<%BANNER%>

Evaluating Workspaces in European Sustainable High Rise Buildings






























2010 Jennifer Mackey



























To all Architects and Developers, please consider the environment and occupants of
your project









ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis is the result of collaboration and help from many people, whom I

finally have the opportunity thank in these few lines. First, I would like to thank my

family for their emotional support and strength: my mother Maria Mackey, and my sister

Jessica Mackey. My mother has given me endless strength and has always believed in

all my decisions. I thank my twin Jessica, simply because she is my other half.

While living in Europe, I was fortunate to have met some incredibly helpful and

kind people. I thank Serge Ries for translating the surveys I made into German, which

came in handy in several instances. I also thank the office workers who have taken

their time to fill out my surveys and provide me valuable feedback in conversations. Dr.

Roger Wyrembek, Catrin Kuhlmann, and Maribe RuBluauu for giving me an outstanding

tour of Nord/LB and for answering my questions. In addition, I thank Jan Forster and

his family for giving me a place to stay in Frankfurt. They were so kind to do everything

they could to help me during my short stay there.

The statistics department at UF also deserves a thank you for their counsel.

Also, Professor Thomas Smith, who has inspired me to explore the topic of my thesis.

My thesis Chair: Professors John Maze and Martin Gold who have helped collaborate

and given me feedback diligently.

Lastly, a special thanks to Lorenzo Pagano, who has not only helped me

endlessly with my travels, surveys, and research, but also always encouraged me to

push my limits academically, such as getting me to study abroad independently in

Switzerland. Without his and my family's support, love, and continuous attention, this

work would not have been possible.









TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W LE D G E M E N T S ..................................................................................... 4

L IS T O F T A B LE S .................................................. 7

L IS T O F F IG U R E S .......................................................................................................... 8

L IS T O F A B B R E V IA T IO N S .................................................................................. 12

A B S T R A C T ................................................... .......................................... 1 3

CHAPTER

1 INTR O D U CTIO N ................................. ....................................... 15

2 WORK AND OFFICE PRODUCTIVITY ........................................................ 18

3 FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY...................... ...... ............... 22

A ir Q u a lity ................................................................................................... 2 2
T herm al C om fort............................... .............. ...... 24
L ig h t ............... ........................................................................................................... 2 6
A c o u s tic s ................................................................................................... 3 0
Green View ........................... ............... 30
Ergonomic Control ................ ......... .......... ........ 31
Office Layout................................. ............... 33

4 THREE BUILDING CASE STUDIES AND THEIR SUSTAINABLE
TECHNOLOGIES ................... ... ......... ........................ 36

Reasons to Study Buildings ............................. ......... ................... 36
Commerzbank by Sir Norman Foster, Frankfurt .............................. ............. 39
Ventilated Skin ................................. .............. ................. 41
Temperature Control ................ ............................... 44
D a y lig h t ............. ......... .. .............. .. ................................................ 4 5
Artificial Lighting .................................. .............. .......... ... ...... 46
Organization ............... .............. ............... ........ ..... .............. 47
Winter Gardens ................ ......... .............. .......... ....... 48
Atrium ............................................................................................................................ 49
Nord/LB Hannover by Behnisch, Behnisch and Partner, Hannover..................... 50
Natural Ventilation ................................................... 52
Natural daylight ..................... .............................. 54
G re e n R o o fs .......................... ...... .......... ...................................... ............... 5 7
Courtyard............................. ............... 58
Reflection Pools .......... ...... ................. .......... ....... 59









Office Layout ...................................................................... ......... ................... 60
Geothermal heating ............... ....................... ......... 61
Artificial Lighting ..................... .................................. 62
RWE Tower by Ingenhoven, Essen ........................... ......... ................. 63
First Ecological H igh R ise.................................................... .................... 63
Natural Ventilation ....................... ....... .......... ......... 64
Individual Temperature Regulation.................................................. 67
Natural Daylight ................................................... 68
Artificial Lighting ..................... .................................. 69
Office Organization ............... ..... .................. ......... 71

5 SURVEYING OFFICE WORKERS ........................... ..........................73

M ethod of S urvey.................................................... 73
Sem antic D ifferential Scale.................................................. .................... 75
S am ple S urveys..................................... ............... 77

6 RESULTS AND CONCLUSION ..... .................. ................... 83

Graphs and Charts ................ ......... ......... ......... 83
Recommendations ................ ........ ......... ......... 103
Transparency/O pacity Ratio ............... ....................... .... ............. .. 103
Noise Reducing Strategies ............................... ................... 106
O occupants per O office .................................................................. ......... 109
Ideal O office .............. ........................................................... ................... 110
Ideal Office Plan ........................................... 1101
C o n c lu s io n ............. .................. ............................................. ............... 1 13

LIST O F R EFER EN C ES ...... ... ............ .......................................... .............. 115

BIO G RA PHICAL SKETCH .................................. ............... ........... ......... 120


















6









LIST OF TABLES

Table page

6-1 STC ratings for common walls between enclosed spaces in conventional
office and conference areas. .................................... 107









LIST OF FIGURES


Figure page

1-1 A) Average global temperature increases as carbon dioxide concentrations
increase. B) US Energy Consum ption pie chart .............................................. 16

2-1 Productivity versus degree of control. ............. ................................. ........ 21

3-1 Diagram of how to size windows according to the depth of the room ............. 28

3-2 Diagram of ergonom ic practice................................................................ ..... 32

3-3 A) Diagram describes the relationship between office typology and
interaction. B) Diagram shows typical layouts of the four typologies ............. 34

4-1 Map of Germany with the cities selected buildings are in: Frankfurt, Essen,
and Hannover................................................................... ................. 38

4-2 Commerzbank tower maintains the scale of the block at the base with
restaurants and cafes .................................................................................. 40

4-3 A. Section of Commerzbank tower. B. Site plan of Commerzbank showing
public restaurant, entrance, and public amenities................... ............ 41

4-4 A) a. steel structure. B) Detailed section of external windows ...................... 42

4-5 Detailed section through the tower ................................................................. 43

4-6 Detailed section through a tower floor......................... ..... ........ ....... 44

4-7 A) When weather conditions are suitable, all the Commerzbank's offices are
naturally ventilated. B) Picture of a typical window opened. ............................. 45

4-8 A) Office in the north core "panoramic office." B) Natural Daylight enters
each office in the building, including in the interior offices ............................ 46

4-9 Glazed partitions and light reflective materials allow daylight to reach all
offices and give visual access to colleagues ............... ........ ............... 46

4-10 Typical floor plans at the completion of the tower with team and combi
offices. ................. ... ............................ ......... ................. 47

4-11 A) Garden with North American vegetation. B) Garden with Mediterranean
v e g e ta tio n ............................................................ ................ ...... 4 9

4-12 A) View from lobby of Atrium at night. B) Fire Stopper segments atrium. C)
View of atrium from top of tower with views of gardens.................................... 50









4-13 View of Nord LB Building in Hannover at dawn from across the street............... 50

4-14 C ross section of the building............................ ................. ... ........... ... 51

4-15 Left: Plan of third floor plan showing typical offices. Right: Plan of sixth floor... 52

4-16 A) Simulation of the natural ventilation system. B) Vent stacks in hallways
have slits to intake exhaust air ............................................. ..... ................ 53

4-17 A) Typical operable window in office provide natural ventilation. B) Double
skin facade from tower. ................. .... ...... ..................... ............... 54

4-18 A) Screens in typical office reduce glare. B) Strings hanging down and
horizontal blinds control light levels in a conference room............................... 55

4-19 A) Typical office at night. B) Heliostat on the building perimeter.................... 56

4-20 Control gauges for artificial lighting and blinds are by doors ......................... 56

4-21 Roof plan indicating gardens and pool ....... .. ...................... ........... .... 57

4-22 A) Green roof. B) Dense greenery on the staff restaurant. C) Roof garden in
winter................................... ......... ........... 58

4-23 A) Reflection pool in courtyard. B) Pool drained and frozen in winter ............... 59

4-24 A and B) Office corridors with transparent partitions. ......................... ..... 60

4-25 Kitchenette with clearly marked recycling bins. ................ ............... .............. 61

4-26 Computer screen showing the geothermal monitoring ............................ 62

4-27 A) Ground Plan. B) Street level view of RWE from a block away ................. 64

4-28 Isometric view of the fa ade ............................ .. .................................. 66

4-29 A) Section view of the facade. B) 1. facade construction .............................. 66

4-30 A) Typical Section showing the thermal mass of the concrete ceilings and of
the technical element integrated into the ceiling vault. B) Picture of surfboard
in testing. .................... .. ............. ........... ....... ....... ....... 68

4-31 A) Glazing of typical office. B) Lever to open windows ............................... 69

4-32 Daylight can be diverted and dimmed thanks to the sun protector blinds
inside the double layered facade and the interior anti-glare screen................ 69









4-33 A) Sun protector blinds and antiglare screens. B) Typical office facing the
hallway with the glazing on top of the cabinets and door. C) Typical office
with wood interior cabinets. D) Office space. E) Conference room................. 70

4-34 Typical floor plan of offices. .............................. ......................... ... ......... ....... 71

4-35 Typical floor plan of conference level ............................................................. 72

4-36 Typical corridor ................................................................................... 72

6-1 Temperature rating of Commerzbank during all four reasons .......................... 83

6-2 Temperature rating of Nord/LB during all four reasons ..................... ..... 84

6-3 Temperature rating of RWE during all four reasons .................................. 85

6-4 Humidity rating of Commerzbank during all four reasons .............. .......... 86

6-5 Humidity rating of Nord/LB during all four reasons ................. .................. 87

6-6 Humidity rating of RWE during all four reasons .............. .............. 88

6-7 Natural daylight levels for all three buildings. ................ ............. ............... 89

6-8 Controllability ratings and glare ratings from natural daylight for
Com m erzbank ............. .... ....................................... ..... ........ 90

6-9 Controllability ratings and glare ratings from natural daylight for Nord/LB.......... 91

6-10 Controllability ratings and glare ratings from natural daylight for RWE............ 92

6-11 Artificial light levels for all three buildings.. ................. ................................ 93

6-12 Controllability ratings and glare ratings from artificial lighting for
Com m erzbank ............. .... ....................................... ..... ........ 94

6-13 Controllability ratings and glare ratings from artificial lighting for Nord/LB......... 95

6-14 Controllability ratings and glare ratings from artificial lighting for RWE............ 96

6-15 A) Sound level ratings for all three buildings. B) Box Plot Chart of all
building's sound rating ......................................................................... 97

6-16 Pie charts of responses for all three buildings........ ................... ................ 98

6-17 Access to view green environments for all three buildings .......................... 98

6-18 Building organized for collaboration and creativity ratings of all three
buildings. .................... .. ............. ........... ... ..................... 99









6-19 Ergonomic ratings for all three buildings.................................. ............... 100

6-20 Plot of energy level vs. age................................... ............... 101

6-21 Productivity rating for all three buildings .............. ..... ...... ............. .. 102

6-22 Diagrams showing the transparent and opaque walls of each building's
typical office, along w ith their ratios ........................................... ................. 105

6-23 Detail of the DeVac 640-AL model. ........... ............ .............. ......... ..... 108

6-24 Sketch of an ideal office. .......... ... ...... ........................... ..... .......... 10811









LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ASHREA The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air
Conditioning Engineers

BAuA Bundesanstalt fCr Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin. Translation:
Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics

CBE Center for the Built Environment

CFM cubic feet per minute

IEQ Indoor Environmental Quality

IFA Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German Social
Accident Insurance

HVAC Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning

KILM Key Indicators of the Labour Market

LED Light-emitting diode

LEED Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design

Ix Lux (SI unit of luminance)

MSDs Work-related musculoskeletal disorders

Nord/LB Norddeutsche Landesbank

OES Office Environmental Survey

OSHA Occupational Safety & Health Administration

OSHSPA Occupational Safety and Health State Plan Association

RWE Rheinisch-Westfalisches Elektrizitatswerk

SBS Sick Building Syndrome

STC Sound Transmission Class

UN United Nations









Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Architecture

EVALUATING WORKSPACES IN EUROPEAN SUSTAINABLE HIGH RISE
BUILDINGS
ASSESSMENTS, RESPONSES, AND SPECULATIONS FROM THE INHABITANTS


By

Jennifer Mackey

August 2010

Chair: John Maze
Cochair: Martin Gold
Major: Architecture

According to a March 2005 Microsoft survey, Americans work an average of 45


hours per week; sixteen of those hours are labeled "unproductive." As the average

working time in countries like America and Luxembourg has steadily increased over the

decades, so too has the knowledge in understanding how office environments affect

productivity. Several studies prove productivity is affected by several factors including:

access to natural day lighting, office furniture, office organization, temperature, indoor

air quality and ventilation, ergonomics, and acoustics. Poor workplace design can cost

U.S. businesses at least $330 billion in lost productivity per year. Considering more

money is typically spent on salaries rather than building costs, companies could realize

significant savings by providing properly designed office buildings. Companies can

further save on long term energy costs if their office buildings are designed sustainably.

Recent "green" projects such as Commerzbank by Norman Foster have addressed

these issues so employees can work more productively in their environments.









This thesis will concentrate on three renowned sustainable high rises in Germany

and will evaluate the elements needed to enhance productivity. Data for the selected

buildings will be collected through surveys, personal observations, and interviews to

provide feedback on the pros and cons of the buildings' sustainable features directly

affecting their workspaces. The survey asks employees to rate different factors

affecting productivity, such as light, temperature, and acoustics. This research provides

a better understanding if the selected buildings have the elements needed for office

productivity. Recommendations for a typical office to enhance productivity are also

explored.









CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

The most popular definition of sustainability can be traced to a 1987 UN

conference. It defined sustainable developments as those that "meet present needs

without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs." In other

words, we should minimize consuming both Earth's non-renewable and renewable

resources so future generations may benefit from the same. Humans use many

resources for energy and to create materials. As a result, carbon dioxide and other by-

products, such as toxic gases, are released into the environment. The excessive

carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere creates what the earth experienced as

"global warming" (Woodwell 5). Buildings are the biggest consumer of energy,

accounting for consumption of 48% of all energy in America, while the rest is consumed

by Transportation (27%) and Industry (25%) (US Energy Information Administration).

Therefore, buildings should invest in low-carbon technologies and ultimately be

designed sustainably.











Global Average Temperature and
Carbon Dioxide Concentrations, 1880-2006

390
380 -
370
360-

340-
330
320-
310
300
290
280-


S00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SO- 0 C L ( r C YEAR

YEAR


US Energy


Transportation 27% M


a
r-
0
0
c.,


58.1 L

57.9 a
57.7

57.5 .
57.3 w
I-
57.1 0

56.9 w
56.7
56.5 0
.-J
O

Global Temperatures
C02 (ice cores)
C02 (Mauna Loa)


Consumption


Buildings 48%


Industry 25%


Figure 1-1. A) Average global temperature increases as carbon dioxide concentrations
increase. (Source: Woodwell). B) US Energy Consumption pie chart.
(Source: US Energy Information Administration).

From an architectural standpoint, sustainable design is about making responsible

decisions to maximize passive design strategies for heat loads, and to minimize the use

of both renewable and non-renewable resources for the building's construction and life

cycle. This could range from using green roofs, efficient insulation, rainwater collection,

using renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal), and recycling materials. Climate









should be the first factor of consideration when designing a building. Buildings

designed in hot climates will use different passive cooling strategies than buildings

designed in cold climates. Overhangs, for example, should be sized so enough direct

sunlight enters a window during winter, but provides shade during the summer for

places with moderate climates. Equally as important, is to provide a healthy

environment to meet the needs of the occupants with elements such as access to

natural day lighting and operable windows to provide fresh air, using non-toxic materials

on surfaces, and providing ergonomic equipment. When office workers are satisfied

with their environmental conditions, with greater comfort and control, they will be more

productive (Lomonaco and Miller 2). The line between energy and occupants' needs

must meet at some point in order to foster good design. Architects are responsible for

creating the tools, places, processes and systems which optimize human well-being.









CHAPTER 2
WORK AND OFFICE PRODUCTIVITY

Employed Americans work an average of 7.6 hours on the days they worked with

86 percent of them doing some or all of their work at their workplace (Bureau of Labor

Statistics 2008). For those working in office buildings, the building will become a part of

their lifestyle. The percentage of people who work in office buildings will continue to rise

as the world's population moves into urban cities, especially in developed countries.

The United Nations Population Division estimates the current world urban population is

at 50.6 percent and by 2050 it is expected to be at 69.6percent (United Nations 75).

This could suggest that as the world becomes more urban, less space will be available

for construction and therefore high density construction will appear more due to its

efficiency.

It is possible, in the future; people will also work even longer hours. Americans, in

fact, work more hours per year than workers in most other developed economies.

