HYBRID BUILDING WITH SUSTAINABILITY ELEMENTS

Supervisor : Prof. Laura Daglio

Autor:

Ali Faraji 10448970

Mohammad Faraji 10448978

1
Mixed-use or Hybrid Apart from the same footprint, these functions
have (in general) nothing in common and
one of the issues of a plinth in regard to the share no spaces. The sum of its parts is just that
two different worlds it creates is that the up- and nothing more. On the contrary, the hybrid
per building block is disconnected from the building contains several functions that are
surroundings. Often, the plinth contributes integrated and might even share spaces, tar-
to a mere stacing of functions. But, one of the get groups, etc. In short, the sum of the parts
strengths of co bining functions is that togeth- of the hybrid building is greater than if they
er the result should be greater than the sum of would be separated. In biology, the hybrid off
the two. But, spring that has qualities superior to those of
when talking about mixed-use or hybrid either parents is called a heterotic hybrid, or
buildings there appears to be no clear defini- what we consider to be a ‘true’ hybrid.20
tion of either and they seem to almost be in- But this does not mean functions in the mixed
terchangeable in the architectural community. use building are not compatible, for instance
It is important that we define what we mean most of the times it is primarily a residential-
with these terms to create common grounds building that contains some additional func-
for our research. tions. However, the additional functions pres-
ent are for the exclusive use of the residents in
Kenneth Kaplan explains very clearly how re- the building.
lated, but still so different a mixed-use build- Further, the mixed-use building is character-
ing is from a hybrid building. According to Ka- ized by isolation within the urban context.21
plan, “…buildings, in a sense, have also been In contrast, a hybrid building “turns against
“crossed”, like plants and animals, to produce the combination of the usual programs and
Hybrid Architecture. (…) despite their idio- bases its whole raison d ‘etreon the unexpect-
syncratic and even strange manifestations,all ed mixing of functions.”22
the cited buildings possess the common idea Even though the relation of these programs
of heterosis or hybrid vigour. might not initially be obvious, they ought to
Each example, no matter which of its formal, be compatible. This might be the combination
functional or urbanistic elements might pre- of a function that uses a space during office
dominate,ascends to a richer, more elemental- hours, together with a function that uses that
wholeness, invigorated by a poetic union of its same space during the night.
minor parts.” But, this does not mean that it
will always be successful, as Kaplan adds: In addition to what This is Hybrid states about
“curiously, like its cousin in genetics, architec- the hybrid as an unexpected mixing of func-
tural “hybridization” also can breed sterility in tions, we should look at what we actually mean
its offspring: those all too familiar, barren with this unexpectedness.
“mixed-use” mega-structures that have invad- At first glance, it might seem that this un ex-
ed our urban and rural landscape. The taut pectedness is solely based on the combination
line between vigour and sterility dares our of particular functions, for instance two func-
mastery.”19 tions that one just didn’t think about combin-
So, in other words, a mixed use and hybrid ing before. But this is not necessarily always
building are two extremes on a single scale.
With that in mind, the mixed-use building in
essence contains several functions that are not
mixed, but instead are simply placed back to
back. 20 The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009.
21 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011),
p.60
22 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is
19 Kenneth Kaplan in Joseph Fenton, Architecture Pamphlet #11; Hy- Hybrid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011),
brid Buildings, 1985, p.4 Back cover

2
the case. It can also refer to the nature of func- imposed with the grid of the city as defined by
tions that might be unexpected, but would city blocks and other factors, like perspectives,
work very well together. The hybrid is a “cele- public spaces, and landmarks, the hybrid ac-
bration of complexity, diversity and variety of tually becomes a part of the realm of public
programmes.(…) a mixture of different inter- planning.26
dependent activities.” It is a search for “unex
pected, unpredictable, intimate relationships, Sociability is a more abstract view on what the
encourages coexistence and is conscious that hybrid should be, what it should facilitate.
unprogrammed situations are the keys to its A place where the intimacy of the private and
own future.”23 This shows that it is truly about sociability of the public spheres meet. With
the interaction between these functions that is this a key element is its permeability for (in
the unexpected element. The hybrid opens up essence) everybody.
to its surroundings and contact among strang- And it is a place where there is activity 24 hours
ers should be encouraged. a day, because the activity ought to be constant
and, therefore, not controlled by public or pri-
In order to illustrate what we mean with this, it vate rhythms.
may be helpful to now introduce an example. This is Hybrid coins the term of the “fulltime
At OMA’s Bryghusprojektet in Copenhagen, building.” 27
there are terraces present on the upper level of Considering the qualities of a hybrid building
the building that are shared by the dwellings, as opposed to a mixed-use building, the fol-
offices and the Danish Architecture Centre. In lowing question was then triggered: what are
this scenario, the Danish Architectural Centre the architectural elements through which the
attracts both external visitors as well as the qualities of a hybrid have been achieved in
dwellers and workers from the offices which precedent projects?
creates a connection among strangers. This
illustrates how unprogrammed situations in Development of the Hybrid
a combination of functions affect each other
and can generate a higher quality experience. The combination of multiple functions within
a single building structure is something that is
Two recurrent, major aspects that differentiate not a new approach. Rather, it is an architec-
a hybrid from a mixed-use building are scale tural strategy that has been practiced for hun-
and form. Leen van Duin compares the rela- dreds of years. Joseph
tively new hybrid building typology with the
studies done by the Structuralists or the Me- Fenton in 1984 already compared “the house
tabolists in the 1950s and 1960s. But he states over the store, the apartment above the bridge
that there is a fundamental difference between and the Roman bath” as traditional examples
these mixed-use ‘megastructures’ and the hy- of “combining two or more functions within
brid building in scale and form24. the walls of a single structure.” 28
Kaplan argues that more specifically a hybrid’s Already in the middle of the twentieth centu-
“scale is determined by the dimension of a city ry, buildings that contained multiple functions
block within the orthogonal grid.” 25 were coined mixed-use buildings.29
The fact that a hybrid building is often super-

