See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303601454

An Analysis of the Adaptive Re-use of Heritage

Buildings in South Australia

Chapter January 2017

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-0855-9_114

CITATIONS READS

0 18

2 authors, including:

Ma Tony
University of South Australia
32 PUBLICATIONS 38 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Ma Tony
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 23 November 2016
 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

An Analysis of the Adaptive Re-use of Heritage Buildings in

South Australia

Tony Ma1*, Minmei Yu2

Abstract: The conservation of heritage buildings plays an important role to enhance the
sustainable built environment. Adaptive re-use of heritage buildings has become a wider
revitalization way to promote sustainability and protect the heritage buildings significance.
However, many building owners and developers still perceive the re-use of heritage buildings as
being an unviable option as planning and building regulations may restrict their uses. Therefore
the viability of adaptive re-use of heritage buildings is yet to be fully evaluated.

The aim of this research is to investigate the perceived benefits and barriers of adaptive re-use of
heritage buildings and to suggest recommendations to promote its re-use. Questionnaire survey
and case studies collected in South Australia are used to illustrate the research objectives.

This research discovers that the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings provides environmental,
social and community benefits based on the conservation experts point of views. From the
building owners, the adaptive re-use did provide some economic benefits. It also identifies the
barriers for the conservation work. The major problem is the conservation cost. Moreover, the
compliance of Building Code requirements and earthquake review are also the barriers for the
conservation work. The long development approval can be another obstacle for the conservation
work.

Keywords: Heritage Building; Adaptive Re-use; Conservation; South Australia.

1*Tony Ma
Corresponding author, School of Natural & Built Environments, University of South Australia
E-mail: tony.ma@unisa.edu.au
2 Minmei Yu
School of Natural & Built Environments, University of South Australia
 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

1 Introduction
Nowadays, all Australian governments regard sustainable development as a goal to balance the
environment with the health of the economy. There is no double that conservation of heritage
buildings plays an important role to enhance the sustainable built environments. Heritage
buildings not only provide a footnote to Australia histories, but also help to identify the places as
significant to Australia [10]. Conserving heritage buildings will provide significant economic
benefits, cultural and social benefits, and is gaining acceptance within Australia [7]. Adaptive
re-use of heritage buildings has become a wider revitalization way to promote sustainability rather
than being subjected to demolition [5, 6]. In fact, adaptive re-use of heritage building is not a new
strategy in South Australia; instead it has been used for many years. For example, the Belmont
House in North Adelaide had been converted from residence to an office house in 19th
Century[17] .
Cooper[9] suggested that the adaptive re-use of heritage building improves the material and
resource efficiency (environmental sustainability), reduces cost (economic sustainability) and
improves retention (social sustainability). The Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH)
also regards that the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings provides environmental benefits (the
retention of the original buildings embodied energy), social benefits (protection of heritage
buildings will provide benefits to future generations) and economic benefits (embodied energy
saving from not demolishing buildings[10]. Besides, the DEH considers that the most successful
built heritage adaptive re-use projects are those that best respect and retain the buildings heritage
significance and add a contemporary layer that provides value for the future. For example,
Balhnnah, remarkable as the most intact group of 19th Century mining structures in South
Australia, was uninhabitable and derelict in 1986; now it has been adapted to fit the needs of 21st
century families with its heritage significance.
However, many building owners and developers still regard the re-use of heritage buildings
as being an unviable option as planning and building regulations may restrict their functioning[7].
Australias heritage management system has been well-developed, but its sustainable practices in
built heritage is found to be slow[18]. There are still plenty of historic buildings waiting for
conservation in Australia, especially in South Australia. Hunter[16] mentioned there are 1500
buildings under protected in the South Australian Heritage Register (Register), and it is believed
that the number of heritage buildings in the Register will be increased continually. Some owners
may prefer to adapt to a new use with its heritage significance. Heritage buildings that lose
relevance or purpose may become vulnerable to lack of care, decay and possibly demolition[10]. In
order to protect the invaluable heritage buildings, users, developer, planner and government are all
encouraged to participate in the conservation process. A number of literatures and researchers in
the past have developed to contribute a more sustainable built environment and a more feasible
adaptive re-use strategy for heritage buildings around the world. But not many researches are
related to the South Australia. Since some heritage buildings have been adapted to a new function
to fit the market demand and provide benefits to the environment, community and society, the
experience of those cases is worth as a reference point to new heritage owners and advisors. It
would be useful to study the perceived benefits of adaptive reuse of heritage buildings in order to
provide critical information for those potential developers, planners and investors who are
interested in adaptive re-use and to encourage them to take action to protect the history.
 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

