AN ARCHITECTURE OF DISASSEMBLY AND CYCLICAL MATERIAL LIFE

by

Danya Sturgess, B.Arch, University of Waterloo, 2009

A thesis
presented to Ryerson University

In partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of
Master of Architecture
In the program of
Architectural Science

Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2012

© Danya sturgess 2012
Author’s declaration for electronic
submission of a thesis

I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy

of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my

examiners.

I authorize Ryerson University to lend this thesis to other institutions or

individuals for the purpose of scholarly research.

I further authorize Ryerson University to reproduce this thesis by photo-

copying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institu-

tions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research.

I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the

public.

iii
An Architecture of Disassembly and Cyclical Material Life
Master of Architecture 2012
Danya Sturgess
Architectural Science
Ryerson University

Abstract
This thesis explores disassembly as architectural expression and libera-

tor of components for reuse and recycling in order to diminish material

waste when the building is deemed obsolete. It questions that contem-

porary buildings be built for permanence, but proposes instead that they

be able to be modified and taken apart in order to provide material for

the next generation of buildings instead of the landfill. It examines the

history and theory of joints and connections in architecture and the pos-

sibilities these offer for disassembly. It examines production and construc-

tion methods pertaining to disassembly and reversible joints, as well as

the implications of an architecture that strives to express its construction

and material being. Principles of disassembly and component reuse are

established through the study of temporary, prefabricated, modular, and

waste-as-material precedents. The principles are utilized in the design

project, which aims to create an architecture expressing the assembly of

parts in addition to the whole while significantly contributing to a reduction

of material waste.

v
Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my tireless supervisor Dr. Mark Gorgolewski, to whom

I am indebted for his ideas, time, and thoughtful commentary. His vast

knowledge and enthusiasm continued to motivate, encourage, and inspire

me at weekly meetings over the past eight months.

I am grateful as well to my second advisor, Professor Vincent Hui, for his

perceptive and focused guidance. His tough-love approach kept me work-

ing hard.

I have to thank Professor Arthur Wrigglesworth for his energetic reception

and criticism at presentations of the work, as well as Richard Witt and

Chloe Town for the insightful discussion and comments generated at the

final public presentation.

I am also indebted to my many Ryerson colleagues who supported and

suffered alongside me in the studio – it was a great relief to know I was

never alone.

Finally, I owe a deep thanks to my partner, John, for his constant support

and optimism - and his willingness to let me ignore him for days at a time.

I offer my kind regards to all those who supported me in any respect during

the completion of this lengthy project.

vii
Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................1
Problem ..................................................................9
2 Background and literature review .....................15
2.1 Design with reused material

2.2 Design for disassembly

2.3 Tectonics and the building as autonomous form

2.4 The architectural joint

2.5 Fabrication and assembly

2.6 Building typologies for impermanence

3 Precedent review .................................................69

3.1 Mechanical joinery

3.2 Pre-fabrication

3.3 Design for disassembly

3.4 Layering assemblies

3.5 Portable and temporary structures

3.6 Building with standardized elements

3.7 Case studies for disassembly

4 Design exploration ............................................127

4.1 System design proposal

4.2 Commercial agenda

4.3 System design

4.4 Site specific design

Wellesley St W and Sherbourne St site

Danforth Ave and Playter Blvd site

5 Conclusions .......................................................199

Appendices..................................................................209

References ..................................................................213

ix
List of figures
Fig 1.1 Resource extraction - Mallet, Mark. (2011) Is Green Min-
ing Possible?, retrieved from http://www.greenlivingon-
line.com/, Nov 4, 2011.

Fig 1.2 Demolition - Dallas Contracting Co., (2011) Building

Demolition, retrieved from http://www.dallascontracting.
com, Nov 4, 2011.

Fig 1.3 Material waste - Your Kloset, (2011) Landfill-landscape,

retrieved from http://www.yourkloset.com, Nov 4, 2011.

Fig 1.4 Parthenon - Camarillo Dunn, Jerry Jr. (2011) The Parthe-
non and the Acropolis, retrieved from http://tlc.howstuff-
works.com, Nov 4, 2011.

Fig 1.5 Crystal Palace – 7CCV (2010, Jul 17) A relaxing way to
Crystal Palace, retrieved from http://www.7ccv.com/tag/
crystal-palace, Nov 4, 2011.

Fig 1.6 Sanaa Art Gallery - blog.betaflop.de (2008, Feb) Day

114: New York City (3), retrieved from http://blog.pet-
aflop.de/2008/02/05/day-114-new-york-city-3/, Nov 30,
2011.

Fig 1.7 Renzo Piano, Tjibaou Centre – Buchanan, Peter. (1993)

Renzo Piano Building Workshop: complete works v.2,
London: Phaidon Press.

Fig 1.1.1 Traditional Architecture Cycle, drawn by author

Fig 1.1.2 Revised Architecture Cycle, drawn by author

Fig 1.1.3 Principles, drawn by author

Fig 2.1.1 Material Reuse with Villa Welpeloo, drawn by author

Fig 2.1.2 Biological and industrial nutrient cycle, drawn by author

Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners British Pavilion -

Fig 2.1.3 Design4deconstruction. (2011) British Pavilion at Expo
’92, Seville, Spain - Architect. Retrieved from http://www.
design4deconstruction.org/, Nov 22, 2011.

Fig 2.1.4 Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners British Pavilion interior

- Design4deconstruction. (2011) British Pavilion at Expo
’92, Seville, Spain - Architect. Retrieved from http://www.
design4deconstruction.org/, Nov 22, 2011.

Fig 2.2.1 Shigeru Ban Centre d’Interpretation - Miyake, Riichi.

(2010) Shigeru Ban Paper in Architecture, Luna, Ian &
Gould, Lauren A. (Ed.) New York: Rizzoli International
Publications, Inc.

Fig 2.2.2 MIT Building 20 – MIT Institute Archives. (1998) Cel-

ebrating the History of Building 20, retrieved from http://
libraries.mit.edu/archives/mithistory/building20/index.

xi
Fig 2.2.3 Layered Assembly Sketch, drawn by author

Fig 2.3.1 Shigeru Ban Haesley Nine Bridges Clubhouse (2012)

Shigeru Ban in conferenza a Ferrara,“Works and hu-
manitarian activities,” retrieved from http://www.materi-
aldesign.it/it/post-it/shigeru-ban-in-conferenza-a-ferrara-
works-and-humanitarian-activities-_13_59.htm, May 1,
2012.

Fig 2.3.2 Renzo Piano Tjibaou - Buchanan, Peter. (1993) Renzo

Piano Building Workshop: complete works v.2, London:
Phaidon Press.

Fig 2.3.3 Yukiharu Suzuki & Assoc, Barn House – modern resi-
dential design. (2010) Barn Home Design by Yukiharu
Suzuki & Associates. Retrieved from http://www.modres-
des.com/2010/08/barn-home-design-by-yukiharu-suzuki-
associates/, Nov 24, 2011.

Fig 2.3.4 Kengo Kuma, Bamboo House – inhabitat. (2006) Great

(Bamboo) Wall. Retrieved from http://inhabitat.com/
great-bamboo-wall/, Nov 24, 2011.

Fig 2.4.1 Renzo Piano, UNESCO Laboratory Workshop – Bu-

chanan, Peter. (1993) Renzo Piano Building Workshop:
complete works v.2, London: Phaidon Press.

Fig 2.4.2 Francois de Menil, Byzantine Fresco Chapel Museum

- Ojeda, Oscar Riera & Pasnik, Mark. (2003) Elements:
Architecture in Detail, Rockport Publishers: Massachu-
setts. 164.

Fig 2.4.3 Olson Sundberg Kundig Allen, Mission Hill Family Estate
Winery - Ojeda, Oscar Riera & Pasnik, Mark. (2003)
Elements: Architecture in Detail, Rockport Publishers:
Massachusetts. 114.

Fig 2.4.4 African Nomadic Frame – Prussin, Labelle. (1995) Af-

rican Nomadic Architecture: Space, Place and Gender,
Smithsonian Institution Press and The National Museum
of African Art: Washington and London.

Fig 2.4.5 Demountable foundation sketch, drawn by author

Fig 2.4.6 Demountable foundation sketch 2, drawn by author

Fig 2.4.7 Crystal Palace Roof – The Crystal Palace Museum.

(2011) Artifacts From The Crystal Palace: Black & White
Photographs, retrieved from www.crystalpalacemuseum.
org.uk, Dec 7, 2011.

Fig 2.4.8 Doric Column Assembly - Miller, Stephen G. (1990)

Nemea: A Guide to the Site and Museum. Berkeley:
University of California Press. retrieved from
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/
view?docId=ft1q2nb0x1;chunk.id=d0e5888;doc.
view=print, Mar 28, 2012.

Fig 2.4.9 Le Corbusier, Villa Savoye – Wikipedia. (2011) Villa Sa-

xiii
 voye, retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Savoye,
Nov 22, 2011.

Fig 2.4.10 Zaha Hadid, Abu Dhabi Performing Arts Centre

- dezeen. (2007) Zaha Hadid in Abu Dhabi update,
retrieved from www.dezeen.com, Nov 22, 2011.

Fig 2.4.11 Renzo Piano, UNESCO Lab Workshop Joint - Bu-

chanan, Peter. (1993) Renzo Piano Building Workshop:
complete works v.2, London: Phaidon Press.

Fig 2.4.12 Peter Marino and Assoc, Datascape Corporation -

Ojeda, Oscar Riera & Pasnik, Mark. (2003) Elements:
Architecture in Detail, Rockport Publishers: Massachu-
setts. 46.

Fig 2.5.1 Andrew Kudless, Manifold detail (2012) Matsys, retrieved

from http://matsysdesign.com/category/information/exhi-
bitions/, May 2, 2012.

Fig 2.5.2 Renzo Piano and Richard Rogers, Pompidou Center –

(2010) Architectural Design In Steel Frame Design, In
Architecture-Structure. Retrieved from http://tukangarsi-
tek.blogspot.com/2010/11/architectural-design-in-steel-
frame.html, Dec 7, 2011.

Fig 2.5.3 Herzog and DeMeuron Bird’s Nest model - Iwamoto,

Lisa. (2009) Digital Fabrications: Architectural and Mate-
rial Techniques. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
016.

Fig 2.5.4 Andrew Kudless, Manifold - Iwamoto, Lisa. (2009) Digi-

tal Fabrications: Architectural and Material Techniques.
New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 086.

Fig 2.5.5 Shigeru Ban, Nemunoki Children’s Museum of Art - Mi-

yake, Riichi. (2010) Shigeru Ban Paper in Architecture,
Luna, Ian & Gould, Lauren A. (Ed.) New York: Rizzoli
International Publications, Inc. 67.

Fig 2.5.6 Andrew Kudless, P_Wall - Iwamoto, Lisa. (2009) Digital

Fabrications: Architectural and Material Techniques.
New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 115.

Fig 2.6.1 East York Bungalow renovations, drawn by author

Fig 3.1.1 Shigeru Ban, temporary Artek Pavilion - UPM. (2012) Im-
ages for media, retrieved from http://www.upmprofi.com/
en/media/photo-gallery/Pages/default.aspx, May 2, 2012.

Fig 3.1.2 Stan Allen, Infobox - Dezeen magazine. (2011, Nov 17)
Taichung Infobox by Stan Allen, dezeen magazine. Re-
trieved from www.dezeen.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Fig 3.1.3 Stan Allen, Infobox Detail - Dezeen magazine. (2011,

Nov 17) Taichung Infobox by Stan Allen, dezeen maga-
zine. Retrieved from www.dezeen.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Fig 3.1.4 DSA+s Architects Bamboo Restaurant - Architecture,

xv
 Modern Home & Interior Design, Furniture. (2010, Nov)
Outdoor Bamboo Restaurant. Retrieved from www.arch-
planner.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Fig 3.1.5 DSA+s Architects Bamboo Restaurant Detail - Architec-

ture, Modern Home & Interior Design, Furniture. (2010,
Nov) Outdoor Bamboo Restaurant. Retrieved from www.
archplanner.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Fig 3.1.6 SSM Architekten, Kunsthaus - Saieh, Nico. (2008, Aug

14) Kunsthaus Art House Extension/ssm Architekten,
archdaily. Retrieved from www.archdaily.com, Nov 28,
2011.

