The Implication of Adaptive Reuse of Gotiaco Building as a Chinese Museum
In:
Submitted By maryannedem Words 7568 Pages 31
CHAPTER 1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE
INTRODUCTION
Rationale of the study
One of the great challenges of progressing cities in the Philippines is the need to preserve and conserve its heritage. Cebu is one of the known cities that posseses a rich culture and historical landmarks that serves as a potent symbol of National Identity has faced the same challenges. With the emergence of commercial buildings and growth of population in the City, the maintenance and conservation of Heritage is more likely needed.
Altering existing buildings for a new function is not a new phenomenon. Working with the existing buildings, repairing and restoring them for continued use has become a creative and fascinating challenge within the architectural descipline. The process of wholeheartedly altering a building is often called “ Adaptive Re-use”. It is known that adaptive re-use helps extend the life of Historical buildings and prevents them from becoming foresaken and derilict. The Gotiaoco building which is situated at the M.C Briones Ave. Behind Cebu City hall is one of the significant architectural building that is currently proprosed to be reuse as a Chinese Heritage Museum under the supervision of Sugbu Chinese Heritage Museum Inc.. In contemporary conservation theory and practice, adaptive re-use is considered to be an important strategy towards conservation of cultural heritage. It preserves buildings by changing outdated functions into new uses to meet contemporary demand. However, it is known that the affected community is one of the external factors that affects the sucessful planning and decision making on the implementation of Heritage preservation program.
Hence, a study is conducted by the researchers in order to evaluate the implications of adaptively re-using the Gotiaoco buillding as a museum, as a strategy towards tourism and heritage preservation. This study will greatly help them in looking into cosiderations the possible impacts of Adaptively reusing heritage building to the community.
Related Literature
The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the factors influencing the decision to adopt an adaptive re‐use strategy. Adaptive re‐use enables a building to suit new conditions. It is a process that reaps the benefit of the embodied energy and quality of the original building in a sustainable manner. Initiatives to improve the sustainability of buildings have tended to focus on new construction projects rather than existing ones. One reason is the tendency to regard old buildings as products with a limited useful life that have to be eventually discarded and demolished. Much of the existing building stock will still be in use for another 100 years. Thus, there is a need to develop policy and strategies that encourage adaptive re‐use and the ongoing sustainability of building stock (Peter Bullen; Peter Love, 2011).
Additionally, a very simple definition would identify the built heritage as the buildings and monuments inherited from the past, with a cultural or historical dimension justifying their preservation for future generations, but also modern monuments whose symbolic or cultural value is high: houses or buildings designed by a kind of international elite of architects. Even in this sense, heritage includes a large range of goods, whose definition changes over time and space and depends on the variety of dimensions (symbolic, cultural, national identity-oriented, social and suchlike) included in the concept (Chastel, 1986).
Heritage includes different forms of cultural capital ‘which embodies the community’s value of its social, historical, or cultural dimension’ (Throsby,1997, p.15).Historic preservation is a wonderful site for locating the politics of history, the social organization of taste, and the mode of urban development. In the case of old things, decay sets up an urgency to valorise or let it go and hence what can often be spirited debate and a good occasion for research (Molotch, Harvey,1997).
The advent of the environmental movement of the 1960s and 1970s (Cantell, 2005) in the United States of America challenged amongst many other industries, the building construction industry to investigate environmentally conscious building solutions (Gordon, 2012). This gave rise to the concept of reusing already-existing buildings and adapting them for reuse. Today an increased number of metropolitan cities around the world are turning to the option of urban renewal solutions via the adaptive reuse of old buildings in order to address the rising number of city inhabitants, including new emerging inner city businesses (Cantell, 2005).
Appreciated as the perfect remedy to our throw-away culture (Cantell, 2005), the adaptive reuse of buildings offers an environmentally and economically sustainable solution aimed at dealing with disused and old architecture. The creation of something functional and new by simply amending an existing structure to serve a new purpose is not only nostalgic as it preserves old architecture, but also holds economic, social and environmental benefits. Architectural adaptive reuse also preserves iconic and heritage buildings by retrofitting them to be reused again for/by generations to come (Cantell, 2005). The principle of adaptive reuse is echoed in the words of the 1960s architect and theorist, Ada Louise Huxtable; “Preservation is the job of finding ways to keep those original buildings that provide the city’s character and continuity and of incorporating them into its living mainstream,” not placing them in “sterile isolation.” (Mirza- Avakyan, 2013).
