This article was downloaded by: [University of Windsor]On: 20 November 2014, At: 21:27Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Building Research & InformationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbri20

Research information: Open BuildingSystems: a case studyPublished online: 14 Oct 2010.

To cite this article: (1998) Research information: Open Building Systems: a case study, BuildingResearch & Information, 26:5, 311-318, DOI: 10.1080/096132198369797

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/096132198369797

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, ouragents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to theaccuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions andviews expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are notthe views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not berelied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylorand Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply,or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Research information

Open Building Systems: a case study

Karel Dekker from TNO Building & Construction Research in The Netherlands explains the OpenBuilding approach for design and construction as the principles of ordering and combining subsystems tocreate variety and ef�ciency. The disentanglement of subsystems allows for alteration over time and higherpossibility of user choice. The case study of a post-war housing estate in the Netherlands demonstrateshow Open Building strategies combined with a �exible rent policy have been used to improve quality onthree scales (neighbourhood, building and dwelling interior) and to provide residents with choices abouttheir living conditions.

Keywords: open building, consumer orientation, innovation, renovation, building systems

What is Open Building?

Open Building is a way of building in whichsubsystems making the whole are given optimalfreedom for design layout and installation. Itbrings together many strands of development inarchitecture, construction and the industrial pro-duction of building parts which have been takingplace over the past 30 years. These includesystems approaches to building, modular anddimensional coordination, user oriented designand construction, computational support of de-sign, construction and manufacturing, industriali-zation in the building industry, rehabilitation ofexisting buildings, and the development of prin-ciples of sustainable environments.

In respect to these many strands of developmentin the building industry, those who practise onOpen Building principles, explicitly or not ­whether architects, contractors, product manufac-turers, regulators, developers, suppliers, etc. ­are practising at the leading edge. Around theworld, many thousands of residential unitsconstructed on open building principles havebeen built. Other thousands of nonresidentialbuildings have also been built in an openbuilding-like way. New building systems andproducts, software and procedures are beingdeveloped.

The basic idea in Open Building is to �ndprinciples of ordering and combining subsystems

by which interference between subsystems isminimized. This has two important results. First,it allows for ef�cient building. Second, it makespossible the redesign of a subsystem or itsreplacement with another performing the samefunction without having to redesign the wholebuilding. This is because the ordering principles,by minimizing interference and clearly statinginterfaces between subsystems, should precludethe reverberation of one system’s change throughthe whole form.

This principle applies in many ways. At the levelof the urban tissue, the stability of the urbaninfrastructure and the basic form of urbanneighbourhoods is possible because the indivi-dual buildings in them can change withoutforcing the tissue to change. This enables bothstability and transformation. At the level ofbuildings, parts of buildings relating to the localbuilding style and regulations remain constantwhile the building interiors change at a morerapid cycle. Also, within a given subsystem suchas the heating and cooling equipment, a certainassembly will be replaced without requiring thereplacement of the entire system.

Those who study Open Building advocate thedisentanglement of the subsystems in buildingsto enable such examples as those given to benormal. This has come to be important in partbecause of a formal recognition of the complex-ities of buildings resulting from certain contem-

0961–3218 # 1998 E & FN Spon

Bu i l d i n g Re s e a r c h & In f o r m a t i o n (1998) 26(5), 311–318 311

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 2

1:27

20

Nov

embe

r 20

14

porary developments, and the widespread desirefor buildings with better behaviour.

One of these developments is the increasednumber of participants in the built environmentgame, each having a stake in shaping thebuildings and cities we live in. Another relateddevelopment is an increased awareness of theimportance of recognizing both the individualand the group, a matter of major signi�canceespecially in large projects where it is easy toforget the �ne-grained scale, the individual user,and the need for gradual improvements of theparts.

Another important factor is the increased ten-dency for buildings to undergo signi�cant inter-ior alteration to remain useful, within 10­ 15years of their construction or even sooner.Another is the gradual emergence of supplysystems in buildings, in increasing numbers andcomplexity, a reality which effects buildings ofall use types but which is still not suf�cientlyunderstood.

As a means of controlling this complexity forboth ef�ciency and to suit the preferences of thevarious parties, we see the gradual emergence ofa distinct in�ll or �t-out level in buildings. Thislevel has in it the equipment, non-loadbearingpartitions, and a substantial part of the pipes,cables, and ducts serving them. These parts aretaken out of the building level and given theirown, independent deployment.

