JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCE, VOL. 65, NO. 6, DEC. 2018, PP.

423-445
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING, CAIRO UNIVERSITY

A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL

ADDITIONS TO HERITAGE BUILDINGS

O. A. SOLIMAN1, AND M. M. AGGOUR1

ABSTRACT

As time passes, the heritage buildings need rehabilitation to meet the needs of
current and future generations, while respecting its heritage value. Due to the physical,
functional and/ or economic reasons, heritage buildings require architectural additions
while adapting them to the contemporary conditions. For this reason, that the research
seeks to establish a framework for using new additions to heritage buildings, therefore
these additions should be compatible for achieving a harmony with use, construction,
appearance of the original building. To achieve our aim, the study divided into two
parts, the principles and considerations of conservation for heritage buildings in
addition to design strategies for architectural additions and their types in terms of use,
construction and appearance have been included in a theoretical study. Following the
theoretical an analytical inductive approach has been adopted to analyze the levels of
the new additions to heritage building by examining the selected examples that linking
different addition types of mass transformation. Same examples have been analytically
measured by the opinion of audiences through filling a survey to show the acceptance
ratios according to the levels of addition to the original building.

KEYWORDS: Heritage building, additions, conservation principles, compatibility.

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem

The liable issue seems to be the search for employing the new additions to
heritage building, as how these additions can be compatible to match the heritage
building use, original construction, appearance after addition? As shown in Fig.1.

1
Associate professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Mattaria, Helwan University.
[email protected]
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

Adding inappropriate Adding new mass with Adding new structure element Adding new compatible
use to the original incompatible to the old. Gourna construction to the old, with
inappropriate appearance to the
building. Cairo, Egypt. Village, Luxor. The most inappropriate appearance.
[Author] old building. New York, USA. [1] famous work, H. Fathy. [2] Alexandria, Egypt. [Author]

Fig.1. Some Aspects of the Problem, Source: [1-2].

1.2 Objectives

This research aims to establish a framework for using new additions to heritage
buildings, therefore these additions should be compatible for achieving a harmony
with use, construction, appearance of the original building. The purpose of this
framework is to promote a better understanding of the design issues, the different
possibilities of additions to heritage building and to assist architects design additions
that will complement rather than compromise the heritage value of the original
building. In addition, to examine the success of the selected additions according to use,
construction, appearance to the original building.

1.3 Methodology

The suggested methodology is presented into theoretical and analytical studies.

Firstly, theoretical study concerning the principles and considerations of conservation
for heritage buildings and then studying design strategies for architectural additions. In
addition, type of additions in terms of use, construction and appearance. Secondly, it
has been adopted an analytical inductive approach to analyzing the levels of new
additions to heritage building by examining the selected examples that linking
different addition types of mass transformation. Same examples have been analytically

424
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

measured by the opinion of audiences through filling a survey to show the acceptance
according to the levels of addition to the original building – as in Fig.2.

Fig. 2. Research Methodology, Source: [Author].

2 ARCHITECTURAL ADDITIONS TO THE HERITAGE BUILDINGS

2.1 Principles and Considerations of Conservation Using a New Additions

Some authorities in different countries are making policies to manage change,

including adaptation, when assessing development of heritage buildings. Such policies
contain standard criteria to help ensure that an architectural addition has minimal
impact on a building’s heritage values, such as retaining the building façade, seeking a
new use for the building that is compatible with its original use [3-4]. The General
principles and considerations for conservation of using new additions include
minimize changes, make changes reversible, maintain evidence of age and distinguish
between new and old [5], An addition should play a subordinate role, it should not
dominate the original building as a result of its scale, materials or location, and should
not overlay main elevations. Where an addition form is built beside a main elevation it
should generally be lower than, and set back behind, that façade. Design an addition to
be compatible with the heritage building in mass, materials, color, and relationship of
solids to voids in the exterior walls. Fire escape routes may be needed an external
escape stair, it should be located as reversibly and inconspicuously as possible, and not
on main elevations [6-8].

