Part 2 Architecture Portfolio: Adaptive Re-use Project

Intersection The Adaptive Re-Use of Manchester Metropolitan Universit y ’s Righton Building PS2 Por tfolio

The Brief Client: Manchester Metropolitan Universit y Estates

Our brief for this project was propose an adaptive reuse of an existing listed building, combining new and old historic architecture.

The site for our project is the Righton Building opposite the Manchester School of Architecture. The building dates back to 1905 when it was originally constructed as a draper’s shop and showroom. In June 1991 it became Grade II listed. The building is currently owned by Manchester Metropolitan University and provides predominantly office spaces.

We have been asked to accommodate a hybrid between design school and a maker’s space using an adaptive re-use strategy.

PAGE

E | 02

T h e s is Our Approach

In our response to the brief we have proposed a makerspace aimed at a new university course on the advancement of technological and computational processes in the development of construction materials and methods. The facilities provide space for students to work alongside or collaboratively with local architecture practices and researchers, providing a continuous opportunity for networking.

Our adaptive re-use strategy has focused on the analysis and emphasis of voids within the existing building and the creation of a public route through the building, both helping to maximise the building’s connection to its surroundings. The under-used courtyard to the rear becomes our adaptive void which intervenes with the existing building creating a large enclosed space at the heart of the building.

Contents 1.0 Site and Building Analysis

1.1 Estates Master Plan 1.2 Building Heritage 1.3 Site Analysis 1.4 Building Fabric 1.5 Building Analysis 1.6 Design Constraints and Opportunities

2 .0 Adaptive Re-Use Strategy

2.1 Adaptive Re-Use 2.2 Building Strategy 2.3 Building Accommodation 2.4 Massing Strategy

3.0 Design Development

3.1 Key Interventions 3.2 Circulation Form-Finding 3.3 Design Drivers 3.4 Facade Development 3.5 Exterior Visual

4.0 Technical Drawings

4.1 Site Plan 4.2 Floor Plans 4.3 Elevations 4.4 Sections 4.5 Interior Visuals

PAGE

E | 03

5.0 Tec tonics and Detailing

5.1 Structural System 5.2 Construction Sequence 5.3 Tectonic Strategy 5.4 Construction Details

6.0 Environmental and Mechanical

6.1 Facade Strategy 6.2 Environmental Analysis 6.3 MEP Strategy

7.0 Building Regulations

7.1 Building Regulations and Standards 7.2 Fire Regulations

8.0 Project Reflection

8.1 Conclusion and Reflections

Interac tive PDF This document contains interactive features. We advise for it to be viewed in Adobe Acrobat Reader.

The CLICK BUTTON below means it is interactive:

Interac tive CLICK BUT TON

1.1

Estate Master Plan Building Uses

Between 2008 and 2014, the University’s £350 million Estate Strategy focused on consolidating 7 campuses into 2 (Manchester and Crewe).

The Crewe campus was integrated into the Manchester campus in Summer 2019. The University’s 29 non-residential buildings amass to a gross area of 185,227m2 .

Strategic Development Oppor tunities

The University’s Estate Strategy for 2017 - 2027 identifies 14 areas of development opportunities, which includes the Righton Building.

The strategy states the heritage building has the potential for quality spaces internally with the opportunity for a distinct identity and variety.

The entrance is poor and the building front could be readdressed.

L isted Buildings

The Righton Building forms part of a small cluster of Grade II listed buildings built in the late 1800s and early 1900s (excluding the St Augustine Church which is not part of the Manchester Metropolitan University Estate). This means the architecture is likely to have a relationship between them.

Estates Aims and Principles

The estate strategy identifies several key aims and principles required to meet the University’s requirements. The diagram highlights some mains points we would like to address with our project.

PAGE

E | 04

18 17

11 2

9

4

1 3

5

10

12

13 15

6 7

Building Names

1. Student Union 2 . Cambridge Hall 3. Chatham Benzie Building 4. Cavendish Hall 5. R Ighton Building 6. Grosvenor Building 7. Geoffrey Manton 8. Mabel Tylecote Building 9. Ormond 10. Bell House 11. MMU Business School 12 . All Saints L ibrar y

14

8

16

Key - Building Uses

13. All Saints Building 14. John Dalton 15. Old Students Union 16. Spor ts Centre 17. Brooks Building 18. Birley Fields Residences

Campus Site Facult y of Education / Health, Psychology and Social Care Facult y of Science and Engineering Facult y of Business and L aw Facult y of Ar ts and Humanities Students’ residencies Spor t Students’ Union L ibrar y Professional Ser vices

Original / restored Altered Later additions

PAGE

E | 05

1.2

B u il d in g He rit age Histor y of the Building

Original Uses

Original Features

L isted Building Statement - E x ternal

1. Canted 8-light windows alternating with transomed 6-light windows. Segmentalarched upstand to the parapet over each of the latter with moulded terracotta decoration.

