BUILDING FLEXIBILITY

DRIVERS, ENABLERS AND BARRIERS OF THE ADAPTIVE CITY

-

UP 835398
M ARCH 2, UNIT 421
UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
University of Portsmouth
MArch 2
UNIT 421

TITLE: BUILDING FLEXIBILITY - DRIVERS, BARRIERS AND ENABLERS OF FLEXIBILITY

DATE: 18 - JAN, 2018

I Affirm that all contents in this paper, unless otherwise specified, are original and unaided
work, and all quotes used from literature sources are appropriately acknowledged.

SUBMITTED BY SALIM HAMZA, UP835398

BUILDING FLEXIBILITY – ‘DRIVERS’, ‘BARRIERS’
AND ‘ENABLERS’ OF THE ADAPTIVE CITY
ABSTRACT:
This paper identifies the various endogenous and exogenous
factors that trigger growth/change in buildings [DRIVERS],
whilst recognizing the several associated conventional
practices within the construction industry, that minimize the
evolving potential of the built environment [BARRIERS]. The
research leads to frame the question:
What is the most effective way to design buildings to ensure
sustainable growth allowing easy user-friendly alterations
while maintaining the integrity of the building?
It defines the role of adaptability and flexibility of buildings in
the everchanging context analogizing between the literature
review and case studies that show how cities and buildings
have evolved in the past, aiming to guide the facilitation of
sustainable and economical approach to designing buildings
that respond to the future context.
The research leads to examine various case studies that have
attempted to solve issues related to building adaptability,
thereby assisting in deriving a set of principles [ENABLERS]
that may be considered in designing buildings for long term
use.
INTRODUCTION:
‘Flexibility’ refers to spaces that are capable of different
physical arrangements or can be altered to suit the user’s
changing needs. ‘Adaptability’ refers to spaces that can adapt
to change in demographics, climate, technology, etc. These
definitions are however too broad and can be defined in
several ways according to the scale.(French 2016; Hinte et al.
2003)
‘Flexibility’ could mean that the spaces within buildings
are entirely reconfigurable leaving the structure and
services unaffected. On a micro-level, it could simply mean
rearranging furniture. ‘Adaptability’ could mean that ‘it is
capable of different social uses to accommodate a growing or
changing family.’(French 2016)
The overlap between the definition of the two terms,
flexibility and adaptability, could easily be understood by
their opposite: “tight-fit functionalism” – that sees all rooms
ascribed a single purpose with little option for other use.
(Schneider & Till 2007)
The most common observation is that the planning and
design of building tends to drift away gradually from actual
needs and developments once the building is in place. It
usually takes a few years to materialize designs and it is not
uncommon for programmatic demands to already begin
changing slightly during that period. When a building is
finished, different kinds of developments gradually put it
under ‘severe functional stress’(Hinte et al. 2003) which the
building was not designed to handle.
Our society is confronted by unprecedented and accelerating
changes such as urbanization, political instability, climate
change, etc. most of which are impossible to predict. Most
buildings are demolished prematurely because they are
not designed to accommodate change. If buildings are not
fit for its purpose or for re-purposing of any kind, it could
have severe adverse effects on the physical and the social
environment which in turn, tampers with the city’s growth.
A city is a facility rather than a rigid masterplan, with a
given set of buildings and an infrastructure. The more
encompassing a plan, the bigger the chance that it, or parts
of it, will have the wrong result as time passes.(Hinte et al.
2003)
Architects and City planners have assumed the position of
controlling activities and functions within the cities. However,
changes are still made to a building even if its reluctant to
change, which in turn affects the building’s performance
and cost inefficient. It becomes ‘maladaptive’. (Brand 1994;
Champika & Anupa 2016; Hinte et al. 2003)
It is vitally important to acknowledge the drivers of change
in the built environment. With shifting economy, technology,
and demographics, the context of today will not be the same
tomorrow. Buildings were built to last for 50 to 100 years
without a provision for adaptability to the future context.
How a space is designed in a dense urban context could lead
to a functional obsolescence and remain vacant for several
years before getting demolished. During the vacant period,
it becomes a target for crime-related activities and affect the
social security and wellbeing of the neighborhood (Champika
& Anupa 2016) . This could trigger an overall demographic
decline in the area. 
There are limits to our ability to plan the future. Maybe one
third of what is to come can be planned or foreseen, the
rest is to remain foggy until further notice. The more we
look ahead, the greater that chance that we’re wrong. So,
whatever is projected and built should allow either for easy
modification or for a change of programme that implies
minimal material adaptation. This begins at the level of city
planning, which is dynamic by nature. (Hinte et al. 2003)
The first chapter, ‘Drivers of change’ focuses on the
unforeseen demands that drives the need for significant
change to the buildings. It starts by explaining how time
plays its part in triggering a dynamic atmosphere, with which
more and more buildings fail to cope with today. It then
introduces the two main drivers of change recognized under
the following sub-headings for this research – Functional
Drivers – ‘demands that lead to changing patterns in terms of
demographics, technology or environment’ and Technological
Drivers—’Often demanding upgrade of a component
(structure, services or material) to a newer model either
because the previous model is deemed unsuitable,
intolerable, or simply because they wear out.’
The tight-fit functionalist spaces have proven to be barriers
to adaptability. The second chapter explores the various
barriers to adaptability, by examining issues with policy
making, master-planning and functional zoning along with
the technical issues that arises with the choice of structure
and material.