26 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
23 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy- brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), p.45
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), p.43 27 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
24 Clemens Steenbergen, Henk Mihl, Wouter Reh, and Ferry Aerts, brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), p.50
Architectural Design and Composition (Bussum: THOTH Publish- 28 Joseph Fenton, Pamphlet Architecture: Hybrid Buildings, 1985,
ers, 2002), p.208 Vol. 11, p.5
25 Joseph Fenton, Architecture Pamphlet #11; Hybrid Buildings, 29 Joseph Fenton, Pamphlet Architecture: Hybrid Buildings, 1985,
1985, p.5 Vol. 11, p.3

3
According to This is Hybrid, the mixed-use structions and steel frames, and maybe even
concept itself came about at the end of the 19th more importantly: the development of the el-
Century in American cities.30 evator.

Additionally, Richard Ingersoll believes that Apart from the fact that hybrid buildings are
in order for city life to survive it requires the comprised of several unexpected functions
“anthropological equivalent of biodiversity”31. that should work together seamlessly, makes
In his eyes, one of the things to guarantee this it a resistant building to different needs. But
diversity is crossing programs. So it is not that doesn’t necessarily mean it is resistant
remarkable that mixing of functions within to changes in these needs. As mentioned in
one building has been around for years. But previous chapters, society is diverse, and ever
it has not been until the twenty-first century changing. Thus, the hybrid building will also
that a rise of a second building type has been be subject to changes in functions, so it has to
seen: the hybrid building. This is Hybrid states be flexible. Some functions will leave spaces,
that the hybrid building type has the mixed- others will reoccupy them. In essence this is
use building type gene in its gene code, but always the case with buildings, and there fore a
that the hybrid building has evolved from the problem that architects, engineers, urbanists,
mixed-use building type. 32 etc. have always had to deal with. But in the
As defined in the previous chapter this is de- case of the hybrid building this is something
rived from the fact that the mixed-use and that will affect the whole building, as the idea
hybrid building both consist of the ‘gene’ of is that the function should work together in a
combining functions. However, we define way that the building transcends itself.
the mixed-use building as something that is a
mixture of functions that is just that. The true But, it is good to specify what we mean with
hybrid building evolved from this in the sense flexibility. A good summation to illustrate
that its main purpose is to create a greater this is given by the article Building Flexibility
building through the mixing of functions. Management. It talks about three basic types
One of the first publications regarding the hy- of flexibility within a building, which should
brid building was Joseph Fenton’s Pamphlet be present in order to facilitate change. The
Architecture #11 Hybrid Buildings, which was first one is service flexibility, and is important
published in 1985. In this publication, he at- for the (amount of) building’s users. In aver-
tempted to write about the fact that there was age this is important during the first two years
a distinction between the anonymous building of the building’s life. Second is the modifiabil-
masses filled with several functions and build- ity of the building itself, to allow for changes
ings with integrated, well-thought function in use of spaces. On average, this is of special
combinations. Steven Holl wrote in his fore- importance from the third until the tenth year.
word that “hybrid buildings are undeniably And lastly the long-term adaptability which
fruits of modernity”. 33 He states that this is di- “is a key factor especially in the stratification
rectly linked to the mechanical advancements of the urban structure and the cultural envi-
of that time, such as improved concrete con- ronment. ”34

For example, “The Hub” at Kings Cross in Lon-

don is an example of how this can be imple-
mented, and is a proven success. Even though
30 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), p.13
31 Lecture by Richard Ingersoll, The Death of the City and the Surviv-
al of Urban Life (2004), Source:
http://www.publicspace.org/en/text-library/eng/a030-the-deathof-
the-city-and-the-survival-of-urban-life, visited 30-01-2014 34 Arto Saari and Pekka Heikkilä, Building Flexibility Management
32 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy- (The Open Construction and Building Technology Journal, 2008),
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), back extract p.239. source:
33 S. Holl in his Foreword in J. Fenton, Architecture Pamphlet #11; http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tobctj/articles/V002/239 TO-
Hybrid Buildings, 1985, p.3 BCTJ.pdf, accessed 03-02-2014.