The development of a �t-out or in�ll level restoresthe building level as the essential provision ofspace and shelter. Along with it go knowledgeand tools for designing and building. This in turnallows the in�ll level to cater more directly to thespeci�c needs and preferences of inhabitation. Atthe in�ll level, we �nd other tools for designingand constructing. As such, this solution is notpurely technical but has to do with the control ofparts by a variety of agents, and the clari�cationof techniques and knowledge appropriate for eachlevel and their coordination in living buildingsand neighbourhoods.

Where is Open Building happening?

Hundreds of residential projects containing thou-sands of dwelling units, based on these principles

in an explicit way, have been built in Europe,Japan and China.

In the United States and Canada, the basic ideaof operating on two levels has been conventionalfor at least two decades in the of�ce and retailsectors. There is much room for improvement,and recent developments in both technical andorganization terms deserve study. Its adoption inthe residential market is likely to happen in thecoming few years.

In Europe, a comprehensive in�ll system hasbeen introduced into the market and is beingused in new construction and in the renovationof older apartment buildings. Several other lesscomplete in�ll systems are also on the market inEurope, and interest is growing rapidly, both inthe residential and nonresidential markets.

In Japan, many companies and governmentagencies have been working for several decadeson the development of open building projectsand technologies. Recently, a number of projectshave been realized that break new ground. Moreare under development.

In China, several experimental projects have beenbuilt to assess the problems of dividing technicaland organizational processes on two levels.Activity continues in several cities both at thelevel of improved base building construction andin the development of new products andsubsystems for the �t-out level.

What is next for Open Building?

The basic research into principles of design andsystems disentanglement has been done. Trans-lation of much of this work needs to be done. Thiswork has been accomplished in the Europeancontext but has wider applicability in manyrespects. The principle of working on levels hasalso been developed and applied in practice at thelevel above buildings, sometimes called the urbantissue level.

The next stage is the stimulation of additionaldevelopments in the various parts of the buildingindustry following Open Building principles.This includes the commercialization of improvedways to construct base buildings for all kinds ofuses, including of�ce, retail, health care, educa-

312

RESEARCH INFORMATIOND

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Win

dsor

] at

21:

27 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

tion, residential and mixed use activities. Thisconcerns base buildings with optimum capacityfor variety and ef�ciency at the �t-out level. Thismay include better structural systems imposingfewer constraints on the free planning and in-stallation of interior �t-out. It may also includeimproved facade and roo�ng systems, and bettermechanical systems for provision of environmen-tal comfort, power and communications at thebase building level.

In addition, the commercialization of improvedsubsystems for in�ll and the development ofcomprehensive open systems for interior �t-outare also important. This is a development ofmajor signi�cance in light of the massive invest-ments projected in the coming decades on therefurbishment of existing buildings and the con-version of existing buildings to new uses. Atleast 50% of the value of this work will be at the�t-out level, requiring new design methods,improved installation skills and procedures, andnew products with improved technical interfacesallowing streamlined inspection and review pro-cesses. New construction also calls for advanced�t-out technology and processes to match thehigher level of variety demanded in manycountries, to reduce waste in materials use, andto improve ef�ciency and cost control in newconstruction everywhere.

CIB and Open Building

These developments point towards major im-provements in the behaviour of the built environ-ment, and new opportunities for research,product and methods development and commer-cialization. As a result, a new Open Building TaskGroup TG26 in CIB will explore these principles,practices and projects as they are taking place inmany countries. It will help to formulate meansby which improvements can be made and willdisseminate information about these initiativesand assessments of them, in printed and electro-nic form as well as in conferences held regularlyin various locations.

Dutch housing

Many post-war housing estates, built in theperiod 1950­ 65, are in a derelict state and areunattractive to live in. In that time, when the

Dutch housing need was high, there wereproduced more than 80 000 dwellings per yearin monotonous housing blocks. Now that theseblocks are 25­ 30 years old, renovation can beconsidered (see Fig. 1). The housing projectshowever have the potential for better housingconditions. What they lack is the potential tochange according to the needs of the consumers.

A considerable part of the housing demand inthe industrial world has to be found in theexisting stock.