425
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

2.2 Design Strategies of Using New Architectural Additions

Brookner and Stone developed three strategies of building reuse based on the
extent of integration between the host building and the new elements of addition.
These strategies are intervention, insertion, and installation While Bollack divides
adaptive reuse projects design into five strategies which are: wraps, weavings,
juxtapositions, parasites, and insertions [9-10]. Table 1 shows the strategies
definitions.
Table 1. Design Strategies of Using New Architectural Additions, Source: [9-11]

The old and new buildings

Installation (wrap, parasite,

exist independently. The

juxtaposition)

new elements design may be

influenced by the existing
building but they are not
necessarily compatible with
it.
A new, independent element
that is suited exactly to the
existing envelope. It is
Insertion

constructed to fit and is

located within the
boundaries of the existing
building
The existing structure
undergoes major
transformations so that it
Intervention

(weaving)

can no longer exist

independently. The old and
the new additions are
completely integrated

426
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

2.3 Levels of Additions of the Heritage Buildings

In this part of study, the vocabulary of architectural addition and its relation to
the heritage building are studied in terms of use, construction and appearance.

2.3.1 Types of addition influencing the heritage building use

The new additions in this level to the original building have three possibilities:
1) The same original use; 2) New use is compatible with its original use; and 3) New
use differentiating with the original use of the building heritage [12, 9].

2.3.2 Types of addition influencing the construction of the heritage building

In this level, new additions can be classified according to: 1) Elements and size
of the additions “treatments, transparent membrane, structures to cover courtyard,
lightweight structures, adding-new volumes, mezzanines and floors-to the existing
building, adding new separate building”; 2) Adding new materials should appropriate
structural integrity and choice of materials should revitalize and enrich the existing
building, these materials like “stone, brick, wood, concrete, steel, glass, etc.”; 3)
Constructions works: Structural system, finishes, electrical, lighting, plumbing,
mechanical, heating and cooling fighting fire system, Security [13, 9].

2.3.3 Types of additions influencing the appearance of the heritage building

The Addition impact includes three main aspects as the following: 1) Different
types in the location of the new addition to the original building “exterior- on top of
original building, interior- in plans, courtyard surrounding of the original building,
underground the original building”; 2) Analysis for the vocabularies of addition (plan
shape-geometric, irregular or freeform; Façade-material color and texture, realistic
aesthetics, natural aesthetics “proportionality, diversity, etc.”, engineering aesthetics
“organization, rhythm, etc.”, high-tech values “luxury, height, etc.”, the values of
deconstructive beauty “non-linearity, complexity & chose, surprise” [7, 14-16].

427
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

3 THE ANALYTICAL STUDY FOR THE LEVELS OF NEW

ADDITIONS TO THE HERITAGE BUILDING

The selected case studies have been classified in terms of the transformation of
form by types of addition, that defined from the visual aspects by Ching [17], then
measuring the acceptance of audiences for these new additions to the original building.
The case studies have been selected according to the criteria defined the variety of
levels of new additions to the heritage building, either design strategies for use specific
new additions, diversity between international and local examples, new additions are
contemporary examples. This study has adopted a questionnaire using visual images
for selected case studies, it has been delivered by social media networks and direct
interviews. The questionnaire was directed to a variety of participants (110), The
participants’ ratio is in the field of architecture 13%, In the field of architectural
academic 52%, students in architectural department 4%, others 31%, the following
Tables 2-6, show the analysis of the selected case studies. Each table includes building
images that associated with a specific transformation type where additions serving the
different use of the buildings. Also, it defines data about studied building like (a type
of use, country, construction date, the designer name). While Tables 7-9 compare
between items of each level according to an outcome of the theoretical study, also the
ratio of acceptance of the addition in each level for all case studies in this research
which will be evaluated later in this study. The remaining of the questionnaire data
reported in the form of graphs to study the results and relations between the case
studies to reach the findings as in Figs. 3, 4.

3.1 Case Studies

This part of the study shows the analysis of the selected case studies classified
according to using addition by intertwined volumes as in Tables 2, 3, Using addition
by surface to surface as in Table 4, Using addition by no contact (spatial tension) as in
Table 5 and finally using addition some of the architectural vocabularies and its effects
as in Table 6.

