seeking the suitable and sustainable skyscraper€¦ · seeking the suitable and sustainable...

105
Antony Wood CTBUH Executive Director GACCoM Green Building Seminar UIC, Urbana-Champaign, 13 Nov. 09 Seeking the suitable and sustainable skyscraper

Upload: nguyentram

Post on 04-Jun-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Antony WoodCTBUH Executive DirectorGACCoM Green Building SeminarUIC, Urbana-Champaign, 13 Nov. 09

Seeking the suitable and sustainable skyscraper

1930, Chrysler Building, New York,

William van Alen

Tall Buildings and Place: The shortfall of Tall?

1896, Fisher Building, Chicago, Burnham & Co

1958, Seagram Building, New York,Mies van der Rohe & Philip Johnson

Shortfall 1: The Commercial Design Approach

2003; Swiss Re Tower, City of LondonFoster Associates

Shortfall 2: The Iconic-Sculptural Design Approach

1969, Commercial Union Building, LondonGollins, Melvin Ward & Partners

Canary Wharf / Docklands Development; early 1980’s – to date

Typical Towers at Canary Wharf

1991; No.1 Canada Square, LondonCesar Pelli Associates

1985; World Financial Centre, New YorkCesar Pelli Associates

Tall building-scape, Jakarta Tall building-scape, Seoul

1990; Thaniya Plaza, BangkokPlan Associates Co Ltd

1990; Grand Hyatt Erawan Hotel, BangkokRangsan Torsuwan Architects

Literal Cultural Symbolism

1997; Menara Batavia, IndonesiaArchitects Pacific Group

Literal Cultural Symbolism

2004. Taipei 101, TaiwanCY Lee & Partners

Literal Cultural Symbolism1998. Jin Mao Tower, Shanghai. SOM

Abstract Cultural Symbolism2007. World Financial Centre, Shanghai. KPF

Abstract Cultural Symbolism

1997. Petronas Towers, Kuala Lumpur.Cesar Pelli Associates

Abstract Cultural Symbolism ?

1984. Menara Dayabumi, Kuala Lumpur. BEP Architects

1932. Broadacre City, Frank Lloyd Wright

The Rise of an Environmental Consciousness in High Rise design…

1956. Price Tower, Frank Lloyd Wright

1984. National Commercial Bank, Jeddah. SOM Architects

Dubai World Trade CenterDubai, U.A.E., 1978JR Harris & Partners,

1993. Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah Nikken Sekkei Architects

Harry Seidler in Australia …………

1986. Riverside Centre, Brisbane. Harry Seidler 1989. Capita Centre, Sydney. Harry Seidler

1983. Kanchanjunga Apartments, Bombay. Charles Correa.

Charles Correa in India …………

1992. Menara Mesiniaga, Kuala Lumpur Hamzah & Yeang.

Bioclimatic Skyscrapers – the work of Ken Yeang……..

Design features:

- Skycourts / Skygardens- Vertical Landscaping- External louvres for solar shading on ‘hot’ facades (i.e. east / west)- No shading on north / south facades for daylighting- Lift core used to reduce solar gain to internal space (positioned on east side)- Naturally ventilated ‘low energy’ Lift Lobbies, with view- Naturally ventilated / lit toilets / ancillary areas.- Structures for positioning of solar arrays etc.

1993. Mbf Tower, Penang. Hamzah & Yeang.

1995. Tokyo-Nara Tower Hamzah & Yeang.

1983. Trump Tower, Swanke Hayden Connell

The rise of ‘green’ as a material…………

1994. ACROS Fukuoka Prefectural International Hall, Japan. Emilio Ambasz and Associates

2007. Newton Suites, Singapore. WOHA

1999. Frankfurt Max Tower. Hamzah & Yeang.1997. Commerzbank, Frankfurt. Foster Assoc.

Green or Grey?: The Aesthetics of Tall Building Design

The work of Norman Foster ………………….

1997. Commerzbank, Frankfurt. Foster Associates

2003; Swiss Re Tower, City of LondonFoster Associates

1999. Conde Nast Building. New York. Fox & Fowle Architects

2008. Bahrain World Trade Centre. Atkins

Sustainable Technologies ………………….

2009. Pearl River Tower. SOM 2008. The New York Times Building, New York. Renzo Piano

Sustainable Technologies ………………….

Challenges: Tall Buildings & Sustainability – the Case ‘Against’

“The age of skyscrapers is at an end. It must now be considered an experimental building typology that has failed”

Kunstler & Salingaros, in Roaf et al (2005)

Factors:

• Construction & Operation

• Internal Environment / People

• Urban

Challenges: Tall Buildings & Sustainability – the Case ‘Against’

Construction & Operation

Higher embodied energy in constructing at height – structure, materials etc.Greater wind loading at height (impact on size of primary structure, façade design

etc).High energy consumption in operation – elevators (up to 15% of bldg energy

use), services etc.

Higher energy consumption for cleaning and maintenance (e.g. replacement of façade silicon joints).

Energy consumption is a small percentage of total costs (salaries etc) – little incentive for owners / operators / developers.

Implications of Power failure (impact on vertical circulation, safety etc).Recycling potential / urban impact of demolition / disposal of materials after

demolition.

Challenges: Tall Buildings & Sustainability – the Case ‘Against’

Internal Environment / People

Less net usable area to gross area and restrictions on internal planning; vertical circulation core etc.

Anti-social internal environment – lack of open, recreational, communal space (esp. in residential).

‘Sealed’ environments at height – thus requirement for air conditioning, artificial lighting etc.

Safety and Security fears (especially post 9/11) – including safety during construction.