This paper sets out principles of adaptability that can begin

as early as the policy making stage to the post-occupancy
stages. The data driven from the literature reviews is
analogized against precedents to comprehensively illustrate
the application of enablers on these precedents which might
be used as a reference for designing new buildings.
The chapters ‘Barriers of Adaptability’ and ‘Enablers
of Adaptability’ each subcategorized into sub-chapters
describing its respective roles in influencing adaptability on
two levels: process and material. It has been structured this
way because ‘Process and Planning Barrier/Enablers’ relate
to master planning and policy making, beginning at an Urban
Scale while ‘Material Barriers/ Enablers’ apply directly to
buildings.
METHODOLOGY:
A Literature review was undertaken to analyze the various
‘drivers’(Peter & Peter 2011), ‘barriers’ and ‘enablers’ (Ross
et al. 2016) of building adaptability.
‘Drivers’ refer to the various forces that demands a provision
for growth or change while ‘Enablers’ are the various
principles and strategies that emerge out of the literature
review. ‘Barriers’ are factors that restrict the possibility of
adaptability.
Further research is conducted into precedents that
have implemented one or more of these strategies. The
data from the literature review and the case studies are
morphologically analyzed to explore the role of adaptable
buildings in an everchanging urban context.
CHAPTER 1 -DRIVERS OF CHANGE
Steward Brand argues, “The whole idea of Architecture is
permanence”, although, “the idea is crystalline, fact fluid”.
Buildings put to new usages “persistently retire or reshape
buildings”.
The main challenges are identified in areas of “environment
considerations”, “Innovations in Technology”, “planning
and policy issues”, “social requirements”, “political forces.
(Champika & Anupa 2016)
Most buildings don’t work because of the unforeseeable
dynamic nature of the socio-economic, political, and
technological context they sit in. Decision-makers behind
the construction of these buildings failed to anticipate
how the changing needs and changing patterns retire or
reshape them. As Jeremy Till and Tatjana Schneider asserts
in their book, Flexible housing, changing needs may be
personal (ex. Expanding house), practical (i.e, onset of old
age) or technological (i.e, updating of old services). The
changing patterns might be demographic (the rise of single
person household), economic (i.e rise in rental market), or
environmental (responding to climate change.
Some buildings succeed in surviving generations of people
without anyone having arranged this beforehand. Others are
demolished way before they were meant to be. It is clear that
in this respect time is more often than not overlooked.(Hinte
et al. 2003)
The root of all problems relating to adaptive capabilities of
buildings is the failure to consider time as a design factor.
‘Time’ shall not be considered as a driver of change but
rather as an invisible axis along which the context evolves.
As Frank Duffy professes, time is at the essence of the
real design problem. He encourages designers to think of
buildings as different time-based layers which was further
expanded by Stewart Brand as shown in the figure below.
Fig. 2 - (by Steward Brand - shearing layers of change)
time-based layering system introduced by Duffy.
It is the building’s internal components classified as ‘layers’
according to their life spans.(Braham et al. 2007) ‘Because of
the different rates of change of its components, a building is
always tearing itself apart.’ Over fifty years the total cost of
the building including renovations cost three times that of
the original building cost.(Brand 1994)
To consider time as a design criteria is very difficult because
it is next to impossible to foresee “accelerating trends in, for
example, urbanization, political instability, terrorist activity,
climate change, and technological transformation”(Ross et al.
2016).
Buildings in the past have been designed to cope with the
timeframe at which it was built and resist any changes
thereby putting it under “severe functional stress”(Hinte et
al. 2003). As Steward Brand claims, “All buildings grow. Most
grow even when they are not allowed to. Urban height limits
and party walls are no barrier….”. It is extremely important
in today’s building industry to enforce a more open-ended
approach over a “tight-fit functional scheme”. (Hinte et al.
2003; Schneider & Till 2007)
Fig. 1 - (by Author)
Fig. 3 - (retrieved from ‘How buildings Grow - Steward Brand’)
Cumulative capital costs of a building over 50 years.
FUNCTIONAL DRIVERS:
A shifting demand for usage of spaces is often driven largely
in cities. These demands are tagged in this research as
‘Functional Drivers’ which are further branched into:
SOCIO-ECONOMIC DRIVERS:
“with the greatly increased rate of social and economic
change, the adaptable house was becoming a national
necessity…. As it would allow much easier and perhaps more
satisfactory adaptation to the changing general needs”-
Parker Morris report, 1961
Various socio-economic forces perpetually create new
demands on the built environment. These may include the
need to reduce pollution due to unforeseen vehicular traffic,
time-wasting due to long hour commutes between home and
workplace thereby driving the need for people to live close to
where they work.(Gann & Barlow 1996).
In the UK, market-led factors largely determine the shape of
housing, leaving both private and public sectors with excess
demand over supply, mainly due to scarcity of land or at least
land in the right places.(Schneider & Till 2007)
The costs sunk in the existing stock of buildings is enormous
and it is inconceivable that this can be written off in the
short-term to be replaced with new buildings. This means
that a considerable amount of housing demand must be met
from the existing building stock.(Gann & Barlow 1996)