Voorburg housing estate

This paper focuses on problems, the possibilitiesand a special solution found for a post-warhousing estate in Voorburg, the Netherlands.The character of this housing estate is very lookalike as the many large scale projects that havebeen built during the 1950s until the 1970s. In thattime professor John Habraken wrote his book DeDragers en de Mensen.1

Between 1986 and 1989 a series of researchprojects related to Open Building Strategies inpost-war housing estates were undertaken byOBOM research group of the University ofTechnology, Delft.2

In the fall of 1989 commissioned by the housingcorporation Patrimoniums Woningen the OBOMresearch group did a feasibility study to adoptthe developed Open Building strategy on a 30-years old housing complex in Voorburg. Theproject consists of three �ve storey blocks con-taining 110 �ats. These apartments are enclosedby 13 staircase halls.

After the feasibility study for this project thehousing corporation Patrimoniums Woningen

Housing stock, owned by housing corporationsclassified to building periods

situation in 1985

19451949

19501954

19551959

19601964

19651969

19701974

19751979

19801984

, 1940

1816141210

86420

%

Fig. 1. Housing stock and building periods in theNetherlands.

313

RESEARCH INFORMATIOND

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Win

dsor

] at

21:

27 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

decided to renovate the housing estate accordingthe philosophy developed in the study project ofOBOM. The housing corporation commissionedan architect to develop independent proposals forthe envelope of the building blocks and itsenvironment.

Before starting the renovation design process oneapartment was initiated as a pilot project. Thispilot project was prepared by an investigation ofthe capacity of the support. A major constraintwas that the apartments had to be renewed whilethe complex stayed inhabited. This meant whenremoving the old inner partitions, the ducts thatservice the apartment (electricity, water, gas sup-ply and sewerage) had to remain intact as wellas the ducts that service the apartments below:ventilation and chimney channels. This resultedin the ’stripped’ plan (Fig. 2).

After a short study by the architect to thecapacity of the support and the proposals forlay-out, the architect had a meeting with the newtenants who expressed their wishes. A new lay-out was developed �tting the needs of thetenants (Fig. 3).

The next step was to remove the interiors andthe inner partitions according to the strippedplan. The demolition of the interior walls, ser-vices and equipment needed to be done verycarefully. Demolition caused considerable noiseinconvenience for the average apartments knock-ing out the interior took about ten days, thisincluded some special steel constructions neededfor new openings in load bearing walls.

The in�ll system was supplied and installed byMatura Nederland B.V., a company specializedin individual in�ll systems.

This paper describes the decision making processfor the housing corporation and the �nancialconsequences at the long term.

Rent policy and consumer control

The best guarantee to insure a good rentability of ahousing project over the long term is to undertakea market oriented and �exible rent policy, in whichthe tenant and his individual wishes have a centralposition. Every tenant has his own individualwishes. It is impossible to have a standard answerto each individual, requirement. Offering a stan-dard quality is spoiling energy and money. One

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. (a) The old lay-out and (b) the strippedsupport.

2400 6400

2200 2200 3800

1000 1200

380

01

600

900

290

02

100

510

0

RE

NO

VA

TIE

DA

VID

KLE

MA

NL

AA

N V

OO

RB

UR

G M

OD

ELW

ON

INGWERKKA

BALKON

BADKACV

W MKR

DOUCHEWC

MK

SLAPEN

ENTREESTUDY

KOKEN BOEKEN

ETEN

ZITTENTV

BALKON

Fig. 3. A new layout within the con�nes of the existingshell.

The user needs are different for each family

Traditional approachSupply

5uniform quality

not desiredqualitynot usedpurchasepower

Quality

Qua

lity

10 individual tenants

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Fig. 4. The traditional approach, a standard for every-one.

314

RESEARCH INFORMATIOND

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Win

dsor

] at

21:

27 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

tenant will have a lot of undesired quality andothers could have spent more money (unusedpurchase power) (see Fig. 4).

The only solution for this problem is to decideto implement a consumer oriented-rent policy,giving a �exible response to users’ needs. Thismeans a high quality offer for the support and a�exible response to individual needs with thein�ll (see Fig. 5).

Headlines of the strategy for this housing estatewere:

· a face-lift of the residential environment(tissue level):adding ten small dwellings at ground level,to improve the relation to the street,adding four new dwellings on the edges ofthe blocks instead of the existing car boxes.

· renovation of the housing estate blocks(support level):adding elevators,enlarging balconies,better thermal isolation of roof and outerwalls,window renovations and isolation glass.

