Asia Conserved (for Web)

Spanning diverse cultures and building traditions, Asia Conserved: Lessons Learned from the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation (2000-2004) presents a panoramic survey of the wealth of architectural heritage in the region and provides a blueprint for concerted action on the part of private citizens and governments alike in its conservation.

Presented in case study format, this book showcases best conservation practices achieved by winning projects in the first five years of the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awards programme. The projects encompass a range of building typologies, from fortified palaces to vernacular residences, ornate houses of worship to utilitarian factories, elegant engineering works to urban districts. From the case studies are derived important lessons that show how strong public-private partnerships and innovative grassroots initiatives can create a powerful platform for the protection of the historic built environment in such diverse places as the ancient cities of Central Asia, the cultural landscapes and historic precincts of South Asia, the port settlements of South-East Asia and the urban centres of East Asia. Through colour photographs, architectural illustrations and detailed narratives, profiles of the Award-winning projects guide the reader in the approaches taken to resolve challenging technical, economic, social and political issues. Technical briefs, contributed by the conservators themselves, provide in-depth solutions to critical conservation problems. Bridging theory and practice, essays authored by the distinguished jury members provide a cross-cutting analysis of the body of conservation knowledge emerging from the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awards programme. Aimed at a broad audience of conservation architects, heritage professionals, decision-makers, heritage homeowners, scholars, students and the concerned general public, the publication will serve as an invaluable reference for safeguarding the monumental and vernacular heritage of the Asia-Pacific region and contributing to its sustainable future.

Lessons Learned fromthe U

NESCO

Asia-Pacific H

eritage Aw

ardsfor Culture H

eritage Conservation (2000-2004)

Lessons Learned fromthe UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awardsfor Culture Heritage Conservation (2000-2004)

Supported by the Lord Wilson Heritage Trust

Back cover images from top to bottom:St. Ascension Cathedral, Kazakhstan

Dorje Chenmo Temple, IndiaGongziting, China

Asia ConservedLessons Learned from the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awardsfor Culture Heritage Conservation (2000-2004)

Supported by the Lord Wilson Heritage Trust

Library CatalogueISBN 92-9223-117-0

The publication of this volume was supported by Lord Wilson Heritage TrustUNESCO BeijingUNESCO IslamabadUNESCO JakartaUNESCO Phnom Penh

Published in August 2007 byUNESCO Bangkok920 Sukhumvit RoadBangkok 10110ThailandTel: (66) 2 391 0577 x509Fax: (66) 2 391 0866Email: [email protected]/culture

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be copied, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or otherwise, except brief extracts for the purpose of review, and no part of this publication, including photographs and drawings, may be sold without the written permission of the publisher.

The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or boundaries.

The views expressed by the authors, the selection of facts presented and the opinions stated with regard to the facts are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of UNESCO.

UNESCO 2007

Printed by Clung Wicha Press Co., Ltd.Email: [email protected]

Editor-in-ChiefRichard A. Engelhardt

EditorMontira Horayangura Unakul

Assistant EditorErnesto Endrina

Editorial CoordinatorCaroline Swartling

Copy EditorsKim ChaiEllie Meleisea

Art DirectorWee Viraporn

LayoutSupamas AdulpatChanya AnupasanantChatnarong JingsuphatadaTaweesak PathungwongParisa RatanaprichavejRavin Vichien

IllustratorsFanny AngSorasith BootsingkhonKachain ChanjaroenErnesto EndrinaSiyanee HirunsaleeThananart Kornmaneeroj Chonthicha ThamasithAttakit UthaikarnAkekaraj WerunitPongsakorn Yimsawat

ContributorsAga Khan Cultural Service Pakistan Fanny AngSusan BalderstoneSalman BegWilliam ChapmanChiba UniversityParomita DesarkarSanjay DharLynne DiStefano Sher GhaziGodden Mackay LoganHoi An Centre for Monuments Management and PreservationMinakshi JainSheila KamunyoriLee Ho YinMandy LeeSpencer LeineweberBudi LimLaurence LohLin Lee Loh-LimDavid P. Y. Lung Nimish PatelGurmeet RaiRuan YisanPat SeeumpornrojShowa Womens UniversityTanner & AssociatesEric TilburyNatalia TurekulovaTimur TurekulovJohannes WidodoDebbie Wong

As the only UN agency with a mandate in the culture sector, UNESCO is charged with promoting the conservation of both tangible and intangible cultural heritage, in particular, the built environment and associated social practices. Cultural heritage constitutes a signifi cant aspect of our resource endowment and its stewardship has become increasingly critical as sustainable development advances to the forefront of political concerns.

A broader understanding of cultural heritage has developed in the past decade, with heightened recognition for the importance of cultural diversity. Accordingly, the representation of diverse interests has become critical for the sustainability of any conservation effort. In addition to the public sector, the private sector, including local residents, commercial establishments, corporations, traditional caretakers and homeowners, has emerged as an important stakeholder in the conservation and utilization of cultural heritage in all its diverse manifestations.

In response to this paradigm shift, UNESCO has set standards and developed strategies for the preservation of cultural heritage through legal frameworks, including the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage and the 2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which are used in conjunction with a growing array of professional guidelines and charters in the conservation fi eld.

The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation programme was founded in 2000 to recognize outstanding conservation efforts that have been undertaken through public-private initiatives in the region. Pathbreaking in their scope and rigour, the Award-winning projects have not only consolidated signifi cant structures, but have also raised awareness of the value of local building traditions and the viability of giving a range of types of historic structures a renewed lease on life through restoration and creative adaptive reuse. The projects are a testament to concerted community efforts: they have galvanized both local and professional communities alike, resuscitating lost craft guilds, reviving traditional social practices and reinvigorating neighbourhoods.

As a compilation of lessons learned from the programme, this publication investigates both the technical aspects and the social process of conservation, refl ecting on successes and challenges encountered. Representing a range of cultural and socio-economic contexts, the projects provide worthy models for emulation that operate within the UNESCO framework of linking cultural heritage conservation to local development, which emphasizes sustainability through grass-roots capacity-building. It is hoped that the publication of these best practices will be a positive step towards creating a self-educating community of conservation specialists and advocates in the Asia-Pacifi c region.

Foreword

Sheldon ShaefferDirector UNESCO Asia and Pacifi c Regional Bureau for Education

Foreword

Part I First Principles 1

Part II UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards Criteria Essays

Conveying the Spirit of Place 9

Determining Appropriate Use 13

Interpreting the Signifi cance of Heritage Sites 21

Understanding Technical Issues of Conservation 28

Using Appropriate Techniques and Materials 34

Adding New Elements 40

Contributing to the Communitys 46Cultural Continuum

Infl uencing Conservation Practice and Policy 51

Ensuring Ongoing Viability 59

Part III Five Years of the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards: Case Studies of Best Conservation Practice

2000 UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Award Winners

Most Excellent Project Cheong Fatt Tze Mansion, Malaysia 69

Excellent Project Chanwar Palkhiwalon-ki-Haveli, India 77 Hoi An Town Preservation Cooperation Project, 83 Viet Nam

Outstanding Project Hotel de lOrient, India 89 Hung Shing Old Temple, Hong Kong SAR, China 93 Ohel Leah Synagogue, Hong Kong SAR, China 97 Residence of Dr Zhang Yunpen, China 103 St. Patricks College, Australia 107

Honourable Mention Harischandra Building in Maha Vihara Monastery, 111 Sri Lanka Mawsons Huts Historic Site, 115 Australian Antarctic Territory Residence of Charles Prosper Wolff Schoemaker, 119 Indonesia Rumah Penghulu, Malaysia 123


Award of Excellence National Archives Building, Indonesia 129

Award of Distinction Bushells Tea Warehouse, Australia 135 Krishan Temple, India 141

Award of Merit DBS House, India 147 King Law Ka Shuk Temple, Hong Kong SAR, China 151 Tea Factory Hotel, Sri Lanka 155 Xijin Ferry Project, China 159 Zhongshan Road, China 163

Honourable Mention Jin Lan Tea House, China 167 University of Mumbai Library Building, India 171 Nielson Tower, Philippines 175 St. Josephs Seminary Church, Macao SAR, China 179 Thian Hock Keng Temple, Singapore 183