428
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

Table 2. Case Studies of Heritage Buildings Using Addition

by Intertwined Volumes, Source: [18-22].
Building description Addition by intertwined volumes
1- Royal Ontario
Museum(ROM), Canada,
the building’s five
intersecting metal-clad
volumes, Studio Daniel
libeskind,2007 [18]

2- Milstein Hall. Cornell

university, 2009-2011,
Ithaca, New york, U.S.A,
Architect: OMA and KHA
architects, LLC [19]

3- Kennington Water
Tower, to convert to a
single-family home
London [20]

4- D-House Urban
Sandwich,
Housefrom1930, Addition
turns brick A-frame to
green box, Poland [21]

5- Astley Castle,
Witherford Watson Mann
Architects, 2013,
Warwickshire, Uk [22]

429
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

Table 3. Case Study of Heritage Buildings Using Addition

by Intertwined Volumes, Source: [23-27].
Building description Addition by intertwined volumes
6- Reid Building, School
of the Arts, University of
Glasgow 1894-2014
designed by Stephen
hall.UK. [23]

7- Museum De Fundatie
Zwolle, Palace of justice
(Blijmarkt courthouse)
Netherlands, 1838,
Bierman henket architects,
2013. [24]

8- Antwerp Port House,

Zaha Hadid architects
Brussel, Belgium date of
renovation: 2016. [25]

9- Rotermann Carpenter’s
Workshop ,19th century,
Tallinn, Estonia, by
Koko.2009 office building
in a historic industrial
quarter [26]

10- Glass farm, a

traditional schijndel farm
1980 features a printed
glass façade, mixed-use
development 2013,
contributed by MVRDV,
Holland [27]

430
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

Table 4. Case Study of Heritage Buildings Using Addition

by Surface to Surface Contact, Source: [28-32].
Building description Addition by surface to surface contact
11- Restaurant 2013 an
annex to the nearby
serpentine gallery1805.
Kensington gardens,
London, Zaha Hadid,
Patrick Schumacher [28]

12- Expansion of the holy

mosque in Makkah, Saudi
Arabia, Architect Saudi
ballading group [29]

13- Haikai House, Akashi

City, Hyogo, Japan 300-
year-old Japanese house
wrapped in a modern
home, by Katsuhiro
Miyamoto &
Associates,2007, [30]
14- Viaduct Arches, late
19th-century Zurich,
historic railway viaduct
arches transformed into a
trendy shopping
district.2010, design firm
EM2N [31]
15- Museum of arts and
Crafts Hamburg-
Germany. by Haus-
Rucker- “Architectural
utopia reloaded,” [32]

431
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

Table 5. Case Study of Heritage Buildings Using Addition

by No Contact (spatial tension), Source: [33-37].
Building description Addition by no contact (spatial tension)
16- Sharp center at the
Ontario college of art &
design, Toronto,2003, [33]

17- Joanneum Museum

extension and
refurbishment, Graz
(Austria), old building
1811, Architects: Nieto
Sobejano arquitectos, eep
architekten, 2011[34]
18- The Bombay sapphire
distillery, Glass houses
award winning BREEAM,
Heatherwick studio,
Laverstoke, Hampshire,
UK, 2014, [35]

19- The british museum -

world conservation and
exhibitions centre, by
Rogers stirk harbour +
Partners, extension to the
museum of 1907-2014.
[36]
20- Museum of Suez Canal
history2014, Fernand
delesibs palace1859,
Ismailia, add a separate
mass to display delesibs
vehicle. [37]

432
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

Table 6. Case Study of Heritage Buildings Using Addition Some of

Architectural Vocabularies and its Effects, Source: [38-42].
Building description Addition by Architectural vocabularies
21- The palace of fine art
Cairo, Egypt, 1998. [38]

22- Sky stage, Frederick arts

council, Maryland, historic
building (1762) was
damaged by a major fire in
2010, Now a center for free
arts and culture, by Heather
Clark [39]
23- Damanhur creation
center, 2013. Old city
council building and turn it
into a creativity center.
Upgrade building,
equipment and it restores
the facades and interiors.
[40]
24- "Open borders
courtyards and porticoes”,
Milan university, Italy,
2016. Exhibition, material
P.A.T.I. ETFE polymer,
design ma yansong &others
[41]
25- Hammam tanbali,
Cairo, refurbishing the
building to its original use,
while providing it with the
necessary protection
measures; installing modern
techniques in restoration
[42]

