Adaptive reuse of architectural heritage and its role in the post-disaster reconstruction of urban identity: Post-communist Łódź

Sustainability (Switzerland)

Volumn 12, Issue 19, 2020, Pages 1-21

  Sowińska Heim, Julia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LODZ   (Poland)

Author keywords

Adaptive reuse; Architectural heritage; Cultural heritage; Disaster; Post industrial heritage; Protection of cultural heritage; d

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT; ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN; DEINDUSTRIALIZATION; DISASTER MANAGEMENT; HISTORIC BUILDING; NINETEENTH CENTURY; POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT; RECONSTRUCTION; TEXTILE INDUSTRY; URBAN DEVELOPMENT;

POLAND [CENTRAL EUROPE];

EID: 85092898462     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20711050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su12198054     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Dubos, R.J. Pochwała Różnorodności; PIW: Warszawa, Poland, 1986.
2. Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (Faro Convention). October 2005.
3. The Charter of Krakow 2000. Principles for Conservation and Restoration of Build Heritage, Cracow, October 2000. Available online: http://smartheritage.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/KRAKOV-CHARTER-2000.pdf (accessed on 12 September 2020).
4. European Charter of the Architectural Heritage. Adopted by the Council of Europe. October 1975. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-standards/170-european-charter-of-the-architectural-heritage (accessed on 12 July 2020).
5. The Declaration of Amsterdam. Congress on the European Architectural Heritage, 21–25 October 1975. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/en/and/169-the-declaration-of-amsterdam (accessed on 12 July 2020).
6. UNESCO Recommendation Concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role of Historic Areas, Warsaw-Nairobi. 1976. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/publications/93towns7o.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
7. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter), Burra. 1999. Available online: https://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/BURRA_CHARTER.pdf (accessed on 12 September 2020).
8. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter), Burra. 2013. Available online: http://portal.iphan.gov.br/uploads/ckfinder/arquivos/The-Burra-Charter-2013-Adopted-31_10_2013.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
9. Québec Declaration on Preservation of the Spirit of Place, Canada, October 2008. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-646-2.pdf (accessed on 12 September 2020).
10. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter 1964). Adopted by ICOMOS in 1965. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/charters/venice:e.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
11. Mason, R. Assessing values in conservation planning: methodological issues and choices. In Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage; de la Torre, M., Ed.; Research Report; The Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2002; pp. 5–30.
12. Sowinska-Heim, J. Transformacje i Redefinicje. Adaptacja Dziedzictwa Architektonicznego do Nowej Funkcji a Zachowanie Ciągłości Historycznej Miejsca; Wyd. UŁ: Łódź, Poland, 2018.
13. ICOMOS Charter—Principles for the Analysis, Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage, Victoria Falls. 2003. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/charters/structures_e.pdf (accessed on 12 September 2020).
14. Feilden, B.M. Conservation of Historic Buildings; Architectural Press: Oxford, UK, 2003.
15. UNESCO. UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape, Paris. 2011. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-638--98.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
16. Plevoets, B.; van Cleempoel, K. Adaptive Reuse of Built Heritage: Concepts and Cases of an Emerging Discipline; Routledge: London, UK, 2019.