Fig 3.1.7 SSM Architekten, Kunsthaus detail - Saieh, Nico. (2008,

Aug 14) Kunsthaus Art House Extension/ssm Architek-
ten, archdaily. Retrieved from www.archdaily.com, Nov
28, 2011.

Fig 3.1.8 Gregg Fleishman, Disaster house – Fleishman, Gregg,

(2011) Humanizing the Factory Produced House. Re-
trieved from www.greggfleishman.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Fig 3.1.9 Shigeru Ban Tea House - Miyake, Riichi. (2010) Shigeru
Ban Paper in Architecture, Luna, Ian & Gould, Lauren A.
(Ed.) New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc.

Fig 3.1.10 Suyama Peterson Deguchi, Mount Vernon cabin interior

– Remodelista. (2011, March 21) Architect Visit: Suyama
Peterson Deguchi Architects in Seattle, retrieved from
www.remodelista.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Fig 3.1.11 Gaia, Glencoe Visitor Center interior- Design4decon-

struction. (2011) Glencoe Visitor Center, Glencoe,
Scotland – Gaia Architects. Retrieved from http://www.
design4deconstruction.org/, Nov 22, 2011.

Fig 3.1.12 Shigeru Ban, Paper dome - Miyake, Riichi. (2010) Shige-
ru Ban Paper in Architecture, Luna, Ian & Gould, Lauren
A. (Ed.) New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc.

Fig 3.1.13 Renzo Piano, IRCAM detail - Ermanno, Ranzani. (1990,

Feb) Ampliamento dell’Ircam a Parigi, in Domus [38] -47.

Fig 3.1.14 Curved brick wall sketch, drawn by author

Fig 3.1.15 Shigeru Ban Vasarely Pavilion - Miyake, Riichi. (2010)

Shigeru Ban Paper in Architecture, Luna, Ian & Gould,
Lauren A. (Ed.) New York: Rizzoli International Publica-
tions, Inc. p.106-109.

Fig 3.1.16 Shigeru Ban Canal Boathouse Museum - Miyake, Riichi.

(2010) Shigeru Ban Paper in Architecture, Luna, Ian &
Gould, Lauren A. (Ed.) New York: Rizzoli International
Publications, Inc. p.106-109.

Fig 3.2.1 Huang and Dempsey, [c]space pavilion exterior detail -

SDA (2008) DRL10 [C]SPACE PAVILION, retrieved from
http://synthesis-dna.com/project-example-1/, May 2,

xvii
 2012.

Fig 3.2.2 Huang and Dempsey, [c]space pavilion - Kallaway (2012)

Architectural Association School of Architecture, retrieved
from http://mediacentre.kallaway.co.uk/architectural-as-
sociation-school-picture-library1.asp, May 2, 2012.

Fig 3.2.3 Flatform Installation - Marble Fairbanks. (2011) Flatform,

Home Delivery: Fabricating the Modern Dwelling. Re-
trieved from www.marblefairbanks.com, Oct 27, 2011.

Fig 3.2.4 Bead Brick high rise - Muslimin, Rizal. (2010) Bead Brick,
retrieved from http://www.brickstainable.com/current-
winners/technical-design.html, Dec 9, 2011.

Fig 3.2.5 Bead Brick arrangements - Muslimin, Rizal. (2010) Bead

Brick, retrieved from http://www.brickstainable.com/cur-
rent-winners/technical-design.html, Dec 9, 2011.

Fig 3.3.1 Nicholas Grimshaw, Igus Headquarters and Factory fa-

cade detail - CSI Ltd (2012)
retrieved from http://csicsf.com/, May 2, 2012.

Fig 3.3.2 The Adaptable House axonometric detail - 4d Archi-

tects, (2011) The Adaptable House, retrieved from
www.4darchitects.nl, Nov 24, 2011.

Fig 3.3.3 The Adaptable House exterior - 4d Architects, (2011) The

Adaptable House, retrieved from www.4darchitects.nl,
Nov 24, 2011.

Fig 3.3.4 Glencoe Visitor Centre – Gaia Group. (2011) Design

Excellence Providing Access and Conservation, retrieved
from www.gaiagroup.org, Nov 22, 2011.

Fig 3.3.5 Glencoe Visitor Centre, glazed link – Gaia Group. (2011)
Design Excellence Providing Access and Conservation,
retrieved from www.gaiagroup.org, Nov 22, 2011.

Fig 3.3.6 Station Z Memorial interior – Werner Sobek. (2011) Sta-

tion Z, retrieved from www.wernersobek.de, Dec 9, 2011.

Fig 3.3.7 IGUS Factory exterior -Kronenberg, Robert. (2000) Por-

table Architecture, Second Edition. Oxford: Architectural
Press.

Fig 3.3.8 IGUS Factory interior -Kronenberg, Robert. (2000) Por-

table Architecture, Second Edition. Oxford: Architectural
Press.

Fig 3.3.9 IGUS Factory detail drawing -Kronenberg, Robert. (2000)

Portable Architecture, Second Edition. Oxford: Architec-
tural Press.

Fig 3.4.1 Essex House – Bahamon, Alejandro & Sanjines, Maria

Camila. (2010) Rematerial: From Waste to Architecture.
WW Norton & Co.

Fig 3.4.2 Steenwijk Community Centre exterior – Marx & Steketee.

xix
 tee. (2011) Toga Nu, Steenwijk. Retrieved from www.
mrxnstkt.nl, Dec 9, 2011.

Fig 3.4.3 Steenwijk Community Centre interior – Marx & Steketee.

(2011) Toga Nu, Steenwijk. Retrieved from www.mrxn-
stkt.nl, Dec 9, 2011.

Fig 3.4.4 Racine Art Museum detail- Bahamon, Alejandro & San-
jines, Maria Camila. (2010) Rematerial: From Waste to
Architecture, WW Norton & Co.

Fig 3.4.5 Racine Art Museum facade- Bahamon, Alejandro &

Sanjines, Maria Camila. (2010) Rematerial: From Waste
to Architecture, WW Norton & Co.

Fig 3.4.6 Mechanical acces panel - Durmisevic, Elma & Linthorst,

Patrick. (2000) Industrialization of Housing (Building with
systems), The Netherlands: Delft University of Technol-
ogy,

Fig 3.5.1 Renzo Piano, IBM Travelling Exhibition exterior detail -

Arquitectura + Historia (2010) SC 137: El Pabellón IBM
de Renzo Piano Reelaborado por el Studio Gang en
Chicago, retrieved from http://arquitecturamashistoria.
blogspot.ca/2010/08/sc-137-el-pabellon-ibm-de-renzo-
piano.html, May 2, 2012.

Fig 3.5.2 The Nomad Contemporary Yurt interior– NOTCOT

(2008) The Nomad Yurt by Ecoshack, http://www.notcot.
com/archives/2008/03/the-nomad-yurt.php, Nov 4, 2011.

Fig 3.5.3 The Nomad Contemporary Yurt kit– NOTCOT (2008)

The Nomad Yurt by Ecoshack, http://www.notcot.com/
archives/2008/03/the-nomad-yurt.php, Nov 4, 2011.

Fig 3.5.4 Shigeru Ban Artek Pavilion - Miyake, Riichi. (2010)

Shigeru Ban Paper in Architecture, Luna, Ian & Gould,
Lauren A. (Ed.) New York: Rizzoli International Publica-
tions, Inc. p.106-109.

Fig 3.5.5 Renzo Piano, IBM Traveling Pavlion detail - Vidani,

Peter (2012) Arquitectura en Movimiento, retrieved from
www.arquitecturaenmovimiento.tumblr.com, Mar 27,
2012

Fig 3.5.6 Renzo Piano, IBM Traveling Pavilion - NCSEA (2007)

The Imaginative Engineer, In Structure Magazine, re-
trieved from www.structuremag.org, Mar 27, 2012.

Fig 3.6.1 2012 Architects, Villa Welpeloo facade - Paperblog (2012)

Villa Welpeloo par 2012 Architects, retrieved http://www.
paperblog.fr/2706036/villa-welpeloo-par-2012-archi-
tects/, May 2, 2012.

Fig 3.6.2 2012 Architects, Villa Welpeloo - 2012 Archi-

tecten (2012) Villa Welpeloo, retrieved from
www.2012architecten.nl, Mar 25, 2012.

Fig 3.6.3 Azkoitia Museum - Bahamon, Alejandro & Sanjines, Ma-

xxi
 ria Camila. (2010) Rematerial: From Waste to Architec-
ture, WW Norton & Co.

Fig 3.6.4 Curved standardized material sketch, drawn by author

Fig 3.6.5 Curved standardized material sketch, drawn by author

Fig 3.6.6 Palette Structure - Bahamon, Alejandro & Sanjines,

Maria Camila. (2010) Rematerial: From Waste to Archi-
tecture, WW Norton & Co.

Fig 3.6.7 Planar material sketch, drawn by author

Fig 3.6.8 Planar material sketch, drawn by author

Fig 3.7.1 Werner Sobek, R128 House exterior - 1 Kind Design.

(2011) Off-the-grid green house with glass facade, re-
trieved from http://www.1kindesign.com/2011/03/25/off-
the-grid-green-house-with-glass-facade/, Mar 28, 2012

Fig 3.7.2 R128 House structural detail - Stang, Alanna and

Hawthorne, Christopher. (2005) The Green House: New
Directions in Sustainable Architecture. New York: Princ-
eton Architectural Press.

Fig 3.7.3 R128 House kitchen - Stang, Alanna and Hawthorne,

Christopher. (2005) The Green House: New Directions in
Sustainable Architecture. New York: Princeton Architec-
tural Press.

Fig 3.7.4 Kieran and Timberlake, Loblolly House - Kieran, Ste-

phen and Timberlake, James. (2008) Loblolly House:
Elements of a New Architecture. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press.

Fig 3.7.5 Loblolly House scaffolding detail - Kieran, Stephen and

Timberlake, James. (2008) Loblolly House: Elements of
a New Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural
Press.

Fig 3.7.6 Loblolly House service block - Kieran, Stephen and

Timberlake, James. (2008) Loblolly House: Elements of
a New Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural
Press.

Fig 3.7.7 MEC Burlington exterior - Cowling, Dan. (2010) Moun-

tain Equipment Co-op: New store tests design for recov-
erability, SAB Magazine, retrieved from www.sabmaga-
zine.com, Nov 30, 2011.

Fig 3.7.8 MEC Burlington interior - Cowling, Dan. (2010) Mountain

Equipment Co-op: New store tests design for recover-
ability, In SAB Magazine, retrieved from www.sabmaga-
zine.com, Nov 30, 2011.