4
it is for a large part owned by a single company, ing model that is so often referred to as a “hy-
which facilitates a combination of renting and brid” is not wrong per se, but we believe that
traditional membership. Members are chosen the conventional building model in question
to ensure a diverse membership mix that rep- is not actually what it claims to be.
resents an array of professions, sectors, and in- Faced with the reality that so many buildings
dustries. They can work on flexible desk-/ and claim to be or are referred to as “hybrids” in
networking spaces during the day, which the architectural community but are actually
opens up as an event space for debates and mixed-use buildings, the logical next step is to
lectures during the night. All flexible spaces then formulate a mental model regarding the
are available for private hire, and in addition qualities that encompass a true hybrid build-
to all the flexible spaces it also contains a café ing. A mental model is described as “…per-
and meeting rooms. Bringing people together sonal, internal representations of external re-
is apparent as one of the greatest benefits of ality that people use to interact with the world
this concept. Again, even though this building around them. They are constructed by indi-
might not be entitled as a true hybrid, its prin- viduals based on… their perceptions, and un-
ciplesare in essence the same. derstandings of the world. Mental models are
used to reason…They provide the mechanism
In the beginning of this chapter, we talked through which new information is filtered and
about the hybrid building as a strategy rath- stored”.35
er than a building per se. Therefore, with the A mental model will provide us with clear cri-
eye on tomorrow it would be inconsistent to teria regarding a true hybrid building that will
write down how exactly to build a hybrid. One allow us to quickly decipher whether a prece-
has to keep in mind that the whole idea of the dent project is truly a hybrid building and will
hybrid is to provide for the needs of various also provide direction regarding our personal
people and target groups. And as hard as it is designs for the hybrid buildings that we will be
to build for the current society, all the harder it designing for the site on the Oostelijke Han-
is to build for the future society. Therefore the delskade.
(future) hybrid building should be adaptable
to all kinds of situations. This could be a small
change on the scale of immediate users, to a
change which might impact the whole hybrid
building. Which means changes of user groups Mental Model for a True Hybrid Build-
over the course of a day, to complete function ing
replacement. And it could even mean that the
building has to deal with a (temporary) vacant Through our theoretical research, bound by
space, whilst retaining its functionality. literature about the hybrid building and the
observations that we have discussed in the for-
mer paragraphs, we arrived at a mental mod-
el that is comprised of eight qualities that we
Doubts: Are “Hybrids” True Hybrid argue when implemented together result in a
Buildings? true hybrid building.The following section in-
troduces and provides an explanation regard-
Today, more than ever, it seems that every- ing each of the eight qualities contained in the
where you turn in the architectural commu- mental model for a true hybrid building:
nity, the term “hybrid” building is mentioned.
However, once we embarked on our research
regarding hybrid buildings, doubt and a hy-
pothesis surfaced: we realized that the majori-
ty of the buildings that are coined as “hy
35 Natalie A. Jones, Helen Ross, Timothy Lynam, Pascal Perez, and
brids” are in reality not more than mixed-use Anne Leitch, “Mental Models: An Interdisciplinary Synthesis of The-
buildings. In essence, the conventional build- ory and Methods”, Ecology and Society 16 (1): 46.

5
1.Project Scale The second quality in the mental model for
a true hybrid building pertains to urban area
density. Hybrid buildings thrive in the pres-
ence of a dense urban fabric surrounding the
project. Globally,congestion and density in the
city have been plaguing issues; however, it was
Rem Koolhaas who first saw the potential that
lies in density regarding the architecture of
mixing different functions during his study of
New York. A true hybrid building “exploits the
conditions of congestion to generate new
forms of social interaction”. 38
The first quality in the mental model for a true In regard to urban context, the hybrid build-
hybrid building is project scale. ing “…proposes intense environments of cross
In regard to scale, This is Hybrid describes fertilisation, which mix known genotypes and
hybrid buildings as “…super buildings, su- create genetic allies to improve living condi-
per-blocks, megastructures,or Building-as-a- tions and revitalise their surrounding environ
City”. This is Hybrid argues that hybrid build- ments…The hybrid goes beyond the domain
ings are of a large scale due to the fact that of architecture and enters the realm of urban
mixing different functions requires that the planning”.39
building be of a large size and superposing (or Essentially,the hybrid building flourishes in
placing things on top of one another) results dense urban environments and even has the
in a greater building height.36 potential to positively impact the surrounding
Furthermore, in her essay regarding hybrid urban fabric.
buildings, Susanne Komossa refers to a hybrid
building is an“extremely condensed urban
block”. 3.Function Diversity
Komossa argues that this is an important
characteristic of the hybrid building due to the
fact that the hybrid building itself “…increases
the city’s density and contributes to the public
realm of the city – horizontally as well as ver-
tically…” 37

