THESIS
The existing building stock of New York City offices are unable to accommodate the emerging needs of both today and the future. As a result, tall towers should be designed with flexible components to allow for a more dynamic and efficient utilization over a longer period of time. Joseph Skrocki - M. Arch ‘14
RESEARCH: This chart shows the prevalence of office space within NYC. In Manhattan, over 10% of the buildable land is composed of offices, many of which have multiple floors, creating a landscape in which mid rise and tall buildings dominate.
CATEGORY:
WINDOW HEAD ABOVE CEILING
SPATIAL SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
COLUMN IN WINDOW WALL
COLUMNS IN OPEN OFFICE
TALL WINDOW SILL
WINDOW HEAD ABOVE CEILING
COLUMN IN OFFICE SPACE
CURRENT CONDITIONS Today, office towers are composed of space deemed less desirable for a variety of reasons. The images at the left depict some common conditions seen in earlier high rise buildings, where columns inappropriately lie within the center of offices or small punched window openings dominate the entire floor’s facade, removing the user from both views and light. As a result, office tenants often choose not to occupy these and other spaces, leaving portions of a tall tower vacant.
RESEARCH: This picture visually represents the dominance that office buildings have in Manhattan. However, their presence does not imply consistent use. Many of these mid and tall office towers become riddled with vacancy, creating a hidden problem that exists throughout the city. Offices are built, but their configurations are outdated, creating wasteful vacancy http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2013/05/31/one_possibility_for_nycs_vacant_office_space_popup_hotels.php
CATEGORY:
SPATIAL SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
RESULTING VACANCY While a small amount of vacancy may be acceptable, there are cases where rates of vacancy become a severe detriment to the operation and efficiency of a tower. While most architects were probably touting the high usable floor rates of these towers, if one considers possible future vacancy, one can see how easily that figure is skewed. As a result, towers should be designed with this in mind, and strive to create dynamic spaces to attract and maintain tenants, but also efficient ones to remain solvent during periods of decline.
0.86
0.69
UA AVG. USABLE AREA OF CASE STUDIES
UA MARKET CHANGES
FUTURE USABLE AREA WITH 20% VACANY
+150 %
+100 %
+50 %
0.99
SF
AVG.
0.95
CLS
0.042
VC
13.49
FAR
0.0043
D
0.71
PA
0.86
UA
0.99
CPF
0.39
PO
5.15
PAR
0.72
SU
-50 %
-100 %
RESEARCH: The deviation graph of all nine class case studies laid over one another revealed something about the collection of buildings. While some values ranged wildly, there were six genes that were locked in a much smaller gene. Examining these genes and their influence became an important basis for initial design.
0.75
CWU
0.29
SA
1.39
SAR
1.29
PEF
0.49
PV
0.75
UI
0.55
ET
0.034
1.69
SA2V PA2S
10.58
CF
0.87
VO
4.14
AR
10.73
CAR
0.91
TF
1.97
SA2P
CATEGORY:
SPATIAL SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL SAMENESS FACTOR
CONSISTENCY OF LEASE SPAN
PLANNABLE AREA
USABLE AREA
SECTIONAL USABILITY
COLUMNLESS PLANNABLE AREA
001
002
006
007
011
008
SF CLS
PA
UA
SU
LIMITING GENES
NAME:
CPA
+
014
SAR 015
PEF 010
CWU
PAR
020
005
PA2S 019
SA2V
D
022
VO
017
UI
016
PV 018
ET
024
CAR
RELEVANCE
012
023
AR 026
021
SA2P
CF 013
SA 009
PO
004
FAR
003
VC
025
TF
-
GENE STUDY & DEPENDENCY MAP After having this revelation of vacancy, the book of research was consulted to examine what genes could be “responsible” for vacancy. While vacancy is the result of a market condition, it’s presence in some buildings more than others could perhaps be attributed to underlying gene issues. When looking at the nine cases studies in the book, it became clear that six genes were consistent across each case study. The six genes: sameness factor, consistency of lease span, plannable area, usable area, sectional usability, and columnless plannable area. Instead of creating a building that would lock in these genes like every other case study, a range was to be desired.
10 15 20 25
25
20
15
10
25 20 15 10
10
15
20
25
10 15
25 20 15 10
20 10 25
25 10 20
15 10
10
15
20 25 10 15 20 25
RESEARCH: These nine images portrayed some of the interesting ways in which a building could assemble vacancy. While some are more plausible than others, the upper right example of an inner ring / outer ring condition showed that by preserving the exterior window wall office, one could assemble void space at the center for a more dynamic interior space. 25
20 15
10
CATEGORY:
SPATIAL SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
VACANCY STUDIES & IMPLEMENTATION To create this range in gene values, flexible space would need to be created within the building. The images on the left were studies of how vacant or flexible space could be accumulated within a building. Some seemed more plausible than others, but the top right corner revealed a condition that could be replicated in a new design. By leaving the exterior window wall of a building as a typical office floor plan, the interior (and typically less desirable floor area) could be leveraged as flexible and dynamic space. Instead of placing this area as an inner ring around the core, the choice to split the core and place it within this consistent center allowed for a vast, usable section of the building devoted to flexible space.