While some of those offices were able to be converted
to flats, many were faced with onerous challenges along
the lines of “property market dynamics and economics of
conversion, the planning system and location of buildings and
technical constraints. “(Gann & Barlow 1996)
Real Estate has vastly more influence on the shape and fate
of the buildings than architectural theories or aesthetics.
Stewart Brand quotes Paulette Thomas, Wall Street Journal
(17 May 1991), “The business of financing, building, selling
and furnishing real estate account for nearly one-fifth of the
nation’s total output.”
This one-fifth, unfortunately for national stability and
building longevity, is the last arena of truly wild-eyed
financial speculation. Real estate bubbles inflate and pop
repeatedly with amnesiac regularity. Since the boom-times
are as destructive as the busts, you’d think that governments
and banks would take steps to gentle the oscillation. Instead
they feed it.(Brand,1994)
When the Real-estate boom in took off during the 1980s,
Britain was fueled by its notorious “long-lease”, the
government privatized public housing and suddenly there
was a large naïve population to whom mortgages looked
like free money. In the States, new tax laws, property was
treated as the leading tax-shelter. Deregulated Banks, though
federally insured, poured money into real-estate schemes.
Pension funds and Insurance companies decided real estate
was the place to invest money.
Investment and return were the prioritized over actual
demand, location, building type, access, quality of design.
Finance was the only driver to decision-making for the swift
construction of new high-rises only because money was
available and not because tenants were waiting. (Brand
1994). By 1986, New commercial construction ceased as the
national economies tipped into severe recession.
This situation left many new buildings empty, cities unable to
accommodate further demands for new construction could
not be met “because too much future had been oversold and
overbuilt”. Brand 1994)
Fig. 4 - (By Author)
In Tokyo during the 1980s, when its real estate market
spiraled so high that the total value of Japanese real estate
was worth four times the total value of America’s – a nation
twenty-five times its size. Highrises were being torn down
in downtown Tokyo after five years, because the land value
was so high it was trivial to demolish the last over-specified
skyscraper and put in the next over-specified one. (Brand
1994)
The findings of Gann & Barlow’s research suggest that by
the early 1990s, there was an enormous oversupply of office
spaces in many cities around the world while there was a
huge demand for housing. This indicates a failure of planning
policies as well as of developer judgement, demonstrating
that too many buildings were designed to meet static user
needs without consideration of the dynamics of building
use. This drives the need to consider the possibility of future
change of use while designing buildings.
DEMOGRAPHIC DRIVERS:
The only way to get over supply and demand problem is to
build buildings that are flexible enough to accommodate
new demands on the built environment such as changing
demographics, working patterns, and aging users. (Schneider
& Till 2007)
One of the problems of treating housing as a static
commodity with fixed design parameters is that it arrives into
a world of changing demographics. Mix of units developed
by volume builders might not be the sustainable approach
to meet the immediate demand. Over the last few decades
there was a significant rise in demand for single-person
households in the UK, primarily triggered by the rising
number of students which is expected to grow to 10m by
2026.
Fig. 5 - (By Author) -family demographics
In Manchester, the rising housing demand created by the
ascending inner-city population was initially satisfied by
conversion of redundant warehouses into housing. Schneider
and Till treats these warehouses as exemplars for flexible
housing.
Schneider and till argues that although some demographic
changes can be gauged with some certainty, mass migration
of EU and Non-EU citizen over the last decade have proven
to be unpredictable. Each migrant group brings with it a
certain set of cultural expectations with regard to living
patterns and spaces, and yet are confronted with fixed
structures and prejudices of their adopted country’s housing.
There is mounting evidence that first and second generation
immigrants find this spatial restriction at best, uncomfortable
at worst unacceptable.
At a macro level, it is the mass movements of migration that
have always proved most unpredictable. For example, in
2003 the UK government predicted that the newly expanded
European Union would result in a net inwards annual
migration of between 5000 and 13000 people. By 2006,
the Home Office recorded that 447,000 people from the EU
accession states had registered for work permits.
ENVIRONMENTAL DRIVERS:
It is predicted that climate change will result in rising sea
levels, more frequent and extreme weather events, hotter
and drier summers and warmer and wetter winters (Kinnane
et al. n.d.). This will have a significant impact on the design
of buildings, how they are kept cool and how they are
weathered against more extreme climatic conditions. The
residential sector is already a significant environmental
burden with high associated operational energy. Climate
change, and a growing population requiring residence, has
the potential to exacerbate this problem seriously. New
paradigms for residential building design are required to
enable low-carbon dioxide operation to mitigate climate
change. They must also face the reality of inevitable climate
change and adopt climate change adaptation strategies to
cope with future scenarios. However, any climate adaptation
strategy for dwellings must also be cognisant of adapting
occupant needs, influenced by ageing populations and new
technologies. (Gosling et al. 2013).