According to Key Indicators of the Labour Market (KILM), Luxembourg and the United

States had the largest shares of persons working at least 40 hours (78.8 and 76.6

percent, respectively). The KILM study also suggests work hours will continue to rise

in certain parts of the world, such as in Latin America. For those working long hours,

the office environment in which they work will influence their lifestyle. Working long

hours, however, doesn't exactly mean one is more productive. "The more hours you

work, the less satisfied you become with your life, even though you make more money"

(McKibben 114). This could be why, measured as value added per hour worked,

Norway has the highest labor productivity level (US$ 37.99), followed by the United

States (US$ 35.63) and France (US$ 35.08) (KILM). Additionally, "The more hours you









work, the bigger you ecological footprint, too. That's because you're spending more

money and spending it carelessly; with no time to go to the farmer's market, let alone

cook what you buy there, you drive through the drive through instead" (McKibben 115).

"In 1930, in the teeth of the Great Depression, the cereal entrepreneur W. K. Kellogg

put his workers on a six hour day at full pay. Productivity increased dramatically,

helping pay for all the experiment" (115). If buildings were designed in a way to make

people happy and productive, fewer hours would be spent working. From this, better

office design equals should better work performance.

For companies constructing buildings for their employees, finding the balance

between using the least amount of energy and productive work environment is

essential. Architects alike should consider this environmental aspect as it directly

affects inhabitants. Productivity, for example, is directly related to work environments.

A 2008 Gensler survey estimates companies would be able to perform an average of

22% more work if their companies had better designed physical working environments

(Gensler 2008). "An employee's workplace is responsible for 24 percent of their job

satisfaction level and this can affect staff performance by five percent for individuals and

11 percent for teams" (Management-Issues).

The greatest expense companies have is employee salaries. If the average

construction cost of a building is $20 per square foot when amortized over 25 years,

there is an average of $200 per square foot spent on salaries per year, while energy

costs are roughly $2 per square foot per year (Callan). "As little as a 1 percent increase

in productivity would be the equivalent of $2 per square foot per year cost savings,

covering the annual energy bills. A 10 percent increase in productivity would be









equivalent to $20 per square foot per year cost savings, which would pay for the

building itself" (Callan). According to an analysis conducted by the research firm D/R

Added Value, poor workplace design costs U.S. businesses at least $330 billion in lost

productivity per year (Gensler 2006). Companies could lose money from employees

using sick time due to building related illnesses or even from distractions such as when

an uncomfortable temperature results in employees frequently adjusting the

temperature of their office. Nine in ten workers believe better office design leads to

better overall employee performance (Gensler 2008). By investing in productive office

design, a company could save on salaries.

By contrast, poor workplace design is linked to lower business performance and

higher stress levels experienced by employees (Management-Issues). Unfortunately,

many businesses seem to ascribe a low value to workplace design. Forty-six percent of

workers do not believe creating a productive workplace is a priority at their companies,

and 40% say minimizing costs is the main reason behind their workplace's current

layout. One in five respondents rated their current physical workplace environment as

being only 'fair to poor' (Gensler 2006).

According to the Gensler survey, "Over one third of respondents say their current

workplace design does not promote health and well-being; yet healthy and secure

working conditions are reported as the most important factors in an efficient working

environment." Increased productivity is mainly the result of a firm better combining

capital, labor and technology. A lack of investment in people (training and skills) as well

as equipment and technology can lead to an underutilization of the labor potential in the

world (ILO News). The graph below, for example, demonstrates that occupants who










can control their surrounding (temperature, ventilation, and lighting), rather than using

an automatically controlled building, will be more productive.

More or less productive
than average, Average
for a building = 100%
Temperature
108.0

106.0 Ventilation
Ventilation


102.0 Lgt

100.0
4 5 6 7
98.0
Degree of control (None=l, Full=7)
96.0


Figure 2-1. Productivity versus degree of control. The Office Environmental Survey
(OES) revealed fewer building-related illness symptoms and greater
productivity as the perceived level of individual control increases. (Source:
Bordass, B. 2).

In order to build a place for productivity, the direct environment must be studied.

There are many instances in buildings where the temperature extremes become too

distracting or air quality causes sicknesses. Buildings must have the design and tools

so positive outcomes of health and productivity can be integrated into the initial cost-

benefit calculations and then energy and maintenance costs. In the following chapter, a

closer look into these factors affecting the work environment will be discussed. The

factors listed are: air quality, thermal comfort, light, acoustics, green views, ergonomic

control, and office layout.









CHAPTER 3
FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY

Air Quality

"Air-conditioning systems tend to have two settings: too hot and too cold:
give me an openable window anytime." Barbara Ritchie, Inland Revenue, E
Kilbride

Millions of Americans work in buildings with mechanical heating, ventilation, and

air-conditioning (HVAC) systems; these systems are designed to provide air at

comfortable temperature and humidity levels, free of harmful concentrations of air

pollutants. Ventilation is a combination of processes which results in the supply and

removal of air from inside a building. These processes typically include bringing in

outdoor air, conditioning and mixing the outdoor air with some portion of indoor air,

distributing this mixed air throughout the building, and exhausting some portion of the

indoor air outside. The quality of indoor air may deteriorate when one or more of these

processes are inadequate. For example, exhaled carbon dioxide may accumulate in

building spaces if sufficient amounts of outdoor air are not brought into and distributed

throughout the building. Carbon dioxide is a surrogate for indoor pollutants that may

cause occupants to grow drowsy, get headaches, or function at lower activity levels

(USEPA 1991).

Carbon dioxide and other pollutants like mold in the air may have developed what

was termed as "Sick Building Syndrome" in the 1970s. Sick Building Syndrome (SBS)

started in the late 70s, after the 1973 oil embargo, when buildings were limited to 5 cfm

of fresh air per occupant from mechanical air conditioning to save money on high fuel

prices. Many buildings built then suffered from air quality problems related to









dampness, including mold and other microbial growth. The causes of SBS are from

chemical and biological pollutants such as:

Mold, mildew, and other moisture-related contaminants
Off-gassing from building materials and furnishings
Chemical and maintenance products, including pesticides
Combustion gases from appliances, automobiles, and tobacco
Naturally occurring gases such as radon
Outdoor pollutants that enter the building ( American Institute of Architects 309)

Symptoms of Sick Building Syndrome include headache, eye, nose, or throat irritation,

dry cough, dry or itchy skin, dizziness, nausea, difficulty in concentrating, fatigue, and

sensitivity to odors (USEPA 1991).

Therefore, air quality is directly related to health. A fresh supply of outdoor air can

dilute the amount of airborne contaminants in building. Fresh air finally became an

important issue in the late 80's. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air

Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) recommends the standard fresh air requirement for

an office building should be 20 cfm/person based on their "Standard 62-2007:

Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality." This standard explains "minimum

ventilation rates and indoor air quality that will be acceptable to human occupants and

are intended to avoid adverse health effects." Standard 62-2007 is a voluntary standard,

which means it becomes enforceable only after a state or locality adopts the standard in

its building code. Furthermore, most current building codes pertaining to ventilation are

standards only for the way buildings in a particular jurisdiction must be designed; they

are not enforceable standards for the way the buildings are operated (Ventilation and

Air Quality in Offices). Currently only 26 states and territories approve OSHA's state

plans from the Occupational Safety and Health State Plan Association (OSHSPA).









It is generally agreed that poor indoor air can adversely affect employee health

and productivity. A study by Milton found the absence rate, controlling for age, gender,

seniority, crowding, and type of workspace was 35% lower in the high-ventilation

buildings (Milton). A Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality states economic costs to

industry from indoor air pollution have been estimated to be in the "tens of billions of

dollars per year" (USEPA 1989). Reducing Sick Building Syndrome symptoms by 20-

50% at work for ~15 million workers could save $10-$30 billion in savings or productivity

gain (Fisk). In an article by Seppanen, Fisk, Faulkner, they found "with a simple

example using night-time ventilative cooling, energy efficient methods are available to

improve the indoor environment. For this example, the ratio of productivity gains to

energy used by fans varied from 32 to 120 depending on cost of the electricity

(Seppanen, Fisk, Faulkner 7). Improvements in the indoor air environment may

substantially increase employee morale and productivity. Therefore, it is important to

include indoor air quality controls in operation, maintenance, and energy conservation

strategies.

Thermal Comfort

Thermal comfort is directly affected by temperature and humidity. The perception

of thermal comfort in also influenced by radiant temperature, air velocity, occupant

activity, metabolism, gender, and clothing insulation. Therefore, thermal comfort varies

among individuals. "The indoor temperature affects several human responses,

including thermal comfort, perceived air quality, sick building syndrome symptoms and

performance at work" (Olli Seppanen, William J Fisk, QH Lei 2). ASHREA Standard

55-2004 provides guidelines intended to achieve thermal conditions 80 percent of the

occupants would to find acceptable or comfortable. They recommend that during

24









summer, if relative humidity is 30 percent and the person is wearing light clothing, then

the temperature should be 76- 820F. If the humidity is 60 percent, then the temperature

should be 74-780F. For a person wearing warm clothing during winter, the temperature

should be between 69-78oF if the relative humidity is 30%. A general recommendation

for an office is that the temperature be held constant in the range of 21-23C (69-73oF)

(Canadian Center).

Relative humidity levels below 25% are associated with increased discomfort and

drying of the mucous membranes and skin, which can lead to chapping and irritation.

Low relative humidity also increases static electricity. High humidity levels can result in

condensation within the building structure causing potential for mold and fungi.

Generally it is normal for large buildings to supply humidity during the winter and to

remove it during the summer (Health Canada 22).

A study found there was a decrease in performance by 2% per oC increase of the

temperature in the range of 25-320C (77-890F), and no effect on performance in

temperature range of 21-250C (70-770F) (Seppanen 2) in his experiment of the linkage

between productivity and temperature. The study also stated "high temperatures, in

practice, may be associated with low ventilation rate." However, "the ventilation was

constant, thus the results indicate only the effect of temperature. Low ventilation

combined with high temperature would most probably decrease the productivity further

due to the increased prevalence of SBS symptoms and other effects" (9). Another

study found low temperatures have been found to decrease dexterity of hands with

indoor temperatures between 20-220C (Messe).









Given the optimum temperature depends on the nature of the task, and varies

among individuals and over time, some researchers have advocated the provision of

individual control of temperature as a practical method to increase productivity. A study

in an insurance office, using the number of files processed per week as a measure of

productivity, suggested that the provision of individual temperature control increased

productivity by approximately 2% (Kroner and Stark-Martin). Another study by has

estimated that by providing workers 3C of individual control, there should be about a

3% increase in performance for both logical thinking and very skilled manual work, and

approximately a 7% increase in performance for typing relative to performance in a

building maintained at the population-average neutral temperature (Wyon).

Light

Lighting is believed to potentially influence human performance "because work

performance depends on vision, and indirectly because lighting may direct attention, or

influence arousal or motivation. Several characteristics of lighting, e.g. illuminance (the

intensity of light impinged on a surface), amount of glare, and the spectrum of light, may

theoretically affect work performance (Spengler J.D., Samet, J.M., & McCarthy, J.F.

4.22). "Physiologically, daylight is an effective stimulant to the human visual system

and the human circadian system. Daylight reduces the incidence of health problems

caused by the rapid fluctuations in light output typical of electric lighting with discharge

lamps" (Cakir 7). Conversely, lighting extremes can also adversely influence

performance (Fisk).

Both natural and artificial light have important roles in an office environment. It is

preferable to maximize the amount of daylight in an office for many reasons. One









reason is natural daylight reduces the need to use energy for artificial lighting during the

day. Another reason may be because of its high color rendering. The Whole Building

Design Guide website states "Electric lighting accounts for 35 to 50 percent of the total

electrical energy consumption in commercial buildings" (Ander) with the addition of

supplemental mechanical cooling needed for the heat generated by lights. "The energy

savings from reduced electric lighting through the use of daylighting strategies can

directly reduce building cooling energy usage an additional 10 to 20 percent.

Consequently, for many institutional and commercial buildings, total energy costs can

be reduced by as much as one third through the optimal integration of daylighting

strategies" (Ander).

Humans instinctively prefer to see natural daylight as it stimulates a productive

environment. In fact, "studies have shown ample daylight and proper ventilation lead to

greater satisfaction, and increased sense of comfort, fewer sick days, and increased

productivity" (AIA 309). In addition, "Natural light and views to the outdoors can help

enhance physical and mental health. Ample daylight increases productivity in the

workplace and test scores in schools" (309)

Thus, it should be no surprise that in Germany, all work places intended for

permanent use must have visual contact with the outside world. This is to ensure an

employee relaxes their eyes from the computer screen. The Deutsche Industrie

Normen gives guidelines and regulations for office design. In practice, "every workplace

is located within 6 m of a window" (Meel 89) to afford adequate daylighting to each

worker. This requirement explains why German floor plans are so narrow. Additionally,

the German legislation EN 12464-1 requires a minimum of 500 Ix in a workplace.









However, this is only for artificial lighting because natural daylighting is not defined

under these terms. The Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German

Social Accident Insurance (IFA) states:

Today, the state-of-the-art of science and technology is that illuminances for
office and VDT-workplaces of 500 Ix and of 1.000 Ix for those in open plan
offices are to be planned. If these illuminance values are maintained even
with partly or fully missing daylight and the rest of the quality criteria for
artificial lighting considered, accidents as well as undue stress and strain
and fatigue for the workers will be avoided.

This further stresses the importance of having a minimum standard to ensure adequate

lighting levels.

Daylight and views can be maximized several ways. One is by coupling a narrow

building section with careful window placement. A general rule-of-thumb is, for a

vertical window, useful daylight penetration is up to a depth equal to 2.5 times the height

of the effective window head above the horizontal surface of interest. Desired amounts











Figure 3-1. Diagram of how to size windows according to the depth of the room.
(Source: Ander).

of daylight also can be achieved with the use of skylights, atriums, and light shelves, the

shape of the windows and ceilings, and use of light-colored surfaces. Natural daylight

also presents the challenge of heat and glare. Care must be given to avoid excessive

heat gain from direct solar rays and minimize glare (AIA 309). This could be achieved

with the use of satin finishes, translucent curtains, and an automated or manual system









of exterior blinds. Some office buildings have even used a smart system which moves

shading devices according to the actual daylight readings from sensors. The individual

controllability of daylight will give even more satisfaction to an office worker and an

individual task lamp may help this even more.

The types of light fixtures must also be considered as certain lighting may lead to

better occupant satisfaction. Although incandescent light bulbs are great for illuminating

a room, they are not energy efficient. Fluorescent light fixtures, conversely, use 75

percent less energy than an incandescent bulb (Energy Star) but, according to Helen L.

Irlen, could create negative effects such as triggering headaches, migraines, and eye

strain (Irlen). LED lights and full spectrum fluorescent light, on the other hand, have

proven to be a great alternative for both energy savings and quality of light. "The study

by the Commission for Architecture & the Built Environment and the British Council for

Offices has found even simple things such as good lighting and having adequate

daylight can reduce absenteeism by 15 percent and increase productivity by between

2.8 percent and 20 percent" (Management-Issues). In another study by Hedge,

occupants reported both lensed-indirect and parabolic downlighting supported reading

and writing on paper and on the computer screen better than a recessed lighting system

with translucent prismatic diffusers (Hedge). A laboratory study by Veitch & Newsham

found the type of luminaire influenced performance of computer based work (Veitch).

Also, energy-efficient electronic ballasts, which result in less lighting flicker than

magnetic ballasts, were associated with improvements in verbal-intellectual task

performance" (Fisk).









Acoustics

Acoustics is an important factor affecting productivity. Noise has been

recognized as one of the main problems in open-plan office. A Danish study concludes

that office noise and type of office environment have a significant effect on office tasks

that included processing words. "Compared to a cellular office, the open-plan offices

caused significantly higher dissatisfaction with noise in the environment and decreased

subjects' ability to concentrate" (Balazova 7). The Federal Institute for Occupational

Safety and Health (BAuA) of Germany recommends an office have a noise level no

higher than 55 dB (A), about the same level as a normal conversation. Lower levels

between 35 and 45 dB (A) should be designed where higher levels of concentration are

required, for example when working on the computer (BAuA 17). To reach these levels,

BAuA recommends using quieter electronic data processing equipment (17). State of

the art computers and printers produce noise levels of maximum of 48 dB (A). Offices

could also be designed with sound absorption materials or sound isolating assemblies.

Green View

As the world population moves towards cities (UN), people could be finding less

time in parks and nature. This trend could be the cause of health related issues, even if

minor (Univ. of Illinois). As humans, it is in our biological nature to want to be in nature.

Several studies have been conducted revealing humans naturally desire views of trees,

plants, and landscapes. Frances Kuo, a professor of natural resources and

environmental science and psychology at the University of Illinois, said "nature is

essential to the physical, psychological and social well-being of the human animal"

(Univ. of Illinois). The presence of plants can also promote feelings of well-being and

mental equilibrium at home, the office, or places where people will spend many hours.

30









Plants have also been found to improve spirit, health, and efficiency in studies

conducted in the Netherlands, Norway, the USA and in Germany (BAuA 34). One study

commissioned by the Bavarian State Institute for Viticulture and Horticulture recorded

from all of its 139 participants that the offices with plants were more "pleasant, brighter

and generally more interesting" (34). The vast majority also felt their 'office biotope' was

more refreshing, made them feel less stressed and enabled them to concentrate better.

