Good Office Design

DaviD LittLefieLD

DaviD LittLefieLD

GooD office DesiGn

GooD office DesiGn

www.ribapublishing.com

Good Office Design examines the trends and innovations at the cutting edge of office design in the UK today. Selected from British Council for Offices Award winners since 2002 and interpreting empirical analyses by Davis Langdon, the varied and stunningly illustrated case studies presented here demonstrate the latest thinking from the world of workplace design. Taken together, they offer insight and inspiration for architects, developers, clients and anyone interested in getting the very best out of places of work.

Written by the distinguished author and journalist David Littlefield, the text is sharp and authoritative, and complemented by colour photographs, floor plans, elevations and detail drawings. The chapters are organised into salient topics – the Workplace, Location, Structure, Cost and Sustainability – but along the way take account of numerous critical issues such as light levels and staff amenities. A wide-ranging end chapter, written by Jeremy Myerson and Paul Warner, knits together contemporary socio-cultural influences to imagine the future of the office.

Good Office Design is a treasure trove of ideas, shedding light on current best practice in the sector where matching the needs of business with the needs of staff is increasingly important for commercial or organisational success.

DaviD LittLefieLD

GooD office DesiGn

DaviD LittLefieLD

GooD office DesiGn

DaviD LittLefieLD

GooD office DesiGn

4

© David Littlefield, 2009

Published by RIBA Publishing, 15 Bonhill Street, London EC2P 2EA

ISBN 978 1 85946 328 4

Stock Code 68701

The right of David Littlefield to be identified as the Author of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 Sections 77 and 78.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the copyright owner.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication DataA catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Publisher: Steven CrossCommissioning Editor: Matthew ThompsonProject Editor: Susan GeorgeCopy Editor: Paul Beverley Designed and typeset by Kneath Associates Printed and bound by Butler, Tanner & Dennis, Frome

While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy and quality of information in this publication, the Publisher accepts no responsibility for the subsequent use of this information, for any errors or omissions that it may contain, or for any misunderstandings arising from it.

RIBA Publishing is part of RIBA Enterprises Ltd.

www.ribaenterprises.com

The case studies in this book are drawn from award-winning entries from the British Council for Offices’ annual awards over the past six years. Statistical analysis from Davis Langdon has also been used.

Front cover – 5 Aldemanbury Square © Timothy SoarFrontispiece – Blue Fin Building © Hufton + Crowe

The case studies in this book are drawn from award-winning entries from the British Council for Offices’ annual awards over the past six years. Statistical analysis from Davis Langdon has also been used.

GooD office DesiGn workpLace

5

The BCO Awards justify their premier status in part because of the quality of entries but equally due to a judging process that looks beyond the architectural merit to function and fitness for purpose.

Judges look for excellence in architecture, clarity of purpose from those commissioning the building, ingenuity of the product, clever design solutions, delivery on time and budget and that special aspect of a project that makes it a delightful and productive place of work. Quite rightly, a lot of emphasis is placed on the ability of the workplace to support occupiers’ business needs and, of course, an attention to sustainability that occupiers increasingly expect as standard.

The BCO Awards act as a snapshot of the way offices are changing to meet new demands. If you accept, as we do, that the UK leads the world in best practice, they also provide a wider insight into the workplace of tomorrow.

Throughout this book you will see case studies defining best practice from six years’ worth of entries. Researchers at Davis Langdon took on the job of analysing over 500 entries to find key trends and progressions from this period. Some trends may seem obvious – added emphasis on sustainable and energy efficient buildings – but others may be surprising.

Each chapter draws together a selection of award entrants that demonstrate innovations and good practice in a particular area from the workplace through to structure.

“Good Office Design” is a culmination of over a year’s worth of research and analysis and I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has been involved in putting this book together. Special thanks, of course, goes to all those who have entered the BCO Awards. Without their input this book would not be possible.

foreworDby richarD kauntze chief eXecutive, british counciL for offices

contents1. workpLace 1 Unilever House 4 Roche Products HQ 8 GCHQ 12 eOffice 16 PricewaterhouseCoopers 20 ISG Headquarters 24 Blue Fin Building 28

2. Location 33 Quartermile One 36 38 Finsbury Square 40 85 Southwark Street 44 19 George Road 48 One Hanover Street 52

3. cost 57 Great Glen House 60 South Cambridgeshire Hall 64 Scottish Gas HQ 68 Oxfam Global Hub 72 Fort Dunlop 76

4. sustainabiLity 81 Heelis National Trust HQ 84 Beaufort Court 88 Lemsford Mill 92 Skyways House 96 Wellcome Trust 100

5. structure 105 5 Aldermanbury Square 108 BBC Mailbox 112 HM Treasury 116 Royal Bank of Scotland HQ 120 180 Great Portland Street 124

6. futures 129

inDeX 138opposite. bbc MaiLboX, birMinGhaM. © David Barbour.

8

1.0 workpLace

This book draws on submissions To The annual awards programme ThaT has been run by The briTish CounCil for offiCes (bCo) from 2002-2008. over ThaT period There have been more Than 400 individual enTries for projeCTs around The uk, and This book highlighTs a broad range of Them – drawn from aCross differenT seCTors, loCaTions, ClienT Type, budgeT, size and approaCh. iT is Telling ThaT a large proporTion of projeCTs enTered for The bCo’s awards are loCaTed in The souTh of england, or even wiThin The m25 (roughly half, in faCT). This is perhaps To be expeCTed, as The souTh easT is where large numbers of privaTe enTerprises are headquarTered, while parTs of london have addresses of suCh presTige ThaT noThing buT Top-flighT offiCe developmenTs Can be expeCTed. noneTheless, This book ConTains projeCTs from aCross The uk (albeiT wiTh someThing of a souTh-easT bias), while edinburgh probably also geTs more Than iTs fair share, as a poliTiCal/CommerCial CenTre in iTs own righT.


1


opposite. roche proDucts, new heaD office © David Barbour.

2

Wherever office developments are located, the approach to staff provision and spatial standards has remained remarkably consistent over recent years. Occupational density has ranged from one person per 24 m2 to as little as one per 6 m2, while the average remains around 12 m2 per person. Similarly, light levels vary, although the average of 400 lux has become the typical provision. Generally, all projects submitted for awards, and certainly all those featured here, put a premium on the creation of a positive, efficient and delightful workplace. Many clients have entirely bought into the idea that high-quality surroundings will help attract (and retain) high-quality staff; and it genuinely does appear that clients have been happy to explore the widest possible range of options in the search for the ideal workplace.

The move to open-plan working is a common feature of most contemporary offices, although plenty of spaces are provided for meetings and conversations to be held in private. This move in terms of spatial planning accompanies a change in the perceived hierarchy of employers – a pecking order remains, but as everyone has their own value and role to play, status is no longer

badged by the size or position of one’s private office. In fact, clients appear to have seized the potential of wireless working to allow staff to work flexibly anywhere, and a wide range of spaces are provided, from conventional desks, to cafes, cellular rooms, ‘breakout’ areas, light-filled atria and courtyards. ‘Plug-in-and-work’ is becoming common practice, often allied to hot-desking where people work at whichever space is available and appropriate for a specific task; centralised computers know exactly who is working where, allowing others to find them. Offices seem to be characterised by a certain informality, based on the idea that it is a person’s knowledge, capability and attitude that is important rather than where they sit. But informal does not mean uninspiring; typically, staff are grouped around perimeter windows for views and light (no longer are the best vistas reserved for board directors), while large atria, the application of colour and artworks, contemporary furniture and clear sightlines also animate the new generation of workplaces.

A serious consideration of staff amenity is also bound up with the provision of an appealing and motivating environment. A good number of BCO

© Crown Copyright © eOffice


3

entries (perhaps because those entering will only submit their most prestigious projects) contain facilities such as a gym, showers, coffee bar, roof terrace, retail outlets, restaurants and libraries. Where businesses occupy out-of-town locations, there is often an increase in retail provision and possibly even the inclusion of a health centre; providing transport in the form of a private bus or extending the route of a public bus service is also becoming good practice.

In planning terms, there seems to be a small number of office typologies emerging. Out-of-town offices, perhaps configured along the lines of a campus, often adopt the model of an internal ‘street’ along which workspaces and other facilities are ranged; bridges across this street often function as informal lounge or breakout areas. Urban developments tend to go upwards rather than outwards, so the street becomes compressed into an atrium, while roofs are deployed as terraces. In both cases, almost everything is visible, and a sense of activity and identity is provided through one sweeping gaze. Also, attention is given to the sense of entrance,

of arrival; often staff and visitors are treated to a certain grandeur on entry.

Smaller developments are more difficult to characterise; often they will occupy just a single floor of a large building, or they will be conversions of buildings which come with their own curiosities and constraints. Even in these smaller, more individual, places, efforts are made to bring colour, light and openness to the working environment and amenities might be provided in simpler ways, such as the inclusion of bicycle racks, interesting graphics and coffee-making facilities that are well designed and on view rather than hidden in dark ‘kitchens’. The statistical research carried out by Davis Langdon on all the BCO award entries highlights one project which seemed to outdo all others in terms of staff amenity: there are free newspapers, free beverages, two coffee shops, an aerobics studio and much more. This is unusual, but the idea that employees are more than just workers is becoming fairly typical.

© Stanhope plc by Hufton + Crowe © Richard Leeney Photography

4

The brief was to create a working environment of the highest possible specification within this Grade II listed structure. The developer, with architect KPF, has managed to create a highly contemporary and immensely eye-catching office space which is more accessible, more sustainable and more stimulating than its forebear. Cleverly, in spite of the scale of the reinvention of this building, the design and construction team managed to make the best of a long list of original artefacts including doors, marble, parquet flooring, fireplaces, Gill lift panels and light fittings (and where some parquet flooring could not be reused, it was reassembled to create a set of tables for Bovis Lend Lease). Even internally, there are enough historic clues to remind occupants they are still in Unilever House.

Circulation has been greatly improved. The original floor plates, which encompassed dispersed lift cores, have been reconfigured to create a dramatic atrium (created by linking five central light wells) with a single lift core. Adding to the drama of this space are four ‘flying carpets’ which provide extra circulation opportunities for floors five to eight. Suspended from the perimeter columns of the atrium, this multilevel structure (linked by a spiral stair) is held rigid by being twisted into tension and secured by high-strength, stainless steel tension rods. Suspending these floors in this manner enables the lower part of the atrium to be kept clear. This radical reinvention of the nine floors, stair cores and lifts was made possible by replacing much of the original complex

Unilever House was a wonder of the age when completed in the 1930s, but in spite of a 1980s refurbishment, this iconic building had become cramped, confusing and poorly used by the end of the century. The company began to explore ideas about redeveloping the building in 2002, and even considered moving to a new location. However, the headquarters is so firmly lodged within the identity and culture of Unilever (and its location is almost unbeatable) that the decision was taken to work with Stanhope to entirely update and reinstate the elan of this curved, neoclassical edifice.

uniLever house100 victoria eMbankMent, LonDon

cLient: uniLeverDeveLoper: stanhopeowner/investor: sLoane bLackfriarsarchitect: kohn peDerson foXinterior DesiGner: prinGLe branDonstructuraL enGineer: arupservices enGineer: arupQuantity surveyor: Davis LanGDonproject ManaGer: stanhopecontractor: bovis LenD Lease

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: apriL 2007net: 24,121 m2

Gross: 36,077 m2

efficiency: 67%fLoors: 10cost: £98,055,000


5

uniLever. this buiLDinG, rateD eXceLLent throuGh its breeaM assessMent, has been entireLy rethouGht – aLLowinG uniLever to continue occupyinG this iconic heaDQuarters by the river thaMes. © Stanhope plc by Hufton + Crowe

6

and heavy structure with lighter steel floor plate, rigidly connected to the retained elements of the building and relocated concrete firefighting cores.

Sixty per cent of the original building has been retained, although much of what we now see behind the retained facade is entirely new (and 88% of the 33,000 m3 of demolition material was recycled). Concrete roof slabs were replaced to allow for the creation of a roof garden, with openings to bring daylight into the atrium below; rooftop plant was moved to the basement; the 1970s west elevation was entirely replaced, while the original northern elevation was retained but opened up to provide a much stronger sense of access, light and transparency at ground level. Also, the principal front entrance, facing the Thames, has been reopened and enhanced. The overall feel of the re-engineered building is one of openness and interconnectivity; any sense of stuffiness has been consigned to the bin. Staff

amenities have been relocated from the basement to the top floor, and directors’ offices and the boardroom itself have been moved to the sixth floor from their previous ‘near invisibility’ at the top of the building in small enclosed spaces. ‘We use the word “transformation” all too easily these days, but in this case it is totally justified,’ said the client. ‘The building has been totally transformed and in a most stunning way.’

Just as important is the performance of the building environmentally and spatially. Occupation density has been increased from 1:21 m2 to 1:12 m2, and floor plates and entrances have been configured to allow subletting for the first time. In terms of carbon emissions, as a listed building, Unilever House is permitted to use 20.5 kg of carbon per m2 per year. A target of 18.5 kg/m2/yr was set for the reinvented building, but this goal was beaten by a large margin. As built, Unilever House uses 15.99 kg/m2/yr – 22% better than


7

the building regulations specify and 13.5% better than the target. The building’s BREEAM rating is ‘excellent’.

The construction of the building also benefitted from the establishment of the London Construction Consolidation Centre, a builders’ depot part funded by Stanhope and opened in 2006 just outside London’s Congestion Zone in Bermondsey. This allows products to be delivered to construction sites in central London in relative bulk on a just-in-time basis. The project was the first Stanhope scheme to benefit from this facility.

‘Irreplaceable historic facades were retained and the inside remodelled to create internal visibility, recover organisational legibility to the floor space, improve light and encourage the public back into the building. The renovated building provides an inspiring and invigorating workplace that can be shared with visitors and the public,’ said the BCO.

opposite. with a Gross internaL fLoor area of 36,077 m2 (388,329 ft2), the buiLDinG has an efficiency of 66.7%. typicaLLy, office spaces on each fLoor aMount to arounD 2,500 m2 (net). © Stanhope plc by Hufton + Crowe

Left. previousLy DisperseD Lift cores anD LiGht weLLs have been reconfiGureD, anD the buiLDinG proviDeD with a centraL core anD DraMatic atriuM. the ‘fLyinG carpets’ can be seen throuGh the curveD GLazinG. © Stanhope plc by Hufton + Crowe

‘we use The word “TransformaTion” all Too easily These days, buT in This Case iT is ToTally jusTified,’ said The ClienT. ‘The building has been ToTally Transformed and in a mosT sTunning way.’

8

‘This is an opportunity, and one that happens rarely in the life of an organisation, to evolve our working environment toward one that creates a culture of dynamic cohesion, open communication and teamwork,’ said John Melville, general manager of Roche Products. ‘Our aspirations were enshrined within a brief that called for a building that reflected the quality of Roche without being ostentatious, drew together our organisation under one roof, transforming our working environment and culture to one which attracted and retained the best staff in our industry. That is exactly what has been delivered in a fine, contemporary building that was delivered ahead of programme and within budget, and within which our effectiveness, productivity and sense of identity have all been enhanced.’

BCO guidelines were used extensively as benchmarks during the design phase of this three-storey building, which takes advantage of the sloping topography of the site to appear as a two-storey development (the entrance is located at first-floor level). This building was conceived as a modern, stand-alone pavilion, with its volume sheltering under a single, horizontal roof plane. A central atrium/street runs through the building, flanked by offices on one side and communal facilities such as conference centre and staff restaurants on the other. This simple zoning provides excellent legibility and clarity for both staff and visitors.

Prefabrication was maximised throughout the project, for reasons of speed and quality control. The atrium rooflights, which contain integral

The new head office for Roche Products was designed to deliver against a brief which demanded a cultural transformation for the company. From an entirely cellular, multi-site office environment Roche has moved to a 90% open-plan building which has brought all 1,200 staff together under a single roof. The overall ambition was to provide the company with a building in which innovation could flourish.

roche proDucts, new heaD officeweLwyn GarDen city

cLient: roche proDucts LtDarchitect (anD interior DesiGner): bDpstructuraL enGineer: bDpservices enGineer (incLuDinG LiGhtinG anD acoustics): bDpconstruction ManaGer: pcMQuantity surveyor: cLarus pcMaccess consuLtant: reef associatescLaDDinG consuLtant: eMMer pfenninGer partner aGtransportation consuLtant: Mvafire consuLtant: faberMaunseLL

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: auGust 2005net: 19,416 m2

Gross: 21,798 m2

efficiency: 89%fLoors: 3cost: confiDentiaL (brief was to DesiGn within £1,800 per m2)


9

roche heaD office. this buiLDinG, which utiLiseD prefabrication to a hiGh DeGree in its construction, is GeneraLLy DesiGneD to a coLuMn GriD of 7.5 m anD a pLanninG GriD of 1.5 m. facaDe MoDuLes were DesiGneD as 1.5 m or 3 m units. © David Barbour

10


11

lighting and roof vents, were prefabricated. So too were the solid oak structural curtain walling panels – a UK first. Although this project is being featured here for its workplace benefits and the cultural shift it has helped engender at Roche, it is also worth noting that the building secured an ‘excellent’ BREEAM rating and makes use of an extensive network of boreholes and ammonia-based chillers with zero CO

2 emissions, as well as an orientation

which takes best advantage of sunlight.

The building was configured around a notion of three key spatial types: workplace, shared space and individual space. Open-plan offices are located across three floors and, in spite of their large size (60 × 90 m), no workstation is more than 7.5 m away from natural light, owing to a pair of internal atria and a landscaped courtyard which sits in the centre of the building. This principal working area also contains numerous breakout points, informal meeting zones and hot-desking for visitors and mobile staff. The whole configuration of the work area is based around the wish for staff to mix, relax and share ideas informally.

Shared accommodation is provided by an upper-floor conference centre (containing a variety of rooms that can be joined together), a restaurant that can double up as an occasional assembly space, a cafeteria and the atria/street. This internal street was designed as the vibrant heart of the building, containing all circulation mixed with viewing galleries, bridges and informal meeting places – it is a place of movement and interaction,

and is even equipped with an ATM machine and dry-cleaning drop-off point.

Individual zones comprise a gym and dance studio, an acoustically isolated library, an occupational health centre and a ‘travel to work’ facility providing changing rooms and showers for cyclists.

Considerable thought has also been given to the landscaping, which contains formal lawns, water features and a perimeter promenade. The courtyard, set in the middle of the building, can also be accessed by staff, and seating is provided among the ornamental planting.

The upshot is that the cellular mindset of Roche’s staff, who were once located in 37 different buildings, is fast disappearing in an environment that clearly places a premium on communication and teamwork. The open-plan offices are large enough to soak up entire departments, but there is enough visibility throughout the height of the building to emphasise the connectivity of separate teams. ‘The office space will easily accommodate the natural ebb and flow of local team and department sizes within a dynamic office environment designed for great flexibility and comfort,’ said the client.

This project won the ‘Best of the Best’ award in 2006, the BCO’s highest accolade. ‘The place is full of contradictions. It is massive – more than 21,000 m2 – yet intimate and friendly,’ said the judges, who also praised the building’s ‘love affair with light’.

opposite. a three-storey voiD (or ‘street’) runs throuGh the centre of the buiLDinG; offices are LocateD to one siDe, whiLe a conference centre, restaurant anD other staff aMenities are LocateD on the other. © David Barbour

beLow. section throuGh the buiLDinG, iLLustratinG internaL atria (Left anD riGht) anD the centraL courtyarD. © BDP

12

The ring, or torus, shape was not an act of architectural whimsy. Part of the brief was that business units should be both integrated and autonomous, so the idea of allowing departments to inhabit specific segments of a circle was a piece of shrewd thinking. Also, this shape has the advantage of clustering all the employees very close together – no one in the organisation is more than a five-minute walk from anyone else. Furthermore, Gensler points out that the circle means that the building achieves ‘the maximum site for the minimum perimeter’, reducing the cost of building materials, surveillance and other security measures. Externally, there are no corners to hide around.

As might be expected, GCHQ was a relatively expensive building to build, coming in at £3,369 per m2 (calculated on a gross internal floor area of 103,877 m2). For the investment, staff working conditions are excellent: 80% of the space is close to a window and natural light; a landscaped courtyard at the centre of the building provides a high-quality, but secure, external space; there is a wide variety of office and meeting areas, including open and high-security spaces and ‘work anywhere’ facilities; and the building is equipped with laboratories and technical facilities of ‘often unusual specifications’.

This iconic building, well known for its doughnut shape, provides a single home for GCHQ staff who had previously been spread across 50 buildings over two campuses. The brief, like many in this book, was to provide employees with a flexible and efficient workplace which would facilitate improved communications across the organisation while (simultaneously) preserving a sense of the autonomy of distinct business units. It was an altogether tougher brief than most headquarters projects, not least because Gensler also had to build in security measures and provision for an IT facility that far exceeded the demands of standard commercial contracts. The fact that they have done this so elegantly and to the satisfaction of GCHQ staff is to Gensler’s credit.

GchQcheLtenhaM

cLient: GovernMent coMMunications heaDQuartersDeveLoper: inteGrateD accoMMoDation servicesarchitect: GensLerinterior DesiGn: GensLerstructuraL enGineer: tps consuLtservices enGineer: crown house enGineerinGcontractor: cariLLion

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: septeMber 2003net: 64,272 m2

Gross: 103,877 m2

efficiency: 62%fLoors: 4cost: c.£350,000,000


13

the GLass anD steeL structure is set on a pLinth of cotswoLD stone. GLazinG is reinforceD anD set at anGLes to cLoak the buiLDinG in ‘a veiL of secrecy’. © Crown Copyright

14

above. this LarGe buiLDinG, with a Gross internaL fLoor area of 103,877 m2, was not cheap at £3,369 per m2. but the brief was coMpLeX anD the buiLDinG haD to heLp ManaGers Meet a wiDe ranGe of orGanisationaL outcoMes. © Crown Copyright

Left. the circuLar buiLDinG wraps arounD an open, Green heart at its centre, 80 m wiDe. the eMphasis of the buiLDinG’s DesiGn is on inteGration anD knowLeDGe sharinG – aLL staff are within a five-Minute waLk of each other. © Crown Copyright


15

The efficient provision of workspaces and facilities is one thing, but to create both a fortified bastion and a colourful, open-plan and delightful environment (with a ‘very good’ BREEAM assessment) is of another order entirely. ‘Like a medieval fortress, GCHQ offers an inner secure space and an outer defensive wall,’ say the architects. That defensive wall is composed of a plinth of Cotswold stone, angled glass (one can see out, but not in) and aluminium. Access is obviously highly controlled, and all goods are checked and palleted up in a remote logistics centre before being transported to the main building (which contains an inner ‘ring road’) via electric train.

The roof of the building is, rather, something of a canopy which covers a series of distinct open and closed spaces. A very open, bright and airy ‘internal street’ runs around the centre of the building linking everything, providing the ‘lungs’ of the GCHQ community. Office spaces look out over this glass-roofed zone. For all its functional requirements and the fact that this building sits at the sharp end of government intelligence gathering, it is a very civic place, full of grandeur,

colour and visual warmth. ‘It’s been called the great doughnut and the hole with a million secrets, and reflects a massive change in culture by this ultra-secret organisation,’ said the BCO judging panel. ‘This is still a secret building, protected by heavy walls and restricted access. Yet even this is attenuated by clever use of glass and Cotswold stone, making the entry like that of a luxury hotel.’