Fig 4.1.1 Anderson, Mark & Anderson, Peter. (2007) Prefab Pro-
totypes: site-specific design for offsite construction, New
York: Princeton Architectural Press.

xxiii
Fig 4.2.1 Suburban retail concept, drawn by author

Fig 4.2.2 Suburban retail parking, drawn by author

Fig 4.2.3 Commercial infill concept, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.1 Toronto urban block size, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.2 Parking bay dimension concept, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.3 Screw pile detail, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.4 Timber cross bracing concept, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.5 Timber beam detail, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.6 Structural joinery, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.7 Skin concept, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.8 Roof panel exploded, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.9 Wall panel exploded, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.10 Floor panel exploded, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.11 Service-washroom and circulation cores concept, drawn

by author

Fig 4.3.12 Service plenum perspective, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.13 Furnishings exploded, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.14 Bay assembly exploded, drawn by author

Fig 4.3.15 Process cycles at obsolescence, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.1 Site plan for Wellesley St E and Sherbourne Ave site,
drawn by author

Fig 4.4.2 Commercial land-use map for the Sherbourne Ave site,
drawn by author

Fig 4.4.3 Commercial square footage map for the Sherbourne Ave
site, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.4 Site photo from February 2012, taken by author

Fig 4.4.5 Site photo from February 2012, taken by author

Fig 4.4.6 Assembly process images, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.7 Building massing on site, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.8 Ground floor plan, drawn by author

Firg 4.4.9 Upper floor plan, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.10 Wellesley St E and Sherbourne Ave corner perspective,

xxv
 drawn by author

Fig 4.4.11 Sherbourne St looking North towards Wellesley St E,

drawn by author

Fig 4.4.12 Upper floor interior view towards Sherbourne-Wellesley

corner, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.13 Disassembly process images, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.14 Danforth Ave and Playter Blvd site plan, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.15 Assembly process images, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.16 Ground floor plan, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.17 Upper floor plan, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.18 Danforth Ave perspective looking east, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.19 Danforth Ave perspective looking west, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.20 Exterior perspective of south entry to building, drawn by

author

Fig 4.4.21 Aerial view of the disassembly process, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.22 Conventional material cycle with waste, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.23 Demolition material cycle, drawn by author

Fig 4.4.24 Disassembly of conventional building material cycle,

drawn by author

Fig 4.4.25 New material cycle with reusable and recyclable materi-
als, drawn by author

xxvii
List of appendices
Appendix 1 Material volume estimate analysis for Sherbourne St and
Wellesley St East building iteration, created by author

xxix
 1 Introduction
Fig 1.1 Resource extraction The thesis study began with the desire to address the problem of mate-
Fig 1.2 Building demolition
rial waste in architecture. The consumption of earth’s resources is es-
Fig 1.3 Material dumping
sential for the economic prosperity of developed society, but increased

rates of consumption and growth in world population put high demand

on all earthly goods (Durmisevic & Brouwer, 2002)(Ashby, 2009, p.7).

The construction industry is the second most massive consumer of ma-

terial resources in the world (Berge, 2009, p.6). The greatest amount of

waste is generated at the end of a building’s life – when they are demol-

ished to make way for new creations. Typically this act of destruction is

undertaken with little attempt to recover parts for reuse and relegates

material to landfills (Durmisevic &Yeang, 2009, p.136). In Canada, con-

struction and demolition creates 9.3 million tonnes of waste each year,

and in 2008 data shows that only 12% was recycled or reused. (Ontario

Waste Management Association, 2005) Although materials often outlive

the building use, architects rarely design to consider their fate after the

building life is over (Berge, 2009, p.6) (Mori, 2003, p.30). Contrary to the

reality, architecture is perceived as permanent, while building materi-

als are viewed as disposable. To sustain the quality of life on earth it is

critical to conserve and effectively use resources (Durmisevic & Bouwer,

1
 2002). Disposing of good material is impractical since harvesting and

processing resources generally requires more energy than recycling or

reusing that which has already been sourced (Ashby, 2009, p.72). The

concept of constructing with reused materials is not currently practical or

widespread since designs do not accommodate disassembly and easy

means of liberating their components.

There are two approaches to using material effectively: the one is to de-

sign for endurance and lasting building life, while the other is to design

for a limited existence with the intention of material reuse. Traditionally

architecture has been considered a permanent and lasting fixture that

VS acts as a reminder of the zeitgeist from when it was conceived. How-

ever it is almost impossible to foresee which buildings will be preserved,

maintained and treasured while others are taken down and replaced.

Contemporary architecture is often impermanent despite its intentions,

and is not necessarily an enduring solution. Current construction prac-

tices usually aim to create buildings with the material life of at least 50
Fig 1.4 Parthenon as enduring
years, but many buildings are demolished after only 15 (Durmisevic &
Fig 1.5 Crystal Palace as imperma-
nent Yeang, 2003, p.134). Demolitions and renovations typically account for

more projects than new builds each year. In the United States, 1.75 bil-

lion square feet of building stock are torn down each year, 5 billion are

renovated, and 5 billion are built new (Architecture 2030, 2011). Pro-

grammatic needs change, technical innovations render obsolete older

systems, and materials are damaged and deteriorate. A 2011 CBC ar-

ticle described how the vast fields of new condominium buildings with

window wall cladding in Canada are destined to need entirely new skin

and mechanical systems within 25 years (CBC, 2011). There is constant

growth and change to the fabric of the built environment as needs and

lifestyles change. Elma Durmisevic and Jan Brouwer (2002) describe

how buildings are changed based upon “user requirements,…degrada-

tion of materials and more technology dependent components.”In the

research paper “Understanding Obsolescence: A Conceptual Model for

Buildings,” the authors claim that obsolescence leading to demolition

3
 can arise at small scale within “building materials, parts and elements,

building construction systems (structure, fabric, mechanical and electri-

cal, etc.)” or at the scale of an entire building, block or neighbourhood

(Thomsen and van der Flier, 2011, p.353). Buildings can be rendered

obsolete due to physical factors such as poor design and material wear,

behavioural factors such as change in use, damage by occupants, or

external factors such as changing physical and behavioural conditions

in the surrounding environment such as new technologies, traffic, near-

by buildings and social deprivation. The physical factors of the build-

ing can be controlled through design and management, but behavioural

factors tend to be beyond control of the owner, and external factors are

too complex to be tackled by the owner or foreseen by the architect

(Thomsen and van der Flier, 2011). These factors make it near impos-

sible to design a lasting building, but designing a solution that is capable

VS of change and adaptation could extend usefulness. In the book “Cradle

to Cradle”, William McDonough and Michael Braungart question the de-

sire to build lasting forms. They believe that to build for permanence

is arrogant and selfish, and that we should allow future generations to

conceive and create their own products and architectures.

“Maybe we want our things to live forever, but what do future

generations want? What about their right to the pursuit of life,
liberty, and happiness, to a celebration of their own abundance
of nutrients, of materials, of delight?”
(McDonough & Braungart, 2002, p.114)

Futurists Sant Elia and Marinetti stated as far back as 1914: “The life of
Fig 1.6 SANAA, Contemporary Art a house will not be as long as it is with us, every generation will want to
Gallery avoids the expression of
construction, structure and material build its own town” (Universitat Stuttgart, p.43). It is irrational to expect
Fig 1.7 Renzo Piano, Tjibaou Cul-
tural Centre, expresses a study of that solutions derived based upon the flows, knowledge and data of to-
vernacular construction with con-
day will be successful and functional in the years to come. Architects
temporary method and materials
must come to accept that their creations are not permanent, but the

management of the materials that composes them has a lasting effect.

A secondary architectural issue is that of tectonics. Architecture is the

5
art of building, yet most contemporary edifices are dislocated from the

expression of construction. Architecture abstracted to imagery has no

substance or meaning with respect to construction and withholds the

evidence of effort and skill from perception. For a user to take pleasure

in a work of architecture they must comprehend its matter, its weight,

and its rigidity. Respecting and comprehending material qualities can

elevate the building beyond simple form to poetics, and create compel-

ling tectonic architecture. There is power in the essential elements of

architecture: light, shadow, material, structure, texture and detail, and

there is satisfaction in gaining an understanding of the effort involved in

designing and making a building through its tectonic language. Disas-

sembly architecture should be a tectonic expression of assembly, disas-

sembly, and impermanence through joinery.

7
 1.1 Problem
Contemporary architecture leads to wasteful use of material while there
Fig 1.1.1 Traditional Architecture
Cycle with I.M. Pei’s demolished is rising demand for construction materials. Buildings today are often im-
JKK Terminal
permanent, yet even design for disassembly often does not conceive of

material life after the building. Design for disassembly attempts to mimic

traditional construction techniques while hiding or only subtly exposing

connections, avoiding a radical reconfiguration of architectural expres-

sion. Many current architects try to avoid the expression of assembly

in architecture by favouring abstraction and absent details that create

environments without evidence of the effort involved in construction and

devoid of material honesty.

9
 Position

Fig 1.1.2 Proposed Architecture It is critical to use resources effectively. Contemporary architecture
Cycle
needs to reduce material waste by designing to liberate materials at the

end of use. Material life cycle can be extended by changing linear flow

into cyclic flow through reuse or recycling of components. A focus on

creating an impermanent but durable assembly can create architecture

that can be taken apart and components reused. The built form will be

about the assemblage of pieces, expressing the details that allow the

materials to be separated. Architecture is not a product, but a process of

design, making, use, adaptation and unmaking. New architecture needs

to embrace its impermanence, with an expression of the act of construc-

tion through visible joinery and a promotion of the reuse and recycling

of materials. Disassembly also means the building components can be

modified and updated when problems or new solutions arise. Architec-

ture as autonomous form can be visually interesting using only basic

elements such as structure, material, and detail that reflect the act of

construction.

11
 Principles

Fig 1.1.3 Principles Research into disassembly architecture, building with material reuse,

and reversible joinery among other things led to several principles to

explore in the design project. Layering of assemblies requires building

with separate conditions of site, structure, skin, services and finishes

so that parts can be updated without compromising the longevity of

other layers. Working with uncut standard forms ensures materials are

more likely to be reused. Employing homogeneous materials instead of

composites allows for the separation of components into base materials

for recycling or reuse. Creating non-permanent, reversible connections

also allows for easier recycling and reuse, and easier disassembly of

the whole building. Selecting materials based upon the expected lifetime

of the assembly or building by balancing functional and technical life

spans, as well as using recyclable components when compelled to cut

or customize, ensures that material lives are most suited to their func-

tion.

In terms of architectural expression, to show the making of the architec-

tural object, assembly will be demostrated through deliberate joinery.

A built form would express the assemblage of pieces and connections

that allows materials to be separated. It would have details that display

the effort of assembly and the properties of materials. It would explore

prefabrication of components and connectors to improve disassembly,

and highlight joinery and the expression of assembly.

13
2 Background and literature
review

15
 2.1 Design with reused
material
Fig 2.1 (Page 9-10) aged metal sur- Many designers and architects have embraced the practice of design
face
Fig 2.1.1 Reused materials in Villa with used components and materials. This practice extends material life
Welpeloo by 2012 Architects in- by diverting it from the landfill for the duration of its use. However, it can-
volved significant energy input and
reconfiguration to obtain the desired not become successful until design practices adjust to enable it as an
component arrangements
endeavour. Elma Durmisevic and Ken Yeang, (2009, p.134) authors of

“Designing for Disassembly (DfD),” state that buildings are not designed

to accommodate deconstruction that will liberate their components for

reuse – they are currently conceived as integrated systems in closed

structures. Demolition is still the most practiced method of taking down

a building whose usefulness has ended, and it ensures that potentially

reusable materials are contaminated or lost.

William McDonough and Michael Braungart of “Cradle to Cradle” (2002)

believe that there are two types of material flows in human society that

must be kept independent, that of biological nutrients and technical nu-

trients. The first allows for biological decomposition at the end of its life,

while the second can be recycled into industrial systems. They have

found that mixtures of the materials mean that neither can be reused

once the useful life of the product has come to an end, since then they

17
 plant
manufacture

nutrients parts product

animal

decomposition consumer use

Fig 2.1.2 The separate material can neither biodegrade nor be recycled. Bill Addis, who wrote “Building
cycles: biological nutrient cycle and
industrial nutrient cycle With Reclaimed Components and Materials: A Design Handbook for Re-

use and Recycling,” expands on the importance of this idea, as design

where materials are joined together in ways that allow them to be easily

separated helps facilitate recycling and reuse (Addis, 2006, p.19).