2. Urban Area Density

The third quality in the mental model for a

true hybrid building concerns function di-
versity. For example, This is Hybrid states that
the hybrid building“…turns against the com-

38 Rafael Luna, “A Flexible Infra-Architectural System for a Hybrid

36 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy- Shanghai” MA Thesis MIT (2006), 10-12. Retrieved from:
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), 45 http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/57525, Accessed 16 December
37 Susanne Komossa, “Researching and Designing GREAT; the Ex- 2013
tremely Condensed Hybrid Urban Block”, AE... Revista Lusófona de 39 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
Arquitectura e Educação 5 (2011), 29 brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), 45

6
bination of the usual programs and bases its 4.Function Scale
whole raison d’etre on the unexpected mixing
of functions”. 40
This is Hybrid compares the hybrid building
to the “social condenser” which is a building
type that arose in the Soviet Union. Like the
hybrid, the social condenser typology is said to
also have the mixed-use typology in its DNA.
However, what really seems to distinguish the
hybrid from the social condenser is the fact
that the condenser is only geared to a closed
community, and this is especially visible in the
functions that are present in a condenser: The fourth quality in the mental model for a
they are predictable and only cater to the needs true hybrid building relates to function scale.
of the building residents. Whereas, the hybrid As previously discussed, in order to mix var-
is claimed to open up the city and ultimately ious functions, the overall scale of the hybrid
encourage contact among strangers. 41 building itself must be quite large. However,
In terms of defining exactly what can be con- this is not the case in regard to the individual
sidered “unexpected” in terms of functions, it functions themselves that make up a hybrid
may be best to define “unexpected” functions building. Accord ing to Susanne Komossa,
as those that do not simply serve a closed com- hybrid buildings will often contain large scale
munity and promote contact among strangers. functions such as swimming pools; we argue
It has even been said that a hybrid building though that the building should not only con-
doesn’t just juxtapose unexpected functions tain large scale functions.43 Rather, arange in
but that it actually containsm‘disparate’, or the scale of functions should be present in a
contrasting functions. 42 Again, we argue that true hybrid building. Jan Gehl states that a
a building that simply contains two functions collection of smaller scale functions is more
is not a hybrid building; instead, the hybrid likely to generate a vibrant, mixed audience as
building must contain unpredictable or even opposed to a single, large scale function.44
(preferably) functions that although they are For example, Steven Holl’s Linked Hybrid in
unalike they support each other, and result Beijing contains a range in the scale of the
in a higher quality building. Further, the un- functions present; larger functions such as a
expected nature regarding the functions in a cinema are present as well as smaller functions
hybrid building may also refer to their com such as small groups of small scale shops,
plexity; for example, the unforeseen element which Holl refers to as “micro-urbanisms” due
regarding the functions in a hybrid building to the fact that they activate certain areas pres-
may refer to a situation in which one function ent at the project. 45
operates in a space in the morning and anoth- In essence, we are not referring to the scale of
er operates in the same space during the eve- the unit in particular (in the case of a dwelling
ning. or a shop), rather in regard to scale we are re-
ferring to the size of the function as a block as
it has been implemented.

40 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), back extract
41 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy- 43 Susanne Komossa, “Researching and Designing GREAT; the Ex-
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), 52 tremely Condensed Hybrid Urban Block”, AE... Revista Lusófona de
42 Ariel Manolo Fausto, “Merge: The Hybridization of Architecture, Arquitectura e Educação 5 (2011), 29
Infrastructure, and Landscape” MA Thesis MIT (2002), 1. Retrieved 44 Jan Gehl, The City at Eye Level (Delft: Eburon, 2012), 16, 203
from: http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/37562, Accessed 28 Janu- 45 “Linked Hybrid”, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat
ary 2014 (July 2013), 58

7
For example, one of the precedent projects 6.Flexibility
that we studied was the Marina Bay Complex
in Chicago, where one massive functional
block of 900 apartments was implemented –
we are not referring to the size of the individ-
ual apartments, but instead the fact that the
dwelling function is massive and has not been
broken up by subsequent functions.