This PFI project, completed in September 2003, has also managed to convert GCHQ to new and alternative working practices; the open-plan offices, desk sharing and informal, flexible spaces to suit different work styles are all innovations for this government employer. There is also a gym, and changing facilities for people who cycle to work. What the project delivers is a blend of practical advantage and delight. ‘We were looking primarily for organisational development outcomes, although we also sought efficiency, environmental and community benefits,’ said the client. ‘As well as supporting our many and varied business activities we also looked to achieve a joined-up organisation [from] our many professional and geographically distinct tribes.’

The effiCienT provision of workspaCes and faCiliTies is one Thing, buT To CreaTe boTh a forTified basTion and a Colourful, open-plan and delighTful environmenT is of anoTher order enTirely. ‘like a medieval forTress, gChq offers an inner seCure spaCe and an ouTer defensive wall,’ say The arChiTeCTs.

16

What eOffice has done is to borrow from hotel technology to enable extremely flexible communications so that businesses can operate from any desk, take a call at any phone and use wireless technology for services such as printing. They have created the facility to ‘plug in and work’. Moreover, the company has used interior designers to give its offices a slick, contemporary, colourful and almost quirky ambience. There is something of the boutique hotel or the well-appointed advertising agency about these

environments, rather than the pared-back neutrality of most ‘boxes to rent’. The Manchester site provides 100 workstations in an open-plan configuration, as well as private spaces which can operate as boardrooms, and a 100-seat conference facility. A ‘working wall’ provides central storage, mail boxes and coffee-making facilities, leaving more than half of the site free of barriers or partitions. Like most modern offices, this workplace boasts informal lounge-like areas and ‘touch-down’ points, as well as more formal

eOffice is a rapidly expanding network of serviced office environments that enable new and growing enterprises (or businesses with only the occasional need for a desk) to inhabit contemporary commercial space without incurring large overheads or property responsibilities. Typically, serviced offices are highly cellular, but eOffice broke the mould by introducing largely open-plan environments to this sector. Meeting rooms and small one-to-one rooms are made available, but the philosophy of the business is to create a network of like-minded and mutually supportive companies – a sort of entrepreneurial community. eOffice won the BCO’s Award for Innovation in 2007 for its premises in Manchester; the following year its Birmingham site won a BCO Regional Award. The key to the success of these places is creating facilities, plans and designs for unknown clients. This is the spec office par excellence in that the eOffice offers what appears (at first glance) to be a bespoke solution for what can only be a generic tenant.

eoffice1 portLanD street, Manchester

cLient: eofficeowner: bruntwooDinterior DesiGner: asseMbLyrooMservices enGineer: workspaceproject ManaGer: workspacecontractor: workspace

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: March 2006 (Manchester site)net: 883 m2

fLoors: 1 (within an eXistinG buiLDinG) cost: £500,000 – incLuDes fit-out anD furniture


17

this LarGeLy open-pLan office space contains 100 work stations anD private rooMs for up to ten peopLe. private Lockers are ranGeD aLonG the Left. © eOffice

18

workstations, all bound up in a package of hyper-graphics, bright colours, sophisticated lighting and Hermann Miller furniture systems. ‘The objective was to develop an innovative serviced office with a strong identity,’ said the company’s award submission in 2007. ‘eOffice is designed as an environment which enables cross-fertilisation of companies; a mini-business district under one roof; a space that enables companies to network informally.’

BCO judges described the Manchester site as more like an ‘office club’ than a workplace: ‘Design and attention to detail is part of the secret. Ferrari-red casual furniture and record covers on the walls create a dynamic character from a limited budget and tight space. High-quality furniture with a range of configurations and

services have made good use of a base building on a busy city centre corner.’ Judges were similarly impressed with the Birmingham branch, which they said ‘deserves an award for the pure refusal to do the proper thing and its sheer spirit of achievement’.

Part of the success of these spaces is that they are not, in fact, just spaces – the sense of community and belonging that eOffice tries to bring to their operation is just as important as the hardware and space planning. Regular events bring users together, members can communicate via an intranet, and other services such as file-sharing and email are provided on subscription. It is all very flash, and almost certainly beyond the means of many small businesses were they to try to create all this for themselves.

eoffiCe is designed as an environmenT whiCh enables Cross-ferTilisaTion of Companies; a mini-business disTriCT under one roof; a spaCe ThaT enables Companies To neTwork informally.


19

opposite. coLour is key to this DeveLopMent. the cLient aiMeD to proviDe a serviceD office environMent with a buzz – an entrepreneuriaL coMMunity. © eOffice

Left. furniture was sourceD froM kristaLia, MaGis anD hitch MiLius. MeMbers can ‘pLuG anD work’ anywhere. © eOffice

20

The brief to the designers was – as it would be from PwC – taxing. The design had to respond to a new corporate structure, and encourage cross-disciplinary working; it also had to get directors out of their individual offices, create spatial and organisational clarity, promote improved circulation, maximise natural light and deliver a flexible space where mobile working and sharing could flourish. Moreover, there had to be a clear demarcation between flexible and fixed work zones. The Birmingham office was the first of PwC’s locations to move to a cross-disciplinary culture, embracing what the company calls ‘line of service’ working as part of a strategy of becoming an integrated financial service provider rather than a collection of separate specialisms, each with its own culture.

The overall idea was to bring the service industry ethos into play, one which treated staff like consumers. So PwC employees, or even their clients, can book a desk, plug in their laptop and get on with it. If staff want to find someone, they simply type a surname into one of many consoles throughout the building and the central computer indicates where to find them. Of the 900 desk spaces in the building, 800 are bookable under a ‘hotelling’ system (even private offices can be booked out when the principal occupant is absent). Staff are given lockers, archives have been moved off-site, and working files have to be retrieved from a central vault. Electronic document management has further reduced the amount of paper here. There are very few tall filing cabinets

This 7,355 m2 refurbishment of PwC’s office in central Birmingham was more than just a makeover – this was about using design to underpin a change in corporate culture. Bringing all staff together into Cornwall Court (rather than occupying a pair of buildings in the city) and a wish to create a more flexible, integrated and welcoming culture led to PwC completely re-imagining their ‘tired, dark and uninspiring’ 1980s block. With BDGworkfutures, the company has managed to create an inspiring place in which to work and host visitors. In 2004, the BCO gave the project its ‘Best of the Best’ award.

pricewaterhousecoopersbirMinGhaM

cLient: pricewaterhousecoopersDesiGn anD coMMunications: bDGworkfuturesproject ManaGer: faithfuL & GouLDstructuraL enGineer: faithfuL & GouLDservices consuLtant: Gw buiLDinG services consuLtantsQuantity surveyor: faithfuL & GouLDchanGe ManaGeMent consuLtant: zzacontractor: watesfurniture: tsk


Gross: 10,266 m2



21

this 10,266 m2 (Gross) reinvention of a 1980s buiLDinG has reDefineD the way peopLe use this birMinGhaM office. © BDGworkfutures

22

in this office. The blinds around the central atrium have been taken down and desks moved away from its perimeter, opening up clear views and generating expansive circulation routes. Stripped of most of its cellular offices, this is the most transparent the building has ever been.

Interestingly, it appears that the most popular desks are the ones in the most open, communal spaces. Faced with the choice, people aren’t squirreling themselves away any more. With this interior of bright colours and murals of West Midlands icons, this is (intentionally) not what one would expect from a firm of accountants, auditors and business strategists.

‘Buildings are becoming catalysts for change in company culture. Employers realise that they must cast off old-fashioned working practices to survive in a business environment that is

more open, interactive and flexible,’ said BCO judges in 2004. ‘At ground level, a French cafe in extraordinary colours and textures entices the staff to linger. In fact, colours give a tremendous sense of orientation, in any part of the building, as well as an uplifting spirit. The holistic approach incorporating a variety of environments and working practices has produced a distinctive and appealing workplace that has injected new life into a tired building.’

Everything about this project addresses practicality. The three-month strategic briefing was followed by a seven-month fit-out that took place while the building was occupied by the client. And the project is about more than just colour, light and flexibility (important though these things are); the building is equipped with plentiful storage, printing and copying hubs, access-controlled project rooms for eight to ten people, quiet rooms, interactive

23

areas and breakout/vending spaces. Although open space and areas for informal chats have been incorporated into the design, the building still provides secure and private spaces for the discussion of confidential matters. Nonetheless, the multiple working environments generate a lively atmosphere throughout the building, and the relationships between work and well-being have been fully explored through the design, largely by adhering to four principles:

> smart planning improves productivity

> space is required for relaxing and talking to colleagues

> a creative environment is a stimulating place to be

> supporting flexibility and mobile working can improve the work–life balance.

‘We now have a modern 21st-century facility which is proving extremely motivational for staff,’ said David Waller, PwC Midlands’ chairman. ‘Our working environment, particularly in terms of light, visual impact and flexibility, has helped us move forward on our “people” and “great place to work” agendas, supporting our ambitions to recruit and retain the best people.’

aLL fLoorspace in this DeveLopMent is within 7.5 m of naturaL LiGht. the buiLDinG is occupieD at a Density of 7.4 m2 per person. Desk LiGhtinG is set at 400 LuX. © BDGworkfutures

iT appears ThaT The mosT popular desks are The ones in The mosT open, Communal spaCes. faCed wiTh The ChoiCe, people aren’T squirreling Themselves away any more.


24

The project occupies just a single floor of Aldgate House, and in winning its ‘Best of the Best’ award, it edged out some far higher-profile schemes, which demonstrates the thoughtfulness and attention to detail with which this particular development was carried out. What makes this 2,166 m2 floor space so successful is that it manages to encompass a huge range of spaces, colours, materials, scales and ‘attitudes’ without becoming messy. As a demonstration project, as well as for providing staff with comfortable and efficient places to work, the office almost had to become a showroom for ISG’s skills, and variety

was therefore almost obligatory. Again, with ORMS Architecture Design, the company made it all work with apparent ease.

In plan, the sixth-floor office is bisected with a timber ‘boardwalk’ which runs the width of the building. Running in the other direction are the service cores, alongside which is located a multi-coloured glass ‘pavilion’ containing meeting rooms of different sizes. A pair of open, timber-clad, informal meeting spaces punch through this pavilion to frame views and prevent the floor plate from becoming overly subdivided – this is

This project represented something of a high-profile gamble (or opportunity) for ISG, a construction and fit-out company with an international reputation to uphold. These offices in a large but unremarkable block in London’s Aldgate form ISG’s own headquarters; if done well, not only would it provide brand new accommodation for the company’s 200 London employees (brought together from three separate locations) but ISG would also gain a valuable marketing and demonstration tool. Fortunately, it worked. ‘Elegant, immaculate, efficient and “all-round damn cool” was the breathless reaction of one experience-hardened judge to this year’s supreme award winner. He was not alone: every one of the panel decided on the spot that this was the place they would like to work.’

isG heaDQuartersLonDon

cLient: isGproject ManaGer: isGinterior DesiGner: orMs architecture DesiGnstructuraL enGineer: aLan conisbee associatesservices enGineer: cunDaLLcontractor: isG

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: october 2006net: 2,166 m2

fLoors: 1cost: £1,748,700 to cat b


25

this carbon-neutraL project (achieveD by trackinG the carbon content of aLL buiLDinG MateriaLs anD off-settinG) proviDes offices anD a branDinG stateMent for the contractor. © Richard Leeney Photography

26

aT The ouTseT, a series of non-negoTiable objeCTives were desCribed in deTail, inCluding The CommiTmenT To delivering a Carbon-neuTral fiT-ouT, CreaTing a spaCe ThaT maTChed The CorporaTe brand, promoTing effeCTiveness and effiCienCy, minimising disrupTion To The business and insisTing on a zero-defeCT regime.


27

largely an open-plan environment and the flow and adjacencies between different teams is a vital factor behind the design. In fact, a good deal of staff consultation took place at the design phase, and factors such as clear vistas, the provision of informal lounge areas, breakout spaces and the almost boutique hotel aesthetic (as well as the option to work and meet in private) flowed directly from this opinion-gathering exercise.

As well as asking staff what they wanted, ISG directors drew up a project charter for both themselves and their suppliers. Thus, at the outset, a series of non-negotiable objectives were described in detail, including the commitment to delivering a carbon-neutral fit-out, creating a space that matched the corporate brand, promoting effectiveness and efficiency, minimising disruption to the business and insisting on a zero-defect regime. The carbon-neutrality was achieved by tracking the embodied energy of building materials, encouraging contractors to use public transport and recording the energy use of journeys made by private vehicle. A final calculation was made and the carbon was then offset by funding projects through the Carbon Neutral Company. More than 70% of the waste produced in the project was diverted from landfill by being separated into appropriate material streams and sent for reuse or recycling.

Enhancing the efficiency of the office spaces is a sophisticated system which automatically logs staff comings and goings. On entering the office, staff swipe themselves in and receptionists can see at a glance who is present by looking at a computer screen. Reception staff are also able to print off an attendance list at the outset of an emergency. The reception area, located at the centre of the office, can also double as an event space.

The BCO judges’ only complaint was that the office contained just one shower – although they added that this single shower is ‘exquisite enough to win a prize on its own’. Well executed and obsessively considered, this space manages to balance function, comfort and ambience extremely well at a cost of £800 per m2. ‘The office is full of surprises yet free of gimmickry. It manages to be clean and crisp yet still friendly and comfortable,’ said the BCO jury. ‘ISG spent endless hours testing and fine-tuning the brief to meet what staff would like. And it worked. This is clearly a fun place to work. The layout shows vision, fluency and quality. Most of all it shows how an ageing, tired and hard-to-let deep office floor can be turned into dense but comfortable workspace through intelligence and professional skill. ISG is living in its own showroom, inviting us all to do the same. Quality is worth the effort.’

opposite top. the GLazeD ‘paviLion’ runs the LenGth of the office space, punctureD by tiMber-cLaD openinGs which fraMe views. © Richard Leeney Photography

opposite bottoM. this pLan shows the way the office is bisecteD in two Directions. a connecteD series of open zones runs north–south, whiLe a ‘paviLion’ of ceLLuLar offices runs east–west. © ORMS Architecture

above. the interior is DefineD by coLour, transparency, connectivity anD MoDernity. LarGeLy open-pLan, Discrete rooMs are proviDeD for MeetinGs, traininG anD presentations. © Richard Leeney Photography

28

The building, with two others nearby, replaces St Christopher House and Tabard House, both large post-war blocks with long, unbroken facades, poor floor-to-ceiling heights and restrictive structural grids which made them awkward to redevelop. Land Securities’ intention was to replace these buildings with architecture that was more permeable, while active frontages (containing shops and cafes) and carefully considered landscaping would create an urban quarter that was more in tune with the changing fortunes of Southwark – where the presence of Tate Modern, the Globe Theatre and the Millennium Bridge has transformed this backwater into something of a tourist Mecca. Bankside 1, later

to be renamed the Blue Fin Building by IPC staff, was to provide large floorplates with the ability to become a multi-tenanted office block with up to three occupiers per floor, while making the most of the dramatic view of the central London skyline. IPC has sublet two entire floors and part of a further storey, demonstrating the building’s adaptability.

IPC moved just 600 m from its former headquarters, but the change to its staff environment is vast. Surveys show that employees are proud of their new building and feel stimulated by it – especially by the sense of space and light, and the almost theatrical central atrium that is

The Blue Fin Building is notable on a number of levels. It is a very large building which manages to make a lot more of its public realm than the giant 1960s slab it replaced. It provides a thoughtful, practical and inspirational environment for principal occupier IPC Media, one of the UK’s largest magazine publishing houses (which originally sought to lease the building, but then decided to purchase it). Finally, the resolution of its spaces is the result of an incredibly close collaborative relationship between the design and construction team appointed by Land Securities, when the building was a speculative development, and IPC which emerged as owner-occupier during construction. IPC insisted on a number of radical changes, all of which were accommodated without compromising the build schedule.

bLue fin buiLDinG110 southwark street, LonDon

cLient anD DeveLoper: LanD securities propertiesowner: ipc MeDiaarchitect: aLLies anD Morrisoninterior DesiGner: bennett interior DesiGnstructuraL enGineer: raMboLL whitbybirDservices enGineer: foreMan roberts (sheLL & core) wsp Group (fit-out)Quantity surveyor: Davis LanGDonproject ManaGer: LanD securities propertiescontractor: bovis LenD Lease (sheLL & core) isG interioreXterior (fit-out)investMent/property coMpany: LanD securities properties

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG Data (averaGe fLoor)

coMpLeteD: 2007net: 37,940 m2 (offices) 3,930 m2 (storage) 2,210 m2 (retail)Gross: 46,660 m2

efficiency: 84.5% (averaGe fLoor)fLoors: 11cost: withheLD

view upwarDs into the atriuM. a tenth fLoor terrace proviDes rooM for a GarDen. the buiLDinG fraMe is coMposeD of reinforceD concrete fLat sLabs, typicaLLy 330 mm thick supporteD on concrete coLuMns anD reinforceD concrete sheer waLLs LocateD within the cores. © Hufton + Crowe


29

30

crossed by bridges. The move to new premises also gave the publisher the chance to reorganise the way it accommodates the staff across its 60 magazines, as well as introducing a degree of flexibility which allows editorial and project teams to quickly and cheaply expand and contract as priorities change.

Broadly, floors are characterised by a ‘street’ that runs around the edges of the atrium, which is separated from the open-plan editorial spaces by a row of offices, meeting and storage rooms and other cellular units. The idea is that people can circulate around the building without creating a disturbance for people at their desks, who are seated around the perimeter of the floorplates with views outwards. It is a sensible arrangement and one which recognises (in an age where the vogue for open-plan working is in danger of making the individual room an endangered species) that enclosed, private areas still play a useful role in modern life. This is certainly true of publishing environments; a company like IPC can host hundreds of visitors every day, many of whom come from widely different backgrounds and interest groups.

The design and construction team also had to contend with the demands of individual magazine titles and provide spaces for their particular needs;

fashion magazines, for example, need plenty of storage space for new collections, while music titles require the facility to listen to music without disturbing others. Wine magazine Decanter was even provided with its own temperature-controlled tasting room, with a specially designed spittoon and glazing which (unlike other glass in the building) allows tasters to see the true colour of the wine. Photography studios, a demonstration kitchen and a 24-hour radio studio have also been accommodated without fragmenting the office spaces unduly.

‘Bad buildings weigh down occupiers: good ones raise the spirit. The sense of vibrancy before you even enter Blue Fin Building shows into which category it falls,’ said a BCO judging panel. ‘A tired and ugly building has been replaced by one that brings new life to this neglected area and has given IPC a new lease of life. Staff have better communications, integration and a desire to come to work in a vibrant atmosphere. The thrill of the new offices and the effect on the business was obvious.’

Part of that thrill is the collection of communal (‘heartspace’) areas at the top of the building, including a winter garden, restaurant, roof terrace and 300-seat theatre. The 11th-storey winter garden was actually a serious amendment to

riGht. occupieD by MaGazine pubLisher ipc, which MoveD just 600 m froM its previous office, the buiLDinG was naMeD ‘bLue fin’ by staff – for obvious reasons. © Dennis Gilbert/VIEW

Left. this pLan, showinG a typicaL eDitoriaL fLoor, iLLustrates how staff Desks are ranGeD arounD the periMeter of the buiLDinG. MeetinG spaces anD service areas rinG the centraL atriuM. © Allies and Morrison

opposite. a key objective was to keep the Main circuLation away froM the principaL workinG spaces. a series of ‘streets’ run arounD the periMeter of the atriuM. © Hufton + Crowe


31

the original building design, brought about at the insistence of IPC. The company also insisted on structural loading changes in particular places, the omission of planned escalators, additional WCs, extra service risers and the need for standby power generation. ‘The shell and core team and IPC’s team set about creating a collaborative environment that allowed the design of the building to be monitored, changes reviewed and the blistering pace of construction maintained,’ said the architects. ‘The Land Securities and IPC teams worked as one.’

The building’s distinctive fins animate the large facades and provide both solar shading and a suggestion of randomness to counter the otherwise strict elevational grid. The extruded aluminium fins, installed at a number of rakish angles, respond to a range of factors including the orientation of each facade, the distance from neighbouring fins and the degree of shading required. The architects use an intriguing analogy to describe the overlay of fins against the rigour of equally spaced mullions – the mullions, they say, act as a drum beat behind the fins’ musical dance.

‘We visit buildings with solar shading that is often so much flimflam. This one works,’ said the BCO. ‘The Blue Fin Building works not just as a sustainable icon. It buzzes like a hive.’

32


33

2.0 Location

in 2008, submissions To The bCo’s awards programme presenTed a skewed view of The uk’s geography. The largesT number of enTries (45%) Came from london, while a furTher 14% were from The souTh of england generally; The norTh of england, norTh wales and norThern ireland supplied 23% of enTries; 11% Came from The midlands and easT anglia, wiTh jusT 7% of submissions represenTing sCoTland. These figures are fairly TypiCal – The profile of enTries for The previous year was noT muCh differenT. as ouTlined aT The sTarT of The firsT seCTion of This book, This is probably unsurprising given The dominanCe of london and The souTh-easT over naTional CommerCial and publiC life. The CharaCTer of developmenTs also maTChes ThaT london bias – Tall buildings and projeCTs wiTh large budgeTs Tend To be found in The CapiTal. There are obviously exCepTions Though, and The £350 million gChq projeCT near ChelTenham and a range of CommerCial developmenTs near edinburgh have ensured ThaT london does noT have a monopoly on Top-flighT, imaginaTive and high-qualiTy offiCe buildings.

GooD office DesiGn Location

opposite. view of eXterior, one hanover street, LonDon © Stanhope plc by Hufton + Crowe

34

The response to context is variable, and this book contains examples of facadism, a polite acknowledgment of neighbours in terms of composition and scale, and a determination to prove that contemporary buildings can work well in historic areas if executed to a high standard. The result is that the term ‘context’ becomes one of many factors with which the architect works, rather than the single dominating consideration which can lead to the architectural dead-end of pastiche. It is worth noting that other sections in this book contain interesting approaches to context and location, but they appear elsewhere because they also have other stories to tell in regard to matters such as structure or sustainability. Office buildings are rarely exemplars of a single idea or technique – they are, in a way, multi-disciplinary.

What becomes clear when looking into the programmes behind many of these projects is that architects and clients have often produced exemplary work by liaising closely with conservation officials; older buildings have been brought back into use and given a new lease of life, while entire neighbourhoods have been

reinvented because of the rescue of a single building. In this sense, meeting the demands of context and location has a strong link with the sustainability agenda, if economic and social sustainability is part of the overall equation.

Architects have also cleverly used the arts of composition to insert an unashamedly new building into an elderly context. Broadly, historic heights and massing have been respected while architectural language and the use of materials have been thoroughly reinvented. When executed thoughtfully, this approach is entirely appropriate and successful. Even a leafy suburb can benefit from a commercial development in a broadly Modernist language, as this section demonstrates.

Architects and interior designers also make an effort to maximise views when they can. Gone are ideas that cityscapes and distant rural vistas are distractions; rather, they provide people with stimulation and a sense of identity and belonging. Offices are an intrinsic part of national life, not separate from it, and the best developments put people directly in touch with what surrounds them.

© Will Pryce © Will Pryce

35


Intriguingly, this section also includes an example of an existing building (38 Finsbury Square) changing its address by moving its front door – the position of the building remains unchanged but its ‘face’ has been brought around the corner to generate a more prestigious address and provide occupants with a grander approach and entrance. Quite apart from that, the building itself has been considerably improved.

