26 THE FUTURE OF TALL BUILDINGS


believed (67% total saying it was ‘important’), that mixed use could offer a ‘more attractive and lively proposition’ for both residents and office workers and clients.


When it came to the new office-averse post-covid dynamic, 28% said this was ‘very important’ in driving mixed use rather than purely office-occupied tall buildings.


Supertall reaches a crossroads China banned ‘supertall’ buildings over 500 metres in July 2021, based on safety concerns around building quality following a ‘wobbling’ supertall building incident in Shenzhen this year, but also thought to be due to issues around aesthetics and sustainability. The Chinese government, has also severely restricted constructions over 250 metres.


Given this about-face, our respondents were asked whether they thought buildings on this scale were still viable globally, and responses were somewhat mixed. 42% thought that yes, building up to and beyond 500 metres was still achievable, however 58% said it wasn’t. Comments were made such as ‘post-pandemic we should be reassessing everything...building high is all about maximising profit for developers’ shareholders, nothing to do with creating healthy, successful towns and cities.’


Sustainability


The question was asked as to whether tall buildings clad in glass represented a 'sustainable future option' for architects, clients and communities, due to their cooling requirements. There was a resounding ‘no’ from our survey respondents (60%). Although New York’s Mayor may have required new glass buildings on such a scale to have carbon offsetting, they’re still flavour of the month globally when it comes to tall buildings, despite rising energy costs.


Some respondents explained their voting ‘no’ by saying alternatives such as timber cladding would be better from a sustainability perspective, however another said using recycled glass should be considered, as it’s possible to use on facades, although a further comment was that it was difficult to do so.


Impact of disasters


Disasters occurring in tall buildings tend to seize the national psyche, partly due to the


numbers of people affected and the high- profile nature of such events. The stigma caused can last for decades, and the lessons for designers can be painful. The 9/11 attacks were of course very different to what occurred at Grenfell Tower, but the impacts for design were in their own way equally deep. Our survey respondents generally believed that the World Trade Center attacks did ‘change the world in terms of attitudes to building tall in major Western cities.” However the ratio was only 55% in favour versus 45%.


This is corroborated by research from the CBTUH this year, which showed that 84% of the current array of 200 metre buildings across the world were constructed post-9/11, and the average height of the 100 tallest buildings have increased by 14% since the towers came down. However, with the original WTC largely constructed of steel, the CBTUH revealed that only 9% of the current 100 tallest buildings were all-steel, compared with 39% in 2001. New York, the ultimate skyscraper city, has been building tall buildings with a vengeance in the 21st century. As well as Central Park Tower, recent additions include One Vanderbilt Place (a 427 metre office scheme completed in 2020), and an even skinnier residential tower built at 432 Park Avenue in 2015 (425 metres). Daniel Liebskind’s 541 metre One World


Trade Center, at its completion in 2012 was the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere, and the ultimate architectural statement of defiance of the terrorist attacks, erected on the same site. Grenfell Tower, albeit only a ‘tall building’ by London standards, being above 15 storeys, catalysed a major review of procurement, Building Regulations, and accountability. We asked ‘‘which aspects of the post-Grenfell safety regime should receive the highest focus,’ and the largest amount of votes were for the ‘fundamental changes to clarify the Building Regulations’ around safety,’ currently under discussion at Government level.


The UK industry has been taking stock of the horrendously dysfunctional nature of aspects of construction, such as fragmented supply chains and as a result, accountability, against a backdrop of weak specification enforcement, confused Building Regulations, and value engineering.


Lack of ‘policing’ in the industry seems to have led to an utterly unforgivable result – nearly 100 deaths in one tragic fire, to add to those at Lakanal House and other buildings. We need a robust, nationally enforced, materials and construction testing regime, one which doesn’t allow sub- standard product assemblies to be put on buildings. It appears that this is now being addressed, with a ‘Responsible Person’ initiative to ensure one person looks after safety in specifications, but the entire building procurement system needs shaking up.


Solutions


Sustainability Timber is of course the ultimate sustainable solution when it comes to constructing multi-storey buildings, but the Government knee-jerk response to Grenfell Tower saw it effectively ban timber construction over 18 metres in the UK, being a combustible material. This is despite decades of experience and studies to show that the manner in which timber burns means it isn’t necessarily a higher risk than other cladding or frame materials. The Government’s ‘Net Zero Strategy,’ announced at the end of October 2021 in the run up to COP26 in Glasgow, was hammered by architects for ‘totally lacking in ambition.’ However, it did include something of an about-face in explicitly backing timber construction on sustainability grounds generally, although the material is banned over six stories in the UK. We asked our survey respondents to pick the main obstacles they perceived for designing tall timber buildings currently, and the front-runner by some margin was ‘fire safety’ (69%). Next in line were planning authority/clients’ acceptance (44%), availability of materials (40%), structural shrinkage/expansion (38%), timber volumes required for performance (34%), and cost bringing up the rear with 33%.


Facade innovations We also asked the survey group their views on the innovative passive design technique of ‘solar activated facades’ for tall buildings. Our sample was broadly supportive (86% versus 14%), but some offered objections, such as that the UK’s climate wouldn’t support a completely solar facade,


WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK


ADF NOVEMBER 2021


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84