5.Function Integration The fifth quality

The sixth quality that we have included in the
mental model for a true hybrid building per-
tains to flexibility, or the ability to change the
current building situation. As previously dis-
cussed, the hybrid building should not be seen
as an endpoint, but rather a strategy in which
things are left rather free. For example, Rem
Koolhaas has stated that, “I am incredibly bad
at predicting the future… A building has at
least two lives –the one imagined by its maker
and the life it lives afterward – and they are
never the same”.48 Thus, accepting that there
in the mental model that we have compiled re- should not be a sense of finality in regard to
garding qualities of a true hybrid building is the hybrid building and that it must instead
function integration. As we have previously react to unpredictable future needs and situa-
discussed, the true hybrid building contains tions, it is crucial that the hybrid building can
unexpected functions, but what is essential is accommodate possible future uses.
the fact that these functions do not simply ex- Flexibility is greatly reliant upon a structure
ist in the same building but that they in fact that results in spaces that are flexible in terms
are integrated, or mingled. Susanne Komos- of subdivision as well as changes in function.
sa states that the hybrid building integrates The flexibility of a building also relates to the
functions in order to “activate”.46 This is Hy- surrounding urban context; a building can
brid compares integration within the hybrid best serve the social needs of a community by
building to a system of interconnected vessels; having the ability to adapt to the changes in
she states that potential is generated by the the needs of those in the community.49
integration of functions and it is transferred
to weaker activities present within the hybrid
building.47 From precedent research, we have
concluded that integration of functions can be
horizontal or vertical and furthermore can be
achieved through visual or physical connec-
tions.

46 Susanne Komossa, “Researching and Designing GREAT; the Ex-

tremely Condensed Hybrid Urban Block”, AE... Revista Lusófona de
Arquitectura e Educação 5 (2011), 34
47 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), 45 49 Laura Maynard, “Community Reclamation: the Hybrid Building”
48 Paul Fraioli, “The Invention and Reinvention of the City: An Inter- MA Thesis, 2012. Retrieved from:
view with Rem Koolhaas”, Journal of International Affairs 65 (2012) http://docs.rwu.edu/archthese/84/

8
7. Vertical Connections grated public gathering space. In general, the
presence of public space in which people can
gather contributes to a vibrant, successful ur-
ban realm.51 Specifically in regard to the hy-
brid building type, the intimacy of the private
realm as well as the sociability of the public
realm dwell within the true hybrid. Further,
This is Hybrid states that the hybrid building
thrives off of the meeting of public and private
realms.52 Finally, Susanne Komossa states that
a hybrid building “…extends the city’s public
domain horizontally and vertically into the
The seventh quality contained in the mental building’s interior and links the public domain
model that we have created for a true hybrid inside and outside”.53 In short, regarding pub-
building pertains to vertical connections that lic space, the true hybrid building integrates
promote integration. Again, returning to the public space; the true hybrid does not stop at
idea that a true hybrid building contains in- confining public gathering space to the ground
tegrated functions and that the public realm floor, but instead integrates public gathering
is not simply isolated to the ground floor in space vertically into the building.
a hybrid building, it is then necessary to cre-
ate strong vertical connections that facilitate
way-finding in the hybrid building for users. To conclude, the eight qualities contained
According to Susanne Komossa, vertical con- in the mental model for a true
nections such as elevators and stairs make it hybrid building are as follows:
possible for building users to find their desti-
nation in the city within the city, which is the 1. Project scale
hybrid building.50 It is clear that vertical con- 2. Urban area density
nections in the hybrid building have the abili- 3. Function diversity
ty to facilitate the integration or separation of 4. Function scale
the functions present. 5. Function integration
6. Flexibility
7. Vertical connections (that promote
8. Integrated Public Gathering Space integration)
8. Integrated public gathering space

The final quality that is present in the mental

model for the true hybrid building is inte-
51 “Regarding Public Space”, 306090 Architecture Journal 9 (2005), 32
52 Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, and Javier Arpa, This is Hy-
brid (Vitoria-Gasteiz: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2011), 43
50 Susanne Komossa, “Researching and Designing GREAT; the Ex- 53 Susanne Komossa, “Researching and Designing GREAT; the Ex-
tremely Condensed Hybrid Urban Block”, AE... Revista Lusófona de tremely Condensed Hybrid Urban Block”, AE... Revista Lusófona de
Arquitectura e Educação 5 (2011), 32 Arquitectura e Educação 5 (2011), 29