Table of Contents


Award of Excellence Ahhichatragarh Fort, India 189

Award of Distinction Australian Hall, Australia 199 Yarikutz, Rupikutz, Kuyokutz, Mamorukutz 205 Mosques, Pakistan

Award of Merit Cheng Hoon Teng Main Temple, Malaysia 211 Convent of the Holy Infant Jesus (CHIJMES), 217 Singapore Polsheer House, Iran 221 Sydney Conservatorium of Music, Australia 225 Wat Sratong, Thailand 229

Honourable Mention No. 125 Huajue Alley, China 233 Broken Hill Heritage and Cultural Tourism 237 Programme, Australia Centre for Khmer Studies, Cambodia 241 Jaisalmer Streetscape Revitalization Project 247 (Phase I), India Kow Plains Homestead, Australia 251


Award of Excellence Guangyu Ancestral Hall, China 257

Award of Distinction Astana of Syed Mir Muhammad, Pakistan 265 Water Towns of the Yangtze River, China 273

Award of Merit Cangqiao Historical Street, China 281 The Medina Grand Adelaide Treasury, Australia 285 The Virtuous Bridge, Indonesia 289

Honourable Mention Catholic Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, 293 Hong Kong SAR, China Dalongdong Baoan Temple, China 299 Gota de Leche, Philippines 303


Award of Excellence Baltit Fort, Pakistan 309

Award of Distinction Church of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, Australia 317 Lakhpat Gurudwara, India 323 St. Ascension Cathedral, Kazakhstan 331

Award of Merit Dadabhai Naoroji Road Streetscape, India 339 Dorje Chenmo Temple, India 343 Phra Racha Wang Derm Palace, Thailand 349 St. Thomas Cathedral, India 355 Vietnamese Traditional Folk Houses, Viet Nam 359

Honourable Mention Elphinstone College, India 365 Female Orphan School, Australia 369 Gongziting, China 373 Namuna Ghar, Nepal 377 Suzhou River Warehouse, China 381 Tak Seng On Pawnshop, Macao SAR, China 385 Zargar-e-Yazdi House, Iran 389 Zhangzhou City Historic Streets, China 393

Part IV Conclusion: Sources of Knowledge 397 and Sources of Continuity

Part V Regional Map of Winning Projects 398

Part VI Regional Directory 400 Heritage Architects/Designers Contractors

Part VII Glossary 412

Part VIII International and Regional Charters 418

Part IX Profi les of Jury Members 420 (2000-2006)

Part X Award Regulations 425

Index 429

Photographic and Illustration Credits 438

References 439

1UNESCO leads efforts worldwide to safeguard the continuity of diverse cultural values represented in both tangible and intangible heritage. The 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (popularly known as the World Heritage Convention) forms the framework for international action in the conservation of immovable tangible cultural heritage, which encompasses built structures, sites and landscapes. The principles enshrined in the Convention and its Operational Guidelines extend not only to properties inscribed on the World Heritage List, but also, by example, to other heritage sites.

The World Heritage Convention calls on each State Party to ensure effective measures for the protection, conservation and presentation of the cultural and natural heritage situated on its territory, especially in the context of growing pressures stemming from both natural and human causes. In particular, the Convention encourages States Parties to adopt a general policy which aims to give the cultural and natural heritage a function in the life of the community, thus linking heritage conservation to living traditions and sustainable development.

UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation

Throughout the Asia-Pacifi c region, the role of private individuals and institutions in safeguarding built heritage is paramount, as buildings and sites are largely in private or civic ownership. The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation programme, launched in the year 2000, is a fl agship strategy to recognize private sector achievements and public-private initiatives in successfully restoring structures of heritage value.

The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards programme was established as a means of identifying and showcasing the most successful best practices in built heritage conservation and adaptive reuse in the region. Through the programme, UNESCO encourages policies and practices which result in the preservation of the unique heritage values and historic signifi cance of our communities, thereby paving the way for future projects both within the same communities and beyond.

Since its establishment, the programme has brought to public attention a noteworthy body of work in the fi eld of heritage conservation. In the fi rst fi ve cycles from 2000-2004, 181 entries were received from 23 countries, of which 64 projects were recognized with UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards. Winners represent a broad spectrum of the regions built heritage, serving as a testament to how buildings can be successfully preserved in their traditional settings and also to how conservation principles can be integrated into various local development strategies. The range of religious architecture that has been awarded is extensive, encompassing Chinese ancestral temples, Buddhist monasteries, Hindu shrines, Sikh gurudwaras, Muslim mosques, Christian churches and Jewish synagogues. These buildings collectively bear testament to the diverse living traditions of the region. Secular buildings receiving awards include monumental structures such as forts and palaces; non-monumental buildings such as houses, factories, schools, shops and other commercial buildings; and public infrastructure such as bridges. Awards have also gone to large-scale projects involving the protection and rehabilitation of gardens, streetscapes, canal and waterfront districts, in situ archaeological sites and historic urban quarters.

First Principles for Conserving Built Heritage Best Practices from the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation (2000-2004)

First Principles

2UNESCO Asia-Paci c Heritage Awards

Since the award-winning projects are mostly drawn from the private realm, they include a representative slice of the vernacular built legacy of the Asia-Pacifi c region. This focus on the everyday landscape underscores the broad mandate of UNESCO and the World Heritage Convention to foster an inclusive interpretation of heritage and nurture an ethic of conservation that extends beyond the hallmarks of high architecture to the living, and now threatened, traditions of vernacular building.

UNESCO receives entries from countries and administrative areas across the Asia-Pacifi c regionfrom Antarctica to Uzbekistanrevealing the universal concern for conserving the unique sense of our cultural places. The entries highlight the various challenges facing the conservation profession in the Asia-Pacifi c region today, ranging from the disappearance of traditional materials, skills and techniques to the economic and political forces driving urban redevelopment.

In recognition of the ever-evolving nature of built form and cultural expression, a special award category, the Jury Commendation for Innovation, was inaugurated in 2005 to recognize innovative new buildings which are integrated into historic districts in a way that complements and enhances the historic character and contributes to the cultural continuum of the area.

Assessing Conservation Excellence: the Criteria of the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards

The selection process for the Awards programme is rigorous and is conducted annually by a panel of international experts in conservation architecture, urban planning, landscape design and heritage conservation, all of whom practice professionally in the Asia-Pacifi c region.

To qualify for the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards, buildings must be more than 50 years old, the restoration must have been completed within the last 10 years and buildings must have been in viable use for at least one year. Residential, commercial, cultural, religious, industrial and institutional buildings; historic towns; gardens and bridges are all eligible for consideration. The project must have been carried out with private sector input in the form of ownership, funding or other support. Public-private partnership projects are especially encouraged to apply for the Awards.

Entries to the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards are examined in terms of the extent to which they demonstrate excellence in the following criteria:

Criterion A: The articulation of the structures heritage values in order to convey the spirit of place through the conservation work.

Criterion B: The appropriate use or adaptation of the structure. Criterion C: The interpretation of the cultural, social, historical and architectural signifi cance of the structure(s)

in the conservation work.Criterion D: The understanding of the technical issues of conservation/restoration in interpreting the structures

signifi cance.Criterion E: The use and quality control of appropriate building, artisan and conservation techniques. Criterion F: The use of appropriate materials. Criterion G: How well any added elements or creative technical solutions respect the character and inherent

spatial quality of the structure(s).

3Criterion H: The manner in which the process and the fi nal product contribute to the surrounding environment and the local communitys cultural and historical continuum.

Criterion I: The infl uence of the project on conservation practice and policy locally, nationally, regionally or internationally.

Criterion J: The ongoing socio-economic viability and relevance of the project, and provision for its future use and maintenance.

Criterion K: The complexity, sensitivity and technical consistency of the project methodology.

The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Award winners consistently demonstrate that technical achievement in conservation should be underpinned by a profound understanding of conservation as a social process. As such, the Award-winning projects not only set standards of technical excellence, but also make a signifi cant impact by contributing to the local cultural and historical continuum. All winning entries serve as best practice models in their understanding of the issues of conservation in relation to the cultural, social, historical and architectural signifi cance of the building. They foster community involvement and capacity-building, and have a catalytic effect on local restoration and conservation efforts. The process of conservation consolidates important structures while at the same time returning the buildings, which are signifi cant either by themselves or as part of an urban ensemble, to their place of pride within local communities.