The aim of this research is to investigate the perceived benefits and barriers of adaptive
re-use of built heritage and to suggest strategies for the conservation of heritages buildings.
Questionnaire surveys were collected based on the opinions of the conservation experts which will
focus on the technical side and issues with the regulations. On the other hand, owners and
consultants point of views is also collected through case studies. It is anticipated that the insights
of how well the buildings have been adapted will be investigated.

2 Adaptive re-use of Heritage Buildings in South Australia

2.1 Adaptive re-use Principles

The Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) identifies the adaptive
re-use as the adaptation of historic buildings from one use to another while preserving their
heritage value. In the Year of Built Environment[10], the Commonwealth Department of
Environment and Heritage claimed:
The adaptive reuse of a historic building should have minimal impact on the heritage
significance of the building and its setting. Developers should gain an understanding of why the
buildings has heritage status, and then pursue development that is sympathetic to the building to
give it a new purpose. Adaptive reuse is self-defeating if it fails to protect the buildings heritage
values.
The DEH also stated at the Year of Built Environment[10]:
Sometimes, adaptive re-use is the only way that the buildings fabric will be properly cared
for, revealed or interpreted, while making better use of the building itself. Where a building can no
longer function with its original use, a new use through adaption may be the only way to preserve
its heritage significance.
It is suggested that the adaptive re-use of a heritage building should have minimal impact on
its heritage significance of the building. However, it is easier said than done. Many heritage
buildings are required modifications to fit their new functions. Their heritage significance should
be properly cared and considered well before commencement. Therefore, the adaptive re-use is an
important process in retaining heritage buildings and are useful for future conservation activities.
The adaptive reuse of heritage building is regarded as a vital part of Australian environment
planning in order to create a more sustainable future[14].

2.2 Adaptive re-use Development Process

The DEWNR[11] compiles a guide to developing State Heritage Places. According to this guide,
the change of use has been defined as development which requires the application for
development approval lodged with the relevant planning authority usually the local council but
in some areas the Development Assessment Commission (DAC). In order to get the development
approval, the sufficient information must be included. The sufficient information includes clear
documentation and as much descriptive materials as is necessary, which can help to speed up the
assessment and prevent unnecessary delay. The information required may include details of the
Place, the Drawings, a written Specification, Photographs, the Heritage Impact Statement and the
Conservation Studies. For a State Heritage Place, its cultural heritage value must be identified in a
Statement of Heritage Significance; DEWNR Heritage Advisors will then assess the impact of
proposed development based on that Heritage Significance. The Advisers will also assist
 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

applicants with design options, building materials and techniques sympathetic to the heritage
value of the State Heritage Place. Recommendations will be provided by the Heritage Adviser for
the Ministers delegate. The overall Development proposal will be assessed against the principles
of the Burra Charter and the requirements of the Heritage Places Act based on the places
significance. The Burra Charter defines the basic principles and procedures to be followed when
heritage places are undergoing conservation. Once the planning consent has been granted, the
applicant shall arrange building rules consent through private certificate, if applicable.