2. Last 3 no. bays at ground floor oriel windows and a doorway 3. Terracotta sill - band frieze corniec and shaped parapet 4. 3 no. oval windows at ground floor, plain frieze and dentilled cornice 5. 5 no. bays altered 6. Transomed 6-light canted oriel windows to the outer bays and corner 7. Centre arched with a finial and displaying banner with raised lettering “A.D RIGHTON 1905” 8. 5 no. windows to Cavendish St plus the corner to the left - altered 9. Corner site with chamfered corner.

L isted Building Statement - Internal

1. Glazed roof supported by slender iron trusses with open-work spandrels 2. Central atrium 3. Set-back glazed screen walls to both ground and first floor 4. Art Nouveau wrought-iron balustrades to the gallery 5. Superimposed cast-iron columns to the atrium, the lower with open-work brackets forming elliptical arches and the upper with Corinthian capitals supporting panelled frieze

Internal and E x ternal Finishes

E

W

N

1.3

Site Analysis L and Use

Transpor t Routes

Pedestrian Routes

Wind and Solar Study

PAGE

E | 06

Retail Anchor Destination Cafe Private Courtyard Public Green Space Student Accommodation Religious Pub Education Our Site

Our site is located towards the Eastern end of the Manchester Metropolitan University Campus. Therefore it is primarily surrounded by educational buildings and student accommodation. This includes: the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, University Administration and Manchester School of Art. There are also a number of cafe dotted around our site. The main open public space in the area is All Saints Park, located across the road from our site. A private courtyard is situated in-between Righton and Cavendish building.

Exploded Isometric showing window and door components

PAGE

E | 07

Existing Section - Decorative Partitions

The rear exterior wall is the largest secondary structural component and provides additional stability and support to the primary structural system.

Smaller sections such as the first floor arches and skylight arches are structural, loadbearing supports but are not integral to the building’s structural integrity.

In section, we can see indicative outlines for the floor joists to support the floor composition on-top of the main beam structure.

1.4

Bu il d in g Fabric Primar y Struc ture Secondar y Struc ture Par titions Openings 1 Openings 2 A sbestos

1.5

Building Analysis Accessibilit y

Currently, only the ground floor of the Righton building is accessible.

We will insure that our whole scheme is accessible and fully complies with Approved Document M.

Fire Strategy

Neither staircase leading up from the basement is protected/ enclosed, suggesting there is currently no appropriate means of escape from basement level. Therefore the basement does not comply with B1 of Approved Document B. It is also important to note that when designing escape stairs from basement level, at least one staircase must not be connected to upper storey escape stairs (refer to 3.40 and 3.41 of Approved Document B).

Roof Access and Hazards

MEP Strategy

It is important to study the existing building’s MEP strategy to see if there are any services, rooms or pipe work that can be maintained.

For example if we were to locate new toilets near the existing ones we could then use the original pipe work to service them. Also a new boiler-house plant room was installed around 2003 so if possible we should aim to incorporate it into our new scheme.

Current Building Use

Having categorised the current uses of space within the building we then identified areas and rooms we think should be maintained in our design (e.g. the boiler-house plant room, some toilets and emergency escape routes). Some spaces would need to be improved to comply with current building regulations.

PAGE

E | 08

Use this area for toilets and cleaners cupboards to stack all the way up the building as it is located near the plant room and existing pipework.

First Floor Plan Maintain and improve these current emergency exit routes and staircases; creating protected staircases all the way up the building.

Student Workspace Office Cleaners Cupboard Toilets Mail Room

Ground Floor Plan

Kitchenette Meeting Room Server Room Reception Goods Lift Storage Boiler-house Plant Room Switchboard

Maintain the boiler-house plant room and switchboard (it is likely their sizes will need to be increased).