First Principles for Conserving Historic Built Heritage

The Award-winning projects refl ect a consensus around a set of powerful fi rst principles guiding the conservation of the historic built heritage in the Asia-Pacifi c region, which have evolved and been validated through professional practice over the past two decades. They are:

Principle 1: Collective mapping of cultural space, its hierarchies, symbolic language and associations is a pre- requisite for appropriate and successful conservation.

Principle 2: Tangible cultural expressions derive their origin, value and continuing signifi cance from intangible cultural practices.

Principle 3: Authenticity, the defining characteristic of heritage, is a culturally-relative attribute to be found in continuity, but not necessarily in the continuity of material only.

Principle 4: The conservation process succeeds when histories are revealed, traditions revived and meanings recovered in a palimpsest of knowledge.

Principle 5: Appropriate use of heritage is arrived at through a negotiation process, resulting in a life- enhancing space.

Together, the fi rst principles affi rm a set of professional norms which have arisen out of a distinctive Asia-Pacifi c physical and socio-cultural space, but which have universality in application.

First Principles


Principle 1: Collective mapping of cultural space, its hierarchies, symbolic language and associations is a pre-requisite for appropriate and successful conservation.

Conservation professionals and students are taught that conservation work should begin with a thorough investigation of the building. By studying historical documentary evidence and in situ physical evidence in the building fabric itself, it is possible to come to an understanding of the evolved signifi cance of the place and to identify character-defi ning elements of the site which must be conserved in the ensuing work.

Developing an understanding of the true spirit of place, and refl ecting this understanding in the conservation process and product, is central to the mission of re-animating the heritage through conservation work. Only a truly participatory process, which is predicated on a broad-based cultural mapping exercise, can ensure a full understanding of a place. The mapping process reveals which heritage is important, to whom and why. It may identify heritage which was heretofore overlooked, or it may uncover other aspects or alternative readings of already-identifi ed heritage. This socio-cultural mapping process brings to light the heritage values which are inherent and often unspoken in a community, notably, social and spiritual values. On this basis, conservation work can be undertaken in an appropriate manner, with full cognizance of the issues at hand, adding a how dimension to the mapping exercise.

Beyond a purely technical approach to the research process, often dominated by the voice of the conservation expert, the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards winners bring in multiple voices, resulting in a collective mapping of cultural space, its hierarchies, symbolic language and associations. This allows for actualization of the principles espoused in the 2001 Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity.

Principle 2: Tangible cultural expressions derive their origin, value and continuing signifi cance from intangible cultural practices.

Tangible and intangible cultural expressions are interdependent. Any conservation project which privileges tangible over intangible values of a building risks stripping away the signifi cance of the place, leaving only an empty shell.

Manifestations of intangible cultural heritage include oral traditions, performing arts, social practices, rituals, knowledge about nature, traditional craftsmanship and associations acquired through use. This living heritage provides not only the wellspring of cultural diversity, but in fact guarantees continuing expressions of creativity. Indeed, the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage makes provisions for the protection of tangible artefacts and cultural spaces which are associated with the manifestations of intangible cultural heritage. This allows for effective harmonization between the 2003 Convention and other international legal instruments, such as the World Heritage Convention.

Principle 3: Authenticity, the defi ning characteristic of heritage, is a culturally relative characteristic to be found in continuity, but not necessarily in only the continuity of material.

The Heritage Awards have shown that the conservationists mantra of do as much as necessary and as little as possible is subject to interpretation in the context of cultural norms of the Asia-Pacifi c region. Anecdotal evidence illustrates that tensions can arise between conservation professionals who hold material authenticity sacrosanct and local stakeholders who call for renewing the material fabric to ensure the spiritual intactness of the place.

5The Nara Document on Authenticity, adopted in 1994, has articulated a middle ground which refl ects a way of balancing the varying defi nitions of authenticity, refl ecting diverse underlying values in the conservation process and product. The Nara Documents states that It is thus not possible to base judgements of value and authenticity on fi xed criteria. On the contrary, the respect due to all cultures requires that cultural heritage must be considered and judged within the cultural contexts to which it belongs.

The Nara Document further states that, Depending on the nature of the cultural heritage, its cultural context, and its evolution through time, authenticity judgements may be linked to the worth of a great variety of sources of information. Aspects of these sources may include form and design, materials and substance, use and function, traditions and techniques, location and setting, spirit and feeling and other internal and external factors. The use of these sources permits elaboration of the specifi c artistic, historic, social and scientifi c dimensions of the cultural heritage being examined.

The Nara Document does not provide a license for cultural relativity, but rather, reaffi rms the validity of a rational system for evaluating and consequently safeguarding various heritage values, one that is consistent within its own socio-cultural system. In so doing, social, cultural and spiritual values may gain a foothold alongside artistic and historic values in the conservation process.

Principle 4: The conservation process succeeds when histories are revealed, traditions revived and meanings recovered in a palimpsest of knowledge.

In extreme, but increasingly more common circumstances, the thread of continuity of a historic place has been frayed to the point that it is barely distinguishable. Left to the course of economic renewal and the tides of social change, the heritage and the values it embodies is often vulnerable to being erased or subsumed into newer narratives which may not be self-refl exive, thus failing to incorporate the richness of a places past into its present regimes of creating and re-creating identity and knowledge. The judicious intervention in these cases through a conservation activity can result in revealing unique histories, reviving local traditions and recovering the meanings of the place.

The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards have recognized projects which have excelled not only in technical merit but also in the dramatic impact that they have effected, especially in the revival of traditions that are dying or have faded away. These projects do so in a way which does not impose one solitary reading of the place, freezing one particular narrative at a point in time, but rather by revealing a renewed understanding of the place in the context of other historical layers of meaning embodied in the building. In some projects, this remembrance of meanings past is accomplished in a quite literal yet effective mannerby physically juxtaposing the layers of the building history over each other until the present day. In other projects, this recovery is a social process, which reaches back into historical traditions and revives the living core of the community by renewing social practices associated with place.

Principle 5: Appropriate use of heritage is negotiated, resulting in a life-enhancing space.

The projects which have won the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards have often been conducted by conservationists who also play an advocacy or activist role. With heritage conservation unfortunately being a relatively low priority on most political agendas in the Asia-Pacifi c region, the conservationist-activists have had to shoulder the task not only of

First Principles


ensuring professional excellence, but also of raising awareness of the multiple benefi ts of conserving heritage. The essential messages conveyed by these change agents include: heritage as a fundamental cultural right, heritage as a building block for sustainable development and heritage as a shared resource for local stakeholders.

The success of such advocacy efforts is usually the result of a process of negotiationrevisiting the fundamental questions of which heritage is important, to whom, why and how it should be conserved. The cultural diversity of the Asia-Pacifi c region, embodied in multicultural infl uences dating back to its earliest periods of history, belies easy answers to these questions. Add to the debate, at the local level, the complication of state-mandated histories and defi nitions of heritage, and the process becomes very complicated indeed.

Seeing value in the process of negotiation, however, means recognizing the value in this cultural diversity and according respect to the full range of stakeholders. The projects that have been undertaken through this negotiation process in identifying the heritage, its values, its conservation and adaptive reuse have emerged all the stronger, ensuring greater social and political sustainability.

Building on Best Practices

The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards winners bring to light best practices in conservation of tangible heritage as inextricably linked to intangible heritage. As a whole, they add to the global scope of our understanding of the role of heritage conservation as a social development process. They demonstrate that good conservation practice needs to be grounded in an understanding of the place and its many values. These values of place, identifi ed through a participatory cultural mapping process, should inform the conservation decision-making and process. The values-based approach to conservation practice yields a richly-nuanced end resultwhere tangible and intangible heritage are authentically conserved, and historic layers of meaning are revealed. Through the application of these fi rst principles, we can ensure the long-term safeguarding of our cultural heritage, which form the core resources for sustainable development.

UNESCO Asia-Pacifi cHeritage Awards Criteria Essays

Award Criteria Essays

9

Spirit of place conveys the cultural essence of a site. In historic sites it encompasses the meanings of a place accrued through time and through its past and present uses. Expressed through the tangible built heritage, these intangible heritage values give the place its distinctive character, an aura that draws people to the place, speaks to them, engages their emo-tions and, often, gives them a sublime experience of their surroundings.

