# Conservation and Development of Residential-Type Historical and Cultural Blocks in Guangzhou under Subjective Evaluation

Authors: Yue Ma; Zhongwei Wang; Nan Li; Jue Chen
Journal: International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Historical and cultural blocks not only carry numerous cultural heritages but always undertake urban functions. As a major driver of urban context construction, historical and cultural blocks have never been abandoned by the times. Regardless of the purposes for which they were built in the first place, all historical and cultural blocks should be extended functionally to rejuvenate them in current and future developments. In particular, in single-functional residential-type historical and cultural blocks, the large numbers of traditional architectures left vacant by out-migrating residents can be redeveloped for other functions. The effectiveness of block conservation and development affects the cultural construction of a city. More importantly, it is closely related to all kinds of users in blocks, as users engage in in-depth interactions with environments and are best able to discover the merits of block conservation and development. Moreover, the conservation and optimal design of historical and cultural blocks must, ultimately, be based on the users’ needs. By collecting users’ subjective evaluation opinions about two typical residential-type historical and cultural blocks based on the existing evaluation index and putting them through quantitative analysis, this paper analyzes block status in many aspects. It identifies focuses on optimization, offering references and suggestions for future development.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Historical and cultural blocks constitute an essential part of cultural heritages, as they not only gather large numbers of tangible heritages, such as architectures, streets, and structures, but also retain a series of intangible cultural heritages, like regional cultural features, traditional lifestyles, and so on [1] Meanwhile, historical and cultural blocks still undertake certain social functions in modern cities. Unlike many cultural relics, historical and cultural blocks have never lost their use values and are actively blending into the trend of social development. In addition, historical and cultural blocks are of vital significance for promoting traditional culture, reproducing regional features, and building the urban context network [2]. In this sense, the conservation and development of historical and cultural blocks have always played an essential role in urban construction.As one of the most important cities in Chinese history, Guangzhou is home to many traditional architectures and street heritages, especially the remains from the late Qing Dynasty to the Republic of China era. Having witnessed urban development, they are valuable assets that embody social reforms, traditional building techniques, and aesthetic interests. A total of 26 areas in Guangzhou have been recognized as provincial historical and cultural blocks according to current principles of recognition. These blocks are the priorities of conservation and development at present and in the future. They are mainly concentrated in the old urban districts of Guangzhou (Figure1), including small blocks composed of several streets and large ones covering whole islands and demarcated according to geography, history, features, and traditional architecture distribution. Historically, these 26 blocks came into being for different reasons. Depending on their main functional features and user identities at the beginning, they can be roughly classified into the following types: “residential,” “commercial,” “cultural and educational,” “religious,” “pharmaceutical,” and “military and political,” and “comprehensive.” Most blocks serve more than one function. Notably, residential and commercial functions are usually mixed together, which is mainly attributable to the historical role of Guangzhou as a trading port. These historical and cultural blocks are classified based on their respective prominent features, mainly for the convenience of analysis. In the course of urban development, many blocks have retained their functions and features, while others have gradually changed and begun to take on other functions because they can no longer meet social needs. Finding a way to continue to serve urban development is the inevitable course for historical and cultural blocks to maintain vitality [3].Figure 1
Distribution map and serial numbers of historical and cultural blocks in Guangzhou.Xinhepu Historical and Cultural Block (#24) and Overseas Chinese New Village Historical and Cultural Block (#25) first originated as typical residential blocks. Block #24 used to be a mansion area in the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China era. Block #25 is a villa area built for returned overseas Chinese after the founding of the new China. As can be seen from architectural forms, Block #24 is largely composed of typical detached low-rise dwellings combining Chinese and Western styles. Block #25 is composed of garden villas and apartments with modern Lingnan architectural style (an architectural style prevailing in areas south of the Five Ridges). There are also a few supporting commercials, cultural, and educational architectures in these blocks. As seen from user groups, these two blocks used to be frequented by people of high social status, such as politicians, rich business people, overseas Chinese, literati, and artists, and service workers. Clearly, the attributes of these two blocks were relatively simple in history. Today, the residential function is no longer a major function for either of them. Instead, they have taken a path of diversified development under planning guidance. Block #24 has introduced many featured businesses, such as brand shops, boutique hotels, catering, and creative and cultural entrepreneurship. Cultural and educational functions have also been developed to popularize modern history and promote a patriotic culture based on the existing resources of the block. Block #25 is intended to be built into a cultural, high-tech, and innovative business office park, supported by specialty catering and public service functions for the purpose of value extension [4, 5].