Basement Plan

PAGE

E | 09

1.6

Desig n Co n strain t s & Opport unit ie s Site Constraints

Contex tual Height L imit Indicative E xisting Boundaries

Site Oppor tunities

Align to Pedestrian A xis Re-define Building’s Public Inter vention Re-inforce Connection to Chatham

Building Constraints

E xisting Structural Form L isted Heritage Features

Building Oppor tunities

Maximise E xisting Facade Features E xhibit Detailed Interior Features

2.1

Adaptive Re-Use What Adaptive Re-Use Is

Historical Timeline

Precedent 1: The Idea E xchange, Canada

The original building was built in 1885 and was originally used as a government building before being converted into a post office. RDH Architects designed a 836m2 glass pavilion to wrap around the old building and cantilever over the river. This building has been transformed into a community centre that offers services such as: performance areas, studios (audio and film) and makerspaces.

Precedent 1: Applying the Strategy To Righton

Precedent 2 : Hearst Tower, New York

Architects Foster and Partners. Building area increased from 3,715 m² to 79,500 m². The existing stone facade is retained as a podium to the distinctive tower. The majority of the original building is occupied by the lobby to create a main spatial event.

Precedent 2 : Applying the Strategy To Righton

Conclusion

The additional storeys seems a viable option when applied to the Righton building although would likely be on a smaller scale / not as many floors.

The Hearst tower floor plans are larger and square therefore the plans don’t work as well and may clash with the listed atrium.

Maintaining the enclosed rooms to the side of the plan with adjacent buildings could work to ensure maximum daylight in the open plan spaces.

PAGE

E | 10

Definition

Adaptive re-use is where an existing building is refurbished and it’s function changes from what it was originally used for. It is important for us to maintain as much of the Righton building’s existing historical architectural qualities, whilst still meeting the needs of the new use we propose.

Transformation Strategies

No Contact

Edge to Edge Contact

Surface to Surface Contact

Intertwined Contact

Transformation Types

Corner

Wall

Gate

Hat

Parasite

Roof

Underground

Transition

Bridge

Skin

Interior

Divider

Umbrella

Alignment

Boundary

Infill

Feature

Glue

2.

Building

Makerspace

Architect collaboration

Makerspace aimed at future courses catering for the advancement of technological and computational processes in the development of construction materials and the built environment. The spaces will be particularly aimed towards the development of traditional materials.

Local architecture practices could be invited to collaborate with students for research or development of materials. This would improve the university’s and students’ relationships with local architecture firms.

PAG

.2

Stra teg y

C irculation through the building

Urban Inter vention

By encouraging public circulation through the building we can showcase the work of the students and the technology used.

Creating an urban intervention around the building to utilise the space and encourage more interaction with the building.

All Saints park could also be utilised to showcase research pavilions.

E | 11

Large-scale Robotics Lab: 200m2 Testing Rig / 3D Tracking: 150m2 Storage: 100m2 Human-scale Robotics Lab: 80m2 Fabrication Lab: 80m2 Plant Room: 80m2

Archive Storage: 60m2 Toilet Facilities: 44m2

Exhibition Gallery: 125m2 Entrance Lobby: 60m2

Studio Space: 370m2 Social / Breakout Space: 100m2 Auditorium: 60m2 Computer Lab: 60m2 VR Lab: 40m2

Staffroom: 50m2 ‘Visiting Practice’ Room: 40m2 Management Office: 20m2 A. Management Offices: 2 x 10m2 Meeting / Seminar Rooms: 3 x 20m2

Spatial Hierarchy

‘Connector’ Spaces

Double-height Lab space well connected to support spaces

Auditorium and seminar / meeting rooms can act as central connection between staff and student areas

Accommodation Sizes

2.3

1

3D_WIP Copy 1

Building Accommodation Computational Manufac turing Industrial Robot Arms and End Effec tors L ab Requirements Precedent: UCL - Hawkins Brown Accommodation Schedule

PAGE

E | 12

Control Room (6m² per workspace)

Suspended Robot Moving on a Rail System (Testing) A glazed partition wall between the control room and larger robotics labs allows the processes to be viewed and controlled safely

12m²

1

m 1200m 3000mm

Small Scale Robotics Research Lab 3D_WIP Copy 1- Prototyping) (4m² per workspace

2 A circular workspace to encourage collaboration and group work

mm 2000 mm 2000

A Linear Series of Stationary Robots (Assembly - Production Line)

16m²

2

3D_WIP Copy 1 Copy 1

3D_WIP Copy 1 Copy 1 Stationary Robot (Manufacturing)

2500mm

2500m

m

2000mm 750mm

2100mm m 4000m

mm 2000

We have used standard space guidelines to generate typical layouts for our control rooms (based on a Large Shared Cellular Office Space) and small scale robotics research labs (based on a Postgraduate Research Space) that will be present in our building. Our large scale robotics lab spaces are based on the specific movements of different types of robot arms and industry examples of robots.