The concept may be better understood if one alludes to the notion of body and soul. The body is the physical fabric of the heritage site in its original state and setting. The soul, the spirit of place, is the sum of the sites history, traditions, memo-ries, myths, associations and continuity of meanings connected with people and use over time. Collectively, these tell the story of the place, generate its identity and give it emotional impact.

How does conservation of a physical structure articulate its spirit of place? Primarily, the place has to be true to its history. This truth must be conveyed in the very process of conservation itself, in a heritage sites physical form, in its contemporary use, and in its interpretation and presentation.

Authenticity, East and West

Most fundamentally, the spirit of a place resides in its authenticity, retention of which is an essential condition of heritage conservation, as refl ected in many international charters, especially the Nara Document on Authenticity. The challenge, therefore, is fi rst to identify the authentic elements that defi ne the character of a place and convey its spirit, and, secondly, to ensure that through the conservation process these elements are maintained, safeguarded and celebrated.

As the Nara Document asserts, judgments of authenticity must be culture-specifi c. This emerged in the conservation of the Cheng Hoon Teng Main Temple (2002 Award of Merit) in Melaka, Malaysia, for which I was the heritage architect. The seventeenth century temple, the oldest formal site of worship of Malaysias Chinese community, was restored to a high standard, using traditional materials and techniques wherever possible. At the insistence of the congregation, many of the temples frescoes or chai hui, which had succumbed to the tropical climate, were repainted by specialist Chinese artisans with the traditional tempera paints and organic dyes. Since time immemorial such frescoes, with their relatively impermanent inks and paints, have been periodically renewed, often by different artists, to honour the deities.

But renewal in the conservation of traditional Asian architecture raises the question of authenticity. To Western eyes, ac-customed to the preservation of frescoes in their found fragmentary form, not only would the new painting look too bright, fresh and intact, but also it would be deemed poor conservation practice, resulting in the loss of material authenticity. From the Chinese viewpoint, however, renewal of the frescoes conforms to traditional religious beliefs and promotes continuity through artisanship and apprenticeship. There is authenticity in form and function as well as meaning, helping to preserve the temples cultural essence, enhancing its spirit of place.

Laurence Loh

Conveying the Spirit of Place

Criteria A.

The articulation of the structures heritage values in order to convey the spirit of place through the conservation work.

UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards Jury Member

10

UNESCO Asia-Paci c Heritage Awards

Histories revealed

Since heritage is by defi nition a legacy of the past, revealing the history of a heritage site is vital to manifesting its spirit of place. Visual evidence of the march of time, and clear interpretation of that evidence, makes people feel they have direct access to the history of the place. This can be achieved by displaying a sites accretions over its lifetime, rather than restoring it to a state at a chosen moment in time. Exhibiting a sites historical timeline often enlarges its signifi cance and amplifi es its spirit of place.

The conservation of the Guangyu Ancestral Hall (2003 Award of Excellence) in Guangdong province, China sensitively exposes its layers of meaning. Not only was the buildings original structure, dating from the Song dynasty (960-1279) retained and repaired, but also many traces of its 600-year history were preserved. These include political slogans painted onto its walls and gables during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). Moreover, the replacement of original components, mainly for reasons of safety, was guided by the principle of making the new distinguishable from the old. This juxtaposi-tion is apparent, for instance, in the replacement of the halls original, severely weathered red sandstone column bases. The new bases, fashioned in the same style and material, are placed next to the old ones, giving a sense of their age. The meticulous preservation of these historical layers means that the Lu clans ancestral hall is not only a record of Qiangang villages history, but also of Chinas as well. Traditions revived, meanings recovered

Spirit of place comes alive not just in the ways a site is conserved and presented, but in the ways it is used and valued by people. How a place is animated by its community gives it meaning, just as a place has meaning for its community, be it historic, social, spiritual or aesthetic. The best conservation brings out the values implicit in the heritage site and integrates them into the life of the community. By taking part in the conservation work, and then using and maintaining the building after it is conserved, the community breathes life into the site, invigorating its spirit of place.

An exemplary case is the rehabilitation of a quartet of 300-year-old, wooden mosques in Ganish, an historic mountain vil-lage in northern Pakistans Hunza valley. The village elders initiated the project to restore the disused Yarikutz, Rupikutz, Kuyokutz and Mamorukutz Mosques (2002 Award of Distinction) to a structurally sound condition, and Ganishs 30-plus households freely contributed labour, materials and organizational skills. Under professional guidance, the small mosques were stabilized with minimum intervention that retained their original fabric and intricate decoration. The long abandoned chataq, a paved courtyard that the mosques enclose, was returned to its traditional use for village gatherings. The work strengthened community spirit and cohesion in a village that had experienced in recent decades disastrous fl ooding, sub-stantial demolition and major socio-economic change. After the projects completion in 2001, the villagers set up their own heritage body to manage their cultural resources. Here, Ganishs spirit of place is amplifi ed by villagers wholehearted participation in reviving local tradition and commitment to sustaining it. Involving the local community from the outset in the conservation of their heritage is more likely to ensure the sustainability of the project and the living traditions.

An equally powerful project which rebuilt social meaning through the process of recovery is the Krishan Temple (2001 Award of Distinction) at the heart of Kishankot village in Punjab, India. The temple, built in the 1830s and containing fi ne murals depicting Hindu and Sikh themes, represents inter-faith harmony in a region of religious and sectarian strife. These


11

divisions had also affl icted Kishankot, a community of Sikhs, Hindus and Christians, compounding its high unemployment rate and social problems. Restoration of the dilapidated temple was not only a technical job but also a social process. It mobilized the community to work together, empowered them to offer ideas and make decisions, and equipped them with skills to assume responsibility for the building once it was conserved. Villagers became deeply involved in the project through paid labour as well as unpaid seva (service for the community by the community), demonstrating the temples message of communal cooperation. The conservation project was linked to long term community development schemes to improve the quality of health and education in the village, especially involving its women, children and elderly.

Conservation of the Krishan Temple was a contemporary expression of what the building stood for, both symbolically and materially. Painful memories found a healing ground through the process of restoration, resulting in the recovered selves of the people. The temples spirit of place was revived as it became again a common social, spiritual and educational space for a multicultural community.

Appropriate use

The appropriate use of a heritage site is often the key to revealing the cultural values embedded within its original design and purpose, which is, in turn, a fi rst step towards enshrining its spirit of place. The concept is particularly evident in Cheong Fatt Tze Mansion (2000 Most Excellent Project) in George Town in the Malaysian state of Penang, for which I had to privilege to serve as the conservation architect. Once a neglected ruin, the building has been meticulously restored to its former glory, revealing its many layers of meaning, the philosophy of its maker and the genius of its artisans.

Cheong Fatt Tze personifi ed the immigrant success story, rising from humble origins to social and fi nancial prominence as head of a business empire at the turn of the last century. He built and decorated his magnifi cent 38 room mansion with the fi nest materials from Europe, yet based the design on Chinese principles of geomancy and feng shui, and imported master craftsmen from China to do traditional decorative work. Today, the sumptuous restored mansion refl ects his cosmopolitan outlook and eclectic tastes.

As an architectural statement, given its beauty and originality, conservation of the building alone would have carried the day. However, its spirit of place has been further enhanced by its adaptive reuse as a heritage homestay. The creation of 16 guestrooms enables residents to experience life in the mansion as it was in its heyday, when entry was a privilege, thus maintaining its aura as a private sanctuary. The presence of residents also ensures that the mansion is always animated with a human presence, in keeping with the conservation principle that the most sustainable use for a heritage structure is one which is closest to the use for which it was originally intended.

Interpretation of the house is crucial to evoking its spirit of place. During daily guided tours, the mansions stories are retold, myths reborn, memories aroused, adding to the intangible quality of the experience for visitors. They start to form an association in their minds between the place and its creator, and they never fail to be moved by the beauty of the ar-chitecture and interior dcor.

Visitors are also introduced to the concepts of geomancy and feng shui observable throughout the mansionin particular the chi point (energy vortex) in the middle of the central courtyard. Visitors with extra sensory abilities have perceived its

Krishan Temple, India

12


existence. Real or imagined, the chi point and its explanation contribute to embedding the mansions spirit of place in the psyche of visitors.

