How Buildings Last - What happens after they're built for adaptability?

1

HOW BUILDINGS LAST

What happens after they’re built for adaptability?

[Foundry Studio, Pre-retrofit]

[Foundry Studio, Post-retrofit]

C H I D O C H A S H E VA N E S S A M AW O N E K E MArch Environmental Theory U2087969

2

Abstract This dissertation intends to look at the different methodologies of adaptable architecture in the last hundred years and evaluate if these strategies will create durable buildings or not.

As seen on the top left of this page, is an image of Stewart Brand’s book ‘How buildings learn, What happens after they’re built’ . I have shaped my essay around his theories and conclusions about adaptable architecture, and have as a result decided to make my front cover and title of essay to imitate this famous book cover. I not only agree but I also argue some of Mr Brands opinions.

I will aslo analyse how the embodied and operational carbon is altered by adaptive design against non adaptive edifices.

Contents 1. A Summary of the History of Adaptivity ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 2. Stewart Brand: Conservatism and Looking at Buildings as Layers ....................................................................................................................................... 7 3. Methods or Strategies of Adaptability 3. 1 Modular Construction Nakagin Capsule Tower......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Megastructures 6 Orsman Road ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 3.3 Seperating ‘Servant’ from ‘Service’ Spaces Centre Pompiduo .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 3.4 Designing for Disassembly ‘Nest We Go’ by Kengo Kuma (and Japeanease Architecture)............................................................................................................................................... 16 3.5 Recycling and Reusing Case Study: Ningbo History Museum .................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 4. The Importance of Retrofit ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 5. Adaptability and Carbon Footprint........................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 7. Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22

3

4

2.2 A History of Adaptivity PREHISTORIC & PREMODERNISM 1851 Primaval Form

Japeanese Traditional Homes

Crystal Palace - temporary and prefabricated building.

1925 Schröder House De Stijl architecture with movable panels.

Fig 1 (Schmidt, 2014)

Fig 3

Fig 5 (Schmidt, 2014)

Fig 7

17th-19th Century

1914 Maison Domino Le Corbusier‘Plan Libre’, one of the first open plans.

Primative Architecture

European Venucular Architecture

Fig 2 (Schmidt, 2014)

Fig 6 (Schmidt, 2014) Fig 4 (Schmidt, 2014) 1800’s Industrial Revolution

MODERNISM

1957-1961 Richard Medical Lab Louis Kahn’s ‘served and servant spaces’.

Fig 9

1952 Unite d’Habitation Mixed use Architecture and megastructure.

Fig 8 (Schmidt, 2014)

5

POSTMODERNISM 1961 Tange’s Yamanishi Offices that can be extended upwards and horizontally.

1972

Fig 11

Fig 13 (Arcspace, 1972)

1960s Pneumatic Architecture

Fig 10 (Schmidt, 2014)

Nakagin Capsule Tower Metabolist Architecture.

1977 Pompidou Centre

1960’s, 1970’s, and 1980’s ‘Big Box Buildings’ or ‘Big Sheds’.

2020 6 Orsman Road Megastructure using sustainable approaches.

Fig 15

Fig 17

Fig 19 (Reeves, 2020)

1967 Reliance Controls Edifice Had an extendable plan! By Norman. F and Richard. R

1972 Unite d’Habitation Hertzinger’s “unfinished” architecture.

1989 School of Construction Ehrenkrantz ceiling service design

2010 Mosque of Medina Using “intelligent” architecture for adaptivity.

Fig 12 (Schmidt, 2014)

Fig 14

Fig 16 (Schmidt, 2014)

Fig 18

2015 UN 17 Suistainablee Goals Paris Agreement

1. A Summary of the History of Adaptivity

1

Prehistoric and Pre-Modernism The primeval form [Fig 1], that later evolved to the primitive hut [Fig 2], was architecture that was made of two parts - the branches which acted as the support or structure and the leaves which were the skin or the protection.

(Frampton, 1980). In prehistoric times most lived in hut’s said to be square shaped plans with pitched roofs, and for the hunters or Egyptians they lived in caves and for the Chinese, in tents. (Weston, 2011) These were all adaptive single spaces that could accommodate a lot of different activities such as sleep, eating, working etc (Fletcher, 1946) which had a supportive structure and skin (Leupen, 2006). These buildings were said to be “functional responses to local climate...availability of materials and temporal requirements, nomadic, seasonal or settled” (Horning, 2009) (Schmidt, 2014).

Pre-Modernism There are a few examples of pre-modern buildings in both the eastern and western parts of the world. An example of the Eastern part are Japanese homes [Fig 3] . (Weston, 2011) Traditional Japanese home spaces were determined as the difference in measurement between columns known as Ken with the lengths and widths of the spaces all multiples of this measurement (90cm x 180cm), leaving room to extend spaces or change them easily. The columns are load bearing and thin enough to fit into the outer wall (12-15cm), with beams and trusses that can also be removed or extended. Rooms are parted with sliding windows and partitions and also connected to the outer wall through this mechanism. (Harai, 1998) Their rooms were multi-functional and had no apparent labels, with additional storage spaces (Nute, 2004). Japanese regarded homes as temporary structures (ephemeral) and would therefore construct buildings that can be adapted with lightweight materials and nonpermanent connections (can be assembled and reassembled). (Kuma, 2005) This can be linked to Kengo Kuma ‘Nest We Grow’ case study.

Another good example, on the Western side of the world, is European vernacular homes [Fig 4] that were built in the 17th until about the 19th century. They are buildings that are durable and this is the key to their adaptability. These homes were very spacious and had load bearing brick

2 walls supporting them. (Venturi and Brown, 2004) (Hertzberger, 2005). They had partitioned walls that had unambiguous spaces, allowing any room to be adapted to anything.