Designing with reused materials favours standard forms and generic

materials because they are available in larger quantities for construc-

tion, such as old tires and wood skids. Custom forms do not offer as

many possibilities for new projects – and are often scrapped, even when

originally intended for reuse. The British Pavilion by Nicholas Grimshaw

Fig 2.1.3 Nicholas Grimshaw and
Partners, British Pavilion, 1992 and Partners, for the Seville Exhibition in1992, was purchased for re-

construction at a hotel in Asia, but the plan failed due to code issues. Pin

joint connections and tubular steel allowed the vast majority of the struc-

ture to come apart easily. The only bolts connected columns to piles that
formed a permanent foundation for a temporary structure. The entire

steel structure was recycled in England, while the piles, concrete ground

and mezzanine floor slabs, and plasterboard shaft wall were demolished

(Design4deconstruction, 2011). Shipping the building to Asia from Eng-

Fig 2.1.4 British Pavilion interior land for reuse would not be an ideal use of energy; building components
pinned connections on steel struc-
would ideally be able to be reused local to their original built form. More

generic and ubiquitous materials and components are more likely to be

in demand for reuse.

In the book “Green building: project planning & cost estimating,” there

19
are said to be over 1,600 construction material reuse stores throughout

the United States and Canada. The authors found that the most sought

after salvaged materials tended to be finish and structural woods, win-

dows, doors, cabinets and casework, masonry, metals of almost any

sort, lighting and plumbing fixtures, and often ceiling tiles and carpet

(R.S.Means, 2011). Specialty recovery companies placed particular fo-

cus on high-end commodities, such as high-quality lumber and antique

doors, as well as low-value generic components like strip flooring, win-

dows and roof joists.

If reuse and recycling is to become standard practice to extend construc-

tion material life then building detailing and design will need to incorpo-

rate the means for easy separation of parts, and material properties

would need to be considered to facilitate recycling. For reuse, standard

forms with minimal manipulations would have to be favoured over cus-

tom shapes and components, and durable, high-quality materials would

be encouraged to promote markets for reclamation.

21
 2.2 Design for disassembly
Fig 2.2.1 Shigeru Ban, Centre The concept of design for disassembly creates an architecture that is
d’Interpretation is designed to come
apart using custom joinery so that inherently impermanent. The impermanent building could last anywhere
parts can be replaced over time from 1 day to 1000 years, but it is understood that it will not stand for-

ever. Impermanent structures are designed differently from permanent

structures through assembly methods, materials, and site relationships.

For buildings of very short duration, such as nomadic structures, foun-

dations are often unnecessary. The temporary building is not affixed to

a particular location, but can still be shaped by them:

“...It befits a temporary provision symbiotic on an enduring site

to practice two modes of economy: the first is to be in itself as
economical as is functionally/physically possible; the second
is conservation and exploitation of the configuration of its site
- unlike a new building on its assigned plot, it must respect its
supporting site’s independence and continuence, use it as a
borrowed resource - but not passively: to solve its economics
design-intelligence must replace the routine choices an empty
plot allows, must notice opportunities the existing site presents:
features to be exploited but not changed (Carr-Smith, 2009).”

Impermanent architecture has been considered contradictory, since ar-

chitecture is dominated by characteristic permanence and lasting solu-

tions. However, designing for permanence is impractical and often im-

possible. We can only hypothesize the effect an intervention will have,

and hope our work will be accepted and lasting. An example of the un-

23
 predictability of building life stood on MIT campus. Building 20 was de-

signed and built rapidly in 1943 with the intent of temporality as it was

slated for demolition after the war. It ended up lasting over 35 years

because it was so beloved for its flexibility, roughness and functionality

(Brand, 1994, p.24). .

Fig 2.2.2 Don Whitson, MIT Building
20 “Temporary is permanent, and permanent is temporary.
Grand, final-solution buildings obsolesce and have to be torn down
because they were too overspecified to their original purpose to
adapt easily to anything else. Temporary buildings are thrown up
quickly and roughly to house temporary projects. Those projects
move on soon enough, but they are immediately supplanted by
other temporary project—of which, it turns out, there is an end-
less supply (Brand, 1994, p.28).”

What is the implication of impermanence upon architecture? The defi-

ciency of an impermanent building lies in the potential loss of its physical

presence over time, which removes cultural and historical legacy from

the built environment. It is a loss that permanently-built architecture also

frequently undergoes despite the intentions of the architect, since ob-

solescence is frequently unpredictable. Change is inevitable in the built

world and nothing is truly permanent. The most lasting part of archite-

ture is the materails used to construct. Even if the design fails and the

building is destroyed, the materials remain. Buildings that have lasted

hundreds or thousands of years have not done so without transforma-

tion. They are no longer the true imaginings of their originators, having

acquired the additions to permit functionality in present day. Architecture

that has been withheld the transformations of time becomes an artifact,

incapable of functioning in present day, but maintaining a connection to

cultures past. Architecture must continue to adapt and change if it is to

maintain usefulness. Stagnation leads to obsolescence and relegation

to a cultural artefact. Impermanent buildings accept change and can

achieve other architectural aspirations comparable to those designed

for permanence. They can contribute to memory, fulfill uses, and delight

aesthetically and spiritually. In addition, impermanent buildings have the

power to achieve something more than those built with the intent to

25
 last forever. The architect and writer Christopher Alexander claims that

every time we build we make “nine mistakes for every success,” so the

more complete an architectural reality we present, the more opportunity

there is for feedback to learn, to correct that which fails to perform the

way it should and to improve (Brand, 1994, p.63).

“. …Indeterminability emerges in the meeting of experience,

time and context; the outcome of this conflation is impossible
to predict. Irregularities, instabilities and deviance which ap-
pear in a given place, which disturb and transform an expected
physical order, give rise to shocks, random encounters and ac-
cidents (Levesque, 2008)…”

The liberation that arises from impermanence is that of experimenta-

tion. The architecture can become a form of physical research, whose

performance in context can lead to revisions and new iterations. The im-

permanent building is a full-scale model that can be scrutinized, revised

and rebuilt. The architect Renzo Piano believes that most experimental

and unusual architecture is made possible through temporary or imper-

manent briefs, and he “views impermanent buildings as just another

part of mainstream architecture (Kronenberg, 2000, p.18).” Buildings

designed for disassembly accept impermanence in architecture, and

understand that management of materials and resources has a lasting

effect. They are designed for partial or entire deconstruction, in order to

replace materials and systems that have worn or become obsolescent,

to move to a new location, to grow or shrink, or to disappear entirely into

their component parts.

There are valuable principles to take away from the disassembly rheto-

ric including the concept of layered assemblies, and using dry connec-
Fig 2.2.3 Concept sketch for layered
cladding, structure and finishes tions. Layered assemblies divide the building into separate parts - shell,

structure, services, finishes, furnishings - and limit their overlap so that

each can be modified as necessary without impacting others, since they

can last for different lengths of time (Durmisevic & Yeang, 2009). Frank

Duffy and Stewart Brand both believe in the concept of dividing a build-

27
ing into separate systems and limiting their interaction (Brand, 1994,

p.14). This concept counters designs where systems are integrated,

preferring to separate them. Duffy distinguishes the layers as “Shell,

Services, Scenery and Set,” while Brand expands the layers to include

“Site, Structure, Skin, Services, Space Plan and Stuff” (Brand, 1994,

p.17). Elma Durmisevic and Jan Brouwer describe the layers as sub-

assemblies that have different functional and life cycle expectancies.

By keeping them independent they can be replaced without influencing

transformation of the whole structure (Durmisevic & Brouwer, 2002).

Using dry connections means adhesives and other permanent means of

fastening are avoided to construct details with components that can be

disconnected for reuse or recycling. Dry connections also begin to refer

to the idea of avoiding composite materials and advocating for ‘pure’

materials. The concept of using ‘pure’ materials to maximize material

life comes from Michael Braungart and William McDonough of “Cradle

to Cradle (2002).” Their definition of pure materials can be described

as homogeneous material compositions with finishes or additives that

do not compromise their ability to be reused or recycled. If composites

cannot be separated into ‘pure’ materials for reuse or recycling or even

down-cycling, they are forced into the waste stream.

Barbara Knecht, who wrote an article entitled “Designing for Disassem-

bly and Deconstruction,” claims that for a building to be successful in ac-

commodating disassembly it should try to build as little as is necessary

to achieve the design, that details should avoid permanent connections

and composite components, and that mechanical systems should not

be bound to structure, but accessible for maintenance and updating (

2004, p.183). Knecht’s statement to ‘build as little as necessary’ verges

on anti-architectural, but could be interpreted as envisioning a minimal

and reductionist aesthetic. The suggestion of dislocating mechanical

systems from structure could also be adapted to include electrical, com-

munication networks and plumbing. Durmisevic and Yeang (2009) offer

29
further suggestions, such as separating levels of material, creating sub-

assemblies, and using dry mechanical connections. In “Dynamic Versus

Static Building Structures,” Durmisevic and Brouwer (2002) describe

the various life cycles of materials in contemporary buildings. They

claim that there are three scenarios, the first is where the functional

durability of the material is short compared to its technical life cycle, the

second is where the functional durability is expected to be longer than

the technical life cycle, and the third is where functional and technical

life cycles are equivalent. Technical life cycle can be considered the ex-

pected length of time the building will be used for its intended purpose.

1. Functional lifecycle < technical lifecycle

2. Functional lifecycle > technical lifecycle

3. Functional lifecycle = technical lifecycle

The first scenario would ideally be disassembled into reusable or recy-

clable materials, the second should be composed of replaceable and

recyclable materials and the third should be fully recyclable. Durmisevic

and Brouwer (2002, p.14) claim that a significant part of our built envi-

ronment falls into the first scenario, that the second scenario involves

monuments that are critical to maintain and the third scenario includes

temporary buildings that should be designed for recycling. They believe

the more separate life cycle layers a building is designed to accommo-

date the more likely it is open to transformation and longer life before

obsolescence (Durmisevic and Brouwer, 2002).

Designing for permanence is impractical because change is inevitable.

Buildings are required to adapt over time, whether designed with lasting

or temporary construction methods. An acceptance of impermanence

and the flexibility of design for disassembly allows for architecture to

take on a more responsive and experimental approach, and avoid stag-

nation and obsolescence. Through the separation of systems, the use

of pure materials and dry impermanent connections, and the selection of

material based upon expected lifetime of the building, design for disas-

sembly allows for entire deconstruction or even partial deconstruction to

31
material based upon expected lifetime of the building, design for disas-

sembly allows for entire deconstruction or even partial deconstruction to

permit the building to grow, shrink or re-locate, and it allows materials

and systems to be replaced and manipulated without the premature de-

struction of the entire building.

33
 2.3 Tectonics and building
as autonomous form
Fig 2.3.1 Shigeru Ban’s Haesley An architecture that explores the expression of assembly of materials
Nine Bridges Clubhouse is expres-
sive of material properties and struc- and visible demountable joinery is inherently tectonic. Tectonic architec-
ture - a heavy stacked wall of stone ture expresses essential characteristics of construction and buildings,
beneath a flexible web of timber
members bent into elegant posts such as structure, material and the process of making, to create power-

ful architecture. Kenneth Frampton describes tectonic architecture as a

“poetic manifestation of structure…as an act of making and revealing

(Frampton, 2008, p.519).” It communicates the building as autonomous

form and expression of construction, and architecture as an act of mak-

ing. Concern for detailed connections and material is an exploration of

the basic elements of architecture. It is important to explore the argu-

ment for tectonic architecture and how it creates powerful buildings in

order to develop a successful architecture of joinery, material and as-

sembly.

Tectonic design has historically been undertaken for diverse reasons.

Architects who embraced tectonic expression often were rejecting the

impression of architecture as a sculpture or image, wanted to express

the process of construction in the final form, or sought to understand and

demonstrate the properties of buildings such as structure, material and

35
 detail. A proponent of phenomenology, architect Juhani Pallasmaa be-

lieved that architecture detached from the truths of construction created

buildings that were “stage sets for the eye, devoid of the authenticity

of material and tectonic logic (Pallasmaa, 2008, p.565)…” Mies van

der Rohe argued for the restoration of architecture as building, and to

reclaim it from “aesthetic speculators.” (Frampton, 2001, p.161) It was

inappropriate for the skilled architect to design architecture as sculpture.