· inside the dwellings (in�ll level):renovation if the individual tenant wishes toinvest money in the improvement of theinterior,if a family is moving the next tenant has thepossibility to choose for a complete newin�ll, regarding his own wishes and possibi-lity to pay for.

The decision making process about choosing astrategy for an existing housing estate of about 30-years old, needing a big investment for repair andmaintenance, is not very easy.

In this complex situation it is very important tolook after criteria on environmental level and onsupport level such as:

· how is the housing estate situated in relationto shops, schools, facilities for welfare andsport;

· the image of the area and environment inwhich the housing estate is situated such as:the age of the area,the maintenance of the public space,the kind of households living in the area(age, welfare, education etc.),the level of vandalism, small criminality etc.,the price­ quality ratio of the housing stockin the area.

Related to these criteria the housing corporationhas to de�ne their policy. This policy makingprocess will be illustrated with some charts in thenext section.

Policy alternatives and strategies

In the following the choices for a housingcorporation will be explained and related to thedecisions about the housing estate Beatrixlaan.The decisions are given in Tables 1­ 5.

Adaptation of the supply side

Important for the supply side is the balancebetween price and quality.

The user needs are different for each family

Open BuildingApproach

fitness for use

individualinfill

suport ofhighquality

10 individual tenants

Quality

Qua

lity

Fig. 5. The Open Building approach, a � exible re-sponse to users’ needs.

Table 2. Decisions on adaptation of supply side

The technical construction quality has been improved bytechnical measures improving the roofs, the windows, theconcrete works and the masonry works. These measuresrequired an investment of about $8000.

The most important decision is to improve the housing qualityof the project by increasing the housing quality at all levels.

Table 1. Decisions on policy and strategies

Regarding the quality of this housing complex and the goodrentability redevelopment is not a relevant strategy(demolishing and new building). It is also not needed to havemeasures for changes on the demand side.

315

RESEARCH INFORMATIOND

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Win

dsor

] at

21:

27 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Quality has been de�ned as the degree to whichthis housing project ful�ls the users’ require-ments nowadays and during the next ten years(the �tness for use). As mentioned above thereare three aspects:

(1) technical construction quality,

(2) housing quality,

(3) the quality of the tenants.

Improving the housing quality

The improvement of housing quality can beachieved on three levels:

· tissue level (building environment),

· support level (building block),

· in�ll level (inside the dwelling).

At every level two kind of measures are possible:

· changing the way of control,

· changing the construction itself.

Examples of other kind of control are:

· at tissue level; the possibility to decentralizethe control of green areas, parking places etc,

· at support level; decentralizing the control ofthe housing estate (a housekeeper with hisown budget for maintenance and repair),

· at in�ll level; decentralizing the control ofthe in�ll and in some cases a completeownership of the in�ll by the tenant.

Measures at tissue level (buildingenvironment)

The building environment is the responsibility ofthe municipality. The housing corporation shouldlike to improve the quality of the buildingenvironment in the design of the architect work-ing in commission of the housing corporation.Several proposals are made for the buildingenvironment.

The building environment will be improved bynew dwellings at street level on the front side ofthe blocks and the new dwellings on the edge ofthe housing blocks. These last improvementshave been carried out under the responsibilityof the housing corporation.

Renovation of the support

This housing estate consists of three �ve storeyblocks containing 110 walk up �ats. Theseapartments are enclosed by 13 staircase halls.

The decision making aspects were:

(1) the dwellings are, regarding space orienta-tion, usable for all kind of households,

(2) adding elevators and enlarging the smallbalconies are urgently needed inprove-ments,

Table 3. Decisions at tissue level

Building of ten extra dwellings at street level in combinationwith new glassy staircases and terraces for the dwellings atthe � rst �oor.

Demolition of several awful car boxes and replacement byfour new dwellings with car boxes.

A proposal with a design for the improvement of the buildingenvironment has been submitted to the municipality counsel.

Table 4. Decisions by the housing corporation

Adding elevators in combination with the improvement of thestaircases (added glassy staircases at the front side of thehousing blocks).

Increase of the size of the balconies.

Improvement of thermal insulation of roofs and facades.

Changing the street level quality by ten extra dwellings and –renewed entrance halls.

Improvement of the ducts that service the apartments.

Table 5. Decisions related to the in� ll level

Renovation of individual dwellings at the moment of movingof people, dependent on the possibilities of the new renterusing the Matura in� ll system.