According to Bezuidenhout (2008) Adaptive Reuse as it pertains to the architectural community is also known as reuse, and it is basically defined as a process that adapts an existing structure to serve new uses, whilst the historical features of said building are retained. Therefore, in its most basic form Adaptive Reuse is the process of repurposing architecture/objects with expired or outdated uses. Additionally, the term ‘Adaptive Reuse’ is often interchangeable with similar words such as remodelling, retrofitting or adaptation (Plevoets and Cleempoel, 2011). Additionally, Plevoets and Cleempoel, have conducted a various studies on the relationship between adaptive reuse and architectural heritage conservation in Europe, specifically in Belgium (2011); during the French revolution religious structures were transformed to serve military and industrial needs. The early adaptation of these buildings was however performed in order to serve immediate needs and these buildings were not retrofitted with architectural conservation in mind. During the 19th Century the French architect and restoration theorist, Eugène Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc (1814 –1879) maintained that the success of a reused building is based on the functionality of the adaptation whilst maintaining the essence of the particular building. Preceding restoration theorists such as Ada Louise Huxtable have based most of their work on the principles of Viollet-le-Duc’s early work, and his theories on restoration and preservation remain applicable in adaptive reuse projects during postmodern times. Again, Building adaptive reuse is an important global topic. In the context of sustainable development and the effects of climate change caused by previous disregard for our environment, adaptive reuse has significant implications. There are reports on current research undertaken in Australia as part of a nationally-funded program in collaboration with industry, proposes a new model for early identification of adaptive reuse potential, tests this model with case study data, and looks at the social advantage from making better use of what we already have. The paper proposes that adaptive reuse needs to be planned at the outset, and if this is done wisely and routinely, it will provide a means of realizing sustainability objectives without reducing investment levels or economic viability for the industry. In fact, adaptive reuse is the future of the construction industry (Langston, C. A.,2008).
On a study conducted by Hassan, A. S., Badarulzaman, N., Ahmad, A. G., Mohamed, B., &Wöber, K. W.(2002). Seven heritage buildings were surveyed and interviews were conducted with hotel managers and 70 guests staying at these hotels during September and December 2000. Findings showed that the heritage hotels in Malaysia have appealed very strongly to tourists, especially to those who enjoyed staying at restored old buildings of significant architectural, historical and cultural values. It is anticipated that this trend would continue into the future and that heritage hotels would serve as a competitive alternative for tourist accommodation in Malaysia. Challenges of adaptive re-use and policy recommendations in the Malaysian tourism are outlined. Moreover, Adaptive reuse is seen as an exciting and inclusive way of dealing with dilapidated, yet still charismatic, architecture in a non-brutal manner. The current recycling and reusing outlook, as well as the accompanying ‘cool factor’ synonymous with the concept of urban renewal and urban living has resulted in the increase of adaptive reuse of old, heritage and iconic buildings globally. Locally, the trend of adapting warehouses into indoor market areas and studio apartments is fast gaining ground with cities like Cape Town and Johannesburg enthusiastically embracing the idea. The recent increase in the number of urban renewal projects occurring in Johannesburg, South Africa, according to the City of Johannesburg (2007) has resulted in vast interest in city living amongst the young, hip and entrepreneurial. The ‘cool factor ’ associated with living, playing and working within the renewed structures of city centres such as the Maboneng Precinct has resulted in an ever-increasing number of individuals moving or returning to the city; thus the need to adapt buildings for reuse intensifies.
On another study, there is growing acceptance that heritage buildings are an important element of Australia's social capital and that heritage conservation provides economic, cultural and social benefits to urban communities. The decision whether to reuse a building entails a complex set of considerations including location, heritage, architectural assets, and market trends. The role of building conservation has changed from preservation to being part of a broader strategy for urban regeneration and sustainability. A growing body of opinion supports the view that adaptive reuse is a powerful strategy for handling this change. Urban development and subsequent redevelopment has a significant impact on the environment and the purpose of this paper is to investigate how the conservation of heritage buildings may contribute to a more sustainable urban environment (Peter Bullen; Peter Love, 2011).
Rapidly changing markets can alter demand prior to a completion ofa project. The assessment of present and future market needs requires consultation with thoseproficient in the fields of real estate and construction, and also necessitates sound knowledge ofthe historical background of the neighbourhood in which an expansion is planned. The market demand for adaptive reuse projects is dependent on new expansions and requires awareness of the level of demand, the target market and the building site (Heath, 2001)
It is advantageous to developers and architects to be able to accurately assess a site and also to determine how it has been transformed over time (Peiser and Frej, 2007). The concerns associated with the location of adaptive reuse projects are the same for those of a new building construction; these include features of the environment, safety and security, neighboring land uses, views, ease of access to use services and transportation and accessible private vehicle parking (Heath, 2001).
