intervention strategies for renovation of social housing estates

Conclusions and recommendations. Chapter 9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
neighbourhood and the sense of identification (see the power of ‘landmark’
renovation), particularly recognizable renovation can be used to sponsor the
restructuring of the area (also leading to higher confidence by people).
Weaknesses can be that the repetition of the same solution could replicate the
problem, high degrees of differentiation could lead to a 'patchwork' effect, radical
solutions might not be appreciated by the residents (only certain groups) and
change of the initial look might be subjected to the approach undertaken by the
housing association and the local building regulations.
Demolition
Above all the mentioned issues the most relevant factor in implementing the
discussed group of physical measures is: why go for demolition rather than
renovation?
Motivations in favour of demolition can be the high commercial value of the land
where there are no special restrictions (like historical or environmental), presence
of residents, corporate objectives, image, management policies and even an
“hidden agenda” (van der Flier and Thomsen, 2005 and 2006) (Chapter 4 and 8).
9.2) RECOMMENDATIONS
9.2.1) GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PRACTICE
Based on the information described in this study, a list of general recommendations that
might serve as a reference when implementing renovation projects is added:
Social housing systems, management models and solutions for implementation of
strategies adopted in other countries should inspire alternative models for the Italian
social housing context.
For renovation to be successful the approach should be integrated assembling
physical, social and (micro) economic factors. Solution sonly on physical aspects
alone will not succeed.
Architecture is not the key factor for successful renovation but can substantially
contribute in revising the decay process on neighborhood level. It should not be
overestimated but rather be considered as one of the crucial aspects of renovation.
Attractiveness of the built environment for wider groups is a crucial issue. On the
building level, this could be achieved by improving the differentiation of the existing
housing supply combined with the physical transformation of the exteriors (the
building envelope).
If based on preferences of people for residential facades, the improvement of the
appearance of deprived social housing estates could be employed to change bad
reputation and improve neighborhood image. However, it should be integrated within
restructuring plans on a neighbourhood level.
Successfulness of renovation also depends on the scale of the interventions. Solutions
should not be directed to the single buildings alone but also to the surroundings. The
role and incidence of open areas, the border between public and private proprieties,
the accessibility system and the mix with non-residential functions should deserve
more attention.
On the physical level, combination of solutions directed to the housing differentiation,
the improvement of the accessibility, the mix of different functions, the appearance of
exteriors and higher energy efficiency can contribute improving the livability.
8. I
GENERAL
RECOMMENDATIONS