## 2. Subjective Evaluation of Ordinary Users

A sound analysis of block status not only requires professional evaluation but also demands us to examine various aspects of each block from the perspective of ordinary users. This people-oriented approach embodies the philosophy of architectural environment development based on users’ needs [6]. Guided by surveys and interviews and supported by literature data, this approach aims to extract critical questions about block conservation and development and create an evaluation index set (Figure 2). At the same time, users in these blocks are identified and roughly classified according to different behavioral objectives into six types (i.e., residents, visitors (including tourists and users who stay for a short while in these blocks), commercial tenants, corporate employees, street management and service workers, and school teachers and students).Figure 2
Evaluation index set.The evaluation indices defined are used to prepare satisfaction evaluation questionnaires (the process of determining evaluation indicators is described in detail in another), which are then used in interviews of various types of subjects. At least 30 evaluation samples are collected for each type of user so as to ensure the diversity of evaluation information. A total of 187 and 181 samples have been collected for Blocks #24 and #25, respectively. Evaluation grade assignment is performed to obtain the mean value of each index first, as shown in Figure3.Figure 3
Broken line graph of mean values of satisfaction evaluation indices for Blocks #24 and #25.In the evaluation questionnaire, the satisfaction degree of the evaluation subjects is divided into five grades, with 1–5 points from “very satisfied” to “very dissatisfied.” The average satisfaction of valid questionnaires was calculated as a broken line in Figure3. Each breakpoint in Figure 3 corresponds to an evaluation index. The value of an index characterizes the satisfaction of users in this regard. Meanings of different value intervals are as follows: [1–1.5], very satisfactory; [1.5–2.5], satisfactory; [2.5–3.5], acceptable; [3.5–4.5], unsatisfactory; and [4.5–5], very unsatisfactory. The attitudes of evaluation subjects towards various indices of these two blocks are largely “satisfactory” and “acceptable,” so the overall evaluation is satisfactory. Comparatively speaking, Block #24 is slightly superior to Block #25. The results of subjective evaluation help to clarify the relationship between block status and users and offer feedback about the effectiveness of block conservation and construction.


## 3. Effectiveness of Protection and Development of Overall Environmental Construction

Historical and cultural blocks’ overall environmental construction indices measure the following three aspects. The first aspect involves block values. The focus is on whether these two blocks, since their completion, have maintained their place and importance in the city. Block #24 used to be a gathering place for dignitaries. The popularly known title of “Young Master of Dongshan” originated here. It was a time when the identities of block users could exert a decisive influence on social and urban development, so the block played an irreplaceable role in Guangzhou then. The architectural and building techniques and spatial and environmental aesthetics of the block were all top class at that time and had combined Lingnan traditional aesthetics with featured Western elements. The values of Block #24 lie in its exquisite architecture and the influence of its inhabitants on society, economy, and politics. Similarly, Block #25 also attained its place in history, relying on the special identities of its users. After the founding of the new China, many overseas Chinese chose to settle down here and brought back advanced techniques and concepts, rich culture and arts, and a lot of funds. They contributed a lot to the construction of the new China. Block #25 possessed a unique temperament that distinguishes it from other cities as a result of the settlement of numerous celebrities and masters. Geographically, the block is far away from downtown Guangzhou, but its simple and graceful architectures and comfortable and beautiful environments have perfectly embodied the features of modern Lingnan architecture. Block #25 stands out from ordinary villa areas by virtue of its remarkable values, especially the original intention behind its construction and the patriotism and humanism brought about by its inhabitants. The title “First Overseas Chinese Village in China” fully testifies to its national influence.As it could be seen from users’ subjective evaluation, these two blocks are ranked at a moderate level, and Block #24 is slightly superior to Block #25 numerically. This fact suggests that most users are not very optimistic about the continuity of block values. In modern times, the historical values of these two blocks have changed. The patterns of most architectures and streets still remain intact, but their users are no longer limited to dignitaries or overseas Chinese celebrities. Like other ordinary neighborhoods, they are now inhabited by users with different identities. Thus, the gradual weakening of the block values created by special user identities is an inevitable result of the development of