433
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

This step of the study shows comparative analysis between case studies based on
the use of architectural additions, its ratios of acceptance, its design strategies, and the
extent effect of the use in acceptance as illustrated in Table 7.
Table 7. Analysis of Case Studies Based on the Use of Architectural Additions,
Its Ratios of Acceptance and its Design Strategies, Source: Authors.
Relationships between Architectural Additions & Heritage Building
Case study Surface to No contact
Architectural
buildings Intertwined volumes surface (spatial
vocabularies
contact tension)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
The same
Relation new use with the original use

original use
New use is
compatible
with its
original use
New use
differentiati
ng with the
original use
Ratio of
additions
14.7
34.3

27.5
39.6
25.7
27.5
33.7
35.6
51.5
32.7

67.6
24.5
29.3

34.7
34.3
45.5
64.7

46.1
48.5
50

62
32

51

39
52
based on the
use
wrap
installation
Design strategies

parasite

Juxta-
position
Insertion
Intervention

Then the comparative analysis between case studies based on the construction of
architectural additions (Material, Construction works, Elements & size of the
additional building) and its ratios of acceptance as illustrated in Table 8.

434
 Architectural no contact surface to intertwined volumes
vocabularies (spatial surface
tension) contact

9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
Case study buildings
same original material
Different of original material
Material

Harmonize with original

building system
Structural
Finishes
Electrical
Lighting
Plumbing
Mechanical

435
Heating & cooling
Construction works

Fighting Fire Systems

Security systems
Treatments
Parts of building
Transparent membrane
A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

Structures to cover courtyard

Lightweight structures
Additions and its Ratios of Acceptance, Source: Authors.

Adding-new volumes
Mezzanines & floors-
Size of the addition

New full separate building

Table 8. Analysis of Case Study Based on the Construction of Architectural

Ratio of architectural additions

37
26
18
30

22.7
45.1
24.5
17.8
21.6
52.5
39.2
45.5
41.2
36.3
38.6
46.5
34.7
49.5
31.4
29.7
29.7
21.6
29.4
32.4
19.6

based on construction

appearance of architectural additions and its ratios of acceptance illustrated in Table 9.

The table below shows a comparative analysis between case studies based on the
 Architectural no contact surface to intertwined volumes Relationships between
vocabularies (spatial surface Architectural Additions &
tension) contact heritage buildings

9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
Case study buildings
Exterior- on top of original building
Interior- in plan
Courtyard surrounding the original
Location
of Add.

Underground
building the original building
geometric Plan’s shape after
Irregular addition
Freeform
Material (harmony) Façade’s shape after
Color (harmony) addition
Texture(harmony)
Abstraction & simplicity(Realistic aesthetics)
Regulation and compatibility

436
Proportionality
Diversity
Natural
aesthetics

Equilibrium and symmetry values

Organization Engineering
Unity aesthetics
O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

Repetition
Rhythm
Height High-tech values
Dazzling
Dower and luxury
Additions and its Ratios of Acceptance, Source: Authors.

Non-linearity The values of

Complexity & chaos deconstructive
Table 9. Analysis Case Study Based on the Appearance of Architectural

Surprise beauty
Ratio of architectural additions based on

70
74
70
69

63.9
69.6
74.5
74.3
80.4
73.3
79.4
78.8
73.5
68.6
75.2
64.4
68.3
66.3
81.4
84.2
72.3
74.5
63.7
61.8
85.3

appearance
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

Graphs below show the participants’ ratios for study questionnaire and the
extent of an acceptance of a new addition as in Fig. 3, the participants’ ratios and the
extent of an acceptance based on (use, construction, and appearance) as in Fig. 4.

% Addition by intertwined Surface to No contact Architectural

volumes surface (spatial tension) vocabularies
contact

Fig. 3. Participants’ ratios for Study Questionnaire and the acceptance ratios [Authors].

%
Addition by intertwined Surface to No contact Architecture
volumes surface (spatial vocabularies
contact tension)

Fig. 4. Participants’ ratios for Study Questionnaire [Authors].

437
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

3.2 Results and Discussion

Appearance is the highest factor of acceptance among participants as in Fig. 4.

