Improving Condition of Prefab Multifamily Housing Stock: User Perspective Assessed via Direct Survey

3rd World Multidisciplinary Civil Engineering, Architecture, Urban Planning Symposium

土木建筑工程;文学

Ostanska, Anna^1

Politechnika Lubelska, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Nadbystrzycka 40, Lublin, Poland^1

关键词: Energy-saving measures;    Facility managers;    Heating energy;    Multi-family housings;    Opinion surveys;    Social integrations;    User perspectives;    Viable solutions;   

Others  :  https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/471/7/072037/pdf
DOI  :  10.1088/1757-899X/471/7/072037

学科分类：土木及结构工程学

来源: IOP

【 摘 要 】

Multifamily buildings of the mass prefabrication era (1960-1990) have a considerable share in the Polish housing stock. These assets, though still valued due to good location and shortage of other affordable flats, tend to become obsolete. So far, efforts to maintain their value were limited to reducing their heating energy demand by insulations. To go beyond obvious repairs and investment measures enforced by more strict regulations on energy demand, and to prevent depopulation, the facility managers need to think ahead and prepare for improvements that would satisfy the users. To find out what the users think on possible improvements, the author decided to undertake regular opinion surveys among the inhabitants of selected housing estates. The surveys are based on direct interviews. The paper presents findings of the survey conducted in a particular estate in Lublin, south-eastern Poland. The most frequently mentioned issue was lacking of parking spaces. Although the inhabitants seem to long for social integration and would have equipped the spaces between buildings with some infrastructure to facilitate outdoor social life, they are reluctant to the idea of hands-on participation in improvement works. As for the buildings, some functions designed before 1990 (like common laundries) are not used any more, which opens discussion on how to use spare areas. Building accessibility is considered a problem: buildings of 5 storeys have no lifts, and taller buildings are equipped with lifts accessible only form the ground floor level (which means climbing one flight of stairs). Larger balconies would be welcome. However, the inhabitants are generally not willing to pay more for the improvements, though they would accept construction of an extra floor on top of their blocks if the sales of new flats would pay for new facilities. Similarly, further measures to reduce environmental impact of the buildings would be welcome if the savings on energy consumption could be used to refund their spending; urgency of energy-saving measures is considered low as buildings were recently insulated. The users are not satisfied with the size of flats (too small) and quality of finishing. Many decide to improve flats on their own (individual owners). However, in spite of shortcomings of their dwellings, the majority of respondents declare they would rather stay than move to other housing estates - unless they could afford a detached house. The results of the survey provide a clear guideline for the facility managers: the inhabitants, if approached directly, are willing to discuss improvements. Only cooperation between the facility managers and the users is likely to provide viable solutions to maintain the estate's value. The proposed questionnaire can be a practical tool in defining products of improvement projects.