However, Adaptive reuse of older commercial buildings, particularly in countries such as the USA, has been regarded by building owners and developers as uneconomic. Retention of older commercial buildings has commonly been regarded as a barrier to progress and a hindrance to the regeneration of older urban areas. A case example is used to examine the underlying factors that have contributed to LA being an exemplar for adaptive re‐use and its contribution to sustainability. Urban regeneration requires a vision and a continued commitment to sustainability. In the case of LA, there is clearly evidence of a commitment to sustainability through the implementation of an adaptive re‐use program. A key to this strategy's success is the offering of incentives. Such incentives are required to entice investment and involvement in the program. The ability to make commercial buildings attractive to developers as viable reuse projects relied heavily on the use of legislation that reduces code and zoning requirements and offers substantial financial incentives in the form of tax concessions. The advantages of adaptive reuse in terms of sustainability appear to outweigh the advantages of demolition and new development as experienced in LA. Certainly in terms of urban regeneration the adaptive reuse program in the downtown area appears to have been something of a catalyst in prompting investment in major developments (Peter Bullen; Peter Love, 2009).
An increasing number of cities are initiating holistic policy approaches to decrease and revitalize their derelict or underutilized heritage industrial structures. (Schilling, 2002) An option for ourever-growing cities, adaptive reuse is a sustainable strategy for existing structures and materials. In North America today, one controversial concern in contemporary urban expansionis the adaptive reuse of aged urban industrial sites or structures. These sites are known asbrownfields instead of Greenfields due to the fact that they may contain chemical contamination; it is of course necessary to deal with this problem before the structures can be put to residential or commercial use. A successful adaptive reuse project can offer growth and also bring heritage tourism to its city and new life to its neighbourhood (Berens, 2010).
The rehabilitation of existing structures is nearly always superior to new or replacement construction in terms of the various aspects of sustainability and sustainable development. Rehabilitated projects provide many advantages, including maintenance of historical and architectural integrity, revitalizing urban areas, and avoiding negative environmental impacts and unnecessary consumption of materials and energy. In planning a sustainable rehabilitation project, it is necessary to consider the surrounding context of the project, potential impacts to the human and natural environment, and economic viability compared to other alternatives. Sustainability as a decision criterion encompasses all of these considerations, and can serve as a governing objective for all project decision makings which will help to ensure the survival of the earth and its inhabitants into the foreseeable future. (Akhtarkavan, Alikhani, Ghiasvand, Akhtarkavan, 2008)
Although there are many factors, the concept of adaptive reuse has significant support as a positive strategy to make the built environment more sustainable. Adaptive reuse enhances the longer term usefulness of building and is more sustainable than demolition or rebuilding. The positive benefits for adaptive reuse identified during the research also support the tenets of sustainability and include: reducing resource consumption, energy use and emissions; extending the useful life of buildings; being more cost effective than demolition and rebuilding; reclaiming embodied energy over a greater time frame; creating valuable community resources from unproductive property; revitalizing existing neighbourhoods; reducing land consumption and urban sprawl; enhancing the aesthetic appeal of the built environment; increasing the demand for retained existing buildings; retaining streetscapes that maintain sense of place; and retaining visual amenity and cultural heritage. Some uncertainties remain about the viability of adaptive reuse, which invariably focus on the obstacles. (Akhtarkavan, Alikhani, Ghiasvand, Akhtarkavan, 2008)
Adaptive reuse is an effective strategy for optimizing the operational and commercial performance of built assets. While the benefits of adaptive re‐use have been widely espoused, it would appear that owners and practitioners lack a point of reference to justify and evaluate their decision‐making with regard to reusing existing assets. To gain an understanding of the issues that owners and practitioners are confronted with when considering adaptive re‐use, demolition and issues pertaining to sustainability, an interpretative research approach was adopted. A total of 81 in‐depth interviews were conducted over a six‐month period with a variety of stakeholders such as architects, developers, planners, building managers/owners and property consultants. Content analysis was used as the primary analysis technique on the collected data. The analysis of the interviews revealed three key criteria are used to examine adaptive reuse decision making: capital investment; asset condition; and regulation. While financial criteria such as development and construction costs were the primary determinants influencing the decision reuse or demolish, the physical condition of the asset juxtaposed with regulations were also considered. Additionally, issues associated with the environmental, economic and social tenets of sustainability were identified as being important but had been given less priority when considering reuse. As current building stock is rapidly becoming obsolete, increasing emphasis is beginning to be placed on them during the adaptive reuse decision‐making process to ensure sustainable outcomes. (Peter Bullen; Peter Love, 2011).
According to Standards and Guidelines for the conservation, the aims of environmental sustainability have to be in harmony with heritage conservation intentions when making choices regarding sustainability-related interventions. Awareness of thepast and present environmental features and performance of an historic place is requisite to recognizing and developing suitable solutions. First of all, character-defining elements must be recognized and assessed so that their inherent environmental potential can be determined. Thisis a prerequisite to further attempts at adaption to, or interventions with, historic places to makethem more sustainable. Decisions regarding resource-saving measures that concern energy, water or materials should involve weighing the environmental advantages of these measures against any possible negative effects on heritage value. Resolutions should be adopted that will derive benefit from the natural durability and adaptability of the historic structures (Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation, 2003).