times. The transfer of block values to other aspects today is a symbol of the diversification of block values. Taking historical values as an example, these two blocks both have a glorious past. Therefore, the important historical events taking place in these blocks (e.g., the Third CPC National Congress in Block #24) constitute an essential part of their values. However, humanistic values are missing from both blocks, which explains why they have been given a moderate rating. As a result of changing user identities, their original unique humanistic temperament has faded and been replaced by modern urban cultural elements (e.g., CAFE, creative and cultural entrepreneurship, and homestay), resulting in a lack of uniqueness. In terms of locational values, these two blocks are both located in downtown Guangzhou, enjoying convenient transportation conditions and outstanding locational values. In terms of architectural values, the exquisite architectures, street patterns, and garden designs with epoch and regional features are all precious heritages. As for residential and educational values, although the houses in these blocks are old, their environmental and educational resources are still attractive. Economic values are created by other values. Besides the economic values created by residential values, a substantial portion of economic values is also attributable to the diversified development of these blocks stimulated by various types of businesses. The historical, cultural, locational, and architectural values of these blocks also increase the economic values of their businesses.The second aspect of overall environmental construction relates to these blocks’ conservation and creation of overall scenes. After undergoing dramatic social reforms and rapid urban development, neither of these two blocks is able to retain its old appearances or functions. In the conservation of historical and cultural blocks, it is necessary to restore their original appearances and regional features on the one hand and meet the needs of modern urban development on the other. The three evaluation indices of block scenes, namely, integrity, continuity, and internal/external harmony, are introduced exactly to examine the coordination between block conservation and development. From their evaluation results, users are satisfied with Block #24 but not well satisfied with Block #25.The old appearances of historical architectures in Block #24 have been largely restored after several rounds of repair. Currently, historical architectures and modern buildings stand side by side on these blocks. Notably, on quite a few streets, traditional dwellings and modern dwellings each occupy one side, posing a sharp contrast in architectural forms and decorative elements. Some large-volume modern buildings located at the center of conservation areas, such as the Yuegang Building (Figure4), fit poorly with surrounding environments. These modern buildings affect the integrity of historical scenes to some extent. The current practice is to renovate these modern buildings using similar materials, colors, and pavements, such as red bricks and gray plastering. This practice aims to reduce the sense of abruptness caused by heterogeneous forms. By maintaining the dense historical atmosphere in clusters with concentrated historical architectures, the spillover effect of style and temperament can affect streets and architectures outside these clusters. Thus, they enhance the unity and integrity of historical and cultural scenes in these blocks. Block #25 has a small scope and a concentrated distribution of historical heritages. The style of these historical heritages is closer to modern style. This explains why, notwithstanding a large number of modern buildings here, the overall scenes of Block #25 still fit better with surrounding environments than those of Block #24. However, the user evaluation of Block #25 is moderate. Return visits reveal that this is because some users think that renovations have reduced the lasting appeal of historical architecture on the outside. Other users point to the problem of incomplete block optimization. That is, some areas have been repaired in place, while others are left bedraggled and ruined, resulting in damaging the overall scenes. It is also claimed that the expression of the historical and cultural atmosphere is inadequate and insufficient to form overall scenes. Compared with other blocks, Block #25 has a weak sense of time, and its values largely lie with the passions of patriotic personages for the country. When tangible heritages are activated through functional change, their historical values can be easily undermined, making it difficult for them to reflect on block scenes. In this sense, the diversified development of historical and cultural blocks with single functions should consider the conservation of their original value attributes. It would be advisable to moderately increase other functions while highlighting their chief values, thus creating a multilayered, diversified value system.Figure 4