The conclusion of the Bavarian study was a working atmosphere with this 'office

biotope' was beneficial not only in improving people's mood but also for their work.

Another study conducted in Norway found that by adding plants, health complaints

among workers decrease significantly; tiredness fell by 30 percent, sore throats fell by

30 percent, cough fell by 37 percent, and sore skin fell by 23 percent (Fjeld). Therefore,

by bringing some greenery into the office, the employees and company will benefit not

only by improved working atmosphere, but also by creating a "natural" environment that

will improve the climate too (34).

Ergonomic Control

Work environments designed to enhance productivity will range from the

architecture to office equipment. With the computer being one of the most widely used

tools in companies, office equipment such as desks, keyboards and computer monitor

screens, should be adjusted to the individual's body to be ergonomic. Ergonomic

means "the applied science of equipment design, as for the workplace, intended to

maximize productivity by reducing operator fatigue and discomfort"

(www.dictionary.com). Poor, non-ergonomic workspaces commonly create adverse

long-term and short-term symptoms such as headaches and musculoskeletal disorders

(MSDs). MSDs are injuries or illnesses such as sprains, strains, tears, back pain,

31










carpal tunnel syndrome, and hernia (BLS). The Occupational Safety & Health

Administration (OSHA) stated in 1991; "Work-related musculoskeletal disorders

currently account for one-third of all occupational injuries and illnesses reported to the

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) by employers every year. These disorders thus

constitute the largest job-related injury and illness problem in the United States today."

"Common examples of ergonomic risk factors are found in jobs requiring repetitive,

forceful, or prolonged exertions of the hands; frequent or heavy lifting, pushing, pulling,

or carrying of heavy objects; and prolonged awkward postures. Vibration and cold may

add risk to these work conditions" (Occupational Safety). The diagram below shows

good working practices of a computer; Implementing a flexible ergonomic work program

will help reduce work related injuries. No single arrangement of components will fit

everyone.


Sbe b lma~hairontal
\ ::~~--o f'. '(lait(ilight* y

SSam s should be free
of 91ale and sIouw d t t
Upper Back OW 1 J piri t

Lower Back
(support umber curve) Arnms
(minimal bend It thR wrist)
Sitting Bones. L
(ditrib d pressre) Area Behind the Knee
(not touching seat pan)
Thigh Behind the Knee
(distributed presure)
Feet
cowrq s i oawfE> 4 (flat an noo or fiootrst)

Figure 3-2. Diagram of ergonomic practice. (Source:
http://www.desertbusinessinteriors.com/ergonomic.htm. Last accessed
February 2, 2010).









Office Layout

Despite popular belief, a survey by Gensler found 62% of U.S. office workers

have great respect for leaders who work in an open plan environment with their teams

rather than in private offices. Traditional offices of the past have been rigidly organized,

often times revealing the structure of a company. The managerial positions tended to

have their own windows facing outside which in turn blocks daylight inside the

remaining work spaces. Meanwhile, the rest of the office workers worked in 6 foot tall

cubicles that would cut any sort of distant view. This style of open floor plan still divided

workers. People are shifting from a traditional mind set and are thinking of ways the

office design can enhance collaboration and creativity.

Historically, a typical office configuration has 70-80 percent of the space

dedicated to individuals, called "I" space. The remaining 20-30 percent is then "we"

space. The Use Center Research, a group that writes articles on office organization,

looked at themselves and found they needed a ratio of 30-40 percent of "I" space and

60-70 percent of "we" space (Tanis 10). Not all companies need to achieve the 30:70

ratio but it points out that "collaboration space is really key to supporting the knowledge-

based culture. How you organize this "we" and "I" space can be solved through

architecture.

In an ideal office layout, there would be a balance between "we" spaces and "I"

spaces. This means that there would be a combination of quiet spaces, private offices,

an open floor plan, formal and informal meeting spaces. The benefits for having

collaborative spaces include having a sense of community, encourage better

communication and improve information exchange among co-workers. It also allows

intergenerational communication. This provides opportunities for the more experienced

33









workers to learn new ways to work or new technologies from younger co-workers while

younger workers can receive less formal mentoring from working around those more

experienced. Individual workspace, on the other hand, has privacy, less noise, more

individual space, typically, and is seen as a status symbol (Kupritz).

Though there can be several ways to organize office space in an open floor plan,

this thesis will narrow it down to four basic layouts according to Francis Duffy's book

"The New Office": the Hive, Den, Club, and Cell.

DEN CLUB
High C O

Den Club O

Interaction C
HIVE CELL
Hive Cell Is

Lo

Low Autonomy A ea -. B

Figure 3-3. A) Diagram describes the relationship between office typology and
interaction (Source:Jaunzens). B) Diagram shows Duffy's typical layouts of
the four typologies (Source:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/fig/3080040101005.png. Last accessed
March 21, 2010).

In the Hive layout, staff have little autonomy and little interaction. "The workstation style

is uniform and relatively simple with rigid layouts. There is little opportunity for space

use intensification e.g. hot desking as staff will rarely leave their desks" (Jaunzens 5).

It gets its name from the beehives because workers are busy working. Then Den is

more interactive and "the idea of team based work of a relatively straightforward and

uniform kind, although requiring a mixture of different interdependent skills" (5). These









workers will more likely carry varied tasks than those in a hive. It is an office made for

busy individuals that also have nearby places to interact informally as a team. The Cell

is less interactive with more individual based work. Each desk is divided into its own

room for concentrated study and privacy. The Club, which is seen used more often

today, is a combination of all three office types and is typically composed of "a collection

of highly autonomous people who require at times being highly interactive, but at other

times to have their own space for concentrated individual based work, to match the

varied tasks they carry out. It is a dynamic organization where there is an erratic and

changeable occupancy pattern of individual and group settings to suit the needs of the

market" (5).









CHAPTER 4

THREE BUILDING CASE STUDIES AND THEIR SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGIES

Reasons to Study Buildings

The decision to study highrises came about because the nature of high rises

makes it difficult to make them sustainable because a lot of energy is used to power

these buildings. It takes critical decision making skills when creating a typical floor plan

and extra attention is needed to find ways to make them save energy since major

details will be repeated. The architect must also consider satisfying everyone's needs:

the client's needs, budget, and technical aspects. The choice to study high rises also

came about because they are efficient in terms of minimize the building's footprint on

land and because they provide such a high ratio of rentable floor space per unit area of

land. They also give identity to cities as icons. As the world becomes more urban,

there will be a greater trend to develop high rise constructions. More attention should

focus on saving energy in these large structures so architects can constantly improve

on them as more are built in the future.

In narrowing down the buildings to study from, three were selected from Germany.

Buildings were not picked from the U.S. because sustainable buildings are not the

industry standard yet because certificates such as LEED are still just voluntary. Europe

is generally perceived to be more progressive in sustainability than other developed

countries. An example of its progressive approach is the EU Legislation, the Energy

Performance of Buildings Directive 2002/91/EC (EBP Directive), which sets minimum

standards for all new buildings and large renovations. Furthermore, Germany has

created policies adding an extra notch in sustainability. Germany actively obeys their

progressive government regulations to reduce their carbon footprint, such as Agenda 21

36









and Energieausweis. Energieausweis is an energy certificate each building is required

to have that evaluates its energy performance when it is sold or leased (DENA).

Germany maintains strict building regulations on issues such as access to view a

window and minimum light levels (See Page 28). Though this does not apply to the

buildings selected, Germany has enforced an Energy Saving Ordinance since 2007

(EnEV2007) by the Deutsche Energie-Agentur the German Energy Agency (DENA).

These require that whenever a building is built, sold, or rented out, it will be valid for 10

years.

In addition, it was important to select buildings within the climate zone to make the

temperature and humidity variables more comparable since not all buildings could apply

the same passive heating/cooling strategies in different climates. The buildings'

location selected is characterized as "temperate and marine." Generally, in Germany it

is cool and cloudy, with wet winters and summers and occasional warm foehn wind

(Climate-zone). Hannover has an average high temperature of 720F and average low

temperature 280F (Climate-Charts.com). Frankfurt has an average high temperature

770F and average low temperature 280F (BBC Weather Centre). Essen's average high

temperature is 70.90F, average low temperature 31.50F (Climate-Charts.com).











DENMARK



GERMANY POLAND
i'" -- 'J '
*Hannover

BELGIUM' Esen
n f -.. CZECH
Srankurt REPUBLIC


FRANCE AUSTRIA

SWITZERLAND,
S:'' ITALY ,


Figure 4-1. Map of Germany with the cities selected buildings are in: Frankfurt, Essen,
and Hannover. (Source: Jennifer Mackey).

Selecting buildings designed for employees was equally as important. Therefore,

the three high rises selected found ways to connect people to one another, the building,

and the external environment while giving a degree of control to the individuals. The

buildings selected are: Commerzbank by Sir Norman Foster, Nord/LB by Behnisch,

Behnisch & Partner, and the RWE Tower by Ingenhoven Architects. These buildings

have been selected because they are innovative prototypes of sustainable highrises.

The buildings not only consider energy but also deeply consider the workers inside it,

taking into account their needs in order to make them more productive. While all

buildings have similar features such as double glazed facades and use of daylight, they

also approach their office layouts differently. These buildings are a good starting point

in order to understand whether these sustainable high rises could be prototypes for

future projects.









The relationship between buildings and occupiers is constantly changing, with

frequent clashes between operational requirements and physical facilities. Designers

seldom get feedback and typically only notice problems when asked to investigate a

failure. To get some insight on the building's performance as a tool for productivity, a

survey was created and passed out to office workers working inside these three

buildings. The surveys ask employees to rate certain features of the building. Getting

feedback on employees' experiences is invaluable in developing shared understanding

and will help architects understand what improvements could be made in order to

enhance employee performance. For example: if there's too much glare, then more

screening devices need to be added; or if it is too noisy, sound absorbing materials

should be used; or if there's not enough natural daylight in certain parts of the building,

more transparent materials should be used. Since the typical floor plan of an office high

rise is repeated several times, it is important to design it right the first time. The

hypothesis will be that all these buildings will generally be rated satisfactory/neutral in

the questions asked but each will need minor improvements, even on their sustainable

features. The feedback and data from surveys will provide clues to find better solutions.

Commerzbank by Sir Norman Foster, Frankfurt

"The form of the building is strongly influenced by energy considerations." -
Sir Norman Foster (Fischer 9)

Commerzbank has the reputation of being one of the first ecological high rises in

the world. It was built in 1997 with design features made to save energy and with

innovative features defying traditional work environments. The tower has operable

windows and a high level of transparency to promote natural daylight and social visual

contact. Other innovative features include winter gardens spiraling up the tower and an









atrium running throughout the entire tower. The building consumes half the energy

levels than conventional office towers (Foster + Partners 2007, 118). The base of the

tower is filled with program such as "27 dwellings with a total area of 4500 mA2, a bank,

shops, office, and a multi-story garage for 300 cars and 200 bicycles" (Fischer 11). Its

53 stories of office and multifunction floors make it an icon for sustainability for the city

of Frankfurt


Figure 4-2. Commerzbank tower maintains the scale of the block at the base with
restaurants and cafes (Photo: Jennifer Mackey).










































A B

Figure 4-3. A. Section of Commerzbank tower. (Source: Fischer 22). B. Site plan of
Commerzbank showing public restaurant, entrance, and public amenities.
(Source: Fischer 20).

Ventilated Skin

The double skin facade is a feature Commerzbank and all the other buildings

selected for this thesis have. Double skin facades allow occupants to open windows for

fresh air without the effect of draft winds associated with high elevations. Every office in

the building has access to its own operable window which enables occupants to control









their environment. The aluminum curtain walls are double glazed with an "integrated

sun protection and can be controlled both by the central control system of the building

and the individual employee" (Fischer 13).


Figure 4-4. A) a. steel structure, b. glazed partition, c. sprinkler, d. convection heater,
e fire protection, f. raised floor, g. lightweight concrete floor, h. suspended
ceiling, j. movable double-glazed window element. K. fixed outer glass, I.
enamel-coated glass sprandel, m. air-intake transom, n. air-exit transom, o.
lighting, p. glass cover. (Source: Fischer 27). B) Detailed section of external
windows. Ventilation slots above and below each window supply fresh air.
When windows cannot be opened, fresh air is introduced via supply ducts in
the ceiling. The air is slightly cooled in summer and heated in winter, but only
to maintain a sense of freshness or to reduces draughts. (Source: Foster
2007, 76).









Offices in the outer perimeter of the tower are ventilated naturally from the

exterior air. Offices on the atrium side are ventilated from the gardens which draw air

directly from the outside through ventilation flaps. Although the mechanical ventilation

is proposed only for days with extreme temperatures (Fischer 17), occupants from the

building reported mechanical ventilation is used majority of the time.


Figure 4-5. Section through the tower showing typical office floors and gardens.
(Source: Foster 2007, 24).




























Figure 4-6. Detailed section through a tower floor. (Source: Foster 2007, 26).

Temperature Control

As a means to save energy and maintain thermal comfort, the building features

an "Intelligent" building-control technology. This feature controls the air quantities

pumped in or out of the building and even cuts air supply to unoccupied spaces.

Commerzbank tower also uses water, instead of air, to condition the building, which

saves energy over the life of the building. It also controls direct solar heat gains by

controlling the external shading located inside the double glazed facade. The building

control system is also activated while the building is not used at night or during holidays.

For example, the building could be naturally cooled during summer by opening the

windows at night (Evans). "Office design temperatures are 20C minimum in winter and

27C maximum in summer" (Evans).

























# V A -.ig_` l B

Figure 4-7. A) When weather conditions are suitable, all the Commerzbank's offices
are naturally ventilated. Under these circumstances, the building's
mechanical ventilation and cooling systems close down automatically.
(Diagram: Jennifer Mackey). B) Picture of a typical window opened. (Source:
Foster 2007, 76).

Heat during winter months is supplied by conventional fixed radiators at the side

of the windows. For hot summer days, the building is cooled "by a static water filled

cooling system" (Fischer 17). "The pumped cold water needed for cooling is produced

by environmental-friendly absorption-type refrigerating machines attached to the

municipal steam networks" (17). Since heating and cooling at not controlled by

"air only systems," the air exchange rate can be reduced to the required minimum with

the outside air being used exclusively. Energy is further saved with the facade's high

heat insulation quantity. Thus, 25% to 30% less energy is used than in comparable

conventional buildings (17).

Daylight

Natural daylight is maximized with the tower's glass facade, transparent

partitions between offices, and the atrium. As a result, all offices have access to natural









daylight. Transparency is also used as the supreme principle for a "sense of mental

openness to a working world based on communication" (Fischer 15); a concept clearly

made in these visually open offices. The level of transparency creates a "meta-

atmosphere of trust," (15) a characteristic of creative work. This works well as banking

is becoming an ever more creative profession.


A B


Figure 4-8. A) Office in the north core "panoramic office." (Source: Fischer 69). B)
Natural Daylight enters each office in the building, including in the interior
offices. (Source: Fischer 68).














Figure 4-9. Glazed partitions and light reflective materials allow daylight to reach all
offices and give visual access to colleagues. (Source: Fischer 66, 67, 73).

Artificial Lighting

The lighting system in the offices is suspended fluorescent tubes regulated with

light sensors. The light sensors determine the amount of daylight from the facade and

46








will adjust according to a prescribed set value which is implemented by a dimmable

electronic ballast device (Evans). Corridors and offices lit with continuous light are

automatically switched by movement detectors (Fischer 19). The overall systems work

to ensure adequate light levels of energy efficiency with the dimming control rather than

the switching on and off system.

Organization





A *



T. ,




Figure 4-10. Typical floor plans at the completion of the tower with team and combi
offices. (Source: Fischer 21).
Most offices at the time of completion used the combi office layout. Recent

reports from the employees have said many offices have converted to the open floor

plan in 2009 due to the recent merge with another company. The floor plan also offers

team offices. The walls between access corridors and the offices are glazed at the

architect's request. The glazed walls permit daylight and open up views through the

building of "wide angle perspectives" as the architect intended. More importantly, the

partitions enhance collaboration from the visual connection among employees (Fischer









13). All core functions of the building (stairwells, elevators, mechanical) have been

pushed to the corners in order to make way for the atrium.

Winter Gardens

From the street view, one can easily distinguish the location of the sky gardens

spiraling around the building with the different glazing system from the offices. A

garden takes up one arm of the triangular plan for the four floors. Then, the next garden

shifts round to the next arm. The gardens bring daylight into the central atrium and are

said to make socially "village-like clusters of offices" (Foster + Partners). Each office

cluster is four stories. These 'gardens in the sky' play an ecological role for fresh air,

places to relax during breaks, and informal meeting spaces. People working in the

inside offices of the other two arms can look across the atrium into the gardens for

visual break, and beyond through the structural glazed screens to the city. Their

landscaping "reflects the directions they face Asian, Mediterranean or North

American. For [the] Commerzbank staff these spaces offer an extra dimension to the

workplace" (Evans). The gardens are set to a minimum temperature of 5C and are

warmed when necessary with exhaust air from the offices (Evans).






