17. Brooker, G.; Stone, S. Re-Readings. Interior Architecture and the Design Principles of Remodelling Existing Buildings; RIBA Enterprises: London, UK, 2004.
18. Cantacuzino, S. New Uses for Old Buildings; Architectural Press: London, UK, 1975.
19. Plevoets, B.; Sowińska-Heim, J. Community initiatives as a catalyst for regeneration of heritage sites: vernacular transformation and its influence on the formal adaptive reuse practice. Cities 2018, 78, 128–139. [CrossRef]
20. Mısırlısoy, D.; Günçe, K. Adaptive reuse strategies for heritage buildings: A holistic approach. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2016, 26, 91–98. [CrossRef]
21. Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe, Granada. 1985. Adopted by the Council of Europe. Available online: https://rm.coe.int/168007a087 (accessed on 12 July 2020).
22. ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas (Washington Charter), Toledo-Washington, October 1987. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/charters/towns_e.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
23. The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic Cities, Towns and Urban Aeras. Adopted by ICOMOS, Paris, November 2011. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ CIVVIH_text_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
24. ICOMOS. New Zealand Charter for Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value, New Zealand. 2010. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/ICOMOS_NZ_Charter_2010_ FINAL_11_Oct_2010.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
25. Bullen, P.; Love, P. The rhetoric of adaptive reuse or reality of demolition: Views from the field. Cities 2010, 27, 215–224. [CrossRef]
26. Cizler, J. The role of creative and civil initiatives in transforming post-industrial landscapes: A case study of industrial heritage re-use in the Czech Republic. Archit. Civ. Eng. 2014, 12, 207–219. [CrossRef]
27. Kirbi, A.; Kent, T. The local icon: Reuse of buildings in place marketing. J. Town City Manag. 2010, 1, 80–91.
28. In 1423 king Władysław Jagiełło granted city rights to Łódź, but up to the beginning of the 19th century it functionedas a small village rather than as a city.
29. Puś, W. Zmiany Liczebności i struktury narodowościowej ludności Łodzi do Roku 1939. In Wpływ Wielonarodowego Dziedzictwa Kulturowego Łodzi Na Współczesne Oblicze Miasta; Koter, M., Kulesza, M., Puś, W., Pytlas, S., Eds.; Wyd. UŁ: Łódź, Poland, 2005; pp. 9–39.
30. Yarn Roduced by Karol Scheibler’s Plant Was Awarded a Gold Medal at the Industrial Exhibition in Paris in 1878. National Archive in Łódź. Available online: http://www.lodz.ap.gov.pl/art,57,lodzcy-fabrykanci (accessed on 20 July 2020).
31. Numerous Studies Indicate both Similarities and Significant Differences in the History of Development of Both Cities. In the Analyses Concerning Industrial Łódź, Lyon (France) is Often Cited as a Comparative Example; See among others: Majer, A. Socjologia i przestrzeń miejsk; PWN: Warszawa, Poland.
32. The German term Lodzermensch (lodzer–łódzki, Mensch—man) emphasized the distinctiveness of the inhabitants of industrial Łódź, and showed their strong identification with the city. The German etymology of the word indicates the multinational and multicultural character of the Łódź community of that time.
33. Kusiński, J.; Bonisławski, R.; Janik, M. Księga Fabryk Łodzi; Wyd. Jacek Kusiński: Łodź, Poland, 2009.
34. Wilkoszewski, B. Widoki Łodzi; Łódź 1896. From the collection of the Library of the Lodz University, Special Collections—Iconography.
35. This influenced, among other things, a decision to move the State authorities between 1945 and 1948, owning to the destruction of much of Warsaw.
36. Gzamm, J. Łódź się zmienia, czyli trochę ogólnych wrażeń. Słowo Powszechne 1951, 305, 2.
37. Karpińska, E. Miasto wymazywane: Historia łódzkiego przypadku. Studia Etnol. Antropol. 2004, 8, 165–178.
38. Beatus, B. Zbudujemy organizację partyjna˛ ludu łódzkiego. Przekształcimy Łódź w miasto przemysłu, kultury i dobrobytu mas pracujacych.˛ Wywiad z tow. Kozłowskim-pierwszym sekretarzem Komitetu Miejskiego Polskiej Partii Robotniczej. Głos Robot. 1946, 94, 4.