The Prometheus Project have distilled Climate projection

data into formats made comprehensive for building
engineers and designers by creating simulation appropriate
digital file format that can be used to render projected
climate scenarios such as increased temperature, rain, etc.
(Kinnane et al. n.d.)

The environmental drivers of change usually combine with

the need for a technological upgrade. After the 1973 oil crisis,
the energy budget of a building suddenly became a new issue
and windows, insulation, heating and cooling systems needed
to be upgraded to achieve energy-efficiency standards.(Brand
1994)
TECHNOLOGICAL DRIVERS:
Unremitting revolutions in communication technology
require rewiring of whole buildings every seven years.
(Brand 1994). During the late 20th century, the hazardous
toxic nature of asbestos was discovered were used as a fire
proofing solution until then. Fire codes and building codes
kept updating itself constantly as they found new issues with
technology, planning and materials forcing old buildings to
adapt to new standards.
Wearing out combined with the constant deterioration, ”in
new buildings as much as old”(Brand 1994) such as leaking
roofs, cracked walls, failed weather-proofing systems, etc
has been a consistent driver for the need for maintenance
thereby enforcing the need for easy user-level replacement
capacity.
Besides from the persistent repair and maintenance works
demanded by most buildings, new inventions in technology
that allows building owners to switch to a more environment-
friendly system to save energy and money on the long
run. As Brand exemplates, “double-pane windows with a
sun-reflective membrane which to replace the traditional
windows – expensive but will save significant energy costs
and you get political points for installing them. By the time
their defects become intolerable, even newer windows will
beckon.
CHAPTER 2 -BARRIERS OF
ADAPTABILITY:
The primary factor to resist the scope of adaptability begins
with the role of developers, home-owners, planning board
and design review board, i.e, Master-planners and Policy
enforcers. Garreau defines master-planning there as “that
attribute of development in which so many rigid controls
are put in place, to defeat every imaginable future problem,
that any possibility of life, spontaneity, or flexible response
to unanticipated events is eliminated.” This chapter is
split into two sections:-Planning Rigidity – focusing on the
rigid planning and policy making that forms a barrier to
adaptability;Material Inflexibility – focusing on how choice of
materials and technology contributes to inflexibility for future
uses
POLICY AND PLANNING BARRIERS:
Zoning froze up cities tightly destroying the infinitely
complex social and physical fabric of pre-industrial urban
communities, of urban democracy and culture(Brand 1994).
Although zoning worked successfully to some extend in
protecting the residential communities from industrial and
commercial ruckus leading to healthier lifestyles solving
issues relating to pollution and sanitation, it opened doors to
many issues relating to adaptability like time wasting due to
long commutes mostly stuck in slow moving traffic between
residential and work zones.(Gann & Barlow 1996) Zoning
in this respect, shall be an antagonist to building flexibility
specifically because zoning primarily meant separation of
usage zones.
A building is an interface between two human organizations-
the intense group within and the larger, lower, more powerful
community outside.(Brand 1994) One area of perpetual
discord is the enforcement of building codes. Apart from
blocking creativity and defying reasons, the codes often force
builders and dwellers to act against their short-term interests
which tempts them to bend the code, thereby, doing addition
and remodeling works without getting permission for it.
They use unethical techniques for hiding the new works from
the building inspectors which consequently leads to variety
of issues on the long use, some of which may be sanitary,
electric wiring that are not in the drawings may have done
on the site which is not as per the previous building permit.
“…They contract to fix a warped bathroom floor and find
that they have to completely redo the plumbing, wiring,
walls, and floor joists because earlier slapdash work put
in hazardous wiring and leaky rot-producing pipes.”(Brand
1994).
In many cases, the cost involved in getting the permit added
to the tax because of the required tax re-assessment often
exceeds the costs of the work itself which prompts people
to go ahead with the works without obtaining the necessary
permits.
The homeowner’s associations took off in the late 1980s
and by 1990 there were 130,000 of them in America who
enforced “covenant, conditions and restrictions” upon
users.(Brand 1994) Their power to control over the user’s
interaction with the buildings prevents buildings from getting
better with time.
Studies of Gann and Barlow show that conversion of many
office buildings to flats was mainly not possible because of
meeting of fire-safety regulations because it introduces a
new risk due to people sleeping overnight.
DESIGN AND MATERIAL BARRIERS:
From the time-based layering system expanded by Brand, it
is suggested not to embed the layers together as one might
tear down the other over time. It could mean how burial
of services deep into the structure of the building. Services
usually last for 10-15 years and structure is designed to last
50.
Pouring concrete on the ground for an instant foundation
provides no room for expansion, access to services or
maintenance. (Brand 1994)
Older buildings built during the 19th century that are of load-
bearing wall construction have been proven to be resistant
to undergo change of use(Gann & Barlow 1996). Materials
vary in the ease with which they can be separated from the
general mass of a dismantled or demolished building- iron
and steel, for instance can be separated magnetically, copper
and tin cannot; glass and plasterboard are very likely to be
damaged when removed from a building but timber is more
robust (Addis & Schouten 2004). Design for destruction ‘DfD’
is a phrase widely used to refer to the process of designing
buildings to facilitate their deconstruction or disassembly to
repurpose or recycle.
Different materials and techniques of building assembly have
varying degree of ‘process-reversibility’ and the likelihood of
damages taken during the deconstruction process depends
on this aspect. As a simple example, a bolted connection is
easier to deconstruct without damage than a welded one
(Addis & Schouten 2004).
Building elements are usually installed using a series of
assembly and fixing processes which strongly affect how
reversible the process is and the degree of damage its likely
to be caused in the deconstruction process.
If the building elements contribute to material flexibility
largely depends of if process of fixing building elements
are reversible or not, else, it becomes a barrier to material
adaptation.
Adaptability of buildings built out of steel or concrete framing
with disintegrated systems such as cladding and internal
partitions still depends on the following issues
(Gann & Barlow 1996):
1. Size and height of building
2. Building depth
3. Building structure
4. Building envelope and cladding
5. Internal space, layout and access
6. Building services
7. Acoustic Separation
8. Fire safety and means of escape
CHAPTER 3 -ENABLERS OF
ADAPTABILITY:
“Piecemeal growth is based on the assumption that
adaptation between buildings and their users is necessarily
a slow and continuous business which cannot, under any
circumstances, be achieved in a single leap”
-Christopher Alexander
PLANNING AND PROCESS FLEXIBILITY
The previous chapter focused on how the rigidity of planning
process becomes a barrier to adaptability. Facilitating a piece-
meal approach is key, to ensure adaptability in cities. This
begins at the policy-making and planning level.
Different site arrangements lead to different city evolutions.
Downtown New York city, with its narrow long blocks, is
uniquely dense and uniquely flexible (Brand 1994). According
to Urban designer, Anne Vernez Moudon, San Francisco
is kept adaptable by its modest lot sizes: They “support
resilience because they allow many people to directly attend
to their needs by designing, building, and maintaining their
own environment. By ensuring property remains in their
hands, small lots bring important results: many people make
many different decisions, thereby ensuring variety in the
resulting environment.”
Procedures to obtaining permits for remodeling should take
on a different approach as Brand notes, “Communities that
want their built environment to improve over time would
do well not to punish remodeling work. They could keep tax
reassessment separate from improvement—do it strictly by
calendar or only at the time of resale.” The overall procedure
Fig. 6 - (By Author)
to obtain permits must be re-defined to make it more hassle-
free and cost-effective.
Frank Duffy believes that to ensure long-term sustainable
growth in buildings, the role of facilities-manager needs to
be re-defined. “An office building exists to accommodate
changing organizations. The management of that change
process is now the domain of the facilities managers.”(Brand
1994). Facilities management can prove to be advantageous
depending on how the organization works.
Any building user can send a request for the work to the
maintenance team, who constantly updates the “as-built”
drawings and the maintenance logs, and processes the
request to the president, thereby enabling remodeling work
to be done with ease.
In their research paper, Adaptable buildings: A system’s
approach, Gosling et al., highlight the importance of
integrating different members of the construction supply
chain, (i.e, Property owners, architects, contractors,
authorities, project managers, users and clients) with
the design process to deliver adaptable buildings. They
specifically argue that clients are often the initiators of
production of buildings and thus have a good opportunity
for influence. POEs or Post Occupancy Evaluation of
buildings can help especially for developers (repeat
construction clients) to learn from past mistakes in design
and commissioning of buildings helping them to make better
decisions to new construction at the least (Anon n.d.).
The role of facility managers can bridge the gap between
the different phases of the building life cycle, suggesting
that supply chain integration is important well beyond the
initial construction phase of the building. The total cost of
ownership should be considered early in the project process,
and all parties should contribute to ongoing management of
the total cost of ownership. (Gosling et al. 2013)
Fig. 8 - (By Author)

