Demolition and reconstruction: a necessary evil to create housing?
As the housing shortage worsens in Switzerland, demolition and reconstruction is gaining momentum. This sometimes controversial method involves tearing down an existing building to rebuild a new one that is denser and better suited to current standards, but it is not without consequences.
This increase in density is particularly valuable in city centers, where land reserves are limited and horizontal urbanization is prohibited. It is also a way to renew an aging housing stock that is not very energy efficient.
From an environmental perspective, demolition and reconstruction involves a loss of “gray energy,” i.e., the energy already invested in the construction of the original building. At a time when climate concerns are intensifying, this factor weighs heavily in the balance.
In short, demolition and reconstruction may not be ideal, but in many cases it seems unavoidable. The challenge is to make it a fairer and more virtuous lever.
Sources
allnews.ch- Article
watson.ch - Article
An effective lever for densification
In a context of scarce building land and sustained population growth, demolition and reconstruction appears to be a concrete solution for creating more housing where demand is highest. On average, one demolished dwelling gives rise to four new dwellings, and this figure can reach up to 20 new dwellings in certain urban projects involving the demolition of a building.This increase in density is particularly valuable in city centers, where land reserves are limited and horizontal urbanization is prohibited. It is also a way to renew an aging housing stock that is not very energy efficient.
Impacts that should not be overlooked
But this solution, as pragmatic as it may be, is not without its critics. On a social level, it often contributes to the disappearance of older, more affordable housing, which is replaced by more expensive new properties. This can lead to displacement effects for some tenants.From an environmental perspective, demolition and reconstruction involves a loss of “gray energy,” i.e., the energy already invested in the construction of the original building. At a time when climate concerns are intensifying, this factor weighs heavily in the balance.
A balance to be found
Despite these challenges, new replacement construction remains one of the few ways to rapidly increase the housing stock without expanding built-up areas. For it to be socially and environmentally acceptable, it should be part of a comprehensive urban sustainability strategy: prioritization of sites, compensation for social losses, and stricter environmental requirements.In short, demolition and reconstruction may not be ideal, but in many cases it seems unavoidable. The challenge is to make it a fairer and more virtuous lever.
Sources
allnews.ch- Article
watson.ch - Article