If existing tenants require a new inside apartment it ispossible to ful� l individual requirements without �nancialproblems for the housing corporation.

A lifetime calculation gives as result the need for a 7%increase of the rent related to the investment of the in� ll.

If a new tenant is not willing to get a complete new in� llsystem it is also possible to partly renovate the in� ll (onlybathroom and kitchen) with a moderate increase of the rent.

316

RESEARCH INFORMATIOND

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Win

dsor

] at

21:

27 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

(3) the housing block at street level containingstorage facilities will be dramatically im-proved by adding living-space at streetlevel,

(4) the ducts for services as electricity, water,gas supply, sewerage and ventilation haveto be improved

The building costs for this renovation are $25 000per dwelling (excluded maintenance and repair).And the average increase in rent is about $35 permonth.

Improvement of the in�ll level (insidedwelling)

During the renovation of the housing block theinside of the dwelling has not been changed at all.Only in two demonstration dwellings the com-plete in�ll has been renewed by an in�ll systemas mentioned before.

The two demonstration dwellings have provedthe possibility to renovate individual dwellings atthe moment the tenant is wishing a new insideapartment. This can be at the moment thatpeople are moving out and a new tenant ismoving in, but also at any other moment thetenant desires.

This very �exible strategy has the followingadvantages:

(1) It is possible to ful�l completely theindividual requirements of a (new) tenant.

(2) There is an increasing �exibility in timingthe individual dwelling renovation.

(3) The existing tenants are completely free intheir own choices and they are neverobliged to accept inside renovation againsttheir will.

(4) It is a very �exible way to modernizehousing estates in time, related to the lasttechnical possibilities.

(5) The noise insulation of the existing dwell-ings needs improvement. The chosen reno-vation technology includes a much highernoise insulation (Matura system).

(6) The rentability of the whole project can beimproved by these individual renovations.The increase of the rent has to insure a costeffective exploitation in time (this is about7% of the investment).

Financial consequences

To predict the consequences at long term for thehousing corporation calculations are made with alife time cost. With this model the future exploit-ation can be simulated regarding several para-meters such as:

· interest rate,

· in�ation,

317

RESEARCH INFORMATIOND

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Win

dsor

] at

21:

27 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

· increase of building and maintenance cost onlong term,

· yearly increase of the rent,

· moving frequency of tenants.

Investments of the renovation

The investments of the renovation are given inTable 6 and in the chart shown in Fig. 6. Thevalues are given in dollars per dwelling.

Exploitation at longer term afterrenovation

The exploitation cost and income from the rent hasto be in balance over time. In the chart shown inFig. 7 the results of the calculations are depicted.The �rst three years give a pro�t. The next 13 yearsa de�cit. After year 16 the results are positive. TheNet Present Value (NPV) over 30 years is includ-ing a rest value for the support positive.

Concluding remarks

The successful example of the Voorburgrenovation indicates the viability of Open Build-ing systems to renovate existing blocks andto respond to individual tenants’ needs andwishes.

The positive involvement of all stakeholders inthe built environment and the adaptation ofexisting �nancial structures has led to theconclusion that it is really possible to extendthe life time of existing housing estates and atthe same time increase the quality of life. Thispositive shift from a formerly unwanted buildingenvironment toward a sustainable architecturewhich embraces the physical, social and econom-ic facets of development presents design profes-sionals, estate managers and tenants with apowerful model.

Endnotes

1Translated in English; Supports ­ An alternative to Mass-Housing.

2An abstract of this series of studies is published inOpen House International (1993) 18(2).

Table 6. Investments of the renovation (US$)

Subject Support In� ll Total Overhead Tax Total Others Investment

10 dwellings 28 000 11 000 39 000 8600 8300 55 900 6100 62 0004 dwellings 46 000 16 000 62 000 13600 13 200 88 800 16200 105 0004 carboxes 8000 – 8000 1800 1700 11 500 1500 13000

3 $1 million

1.5

1.0

0.5

01992 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017

positive

negative

RENT

positive

capital costsrenovation

capital cost rest value

Fig. 7. Exploitation.

Infill, individual$18000

Stripping thesupport6 $5000

Current capital costs$11400

Repairconcrete/windows$9400

Renovation,elevators/balconies$26000

Fig. 6. Investments per dwelling.

318

RESEARCH INFORMATIOND

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Win

dsor

] at

21:

27 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014