DESIGN AND MATERIAL FLEXIBILITY
Material flexibility relates back to the shearing layers of
change developed by Duffy, then expanded by brand. As
Frank Duffy explains, “Thinking about buildings in this time-
laden way is very practical. As a designer you avoid such
classic mistakes as solving a five-minute design problem with
a fifty year solution, or vice-versa. It legitimizes the existence
of different design skills,-architects, service engineers, space
planners, interior designers – all with different agendas
defined by this time scale. It means you invent buiding forms
that are very adaptive.”
Besides this, the layering system also relates to the different
organization levels of responsibility at each level. Users
and buildings interact with each other at the level of the
innermost layer ,i.e, Stuff. Whereas the tenant organization
interacts with the Space plan while landlord interacts mainly
with services and Planning authorities interact with Site and
context.
Following the studies of Brand, 1994; Gann & Barlow, 1996;
Ross et al.,2016, the various enablers can be categorized
under:
Usage considerations:-
Arge (2005) suggests that organization of space, building
width and floor to floor height contribute to generality, which
is defined as the ability to meet changing user or owner
needs without changing its properties.
Fig. 9 - (By Author)
1. Size, and height of buildings:
The size and height of the office building has
implications for the potential number of units
and occupant densities. While building height can
enable adaptability; (high rooms allow addition of
mezzanine), the increase in usable floor area means
inviting pressures on local amenities and building
management.(Gann & Barlow 1996). The internal
floor to ceiling height however should be sufficient
enough to allow installation of false ceilings that
masks services.
2. Internal layout and depth:
The most primal design features taken into
consideration by architectural practices in order
to enhance adaptability involve reduction of load
bearing or solid internal partitions which in turn,
maximizes interior usage space(Hinte et al. 2003;
Ross et al. 2016; Schneider & Till 2007; Slaughter
2001). Buildings that provide deep plans with non-
load bearing walls enables adaptability for a range
of internal layout possibilities. The case study of
Middlesex House, Brent, conducted by Gann &
Barlow suggests that the conversion from office to
flat was possible because of its deep plans allowing a
corridor run by its spine and demarcating spaces on
either side into residential apartments.
3. Accessibility to services and technological
considerations by reduction of non-adaptable
services:
Technological Considerations:
Schneider & Till argue that flexibility in buildings can be
enhanced through consideration of use through design along
with deployment of technology. The possibility of removal
of internal load bearing walls was made only because of
technological advancements that led to development of long
span structures.
4. Building structure:
The main issue of conversion relating to building
structure is the need to install new service ducts.
Piercing the structure with holes for services
will have implication of fire safety and acoustic
separation.
Steel frame buildings are easiest to convert because
their services run close to beams while units can be
partitioned along beam lines and services can be
placed close to partition walls, whereas in concrete
slabs, to pierce a hole for services, should be done in
the center to have the least impact on the integrity
of the structure. Unfortunately center of a room is
the least desirable location for services .(Gann &
Barlow 1996)
5. Building Services:
The provision of building services to each new usages
is one of the most difficult and expensive technical
aspects of conversion.
Offices with centralized air-conditioning systems or
perimeter heating systems need to be replaced by
unit specific heating systems. (Gann & Barlow 1996)
6. Acoustic consideration:
Modifications to the structure and services will need
to address the need for acoustic consideration as
piercing holes in structures and provision of new
services might account for new duct works between
spaces requiring acoustic independency. In areas
where acoustic independency is not attainable with
usage considerations (Schneider & Till 2007), Cross-
talk attenuators shall be installed. (Gann & Barlow
1996)
7. Fire-safety considerations:
Fire-safety requirements vary with different usages
depending on occupancy rate, occupancy hours, type
of usage, density, etc. Gann & Barlow recommends
considering the following:
• Means of escape- travel distance
• Access for fire brigade
• Fire detection and alarm systems
• Means of preventing spreading of flames
with use of fire-rated doors and walls where
necessary.
The approval from the building department must be
obtained before approaching the fire department as
any changes suggested by the building department
should reflect in the drawings submitted to the Fire-
safety department.
ADOPTED METHODS:
This section identifies the various methods adopted to
enhance building adaptability ranging from techniques and
methods enforced in the planning and policy making process
to use of traditional construction techniques and materials,
to fully pre-fabricated modular units, recognizing the drivers,
barriers and enablers conversion.
The role of zoning in cities were redefined by the formation
of the Urban Villages Group in UK in 1989 to promote mixed
use urban developments and shift away from the out-of-
date monoculture of separate zoning (Aldous, 1992). This
phenomenon mainly eliminated the need for people staying
in the urban village to commute long distances between
work and home thereby instigating a environment-friendly
neighborhood supporting a range of mixed uses. Urban
village ideals have been applied to new greenfield and
brownfield developments and urban renewal projects. They
have been used as a guiding concept for many projects
globally.
LIFETIME HOMES STANDARD– HOUSEHOLD ADAPTATION BY
INCLUSIVE DESIGN
Lifetime Homes emerged from work developed by the Helen
Hamlyn Foundation and Habinteg Housing Association in the
late 1980s. Both bodies approached the Joseph Rowntree
Foundation developed the concept of Lifetime homes in
1991. It is a design that maximizes utility, independence and
quality of life, while not compromising. Other design issues
such as aesthetics or cost-effectiveness. (Authority 2017)
London Plan Policy 3A.4: Housing Choice requires boroughs
to include policies in development plan documents that seek
to ensure that all new housing is built to Lifetime Homes
standards.
The lifetime homes standard seeks to enable general needs
housing to provide, either from the outset or through simple
and cost-effective adaptation; design solutions that meet the
existing and changing needs of diverse households.
Lifetime homes provide residents with many advantages,
giving private builders of new homes a marketing edge in
relation to the second-hand stock with which they compete.
Because lifetime homes are suitable for older people (whose
numbers are increasing rapidly) and for the vast majority
of disabled people, as well as non-disabled people, they
will have a wider market of potential buyers and residents, and areas particularly hit by recession.
probably increasing their value and the ease with which they
can be re-sold.(Authority 2017) FUTURE GENERATIONS UNIVERSITY :
A multidisciplinary group of designers made a proposal for
In early 2008, The Department for Communities and Local
‘Future Generations University’. The scheme proposed that
Government (DCLG) launched Lifetime Homes, Lifetime
only a part of the scheme was built, and the other part of
Neighbourhoods: A national strategy for housing in an ageing
the program was meant to be dissipated across the world.
society. The strategy made a commitment that all new
The main feature in this is its distinction with respect to its
homes receiving public funding would be built to the Lifetime
mobility and flexibility. ‘Green membranes’ are light-weight
Homes standard by 2011. Beyond this, it stated an ambition
domestic structures and ‘Information membranes’ house the
to see all new homes in England built to the Lifetime Homes
university facilities such as library, theatre and retail and are
standard by 2013.
more definitive in nature but can function well even if the
university disappears altogether. (Hinte et al. 2003)

DOM-INO House, Le Corbusier: DOMED CITIES:

The DOM-INO House is an open plan structure designed A building complex with two skins houses several companies
by Architect, Le Corbusier. The open plan structure free of called ‘Crystalic’ designed by Gunnar Daan, 2002 with a
internal load bearing walls, giving the freedom for units to crystal skin that accommodates climate control. The inside
be aligned in series like dominoes, to make row-houses of skin does not have to be weather proof so the inside
different patterns. structure can be simple and light easily adaptable to changing
demands. (Hinte et al. 2003)
Similar characteristics of such a model can be seen in the
Pompidou Centre, which supports a mix of uses such as
commercial spaces, museum and theatre and Interaction
center. The common criteria for adaptability and flexibility in
here lie in the open-planning, size, depth and height of the
buildings.