Things become particularly interesting when the building itself responds to its context in such a way that it veers far away from the standard rectilinear box and becomes characterised by acute angles, setbacks and voids which respect ancient street patterns and neighbours’ right to light. Buildings like these test the designers’ ingenuity – it is so much simpler to organise staff in even rows without being compromised by awkward plans and floor plates of unequal area. But, done well, buildings like these gain a personality that would otherwise have been absent; they become rooted to their site as if they belong there.

arChiTeCTs and inTerior designers also make an efforT To maximise views when They Can. gone are ideas ThaT CiTysCapes and disTanT rural visTas are disTraCTions; raTher, They provide people wiTh sTimulaTion and a sense of idenTiTy and belonging.

© Nigel Young / Foster + Partners © Calthorpe Estates

36

This building is yet another demonstration of Foster’s ability to take a brief, subject it to the closest examination and deliver a building that is a simple and intelligent interpretation of client need. Prior to embarking on the project, the practice carried out a benchmarking exercise in order to identify the characteristics of successful, recently completed office projects. Such offices encompassed, they determined: flexibility for multiple tenancies; flexibility for tenant fit-out options; column-free floor plates; floor-to-ceiling glazing; dramatic reception spaces; and high-quality materials in landlord areas.

The completed building contains enough flexibility to accommodate up to 19 separate office tenancies and two retail outlets; the structural system provides clear spans, while high-performance glazing admits generous daylight, offers stimulating views and reflects the colours and textures of adjacent buildings. At night, the building glows as any glass box would – although this is unusual for central Edinburgh which is characterised by solid facades. The heights and depths of the blocks which comprise Quartermile One have also been

Quartermile One is a key element within the redevelopment of the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary site, a £450 million mixed-use project. The building fronts the main access road to this major project and forms a corner of a new public square to the south. The site is characterised by listed stone buildings and affords spectacular views of Edinburgh Old Town and Arthur’s Seat – nonetheless, Foster + Partners have delivered an unashamedly contemporary building, offering the starkest possible contrast between the old and the new. But because of the obsessive attention to detail, helped by stringent quality control procedures and forging close partnerships with suppliers, Quartermile One very definitely enhances this historic site. ‘This is a confident, proud, modern building providing outstanding accommodation worthy of the location. It is crisp and modern without being pastiche and stands up to its surroundings without shame,’ said a 2008 BCO report. ‘It lifts the spirits inside and out and makes the most of spectacular surroundings.’

QuarterMiLe oneeDinburGh

cLient/DeveLoper: GLaDeDaLe capitaLowner: norwich property trust, MorLey funD ManaGeMentarchitect: foster + partnersinterior DesiGner: foster + partnersstructuraL enGineer: arup scotLanDservices enGineer: huLLey & kirkwooDQuantity surveyor: thoMas & aDaMsonproject ManaGer: GLaDeDaLe capitaLcontractor: sir robert McaLpine


Gross: 12,640 m2

efficiency: 78%fLoors: 7cost: £21,612, 771

37


the buiLDinG is not a MonoLithic Mass; rather, it coMprises a nuMber of interLinkeD voLuMes which respect their neiGhbours. nonetheLess, the Most is MaDe of the reMarkabLe views. © Neil Young / Foster + Partners

38

modulated to reduce the degree of shadowing over neighbouring residential buildings.

Much of the success of this building was down to the cladding solution, and Fosters put rival cladding firms through their paces before making an appointment. The architects and the client commissioned two cladding companies to provide advanced design and cost advice, and a final decision was made after a series of workshops. This process gave the client greater cost certainty over a key component of the project, and allowed the Austrian manufacturer to get a head start on the final design solution, once appointed.

The positive relationship that emerged between architect, client and cladding provider led to the same team working on further projects across the old Royal Infirmary site, providing cost efficiencies, shorter construction programmes, reduced lead-in times and higher confidence in the end product. Furthermore, a large number of elements within the building were prefabricated (including large portions of the facade, internal stonework and precast stairs) while strict standards were set up for both factory and on-site benchmarking; defects were therefore spotted early and eliminated, reducing snagging times and remedial works, and further enhancing the overall impression of a high-quality finish to the building.

This highly transparent, open building is anchored by solid cores (arranged to permit subdivision of the floor plates with relative ease) clad in Romano Classico Travertine marble. This solidity contrasts with the frameless glazing of the central atrium space, which in turn is countered by the expressed steel framing of the two accommodation wings. Glass cubes are sited on each side of the building as ‘modern turrets’. The whole composition is one of interlocking blocks of different heights and volumes; a cascade of setbacks reduces the danger of Quartermile One becoming a monolithic presence. The open, column-free spaces are made possible by the use of deep, very long cellular beams of steel; services are distributed through the holes within the beams in long straight runs.

The original consented scheme (of July 2004) included two atria and three cores. Post planning, the scheme continued to be subjected to analysis to ensure the most efficient use of space. The cores came to be rationalised and reduced to just two, increasing the net area while reducing the number of stairs and lifts. Also, the two atria were combined into one larger volume, adding gravitas to the northern entrance. Floor plates cut into this void increase in depth storey by storey, further adding space while preserving a certain drama on arrival. ‘The entrance is one of the finest in

above Left. section throuGh the buiLDinG, iLLustratinG the staGGereD nature of the fLoorpLates, which eventuaLLy span the Depth of the structure. © Foster + Partners

above. the GLazeD buiLDinG, unusuaL in a city of soLiD facaDes, GLows at niGht. it is the iMpeccabLe DetaiLinG whch Makes this project a success. © Neil Young / Foster + Partners

39


town,’ said Magnus P. Swanson, chief executive and corporate partner of law firm Maclay Murray & Spens LLP, one of the building’s chief tenants.

Landscaping is also an important part of the way that this building occupies its plot. In fact, the building sits on a sloping site, so primary and secondary entrances have been located in its north and south elevations respectively. Limited car parking (21 spaces) has been located underground, along with refuse and recycling facilities and a delivery zone – all located beneath a lawn. Granite surfaces, planting and mature trees surround the building.

‘Office buildings are more than machines, or empty vessels. They are elements of our cities, and settings for people’s lives,’ said a statement from the architects. ‘Quartermile One was designed as the flagship office within the Quartermile master plan. Although it is an unashamedly modern building, it is constructed with crisp details and beautiful materials of its time, in the same way that its neighbours were designed in their time.’

Quartermile One started on site in October 2005 (after receiving a revised planning application the previous month). Practical completion was achieved in October 2007.

muCh of The suCCess of This building was down To The Cladding soluTion, and fosTers puT rival Cladding firms Through Their paCes before making an appoinTmenT.

40

Henderson purchased the building in November 2004 and aimed to put it back on the market, fully refurbished, by January 2007 to take advantage of predicted increases in office rental rates. Leases had expired, and the building was vacant apart from one ground-floor tenant who insisted on remaining in place; contractors had to work around this tenant, causing as little disruption as possible, which included isolating their services from those of the rest

of the building, allowing them to operate as an independent unit. By engaging a contractor very early in the design process, the aim was to achieve a high-quality, contemporary and realigned building with a ‘very good’ BREEAM rating at a cost of no more than £1,000 per m2.

Moving the entrance was not a simple task, largely because of a 1 m difference in height between Wilson Street and Sun Street, meaning that floor levels and structural arrangements had

This project is interesting because a key element of the refurbishment programme for this tired 1980s building was to give it a new address. Well positioned in the City of London, this office originally had its entrance on Wilson Street, prompting owner Henderson Global Investors to relocate the entrance so that it faced the far more prestigious Finsbury Square (across Sun Street). Apart from providing the square with a more satisfying ‘punctuation point’ in one corner, the building is given a more attractive outlook and a good deal more prestige. Apart from that, and in spite of the fact that the building was only two decades old, it had become shabby and in need of major refurbishment – partly because it was planned so poorly in the first place. The lack of an active frontage made the building look uninviting, and the reception area was small, dark and awkward; the building was served by just two lifts, while a third could be accessed only via a firefighting lobby. WCs, too, were of low quality, and much of the M&E equipment was either in need of replacement or verged on obsolescence.

38 finsbury sQuareLonDon

cLient/owner: henDerson centraL LonDon office funDarchitect: Gaunt francisinterior DesiGner: Gaunt francisstructuraL enGineer: peLL frischMannservices enGineer: LonG & partnersQuantity surveyor: riDer huntproject ManaGer: Gva GriMLeycontractor: skanska kontor

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: DeceMber 2006net: 4,535 m2

Gross: 6,246 m2

efficiency: 73%fLoors: 7cost: £5,735,500 to cat a

41


the Main entrance to the buiLDinG was oriGinaLLy on wiLson street (seen Left). the new entrance, which invoLveD cuttinG into the facaDe on sun street, Meant rethinkinG the entire GrounD fLoor of the buiLDinG anD re-GraDinG the eXternaL pavinG. © Will Pryce

42

beLow. GrounD fLoor pLan.the new entrance is shown at the riGht of the DrawinG. oriGinaLLy, it appeareD at the bottoM. the new reception area is More Generous, spatiaLLy. © Gaunt Francis

43


to change. Nonetheless, a double-height opening was carved through the Sun Street facade and a relocated reception area was provided with a generous 3.2 m ceiling height after carefully rethreading services through the structure. A retail unit was created around the corner on Wilson Street, and the remaining tenant provided with its own independent entrance.

Thankfully, negotiations with the district surveyor resulted in an agreement that the firefighting lift could be replaced and made accessible to tenants (while still retaining a firefighting function), thereby improving the vertical circulation by 50%. The building was stripped out and provided with new 150 mm raised floor systems and replacement ceiling units while maintaining the floor-to-ceiling height of 2.6 m. Additionally, ceiling and M&E systems were configured to allow the open floor plates to be easily subdivided into cellular offices on a 4.5 m grid, subdivisible on a 1.5 m module. The WCs are characterised by a similar flexibility: installed as unisex ‘super-loos’, they can be grouped into male and female clusters through the addition of a simple screen.

The client is particularly proud of the partnering approach brought to the project. Because the contractor was appointed early, elements such as detailing and ‘buildability’ were on the agenda from the very start. Surprises were kept to a minimum. ‘The client, design team and construction team wanted clean lines, simple forms and high-quality finishes. [But] it is often the most simple ideas that are the hardest to achieve,’ said a statement from Henderson. Tight construction tolerances and the reduction of snagging problems were dealt with by the construction of full-scale mock-ups of key elements, notably ceiling details, the WCs and the glass feature wall which animates the reception area. The changes that resulted from the mock-up exercise were minor but important, mainly over coordination and detailing.

Henderson got what they wanted. The building reached a state of practical completion on 18 December 2006 at a cost of £990 per m2. Furthermore, 38 Finsbury Square received its ‘very good’ energy rating. The BCO has called this project ‘a classic tale of the ugly duckling turned into a swan … Major surgery on the entrance and a “massaged” core have created a modern and reinvigorated space.’

opposite. the buiLDinG’s reception. the feature waLL conceaLs an accessibLe wc anD store area. the LiGht waLL aLso reDuces the aMount of ceiLinG-MounteD LiGhtinG neeDeD, cuttinG the nuMber of access paneLs anD eLectricaL instaLLations. © Will Pryce

Left. the buiLDinG’s reception is enLiveneD by a GLass waLL in which are eMbeDDeD Diachroic Layers – coLours chanGe DepenDinG on the anGLe of view. the screen was DeveLopeD by Gaunt francis architects anD fusion GLass systeMs. © Will Pryce

44

The site is shaped like the letter ‘k’, as the dog-leg of a road to the rear pushes towards the very linear Southwark Street. It was acquired in June 2000, and planning permission was granted for a six-storey building (including basement) in January 2001. The result is a 2,295 m2 building that has two very different faces: a highly glazed 36 m northern facade which emphasises the architectural grids at work, and a stepped, rendered southern elevation which respects complex rights-to-light issues. The wider area is something of a hotchpotch of styles (although massive regeneration, assisted by the proximity of Tate Modern and the Millennium Bridge) is tidying things up somewhat. Allies and Morrison’s building

was a brave attempt to bring a crisp and confident architectural language to the area, while working within local scales and constraints.

‘In taking on a difficult and awkward-shaped site, this building has more than exceeded our hopes and aspirations for it,’ said the architects. ‘As a creative organisation we were seeking flexibility, openness and connectivity. We also hoped to achieve an inspiring contemporary studio feel, but within a mature and competent building which could, if necessary, be sublet or sold on. We feel all of this has been achieved, together with a well-judged restraint and quality of detailing which allows the building to act as a showcase for our business.’

Like the ISG Headquarters project described at the end of the previous section, this project is part office, part branding exercise. Back in 2000, when Allies and Morrison Architects was undergoing rapid expansion, it made organisational sense to bring its staff together on a single site rather than keep them dispersed across five offices. The purchase of a former petrol station site in the rapidly regenerating borough of Southwark was also a smart commercial move. But the design of their own offices was an opportunity for the architects to articulate how they wanted to be perceived, and to demonstrate how their architectural language can be brought to bear on a difficult, tight, inner-city location.

85 southwark streetLonDon

cLient: aLLies anD Morrisonarchitect: aLLies anD MorrisonLanDscape architect: schoenaich reesstructuraL enGineer: whitbybirDQuantity surveyor: barry tankeL partnership; Davis LanGDonservices enGineer: wspcontractor: ManseLLfit-out contractor: spectruM projects

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: june 2003net: 1,700 m2

Gross: 2,295 m2


45


the atriuM of the buiLDinG, over which office spaces Look. this buiLDinG, of reinforceD concrete with 250 mm thick sLabs, was DesiGneD for an occupationaL Density of 12 m2 per person. over 99% of the office space is within 7.5 m of a winDow. © Dennis Gilbert / VIEW

46

Of course, the architects could not be expected to say anything else, but the BCO agrees with them: ‘This is a gem of a building set in what was a dreary backwater, south of the Thames. This is a breath of 21st-century air which has helped lead the regeneration of a Victorian enclave.’

The building didn’t come cheap. At £6.6 million (including demolition and enabling works) the studio came in at £2,884 per m2 – but they have packed a lot in, and the building is delightful at every turn. The facade reveals the build-up of layers from which the building is composed, including the colourful, internal aluminium fins that animate the streetscape and provide solar control and privacy

when required. The fully glazed ground floor of the building has been kept free, as a generous reception and informal meeting space that also doubles as an exhibition area for the practice’s work – giving passers-by a sense of breadth and space on an otherwise unremarkable pavement.

The elevation facing Farnham Street to the south adopts a more intimate scale, and openings are cut into solid surfaces to control light and frame specific views. Basement-level workshops receive light from a light well which runs along the length of the site, while the rest of the building benefits from a triple-height atrium which gives the entire office a feeling of space and interconnectivity. The

Left. the hoMe of aLLies anD Morrison architects, this buiLDinG projects a sophisticateD GLass frontaGe to busy southwark street, but a softer, terraceD, pLanteD aspect to the rear. © Dennis Gilbert / VIEW

riGht. this concrete buiLDinG is Given suDDen bursts of coLour, in yeLLows anD oranGes, via paneLs, furniture anD verticaL Louvres. it is a cLear stateMent of the architects’ vision, aesthetic anD capabiLity. © Dennis Gilbert / VIEW

opposite bottoM. upper LeveL pLan. the architects haD to work harD to DeaL with the awkwarD site pLan southwark street runs aLonG the bottoM. © Allies and Morrison

47

amount of office floor space that is within 7.5 m of a window and natural light is virtually 100%. The southern face of the building comprises a series of stepped terraces, the upper of which is a natural extension to the fourth-floor conference room. Materials are simple and robust, and the concrete columns, walls and soffits are exposed, achieving a fine balance between no-nonsense strength and a certain finesse. Colour is emphasised by being used on a limited basis: against the grey of the concrete, yellows and oranges appear as sudden bursts.

The approach to environmental control discounted natural ventilation – which seems obvious for a building with a narrow plan – because of the

noise and traffic pollution from Southwark Street. Several windows to the south are openable, but the overall approach is one of creating a sealed, glazed northern facade and minimising windows to the south, controlling heat gain. A mechanical-displacement ventilation system was selected for its ability to provide a high level of comfort (with good levels of air distribution) as well as being less energy-intensive than many other mechanical air-conditioning options available. This system provides ventilation via a pressurised floor plenum, with air introduced through perimeter trench convectors supplemented by circular aluminium floor grilles.

maTerials are simple and robusT, and The ConCreTe Columns, walls and soffiTs are exposed, aChieving a fine balanCe beTween no-nonsense sTrengTh and a CerTain finesse.


48

‘This will help set a tone for the shape of regeneration by rebranding what had become a tired estate,’ said the BCO. ‘The key aspirations and brief have evidently paid off well, with full occupancy and a good level of positive feedback from the occupier. It has an exceptional “feel good” factor.’

The mixed-mode ventilated development is based on the architect’s concept of a ‘floating’ office box, centred around a semi-private courtyard and set within a landscaped clearing. The tenant required a design that enhanced their public profile while simultaneously preserving a sense of privacy. ‘Attention has been paid to creating a comfortable

environment with an emphasis on quality and discipline rather than opulence,’ said a statement from 3DReid (formerly REID Architecture). The building is a neat composition of solid and void, raising a good portion of the office off the ground and anchoring it with masonry. The building, in plan, is assembled from two primary elements: L-shaped office accommodation and a street-facing ‘core’ containing reception, circulation and services. This core has been pulled away from the main office wing, leaving a central courtyard between the two main building components to provide a focus to the entire ensemble.

This 1,655 m2 headquarters building, designed with the tenant (Shaw Tax) in mind, introduces a refreshing and contemporary architectural language to a conservation area within Birmingham’s Edgbaston. The BCO described this building as ‘strongly structured’ and ‘finely stylised’, adding to the perceived quality of the rather traditional streetscape without feeling the need to mimic it. This was the first office building in Birmingham to be awarded an ‘excellent’ BREEAM rating, and was consciously designed to adhere to the principles outlined in the city council’s ‘Places for All’ policies concerning issues of character, the clarity between public and private space, and sustainability. What makes this building interesting is the determination of the developer to avoid the easy option – to simply repeat the traditional vernacular.

19 GeorGe roaDbirMinGhaM

cLient: caLthorpe estatesDeveLoper: caLthorpe estatesarchitect: reiD architecture (now 3DreiD)structuraL enGineer: waterMan partnershipservices enGineer: esc consuLtinGQuantity surveyor: Dbk back Groupproject ManaGer: Dbk backcontractor: costain

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: March 2007net: 1,161 m2

Gross: 1,655 m2

efficiency: 82%fLoors: 3cost: £1,754,400 to cat b (sheLL anD core £969,000)

49


this 1,655 m2 heaDQuarters buiLDinG was DesiGneD for a specific enD user but with the fLeXibiLity to subDiviDe the two fLoors shouLD the tenant DeciDe to Move on. © Calthorpe Estates

50

The mixed-mode venTilaTed developmenT is based on The arChiTeCT’s ConCepT of a ‘floaTing’ offiCe box, CenTred around a semi-privaTe CourTyard and seT wiThin a landsCaped Clearing. The TenanT required a design ThaT enhanCed Their publiC profile while simulTaneously preserving a sense of privaCy.

51


The main body of the office complex has been designed to appear lightweight, so large glazing units contrast with the ground-level masonry walls which conceal the parking area. ‘The core is the only element which appears to touch the ground and is treated, architecturally, quite differently to the office component, to draw attention to itself as the entrance but also to become a strong object in its own right,’ said the architects. Although the building was designed with a single client in mind, the two-storey development can be adapted for a twin tenancy. The air supply system is run in zones that can be operated independently.

This is hardly a low-key building, but it is polite and contextual without making uncomfortable sacrifices to the heritage lobby. It is modern, efficient and graceful enough to stand as an advert for how a clean, broadly Modernist language can enhance a leafy suburb while meeting the needs of a commercial tenant.

above. the new office buiLDinG Does not MiMic the architecture founD on this suburban street; rather, it eMpLoys a poLite MoDernist aesthetic which is coMpositionaLLy eLeGant anD restraineD. © Calthorpe Estates

opposite. a sophisticateD DiGitaL controL systeM is useD to Maintain heatinG, ventiLatinG anD cooLinG systeMs, which aiDs in the conservation of enerGy. hiGh-efficiency LaMps are coMbineD with MoveMent Detection, whiLe water consuMption is strictLy controLLeD by fLow reGuLators which coMe with a Leak-Detection systeM. © Calthorpe Estates

52

The building is, really, brand new. The listed facade was retained and the 11 buildings behind it demolished to make way for a retail, office and residential development of column-free spaces and large floor plates. The building actually takes up most of a city block, flanking Hanover Street and Princes Street as well as Regent Street. Numbers 3–5 Hanover Street were demolished to make way for a new building and facade (incorporating a Bruce McLean sculpture) which functions as the principal entrance and circulation facility for the office accommodation. Next door,

6–7 Hanover Street was restored and converted into five apartments; on the other side of the block, 20–21 Princes Street was demolished to make way for a further five apartments, this time decorated with a piece of public art by Alex Beleschenko. The sixth floor, comprising offices, is a new addition and retreats modestly behind the parapet.

‘Sheppard Robson’s plans and Gensler’s interiors conjure a perfect balance between old and new, which was made all the more complicated by having to include a mix of residential, offices and

The complete reinvention of this Grade II listed building, part of Westminster’s conservation area, was no mean feat. Behind the magnificent Edwardian facade lay a cluster of tired, cellular, inflexible and rather dark buildings – all of which were difficult to let and none of which lent themselves to the high expectations of its Mayfair address. The Crown Estate was anxious that this large plot be brought back into profitable use while providing a standard of accommodation that would attract premier league tenants. And the list of tenants speaks for itself: a good deal of the ground floor, as well as floors one and two, have become the European headquarters of Apple Computers; levels three through to six have been taken by Kaupthing Bank; while other ground-floor spaces have been let to stores including Ted Baker, Karen Millen and Lacoste. The building was fully let within six months of practical completion.

one hanover streetLonDon

cLient: the crown estate (principaL tenant: appLe)DeveLoper: stanhopearchitect: shepparD robsoninterior DesiGn: GensLerstructuraL enGineer: waterMan partnershipservices enGineer: faber MaunseLLQuantity surveyor: Davis LanGDonproject ManaGer: GensLercontractor: bovis LenD Lease

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: noveMber 2004net: 18,427 m2

Gross: 24,469 m2


53


this project, which contains an iMportant facaDe runninG aLonG reGent street (seen here) proviDes the key uk store for appLe coMputers, aLonG with other prestiGious tenants. reGent street was reDeveLopeD in the 1920s with 80-year Leases, which proviDeD an opportunity for whoLesaLe upGraDinG when they beGan to eXpire. © Stanhope plc by Hufton+Crowe

54

retail without disturbing the exterior elegance,’ said the BCO judging panel in 2006. ‘The Crown Estate wanted this to be a hallmark for 21st-century developments on the rest of its Regent Street estate, and [this project] has certainly achieved that aim.’

The construction of large, 2,400 m2 floor plates and the inclusion of a central atrium (bringing daylight deep into the building from above) allowed the space planners of the Apple HQ to ‘flip’ the conventional office arrangement.