Lab Space Studies

Void Intersection:

Extruded Hat and Voids:

Two Partially-Connected Masses

Existing Mass:

Development of Mass and Form

PAGE

E | 13

Practice Spaces

Studio Spaces

Allocation of Key Spaces

2.4

Mass in g St rat e g y Design Process of O verall Shape and Hierarchy of Spaces

Additional Studios and Prac tice Space

Axonometric In Context - Post-Intervention

3.1

Key Interventions E xisting Building

Sequencing the inter vention stages on the existing building and its interior : Step 1 - Removal

Step 1 - Post-Removal

Step 2 - Demolition

Step 2 - Post-Demolition

Step 3 - Re-Use

Step 3 - Post-Re-Use

Step 4 - Inter vention

Step 4 - Post-Inter vention

PAGE

E | 14

Roof Build-up

R

Internal Partitions

01

External Escape Stairs and Lift Core

00 Cavendish Connection

-01

Exploded Axonometric - Demolition

Optimisation Graph

Resolved Option

C ircular Option 1

C ircular Option 2

Diagonal Option

Perimeter Option

Isometric showing most successful circulation options

PAGE

pt

io n

us e

d

A to vg. (lo dia dis w g o ta n er n c ) al e

A to vg. (u dia dis p p g ta n er on ce ) al

A to vg. f lo d is or tan be c e lo w

A to vg. f lo d is or tan ab c e ov e

S pl p a c at e fo fo rm r s

Vo lu m e

V e d ie w ge s f s rom

O

E | 15

Total volume of circulation within atrium space

Northern block

Southern block

Distance to upper diagonal floor

Distance to lower diagonal floor

Space along edges for platform for social, break-out space

Unobstructed view from edge into atrium

Perspective schematic showing main circulation parameters

3.2

Circ u lat ion Form- F in d ing Optimising the atrium circulation for internal views

Site Plan

Schematic

3.3

Design Drivers Route Through the Building

One of the main design drivers for this project is creating a public route through the building to improve connections with the surroundings such as the Benzie Building.

The ground floor plan in particular has been designed in conjunction with this route to provide the University and students to ability to showcase their work and the facilities.

Double Height Robotics Space

As the majority of the robotics spaces are sited in the basement, a double-height space provides a relationship with the more public areas and the street front.

The space that was originally used as the draper’s shop store-front becomes a way for the occupants or the public to gain an insight into the building’s activities.

Glazed Cour t yard Dome

Another design driver was the creation of a glazed dome in the courtyard that provides a view to a robotics space and creates a feature to draw people into the space.

The existing courtyard is under used and cut off from the rest of the building. By opening up the existing building to create a large enclosed space the connection to the route through the building is further improved.

PAGE

E | 16

Step 2: Design iterations of two-dimensional form

Step 3: Perforation aspect

PAGE

E | 17

The undulation in the facade surface is also influenced by the top profile of the original building.

This undulation also provides shading to the internal spaces.

East elevation showing the development of the exterior form

3.4

Fa ca d e D e ve l opme n t Design iterations of the facade form

South and Nor th Additions

Roof Slope and E xisting Profile

Undulation Wave

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

A

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

3.5

Exterior Visual The proposal at 10am - Summer Solstice

Scale 1:200 PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

Site Key Plan

PAGE

E | 18

Drawing Title - Scale

IO TO

D

CE

PR

OD U

AU

AN

BY

ST K DE S

V NT UD E

N ER S

Site Plan 1:400 @ A3 BY

AN

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

ED

UC

OD

PR

DE SK

TO

AU

ST UD EN T

A

Sc

ale

PAGE

ON

VE RS I

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

er

gh Hi Or e tre

dS

n mo

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

t

A

t

VE RS I

ON

Location Plan 1:1000 @ A3

4.1

Sit e P l an Key

North Arrow Main Entrances

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

ST UD EN T

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

AU TO DE SK

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

AN

ee Str

BY

am ath Ch

PR OD UC ED

er

gh

Hi

O

PR

Site Boundary

ED

DU C BY AN AU D

TO ES K U

ST DE N T V N

IO

ER S

1: 20 0 E | 19

A

Scale 1:200

Scale 1

4.2

Floor Plans Four th Floor

PAGE

3

1

PR

OD

UC

ED

BY

AN

AU

TO

DE

SK

ST

UD

EN

T

VE

RS

IO

N

4

le

Sc a

Third Floor GA Plan 1:200 @ A3

0

20

1:

E | 20

2

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

East Elevation 1:400 @ A3

West Elevation 1:400 @ A3

PAGE

A North Elevation 1:400 @ A3

South Elevation 1:400 @ A3

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

4.3

El e vat ion s Adaptive Re-Use Elevations

Original Elevations

Scale 1:200 PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

E | 21

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

Site Plan Key

An event space that can be used by both students and practices to hold crits, talks and presentations.

Office space for practices to rent out

Computer rooms and open plan studio spaces for students.

A small scale robotics lab for students to learn and experiment with new ideas.

The large scale robotics labs can be accessed by students and practices. Full transparency encourages a collaborative work environment.

A shared exhibition space to showcase new and innovative work produced by everyone using our facilities.

Students Only

Shared Facilities

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

Practices Only

The diagram above shows how our building’s facilities will accommodate both students and practices. Our makerspace is A aimed at encouraging and teaching students to use technological and computational processes and so allowing them to work alongside practices will create a continuous opportunity for them to learn new skills and network.

4.4

Sections Long and Cross Sections - Perspec tive Sec tion on Nex t Page Existing Building Elements

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

Perspective Section Long Section

Cross Section

Scale 1:200

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

The Division of Facilities

Site Plan Key

PAGE

E | 22

Long Section 1:400 @ A3

Short Section 1:400 @ A3

Perspectiv

PAGE

ve Section

E | 23

Ground Floor Axonometric

4.5 1

3D_Plans Axo

Interior Visuals Controlled Environment Robotics L ab L arge Scale Robotics L ab The Atrium The Main Entrance A Studio Space

PAGE

E | 24

The Atrium - Ground floor

Exploded Structure Axonometric

15 Pre-fabricated steel arches spanning up to 39m

Floor supported by steel plating attached to cruciform hangers

Constructed as 800x800 at their base and 800x2100 at their peaks

Ludwig Erhard Haus - Structural Arches

Arches stabilised by tension elements integrated into floor plates to reduce deformation

Highly-stressed cruciform hangers suspend floor plates from roof arches

Ludwig Erhard Haus - Suspended Atrium

Building stabilised in transverse direction by arches

PAGE

E | 25

Structural Problem:

Structural Solution:

Our proposed massing requires load capacity greater than that of the existing Righton structure

Install new columns and trussed roof to basis of additional structure to remove any additional loads from existing Righton columns.

Suspension-based SubStructure allows additional floor plates to be suspended from roof and held in tension not compression.

Space Frame connects two sections of roof structure and provides canopy to atrium and courtyard spaces.

5.1

Stru c t u ral Sys t e m Suspending Additional Floors From Roof Super-Struc ture

Structural Precedent: Ludwig Erhard Haus - Grimshaw The Ludwg Erhard Haus in Berlin utilises a super-structure system of steel arches to suspend its additional floors by holding them in tension rather than compression.

We want to use a similar system in our proposal for the main purpose of transferring the additional weight onto the new roof and not the existing structure

5.2

Construction Sequence Construction Sequence

Construction Steps accompanied by RIBA Plan of Work Proposal

R IBA Plan of Work

PAGE

E | 26

Step 0 - Existing

Step 1 - Ground Work

Step 2 - Columns

Step 3 - Cores

Step 4 - Roof Trusses

Step 5 - Hangers and Beams

Step 6 - Suspended Floors

Step 7 - Space Frame Canopy

Step 8 - Roof Build-Ups

Step 9 - Ground Floor Facade

Step 10 - Facade Sub-Structure

Step 11 - Facade Panels

Additional Existing

Additional Existing Detail Section - Existing and Additional Facade

Visual - Existing and Additional Facade

PAGE

E | 27

Additional Existing

Lightweight Adaptive Construction over existing heavy masonry Use of GFRC panels for durable, cost-effective solutions, stone effects to complement existing facade

Facade Materiality

5.3

Tect on ic St rat e g y Strategy to Connec t E xisting and Adapted Building Elements