Modernism and Post Modernism The concept of flexibility and adaptability wasn’t really considered until the 20th century increase of modernity. (Forty, 2000) The reason for modernism came about because of the Industrial revolution in the 19th century. This is because of not only social changes, but the introduction of urbanism, the demands of buildings, the introduction of new materials and building methodologies. (Julier, 1993) Functionalist Architecture came about with the famous architectural term “form follows function” meaning that form can be defined by the building’s function or functions. (Weston, 2011) However, it was argued that building solutions became far too specific (Hertzberger, 2005) and created one function: rooms, buildings etc Creating defined spaces. Therefore there was now a demand to create more flexible spaces. In the context of the changing world, it is criticised that Functionalism was not made for such an environment - it doesn’t account for the fact that the users may do things differently or would want to combine functions- (Venturi and Brown, 2004) and (Gausa, 2003).

Different aproaches of Adaptability Loose Fit The author states that the term ‘Loose fit’ actually was already there in premodernist times and that functionalism became like a “glove” that had a specific fit (function). (Lerup, 1977) Loose fit is having generous dimensions of space to allow for future reconfiguration (Sutherland, 1984). The disadvantage of this is the costs, which includes structural costs - it is more cost effective to have rigid programming and sizes.

Open Plan (Plan Libre) Corbusier got his influence from his teacher and Architect Auguste Perret who believed in using concrete framed structures with non-load bearing walls (Watkin, 2000). Maison Domino was a diagram of two concrete floors with slabs, columns and sets of stairs [Fig 6] (Jordan, 1972) but Corbisieur called it

3 plan libre meaning free plans (no walls). This would mean walls can go anywhere depending on functional needs. This can also be considered loosefit.

In 1930’s Mies Van der Rohe also went further with this concept of ‘open plan’ with even bigger spaces, he called this ‘Universal Space’ (Weston, 2011) with minimal structural components and evenly spread servicing (Weston, 2011).

In the 1950’s Louis Kahn expanded this ‘universal space’ further by proposing ‘servant’ and ‘served spaces’, this in an attempt to have an open plan free from obstructions, an example of this is the Richard Medical Laboratories [Fig 9].

This is where the services are located in brick towers (service ducts). (Venturi and Brown, 2004). However, the building did not do a good job for the users (science laboratories) as it had big windows that allowed solar glare and cement dust would come from the exposed structures. (Rybczynski, 2001).

The Pompidou Centre [Fig 15] also followed Louis Kahn’s ideologies, with its services seperated onto it’s exterior. (Steele, 1997) However, the building underwent renovations that went on for two years and cost 90 million dollars and half was spent on the exposed facade (apparent servant space).

Ehrenkrantz and Wachsmann created buildings with services at the ceiling divided [Fig 16] by lightweight frame construction with partitions that can be dismounted, for the School of Construction Systems Development (SCSD).

(Weston, 2011) Prefabrication An example of the beginning of prefabrication is the Crystal Palace designed

by Joseph Paxton [Fig 5]. (Gibb, 1999) This three storey exhibition hall was assembled quickly, then disassembled to be located in another place altogether called Lambeth. The building used an iron frame with wooden cladding or glass and timber columns - it also used prefabricated louvers on its exterior that could open and close. (Anthony, 2008)This was due to the industrialisation of aluminum which could be movable and demountable.

The Schröder House [Fig 6] by Architect Gerrit Rietveld is actually called ‘De Stijl’ Architecture and this brings out the idea of movable panels in a clients home to support their changing lifestyle. The upper floor is open plan but can

be subdivided into rooms through gliding doors and revolving panels . It’s a modern solution however it is built with brick and timber (Song, 2008).

4

The introduction of “big box buildings” or can be called “big sheds” [Fig 17] were large open one-storey built spaces, with one main room which were used for retail (Christensen, 2008). Wilkinson writes there are large spanned buildings for transportation hubs or industrial work (Wilkinson, 1991). Pawley adds that their very simple construction meant that costs were at minimum (Pawley, 1998). Also some have been used for other needs such as churches, museums, community centers, offices etc. (Pawley, 1998) Kinetic Architecture Kinetic architecture is to do with the idea of portable architecture but Architecture that can also change its shape (such that were also in prehistoric times) (Kronenburg, 1996) this can be the scaling up of one part or the whole building because of the ever changing environment (Schmidt, 2014).

Megastructures On of the best definitions I’ve heard about megastructures is by Alison (Alison et al, 2006): “ …buildings on a massive scale, heroic structures to which smaller pods, capsules and partitions could be added or taken away: quietly relocated according to daily or hourly spatial demand.”

These megastructures rather disregard the fixed Functionalism and embrace flexibility with the ever changing society. An example of this is the housing apartments called Unite d’Habitation Marseille by Le Corbusier- Mixed Use Architecture which contain 321 apartments, shops, infants school, hotel and gymnasium [Fig 8] Intending to meet all the needs of the community in one place with added circulation space that encouraged interaction between neighbors (Leupen, 2006).

The rise of the similar term’s Archigram (founded by young British Architects) and Metabolism (by a group of Japanese Architects) (Jenks, 1973) A Metabolist called Fumihiko Maki said megastructures are the following: “modular units (with a short life span) that attached to structural framework [with a longer life span]” (Lin, 2010) [Fig 13] Archigram and Metabolism

5 both had large scale megastructures with frameworks that could have prefabricated lightweight homes that could be inserted or taken out. This is very similar to Le Corbusier’s ‘bottle rack’ concept where the bottle rack symbolised the main support framework and the prefabricated changeable dwellings were the supposed ‘bottles’ called capsules that could be put in and taken out. (Schneider and Till, 2007) Metabolism was known for prefabrication, modular design, growth (or shrinkage) and renewal (Koolhaas and Obrist, 2011). Building megastructures was a clever way to respond to user needs. This can also be linked to the concept of layers.