Mies believed that novel form could arise from exploring the issues of

building, but could not be the goal of architectural work (Frampton, 2001,

p.161). Aesthetic projects were seen to have no substance or meaning

with respect to building, but just reduced architecture to imagery. The

rejection of scenographic architecture, which condenses architecture to

a final image by hiding any evidence of the process of making, is not

uncommon since it avoids a sense of effort, process and construction

(Frampton, 2008, p.518). A response to scenographic architecture is to

create buildings that express their construction method. The embellish-

ment and expression of the basic elements of architecture can pull the

user from the state of distraction typical of the contemporary world by

heightening the awareness of place, experience and self in the space

(Caldwell, 2007, p.vii). There is an inherent physicality in a crafted build-

Fig 2.3.2 Renzo Piano, Tjibaou Cul-
tural Center was a study of vernacu- ing with its own properties and characteristics that can reconnect the
lar construction expressed through
structure and material visitor to their own body and self-conscious (Frampton, 2008, p.522).

Tectonic architecture can be powerful to encounter and the perception

of the means of construction creates a richer experience and apprecia-

tion. There is strength in the essential elements of architecture: mate-

rial, structure, joint, and construction, and there is satisfaction in gaining

an understanding of the effort involved in designing and making a build-

ing through its tectonic language. For a user to take pleasure in a work

of architecture Arthur Schopenhauer wrote that they had to understand

its matter, and properties such as weight, rigidity and cohesion. He be-

lieved that:

37
 “…if we were ‘told clearly that the building, the sight of which
please[d] us, consisted of entirely different materials of very un-
equal weight and consistency, but not distinguishable to the eye,
the whole building would become as incapable of affording us
pleasure as would a poem in an unknown language (Weston,
2003, p.44)...”

Architect Juhani Pallasmaa argued for the use of natural materials since

they allow users to become “convince[d] of the veracity of matter (Pal-

lasmaa, 2008, p.565).” He thought they offered another level of depth

beyond their physical presence since they could express their age,

history, birth and human use. However, industrial materials can offer a

sense of nostalgia and history. Exposed rivets and cylinder glass win-

Fig 2.3.3 Yukiharu Suzuki & As-

dows act as reminders of older methods of construction and assembly,
soc, Barn House uses a beautifully and of the work involved in construction:
detailed timber structure and rich
natural materials as architectural
expression “…The massed rivets of plated-steel structures greatly add to the
impression of strength, and also offer the satisfying feelings of
being able to grasp how, and with what effort, the structure was
assembled. This satisfaction is not so readily afforded by many
modern structures, where welding frequently eliminates more ex-
pressive joints (Weston, p.155)…”

Pallasmaa claimed that materials act in conjunction with time, light,

shadow, transparency, texture and detail to produce a complete archi-

tectural experience (Pallasmaa, 2008, p.565). Honest material use is

critical to create compelling tectonic architecture. Respecting and com-

prehending material qualities can elevate the building beyond simple

form to poetics. German philosopher Martin Heidegger claimed that the

properties of materials were expressed for the first time in ancient Greek

temples, as they were “worked, assembled and presented in such a

way that they ask[ed] us to pay attention to their individual qualities: in

its presence, we [felt] that we [saw] stone as stone—and as something

marvellous (Weston, 2003, p.44).” The structural engineer Cecil Bal-

mond (2008) believed that structure could also be the animator of archi-

tecture and give it richness. He explained that “new structure animates

geometry…buildings become rhythm and sequence and clash and con-

frontation (Balmond, 2008, p.558).” Architect Peter Zumthor believed

39
 that appreciation for a work was influenced by the expression of skill

and effort, owing to his profound respect for the “art of joining” by crafts-

men and engineers. He rejected the pursuit of novel form in contempo-

rary architecture and instead worked with the essential characteristics

of architecture to create powerful spaces (Weston, 2003, p.205). The

use of structure, detail, material, and construction can create powerful

architecture.

An architecture that aims to be respectful of material and expressive of

joinery and assembly is tectonic in nature. It uses the basic elements of

architecture in order to create an appreciation of the means of assem-

bly and the final built form. It turns architectural works into autonomous

forms to be appreciated for the visible effort and skill needed for their

realization. When matter and the means of making are made visible the

Fig 2.3.4 Kengo Kuma, Bamboo user takes more pleasure in discovering a work of architecture. When
House uses the qualities of bamboo
the basic elements of architecture are embellished for expression, they
as architectural expression
can heighten the awareness of place, experience and the self in the

space. For the thesis study it will be important to create details that dis-

play the effort of assembly and the properties of materials, to embellish

joinery and the expression of disassembly.

41
 2.4 The architectural joint
Fig 2.4.1 Renzo Piano, UNESCO In “The Tell-the-Tale Detail,” Marco Frascari believed that “the art of
Laboratory Workshop, dry stone
stacked joints with stucco overlap detailing [was] really the joining of materials, elements, components,
Fig 2.4.2 Francois de Menil, Byzan- and building parts in a functional and aesthetic manner (Frascari, 2008,
tine Fresco Chapel Museum, metal
and glass expressed joinery p.501).” The detail was always a joint, a connector between two parts
Fig 2.4.3 Olson Sundberg Kundig
Allen, Mission Hill Family Estate (Frascari, 2008). Architects Kieran and Timberlake believed that with-
Winery, stair structure seam of hid- out separation there would be no need for joining, and ”separation in
den joint
architecture arises from the characteristics of the materials to be as-

sembled into a building or from the evolution of the site (Kieran and

Timberlake, 2002, p.51).” Joining was the way to assemble separate

pieces into buildings (Kieran and Timberlake, 2002). It could express

the meaning of man-made objects, giving order and intelligibility to the

world (Frascari, 2008). The Beaux-Arts tradition developed a represen-

tation of designed or surveyed buildings called the “analytique” which

would focus on capturing the details graphically, in order to determine

the overall language of the building (Frascari, 2008). French theore-

ticians developed the term “architecture parlante”, which meant that

details were essentially the words that were used to compose the sen-

tence of the building and give it character (Frascari, 2008, p502).

The earliest reversible joints were knots tied in nomadic building forms

43
 (Frampton, 2008, p.524). The structures were fully demountable and

portable in their component parts, were essential and minimal for light-

ness, and employed locally available materials. In the American tipi, tim-

ber posts delineated the space and formed the structure, skins or reed

mats acted as an outer membrane laid over the timbers, ropes held the

skins down, and wooden pegs and rope bound the timber poles togeth-

Fig 2.4.4 Frame of African nomadic er (Laublin, 1977). In some African nomadic structures, if the ground
building
was too tough to bury frame supports, rocks were piled around the base

to hold the structure in place (Prussin, 1995, p.156). The stones formed

a natural and demountable foundation for the frame. Gottfried Semper

believed it was the joint between the heavy base or podium, and the light

frame that was the essence of architecture (Frampton, 2008, p.522).

Primitive nomadic architecture required disassembly to allow users to

pack up their belongings and relocate for resources. Nomadic construc-

Fig 2.4.5 Demountable foundation tion techniques are appropriate precedents for an architecture of dis-
sketch
assembly, cyclical material life, and tectonic expression. Joinery and

construction expressed the impermanence and portability of the tradi-

tional design. Industrial prefabrication and design for speed assembly

could also lead to impermanent architecture. Joseph Paxton’s Crystal

Palace, initially assembled in England in 1851 for the temporary hous-

ing of the Exhibition of the Industry of all Nations, was an early design

that showcased the deconstructive possibilities of prefabrication. The

Fig 2.4.6 Demountable foundation original proposal for a permanent structure of brick and stone in Hyde

Park was quickly overturned when Paxton came forward with a design

for a structure of iron and glass that could be speedily assembled and

removed afterward, (Citizendium, 2010). The experimental building was

assembled from standardized machine made parts, including 300,000

uniform panes of glass, in a repeated bay system in only nine months

(Alfred, 2009). The iron columns and girders with mechanical joints sat

on a concrete foundation - which was a permanent construction that

would require demolition (Alfred, 2009). Despite its temporary intent, the

building was dismantled, modified to increase its height, then relocated

and re-assembled as a destination outside of London (Citizendium,

45
 2010). The Crystal Palace demonstrated the flexibility, easy disassem-
bly and re-assembly of a building designed for impermanence, using
standardized parts and mechanical joinery.

There have been different periods in the history of architectural move-
ments when craftsmanship and construction was expressed and also
when connections and the evidence of assembly were hidden (Daniels,
48). Despite the appearance of heavy permanence, some classical con-
structions allowed for disassembly through their realization. Doric Greek
Fig 2.4.7 The glass roof of the Crys- columns were cylinders of stacked stone with hidden wood dowel joints
tal Palace
to hold them in place, and contained both absent and expressive joints
(Miller, 1990). They appeared as monolithic forms with only a seam de-
noting the hidden joint and how it was built. The lack of permanent con-
nections meant that forms could be taken apart, allowing for the reuse of
marble and steel from classical buildings. The intention for the column
was likely to be a lasting form considering its monolithic and solid ex-
pression, but limitations of construction methods led to impermanence.
The International Style Movement deliberately hid construction details,

Fig 2.4.8 Doric column assembly with the intent to dematerialize and express the building as an idealized
image (Daniels, 48). The pure aesthetic of the Modernist forms were not
designed with time or change in mind, and their lack of material honesty
led to buildings that have weathered and decomposed in unflattering
ways (Weston, 2003). The absent or abstract detail allowed the building
to be perceived as a unified whole, and were considered the opposite of
Fig 2.4.9 Le Corbusier, Villa Sa- the expressive or articulated detail. When the articulated detail showed
voye, demonstrates an absence of
its consideration of material, weight, connection and assembly, the ab-
evidence of assembly in its detailing
stract detail denied those characteristics with an “absence of weight, an
indifference to material, a lack of apparent connection, and an apparent
disregard for the elements (Ford, (2009), p.11).” The post-postmodern
approach was to create seamless forms and hide any sense of assem-
bly or parts. Many architects designed monolithic forms out of an as-
sembly of parts, but risked damage and wear by avoiding articulated
joints:

“…Seemlessly unseen, these details revelled in the fact that “ig-

norance is bliss” when it comes to expressing how materials con-
nect with each other when they are assembled… The problematic
aspect of gloss-over detailing is that over time, almost all such

47
 detailing has a propensity to evidence its inherent dishonesty. Ma-
terials have different expansion coefficients, they accept or reject
water to varying degrees, some materials propagate organic or
biological infestations while others preempt them, and oxidation
and galvanic action are always waiting patiently to undo the best
laid plans an architect can come up with. Rather than age grace-
fully, most of these examples are inevitably fated to lose their
battle with the elements and time far more rapidly than those who
express both materiality and use the knowledge of weatherability
as a design criteria rather than subordinated “baggage” (Dickin-
Fig 2.4.10 Zaha Hadid, Dubai Arts son, 1997, p.ix).”
Center attempts to create seamless
joints for a continuous form
Joints between materials are also often hidden through the use of base-

boards and moldings. Alternatively, many modern architects decided

to emphasize keeping materials apart with ‘shadow gaps’ between

doors, skirtings and walls to demonstrate and emphasize the assembly

(Weston, 2003, p.153). In the essay “Detail and Articulation,” Yolande

Daniels argues that internalizing the details in seamless architecture is

foolish because the intelligence of the system is hidden and suppressed

(Daniels, 2003).

Detailing the joints between different surfaces and materials demands

a surprising amount of time on most architectural projects and is an es-

sential task of the architect (Weston, 2003). The conception is practical

and formal, and can determine the success or failure of a building de-

sign (Frascari, 2008, p.501). Kent Bloomer of Yale University considers

detailing to be “the most undervalued opportunity in the profession.” He

believes that although buildings are traditionally approached as a “top

down” design problem, they should be designed from the bottom up, and

allow the different scales to inform each other (Dickinson, 1997, p.xix).