Typically, prestigious executive offices would be ranged around the perimeter, granting senior staff the best views and generous daylight; instead, however, general functions such as human resources and finance have been located at the edges, while glass-walled, cellular spaces are clustered in the centre of the building towards the atrium. Rather than being an inversion of usual corporate hierarchies, this design aims to be non-hierarchical. Indeed, the second floor of Apple’s HQ is equipped with display spaces and relaxing areas in the style of

whaT makes This projeCT parTiCularly worThy of noTe is The speed and effiCienCy wiTh whiCh iT was all managed, parTly helped by some off-siTe fabriCaTion. This projeCT wenT from enabling works To praCTiCal CompleTion in jusT 21 monThs.

55


above. view throuGh the atriuM which pierces the reMaDe buiLDinG. office fLoors are proviDeD with fLoor-to-ceiLinG heiGhts of 2.7 m, whiLe the retaiL units benefit froM heiGhts of 4–5 m. © Stanhope plc by Hufton+Crowe

opposite. this reinvention of a DifficuLt site invoLveD preservinG a ListeD facaDe anD creatinG LarGe coMMerciaL fLoorpLates, with soMe resiDentiaL eLeMents on a pLot forMerLy occupieD by ii buiLDinGs. © Sheppard Robson

coffee bars; meeting spaces are open and semi-open, while many staff employ the ‘hotelling’ (i.e. temporary, bookable) approach to using a desk.

What makes this project particularly worthy of note is the speed and efficiency with which it was all managed, partly helped by some off-site fabrication. In fact, local retailers noted that the large hoardings and building works had little or no effect on their businesses, and may even have improved trade. In spite of the busy central location and the technical issues associated with

retaining a complex facade – plus the obvious interest of the heritage lobby – this project went from enabling works to practical completion in just 21 months (January 2003 to November 2004). The entire £52.5 million building was available for occupation by August 2005, and the retail units had begun trading the previous October. The building (of structural steel with composite floor slabs of concrete and profiled metal deck) even managed to achieve a ‘very good’ BREEAM rating.

56


57

3.0 cost

sinCe 2002 The average CosT of a building projeCT submiTTed for a bCo award has been around £14 million (£14.2 m in The period 2002–04; £12.8 m in 2007; £13.8 m in 2008). The year 2005 seems To have been an aberraTion when The average projeCT Came in aT £22.5 million. ‘This shows The level of CommiTmenT whiCh These ClienTs, parTiCularly The privaTe ClienTs, are puTTing inTo The faCiliTy They are providing for Their sTaff To work wiThin,’ said davis langdon, whiCh has analysed all submissions over This period. however, dl warns, ‘These figures should noT be Taken as examples of a TypiCal offiCe developmenT as iT musT be assumed ThaT, generally, submissions will only be made for higher speCifiCaTion developmenTs.’ There is a furTher warning ThaT musT be added – inCreasing numbers of ClienTs regard CosT informaTion as CommerCially sensiTive, and They Therefore deCline To inClude preCise figures in award submissions. in The period 2002–04, jusT 14 appliCanTs ouT of 94 felT The need To wiThhold CosT informaTion; This figure rose To 25 ouT of 63 in 2005, buT fell baCk proporTionaTely To 23 ouT of 94 Two years laTer; in 2008 an asTonishing 49 ouT of 115 submissions failed To inClude CosT deTails.

GooD office DesiGn cost

opposite. view of interior, fort DunLop, birMinGhaM. © Daniel Hopkinson Photography

58

The picture is further muddled when it comes to the important matter of costs per unit area. Often it is unclear what is and what is not being included in these unit costs, in spite of the BCO’s efforts to seek clarification in submission documents. However, a general picture does emerge from an analysis of the data – high-cost buildings tend to be spread around the UK, but high-cost fit-outs tend to be located in London. In 2008, just three out of the ten most expensive buildings (in terms of cost per square metre) were located in the capital, but all the top ten most expensive fit-outs were located there. This is undoubtedly due to a combination of (pre-recession anyway) cash-rich financial and legal institutions in the City, and the stiff competition among property owners to attract tenants.

Costs vary enormously, of course, and the value of projects submitted for BCO Awards over the past seven years ranges from £150,000 to

£350 million. But, in many respects, cost is less important than value for money – especially if an owner or tenant can be sure they are attracting/retaining key staff, maximising productivity and work effectiveness, able to reconfigure their buildings easily and cheaply to respond to changing circumstances, and can minimise running costs. For some clients the building is also a marketing tool, a demonstration of corporate capability or a brand asset. That, too, is worth paying for.

The ratio of net to gross internal floor areas is also a vital indicator of value for money. This compares the amount of space within a building that is genuinely usable with the total amount of space within the building envelope (including, for example, stairs, plant rooms and WCs). The BCO suggests that architects should aim for an efficiency ratio of 80–85%. In the last year for which figures are available (and for 2005 also), award entries

© Nigel Young / Foster + Partners © Simon Warren © Goodman

59


achieved an average of 82% efficiency (range 46–99%), although typical floors achieved a more impressive average efficiency rate of 85% (range: 70–97%; a more respectable figure). This is a welcome move upwards from earlier in the decade when buildings recorded a 79% efficiency rating. Figures like these cannot be absolutely clear cut, though. A point made elsewhere in this book is that contemporary offices tend to offer a wide range of spaces (enclosed, semi-enclosed and open); atria, which by and large function as reception spaces, can also offer cafes and informal work areas; circulation routes may become points for occasional meetings where valuable ‘work’ (no matter how unformed and ad hoc) can be done. Certainly the vogue for ‘touch-down’ and ‘breakout’ spaces blurs the boundary between what is work and what is not. The key consideration is that the business of the tenant gets done, profitably, without the building getting in the way.

in many respeCTs, CosT is less imporTanT Than value for money – espeCially if an owner or TenanT Can be sure They are aTTraCTing/reTaining key sTaff, maximising produCTiviTy and work effeCTiveness, able To reConfigure Their buildings easily and Cheaply To respond To Changing CirCumsTanCes, and Can minimise running CosTs.

© Jonathan Keenan Photography © Michael Wolchover

60

The atrium is the hub of the building; this large space drives the natural ventilation strategy and provides a central access point for distinct zones including the open-plan offices, the public library, and a separate zone encompassing the boardroom, meeting spaces and the staff lunch area. The atrium also functions as reception and exhibition gallery, while providing touch-down facilities for visitors to work remotely. Almost everything (except the staff gym, labs and workshops) is fed by the atrium, which bisects the building almost north–south. Its open nature

helps ensure that the three floors of office accommodation (all 15 m wide) receive as much daylight as possible while views to the landscape beyond are maximised. The glulam structure of the atrium contrasts with the rest of the building, which is built of steel and concrete, the thermal properties of which are an integral part of the cooling system.

Great Glen House is a large building and had to have a certain civic presence; equally, though, it is a publicly owned building which should enhance,

Great Glen House is the headquarters of Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), an organisation which relocated from Edinburgh to Inverness as part of the Scottish Executive’s decentralisation strategy. Completed in June 2006, this £12 million building was awarded a BREEAM certificate of ‘excellent’, with a score of 84% – then the highest score ever given. For such a large and complex building, Great Glen House represents extraordinary value for money; the 6,000 m2 building (although later purchased by the client) was costed and designed to attract a rental income of £160 per m2, then the market rate in Inverness. For the investment, the project benefits from heated bat roosts, locally sourced building materials, and a wide range of high sustainability features including the use of solar vacuum tubes to preheat water, and rainwater harvesting and recycling for use in the WCs. A good deal of the materials from a demolished hospital building, which Great Glen House replaced, were recycled on site.

Great GLen housescottish naturaL heritaGe hQ, inverness

cLient/DeveLoper: robertson Group, on behaLf of scottish naturaL heritaGetenant: scottish naturaL heritaGeowner: robertson Grouparchitect: keppie DesiGnstructuraL enGineer: waterMan Groupservices enGineer: DssrQuantity surveyor: kLM partnershipproject ManaGer: kLM partnershipbrief consuLtant: urscontractor: robertson Group


Gross: 6,000 m2

efficiency: 80%fLoors: 3cost: £12,000,000 sheLL anD core

61


a Library, ovaL in pLan anD open to the pubLic by appointMent, projects froM the front of the buiLDinG, DrawinG peopLe in towarDs the entrance. the buiLDinG is proviDeD with separateLy MetereD power Distribution boarDs to aLLow for it to becoMe MuLti-tenanteD. © Michael Wolchover

62

rather than detract from, its spectacular setting. The architects, Keppie Design, tried hard to reflect the character of the client, and the building’s design grew out of SNH’s ethos: ‘caring for the natural environment, enriching people’s lives and promoting sustainable use’. Value for money and project control were delivered through a design and build contract with the Robertson Group, while the Building Research Establishment monitored the environmental aspects of construction. Indeed, building materials – which also had to reflect the civic, environmental and social responsibility of the end user – had to be ‘A rated’ under the BRE’s Green Guide to Specification, creating a very low embodied energy rating for the completed project. The requirement to source materials locally, where possible, provided local investment.

Nonetheless, BCO judges were satisfied that the design intent was realised in the finished building, and costs were kept under control in spite of the extra demands placed on the delivery team. The shell and core was built at a cost of £1,250 per m2. ‘It was only late in the project that the tenant exercised an option to purchase. This proved that quality is not just confined to high- value locations,’ said the BCO judges’ report in 2007. ‘A key factor is that the initial tight design brief was carried through rather than succumbing

to the temptation to cut corners. It could so easily have been compromised by value engineering.’

In terms of value, Great Glen House has been further enhanced through its ability to become multi-tenanted, should SNH decide to either move on or rationalise its presence and let under-used space. Each of the three office floors is metered separately and the cores have been located so as to allow the easy subdivision of these open-plan areas.

The building was also delivered relatively fast. Robertson Property was appointed as preferred developer in October 2004, and planning consent was granted in February 2005 (shortly before the developer was awarded a bat licence); work on site began the following month, and practical completion was achieved in June 2006, although the building wasn’t occupied until the following October. This highly insulated, naturally ventilated 5,340 m2 (net) building provides 3,000 m2 of office space, 1,000 m2 of support space and 300 m2 of laboratories and other ancillary accommodation; it also provides breeding grounds for newts and sets a particularly high standard in developing commercial buildings in sensitive rural locations. ‘The building has created pleasant and efficient working conditions, with a clearly legible form taking advantage of views across Inverness,’ said the BCO judges.

above. the atriuM, in GLuLaM, orGanises the spaces of the buiLDinG, whiLe users benefit froM Generous views of the LanDscape. occupants aLso benefit froM 3.7 m fLoor-to-ceiLinG heiGhts anD a pLan Depth of 15 m. © Michael Wolchover

riGht. this pLan shows the ‘internaL street’ runninG Left–riGht, cuLMinatinG in the ovaL-shapeD Library. this street is the heart of the buiLDinG. © Keppie Designs

63


Left. this £12 MiLLion buiLDinG proviDes 6,700 m2 of open-pLan, fLeXibLe office space for scottish naturaL heritaGe. when coMpLeteD, it obtaineD a breeaM score of 84.01%. © Michael Wolchover

64

Prompted by the high cost of upgrading and expanding existing facilities, SCDC ran a design competition which was eventually won by Aukett in partnership with Cambourne Business Park Ltd, a joint-venture property business. Importantly for a local authority, the building was procured by first agreeing a total cost and a firm timetable. The council has certainly got a lot of value for money, while the move to this new business park has freed up land for development in Cambridge itself. The council’s 340 staff are now able to work more efficiently in a building which is highly flexible and welcoming for members of the public. Since completion in April 2004, the rate of staff turnover has reduced.

‘A modern building providing good-quality office accommodation,’ said the brief to the architects, and continued, ‘to provide a high-comfort working environment that will be adaptable to the defined future requirements of South Cambridgeshire District Council. The building is to be of a suitable civic style befitting a council office. It is important that the building achieves a pleasant working environment for staff and a welcoming and pleasant space for the general public to visit.’

Like many buildings featured in this book, the SCDC development centres on a ‘street’ around which open-plan offices are ranged. The idea, no different from a commercial environment, is to

This building, the head office for South Cambridgeshire District Council (SCDC), is an important local building in a number of ways. It attempts to establish a new language for a local authority building while adding a sense of gravitas and civic grandeur to a new business park. It achieves a BREEAM rating of ‘excellent’, has successfully provided a single workplace for staff once spread across three sites, and provides much improved access for disabled people. The building, which cost £1,478 per m2, also came with a forecast of running and maintenance costs covering a period of 30 years.

south caMbriDGeshire haLLcaMbriDGe

cLient: south caMbriDGeshire District counciLarchitect: aukettDeveLoper: DeveLopMent securities & wenbriDGe LtD structuraL enGineer: whitby birDservices enGineer: faberMaunseLLQuantity surveyor: ayhproject ManaGer: wrenbriDGe LanDbrief consuLtant: LaMbert sMith haMptoninterior DesiGner: breathecontractor: aLfreD McaLpine


Gross: 5,899 m2

efficiency: 87%fLoors: 3cost: £8,719,135 to cat b

65


this breeaM ‘eXceLLent’ rateD buiLDinG forMs a new counciL office for south caMbriDGeshire District counciL. it is a steeL-fraMeD buiLDinG with precast oMina fLoor sLabs – a coMbination chosen for its speeD in construction anD the therMaL Mass reQuireD for cooLinG. © Simon Warren

66

67


preserve a sense of ‘neighbourhood’ for specific teams and departments while encouraging better communication and a reduced silo mentality across the entire organisation. The big difference between this building and its corporate cousins is the large stone-faced block that projects forward adjacent to the entrance – this contains the council’s debating chamber. This space, now more accessible to the public, is also flexible enough to be easily converted into three separate meeting rooms.

Although the building can boast a large array of sustainable features, Aukett took the decision to make no great song and dance about them. ‘In setting out to design a highly sustainable building such as South Cambridgeshire Hall there can often be temptations to incorporate rafts of highly visible innovative features loudly proclaiming to the casual observer the project’s green credentials,’ say the architects. ‘However, a truly sustainable building needs by definition to work successfully over a long period of time.’ The practice therefore adopted robust, tried and tested techniques: use of the stack effect for ventilation; a mixed-mode air-conditioning system; opening windows for fresh air; shading devices; and the thermal mass of concrete, for example.

This is a building that could very easily be adapted for a commercial client should the district council wish to move out, or to sublet space, so the architectural language had to be neutral enough to have a broad appeal. However, the building

also boasts a handful of more eye-catching frills, including louvres which track the sun to optimise shading and an ETFE canopy over the internal ‘street’ – a product selected for its lightness, insulative properties and its ability to transmit indirect natural light deep into the office spaces.

Because of the wish to expose large amounts of concrete within the building, South Cambridgeshire Hall contains no suspended ceilings. The long-term worry, then, was that adaptations (especially of partitions, lighting and signing) would eventually leave a substantial amount of scarring on the soffits; indeed, the architects had to work hard to give an acceptable finish to even the first fit-out. ‘A cluttered soffit covered with electrical conduits snaking in all directions was a real danger,’ they admit. The lighting and services strategy was considered very early – all fixings to the flat soffit were to be applied to specially designed joint lines, thereby concealing holes and reducing the danger of long-term damage. The lighting and electrical systems are distributed through a network of simple cable trays; a central spine supplies ‘fingers’ of lighting which branch off at regular intervals.

The building has enhanced the profile of the business park in which it sits, while lending a certain status to the growing community of Cambourne. In fact, the building is fast becoming something of a community hub by playing host to all manner of local events.

This is a building ThaT Could very easily be adapTed for a CommerCial ClienT should The disTriCT CounCil wish To move ouT, or To subleT spaCe.

above. this fLoorpLan shows workspaces runninG aLonG the bottoM, with ceLLuLar MeetinG spaces (essentiaL for LocaL GovernMent work) LocateD on the other siDe of the atriuM. © Aukett Fitzroy Robinson

opposite. the atriuM sits at the heart of the buiLDinG. each DepartMent stiLL has its own ‘neiGhbourhooD’, but open- pLan workinG faciLitates cross-DepartMentaL coMMunication. hiGh staff turnover has reDuceD as a resuLt of this hiGh-QuaLity workinG environMent. © Simon Warren

68

This 10,500 m2 building was eventually completed at a cost of £1,837 per m2 (£1,036 of which was for the shell and core). This very reasonable cost for a headquarters building is enhanced by the fact that it has been designed to be quickly and cheaply reconfigured. In 2004 the third floor of the building was entirely reorganised, involving the complete relocation of 350 staff; the entire process was completed within 12 hours at no cost. Moreover, although this headquarters and call centre was designed with two-shift operations in mind, it could assume a 24-hour work programme without incurring building-related costs. Foster + Partners actually delivered the building on time and under budget. The base-build and fit-out

processes overlapped, owing to an integrated team of architects, consultants and interior designers. Better than that, Fosters have managed to preserve a sense of lightness and space in a building that is occupied at a density of 6 m2 per person.

Part of the project’s aims was, apart from a piece of corporate image-making, to reduce staff turnover, encourage loyalty to the company and enhance productivity – all of which, of course, have direct financial implications. ‘Staff are using the building as though they had been here for years, which is testament to their acceptance of it,’ wrote the client. Fosters describes the building as ‘a benchmark for future call centres across Britain’.

The brief for this building sounds like a classic tall order: the client (which manages the estate of the National Grid) was looking for a high-quality building which projected the image required of a corporate headquarters, but at a low cost. Chris Robertson, the project manager for the relocation of Scottish Gas to the new Edinburgh Waterfront development, was clear at the outset: ‘It should be stylish, modern and innovative but with an air of maturity and professionalism. The quality of the building and fit-out must be high, the standard durable to withstand possible continuous operation but with low maintenance costs. The building should reflect a balance, providing a modern working environment without excessive cost.’

scottish Gas hQeDinburGh

cLient: seconDsite propertytenant: scottish Gasarchitect: foster + partnersstructuraL enGineer: white younG GreenenvironMentaL consuLtant: battLe Mccarthyservices enGineer: battLe MccarthyLanDscape architect: hyLanD eDGar Driverfire consuLtant: eDinburGh fire consuLtancyacoustic consuLtant: sanDy brown associatesauDio-visuaL consuLtant: hewshott MeDiaQuantity surveyor: Davis LanGDon Mott Green waLLcaterinG consuLtant: berkeLey projects ukMain contractor: eXterior internationaL


Gross: 9,805 m2


69


the cLient wanteD a Lot for very LittLe, anD fosters DeLivereD a hiGh-QuaLity buiLDinG for £1,036 per m2 (sheLL anD core). © Nigel Young / Foster + Partners

aparT from a pieCe of CorporaTe image-making, The projeCT aimed To reduCe sTaff Turnover, enCourage loyalTy To The Company and enhanCe produCTiviTy.

70

The building is, essentially, a glass box. A very simple brise soleil of thin metal strips transforms the appearance of the four-storey building, cutting solar gain while not compromising the views to Edinburgh and the Firth of Forth. The brise soleil also delicately encloses the canopied entrance, which leads to a full-height atrium crossed by staggered bridges which act as breakout areas. Density was increased by dispensing with the typical arrangement of cruciform furniture layouts and introducing a linear bench configuration, developed with the client’s space planners and furniture manufacturer Beyon. The planning and desk solution allows for a clear and effective definition of team space, while personal storage

is provided by communal banks running between lines of desks – each shift starts with a clear desk, leaving the workstation ready for the next user. People can also use a different desk location each day, so personal adjacencies are constantly changing, team identity is preserved and flexibility maintained. Staff effectiveness also extends to the arrangement of personal computers and cabling: PCs are arranged in banks at the end of each bench, providing ease of access for maintenance, while power and data are fed from a bespoke cable management pod which reduces the number of floor penetrations for wiring to two per ten members of staff. Each storey has been given its own colour treatment, selected by staff from

Left. the steeL stair anD briDGe systeM, suspenDeD over the atriuM, proviDes space for inforMaL MeetinGs. the fraMe of the buiLDinG is of reinforceD concrete. © Nigel Young / Foster + Partners

71

a set of options prepared by the architect; loose furniture was selected in a similar manner, after Fosters drew up a shortlist of appropriate pieces.

Structurally, the building is of a reinforced concrete frame using coffered floor slabs; the entrance canopy is of structural steelwork. The brise soleil shading devices and high-performance glazing manages to achieve a balance between light and heat, while 350 mm raised floors provide for high volumes of fresh air distribution, necessary for the occupational density and computer use of call centre conditions. The internal environmental conditions are modulated by a combination of displacement ventilation, passive chilled beams and pre-cooled exposed thermal mass. Originally,

the design team considered natural ventilation, but the high winds (containing moist, salty air) blowing off the Firth of Forth caused Fosters and environmental engineer Battle McCarthy to reconsider their options. The building, as built, purges any accumulated heat at night through a draft-free turnover of internal air with cool external air (at around 0.5 to 1.0 air changes per hour). The project has been awarded a BREEAM rating of ‘excellent’.

‘Call centres are not renowned for their beauty or friendliness,’ said a BCO report. ‘Low cost generally means low-quality location. But Foster + Partners has broken all these rules with their Scottish Gas development.’


Left. this buiLDinG, DesiGneD for an occupationaL Density of one person per 6 m2, stiLL ManaGes to retain a sense of LiGht anD airiness; views both within anD without the buiLDinG are cLear anD uncLuttereD. DeskinG is proviDeD by beyon’s 6.5 m LonG bench systeM © Nigel Young / Foster + Partners

above. section throuGh office space circuLation core anD atriuM. the staGGereD briDGes over the atriuM are useD as inforMaL MeetinG areas. © Foster + Partners

72

Oxfam eventually teamed up with Arlington, a business park developer with a strong reputation for managing design and build projects efficiently, while keeping costs down and maximising value. A sense of partnership was paramount: not only was Oxfam insisting on making (and being seen to make) financial efficiencies, but it made an adherence to its ethical purchasing and sustainability criteria a condition of the contract. The result is a building with a net internal floor area of 8,073 m2, purchased at a cost of £1,895 per m2 (£1,646 per m2 gross floor area). This cost includes a large staff restaurant and crèche, general shower facilities for staff who cycle to work, spaces for Oxfam to host large

public functions and media events, and intelligently thought-out office accommodation for over 700 employees.

Efficiencies were partly secured by that strong sense of partnership and a very close collaboration between client, developer, architect and engineers. A series of key performance indicators were established very early on in the project and adhered to throughout the design and construction phases. Also, Arlington made clever use of Oxfam’s charitable status to secure a tax-efficient procurement strategy.

Apart from cost efficiencies, though, Oxfam was keen to change its work culture and provide staff

This project forms a crucial part in Oxfam’s role as a global disaster relief agency, but managers were understandably concerned about achieving value for money when all available funds ought to be channelled into charitable activities. When operating from nine different buildings (over 14 floors) across north Oxford, the organisation clearly needed to operate in a more efficient manner; furthermore, IT systems were unintegrated and expensive, relying on a number of different servers. Investing in a new, purpose-designed building to provide a single global ‘hub’ made sense, especially when that building was designed as a low-energy facility to keep running costs down.

oXfaM GLobaL huboXforD

cLient: oXfaMarchitect: frank shaw associatesowner / investor: arLinGton business parks partnership DeveLoper: arLinGton DeveLopMent servicesstructuraL enGineer: jacobsservices enGineer: ieiQuantity surveyor: wt partnershipproject ManaGer: arLinGton DeveLopMent ManaGeMentinterior fit-out: bennett interior DesiGncontractor: Moss construction c/o kier Group


Gross: 9,309 m2


73


the finish of the buiLDinG is cLean, efficient anD effective without beinG showy. nonetheLess, it is sufficient for oXfaM to host eXhibitions, events anD MeDia briefinGs, which forMerLy wouLD have been LocateD off-site. © Goodman

74

a series of key performanCe indiCaTors were esTablished very early on in The projeCT and adhered To ThroughouT The design and ConsTruCTion phases.