2.3 Examples of Adaptive re-use of Heritage Building in South Australia

Table 1 below indicates the examples of adaptive re-use of heritage buildings in South Australia:
Table 1. Examples of Adaptive re-use of heritage Buildings in South Australia
No. Property Name Heritage Original Use New Use The benefits
Protection
1 Railway goods State Brewery Goods shed Visitors to the Goolwa Wharf can
shed [12] Heritage enjoy a unique blending of the old
Place with the new: paddle steamers and
steam engines, boatbuilding and
brewing.
2 Norwood State Baptist church Caf and The commercial stability can
Baptist Heritage bookshop provide the incentive and funds for
Church[12] Place restoration and conservation work.
3 The Former State A warehouse New office The new function and conservation
Megaw and Heritage building can make the building meets the
Hogg Building[12] Place needs of the 21st century tenants.

4 Old treasury State Office Medina The National Trust runs tours of the
building [1] Heritage building Grand Hotel old Cabinet Room and tunnels under
Listed the building used for the secure
transport of gold.
5 Adelaide town State Hall Community The Town Hall remains a major city
Hall[3] Heritage Centre landmark and a popular venue for
Listed concerts, public meetings and
special events.
6 Balhannah State Private Home for The mine was uninhabitable and
Mine[10] Heritage slaughterhouse South derelict before adaptively reused,
Place and implement Australian now it is the home for a South
shed based Family Australian based family.
7 Mount State Institute Civic club Inserting a new contemporary
Gambier City Heritage building multipurpose space to meet the
Hall[15] Place Communitys ever changing needs.
8 Strut Street Local Primary Integrated The building had been disused and
Primary Heritage School early learning dilapidated for more than 10 years.
School[14] Place center

9 Bray House[2] State Residential Office The building changes its use to fit
Heritage the market demand.
Listed
10 Former Produce State Food market Caf, shops The building changes its use to fit
Markets[11] Heritage and offices the market demand.
Place
From the examples, the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings supports the realization of
environmental, social, economic and cultural benefits to wider communities. Despite the many
positive outcomes, they are not without planning, financial and commercial risks. The
redevelopment of a heritage building must meet the requirement of heritage conservation
guidelines and Acts, and proceed in accordance with the authoritys recommendations. It is
difficult for some heritage buildings to satisfy the present-days building, health, safety and
 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

accessibility requirement of current regulations[4]. If the redevelopment proposal has been

disapproved by the planning authority, developers and owners need to re-address the design and
plan, which may take a lot of time and additional cost. The risks may also include unknown work,
scope changes, compatibility of materials, quality of information and the operation environment,
health and safety, design constrains and decanting of occupants[19]. Moreover, the potential latent
problems, defects or dimensional and material inconsistencies may affect the success of adaptive
re-use[6]. In the past, the local government did provide some sort of heritage incentive schemes.
The most persuasive incentives includes relaxation of building requirements for heritage listed
relaxation of building requirements for heritage listed buildings, monetary contributions to
construction works and flexibility in meeting current construction regulations. In South
Australia, the fund is administered by the DEWNR. The funding is from $5,000 up to $25,000 for
the conserving the State Heritage Places[13]. Unfortunately, the State Heritage Fund has been
canceled. Adelaide City Council has some incentive schemes for city propertys conservation
work but not for adaptive re-use.

3 Research Analysis

3.1 Questionnaire survey

In order to obtain a better understanding about the benefits and barriers of the adaptive re-use of
heritage buildings, a questionnaire survey was developed from targeting the heritage and building
conservation advisers and consultants, architects and planners. Over 40 invitations were sent out;
and after repeated reminders, 20 responses were finally collected. 85% participants have been
involved with the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings. There are four major questions being
asked and the answers from respondents were summarized in Table 2 below:

Table 2. Questionnaire survey analysis

Q1. What are the perceived benefits of adaptive re-use of heritage buildings (from 5-strongly agree to
1-strongly disagree)?
Benefits Ranking Mean

Ability to aesthetically fit streetscape 2 4.75

Benefits of re-use vs. redevelopment 2 4.75

Community value of existing buildings 1 4.85

Demand for buildings for economic use 6 3.40

Opportunity for technical innovation 5 3.95

Public awareness of adaptive re-use 4 4.25

Viability of recycling existing building materials 3 4.65

Q2. What are the perceived barriers of adaptive re-use of heritage buildings (from 5-strongly agree to
1-strongly disagree)?

