Fred Scott’s On Altering Architecture opens with a clarifying statement on the built environment: ‘All buildings […] have three possible fates, namely to remain unchanged, to be altered, or to be demolished.’ In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, of the three ‘fates’ Scott refers to, demolition and remaining unchanged were the preferred mechanisms for dealing with existing buildings. Demolition is sometimes unavoidable: a building might be unsafe, beyond repair, or unable to reasonably keep pace with contemporary requirements. However, in the twenty-first century, and due to the increasing scrutiny on the validity of new buildings in the climate crisis, demolition should not be a default. To ‘remain unchanged’ – or what might commonly be thought of as ‘preservation’ – presented itself as an antidote. However, as Bie Plevoets and Keonraad Van Cleempoel explain in their theoretical introduction to Adaptive Use of the Built Heritage: ‘The widening scope of heritage conservation makes it impossible to [preserve] all heritage aspects in a strictly restorative manner.’ Besides, preservation is not necessarily the right answer if a building has already become stranded, inefficient, or its old purpose is no longer viable.

Strict preservation can risk freezing a building in the past and alienating it from contemporary and future users, while outright demolition risks losing a building altogether. In the space between these two poles, Scott’s third option of ‘alteration’ – of adaptive re-use – emerges. Adaptive re-use is the practice of modifying existing buildings to fulfil a function that is different from that originally intended, ideally in ways that acknowledge the history of a structure and its surroundings while bringing about necessary environmental and structural updates. A design approach that has grown in momentum over the past few decades, adaptive re-use seeks to extend a building’s lifespan and challenges architects to think creatively about how existing and future designs can interact.

Case Study: The Murray, Hong Kong

Foster + Partners’ reimagining of the Murray Building in Hong Kong, which began in 2013 and completed in 2018, is the story of a vacated office building finding new purpose as a leading hotel, now known simply as The Murray. From the onset, the Foster + Partners design team, alongside the client, wanted to celebrate the original, protected structure, while also creating a bespoke, twenty-first-century experience within. How could such a building change use while retaining its character and ethos? And how could these design decisions be traced and justified? The resulting project – like the Sackler Galleries over 25 years earlier – is a sensitive balancing of old and new, a practice of innovation and retention. In a departure from those early projects of building with history, however, The Murray is also a story of transformation. 

In 1967, the British government commissioned city planner Ron Phillips to design a tower block for the Hong Kong Public Works Department. This was an era when Hong Kong was rapidly expanding and, in response, at the time of opening the twenty-seven-storey tower block was the tallest in the city and an exemplar of a Modern style of office design.

In the 1960s and 70s, car use had risen dramatically to become the leading mode of transportation in Hong Kong (the government had stopped issuing rickshaw licences in 1968). As an extension of this transportation trend, the Murray Building prioritised motor access with a car ramp. This ramp reflected a worldwide trend in bureaucratic architecture: the more senior an official, the closer their car was parked to their workstation and the shorter their walk.

Alongside its urban situation, the Murray Building’s structure was formed in direct response to the climate of Hong Kong. Phillips designed fin walls that were placed at an angle of 45 degrees around the building, with windows recessed within the facade. Combining both structural and environmental engineering principles, Phillips’ design provided shading from the harsh tropical sunlight and, in turn, reduced the operational costs of cooling the building.

Adaptive re-use as reinterpretation of the plan

Any change in a building’s use requires a reconsideration of spatial layout – which must address changes in atmosphere and updates to environmental and technological services. To achieve an integrated outcome, all associated specialists must work closely throughout the design process. The layout of each hotel room in The Murray, for example, went through numerous iterations and tests. After several mock-ups and studies, the design team realised that a reorientation of the plan around the fins, and not the central core, was a way to unlock the Murray Building’s potential as a hotel.

Side-by-side comparisons are evidence of a much deeper process of understanding and working with the constraints and possibilities of a building. 

By allowing the windows to lead the design, rather than inconvenience it, the hotel rooms celebrated the retained structure and were more generously spaced than a conventional room layout. The windows were also enlarged to enhance The Murray’s views of Hong Kong – a subtle shift in windowsill height transformed the overall experience of each hotel room. As Lawrence Wong, an architect in Foster + Partners’ Hong Kong studio, reflects: ‘This close engagement with the existing structure resulted in a unique spatial layout that could only have emerged from adaptive re-use.’

Beyond the immediate built envelope of Phillips’ design, the adaptive re-use of this former office building also engaged with Hong Kong at an urban scale. Through The Murray’s arches, the formerly inaccessible basement and street levels were opened to pedestrians, and pathways were introduced to connect the site with the Botanic Gardens and tram station a few hundred metres away. The design team also protected the ‘Old and Valuable’ cherry tree at the front of the site to make it a centrepiece to the drop-off experience of the hotel. The tree was carefully released from its concrete confines – with the help of landscape architects – and continues to blossom each spring. As Stefano Cesario, Partner and Architect adds: ‘We love to get the best out of what is already there.’

The project’s transformation is expressed through ‘before and after’ photography. These are useful insofar as they demonstrate how a design has both sustained and changed – but such images alone can make adaptation seem deceptively straightforward. The practice of adaptive re-use happens between these moments; side-by-side comparisons are evidence of a much deeper process of understanding and working simultaneously with the constraints and possibilities of a building. And, as a project like The Murray demonstrates, a reconsideration of the building’s relationship with itself must also work alongside a reconsideration of the building’s relationship with its place. The motions between ‘before and after’, ‘old and new,’ ‘inside and outside’ are highly pressurised in adaptive re-use practice, and always implicit in a building, even as a project is completed.

Full article: The Science and Art of Adaptive Re-Use