Moreover, in the pursuit of sustainable development, communities have much to gain from adaptively reusing historic buildings. Bypassing the wasteful process of demolition and reconstruction alone sells the environmental benefits of adaptive reuse. Environmental benefits, combined with energy savings and the social advantage of recycling a valued heritage place make adaptive reuse of historic buildings an essential component of sustainable development (Department of the Environment and Heritage, 2004).
The act of preserving a site, a building, or a community is a gesture of respect for a past decision and a gift to future generations who may enjoy or be curious about the physical manifestation of different time and culture. The civic engagement of the heart of important as the buildings (Carroon, 2010). The benefits of historic preservation come in many forms. The prime benefit of historical restoration is always education. It also includes both public and private benefits. Historic preservation safeguards a community’s heritage, making it available to future generations for civic enjoyment and educational activities. Preservation stabilizes property values and maintenance of historic resources and bolsters community pride. Finally, historic preservation has been successfully employed to improve business opportunities in many locales (T.R. Hazen, 2000).
Also, Heritage conservation has been portrayed as the alternative to economic development, 'either we have historic preservation, or we have economic growth.' That is a false choice. In fact, heritage-based economic strategies can advance a wide range of public policy priorities (Donovan Rypkema, 2005).
The success of many adaptive reuse projects can result in revitalization of a block or neighbourhood. This is often more noticeable for reuse projects in distressed districts. In such instances, the industrial buildings could have been a source of blight and their use is welcomed by the general public. At a certain point, however, the success of a revitalizing area causes displacement, whether it be of artists or small industries using the industrial buildings or of residents living in nearby houses, and this is viewed unfavourably by many. Other concerns the public might have in response to theadaptive reuse of a historic industrial building include congestion and parking, as wellas contamination. It is important to notify the public about the project early on itsplanning stages to get public buy-in and assess the neighbourhood’s support. This canbe achieved by holding public meetings and charrettes. Another way to engage the public is to invite key members from the community, perhaps from neighbourhood associations and local businesses, to serve on a task force to help guide the adaptive reuse of a particularly important building within a community. (Cantell, 2005)
‘The Historic Environment: A Force for Our Future’ was published by English Heritage for the British Government in 2001. The publication sets out how the historic environment holds the key to more attractive towns and cities, a prosperous and sustainable countryside and world class tourist attractions. It also states that ‘Historic landscapes or iconic buildings can become a focus of community identity and pride and proclaim that identity and pride to the wider world’ (English Heritage, 2001: 7). An iconic building is for example a redundant factory which is an important local landmark for the community. Preservation and adaptive reuse of this landmark can be a source to create a sense of local cohesion. Issues regarding place identity are discussed in the publication ‘Power of Place’ (English Heritage, 2000). Among others this publication makes recommendations on how local communities can take part in decision-making processes that affect their local historic environment. A key issue identified is that the historic environment has the potential to be inclusive and unifying but people feel excluded from the decision-making processes that concerns it.
Using a survey of tourists and locals, the study on Tourism and Heritage Conservation conducted in Singapore investigates the success of Singapore's Civic and Cultural District as a conservation project. The survey revealed that tourists were attracted by the facades of old colonial buildings that have been carefully restored. In contrast, Singaporeans attach a great deal more to activities and lifestyles within the district that have since been removed or have disappeared because of conservation. Planning authorities have concentrated mainly on the issue of economic viability and favour commercial activities such as retail and recreation/leisure. As such, Singaporeans feel that conservation in the district, because it “museumizes” or makes “elitist” to encourage tourism, has failed to preserve their heritage (Teo; Huan, 1995).
Industrial heritage is the representative historical evidence in the advancement of city civilization, and also resources which should be treasured and used in the process of city renewal. According to the present situations of reusing the urban industrial heritage, the study on Issues in the Re-use of Urban Industrial Heritages, summarizes some problems in the reuse of urban industrial heritage in China based on case studies. Then it points out that it is necessary and urgent to deepen the understanding of industrial heritage and enrich reusing patterns, promote planning guidance and improve related mechanism and so on (Yu; Li, 2010).
Theoretical Background
This study is anchored on the Land value theory, also known as bid rent theory and urban rent theory, first achieved recognition in a retailing context from the early work of Haig (1926) and modified by Hotelling (1929). Haig argued that competition for an inelastic supply of land ensures that, in the long run, all urban sites are occupied by the activity capable of paying the highest rentals, and land is thereby put to its “highest and best” use.
According to Clarkson et al (1996), land value theory proposes that the location of different activities (retailing formats) will depend on competitive bidding for specific sites. Land use activities occupy locations sequentially and once established they can prove difficult to move. In an urban area there will always be nonconforming or outmoded land uses “interfering” with the logic of bid rent theory. Modern cities such as London are plagued with pedestrianisation, congestion and restrictions on vehicular access and parking and, in addition, the centre has lost much of the accessibility expressed in land value theory. This has led to the existence of positive and non-negative rent gradients, which do not always decline with distance.