A B

Figure 4-11. A) Garden with North American vegetation. (Source: Fischer 64). B)
Garden with Mediterranean vegetation. (Source: Fischer 61).

Atrium

The triangular atrium originally was envisioned to be open. This would have

created a giant chimney with air being exhausted out of the top of the building in a stack

effect. It would have resulted in an undesirable updraft and accumulated heat at the

top. The solution was to segment the atrium every 12 stories. The atriums help from an

energy point of view too for a building using natural ventilation for some of the year.

(Davies).































Figure 4-12. A) View from lobby of Atrium at night (Source: Jennifer Mackey). B) Fire
Stopper segments atrium. C) View of atrium from top of tower with views of
gardens. (Source: Foster + Partners 2007, 58).

Nord/LB Hannover by Behnisch, Behnisch and Partner, Hannover

"In our opinion it was important to develop an unmistakable formal language
for the functions of the external areas and to respond to the clear character
of the architecture." Behnisch (Flamme-Jasper 98)


Figure 4-13. View of Nord LB Building in Hannover at dawn from across the street
(Photo: Jennifer Mackey).









Norddeutsche Landesbank (abbreviated Nord/LB) is one of the largest

commercial banks in Germany. The company set up a design competition for their new

headquarters in Hannover, one block by the prominent, historical city hall of Hannover.

The winning design was won by Behnisch, Behnisch & Partner, whom originally

designed the building without the tower. Later, it was decided to add the tower.

Completed in 2002, the building formally hugs the entire edge of the block giving it a

traditional block resemblance with a featured glass curtain facade. Inside the block

there is a public courtyard with a few shops and restaurants on the street level. A

distinctive tower rises 80 meters from the center of the courtyard (Reynolds 113). The

form of the tower has a twisted, irregular expression of floors stacked on top of each

other. Its geometry conforms to nothing in its surroundings. The tower's form is in

response to the historical geometries of the north (Behnisch Architektenl).






I ~ -









Figure 4-14. Cross section of the building. (Source: Flamme-Jasper 81).

The building is more famously known for its ecological concepts. A vast portion

of it is naturally ventilated with a double facade. The building also has many added

features, some being high tech while others basic passive strategies, to save energy









and resources. Some of its features include use of natural daylight, geothermal heating,

reflection pools, green roofs, and rainwater collection.




!iy ... .
S- 'I I -- 1 --- t-.









Figure 4-15. Left: Plan of third floor plan showing typical offices. Right: Plan of sixth
floor. (Source: Flamme-Jasper 83).

Natural Ventilation

Depending on the direction and requirement of the surrounding area, the office

facades are built in a variety of ways. Rather than relying solely on fresh air intake from

conventional air conditioning, all rooms in Nord/LB have an operable window for fresh

air (Flamme-Jasper 57-58). Air from the outside enters the exterior window and then

enters through another flap window between the office and corridor. The air then exits

through the fan-powered vent stack located in the hallway which pushes the air up out

of the building.





















A B

Figure 4-16. A) Simulation of the natural ventilation system. (Source: Flamme-Jasper
102). B) Vent stacks in hallways have slits to intake exhaust air (Photo:
Jennifer Mackey).

Where applicable, the building is skinned with a double facade in order to protect

employees from the wind, noise, and vehicle emissions. This occurs towards

Friedrichswall, WillyBrandt-Allee, and the Theatre am Aegi (Flamme-Jasper 57). The

inner courtyard and side facing the surrounding residential areas do not need the

double facade (59). The facades for the eighteen-storey tower block however need

particular demands. Stronger winds from the high elevation and intense heat from the

sun have to be considered. For those areas a double facade and special solar

protection features were installed. The tower is formed by the steel and glass tip in a

futuristic way. "Glass surfaces of different sizes lead the vertical emphasis of the tower

on upwards" (59).




















A B

Figure 4-17. A) Typical operable window in office provide natural ventilation. B) Double
skin facade from tower. (Photos: Jennifer Mackey).

Natural daylight

A high level of transparency is used throughout the skin of the facade. This gives

the building an open and friendly character from its unusual geometric shapes and the

materials used. The tower, compared to the rest of the building, is much more exposed

to the direct rays of the sun. For this reason, a solar protection system was integrated

into the space between the double facade on the south-east side. In the other areas

there are highly reflective sun blinds and anti-dazzle blinds situated internally which

follow the sun and control the daylight. They are concave-shaped layers of aluminum

and direct the light deep into the room (73).

























Figure 4-18. A) Screens in typical office reduce glare. (Photo: Jennifer Mackey). B)
Strings hanging down and horizontal blinds control light levels in a conference
room. (Photo: Jennifer Mackey)

There are also, however, areas in the building where sunlight never reaches, such

as the main entrance area beneath the tower. The fully glazed entrance hall, for

example, is therefore given additional lighting by heliostats. The heliostats are located

on the perimeter roof area where they reflect the sunlight into (73) the inner courtyard,

into the water basins, and into the hall. The narrow high area between the historical

Siemens buildings and the new building is treated in similar fashion, since this glass-

roofed access area hardly receives any sunlight down to the ground floor. With

heliostats and fixed mirror elements in the new building occupants benefit with

supplemental vitamin D from the supplemental sun rays.

The building was so conceived that, independently of the available indirect lighting

of the room and the direct lighting of the work-stations, all employees can work as much

as possible in daylight. For the office rooms in the perimeter block a special solar

protection system was developed for the outside rooms, equipped with slats set at two

different angles. It automatically adapts to the current positions of the sun, and, due to









the special angle of the upper third of the slats; even when closed there is enough

daylight reflected onto the ceiling to be sufficient for working (72). In order to give the

employees the greatest possible measures of freedom, the solar protection system can

also be manually operated. The different depths of the rooms, varying from five to

seven meters, enable one to experience the changes in daylight even in the corridor

areas and create a flood of light throughout the building.


A B

Figure 4-19. A) Typical office at night. (Source Nord LB). B) Heliostat on the building
perimeter. (Photo: Jennifer Mackey).


Figure 4-20. Control gauges for artificial lighting and blinds are by doors. (Photos:
Jennifer Mackey).









Green Roofs


....r ,0 ---------r'- _._














Figure 4-21. Roof plan indicating gardens and pool. (Source: Flamme-Jasper 84).

The concept of the exterior was worked out by the Behnisch office while the

execution was carried out by Landscape Architects Prof. Nagel Schonhoff + Partner.

The inner courtyard next to the large sloping glazed surfaces of the communal areas

was intended to not be naturalistic like the nearby park, Maschpark, "but rather an

architectural landscape with three lakes adjacent to each other" (62).

Though the gardens are not seen by the public, it is seen by the employees of

the building in order to "feel good in the building" by seeing something pleasant and

atmospheric. The roofs are "planted with greenery" (66) and are a way to soften the

view of the roof tops. The roofs are constantly maintained to keep a beautiful floral

display and are watered by an automatic drip watering system. Other roofs on the

perimeter block and the twisted roof of the tower exhibit the extensive greenery. Here

the roofs have different varieties of drought-tolerant sedum over wise areas so plants

are relatively undemanding and require only little care. Their colors vary between

yellow, blue, and red. Because the architects have designed each storey to also have a









direct link to the outside via terraces, employees can enjoy this pleasant view not (66)

only from the window. Even the view to the originally unattractive transformer station

has been interestingly fashioned. While it was enhanced visually at ground level by

wood paneling and an illuminated wall, from above it looks more like a park than a

building. The roofs of the individual parts of the building were covered completely in

greenery and large trees were also planted (67).























C

Figure 4-22. A) Green roof. (Source: Flamme-Jasper 97). B) Dense greenery on the
staff restaurant. (Source: Flamme-Jasper 97). C) Roof garden in winter
(Photo: Jennifer Mackey).

Courtyard

The courtyard is a semi-public area for employees and the public to enjoy. It

buffers sound and polluted air, serving as an urban oasis from the Hannover traffic.

Here, there was no need to take into consideration the high demands regarding sound









proofing and air-pollution, and so double facades were not necessary in this area. It

serves as a "duct transferring clean air from the central courtyard to the individual

offices" (Behnisch Architekten 1).

Reflection Pools

The pool in the courtyard has many useful purposes. Its primary purpose is to

collect rainwater for plant irrigation. It also serves as a microclimate controller for cooler

air in the courtyard and as a means to reflect light into the building (Behnisch

Architekten 1). The whole inner courtyard, including the water basins, is paved in

natural sand-colored stone slabs made of travertine in a unified way. In winter, when

the lake's water is drained because of frost, the stone plaza increases in size and

pedestrians can walk across the shallow basins, where they would normally walk over a

footbridge (Flamme-Jasper 62).
















A B

Figure 4-23. A) Reflection pool in courtyard. (Source: Flamme-Jasper 65). B) Pool
drained and frozen in winter (Photo: Jennifer Mackey).









Office Layout

Above the public area, on the ground-floor level, is the beginning of the interior

working areas. The complex was planned in this way so offices with economical floor

plans could be created everywhere. Since the shell is jointless construction of

reinforced concrete, more stiffened walls could be allocated. The architect used a

recurring planning grid of 1.5 meters to allow for flexible use of the building. The

individual parts of the building have varying office depths, so several types of office

could be realized: open-plan, private, cellular, combined, or shared.














A B

Figure 4-24. A & B) Office corridors with transparent partitions. (Photos: Jennifer
Mackey).

Furniture for working areas has been designed by the Behnisch office. Between

the typical individual work spaces, there is a customized, double-sided cupboard

serving for storage and as a wall partition. The top portion of the cupboard is made of

glass to further distribute more natural daylight inside the building. The furniture was

designed to be functional and ergonomic, while also creating space (68). Walls to the

corridors and exterior side are transparent glass. The abundance of transparency

creates desired openness, generous flow of light, and an ease of communication.









Window ledges are placed at a certain height so even people sitting have a view from

their desk into the distance and sometimes downwards. Offices and other spaces are

painted white with bright accent colors for a pleasant, bright working atmosphere (67).

The common accent colors are yellow and blue, while the shades of the cupboards are

delicate and light. Colorful artwork throughout the building enhances the positive

atmosphere.

The impression of long corridors was avoided by creating special areas or little

foyers set at sensible intervals near the stairwells, providing a rhythmic flow to these

corridors (68). On different floors, many recreational rooms, open-plan offices, or tea-

kitchens have greenery or wood terraces in front of them. Terraces on each floor can

be used by the employees during their breaks, giving structure to the building and

offering places for viewing the city, City Hall, and Maschpark. These terraces also

provide a link to the inner courtyard.















Figure 4-25. Kitchenette with clearly marked recycling bins help break the long
corridors. (Photo: Jennifer Mackey)

Geothermal heating

To further reduce energy costs, geothermal heating is used to preheat warm air

from the 20 meters tubes below the ground. Heat exchanger tubes in the building's

61









1,220 foundation pilings heat or cool water as required by the season. The water then

circulates through polyethylene pipes in the building floor structure to activate the floor

slab as a thermal mass. Performing as a thermal storage bank, the geothermal system

balances heat supplied to the ground during the summer and extracts from it during

winter. The only electric power required in the geothermal system stems from the

circulating pump balancing the amount of heat admitted to, and extracted from, the soil

(Flamme-Jasper 98-104).

















Figure 4-26. Computer screen showing the geothermal monitoring. (Photo: Jennifer
Mackey).

Artificial Lighting

Development of the interior lighting plan was conducted in tandem with the exterior

illumination. Particularly interesting for the long distance effect is the tip of the high-rise

building, whose specially layered blue-yellow glass elements change in color according

to the amount of light and the position of the viewer, even in the daytime. At night, the

tip acquires a quite different quality through powerful white and blue LED illumination

integrated into the construction. The illumination of the tower is completed, amongst









other things, by the illumination of a stairwell, some protruding elements, and the wall

surfaces in corridors. The concept of vertical lit surfaces continues into the ground (78)

floor area of the perimeter block, whereby the main entrance is highlighted additionally

with floodlights on the ground. Through the illumination of the rear walls in the staff

restaurant, in the cafeteria, and in the entrance hall, the inner courtyard becomes

transparent and thus, is also seen in the evening from Friedrichswall (79).

RWE Tower by Ingenhoven, Essen

First Ecological High Rise

The RWE AG Tower became Germany's first ecological highrise when it was

completed at the end of 1996, just before Commerzbank in Frankfurt opened. The

design was inspired after RWE's request to make an office that would create employee

and visitor comfort, clarity and style, building incorporation into the city plan of Essen,

and individual control of natural light, temperature, and ventilation. Its highest priority,

though, would focus on energy. As a result, it has a double skin facade so employees

may open windows, solar panels, and other mediums to save energy (Bridgleb).




































Figure 4-27. A) Ground Plan: 1. elevator lobby, 2. glass elevators, 3. connecting
S y 6






'50





serving point for meal, 10. 1. lounge, 12. conference rooms, 13.





block away. (Photo: Jennifer Mackey)-

















It was always envisioned office workers would be able to open the windows for

ventilation, physiological, energy reduction, general wellbeing, and employee

satisfaction reasons (76). The advisors for the transparent fakpade, Gartner Fardade

Specialists, were commissioned to design, deliver, and install the facade. The offices

would be ventilated naturally via a double-layer facade on weather permitting days. The
A B

Figure 4-27. A) Ground Plan: 1. elevator lobby, 2. glass elevators, 3. connecting
stairs, 4. foyer, 5. cafeteria, 6. restaurant, 7. bar, 8. dining room, 9.
serving point for meal, 10. kitchens, 11. lounge, 12. conference rooms, 13.
light well, 14. lake-side terrace, 15. lake, 16 RWE park. The garden level
links the tower with the RWE parks and gardens. A natural difference in
height allows the tower's park-side basement to be lit by daylight. All
restaurant and conference rooms are organized in a ring around the tower's
circular plan." (Source: Bridgleb 36). B) Street level view of RWE from a
block away. (Photo: Jennifer Mackey)

Natural Ventilation

It was always envisioned office workers would be able to open the windows for

ventilation, physiological, energy reduction, general wellbeing, and employee

satisfaction reasons (76). The advisors for the transparent facade, Gartner Facade

Specialists, were commissioned to design, deliver, and install the facade. The offices

would be ventilated naturally via a double-layer facade on weather permitting days. The









solution was to create the double-glazed facade "with a 50-cm wide space between the

two glass walls referred to as a facadee corridor'" (63). The exterior window assembly

"is made of flint glass that is fastened in only eight places" (63). The inner windows,

which were designed as sliding windows, extend from the floor to ceiling.

In order to make them user-friendly, a wheel opens the window by varying

degrees when turned. The glass is fitted with a high translucent insulation laminate with

k-value of 1.2 W/m2K. This provides good heat insulation in winter and, in combination

with slatted blinds, effective sun protection in summer (63). In order to ventilate the

facade, diagonal air streams were created within the facadee corridor", requiring the

supply and extracted air sections to be arranged laterally. Hence, the facade perforates

the under and upper sides and outer glass walls. An effective section is achieved with

120 mm wide vents. "The limited outer supply air vents and the perforation of the

platform panels act as a wind-breaker to oncoming wind, thus preventing disruptive

draught when windows are opened, even at considerable heights" (64).































Figure 4-28. Isometric view of the facade. Facade details were examined and
optimized using a large number of samples and mock ups. To obtain
planning permission for individual parts of the facade, crash- resistance trials
with a pendulum ball were conducted. (Source: Bridgleb 68).


Figure 4-29. A) Section view of the facade. (Source: Bridgleb 63). B) Fagade detail. 1.
facade construction 2. facade segmentation 3. supply and extracted air
vents 4. sun protection blinds 5. sliding window 6. thermal separation 7.
anti-glare device 8. convector 9. walking platform. (Source: Bridgleb 64).


I









Individual Temperature Regulation

Each individual office could be naturally ventilated from the double skin facade.

Even more ideal, all offices could each control their own temperature with a thermostat.

At the client's request, the team had to come up with a way for each office to have its

own temperature regulation. After much testing, it was decided they would use cooled

girders and mechanical ventilation. The final design resulted in a surfboard-like shaped

installation with fins placed in the ceiling of each office. Cool water runs in the pipes to

cool down the office. This "surfboard" is only used on floors leading up to the 18th floor

(the technical floor). The floors above would not be applicable to this cooling installation

because the cooling loads are higher for rooms such as dining conference rooms.

Those rooms have the same surfboard concept; however, the ducts and diffusers are

integrated inside (Bridgleb 74).

The offices in the tower and peripheral building use a convector heating system.

The heat is supplied by the district heating network of the city of Essen. The heating

supply is indirect as it comes from three district heating transfer points. The distribution

of heating water is set up in a two pipe system from the central transfer unit on the 3rd

floor via pumps (pressure differential- controlled). It then travels to the central climate

control-units on level -3 and to the technical installations floor (T1) in the tower (81).

