Abstract
The article deals with the systematization of existing restoration and reconstructive methods in a hierarchical order, depending on the possibility of introducing a new one into the historically established – from, the gentlest, restoration to the most active reconstructive. Their classification is proposed: according to the activity of the intervention – into preserving, restoring, renewing, transforming; to carry out qualitative changes at different system levels – urban planning, volumetric and functional. Preserving and restoring methods are classified as restoration, and renewing and transforming methods are classified as reconstructive. Their correspondence is shown depending on their activity in bringing new into the historical formed and their use for various system levels in the implementation of the complex process of restoration-reconstructive transformations. A brief explanation of each method is provided. It has been determined that the use of the restoration or reconstructive methods depends on the qualitative indicator of the existing state of the selected site, namely, its degree of value (historical-architectural value) and the degree of destruction (integrity). It is recommended to use restoration methods (preserving and restoring) for sites of the I and II degrees of value and integrity, and reconstructive methods (renewing and transforming) for sites of the III and IV degrees of value and integrity. It was indicated that the restoration methods correspond to the I and II degrees of restoration-reconstructive transformations, and the reconstructive methods correspond to the III and IV degrees of the RRT. For the effectiveness of the complex process of restoration-reconstruction transformations in any historical urban environment, it is recommended to use not individual methods, but their combinations.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call