Tange’s Yamanishi Press Office [Fig 11] constructed in 1961 was built in a way that could permit extension upwards if needed in the future, with its towers at different heights. Basically building like an “unfinished” building, you could say. These 16 cylindrical towers kept mechanical services and circulation and allowed for the other three parts to have free flow open office spaces and functional needs. (Lin, 2010) Pneumatic Architecture Pneumatic Architecture begun by Architects who experimented with inflammable materials and tensile structures [Fig 10] in the 1960’s (Alison et al. 2006). It went hand- in- hand with the industrial revolution (Prove, Fuller) and the of the creation of better materials that were more lightweight, portable and cost effective (Herzog, 1972) It created temporary Architecture with new unique shapes. It is defined as “supported by the difference of pressure between the air inside and outside… air is pumped in through fans… for ventilation … sealed to prevent its escape. Entrance is through its airlock”.

(Fleming et al.) Today these types of structures can be made for movable and temporary or permanent domes, fairground structures, pavilions and so much more. (Fleming et al.)

Intelligent and Adaptive Architecture After the evolving kinetic architecture, ‘intelligence” in buildings came about first in the USA. This involved the integration of computer technology into our buildings, that effectively responded to change (Nicholas Megropone, 1975) (Harrison, 1992) For example, these technologies included management building programmes for example BMS or BAS, which were hardwares and

6 softwares provided to control and also manage mechanical and electrical systems such as ventilation (heating and cooling), lighting, security (locking and unlocking doors) to meet user requirements. (Harison, 1992) (Beesley et al., 2008) The Mosque of Medina uses “intelligence” [Fig 18] as the pillars that open up, at the Medina prayer courtyard, to block sunlight during prayer time.

(Negroponte, 1975) (Beesley et al., 2008) (Sekratarin, 2009) “Unfinished” Architecture This is more the user oriented design, where the user can choose whatever they want to do with a space. Giving the user more control. (Jencks, 1973) An example of this is the building called the Central Beheer in Apeldoorn by Hertzberger [Fig 14] which creates spaces that permit users to bring in their own belongings to make their spaces fit them. This makes spaces open and unpredictable. (Weston, 2011)

2. Stewart Brand: Building in Layers and Conservatism

7

This book ‘How Buildings Learn’ is what you could call “steps toward an adaptive architecture”, well that is according to Stewart Brand. (Brand, 1997)

Figure 26 Shearing layers of change. (Brand, 1997)

Figure 27 A graph showing the expenditure of a building, demonstrating that space plan and services is spent on more than structure. (Brand, 1997)

Layers Layers were first derived from Frank Duffy (president of the RIBA 19931995 who said: ‘...there is no such thing as a building… a properly conceived building has several layers of longevity of built components’ . These components he states are the Shell, the Services, the Scenery and Set. Stewart Brand took Duffy’s “four S’s” to produced own his “six S’s”. Which are: • Site • Structure - foundation and load bearing components. It is expensive to change. They can last between 30-300 years, but on average 60 years.

• Skin - better skins are airtight and better insulated. Changed every 20 years.

• Services - 7 to 15 years • Space Plan - 3 years homes 30 years • Stuff- changed daily, weekly or monthly. (Brand, 1997) [Fig 26] Duffy and Brand expresses that thinking about designing a building with a time-laden focus can hence help us create adaptable buildings (Brand, 1997) . From this I can conclude that spending the most money on Structure then supposed to servives, to get a durable and quality material [Fig 27] would be more strategic.‘Buildings rule us via their time layering at least as much as we rule them’ this is a quotation from Robert V. O’Neil who speaks about the ‘Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems’ (Brand, 1997). He relates how the ecosystem in itself has different layers, just like buildings, and looking at ecosystems can help us understand the rates of change of each layer or component. For example he uses hummingbirds and flowers as something he considered ‘quick’ but redwood trees would be ‘slow’. He then concludes that the slower components are higher in hierarchy than the quick, stating: ‘The dynamics of the system will be dominated by the slow components, with the rapid components simply following along.’ meaning that as Mr Brand says the ‘slow constraints quick; slow controls quick’. (Brand, 1997) This simply means that, in Mr Brand’s six s’s, site dominates structure, structure dominates skin and so on and so on. For example, in a developing cities, often the site

remains resistant to change, with its property lines even in some disasters such as in floods or fires (i.e. Great Fire of London, 1666). Structure comes after the site and is another integral part. For example, with its foundation as the most important part of the building, if it isn’t to standard it will cause problems to the whole building. Problems such as a weak foundation would limit the height of the building (Brand, 1997) . This very much relates to the Nakagin case study, where the structural change wear and tear effected the capsules, so much so that they had to detached from the structure.

Figures 28 Change of the garage from the outside 1995 to 1990. (Brand, 1997)

Figure 29 Interior changes from 1925-1993 from an Automative Service shop to a clothing store. (Brand, 1997)

8

Stewart Brand highlights that it is important that these layers remain conveniently separate, or in a way that can be separated and argues that ‘embedding the systems together may look efficient at first but over time it is the opposite and destructive’ (Brand, 1997). He states that there has to be an allowance of ‘slippage between the differently-paced systems of ‘Site, Structure, Skin…’ and so on (Brand, 1997). The floating slab method “slabon-grade” is an example of ‘embedding the systems together’ , where pipes are hidden underground and not easily accessed, there’s no basement to keep services for easy access. (Brand, 1997).

Retrofitting Garage Spaces An example of this separation of layers and how it is good for changes can be found in Barsotti’s Automotive Service shop case study. What used to be strictly for cars [Fig 28] [Fig 29], became a florist, then an aerobics studio and then eventually a clothing store (Brand, 1997). What made this building so good for retrofitting is the fact that the Structure and the Skin were very simple and separated, with the structure made of steel trusses and column free [Fig 29] (initially to let cars go through easily) (Brand, 1997). This made the space so adaptive to many different uses, with its addition of large windows added to the space. This building went from being used in 1925 to 1993- [Fig 29] with such durable structure and skin that it has remained unchanged for an astounding seventy years (Brand, 1997). Maybe the conclusion from this is building spacious open plan spaces, with structures and skins that are not only durable but separated from Skin and other elements, are good quality buildings that can be possibly adapted in the future. When you make a building durable and adaptable, then retrofit can come to play. Quote for retrofitting : ‘Age plus adaptivity is what makes a building come to be loved. (Brand, 1997)’

Figure 30 San Francisco Victorian houses, though ornamental decorations didn’t last the house remained intact for more than a hundred years (1887-1991).