On the other hand, this study also involved in the Aesthetic value of the building. Aesthetic value can be defined as theory of the level of beauty of a certain natural resources (Slater, 2006). This term appear when there was some interest among researchers to assess the level of aesthetic quantitatively instead of just qualitatively. It is about the objectivity and universality of judgments of pure beauty. It can also be defined as the individual judgment of the quality of beauty.
The main debate over aesthetic value concerns on social and political matters, in many different points of view. The central question concerns whether there are existing aesthetics expertises that have aesthetic interests and whether their view represents a fair view since, from a sociological perspective, it only just a portion of the whole population. There are some factors that could contribute in viewer view or perception on aesthetic value level. Negative reaction such as disgust shows that sensory detection is linked to body language, facial expressions, and behaviours (Slote, 1971). Aesthetic judgments also linked to emotions that partially embodied in physical reactions. For example, watching a well-design landscape parks may give the viewer a reaction of awe and consequently, physical reactions. In the other hand, aesthetic judgments may be affected by culture or norm of the community. Other factors that could affect the judgments are desirability, economic, political, or moral value.
Besides location, the appropriate design for the intended function of the building is one of the important elements of value. The style and functional utility of a building are necessarily interrelated to create a success. In the valuation process, the aspects that are critical are functionality of the layout, design attractiveness, the appropriateness of the material and its quality and workmanship applied.
In addition, in terms of applying adaptive re-use in the conservation of urban cultural heritage, this research is attached to the study conducted by Yongtanit Pimonsathean which is entitled “Current Issues Concerning Adaptive Re-use in the Conservation of Urban Cultural Heritage”. According to Pimonsathean, there are three alternative approaches that can be considered. First is the top-down approach, where government has the absolute authority to control and guide development in the conservation area. This approach is appropriate when the government has alternative places for relocating existing residents and practical incentives for private investment. The first approach brings rapid physical improvement to the conservation area but it has to accept the probable impact of gentrification.
The second is the bottom-up or grassroots approach. Existing communities and residents are not forced to leave the conservation area since they are seen as an integrative part of the heritage. This approach is applauded by many social workers, NGO’s and existing residents but the issue is how to introduce new activities into the building while the same group of people remains. The socio-economic background, education, experiences and attitudes of the current inhabitants may not fit in with the new economic activities. Capacity building, training and community education may help in this regard but it is a time consuming process. The government may not support this approach because it is a long-term process and there is no proof of success at the beginning. However, if it can be done, the government gains not only economic viability in the conservation area, but also the success of human resource development.
The last approach is working in partnership. Since the top-down approach may create resistance from existing communities, NGO’s and some scholars, and the second approach may not be practicable, working in partnership may be the third alternative in running adaptive re-use programmes. The concept of partnerships is to work in a mutual and supportive manner among the beneficiary groups. The strengths and weaknesses of all stakeholders must be understood in order to make full use of those strengths, and to reduce the inefficiency of the weaknesses. For any adaptive re-use programme, an understanding of the existing capacity of private investors and current residents is needed, and this should be in line with government policy. Frequent public hearings and dialogues may need to be organised, and negotiation and conflict resolution may have to be used in this adaptive re-use game. Thus, the researchers have gathered these different theories and approaches as a basis to further support the different variables used on this study.
Conceptual Framework
Implications of the Adaptive Re-use of Gotioaco building as a Chinese Museum
Gotiaoco Building * Location and Accessibility * Aesthetic Value * Environment * Social Acceptability
Respondents * Barangay Officials * City Engineers * DOT Personnel * Local community
Implications of Adaptive Re-use Projects
Tourism and Heritage Preservation
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
This study aims to evaluate the Implications of the Adaptive Re-use of the Gotiaoco buillding as a Chinese museum as a strategy towards tourism and heritage preservation to the local community of Brgy. Sto. Niño and Brgy. San Roque as perceived by the randomly chosen respondents.
Particularly, this study attempts to answer the following sub-problems: 1. What are the implications of adaptively reusing the Gotiaoco building in terms of: 1.1 Location and Accessibility 1.2 Aesthetic value 1.3 Environment 1.4 Social acceptability 2. Based on the findings of the study, is there a significant difference in the assessment of the study variables (location and accessibility, aesthetic value, education, environment and social acceptability) on the implications of adaptively Re-using the Gotiaoco building as a Chinese museum?
Significance of the Study
The research is functional for the management of The Gotiaoco building and the researchers. The finding specifically on the implications adaptively reusing the Gotiaoco building as a Chinese Museum to the local community of Brgy. Sto. Niño will give the management data concerning its effectiveness towards heritage preservation as basis for future enhancement.
Specifically, this study will benefit the following stakeholders’ in terms of:
The Developer – They are the direct recipients of the study as it will provide the developer a concrete feedback from the representative of the local community with a different perspective in terms of Adaptive Re-use that could be useful on their future projects.
