating the building |
|
|
49 | (1) |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
5 Common takes on adaptability |
|
|
51 | (4) |
|
5.1 Level of specificity: tight fit vs. loose fit |
|
|
51 | (2) |
|
5.2 Strategic focus: technology-driven vs. planning-driven |
|
|
53 | (1) |
|
5.3 Object of adaptability: building-centric vs. human-centric |
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
|
55 | (13) |
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
6.2 Influence of change on the layers |
|
|
55 | (3) |
|
6.3 Understanding dependency: DSM explained |
|
|
58 | (2) |
|
6.4 Cellophane House, part I: clustering analysis |
|
|
60 | (8) |
|
7 A typology of adaptability |
|
|
68 | (16) |
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
|
71 | (1) |
|
|
72 | (2) |
|
|
74 | (1) |
|
|
75 | (1) |
|
7.7 Occurrence of the types |
|
|
76 | (2) |
|
7.8 Cellophane House, part II: impact analysis |
|
|
78 | (6) |
|
|
80 | (2) |
|
|
82 | (2) |
|
8 Design strategies, characteristics and tactics |
|
|
84 | (7) |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
8.2 Building characteristics |
|
|
85 | (2) |
|
|
87 | (2) |
|
8.4 Relationship between strategies, characteristics and tactics |
|
|
89 | (2) |
|
9 Building characteristics in detail |
|
|
91 | (23) |
|
|
91 | (17) |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (2) |
|
|
94 | (2) |
|
DS4 Simplicity and legibility |
|
|
96 | (1) |
|
|
97 | (2) |
|
|
99 | (2) |
|
|
101 | (1) |
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
DS9 Maximise building use |
|
|
103 | (2) |
|
DS10 Increase interactivity |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
|
106 | (2) |
|
9.2 Relationship of CARs to building layers |
|
|
108 | (3) |
|
9.3 Links between CARs and adaptability types |
|
|
111 | (3) |
|
10 Unravelling contextual contingencies |
|
|
114 | (21) |
|
|
114 | (6) |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
|
115 | (2) |
|
|
117 | (1) |
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
|
120 | (3) |
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
|
123 | (3) |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
|
124 | (1) |
|
|
125 | (1) |
|
|
126 | (1) |
|
|
126 | (1) |
|
|
126 | (9) |
|
|
126 | (4) |
|
|
130 | (2) |
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
|
132 | (2) |
|
|
134 | (1) |
|
|
135 | (20) |
|
|
135 | (3) |
|
|
135 | (2) |
|
|
137 | (1) |
|
|
137 | (1) |
|
|
138 | (1) |
|
11.2 Critical (design) parameters |
|
|
138 | (4) |
|
|
142 | (6) |
|
11.4 Other time-based resources |
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
|
148 | (3) |
|
|
151 | (1) |
|
|
152 | (3) |
|
|
155 | (10) |
|
12.1 Adaptability types, layers and stakeholders |
|
|
155 | (1) |
|
|
156 | (1) |
|
|
157 | (1) |
|
|
157 | (1) |
|
|
158 | (1) |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
|
160 | (4) |
|
|
164 | (1) |
Part IV Adaptability in practice |
|
165 | (106) |
|
13 Linking theory to case studies |
|
|
167 | (7) |
|
13.1 Design strategies and building characteristics |
|
|
167 | (4) |
|
13.2 Linking adaptability types |
|
|
171 | (3) |
|
|
174 | (46) |
|
A1 Kentish Town Health Centre |
|
|
174 | (7) |
|
|
181 | (3) |
|
A3 Folkstone Performing Arts Centre |
|
|
184 | (3) |
|
A4 Cedar Rapids Public Library |
|
|
187 | (4) |
|
|
191 | (3) |
|
A6 Dato Onn International Medical City |
|
|
194 | (3) |
|
|
197 | (3) |
|
|
200 | (2) |
|
|
202 | (3) |
|
|
205 | (3) |
|
|
208 | (3) |
|
|
211 | (2) |
|
A13 The King's School Theatre |
|
|
213 | (2) |
|
A14 Vodafone Headquarters |
|
|
215 | (2) |
|
A15 Kettering Old Persons Unit |
|
|
217 | (3) |
|
15 Designing for adaptability |
|
|
220 | (30) |
|
B1 Industrial Democratic Design |
|
|
220 | (4) |
|
B2 An adaptable building app |
|
|
224 | (2) |
|
B3 An emporium for education |
|
|
226 | (2) |
|
|
228 | (5) |
|
|
233 | (3) |
|
B6 An approach to adaptability |
|
|
236 | (5) |
|
B7 Adaptability through hybridity |
|
|
241 | (3) |
|
|
244 | (1) |
|
B9 The adaptable primary school |
|
|
245 | (2) |
|
|
247 | (3) |
|
16 Designing for adaptable futures |
|
|
250 | (21) |
|
C1 New Addington's Village Green |
|
|
251 | (2) |
|
|
253 | (3) |
|
|
256 | (3) |
|
|
259 | (3) |
|
|
262 | (3) |
|
C6 Inside and out of the box |
|
|
265 | (3) |
|
|
268 | (3) |
Part V Conclusions |
|
271 | (9) |
|
|
273 | (7) |
|
17.1 A manifesto for adaptability |
|
|
273 | (5) |
|
Proposition 1 We need a broadened scope for adaptability |
|
|
274 | (1) |
|
Proposition 2 Adaptability is context specific |
|
|
274 | (1) |
|
Proposition 3 Adaptability is supported by simplicity and familiarity |
|
|
275 | (1) |
|
Proposition 4 Adaptability stresses process over product |
|
|
275 | (1) |
|
Proposition 5 Industry's short-termism hinders adaptability |
|
|
276 | (2) |
|
17.2 Designing for adaptability in practice |
|
|
278 | (2) |
Glossary |
|
280 | (2) |
References |
|
282 | (6) |
Index |
|
288 | |