Integrity and continuity of block scenes.The continuity of a block refers to the absence of fragmentation and abruptness in the historical and cultural scenes of the block and the presence of echoing between key historical architectures. Block #24 has a wide scope and a scattered distribution of historical heritages. Greening spaces and archaistic forms can be employed here to create a network that covers the entire block. By contrast, the historical architecture and landscape of Block #25 are compact and continuous in terms of distribution locations. Due to the large differences between architectures in the sense of time and the changes brought about by renovations, some users have doubts about the historical scenes conveyed by these architectures and tend to regard the block as an ordinary villa area while neglecting its historical significance. It is worth mentioning that the lively and vivid graffiti on some enclosures and architecture has attracted numerous tourists (Figure4). The graffiti in Guangzhou mainly depicts the city’s traditional culture and modern arts. Although they are out of touch with block history, they can nevertheless help integrate block scenes and enhance landscape continuity. Integrity and continuity are two major indices, measuring the expression of the overall scenes of historical and cultural blocks. The effectiveness of such expression has a direct bearing on whether these blocks can serve as important nodes of the urban context. A good expression can create a strong sense of immersion in users and further influence their behaviors and thoughts, thus reaching the goals of historical inheritance and cultural edification.Internal/external harmony refers to the fitting between historical and cultural blocks and external environments, especially at the boundaries, as shown in Figure5. Spatially, blocks are demarcated by their external roads. The boundaries of Block #24 are mainly two-lane or one-lane roads instead of urban trunk roads. The trees on the two sides of the edges are tall and luxuriant, and the architectures are mostly dwellings and shops less than 30 m in height. The southern boundary is largely extended along a river and buffered by rich landscapes. Sometimes large-volume modern buildings are blocked by trees, which reduces the sense of pressure imposed by these architectures. According to user feedback, the internal and external elements of the block are smoothly connected. There is no abrupt architectural environment from the internal core historical conservation area to the boundaries. The southern boundary is close to a river. However, the architectures on the two sides of block boundaries are disorderly and unaesthetic. In particular, the burglar meshes, sun shades, shop fronts, and signboards of dwellings slightly compromise the scenes of historical blocks and the city. Block #25 is built on a highland with relatively clear boundaries. Its southern boundary closely adjoins an urban trunk road, with large differences between internal and external scenes. However, the terrain of the block is high and does not connect with external roads, so the block emerges as an independent area. The eastern, northern, and western boundaries are far away from trunk roads, and the architectures on the two sides of these boundaries are mostly dwellings with similar attributes. Modern buildings are basically painted in low-key off-white to reduce sharp color contrasts. However, the large numbers of high-story modern buildings still impose a sense of pressure on the historical architecture in the block. In some places, enclosures are used as boundaries to separate internal and external scenes. Relatively speaking, Block #24 is more closely linked up with the outside world, while Block #25 presents a more significant cohesiveness. As seen from the perspective of three-dimensional spaces, skylines can also serve as block boundaries (Figure 6). Looking upwards at the core conservation areas of these two blocks, people can still get the first glimpse of a few modern buildings. Notably, Block #25 is surrounded by plenty of tall modern buildings with unique appearances. The visual impact of these modern buildings on the historical and cultural atmosphere of the block cannot be ignored.Figure 5
Internal/external harmony of block.Figure 6
Harmony of block skylines.The third aspect of overall environmental construction touches upon users’ subjective feelings about activities in these blocks and their attitudes towards block development. The comfort levels of these two blocks are recognized by most users, especially visitors. This fact testifies to the tourist attractiveness of these two blocks, which cannot be separated from their high greening rates and exquisite, unique historical architecture. By contrast, other types of users have mixed views about these two blocks, mainly because they live and work here and demand more material and spiritual elements. Regarding the degree of recognition of block development, most users say that they are not very clear about the policies on block conservation and development, but they are optimistic, considering the changes already taking place in these blocks. Some users of Block #25 have pointed out a series of problems, including insufficient publicity, dilapidated villas, and surrounding environments, slightly insufficient living facilities, and damaged pavements. In comparison, Block #24 is more open, while Block #25 is more private. Although they are both residential blocks, their temperaments differ, and so do their development strategies.


