Highrise workshop 2012 TU Delft ! ! Innovative and Contextual design award! By Stichting Hoogbouw! ! ! ! Building Design by! ! Alex Christodoulou! Thao Le! Wouter van der Linde! Jouke Lutgendorf! Jayadeep Premnath! Walter Woodington!
1 Â
Table of contents Introduction p.03! Site analysis p.05! Architecture p.11! Façade p.41! Vertical Transport p.56! Structure p.57! Climate p.78! Economics p.88! Conclusion p.90! Annex p.94!
2
Introduction | Design Summary
The urban and ideological context of an E.U. highrise in the European District of Brussels imposed a great design challenge.! The design team attempted to address the symbolic weight of the building by underlining and inserting the European Urban values within the buildingʼs envelope.! Europeʼs answer to the highrise has to bear all the characteristics and contradictions that make Europe unique. Diversity (Different Identities), interconnectivity (Unity), the accessibility and openness of the European streets and the rational European spirit have to be portrayed in the form and the construction of the highrise.! Beginning from the ground level, the public routes connecting existing streets where connected within the floor plan creating a central public square in the middle of the ground plan.! To make a dynamic building, diverse and active throughout the day and night, residential and hotel program is suggested, while the suggested office program has been reduced due to the less square meters that the new open office concepts require.! Shifting horizontally the programʼs blocks gives the possibility for diversity within the building, while keeping all floor plans the same. The shifts also give a possibility for exposed green terraces, which become places for interaction between the different programs. The designed structure concept allowed these gardens to be column free. Vertical Transportation/Structural cores connect the public spaces in different levels, with a varying level of privacy.! In the lower part of the building smaller blocks give the possibility for more terraces, while forming a lighter lower part, which allows light in the public spaces near ground level. The smaller blocks have multifunctional program, with the ability to transform from smaller meeting rooms to larger exposition areas, using revolving walls.! Flexible solutions like the above and provision for future program changes can contribute in the longevity of the building.! ! 3
Introduction | Wordcloud
4 Â
Site Analysis | Photo from Existing Building The closed facades of the E.U. office buildings at Rue de La Loi, form an asphyxiating urban environment, as expressed on the writing on the wall of the existing building on the buildingʼs site.!
5
Site Analysis | Urban Typologies
6 Â
Site Analysis | Monofunctional European District
7 Â
Site Analysis | Area Users
8 Â
Site Analysis | Program Critique
9 Â
Site Analysis | Program Critique
10 Â
Site Analysis | Program Critique
The suggested program for the highrise was to make an almost monofunctional office highrise building. Such a building would be facing the dangers, usually associated with monofunctional tall buildings. At night offices, conference centers and stores are be empty, giving the impression of a dead void space. The public spaces of the building will be uninviting, and probably closed, or needing security surveillance.! Residential program! In order to avoid the aforementioned situation, it is of high importance to introduce short-term (hotels) and long-term (houses) residential options.! Of course this introduces new challenges: While a hotel matches harmoniously with the conference center, giving the option to participants of conference to stay inside the building, placing houses inside a European Union building seems unfitting. The European Union might not like the option of people staying inside their “iconic” building and people might also feel strange about this prospect. It is important to also include permanent inhabitants to the program, because without them, the building will lose any prospect of becoming a vivid vertical city within the city. So the solution to the mismatch is the following: The residential houses could be offered with priority to EU employees.! This prospect actually has some extra benefits for the employees themselves, the city of Brussels and the European Union. ! For the employees:! • They wonʼt have to search themselves for a house when they first get hired by the EU, and have to move to Brussels.! • They wonʼt have to endure the growing traffic jams from the suburbs to the city (See Urban Context chapter, Burgess model)! For Brussels:! • Wealthy people will return to the centre of Brussels, enhancing the economic growth of the city centre.! • The peak hour traffic jam from the suburbs to the city, currently a very severe problem of the city, will be diminished.! For the E.U.:! • The cooperation and relationship of employees can be enhanced, with positive outcome to their working performance, as they will live in close proximity. ! • This vertical village can set a paradigm for harmonious coexistance of the diverse cultures of the European Union.! Culture! Multifunctional culture areas cannot be missing from a building destined to present a new face of the European Union. ! Extended Retail Program! The residential program requires the extension of the retail program to fulfill the everyday needs of the residents.! 11
Architecture | Massing Process Ground Level Routes!
12 Â
Architecture | Massing Process Basement Extrusion!
13 Â
Architecture | Massing Process Core Extrusion!
14 Â
Architecture | Massing Process Blocks with! Central Cores! ! Minimum Efficiency = 70%!
!
15 Â
Architecture | Massing Process Symmetrical Shifts for ! • Diversity ! • Green Terrace opportunity! • One type of floor plan (mirrored)! • Symmetrical loads!
!
16
Architecture | Massing Process Smaller blocks on the lower part for lighter basement, more green terrace opportunities!
17 Â
Architecture | Massing Process Connections between interrelated programs!