(Brand, 1997)

Figure 31 The floor plans and section showing its flexibility. (Brand, 1997)

9 Conservatism Steward Brand talks about initial conservatism, at design stage, as a good solution to building for change. He argues that conservatism; by this Mr Brand means design that imitates the style of the local vernacular architecture; responds well to the local community (Brand, 1997). This is because it is familiar to the community, tried and tested (and you know the materials last), responds well to the climate, as well as the local culture (Brand, 1997). . It also conforms to basic living standards. Furthermore, avoiding the chance of taking on new ‘trendy’ materials that would not last or not perform well over the years. These ‘trendy’ buildings also have a risk of looking ordinary and not ‘unique’ (Brand, 1997). ‘Honoring the future begins with honoring the past’, Mr Brand says (Brand, 1997). In addition, these vernacular buildings, as explained previously in the historical section [Fig 4], are adaptable, with usually rooms without specific functions or that are mixed use.

Making buildings last by using quality materials and also great builders, even though it is very costly (Brand, 1997), is another strategy to create a building that can be adapted and that can last.

Another good strategy is to build in a square shape or a rectangular shape, this is able to be partitioned effectively and easily [Fig 31] (Brand, 1997).

This may be boring to some Architects but complex shapes are expensive to construct, hard to maintain and change. Futhermore, how to make spaces adaptable to change through space planning is to separate generous circulation space (stairs, corridors, bathrooms can be squeezed in as well as closet spaces) from usable spaces (rows of rooms without specific functions) [Fig 31] (Brand, 1997). Anne Vernez speaks about this approach in her book ‘Built for Change’ where she speaks about the wooden framed San Francisco “painted lady” houses [Fig 30] that have shown to last a long time (Brand, 1997). This sounds alot like Louis Kahn’s theory of ‘servant’ and ‘service’ spaces [Fig 9]. The flexibility of these houses were later shown by their ability to become flats of two or even three, each room having ventilated windows, access to corridors and doors accessing adjacent rooms (Brand, 1997). .

3. Approaches of Adaptability

10

3.1 Modular Construction

Figure 32 Nakagin Capsule Tower in its context (Arcspace, 1972)

Figure 33 Axonometric of the capsule. (DesignBoom, 2023)

Figure 34 Detailed plain of how the capsules can be extended, as well as detailed connections from capsule to concrete core. (DesignBoom, 2023)

The Nakagin Capsule Tower The Nakiagin Capsule Tower [Fig 32] was designed by Architect Kisho Kurokawa and built in Ginza, Tokyo (Sveiven, 2011). It tries to be sustainable and recyclable, created for traveling business men that worked in Tokyo (Sveiven, 2011). Metabolic buildings are living microorganisms that can change to cater the needs of the city and the expanding of cities (Sveiven, 2011). This is the perfect example of metabolism in motion, where Kisho uses capsuales [Fig 33] or modular construction to produce an adaptable building that is responsive to a city that is constantly moving and changing. ‘The modules were designed to be swapped in and out, like the cells of an organism constantly renewing itself’ (Block, 2021).

The building has a main structural core, which were two interconnected concrete shafts (Block, 2021). Each steel capsule is prefabricated off site and is 4 by 2.5 metres, made for the comfortable living of a single occupant [Fig 33] (Sveiven, 2011). Furniture like sinks, tables, toilets etc are also installed offsite [Fig 35]. The capsules are then taken onsite, lifted by a crane and fixed unto the concrete shaft. Interior spaces can then be expanded by adding a futher capsule (Sveiven, 2011) [Fig 34]. The whole building is made out of 140 capsules staked to about 14 stories and rotated in different angles, wrapped around the perimeter of both concrete shafts [Fig 32] (Sveiven, 2011).

Opportunities and Constraints One of the advantages of scheme is that it took only thirty days to build (Block, 2021) and would inevitably only take a matter of hours to replace parts , in terms of the steel capsules and other snaller parts. This type of fast adaptability is essentail for rapidly chamging cities with rapid growth, this type of model can solve the problem of the demand of housing in urban cities.

Not only housing but other functionalities that are also desired, in a urban landscape. In the design process , this also forced unique collaborations with scientists, designers and industrial designers to come up with something like this in the early stages of design (rather than later which usually happens), therefore creating a better design and a better managed design process.

Figure 35 The original capsule design and layout. (Arcspace, 1972)

Figure 36 Capsule that has been converted into an office, demonstrating the flexibility of the capsules. (Minami, 2017)

11 Unfortunately, there were problems with the design and it ended up being demolished, mainly the core shaft which suffered deteriotation (Sveiven, 2011) and some steel capsules were preserved and used for other fuctions (Sveiven, 2011) such as storage units or put in exhibition, some where even abondoned (Sveiven, 2011). The capsules were meant to be replaced every 25 years but because of lack of funding, this could not be achieved (Block, 2021). The capsules were meant to be replaced every 25 years but because of lack of funding, this could not be achieved (Block, 2021). There was also lack of maintenance for over thirty three years of being built, leading to to ruined pipes and drainage systems (Sveiven, 2011). It was said the design was also rushed, designed in four months), with the designing still being done even in the construction process (Sveiven, 2011). This meant that the building might not have been built to its full potential, as the design had a great concept, but lacked in excecution and did not achieve the lasting that the designer intended.

I believe that this concept of a metabolic architecture, by adding or removing modular capsules according to demand, is a good and strategic idea. My suggestion is to consider the “six S’s” according to Steward Brand which are site, structure, skin, services, space plan and stuff (Brand, 1997). Using this theory we can aim to reach maximum time spans for each layer. For example when we look at the layer ‘structure’ (the two core concrete shafts) if they were made out of a concerete mix ratio that had stronger and more durable properties, the building could have endured more years. Also, investing more money on the main structure could have made the buildinglast longer. The ‘skin’ (according to Stewart Brands six s’) (Brand, 1997) of the capsules actually did last, with some even been converted to offices [Fig 36], demonstrating how flexible these capsules were, with only the furniture needing to be stripped of, which is expected as furniture only lasts a few years.