9
 Overview Precedent Studies We have reviewed fifteen case study projects
using the mental model we derived
To reiterate, a quick review of many precedent from our research regarding hybrid buildings;
projects that are referred to as “hybrid” build- the projects include:
ings instead often shows a very different situ-
ation, which can be summarized in diagram a. Marina City Complex, Chicago
1.11 b. John Hancock Center, New York City
However, our research regarding hybrid c. Ihme Zentrum, Hannover
buildings resulted in a clear mental model of d. Torre Velasca, Milan
the qualities that are present in a true hybrid e. Seaside Hybrid Building, Seaside, Florida
building and our mental model can be quickly f. Cube Dwellings, Rotterdam
summarized in diagram 1.12 g. Shinonome Canal Court Block I, Tokyo
h. Bryghusprojektet, Copenhagen
i. Linked Hybrid Building, Beijing
j. The Galleria, New York City
k. De Rotterdam, Rotterdam
l. Sliced Porosity Block, Chengdu
m. Solid 18, Amsterdam
n. Brunswick Centre, London
o. Groothandelsgebouw, Rotterdam

10
PRECEDENTS
A MARINA CITY COMPLEX B JOHN HANCOCK CENTER
Bertrand Goldberg, 1959-1964 Skidmore,Owings & Merrill, 1968-1970
Chicago,USA Chicago,USA

C IHME ZENTRUM D TORRE VELASCA

Helmut kloss, Peter Kolb & Partners,1972 BBPR, 1954
Hanover,Germany Milan, Italy

E EASIDE HYBRID BUILDING F CUBEDWELLINGS

Steven hall Architect, 1984-1988 Piet Blom, 1984
Ceaside,USA Rotterdam, The Netherlands

11
 PRECEDENTS
G SHINONOME C.C. BLOCK I H BRYGHUSPROJEKTET
Riken Yamamoto & Associates, 2003 OMA, 2017 (expected)
Tokyo, Japan Cpenhagen, Denmark

I INKED HYBRID J GAKKERIA

Steven Holl Architects,2008 David Specter, 1975
Beijing, China New York, USA

K DE ROTTERDAM L SLICED POROSITY BLOCK

OMA,2011 Steven Hall Architects, 2007-2011
Rotterdam, The Netherlands Chengdu, China

12
 PRECEDENTS
M SOLID I8 N BRUNSWICK CENTER
Claus en kaan, 2007 Patrick Hodgkinson, 1971-1974
Amesterdam, The Netherlands London, United Kingdom

O GROOTHANDELSGEBOUW
Hugh Maaskant,1952
Rotterdam, The Netherlands

13
 PRECEDENT CRITERIA

1. PROJECT SCALE 2. URBAN DENSITY 3.FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY 4.FUNCTION SCALE

5. FUNCTION INTEGRATION 6. FLEXIBILITY 7. VERTICAL CONNECTIONS 8. INTEGRATED PUBLIC

GATHERING SPACE

14
GROOTHANDELSGEBOUW
Hugh Maaskant,1952
Rotterdam, The Netherlands

SHINONOME C.C. BLOCK I

Riken Yamamoto & Associates, 2003
Tokyo, Japan

BRYGHUSPROJEKTET
OMA, 2017 (expected)
Cpenhagen, Denmark

15
16
GRO OTHANDELSGEB OUW

Hugh Maaskant
1952,Rotterdam, The Netherlands

17
 ANALYSIS
1. PROJECT SCALE 3.FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY 4.FUNCTION SCALE

In terms of scale, the Groothandels- There are several different functions In terms of scale, the Groothandels-
gebouw building is quite massive due to present at the Groothandelsgebouw gebouw building is quite massive due to
the fact that it contains several functions building such as: shops, offi ces, restau- the fact that it contains several functions
that would typically be found in a more rants, and dwellings. Presently, there are that would typically be found in a more
sprawling city block it is truly a city with- over 160 tenants in the Groothandels- sprawling city block it is truly a city with-
in a building regarding scale. gebouw building, which means that there in a building regarding scale.
is a wide range of functions present in the
building.

2. URBAN DENSITY 5. FUNCTION INTEGRATION

The Groothandelsgebouw building is lo- Some of the functions are integrated at the Groothandelsgebouw building. For exam-
cated in the dense urban context of Rot- ple, the triple-height main lobby offers visual integration of different functions across
terdam. The building seems to respond the void present. Otherwise, there is no physical integration of functions present.
and positively impact the surrounding
context. For example, public gathering
spaces in the form of lobbies have been
placed at nodes corresponding to the site
context.

18
6. FLEXIBILITY 7. VERTICAL CONNECTIONS 8. INTEGRATED PUBLIC GATH-
ERING SPACE
The column structure at the Groothan- All of the functions present share vertical All of the functions present share vertical
delsgebouw project provides a high connections at the Groothandelsgebouw connections at the Groothandelsgebouw
level of horizontal fl exibility for future building, much like a system of connect- building, much like a system of connect-
changes. The column structure results ed vessels which can transfer potential ed vessels which can transfer potential
in spacious, neutral floor plans. Further- to the weaker functions present. There to the weaker functions present. There
more, portions of the ground fl oor are are greater chances for different people are greater chances for different people
double-height, which offers fl exibility to groups to integrate when access is shared groups to integrate when access is shared
make changes vertically, as well. between different functions. between different functions.