Increased travel time (wasted time?).People suffering from vertigo – building occupation / human rights legislation?

Challenges: Tall Buildings & Sustainability – the Case ‘Against’

Urban Factors

Impact on urban scale; cities that ‘don’t want’ to be tall?The poor ground floor interfaceWind downdraftsOvershadowing (solar rights / right to light)Wind rights (ventilation?)Overpopulation in certain localities / greater demand on existing urban services

and infrastructure.

Climate Change will increase all these pressures on high rise – wind, storm, solar, power failure etc …….

Challenges: Tall Buildings & Sustainability – the Case ‘For’

Efficient land use in population concentration – reduced suburban spread / loss of countryside.

Denser cities = reduced transportation (and consequential impact on environment). Reduced size of infrastructure networks (urban / suburban, power, services, waste

disposal etc).Proximity of residence and workplace; therefore less travel time (less wasted time?).More of the ground floor / urban level can be dedicated to ‘public’ use e.g. retail.Standardisation of floor plates and use of materials – prefabrication efficiencies? Higher wind velocities at height = greater potential for harnessing wind energy.Potential for natural ventilation through increased ‘stack effect’ etc.High ‘thermal mass’ potential for use in natural ventilation / heating / cooling strategies.Potential for good internal daylighting (and thus reduced energy).Increased quality of life at height – view etc?The potential for ‘secure’ communal / recreational spaces at height, away from traffic,

pollution etc.Increased ‘legibility’ of the city – urban signposting etc.Life-cycle costing; re-use of building structure, services etc in refurbishments.

The U.K.

Factors:

- longer life expectancy- smaller household size(single person households, divorce rate, children outside marriage, etc)

Results:- a government demand of

2.6million new homes by 2020

- An annual requirement of 189,000 new homes

“the high energy, gas-guzzling fully glazed office block is … at the end of an era … façade design is on the frontline of a change”

Ken Shuttleworth

Models for the Future?

2005. The Spiracle, Leeds

2004. Bank of Kuwait, KuwaitSOM Architects

2007 Project. COR tower, Miami..Oppenheim Architects

2010. O14 Tower, Dubai, Reiser + Umemoto Architects

2009. Torres de Hércules, Cádiz, Spain. Rafael de La Hoz Castanys

2009. Torres Porta Fira, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain. Toyo Ito / b720 Arquitectos

2009. The Met, Bangkok, Thailand. WOHA

London, 2002-06

Design Research; CTBUH + Illinois Institute of Technology + University of Nottingham + others............

Chicago, 2007-08

Mumbai, 2009

1981; Natwest Tower (Tower 42)City of LondonRichard Seifert Architect

2008. Minerva Tower.Nicholas Grimshaw Architects

Physical Responses to Site2004. “Building As Frame”

2004. ‘Building As Frame’ Design response. Typical Floor Plan

Office Environmental Section

Residential Facade Section

View Looking Down

2007. “Wind Farm”

Environmental Responses to Site

Physical & Environmental Responses to Site2002. “SkyBox version 1”

Conceptual Layer 1: Relationship between core, function & climate

North

Residential?

Office?

Conceptual Layer 2: Relationship between floor plate & context

Differing City View at higher levelCity View

Conceptual Layer 2: Relationship between floor plate & context

Conceptual Layer 3: Structural ‘blocks’

2007. “SkyBox version 2”

2007. “SkyBox version 2”

Environmental Responses to Site2007. “Solar Thermal Tower”

Solar Power Station, Seville, Spain

2007. “Solar Thermal Tower”

2007. “Solar Thermal Tower”

Environmental Responses to Site2007. “The Chicago Aquifer”

2007. “The Chicago Aquifer”

2007. “The Chicago Aquifer”

2006. “Sports Tower”

Challenging traditional functions……………

Responses to Programme“Vertical Farm”

2006. “Vertical Farm”

2007. “SkyFarm”

2007. “SkyFarm”

2007. “SkyFarm”

Responses to All...........“Pavements in the Sky / Skybridges”

1998 - Petronas Towers, Kuala Lumpur.Cesar Pelli.

1908 - The Cosmopolis of the Future. Harry Petit. From King’s Views of New York

1927 - Metropolis. Erich Kettelhut. Still from Fritz Lang’s film.

1997 - The Fifth Element. Luc Besson. Still from film.

2009. Linked Hybrid, Beijing, China. Steven Holl Architects

Urban Enrichment – Hong Kong

Cultural Responses to Site2009. “Yatra Towers”, Mumbai

2009. “Annapurna Tower”

2009. “Gyana Tower”

2009. “Bhangar Tower”

2009. “Swadeshi Tower”

2009. “Swadeshi Tower”

Cultural Responses to Site2009. “Yatra Towers”, Mumbai

A new Vernacular for the Skyscraper?

Seven Design Principles for future Tall Buildings ……….

1. Should vary with height – not be just vertical extrusions of an efficient floor plan.

2. Varying Texture and Scale essential – should be designed as many small buildings harmoniously together, rather than one piece of iconic sculpture to be viewed from afar?

3. New functions to be introduced4. Communal, open, recreation space vital5. More facade opacity (and variation / texture) in skin / cladding6. Organic matter (vegetation) to become an essential part of the

material palette.7. More physical, circulatory, social and programmatic

connections (skybridges!).

Tall Buildings have an opportunity to lead the way for the benefit of the entire construction industry, due to the financial and professional expenditure involved and thus the opportunity for incorporation of experimental technologies etc......

www.ctbuh.org

www.ctbuh.org/designresearch.htm

[email protected]