75


with a more integrated environment. The three-storey building clusters around a central atrium; most working space is on the first and second storeys, while bridges across the atrium both improve linkages and incorporate informal breakout areas. The ground floor includes a conference suite with facilities for outside broadcasts. No longer does the organisation have to use external facilities for large public events or announcements.

The brief to the developer asked that working environments be ‘bright, airy and colourful, making maximum use of natural light’. The open-plan layouts, moreover, should assist with communications between staff. Arlington and the design team delivered just that, commented judges when making the Oxfam Global Hub a regional winner in the 2006 BCO Awards. ‘What could have become a standard business park building has become a showpiece,’ they added.

Via a series of sustainability and energy efficiency measures, including the use of laboratory-tested, active chilled beams, the building achieves a ‘very good’ BREEAM rating. At least 80% of all

timber used in the project (both temporary and permanent) was sourced with FSC certification, and recycled materials were used wherever possible. The supply chain was closely monitored to ensure compliance with Oxfam’s ethical purchasing policy, a process which included the scrutiny of all subcontractors. Prefabrication was also adopted wherever possible to maximise quality and shorten the construction programme.

‘In general, staff and management are very conscious that the charity needs to demonstrate efficiency and a high degree of public and donor accountability,’ said a report from architects Frank Shaw Associates. ‘Waste and extravagance are not tolerated, given that a new headquarters building is very much in the spotlight. Bureaucracy and excessive overhead costs would portray Oxfam badly to the outside world and would seriously damage the organisation’s credibility. The improvements in operational efficiencies and working practices have been assessed in cost–benefit analyses and have satisfied the primary objective of cost-effectiveness.’

above. oXfaM GLobaL hub, a buiLDinG coMMissioneD to represent vaLue for Money to avoiD the internationaL charity beinG accuseD of profLiGacy. © Goodman

opposite. the centraL atriuM which runs the LenGth of the buiLDinG. this office DeveLopMent was DesiGneD to achieve an occupant Density of one person per 8.5 m2. the pLan efficiency Measures 86.9%. © Goodman

76

Built in 1917, the six-storey Fort Dunlop had become an iconic but troublesome behemoth by the turn of the century, surrounded, in Urban Splash’s own words, by ‘a deserted, crumbling wasteland’. A number of key decisions taken by the developer, with architects ShedKM, lie at the core of this ambitious project:

> the floor plates were, indeed, too large for hotel accommodation so a narrower wing would have to be built to attract visitors and

create an income early on in the project

> construction would be phased to bring in tenants on a gradual basis

> large openings would be carved through the floor plates to bring light down into the central atrium

> the building’s grid would be preserved and used as a way of easily subdividing space for all manner of tenants

‘When we first looked at Fort Dunlop all we could see was opportunity when many people were questioning our sanity,’ Urban Splash Midlands managing director Nathan Cornish told the Birmingham Post in 2007. This is a key part of the Fort Dunlop story – that it appeared to be too big, too broken up by chunky concrete columns on a 5.2 m grid, too deep in plan and too remote from the city centre to be a viable commercial development. But developer Urban Splash pulled it off by blending a very practical and hard-headed approach to regeneration with a certain sensitivity and intelligence. The developer can now boast that the building is occupied by more than 50 tenants, two of whom have taken up an entire 4,920 m2 floor each; later phases of the construction programme were, in fact, brought forward by two years to meet demand for space. The building was also rehabilitated without anything going to landfill.

fort DunLopbirMinGhaM

project cLient: urban spLashinvestor/DeveLoper: urban spLasharchitect: sheDkMinterior DesiGner: sheDkMstructuraL enGineer: curtins consuLtinG enGineersservices enGineer: bennett wiLLiaMs buiLDinG servicesQuantity surveyor: siMon fenton partnershipproject ManaGer: urban spLashbrief consuLtant: sheDkMcontractor: urban spLash buiLD


Gross: 38,834 m2


77


fort DunLop was buiLt to a structuraL GriD of 5.2 m. Many feLt the forest of coLuMns wouLD be probLeMatic, but they assist in the easy subDivision of spaces anD reMinD occupants of the provenance of the buiLDinG. © Daniel Hopkinson Photography

78

> concrete soffits would remain exposed as a constant reminder of the building’s provenance, while preserving the generous floor-to-ceiling heights and taking advantage of the building’s thermal mass

> raised floors would be installed, under which all power, heating and ventilation would be delivered

> the original windows would not be replaced but left open – instead, a new glazing line would be introduced behind the facade, providing space for services to be installed without being on view.

It is also worth noting that Urban Splash was the contractor on the job, as well as property agent and building manager. During construction, the build and letting teams worked closely together, enabling site visits to be arranged easily and tenant needs to be considered as work progressed. The developer still owns and manages the building. The coordinated approach (assisted by a funky image) caused even Urban Splash to be surprised by the demand for space. Construction began in October 2004; phase 1, including all structural works, ground floor spaces and the hotel, were completed by December 2006, and the intention was to open the 32,000 m2 (net) building floor by floor over a three-year period culminating in December 2009. In fact, the building, which cost £50 million to reinvent, was fully let by March 2008.

The fundamental organisational approach is simple – a central service core runs through the building as a spine, which extends beyond the 130 m-long Fort Dunlop to form the dimensions of the 100-room Travelodge hotel. Circular openings were cut through all six floors and lined with steel drums, giving the building a dramatic, light-filled space right in its middle. The sixth floor was entirely remade and sits atop the Fort as a penthouse structure, where the 5.2 m grid does not apply. The north-eastern facade was demolished (and recycled in the making of the car park) and replaced with an entirely glazed facade from which the hotel projects. Shops, cafes and a childcare centre occupy the ground floor, with offices above. A sedum roof and occupant barbecue area (equipped with fridges and binoculars) is a further amenity in what

Left. coMparison of fLoorpLate confiGuration pre anD post DeveLopMents. the key Difference is the LiGht weLL that has been sunk in the centre of the structure. © Urban Splash

79


The developer sTill owns and manages The building. The CoordinaTed approaCh (assisTed by a funky image) Caused even urban splash To be surprised by The demand for spaCe.

above. fort DunLop is a 100-rooM hoteL, which eMerGes froM the spine/core of the buiLDinG. it is an iMportant part of the project’s 24-hour proGraMMe. the renDereD spine aLso proviDes a 170 m LonG roof terrace. © Daniel Hopkinson Photography

Left. owneD, DeveLopeD anD ManaGeD by urban spLash, fort DunLop has proven to be a consiDerabLe business success. in the perioD january to March 2007, 10,034 m2 of the buiLDinG was Let, coMpareD with 11,985 m2 in the whoLe of birMinGhaM city centre. © Ben Blackall

Urban Splash calls ‘a 24-hour destination for business, retail and enterprise’.

Underlying the success of the building is the fact that there is no mistaking where you are. No attempt has been made to mask the original fabric – the steel-framed concrete-covered structure is very much in evidence. In fact, the forest of columns has proven rather popular – as well as assisting in the easy subdivision of the space, occupants apparently like them for the character and sense of perspective they bring to the building. ‘We lost count of how many “expert” property people told us that it was too big and that there were too many columns in the space for it to work,’ said the developers. What Urban Splash purchased in 2002 was an incredibly robust building which could take some bashing about. Tenants occupying multiple floors have been able to cut through and add staircases without problems.

‘The renovation demonstrates a rare social and economic awareness,’ said the BCO. ‘It has been successful in attracting occupiers, and provides a wake-up call to more conventional established offices.’

80


81

4.0 sustainabiLity

iT is, perhaps, quesTionable wheTher a book suCh as This should inClude a seCTion devoTed To susTainable design. susTainabiliTy, in all iTs guises, is suCh a maTTer of regulaTion, good praCTiCe and sheer Common sense ThaT any building projeCT should embraCe iTs prinCiples. mosT do, in faCT. generally, when making submissions To The bCo’s awards programme, appliCanTs sTress Their projeCT’s environmenTal CredenTials buT noT all of Them have managed To seCure a raTing under The breeam sCheme (building researCh esTablishmenT environmenTal assessmenT meThod). ofTen, appliCanTs have noT had Time To seCure an assessmenT before Compiling an award submission, parTly explaining The relaTively low numbers of breeam raTings; also, iT appears ThaT some privaTe ClienTs do noT feel The need To seek exTernal validaTion of The performanCe of Their building, even where susTainabiliTy was an imporTanT parT of The original projeCT brief. in 2008, only half of The buildings presenTed for an award had been given a breeam assessmenT; of Those, 11 reCeived a raTing of exCellenT, 41 were very good, Two were good and one reCeived a pass. The previous year, jusT 27 projeCTs ouT of 94 award enTries were aCCompanied by an environmenTal assessmenT; five were ranked as exCellenT, 16 very good, Three good, one pass and one poor. iT is a similar piCTure over previous years.

GooD office DesiGn sustainabiLity

opposite. eXterior view, heeLis buiLDinG © Dennis Gilbert

82

The sustainable tools and techniques employed in office projects across the UK are hugely variable, and often the matter of sustainability depends upon one’s definition of the word. There are, on the one hand, the clean energy facilities such as photovoltaics, wind turbines and ground-sourced heating and cooling; on the other hand, a building project can score points for sustainability by sourcing construction materials locally, reducing waste and considering the transport needs of its users. Furthermore, reusing an elderly building (possibly the ultimate act of recycling) is also a highly sustainable act even if a BREEAM assessment is either unimpressive or unavailable. This book (and particularly this section of the book) contains examples of all these approaches; certainly the case studies on the Heelis and Beaufort Court buildings provide an almost comprehensive view of low-carbon energy

generation, passive environmental techniques and intelligent engineering; the project at Lemsford Mill is also noteworthy for its reinstatement of a waterwheel, while the Wellcome Trust building is a strong demonstration of how a very large, highly populated, central London office can seek to minimise its environmental impact.

Many of the techniques listed by award applicants are rather low-key – such as the creation of permeable car parks to reduce the burden on the drainage system; rain water harvesting; and the installation of bicycle racks. But some buildings do more than offer bolt-on accessories, and their entire form, materiality and operation revolves around a sustainable agenda. Typically, buildings with large atria use these big internal volumes as an integral part of the ventilation and cooling strategy; buildings are often orientated and clad to

© Paul Collinge © Peter Mackinven

83


control heat gain and shade; also, as mentioned earlier in the book, concrete construction can offer thermal mass which can be integrated into a building’s heating/cooling strategy. As ever, there are always trade-offs, and an inner-city location often adds extra complexity to an environmental programme because of road noise and pollution (making natural ventilation a less attractive option). ‘Although much attention is being focused on this subject, it is clear that there is still considerable work to be undertaken surrounding this issue. Within the commercial sector the projects are frequently being driven by time and cost requirements,’ says a Davis Langdon study. It does appear that public sector clients are more willing to subject their buildings to the rigours of a BREEAM assessment (and incur the costs that go with it).

many of The TeChniques lisTed by award appliCanTs are raTher low-key – suCh as The CreaTion of permeable Car parks To reduCe The burden on The drainage sysTem; rain waTer harvesTing; and The insTallaTion of biCyCle raCks. buT some buildings do more Than offer bolT-on aCCessories, and Their enTire form, maTerialiTy and operaTion revolves around a susTainable agenda.

© Paul Collinge © Peter Mackinven

84

> to be as environmentally friendly as possible

> to be the platform for new, more business-focused ways of working across all functions

> to demonstrate that sustainability, carbon neutrality and low energy usage were achievable within an institutionally fundable project

> to be wholly flexible in use, adapting economically and speedily to business changes.

The architects explored a wide range of technologies, techniques and materials in order to meet the terms of the brief, including a range of ‘good practice’, ‘best practice’ and ‘innovative’ systems. These embraced measures such as heat recovery, the use of non-petrochemical-based

insulation materials, providing office spaces with 100% natural light, sourcing building products as locally as possible and using micro power generation. The result, according to a statement from the client, was that ‘the building met and exceeded these aggressive criteria’.

‘The naturally ventilated, daylit working environment is the subject of constant favourable comment by users and visitors … Empiric evidence indicates absenteeism, days off sick, etc. has dropped significantly since we occupied the building,’ said the National Trust, adding that ‘the building is a great place to work’.

Heelis is a low-rise, deep-plan building whose mass, materiality and form show deference to the nearby train sheds which make up Swindon’s World Heritage Site. It is a complex, two-storey

Heelis is the operational headquarters for the National Trust. Completed in 2005, the building was awarded an ‘excellent’ BREEAM rating, scoring an environmental performance index of 10. Reaching such a high standard was an integral part of the brief to the architects, who were asked to design a building which met four principal objectives:

heeListhe centraL office for the nationaL trust, swinDon

cLient: the nationaL trustarchitect: feiLDen cLeGG braDLey stuDiosinvestor property coMpany: aiM DeveLopMentsDeveLoper: kier ventures structuraL enGineer: aDaMs kara tayLorservices enGineer: MaX forDhaMQuantity surveyor: Davis LanGDonproject ManaGer: buro four project servicesacousticians: appLieD acoustic DesiGn contractor: Moss construction

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: juLy 2005net: 6,942 m2

Gross: 7,680 m2


heeLis is a Low-rise, Deep- pLan buiLDinG with a LarGe, airy atriuM. the two-storey structure is fitteD with a wiDe variety of sustainabiLity Measures with a ‘pay back’ perioD of Less than 20 years. © Dennis Gilbert

85


86

affair with a plan designed around solar orientation and the need for a roof which maximises daylight penetration. Photovoltaics, enhanced thermal insulation, lighting controls, mechanical ventilation with heat recovery in winter months, propane chillers (which have zero ozone-depleting potential) as well as a host of other measures combine to create a building with impressive environmental performance.

The mixed-mode, natural/mechanical ventilated building was designed around targets which stated that internal temperatures should not exceed 25°C for more than 5% of working hours; and should not exceed 28°C for more than 1% of working hours. Thermal modelling with TAS software indicated these targets would be achieved, and this has been borne out by experience. Occupant feedback among the Trust’s 470 staff during summer 2005 showed that they remained comfortable during hot weather.

The main office areas are naturally ventilated using a combination of night cooling and exposed thermal mass. Automatic windows are generally at high level with manual over-rides. Floor plates are split into a number of zones to allow local control based on orientation, wind direction and so on. Solar gain is limited since only northlight is allowed through the rooflights, while vertical glazing is

provided with external shading. The roof-mounted PV panels also act as shading devices. Mechanical cooling is provided only to the ‘highly loaded’ areas such as meeting rooms. Meeting rooms adjacent to the perimeter use natural ventilation for as much of the year as possible. Windows close when mechanical cooling is operational. The National Trust retained the services of M&E consultants Max Fordham for one year after the building’s completion to monitor its energy use, allowing tweaks to the building management system where necessary.

In addition to the features outlined above, as many materials as possible were sourced from the National Trust’s own estate – timber from NT forests was used in key parts of the building and even wool from Herdwick sheep was used for the manufacture of carpet tiles.

Structurally, the building is composed of a steel frame on a grid of 6 m and 9 m spacings (concrete, timber and hybrid framing systems were also explored). Both storeys contain exposed precast concrete soffits; there are no suspended ceilings. Because of the deep-plan nature of the building, and the requirement to bring a good level of daylight into most parts of the base of the building, the floor-to-ceiling height at ground level is a very generous 3.75 m. Floor-to-ceiling heights

above. heeLis, the heaD office of the nationaL trust. in its 100-year history, the nt haD never ManaGeD to Locate aLL its centraL functions unDer a sinGLe roof. © Dennis Gilbert

opposite. the facaDe. northLiGht is aDMitteD throuGh roofLiGhts, whiLe verticaL GLazinG is proviDeD with eXternaL shaDes.the Main office areas are naturaLLy ventiLateD usinG a coMbination of niGht cooLinG anD eXposeD therMaL Mass. © Dennis Gilbert

87


vary on the upper storey owing to the pitch of the roof – 2.5 m at valley level to 5.17 m at ridge level. It is worth noting that use of the lift, located adjacent to a grand staircase, is discouraged (apart from disabled users, of course).

Floors are raised to a height of 250 mm, and it is this void that is utilised by the mechanical heat recovery system which operates during the winter. The original intention was to employ a timber-based raised floor system for sustainability reasons, but the developer insisted on using a metal composite product to meet institutional standards.

By common consent, this elegant, innovative and highly contextual project has been a success across a wide range of indicators – not least, according to the architects, because all concerned with the building bought into the same agenda: ‘The key success of the procurement of this building has been in the selection of like-minded consultants, developer, contractor, subcontractors and suppliers. By all working to a common set of clear objectives the Trust has been able to achieve a new operational building that meets its operational, financial and sustainability aspirations.’

top. fLoor to ceiLinG heiGhts are Generous throuGhout the buiLDinG: 3.75M at GrounD LeveL, anD a ranGe froM 2.5M to 5.17M at first fLoor LeveL, DepenDinG on the faLL of the roof Line. © Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios

The main offiCe areas are naTurally venTilaTed using a CombinaTion of nighT Cooling and exposed Thermal mass. auTomaTiC windows are generally aT high level wiTh manual over-rides.

88

The brief required that the former egg farm be converted to provide 2,700 m2 of flexible office accommodation (as well as lecture and exhibition facilities) by employing best practice sustainable strategies. The project received EU assistance in return for involving a pan-European design and development team. The project team included contributions from the Netherlands Energy Research Foundation, Amsterdam-based Shell Solar Energy and Esbensen Consulting Engineers from Copenhagen. The energy

performance of the building was eventually posted on Esbensen’s website.

Studio E Architects had to exercise a series of practical and aesthetic judgements during the design of this complex project. The transformation of farm buildings intended for chickens to modern office space required extensive and radical alteration. However, the existing buildings had to be more or less preserved (at least externally) but the architects decided not to replicate the Arts and

This project, as well as creating what was arguably the UK’s first refurbished carbon-neutral office building, is a clever piece of marketing. Built for Renewable Energy Systems (RES), which specialises in designing green energy systems, the building is powered and cooled by a mix of photovoltaic and solar-thermal arrays; a wind turbine; biomass boilers (fuelled by crops grown on site); and a 75 m-deep borehole. Summer heat is stored in 1,000 m3 of water contained within an insulated pit. Configured to export more energy to the national grid than it extracts, this building is a working demonstration project for its owner-occupier. Interestingly, the building doesn’t shout about its environmental credentials – it is built on green-belt land in a pair of old farm buildings, and the local authority granted planning consent on the condition that the external appearance of the buildings remained largely unaltered. The wind turbine required a separate planning application.

beaufort courtkinGs LanGLey, hertforDshire

cLient: renewabLe enerGy systeMsarchitect: stuDio e architectsinterior DesiGner: breathestructuraL enGineer: Dewhurst MacfarLane anD partnersservices enGineer: MaX forDhaMLanDscape DesiGner: caMLin LonsDaLe LanDscape architectsQuantity surveyor: a&s frienD anD partnersproject ManaGer: kinG sturGeheatstore DesiGn: sarnafiL acoustics: hoare Lea acousticsMain contractor: wiLLMot DiXon construction

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: auGust 2003net: 2,149 m2

Gross: 2,697 m2


89


this project represents the conversion of a forMer eGG farM into the hQ of renewabLe enerGy systeMs, which was proviDeD with 2,700 m2 of office space. © Peter Mackinven

90

Crafts style of the farm for the new structures. ‘The additions and replacements are expressed in a clean, modern, albeit sympathetic idiom, reflecting the contemporary concerns of RES and the leading-edge energy systems deployed over the site and concealed within the buildings,’ said the architects.

Internally, the two principal elderly buildings were considerably adjusted. In the larger horseshoe-shaped building, masonry cross walls which provided lateral stability were removed (and replaced by a steel frame) to open the space up for office accommodation. Also, this building was extended by wrapping a simple ‘lean-to’ structure around its courtyard face, while a single-storey entrance structure was built to tie the ends of the

horseshoe together. A coach house was given similar treatment, and an extension was constructed across its courtyard. An entirely new building was built at the perimeter of the site, partly sunk into the ground with excavated earth banked up against its northern wall; this third building provides a store for harvested biomass crops, and the hybrid PV/thermal array sits on its roof.

During the winter, fresh air is warmed by the heat collected from hybrid PV/solar-thermal panels; also, the summer heat collected in the large volume of water on site is released during the colder months, backed up by the heat from the biomass. During the summer, the air supply is cooled and dehumidified with 11°C ground water from a 75 m deep borehole, which also serves

above. the principaL buiLDinG was eXtenDeD by wrappinG new space within the courtyarD periMeter. the roof of the eXtension was GrasseD over, whiLe the enDs of the horseshoe-shapeD buiLDinG were tieD toGether to proviDe an entrance. © Peter Mackinven

opposite. first-fLoor office space. the horseshoe forM of the oriGinaL buiLDinG can be seen froM the curve of the waLL. Much of the eXterior of the buiLDinG has been preserveD, but a More conteMporary architecturaL LanGuaGe has been appLieD where appropriate. © Peter Mackinven

91


chilled beams. A building management system controls and coordinates these technologies and provides data for an ongoing monitoring programme.

The client says that the building has more than met its expectations. ‘Its status as the first refurbished commercial office space to be carbon neutral is very important to the company. We are now working in a highly sustainable space that directly reflects the objects of our business and

the natural aspirations of our staff as, almost without exception, we all believe in what we do … The office is expected to have substantially lower running costs than our previous headquarters, with a low energy requirement (approximately half that of a conventional office) and mostly “free” energy. It also has a financial value as a marketing tool, demonstrating the value and application of renewable energy and the skills and vision of the company.’

during The winTer, fresh air is warmed by The heaT ColleCTed from hybrid pv/solar-Thermal panels; also, The summer heaT ColleCTed in The large volume of waTer on siTe is released during The Colder monThs.

92

Ramblers Holidays, a sister organisation of the Ramblers’ Association, was in 2003 planning to move from its Welwyn Garden City headquarters. Lemsford Mill appealed because the principal building (the mill itself) provided multiple levels of open-plan space, while a cottage alongside provided more intimate spaces for meeting rooms, library, eating facilities and so on; moreover, the estate also came with planning consent for a number of business/light industrial (B1) units (of approximately 460 m2) which could provide a rental income and space for expansion as necessary. Aldington Craig + Collinge took on the entire project, as well as the landscaping.

What makes this project particularly exciting is that this redundant mill is once again drawing

power from the stream which runs beneath it. The original wheel had long since disappeared, but researchers from Southampton University, working with German manufacturer Hydrowatt, designed and installed a 4.2 metre diameter breast-shot waterwheel that provides, on average, 60% of the building’s daytime electricity needs. While soundproofed, the wheel is clearly visible through glazed screens and floor panels.

The architects have also responded elegantly to the awkward topographical relationship between the principal buildings – the mill and the mill house, both Grade II listed and separated by a gap just 1.3 m wide. It made sense to roof this space over and create a new link and circulation zone. However, the floors of the two buildings

This ambitious yet sensitive project is a demonstration of almost everything that architecture, at its best, can deliver: comfortable and well-thought-out spaces, deft handling of new and old structures, energy efficiency and generation, and a careful approach to context. Curiously, the architect, Paul Collinge, had converted this Victorian mill for light industrial use in the early 1980s; because of that experience, Ramblers Holidays, which was set to purchase the site, gave Collinge the chance to give it a further reinvention.