19
 SUB-CONCLUSION
Flexibility Strongest quality

ADAPTABILITY IN FUNCTIONS AND DIVISION VERTICAL ADAPTABILITY WITHIN FUNCTIONS

A key quality that is present at the Groothandelsgebouw is the Portions of the ground floor at the Groothandelsgebouw
flexibility that is offered by the structure. The neutrality of the building offer a spacious, double height section. The spacious
column structure that is present at the project offers a high section provides a high degree of vertical flexibility for future
level of fl exibility for future changes. For example, Iteration changes. For example, the spacious section offers the possi-
1 (above) of the offi ces shows a future situation where one of bility of constructing a full first-floor level within the space
the existing offi ces has been divided into several smaller offi (Iteration I, above). Furthermore, the neutrality of the struc-
ces. Iteration II shows a future situation where two shops have ture on the ground floor allows for flexibility in terms of fu-
replaced a portion of an existing larger offi ce. Although the ture changes in function within the space; Iteration II (above)
structure offers a great deal of fl exibility, the routing system is shows a future situation where a full-ground storey floor has
limited; thus, if offi ces are sub-divided into small offi ces or been constructed and a commercial function has been re-
shops, the routing must be extended to offer access to the new placed with an office.
functions (visible in Iterations I and II, above).

20
21
SHINONOME CANAL COURT BLOCK I

Riken Yamamoto & Associates, 2003
Tokyo, Japan

22
ANALYSIS
1. PROJECT SCALE 3.FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY 4.FUNCTION SCALE

In terms of scale, the Shinonome Canal There are several different functions pres- In general, the scale of the function
Court project is massive; due to the var- ent at the Shinonome Canal Court Block blocks at the projet is quite small and
ious functions present, the project truly 1such as: shops, offi ces (SOHOs - small optimal to contribute to function inte-
embodies the hybrid spirit of a city with- offi ce/home offi ces), and dwellings. Fur- gration. For example, a SOHO (possibly
in a building. thermore,the flexible nature and number used as a public function) has been im-
of SOHOs at the project means that there plemented with every dwelling - which
is the potential for a high amount of di- has resulted in an absence of a mo-
versity in the functions present. no-functional block.

2. URBAN DENSITY 5. FUNCTION INTEGRATION

The Shinonome Canal Court Block proj- There is a high level of integration present at the project. For example, an offi ce (SOHO
ect 1 is located in the extremely dense - small offi ce/home offi ce) has been integrated horizontally with every dwelling in the
urban context of the Koto ward of Tokyo. project. Further, voids in the form of terraces at the project provide opportunities for
The project design responds to the urban the visual integration of functions.
fabric in the sense that it provides a route
through the project which maintains
connectivity in the site context.

23
6. FLEXIBILITY 7. VERTICAL CONNECTIONS 8. INTEGRATED PUBLIC GATH-
ERING SPACE
The column structure is at the Shinon- At the Shinonome Canal Court Block 1 Public gathering space has been integrat-
ome Canal Court Block 1 project pro- project, the dwellings and the SOHOs ed into the project. The public gathering
vides a high level of flexibility for fu- share vetical connections; this sharing of space is not located within a building per
ture changes. Further,opportunities for vertical connections facilitates the inte- se, but an elevated space (located one
short-term flexibility have been provided gration of functions and the interaction storey above ground level) for gathering
through movable partitions present that of people. However, access to the vertical that is fully accessible to the public has
separate the SOHO from the dwelling. connections themselves is limited at the been provided.
project; the vertical transport at the proj-
ect is not fully open to the pub-

24
 SUB-CONCLUSION
Flexibility Strongest quality

POSSIBLE DWELLING CONFIGURATIONS

A key quality that is present is the fl exibility that is provided

by the fl oor plan as well as certain architectural features that
are present at the Shinonome Canal Court Block 1 project.
For example, a SOHO (small offi ce/home offi ce) has been
provided for every dwelling, but architectural features such as
movable wall panels (above, right) provide fl exibility for the
dweller to either utilize the provided SOHO space as a public
offi ce or shop or instead utilize the space for more personal
use as part of the dwelling (Iteration A 1). Furthermore, the
moveable wall panels allow the dwellers to also control
the actual size of the SOHO (Iterations A II, A III & A
IV).

