ARE OUR BUILDINGS FIT TO RESIST INCOMMENSURABLE EVOLUTION?

NATALIE PLAGARO COWEE

Competence Centre for Typology & Foresight Planning in Architecture (CCTP)
Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts / Switzerland

natalie.plagaro@hslu.ch
PROF. DR. PETER SCHWEHR
Competence Centre for Typology & Foresight Planning in Architecture (CCTP)
Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts / Switzerland

peter.schwehr@hslu.ch

Abstract
If change is the only constant (Heraclitus of Ephesus), adaptation is a matter of survival.
Today, building in a sustainable way is a necessity. Flexibility is a must for any project
wanting to attain a long life cycle and subsequently, to attain sustainability. In the same way
as doctors not only care for a patients long life but also for life quality, a building should
guarantee high-quality comfort for its users during its life cycle. However, requirements
constantly change due to new society patterns. Predicting future needs is an exercise in
speculation. The more reliable solution is to enhance flexibility in the building system in
order to guarantee adaptability. When the world changes, buildings should change with it.
The relevant factors of flexibility interact closely but their level of importance differs during
the various design and construction stages. The research project includes introductory
concepts, a description of flexibility types, their influencing factors and interaction.
After exploring the interacting factors, an evaluation of flexibility based on typologies allows
a systematic research of building flexibility types (planning, extension, use and modification).
In order to enhance flexibility in construction, an explanation of practical, interdisciplinary
measures are included. To identify flexibility, the key factors (cost, time and effort) which
make a building flexible or not are determined and a method with diagrams which allow
investors, architects and clients to compare the degree and types of flexibility in buildings is
outlined.
Keywords: flexibility, sustainability, adaptable futures, typology, extension flexibility,
internal flexibility, use flexibility, planning flexibility, key factors for flexibility
INTRODUCTION
In our society, flexibility is becoming increasingly important. Flexibility is understood to be
the ability to adapt to continually changing requirements and conditions of the environment.
Flexibility is an indicator of adaptability. As clearly exposed by John Habraken in his
definition of Open Building, the built environment is the product of an ongoing, never ending
design process in which environment transforms part by part
(http://www.habraken.com/john).

Building flexibility and sustainability are closely linked. These key factors are connected by
the appropriateness of the planned or implemented measure which subsequently leads to
property value retention and a reduction in resource use. Both of these aspects are opportune
in times of economic crisis. However, basic systematic principles are needed in order to
identify the different building flexibility types and their influencing factors, to establish
evaluation parameters and to define benchmarking processes.
OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY
The research project Typology of Flexibility in Building Construction attempts to uncover
the complexity of flexibility and its interacting factors. With the help of typological research
and the analysis of existing and projected buildings, the consequences of flexibility for the
planning are examined as well as for the overall building system. The following main
objectives guided the research:
To identify the influencing factors in flexibility and study state of the art.
To record existing building flexibility types and provide guidelines for implementing these
measures to reinforce flexibility.
To identify the key determinants of flexibility and outline a method to evaluate and compare
different degrees of flexibility in a building.
Our procedure was divided into five stages:
1. Exploring flexibility as a must for adaptable futures;
2. Compiling the relevant types of flexibility;
3. Developing guidelines to implement flexibility enhancing adaptable futures ;
4. Outlining a method to evaluate a buildings degree of flexibility;
5. Publication
EXPLORATION
The complexity and interwoven factors of flexibility are examined in our exploration phase.
Flexibility Sustainability
To maintain property value retention and appreciation of a building throughout its life cycle
presents a great challenge. An important feature for a sustainable building is its ability to
adapt to changing requirements. "Sustainable development is development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs"[1]
The implemented measures for flexibility can only be evaluated in the long run; therefore the
dilemma arises in trying to guess the appropriate amount and nature of the measures to be
implemented.
Flexibility - Dilemma, Scenario and Forecast
As long as the building meets the needs of its users, no change is needed. As soon as users
needs change, the need to adapt the building arises. The aim is to adapt using the least
amount of effort and resources possible. During the planning phase, different scenarios
should be studied to forecast space, construction, needs and their consequences. The success

probability of each scenario should be evaluated. Planning teams are confronted with the
following questions: What will happen in the future? How will our clients live and work in
ten or twenty years time? What are the consequences of this for current planning projects?
Which measures are appropriate?

Fig.1: Dilemma of determining the appropriate measures for flexibility

Flexibility at different times for different people
For the individuals involved, different flexibility types are relevant at different times and in
different degrees. Throughout the planning, construction and operation phases of the
building, different objectives and perspectives will create a conflict of interest when deciding
when, how and what degree of flexibility will be required. Although flexibility is required
during the whole process, the priorities and the appropriateness of each measure have to be
established.

