Conversion Potential Assessment Tool

Abstract

Building owners and other stakeholders can adopt different strategies to cope with vacancy, such as consolidation, rent reduction, selling the building, renovation, transformation and conversion to adapted reuse, or demolish and build a new building. This chapter discusses various tools to cope with vacancy by adaptive reuse. It presents an overview of the many factors and aspects that enable or hinder adaptive reuse by conversion of (office) buildings into housing, and how to assess the characteristics of the market, location, building and involved stakeholders. Furthermore, it presents the Conversion Meter, a tool to assess the conversion potential of vacant office buildings into housing. The tool is built up from a first quick scan using veto criteria (Step 1) till a more detailed scan of the conversion potential based on gradual criteria (Step 2). No single gradual criterion is sufficient to decide if conversion is possible or not; it is the combination of all criteria i.e. the sum that provides a valuable indicator for the conversion potential.Step 3 calculates a conversion potential score as a weighted sum of all criteria.Step 4 is a scan on financial feasibility. The final Step 5 is a check on possible risks and opportunities to eliminate these risks. The chapter continues with lessons learned from case studies by applying the Conversion Meter.

Comparative analysis of multi-criteria models for decision-making in the process of building adaptation

“…In Table 1 the criteria and indicators of multi-criteria models are presented, based on the potential of a building for which one or more types of adaptation are estimated [ 14 , 18 , 21 , 29 ]. Depending on the degree of specialization of the model for a certain type of adaptation, the criteria, and especially the indicators, are adapted to the specific type of intervention.…”

“…Table 2 the results of a comparative analysis of the principles and types of evaluation of criteria and indicators of multi-criteria models, the presence or absence of hierarchy between criteria and indicators in relation to the outcome of the conversion process, the way the hierarchy is achieved and MCDA methods used for valorization in multi-criteria models, are presented [ 14 , 18 , 21 , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [29] , [30] ].…”

“…The fourth step is to assess the financial feasibility of the process of conversion of a particular office building and is based on several criteria: acquisition costs, the current condition of the building, level of renovation or modification work required, finishing and comfort level of the housing units, number of (extra) dwelling units that can be created in the building, shape, and opening on façade, project yield by rental income and/or sales prices which depends on a target group of users (different users have different preferences when it comes to the type of home, number and layout of the rooms, access, appeal and the size of the outdoor area); The last step is to present a list of potential risks and problems during the process of conversion of the office building, which may be due to market conditions, location, and facility characteristics. With the consideration of risks, a list of possible solutions is offered [ 14 ]. …”

“…The last step is to present a list of potential risks and problems during the process of conversion of the office building, which may be due to market conditions, location, and facility characteristics. With the consideration of risks, a list of possible solutions is offered [ 14 ].…”

Prioritising optimal underutilised historical buildings for adaptive reuse: a performance-based MCDA framework validation in Auckland, New Zealand

“…These examples include strengthening the overall sense of place of a community by linking the community's past to its future (Aigwi et al. , 2020b); maintaining the shared identity of a place (Geraedts et al. , 2018); minimising overall construction time and costs (Douglas, 2006); attracting investments through commercially viable new use (Aigwi et al.…”