From the data analysis it has been observed that for specific buildings (#12, 14, and
21) most recipients have selected appearance and use due to the innovation in the area
utilization and/or the importance of building function. The highest building selected
for its appearance is building (#17) where the original building was preserving its
appearance by adding underground structure. The building with lower frequency is
(#1) due to the contrast of the addition to the original building (which is corresponding
to the principles and considerations of design architectural additions). Architecture
additions for most of the buildings have achieved the compatibility with the values of
Natural & Engineering aesthetics. Building that used high-tech values or values of
deconstructive beauty have no specific trend, some have refused (#2) others, some
received moderate acceptance (#8) while others (#11, 12) received high acceptance
due to the dominance of use and construction level and the addition appearance did not
change the original building appearance (new vision for the principles and
considerations of design architectural additions). Plan’s shape after addition, a free
form plans are more acceptable in arena of arts and museums, while geometric &
regular plans are more suitable for service functions such as education, housing, and
multi-function buildings. Most of Façade’s shape after addition is in harmony with the
original building in terms of material, color, and texture. But using contrast seems a
risk, for example, it was the reason for the rejection of (#1) and the acceptance of
(#18).
The use is the second factor influencing participants’ acceptance of for
buildings as illustrated in Fig. 4 & Table 7. Most buildings have been the same
original use or new compatible use with its original use except building (#3, 9, 14, 18)
which have a new use different than the original use. Building (#14) has received the
highest acceptance score for getting optimal utilization of space, urban perspective, as
well as performing the original use.

438
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

Participant acceptance for construction was under condition of addition by

Intertwined Volumes. Most of the additions have utilized different material different
from of original one. However, most of them were accepted. This could be due to the
same color of old and new material. Most cases have used all construction works for
rehabilitation and adaptive reuse for the modern era. It has been noted that building 8,
18 have the highest acceptance ratio for construction although the contrast in
construction with the original building. On the contrary, building (#11) is different in
the construction system but with neutral effect on participants, the actual effect was
due to appearance. This was due to the addition was light construction, and consistent
in color with the original building (new vision for the principles and considerations of
the design of architectural additions). In the case of adding architecture vocabularies,
some participants did not realize the type of addition.
The study showed that most of the examples of the analytical study are
consistent with the principles and considerations of conservation and design strategies
of using new additions. But there are situations that differ with these principles, and
yet have been accepted and successful because of their achievement of an integrated
performance of levels (use, construction, and appearance).
Based on the theoretical study, analyzing case studies and the survey results,
Fig. 5 is presenting the suggested framework to be considered as a guideline when
renovating or rehabilitating heritage buildings to make sure that the addition will be
compatible with the original building as in the Figure below.

439
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

Data collection & analysis Program phase Design phase Alternatives Decision
making
Selecting
Select of Suggesting
Determining the best
A case design set of
the type of use alternative, a
study of the strategies alternatives
of the building questionnaire
original based on determined by
(original & Principles of for users of
building levels of
adaptive Conservation building
additions

Installation Insertion Intervention

Wrap Parasit Juxtaposit
e ion

Add. -based on the appearance Add. -based on the use

Relation shapes between Architectural - The same original use
Additions & heritage building - The New use is compatible with its
-Intertwined volumes original use
- New use differentiating with the
-Surface to surface contact original use of the heritage building
-No contact (spatial tension)
Types of location the new addition
to the original building Add. -based on the
-Exterior- on top of an original Structural system
Stone
Addition's Material types

building. construction Best alternative

Construction works

-Interior - in a plan. Brick Finishes

-Courtyard surrounding the Steel Electrical
original building.
-Underground of the original Concrete Lighting
building Wood Plumbing Users
Analysis for the vocabularies of adds.
Glass Mechanical Participants
Plan shape Geometric, irregular Polymer Heating & cooling
or freeform
Façade Material, color, and Other
Elements Fighting
& size of the Fire
additional Questionnaire
texture (harmony building
shape and contrast) Systems Developing the
Abstraction and
-Treatments
Realistic Security
aesthetics simplicity -Parts of building like walls, chosen alternative
systems
Natural Regulation and
compatibility, roofs, floors, openings,
aesthetics
proportionality,
composition, corridors, entrances,
diversity, Execution phase
equilibrium and covered roof,
symmetry values.
Chimneys, Skylights,
Engineering Organization, unity,
aesthetics repetition and bridges, etc.
rhythm.
High-tech Height, dazzling, -Transparent membrane Enrich the building
values power and luxury concept to represent the
Values of Non-linearity, chaos, -structures to cover past, present and future
deconstructive complexity and at the same time
beauty
surprise
courtyard.
-Lightweight structures.
-Adding new volumes.
Fig. 5. A Framework for New Architectural Additions to Heritage Buildings [Authors]
-Mezzanines & floors to
the existing building.
-New full separate
440
building
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