Fig.2: Flexibility is relevant during the entire life cycle of a building, but at different times
for different people.
Flexibility Harmonisation
The assumption that a building system results from the combination of all its embedded parts
is no longer valid. Rearrangement of the building parts in a functional, complex system with

simple connections to neighbouring elements offers more opportunities to achieve a targeted

building performance.
The level of prefabrication of modular retrofit systems allows a quicker construction and an
easier replacement of the parts. Consideration of such systems and the optimisation of the
operation process and its relevance for the building cycle and users cycle, allow a
harmonised building system which can react in a flexible way during the whole life cycle of
the building. Some building parts age more quickly than others; these differences hinder
coordinated maintenance and a damaged building part can lead to faults in the whole building
system.
Modern service models, such as contracting [2], provide suitable solutions which not only
consider construction but also maintenance. Contracting is a new form of project organisation
and services for the finance, construction and operation of buildings. Flexible contractual
relationships between building system providers (contractors) and the owners/users
(contractees) lead to increased building performance. Contracting allows owners/users to
obtain the appropriate service for that specific time. The building is considered to be cyclebased and the individual parts are temporarily commissioned to companies for its
construction, maintenance and refurbishment.
FINDINGS
Typology of Flexibility in Architecture

Based on concepts described by the Fraunhofer Institute [3] and

supported by typology-based building evaluation [4], four main
building flexibility types were identified [5].
Extension Flexibility refers to extension and retrofit in architecture. This involves analysing
and classifying the positioning and structural properties of extensions and retrofit systems.
Internal Flexibility defines the adaptability of a building: In which degree are modifications
within an existing structure possible. What are the risks and time requirements. How does the
extension influence the building.
Use Flexibility analyses building flexibility in relation to how it reacts to change of use.
Concepts concerning the reversibility of changes and the future mono or multi-use are also
considered.
Planning Flexibility refers to characteristics which determine whether and how a building
reacts during the entire planning and construction phase. It also investigates which measures
can be implemented during the planning phase in order to facilitate flexibility during a
building's operation time, with the least possible cost and effort.

Fig. 3: Extract of a typological overview of flexibility in buildings

Measures to enhance flexibility

The new role of the design project is to guarantee future flexibility and sustainability.
If requirements on a building change, the primary and secondary structures often need to be
modified. As underlined in the guidelines for Open Building Implementation CIP W 104 [6],
designing is a process with multiple participants also including different kinds of
professional. Flexible heating, cooling, ventilation and electrical system concepts facilitate
the task. Inflexible solutions result in difficult refurbishment operations. Intelligent design
includes passive and active measures to enhance flexible, sustainable construction.
Measures Structure
1.The structural walls are made of steel, or concrete and steel / 2.A regular structural grid
allows a higher variability of space / 3.Structural elements are foreseen for future additional
loads.

Measures Faade
4.The sun protection elements are in line with the facade modules / 5.Power and
telecommunication cables are in line with the facade modules / 6.Connections points are
integrated in the facade elements / 7.The facade elements are independent from adjacent
elements.

Measures - Mechanical Engineering

8.The dimension of ducts include reserves for future needs. Certain devices or connections
for future services are installed but not yet activated / 9.Embedded elements free space for
easier modifications / 10.A harmonised initial design (passive intelligent architecture design)
reduces the needs of mechanical engineering making changes easier.

Measures Fire protection

11.The number of staircases and emergency exits are calculated for a scenario of maximal
future capacity / 12.Escape routes are designed for a multi-scenario use / 13.Fire
compartments have the same fire-resistance rating as the structural elements / 14.Structural
elements are calculated for the highest possible structural load, fire load and future number of
floors related to possible uses.

Determining factors for flexibility

The appropriateness of Flexibility
As Aristotle explains in his Nichomachean Ethics [7], ethical virtue falls between two vices;
one because of excess, the other one because of deficiency. This is easily understood if we
look at the following example: Braveness, in itself a virtue, falls between two extremes;
cowardice (deficiency) and fearlessness (excess).
With this in mind, we arrive at the following conclusion: If the flexibility is considered
appropriate, unnecessary flexibility is excess, i.e. unnecessary investment which will never be
useful. Deficiency results in a rigid building structure which cannot be adapted.

In the long run, excess (unnecessary flexibility) is more advantageous than deficiency (rigid
structure), but in contradiction to the cost factor. The question arises: If a substantial amount
of resources have been (mis)used to implement the flexible measures, is excess flexibility
more sustainable than its deficiency?

Fig.4: Finding the appropriate flexibility (avoiding excess and deficiency) is a key issue for
sustainable architecture.
The following method has been outlined to evaluate flexibility and facilitate comparison to
other buildings in relation to flexibility degrees and types.
Firstly, the three key determinants of flexibility have been identified:
Effort: How much effort is necessary to adapt the building?
Cost: How high is the required investment in order to achieve the desired result?
Time: How much time is needed to make the changes?
These determinants influence each building to a different degree. It may be that enough
financial resources are available, but time is not. On the other hand, the effort may be
minimal but financial resources limited... There is a multitude of possible scenarios, since
each determinant is a combination of other key factors which influence flexibility.
These factors are:
Effort:
Potential for additional surface (PS):
Relation between the surface which can be gained and the existing surface.
Extensibility Index (E):
Amount of surface which can be gained without needing additional infrastructure.
Time:
Disturbance time index (DT):
Relation between the surface being modified or extended and the time in which the
building is out of use.
Refurbishment performance (RP)
How quickly a building can be refurbished. It indicates the amount of surface which
can be modified or extended per hour.