Public areas use an air system of ducts integrated into the ceiling's concrete structure to

cool and heat the spaces. The cooled air flowing through the ducts also cool the

concrete mass, further stabilizing the ambient conditions in the room (75).



























S I I I I I l A

Figure 4-30. A) Typical Section showing the thermal mass of the concrete ceilings and
of the technical element integrated into the ceiling vault. (Source: Bridgleb
75). B) Picture of surfboard in testing. (Source Bridgleb 75).

Natural Daylight

Natural daylight is accessible in every office and conference room on the

conference level. The conceptual idea of the client to create a highly transparent skin

was generated by the idea of harnessing as much daylight as possible inside the tower.

The double skin glass facade is made with sun protector slats and semi-translucent

textile anti-glare screens to control daylight according to the worker's need. This is

effective in many ways to address challenges with interior blinds, including reducing

solar heat gains. The circular plan also allows the office to "have a larger surface area

towards the windows" (44). The interior walls, glazed at the top, further permit more

natural daylight to enter inside the building center. Even the glass dome atop the

building, storey-height glazed windows and auxiliary zones, such as technical

supervision, communication and technical installation benefit from virtually unrestricted









daylight (48). The glass dome, a raised circular steel structure with aluminum slats and

extended glass screen divert the direct sunlight from the circular conference room below

(49).















A B

Figure 4-31. A) Glazing of typical office (Source: Bridgleb 63). B) Lever to open
windows. (Source: Bridgleb 63)












Figure 4-32. Daylight can be diverted and dimmed thanks to the sun protector blinds
inside the double layered facade and the interior anti-glare screen. (Source:
Bridgleb 64).

Artificial Lighting

The office lighting concept is designed with a day and night setting for maximum

comfort. The settings can be activated by the occupants. At night, illumination is

provided with downlights producing a warm white light. In order to minimize any









unwanted vertical dazzle when looking directly into the lights from below, the lights have

been fitted with special diffusers. Special reflectors in the lights also minimize direct

glare (87). During the day setting, involute lamps are use to complement natural

daylight with a neutral white light. "Involute lamp technology helps to minimise reflective

glare. All lighting systems are integrated flush into the technical duct in the ceiling

which also accommodates sprinklers, loudspeakers, etc." (87).











A B


C D E

Figure 4-33. A) Sun protector blinds and antiglare screens on the glass work together
to regulate the daylight and artificial lighting. B) Typical office facing the
hallway with the glazing on top of the cabinets and door. C) Typical office
with wood interior cabinets. D) Office space. E) Conference room (Source:
Bridgleb 44-114).










Office Organization


Typical floor (M 1:320)
1 Elevator lobby 6 Catering service room
2 Access corridor 7 Kitchette
3 Circular floor 8 Fire brigade elevator
4 Office 9 Emergency stairs
5 Conference 10 Technical installations


Figure 4-34. Typical floor plan of offices (Source: Bridgleb 44).

The plan of a typical office floor is circular with individual offices hugging the outer

edge. The elevator core was moved outside to enhance communication within the

building, rather than having a solid core creating a block between offices. The inner

circle of the plan has spaces such as conference rooms, restrooms, storage,

mechanical space, and staircases. Every so often, the ceiling is cut out for glazed

interior stairs, linking user zones stretching across several floors. "Recreational areas

and lounges are located in the interior zones along with the relevant catering service

equipment" (47). This promotes communication amongst different levels, unlike the

typical stacked floor plans of typical high-rises. It also encourages less use of the

elevator as people will be inclined to use the open stairs to access nearby floors. By












placing the building's cores to the sides, the lobby at ground level also has a grand free


center space.


Conference level (M 1:320)
1 Elevator lobby 8 Conference room
2 Access corridor 9 Conference room
3 Circular corridor 10 Catering service room
4 Lounge 11 Fire brigade elevator
5 Sky lobby 12 Emergency stairs
6 Bar 13 Technical installations
7 Interior stairs
Figure 4-35. Typical floor plan of conference level (Source: Bridgleb 46).


Figure 4-36. Typical corridor (Source: Bridgleb 44).


"' ,^. f-
*''









CHAPTER 5
SURVEYING OFFICE WORKERS

Method of Survey

In order to gain insight into what working in the selected office buildings is like, a

survey was created for employees working in the actual buildings. The data collected

by the surveyors, Jennifer Mackey and Lorenzo Pagano, can be divided into subjective

and objective variables. The objective variables measured include gender, age, career

position, office location (proximity to windows and exterior walls) and average working

hours per day. The subjective variables measured include occupant satisfaction and

self-reported ratings with the indoor environment quality in following categories: thermal

comfort during different seasons, ergonomics, lighting, acoustics, and overall

satisfaction with building. In satisfaction and self-reported rating questions, a 7-point

semantic differential scale with the endpoints "very unsatisfactory" and "very

satisfactory" were used. For the purposes of comparison, we assumed the scale is

roughly linear, and assigned ordinal values to each of the points along the scale, from -3

(very dissatisfied) to +3 (very satisfied) with 0 as the neutral midpoint. Wherever

possible, other questions rating qualitative aspects of the building are also descriptive

polar terms. For example, question four asked "How would you rate the natural

daylighting in your office space?" The endpoints are "too dark" or "too bright," rather

than "very satisfactory" or "very unsatisfactory." Thus, we could better understand if

there is a problem with the light levels and then were able to infer the cause. At the

end of the survey, surveyees could write what parts of the building they wish to change

in order to better understand what features of the building need improvements. Of the

three buildings surveyed, all are located in northwestern Germany. Each is relatively in









the same moderate climate characterized by "gentle, warm summers and mild winters"

(germany.com).

For access to the buildings, permission was requested to perform the surveys

through the respective human relations or the communications department. If

permission was not granted, as in the case of the RWE Tower, then the surveyors

asked the office workers to fill out the survey on public property. In the case of

Commerzbank, permission was granted to fill out surveys in the public areas such as

the lobby and restaurant. In Nord/LB, access was granted in the semi-public areas until

the surveyor was told to discontinue. Due to the time limit in Europe, all surveys were

conducted during winter which may have an influence on the responses concerning

temperature. The cold weather may have also limited the amount of responses people

were willing to give. An attempt to fill out at least 30 surveys was made for each

building. The only qualification to fill out the survey was the employee have an office

within the building. All people surveyed represent a wide range of careers, including:

receptionists, interns, accountants, analysts and managers.

The survey was carefully worded to not create biased opinions with negative

connotations. For example, instead of asking about "noise levels" of room, which

usually is a negative term, the surveyed are asked about the "sound level" of their work

environment. The questions are also worded as simple as possible in order to avoid

miscommunications and cultural misunderstandings. For example, instead of using the

word "Fall" as a season, people in Europe generally use the word "Autumn" instead.

For office workers who prefer to read in German, a German copy of the survey was

available. The survey was 18 questions, with a variety of "fill in the blank" and close-









ended questions. Many of these high profiled workers had to attend meetings or had

limited time for lunch, so keeping the survey to a five minute time limit helped to obtain a

greater number of completed survey responses.

Semantic Differential Scale

When formatting the questions, it was decided the Semantic Differential Scale

would be the most practical scale to use for respondents to provide their ratings. The

Semantic Differential Scale is a seven point scale with end points associated with

bipolar labels. Bi-polar means two opposite streams are used; in this case, "very

satisfied" and "very unsatisfied." In other cases, bipolar adjectives are used, such as

"too loud" or "too quiet." The Semantic Differential Scale is used to develop an image

profile. It provides a good basis for comparing images of two or more items. The big

advantage of this scale is its simplicity, while producing results compared with those of

the more complex scaling methods. The method is easy and fast to administer, it is

highly versatile, reliable and generally valid. It is also sensitive to small differences in

attitude. Mean and medians collected from the scores can help determine overall

similarities and differences between buildings. The scale used has a score between -3

to 3, rather than 1-7.

The survey was influenced by the Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

Occupant Indoor Environmental Quality (leq) Survey. The CBE is at the University of

California, Berkeley. It is an anonymous, invite-style survey measuring occupant

satisfaction and self-reported productivity with respect to nine environmental categories:

office layout, office furnishings, thermal comfort, air quality, lighting, acoustics, cleaning

and maintenance, and overall satisfaction with building and with workspace. Their

survey also asks respondents for a follow-up regarding a "dissatisfied" answer for any

75









question. Because of the limited time surveyees have to fill out the survey, this survey

did not ask for follow-up for all questions. Instead, the end of the survey provides an

opportunity for the respondent to indicate what they would change about the building.












Sample Surveys


School of Architecture
Building Evaluation University of Florida
RWE AG Tower, Essen Gainesville, FL 32611

Informed Consent
Protocol Title: Building Evaluation in Sustainable High Rises

Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study.

Purpose of the research study:
The purpose of this study is to understand how features in the building effect your work environment.

What you will be asked to do in the study:
You will be asked to a series of questions about the office environment in which you work in. The
questions are formatted in short response and a number rating system. All questions are related to the
location of your work space.

Time required:
5-10 minutes

Risks and Benefits:
There are no known risks or immediate benefits to the participants.

Compensation:
No compensation is offered for participation.

Confidentiality:
Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Your information will be assigned a
code number. The list connecting your name to this number will be kept in a locked file in my faculty
supervisors office. When the study is completed and the data have been analyzed, the list will be
destroyed. Your name will not be used in any report.

Voluntary participation:
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating.

Right to withdraw from the study:
You have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence

Whom to contact if you have questions about the study:
Jennifer Mackey, Graduate Student, School of Architecture, Gainesville, FL 32611, email:
jentwin@ufl.edu.
Professor Maze, Assistant Professor, Assistant Director, School of Architecture, Gainesville, FL 32611,
email: maze@ufl.edu

Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study:
IRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250; phone 1-352-392-0433.

Agreement:

I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and I have
received a copy of this description.

Participant: Date:

Principal Investigator: Date:
Jennifer Mackey













School of Architecture
Building Evaluation University of Florida
RWE AG Tower, Essen Gainesville, FL 32611


The following questions pertain to your immediate surroundings of your office space.

1. What zone of the building is your workspace?
(Floor number and please
mark on typical floor plan)











2. How would you rate the thermal comfort during these times of year?
Summer codl -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 ho
Autumn cl -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Io
Winter od -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Fhot
Spring o -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 ho

3. How would you rate the humidity during these times of year?
Summer 57 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3humid
Autumn Il -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 hum
Winter d -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 hum
Spring -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3humid

4. How would you rate natural day lighting in your office space? (diffused light, sunlight, etc)
Light Levels toodark -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 too brht
Glare (computer screen) very unsatisfied -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 verysatisfied
Controllability Iveryunsatisfed -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 verysatisfed

5. How would rate the artificial lighting (task lamps, ceiling lights, etc)?
Light Levels too dark -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 too bnht
Glare (computer screen) I very unsatisfied -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 verysatisfied
Controllability I ver unsatisfied -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 very satisfied


6. How would you rate the sound levels (background noise)?
Sound Level tooloud -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 tooet
Please list factors influencing sound level
















School of Architecture
Building Evaluation University of Florida
RWE AG Tower, Essen Gainesville, FL 32611



7. Is view to "green space" important to you while you are working?

8. How would you rate your access to view green environments (view of gardens, trees, etc)?
Svery unsatisfied I -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 versatisfed I

9. Is the office organized in a way that supports collaboration and creativity?
Iveryunsatisfied -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 |verysatisfied

10. How would you rate the ergonomics of your workspace (desk, chair, keyboard and computer
monitor adjusted to your needs)?
Very unsatisfied | -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 verysatisfied

11. How do you feel after work?
irdl -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 entered

12. What improvements would you make to the building?



13. What is your age?

14. Sex: female I male

15. Average working hours per day?____ hrs

16. Job title?

17. Rate job satisfaction?
Iveryunsatisfied -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 verysatisfied


18. On average, how many sick days do you use per year?

19. Overall, do you think the building enhances productivity?
I strongly disagree -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 stronagree















School of Architecture
Building Evaluation University of Florida
Nord/LB, Hannover Gainesville, FL 32611

Inkenntnissetzung
Protocol Betreff: Evaluation von Gebaude in kontinuierlichem Anstieg

Bitte lesen Sie dieses Dokument aufmerksam bevor Sie sich zur Teilnahme der Studie
entscheiden

Grund der Forschungs-Studie:
Diese Studie wurde gemacht um zu verstehen wie die Eigenschaften eines Gebaudes Ihre
Arbeitsumgebung beeinflussen.

Was wird in dieser Studie von Ihnen verlangt:
Wir werden Ihnen eine Serie von Fragen bezoglich Ihres Arbeitsumfeldes stellen. Der Fragebogen ist auf
kurze Antworten und nach einem Nummer-Bewertungsverfahren aufgestellt. Alle Fragen beziehen sich
auf Ihr Arbeitsumfeld.

Durchfuhrungs-Zeit:
5-10 Minuten

Risiken und BegUnstigungen:
Es gibt keine bekannte Risiken und Begonstigungen fur den Teilnehmer.

Abfindung:
Es wird keine Abfindung angeboten.

Vertraulichkeit:
Ihre Identitat wird Vertraulich nach erweiterter Gesetzgebung behandelt. Die Informationen werden einer
Code Nummer zugeteilt. Die Code-Nummer Liste mit Ihrem Namen wird verschllsselt im Buro des
Fakultat Vorgesetzten aufgehoben. Wenn die Studie abgeschlossen ist und die Daten ausgewertet
wurden dann wird die Liste vemichtet. Ihr Name wird in keiner Weise im Bericht erwahnt

Freiwillige Beteiligung:
Die Beteiligung an der Studie ist Freiwillig und es gibt in keiner weise Nachteile oder Straffen wenn Sie
nicht Teil nehmen.

Ausscheidungs- Recht:
Sie konnen sich zu jederzeit aus der Studie zurtckziehen.

Wer wird kontaktiert zu eventuellen Fragen der Studie:
Jennifer Mackey, Graduate Student, School of Architecture, Gainesville, FL 32611, email:
jentwin@ufl.edu-
Professor Maze, Assistant Professor, Assistant Director, School of Architecture, Gainesville, FL 32611,
email: maze@ufl.edu

Wer wird kontaktiert fur Fragen Ober Ihre Rechte als Teilnehmer der Studie:
IRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250; phone 1-352-392-0433.

Vereinbarung:
Ich habe die beschriebene Prozedur gelesen und bin einverstanden, freiwillig an der Studie Teil zu
nehmen und habe eine Kopie der Beschreibung bekommen.

Participant: Date:

Haupt Ermittler: Date:
Jennifer Mackey














School of Architecture
Building Evaluation University of Florida
Nord/LB, Hannover Gainesville, FL 32611


Die folgenden Fragen beziehen sich auf das Direkte Arbeitsumfeld Ihres BOros.

1. In welcher Zone befindet sich Ihr Arbeitsplatz?
(Flur Nummerund bitte auch auf dem Plan einzeichnen)















2. Wie wOrden Sie die Temperatur in ihrem Arbeitsreich wahrend den Jahreszeiten bewerten?
Sommer kal -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 L
Herbst Fkat -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Winter rkat -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Fm
Frohling kt -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 WF

3. We warden Sie die Feuchtigkeit wahrend den Jahreszeiten bewerten?
Sommer rocket -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 eu
Herbst trocken 3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 eucht
Winter trocken -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Ieu
Frahling trocken -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 eu

4. We warden Sie die NatOrliche Tagesbeleuchtung im BOro bewerten? (Sonnenlicht...)
Lichtstarke zudunk -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 zhe
Grelles Licht (ComputerBildschirm) sehrunbefnedigendl-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 sehrbefnedigend
Steuerbarkeit Isehrunbefriedigend-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 sehrbelriedigend

5. Wie worden Sie die Beleuchtung im Boro bewerten? (Lampe, Neon Beleuchtung,...)
Lichtstarke zudun -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 zuhe
Grelles Licht (Computer screen) lunbefnedigend | -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 befredigend
Steuerbarkeit Iunbefriedigendl -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Ibefriedigend

6. Wie warden Sie die Gerausche im Baro bewerten? (Hintergrunds-Gerausche)
Gerausche z ut -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 zuuh

Bitte geben Sie Einflussfaktoren der Gerausche ein














School of Architecture
Building Evaluation University of Florida
Nord/LB, Hannover Gainesville, FL 32611



7. Ist die Sicht auf eine GrOnanlage, wahrend Ihrer Arbeitszeit fur Sie wichtig?

8. Wie warden Sie den Sicht-Zugang zu einer GrOnantage bewerten (Sicht auf einen Garten,
Baume)?
Isehrunbefiedigend -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 sehrbefriedigend

9. Ist der Innenbereich des BUros so gestaltet dass Sie gute Arbeit erstellen und Kreativ sind?
Isehrunbefriedigend -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 sehrbefiediend

10. Wie worden Sie das Buromaterial bewerten (Sind Ihr Barotisch, Stuhl, Tastatur und Monitor
des Rechners auf ihre Hohe eingestellt?)
Isehrunbefriedi end -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 sehrbefiedioend

11. Wie fOhlen Sie sich nach einem Arbeitstag?
Imade -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 energ

12. Welche Anderungen warden Sie im Gebaude machen?



13. Wie alt sind Sie?

14. Geschlecht: weiblich / mannlich

15. Durchschnitt der Arbeitsstunden pro Tag Stunden

16. Berufsbezeichnung?

17. Bewerten Sie bitte ihre Zufriedenheit?
lunbefriedigend -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Ibefridigend I

18. Wie viele Tage benutzen Sie im Durchschnitt wegen Krankheit pro Jahr?

19. Warden Sie Insgesamt behaupten dass die Umgebung und die Struktur des Gebaudes Sie
bei der Leistungsfahigkeit unterstutzen?
slarnichtzustimmendl -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 I shrzustimmend









CHAPTER 6
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Graphs and Charts

How would you rate the thermal comfort during these times of year?