CENTER CORE TYP.
SPLIT CORE TYP.
SPLIT CORE WITH VOID
CONCEPT: After devising a location for this void space, a series of prototypes were examined, with a movable floor being deemed one of the most plausible options. Looking to the architectural firm, Hoberman, a closable floor was devised to begin creating more efficient and dynamic space within the shell and outer ring of a typical office tower.
CATEGORY:
SPATIAL SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
“We believe that a world undergoing accelerating change needs an adaptive, interactive approach to design.�
FLEX FLOOR CONCEPT The concept of the flex floor was derived from a number of studies, with some inspiration derived from Hoberman, a leader of transformable design. While a flexible floor may seem excessive to some, their work suggests that such architectural elements are both plausible but also paramount to creating better design.
PROJECT
T
40T H
UE
KA VEN
PAR
TON
ING
LEX
UE
42N D
AVE N
D
ILT
ERB
43R VAN D
UE
AVE N
ON
DIS
MA
AVE NUE
5TH
AVE NUE
NORTH
45T H
44T H
SIT E
41S
CATEGORY:
PLAN & PERSP SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
SITE OVERVIEW & STREET VIEW
43RD STREET
RETAIL
RETAIL
H
H
H
H
H
H
LOADING DOCK
VANDERBILT AVENUE
H
MADISON AVENUE
H
RETAIL
M
M
M
M
L
L
L
L
M
M
L
L
L
L RETAIL
RETAIL
42ND STREET
CATEGORY:
PLAN SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
GROUND & BELOW GRADE LEVELS LOADING DOCK ABOVE
BUILDING UTILITIES AND STORAGE
RETAIL
RETAIL
S
RETAIL KIOSK
EX. RAMP TO STREET LEVEL
S
RETAIL
RETAIL KIOSK
RETAIL
RETAIL
RETAIL
TERRACE RETAIL RETAIL
RETAIL MADISON AVE BUILDING UTILITIES AND STORAGE
RETAIL
CATEGORY:
SECTION SUB-CATEGORY:
EAST/WEST
NAME:
GRAND CENTRAL CONNECTION SECTION
VANDERBILT AVE
RETAIL
EX. RAMP TO ST. LVL
MAIN CONCOURSE TRACK LEVEL ADD’L TRACK LEVEL
CATEGORY:
PERSP SUB-CATEGORY:
AGGREGATE
NAME:
VIEW OF FLEX FLOORS & CONCEPT
CATEGORY:
PLAN & PERSP SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
GROUND FLOOR LOBBY VIEW
329 MADISON 880’ - 0” CATEGORY:
PERSP & SECTION SUB-CATEGORY:
METLIFE BUILDING AGGREGATE 808’ - 0”
HIGH RISE
NAME:
MID RISE
FLOOR 33 593’ - 5”
LOW RISE
FLOOR 19 369’ - 5”
329 LOBBY HT. 60’ - 0”
UNDERGROUND TO G.C. -14’ - 6”
FLEX FLOORS IN BUILDING
ELEC T
W
FAN ROOM
ELEC SERVICE
W
T
FAN ROOM
SERVICE
M
M
TELE
ELEC
CATEGORY:
PLAN SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
TYPICAL FLOOR PLANS
ELEC FAN ROOM
M
TELE W
SERVICE
ELEC
MECH
The typical floor plans of the building are orthogonal and simple, purposefully like typical office buildings to produce and instant contrast between the outer ring and inner flex space. One can easily see the “racetrack” that the layouts and offices follow, with modest lease spans so that all workers within the space have ample access to daylight and views. The center void remains constant throughout the tower to avoid complications and excessive changes to the flexible insert seen on the following spread.