25
26
B R Y G H U S P R O J E K T E T

OMA,
2017 (expected) Cpenhagen, Denmark

27
 ANALYSIS
1. PROJECT SCALE 3.FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY 4.FUNCTION SCALE

The Bryghusprojektet is of a large scale. There are several different functions The Brughusprojektet does contain some
Due to the range of functions present, present at the Bryghusprojektet project rather large functions (i.e. the Danish
the resulting scale of the building is quite such as: the Danish Architectural Cen- Architectural Centre). The key is that the
large. ter, a cafe, offices, and dwellings.The functions have not been implemented
Danish Architectural Centre truly adds as one large funtional block but instead
the unexpected element to the building have been broken up into smaller func-
that is associated with the hybrid due to tional blocks and distributed over several
the wide range of users it draws and the storeys in the project.
potential for those users to interact with
dwellers from the building.

2. URBAN DENSITY

The Bryghusprojektet project is located

in the dense urban context of Copen-
hagen. The project is quite responsive in
terms of the surrounding urban fabric
due to the fact that it spans over Chris-
tians Brygge Road and further provides
pedestrians connections to all sides of
the site via routes that run through the
project.

5. FUNCTION INTEGRATION

Some of the functions present at the Bryghusprojektet project are integrated. For ex-
ample, some of the functions such as the Danish Architecture Centre, dwellings, and
offi ces are physically integrated through the sharing of public terraces. Visual connec-
tions are also offered in some portions of
the building to the Danish Architecture
Centre; however, there are some oppor-
tunities for physical integration of func-
tions that were missed.

28
6. FLEXIBILITY 7. VERTICAL CONNECTIONS 8. INTEGRATED PUBLIC GATH-
ERING SPACE
The column and truss structure at the Vertical connections at the Bryghuspro- Public gathering space has been inte-
Bryghusprojektet project provides a high jektet are quite isolated in the sense that grated into the Bryghusprojektet proj-
level of fl exibility for future changes. each function present has its own vertical ect. For example, there is a public route
However, some of the fl oors contain un- access system. This results in a fragment- that runs through the project; the public
even portions which means that horizon- ed feeling in terms of access and does not route offers public places for gathering as
tal fl exibility is limited at some locations facilitate the integration of the functions well as connections to functions within
in the building. present. the building. There are also semi-public
gathering places in the form of terraces
that are located on the upper fl oors of
the building; some of the functions pres-
ent are physically integrated through the
sharing of the semi-public

29
 SUB-CONCLUSION
Integrated Public Gathering Space Strongest quality

INTEGRATION OF PUBLIC SPACE

A key quality that is present at the Bryghusprojektet is the

presence of public space that has been integrated into the
building. The public route that runs through the building of-
fers areas for gathering. The entrances to all of the functions
in the building are located along the public route that runs
through the building. Further, elements from the Danish Ar-
chitecture Centre have been placed in the public route - pro-
grammatic elements spill out into public spaces in order to
activate the space.

30
31
DE ROTTERDAM

OMA,2011
Rotterdam, The Netherlands

32
 ANALYSIS
1. PROJECT SCALE 3.FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY 4.FUNCTION SCALE

The DE ROTTERDAM is of a large scale. Nevertheless, the building is exception- The three stacked and interconnecting
Due to the range of functions present, ally compact, with a mix of programs towers of De Rotterdam rise 44 floors to
the resulting scale of the building is quite organized into distinct but overlapping a height of 150 meters and span a width
large. blocks of commercial office space, resi- of over 100 meters. De Rotterdam does
dential apartments, hotel and conference contain some rather large functions. The
facilities, restaurants and cafes. Office key is that the functions have been im-
employees, residents and hotel guests plemented as one large funtional block
are brought together in conference, sport and distributed over several storeys in
and restaurant facilities. the project.

2. URBAN DENSITY

De Rotterdam is a building on the Wil-

helminapier in Rotterdam, designed by
the Office for Metropolitan Architecture
in 1998. The complex is located between
the KPN Tower and Rotterdam Cruise
Terminal and was finalized at the end of
2013. On 21 November 2013, the munic-
ipality of Rotterdam, as the largest user,
received the keys. The design provides
space for offices, a hotel and apartments.

5. FUNCTION INTEGRATION

Some of the functions are integrated at

De ROTTERDAM building. For example
in ground floor we have a physical inte-
gration between Dweling Offices And
Hotel lobby.

33
6. FLEXIBILITY 7. VERTICAL CONNECTIONS 8. INTEGRATED PUBLIC GATH-
ERING SPACE
The column and open plans provide a Vertical connections at De Rotterdam Public gathering space has been integrat-
flexibility for De Rotterdam projects in are quite isolated in the sense that each ed into De Rotterdam project. The build-
different stories such as Offices. function present has its own vertical ac- ing’s shared plinth is the location of the
cess system. This results in a fragmented lobbies to each of the towers, creating a
feeling in terms of access and does not pedestrianized public hub by means of a
facilitate the integration of the functions common hall.
present.

public Gathering Space

34