[ Temperature Commerzbank


Autumn Spring Summer Winter
Temperature Rating within Season


Temperature Rating


*-3 0-2 -1 fDo i E 2 03
Cold Hot


Figure 6-1. Temperature rating of Commerzbank during all four reasons. Autumn and
spring had the most neutral ratings of temperature, although many did report
it was warm. Spring's average temperature (0.53) rating was slightly warmer
than autumn (0.27). Summer had the warmest average of 1.47. This could
be because the clear glass and steel framing transmits heat very easily.
During interviews, employees stated that the higher the floor, the warmer the
temperature. Heat rising up from convection and the greater sun exposure
could be reasons for this comment. Winter had the most varied results but no
correlation could be found for this. Because many respondents did not fill in
the location, it was difficult to predict if location influenced the response. It is
possible that proximity to windows may cause some respondents to state if it
was too cold being the winter gardens and exterior environment reach
temperatures of 5C. People who said it was too warm may have been closer
to heat sources or simply have a higher metabolism. More low energy
cooling systems should be looked at to compensate for the warm temperature
ratings, such as ceiling fans.









How would you rate the thermal comfort during these times of year?


I Nord LB Temperature


Autumn Spring Summer Winter
Temperature Rating within Season


Temperature Rating


*-3 0-2 0-i Fo0 E1 02 03
Cold Hot


Figure 6-2. Temperature rating of Nord/LB during all four reasons. In summer and
autumn, people tended to feel the temperature was too warm. Summer's
average rating was 1.68 and autumn's was 0.56. Spring had the most neutral
responses but an average of 0.52. Men tended to state the temperature was
too warm while women felt both polar temperatures during winter and
summer. The findings in winter could be a result of people sitting closer or
farther from the window. People many times said the interior corridor would
get too warm. Opening the windows helps regulate the office temperature but
would cause the centralized heating system work more to compensate for the
added cool air. More low energy cooling systems should be looked at to
compensate for the warm temperature ratings, such as ceiling fans.










How would you rate the thermal comfort during these times of year?


I RWE Temperature I


c)
0
n
c', 15




1 0 1 2 3 -1 0 1 2 3 -1 0 1 2 3 -1 0 1 2 3
Autumn Spring Summer Winter
E

5


41 0123 01 23012 1 12 1 0
Autumn Spring Summer Winter


Temperature Rating within Season


Temperature Rating *-3 *-2 3-1 0 J 1 l 2 13
Cold Hot


Figure 6-3. Temperature rating of RWE during all four reasons. Overall everyone was
satisfied with the temperature of their office. Each employee can regulate
their own office's temperature to their needs with the climate surfboard. All
season's ratings were close to 0, except for summer with an average of 0.76.










How would you rate the humidity during these times of year?



Humidity Commerzbank
,-1


a)
L
uc 15-

, 10-
..
E
z



A utm- I p In S e n

Autumn Spring Summer Winter


Humidity Rating within Season


HumidityRating -3 -2 3-1 o0 1 2 3
Dry Humid

Figure 6-4. Humidity rating of Commerzbank during all four reasons. Results for
humidity were broad, although most people reported the humidity being
neutral for all seasons, or slightly dry if they answered otherwise. The mean
for winter had the lowest average rating of -0.97, -3 being the driest and 3
being the most humid. This is probably because the conventional fixed
radiators at the side of the windows runs more for the cold climate, causing
the air to be dry. Spring (average of -0.37) and autumn (average of -0.53)
had the most neutral ratings. A humidifier in each office would help improve
ratings.









How would you rate the humidity during these times of year?


I Humidity Nord LB


O,
C
c 15-

( 10-
.,
E
3


3


Autumn Spring Summer Winter


Humidity Rating within Season


Humidity Rating *-3 *-2 i-1 []0 f1 *2 *3
Dry Humid

Figure 6-5. Humidity rating of Nord/LB during all four reasons. Most people felt the
humidity was neutral for all four seasons. Averages for all four seasons
leaned more towards the dry rating. Autumn's average was -0.40, spring's
was -0.44, summer's was -0.24, and winter's was -.076. Few people who
filled out the surveys commented they had never thought about the humidity
of their workspace, until they thought about dry eyes and skin as a cause of
dry air.


ih.I1. 1 1 .IILIh&IL.










How would you rate the humidity during these times of year?


Humidity RWE

25-


g 20-
0
i- n
T 15.
-'-

j 10-
E
3


0 I II I I I I I IlMmU Im I

Autumn Spring Summer Winter

Humidity Rating within Season


HumidityRating *-3 *-2 N-1 i 0 [1 *2 *3
Dry Humid

Figure 6-6. Humidity rating of RWE during all four reasons. While filling out humidity
ratings, many people from Commerzbank and Nord/LB hesitated because
they had never thought about it. The people in RWE, however, confidently
circled neutral, meaning humidity was ideal.












How would you rate natural day lighting in your office space? (diffused light, sunlight,


etc)


Natural Light Levels



a 15-
c--



E C




cN,- n L3 L" r- L, N L". ci- C r- "
Commerzbank Nord LB RWE


Light Levels within Building


Light Levels *-3 *-2 --1 [ 0
Too Dark


1 2 3
Too Bright


Figure 6-7. Natural daylight levels for all three buildings. Most ratings were neutral for
all three buildings, meaning it wasn't too bright or too dark. Interestingly,
occupants in Commerzbank who stated their office was too dark had their
offices located by the atrium, towards the core. This is where many
management positions are located. The average rating for Commerzbank
was -0.12 (slightly dark) even with all the glazed interior walls. This could be
because Commerzbank has the deepest floor plan compared to all three
buildings so there is less light the farther you are from a window.
Commerzbank also does not have glazing from the floor to ceiling like
Nord/LB and the RWE Tower on the exterior. Nord/LB and RWE had about a
fourth of respondents report the light levels were too bright. One man
mentioned the conference rooms in RWE are completely closed off from
natural daylight, causing people to want to leave the room.











How would you rate the controllability and glare of natural day lighting in your office


space? (diffused light, sunlight, etc)


Natural Daylight Ratings for Commerzbank


0 L J i 1
-2-1 0 1 2 3 -2-1 0 1 2 3
Controllability Glare


Rating within Natural Lighting


Rating *-3 *-2 i-1 0-
Very Unsatisfied


1 2 *3
Very Satisfied


Figure 6-8. Controllability ratings and glare ratings from natural daylight for
Commerzbank. The average rating for the ability to control daylight was 0.50,
-3 being very unsatisfied and 3 being very satisfied. A wide spread of ratings
were recorded. There was no correlation between office location and rating.
The average rating for glare was 0.50. Exterior shading devices must help to
control glare. Otherwise, all exterior sides of the building would get direct
sunlight.









How would you rate the controllability and glare of natural day lighting in your office


space? (diffused light, sunlight, etc)


[Natural Daylight Ratings for Nord LB }


(,, 'i.-
3)
03
Cl
a
n, 8-

S6
E
= 4-


.i ..I .


Controllabilit Glare
Rating within Natural Lighting


Rating *-3 *-2 f-1 0
Very Unsatisfied


1 2 *3
Very Satisfied


Figure 6-9. Controllability ratings and glare ratings from natural daylight for Nord/LB.
The average ratings were below neutral for the ability to control natural
daylight (-0.24). Not all parts of the building use a double skin facade, so
external blinds aren't there. However, all offices to have a translucent screen
can cover one half of the glazing. The building also automatically overrides
the ability to lower the blinds if the wind is too high. Glare had an average
rating of .20, slightly above neutral. A further look into the individual offices,
especially the tower as they reported the lowest ratings, would be needed in
order to understand what could be causing problem of glare. It may be
because some windows do not come with exterior blinds and the interior
screening devices cover only about 50% of the windows.










How would you rate the controllability and glare of natural day lighting in your office


space? (diffused light, sunlight, etc)


I Natural Daylight Ratings for RWE I


VI
S 10-
.,
10
8-

S6-
E
- 4-
Z


C ontrollabili Glare -
Controllability Glare


Rating within Natural Lighting


Rating *-3 *-2 -1 i O
Very Unsatisfied


1 2 i3

Very Satisfied


Figure 6-10. Controllability ratings and glare ratings from natural daylight for RWE.
Most people were satisfied with how they could control the natural daylight
setting in the RWE Tower. The average rating was 0.88 even though most
people answered satisfactory. This also correlated to the satisfactory ratings
for glare in that building, though that average rating was 0.18.









How would you rate the artificial lighting (task lamps, ceiling lights, etc)?


I Artificial Light Levels


C CiO 1.11 .L iR
Commerzbank Nord LB RWE


Light Levels within Building


Light Levels *-3 *-2 i-1 0
Too Dark


1 2 3
Too Bright


Figure 6-11. Artificial light levels for all three buildings. For all three buildings, most
people reported the light levels from artificial light fixtures to be neutral,
neither too dark nor too bright. The average ratings for Commerzbank is
0.50, Nord/LB 0.08, RWE is 0.12.








How would rate the controllability and glare of artificial lighting (task lamps, ceiling


lights, etc)?


SArtificial Light Ratings for Commerzbank


, l_l
. C m 0 l CN T0 C 0)
Controllability Glare
Rating within Artificial Lighting


Rating *-3 *-2 f-1 0[
Very Unsatisfied


1 2 3
Very Satisfied


Figure 6-12. Controllability ratings and glare ratings from artificial lighting for
Commerzbank. The ratings for the ability to control the artificial lighting were
widespread with an average of 0.07. In general, the ratings for glare were
between neutral and satisfactory, with an average of 0.50. Occupants
unsatisfied with the ability to control the fluorescent lights may not like that the
system is automated to a prescribed light level.










How would rate the controllability and glare of artificial lighting (task lamps, ceiling


lights, etc)?


I Artificial Light Ratings for Nord LB I


a)
C,
10-
ol
rr 8-
a) 6-
E
I 4-
z
2-

0-


Controllabilit Glare


Rating within Artificial Lighting


Rating *-3 *-2 0-1 0[
Very Unsatisfied


1 2 03
Very Satisfied


Figure 6-13. Controllability ratings and glare ratings from artificial lighting for Nord/LB.
The average rating for controllability of artificial lighting was -0.20 and the
average rating of glare from artificial lighting was 0.48. It seems as though
that each desk provides a task lamp, but it is not certain whether each office
has the same kind of permanent light fixture on the ceiling. It seems like
some have recessed fluorescent ceiling lights, while others have hanging
fluorescent lights, or standing light fixtures.










How would rate the controllability and glare of artificial lighting (task lamps, ceiling


lights, etc)?


I Artificial Light Ratings for RWE


E 1
Cl
0
-r
On

E
Z


-2-1 0 1 2 3 -2-1 0 1 2 3
Controllability Glare


Rating within Artificial Lighting


Rating *-3 *-2 l-1 [0
Very Unsatisfied


1 2 *3
Very Satisfied


Figure 6-14. Controllability ratings and glare ratings from artificial lighting for RWE.
Ratings for both are generally satisfactory. The average for controllability is
0.88 and the average for glare is 0.71. The high rating from glare could be a
result of the offices' involute down lighting lamps with fitted diffusers working
well.










How would you rate the sound levels (background noise)?


Sound Level


4-




-1-1
3
2-





-3-
-4-
Commerzbank Nord LB RWE
Building


Commerzbank Nord LB RWE


Rating within Building


Rating m-3 *-2 m-1 0O
Too Loud


1 2 2 3
Too Quiet


Figure 6-15. A) Sound level ratings for all three buildings. -3 being too loud and 3
being too quiet. B) Box Plot Chart of all building's sound rating.
Commerzbank had the noisiest sound level of all the buildings with an
average rating of -1.33 (-3 being too loud). This is because the tower recently
changed to a large open floor plan to fit as many as 30 people inside. People
complained mostly of people talking on the phone as the source of noise and
then technology (fax, phone, printers). One person mentioned there was no
sound absorbing material. Another person said "8 people in the office on the
phone" as a source of noise. The lack of conference rooms in each floor also
contributes to this. For Nord/LB (average rating of -1.04), the most common
cause of noise was from conversations being transmitted through the thin wall
partitions. Others said people talking in the corridors and printers caused
noise. From personal observation, Nord/LB workers appeared happy, open,
and friendly towards one another. They always greeted each other while
walking down the hallways. RWE had mostly neutral ratings (average -0.22)
with some comments the source of noise was from the air conditioning and
from open windows.









Is view to "green space" important to you while you are working?


Commerzbank Nord/LB RWE Tower


E yes E Yes E Yes

l no E 0No E No

Figure 6-16. Pie charts of responses for all three buildings. Commerzbank had the
most respondents answer that view to green space was no important.

How would you rate your access to view green environments (view of gardens, trees,

etc)?

Rating Access to View Green Environments
14-
12-

co 10-
C I
0.
CL
CO


4-
C
-o
E
z


6I

4-

2-

0-
0 .. IIn I Ihn ,
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3-2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3-2-1 0 1 2 3
Commerzbank Nord LB RWE


Viewto Green Space Rating within Building

Viewto Green Space Rating *-3 *-2 f-1 00o 1 2 *3
Very Unsatisfied Very Satisfied

Figure 6-17. Access to view green environments for all three buildings. Commerzbank
had the highest average rating (1.40) of access to view green environments.
This is not surprising being that one of the main design concepts for the
building was the sky garden feature. RWE came in second (0.53) and
Nord/LB came in third (0.04). A reason for the Nord/LB having the lowest
ratings could be the interior of the building does not feature any trees, except
for the one in the lobby and one in the courtyard. Even with the green roofs,
the ratings were low. RWE may have earned satisfactory ratings because the
tower has a view of the garden down below.









Is the office organized in a way that supports collaboration and creativity?

[Creativity and Collaboration


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Commerzbank Nord LB RWE


Creativity and Collaboration Rating within Building


Creativity and Collaboration Rating


*-3 -2 *-1 Do


Very Unsatisfied


1 2 *3
Very Unsatisfied


Figure 6-18. Building organized for collaboration and creativity ratings of all three
buildings. Commerzbank had the highest average 0.77, Nord.LB the second
highest average of 0.76, and RWE the third average of 0.35. Since
Commerzbank is the only high rise utilizing the open floor plan and
completely transparent partitions, the occupants may perceive this as a way
to encourage collaboration and creativity. Nord/LB could also be perceived
as being place for collaboration and creativity because of the transparent
walls facing the corridors and spaces for informal meetings and conference
rooms available. RWE surprisingly got some very satisfactory ratings, even it
is the walls are opaque at eye level. One person reported office workers felt
lonely while working here because there is no visual contact with other
colleagues.









How would you rate the ergonomics of your workspace (desk, chair, keyboard and


computer monitor adjusted to your needs)?


[Ergonomics


-3-2-1 0 1 2 3 -3-2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3-2 -1 0 1 2 3
Commerzbank Nord LB RWE


Ergonomic Ratingwithin Building


Ergonomic Rating *-3 *-2 --1 i o
Very Unsatisfied


1 2 3
Very Unsatisfied


Figure 6-19. Ergonomic ratings for all three buildings. While interviewing an employee
from Nord/LB, the researcher questioned if the company provided ergonomic
work space. It was a question she had never thought of. From personal
observations, it was clear the company did not provide simple needs such as
monitor stand. However, because she had never thought headaches and
back pains could be the result of a poor computer set up, she felt what she
had was satisfactory. This helped lead to the conclusion that office workers
who were knowledgeable about what made a work space ergonomic were
actually unsatisfied with their work conditions provided by the company.
Those who were satisfied were either not knowledgeable about the
importance of practicing ergonomic set up or they simply never had an issue.
The selection of furniture, desks, and chairs then becomes an important issue
that must be solved during the design stage because to upgrade furniture in
the future would be costly. One comment from a Commerzbank employee
stated that adjustable tables and better chairs would improve the work
conditions. Items such as monitor stands or wrist supports can be solved
later.