1
2
7 3
7 8 4
12 11 8
10 9 5
9
8
10
6
8 7
7
11
12
1
FLOOR PLATE FINISH
2
ELEC & TELE CONDUIT PATHS
3
STRUCTURAL FLOOR PLATE
4
FLOOR PLATE INSERT
5
FOLDING STRUCTURE
6
FOLDING HARDWARE
7
STEEL HOUSING PANEL
8
GUIDE RAIL
9
ROLLING EXTENSIONS
10
STEEL HOUSING PANEL
11
STORAGE ENCLOSURE
12
STORED MODULAR WALLS
CATEGORY:
AXONOMETRIC SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
COMPONENTS OF FLEX FLOOR
10
11 12 1
WALL INSERTS
7
8
9
8
2
3
4
FLOOR
7
TRACK 7
8
9
TRACK
8
7
5
6
10
11 12
WALL INSERTS
OPTION A + 1,222 SF
ELEC
+WORK STATIONS
T
W
M
OPTION A + LOW RISE PLANNABLE = 1,222 SF + 21,649 SF = 22,871 SF
0.69
PA
FAN ROOM
SERVICE
CATEGORY:
PLAN & SECTION SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
FLEX FLOOR OPTIONS OPTION B + 2,042 SF
ELEC
+WORK STATIONS +PRIVATE OFFICES
T
W
M
OPTION B + LOW RISE PLANNABLE = 2,042 SF + 21,649 SF = 23,691 SF
0.71
PA
FAN ROOM
SERVICE
OPTION C + 3,398 SF
ELEC
+TRAINING ROOMS / CLASSROOMS
T
W
M
OPTION C + LOW RISE PLANNABLE = 3,398 SF + 21,649 SF = 25,047 SF
0.75
PA
FAN ROOM
SERVICE
CATEGORY:
PLAN & SECTION SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
FLEX FLOOR OPTIONS
OPTION D + 4,218 SF
ELEC
+WORKSTATIONS +SOFT SEATING +OPEN COLLABORATION SPACE
T
W
M
OPTION D + LOW RISE PLANNABLE = 4,218 SF + 21,649 SF = 25,867 SF
0.77
PA
FAN ROOM
SERVICE
OPTION E + 5,574 SF
ELEC
+PRIVATE OFFICES +WORK STATIONS +OPEN COLLABORATION SPACE +SOFT SEATING
T
W
M
OPTION E + LOW RISE PLANNABLE = 5,574 SF + 21,649 SF = 27,223 SF
0.81
PA
FAN ROOM
SERVICE
CATEGORY:
PLAN & SECTION SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
FLEX FLOOR OPTIONS
OPTION F + 6,528 SF
ELEC
+WORK STATIONS +SOFT SEATING +BREAK ROOM SPACE +OPEN COLLABORATION SPACE +LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM
T
W
M
OPTION F + LOW RISE PLANNABLE = 6,528 SF + 21,649 SF = 28,177 SF
0.84
PA
FAN ROOM
SERVICE
CATEGORY:
PLAN & PERSP SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
DYNAMIC FLEX FLOOR - TYP. OFFICE
CATEGORY:
PLAN & PERSP SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
DYNAMIC FLEX FLOOR - EVENT
CATEGORY:
SYNTHESIS SUB-CATEGORY:
AGGREGATE
NAME:
TYP. ELEVATION
329 MADISON 880’ - 0”
3’ - 6” 5’ - 0”
7’ - 6”
5’ - 0” 3’ - 6”
LESS TRANSPARENT
MORE TRANSPARENT
LESS TRANSPARENT
MULLION SPACING
MULLION SPACING
MULLION SPACING
MULLION SPACING
MULLION SPACING
FLOOR 39
MECH & FLOOR PLATE STOR.
686’ - 0”
FLOOR 13
MECH & FLOOR PLATE STOR.
269’ - 8”
329 LOBBY HT. 60’ - 0”
43RD UNDERGROUND TO G.C.
42ND
CATEGORY:
PLAN & PERSP SUB-CATEGORY:
TYPICAL
NAME:
DUSK BIRDSEYE
35.54
FAR
+150 %
27.38
+100 %
FAR
+50 %
0.47
PO
0
0.050
VC
AVG.
1.00 0.99
SF
1.00 0.95
CLS CLS
0.042
VC
P
0.84
13.49
FAR
0.0046 0.0043
D D
0.0036
D
PA 0.71
PA 0.64 PA
0.78
0.88 0.86
UA UA
0.99
CPF
0.39
0.36 PO PO
5.15
PAR
SU 0.72 SU
0.75
CWU
0.21
SA
3.20
-100 %
SA
1.39
SAR
0.68
UA PAR
-50 %
0.29
0.41
CWU
1.00
SAR
1.29
PEF 1.14 PEF
0
P
29
EF 14 EF
CATEGORY:
SYNTHESIS SUB-CATEGORY:
EVALUATION
NAME:
329 MADISON Lastly. this project finishes with the deviation graph. As mentioned earlier the goal of this project was to produce a building that could creating both dynamic and efficient spaces. While the perspectives of the project reveal its dynamic and exciting influence, this gene deviation graph shows its capability to adapt and remain efficient. By creating space which can be used when desired or closed off and not conditioned when unneeded, the building creates a range of values seen in this deviation graph.
0.88
ET
PV 0.49
PV
5.44
2.18
0.62
PA2S
0.85
UI
0.75
UI 0.66 UI
AR 12.55
1.00
VO 0.55
ET
0.034
1.69 1.68
SA2V PA22S
10.58 N/A
CF
0.87
VO
4.14
AR
CAR
1.00
10.73
0.91
CAR
TF TF
1.97
SA2P
0.022
SA2V 0.78
SA2P