Barriers Ranking Mean

Difficult to design to fit the new use of the heritage building 6 2.90

Difficult to choose a new function to fit the market demand 4 3.10

Inadequate information of structural plan 5 3.05

 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

Availability of materials to match existing 3 3.10

Availability of high skilled workers 2 3.70

High conservation cost 1 3.75

Communication problems with owner/planners and constructors 7 2.95

Q3. What are the factors impacting on your conservation works regarding the approval process (from
5-strongly agree to 1-strongly disagree)?

Factors Ranking Mean

Long planning approval process 1 3.55

Communication problems with Heritage Advisors guidelines 3 2.85

Difficult to fit the BCA requirements 2 3.9

Difficult to provide required information for planning consent 4 2.75

Difficult to retain the significance 4 2.75

Q4. What are the factors that may encourage the owners to go for adaptive re-use of heritage buildings
(from 5-strongly agree to 1-strongly disagree)?

Factors Ranking Mean

Incentive scheme and/or financial support 1 4.75

Faster the Development approval process 4 3.95

Heritage building promoting / let people be aware the built heritage 2 4.30

Provide more conservation advice 3 4.10

Reduce the BCA requirement 5 3.70

3.2 Case Studies through interviews

Something would have been missed out without the actual analysis of real life cases. It is
anticipated that through the following four case studies, there will be insights of how well these
heritages buildings have been adaptively re-used. Table 3 summarized the profile of cases,
interviewees, questions and answers:

Table 3. Summary of four case studies

Cases Torrens Parade Tandanya Westpac Bank Brecknock Hotel
Ground Building (Jamies (Citi Zen
Italian Restaurant) Restaurant)
(Public) (Public) (Private) (Private)

Interviewees Heritage Architect Heritage Architect Building surveyor Manager (Owner)

Main concern Complying with the -access for disable -BCA requirements If location suitable
during Burra Charter -compliance with -earthquake for the purpose
conservation requirements BCA protection
Benefits identified Visitors understand -increase the -provides for a more Provide good
the history of character of the vibrant city business
building city -economic boost opportunity
-embodied energy - character of the
city while
maintaining the
history
Barriers identified -conservation cost -conservation cost -conservation cost -compliance with
-allow disable access -design challenges -compliance with BCA requirements
-lift installation BCA requirements (e.g. fire services &
 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

-additional building disable access)

services -harsh limitation of
the building facade
After the adaption, Yes Yes No Not sure
would you still
advocate the
adaptive re-use
Supports from Not enough, only Not enough, only No No
government from Council from Council
Recommendations -adapt the most -suitable in very -getting early Reduce BCA
flexible heritage good economic building surveyors requirements
building condition input
-getting early heritage -involvement of
architects input builder early
-pre-application
agreement or heritage
agreement