100










How do you feel after work?" combined with "Age"


Energy Level vs. Age, Commerzbank Energy Level vs. Age, Nord LB
4 4
3- 3
2 2- -
J J)


0 w0

-2 -2-
-3 -3
-4 I I I -4 I
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Age Age
Commerzbank Nord/LB


SEnergy Level vs. Age, RWE
4
3-
2-




-2

-3-






Figure 6-20. Plot of energy level vs. age for all three buildings. For energy levels, 3 is
energized and -3 is tired. The question of how you feel after work (energized
or tired) relates to the oxygen levels of the building. If the building has good
ventilation, it is assumed people will feel more energized. Age also influences
energy levels. No real correlation was found between age and how workers
felt after work, except for in Commerzbank which also had the most
responses. In Commerzbank, the younger the age, the more energized
people felt. Nord/LB had the highest energy level ratings (average of 0.00)
while Commerzbank had the lowest average of -0.77. The varied responses
could be effected by hours worked, amount of sleep, metabolism, energy
intake, stress, or the lack of responses.




101










Overall, do you think the building enhances productivity?


Productivity Rating for All Buildings
12

10-

- 8-
o 6- (
i i

E 4-
Z


-2 -1 0 1 2 3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Commerzbank Nord LB RWE


Productivity Rating within Building


Productivity Rating *-3 *-2 -1 Oi
Strongly Disagree


1 2 g3
Strongly Agree


Figure 6-21. Productivity rating for all three buildings. Commerzbank reported to have
the highest rating for productivity with an average of 1.07. Nord LB had an
average of 0.84 and RWE had an average of 1.0.


102









Recommendations

As predicted, the selected case studies have neutral or satisfactory overall

results in most categories. The major problems found were warm temperatures during

summer for Nord/LB and Commerzbank, sound levels for offices sharing more than four

people, and the ability for individuals to control the light levels.

When calculating the standard deviation of the responses, they were found to be

high (between 1.5 and 2) most of the time, meaning responses had a wide spread. This

could be a result of workers not taking the time to carefully read and think about the

questions, because they were in a rush. Additional time to obtain more survey

responses is needed to improve the accuracy of the results.

Based on the responses from the surveys, Commerzbank had the highest rating

for providing a space that enhances productivity. The average score of Commerzbank

was 1.07, meaning occupants agreed the building enhances productivity. This is

surprising because it also had some of the lowest scores for thermal comfort and some

workers commented that the natural ventilation is sparsely used because the windows

are locked. It also had the lowest score for sound levels compared to the other two

buildings. The high level of transparency and open floor plan in Commerzbank are

speculations for these results. Though some researchers believe open floor plans and

completely transparent partitions foster interaction, it is often the reason why it is too

loud in the building. It can also result in visual distractions hampering people's ability to

focus.

Transparency/Opacity Ratio

The question of what kind of office enhances productivity the best then arises.

Based on the results, a theory was made for what could be the ideal transparency

103









versus opacity ratios for the wall partitions of an office. An approximate calculation was

made of the transparency versus opacity ratios for typical offices from all three buildings

(See Figure 6-22). The calculation included the window view and all other walls

enclosing a typical office. Though every company's needs are different, the goal is to

determine what could be the ideal ratio for every office. Every place ultimately must find

their balance.

Commerzbank's offices are nearly completely transparent with 96% of a typical

office having transparent walls and 4% being opaque at the window where the radiators

are. Nord/LB's typical office with the built in storage furniture has 70% of its walls

transparent and 30% opaque. RWE's cellular-like offices are 20% transparent and 80%

opaque. A slit of glazing occurs in the interior wall on the top of the door to allow natural

daylight to enter deeper into the building. No visual and acoustical connection with

colleagues is made in RWE except when the door is open towards the hallway. This

limits the amount of approachable and informal communication amongst colleagues and

does not support creative work. Complaints from inhabitants include feelings of

loneliness.

COMMERZBANK











Transparent (96%)
Opaque (4%)


104









NORD/LB


Transparent (70%)
Opaque (30%)

RWE TOWER


Transparent (20%)
Opaque (80%)

Figure 6-22. Diagrams showing the transparent and opaque walls of each building's
typical office, along with their ratios. Commerzbank had the most
transparency while RWE had the least.

Commerzbank's interior transparency allows daylight to flow freely throughout

the building and complete visual contact with colleagues. Proximity and visual contact

also promotes more frequent interaction and relationship building, enabling them to

share information, think creatively, and reach more innovative solutions. The interaction

and openness is a trend that will become more popular in the future (Jaunzens 2).

Though people may find the lack of privacy from transparent partitions to be distracting,

as some of the case study occupants reported, it also acts as a self-monitor for office

workers so they do not veer off task, such as surfing the internet. A good ratio to follow

105









for transparency and opacity based on the results and research is a combination of

Commerzbank's and Nord/LB, which is approximately 90:10 (transparent: opaque).

Noise Strategies

Although Commerzbank was reported having the loudest sound level, the noise

may have been an indication of communication and collaboration occurring. Is it

possible that higher sound levels correlates to greater productivity? Most research,

however, finds that excessive noise is a reason for lost productivity, such as colleagues

not being able to understand one another. This was consistent with occupants who

found high sounds levels to be undesirable. Guidelines for acceptable noise levels from

the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration should be used as

minimum standards when designing spaces with different functions.

Spaces in need of high concentration should then be designed appropriately.

Since normal windows easily transmit sound, glass partitions may not be desirable for

quiet zones. Quiet zones, such as conference rooms and private spaces for added

concentrations, should be designed carefully for acoustics. For this, consideration must

be used when selecting wall partitions for offices. Wall partitions are rated with a Sound

Transmission Class (STC). The STC is a single-number rating of a material's or an

assembly's ability to resist sound transmission. The higher the STC, the more efficient

the construction is for absorbing sound (Egan 179). The table in the next page shows

minimum STC ratings for common walls between enclosed spaces in conventional

office and conference areas.


106









Receiving Room


STC Rating

Table 6-1. STC ratings for common walls between enclosed spaces
office and conference areas (Source: Egan 334).


dBA

in conventional


Though expensive, a general recommendation is to use acoustical glass to divide

office spaces with a rating of at least 48, even if it is a rating designed for conference

rooms. This will prevent the distraction of hearing conversations from other rooms.

One recommended wall assembly is the DeVac 640-AL model, a dual frame aluminum

window. This removable panel with an acoustical liner has an STC rating of 48-54 for

the window alone. This window can be used both in the exterior and interior of a

building. Partitions like this will not absorb sound. Instead, these acoustical partitions

are designed to block sound from another room emitting a sound source. The partition

also will not block sound transmitted through the floors or ceiling. Ceilings and floors

should have a high STC rating as well.


107


Open- Background
Conference Private Small plan Corridor noise (dBA)
Room Office Office office
Conference
Room (w/
electrical 50 46 42 53 40 35
amplification)
Conference 45 41 37 48 35 35
Room
Private Office 40 38 34 43 32 40

Small Office 37 34 31 36- -

Open-plan 48 43 38 50
office
Corridor 50 47 43 55






















JAMB JAMB
HEAD





ioo

L o




SILL
JAMB JAMB

Figure 6-23. Detail of the DeVac 640-AL model. (Source: Mon-Ray).

One office worker in Commerzbank commented that the "echo" was a source of

noise in the room, and others suggested that sound absorbing materials would improve

the acoustics of the office space. This is especially true for open floor plans with large

volumes (Egan 61). To reduce reverberation, "the persistence of reflected sound

energy" (Egan 62), sound absorbing materials could be applied as interior finishes. It

would help eliminate noise sources the inhabitants reported, such as ringing telephones

and conversations, printers, and faxes. When selecting materials for the floor, wall, and

ceiling, one could select materials based on the absorption coefficient. The sound

absorption coefficient, represented as a (sabins), is the effectiveness a material has to

absorb sound. Theoretically, the coefficient can range from 0 (no sound energy

absorbed) to 1.0 (complete sound energy absorbed) (Egan 42). For example, a floor

finish of heavy carpet on foam rubber has a coefficient of .69 at 1000 Hz, whereas a


108









concrete floor has a coefficient of 0.02 at 1000 Hz (Egan 52). This means that the

carpet will absorb 69% of the sound energy while the concrete floor will only absorb 2%.

The carpet would be better to use as a floor finish than the concrete finish because it

absorbs sound better. The finished materials selected should have a high sound

absorption coefficient. Other materials such as fibrous ceiling boards, curtains, and

carpets will also reduce sound levels (Egan 38). Breaking up the office into smaller

sections will also cut back the reverberation time.

Occupants per Office

The trend in office work is moving from the routine to the creative. "Organisations

are moving from individual based work (carried out in isolation) to cross disciplinary

project team working for enhanced productivity. There is a general decentralisation of

authority with a resulting increase in individual autonomy" (Jaunzens 2). With issues of

noise complaints from other colleagues, the question then becomes what is the balance

between sharing space with people so that collaboration is enforced and privacy is

available to eliminate distractions. From the surveys, offices with as little as four people

working reported noise complaints. With noise being one of the biggest distractions

from work, it is advised that open floor plans should have no more than four people per

space. But how big should the office be?

The Florida Building Code states that for every occupant in a business function,

there must be at least 100 gross square feet of floor area (Florida Building Code TABLE

1004.1.1). This includes all spaces to be occupied. Imagine a cellular office

having10'x10' of space; it would be too small. In addition, the RWE tower, estimated to

have an area of 178 square feet per individual office, was said to be too small according

to the occupants. The typical office in Nord/LB is approximately 215 square feet. One

109









person there stated that he/she would like more and bigger offices, while another

wanted less glass and more private space. From the occupant's feedback, it is

estimated that a comfortable office should have 900 square feet of space with no more

than 4 people. Based on the feedback, the ideal ratio for a person per square feet could

be 1 person per 225 square feet.

The buildings surveyed could further improve their work spaces with renovations.

Since so many respondents complained about Commerzbank's open floor plan, the

obvious suggestion is to decrease the number of people per office by creating offices

similar to Nord/LB's, but with added personal space. A suggestion for the RWE tower is

to replace portions of interior partitions with glazing, especially in the conference rooms,

so that a ratio close to Nord/LB or Commerzbank is achieved. Another successful move

would be to do what Commerzbank did: create a flexible plan so that interior

renovations can be done easily as the company's needs adjust.

Ideal Office

Based on personal observations, responses from inhabitants, and research, a

model for a productive office space was made (see figure 6-24). The model

demonstrates an office with working space for four workers, a transparency and opacity

partition ratio of 90:10, and a floor area of approximately 900 square feet. The partitions

of the desks are low so colleagues maintain visual connection to each other. A centrally

located table is provided for collaboration. The exterior window is completely

transparent to maximize daylight, although screening devices will always be necessary

to avoid glare.


110


















Desk


Low
Partitions

/ Opaque Partitions








Figure 6-24. Sketch of an ideal office based on results and research.

Ideal Office Plan

With the ideal office in mind, office buildings should include other spaces to meet

the various functions needed in an office. Equally important are the collaboration

spaces, such as open conference rooms or tables nearby for informal meetings. This

supports why the club layout works best for all office types, since flexibility and options

are important for productivity and collaboration.

The depth of a room also influences which type of offices can be made. According

to Jaunzens, the building type with a floor depth of 15 meters ("medium depth") is good

for all four types of office plans: hive, den, cell, and club. The other building types are

the atrium building (with 15 meters of span), deep central core, and shallow depth.

Commerzbank and Nord/LB have the atrium type which is still a desirable plan, while

111









RWE has the shallow depth, given it has a shallow ring of offices on the perimeter of the

tower. The atrium types allows for "higher level of connectivity" (7). Deep core

buildings are the least favored because they reduce the amount of natural daylight to

enter the core of the building.

Each of the building case studies had distinct office layouts. The RWE Tower

follows the Cell office plan with its divided offices on the edge of the buildings. This

arrangement supports privacy and concentration. Nord/LB followed more the Den

layout on the first six floors, although those floors featured characteristics of club layout

with its informal meeting spaces, conference rooms, and kitchenettes. The tower of

Nord/LB was clearly a club layout with each floor being unique and designed for special

purposes. Commerzbank is a club layout, with a combination of cell and den work

spaces. The plan balances work spaces with accessible gardens per every 4 floors, as

well as one formal conference room per floor.

While each company will have its own needs and its distinctive work patterns,

again the ideal office plan is the club layout. This is consistent with results from the

surveys as Commerzbank was the highest rated office for providing a space for

productivity. The club layout is a combination and variety of all these working patterns.

The club layout provides high interaction and high autonomy so that workers may

choose the balance between interaction and autonomy as needed. Based on this, the

ideal office plan should feature the ideal typical office as designed in this thesis, plus

open floor plans for hot desking and routine process work (Hive), private spaces to

isolate noise, open tables, reserved and open conference rooms, and cafe and gardens

for socializing. All these spaces combined will create a flexible and dynamic work


112









environment promoting creativity, collaboration, and productivity. Meanwhile, the

architect should avoid a deep floor plan so daylight is permitted throughout the floor

plan. Core functions, such as the elevators and fire stairwells, should also be placed

outside like in Commerzbank and the RWE Towers so occupants are not divided.

Team spaces meeting spaces should be centralized, while individual spaces should be

adjacent to the window to ensure occupants have a view to the exterior.

Conclusion

While Commerzbank had the highest score for enhancing productivity, it also had

the second highest score (1.21) when asked to rate job satisfaction, whereas RWE was

first (1.80). Though their ratings could be influenced by the building, it could also mean

the workers are simply happy with their scope of work and/or salary. Ironically, the

average work day for the RWE employees was reported to be 10.63 hours, according to

the survey (quite high).

Though this thesis focused on how employees self-rated the building, it ultimately

does not measure their productivity. While there is no standard to measure productivity

for every company, we do know the factors influencing it. Measuring productivity in a

sustainable office versus a traditional one could itself be a topic of future research. A

suggestion to all architects designing office buildings is to understand both the

employees' and company's needs. Employee involvement should start in the beginning

of any design phase to identify needs. Whether it is more individual controllability,

additional individual and collaboration spaces, better environmental quality, or a view to

a window, planning to fulfill their needs will be repaid in the long term with added

productivity. It also is a way to attract and retain the best employees, as evidenced

successfully with Google. Buildings should also be designed to conserve Earth's

113









valuable resources. Since green buildings promote benefits such as better air quality

and natural daylight, the overall ratings of these sustainable high rises buildings were

generally satisfactory to the occupant's needs and do enhance productivity. A good

argument to convince clients to invest in productive work environments and sustainable

buildings is the future savings on energy and productivity costs. The building case

studies selected, though not perfect, exemplify of how architects can design buildings to

save energy and provide a high standard of working space. Architects should learn

from the mistakes of the past to improve the future of humanity and the environment.


114









LIST OF REFERENCES


2007 Florida Building Code: Building (First Printing), includes 2009 Supplement.
(2008). Section 1004 Occupant Load. International Code Council, Inc.

American Institute of Architects. (2009). The Architecture Student's Handbook of
Professional Practice (14th ed). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley

Ander, G.D. (2008, November). Daylighting. WBDG (Whole Building Design Guide).
Retrieved February 2010 from
http://www.wbdg.org/resources/daylighting.php#ar

Balazova, I. (2008 August). Open-plan office environments: A laboratory experiment to
examine the effect of office noise and temperature on human perception, comfort
and office work performance. Indoor Air 2008. Copenhagen, Denmark.

BAuA: Bundesanstalt fCr Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin. (2009). Well-being in the
Office Health and Safety at Work in the Office. Dortmund: Federal Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health.

Behnisch Architekten. (2010, February 1). Norddeutsche Landesbank Am
Friedrichswall. Hannover, Germany, 1997-2002. Retrieved October 2009 from
www.behnisch.com

Bridgleb, T. (2000). High-rise RWE AG Essen/Ingenhoven Overdiek und Partner.
Basel: Birkha user.

Bordass, B., Bromley, K., & Leaman, A. (1993, February). User and Occupant Controls
in Office Buildings. Prepared for Building Design, Technology and Occupant
Well-being in Temperate Climates, Brussels.

Bordass, W., Leaman, A. & Eley, J. (2006) A Guide to Feedback and Post-Occupancy
Evaluation. Usable Buildings Trust, 2006. The Usable Buildings Trust 2006

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). American Time Use Survey. Charts by Topic: Work
and employment. United States Department of Labor. Last Modified Date:
February 25, 2010. Retrieved March 2010 on
http://www. bls. gov/tus/charts/work. htm

Cakir, A. (2009). Daylight for Health and Efficiency A new career for an old friend.
Berlin: Ergonomic Institut.

Callan, D. & Jalayerian, M. (2010 June). Personnel, Operating Costs Can Be
Addressed By New BAS. Building Operating Management. Retrieved June
2010 from: http://www.facilitiesnet.com/green/article/Personnel-Operating-Costs-
Can- Be-Addressed-By-New-BAS--1 1782


115










Canadian Centre for Occupational Health & Safety. (2007). Thermal Comfort for Office
Work. Copyright 1997-2010. Retrieved March 2010 on
http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/phys_agents/thermal_comfort.html

Climate-Charts. (2007). Germany Climate Charts Index. Hannover and Essen.
Retrieved May 2010 on http://www.climate-charts.com/Countries/Germany.html

Climate-zone. (2004). Germany Retrieved May 2010 on http://www.climate-
zone.com/climate/germany/

Davies C. (1997). Commerzbank Frankfurt: Prototype for an Ecological High-Rise."
Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser.