This shows that the steel capsules did last, but it should not have outlasted the main core construction that held the capsules together; the concrete shafts.

On the other hand, if the building had been maintained and inspected every year, problems wouldn’t have gone unnoticed, like the pipe leak and could have been fixed quicker. People here needed to be intrested in the presevation of this building and this is stressed by the photographer of [Fig 36] Minami saying “There is not that much emphasis on the preservation of modern architecture in Japan,” (Minami , 2017). So it is not only important to create a flexible building but preserving it for future use is also just as important.

3.2 Megastructures

12

Orsman Road The building 6 Orsam Road is a flexible timber and steel office in Hackney London, by the Regents Canal (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020). This constructions aims to reduce, reuse and recycle and also produce a zero carbon building by, for example, using left over CLT to produce furniture (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020). Other suistainable strategies used, not only adaptability, were utilised such as good ventilation system of balconies, windows and mechanical ventilation (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020). In addition to Photovoltaic Cells on the roof as well as a brown terraced roof, insect boxes, edible plants and fruit trees (Pintos, 2020).

Figure 37 Structure made out of CLT and Steel structure (Reeves, 2020)

Figure 38 Interior with exposed ceilings, minimum finishes and partitions (Reeves, 2020)

Creating Large Floor Spans for Flexible Interiors This office uses a CLT and Steel [Fig 37] to produce maximum spans for flexibility of spaces and minimum number of columns. Resulting in a flexible interior [Fig 39] [Fig 40] with a partition system that can also be dismounted and reconstructed if needed somewhere else, overnight (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020). Consequently, this building promotes personalisation meaning the occupants can make their working environment fit to them [Fig 38] (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020).

Alhough, in this section the evaluation will be on the ‘open plan’ and ‘loose fit’ apprach (as mentioned earlier in the essay’, there are other adaptable strategies worth mentioning. The interior also avoids too much material finishes, that are not so durable incomparison to Steel and CLT (Pintos, 2020), and just uses natural materials like clay plaster and linoleum tiles (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020). It is very stripped back and minimal (imitating the Domino House’s raw and plain apperance [Fig 2) and the CLT ceiling is exposed [Fig 38 ]. All elements could also be dismantled and rebuilt (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020). Thoughtfully, the designers ensured that each component can be recycled and reused in some way or another when the building comes to the end of its life. These components include SIP panels, cladding, timber decking, steel balustrades etc (Waugh Thistleton Architects, 2020).

Figure 39 Floor plan of the large spans (Reeves, 2020)

Figure 40 Simple overall core structure (Reeves, 2020)

13 Opportunities and Constraints Megastructures with clear spans and robust structure are signatures of adaptability. They result in large open spaces with endless possibilities and this avoids large alteration costs (Melton, 2022).This also creates buildings that can be changed, according to any occupants specification and will therefore have more demand (as clients are not restricted and have many opportunities). Consequently, the building is not restricted to one function, as buildings like that often suffer abandonment and are dimolised when that function is no longer needed. The simple construction of Steel and CLT and regular spaced columns can create spans bigger than the ordinary ones and a resilient structural system such as this one, means that the building can bear and support any alterations made with non load bearing walls without risking the intergrety of the building. The strong structural system [Fig 4] also means that it can support green roofs and photovotaic panels (Melton, 2022). The exposed high ceilings and the seperation of systems ensures [Fig 2] that all services whether ‘mechanical, electrical, plumbing, IT etc can all be maintained, replaced or upgraded’ without affecting the building and without damaging other adjacent services. This would save expenses and also reduce impact to walls and finishes (Melton, 2022). Also using durable materials such as Steel and CLT as the main materials (CLT is not covered and can be seen in ceiling and some walls) and less of the less durable materials such as the finishes will mean that less material will have to be replaced when it starts to deteriote. The main structure is made out of durable material meaning it will stand the test of time (this is essential for a megastructure), as it supports the whole building.

There are high initial costs to creating large spans and using CLT. For example the structure needs to be more robust (and this is costly). The ceiling height may need to be higher than standard lengths so that they can be adapted in the future programmatic use for additional requirements such as HVAC, electrical, data/IT and fire protection- this is also costly (Melton, 2022) . Also, though the office is flexible there are also no gurantee that all the spaces will be used all the time and it could be too flexible.

3.3 Seperating ‘Servant’ from ‘Service’ Spaces

14

Centre Pompiduo Located in Paris from 1977, the Centre Pompidou is a building made of glass and metal [Fig 41] and designed by Renzo Piano and Richard Rogers. It is referred to as a ‘living organism…built in… the beating heart of Paris’ called the Beaubourg plateau (Centre Pompidou, 2022). The design consists of 10 levels with a length of hundred and sixty six, width of sixty meters and height of forty two meters (Centre Pompidou, 2022). This is made to be resembled like a ‘huge construction toy’ (Centre Pompidou, 2022). The building contains an art museum, sprawling public library and a research center for music and acoustics. (Bahr, 2021)

Figure 41 Picture showing whole building with the white frame. (Brizhatyuk, 2021)

Figure 42 The Pompiduo building with the colour coded exposed services. (Brizhatyuk, 2021)

Creating Flexibility by ‘Servant’ and ‘Service’ Spaces How they made the indoor spaces adaptable is that they put all the service systems outside the building, in color code [Fig 42]: blue for air conditioning, yellow for electricity, green for water and red for services such as escalators and lifts (Centre Pompidou, 2022). Each floor is therefore completely free and usable for any type of present or future activity [Fig 43] (Centre Pompidou, 2022). Nothing is concealed and everything is exposed on the exterior perimeter of the building (Centre Pompidou, 2022) meaning that it is easier to replace components and fix them. In contrast the framework [Fig 41] is painted white and made out of metal and that too is completely visible (Centre Pompidou, 2022). This clearly makes it easier for maintenance, as you able to identify and differentiate coponents and therefore perform fuctures.