PLUG-IN Cities, Archigram:

Plug-in City is one of many vast, visionary creations produced

in the 1960s by the radical collaborative British architecture
group Archigram, of which Cook was a founding member. A
“megastructure” that incorporates residences, access routes,
and essential services for the inhabitants, Plug-in City was
designed to encourage change through obsolescence: each
building outcrop is removable, and a permanent “craneway”
facilitates continual rebuilding.
Persistent precedents and concerns of modernism lay at the
heart of Plug-In City’s theoretical impulse, not limited to the
concept of collective living, integration of transportation
and the accommodation of rapid change in the urban
environment.(Anon 2013)

Although Plug-in cities were only imaginary, it inspired

many architect’s minds to look for nomadic alternatives to
traditional ways of living- Mobile, flexible, impermanent
architecture.

Malaysian architect unveiled a towering vertical city

populated with hexagonal housing units that offer a solution
to urban population growth problems in Ancient Cities. The
tower itself serves as a a scaffolding – as the population of
urban areas fluctuates, modular units can be “plugged-in” to
the structure to accommodate an expanding population.

Boston architects, Howeler + Yoon Architecture, designed

a conceptual structure for boston, where an unfinished
building would be covered in modular pods growing algae
for bio-fuel. The designers hope that the temporary nature
of structure can be installed on suspended construction sites
Fig. 10 - (By Author)
Tables deriving concepts from adopted techniques to identify the stages at which adaptability, as a
criteria, was acknowledged; the respective drivers that called for the proposals; barriers and enablers
of adaptability.
CONCLUSION: design challenges such as acoustic separation, insulation,
weatherproofing, etc.
With the appropriate integration of the supply team, i.e,
Architects, Planners, Municipal Authorities, Developers, Brand’s time-based layering system suggests that for
Clients and Facility management services along with design buildings to be flexible, User-level interaction must be
intelligence, it is possible to build productive buildings that enhanced.
can last practically forever.
Flexibility in housing can work either prior to occupation by
the residents, or post-occupation, or both. In former, flexible
housing design allows future residents to have some say
over the layout and/ or look of their home. Thus, the use of
non-load-bearing internal partitions might give a variety of
possible layouts from which future tenants could choose, or
else the use of modern methods of construction can allow
residents to choose the way that their house looks. Post-
occupation flexibility refers to the way that the design and
construction of the housing allows residents and housing
managers to make adaptations over time. Generally, a
technique to achieve pre-occupation flexibility enables post-
occupation flexibility, and vice-versa.

As previous studies by Authors such as Schneider & till, Ross

et al., Manewa et al., there is no “one-size-fits-all” technique
to counter the challenges related to adaptability. Each project
needs careful attention in terms of organization considering
the probable change in time and to provide flexible systems
while also considering other issues associated.

Precedents that seem to work flexibly enough to adapt well

in its context might be inflexible elsewhere. As Schneider &
Till notes, “Some previous approaches to flexible housing
design have fallen on the sword of their own dogmatism”.
Sometimes the simplest things are overlooked.

Pompidou Centre, for example, supports a range of uses

because of its transparency and spacious design qualities.
However, Steward Brand designates this building as “A
maintenance nightmare”: Exposing services helps in
maximizing interior space for adaptability; but at the cost of
high-degree maintenance.

Therefore, depending on the context and function of the

building, it usually requires a trade-off between the BARRIERS
AND ENABLERS, depending on the scenario its likely to be
exposed to.

With the modulation of Facility manager’s role and POEs by

the planning authority, thereby facilitating constant feedback
loop, the improvement of buildings overtime can be ensured
especially on developments by large scale builders.

Future change of use must be considered at the design

phase because different usages have different building and
fire-safety codes respectively. Computer-aided softwares,
climate-simulation softwares, BIM Models, etc. must be
exploited to render different scenarios of how the building
shall respond to the respective context.