The Community- The local community will be given insights on the possible impacts of adaptive re-use projects and will learn on the options to improve the redevelopment projects of the government, particularly in promoting heritage preservation.
The Tourist– The findings of the study will impart substantial information to the local and foreign tourists about the effective ways on how to preserve heritage through adaptive re-use.
The Readers - They will get insights on the proper and effective ways on heritage preservation and further knowledge about Adaptive re-use.
Hospitality management students- on their field of expertise, these students will gain substantial knowledge on the effects of converting old buildings into museum and furtherly enhance their familiarity with the historic background of the city.
The Researchers - Other researches can also get benefits from this study. The findings that were exposed in this research will serve as basis to accomplish advance thinking skills of the researchers based on the heritage preservation.
The Government - This study will help the government to come up with policies that will support the improvement on the heritage preservation programs and may further enhance the protection of the city’s significant heritage. RESEARCH DESIGN
Research Methodology To accomplish the specific and general objective of the study, the researchers used the descriptive quantitative design using the survey method in conducting the research; the questionnaires made by the researchers were used as the main instrument for gathering the data relevant to the study. The study involved the collection of data from the Local community, Barangay Officials, City Engineer and a DOT Personnel.
Research Environment
Figure 1, illustrates the map of the Gotiaoco building.
This study was conducted at the Gotiaoco building. It was built in 1914, the Neo-Classical building stands along M.C. Briones Ave. behind Cebu City Hall was once the headquarters of one of the most successful agricultural trading firm of Cebu, the Gotiaco Hermanos Inc., which was owned by Chinese trader Don Pedro Gotiaoco (1856-1921), who migrated from the Fukien Province in China.
The building was instrumental to Cebu’s burgeoning trade, as it provided the much needed office and commercial spaces, particularly for the Royal Line Inc., Dollar Shipping Lines, and insurance company Visayan Surety.
Gotiaoco building also housed the Cebu Chamber of Commerce since its existence and became the center and hub of all business activities.
In 2012, the building was turned over to the Cebu City Government after the 99-year foreshore lease agreement granted to the Gotiaoco’s expired. The building has been declared by the Cebu Sangguniang Panglungsod as a local heritage site. Together with the National Museum of the Philippines, the Gotiaoco Building will be the site of the Sugbu Chinese Heritage Museum.
Research Respondents
The research respondents of the study are composed of the Barangay Officials, Local community, City Engineer and a DOT Personnel which were identified using the random sampling. The Gotiaoco building is one of the recognized heritage site of Cebu City which is located within the premise of Brgy. Sto. Niño. The Gotiaoco building is currently proposed to be converted into a Chinese Heritage Museum. There are seven hundred thirty-five (735) respondents that were given the opportunity to answer the questionnaires made by the researchers.
Table 1
Respondents
n=131
Respondents | Frequency | Percentage | Barangay Offcials:-Brgy. Sto. Niño -Brgy. San Roque | 1515 | 12%12% | City Engineer | 1 | 1% | DOT Personnel | 1 | 1% | Locals-Brgy. Sto. Niño-Brgy. San Roque | 99 | 73% | TOTAL | 131 | 100% |
Table 1, illustrates the distribution of the respondents. The researchers conducted the study at Barangay Sto. Niño and Barangay San Roque, Cebu City. There were 2,010 total number of locals from Brgy. Santo Niño and 5,043 total number of locals from Brgy. San Roque: which is N. In order to get the number of respondents: which is the n, the researchers used the Slovin’s formula. As the result, there were 99 number of respondents from Brgy. Sto. Niño and Brgy. San Roque.
Research Instruments
The researchers made use of questionnaires as main instrument in gathering data. It had been carefully formulated by the group so as to gather the information necessary for the study. The questionnaires are divided into three parts.
The first part of the questionnaires was designed to establish the profile of the respondents which may include their name, age, sex and status in order to know their backgrounds. The second part of the questionnaire consisted of questions that were aimed to gather information regarding the implications of adaptively re-using the Gotiaoco building as a strategy towards Tourism and Heritage preservation. The third part of the questionnaire consist of Recommendations for improvement with regards to adequate preservation of the building. The qualitative scale equivalents are as follows:
4 – Strongly Agree (SA) – means that in major cases, adaptively re-using the building has a significant impact.
3 – Agree (A) – means that adaptively re-using the building has an impact
2 – Disagree (D) – means that adaptively re-using the building has no impact
1 – Strongly Disagree (SD) – means that in major cases adaptively re-using the building has no significant impact.
Data Gathering Technique The researchers asked the permission from the Respondents to allow them to conduct their study pertaining on the adequacy of adaptively re-using the Gotiaoco building as a museum as a strategy in preserving heritage. In order to confirm the approval of the respondents, a letter of request will be submitted, Upon approval, the questionnaires will be given by the researchers to the respondents and were disseminated during the scheduled survey period. A thorough interview (face-to-face) shall be conducted by the proponents to qualify the answer from the researcher-made questionnaire. This triangulation is very helpful to verify and authenticate the survey result.
