Ball, R (1999) Developers, regeneration and sustainability issues in the reuse of vacant industrial buildings. Building Research & Information, 27(3), pp. 140-148. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The outcomes from a survey of developer and related organizations active in a local industrial property market in mid-1998 are reported in respect of the use and reuse of industrial buildings. The discussion focuses on both refurbishment and reuse and new build sectors, and draws out some evidence on sustainability issues. Despite a relatively limited understanding of sustainability as a concept, developers are found to have a positive attitude to reuse when conditions allow it. Indeed, those more actively involved in reuse have sometimes engaged in a variety of practical, sustainable solutions to refurbishment needs. Most are open to influence on questions of good practice and sustainability. This all suggests that legislation designed to turn the development and construction industry towards brownfield opportunities and the sustainable reuse of existing infrastructure is likely to induce a favourable response.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building stock; developers; industrial buildings; refurbishment; reuse; sustainable development; vacant property |
| Index terms: | legislation, survey, good practice, new build, building stock, sustainable development, property market, evidence, construction industry |
| Subjects: | construction integration, performance measurement, health safety and environment, asset management, industry analysis, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, real estate economics, legal systems |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Legal Issues, Urban Studies, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 CTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here