LeMsforD MiLLhertforDshire

cLient: raMbLers hoLiDaysarchitect: aLDinGton craiG + coLLinGeinterior DesiGner: aLDinGton craiG + coLLinGebrief consuLtant: aLDinGton craiG + coLLinGeQuantity surveyor: northcroftproject ManaGer: aLDinGton craiG + coLLinGestructuraL enGineer: whitbybirDservices enGineer: whitbybirDcontractor: t&e neviLLe

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: noveMber 2006Gross: 1,115m2 (MiLL anD MiLL house)465 m2 (new buiLD)fLoors: 4cost: £1,957,000

93


rehabiLitateD for raMbLers hoLiDays, the MiLL buiLDinG anD an aDjacent house are just 1.3 m apart. the MiLL is a very earLy inDustriaL buiLDinG with two storeys of soLiD brickwork toppeD by a pair of tiMbereD fLoors. © Paul Collinge

94

have a rather staggered relationship, so designing the new link was far from straightforward; nonetheless, the steps and level changes have been neatly done. The use of galvanised mild steel and frameless glazing allows the original buildings to be easily distinguished from one another, rather than being merely joined.

Most office accommodation has been located in the mill building, which is provided with toilet pods and just two separate office spaces; the cellular spaces of the old house accommodate ancillary functions, while showers are located in the basement. The B1 units (which had to be designed and begun relatively quickly as planning permission was close to running out) have been designed in sympathy with the mill and its house, while being unmistakably contemporary. The three single-storey, highly insulated, timber-framed units are each of a different size to allow potential occupiers a choice of accommodation.

The client also secured permission to build a lodge, a derivative of the B1 concept, to provide sleeping accommodation for staff. The entire estate contains an eclectic range of buildings, but the ensemble is tied together with an intelligent use of materials (including timber boarding) that caused the BCO judges in 2007 to describe it as a ‘rare joy’.

‘All three components [the mill, the mill house and the B1 units] demonstrate a sensitive and sustainable approach which has created a memorable and stylish working environment in harmony with the historic context. It is the sort of place where everyone would like to work,’ said the judges. ‘Linking house and mill has been done with a visual connectivity that belies awkward level differences. … Despite the challenges of the historic fabric, workspaces are well planned and provide a stimulating environment, daylit and naturally ventilated.’

whaT makes This projeCT parTiCularly exCiTing is ThaT This redundanT mill is onCe again drawing power from The sTream whiCh runs beneaTh iT.

above. the refurbisheD MiLL contains priMariLy open space, with two transparent offices, toiLet poDs anD tea bars. © Paul Collinge

95


Left. the Link between MiLL anD house neGotiates an awkwarD chanGe in LeveLs – the fLoors of each buiLDinG are staGGereD in reLation to one another. oriGinaL MateriaLs are DeLiberateLy contrasteD with the new. © Paul Collinge

above. these b1 units aLLow the cLient scope for eXpansion or for GeneratinG incoMe throuGh rent. these hiGhLy insuLateD tiMber structures, cLaD in horizontaL feather-eDGe boarDs, have waLLs just 180 mm thick. © Paul Collinge

96

The Grade II* hangar was built in 1940 as a military facility. It comprises a lamella roof structure, composed of identical steel components arranged to form a barrel vault which sits on vertical columns at the periphery. One of the fundamental principles underlying the project was that the historic structure should be changed as little as possible, and interventions should be removable, leaving the original hangar intact. There was also a structural reason for such a ‘hands-off’ approach – the roof structure was designed purely as a canopy and therefore lacked the strength to support anything but itself. The architects could not blithely suspend lighting and air handling equipment from the structure. ‘The success of the project depended on solving many technical problems in an effective and unobtrusive way,’ said the architects. ‘Those challenges proved

to be tougher than everyone in the project team anticipated at the start. However, the outcome is all the more rewarding as a result.’

Architects CDA have made a virtue of the vast size and limited natural daylight of this building. Daylight is admitted through glazed end walls and three rooflights which run the length of the hangar; floor plates were inserted to mirror this configuration. The result is a central ‘street’ which bisects the space, along with perimeter routes which allow natural light to penetrate to ground level. This arrangement also has the effect of creating discrete office areas rather than inserting vast, monolithic floor slabs. Here, the size and rhythm of the hangar is preserved, while the palette of materials (painted steel, timber, glass and stainless steel) has a contemporary yet

Skyways House, a historic aircraft hangar in Speke, Liverpool, is now a headquarters building for Littlewoods’ home shopping operation. This innovative project successfully reuses a redundant (but listed) structure in a manner that saves greatly on the energy and waste that would have been generated in a wholesale replacement programme. Almost 1,500 people now work in this robust, yet elegant, conversion.

skyways houseLiverpooL

cLient: LittLewooDs property hoLDinGsarchitect: cDaDeveLoper: sjs property ManaGeMent structuraL enGineer: curtins consuLtinGservices enGineer: cuDD bentLey consuLtinGQuantity surveyor: christopher sMith associatesproject ManaGer: hiGh-point renDeLLanDscape architect: barry chinn associates contractor: shepherD construction


Gross: 12,245 m2

efficiency: 88%fLoors: 3cost: £15,312,500 to cat a anD b fit-out

97


three internaL LeveLs have been aDDeD to the buiLDinG, accoMMoDatinG 1,450 eMpLoyees. the paLette of MateriaLs is DeLiberateLy restricteD to painteD steeL, pLasterboarD, GLass anD stainLess steeL. the use of conventionaL suspenDeD ceiLinGs is kept to a MiniMuM. © Martin Sellars Photography

98

99


industrial feel that is sympathetic with the original building without imitating it. The main electrical and mechanical services are carried within the new floor plates.

The finished development comprises office space on three levels: ground, first and second floors. The upper floor is smaller than the one below to respond to the curve of the roof. The distance between floors is generous (2.85 m) to maximise daylight penetration, views and airflow, while the upper floor is anywhere from 2.4 m to 7 m beneath the lamella roof structure. In fact, having arrived at an arrangement to make the most of natural light, the architects then had to deal with the issue of glare and heat gain. Extensive research resulted in the use of a Dutch fabric shading system that is more commonly found in horticultural glass houses. This, say the architects, was the only solution which was sufficiently lightweight, effective and capable of installation and maintenance without extensive scaffolding. Artificial lighting is provided through the provision of lighting rafts containing both up- and downlighters.

The heating, ventilation and air-conditioning system supplies free cooling by feeding external air (via the floor plenum) into the building when external conditions allow. A night purge facility can also operate in the summer months to dissipate stored heat. The system also utilises

high-temperature recirculated air to heat incoming fresh air when in heating mode. The building was also upgraded to exceed, where possible, the U-values specified by Part L of the 2000 Building Regulations – a programme which involved lining walls and replacing original glazing with high-efficiency glass. Brise soleil and internal blinds were also added for summer shading.

Skyways House brings a historic building back into use and provides the client with a landmark headquarters which demonstrates that rehabilitation is often just as good as new-build. What is more, the project was completed as part of a wider development within 48 weeks and within a relatively modest budget: £470 per m2 for construction, £100 per m2 for partial demolition and £780 per m2 for fitting out. ‘Cleverness abounds,’ said the BCO judges in 2006. ‘The result is a remarkable, distinctive building that is also highly efficient’.

above. LonG anD short sections throuGh the forMer aircraft hanGar. new fLoors Do not run the fuLL wiDth of the buiLDinG to MaXiMise DayLiGht penetration. © CDA Architects

opposite. the oriGinaL structure was buiLt in the 1940s as a MiLitary aircraft hanGar. new office fLoors have been inserteD, proviDinG space at a Density of 12 m2 per person. the eXistinG GrounD fLoor has a Depth of 46 m. © Martin Sellars Photography

arChiTeCTs Cda have made a virTue of The vasT size and limiTed naTural daylighT of This building. daylighT is admiTTed Through glazed end walls and Three rooflighTs.

100

The building is designed to bring the Trust’s whole administrative team together from disparate workplaces into a single, inspiring, comfortable, ergonomic and socially dynamic space. The building comprises two parallel blocks of open-plan, flexible office space: a ten-storey high, 18 m-deep block faces the Euston Road, while a 9 m-wide atrium links this main building to a lower, slimmer block (five storeys, 9 m deep) facing Gower Street.

Almost entirely clad in glass, the building incorporates a series of triple-glazed, prefabricated facade cassettes which help to reduce solar gain and heat build-up during the summer, while providing a preheated buffer to insulate the building during winter months. This multilayered facade comprises a single-glazed outer skin and a sealed, double-glazed inner unit; the ventilated cavity contains a motorised venetian blind linked to a central control system.

Until the Gibbs building was completed in 2005, the Wellcome Trust was based in a large Greek Revival building that gave few indications of the importance of the work going on inside. Pressure on space, and the desire to allow staff to function and cooperate more effectively, caused this world-class funder and promoter of medical research to commission a new building. As the Trust is a charitable organisation, the strategic brief specified the need for a distinguished building, but not one that was extravagant. A headquarters was required which would surpass the efficiency and economic viability of a commercial office building, while offering a certain amount of prestige without being flashy. The new building, adjacent to the Trust’s original headquarters on London’s busy Euston Road, would also need to respond to the difficult urban characteristics of the site. Furthermore, with a client whose raison d’être is the advancement of human health, Hopkins also had to deliver an environmentally friendly, low-energy building. Upon completion, the scheme was awarded a BREEAM rating of ‘excellent’.

weLLcoMe trust Gibbs buiLDinGLonDon

cLient: the weLLcoMe trustarchitect: hopkins architectsstructuraL enGineer: wsp investMent/property coMpany: the weLLcoMe trustservices enGineer: cunDaLL johnston & partnersQuantity surveyor: turner & townsenDproject ManaGer: Macecontractor: Mace

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: 2004Gross: 29,263 m2

cost: £91,226,798

101


LocateD on a busy centraL LonDon roaD, this buiLDinG ManaGes to DeaL with its noisy anD poLLuteD environMent whiLe eMpLoyinG a ranGe of sustainabLe Measures for heatinG anD cooLinG. the buiLDinG coMprises two paraLLeL bLocks of open-pLan, fLeXibLe office space, separateD by an atriuM. © Nicholas Gutteridge / VIEW

102

a headquarTers was required whiCh would surpass The effiCienCy and eConomiC viabiliTy of a CommerCial offiCe building, while offering a CerTain amounT of presTige wiThouT being flashy.

above. typicaL fLoor to ceiLinG heiGhts are 2.8 m; GrounD fLoor areas are proviDeD with a More Generous 4.7 m heiGht. the pLanninG GriD has been set at 1.5 m. © Nick Kane / ARCAID

Left. this section shows the buiLDinG’s principaL coMponents – office structures of Different heiGhts, LinkeD by a centraL atriuM. © Hopkins Architects

103


above. the atriuM is the centraL internaL feature of the buiLDinG. the air in this space is teMpereD, but not conDitioneD, therefore teMperatures wiLL fLuctuate throuGhout the year. the MiniMuM teMperature is set to prevent the buiLD-up of conDensation. © Nicholas Gutteridge / VIEW

High-performance glass with ceramic fritting also serves to reduce solar gain.

The atrium is the central feature of the building, but Hopkins was determined that this large volume should not become an excessive energy burden. The atrium space is therefore ‘tempered’ but not air-conditioned, which means that a variety of temperatures will be experienced in this space depending on the time of year. ‘Conditions are maintained to reflect the external season; consequently the occupants should be comfortable lightly dressed in peak summer, and more heavily dressed in winter,’ say the architects. A lower temperature limit is fixed, however, to provide condensation control and maintain conditions for planting. Much of the air exchange within the atrium is free, in the sense that this is where exhaust air from the offices ends up; the atrium provides a natural return air path from the offices to the roof-level plant, allowing excess heat to be reclaimed or rejected. Cooling can also be provided by night purging using the smoke ventilation system. Comfort heating and cooling units are strategically located to ensure that air temperatures do not become extreme.

The offices, however, benefit from radiant chilled ceilings and displacement ventilation. The provision of these features provides good comfort conditions and consumes less energy than a traditional fan coil or variable air volume air-conditioning solution. The system is largely passive, with few moving parts, and will therefore require less maintenance and component replacement than for the more typical alternatives. The displacement system provides 100% fresh air at low velocities through 300 mm raised floor voids; the chilled ceilings are used in conjunction with the displacement ventilation strategy, and both systems are more energy-efficient than more traditional mechanical solutions. The result, apart from offering energy savings, is a more comfortable, draught-free working environment with fresher, cleaner internal air. A slight pressure differential between offices and atrium means that air will naturally flow away from the offices into that large central void. The control of both the chilled ceiling and the floor heating systems is zoned every 6 m along the length of the facade, and pipework is designed to allow tighter control on a 3 m basis

with only minor modifications; the partitioning of offices is therefore possible on a 1.5 m grid.

A further sustainable feature of this development is the generous amount of daylight that can flood through the building, reducing the need for artificial lighting.

In 2006, this building was a BCO regional winner, and judges rightly praised its execution: ‘This cathedral-like building boasts the precision and grace of medieval craftsmen, but uses an abundance of glass rather than stone.’

104


105

5.0 structure

noT all submissions To The bCo awards programme inClude deTails of building sTruCTure, buT Those ThaT do suggesT ThaT sTeel is used more ofTen Than ConCreTe. in The years leading up To 2007, slighTly more Than half of award enTries were for sTeel-framed buildings, while The figure for 2008 was nearer To Two-Thirds. There is liTTle daTa available To explain why This should be The Case, espeCially as The high priCe of sTeel during ThaT period was Causing inCreasing numbers of arChiTeCTs To opT for ConCreTe. iT may be ThaT The london weighTing of offiCe projeCTs (where CommerCial developmenT inCludes Tall buildings) may offer a parTial explanaTion; also, many offiCe sChemes involve radiCal inTervenTions in elderly buildings whiCh may well involve The use of sTeel, espeCially when masonry parTiTions are removed in The searCh for open-plan spaCes. The speed of ConsTruCTion, whiCh of Course also has a finanCial impliCaTion, may also favour sTeel. however, one projeCT in This seCTion, 5 aldermanbury square by eriC parry arChiTeCTs, uses a Clever CombinaTion of ConCreTe and sTeel; indeed, This developmenT is an exemplar projeCT in any number of ways, buT iTs sTruCTural innovaTion Causes iT To be loCaTed in This parTiCular seCTion of The book.

GooD office DesiGn structure

opposite. royaL bank of scotLanD hQ © Keith Hunter

106

One of the issues of prime importance to developers, in the creation of office spaces, is floor-to-ceiling heights. Heights of around 2.7 m are virtually non-negotiable in office buildings, and architects almost always manage to reach this criterion no matter what the constraints. Indeed, delivering heights of this order in Victorian or Edwardian buildings, where ventilation and cabling systems have to be installed under floors or above suspended ceilings, is remarkable. Ingenuity is often applied. The BCO Guide to Specification recommends floor-to-ceiling of 2.6–3.0 m; in 2007 the average height of award submissions was 2.75 m, but by 2008 this figure had crept upwards to 2.8 m (ranging from a slightly claustrophobic 2.4 m to a grand height of 3.88 m). Raised floors had also become rather

generous by this time; the BCO expects floors to be raised 150 mm off the floor slab, but the average for 2008 was 228 mm (across a range of 100 mm to a whopping 850 mm).

Ideally, the structural frame and the services provided by the building (including environmental ones) are all part of an integrated system; steel beams containing circular apertures create an ideal way to thread cabling through a structure, while the thermal mass of concrete is frequently used as part of the cooling mechanism in office projects. As the projects featured in this section demonstrate, there is no single ‘best’ way to structure a building, merely a range of options which are more or less attractive at the time.

Certainly, the benefits of prefabrication are cited on a regular basis by architects. Prefab generally

© Keith Hunter © Timothy Soar© David Barbour

107


offers superior quality control, and also frees up space on site as products are brought in and installed almost immediately. Prefabrication does appear to rely on a strong sense of teamwork between architect, engineers, contractor and supplier, and this degree of coordination often spills over into the project generally, saving money and time while improving attention to detail. Moreover, architects often mention sustainability and prefabrication in the same breath, largely because wastage is reduced and transport movements go down because different components arrive on site as a ready-made object rather than separately.

In terms of planning grids and structural loads, the majority of projects fall within BCO guidelines although, as with anything, there are huge variations depending on the scale of the project

in hand. A planning grid of 1.5 m is typical, although the average for 2008 submissions was slightly larger than that at 2.07 m. The average figures for live and dead loads were 4 kN/m2 and 3.12 kN/m2 respectively – both well within BCO guidelines. The holy grail in office projects is achieving uncluttered, column-free floor plates, maximising the amount of flexibility and usable space made available to occupiers. The manner in which this is achieved is often impressive – even breathtaking. Lifschutz Davidson Sandilands’ solution, with engineers WSP, to the problem of transforming the highly cellular, masonry spaces of an Edwardian-era building in a conservation area of London guaranteed the project a place in this book. The project is not just radical surgery, but the height of inventiveness.

‘one of The issues of prime imporTanCe To developers, in The CreaTion of offiCe spaCes, is floor-To-Ceiling heighTs. heighTs of around 2.7 m are virTually non-negoTiable in offiCe buildings, and arChiTeCTs almosT always manage To reaCh This CriTerion no maTTer whaT The ConsTrainTs.’

© Nigel Young / Foster + Partners © Nigel Young / Foster + Partners

108

As is typical, one of the requirements of this project was to create a building with clear, uncluttered floor plates, and so the architects minimised structural intrusion by pushing the key structural elements outwards. Corten steel box columns were filled with concrete to create fire-protected, maintenance-free units that require no inspection or complication of the facade (and paint coatings are not required for a fire rating). The glazing units, extending over two storeys, are set back into the depth of these immense columns, allowing the structure itself to provide a rigorous, three-dimensional composition and a degree of shading. The columns, which are relatively small in profile, are clad in shot-peened

3 mm thick stainless steel panels, which provide a lightly reflective and very clean wrapping to the structure. Steel brise soleils are provided at intermediate floor levels.

This structural approach was part of a revision of the original intention. During design review, the structural zone required for each floor was reduced by 150 mm, allowing the building to gain an extra storey without becoming taller. The typical floor plate is interrupted by a lift and service core (accommodating eight elevators and a service lift), an escape stair and just four internal columns.

Just as remarkable as the structure/cladding solution was the fact that Bovis managed to

The building at 5 Aldermanbury Square is one of a cluster of mid-sized towers in London’s Wood Street area, a highly sensitive location for its proximity to St Paul’s cathedral and the Guildhall. Planning officers usually insist on buildings of this size stepping back at their upper limits, but Eric Parry Architects provided officials with a forceful argument that structural ingenuity and architectural elan could deliver a building that was both polite and uncompromising. The 18-storey tower does benefit from some gentle curves, and its mass is broken down into a pair of staggered wings which share a recessed join, but the real innovation is in the integration of structure and facade.

5 aLDerManbury sQuareLonDon

cLient: scottish wiDowsinvestor/DeveLoper: scottish wiDowsDeveLopMent ManaGer: hanover cubearchitect: eric parry architectsinterior DesiGner: eric parry architectsstructuraL enGineer: raMboLL whitbybirDservices enGineer: hiLson Moran partnershipQuantity surveyor: northcroftbrief consuLtant: bh2contractor: bovis


Gross: 35,171 m2


109


internaLLy, the buiLDinG is pLanneD on a 1,500 mm MoDuLe. a typicaL fLoorpLate is 34.5 m wiDe anD 59 m LonG in the LonGest winG. the facaDe to core DiMension is typicaLLy 10.5 m. © Nicholas Kane

110

opposite. GrounD-fLoor pLan of the office buiLDinG, which incLuDes a Generous pubLic space. © Eric Parry Architects

above. the Depth of the steeL anD concrete fraMe of the buiLDinG proviDes shaDinG anD an aniMateD facaDe. the fraMe rises in two-storey units; brise soLeiLs are fitteD at aLternate LeveLs. © Timothy Soar

Left. buiLt froM a steeL fraMe with coMposite concrete fLoor sLabs; eXternaL steeL coLuMns are constructeD in corten anD fiLLeD with concrete to proviDe hiGh perforMance in fire. © Eric Parry Architects

111


complete the building on time in spite of the fact that Schmidlin AG, the German cladding subcontractor, went into receivership during the build programme. Such a feat was possible because of the immense amount of preparation, testing and quality control procedures that occurred in advance of construction. At an early stage, detailed discussions were held with three facade contractors, and full-sized mock-ups were constructed prior to making a final selection. By the time of the tender the facade package team had detailed knowledge of the particular issues presented by the stainless steel facade, and how they could be addressed on site. This included visits to key parts of the supply chain and frequent quality control checks at the main production plant. There was stringent checking of the finish and dimensional tolerance on site prior to installation.

‘Developers can throw money at a project and still end up with something average,’ said a BCO judging panel. ‘However, at £73 m, 5 Aldermanbury Square was certainly not cheap but value for money shines through. It is bold and brave but also incredibly elegant, achieving Scottish Widows’ wish to set a new benchmark for this part of London. The design has a timeless quality that will age well without excessive maintenance demands.’

The building also benefitted from a sophisticated fire and evacuation modelling strategy, as well as extensive discussion with the London Fire Brigade

and local authority surveyors. Analysis showed that, even if the building was occupied at a density of one person per 7 m2, it could be successfully evacuated in stages. This study was useful in that it proved that the building could accommodate tenants who require financial dealing rooms, while open stairwells could be opened up between floors without compromising the overall fire strategy or having to provide protected shafts. This dramatically enhances the ability of tenants to operate over multiple floors.

It is also worth recording that 5 Aldermanbury Square has gone a long way to improving what was a botched corner of the City of London. ‘The triple-height public space under the building replaces the dysfunctional 1960s urban plan which included a taxi rat-run, elevated walkways and miserable architecture to match,’ said the architects. A newly landscaped public square and better pedestrian links to surrounding streets (including high-level access to the Barbican) has rather rehabilitated this historic zone. That the building has been designed to weather elegantly (through, for example, a combination of high-quality materials, a careful consideration of water run-off, the avoidance of additional layers of glass to minimise the cleaning regime and straightforward, elegant design) provides a further enhancement to the streetscape. ‘The brief from the client was for a building that would improve with age and look as good in 50 years as it does now, without an onerous maintenance regime,’ said the architects.

one of The requiremenTs of This projeCT was To CreaTe a building wiTh Clear, unCluTTered floor plaTes, and so The arChiTeCTs minimised sTruCTural inTrusion by pushing The key sTruCTural elemenTs ouTwards.

112

The BBC demesne within the Mailbox comprises two double-height spaces – one of 72 × 78 m; the other about a quarter of this size, which sits beneath the main space. Into these volumes had to be crammed offices, open-plan teamwork areas, technical facilities, recording studios and public galleries. Flexibility was paramount; hot-desking is widely used and meeting rooms contain movable partitions and furniture on wheels. The entire ethos is for an environment that can be quickly adapted to the needs of changing teams and broadcast priorities. ‘In essence, the modern office is no longer just desks and tables,’ wrote Paresh Solanki, executive director/producer at BBC Birmingham. ‘It is much more of a complete experience with the latest technological tools,

better people–machine–office interfaces and a friendly creative environment where staff feel inspired and safe.’