After the survey the researchers collected the given questionnaires. As expected the researchers would gather the seven hundred thirty five (735) answered questionnaires.
Statistical Treatment The researchers collected and tabulated the results of the survey. The data used in the study were taken from seven hundred thirty five (735) respondents.
In solving the percentage shown in the tables, the following was used:
P = f/n x 100%
Where:
P = Percentage
F = Frequency
N = Number of Respondents
100 = Constant
The weighted mean was computed with the formula
WM =
Where:
WM = weighted mean “the sum of” f = Frequency of scale of number of respondents N = total of respondents
In order to arrive at the definite interpretation of each scale, the researchers assigned a hypothetical range for each scale, and interval was used. In getting the class interval the lowest scale was deducted from the highest scale and the result was divided by the number of scales where: Ci = class interval Ci = (4-1) / 4
Ci = 0.75
Below is the following hypothetical range with its corresponding interpretation used by the researchers: HypotheticalRange Interpretation 3.25 – 4.00 Strongly Agree
2.50 - 3.24 Agree
1.75 - 2.49 Disagree
1.00 - 1.74 Strongly Disagree
Definition of terms
To understand the terms used in this manuscript, these terms are operationally used as follows:
Accessibility- also refers to the quality of being available when needed.
Adaptive Re-use-refers to the process of reusing an old site or building for a purpose other than which it was built or designed for.
Adequacy- the state or quality of being adequate.
Architect- a person who designs buildings and in many cases also supervises their construction.
Cultural Promotion- to further or encourage the progress or existence of
Barangay Officials- a person holding public office or having official duties, especially as a representative of an organization or government department.
Engineer- a person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or public works.
Heritage preservation-Its mission is to preserve the nation’s heritage for future generations through innovative leadership, education, and programs.
Physical Condition- the condition or state of the building or building functions.
Structure- The arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of the building. REFERENCE
Adaptive Reuse of Industrial Building in Toronto,Ontario (Evaluating Critiria for Determining Building Selection), Corey Andrew Wilson, https://goo.gl/oZKBW7. Retrived: January 2015
Adaptive reuse as a strategy towards conservation of cultural heritage : A literature Review,BPlevoets and K Van Cleempoel, http://goo.gl/zRpweW, Retrieved: March 2015
Adaptive Reuse as a strategy towards Conservation of Cultural Heritage: A survye of 19th and 20th century theories (Phl University College and Hasselt University),BiePlevoets and Keonrad Van Cleempoel, https://goo.gl/Se65ec ,Retrieved: March 2015
Assesment of Adaptive Reuse of Heritage shop Houses for sleep Lodging in Malaysia: Fulfilment of Conservation Guidelines, M.A OthumanMydin,N.AKeling,N. Md. Sani and N.F Abas, http://goo.gl/74xOmm. Retrieved : March 2015
Bullen, P., & Love, P. (2011). A new future for the past: a model for adaptive reuse decision-making. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 1(1), 32-44.
Bullen, P., & Love, P. (2011). Factors influencing the adaptive re-use of buildings. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 9(1), 32-46.
Bullen, P. A., & Love, P. E. (2009). Residential regeneration and adaptive reuse: learning from the experiences of Los Angeles. Structural Survey, 27(5), 351-360.
Craig A. Langston. "The sustainability implications of building adaptive reuse" Paper presented at the CRIOCM 2008 international research symposium on advancement of construction management and real estate. Beijing, China. Nov. 2008.
Deconstruction + Reuse = N¯ Waste, Jose Mendoza Milara, March, Mar’a L—pez de Asia’n, DA, Gabriel Gomez Azpeitia, DA. http://goo.gl/JQpXUd Retrieved: March 2015
GotiaocoBldg: Future home of the Chinese Heritage Museum (The Freeman), Maria Eleanor E Valeros, http://goo.gl/AvhqEd Updated: May 2015, Retrieved: June 2015
Hassan, A. S., Badarulzaman, N., Ahmad, A. G., Mohamed, B., &Wöber, K. W. (2002). Adaptive re-use of old buildings for heritage hotels: prospects and challenges in the Malaysian tourism industry. In City tourism 2002: Proceedings of European Cities Tourism's International Conference in Vienna, Austria, 2002. (pp. 112-122). Springer-Verlag Wien.
Improving the Implementation of Adaptive reuse Strategies for historic building ,SheilaConejos,Craig Langston, and Jim Smith,http://goo.gl/Mio8db ,Retrieved: June 2015.
Industrial Heritage in Albania and the Opportunities for Regeneration and Adaptive Re-use, Florian Nepravishta. http://goo.gl/2ncsAv Retrieved: March 2015
Kalman, H. (2002, September). Adaptive Re-use: Learning from Vancouver. In Proceeding on The Conservation of Urban Heritage: Macao Vision Conference, International Conference (Vol. 10, p. 12).