Cost:
Extension and Refurbishment cost index (RC)
This defines the relation between cost of the extension and refurbishment in relation
to the standard cost of a new construction.

Example of a flexible building

Example of a non flexible building

Fig.5: Key determinants for the evaluation of flexibility

When all factors are represented in relation to each other in the diagram, the flexibility degree
of each individual building becomes apparent.

A flexible building with a

high refurbishment cost.

A flexible building which

requires a long time for the
refurbishment works.

A flexible building which

requires a large effort to be
adapted, although the amount
of surface which can be
gained is large

Fig 6: Diagrams indicating how buildings incorporate different types of flexibility in different
degrees

CONCLUSION
In the context of sustainable construction Flexibility will be the central issue to succeed in
offering adaptable futures which allow value retention and appreciation, and subsequently
lead to a longer building life cycle and a reduction of use of resources. So far, a series of
measures for sustainability have been proposed [8], e.g. to exploit space flexibility or to
provide easy, quick and cheap refurbishment strategies [9].
However, a sustainable strategy which shows the measures in an overall context and their
hierarchical criteria to evaluate flexibility does not exist. A prerequisite for developing such a
strategy is an open-minded spirit with a holistic and interdisciplinary understanding of the
problematic nature of flexibility in buildings.
This understanding affects all three aspects of sustainability and is strongly linked to
flexibility.
Life quality mature user
Social developments lead to a change in living habits. For example, only 23% of all rented
accommodation in Switzerland is occupied by a couple with a child or children [10]. The
percentage of elderly and single users is increasing. Demographic change calls for constant
reviewing of building design projects which form the basis for future construction.
Resources upcycling instead of downcycling
The operation and construction of a building uses 45% of the gross energy consumption in
Switzerland [11]. Replacement, renovation or refurbishment optimises material and energy
use in a building [12]. However, susceptibility to failure increases as technology integration
increases. This means that building systems and components have to be easily replaceable.
New services such as the cyclical system model [2] could provide a viable solution.
Adding value Effectiveness instead of Efficiency
Quality and sustainability awareness stands often in contradiction to the all-overriding cost
pressure. An adaptable building is a high-quality product. It seems inappropriate to focus
exclusively on efficiency (cost). If we consider value retention and profitability as an
indicator of sustainability, effectiveness not efficiency is the more appropriate scale to judge
additional value.
A room should not be fixed, should not create a static mood, but should lend itself to change
so that its occupants may play upon it, as they would upon a piano [13].

LITERATURE
[1] Hauff, Volker, Unsere gemeinsame Zukunft, Greven:Eggenkamp.
[2] Lamster, J., Contracting im Hochbau Einfhrung in das zyklische Systemmodell,
interact Verlag, Luzern, 2008.
[3] Fraunhofer-Institut fr sichere Informationstechnologie, Forschungsprojekt FlexHaus,
2002.
[4] Fischer, R. Schwehr, P., Typenbasierte Evaluation. Chancen fr den ganzheitlichen
Wohnungsbau, contribution to 15th Swiss Status-Seminar Energie und Umweltforschung im
Bauwesen, Zrich 2008.
[5] Plagaro, N. Schwehr, P., Die Typologie der Flexibilitt im Hochbau, interact Verlag,
Luzern 2008.
[6] Kendall, S., Education for an Open Architecture, Proceedings of the Joint Conference of
CIP W104 and W110, Ball State University College of Architecture and Planning, Muncie
Indiana 2008.
[7] Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics, (Translation Roger Crisp), Cambridge University
Press, Oxford 2000.
[8] Schweizerischer Ingenieur und Architektenverein SIA, Nachhaltiges Bauen Hochbau. Ergnzungen zum Leistungsmodell SIA 112. - Empfehlung SIA 112/1, SIA,
Zrich 2004.
[9] Schwehr, P. Fischer, R. u.a., Haus der Zukunft Module fr ein nachwachsendes System.
Hochschule Luzern, MehrwertHolz, Luzern 2006.
[10] Bundesamt fr Statistik, BFS, Eidgenssische Volkszhlung 2000 - Gebude
Wohnungen und Wohnverhltnisse, Tab.Nr.10.103-00, S.98, BFS, Neuchtel 2004.
[11] Koschenz, M. Pfeiffer A., Potenzial Wohngebude. Energie und
Gebudetechnik fr die 2000-Watt-Gesellschaft, Faktor Verlag, Zrich 2005.
[12]. Fischer, R., Schwehr, P., Typenbasierte Evaluation. Chancen fr den ganzheitlichen
Wohnungsbau, contribution 15th Swiss Status-Seminar Energie und Umweltforschung im
Bauwesen., Zrich 2008.
[13] Krausse, J., Lichtenstein, C., Your private sky, R. Buckminster Fuller. Design als Kunst
einer Wissenschaft, Lars Mller, Zrich 2000.