[Greenbuilding] Open Building

[John Daglish]

Bonjour David,

some comments below

Cordialement

-- 
John DAGLISH, B.Arch,1984
Paris, France



Friday, March 2, 2012, 7:24:37 PM, you wrote / vous ecrirez:

DB> When researching for my book, I found 
DB> surprisingly little in print or online. Tedd 
DB> Benson seems to be the primary advocate, at least 
DB> in the US. See http://bensonwood.com/innovation/whitepaper2003.pdf.

DB> It's more conceptual than what I think you're 
DB> looking for, but here's a link to the 
DB> illustration we created for my book, based on a 
DB> combination of Benson, Stewart Brand and Philip 
DB> Proefrock's writing on the idea. 
DB> http://cyberg.com/building%20layersnew.jpg . Here's my accompanying text:

DB> Durability or Planned Obsolescence?

DB> In light of the amount of material and embodied energy
DB> invested in every building, a clear element of sustainability
DB> is ensuring that it has a long life. With few exceptions
DB> (such as temporary structures), building for durability is
DB> one of the basic tenets of ecodesign. But creating a structure
DB> that will endure over the years is not just a matter
DB> of designing it with long-lasting materials. One perhaps
DB> obvious point: the building must be valued by those who
DB> use it. If the design does not result in a building that functions
DB> well and is pleasing, then it is likely to be renovated
DB> or demolished sooner.

It is interesting to note that public opinion surveys indicate that
the grand public prefers traditional looking architecture. Architest's
who undergo 5 or more years of brainwashing prefer modern
architecture.

The grand public prefers pleasing buildings...


A problem is that most architects coming out of
university do not kow how to compose well a traditional / vernacular /
classical building and that builders have mostly have lost the tradition.

But not all... the tradition is still alive and making a bit of a
comeback in the US.

Simarly urban structure, the foundation for our towns and  cities,
which probably wont change much over 400 years, has deviated in the 20C
from the "traditional" to low density urban sprawl with
seperated, car necessary, functional zoning.


DB> If a building is to last, then it needs to be able to adapt
DB> to changes in usage, technology, and cultural patterns. In
DB> other words, it needs to be durable and flexible. “Design for
DB> deconstruction” is one way to achieve flexibility and provide
DB> for the eventual need to replace the building. The industrial
DB> design world has for a while been at work on design for
DB> disassembly (DfD, which can also stand for design for deconstruction).
DB> One high-profile example involves the office chair;
DB> several manufacturers have engaged in a kind of competition
DB> to design the chair that can be disassembled the fastest
DB> and with the fewest tools. The objective is to make recycling
DB> more economically viable by designing so that materials are
DB> readily separable at the end of the product’s life.

There is a difference between adaptability and flexability. A 17c
traditional building with well sized rooms has adapted over centuries
to various uses. Much of the flexible buildings arising from archigram
et al (the British high tech contingent) in the 20c have not been a great sucess.

DB> Buildings, of course, are more complicated than
DB> office chairs. And they should last longer—or at least parts
DB> of them should. Stewart Brand, in How Buildings Learn,
DB> describes how buildings should be thought of as having
DB> six layers, ranging from the site, which is timeless, to the
DB> skin and structure, which may last generations, to furnishings
DB> that are frequently changed.6

DB> The application of this concept has become known as
DB> open building, and it can lead to a fundamentally different
DB> way of understanding buildings in which these layers are
DB> independent.7 To a degree, modern offices do this already
DB> with non–load bearing, demountable partitions and
DB> mechanical cores. But more often than not, an office renovation
DB> or a home remodel involves brute force removal
DB> (destruction, really) of building materials. Imagine if the
DB> walls of our homes were built so that wiring and plumbing
DB> could be easily accessed for repairs and modifications—
DB> without cutting holes in walls, perhaps without encountering
DB> obstacles, and then without patching and painting
DB> (or, for instance, if windows could be replaced without
DB> entailing interior and exterior damage). The key lies in
DB> separating the layers so that the less durable layers can be
DB> altered without interfering with the others.

You have to be carefull balancing all the factors. Flexible electrical skirting
trunking around a room gives great flexability, but creates EMF
(electromagnetic field) problems.

DB> Open building also relates to the concept of futureproofing:
DB> designing and constructing buildings to anticipate
DB> the future. If, for instance, PV panels are not in the
DB> budget but may be added eventually, run conduits to the
DB> roof and provide support structure so that the panels and
DB> wiring can be accommodated later with minimal disruption
DB> and cost. Similarly, a gray-water system may not be
DB> allowed by current code, but if you provide the necessary
DB> plumbing at the outset, it can be implemented by simply
DB> opening a valve when the code catches up.

Its all so necessary to look at the life cycle analysis of self
sufficient solutions. Household rain water harvesting often has a greater impact
than taking your water from the network.  But local quarter harvesting
could be interesting.

DB> David Bergman  RA   LEED AP
DB> DAVID BERGMAN ARCHITECT / FIRE & WATER LIGHTING + FURNITURE
DB> architecture . interiors . ecodesign . lighting . furniture
DB> bergman at cyberg.com    www.cyberg.com
DB> 241 Eldridge Street #3R, New York, NY 10002
DB> t 212 475 3106    f 212 677 7291

DB> author - Sustainable Design: A Critical Guide
DB> adjunct faculty - Parsons The New School for Design

DB> At 12:26 PM 3/2/2012, Jason Holstine wrote:
>>Can anyone point to a nice succinct resource on 
>>Open Building techniques?  The idea that the 
>>walls are built without the conduits inside, so 
>>they can be more easily maintained, changed, 
>>moved, deconstructed, etc?  Thanks.
>>_______________________________________________
>>Greenbuilding mailing list
>>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
>>
>>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org