Kurul, E. (2007). A qualitative approach to exploring adaptive re-use processes. Facilities, 25(13/14), 554-570.
Langston, C. A. (2008). The sustainability implications of building adaptive reuse. Paper presented at the CRIOCM 2008 international research symposium on advancement of construction management and real estate, Beijing, China.
Langston, C., &Shen, L. Y. (2007). Application of the adaptive reuse potential model in Hong Kong: A case study of LuiSeng Chun. International journal of strategic property management, 11(4), 193-207.
Peter A. Bullen, Peter E.D. Love, (2011) "Adaptive reuse of heritage buildings", Structural Survey, Vol. 29 Iss: 5, pp.411 – 421.
Pimonsathean, Y. (2002). Current issues concerning adaptive re-use in the conservation of urban cultural heritage. RC: Revista de Cultura= Review of Culture, 4, 45-51.
Pimonsathean, Y. (2002). Current issues concerning adaptive re-use in the conservation of urban cultural heritage. Our Heritage, The Development & Conservation of Old Commercial Quarter in Phuket Town, Commemoration of the 5th Old Phuket Town Festival, Phuket Municipality, Old Phuket.
Preserving our Heritage,Improving our Environment ,Michel Chapuis, (Directorate –General for Research Environment) ,http://goo.gl/tQLgqh, Retrieved: January 2015
Reuse of Industrial Building in Heritage-Led RegenarationProject ,Ragnhild Menes Arnesen,http://goo.gl/SsGWmGRetrieved: March 2015
Re-use of historical buildings in the holy city of Makkah - Case study selection guide lines, Mohammad F Mohammad. http://goo.gl/JQpXUdRetrieved: March 2015
The Adaptive reuse of Historic Industrial Building: Regulation Barriers,Best Practices and Case study, Sophie Francesca Cantell, http://goo.gl/vJvupE ,Retrieved: February 2015
Yung, E. H., & Chan, E. H. (2012). Implementation challenges to the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings: Towards the goals of sustainable, low carbon cities. Habitat International, 36(3), 352-361.
Yıldırım, M., &Turan, G. (2012). Sustainable development in historic areas: Adaptive re-use challenges in traditional houses in Sanliurfa, Turkey. Habitat International, 36(4), 493-503.
YU, Y., & LI, J. (2010). ISSUES IN THE RE-USE OF URBAN INDUSTRIAL HERITAGES. City Planning Review, 9, 57-60.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Greetings!
We are the fourth-year Hospitality Management students from the University of San Jose- Recolletos. As a compliance for our requirements, we are conducting a study entitled “The Implications of the Adaptive Re-use of Gotiaoco Building as a Chinese Museum for Tourism and Heritage Preservation”. In line with this, we would like to conduct a survey, in connection to the study we have conducted. Your answer are highly appreciated and will be kept confidential and to be used for educational purposes only.
We are hoping for your kind consideration and participation. Thank you very much. Adelante!
Respectfully yours,
The Researchers:
Rema Lourdes R. Aballe Arnie Brian M. Delator Mary Ann A. Edem
Harold Vincent B. Flores Jade E. Illut
QUESTIONNAIRE I. Demographic Data
Instruction: Please supply the information asked for.
Name: __________________________ Age: ___ Sex:___ Civil Status:_________
Respondent Identity: (Please put a check mark on the option that represents your identity and write your position or barangay where you are currently residing)
___ Brgy. Official Position: ___________________
___ Local Government Unit Official Position: ___________________
___ Local Resident Barangay: __________________ II. Questions
Instruction: Read each statement carefully and indicate your response that appropriately corresponds to the following statement. Please put a check () on the space before the number that represents your response to each item.
The numeric scales with the qualitative equivalents are as follows:
4 – Strongly Agree (SA), 3 – Agree (A), 2 – Disagree (D),1 – Strongly Disagree (SD)
1. What are the implications of adaptively Re-using the Gotiaoco building in terms of: 1.1 Location and Accessibility
The building’s location is accessible to different types of private and public transportation __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __2 Disagree __1 Strongly Disagree
The building’s location is not an interruption to the public road
__ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
The building provides a wide area for parking spaces __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agre __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
The building is a good site for economic and cultural purposes __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __1Strongly Disagree
1.2 Aesthetic value
The building serves as an attraction to the community __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
The architectural compositions of the building adds beauty to the site
__ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree 1.3 Environmental
Limits architectural construction waste within the scope of the site __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
Manages garbage disposal and proper sewage system
__ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
Encourages community awareness on waste disposal and segregation
__ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
Implements environmental program to the community __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
1.4 Social Acceptability
There is a community participation in the planning of the project __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
Supports promotion of the local products __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
Promotes tourism to the community __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
Enhances the living condition of the community __ 4 Strongly Agree __ 3 Agree __ 2 Disagree __ 1 Strongly Disagree
