25.07.2013 Views

EDITT Tower.pdf - Alive2green

EDITT Tower.pdf - Alive2green

EDITT Tower.pdf - Alive2green

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>EDITT</strong> <strong>Tower</strong><br />

Volume: 3 Issue 9 | Saturday, 16 May 2009 |<br />

| 0 comment<br />

Architect:<br />

T.R. Hamzah & Yeang Sdn Bhd<br />

8 Jalan 1, Taman Sri Ukay, 68000 Ampang<br />

Selangor Tel: 03-4571966 Fax: 603-4561005/603-4569330<br />

1. Project Name: <strong>EDITT</strong> <strong>Tower</strong><br />

2. Client: URA (Urban Redevelopment Authority) Singapore (Sponsor)<br />

<strong>EDITT</strong> (Ecological Design in The Tropics) (Sponsor)<br />

NUS (National University of Singapore) (Sponsor)<br />

3. Location: Junction of Waterloo Road and Victoria Street, Singapore<br />

4. Nos. of Storeys: 26 Storeys<br />

5. Date Start: 1998 (Competition: design)<br />

Completion Date: Pending<br />

6. Areas:<br />

Total gross area: 6,033 sq.m.<br />

Total nett area: 3,567.16 sq.m.<br />

Total area of plantation: 3,841.34 sq.m.<br />

7.Site Area: 838 sq.m.<br />

8.Plot Ratio: 7.1<br />

9.Design Features: Our design sets out to demonstrate an ecological approach to tower design. Besides<br />

meeting the Client’s program requirements for an exposition tower (i.e. for retail, exhibition spaces,<br />

auditorium uses, etc.), the design has the following ecological responses:<br />

• Response to the Site’s Ecology<br />

Ecological design starts with looking at the site’s ecosystem and its properties. Any design that do not take<br />

these aspects of the site into consideration is essentially not an ecological approach.<br />

A useful start is to look at the site in relation to an “hierachy of ecosystems” (see below):<br />

Ecosystem Hierarchy<br />

Site Data<br />

Requirements<br />

Design Strategy<br />

• Ecologically-Mature<br />

• Ecologically-Immature<br />

• Ecologically-Simplified<br />

• Mixed-Artificial


• Monoculture<br />

• Zeroculture<br />

Complete Ecosystem<br />

Analysis and Mapping<br />

Complete Ecosystem<br />

Analysis and Mapping<br />

Complete Ecosystem<br />

Analysis and Mapping<br />

Partial Ecosystem<br />

Analysis and Mapping<br />

Partial Ecosystem<br />

Analysis and Mapping<br />

Mapping of remaining<br />

ecosystem components<br />

(e.g. hydrology, remaining<br />

trees, etc.)<br />

• Preserve<br />

• Conserve<br />

• Develop only on no-impact<br />

areas<br />

• Preserve<br />

• Conserve<br />

• Develop only on leastimpact<br />

areas<br />

• Preserve<br />

• Conserve<br />

• Increase biodiversity<br />

• Develop only on lowimpact<br />

areas<br />

• Increase biodiversity<br />

• Develop on low-impact<br />

areas<br />

• Increase biodiversity<br />

• Develop in areas of nonproductive<br />

potential<br />

• Rehabilitate ecosystem<br />

• Increase biodiversity and<br />

organic mass<br />

• Rehabilitate ecosystem<br />

© Ken Yeang 1998<br />

From this hierachy, it is evident that this site is an urban “zero culture” site and is essentially a devastated<br />

ecosystem with little of its original top soil, flora and fauna remaining. The design approach is to rehabilitate<br />

this with organic mass to enable ecological succession to take place and to balance the existent


inorganicness of this urban site.<br />

The unique design feature of this scheme is in the well-planted facades and vegetated-terraces which have<br />

green areas that approximate the gross useable-areas (i.e. GFA @ 6,033 sq.m.) of the rest of the building.<br />

The vegetation areas are designed to be continous and to ramp upwards from the ground plane to the<br />

uppermost floor in a linked landscaped ramp. The design’s planted-areas constitute 3,841 sq.m. which is<br />