Furthermore, the spaces inside are made even more flexible by making them undefined. For example, the Forum (the ten meter entrance space that allows movement of three levels (-1,0,1)) is multi purposeful and connects to all the other fractions in the Pompidou (Centre Pompidou, 2022).

Opportunities and Constraints The building has also been harshly criticised by artists looking for the more stereotypical gallery spaces, rather than the flexible general spaces that the Pompidou offers and also the building‘never had a sense of place’ (does not consider the context) (Powell & Rogers, 2007). However, Richard Rogers argues against this stating ‘its agenda of flexibility has worked’. Stating that

15 every facility has been moved to another space and that these spaces allow for a great number of changes to be made again further in the future (Powell & Rogers, 2007).

Figure 43 Floor plan showing the great flexible ‘big’ space. (Rogers & Piano, 1972)

Figure 44 Detailed elevation of services. (Rogers & Piano, 1972)

In the book Organizing for Change, a section written by Kari Jormakka, speaks about Reyner Banham and Rem Koolhaus’ ideas on ‘neutrality equals flexibility’ which also means having freedom with the spaces created (Shamiyeh, 2007). However, Koolhaas also concludes that the open plan is ‘not optimal for any function’ meaning that the center Pompidou spaces are not the best option or most favorable for just any use (Shamiyeh, 2007). In those spaces, anything was possible. Koolhaus said this flexibility unfortunately was ‘at the expense of both character and precision ... entity at the price of identity’ (Shamiyeh, 2007). The author also mentions a conversation between Mies Van der Rohe and Hugo Haring where Mr Haring designs a shed that would best suit a cow’s speed and movement, as well as including other compartments. Mies disputes this by saying: “Hugo, just make your rooms big, then you can do everything in them” however the author goes on to say in contrast that ‘any room which is equally good for every function is not particularly good for any of them, nor… exactly economical’ (Shamiyeh, 2007). Overall, the Pompidou spaces were judged for being ‘too big’ [Fig 43] and generic, not specific. Therefore it had no identity, character or no relevance to the context (the site). Plus it was not economical or cost effective.

On the other hand, the Pompidou will soon be closed for renovations in 2023 and estimated to finish around 2027 because of its aging exterior (Bahr, 2021). These components must be replaced; the heating and cooling system, escalators, elevators and asbestos and will cost a whopping $243 million (Bahr, 2021). It had undergone renovations before in 1977 that apparently increased exhibition space and created other spaces. It reopened in 2000 and has had no work since then (about 43 years ago) (Bahr, 2021). Although, every building does need renovations, it can be argued that in a city of buildings that have lasted more than hundreds of years, that Pompidou has not stood the test of time, requiring two renovations in the space of around 50 years. Also, the renovations are extremely costly and don’t have to be if the building is built effectively for future renovations.

3.4 Designing for Disassembly

16

‘Nest We Go’ by Kengo Kuma This is an open public structure situated in Hokkaido, Japan [Fig 45] (Valenzuela, 2015) that has sustainable and adaptable qualities. Its main function is to bring people together in the community and to allow them to prepare and store their Japanese cuisine (Valenzuela, 2015). Designed by a group of Califonian students, who wanted to bring renewable building methods into this place, who wanted to incorporate heavy timber construction (as in the USA) using large timber sections (Valenzuela, 2015). However in Japan it translated to using smaller timber parts to build a larger beam. Their connections were inspired by the local Japanese carpentry and also had to work with locally sourced materials (Valenzuela, 2015) (which means low embodied carbon). Although it has a main space for gathering and sitting down, the spaces inside are pretty general, allowing for flexibility of use.

Figure 45 Kengo Kuma exterior. (Sha, 2014)

Figure 46 Kengo Kuma structure. (Sha, 2014)

Figure 47 Diagram and image of detailed conections.

(Sha, 2014)

Opportunities and Constraints In DfD (Design for Disassembly) connections must be accessible and be easy to dismount and not be too heavy (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). Just like this case study, mechanical joints (such as screws, nails and bolts) are better than using chemical glues, sealers etc (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022) [Fig 47]. This means that materials can then be separated and reused again. For disassembly to work, the building must also be understood as layers. The layers suggested by this author (designing for the climate Emergency) are ‘substructure’ and ‘superstructure’, non structural elements, building envelope, services and finishings so that components can be taken apart and for easy accessible maintenance (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022).

So in this case study the layers are structural elements are the wood frame structure made of Japanese Larch with bolts [Fig 46] (Valenzuela, 2015). Non structural elements include the building envelope [Fig 45] which is made up of a roof and facade transparent plastic corrugated sheets (Valenzuela, 2015).

The floor with its topography timber has walls surrounding it. There are no windows (just openings) which are sliding panels to let air in (Valenzuela, 2015).

3.5 Recycling and Reusing

17

Ningbo History Museum This Museum was designed by Amateur Architecture Studio (Hangzhou), Wang Shu, Lu Wenyu and situated in Ningbo in the Eastern part of China (Hoffmann, 2016). This rectangular planned, four storey building stands out uniquely amongst office and government buildings. The Museum is to showcase the history of the city, dating back seven thousand years ago (Hoffmann, 2016). The facade is mostly traditional masonry put together and sourced from demolition sites (ruined villages in the area that had to make way for office buildings) (Hoffmann, 2016). The outer wall is made up of a concrete core and a facade skin made from gray and red rubble stones and bricks (Hoffmann, 2016).

Figure 48 Wider picture of the building. (Hoffmann, 2016)

Figure 49 Section drawing of the wall made up of stones, different brick and so on. (Hoffmann, 2016)

Opportunities and Constraints Steward Brand goes on to say that recycling and also designing for reuse or disassembly conserves the “embodied carbon” of buildings and cuts down demolished materials (Brand, 1997). The only constraints is that It probably will not last longer then a new material of the same kind and seperation of parts could be difficult.