39. Resolution of the active core of the Regional Conference of the Polish Workers’ Party. Głos Robot. 1946, 98, 1.
40. Kuźma, I.B.; Sadowska, J. Łódzcy Niemcy—Fragment pejzażu Ziemi obiecanej. Problemy badawcze. Etnogr. Pol. 2011, LV, 97–132.
41. Cudny, W. Model przemiany miasta postsocjalistycznego—Przkład Łodzi. Studia Miej. 2011, 4, 153–159.
42. Walczak, B.M. Dziedzictwo przemysłowe Łodzi: Przeszłość, teraźniejszość, przyszłość. In Rewitalizacja Miast Poprzemysłowych—Rola Dziedzictwa Kulturowego; Walczak, B.M., Ed.; ŁOIIB and PŁ: Łódź, Poland, 2006; pp. 37–44.
43. Young, C.; Kaczmarek, S. Changing the perception of the post-socialist city: Place promotion and imagery in Łódź, Poland. Geogr. J. 1999, 165, 183–191. [CrossRef]
44. Michlic, J. Lodz in the post-communist era: In search of a new identity. In Post-Communist Cities: New Cultural Reorientations and Identities; Czaplicka, J., Blair, R.A, Hopkins, J., Eds.; John Hopkins University Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2008; pp. 281–304.
45. City Council in Łódź. Integrated Development Strategy for Łódź 2020+. Act No. XLIII/824/12. Łódź. 2012. Available online: https://bip.uml.lodz.pl/files/bip/public/miasto/dokumenty/BSM_strategia_ang_20131018. pdf (accessed on 29 September 2020).
46. City Council in Łódź. Łódź Spatial Development Strategy 2020+; Act No. LV/1146/13; City Council of Łódź: Łódź, Poland, 2013.
47. History Monument Łódź—Multicultural landscape of an industrial city—Thanks to the efforts of the City Hall and Łódź scientists, the City received title from the President of the Republic of Poland.
48. An Interesting Undertaking Was, among Other Things, a Campaign Aimed at Attempting to Create a Definition of Łódź’s Identity and to Provoke a Public Discussion on the Subject. The Identity of Łódź (the Assumptions of the Program to Establish a Definition of Łódź’s Identity). Fundacja Ulicy Piotrkowskiej, Łódź. 2005. Available online: http://piotrkowska.pl/dokumenty/201207041455200.tozsamosclodzi.pdf (accessed on 25 February 2018).
49. Flatt, O. Opis Miasta Łodzi pod Względem Historycznym, Statystycznym i Przemysłowym; Drukarnia Gazety Codziennej: Warszawa, Poland, 1853.
50. City Council in Łódź. Spatial Development Plan for Łódź; Act No. LVII/491/93; City Council of Łódź: Łódź, Poland, 1993.
51. City Council in Łódź. Brand Strategy and Promotion for the City of Łódź for 2010–2016; Act No. VIII/81/11; City Council of Łódź: Łódź, Poland, 2011.
52. Piech, M. Plansza XXVI: Przemiany przestrzenne, gałęziowe i funkcjonalne terenów przemysłowych Łodzi w latach 1938–1999. In Atlas Miasta Łodzi; Liszewski, S., Ed.; ŁTN: Łódź, Poland, 2002.
53. City Council in Łódź. The Simplified Local Programme of Revitalization of Selected Downtown and Post-Industrial Areas of Łódź for 2004–2013; Act No. XXXIV/0568/04; City Council of Łódź: Łódź, Poland, 2004.
54. Frak,˛ M. Le Monde pisze o Łodzi: Miasto kontrastów. Gaz. Wybor. 2011, 256, 4.
55. Sowińska-Heim, J. The identity of a city. Modern conversion of Karol Scheibler’s post-industrial empire in Lodz. In Proceedings of the In Advanced Research in Scientific Areas, Žilina, Slovakia, 3–7 December 2012; Mokrys, M., Lieskovsky, A., Eds.; EDIS: Žilina, Slovakia, 2012; pp. 1240–1245.
56. City Council in Łódź. Municipal Revitalisation Programme of Łódź 2018; Act No. LXXIII/1980/18; City Council of Łódź: Łódź, Poland, 2018.
57. City Council in Łódź. Changes to the Local Area Development Plan of Łódź; Act No. LXIII/623/97; City Council of Łódź: Łódź, Poland, 1997.
58. Ritzer, G. The McDonaldization of Society: An Investigation into the Changing Character of Contemporary Social Life, 8th ed.; Sage: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2014.
59. Davis, S.G. Spectacular Nature: Corporate Culture and the Sea World Experience; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1997.
60. Variations on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space; Sorkin, M. (Ed.) Hill and Wang: New York, NY, USA, 1992.
61. Miles, S. Space for Consumption: Pleasure and Placele ssness in the Post-Industrial City; Sage: London, UK, 2010.