4 Discussions and Conclusion

The aim of this research is to determine the perceived benefits and barriers of adaptive re-use of
heritage buildings, and to recommend innovative strategies to advocate its use. Throughout these
data collection, it is discovered that the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings did provide some sort
of environmental, social and community benefits based on the conservation experts point of
views. In the owners opinion, the adaptive re-use also provides some economic benefits. The
literature reviews also highlight the environmental, social and economic benefits of the adaptation
of heritage buildings.
This research has also identified the barriers for the work. The major problem is the
conservation cost. The conservation work involves a significant conservation amount of
conservation cost. Moreover, the compliance of BCA requirements and earthquake review are also
the barriers for the conservation work. The adaptive re-use of heritage buildings involves the
change of building use, which requires complying with the BCA requirements and the heritage
building is required to be strengthened for the earthquake review. The long development approval
can be another barrier for the conservation work.
Some recommendations have been suggested in order to solve those barriers mentioned
above. Firstly, the Government is recommended to provide incentive scheme and financial support
in order to encourage the conservation of built heritage, and to reduce the conservation cost spent
on upgrading of building structure, building services and fire services. Secondly, the Government
is also recommended to lower the BCA requirements for the conservation of heritage buildings
because the compliance of BCA requirements is one major cause for the significant conservation
cost and long development approval process. Thirdly, the heritage experts, such as heritage
advisors, building surveyors and builders, are recommended to be involved at the early stage.
Their early involvement would help to solve the conservation problems and providing the
innovative solutions for the conservation work.
It can be concluded that the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings do provide some benefits
under the constraints of lengthy development process and conservation cost. These barriers may
prevent the developer, planners and building owners to take initiatives to protect the heritage
buildings by the way of adaptation. The barriers may be mitigated if the Government can provide
financial and technical support. One advisor recommended the use of Heritage Agreement for
 Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium CRIOCM 2015, 23rd-25 Oct, Hangzhou, Zhejiang University

major buildings. That means the range of change of use of buildings has been pre-agreed prior to
the sale. If the use is within the range, the new owner does not need to apply for lengthy approval
process for adaptive re-use.

References

[1]Adelaide City Heritage (ACH) 2014a, Treasury Building, Adelaide City Heritage, viewed 2
April 2014, http://www.adelaideheritage.net.au/all-site-profiles/treasury-building.
[2]Adelaide City Heritage (ACH) 2014b, Bray House, Adelaide City Heritage, viewed 2 April
2014, http://www.adelaideheritage.net.au/all-site-profiles/bray-house.
[3]Adelaide Town Hall (ATH) 2014, History, Adelaide Town Hall, viewed 30 March 2014,
http://www.adelaidetownhall.com.au/visit-discover/history.
[4]Australia ICOMOS 1999, The Burra Charter, Australia, pp.7.
[5]Ball, R. 1999, Developers, regeneration and sustainability issues in the reuse of vacant
buildings, Building Research and Information, Vol.27 No.3, pp. 140-8.
[6]Bullen, P.A. and Love, P.E.D. 2009, Residential regeneration and adaptive reuse: learning from
the experience of Los Angeles, Structural Survey, Vol.27 No. 5, pp.351-60.
[7]Bullen, P. A. and Love, P.E.D. 2010, The rhetoric of adaptive reuse or reality of demolition:
views from the field, Cities, Vol. 27 No. 4 pp.215-24.
[8]Bullen, P.A. and Love, P.E.D. 2011, Adaptive reuse of heritage buildings, Structural Survey,
Vol.29 No.5, pp.411-421.
[9]Cooper, I. 2001, Post-occupancy evaluation-where are you? Building Research and Information,
Vol. 29 No.2, pp. 158-63.
[10]Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH) 2004, Adaptive Reuse Preserving our past,
building our future, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
[11]Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) 2012, SA Guide to
Developing State Heritage Places, Government of South Australia.
[12]Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) 2014a, Adaptive reuse
examples Fact Sheet, Government of South Australia.
[13]Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) 2014b, Fact Sheet -
South Australian Heritage Fund, Government of South Australia.
[14]Government of South Australia (GSA) 2008, State of the Environment Report 2008: Built
Heritage, Government of South Australia.
[15]Government of South Australia (GSA) 2012a, Heritage Direction 2012 A future for heritage
in South Australia. Government of South Australia.
[16]Hunter, I. 2003, Labours plan to protect South Australia Heritage, National Trust Heritage
Management Discussion Paper, Jan 2003, pp. 1-2.
[17]Kent W. Smith 1992, Development Adaptation and Alternation of Heritage Buildings,
University of South Australia.
[18]Lynne A. and Janine I. 2013, The values of built heritage, Property Management, Vol. 31 No.
3, pp.246 259.
[19]Reyers, J. and Mansfield, J. 2001, The assessment of risk in conservation refurbishment
projects, Structural Survey, Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 238-44.