“Be careful when mixing systems together” (Braham et

al. 2007). Design for Deconstruction shall be carefully
considered with the choice of structures, services, and
materials. However, they must not compromise on basic
References
Addis, W. & Schouten, J., 2004. Principles of design for
deconstruction to facilitate reuse and recycling., London :
CIRIA. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?d
irect=true&db=cat01619a&AN=up.670190&site=eds-live.
Anon, 2013. AD Classics: The Plug-In City / Peter Cook,
Archigram. ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.
com/399329/ad-classics-the-plug-in-city-peter-cook-
archigram.
Anon, BRE : Home. BRE : Home. Available at: https://www.
bre.co.uk/.
Anon, PLUG-IN CITY 75 I INHABIT THE FACADES I PARIS
2017 – STUDIO MALKA ARCHITECTURE. STUDIO MALKA
ARCHITECTURE. Available at: https://www.stephanemalka.
com/?portfolio=plug-in-city-75-i-habiter-les-facades-i-paris-
2017&lang=en.
Anon, 2017. Lifetimehomes.org.uk. Available at: http://www.
lifetimehomes.org.uk/.
Authority, G.L., 2017. Accessible London: Achieving an
Inclusive Environment (Lifetime Homes),, Greater London
Authority. Available at: http://www.london.gov.uk.
Braham, W.W., Hale, J.A. & Sadar, J.S., 2007. Rethinking
technology. [electronic resource] : a reader in architectural
theory., Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge. Available
at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=
cat01619a&AN=up.809722&site=eds-live.
Brand, S., 1994. How buildings learn : what happens after
they’re built., New York ; London : Viking. Available at: http://
search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat01619a
&AN=up.285241&site=eds-live.
Champika, L. & Anupa, M., 2016. Adaptable
buildings for sustainable built environment. Built
Environment Project and Asset Management, (2),
p.139. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.
aspx?direct=true&db=edsemr&AN=edsemr.10.1108.
BEPAM.10.2014.0053&site=eds-live.
French, H., 2016. Adaptable housing : accommodating
change. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx
?direct=true&db=edsble&AN=edsble.701881&site=eds-live.
Gann, D.M. & Barlow, J., 1996. Flexibility in building use:
the technical feasibility of converting redundant offices into
flats. Construction Management & Economics, 14(1), p.55.
Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=bth&AN=6424079&site=eds-live.
Gosling, J. et al., 2013. Adaptable buildings: A systems
approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 7, pp.44–51.
Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=edselp&AN=S2210670712000868&site=eds-live.
Habraken, N.J., Supports : an alternative to mass housing.,
London : Architectural Press. Available at: http://search.
ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat01619a&AN=u
p.107112&site=eds-live.
Hinte, E. van et al., 2003. Smart architecture, Uitgeverij 010.
Housley, S., 2016. Eco-pods by Howeler Yoon Architectureand
Squared Design Lab. Dezeen. Available at: https://www.
dezeen.com/2009/10/02/eco-pods-by-howeler-yoon-
architectureand-squared-design-lab/.
Ida Breed, C., (Mias) Claassens, H.J. & Bennett, J., 2012. The
Design of Urban Form as a Response to Elusive Patterns
and Networks: Examples from Industrial and Informal
Urban Areas in Pretoria, South Africa. Spaces & Flows: An
International Journal of Urban & Extra Urban Studies, 2(2),
pp.215–243. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.
aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=91794271&site=eds-live.
KELLER, A. et al., 2017. RESILIENCE OF HISTORIC CITIES AND
ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE. Urbanism. Architecture.
Constructions / Urbanism. Arhitectura. Constructii, 8(1),
pp.15–26. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.as
px?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=119239556&site=eds-live.
Kinnane, O., Grey, T. & Dyer, M., Adaptable housing
design for climate change adaptation. PROCEEDINGS OF
THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS-ENGINEERING
SUSTAINABILITY, 170(5), pp.249–267. Available at: http://
search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswsc&A
N=000410760400003&site=eds-live.
Peter, B. & Peter, L., 2011. Factors influencing the adaptive
re-use of buildings. Journal of Engineering, Design and
Technology, (1), p.32. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.
com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsemr&AN=edsemr.10.110
8.17260531111121459&site=eds-live.
Ross, B.E. et al., 2016. Enabling Adaptable Buildings: Results
of a Preliminary Expert Survey. Procedia Engineering,
145(ICSDEC 2016 - Integrating Data Science, Construction
and Sustainability), pp.420–427. Available at: http://search.
ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselp&AN=S187
7705816300133&site=eds-live.
Schneider, T. & Till, J., 2007. Flexible housing., Amsterdam ;
Boston : Architectural Press, an imprint of Elsevier. Available
at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=
cat01619a&AN=up.1226354&site=eds-live.
Slaughter, E.S., 2001. Design strategies to increase building
flexibility. Building Research & Information, 29(3), pp.208–
217. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dir
ect=true&db=bth&AN=4438494&site=eds-live.
Whitehand, J.W.R. & Larkham, P.J., 1992. Urban landscapes.
[electronic resource] : international perspectives., London ;
New York : Routledge. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.
com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat01619a&AN=up.1197346
&site=eds-live.
(Housley 2016)(Addis & Schouten 2004; Braham et al. 2007;
Brand 1994; Champika & Anupa 2016; French 2016; Gann
& Barlow 1996; Gosling et al. 2013; Habraken n.d.; Hinte
et al. 2003; Housley 2016; Ida Breed et al. 2012; KELLER et
al. 2017; Kinnane et al. n.d.; Peter & Peter 2011; Ross et al.
2016; Schneider & Till 2007; Whitehand & Larkham 1992;
Anon n.d.; Anon n.d.; Anon 2013)
APPENDIX -1 CASE STUDY - DARWIN COURT

ARCHITECT- JESTICO AND WHILES, PEABODY TRUST

LIFETIME HOMES DESIGN CRITERIA-
AIM- TO RESPOND TO THE CHANGING NEEDS OF LOCAL
THE LIFETIME HOME STANDARD PROMOTES DESIGN
COMMUNITY GROUPS AND OLDER PEOPLE.
INCLUSIVITY BY BEING PARTICULAR ABOUT THE FOLLOWING:
76 MIX OF 1-BED AND 2-BED FLATS
1. PARKING (WIDTH OR WIDENING CAPABILITY)
DARWIN COURT IS A PROJECT TARGETING PEOPLE OVER
2. APPROACH TO DWELLING FROM PARKING (DISTANCE,
50S WITH SERVICES SUCH AS SWIMMING POOL, CAFE, AND
GRADIENTS AND WIDTHS)
IT SUITE WHICH ARE AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE WIDER
3. APPROACH TO ALL ENTRANCES COMMUNITY.

4. ENTRANCES

5. COMMUNAL STAIRS AND LIFTS

6. INTERNAL DOORWAYS AND HALLWAYS

7. CIRCULATION SPACE

8. ENTRANCE LEVEL LIVING SPACE

9. POTENTIAL FOR ENTRANCE LEVEL BED-SPACE

10. ENTRANCE LEVEL LIVING SPACE

11. WC AND BATHROOM WALLS

12. STAIRS AND POTENTIAL THROUGH-FLOOR LIFT IN

DWELLING

13. POTENTIAL FOR FITTING HOISTS AND BEDROOM/

BATHROOM

14 BATHROOMS

15 GLAZING AND WINDOW HANDLE HEIGHTS

16. LOCATION OF SERVICE CONTROLS

Fig. 11 - (Retrieved from http://www.lifetimehomes.org.uk)