3.5 The Importance of Retrofit

18

Foundry Studios, London This (low energy) retrofit was done to a previous Victorian 19th century foundry industrial building (brought in 1991) to become a canal side Architectural office, which successfully scored an ‘Excellent’ BREEAM rating (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). They bought one end of this three storey building, located by Regent Canal in London, and would rent out the central part as an art Museum/Workshop space. The two floors will become the architects workspace including retable spaces on the top floor (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019).

Figures 50 Structure and leaning wall (south) pre and ost retrofit. (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019)

Figure 51 Interior roof rafters pre and ost retrofit. (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019)

The Structure The first floor roof trusses had to be kept and its structure, even though it needed a lot of structural work, as the south wall was not vertically straight but leaning 250mm (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). What also had to be preserved was the double height windows (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). This is because the foundry building was a locally listed building meaning that it had historic significance and was valuable to the people. The author puts this new retrofit as a ‘new structural skeleton supporting the creaky original fabric’ and that is true indeed (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). They designed and built a steel frame shear walls (walls that are not whole or have gaps) that split the circulation space from the studio space and a horizontal Vierendell truss (with intermediate supports) that span in between these shear walls (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). This is a key structural part as it supports the inclined wall and it opens to also allow for the double height windows to exist on the south side (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). In terms of ambience or atmosphere the big windows allowed for beautiful views, daylight and ventilation (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). For this they were expanded as much as they were allowed to, in line with conservation guidelines (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). The north wall (along Baldwin Terrace) had new sets of windows and a band of glazing on the top floor. The timber trusses are also supported by this new steel structural skeleton (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019).

As well as retrofitting, to reduce embodied energy this project effectively only used one-third of new materials to renovate this building whilst the rest was reused (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). Another strategy was to insulate the

Figures 52 North wall pre- and post retroffit (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019)

19 building with thick insulation using newspapers, for the walls, floors and roof (to effectively keep heat in) (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). In addition to making the building air tight and sealed, which it achieved with a pressure test number of 5 air changes per hour (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). Heating is provided by low energy means using hot water and underfloor heating (from an air source heat pump) (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). The electricity is produced by twenty two photovoltaic panels on the south side and there is also heat recovery mechanical ventilation (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). Another great tactic was to use intelligent technologies (which is an adaptable strategy mentioned earlier in the essay). Building management systems (BMS) (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019), is a monitor to control the energy used and the temperature of the space and therefore adapts to human favorable conditions and ensures excess energy isn’t wasted. These are just some of the energy conserving strategies used for this case study.

Opportunities and Constraints The building was fit for retrofit, because of its ability to last (its quality of space and durable building materials) even though there were some structural problems, we have to take into consideration that the building did last approximately about 200 years.

Although this was a huge success and retrofitting is very sustainable, retrofits can have huge constraints that are not easily solvable. In this case it was tough to renovate this building because of economical and planning limitations.

Planning took very long especially for the south leaning canal side wall (probably because it is a special and listed building) (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019). Furthermore, though the building was brought in 1991, planning permission wasn’t granted until 2008, but due to the recession the project was delayed another three years.

Figure 53 Additional environmental strategies. (Penoyre & Prasad, 2019)

5. Adaptability and Carbon Footprint

20

The operational energy is defined as the ‘energy… used to keep people warm or cool, provide fresh air and lighting, and to undertake activities in the building’ (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022) such as cooking, keeping computers on etc. The embodied energy is ‘the energy needed to construct buildings’ and this also means the energy to ‘maintain, adapt, replace and disassemble’ (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). Together the operational energy and embodied energy make up the whole life carbon footprint over a building’s lifetime.

Figure 54 Cradle to cradle diagram. (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022)

Adaptable principles can effectively lower Embodied energy, though operational and whole life is still important, the principles are more applicable to embodied energy (as this involves the life cycle of a building from beginning to end) (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). As I have spoken in this essay, constructing structures that have durable and adaptable structures, services, facades etc that can also be disassembled, can reduce the embodied carbon emissions in construction (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). Choice of material is also important in flexible building. Reused or reclaimed materials are good as well (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). A good example is bricks, although it has initial high embodied carbon (because of the firing process) bricks are durable and can be reused, especially if the bricks are bonded with lime mortar (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). For structures avoiding concrete and steel (which are high in embodied carbon) but rather using engineered timber such as CLT and Glulam, also rammed earth walls and straw bale walls are also a durable tradition option for smaller buildings (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). Although long spans are great for future flexibility, they require a deeper foundational structure (which means higher embodied energy) (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). However, adaptability does mean a wider range of uses, therefore a more likely life span because of demand. Also ensuring those durable, renewable materials are locally sourced materials, will further lower carbon emissions (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022).

The substructure of a building are the ‘foundations, retaining walls and any basement’ whilst the superstructure are the elements that hold the building up, and support the floors, roof’ and so on (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022).

Another great method is to build light upwards, this is actually what the

21 Japanese pre-modern domestic architecture (which is mentioned in the History section of the Essay and DfD part) is known for. Building a light superstructure (envelope, partitions and loads) means that less material and strength is needed for substructures to support heavy loads plus it also means for easier disassembling (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). Also, other alternative foundations such as timber piles for the substructure can also be used. To further lower embodied carbon we need to no longer have a linear economy but a more circular economy, as shown by this diagram [Fig 54] .

This means that instead of buildings being demolished or some parts removed and wasted, materials should be reusable. This means buildings need to be built for disassembly and kept in this cycle until it is exhausted.