## 4. Effectiveness of Detailed Optimal Design

To maintain the overall scenes of a historical and cultural block, improve the activity environments of its users, and stimulate its vitality, we need to design block elements in detail optimally. Such optimal design involves a series of complicated and fragmented contents. In particular, in cases where other urban functions are to be implanted into a block based on residential functions, it would be necessary to coordinate many different design details properly. In the evaluation of Blocks #24 and #25, the specific contents about block conservation and development are divided into three parts, namely, resource utilization and activation, environmental optimization and design, and service facility layout.The key to the diversified development of historical and cultural blocks lies in resource utilization and activation. In a block whose original history and culture have been weakened or lost, it would be urgently necessary to conserve and reorganize existing resources and continue their values. In the principles of energy-saving and sustainable development, old blocks are still expected to contribute their shares to urban construction and adapt to the needs of the people and the development of times. Unfortunately, there are always all kinds of contradictions related to resource utilization in the actual conservation and development of block heritages. It may be possible to recover the historical status of a block to the largest extent by reproducing its traditional functions and old appearance. Still, it is impossible to restore its cultural kernel in a changing society. A pure outward show would not be sufficient to support the long-term development of the block. A historical and cultural block is not the simple addition of its individual historical architectures. The charm of a historical and cultural block lies in its rich environmental elements and human activities. The pure reproduction of its old appearance is incapable of maintaining its vitality. This means that resource redevelopment is the inevitable path. Functional transformation and morphological remodeling can indeed change traditional scenes. To that end, a suitable path and a proper degree of renovation should be selected to reconcile the contradiction between history and reality over block heritages [7].In terms of resource utilization, users’ evaluation results indicate that Block #24 is still slightly superior to Block #25. Among various resources, natural resources have been utilized to the most considerable extent. The public green spaces in Block #24 (e.g., sidewalks, pocket parks and river channel) have been renovated into ecological parks through optimal design, for which prizes have been given [8]. In the case of Block #25, the high terrain is fully utilized to build green trails for walking and leisure (Figure 7). The utilization effects of historical architectures and cultural heritages, however, are rated at a moderate level in the user evaluation. According to the planning proposal, the new functions introduced into these two blocks are mainly business places and small office spaces, which are conducive to the utilization of spaces in existing historical architectures, with less environmental pollution and conflicts. Even so, for the purpose of creating novel features for the new types of businesses, it is still necessary to renovate the appearances of historical architectures to varying degrees. In some cases, the improper degrees and modes of renovation have violated the principle of conservation of historical architectures and overall block scenes. Moreover, some historical architectures are poorly maintained and unrepaired, mainly due to property right issues or insufficient funding (Figure 7). There is a patriotic education base in Block #24. Internal exhibitions and external publicities centered around the base have proven effective, but further efforts are still needed to revitalize other cultural forms, such as Cantonese Opera, Dong-Son Culture, and folk arts. The cultural values of Block #25, however, are thin and limited to road names and the former residence of a celebrity.Figure 7
Block resource utilization.The new types of businesses introduced into Block #24 are mainly creative and cultural entrepreneurship, catering, and commercial projects. They are combined with historical buildings to convey cultural connotations in a visitor-friendly manner. The types of businesses serving work and life function mostly emerged in the early stage. The mature shopping environment has gathered popularity for the block and has been rated highly by residents. However, the disorderly appearance here fits poorly with the scenes and temperament of the block. What visitors perceive as the vitality of life may end up impairing the historical temperament of the block (Figure8). Block #25 differs from Block #24 in that the new urban functions are undertaken by the former (mostly headquarters of culture, arts, pharmaceuticals, and high-tech enterprises, as well as a few catering service providers) are mostly introduced into the block under planning guidance. These new urban functions are largely compatible with the style of the block. The commercial facilities serving residential and living functions are slightly insufficient, so their convenience and popularity are in need of improvement. Due to the nature of different types of businesses and the ownership of houses, only a few architectures are open to the public, while others are blocked enclosures. Therefore, visitors may feel a little disappointed about this (Figure 8). The historical buildings and street spaces in Block #24 have more traditional features, so it is rated higher in this regard. In terms of public and community participation in block construction, users say that they will be informed of the construction schedule and progress and invited for discussion and supervision. Communities also organize all kinds of activities to add the joys of life and enhance block cohesion. Community workers say that public enthusiasms still need to be raised [9]. In terms of publicity and branding, Block #25 has low popularity. Many visitors have praised the beautiful environment and several popular restaurants on the block, saying that the block is suitable for walking and leisure but lacks scenic spots worthy of a special visit. The sightseeing value of the block is rated at a low level. In fact, Block #25 has a solid historical and cultural foundation, such as the history of block building in the early years of the new China, the former residences and deeds of celebrities, and the Lingnan architectural style born out of the collision of Chinese and Western cultures, and the concept of garden residence. All these historical and cultural elements can be mined and publicized.Figure 8