Marco Frascari wrote that through their own order, details could impose

order and meaning of the entire construction and that “the understand-

ing and execution of details constitute[d] the basic process by which the

architectural practice and theories should be developed (Frascari, 2008,

p.501).” In the eighteenth century, members of the École des Beaux Arts
Fig 2.4.11 Renzo Piano, UNESCO
Laboratory Workshop, the joint con- described the architectural detail like a word in a language. Through
necting column to beam blends steel its selection and ordering it gave character to a piece of writing, just
into timber structure
as building character is shaped by the meaning and order of its details

49
(Weston, 2003, p.148). In, “The Architectural Detail: Dutch Architects

Visualise their Concept” Ben van Berkel and Caroline Bos, of UN Stu-

dio, are quoted as having stated that well conceived and realized details

help to extend the appreciation of architecture:

“Long after the idiomatic treatment of the whole has been ex-
hausted, details can provide new insights and surprising discov-
eries that determine the vitality of a building (Melet, 2002, p.7).”

Careful joining and detailing should be demonstrated to impart the effort

and skill involved in realizing disassembly architecture.

By failing to control the appearance of joints architect Edward Ford

(2009) believed that buildings could visually come apart into their com-

ponents. If the quantity of parts became too large and visually compli-

cated it was difficult to perceive the whole. There are countless connec-

tions in a building, and they should not all be treated the same way. Ford

described mandatory joints from material properties as a series of chal-

lenges that the architect had to overcome. He lamented over the need

for control joints in materials such as stucco, concrete, masonry, and

drywall that could create a condition of “panelization” of surfaces (Ford,

2009, p.145). Richard Weston—architect, landscape architect, profes-

sor and author—explained in his book “Materials, Form and Architec-

ture” that our vision is “acutely sensitive to joints in or between materi-

als, and the effects of even the slightest systematic marks in a surface

can be considerable (2003, p.152).” It is important to decide what joints

to emphasize, and which to downplay in demountable architecture –

the expression of joints should not be universally bold. Edward Ford

believed that joints were allowed to speak the most powerfully when

they were singular, accompanied by a series of hidden or subtle joints.

A crafted joint presented the building as an assembly and explained

how it was put together. A joint was a reminder that the building was

made of parts brought together with intent to form space (Ford, 2009). If

joints were intended to be read, they often had to be visually reinforced.

51
 Joints between flush stone panels or precast concrete forms could be-

come invisible, while reminders of formwork in cast-in-place concrete

were nearly impossible to conceal (Ford, 2009). Kahn would enhance

poured concrete joints by making them deeper, wider or larger, and mak-

ing them an ornament captured by light and shadow, that reminded the

viewer of the construction process. As a component of tectonic architec-

ture the joint can draw attention to the physical qualities of the building,

such as weight, rigidity, and strength, heightening an awareness of the

place and body within the space.

Fig 2.4.12 Peter Marino and Assoc., The joint is a key component of disassembly construction that has pow-
Datascape Corporation displays the
intentional panelization of a surface erful theoretical roots, is a critical and time consuming detailing practice
through shadows of joints
and raises a series of issues and choices for the architect. The joint can

allow buildings to be demountable and impermanent. The expressive

or articulated joint can demonstrate material properties, weight, and

assembly, and extend the appreciation and enjoyment of a building. A

designed joint can provide the order for a larger scale of assembly. How-

ever, joints can also dissolve a building into its component parts when

their visibility is not controlled, reducing the conception of the whole. A

possible strategy for disassembly and material life cycle architecture

could be to articulate joints based upon the expected endurance of com-

ponents and layers. For example, more rugged and heavy connections

could be used to affix the long lasting structure and site layers, while

more delicate and minimal joints could be easily removed for shorter

lasting layers such as finishes. Achieving a balance between visually

reinforced and reduced joints is critical to maintain the appearance of

an autonomous form, while also achieving an expression of assembly.

53
 2.5 Fabrication and
assembly
Fig 2.5.1 Andrew Kudless, Manifold, The rhetoric against tectonic architecture and visible joinery has been
is a study in folded planar material
assembled with simple bolted con- bolstered by the high cost of skilled craftsmanship in the trades and the
nections dislocation of the contemporary architect from the act of building. The

architect creates the image and meaning, but often does not execute

the creation of their design in reality. Nader Tehrani, in the introduction

to Michael Cadwell’s book “Strange Details,” describes this disconnect

as “somewhat like permitting the writer to use a certain vocabulary, but

disassociating it from the very alphabet from which the text emerges

(Cadwell, 2007, p.ix).” The relatively recent rise of digital fabrication has

permitted the architect to regain some ground in constructing. Drawing

software can be immediately connected to fabrication tools, removing

the contractor as the mediator between the architect and the building

(Cadwell, 2007). This new process can re-establish the architect as

master builder and the building as tectonic assembly. Architects can

combine the specificity of factory customization, the efficiency of stan-

dardization and the speed of prefabrication, in the creation of reusable

and recyclable components for disassembly architecture.

Architecture no longer needs to be an expression of construction, but

55
 can be an assembly. Buildings are increasingly constructed from com-

ponents and assemblies that are prefabricated off-site, with little ma-

nipulation in situ (Weston, p.149). Architect team Kieran and Timberlake

(2008) laud the benefits of assembly over construction. They describe

how construction is time consuming, while assembly is fast; how con-

struction is complex, requires skill, training and specialized tools, while

assembly depends upon precise factory cut, pre-fitted, drilled and jigged

components put together with written instructions. (2008, p.80) Assem-

blies are also more readily reversible and can be disassembled “as

quickly, or more quickly, than assembled (Kieran and Timberlake, 2008,

Fig 2.5.2 Renzo Piano, Pompidou
Centre p.81).” Fabricated connectors, such as steel plates, and bolts have sup-

planted costly craftsmanship and joinery by hand. Massive cast-steel

‘gerberettes’ in the Pompidou Centre in Paris elegantly join columns

to beams, and celebrate the beauty of assembly, joinery and structure

(Weston, p.151). The structural engineer for the project, Peter Rice,

stated that the central design characteristic was “making the joint the

essence of the solution.” He wanted to create a structural design that

was more articulated of its method of making, instead of the ubiquitous

continuous welded structure in contemporary works (Ford, 2009, p.148).

What used to be time-consuming and skilled work that limited the ap-

peal of expressive architectural details is now easily obtained through

fabrication techniques. Full-scale parts can be created from diverse ma-

terials such as metals, woods and plastics from the digital model of

the building (Iwamoto, 2009, p.005). In the book “Digital Fabrications:

Architectural and Material Techniques,” Lisa Iwamoto (2009) divides

digital fabrication into five different techniques: sectioning, tessellating,

folding, contouring and forming. Sectioning, folding and forming ap-

pear to be the methods adaptable to architecture of disassembly and

cyclical material life, with a tectonic expression. Sectioning is typically

Fig 2.5.3 Herzog and DeMeuron, a structural conception that involves the creation of ribs – acting as
Olympic Stadium in Beijing is a sec-
beams or columns – reminiscent of ship and aircraft construction (Iwa-
tioned structure achieving a non-
rectilinear form moto, 2009, p.010). Sectioning is often used to achieve complex forms,

57
 since it is simply a process of deriving two dimensional cuts through a 3

dimensional model. The cross sections are then joined to create a skel-

eton of the form. The drawback to this type of digital construction is that

sections are often cut from panelized materials, creating a lot of waste

for non-rectilinear forms. The model of Herzog and DeMeuron’s Bird’s

Nest Stadium, shows how bent lines of truss along sections could be

used to achieve a lightweight complex form, instead of cut planar mate-

rial which would likely be more wasteful and heavy.

Folding is also a fabrication method that favours planar material, but

demands that it be pliable to bend without breaking (Iwamoto, 2009).

Materials are somewhat limited, with precedents using cardboard, sheet

metal, thick paper and fabric. “When folds are introduced into otherwise

planar materials, those materials gain stiffness and rigidity, can span

distance, and can often be self-supporting (Iwamoto, 2009, p.062).”

Folding can also create continuity of surface through material language,

allowing floors to become walls and ceilings. The process takes two-
Fig 2.5.4 Andrew Kudless, Manifold, dimensional surfaces, and through creasing, folding and wrapping turns
2004
them into three-dimensional forms. A number of software programs offer

tools for transforming a model into two-dimensional information, and la-

ser cutters, water-jets and plasma cutters are used to cut and perforate

the material (Iwamoto, 2009). The concept of folding could extend to

non-pliable materials if material was cut instead of scored at seams and

connected into forms with joinery. Shigeru Ban’s Nemunoki Children’s

Museum of Art uses the same structural method in its roof as Andrew

Kudless’s digitally-produced Manifold project, but is better suited to ex-

tending material life and expressive joinery. Nemunoki has standardized

Fig 2.5.5 Shigeru Ban, Nemunoki
Children’s Museum of Art, 1999 cardboard panels, and uses repetitive custom joinery, made visible to

visitors at the bottom edge to connect the panels together. The Manifold

project hides bolted connectors on the interior surface of the honey-

comb system.

Forming is the final method of fabrication that has potential for reusable
59
 components. It allows the creation of parts from customized molds or

forms (Iwamoto, 2009). Forms made with digital milling or rapid-pro-

totyping machines could be used to mass produce standardized hard-

ware, joints, and panels (Iwamoto, 2009). Andrew Kudless’s P_Wall

project created a custom acoustic panel with plaster and elastic fabric.

The project shows how new standardized components could be created

using form-making techniques. The system created in this project is only

Fig 2.5.6 Andrew Kudless, P-wall, reusable in its panel form, and cannot be recycled or even down-cycled
2006
once it obsolesces or is damaged (reduced to a poorer quality material

assembly, such as the transformation of lumber into MDF). It is not an

ideal mass produced material for cyclical material life, and will ultimately

produce significant waste. For architecture of disassembly and cyclical

material life, it should be ensured that prefabricated components are

either recyclable or reusable, considering demand and obsolescence

are unknown.

Off-site fabrication has replaced handcraftsmanship and construction.

Buildings are assembled from many parts. To simplify and speed the

process, the design can call upon precise factory prepared pieces, often

digitally produced, that are typically more open to disassembly than tra-

ditional construction, but not necessarily to reuse. Digital fabrication of-

fers several methods that could be adopted for the study of an architec-

ture of disassembly and material life cycle, including forming, sectioning

and folding. Although prefabrication has been prone to wasteful designs

and the creation of components not ideal for extending material life cy-

cle, an awareness of the demand for component reuse and material life

cycles can ensure that customized forms do not end up as waste.

61
2.6 Building typologies for
impermanence
Certain building typologies and systems are more predisposed to

adopting principles of disassembly and cyclical material life. If the life

of a building is forecast to be limited, it should be designed to allow its

material components to endure in another form or be recycled. Retail

architecture, domestic architecture, and temporary buildings are a few

examples that lend themselves to principles of disassembly because of

their often shortened existences or predisposition to change.

Retail architecture can be based upon trends and fluctuating economic

factors. “...The exigencies of pushing products mean that the life span

of a boutique or showroom may not be more than a few seasons (Bar-

renech, 2005, p.15).” Minsuk Cho, of the firm Mass Studies, felt shocked

to see a shop design, his first project in Korea, torn down and replaced

by a larger building two years after realization (Cho, 2010, p.202). Retail

projects are often quickly conceived and created:

“Whether a store lasts two years or two decades, it captures the

architectural sensibilities of an era more plainly than maybe any
other building type. Retail is about creating an environment reflec-
tive of the here and now: current trends, movements, aesthetic
directions, whatever is in the air at a given moment (Barrenech,
2005, p.15).”

“‘Freshening up’ a store facade, usually on a five year basis, is a

common tenant lease requirement to keep a centre looking new
(Platt, 25).”

Often stores aim to draw new clients and visitors into the space through

novel displays and eye-catching design. High quality materials and de-

tail design can impart good branding for the company and product.

“Commercial buildings have to adapt quickly, often radically, be-

cause of intense competitive pressure to perform, and they are
subject the rapid advances that occur in any industry. Most busi-
nesses either grow or fail. If they grow, they move; if they fail,
they’re gone. Turnover is a constant. Commercial buildings are
forever metamorphic (Brand, 1994, p.7)…”

63
According to Durmisevic and Brouwer (2002) a short functional life of
architecture would be best served by recyclable and reusable materials

since their technical lives would outlast the architectural iteration.