The vision of Cheong Fatt Tze Mansions current owners is to attain the right balance between conservation and change, the ambience of a home and the exigencies of a boutique hotel, a sense of privacy versus a public role, a mood of informal-ity as well as a sense of etiquette, and most of all, to retain the spirit of place that draws people back to where it resides again and again.

Life enhancing architecture

These regional examples carry within them abstract and metaphysical concepts that are as important as the authentic, physical substance of the sites. Expressions of intangible heritage are spiritual assets that are unquantifi able and impos-sible to label, but nevertheless are central to the Asian approach to heritage conservationboth in how heritage is perceived and how it is conserved.

It is the totality of these tangible and intangible values, recognized and recovered, or created in addition to original themes, which reveal the spirit of place within the architecture. It is an architecture that is life enhancing, that forces us to engage with the site through the use of all our senses, and that allows us to be touched by a place where our sense of self and well being is strengthened and revitalised.

The message that buildings with a strong spirit of place convey is that the answers are not to be found in a purely rigorous analytical approach. A system of evaluation is only a starting point for conservation practice. Looking beyond, it is about allowing what is living to stay alive and true to the place. It is about letting the architecture, the traditions and the cultural essence live on with minimal intervention. Often it is also about the recovery of meaning that has been lost through attri-tion. If change is necessary, the change must be so seamless that very quickly it becomes absorbed into the original value system. Before long, it attains its own meaning and becomes part of the collective memory, as if it has always been there as part of the place.

Cheong Fatt Tze Mansion, Malaysia


13

UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards Jury Member

Appropriate use is a key factor in evaluating the quality of heritage conservation projects. Whether the original property is a palace or a fort, a factory or a house, a church or a mosque, an archaeological site or a cultural landscape, how such a place was used and continues to be used is critical to its heritage value and character. Use relates to the physical and architectural character of a building or site, and also to its history and its cultural signifi cance. How it functioned historically, its original (as well as later) purpose, its symbolic importance in the community, and its continuing social or spiritual values.

Use is concerned with design, materials, layout and decoration, but also involves many intangible factors. These might include the movements of people into, out of, and within the building or site; the periods of occupancywhether seasonal, monthly, weekly or daily; and especially variations or specializations in use within or around the site. Even from an architectural point of view the concept of use might include the effects of voices and sounds, relative temperature and humidity, and countless other, often minute factors that together combinealong with cultural memory and historical associationto give a building or site its spirit of place.

Use then, is a determining aspect of a buildings or sites identityan aspect perhaps not conveyed fully by photographs or drawings but one that can best be gained through direct access to the place itself. Evaluating a project for its use value becomes a task of careful understanding and extrapolation from past experience by anyone undertaking a conservation project, or anyone assessing the results of it afterwards. They must visit the site in their imagination. Comparisons with other buildings or sites may be made. But in the end pictures and written descriptions can only begin to determine whether an appropriate use has indeed been found, or whether the new use fails to convey the heritage values implicit in the building or site. The fi nal test is the experience of the place itself.

Questions of use and reuse

Probably the most important question of appropriate use is whether the primary concern is the retention of distinctive architectural or other physical forms, or whether considerations of use pertain more to cultural, social and symbolic values. To give an example: a historic church might well be adapted to another kind of use. The immediate impulse is to assume it should become, say, a community centre if it no longer is needed as a church. But what about a potential commercial use? Can a church become a restaurant? A discothque? Such new uses may best preserve architectural and decorative elements that distinguish the building. But do such new uses adequately address the less tangible aspects of a building and its signifi cance? Alternatively, were the church to become housing for homeless people or a clinic, these functions might well preserve the social or community-oriented qualities of the original church, but may require more radical changes in the buildings confi guration or appearance. What if, for example, a historic public housing project requires partition walls and a new interior circulation pattern? Do these new elements threaten the physical character of the structure and therefore its greater signifi cance?

William Chapman

DeterminingAppropriate Use

Criteria B.Appropriate use or adaptation of thestructure.

14


The choice of an appropriate use becomes, as a result of these considerations, a complex intellectual and experiential balancing act. Critical factors in evaluation must include how far the original and historic design qualities and materials have been retained, whether the property is still used to the same degree or manner as before, and to what extent community, spiritual and symbolic values continue. Factories turned into housing? Maybe, since few formal architectural features, meaning designed features, are affected. A house made into a hotel? Perhaps an easier transition and one more readily justifi ed.

Other aspects of appropriate use are the intensity of use and the degree of intervention involved in the conservation project. Intensity of use refers to how many new elements are introduced and correspondingly how many new requirements have been imposed on a site or building. An example may be a large private house turned into an apartment building or group of fl ats. Three units may well preserve the original character of the residence; fi ve may be too many. If the project requires changes to the roof to accommodate even more units in order to meet the clients needs, this may further bring into question the appropriateness of the choice of reuse.

Degree of intervention introduces other concerns. How much must a structure be altered in order to allow a new use or uses? Will a steel frame be needed? Will walls be required to divide open spaces into offi ces or rooms? Will an important component of the structure need to be rebuilt? These questions underscore the larger question of whether a planned new use is a good one or whether it will undermine the very values that are to be preserved.

But what about changes in the less tangible qualities of a place as a result of a new use? Can a mosque become a school? Does this shift in use interrupt the quietude and spiritual values once associated with the mosque? What about an offi ce building converted into housing? Does this change the overall character of the property? Again, what if the question is just the degree of new use? If, for example, too many rooms are required to make a hotel project economically viable (from the owner, client or developers point of view), would this tip the balance toward a negative appraisal?

Finally, what about common or utilitarian spaces versus more designed buildings or sites? Are highly decorated buildings representing elite culture of greater value than spaces once occupied by goods or by factory workers? Or do highly designed and decorated spaces also embody workmanship and crafts skills associated with ordinary people? Is the elite structure less adaptable owing to its higher instrinsic value? Does a factory or warehouse open itself to a wider range of uses? All of these are diffi cult questions that need careful consideration of each context.

Appropriate use in charters and resolutions

Since the time of the Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments, promulgated in 1931, appropriate use has entered into the language of conservation. Resolution 2 from this fi rst international congress of conservation specialistsseems to inherently refer to issues of appropriate use: Proposed restoration projects are to be subjected to knowledgeable criticism to prevent mistakes which will cause loss of character and historical values to the structures. Under Doctrines [and] General Principles this same early document states: The Conference recommends that the occupation of buildings, which insures the continuity of their life, should be maintained but that they should be used for a purpose which respects their historic or artistic character [my emphasis].


15

The 1964 Venice Charter, the fi rst comprehensive post-World War II statement of international conservation principles, considered the issue of appropriate use with even greater clarity. Article 5 explains: The conservation of monuments is always facilitated by making use of them for some socially useful purpose. Such use is therefore desirable but it must not change the layout or decoration of the building. It is within these limits only that modifi cations demanded by a change of function should be envisioned and may be permitted. The 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, referred to as the World Heritage Convention, states a similar priority: These components of the cultural and natural heritage should, in addition, be restored, whenever appropriate, to their former use or given a new and more suitable function, provided that the cultural value is not thereby diminished (Article 22).

During the closing decades of the twentieth century, concerns over appropriate use increasingly emphasized intangible cultural values. Australias Burra Charter, fi rst promulgated in 1979, with signifi cant revisions in 1981, 1988 and 1999, puts considerable emphasis on the notion of cultural signifi cance and value. The preamble of the present document advocates a cautious approach to change: do as little as necessary to care for the place and to make it useable, but otherwise change it as little as possible so that its cultural signifi cance is retained [my emphasis]. To further clarify, the charter states that cultural signifi cance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations, meaning, records, related places, and related objects [original emphasis]. Under the section on defi nitions the document explains that Compatible use means a use which respects the cultural signifi cance of a place. Such a use involves no, or minimal, impact on cultural signifi cance [original emphasis].

The 1994 Nara Document on Authenticity similarly emphasizes the consideration of tangible and intangible expression[s] of cultural value. As with the Burra Charter, the Nara Document emphasizes spirit and feeling as implicit aspects of the signifi cance of a place.

