How will office buildings adapt to more cycling?

Louis Sullivan's Wainwright Building

Louis Sullivan’s Wainwright Building

First a little extraneous background to the history of the office building as a type. We could go back to the Greek stoa or Roman basilica, but that would be stupid. The earliest key interval of significance to the evolution of the office building as we know it today, was the rebuilding of Chicago in the wake of the great fire of 1871. The steel frame sheaved in brick to protect the structure from fire, Elisha Otis’s plummet-proof elevator from twenty years before the great fire, and Louis Sullivan’s revelation that levels of the same function should receive the same façade treatment (expressed as “form follows function”), coalesced in this era.

 

worlds_tallest_building_c031110

Cores

 

By the 1930s, the office building had become synonymous with a competition to build the world’s tallest building. A second race for the sky occurred in the 1970s. Height is about power, not function, and brings some functional nightmares, that impact most on lift core design; logistically, it is almost impossible to fill the upper levels of a tower with office workers just before 9am, and empty it again at 5pm, without causing delays. An even greater design challenge for lift core designers is evacuating people in the event of a fire. The thousands of people who died in 9/11 would say this is one area where architects have failed dismally.

 

The logistics of getting workers into the sky

The logistics of getting workers into the sky

 

Lift Cores: variations on a theme

Lift Cores: variations on a theme

On the positive side, the central core office building (with fire stairs, lifts and services clustered in a structural tube), naturally resists wind loads. Visitors arrive on each floor at one central point, making it easy to position reception desks. Putting services and most of the loadbearing at the center of the building leaves the perimeter free for offices with views in every direction. These advantages have made the central core office a favoured type among corporate tenants seeking a high-profile address.

3653616521_c486c8d5b2_o

In recent decades though, we have seen the contest to build the world’s tallest office building shift from New York and Chicago, to emerging cities like Shanghai and Dubai. Countries that once led the race to the sky, have turned their back on this game, seeing it as synonymous with greed and consumption. Today, it is the 6 Green Star, or Platinum LEED certified building, that lends a corporation a new kind of prestige. Corporations are less concerned with symbols of corporate might, than symbols of social and environmental stewardship. Air-conditioned boardrooms looking down on a city have fallen from favour. What is in vogue is the naturally ventilated hot-desking space, with foosball and lounges, close to street life and cafes.

CH2 Melbourne, 6 Green Star

CH2 Melbourne, 6 Green Star

CH2-Melbourne

The perfume bottle tower required a building maintenance unit (BMU) for regular cleaning of an air-tight cocoon made of glass. Now that buildings aren’t reaching the sky (and all those fast air streams), more windows can be opened and cleaned from the inside, or accessed via exterior shade structures that double as catwalks. The new office building is not an energy hungry glass bubble, but a manually adjustable shelter, filled with more of the sounds and air of the street. It is less like a car, and more like a bike. Like a bike it is frugal, to the point of demanding users’ attention and strength.

That is not to say everything about the office building is changing. Premium rent is still paid for views and a landmark address. High paying tenants still prefer an open plan with no columns. Real estate agents still refer to a sweet spot in the rental market for 1000sqm floor plates. And although tenants are prepared to accept a slight fluctuation in lighting levels and temperature, they cannot expect productivity from uncomfortable workers sitting in darkness.

The office building is a type that doesn’t change wildly, but that adapts to the times. Changing attitudes toward power have stalled the quest for height for height’s sake. We’ve stopped controlling the climate using enormous condensers, and moved to tempering the climate with shutters and louvres. The open plan is not for the surveillance of workers, but collaboration between managers and staff who are supposedly on the same level. Cubical sizes have shrunken, while common spaces have grown, reflecting the impact of computers on office work. Basement parking is giving way to bike storage and locker rooms, reflecting changes in the way people move through the city.

Tomorrow's London

Tomorrow’s London

The cultural ascension of bicycle transport represents the next big period of adaptation in office design. London’s mayor Boris Johnson has announced an overhaul of that city’s streets to give bicycles dominance. New York and Sydney are phasing in extensive networks of cycle-tracks. As always, these cities are like compasses for the smaller cities to look to for examples.

Cities change. In the past century cities have added metros, removed horses, then added cars. This century they are removing cars to make way for bikes. With each change in transport, buildings change too—just look at the size of basement car parks beneath office towers, or the reuse of stables. How will the forthcoming reduction in driving, and increase in cycling, cause the sustainable mid-rise office building to change?  A 15000sqm office building could have as many as 3000 workers arriving by bike, when cycling becomes the dominant mode. Engineers could be called on for ways to deal with bike storage as though it were a problem. It is the duty of architects to intervene, and show that bike storage can be treated in positive ways, that bring delight.

Two months from now, I hope to be posting some of my students’ responses to this major new challenge. That gives imaginative readers plenty of time to share their suggestions. If you have followed this blog for a while, or read my book, you will know I’ve speculated on various developments I can foresee. Right now though, I’m more interested in what you and my students come up with.

About Steven

I'm on a mission to put cycling on the agendas of architects, urban designers and fellow academics, who see the potential for bicycles to change cities and buildings. My PhD is in architectural history and my interdisciplinary research spans art theory, philosophy and cultural studies. I teach architectural history and theory and design studio at The University of Tasmania, Australia, and formerly worked as an architect designing large public housing projects in Singapore. My favourite bikes are a titanium racing bike I use for racing, a Velorbis retro commuter for riding to cafes and work, a single speed ultra light Brompton that I take with me when I travel on planes, a 29er hard tail mountain bike that I get lost on in remote places, an old track bike that scares me, a 1984 Colnago Super with all original campagnolo components that is plugged into a virtual realm that I train in, and a Dutch-made Bakfiets, that could easily replace half of the bikes I just mentioned.
This entry was posted in blog. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to How will office buildings adapt to more cycling?

  1. Ria Glas says:

    Offices would have showers. Lockers for clothes where they can dry if people com from far away (> 15 -20 km). Places to plug in your e-bike. A wardrobe where you can dry your wet raincoat withou wetting everybody else’s clothes. A good lunch is needed as well. good place to park your bike safely, i.e. in the basement.
    In the building you walk.
    Utrecht is building an office right now. 2.200 bikeplaces, 270 car parking places, 2500 workplaces. http://www.cu2030.nl/page/stadskantoor
    right on top of the trainstation and busterminal. Question: how many employees are expected to come by public transport? Why build the office there?

    • Steven says:

      Hi Ria, great insights and precedent, thanks. Regional Australian cities are too sprawling, currently, to support non-timetabled public transport. Also, regional town centres are overran by cars, and look set to remain that way for some time. Our best option is to make a fresh start on industrial land with little development pressure right now, and give it a unique and desirable character in the eyes of that portion of society who care about health and sustainability etc.. Does that answer your question about siting? Many smaller cities still have their dockhands available to so something untried.
      I saw the beginnings of the Utrecht station project under construction last year. I wonder if it will be absorbing any of the zillions of parked bikes in the area?

Leave a Reply