The changeability of office buildings would be focused on an interior

architecture, concerned with layout, systems and finishes. During the life-

time of an office building, there are typically ten or more tenant compa-

nies, and each new inhabitant demands a complete remodelling (Brand,

1994). The short functional life of interior office architecture, including the

layers of furnishings, finishes and services, means that it should be com-

posed of reusable or recyclable materials that could have further use after

the office was remodelled. The office building structure could be used

until it reached the end of its technical life, in which case it would ideally

be fully recyclable since it could serve no further material purpose in new

buildings. The structure, services and skin would need to allow flexibility

of uses.

Migrant worker settlements grow and disappear at resource extraction

sites. Workers migrate to often isolated and rural sites for as long as the

economic draw sustains them. The life of the architecture at a forestry

camp, mining village or oil field, such as Fort McMurray, is temporary un-

less it develops another means of economic survival. Disassembly and

design for material life cycle would avoid creating permanent buildings
that will be abandoned and decay once workers have moved on. They

would ideally be assembled of reusable or recyclable materials that would

be easy to remove from the site for new purposes.

Domestic buildings are the steadiest changing type of architecture

(Brand, 1994). The home is constantly required to adapt to family growth,

desires and changes in taste. The relationship between occupant and

home is intimate, and one must adapt to the other. Often the changes are

minor, such as updates to resolve annoyances.

65
 “Homes are the domain of slowly shifting fantasies and rapidly
shifting needs. The widows parent moves in; the teenager moves
out; finances require letting out a room (new door and outside
stair); accumulating stuff needs more storage (or public storage
frees up some home space); a home office or studio becomes es-
sential. Meanwhile, desires accumulate for a new deck, a hot tub,
a modernized kitchen, a luxurious bathroom, a walk-in closet, a
hobby refuge in the garage, a kid refuge in the basement or attic,
a whole new master bedroom (Brand, 1994, p.10)…”

Fig 2.6.1 Typical exterior renova- The home also changes occupants approximately every 6 to 8 years,
tions to post-war bungalows in East
York while most apartments receive new tenants every 3 (Brand, 1994, p.87).

Every new occupant arrives with a new outlook to how the home should

function and they typically demand a renovation. Typically there are two

separate renovations for every home transfer; the previous occupants

attempt to increase the selling price with new features and finishes,

while the new occupants update for their requirements and aesthetic

sense (Brand, 1994). The domestic building, single family or multiple,

would benefit from disassembly principles. Stewart Brand’s layers of

building assembly: site, structure, skin, services, space plan and stuff

all risk change through demands put upon a single-family home. Since

domestic buildings are likely to obsolesce before they have met the end

of their technical lifecycle, they would ideally be assembled of reusable

or recyclable materials.

The functional life of a building should drive the type of materials speci-

fied and the method of assembly. Because change is inevitable, and

buildings are required to adapt to maintain functionality, even buildings

lasting for hundreds of years could adopt concepts of impermanence.

For any building, system or component that is impermanent, disassem-

bly and the architecture of joinery and material life is an appropriate

response.

67
3 Precedent review
This section will explore architectural issues that surface with the inten-

tions of disassembly and cyclical material life. The analysis of built projects

shows the strengths and weaknesses of diverse strategies. Most projects

are only used to observe a selected phenomena, and do not strive to

achieve the same goals as the thesis study.

69
 3.1 Mechanical joinery
Fig 3.1 (Page 37-38) worn wood slat The following taxonomy describes mechanical, and typically reversible,
surface
joinery from a variety of projects, some of which are temporary and oth-
Fig 3.1.1 Shigeru Ban, temporary
Artek Pavilion at the 2007 Milan ers with unstated longevity. The method of fixing components together
Furniture Fair is designed for con-
struction and deconstruction with
is a major factor in whether they can be reused and recycled. Non-me-
lightweight members and bolted chanical joinery, such as mortars and adhesives make assemblies dif-
connections
ficult, time-consuming and expensive to take apart and often necessi-

tate significant cleaning (Berge, 2009). The problem with adhesives and

laminates also extends to the recycling of materials.

“Pure wood waste can be ground and recycled as raw material

for various building boards, such as particle boards and oriented
strand boards. It can also be energy recycled to good effect. How-
ever, glues, surface treatments and impregnating agents often
turn these products into hazardous waste (Berge, 2009, 173).”

To be recycled, many materials have to maintain their original chemical

compositions or be easily stripped of additives. Mechanical joinery is

Fig 3.1.2 Stan Allen, Infobox, 2011 ideal for both reuse and recycling.

Tied joints can use fabric, rope, and wire, are reminiscent of some

nomadic structures and are inherently impermanent in appearance. The

Taichung Infobox in Taiwan by Stan Allen, is a temporary space to dis-

Fig 3.1.3 Stan Allen, Infobox detail play a master plan, models and drawings for a site being constructed

71
 nearby. The bamboo construction is held together with nearly invisible

metal wire in a very lightweight latticework technique that focuses on ex-

pressing the mass of bamboo instead of the joinery. The creators claim

the parts are to be recycled once the Infobox is taken down. (dezeen,

2011). In contrast, a temporary bamboo restaurant in Jakarta, designed

by DSA+s Architects, expresses tied joints distinctly through dark co-

Fig 3.1.4 DSA+s Architects, Bam-
louration. The client wanted a design that was easy to assemble and
boo restaurant, 2010
disassemble (Architecture, Modern Home & Interior Design, Furniture,

2010). The joints are visibly reversible since they are built from a fabric-

like material which would likely only last a limited number of years or

would require replacement. The restaurant is essentially composed of a

concrete plinth with a series of bamboo columns that become generous

Fig 3.1.5 DSA+s Architects, Bam-
boo restaurant detail capitals forming protective roofs. The concrete slab limits the disassem-

bly of the restaurant and the expression of impermanence of the roof

structure above.

Woven connections use the pressure of materials against one another

to hold them in place. An art gallery extension in Genchen, Switzerland

Fig 3.1.6 SSM Architekten, Kunst- completed in 2008 by SSM Architekten employs weaving as its method
haus entry
of joinery for the exterior cladding. Steel rods act as a framework for pli-

able steel bands to wrap around (Saieh, 2008). Weaving is a labour-in-

tensive process, so would benefit from off-site prefabrication. It requires

pliable materials and structural members, and more delicate materials

applications such as screens of wood or bamboo, are usually relegated

Fig 3.1.7 DSA+s Architects, Bam-
to interior purposes or sheltered from weather on the exterior.
boo detail

Architect Greg Fleishmann explores intersecting notch connections

using plywood panels in California, for temporary housing, children’s

playgrounds, sukkahs and pavilions (Fleishman, 2011). The shear

strength of plywood creates a very strong slotted joint, and the notch can

Fig 3.1.8 DH1 Disaster House 2006 be extremely precise when factory-cut. The forms are highly expressive
of their assembled nature, and are reminiscent of a child’s building toy.

The slotted joint would be best applied as a structural connection as

73
 opposed to within the finish layer since it requires intersecting materials

instead of co-planar – reminiscent of beams and columns. In Shige-

ru Ban’s temporary installation, the Cardboard Tea House, the notch

or slot joint becomes the generator of the architectural language. The

overlapping joint extends into the material expression and becomes the

Fig 3.1.9 Shigeru Ban, Cardboard structure, language for openings and the enclosure. The project is tec-
Tea House, 2008
tonically satisfying because it demonstrates how it was constructed and

how it works through its visual language. The details are very simple,

but repetition creates ornamentation and expressive openings that offer

varying density across the different surfaces. The project would not al-

low for reuse of material because it is highly customized for its intended

purpose, but if the cardboard was still a pure material, the house could

be entirely recycled.

Tongue and groove joints are common in panelized finish surfaces

such as floors, ceilings and exterior cladding. They form tight, precise

joints for continuous surfaces, but are usually accompanied by per-

manent connections to hold them tightly together. Nailing or adhering

would not be required if panels were fitted within a framework that held

them in the desired form.

Seattle architecture firm Suyama Peterson Deguchi utilize blind mortise

and tenon joints for the timber in their Mount Vernon cabin (Remodelis-

ta, 2011). The tenon does not extend to the other side of the stile, so the
Fig 3.1.10 Suyama Peterson Degu- timber pieces appear to just butt up against one another in an invisible,
chi, Mount Vernon cabin
friction-fit, and impermanent joint (Woodwork Details, 2007). The detail

is minimal and removes focus from the joinery and act of assembly. The

invisible connection makes the timber appear to defy gravity, which is

not ideal for successful tectonic expression that relies upon the demon-

stration of effort and weight in addition to material properties.

Gaia Architects employed a modified lap joint to reduce the number of

Fig 3.1.11 Gaia Architects, Glencoe
Visitor Center fixings to hold floor and ceiling boards in place in the Glencoe Visitor

75
 Center in Scotland in 2002. To speed assembly they used screws at

lengths along the lapped strip, instead of at the end of every individual

board (Design4deconstruction, 2011). They created a unique detail,

used fewer metal fixings and allowed for easier removal of the materi-

als. The lap joint is subtle, but expressive of the work that it is doing

and the method of assembly. The lap joint could also be used to hold

standardized panel materials in place as finishes.

The architect Shigeru Ban often employs bolted connections for his

buildings and temporary pavilions. They connect coplanar materials and

act as ornamentation since the metal pieces stand out from the standard
Fig 3.1.12 Shigeru Ban, Paper bamboo, cardboard or wood that they hold in place. They often appear
Dome, Japan, 1998
excessive in number and thus time-consuming to assemble and disas-

semble.

Renzo Piano used a bolted system to replace mortar, a permanent

joiner, in a rain-screen wall design. For the IRCAM extension in Paris,

steel bolts run the full height of an aluminum frame and hold stacked
Fig 3.1.13 Renzo Piano, IRCAM ex-
tension facade detail terracotta bricks, with nylon spacers between rows (Ermanno, 1990).

The screen is visually surprising since it reads like a segmented brick

wall, and is expressed as a light and impermanent mechanical system

instead of a traditional compressive and heavy system.

Fig 3.1.14 Sketch of curved brick

with lines representing metal Shigeru Ban also develops custom joinery to connect more standard-
posts running through the standard ized materials. In the temporary Vasarely Pavilion, a multi-nodal metal
holes to fasten
connector accepts between 3 and 7 structural cardboard tubes. Since

each connector appears to be unique they were likely custom fabricated

for the week-long pavilion, and are not likely reusable in other projects

so it is beneficial that the connectors and tubing be of recyclable materi-

als.

Shigeru Ban’s Canal Museum Boathouse, in Pouilly-en-Auxois, France

Fig 3.1.15 Shigeru Ban, Vasarely
Pavilion, 2006 and completed in 2002, does not claim to be demountable or recycla-
77
 ble, but it offers valuable concepts for an impermanent architecture that

allows for disassembly and is expressed through joinery. This work is

tectonically rich through material and constructive expression. Custom

joinery allows structural tubes to be removed individually and replaced

should the cardboard tubes be damaged or deteriorate. This connector

is more repetitive because of the bay structure than that of the Vasarely

Pavilion.
Fig 3.1.16 Shigeru Ban, Canal Boat-
house Museum, 2002
The choice of joinery depends on many factors. The expected func-

tional life of the building must be taken into account. Temporary joinery

could be tied or bolted, as it allows for reuse of materials or recycling.

Notched, mortise and tenon, tongue and groove, and custom joints all

depend upon a longer functional life because they demand more energy

input into the creation of the joinery. Using recyclable materials for cus-

tom components and reducing the number of joints to conserve material

and labour of assembly are good tactics. Almost all of the joint types

listed can be embellished to be more expressive or downplayed to be

more subtle.