More recent resolutions and conventions have reinforced this trend toward recognition of cultural signifi cance. The Principles for the Conservation of Heritage Sites in China (2002), adopted by the Chinese national committee of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) calls for minimal intervention (Article 11), recognizing that a building or site combines historical, artistic, and scientifi c values (Article 3). The Principles also stress that a site should be used in a rational manner for the benefi t of society, recognizing too that its inherent cultural and symbolic values must in no way be compromised for short-term gain (Article 4).

The Hoi An Protocols for Best Conservation Practice in Asia, drafted in November 2003 under the guidance of UNESCOs Regional Advisor for Culture in Asia and the Pacifi c, consistently underscore the retention of integrity and prevention of dismemberment in the reuse of historic sites, as well the need to preserve the historic character in the broadest sense when undertaking new use projects. In the case of historic residential properties, the document emphasizes the importance both of retaining original use and avoiding displacement of historic populations.

Dalongdong Baoan Temple, China

16


Historic context of reuse projects

These conventions, charters and documents were promulgated against a backdrop of increasing acceptance of conservation ideals worldwide. Once limited to sites of great national and international interest, the concept of conservation began to be adopted more widely, especially by the 1970s. Coupled with the birth of the international environmental movement and a growing scepticism of progressive planning policies, the conservation of historic places became a common cause for many of the post-World War II generation. The assumption that modern was better and that highways, skyscrapers and clusters of bland public housing were preferable to traditional urban neighbourhoods and older buildings came deeply into question. Old buildings offered opportunities for places of continuing cultural value; old neighbourhoods provided an alternative to planned housing and suburban migration from inner cities.

The redevelopment of older buildings and sites became an important aspect of this revolution in thinking. Adaptive use became a popular term to describe the revitalization of older buildings through new use. The United States played a signifi cant part in this new trend. Commercial developments such as Ghirardelli Square in San Francisco and Quincy Market in Boston, rehabilitated in the 1960s and 1970s, respectively, celebrated the reuse of older buildings. Features such as Victorian towers, classical columns, ornate entrances and strong articulated cornices became part of the vocabulary of reuse projectsas did fenestration openings fi tted with modern plate-glass, stripped interior wall surfaces and other features to remind the user that this was an old space made new. Through a tax credit programme administered by the United States National Park Service, adaptive use became a signifi cant expression of United States policy, especially in the period between 1979 and 1984 when the tax incentives were at their highest. Thousands of historic buildings were redeveloped, from factories through to warehouses and industrial lofts, many of which become upscale apartments. Other older buildings served as banks, retail spaces and offi ces.

European nations, long committed to the conservation of their historic urban cores, also experienced a surge of reuse projects, such as Londons Covent Garden Market and the adaptation of the Gare dOrsay in Paris for the Louvres collection of nineteenth century art. Similar projects occurred in Sydney, Adelaide and other cities in Australia and New Zealand. These prestige projects, combined with billions of dollars of private and public investment in historic buildings, brought sophistication to the reuse industry. Standards for new mechanical systems, laws to regulate new components such as rooftop additions, and new zoning ordinances that recognized changes in use followed in the wake of this trend.

Luckily for the historic and architectural values of older properties, the fashion for glibly contrasting old and new gradually fell out of favour. A greater appreciation of original components, stronger governmental oversight, the growing infl uence of architectural conservation specialists and, especially, the increasing availability of good quality materials and building componentssuch as historically compatible replacement windows and electrical fi xturesall contributed to the improvement of reuse-type projects. By the 1990s most projects of this kind were far more advanced in their understanding of conservation principles and showed greater respect for original materials and design, as well as for intangible factors such as historical association and traditional use. It is rare now to see a project celebrating the contrast of old and new by simply changing windows and sand-blasting brick walls (although such projects lamentably do still occur).

More recently, say in the last fi ve years, the issues around reuse of historic places have fallen into two primary areas. One is


17

an increasing emphasis on appropriateness in reuse, meaning the consideration of cultural and historical values as part of what constitutes an acceptable project. The other is a growing sophistication in ways to introduce new components, such as elevators, stairs, mechanical systems and built additions.

Two distinct approaches appear to have evolved in the area of introducing new elements. One is to embed modern facilities so that they are not visible, such as hidden air-conditioning ducts and vents. The second trend is to call attention to changes by way of contrast. This latter approach is not the same as that of the 1980s when modern components were used to substitute for historic ones, such as the use of plate glass windows. It is, rather, an approach where original features are respected and newer elements are meant to be read at a different level, almost on a different plane or dimension, from their historic context. Such an approach is in keeping with longstanding prescriptions on the need to preserve the original and historic features of a place and to make new features distinguishable from old ones.

As a result of these developments, approaches to adaptive and even continuing use have grown increasingly sophisticated. Recent projects more clearly defer to the history and cultural values of the property than they might have twenty years ago. Some defer to traditional crafts and skills to ensure the continuity of both technical and community values. Others reintroduce original uses back into buildings. In terms of new features, many projects now use up-to-date components sensitively: high-tech elevators attached to the less visible rears of buildings, consolidated electrical conduits and hubs that obviate the need to install systems in walls, and modern metal stairs that seem to fl oat in unaltered historic spaces.

Overall, the issues stemming from the concepts of continued use and reuse have been subjected to greater scrutiny in almost all contexts. The result has been a gradual and signifi cant improvement in the quality of the projects themselves and the ways in which heritage places convey a sense of their cultural and historic value. The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation

The projects submitted for the UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation demonstrate a diversity of approaches to the appropriate use and adaptive reuse of historic properties. These approaches may be usefully grouped in four categories: continuing original use, return to original use, minimal change of use and completely new use. All involve varying levels of (often reversible) intervention as part of the conservation process.

Continuity of use

A large number of Award-winning projects represent continuity of use. Most of these are historic religious buildings. Those that required a relatively high degree of intervention to repair their fabric and modernize their facilities include: the Ohel Leah Synagogue in Hong Kong SAR, China (2000 Outstanding Project), a 1901 landmark fi tted with new mechanical systems and a contemporary external staircase and lift; the Hung Shing Old Temple in Hong Kong SAR, China (2000 Outstanding Project), a small, rural temple that needed reroofi ng and refurbishment of decorative elements; the Church of Our Lady of Mount Carmel in Mullewa, Western Australia (2004 Award of Distinction), which had its stained-glass windows repaired and cement render removed; and St. Thomas Cathedral in Mumbai, India (2004 Award of Merit), which had a roof replaced and an ancillary building reconstructed.

Sydney Conservatorium of Music, Australia

18


Those that involved a lower level of intervention to continue existing uses include: the Yarikutz, Rupikutz, Kuyokutz and Mamorukutz Mosques (2002 Award of Distinction) and the Astana of Syed Mir Muhammad (2003 Award of Distinction), both in northern Pakistan, which were stabilized and repaired; the Catholic Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception in Hong Kong SAR, China (2003 Honourable Mention) whose roof was waterproofed and lighting and accoustics redesigned; and Dorje Chenmo Temple in Ladakh, India (2004 Award of Merit) a project centering on restoring the small Buddhist shrines deteriorated murals.

Apart from religious buildings, the conservation of several historic streetscapes and townscapes also restored their fabric and improved their infrastructure, but largely left their commercial or residential uses unchanged. Several of these are in China: the Zhongshan Road Project in Quanzhou, Fujian province (2001 Award of Merit); the Cangqiao Historical Street in Shaoxing, Zhejiang province (2003 Award of Merit); the Zhangzhou City Historic Streets in Fujian (2004 Honourable Mention); and the Water Towns of the Yangtze River (2003 Award of Distinction).

In India, the Jaisalmer Streetscape Revitalization Project (2002 Honourable Mention) in the medieval Rajasthani fort city of Jaisalmer restored sandstone facades and installed modern amenities in a traditional neighbourhood. Mumbais Dadabhai Naoroji Road Streetscape Project (2004 Award of Merit) restored shopfronts and signage to refl ect the areas Victorian-era commercial character. In Australia, the Broken Hill Heritage and Cultural Tourism Programme (2002 Honourable Mention) revitalized an historic, New South Wales mining town. Return to original use

Projects that restored historic buildings to their original use are far fewer in number, but again, religious buildings predominate. Perhaps the most dramatic reversion of a spiritual sanctuary to its original purpose was that of St. Ascension Cathedral in Almaty, Kazakhstan (2004 Award of Distinction). Built in 1907, the extraordinary timber building fell into disrepair after the 1930s, when it was used as a museum and radio station. After substantial structural repairs and repainting of the exterior and interior surfaces, the cathedral was returned to its former glory and intended function as a place of worship for the Russian Orthodox community of Almaty.