So where to put it all? The addition of a series of mezzanines, referred to as ‘gondolas’, makes up the shortfall in space requirements, but this had to be done carefully. The double-height spaces of the Mailbox are only around 5 m high, so BDP had to exercise considerable ingenuity in adding these structures – reasonable head heights had to be preserved while delivering cabling beneath raised floors. Furthermore, the open-plan spaces could not become cluttered with extra columns, which might compromise the spatial flexibility which was part of the rationale for relocating in the first place.

Moving BBC Birmingham from its home in Pebble Mill, Edgbaston, to a city-centre site in the Mailbox building (a former Royal Mail sorting office) was technically and organisationally challenging. Spaces in the Mailbox appeared generous, but they weren’t quite sufficient for the BBC’s needs, and incorporating the ICT systems and associated cabling that goes with modern broadcasting, as well the acoustically separated spaces, forced architects BDP to be especially clever and rational. Typically, when intelligent architects work for an enlightened client, the solution looks obvious – even effortless.

bbc MaiLboXbirMinGhaM

cLient: bbc propertyarchitect: bDpinvestMent/property coMpany: bbc propertyinterior DesiGn: bDp (with iDea)structuraL enGineer: bDpservices enGineer: bDpQuantity surveyor: frost associatesproject ManaGer: DearLe anD henDersoncontractor: interior eXterior (isG) pLc

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: May 2004net: 8,111 m2

Gross: 11,527 m2


113


the wave forM of the ceiLinG foLLows the pattern of the buiLDinG’s beaMs. the ‘GonDoLa’ fLoors, with a typicaL Depth of 10.5 m, ManaGe to preserve a reasonabLe fLoor-to-ceiLinG heiGht: 2,250 mm spaces are proviDeD beneath the fLoors; spaces of 2,260–2,700 mm are achieveD above theM. © David Barbour

114

The architects eventually suspended slimline steel structures from the heads of the steel columns of the building itself; these structures were configured as aerofoils, where tapered edges reduced the visual impact of these elements. The gondolas are used to deliver fresh air, power and data into the work spaces, while low-energy chilled panels affixed to their underside provide cooling to the spaces below.

A waveform ceiling also helps to maximise head-heights. The Mailbox is constructed of steel columns and beams, with floor slabs in precast coffered concrete. The architects installed a ceiling that wraps around the structural bays, dropping down as ‘troughs’ where steelwork is located, but providing extra height at regular intervals. This

ceiling system also conceals low-energy passive chilled beams and other services. The complete assembly provides a ceiling height of 2,250 mm under the mezzanines, and 2,260 mm over them (rising to 2,700 mm in the rise of the waveform ceilings).

In spite of the exacting acoustic requirements of the building, loading constraints meant that the new state-of-the-art studios had to be constructed from lightweight materials. Modular perforated metal and timber cladding panels, in cherry, conceal services and acoustic absorbers while providing a high-quality finish. Particular attention had also to be paid to matters including duct layouts, air speeds, plant noise, anti-vibration mounts and door construction.

above. this project, which saw the bbc’s MiDLanDs operation Move froM its pebbLe MiLL buiLDinG to birMinGhaM’s MaiLboX DeveLopMent, reQuireD the provision of eXtra space by suspenDinG new fLoors froM the oriGinaL structure. © David Barbour

opposite. cross section throuGh a Mezzanine unit. these ‘GonDoLas’, which are steeL structures suspenDeD froM the buiLDinG’s coLuMns, contain power anD air suppLy Ducts. © BDP

115


‘The standard of fit-out is very high; all elements display imagination, but also great discipline. It could have been frightful: instead it is great,’ said BCO judges in 2005 before awarding this project the ‘Best of the Best’ Award. ‘The building is full of dynamism and light. A sense of openness is created by vast internal spaces, carried outwards by cutting huge windows across the front of the shell. Extra space was conjured from thin air by floating mezzanine “gondolas” within the hangar-like shell. Over a narrow band, they reduce ceilings below BCO standards but this has been overcome on the upper level with a clever ‘wavy’ ceiling making the most of space and hiding existing structure and environment-friendly chilled beams.’

The addiTion of a series of mezzanines, referred To as ‘gondolas’, makes up The shorTfall in spaCe requiremenTs, buT This had To be done Carefully.

Mezzanine: Cross section

116

Upgrading Her Majesty’s Treasury Building, listed Grade II*, was a job that involved a considerable amount of vision from both client and design/construction team. The original 18th-century building in Whitehall was highly cellular, and circulation was compromised by its many fireplaces and light wells. The Treasury, which formed a PFI consortium to manage the project, wanted to retain the building but open it up and thoroughly modernise it. This entailed removing 7.7 miles of internal brick walls, strengthening the remaining walls, floors and windows, and roofing over eight lightwells. The removal of four major staircases, toilet blocks and chimneys means that this major refurbishment of the western half of the building, completed in August 2002, has provided the Treasury with 25% more space. The building now accommodates 1,200 staff in space

formerly occupied by just 850 people. For the first time in half a century, Treasury employees work in a single building. It has even been awarded a BREEAM rating of ‘excellent’.

The original building, characterised by separate office spaces located off long and unprepossessing corridors, was largely of masonry construction, with load-bearing brick walls supporting floors of steel joists and clinker concrete. Where load-bearing walls have been removed, steel frames have been introduced. More than half the office floors are now open-plan, while the conversion of lightwells into atria has created communal areas and space for a new reception (fitted with four new lifts). Atria are equipped with louvres which react to external weather conditions and assist with natural ventilation. The ground floor

‘From a risk management point of view, the only sensible advice to give anybody contemplating the undertaking that has resulted in the completely remodelled Treasury Building would probably be “Don’t do it!”,’ said the BCO judges’ report in 2003. ‘That the end result looks straightforward is testament to the calibre of a team that displays the practised skill of the concert pianist.’

hM treasuryLonDon

project sponsor/enD user: hM treasuryproject sponsor’s representative: GarDiner & theobaLD ManaGeMent servicescLient consortiuM: eXcheQuer partnership (stanhope pLc, bovis LenD Lease LtD, chesterton internationaL pLc)architect: foster + partnersheritaGe/conservation architect: feiLDen & Mawsonspace pLanninG: DeGwstructuraL enGineer: waterMan partnershipservices enGineer: jaros bauM & boLLescost consuLtant: faithfuL & GouLDservices cost consuLtant: Mott Green & waLLcontractor: bovis LenD Lease


Gross: 36,138 m2

efficiency: 87.6%fLoors: 9 (7 + 2 baseMents)cost: £90,172,751

117


the refurbishMent of hM treasury has aDDeD 25% of useabLe space to the buiLDinG, proviDinG faciLities for 1,200 staff where 850 were eMpLoyeD previousLy. © Nigel Young / Foster + Partners

118

now contains a 200-seat auditorium, as well as meeting and training rooms, a library, restaurant and recreational facilities.

Purely for financial reasons, this project had to be ambitious. Studies showed that, without reinventing the building, updating services would have cost £50 million, so it made sense to invest in the site properly and completely rethink the way the building worked. Views have been improved and energy reduced by increasing the amount of daylight entering the building – in fact, even

cleaning the lightwells and courtyards has caused more daylight to be reflected into the office spaces. Significantly, the large central courtyard has not been glazed over – this remains as an external, landscaped amenity.

‘As the building is also naturally ventilated, it is irresistible to say that, both figuratively and literally, the new Treasury Building represents a breath of fresh air blowing through the corridors of power – a transformation from labyrinth to leitmotif for transparency,’ said the judges’ report.

above. DesiGneD for an occupationaL Density of 1:12 m2, 60% of the refurbisheD buiLDinG is naturaLLy ventiLateD. the project receiveD a breeaM ratinG of ‘eXceLLent’. LiGhtinG LeveLs reach 350 LuX. © Nigel Young / Foster + Partners

The building now aCCommodaTes 1,200 sTaff in spaCe formerly oCCupied by jusT 850 people. for The firsT Time in half a CenTury, Treasury employees work in a single building.

119


beLow. typicaL fLoorpLan. the reMovaL of Masonry waLLs has createD More open space, whiLe LiGht weLLs have been roofeD over anD brouGht insiDe. © Foster + Partners

Left. one of the key Moves was cLeaninG the LiGht weLLs anD brinGinG theM insiDe to proviDe reception anD circuLation spaces. these LiGht weLLs have been fitteD with transparent roofs with openinG Louvres. © Nigel Young / Foster + Partners

120

The main office building – in fact a cluster of seven buildings grouped around an internal street – sits at the centre of the site; Gogarburn House, a Grade B listed dwelling, has been converted into a staff club; and there is also a conference centre, a nursery and a business school (built with support from Harvard University) on this woodland campus. Time and budgetary constraints put prefabrication of the main building envelope high on the agenda; WCs, too, were constructed off-site as modules.

At the project’s concept stage, as many as 13 structural options were examined for the main office block in order to find the optimum solution across a range of factors including cost, floor

heights, ceiling finish and quality, schedule, floor plate flexibility, sustainability and the complexity of service/facade integration. The team settled on post-tensioned floor slabs supported by precast concrete columns on a 9 × 9 m grid. Off-site manufacture reduced on-site waste and labour, and maximised quality, while the post-tensioned slabs increased the span while reducing the thickness of the floor plates. The relatively thin slabs consequently reduced the height of the building, which created further spin-offs: savings on external cladding materials, and less embodied energy. Furthermore, the structure is said to be lighter than the equivalent in situ

The headquarters campus for RBS, located on the site of the old Gogarburn hospital near Edinburgh, provides offices and almost every ‘village facility’ on a single 40-hectare site. In spite of the desire of the bank to remain highly competitive in the local jobs market and create a suite of buildings that would be a match for a global banking brand, the client was not profligate. These buildings (a principal office hub and ancillary spaces) are well finished and ensure that staff are well served, but they are far from opulent. Indeed, there was a fixed budget, and the design and construction teams went to considerable efforts to cut costs and deliver to a rapid timetable.

royaL bank of scotLanD heaDQuarterseDinburGh

project cLient/owner: the royaL bank of scotLanD Groupinvestor/DeveLoper: the royaL bank of scotLanDarchitect/interior DesiGner: MichaeL LairD architects/rhwLservices enGineer /structuraL enGineer: wspQuantity surveyor: DoiG & sMithproject ManaGer: Macebrief consuLtant: MichaeL LairD architectscontractor: MaceanciLLary buiLDinGs consuLtinG enGineers: skM anthony hunt/fuLcruM


Gross: 38,970 m2


121


at the heart of the Main buiLDinG is a 280 m LonG internaL street, onto which separate ‘business houses’ connect. the street is an inteGrateD part of the workinG environMent. © Keith Hunter

122

123


concrete frame, while the flat soffits simplified formwork and allowed complete flexibility on the distribution of services. The design also benefitted from research conducted by engineers at WSP, who reappraised seminal work done in the 1960s on floor loading for offices by Mitchell and Woodgate. ‘The reappraisal supports the view that over-design has been prevalent, in spite of the efforts of the BCO, and shows that 3.5 kN/m2 (including partitions) is perfectly satisfactory for upper floors,’ wrote Michael Laird Architects in their award submission in 2006.

The building was completed in July 2005 (after 2½ years on site), and the client is happy that its new estate makes for a better life–work balance. ‘There is a unanimous feeling that the building not only provides an enviable working environment but also makes the working day much easier,’ wrote Barry Varcoe, RBS’s group property director. It’s not hard to see why: the 280 m-long street running through the main building contains shops,

cafes, a restaurant, a Tesco Express and other ‘high street’ services, while a medical and dental centre form part of a wide mix of other facilities on the site. Views from the 18 m deep office floor plates reveal woodland vistas, while a huge variety of spaces have been provided for staff to meet, relax, collaborate or profitably get away from the desk without leaving the building. Varcoe was even convinced that staff were sending fewer emails internally, preferring to converse face to face: ‘It instinctively feels like a much smarter and more efficient way of working.’

BCO judges, too, were impressed: ‘From the superb entrance, to the street, the office floors and the boardroom, every space, every detail shows consummate skill stemming from the quality of the brief and the designers’ excellence. Despite the huge size, it does not dwarf people … The whole package is great value for money.’

The building has been awarded a BREEAM rating of ‘excellent’.

oppopsite top. royaL bank of scotLanD. this project, in GoGarburn, eDinburGh, was a 100 acre DeveLopMent containinG 74,484 m2 of buiLDinGs (Gross). the DeveLopMent contains 33,850 m2 of office space (net) © Keith Hunter

above. MichaeL LairD architects were initiaLLy appointeD by rbs to consiDer the feasabiLity of reDeveLopinG a 1960s city centre buiLDinG for the bank, but the project was abanDoneD when a property DeaL couLD not be finaLiseD. construction anD security risks aLso counteD aGainst that centraL eDinburGh option. © Keith Hunter

opposite. site pLan. the Main buiLDinG, in the centre of the iMaGe, is part of a wiDer, wooDeD caMpus. © Michael Laird Architects

124

The programme for the building was the reverse of the general trend, which tends to convert elderly buildings into residential units; here, a residential building was transformed into open-plan office accommodation. The building had, in fact, been used as offices for many years, but these were of poor quality and the property was characterised by its maze of rooms and corridors (and fireplaces). The presence of three ground- floor retailers with long leases, and therefore the right to continue operating during building works, made the job trickier still. The architect and engineer’s solution was innovative, to say the least.

Two new structural steel cores were inserted into existing central lightwells to provide lateral stability from new raft foundations. Once the building was braced, vertical openings were cut through five storeys of masonry wall, and steel stanchions threaded through from above, providing a new superstructure. Beams were then bolted to the new columns, on either side of the walls and immediately above the floors; these castellated beams were then attached to the Edwardian steel joists embedded in the clinker concrete floors below. Finally, the masonry walls could be demolished and a raised floor constructed over the Edwardian original. A third core was then

Future building historians will examine this building with particular interest; elements will be distinctly and very definitely of 1910 vintage, while other structural components are of 21st- century design. Yet this is a single building, where its structure (constructed over a century) is so intertwined that it forms a unique whole. The reinvention and thorough update of this large Edwardian building, which sits within the Harley Street Conservation Area, is a superb demonstration of the courage and ingenuity of architects Lifschutz Davidson Sandilands and their engineers WSP Consulting, which concocted a thoroughly new and enterprising way of opening up a highly cellular, masonry building.

180 Great portLanD streetLonDon

cLient: Great wiGMore partnershipowner/DeveLoper: Great portLanD estatesarchitect: Lifschutz DaviDson sanDiLanDsinterior DesiGner: Lifschutz DaviDson sanDiLanDsstructuraL enGineer: wspservices enGineer: cunDaLL johnston anD partnersQuantity surveyor: Davis LanGDonproject ManaGer: buro fourcontractor: isG interioreXterior

buiLDinG teaM buiLDinG DatacoMpLeteD: March 2007net: 7,500 m2Gross: 11,879 m2efficiency: 63%fLoors: 6cost: £20,402,777

125


180 Great portLanD street. this reinvention of the buiLDinG was not a facaDe retention eXercise. just 2,000 tonnes of Masonry was reMoveD froM the site, repLaceD by 600 tonnes of steeL. © Chris Gascoigne/VIEW

126 Left. step-by-step iLLustration of the structure anD MechanicaL services strateGy. coLuMns were pLaceD insiDe the eXisitinG waLLs, anD fLoor joists fiXeD to new spine beaMs. Masonary waLLs were the DeMoLisheD. © Lifshutz Davidson Sandilands

Left. eXistinG structure LoaD bearinG Masonry waLLs cast iron fiLLer joists cLinker concrete

staGe 1 - coLuMn inteGration new 5 storey heiGht steeL stanchions threaDeD throuGh pockets in eXistinG structure.

staGe 2 - spine beaMs new spine beaMs boLteD to stanchions either siDe of eXistinG Masonry spine waLL. eXistinG fiLLer joists sLunG froM unDersiDe of new spine beaMs. eXistinG Masonry spine waLL DeMoLisheD. resiDuaL hoLes in sLab backfiLLeD with insitu concrete.

staGe 3 - hvac pLenuM new pLywooD Deck packeD off eXistinG cast iron fiLLer joists to proviDe LeveL substrate anD seaL eXistinG fLoor contruction. fire rateD pLasterboarD casinG appLieD to each stanchion. intuMescent paint sprayeD on spine beaMs. fuLLy strinGereD raiseD fLoor support fraMe prevents pLenuM air Loss at fLoor tiLe junctions. suppLy / eXtract pLenuM separation barriers instaLLeD to suit base instaLLation air paths.

staGe 4 - raiseD fLoor instaLLation raiseD fLoor tiLe instaLLation. hiross ‘fantiLe’ GriLLe instaLLation (incLusive of eLectric fan anD heatinG eLeMent).return air GriLLes instaLLeD.

1

1

2

3

4

5

2

3

4

5

127


Left. the fLeXibLe, open-pLan office accoMMoDation instaLLeD within this eDwarDian buiLDinG has iMproveD the oriGinaL net:Gross ratio by 15%. © Chris Gascoigne / VIEW

inserted into a further lightwell, over a ground-floor sitting tenant; this core was suspended from a pair of 20 m long, 1.6 m deep, steel girders at roof level, allowing the new vertical stanchions to take up the load. Once completed, the building’s large floors became cleared of obstructions, other than the line of columns which replaced the spine walls. Moreover, this intervention was achieved with little loss of floor-to-ceiling heights; previously, air-conditioning ducts were located at ceiling level, but these could be removed as air-con and heating utilities were located within the 375 mm-deep floor plenum. A 60 mm ceiling void was created to accommodate fully recessed lighting. Loss of height varies from floor to floor: the fifth floor has lost just 10 mm, while the second storey is 70 mm short of its original height. However, floors three and four have gained in height (30 and 40 mm respectively).

The result was that only 2,000 tonnes of masonry was removed from site during building works (replaced by 600 tonnes of steel). If the architects had embarked on a standard facade retention project, that would have meant the removal of 6,500 tonnes of waste. This technique and resolution impressed the BCO judges when they made their visit in 2008: ‘This shows that innovation does not have to involve widgets, gadgets and go-faster stripes,’ they said. ‘It just requires clever ideas put together in a thoughtful way … Our primary focus should be on existing stock, and innovation must go beyond techniques such as insulation and natural ventilation to address the energy and materials embodied within buildings.’

Such a daring structural solution had further spin-off benefits: it reduced the amount of dust, dirt and noise which would have been generated, and allowed a faster build programme than almost total demolition. It also allowed the tenants on the ground floor to continue operating, which would obviously have been an impossibility through a standard facade retention approach. It was a delicate construction job though, helped by the erection of London’s largest temporary roof, covering over half an acre.

The design team was commissioned in February 2003 and planning consent was granted the following December. Construction began in May 2005 and practical completion was achieved in December 2006. Fit-out works continued to March the following year. The reinvention of this fine 11,879 m2 Bath and Portland stone-clad building was achieved for a cost of £14.82 per m2. The building now has 15% more space than it did previously.

‘This former Edwardian residential block, with its cramped cellular spaces, is a classic example of how to think outside the box,’ said BCO judges. ‘As buildings become more energy efficient, this focus on embodied energy will become more important. The immense savings in materials has given the building flexibility and a new lease of life while maintaining many BCO specification requirements. It shows that sustainability does not need to be visible when using careful architectural and structural techniques to regenerate buildings without paying a high price.’

6.0 futures

jereMy Myerson anD pauL warner The award-winning bCo projeCTs desCribed in This book say muCh abouT The CurrenT sTaTe of offiCe buildings and workplaCe design. buT They also ConTain poinTers for how Things mighT shape up in The fuTure – as soCial, demographiC, eConomiC and TeChnologiCal Changes exerT an influenCe on how and where we’ll work. so whaT mighT offiCes look and feel like in 20 years’ Time? will we sTill be in Thrall To open-plan working, as so many exCellenT projeCTs in These pages suggesT? whaT abouT The disTribuTion of lighT, uTilisaTion of spaCe, adopTion of new maTerials and TeChnologies, adapTaTion To ConTexT and loCaTion, and The advanCe of green sTraTegies? will employing organisaTions sTill require so muCh offiCe spaCe, as people work in paTTerns ThaT are more flexible and fluid? many quesTion marks hang over The fuTure of The offiCe, and in This final ChapTer we shed some lighT on The key issues.

opposite. isG hQ © Richard Leeney Photography

130

the trajectory of historyThe first thing to say is that here is little or no evidence to support the ‘death of the office’. Despite all the scare stories about the impact of new ways of working on the demand for office space, we haven’t deserted office buildings yet. On the contrary, the physical work environment appears as important as ever to how organisations perform.

Employers and politicians alike may voice concerns about the environment and commuting, but we still flock to the workplace in our millions every day and office property still provides the main backdrop to our working lives. The issue is how we will extract value from our work environments in 2030 and beyond.

As a starting point for thinking about the future, it is worth briefly looking back at how the modern office has been described over its short 150-year history, as a necessary by-product of the bureaucratisation of industry. If you study both the research literature and popular depictions of the office, as Tricia Austin (2007) pointed out, you will discover four main models are commonly used to describe the modern workplace.

The first is the economic model that sees the office in the context of efficiency, production, utilisation of resources and cost control. The second views the office as a polity, a place of power, rivalry, hierarchy, decision-making and politicking. The third model revolves around the idea of community, placing an emphasis on relationships, belonging, proximity and partnership. The fourth is the ecological model, inspired by Franklin Becker’s studies of the ecology of the workplace (1995), which views the workplace in the context of population flows, interdependence and sustainability.

One can immediately see that the majority of award-winners in this book have taken care to construct workplaces that replace the perception of the office as an economy or polity with ideas of community and ecosystem, based around the values of trust, interdependence and social interaction. Indeed, it would be hard today to find a BCO-endorsed scheme that nakedly flaunts its economic benefits far above the human needs

of people to work effectively, or a project that promotes a brutal survival-of-the-fittest agenda at the expense of collaborative working.

That is because office work has become a fundamentally social activity. The balance has shifted from an overriding focus on management efficiency – conspicuous for much of the 20th century – towards the human factors of individual performance and well-being. Considerable efforts have been made to create a much tighter fit between corporate culture and work environment. The question, of course, is how far can this process go?

three waves of chanGeWhile the edging towards community and ecology from economy and polity is one way to sum up the tide of change in office design, there are other ways to use the past to inform the future. Dr Frank Duffy of architects and designers DEGW has described three major waves of change over the past 100 years to suggest how the office environment has shifted from a visual metaphor for the power of the corporation to an expression of the power of the social network (2006).

Duffy identified the ‘Taylorist’ office (after American engineer and scientific management pioneer Frederick Taylor) as the first key wave – this was an engine of US economic growth in the early 20th century, characterised by corporate sloganising and time-and-motion efficiency. He identified the second wave in the post-1945 emergence of the ‘Social Democratic’ office in Northern Europe, a light and bright postwar reaction to the darkness of Fascism and a reflection of the rising power of the white-collar unions. The third wave he described as the ‘Networked’ office, which is set to redefine time, place and space in working life.

All three waves still wash up over the workplace today. Taylorism is alive and well in the formulaic office planning based on the American model of hierarchical arrangements – its chief benefit is that information is processed as efficiently as possible. Offices based on social democratic principles are still planned and built by progressive employers seeking to create flourishing communities of purpose, despite the high costs and inherent inflexibilities involved. (The Royal Bank of Scotland’s ‘village’ HQ in this book is a good example of such thinking; and more generally, the

GooD office DesiGn futures

131

£14 million average price tag for office projects indicates the willingness to invest.) Neither the Taylorist nor the social democratic model looks in danger of disappearing any time soon.

