How do architects advance the implementation of housing created by adaptive building reuse on a national scale when building codes are the third largest barrier to the typology, after construction costs and financing?
Any debate regarding the advantages of this type of re-use has been settled: transforming vacant office buildings to vibrant housing produces numerous societal benefits. It creates more housing where it’s urgently needed, catalyzes urban revitalization as brick-and-mortar stores and offices evaporate, and facilitates major climate benefits due to lower greenhouse gas emissions.
As the first architect member of the International Code Council (ICC) Adaptive Reuse Working Group (ARWG) —which focuses on Office to Residential code challenges and opportunities—the working group presented an opportunity to not only advance the typology but bring architects’ voices to the discussion. And do it with data.
Recently, AIA members who had realized more than 400 of these types of projects across the country responded to a survey initiated and distributed by AIA California and myself.
The survey was developed to provide real factual information to the ICC working group, as well as the many communities across the country who are trying to catalyze these kinds of projects.
It identifies the analysis tools architects are using to work on these kinds of projects; what the specific code pathways architects are finding successful for this type of work – and what pathways are most problematic; and at the 20,000 foot level, identify how codes fit into the broad landscape of project feasibility.
So, in addition to informing code decisions. It also provides an informal check list for architects to use when assessing the feasibility of a particular office to residential project and to prioritize issues when they evaluate candidates for conversion.
While codes are an important challenge, the opportunities and challenges are focused in a few key areas. Knowing these areas in advance can allow savvy design professionals to quickly evaluate candidate properties for feasibility. This survey puts a spotlight on the key friction areas. And that’s important.
Data in the survey has already informed over a dozen specific code change proposals that are being vetted in the national code development process, with a second round of hearings scheduled in October in Cleveland. When the national code changes, it trickles down to local jurisdictions around the country; some of whom are already actively working on code reform.
To read an executive summary of all survey results, click here.
If you missed the survey, you can participate here.