Less dramatic but equally impressive was the restoration of a disused sim (Buddhist ordination hall) to an active role in Wat Sratong (2002 Award of Merit), a village temple near Khon Kaen in Thailand, and the stabilization of the mid-eighteenth century St. Josephs Seminary Church (2001 Honourable Mention) in Macao SAR, China. So structurally unstable that it was closed in 1995, the Baroque-style church had to be given a new dome, pillars and foundations before it could be reopened to the faithful in 1999.

Minimal change of use

A very wide range of conservation projects that involved a minimal or moderate change to the sites traditional use have won Awards. A sampling: St. Patricks College, an Australian parochial school becoming a tourism training institute in Sydney (2000 Outstanding Project); DBS House, a commercial offi ce building in Mumbai converted for use as a bank (2001 Award of Merit); the Harischandra Building, a colonial building adapted as a monks residence in Sri Lanka (2000 Honourable Mention); and the Centre for Khmer Studies, a temple complex used as a library and meeting space (2002 Honourable Mention). There has also been the conversion of a house into a bank in the Residence of Charles Prosper Wolff Schoemaker (2000 Honourable Mention) and an architects offi ce at the Polsheer House (2002 Award of Merit). These were all conservation projects of the best typewhere the use was little changed, and therefore less intervention was required.


19

Some Award winning properties were restored simply as heritage sites before an appropriate use was found for them. Two projects in Rajasthan, IndiaChanwar Palkhiwalon-ki-Haveli in Amber (2000 Excellent Project) and Ahhichatragarh Fort in Nagaur (2002 Award of Excellence)employed or revived traditional artisan skills in massive efforts to stabilize and restore the abandoned sites. Although the work was done without a specifi c use planned, the haveli (mansion) has since become a textile museum and the fort a venue for local festivals and performing arts. The restoration of Mawsons Huts Historical Site (2000 Honourable Mention), an early twentieth century explorers campsite in Antarctica, was undertaken primarily to preserve a historic chapter in the nations history, in a remote site with very little visitation. These were restorations of the purest kindreuse and economic gain played no part in their rationalization. They remind us that some sites and buildings require no economic justifi cation for their survival if they can have the support of their community.

Completely new use

Award-winning projects that involved change to a completely different use are less numerous, but perhaps more striking because of the contrast between the old site and its new incarnation. Among them: the adaptation of a seventeenth century colonial mansion in Jakarta, Indonesia into the National Archives Building (2001 Award of Excellence), a straightforward restoration with few high-tech frills but excellent workmanship; the reinvention of a rural tea factory as the upscale Tea Factory Hotel (2001 Award of Merit) retaining much of the utilitarian buildings open spaces and tea-processing machinery, in the central highlands of Sri Lanka; and the conversion in Singapore of the Convent of the Holy Infant Jesus (2002 Award of Merit) into CHIJMES, a lifestyle complex of shops and restaurants, with its 1903 Gothic Revival-style church now used for weddings. Australian projects are well represented in the new-use category, with three in and around Sydney alone: the once derelict Bushells Tea Warehouse (2001 Award of Distinction) transformed into offi ce spaceprobably the most technically advanced of the Award winners; an historic armory and stables converted into the Sydney Conservatorium of Music (2002 Award of Merit), and the Female Orphan School, an abandoned orphanage and mental hospital made into a campus building at the University of Western Sydney (2004 Honourable Mention). In Adelaide, the old Treasury Building was reborn as the Medina Grand Adelaide Treasury Hotel (2003 Award of Merit). Many of these reuse projects have involved the sensitive insertion of mechanical systems, modern utilities, elevators and other contemporary features, while the original buildings continued to be legible as historic sites.

To take just one example, the reuse of Bushells Tea Warehouse in downtown Sydney demonstrates the harmonious merger of high-tech adaptation and conscientious preservation. The project introduced mechanical systems, an elevator and other services to convert the building to offi ce use. State-of-the-art electrical and communication hubs were installed and all workstations were organised around centralized power, cable and telephone lines. Lighting was also provided from the central hub. This choice allowed for the retention of the original open plan of the warehouse and even its industrial equipment. Original wall surfaces, down to fl aking paint and graffi ti, were also preserved.

Noteworthy is the number of projects involving adaptive reuse as museumsthe most conventional approach to conservation, but one that clearly has public and educational benefi ts. Signifi cant museum projects include the Phra Racha Wang Derm palace in the old naval headquarters in Bangkok, Thailand (2004 Award of Merit); the Kow Plains Homestead in Victoria, Australia, a late nineteenth-century log cabin (2002 Honourable Mention); Rumah Penghulu, a vernacular

Top: Polsheer House, IranAbove: Bushells Tea Warehouse, Australia

20


timber house that is now a space for folk life exhibits in Kuala Lumpur (2000 Honourable Mention); and the Tak Seng On Pawnshop, reused as a museum and teashop in Macao SAR, China (2004 Honourable Mention).

Intensity of use

Apart from change of use, intensity of use is an important factor in evaluating the effectiveness of conservation projects. But often it is a factor overlooked by owners, architects or developers when making key decisions early in the planning stage. A project that got it right was the Hotel de lOrient in Pondicherry, India (2000 Outstanding Project), where existing walls, rooms and hallways were repaired to convert a large private house into a small hotel. It demonstrated a consensus by the parties involved that the number of rooms would be limited by the existing space. The Tea Factory Hotel also limited reuse to the original structure, when it might have been tempted to expand the number of rooms beyond this limit. Similarly, commercial reuse projects, such as the DBS House, the residence of Charles Prosper Wolff Schoemaker, and Polsheer House showed admirable restraint in deciding on the number of services, offi ces and other uses needed for new purposes.

Some projects, such as the National Archives Building, necessarily experienced a change in intensity, but that change was done with respect to the original character of the building. The same can be said of the far more high-tech transformation of Bushells Tea Warehouse into an offi ce building. In both examples, the need for new uses overrode the general preference for minimal change of both use and intensity. Nevertheless the results are a satisfactory accommodation to both the historic signifi cance of the building and the modern requirements of its new role.

But even when there is continued use or minimal change of use and intensity, some degree of intervention is often necessary. The degree is determined by the condition of the property as much as the desire to introduce changes of use or intensity of use. St. Patricks College remained an educational institution but required the insertion of new mechanical systems and services, in addition to the restoration of its historic elements. The dilapidated St. Ascension Cathedral required a high level of intervention, though the fi nal product looked little different from the original. Similarly, the seemingly modest restoration of Mawsons Huts in Antarctica by an Australian team of architects and conservators showed little apparent change, but was in fact a substantial rebuilding of a severely deteriorated structure.

The UNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards have recognized a diverse range of approaches to conservation practice and use and reuse of historic buildings and sites. These have included traditional, almost pure, restorations and stabilizations of sites, through to museum projects centred on historic buildings, to more dramatic reuse projects involving the injection of advanced technology into historic structures. The best projects have often been those where intervention was least visible, where old buildings in a state of disrepair have been returned to their original use or given uses that minimally alter their historic character and feeling. The Award-winning projects demonstrate the possibilities open to owners and communities to ensure that the regions rich heritage may be preserved for the future.


21

The conservation of built heritage begins with fi nding out the facts and understanding the meaning of a place. Interpretation, or telling the story of a place, moves beyond a straightforward narration of the facts to celebrate the stories associated with the place in either historical or legendary form. These stories exist in the minds of local people or may be discovered through research by interested scholars. As such, interpretation may be seen as the retelling of a known story.

Good interpretation not only draws upon specifi c facts and stories but sensitively relates to the cultural values of the present community. These requirements for good interpretationfacts, sensitivity and relevancemay seem obvious, but in practice, interpretation is only as good as the people doing it, and it is very easy to do it badly.

Insuffi cient research is one of the most common problems affecting the quality of interpretation, and this is often due to blind faith in the published word and to time constraints. The consequence can be the perpetuation of assumptions rather than accurate facts, leading to fl awed interpretation.