But the really interesting trend going forward is the networked one. This wave is being led neither by developers (as in the Taylorist era) nor by owner-occupiers implementing social democratic principles, but by service providers offering office space for the time you need it. The eOffice network of serviced office environments in Manchester (see Chapter 1) is a clear pointer to things to come.

The networked office will increasingly operate like a ‘club’ whose members will be networked virtually and who will use the office space primarily for face-to-face meetings. And as the most amenable, attractive and convenient place for people to meet is usually the centre of the city, we can perhaps look forward to urban consolidation of office property after decades of out-of-town developments and suburban hubs. More on this later.

the rise of knowLeDGe workThe emergence of the networked office, however, depends critically on one factor – the growth of the knowledge economy, requiring the rapid acceleration of networks to capture, build and share knowledge. Already in this book, we have seen several schemes dedicated to the needs of knowledge workers to collaborate, think and act – such as the PricewaterhouseCoopers accountancy office in Birmingham, which offers a range of work settings via an online booking system on an on-demand basis, instead of the old way of allocating and owning workstations according to rank and status.

As a group, knowledge workers are on the rise and will be even more so over the next two decades. Research suggests that they identify themselves more with their professional discipline and specialism and less with their employer or place of work. They don’t fit easily into Taylorist corporate hierarchies and feel better served by

beLow. rethinkinG the city: a new approach to MeasurinG urban Density by pauL cLarke. froM Metricity stuDy (2008) sponsoreD by bco urban affairs coMMittee. © Royal College of Art Helen Hamlyn Centre.

132

networked office arrangements that reflect their more mobile and flexible work patterns.

Doctors, lawyers, academics, accountants and scientists were among the first identified ‘knowledge workers’. Today the term can be routinely applied to most executive and managerial roles within business, industry and professional services. That is because much of the repetitive process work that once occupied large numbers of staff in offices within developed economies is today already being handled by computers or sent offshore to lower-cost economies. In its place is a type of work less dependent on formula and learning from a set script, and more dependent on the independent application of knowledge and learning.

The economist Peter Drucker, who first wrote about knowledge work in 1960, has also drawn attention to an important new class of worker he has termed ‘knowledge technologists’ – computer technicians, software designers, analysts in clinical labs, paralegals and so on. This group is further swelling the ranks of knowledge workers worldwide. Instead of individuals sitting in serried ranks to follow explicit instructions within a supervised hierarchy, emerging working practices are based on collaboration, initiative and exploration – and require a new type of office space to make it all happen.

eXperiMents in reDesiGnKnowledge-intensive companies worldwide have begun to experiment heavily with office redesign to raise the productivity of their smartest workers, but the results so far have been mixed. It seems we still have a lot to learn about designing workspaces that really support knowledge workers.

When the first international survey of new office schemes dedicated to the needs of knowledge workers was published in the book Space to Work (Myerson and Ross 2006), a key insight was how little time knowledge workers actually spend on the corporate campus. Instead they work across a continuum of different locations: employer’s office, settings for professional associations and networks, the city and the home. All of which explains why so many office schemes have occupancy rates hovering around 50–60 %.

LearninG orGanisationsAccording to Space to Work, the corporate campus – the traditional site for employers – is fast being remodelled along the lines of a university campus to encourage more knowledge sharing and collaboration. This is the so-called ‘Academy’ trend; work in these buildings is becoming a more social activity. PricewaterhouseCoopers Birmingham was identified as an Academy-style office, its central template derived from the historic university quadrangle.

Others in the same category included Zaha Hadid’s BMW Plant Central Building in Leipzig, Germany, an office space through which partly built cars move on a blue-lit production line above the heads of marketers, administrators and engineers. Hadid’s scheme is the fusion of two typologies – office and factory – bringing workers closer together and creating a community that shares knowledge and experience. We might expect more hybrids like this in the future, and also more robust conversions of factory buildings into office buildings.

Take the evidence of another Academy-style office – Sedgwick Rd, the Seattle-based subsidiary of the New York advertising company McCann-Erickson, which relocated to the 1926 Star Machinery Building and saved the original beams, windows and doors for reuse. The salvaged parts were recycled by architects Olsen Sundberg Kundig Allen to build six giant but easily moveable partitions which are reconfigured daily to form the newly required space of the day under the roof of the old machine shop.

Sedgwick Rd also has social spaces including a bar and media room. In this open and egalitarian environment, the agency grew 30 % in two years after the building completed in 2001. Many future trends are encapsulated in this one scheme: reuse, recycling, reconfigurable design, all in the service of improving knowledge worker performance.

in the coMpany of peersBut of course knowledge workers don’t spend all their working day at corporate HQ. Many prefer to spend large amounts of time off-site in the company of their peers rather than with fellow


133

above. a view of the interior of zaha haDiD’s bMw pLant centraL buiLDinG (2005) in LeipziG, GerMany, a DraMatic fusion of factory anD office typoLoGies. © Werner Huthmacher, Berlin

134

employees. They flock to the semi-public meeting rooms and exchange spaces of business centres, professional associations, media villages or scientific institutions so they can cluster with like-minded professionals sharing the same particular skill or specialism. For office property people, the professional cluster is one to watch, especially as many employers encourage this work trend to reduce pressure on their own space.

Nor do knowledge workers want to hide away from their clients and customers. In an age of user-led innovation, they are increasingly spending their time close to the marketplace. For employers, there is likely to be a growing demand to provide office space that has a more permeable relationship with the city – either by enabling public thoroughfares through office buildings, providing public facilities such as art

galleries or rooftop restaurants or observation platforms, or creating workspace within mixed-use developments, retail schemes or landmark civic buildings.

the city as officeIntegrating the office more effectively into the urban fabric has many motivations. The requirement for knowledge workers to get closer to the action has been hitherto under-developed. However, we can expect that to change in the near future as boundaries blur and offices become more permeable to public space. Urban Splash’s Fort Dunlop scheme in Chapter 3 has some of these forward-thinking characteristics, a landmark site incorporating workspace, public space and a hotel.

The social democratic SAS building outside Stockholm, completed in 1988 by architect Niels

above. fLeXibLe scenery: saLvaGeD parts of the 1926 star Machinery buiLDinG forM a settinG for creative workers in the seDGwick rD aDvertisinG aGency, seattLe (2001). architects: oLson sunDberG kunDiG aLLen. © Marco Prosso


135

Torp, set a trend for the office as city. The SAS scheme was a large, influential project based around a long, solar-lit internal ‘street’. It gave rise to a spate of out-of-town and suburban campuses across Europe that provided all the amenities of a city inside the workplace. Architects even used the language of urban planning – quiet zones, boulevards, gathering spaces, town squares, etc – within a single building. Some of that thinking persists in some of the BCO winners in this book.

However, the upcoming trend is the opposite – the city as office. Companies in future will downsize the footprint of their urban property and make fuller use of city-centre facilities that are publicly available – coffee shops, eateries, city parks, library reading rooms. Why add millions to the cost of your office scheme to build a boardroom used once a month, when you can simply book a private room in a grand restaurant every month for two years in advance? Why worry about the limits of technology when the city is itself covered by a wireless network?

It all adds to the compelling argument for why offices should head back to urban centres – and not be sealed off from metro life like they were in the 20th century. Already in the UK, the majority of office schemes are within urban areas – 23 % of office stock alone can be found within London. The next 20 years will see office developers play a fuller role in the communal life of the city, no longer plonking down bland rectilinear boxes but creating schemes that are more connected to and respectful of urban street patterns and flows.

That doesn’t mean bowing to the heritage lobby. Contemporary design has a vital role to play. BCO winner, 19 George Road in Birmingham (see Chapter 2), has already shown how a bold statement can succeed in a conservation area and we can expect more daring juxtapositions of this type in the future. We can also expect more ‘narrative’ workspaces that project corporate values – branded office experiences that exploit the closeness of customers to sell the company’s wares. In these workspaces, employees will literally be on the marketing frontline. Already brand leaders in various fields are experimenting – from Accenture’s city networked offices to Apple’s showroom-workspaces.

space anD LiGhtWhile the big themes of future office design – such as networked workers’ clubs, knowledge worker interactions, city locations and branded contemporary design – form the outline picture of change, the more detailed strokes are still taking time to come into focus. However, we can still speculate, based on what we have seen already and on what demographic trends tell us.

Take lighting for example: the era of artificially-lit deep office space already looks at an end, as thin ‘finger wings’ in many schemes allow natural light to flood the workspace from both sides and give more workers a window view. As engineer Max Fordham predicted in the Architectural Review (April 2005): ‘The need for natural light will make buildings thinner so that light will penetrate from the windows.’

In this book, the Roche Products head office at Welwyn Garden City, praised as a ‘love affair with light’ by the judges, and the doughnut-shaped GCHQ at Cheltenham, which has 80 % of space close to a window, point the way forward. Before the Industrial Revolution, natural light was the only available option to illuminate the world of work. Rooms in which people worked tended to be tall with large openings to admit light. With the invention of electricity to light interiors, floor plates were allowed to deepen and more ominously ceiling heights were allowed to shrink. That process now needs to be reversed.

It is not surprising that flexible old warehouse buildings should be so popular with occupiers, as their large windows and high ceilings create a wonderful atmosphere. Average ceiling heights of 2.7 m for the showcased schemes are praised in this book, showing how shrunken our vistas have become. Tradition rules that a sensible width/height ratio for offices is 5:1, so a 15 m wide office should have a ceiling height of 3 m, with windows allowing light in at high level. But if there was a 4 m ceiling height, this would allow for a more efficient depth of plan and greater flexibility in the use of a structure.

We might indeed see an era of higher ceilings and better ceiling treatments in offices, as there is a growing belief that knowledge workers need headspace to think, and are intellectually constrained

136

by low suspended ceilings. In this respect, the ‘rolling’ ceiling at BBC Mailbox Birmingham (see Chapter 5) suggests what is possible.

Conversely, average light levels at 400 lux for all the featured BCO projects could well be regarded as too high in the future, as current codes for artificial lighting come under attack from those who regard commercial office space as blandly and uniformly over-lit. Evidence suggests that lower levels of overhead illumination and more dedicated task lighting at desk level could be on the way to make environments less glaringly oppressive and more geared to human need.

This is especially important in the context of an ageing workforce – many knowledge workers are also older workers, simply because they have acquired their knowledge and expertise over the course of a long career. One in two European adults of working age will be over 50 by 2020. Already in Britain there are more pensioners than children under 16. The changing age balance of the workforce brings issues like lighting to the fore, as older workers need better ambient conditions in order to extend their working lives productively. It is not simply that ageing eyes need more light – they need light precisely where it is needed.

hiGher occupancy LeveLsIn tandem with lower general levels of illumination will come higher densities of occupation. The BCO winners from 2002–08 provide 12 m2 per person on average. Future office workers could well be more bunched together. Already the BCO’s Occupier Density Study (May 2009) by Pringle Brandon Consulting / UCL has predicted that organisations will seek to achieve higher density levels in their properties – a trend exacerbated by the current economic downturn. The squeeze is clearly on, reflected in the growing popularity of bench desking systems that support higher densities.

In the quest for greater density, it is hard to argue against the continuing rise of open plan, an approach adopted by so many schemes in this book. Not only is open plan usually more space- and cost-efficient in comparison with cellular accommodation but it also brings the potential benefits of better team-working. That is why so many different UK organisations have sent their employees scurrying into open-plan schemes in recent years – from city workers to civil servants.

But a word of caution here. According to a recent global study Welcoming Workplace (2008), which looked at organisations in the UK, Japan and Australia, many knowledge workers – especially those over 50 – find open plan to be noisy, tiring and distracting and, by itself, not the total solution to the demands of knowledge work. The chief problem is that they are unable to do solo tasks requiring extended periods of uninterrupted thought. In the rush to turn our offices into high-performance nodes for collaboration within the work network, have we forgotten something? Could it be that that knowledge work is not simply about communicating with others but also about deep personal concentration?

Within 20 years, we might well see uniform open plan replaced entirely by a more mixed suite of work settings: dedicated media-rich spaces for collaboration, strictly policed quiet zones for concentration, and also contemplation spaces – areas within the workplace to switch off, relax, rest, recuperate and be alone with your thoughts away from the communal gaze. We might also see more natural and organic bio-materials replacing the dominance of glass and steel to create a more comfortable environment for the workforce.

towarDs Greener offices Of course, light levels, ceiling heights, space plans, density levels and material choices are all factors in how sustainable an office scheme will be. It doesn’t take a clairvoyant to suggest that green design will be a dominant consideration in years to come. As Paul Finch wrote in the Architectural Review (August 2007): ‘Too many office buildings have lasted for too short a period, have been too greedy of energy use and have proved incapable of beneficial adaptation. The mantras of lightweight construction, tightly engineered structure and minimum volumes have failed to produce buildings either flexible or adaptable or long lasting. They have to go, and all their embedded (embodied) energy with them.’

However, some of the emerging technical responses to the green agenda, such as attaching photovoltaic cells, solar panels and wind turbines to office buildings, could lose appeal in favour of simpler space-planning strategies that use space and time more efficiently to guarantee high levels of occupancy. The argument goes that the


137

more intensely we people existing office space, the more efficient the use of energy to heat and light that space and the less the need to build additional space.

Having more people working in your space to maximise energy use is one thing. Getting them there is another. Urban locations are generally good for efficient public transport links – negating the need for car parking spaces – but polluted city centres can be less attractive for natural ventilation systems and UK commuters already pay the highest rail fares in Europe. Having more bike racks at work is a step forward, but only a small one when there are not enough cycle paths outside and your employees are dicing with death every morning.

What is generally agreed is the need for more sustainable planning in cities, and a way of measuring urban density that encourages

development based on a more vibrant mix of living and working in the city. The authors of this chapter have collaborated on a research study at the Royal College of Art, Metricity (2008), proposing alternative metrics for urban density based on such values as intensity and frequency of use, social amenity and economic autonomy.

We need to consider a future in which offices form part of a mixed use, densely populated matrix of land use, giving rise to an urban ambience that people will enjoy and value, and which can change to suit emerging needs. Inside office buildings we also need to consider the different work settings that the varying facets of knowledge work will require – and the environmental controls that will address the well-being of a diverse and demanding workforce. The BCO winners from the first decade of the 21st century give us optimism that the momentum for change can be maintained.

beLow. conteMpLation space: visuaLisation by catherine Greene, enabLinG an aGeinG workforce to reLaX anD recuperate. weLcoMinG workpLace stuDy (2008). © Royal College of Art Helen Hamlyn Centre

References

T. Austin, Building Awareness of Enhanced Workplace Performance. BAEWP project (2007).

F. Becker, The Ecology of the Mobile Worker, Cornell University (1994).

P. Clarke, Metricity: exploring new measures of urban density, Royal College of Art Helen Hamlyn Centre (2008).

T. Davenport, R.J. Thomas and S. Cantrell, The Mysterious Art and Science of Knowledge Worker Performance, MIT Sloan Management Review (2002).

P. Drucker, Knowledge worker productivity: the biggest challenge, California Management Review (1999).

P. Drucker, The next society: a survey of the near future, The Economist (2001).

F. Duffy Workplace Trends: Global Arena conference, Tate Britain (2006).

J. Myerson and P. Ross Space to Work: new office design, Laurence King Publishing (London, 2006).

J. Myerson, ed. Welcoming Workplace: designing office space for an ageing workforce in the knowledge economy, Royal College of Art Helen Hamlyn Centre (2008).

138

Aacademy-style office 1325 Aldermanbury Square 108–11atria new build 8, 28–30, 38, 46, 54, 60, 103 refurbishments 4, 76, 116

BBBC Mailbox 112–15Beaufort Court 88–91Blue Fin Building 28–31bookable desks

see hot-deskingbranding 27, 44breakout space 3, 11, 23, 27, 59, 70, 75‘bridges’ 3, 30, 70, 75

Ccable management 70carbon emissions 6–7carbon-neutral 11, 27, 88circulation

(see also internal streets) avoiding disturbance 30 improved in refurbishments 4, 43, 116 new build 12city as office 134–5cladding 38, 108, 114colour 22, 47, 70–1communal space 22, 30, 116communication, facilitating 11, 15, 20, 67, 75concrete structures 71, 106, 108, 120conference rooms 11, 47, 75conservation, building 4, 34, 92, 96

(see also historic buildings)conservation areas 48, 135context 34–5conversions 76–9, 88–91, 96–9, 124–7cooling systems 11, 60, 71, 90–1, 103, 114cost 12, 46, 57–79courtyards 11, 48, 90, 118cultural change 8, 15, 20, 72, 75cyclists, facilities for 11, 72

Ddaylighting

see natural lightingdefects reduction 38, 43delivery of materials to site 7, 27desk booking

see hot-deskingdisplay spaces 46, 54, 60, 73, 88

Eefficiency ratio 58–9embodied energy 27, 62energy performance 27, 75, 86, 91, 103entrance 3, 6, 38–9, 40, 43eOffice 16–19exhibition areas 46, 54, 60, 73, 88

Ffacade retention 6, 7, 52

(see also refurbishments)facades curtain walling 11 integration with structure 108 layered 46 stepped elevations 36–8, 44, 47fins for shading 31, 4638 Finsbury Square 40–3fire and evacuation strategy 43, 111flexible workspace 2, 11, 12, 20, 112floor loading see structural loadsfloor plates 107 conversions 78, 96 replaced in refurbishments 4–6, 96 subdivision 43 of unequal area 35, 38floor-to-ceiling height 106 conversions 99, 112–13, 114, 127 new build 62, 86–7 refurbishments 43 in relation to depth of plan 135 retained facades 55‘flying carpets’ 4Fort Dunlop 76–9furniture 18, 71 layouts 70

inDeX

139

GooD office DesiGn inDeX

GGCHQ 12–1519 George Road 48–51glazing conversions 78, 94 new build 51, 100, 103, 108Great Glen House 60–3180 Great Portland Street 124–7green roofs 78

Hheat recovery 87, 99Heelis 84–7historic buildings 4, 52, 92, 96, 116, 120HM Treasury 116–19hot-desking 2, 20, 55, 70

(see also ‘plug-in-and-work’)hotel accommodation 79‘hotelling’

see ‘plug-in-and-work’

Iinformal spaces 2, 3, 11, 16, 23, 24, 46, 54–5, 75, 123insulation 84, 99internal streets 3, 30 conversions 96 new build 8, 11, 15, 64, 123ISG Headquarters 24–7

Kknowledge workers 131–2

Llandscaping 11, 30–1, 39learning organisations 132legibility 7, 8Lemsford Mill 92–5light wells 4, 46, 117, 119lighting 67, 99

(see also natural lighting) levels 2, 136local energy generation 88, 92local materials 62location 33–55, 137London Construction Consolidation Centre 7

Mmassing/scale/volume 34, 38, 48material finishes 47, 114materials delivery 7, 27materials sourcing 62, 75, 86mechanical and electrical services 43, 67, 114media facilities 75meeting spaces 24, 46, 55, 72, 112, 118

(see also informal spaces)mezzanines 112–14mixed use 52–4mobile working 2, 20, 23, 132

(see also hot-desking)mock-ups 43, 111multiple tenancies 16–19, 36, 76, 79 potential for 6, 28, 51, 62, 92

Nnatural lighting 135 basement areas 46 conversions 96 new build 11, 12, 47, 60, 67, 86, 103 refurbishments 6, 23, 118natural ventilation 60, 67, 103, 116networked office 131

Ooccupational density 2, 68, 136 refurbishments 6, 23office as city 134–5One Hanover Street 52–5openness 3, 6, 60

(see also visibility)open-plan working 2, 136Oxfam Global Hub 72–5

Ppartnering approach 43, 72pavilions 8–9, 24personal space see private areasplanning grids 107‘plug-in-and-work’ 2, 16, 20prefabrication 8, 11, 38, 75, 106–7, 120PricewaterhouseCoopers 20–3private areas 2, 16, 23, 27, 30, 136professional clusters 132–4public facilities 7, 60, 64, 111, 134

140

Qquality management 38, 43, 111Quartermile One 36–9

Rraised floors 43, 71, 78, 87, 103, 106reception areas 43, 46, 60, 116recycling

(see also conservation, building) building waste 6, 27refreshment facilities 11, 22, 72, 78refurbishments 4–7, 20–3, 40–3, 116–19renewable energy 88, 137retail provision 3, 36, 43, 78, 123Roche Products, New Head Office 8–9roof gardens 6, 30Royal Bank of Scotland Headquarters 120–3

Ssanitary accommodation 27, 43, 94Scottish Gas HQ 68–71security 12, 15serviced offices 16–19setting 33–55, 111shared buildings

see multiple tenanciesshell and core 38, 48, 78, 108Skyways House 96–9smaller developments 3solar design 100solar shading conversions 99 new build 31, 46, 67, 70, 71, 86, 108sourcing materials 62, 75, 86South Cambridgeshire Hall 64–785 Southwark Street 44–7spatial flexibility

see flexible workspacespatial planning 2 efficiency ratio 58–9 new build 16, 27, 30, 54–5, 70 refurbishments 6, 22–3spatial types 11, 59staff amenities 2–3, 3, 11, 15staff logging 27staff satisfaction 23, 64, 68steel framing 86, 106, 114 inserted in conversions 124 replacement 90stepped elevations 36–8, 44, 47

storage space 16, 20, 22, 30, 70‘streets’

see internal streetsstructural loads 107, 123structure 105–27subdivision 43, 62, 76, 79, 96subletting

see multiple tenanciessustainability 62, 67, 75, 81–103, 136

Tteamwork, facilitating 11, 27thermal mass 67, 71, 78thermal storage 88timber boarding 94timber framing 94touch-down facilities 16, 59, 60transparency

see visibilitytransport to work 137

(see also cyclists)typologies 3, 132

UUnilever House 4–7usable space 58–9

ventilation 99 (see also natural ventilation)

mechanical 47 mixed-mode 48, 67, 71, 86views and vistas 2, 34, 60visibility 3, 11, 15, 22

Wwaste recycling 6, 27waveform ceiling 114Welcome Trust Gibbs Building 100–3wireless working

see mobile workingwork culture, changing 8, 15, 20, 72, 75work zones

see zoningworkspace 2–3, 136

(see also spatial planning) flexibility 2, 11, 12, 20, 112 furniture layouts 70

Zzoning 8, 11, 20, 60, 86

DaviD LittLefieLD

DaviD LittLefieLD

GooD office DesiGn

GooD office DesiGn

www.ribapublishing.com

Good Office Design examines the trends and innovations at the cutting edge of office design in the UK today. Selected from British Council for Offices Award winners since 2002 and interpreting empirical analyses by Davis Langdon, the varied and stunningly illustrated case studies presented here demonstrate the latest thinking from the world of workplace design. Taken together, they offer insight and inspiration for architects, developers, clients and anyone interested in getting the very best out of places of work.

Written by the distinguished author and journalist David Littlefield, the text is sharp and authoritative, and complemented by colour photographs, floor plans, elevations and detail drawings. The chapters are organised into salient topics – the Workplace, Location, Structure, Cost and Sustainability – but along the way take account of numerous critical issues such as light levels and staff amenities. A wide-ranging end chapter, written by Jeremy Myerson and Paul Warner, knits together contemporary socio-cultural influences to imagine the future of the office.

Good Office Design is a treasure trove of ideas, shedding light on current best practice in the sector where matching the needs of business with the needs of staff is increasingly important for commercial or organisational success.

DaviD LittLefieLD

GooD office DesiGn

Date post:	16-Jul-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	spymasterng
View:	47 times
Download:	5 times

Good Office Design

Documents