Space Frame Roof Super-Structure Roof Build

Suspended Floors

1

3D_WIP

Construction Details Key

5.4

Construction Details Proposed Floor and Roof Compositions

Suspended Floors

Space Frame Roof

Super-Struc ture Roof Build

PAGE

E | 28

100mm Double-Glazed Aluminium Framing 65mm Sub-Structure 600mm Space Frame

100 100

600

65

20

100mm Interior Aluminium Framing

1

Section 1 1 : 10

Two dimensional surface: Divided into grid and point attractors allocated

Resolved three-dimensional facade:

Iterations of the panel allocation simulation

PAGE

E | 29

500mm x 500mm Panel for customisable perforations:

Panelised for construction Analysis of the two main faces

6.1

Fa cad e St rat e g y Using attractors to dictate openings on the facade to control daylighting

First Iteration Second Iteration Third Iteration Final Iteration

Summer solstice - 60°

Winter solstice - 15° Perforated facade acts as Perforated facade external shading, blocking allows light to enter the direct solar gain internal spaces, while also providing heat Openable hatches dispels built-up, hot air during the Double-layered glazed skin night time and can be opened traps hot air, creating a thermal during the day if the building barrier, retaining internal heat overheats.

0.4 36.6kWh/m² kWh/m²

0.

1 kWh/m² 12.4 kWh/m²

Perspective section of principle facade - Not to scale

6.2

En vironmental Analysis Using ‘Insight ’ and ‘Green Building Studio’

Winter Strategy

Summer Strategy

Per formance Analy tics

PAGE

E | 30

Solar Insolation (Average across 12 months) Maximum Summer solstice - 60°

Minimum

Winter solstice - 15°

H ig

he r

Osm o

nd S

t.

28° North

Solar gain analysis per floor - 1:500 @ A3

Extract only room Extract and supply (mainly cooling)

Supply

Extract

Section th vent windo summer p

PAGE

6.3

M EP St rat e g y Basement Plan

Ground Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

hrough facade to show openable ows for personal comfort and purging

E | 31

Example upper floor Plant Ventilation Room Supplyboiler and extract vents distributed the ventilation risers Existing room and water storagefrom maintained and enlarged.

Ventilation New combined switch room and server room close to original position and Pick and place robotics have supply vents to enable enlarged.

Supply and extractrooms vents to distributed fromand theextract ventilation risers cooling for the Separate plant roommode provided forequipment ventilation equipment Riser shafts for services locatedtoinbe theon stair cores. mode most Studio and working spaces will be required a cooling of the time due to high usage byWater occupants and use of computers. The ventilation strategy in these areas provides mainly supply and extracts heat Ventilation when required WCs stacked above basement position Cafe positioned above with boilerHeat and Recovery water storage roomchosen for water supply Mechanical Ventilation (MVHR) to provide The facade features high level openable vent windows for personal comfort continuous ventilation. levels for the occupants. Also they enable summer purging whereby on L ift extremely hot days the windows are openedextraction overnightonly to extract Robotics rooms to have separate vents the excess heat from the building Supply only in corridor spaceground to prevent or fumes Goods lift services floordust, andresidue basement only from the robotics space entering the rest of the building.

2 no. lifts provide access to upper floors

Water

Habitable rooms such as control rooms, room, photography room and L ighting andVR Power technician office to have supplyabove and extract ventsposition to enable cooling mode WCs stacked basement due to heat from equipment.

Small kitchenette in the visiting practice working space adjoins to the WCs to Lighting and power distributed from electrical services riser enable supply and drainage of water.

Water L ighting and Power

Original position of WCs maintained with additional provisions.

Lighting and power distributed from electrical services riser

L ift Goods lift services ground floor and basement only.

Used for materials, maintenance of machinery and accessibility.

Studio Space - 305m2 Target - 3.7m2 pp Achieved - 4.2m2 pp

7.1

Building Regulations and Standards Space Standards When starting to design our building we created an accommodation schedule to identify: what facilities our building needs to provide along with their minimum space size targets (based on HSE and UCL space standards guidelines). We referred back to this throughout the project and have successfully implemented them into our final design; adjusting some spaces to suit the specific needs of the robots/occupants.

Approved Document K : Protec tion from falling, collision and impact

Approved Document M: Access to and use of buildings

PAGE

E | 32

Large Cellular Office Target - 20m2 Achieved - 21m2

Meeting Room - 28m2 Target - 2m2 pp Achieved - 2.8m2 pp

Digital Design Lab - 90m2 Target - 3m2 pp Achieved - 5.6m2

Visiting Practice Room Target - 100m2 Achieved - 128m2

Human Scale Robotics Lab Target 80m2 Achieved - 40m2 (x2)

Our Building’s Space Standards

Large Scale Robotics Lab Target - 200m2 Achieved - 180m2

The first floor only consists of office facilities which have a maximum escape distance of 18m in one direction and 45m in alternative directions. This floor plan complies with this.