Block functions and selection of types of businesses.The second part, environmental optimization and design, describes the specific utilization of various resources and the improvement of residential environments in these blocks. The conservation of tangible heritages by these two blocks has basically followed the principle of “restoring the old as the old.” Notably, when it comes to precious historical architecture, structural walls, doors, windows, and decorations should all be restored as far as possible. However, for the sake of introducing new functions, the historical architectures of these two blocks have been renovated to varying extents. Some users regard such renovations as ingenious and aesthetic, while others think that they destroy the traditional beauty of historical constructions. As far as aesthetics is concerned, there are large cognitive differences between users, and the specific situations of these two blocks are different as well. Block #24 is more of the traditional architectural style, while Block #25 has many modern-style historical architectures. In terms of the overall scenes of historical and cultural blocks, the renovation of historical buildings is supposed to be conducted without damaging their structural forms. The utilization of internal spaces, however, can be reshaped according to the circumstances.By comprehensively analyzing the user evaluation results of these two blocks, it can be seen that users basically recognize the design effects of street scale, landscape greenings, public spaces, and physical environments. The combination of artificial landscaping and natural resource utilization has created stunning ecological landscapes and public activity spaces in these blocks. When evaluated using the street scale index, Block #25 is slightly superior to Block #24. There are many narrow traditional streets in Block #24, with low-rise buildings on the two sides; hence it is very walk-friendly. The problem is that the popularization of modern means of transportation is constantly squeezing pedestrian spaces, making narrow streets even more cramped. Although some streets are used as one-lane roads, the vehicles parked on the two sides of roads still impact users’ sensory spaces, causing some discomfort (Figure9). In the new round of optimal construction, the roads have been widened, and the height differences between sidewalks and motorways on some streets have been canceled and replaced by different materials and colors. This design increases the utilization efficiency and walk-friendliness of roads. The roads in Block #25 are wider, and vehicles have a lesser impact on users’ sense of space. The fluctuations of architecture height with terrain change also increase the richness of sensory spaces. However, some pavements have been seriously damaged, making it difficult to solve the problem of waterlogging on rainy days (Figure 10).Figure 9
Squeezed pedestrian spaces (Block #24).Figure 10
Waterlogged pavement (Block #25).The physical environment index of a block measures the quality of the block’s thermal, lighting, and acoustic environments. Under subjective evaluation, physical environments are judged mainly based on users’ subjective feelings. In terms of thermal environments, these two blocks have better sensible temperatures than other areas of the city, mainly by virtue of their high greening rates. However, the humidity is slightly higher in these two blocks as well. The small alleys and narrow lanes spread all over Block #24 can facilitate ventilation, remove moisture, and lower temperature, offering a high comfort level. By contrast, Block #25 is wider and more open, and the impact of humidity is lesser. In terms of lighting environments, resident feedback shows that Block #24 is characterized by the small spacing between dwellings, luxuriant trees, and slightly poor lighting, but the glare problem is less serious accordingly. Both Blocks #24 and #25 are highly praised by users for their sound acoustic environments. All the sections in the block, except those close to trunk roads, major commercial districts, or schools, are relatively silent, and interferences from sightseeing are not very serious.The third part is about service facility layout, which is not only a basic element for blocks to undertake diversified urban functions but also a symbol that embodies the modernity of historical blocks. Thus, the perfection of modern service facilities and their organic integration into historical blocks also constitute a priority of block revitalization. According to user evaluation results, all the indexes, except parking facilities, are rated as “good” or “ordinary,” which suggests that users still have expectations for service facility layout. Leisure facilities include leisure chairs, fitness places, fitness equipment, green trails, sandbank steps, and children’s toys. They not only provide recreational spaces for residents but also make it convenient for visitors to take a rest and take part in community cultural activities. In this regard, Block #24 has received a higher rating as, besides a newly renovated riverbank park, there are also several small pocket parks and fitness places. However, on criss-cross streets, there is a lack of rest facilities, especially for tourists. Instead of searching all the way, they hope that scattered rest facilities can be built on their touring paths. Block #25 has a smaller scope and fewer public activity spaces, equipment, and scattered leisure facilities (Figure11). The block sits back against an urban park, but in the block, there are green trails collocated with featured wooden trestles. Tourists say that the main activities in the block are walking and photo shooting and that there is a lack of facilities for gathering and other activities. The shops and former residences of celebrities in the block can attract some users, but their numbers are limited. Users who are