62. Araoz, G. Protecting heritage places under the new heritage paradigm and defining its tolerance for change. A challenge for ICOMOS. In Conservation Turn-Return to Conservation. Tolerance for Change. Limits of Change, Proceedings of the International Conferences of the ICOMOS, International Scientific Committee for the Theory and Philosophy of Conservation and Restoration, Prague, Czech Republic, 5–9 May 2009; Florence, Italy, 3–6 March 2011; Lipp, W., Stulc, J., Szmygin, B., Giometti, S., Eds.; Edizioni Polistampa: Firenze, Italy, 2012; pp. 47–52.
63. Ashworth, G. Planowanie dziedzictwa. In Miasto Historyczne. Potencjał Dziedzictwa; Broński, K., Purchla, J., Zuziak, Z.K., Eds.; MCK: Kraków, Poland, 1997; pp. 25–48.
64. Zukin, S. Point of Purchase: How Shopping Changed American Culture; Routledge: New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 2004.
65. Zukin, S. The Cultures of Cities; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 1995.
66. Łódź City Hall. Rozpoczynamy Druki Etap Remontu Famuły Przy ul. Ogrodowej 24. Available online: https://uml.lodz.pl/aktualnosci/artykul/rozpoczynamy-drugi-etap-remontu-famuly-przy-ul-ogrodowej-24-id21558/2018/7/5/(accessed on 20 July 2020).
67. Wójcik, M. Manufaktura jako miejsce integrujace˛ w przestrzeni społecznej Łodzi. In Łódzka Metropolia. Problemy Integracji Społecznej i Przestrzennej; Suliborski, A., Przygodzki, Z., Eds.; Wyd. Biblioteka: Łódź, Poland, 2010; pp. 42–52.
68. Hall, P. Creative cities and economic development. Urban Stud. 2000, 37, 636–649. [CrossRef]
69. Promotion of Łódź as a Creative Industries Centre. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= txWi_0ughiA (accessed on 20 July 2020).
70. Łódź Brand Management Strategy for the Years 2010–2016. Available online: https://docer.pl/doc/xv1scx5 (accessed on 12 July 2020).
71. Florida, R. The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, and Every Day Life; Basic Books: New York, NY, USA, 2002.
72. Riegl, A. The modern cult of monuments: Its character and its origin. Oppos. J. Ideas Crit. Archit. 1982, 25, 21–56.
73. Provincial Heritage Monuments Protection Office in Łódź. Koncepcja Orange Property Group (dawna fabryka F. Ramischa), sygn. 799 D.N.Hist.
74. Landry, C. The creativity city index. City Cult. Soc. 2011, 2, 173–176. [CrossRef]
75. Sasaki, M. Urban regeneration through cultural creativity and social inclusion: Rethinking creative city theory through a Japanese case study. Cities 2010, 27, S3–S9. [CrossRef]
76. Sandler, D. Counterpreservation: Decrepitude and memory in post-unification Berlin. Third Text 2011, 25, 687–697. [CrossRef]
77. Jakob, D. Constructing the creative neighborhood: Hopes and limitations of creative city policies in Berlin. City Cult. Soc. 2010, 1, 193–198. [CrossRef]
78. The Nizhny Tagil Charter for the Industrial Heritage. Orginated by TICCIH, July, 2003. Available online: www.ticcih.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NTagilCharter.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
79. Bullen, P. Adaptive reuse and sustainability of commercial buildings. Facilities 2007, 25, 20–31. [CrossRef]
80. Vardopoulos, I. Critical sustainable development factors in the adaptive reuse of urban industrial buildings. A fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 50, 101684. [CrossRef]
81. UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. Paris, November 1972. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/(accessed on 12 July 2020).
82. Pomian, K. Museum und kulturelles Erbe. In Das Historische Museum. Labor-Schaubühne-Identitӓtsfabrik; Korff, G., Roth, M., Eds.; Campus Verlag GmbH: Frankfurt, Germany, 1990; pp. 41–64.
83. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. 1987. Available online: http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2020).
84. Rossi, A. The Architecture of the City; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1982.
85. Rykwert, J. The Seduction of Place: The City in Twenty-First Century; Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London, UK, 2000.