18 Â
Architecture | Program '6/$5*0/4 3&5"*$0/'&3&/$& &9104*5*0/ $"'& 3&45"63"/5 )05&0''*$& 3&4*%&/5*"1"3,*/(
19 Â
Architecture | Routing Public Route!
20 Â
Architecture | Routing Office Routes!
21 Â
Architecture | Routing Residential Route!
22 Â
Architecture | Routing Hotel Route!
23 Â
Architecture | Public areas Green areas connecting adjacent programs!
24 Â
Architecture | Section
25 Â
Architecture | Section '6/$5*0/4 3&5"*$0/'&3&/$& &9104*5*0/ $"'& 3&45"63"/5 )05&0''*$& 3&4*%&/5*"1"3,*/(
26 Â
Architecture | Section '6/$5*0/4 3&5"*$0/'&3&/$& &9104*5*0/ $"'& 3&45"63"/5 )05&0''*$& 3&4*%&/5*"1"3,*/(
27 Â
Architecture | Floorplans
28 Â
29 29
Architecture | Floorplans
30 30
Architecture | Floorplans Multifunctional Rooms
31 31
Architecture | Multifunctional Rooms
32 Â
Architecture | Floorplans
33 33
Architecture | Floorplans Hotel
34 Â
35 35
Architecture | Floorplans Office
36 36
Architecture | Office High Ceiling Concept
37
Architecture | Floorplans
38 38
Architecture | Floorplans Residential
39 Â 39 Â
Architecture | Section
40 Â
Façade | Sun
41
Façade | Sunlight screening
42
Façade | Brussels lace
43
Façade | Office
44
Façade | Office
45
Façade | Office
46
Façade | Residence
47
Façade | Residence
48
Façade | Multifunctional units – low rise
49
Façade | Multifunctional units – low rise
50
Façade | Multifunctional units – mid rise
51
Facade | South elevation
52 Â
Facade | South elevation
53 Â
Facade | South elevation
54 Â
Facade | South elevation
55 Â
Vertical transport | Elevators
56 Â
Structure | Cores
57 Â
Structure | Trusses
58 Â
Structure | Standing Column Floors
59 Â
Structure | Hanging Column Floors
60 Â
Structure | Core Extension
61 Â
Structure | Truss Connections
62 Â
Structure | Connecting Blocks
63 Â
Structure | Basement Blocks
64 Â
Structure | Model
65 Â
Structure | Cross section
66 Â
Structure | Cross section
67 Â
Structure | Phasing
68 Â
Structure | Phasing
69 Â
Structure | Phasing
70 Â
Structure | Phasing
71 Â
Structure | Phasing
72 Â
Structure | Phasing
73 Â
Structure | Phasing
74 Â
Structure | Phasing
75 Â
Structure | Phasing
76 Â
Structure | Phasing
77 Â
Climate | Installation areas
78 Â
Climate | Energy Generation
79 Â
Climate | Rainwater Collection
80 Â
Climate | Centralized vs Decentralized
81 Â
Climate | Conference
82 Â
Climate | Office
83
Climate | Office
84
Climate | Seasonal Strategies
Winter
Spring/Fall
Summer
Office
Solar Gain
Ventilation
Shading + Cooling
Conference
Solar Gain
Ventilation
Shading + Cooling
Residential
Heating
Solar Gain (Office Heat)
Ventilation
Hotel
Heating
Solar Gain (Office Heat)
Ventilation
85
Climate | Light
86 Â
Climate | Cooperating Systems
Trusses + Installation Areas Climate Façade + Ventilation System Building Shifts + Façade Fins
87
Economics | Revenues
88 Â
Economics | Costs
89 89
BIM | Benefits
Solar Studies!
Façade, Structure, MEP integration!
Quick Detailed Sections!
90
Conclusion | Remarks
Attempting to find ways to make seemingly complicated massing feasible, finding symmetries, repeated patterns and connections largely resembles the challenges that European Union nowadays faces. ! ! The building could be an icon for this phase of the European Union, symbolizing a new beginning towards a more open and accessible union for the people. The interconnected diversity of the E.U. should be promoted as an advantage, ensuring the longevity and prosperity for the Union.!
91 Â
Conclusion | Tutors
Highrise Workshop 2012! tutors:! • Ruben Smits (Organisa;on), • Joop Paul (Organisa;on, Structure Engineering) • Karel Terwel (Structure Engineering), • Anke Rolvink (Structure Engineering) • Peter de Jong (Economics), • Arie Bergsma (Facade Engineering), • Roel Schipper (Facade Engineering), • Tanner Merkeley (Architecture), • Darrel Ronald (Architecture), • Henri van Bennekom (Architecture), • Leo de Ruijsscher (Climate Engineering) • Alex van Zalingen (BIM)! 92
Conclusion | References
City Sketchup model found at the courseʼs blackboard files.! ! Façade inspiration photos (p.42) from:! ! epdlp.com! Fastar.is! anirik-01.livejournal.com! arquitetonico.ufsc.br! business.inquirer.net!
93