In addition, many cases of interpretation are indifferent to the interests and needs of the community, or, worse, insensitive to the underlying signifi cance of the place. This is often the case when there is lack of community involvement in the interpretative process, and failure to understand the complexity of the place or to present interpretative materials in a way that stimulates and sustains interest in a broad cross-section of visitors.

Moreover, there are often confl icting views on which version(s) of a story truly expresses the signifi cance of a heritage place. This is probably more apparent in Asia, where many places have experienced a colonial past. The complex multicultural layers of history of heritage places in these former colonies pose particular diffi culties for telling stories that refl ect multiple heritage values. Hence, frequently, the stories of these Asian places are only interpreted truths, almost inevitably tinted by different understandings of the main storyline. To complicate matters further, there can be differences in the storytelling between professionals (trained conservators and interpreters) and residents, who probably perceive themselves as having greater ownership of these stories.

Over time, the values of a place may change. After all, values refl ect the judgement of a particular person or group at a particular point in time. Different people have different perspectives on the importance of any given place, so its signifi cance may grow, diminish or evolve as ideas change about what constitutes signifi cance. As such, good interpretation entails presentation of information that will not become outdated in a short period of time.

The elements of a story: defi ning and assessing signifi cance

The story of a place lies in its signifi cance or its values. Signifi cance not only refers to the physical fabric or physical context of a place, but also to the character-defi ning elements that contribute to its values. Defi ning signifi cance is about

Interpreting the Signifi cance of Heritage Sites

Criteria C.The interpretation of the cultural, social, historical and architectural signifi cance of the structure(s) in the conservation work.

David LungUNESCO Asia-Pacifi c Heritage Awards Jury Member

with contributions by

Lynne DiStefanoLee Ho YinDebbie Wong

22


identifying these values and their contribution to the meaning of a place.

To establish the signifi cance of a place, we must fi rst understand the place, its character and its story. Only then can we tell an engaging story to an audience. The fi rst step entails gathering evidence, both physical and documentary, on the place. Physical evidence comprises information that can be retrieved from the physical fabric of a place, which often includes a site survey and on-site photographs. Documentary evidence covers a broad range of resource materials, including writings, drawings and photographs, as well as oral information. Next comes analysis of both the physical and documentary evidence in order to arrive at a balanced assessment of the place. After analysis, a set of criteria should be used to establish the signifi cance of a place.

Different international charters for heritage conservation have adopted slightly different terminology to defi ne the signifi cance of a place. Table 1 provides a comparison of such terminological differences.

Table 1: Defi nitions of Signifi cance and Assessment Criteria in International Charters

Charters Defi nition of Signifi cance/Assessment Criteria

Venice Charter(1964)

Referred to as cultural signifi cance and encompasses architectural, historical, social and scientifi c values.

Washington Charter(1987)

Referred to as qualities, with the following defi nition:Qualities to be preserved include the historic character of the town or urban area and all those material and spiritual elements that express this character, especially: urban patterns defi ned by lots and streets; relationships between buildings and green and open spaces; the formal appearance, interior and exterior, of buildings defi ned by scale, size, style, construction, materials, colour and decoration; the relationship between the town or urban area and its surrounding setting, both natural and man-made; and the various functions that the town or urban area has acquired over time.

ICOMOS New Zealand Charter(1992)

Referred to as cultural heritage value and cultural meaning. These refer to places which: have lasting values and can be appreciated in their own right; teach us about the culture of those who came before us; provide the context for community identity whereby people relate to the land and to those who have gone before; provide variety and contrast in the modern world and a measure against which we can compare the achievements of today; and provide visible evidence of continuity between the past, present and future.

Rumah Penghulu, Malaysia


23

A comprehensive approach should be used to defi ne a set of criteria (values) for assessing signifi cance. Consistency in the criteria allows for a more accurate assessment and better interpretation in relation to other heritage places. Of course, it is not always possible to fi nd evidence for all criteria; a place may be deemed signifi cant if only one or two criteria are applicable.

As it meets the assessment needs of many countries, the set of criteria (values) listed in Australias Burra Charter have become widely used in Asia and the Pacifi c, although sometimes in modifi ed form. According to the Burra Charter, cultural signifi cance means aesthetic, historic, scientifi c, social or spiritual values for past present or future generations. The values are defi ned in Table 2.

Table 2: Types of Heritage Values

Historic Value What the site has to tell us about the course of human history, or the history of a group or culture. The site may conserve important physical fabric or other evidence of the past. It may be associated with important events and developments of people.

Aesthetic and Artistic Value The intellectual or emotional impact of a place. This may be the emotional association or mood of a site. It may also be a demonstration of a particular design, style, artistic development or high level of craftsmanship.

Scientifi c and Research Value The capacity of a place to provide signifi cant knowledge of value to humanity.

Social Value The degree and the way in which a place is now or was in the past a focus of spiritual, political, national or other cultural activity to majority or minority groups.

Adapted from Proceedings of the International Conference on Cultural Heritage Management and Urban Development: Challenge and Opportunity, Beijing, 2000

Charters Defi nition of Signifi cance/Assessment Criteria

Burra Charter(1979, with revisions in 1981, 1988 and 1999)

Referred to as cultural signifi cance and value. Cultural signifi cance means aesthetic, historic, scientifi c, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations. It is embodied in a place itself, its fabric, setting, use, association, meanings, records, related places and related objects.

Principles for the Conservation of Heritage Sites in China (commonly referred to as China Principles)(2002)

Referred to as heritage values, and comprising historical, artistic and scientifi c values.

Female Orphan School, Australia

24


Broadening the heritage horizon: value-added alternatives

Taking a step back, let us examine how the understanding of heritage value has evolved through time. Alois Riegl, a pioneer in the fi eld, clearly distinguishes the difference between modern and traditional meanings of value. In the traditional usage, the value of a place lies in keeping the story of a place unchanged, while in modern usage, value is perceived as changing in response by different generations to a specifi c cultural context, and hence allowing the story to evolve.

Jukka Jokilehto, in A History of Architectural Conservation (1999), states clearly that modern conservation is principally characterized by the fundamental change of values in contemporary society. Based upon Riegls earlier work, Jokilehto poses the concept of universal value, which is not simply a best model, but rather, it is the sharing of a particular creative quality, a uniqueness, and the quality of being true, original, authentic, as a constituent part of the common, universal heritage of humanity.

While there are some values that have universal acceptance (such as historic, aesthetic and scientifi c), the necessity for fi ne-tuning the categories of heritage value to adequately refl ect a particular local context has gradually been recognized. Further to the mentioned charters and evaluation criteria, alternatives for establishing the signifi cance of a place have been put forward. One example is the work of renowned conservationist Bernard Feilden. In Conservation of Historic Buildings (1994), he suggests, use values and emotional values are as important as cultural values in establishing signifi cance. While this may not be a set of criteria that all countries would choose to follow, Feilden has indeed expanded on how we look at heritage values. He shows us that the signifi cance of a place may extend beyond its cultural factors, and that emotional and use values can also be seen as important determinants of the value of a heritage place.

A heritage hierarchy: comparing and ranking signifi cance

The different criteria adopted in different charters and by different experts seem to suggest that there is no fi xed, standard set of criteria (values) for assessing signifi cance. How, then, can we compare the level of signifi cance of places? While each place may be signifi cant in its own right, what processes are available for comparing the level of signifi cance of different places?

Assessing levels of signifi cance can be done using a qualitative or quantitative approach, or both. The qualitative approach focuses on the description and analysis of a place without necessarily comparing it to other heritage places. In other words, a place is understood and evaluated on its own terms. The quantitative approach provides a basis for comparing one place with another, generally using a fi xed set of criteria. Such comparisons can use a simple rating scale, such as the one proposed by James Kerr in The Conservation Plan (2000), which includes: A = exceptional signifi cance, B = considerable signifi cance, C = some signifi cance, D = little signifi cance.

Similarly, in The Evaluation of Historic Buildings (1980), Harold Kalman presents a quantitative system for grading signifi cance, on the basis of fi ve basic criteria: architecture, history, environment, usability and integrity. He then subdivides these fi ve into detailed criteria. For example, architecture is subdivided into style, construction, age, architect, design and interior, each of which is scored numerically. By adding up the separate scores for each criterion, a numerical score can be obtained for a particular place. This score allows for the classifi cation of heritage buildings in four grades which can then


25

be used for making comparisons with similar