4. CONCLUSIONS

In order to create a framework for new architectural additions to heritage

buildings to achieve a final form appearance that reflects and preserve the original
building and can be used in a manner compatible with the present and able to apply
changes and adaptable for future use. This concept can be achieved through a multi-
step phases that are compatible with the design process:
1) data collection & analysis: It represents the case study of the original building, its
use and its structural system and follows period of time where building has been
established with the values of that time; 2) The program phase: Determining the type
of use of the building (original, integrated or adaptive) and design fundamentals and
finally the required construction works to renovate building use whereas the final
result commensurate with the present age; 3) The design phase: this phase is
concerned with the selection of design strategies of using new architectural additions
based on Principles and Considerations of Conservation and on the status of the
original building and its appearance; 4) Alternatives phase: suggesting a set of
alternatives determined by levels of additions; 5) Decision making and selecting the
best alternative that achieves the highest result. A preliminary questionnaire of
sketches of the chosen alternative can also be done (as in this study). The sample
should include the participants and users of the building under study. Questionnaire
results can help in developing enhancement for the chosen alternative before execution
phase.

5. RECOMMENDATION

 This framework should be used as a guide when assessing development applications

for adaptation or rehabilitation projects.
 The principles and considerations of conservation should be revisited from time to
time to accommodate new technologies that directly affecting levels of addition
(use, construction and appearance).

441
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

 This circle of evolution will provide architectural addition to heritage building with
new visions and renewal process to enrich the building concept to represent the
past, present and future at the same time.

REFERENCES

1. Flaneur, S., “Big Cities, Bright Lights, About New York and Lisbon and other
Places I Travel to”, Available at: https://bigcitiesbrightlights.wordpress.com
/2012/09/25/nyc-manhattan-summer-of-kusama/, (Accessed 12/12/2017).
2. Hagag, H., “Al-Ahram Gate: Revealed by Photos and Documents of the Gourna
Disaster”, Available at: http://gate.ahram.org.eg/News/1825064.aspx, (Accessed
10/2/2018).
3. Yasunaga, Y., “Old and New: Can Contemporary and Historical Architecture
Exit?” Available at: http://www.mkthink.com/2014/08/01/old-new-can-
contemporary-and-historical-architecture-exist/, (Accessed 12/1/2018).
4. Kerr, W., “Adaptive Reuse - Preserving our past, building our future”, the
Department of the Environment and Heritage, the Royal Australian Institute
of Architects, 2004, Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/
publications/adaptive-reuse, (Accessed 2/1/2018).
5. State Heritage Branch, “2.4 Alterations and Additions - The South
Australian perspective”, Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
2008, Available at : file:///D:/Downloads/alterations_additions.pdf, (Accessed
5/2/2018).
6. Grimmer, A.E., “New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation
Concerns”, U.S. Department of the Interior, Available at: http://www.nps.gov,
2012, (Accessed 15/2/2018).
7. “Managing Change in the Historic Environment - Extensions”, Historic Scotland,
2010, Available at: file:///D:/Downloads/managing-change-extensions.pdf,
(Accessed 13/2/2018)
8. “Section 4: Additions and New Construction”, Raleigh Design Guidelines,
rhdc.org/sites/default/files/RHDC-4Z.pdf, (Accessed 2/2/2018).
9. Gewirtzman, D.F., “Adaptive Reuse Architecture Documentation and Analysis”,
J Archit Eng Tech, Vol. 5, pp. 4-7 2016, Available at: https://www.
omicsonline.org/open-access/adaptive-reuse-architecture-documentation-and-
analysis-2168-9717-1000172.pdf, (Accessed 15/12/2017).
10. https://www.aiany.org/news/oculus-book-review-old-buildings-new-forms-new-
directions-in-architectural-transformations-by-francoise-astorg-bollack/,
(Accessed 15/3/2018).
11. http://www.architectmagazine.com/design/francoise-bollacks-new-book-
highlights- the-most-innovative-adaptive-reuse-projects_o (Accessed 10/2/2018).
12. Mısırlısoy, D., “New Designs in Historic Context: Starchitecture vs Architectural
Conservation Principles”, Civil Engineering and Architecture. 5, PP. 207-214,