6. Conclusion

In terms of sustainability there are different goals that were set by different establishments. Such as the UN Sustainability goals declared in 2015 with the aim of creating a more prosperous planet for the present time and the future. There are about 17 goals (SDG’s) that also aim to resolve climate change (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). One of the main goals for architecture (including adaptable and retrofit design) is goal 11 ‘Sustainable Cities and Communities’ but goals 1,3,5,6,10,12,13,16 are also applicable (Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022). From chapter 5 (Adatability and Carbon Footprint) in the essay, we can clearly see that designing an adaptable building and thus making a building fit for retrofit, is definetly a solution for these targets, in the long term. However, there would be few short term results because of the nature of adaptive buildings, longivity is needed to see if a building’s actually will last. Even though adaptability may mean extra costs or too much material or space, it is worth it. However, adaptability alone cannot lower carbon footprint, other sustainability strategies must be incorporated. “Learning in a building, then, is a simultaneous process of constant healing and of arranging for greater possibilities.” (Brand, 1997) Brand states at the end that a building is never really completely finished (those are the best buildings) but that ‘a successful building has to be periodically challenged and refreshed, or it will turn into a beautiful corpse.’ We learn from the building (what works and doesn’t) and we change accordingly- this is what Stewart Brand is trying to say. That we should also construct buildings that consider the future, that is being sustainable and ‘future responsible- open to the emerging world’ (Brand, 1997).

Bibliography

22

Schmidt, R. (2014) Designing for adaptability in architecture. dissertation. rsiii .

Architects, W.T. (2020) Waugh Thistleton Architects, 6 Orsman Road. Available at: https://waughthistleton.com/6-orsman-road/ (Accessed: December 6, 2022).

Pintos, P. (2020) 6 Orsman Road Workspace / Waugh Thistleton Architects + Storey, ArchDaily. ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/946229/6orsman-road-workspace-waugh-thistleton-architects-plus-storey?ad_medium=gallery (Accessed: December 6, 2022).

Melton, P. (2022) Design for Adaptability, Deconstruction, and Reuse, The American Institute of Architects. AIA. Available at: https://www.aia.org/ resources/6282663-design-for-adaptability-deconstruction-and (Accessed: December 6, 2022).

Sveiven, M. (2011) Nakagin Capsule Tower / Kisho Kurokawa, ArchDaily. ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/110745/ad-classics-nakagin-capsule-tower-kisho-kurokawa (Accessed: December 10, 2022).

Block, I. (2021) Nakagin Capsule Tower To Be Dismantled And Turned Into Rental Accommodation And Exhibits, Dezeen. Dezeen. Available at: https://www. dezeen.com/2021/07/16/nakagin-capsule-tower-dismantled-news/ (Accessed: December 10, 2022).

Brand, S. (1997) How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built. London: Phoenix.

Our Building (2022) Centre Pompidou. Centre Pompidou. Available at: https://www.centrepompidou.fr/en/collection/our-building (Accessed: December 14, 2022).

Christele Harrouk. “Pompidou Center to Close Completely for Renovations during 3 years” 28 Jan 2021. ArchDaily. Accessed 14 Dec 2022. <https://www. archdaily.com/955786/pompidou-center-to-close-completely-for-renovations-during-3-years> ISSN 0719-8884 Powell, K. and Rogers, R. (2007) Richard Rogers. Complete Works. London: Phaidon.

Shamiyeh, M. (2007) Organizing for Change/Space Integrating Architectural Thinking in Other Fields. Basel: Birkhäuser.

Bahr, S. (2021) Pompidou Center, Aging Symbol of the Future, to Close for Renovations, The New York Times. The New York Times. Available at: https://www. nytimes.com/2021/01/25/arts/design/pompidou-center-closing-renovation.html?utm_medium=website&utm_source=archdaily.com (Accessed: January 24, 2023).

Valenzuela, K. (2015) Nest We Grow / Kengo Kuma &amp; Associates + College of Environmental Design UC Berkeley, ArchDaily. ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/592660/nest-we-grow-college-of-environmental-design-uc-berkeley-kengo-kuma-and-associates (Accessed: January 27, 2023).

Pelsmakers, S. and Donovan, E. (2022) Designing for the Climate Emergency: A Guide for Architecture Students. London: RIBA Publishing.

(Pelsmakers & Donovan, 2022) Hoffmann, H.W. (2016) Museum Buildings: Construction and Design Manual. Munich: DETAIL. Penoyre, G. and Prasad, S. (2019) Retrofit for Purpose. 1st edn. London: RIBA Publishing.

23

References

24

Photos/ Illustrations Reeves, E. (2020) Waugh Thistleton Storey 6 Orsman Road Facade, Waugh Thistleton Architects. Available at: https://waughthistleton.com/6-orsman-road/ (Accessed: December 6, 2022).

(Reeves, 2020) Minami , N. (2017) The capsules are also used as offices for small businesses. The Nakagin Capsule Tower stands at an excellent location within the city of Tokyo., Pictures Reveal Life Inside Tiny Futuristic Cubes. National Geographic . Available at: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/article/nakagin-capsule-tower (Accessed: December 14, 2022).

(Minami , 2017) Arcspace (1972) AD Classics: Nakagin Capsule Tower / Kisho Kurokawa. Archdaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/110745/ad-classics-nakagin-capsule-tower-kisho-kurokawa (Accessed: December 14, 2022).

(Arcspace, 1972) Brizhatyuk, D. (2021) Pompidou Center to Close Completely for Renovations during 3 years. Archdaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/955786/pompidou-center-to-close-completely-for-renovations-during-3-years?ad_medium=gallery (Accessed: December 14, 2022).

(Brizhatyuk, 2021) Brand, S. (1997) How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built. London: Phoenix.

(Brand, 1997) (2023) kisho kurokawa: nakagin capsule tower building. Design Boom . Available at: https://www.designboom.com/architecture/kisho-kurokawa-nakagincapsule-tower-building/ (Accessed: January 27, 2023).

(DesignBoom, 2023)

25 Rogers, R. and Piano, R. (1972) Centre Pompidou . Great Buildings. Available at: http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/Centre_Pompidou.html (Accessed: January 27, 2023).

(Rogers & Piano, 1972) Sha, S. (2014) “Nest We Grow / Kengo Kuma &amp; Associates + College of Environmental Design UC Berkeley.” Japan: Archdaily.

(Sha, 2014) Schmidt, R. (2014) Designing for adaptability in architecture. dissertation. rsiii .

(Schmidt, 2014)