KV Långmyran. Context model (left) and concept model (right).
The Fallacy of Architectural Speculation (Speculating on the existing)
Master’s Degree Project
2025
This master thesis project interrogates the relevance of adaptation of the ordinary built heritage rather than its absolute replacement, and questions the stakeholders’ attitude toward the existing built environment. The project seeks to investigate how the replacement of entire functional buildings could be avoided, while caring for the needs of our time without compromising those of the future. Two buildings formulated an experimental context, allowing for different interventions and time-based preservation strategies to be tested.
In the district of Haga in Umeå, three conventional buildings, designed in 1936, 1938, and 1947, are set to be demolished and replaced by two slab block structures, as they are deemed to hold no value. Their removal reflects a widespread neglect of the existing built environment, the developer’s desire for quick profits, and the municipality’s aim to increase urban density.
This project investigates the question: How can we adapt existing buildings to meet the needs of our time without compromising those of the future? Thus, it highlights ordinary, often overlooked buildings slated for demolition and interrogates the relevance of adaptation rather than absolute replacement. Two out of the three buildings in Haga were examined, presented as Laboratory A and B. Each Laboratory was transformed through light, medium, and advanced interventions that integrate time-based preservation strategies.
The key takeaway from this project is that value goes beyond numbers and codes. Given the opportunity, the existing building stock could prove its worth, both now and in the future. Regardless of the money, effort, or careful spatial decisions invested in a project, the needs of the future remain unknown; we can only speculate.
Intervention strategies. Demolition plan (red) and construction plan (blue) for the different interventions in Laboratory A (left) and Laboratory B (right).
Elevations Laboratory A. Existing condition (left) and the intervened condition at an advanced level (right).
Scenario II Laboratory A. Furnished typical plan for Laboratory B after the advanced intervention, highlighting the introduced flexibility in spatial configuration.
Elevations Laboratory B. Existing condition (left) and the intervened condition at an advanced level (right).
Scenario I Laboratory B. Furnished typical plan for Laboratory B after the advanced intervention, highlighting the introduced flexibility in spatial configuration.
