Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Addition Strategies in Industrial Heritage Reuse: Selected European Cases

Öz

This study comparatively examines contemporary addition strategies employed in the adaptive reuse of industrial heritage buildings. The transformation of obsolete industrial structures into cultural, public, and educational uses has emerged as an important design approach in relation to sustainable conservation and urban regeneration. However, the ways in which contemporary architectural interventions establish relationships with existing historic fabric remain an important area of discussion within these transformation processes. The research adopts a qualitative multiple-case study design focusing on CaixaForum Madrid, Fondazione Prada, and the Zollverein School of Management and Design. Data were collected through document analysis of architectural drawings, project reports, visual materials, and academic sources. The cases were examined through a criterion-based comparative analysis using four principal analytical dimensions: intervention strategy, spatial organization, structural integration, and spatial adaptation to new use. Qualitative coding and cross-case synthesis were employed to enable systematic comparison across the cases. The comparative synthesis identified three distinct analytical models: transformative integrated addition, hybrid multiple addition, and independent complementary addition. These models were not predefined categories used for case selection, but were derived from recurring and divergent patterns identified through the comparative qualitative analysis. CaixaForum Madrid is characterized by substantial physical and spatial transformation of the existing structure; Fondazione Prada by the coexistence of conservation, adaptive reuse, contemporary additions, and new construction within a multilayered campus organization; and the Zollverein School by structural autonomy and contextual relationships established without direct physical attachment to the existing historic buildings. The findings indicate that these models represent different context-dependent relationships between historic fabric and contemporary intervention rather than hierarchical levels of intervention or performance. Accordingly, the study proposes a comparative analytical framework for examining contemporary addition strategies in industrial heritage adaptive reuse. Rather than identifying a universally applicable model, the framework provides a basis for interpreting how intervention strategy, spatial organization, structural relationships, and the requirements of new uses interact under different heritage and contextual conditions. Consequently, contemporary additions can be understood not merely as means of creating additional physical space, but as architectural interventions that establish new spatial, structural, functional, and contextual relationships between industrial heritage and contemporary use.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Industrial heritage
• Adaptive reuse
• Contemporary additions
• Architectural conservation
• Spatial transformation

Etik Beyan

Ethics committee approval was not required for this study because it did not involve human participants or animals.

Kaynakça

1. Arquitectura Viva. (2026). CaixaForum Building, Madrid (project stage). https://arquitecturaviva.com/works/edificio-caixaforum-madrid-2
2. Baan, I. (2010). Zollverein School of Management and Design / SANAA. https://www.archdaily.com/54212/zollverein-school-of-management-and-design-sanaa
3. Basulto, D. (2010). Zollverein School of Management and Design / SANAA. ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/54212/ zollverein-school-of-management-and-design-sanaa
4. Berganski. (2026). Zollverein School of Management and Design. Bollinger + Grohmann. https://www.bollinger-grohmann.com/en.projects.zollverein-school-of-management-and-design.html
5. Blanc, P. (2008). Vertical Garden Patrick Blanc: CaixaForum Madrid. https://www.verticalgardenpatrickblanc.com/ realisations/madrid/caixa-forum-madrid
6. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
7. Brand, S. (1994). How buildings learn: What happens after they’re built. Viking.
8. Brooker, G., & Stone, S. (2004). Re-readings: Interior architecture and the design principles of remodelling existing buildings. RIBA Enterprises.

9. Bullen, P. A., & Love, P. E. D. (2011). Adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. Structural Survey, 29(5), 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1108/02630801111182439
10. Cantell, S. F. (2005). The adaptive reuse of historic industrial buildings: Regulation barriers, best practices and case studies (Master’s thesis). Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
11. Choay, F. (2001). The invention of the historic monument (L. M. O’Connell, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1992).
12. Douglas, J. (2006). Building adaptation (2nd ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann.
13. Edensor, T. (2005). Industrial ruins: Space, aesthetics and materiality. Berg.
14. Frampton, K. (1983). Towards a critical regionalism: Six points for an architecture of resistance. In H. Foster (Ed.), The anti-aesthetic: Essays on postmodern culture (pp. 16–30). Bay Press.
15. Herzog & de Meuron. (2026). 201 CaixaForum Madrid. https://www.herzogdemeuron.com/projects/201-caixaforum-madrid/
16. ICOMOS. (1964). International charter for the conservation and restoration of monuments and sites (The Venice Charter). International Council on Monuments and Sites. ICOMOS – Venice Charter
17. ICOMOS. (1994). The Nara document on authenticity. International Council on Monuments and Sites.
18. ICOMOS & TICCIH. (2011). Joint ICOMOS–TICCIH principles for the conservation of industrial heritage sites, structures, areas and landscapes (The Dublin Principles). International Council on Monuments and Sites & The International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage.
19. Jodidio, P. (2010). Architecture now! Museums. Taschen.
20. Jones, P., & Evans, J. (2013). Urban regeneration in the UK: Boom, bust and recovery (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
21. OMA. (2026). Fondazione Prada. https://www.oma.com/projects/fondazione-prada
22. Pallasmaa, J. (2005). The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses (2nd ed.). Wiley-Academy.
23. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
24. Plevoets, B., & Van Cleempoel, K. (2019). Adaptive reuse of the built heritage: Concepts and cases of an emerging discipline. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315161440
25. Riegl, A. (1903). The modern cult of monuments: Its essence and its development (K. W. Forster & D. Ghirardo, Trans.). Oppositions, 25, 21–51.
26. Stone, S. (2019). Undoing buildings: Adaptive reuse and cultural memory. Routledge.
27. The Architecture of the 20th Century. (2018). Overview / Photos and Plans. https://architecture-history.org/architects/architects/KOOLHAAS/OBJECTS/20082018,%20Fondazione%20Prada,%20Milan,%20ITALY.html
28. TICCIH. (2003). The Nizhny Tagil charter for the industrial heritage. The International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage. TICCIH – Nizhny Tagil Charter
29. UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape, including a glossary of definitions. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. UNESCO – Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape
30. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage Publications.