@ ratio 1 : 0.5 of gross useable area to gross vegetated area.<br />

Design began with the mapping in detail of the indigenous planting within a 1 mile radius vicinity of the site<br />

to identify species to be incorporated in the design that will not compete with the indigenous species of the<br />

locality.<br />

• Place Making<br />

A crucial urban design issue in skyscraper design is poor spatial continuity between street-level activities<br />

with those spaces at the upper-floors of the city’s high-rise towers. This is due to the physical<br />

compartmentation of floors (inherent in the skyscraper typology).<br />

Urban design involves ‘place making’. In creating ‘vertical places’, our design brings ‘street-life’ to the<br />

building’s upper-parts through wide landscaped-ramps upwards from street-level. Ramps are lined with<br />

street-activities: (stalls, shops, cafes, performance spaces, viewing-decks etc.), up to first 6 floors.<br />

Ramps create a continuous spatial flow from public to less public, as a “vertical extension of the street”<br />

thereby eliminating the problematic stratification of floors inherent in all tall buildings typology. High-level<br />

bridge-linkages are added to connect to neighbouring buildings for greater urban-connectivity.<br />

• Views to the Surrounding<br />

A “views analysis” was carried out to enable upper-floor design to have views of surroundings.<br />

• “Loose-Fit”<br />

Generally, buildings have life-spans of 100-150 years and change usages over-time. The design here is<br />

‘loose-fit’ to facilitate future reuse. Features include:<br />

• ‘Skycourts’ (i.e. convertable for future office use)<br />

• Removable partitions<br />

• Removable floors<br />

• “Mechanical-jointing” of materials (as against to chemical bonding) to facilitate future recovery.<br />

• Flexible design (e.g. initially a multi-use expo building, its future use may be offices [nett lettable area<br />

of 9,288 sq.m. @ 75% efficiency] or apartments).<br />

A set of plans to show conversion to office use has also been prepared @ 75% net to gross floor efficiency.<br />

• Vertical Landscaping<br />

Vegetation from street-level spirals upwards as a continuous ecosystem facilitating species migration,<br />

engendering a more diverse ecosystem and greater ecosystem stability and to facilitate ambient cooling of<br />

the facades.<br />

As mentioned earlier, species are selected not to compete with others within surroundings. “Vegetation<br />

percentages” represent of area’s landscape character.<br />

Factors influencing planting selection are:<br />

• Planting depths<br />

• Light Quality<br />

• Maintenance level<br />

• Access<br />

• Orientation<br />

• Wind-walls / solar-panels / special glazing


Vegetation placements within the tower at different heights respond to the microclimates of each individual<br />

sub-zone at the tower.<br />

• Water-Recycling<br />

Water self-sufficiency (by rainwater-collection and grey-water reuse) in the tower is at 55.1%:<br />

• Total gross area = 6,032 sq.m.<br />

• Water requirements = 20 gallons/day/10 sq.m. gross area + 10% wastage<br />

• Total requirements = (6,032 ÷ 10 x 110%) x 20 gallons<br />

= 13,270 per gallon/day<br />

= 60.3 m3 per day x 365 days<br />

= 22,019 m3 annum<br />

• Total rain-fall catchment area = 518 sq.m.<br />

• Singapore average rainfall / annum = 23.439m<br />

• Total rain-water collection = 12,141 m3 per annum<br />

• Water self sufficiency = 12,141 ÷ 22,019 x 100 = 55.1%<br />

• Water-Purification<br />

Rainwater-collection system comprises of ‘roof-catchment-pan’ and layers of ‘scallops’ located at the<br />

building’s facade to catch rain-water running off its sides. Water flows through gravity-fed waterpurification<br />

system, using soil-bed filters.<br />

The filtered-water accumulates in a basement storage-tank, and is pumped to the upper-level storage-tank<br />

for reuse (e.g. for plant-irrigation and toilet-flushing). Mains water is only here for potable needs.<br />

• Sewage Recycling<br />

The design optimises recovery and recycling of sewage waste:<br />

• Estimated sludge = 230/P.E. / day @ 3. P.E. per 100 m2 GFA.<br />

• Building GFA = 6,032 sq.m.<br />

• Sewage sludge collected/day = 230 litres x 6,032 ÷ 100 x 3<br />

= 41,620.8 litres or 41.62 m3/day<br />

= 15,190 m3/ annum<br />

Sewage is treated to create compost (fertilizer for use elsewhere) or bio-gas fuel.<br />

• Solar Energy Use<br />

Photovoltaics are used for greater energy self-sufficiency.<br />

• Average photovoltaic-cell energy output = c. 0.17 kWh sq.m.<br />

• Total sunlight hours per day = 12 hours<br />

• Daily energy output = 0.17 x 12 =2.04 kWh sq.m.<br />

• Area of photovoltaic = 855.25 sq.m.<br />

Total daily energy output = 1,744 kWh<br />

• Estimated energy consumption @ 0.097 kWh /sq.m. enclosed<br />

& 0.038 kWh/sq.m. unenclosed = (0.097 x 3,567 sq.m.) + (0.038 x 2,465 sq.m.)<br />