442
 A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL …

2017, Available at: www.hrpub.org/download/20171030/CEA2-14810109.pdf,

(Accessed 11/2/2018).
13. Sandbhor, S., Botre, R., “A Systematic Approach Towards Restoration of
Heritage Buildings - a Case Study”, International Journal of Research in
Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 I, p.230, Mar-2013, Available at:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.679.3162&rep=rep1&t
ype= pdf , (Accessed 2/2/2018).
14. Imam, M.M, Bakr, A.F, Anany, Y.M, “Use of Freehand Sketching: Documenting
Heritage Buildings, Gamal Abdel Nasser Street (1830–1930), Alexandria,
Egypt”, Alexandria engineering journal, Vol. 55, Issue.3, p.2761, 2016, Available
at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110016816300904,
(Accessed 7/1/2018).
15. Stavreva, B., “New vs Old: New Architecture of Purpose in Old Settings”,
Master of Science in Architecture, faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute,
p.8, 2017, Available at:https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/
10919/78392/Stavreva_B_T_2017.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y, (Accessed
7/2/2018).
16. Elgohary, A.R., " The Architectural Aesthetics in the Era of Digital Revolution",
Ph.D. of Architecture, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering-
Mataria, Helwan University, p.70, 2014.
17. Ching, F., “Architecture-Form, space and order”, 4th edition, John Wiley & Sons,
p.62, 2015.
18. Jencks, C., “The Story of Post-Modernism: Five Decades of the Ironic, Iconic
and Critical in Architecture”, First Edition, Wiley Publishers, p. 173, 2011.
19. The American Institute of Architects, “Milstein Hall, Cornell University”, AIA
Institute Honor Awards Recognize Excellence in Architecture Interiors and
Urban Design, p.3, 2013.
20. http://www.acrarchitects.co.uk/grand-designs-water-tower.php, (Accessed
12/1/2018).
21. https://dornob.com/sandwich-house-addition-turns-brick-a-frame-to-green-box/,
(Accessed 7/1/2018).
22. Chapman, T., “The RIBA Stirling Prize: 20”, Merrell Publishers Ltd, London, pp.
198-199, 2016.
23. http://www.stevenholl.com/projects/glasgow-school-of-art, (Accessed
25/1/2018).
24. Henket, B., “Museum De Fundatie Zwolle”, pp.2-4, 2013. Available at:
http://www.biermanhenket.nl/media/2612/BHA, (Accessed 25/1/2018).
25. Scofidio, D., Gensler, R., and Jackson, C., “Antwerp Port House, Zaha Hadid
Architects”, Mark Magazine, Vol. 65, Frame Publisher, ISBN: 8710966141267,
pp. 091, 2017.
26. http://www.kokoarchitects.eu/en/project/96-roseni7-carpenter-s-workshop-
reconstruction, (Accessed 25/1/2018)
27. Betsky, A., “Towards the Two Millimeter Icon MVRDV Assembles”, MVRDV
2003 - 2014 Evolutionary City, El Croquis Magazine, Vol. 173, p.243, 2014.