DENA (Deutsche Energie-Agentur). Energy Performance Certificates for Buildings.
Retrieved March 2010 from http://www.zukunft-haus.info/en/energy-
certificate. html

Egan, M. D. (1988). Architectural Acoustics. New York: J. Ross Publishing.

Energy Star. Light bulbs (CFLs). Retrieved 2010 July on
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm ?fuseaction=find_a_product. showProductGr
oup&pgw_code=LB

Evans, B. (1997, February 20). Commerzank, Frankfurt. Banking on Ventilation: AJ
Building Study. Retrieved online March 2010 at
http://www.ajspecification.com/Buildings/B_Home_Page/?CI_Building_ID=293

Evans, B. (1997 February). Commerzbank, Frankfurt. Banking on Ventilation: AJ
Building Study. The Architect's Journal. Retrieved on January 2010 on
http://www.ajspecification.com/Buildings/Section_Page/?CI_Building_ID=293&CI
Section ID=1157&CI Article ID=325

Fjeld, T. (2002). Reducing Health Complaints at Work. Floriade Amsterdam.

Foster + Partners. Commerzbank Headquarters. Retrieved February 2010 from
http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Projects/0626/Default.aspx

Foster + Partners. (2007). Foster, N. & Jenkins, D (Eds.). Foster 40. Munich: Prestel
Verlag

Fischer, V. & Gruneis, H. (1997). Sir Norman Foster and Partners, Commerzbank,
Frankfurt am Main. Stuttgart: Edition Axel Menges.

Fisk, W. (2000, November). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor
Environments and Their Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency. Annual


116









Review of Energy and the Environment. Berkeley: Berkeley National Laboratory.
Vol. 25, 537-566

Flamme-Jasper, M. & Harper Trans, S. (2002). NORD/LB Hannover: Behnisch,
Behnisch & Partner. Ostfildern-Ruit: Hatje-Cantz, 98.

Gensler. (2008). 2008 Workplace Study. Gensler Design+Performance Report

Gensler. (2006). Well-Designed Office Key to Improving Employee Performance: New
Survey. Gensler 2006 U.S. Workplace Survey.

Health Canada. (1995). Indoor Air Quality in Office Buildings: A Technical Guide.
Ottawa, Ontario: Minister of National Health and Welfare. 93-EHD-166.

Hedge A., Sims, W.R., & Becker, F.D. (1995). Effects of lensed-indirect and parabolic
lighting on the satisfaction, visual health, and productivity of office workers.
Ergonomics 38, pp. 260-280.

ILO News, International Labor Organization. (2007, September 2) New ILO report says
US leads the world in labour productivity, some regions are catching up, most lag
behind. Retrieved January 2010 from:
http://www.ilo.org/global/About_the_ILO/Media_and_publicinformation/Press_re
leases/lang--en/WCMS_083976/index.htm#1

Irlin, H. (2007). Fluorescent Lighting Can Trigger ADD/HD, Dyslexia, and Poor
Achievement. California: Irlen Institute International.

Jaeger, F. (2008). Behnisch Architekten. Berlin: Jovis.

Jaunzens, D. (1997) New environments for working- the future of the office. Cobra '97.
Building research establishment

KILM 6. (2007, September 14). Hours of work. Key Indicators of the Labour Market
Programme. KILM 5th Edition Manuscript.
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/strat/kilm/download/kilm06.pdf

Kroner, W.M. & Stark-Martin, J.A. (1992). Environmentally responsive workstations
and office worker productivity. In Proc. Indoor Environ. Product. June 23-26,
Baltimore, MD, H. Levin (Ed.). Atlanta: ASHRAE

Lomonaco, C. & Miller, D. (1996). EnvironmentalSatisfaction, Personal Control and
the Positive Correlation to Increased Productivity. Prepared by Johnson
Controls, Inc.

Management-Issues. (2005 May 23). Poor workplace design damages productivity.
Retrieved April 2003 on


117









http://www.managementssues.com/2006/8/24/research/poor-workplace-design-
damages-pro ductivity.asp

McKibben, B. (2007). Deep Economy. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

Meel, J. (2000). The European Office. Office design and national context. Rotterdam:
010 Publishers.

Meese, G., Kok, R., Lewis, M., & Wyon, D. (1984). A laboratory study of the effects of
moderate thermal stress on the performance of factory workers. Ergonomics, 27,
1:19-43.

Milton, D.K., Glencross. P.M., & Walters, M.D. (2000). Risk of sick leave associated
with outdoor ventilation level, humidification, and building related complaints.
Indoor Air.10(3): In press. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health.

Mon-Ray Inc. DeVAC 600 Series Aluminum Windows. Retrieved June 2010 on
http://www. monray.com/dv600.htm

O. Seppanen, W. J. Fisk& Q.H. Lei. (2006, July). Effect of Temperature on Task
Performance in Office Environment. Berkeley: Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory.

Occupational Safety & Health Administration. (2010). Safety and Health Topics:
Ergonomics. United States Department of Labor. Retrieved May 2010 on
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/ergonomics/index.html

Reynolds, J. M. Behnisch Architekten: New Directions in Democratic and Socially
Responsible Sustainable Design Practices. Oxford, OH: Miami University.

Seppanen, O., Fisk, W. J., & Faulkner, D. (2004, June). Control of Temperature for
Health and Productivity in Offices. Berkeley: Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory.

Spengler J.D., Samet, J.M., & McCarthy, J.F. (2000). IndoorAir Quality Handbook.
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Tanis, J. (Feb 2008). Organizational Change. Workspace and Behavior. Future
Office. Taylor & Francis, Inc.

United Nations Deparment of Economic and Social Affairs/Population Division. (2008)
World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision. New York: United Nations.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1989). Economic Impacts of
Indoor Air Pollution. Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality. Assessment and
Control of Indoor Air Pollution. EPA Publication No. EPA/400/1-89/001C


118










United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1991, February). Indoor Air
Facts No. 4 (revised) Sick Building Syndrome. Retrieved January 2010 on
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/sbs.html

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (2009, February 19). Science Suggests
Access To Nature Is Essential To Human Health.

Ventilation and Air Quality in Offices, Office of Air and Radiation, Indoor Environments
Division (6609J), EPA 402-F-94-003, (Revised 1990, July)

Wilson, S. & Hedge, A. (May 1987). The Office Environment Survey: A Study of
Building Sickness, Building Use Studies. London.

Woodwell, G. M. (2002). Climatic Disruption in 2002: A Scientific Puzzle and Political
Dilemm. Retrieved February 2010 on
http://www.whrc.org/resources/publications/pdf/ClimaticDisruption. pdf#search=%
22warming%20earth%22

Wyon, D.P. (1996). Individual microclimate control: required range, probable benefits,
and current feasibility. Proc. Indoor Air'96, 7th Int. Conf. Indoor Air Qual.
Clim.1:1067-72. Nagoya, Japan: SEEC Ishibashi

Veitch, J.A. & Newsham, G.R. (1998). Lighting quality and energy-efficiency effects on
task performance, mood, health, satisfaction, and comfort. Journal of the
Illuminating Engineering Society. 27(1), 107-29.


119









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Jennifer Mackey was born on March 10, 1985 in South Florida where she spent

the majority of her childhood. She completed her post-secondary education at the

University of Florida in 2007 with a Bachelors of Design in Architecture. After

graduation, she took one year from school to gain work experience in Fort Lauderdale,

FL. She also spent some time working for an architect in Milan, Italy.

In 2008, she returned to her studies at the University of Florida where she earned

her Master of Architecture with a concentration in Sustainable Architecture. During her

time at UF, she traveled to San Francisco as part of her design studio work to learn,

first-hand, what a productive and creative work environment is. There she toured

Googleplex, Intel, and IDEO and was inspired to apply these concepts into sustainable

architecture.

Jennifer has had extensive international experience. During her undergraduate

program, she studied abroad at the Vicenza Institute of Architecture for one semester.

She spent personal time Europe for two summers where she learned basic French and

became proficient in Italian. To expand her experience of Europe, she created a study

aboard program at the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) in

Switzerland. There, she took two courses taught in French, and one design studio

which provided the opportunity to travel to Porto, Portugal for a class design project.

She plans to use her international experiences and education to influence her

sustainable architecture and planning designs.


120





PAGE 16

US Energy Consumption

PAGE 22

Air Quality

PAGE 23

designed operated

PAGE 24

Therma l Comfort

PAGE 26

Light

PAGE 30

Acoustics Green View

PAGE 31

Ergonomic Control

PAGE 33

Office Layout

PAGE 34

H i ve Den

PAGE 35

Cell Club

PAGE 36

Reason s to Study B uildings

PAGE 39

Commerzbank b y Sir Norman Foster Frankfurt

PAGE 41

Ventilated Skin

PAGE 44

Temperature Control

PAGE 45

Daylight

PAGE 46

Artificial Lighting

PAGE 47

Organization

PAGE 48

Winter Gardens

PAGE 49

Atrium

PAGE 50

Nord/LB Hannover b y Behnisch Behnisch and Partner Hannover

PAGE 52

Natural Ventilation

PAGE 54

Na tural daylight

PAGE 57

Green Roofs

PAGE 58

Courtyard

PAGE 59

Reflection Pools

PAGE 60

Office Layout

PAGE 61

Geothermal heating

PAGE 62

Artificial Lighting

PAGE 63

RWE Tower by Ingenhoven Essen First Ecological High Rise

PAGE 64

Natural Ventilation

PAGE 67

Individual Temperature Regulation

PAGE 68

Natural Daylight

PAGE 69

Artificial Lighting

PAGE 71

Office Organization

PAGE 73

Method of Survey

PAGE 75

Semantic Differential Scale

PAGE 77

Sample Survey s

PAGE 83

Graphs and Charts

PAGE 89

natural day lighting

PAGE 91

natural day lighting

PAGE 92

natural day lighting

PAGE 93

artificial lighting

PAGE 94

artificial lighting

PAGE 95

artificial lighting

PAGE 96

artificial lighting

PAGE 98

yes no Yes No Yes No

PAGE 103

Recommendations Transparency/Opacity Ratio

PAGE 106

Noise Strategies

PAGE 109

Occupants per Office

PAGE 110

Ideal Office

PAGE 111

Ideal Office Plan

PAGE 112

club

PAGE 113

Conclusion

PAGE 115

Section 1004 Occupant Load The Architecture Student's Handbook of Professional Practice Daylighting Indoor Air 2008 Well being in the Office Health and Safety at Work in the Office Norddeutsche Landesbank Am Friedrichswall Hannover Germany 1997 2002 High rise RWE AG Essen/ Ingenhoven Overdiek und Partner User a nd Occupant Controls in Office Buildings A Guide to Feedback and Post Occupancy Evaluation American Time Use Survey Charts by Topic: Work and employment Daylight for Health and Efficiency A new career for an old friend Building Operating Management

PAGE 116

Thermal Comfort for Office Work Copyright Germany Climate Charts Index Germany Commerzbank Frankfurt: Prototype for an Ecological High Rise. Energy Performance Certificates for Buildings Architectural Acoustics Light bulbs (CFLs) Commerzank Frankfurt Banking on Ventilation: AJ Building Study The Architects Journal Reducing Health Complaints at Work Commerzbank Headquarters Foster 40 Sir Norman Foster and Partners Commerzbank Frankfurt am Main Annual

PAGE 117

Review of Energy and the Environment NORD/LB Hannover: Behnisch Behnisch & Partner Gensler Design+Performance Report Gensler 2006 U.S Workplace Survey. Indoor Air Quality in Office Buildings: A Technical Guide : Ergonomics New ILO report says US leads the world in labour productivity some regions are catching up most lag behind Fluorescent Lighting Can Trigger ADD/HD Dyslexia and Poor Achievement Behnisch Architekten New environments for working the future of the office Hours of work Key I ndicators of the Labour Market Programme Environmental ly responsive workstations and office worker productivity In Proc Indoor Environ Product EnvironmentalSatisfaction Personal Control and the Positive Correlation to Increased Productivity Poor workplace design damages

PAGE 118

Deep Economy The European Office Office design and national context Ergonomics Risk of sick leave associate d with outdoor ventilation level humidification and building related complaints Effect of Temperature on Task Performance in Office Environment Safety and Health Topics: Ergonomics Behnisch Architekten: New Directi ons in Democratic and Socially Responsible Sustainable Design Practices Control of Temperature for Health and Productivity in Offices Indoor Air Quality Handbook Organizational Change Workspace and B ehavior World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision Assessment and Control of Indoor Air Pollution

PAGE 119

Indoor Air Facts No 4 (revised) Sick Building Syndrome Science Suggests Access To Nature Is Essential To Human Health The Office Environment Survey: A Study of Building Sickness Building Use Studies Climatic Disruption in 2002: A S cientific Puzzle and Political Dilemm Individual microcli mate control: required range probable benefits and current feasibility Lighting quality and energy efficiency effects on task performance mood health satisfaction and comfort


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042264/00001

Material Information

Title: Evaluating Workspaces in European Sustainable High Rise Buildings Assessments, Responses, and Speculations from the Inhabitants
Physical Description: 1 online resource (120 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Mackey, Jennifer
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: architecture, buildings, commerzbank, daylight, germany, green, high, nordlb, office, productivity, rise, rwe, sustainability, ventilation, work
Architecture -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Architecture thesis, M.Arch.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: According to a March 2005 Microsoft survey, Americans work an average of 45 hours per week; sixteen of those hours are labeled unproductive. As the average working time in countries like America and Luxembourg has steadily increased over the decades, so too has the knowledge in understanding how office environments affect productivity. Several studies prove productivity is affected by several factors including: access to natural day lighting, office furniture, office organization, temperature, indoor air quality and ventilation, ergonomics, and acoustics. Poor workplace design can cost U.S. businesses at least $330 billion in lost productivity per year. Considering more money is typically spent on salaries rather than building costs, companies could realize significant savings by providing properly designed office buildings. Companies can further save on long term energy costs if their office buildings are designed sustainably. Recent green projects such as Commerzbank by Norman Foster have addressed these issues so employees can work more productively in their environments. This thesis will concentrate on three renowned sustainable high rises in Germany and will evaluate the elements needed to enhance productivity. Data for the selected buildings will be collected through surveys, personal observations, and interviews to provide feedback on the pros and cons of the buildings sustainable features directly affecting their workspaces. The survey asks employees to rate different factors affecting productivity, such as light, temperature, and acoustics. This research provides a better understanding if the selected buildings have the elements needed for office productivity. Recommendations for a typical office to enhance productivity are also explored.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Jennifer Mackey.
Thesis: Thesis (M.Arch.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Maze, John M.
Local: Co-adviser: Gold, Martin A.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2011-08-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0042264:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042264/00001

Material Information

Title: Evaluating Workspaces in European Sustainable High Rise Buildings Assessments, Responses, and Speculations from the Inhabitants
Physical Description: 1 online resource (120 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Mackey, Jennifer
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: architecture, buildings, commerzbank, daylight, germany, green, high, nordlb, office, productivity, rise, rwe, sustainability, ventilation, work
Architecture -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Architecture thesis, M.Arch.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: According to a March 2005 Microsoft survey, Americans work an average of 45 hours per week; sixteen of those hours are labeled unproductive. As the average working time in countries like America and Luxembourg has steadily increased over the decades, so too has the knowledge in understanding how office environments affect productivity. Several studies prove productivity is affected by several factors including: access to natural day lighting, office furniture, office organization, temperature, indoor air quality and ventilation, ergonomics, and acoustics. Poor workplace design can cost U.S. businesses at least $330 billion in lost productivity per year. Considering more money is typically spent on salaries rather than building costs, companies could realize significant savings by providing properly designed office buildings. Companies can further save on long term energy costs if their office buildings are designed sustainably. Recent green projects such as Commerzbank by Norman Foster have addressed these issues so employees can work more productively in their environments. This thesis will concentrate on three renowned sustainable high rises in Germany and will evaluate the elements needed to enhance productivity. Data for the selected buildings will be collected through surveys, personal observations, and interviews to provide feedback on the pros and cons of the buildings sustainable features directly affecting their workspaces. The survey asks employees to rate different factors affecting productivity, such as light, temperature, and acoustics. This research provides a better understanding if the selected buildings have the elements needed for office productivity. Recommendations for a typical office to enhance productivity are also explored.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Jennifer Mackey.
Thesis: Thesis (M.Arch.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Maze, John M.
Local: Co-adviser: Gold, Martin A.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2011-08-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0042264:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





EVALUATING WORKSPACES IN EUROPEAN SUSTAINABLE HIGH RISE
BUILDINGS
ASSESSMENTS, RESPONSES, AND SPECULATIONS FROM THE INHABITANTS


















By

JENNIFER MACKEY


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2010