working or living on the block hope that more activity spaces and wider sidewalks will be provided here. In the background of city-wide waste sorting, these two blocks’ sanitary facilities and environments have been greatly improved. The piling of wastes is sometimes seen in sections under renovation and upgrading. Weeds and wastes are also found around vacant or unused villas. In addition, the styles of waste bins and stations here are also incompatible with the overall style of the block. Waste bins and stations are indispensable and used in large numbers, and their appearance styles constitute an essential part of block scenes. The selection of waste bins and stations embodies the importance of detailed design. Safety facilities relate to the life and property safety of users. In this regard, these two blocks have similar ratings. The users of Block #24 have pointed out the problems of old houses and electrical safety, stressing that the tangled wires and cables are unaesthetic and unsafe. The riverbank park is unsafe, and, in particular, sandbank steps pose the risk of falling into the water. Furthermore, the spaces around schools are cramped and can easily cause traffic jams and pose safety risks. Block #25 has received a high rating in this regard. However, users have mentioned the problems of the traffic risk posed by the lack of pedestrian-vehicle separation, the occasional waterlogging due to pavement blocking by the sewer system, and the peeling of enclosures and houses (Figure 11).Figure 11
Service facilities.Parking is a prevalent problem in modern cities. With the pushing of urban boundaries, people are traveling within increasingly larger scopes and requiring more comfortable and convenient means of transportation. Combined with the sound development of the economy and the reduced prices of industrial products, vehicle ownership is also increasing rapidly. To seek diversified development, designers must consider all kinds of user needs on historical and cultural blocks, including residence, commerce, business, tourism, and education. The gathering of various user groups inevitably leads to an increase in vehicles. In this case, inadequate transportation and parking facilities will block the development of blocks. As seen from the user evaluation of these two blocks, there is still room for parking optimization, especially in the case of Block #24. In the face of large pedestrian volumes and narrow streets, how to allocate parking, driving, and walking spaces poses a very critical problem. In some streets, the addition of parking spaces has compromised the sense of space (Figure12). Currently, there are more than 60 parking areas in Block #24 (core conservation areas of historical and cultural blocks), which are relatively evenly distributed. Public parking areas are mainly composed of roadside parking spaces. The parking lots of some commercial institutions are also used for public parking. Even so, many users (especially visitors who are unfamiliar with the block) still complain that it is challenging to find a parking space on the block. The narrow, one-lane streets also add to the difficulty. Due to the large scope of the block, the supporting effect of external parking lots is limited. Users still wish to find sufficient parking spaces in the block. In Block #25, there are about 25 parking areas (core conservation areas of historical and cultural blocks), which are mostly composed of roadside parking spaces as well. Notwithstanding the smaller number of parking areas, the wider roads and better view here still make it easier to find a parking space here. However, the parking spaces here are only open to residents and are not very visitor-friendly (Figure 12). Thanks to the narrower scope and smaller pedestrian volumes of the block and the existence of quite a few public parking lots, the parking problem of the block can be alleviated to some extent. However, considering that the block will have to accommodate more users in future diversified development, the addition and improvement of parking facilities are necessary.Figure 12
Parking problem in the block.The lighting index mainly measures the nighttime lighting environments and the nightscape design of blocks. These two blocks are rated highly by users in this regard. In particular, the Western style nightscape of Block #24 is highly praised by visitors. The riverway park is also decorated with night lighting. Ordinary street lighting is not very bright but sufficient for a walk. The light from shops and dwellings can also add to street lighting. The nightscape lighting of Block #25 is ordinary and mainly used for night traffic and activities. There is a sharp contrast between the quiet block and the roaring downtown at night (Figure13). Road names constitute a major feature of Block #25, as they have contained rich patriotic connotations. However, the street signage system does not match these road names, as it only indicates emerging industries and major architectures. The advertising signs of most shops are inconspicuous and hidden by green plants. The humble design ensures that the overall scenes of blocks are not significantly impacted. Some signboards, however, are very publicizing and not harmonious with buildings and surrounding environments. On Block #24, there are many featured signs, which are mainly concentrated around the former site of the Third CPC National Congress. There is a lack of clear directional signs for other streets and traditional dwellings. Although online maps are very detailed and capable of providing useful directions, the signs in actual scenarios are also indispensable environmental elements. In fact, they can be blended into block scenes in many forms, such as artistic standing signs, wall paintings, green plants, multimedia screens, and light and shadows. The common display modes commonly used for indoor exhibitions can also be partially used in outdoor environments to increase exploratory pleasure for users. The signboards in Block #24 are more complicated than those in Block #25. Besides the types of businesses introduced under planning guidance, there are also some long-standing commercial tenants who have put up all kinds of advertising signboards, which greatly impact the appearance of traditional architectures (Figure 14).Figure 13
Block nightscape.Figure 14
Signs and advertising facilities.