443
 O. A. SOLIMAN, AND M. M. AGGOUR

28. http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/serpentine-sackler-gallery/(Accessed
12/1/2018).
29. Kaysi, I., Shalaby, A., and Others, “Background of Material Toolkit”, Center of
Research Excellence in Hajj and Umrah at Umm Al Qura University, p.39, 2010,
Available at: http://wwwusers.cs.umn.edu/~shekhar/talk/2013/ 09042010.pdf,
(Accessed 12/1/2018).
30. http://www.architecturelist.com/2011/05/11/hankai-house-in-hyogo-japan-by-
katsuhiro-miyamoto-associates/amp/, (Accessed 12/1/2018).
31. International Precedents, “Refurbishment Viaduct Arches Zurich, Switzerland,
Precedent Study, Level Crossing Removal Project”, pp.76-77, 2016. Available at:
http://levelcrossings.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/41992/LXRA_PREC
EDENT-STUDY_International-Precedents.pdf, (Accessed 25/1/2018).
32. Choi, E., ‎ Clarke, A., Castillo, G., Dubberly, H., Blauvelt, A., and Elfline, R.,
“Atmospheres of Institutional Critique: Haus-Rucker-Co.'s Pneumatic
Temporality – Hippie Modernism: The Struggle for Utopia”, Walker Art Center
Publishers, p.31, 2015.
33. Hart, S., “Sharp Center”, Architectural Record Magazine, Publisher McGraw-Hill
Companies, Vol. 8, p. 125, 2004.
34. Isopp, A., “Museum Extension, Graz”, A10 new European Architecture, Vol. 43,
Boom publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, p. 32, 2012, Available at:
http://www.a10.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/A10-43.pdf, (Accessed
22/1/2018).
35. Heatherwick, T., Rowe, M., “Thomas Heatherwick: Making – Fully Revised and
expanded”, Thames and Hudson Publishers Ltd, Third Edition, p.455, 2015.
36. Harbour, R.S., + Partners, “Culture & Leisure 2017”, p.54, 2017, Available at:
https://www.rsh-p.com/assets/publications/RSHP_culture_leisure.pdf, (Accessed
22/1/2018).
37. http://cairohistoric.blogspot.com.eg/, (Accessed 10/1/2018).
38. http://www.cdcabdelhalim.com/the-palace-of-fine-art.html, (Accessed 22/1/
2018).
39. Clark, H., “What’s Emerging - Resistance and Rclamation”, Public Art Review,
Vol. 56, p. 17, 2017. Available at: http://heather-clark.com/wp-content/
uploads/2017/12/public-art-review-10.pdf, (Accessed 22/1/2018).
40. http://mimar-architects.com/projects/cultural/cultural-projects-damanhour-
creation-center, (Accessed 25/1/2018).
41. https://www.designboom.com/design/mad-architects-invisible-border-milan-
design-week-interni-2016/, (Accessed 25/1/2018).
42. http://mimar-architects.com/ar/projects/cultural/hammam-tanbali-rehabilitation
(Accessed 12/1/2018).

444
 ‫… ‪A FRAMEWORK FOR NEW ARCHITECTURAL‬‬

‫إطار عمل الستخدام اإلضافات المعمارية الجديدة فى المبانى التراثية‬

‫بح ىث كوى ث مم القى‬ ‫يهدف البحث إلى ضعىإ إرىالس خدىم داض ااعىاللالد ال ديىدا لالبىالث الم ا ى‬
‫ضيظقس ىىل البح ىىث إلى ى الد اسدى ى الظى يى ى اللمماقى ى بلب ىىال‬ ‫ىىا‬ ‫م ىىإ اخد ىىم داض ضالبظ ىىالل ضمىهى ى اللبظى ى ا‬
‫ىىث‬ ‫الد المصىل ل لتعىاللالد اللملالسيى ض اعهىال مى‬ ‫ض اسدى ادىىم اك‬ ‫الم ا ى‬ ‫ضاعمبىالساد الح ىالظ لالبىال‬
‫ل الدساد المحا ا بالدمق ال ضكحا ل مسىم يالد ااعىاللالد ال ديىدا لى اللبىال‬ ‫اخدم داض ضالبظالل ضاللىه‬
‫المحى ل ضالمي ى لى‬ ‫ى ا ااعىالل الل ما ى بأدىالل‬ ‫م خالل كحا ل ا مثاى الل مىالسا المى كى ط‬ ‫الم ا‬
‫ىل كحا ىىل ىىا ا مثاى مى خىىالل سى ال لهى س‬ ‫الشىلل بالدىىم داض اخعىىالل ض اعهىال مى الظال ى البصى ي‬
‫اخدىىمب الث لق ىىالى مىىدى البى ل اخعىىالل ال ديىىدا لى ربقىىال للسىىم ى ض مسىىم يالد إعىىاللمهال‬ ‫بالدىىم داض لى‬
‫ا ‪.‬‬ ‫إل اللبظ ا‬

‫‪445‬‬