Fire Protected Stair Core 2

5m 12m 33m

FD 30 Fire Protected Stair Core 1 Escape Route Horizontal Escape - First Floor Plan 1:400 @ A3

This diagram identifies areas that will require special fire rated construction (e.g. walls/glazing) to prevent the spread of fire.

Robotics Lab

Flammable storage will have a 120mm fire rated wall

Plant Room On the first floor, fire curtains seal off the atrium except for the two walkways connecting the two sides of the building.

Storage

Fire Curtain - Atrium

Protected Lift Shaft

Protected Stair Shaft

Enclosed Structural Column Compartmentalisation - First Floor

PAGE

E | 33

7.2

Fire Re gu l at ion s We made sure our building design complies with Approved Document B: Fire Safety, to ensure the occupants that use the building remain safe in the event of a fire. The width of escape routes and exits for our building (based on 100 people occupancy) should be a minimum of 850mm (based on Table 2.3 Approved Doc. B). As our building has multiple uses we used the table below (based on Table 2.1 Limitations on Travel from Approved Doc B) to insure our maximum travel distances complied for each use.

Purpose Group

Use

Specific to Our Building

Max Travel Distance (m)

3

Office

Office

18

45

4

Shop and Commercial

Cafe

18

45

5

Assembly and Recreation

Lecture Theatre

15

32

Elsewhere

18

45

6

Industrial

Robotics Labs

25

45

7

Storage

Storage

25

45

2-7

Special Fire Hazard

Plant Room

18

45

One Direction Multiple Directions

Initially we intended to have a sprinkler system in place however later decided against it. Each floor plate is less than 2000m2; our overall building height is less than 30m; we compartmentalised the atrium and provided escape distances in compliance with Approved Doc. B; and so reduced the impact of a fire enough to not need sprinklers.

Design For Ver tical Escape

Compar tmentalisation In the event of a fire there will be no circulation in the atrium (except for walkways crossing from one side to the other at the same level) in an attempt to control the spread of the fire.

Basement Floor

Ground Floor

First Floor

Second Floor

Third Floor

Four th Floor

Fifth Floor

Atrium

PAGE

m Visual

E | 34

8.1

Conclusion and Reflections Group Conclusion

This project presents an adaptive re-use solution to transform an under-utilised university building into the vibrant hub of a new university course focusing on the development of technology within construction.

A thorough analysis of the existing building was undertaken to understand both the physical architecture and its history. We were able to identify the constraints and opportunities of working on the existing building and its value as a listed piece of architecture. As a result of this, key elements of the existing building, such as the original façade and use of voids, have been retained to preserve the authentic character of the building whilst new additions reference and accentuate these elements through form and materials.

In addition, we believe our proposal responds to the Manchester Metropolitan University’s Estate strategy to develop bold buildings, create inspiring research spaces and generate engagement with potential employers. Our design aims to create opportunities for students to continuously showcase their work, both to the public and local businesses, through the use of glazing and differing views into the robotic spaces. Also, a mixture of private and shared areas have been provided for visiting practises to further encourage engagement between students and professionals.

Bibliography

ArchDaily. (2019) Idea Exchange Old Post Office Library / RDHA. 6th June. [Online] https://www.archdaily.com/918530/ideaexchange-old-post-office-community-center-rdha Astbury, J. (2018). Building study: Here East by Hawkins/Brown. Architect’s Journal [Online] https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/ buildings/building-study-here-east-by-hawkinsbrown/10029884.article Claypool, M., Garcia, M.J., Retsin, G., Soler, V. (2019). Robotic Building: Architecture in the Age of Automation. DETAIL. Evans, J. (2019) Asbestos Management Survey Report – Righton Building. Cardiff: Santia Asbestos Management Ltd. Fisher-Gewirtzman D (2016) ‘Adaptive Reuse Architecture Documentation and Analysis’. J Archit Eng Tech, 5: (3) pp. 1-8 Foster and Partners (2006) Hearst Headquarters. [Online] https://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/hearst-headquarters/ Gregull, T (1997). Design and Construction of the Ludwig-Erhard-Haus, Structural Engineering International, 7:4, pp. 258-259 Historic England (1998) Righton Building. [Online] https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1197781 Manchester Metropolitan University (2017) Estate Strategy 2017-2027. [0nline] https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/media/mmuacuk/ content/documents/facilities/16197-Estates_Strategy-Document-201718_V2.pdf Menges, A. (2012). Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design. Architectural Design. John Wiley & Sons.