## 5. Conclusions

Blocks #24 and #25 are two typical cases of block transition from residential to diversified type. They are both assuming more urban functions, but the specific directions of utilization are different, which is determined by the existing conditions of these blocks. Block #24 covers a large scope and is closely linked up with surrounding environments, making it convenient for a gathering of popularity. The new functions here, like shops and exhibition and display places, also tend to be more open and accessible to the public. The internal and external appearances of traditional dwellings can be easily exhibited and can actively present the achievements of local architectural techniques and arts. The popularity gathered may not be able to reproduce the social culture of the block in history, but it can nevertheless satisfactorily express local culture and local customs. Block #25 is a relatively independent block that fits poorly with surrounding environments, and the number of famous scenic sports is also small, so Block #25 is slightly inferior to Block #24 in popularity. For this reason, Block #25 has different development priorities and attaches greater importance to a business office, striving to create a high-tech, cultural industry park. The houses with distinctive regional features in the block are perfectly suited to exhibit the features of different enterprises and, to some extent, respond to the original intention of the block, that is, to build a villa area for returned overseas Chinese intending to invest in the construction of our country.The subjective evaluation of users is an examination of the development achievements of historical and cultural blocks. It helps to clarify block status and identify the focuses of optimization. Most users rate these two blocks at high levels, but they do have pointed out some fields in which improvements can be made. The conservation and utilization of blocks constitute a dynamic, ongoing process that needs constant repair and renovation. It requires close attention from the government, academic circles, and ordinary users, no matter the renovation of inharmonious layout, the activation of traditional architectures, and the improvement of facility environments. In particular, the public should be guided to appreciate cultural heritages, understand their values, and know the basic principles of conservation and utilization. Historical and cultural blocks are distinguished from ordinary cultural relics, most prominently by the rich sensory experiences created by them, including touring and in-depth interactions. It should be noted that the blocks’ users themselves also constitute a part of block culture. An immersive atmosphere can imperceptibly influence its users, thus better passing on and continuing the historical culture and unique temperament of a city.The fact that historical and cultural blocks undertake more diversified urban functions means that there are more users with different identities. Consequently, the process of block revitalization should give consideration to the needs of both the original users and the new users with various identities that are pouring into the block in large numbers [10]. For Block #24, the original users are residents and some shop operators. The new users are mostly entrepreneurs, block service management staff, and visitors. Among them, visitors, especially tourists, constitute the primary source of vitality. They can drive block economy, attract more operators, and increase the utilization rate of traditional architectures. As a result, the daily maintenance of houses and surrounding environments can be afforded to carry on the grace of traditional architectures and blocks. The better environments further attract more visitors, thus creating a delicate cycle. The same is true of Block #25, except that the main drivers of Block #25 are entrepreneurs and their employees. The development direction of Block #25 is a SOHO park. That is, entrepreneurs are to be attracted by ideal environments and resident enterprises so that they will undertake the daily maintenance of traditional architectures and surrounding environments in the block. The purpose is to form a certain degree of aggregation gradually and create an innovative park that integrates high-tech, cultural, and artistic functions. Notably, the renovation of traditional architecture in this cycle must be moderate and should not compromise the overall historical scenes of the block. This is also the most significant advantage that distinguishes an innovative park from ordinary commercial and industrial parks.Users with different identities have different purposes and ways of seeing a block. After performing the Chi-squared test on evaluation, identities are used as the variable to obtain test results [11]. It is found that different users hold very different attitudes on many evaluation indices. The persons responsible for formulating and implementing block conservation and development strategies must weigh the needs of various types of users before making the following decisions: whether to add life service providers to meet the needs of residents or increase creative and cultural entrepreneurship businesses to attract more visitors; whether to retain the old appearances of traditional architectures in the principle of “restoring the old as the old,” or allow for proper renovation and utilization according to the needs of the times; and whether to encourage vehicle traffic for the convenience of travels, or reduce the number of vehicles to restore the historical atmosphere of blocks. The numerous points of contradiction encountered in the conservation of historical and cultural blocks are rooted in the complexity of users [12]. By organizing a subjective evaluation of subjects with different identities, we hope to identify the points of contradiction and perform analysis and design on the premise of balancing the interests of all parties concerned.



---

*Source: 8589660-2022-08-08.xml*