DARWIN COURT
CASE STUDY - CONSORT ROAD, SOUTHWARK, LONDON

ARCHITECT- WALTER MENTETH ARCHITECTS

AIM- BROWNFIELD REGENERATION

49 LOW COST DWELLINGS + COMMERCIAL

CONSORT ROAD CONSISTS OF 3 DISTINCT BLOCKS; A SIX

STOREY SHARED OWNERSHIP APARTMENT BUILDING,
LINKS VIA A TERRACE OF FAMILY HOUSES WITH A
CORNER OF RENTAL APARTMENTS, ALL TO LIFETIME
HOMES STANDARDS TO ENSURE A PROVISION FOR
FUTURE ADAPTATION AND CHANGE

IT IS A HIGHLY SUSTAINABLE DESIGN WITH A NUMBER

OF CONSTRUCTION AND PERFORMANCE INNOVATIONS,
INCLUDING SHELTERED LANDSCAPED AREAS TO THE
REAR OF THE DEVELOPMENT, 39 WINTER GARDENS IN
A SEQUENCE OF BAYS AND BUTTRESSES FOR USE BY
RESIDENTS WHOSE INDIVIDUAL STAMP COMPLETES THE
DESIGN THROUGH THEIR USE OF THE SPACE, A DOUBLE
PAVEMENT ALONG CONSORT ROAD, A LARGE CURTAIN
WALL TO THE RAIL VIADUCT, AND USE OF GLAZING TO
ESTABLISH A CLEAN, CLEAR URBAN PRESENCE.

THE DEVELOPMENT IS HIGH QUALITY, AESTHETICALLY

DISTINGUISHED, AT ONE WITH ITS SURROUNDINGS
AND ABOVE ALL, FIT FOR PURPOSE FOR A VARIETY OF
RESIDENTS NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.

Fig. 12 - (Retrieved from http://www.lifetimehomes.org.uk)

APPENDIX -2 CASE STUDY - POMPIDOU CENTRE, PARIS

ARCHITECT - RENZO PIANO + RICHARD ROGERS

DOM-INO CONCEPT - LE CORBUSIER

AN OPEN FLOOR PLAN STRUCTURE DESIGNED BY ARCHITECT

THE CENTRE GEORGES POMPIDOU IS A CULTURAL CENTRE
LE CORBUSIER IN 1914 -1915. IT IS A DESIGN IDEA TO
IN PARIS FAMOUS FOR ITS CONCEPT OF EXPOSING THE
MANUFACTURE IN SERIES, THAT COMBINES THE ORDER HE
STRUCTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING. THE
DISCOVERED IN CLASSICAL ARCHITECTURE.
SKELETON ENGULFS THE BUILDING FROM THE EXTERIOR,
SHOWING ALL OF THE MECHANICAL SYSTEMS.
IT WAS A PROTOTYPE AS A PHYSICAL PLATFORM FOR THE
MASS PRODUCTION OF HOUSING. THE NAME IS A PUN THAT
THE MAIN REASON FOR THIS CONCEPT IS TO MAXIMISE
COMBINES AN ALLUSION TO DOMUS (LATIN FOR HOUSE) AND
THE INTERIOR SPACE ENABLING IT TO WITHSTAND
THE PIECES OF THE GAME DOMINOES, BECAUSE THE FLOOR
ALTERATIONS WITHIN.
PLAN RESEMBLED THE GAME AND BECAUSE THE UNITS
COULD BE ALIGNED IN A SERIES LIKE DOMINOES, TO MAKE
IT HOUSES EUROPE’S LARGEST MUSEUM FOR MODERN
ROW HOUSES OF DIFFERENT PATTERNS.
ART, A HUGE LIBRARY AND A CENTRE FOR MUSIC AND
ACOUSTIC RESEARCH.

Fig. 13 - Le corbusier’s DOM-INO concept (Re-

trieved from http://www.wikipedia.com)
Fig. 14 - (Retrieved from http://www.archdaily.com)

Fig. 15 - (Retrieved from http://www.archdaily.com)

APPENDIX -3
PLUG - IN CITIES - ARCHIGRAM
A PROVOCATIVE HYPOTHETICAL FANTASY DESIGNED BY
PETER COOK. IT SUGGESTS A HYPOTHETICAL FANTASY
CITY, CONTAINING MODULAR RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT
“PLUG IN” TO A CENTRAL INFRASTRUCTURAL MEGA
MACHINE. THE PLUG IN CITY IS A CONSTANTLY EVOLVING
MEGASTRUCTURE THAT INCORPORATES RESIDENCES,
TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER ESSENTIAL SERVICES ALL
MOVABLE BY GIANT CRANES.
Fig. 16 - Plug-in city concept (Retrieved from http://
www.archdaily.com)
Fig. 17 - Plug-in city concept (Retrieved from http://
www.archdaily.com)
CASE STUDY - PLUG-IN CITY 75
ARCHITECT - STEPHANE MALKA
LOCATED NEXT TO LA SEINE RIVER, THIS RENOVATION WORK
TO A BUILDING THAT LACKS IN ENERGY PERFORMANCE
DUE TO THERMAL BRIDGES, BAD INSULATION AND OLD
STANDARD WINDOWS USES LIGHT-WEIGHT MODULAR
CONSTRUCTION WITH BIO-SOURCED WOOD PLUGGED
DIRECTLY TO EXISTING FACADE OF THE BUILDING. THE
ACCUMMULATION OF THE EXTENSIONS ON THE FACADE
DIVIDES THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION OF THE BUILDING
BY 4. THE BUILDING IS TRANSFORMED AND ADAPTED TO
THE REAL NEEDS OF THE USERS.
Fig. 18 - Plug-in city 75 (Retrieved from http://www.
stephanemalka.com)
ECO-PODS

ARCHITECT- HOWELER + YOON

AIM- TAKING ADVANTAGE OF HALTED CONSTRUCTION

SITE

PROPOSAL OF PREFABRICATED OFF- SITE CONSTRUCTED

MODULAR BIO-FUEL ECO PODS TO BE INSTALLED ON
CONSTRUCTION SITES AND AREAS PARTICULARLY HIT BY
RECESSION.

AS AN OPEN AND RECONFIGURABLE STRUCTURE, THE

VOIDS BETWEEN PODS FORM A NETWORK OF VERTICAL
PUBLIC PARKS/ BOTANICAL GARDENS HOUSING UNIQUE
PLANT SPECIES.

Fig. 19 - (Retrieved from http://www.dezeen.com)

Fig. 20 - (Retrieved from http://www.dezeen.com)