= 439.7 kWh<br />

• Estimated daily energy consumption = 10 hrs x 439.7<br />

= 4,397 kWh<br />

• % self sufficiency is 1,744 ÷ 4,397 = 39.7%<br />

• Building Materials Recycling and Reuse<br />

Design has an in-built waste-management system. Recycleable materials are separated at source by<br />

hoppers at every floor. These drop-down to the basement waste-separators, then taken elsewhere by<br />

recycling garbage collection for recycling.<br />

Expected recycleable waste collected /annum:<br />

• paper / cardboard = 41.5 metric-tonnes


• glass / ceramic = 7.0 metric-tonnes<br />

• metal = 10.4 metric-tonnes<br />

The building is designed to have mechanically-joined connections of materials and its structural connections<br />

to facilitate future reuse and recycling at the end of building’s useful-life.<br />

• Natural Ventilation & “Mixed-Mode” Servicing<br />

The options for the M&E servicing modes for any ecological building are:<br />

• passive mode<br />

• background (mixed) mode<br />

• full (specialised) mode<br />

The design here optimises on the locality’s bioclimatic responses using ‘mixed mode” M&E servicing.<br />

Mechanical air-conditioning and artificial-lighting systems are reduced. Ceiling-fans with de-misters are<br />

used for low-energy comfort-cooling.<br />

Wind is used to create internal conditions of comfort by “wind-walls” that a placed parallel to the prevailing<br />

wind to direct wind to internal spaces and skycourts for comfort cooling.<br />

• Embodied Energy and CO2<br />

Embodied-energy studies of the building are useful to indicate the building’s environmental impacts.<br />

Subsequently, estimates of CO2 emissions arising from building materials production may be made.<br />

Design’s embodied-energy (prepared by our expert) is:<br />

Element<br />

GJ/sq.m. GFA<br />

Structural System<br />

• Excavation<br />

• Steel and concrete<br />

• Formwork<br />

764.0<br />

43,850.2<br />

3,113.10<br />

Floor<br />

• Steel<br />

• Timber & other material<br />

• Staircases & railings<br />

• Floor finishes<br />

13,013.10<br />

22,648.00<br />

1,752.50<br />

7,793.00<br />

External wall<br />

• Curtain wall and bricks<br />

• Aluminium cladding<br />

• Solar panels<br />

5,550.30<br />

2,864.50<br />

12,435.70<br />

External wall and partitions<br />

• Bricks<br />

• Other materials<br />

5,482.20


6,078.30<br />

Roof and ceilings<br />

• Concrete & membrane<br />

• Water catchment and<br />

drainage<br />

• Ceiling<br />

5,439.00<br />

8,439.80<br />

1,390.70<br />

Fittings<br />

• Doors<br />

• Sanitary fittings<br />

1,736.60<br />

490.20<br />

Total:<br />

142,841.20<br />

Energy sources affect CO2 emissions associated with embodied-energy. If the majority of energy sources is<br />

petroleum-related (with some gas and electricity), 80 kg CO2 per GJ of energy averages. The building here<br />

is associated with emissions of c. 11.5 thousand tonnes CO2.<br />

Embodied-energy ratio to gross floor area (GJ/m2 GFA) is generally between 6 and 8, but may be more<br />

depending on methodology used. The design’s ratio is at the high end (@ 14.2 GJ/m2 GFA) but differs<br />

from others since using solar-panels having high embodied-energy will significantly offset operationalenergy<br />

saved over building-life. High embodied-energy materials used (e.g. aluminium and steel) are<br />

however easily recycleable and therefore halving their embodied-energy when reused. Replacing concrete<br />

floors with composite timber-floors casettes will reduce embodied-energy by c. 10,000 GJ.<br />

10. Project Team:<br />

Principal-in-charge - Dr. Ken Yeang<br />

Project Architect - Andy Chong<br />

Design Architects - Ridzwa Fathan (PIC)<br />

Claudia Ritsch<br />

Azman Che Mat<br />

Design Team - Azuddin Sulaiman<br />

See Ee Ling<br />

Drafting - Sze Tho Kok Cheng<br />

C&S and M&E Engineers - Battle McCarthy (London)<br />

Embodied Energy Expert - Bill Lawson (University of Sydney)<br />

Swan & Maclaren Architects - James Leong (Architect-of-Record)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!