Meteoblue. (2020) Wind Rose Manchester. 26th February. [Online] https://www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/archive/ windrose/manchester_united-kingdom_2643123 Sculpteo. (2017) Digital Manufacturing – The Factory of the Future is Here Today. Industry Week. [Online] https://www. industryweek.com/technology-and-iiot/article/21995642/digital-manufacturing-the-factory-of-the-future-is-here-today TechNavio. (2018) 6 Major Types of Industrial Robots Used in Global Manufacturing 2018. [Online] https://blog.technavio.com/ blog/major-types-of-industrial-robots UCL Estates Space & Feasibility. (2018). UCL Space Standards Guidelines. V2. [Online] London https://www.ucl.ac.uk/estates/ policies/2019/sep/space-standards-guidelines Watts, A. (2014). Modern Construction Envelopes. Birkhauser Architecture. Ambra.

PAGE

E | 35

Michael’s Reflection

Abigail’s Reflection

A thorough investigation into the existing fabric and composition of the Righton Building was necessary to fully understand its limits and potential.

Through the development of the project, we encountered multiple design obstacles relating to the existing building and solutions were proposed as a result of team discussions that recognised the constraints of an adaptive reuse brief whilst aiming for ambitious outcomes that both respected and celebrated the architectural qualities already in place. The importance of detailed, phased BIM modelling became apparent here.

This project has enabled me to gain new experience and expanded my knowledge on designing educational buildings, computational tools and designing an adaptive re-use strategy for a listed building; all of which will further my architectural education and career. Designing an educational facility for the University’s Estates department has highlighted the different challenges and considerations required compared to the previous newbuild residential project.

The intense nature of the built context and limited boundaries for expansion meant that innovative structural solutions were required to realise our initial concept and massing proposals. On reflection, a closer investigation into the connection between the existing and the adaptive, particularly structural, may have enhanced the success of the overall proposal. Despite this, we feel the proposal responds to requirements for a forward-thinking, innovative scheme, that is beneficial to the University’s masterplan as a whole.

The integration of computational tools such as Rhino and Grasshopper developed my skills and understanding of what these programmes can offer when integrated into the design process. Combining computational design with a listed building enabled us to challenge our pre-existing knowledge of both approaches.

Moving forward, I aim to develop my computational skills in tools like Rhino and Grasshopper. Furthermore, I believe this project has provided skills and tools that can be applied to future projects and beyond.

Henr y ’s Reflection

Elise’s Reflec tion

The adaptive re-use project presented the design team with a variety of challenges that have proved to be both stimulating and rewarding.

This project’s response to the brief was to propose a thought-provoking multi-purpose scheme that uses advanced computational design methods to solve key problems, particularly the delicate intervention to the existing building, of which BIM and the use of phases were critical.

Furthermore, the development of a facade that perforates depending on the occupancy, Rhino and Grasshopper were used to program a script that allocated the openings according to the user input of attractor points.

The team feels that these encouraged methods of design augmentation were embraced and used appropriately.

This adaptive re-use project on the Righton Building has taught me a different process of designing buildings. Having to analyse every aspect of the existing building and consider it’s history prior to any sort of designing was new for me. Exploring the relationship between old and new was particularly interesting, as well as looking at how we could retain existing bits of architecture and accentuate them to make them into features (like we did with the full height atrium).

Through the use of groups on BIM (Revit) and sharing information over the cloud, the team was able to work independently, however one could argue that the implementation of Autodesk’s BIM 360 and work-sharing would have been hugely beneficial. For a project so dense and reliant on effective communication and fluidity between the design team, this feature should be available to students from MSA.

Working in a group was incredibly beneficial because it allowed us to do an in-depth analysis on the existing building which strengthened the plausibility of our adaptive re-use proposal. Overall we worked really efficiently as a group by insuring files, models and drawings were done in a way that anyone in the group could take someone else’s file and start working on it with no issues (s the Revit model got more detailed as the project went on this did become more challenging). Looking to the future I intend to develop my modelling skills through the use of Dynamo, Rhino and Grasshopper. This project has taught me the foundations of the software however I now need to build on these skills.