79
 3.2 Pre-fabrication
Fig 3.2.1 Dempsey and Huang, [c] Off-site fabrication creates a high degree of precision and fast assem-
space pavilion detail
bly. It could also be adapted to speed and simplify disassembly. Digital

fabrication can simplify the creation of complex joinery and allow for the

formation of new standardized materials.

For the 2008 pavilion, [c]space by Alan Dempsey and Alvin Huang, in-

tersecting notch connections were cut in fiber-reinforced-concrete pan-

els (Iwamoto, 2009). Notch connections require highly accurate cuts to

achieve friction fit joints, which are easily achievable with digital ma-

chinery. 2000 joints were made from a digital model and CNC cutting

(Iwamoto, 2009). The curved form would have been incredibly difficult

to achieve without computer modeling, considering each intersecting

notch lay at different angles. The pavilion may have relatively simple
Fig 3.2.2 [c]space pavilion
assembly and disassembly, but its form and materials are not ideal for

extending life cycle. The customized curves of each panel of concrete

do not make for easily reusable pieces. The composite material recipe

does not allow for recycling of the concrete as an aggregate. The con-

crete panels would likely become landfill waste after the temporary use.

The steel plate connectors are likely recyclable, or reusable if they are

not customized. [c]space is a disappointing use of material, but a en-

81
 lightening display of the capabilities of digital fabrication for disassem-

bly.

The Flatform installation by Marble Fairbanks Architects demonstrates

the new possibilities for expression of joinery possible with digital fab-

rication techniques. The laser-cut sheets are formed into the joining

mechanism through folding (Marble Fairbanks, 2011). The connection is

reminiscent of cross-lap furniture joints, but is infinitely easier to achieve

with the precision of the tools. The joints maintain the sense of the panel,
Fig 3.2.3 Marble Fairbanks Archi-
tects, Flatform installation, 2008 while at the same time breaking the whole form down into smaller parts.

It is complex and simple, with a single joint language that demonstrates

how the system is built. The decision to finish the interior surfaces in red

emphasizes the assembly of the system.

“Flatform combines the constraints of material properties and

pre-manufactured sizes with the flexibility of digital production
processes to explore new logics of design and assembly. Archi-
tectural details are largely a product of the relationship of design
to industry. If the modernist detail was based on negotiating tol-
erances (differences) between pre-manufactured, standardized
building components through separate systems of fastening, to-
day we are shifting to methods of production that are based on
the management and organization of information, where details,
tolerances, and assembly logics are numerically controlled and
fully integrated during design. In this context, CNC (computer nu-
merically controlled) systems bring the process of design closer
to the production of buildings, merging them through a common
language of information (Marble Fairbanks, 2011).”

The installation is shown as a hanging screen, while other applications

could be finishes and cladding.

Forming with digital methods can allow for the creation of new standard-
Fig 3.2.4 Bead Brick shown at a
large scale in a high rise application ized materials and components. Experimental stacking bricks by MIT

student Rizal Muslimin aim to eliminate the need for mortar, creating dry

and impermanent connections (Muslimin, 2010). The forms interlock in

various arrangements to achieve different depths of wall with mortar-

less construction. They do not carry load like standard bricks, but are
Fig 3.2.5 Bead Brick in different ar-
rangements instead strung along steel cables. They create tensile lattice works that

83
allow for varying levels of opacity depending on the organization. They

would be applicable in more situations if they were load bearing, less

delicate, and had the thermal mass of a traditional brick wall.

Pre-fabrication can help to create an architecture of assembly a through

custom connectors, new standardized materials, and speedy and pre-

cisely cut joints.

85
 3.3 Design for disassembly
Fig 3.3.1 Nicholas Grimshaw, Igus Design for disassembly was not conceived as a means of safekeep-
Headquarters and Factory facade
detail. Custom removeable and re- ing materials for new buildings, so precedents have limitations when
locatable facade components allow
approached with the intended goal of reuse and recycling. Many disas-
for easy disassembly.
sembly projects try to disguise themselves as standard constructions.

However, their connections and details tend to be more labor intensive

than traditional methods, and thus more costly to construct. Precedents

that claim to be ‘designed for disassembly’ or ‘demountability,’ are fre-

quently not visually demonstrative of their impermanent intention and

often fail to be thorough in their realization.

Fig 3.3.2 The Adaptable House axo-

nometric detail of canopy
The Adaptable House, completed in 1999 by Elma Durmisevic and Buro

Evelein is cited in the article “Designing for Disassembly (DfD),” written

by Ken Yeang and Elma Durmisevic (2009), but does not offer a radical

aesthetic change from traditional construction, and is limited in disas-

sembly principles. The exposed timber structure, and wooden deck can-

opy form the extent of disassembly. These components employ the con-

cept of layering using bolted, impermanent connections. The wooden

canopy is detailed as a separate structure to that of the timber sheltered

within the exterior walls. The canopy beams are bolted to a shared steel
Fig 3.3.3 The Adaptable House deck connector on the end of the internal roof beams. The detail permits the

87
 canopy to be easily replaced should it weather and fail over time without

affecting the primary structure and also allows it to act as a cantilevered

system from the interior roof beams. The interior finishes are not de-

constructable. Traditional gypsum walls and tile bathroom floors do not

offer an easy means of disassembly and reuse.

Gaia Architect’s Glencoe Visitor Centre, completed in Scotland in 2002,

raises similar issues, but manages to push disassembly detailing fur-

ther. The architects aimed to reduce material use by designing a durable

building with the ability to be modified over time (design4deconstruction,

2011). They claim to have built in independent layers, with the timber
Fig 3.3.4 Glencoe Visitor Centre
frame separated from interior partitions, to allow for future changes to

the layout (design4deconstruction, 2011). Cladding and interior finishes

are also layers separated from the structural frame. Services, such as

electrical wiring and heating pipes, are located in voids between the

frame and finishes in floor, walls and ceilings, which are made acces-

sible through screwed-on skirtings and screwed-together floors (design-

4deconstruction, 2011). The design typically employs exposed bolts and

screws as the method of joinery, avoiding adhesives and nails to allow

Fig 3.3.5 Glencoe Visitor Centre, for the layers to come apart. Material selection was very important to the
glazed link
architects, who tried to avoid coatings, finishes and composite materi-

als to maximize recycling. The design compromises on plasterboard, a

rendered exterior finish, traditional finishes in wet areas and nail con-

nections in a few situations (design4deconstruction, 2011). The project

is primarily traditional in appearance through material selections and

form, although finishes appear slightly rough with exposed screws, and

the series of buildings are raised off of the ground with a steel frame

resting on pile foundations that minimize a permanent connection to

the site. Where traditional construction is avoided the building becomes

more interesting and expressive of its disassembly principles. Glazed

links have large custom joints and exposed structure, demonstrating the

layering of assemblies.

89
 The Station Z Memorial in Sachsenhausen, designed by HG Merz and

Werner Sobek, shelters the remains of a Nazi gas chamber. The design

divides the shelter into compression and tension components. Fabric

is vacuum sealed in place on a steel frame made from standard rect-

angular sections (Sobek, 2011). Sobek claims that no connections are

Fig 3.3.6 The Station Z Memorial in- needed to hold the structure together as the relationship between frame
terior
and skin are sufficient. Werner Sobek stated that the enclosure is en-

tirely demountable and recyclable (Sobek, 2010, p.36). It is not possible

to test the veracity of Sobek’s claim of disassembly however one can

criticize that the architecture would be more powerful in its reusability

claims if it expressed its intentions through evident reversible joinery

to the user. A visitor to the site would likely more fully appreciate the

cleverness of the design and the thorough vision of the material lifecycle

if the intent of disassembly were apparent. They would also grasp the

contrast between a hovering impermanent form overtop of the remains

of a permanent assembly that is hard to disassemble or forget.

The Igus Headquarters and Factory in Cologne, Germany designed

by Nicholas Grimshaw and completed in 2000, approaches the prob-

lem of disassembly from an manufacturing perspective (Kronenberg,

2000). The design employs a series of standardized components that

permit replacement and flexibility. Office and administration pods can be

moved in their entirety and rest on long steel legs with footpads (Kro-

nenberg, 2000). The cladding is demountable by “simply loosening and

Fig 3.3.7 Nicholas Grimshaw, Igus
swivelling an aluminium clamp” and is interchangeable with different
Headquarters and Factory exterior,
2000 options including aluminium, louvred, windows, or doors (Kronenberg,

2000, p.72) Joints are highly visible, almost to a fault on the interior,

where the eye is overwhelmed by visual information.

“Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners’ standard procedure is to

spend more time in detail design than might be the case with
many other architects...Because of this the lengthy detailed de-
Fig 3.3.8 Igus Headquarters and sign process that the IGUS project involved was seen as fairly
Factory interior normal, despite the fact that it constitutes the most flexible static
building ever built (Kronenberg, 2000, p.72).”

91
 Pieces can be moved over and over without compromise to their func-

tion, which is an intelligent objective for demountable construction (Kro-

nenberg, 2000). Piping and wiring is exposed and clipped to run along

roof beams so that the factory floor is clear of services (Kronenberg,

2000). Flexibility was limited by meter locations and service connec-

tions, and the project appears to have poured concrete floors on grade,

which are permanent and inflexible (Kronenberg, 2000). The IGUS Fac-

tory is a fairly successful example of disassembly construction and pre-

fabrication that could be adapted for a variety of open span buildings.

It employs custom components with long technical and functional life

Fig 3.3.9 Igus Headquarters and
Factory exterior cladding system spans that ultimately can be fully recyclable.

When design for disassembly reverts to traditional means of construc-

tion or adapts traditional assemblies it appears less effective. More vis-

ible joinery and methods of assembly make apparent the impermanent

intent of the work, but too much visible detail and joinery can be over-

whelming visually. The effectiveness of disassembly architecture can

be tested by measuring the quantity of permanent assemblies, while the

added requirement of material life cycle could be quantified by looking

at the percentage of recyclable and reusable content in relation to tra-

ditional building construction. A metric value would help to enforce the

design for disassembly claims of efficiency that many of the aforemen-

tioned projects allege.

93
 3.4 Layering assemblies
The concept of layering independent systems is endorsed by propo-

nents of design for disassembly. It allows for the removal of obsolescent

layers without impacting others that have longer technical lives. Struc-

ture is typically the longest lasting layer, while cladding and interior fin-

ishes tend to wear quickly as they are exposed to weather and changes

in desired aesthetic. Mechanical and electrical systems are often given

separate accessible layers between the finish and structure to allow for

updates and maintenance.

Structure acts as a separate super-frame layer in the Essex House

in South Australia, created by Andrew Maynard Architects in 2006. Its

structural timber members are separated by a physical void from the

cladding and finishes, and connect by steel members to the body of

the building. The structure forms a super frame encircling the volume

of the enclosed spaces. The frame defines the space of the building,

creating outdoor rooms and extending the concept of space beyond the

shell. Joinery, such as steel bolts, is minimal and exposed, reveals are
Fig 3.4.1 Essex House timber super-
opened between connecting wood structural members to show the steel
frame
substructure running beneath the wood. The super-frame holds the in-

terior spaces above the site, but requires secondary frame structure for

the exterior walls, having little benefit. The structure layer traditionally

lasts the longest and requires the least manipulation and updates in a

building, so leaving it accessible and exposed to weather is not logical

for disassembly (Durmisevic & Brouwer, 2002).

The Steerwijk Community Centre in Holland, by Marx & Steketee Ar-

chitecten, employs a superstructure layer to allow flexibility for interior

arrangements. The extensive roof and columns are independent from

the cladding walls and interior partitions (design4deconstruction, 2011).

The architects claim that the support columns can be moved, along with

the exterior timber clad walls, and the interior partitions to modify the

95
 layout according to user demands (design4deconstruction, 2011). Pre-

fabricated components are connected with screws that are left exposed

to allow them to come apart and be relocated (design4deconstruction,

2011). The project may be capable of coming apart into large prefab-

ricated components, but it is unclear if the disassembly stops at that

Fig 3.4.2 Steenwijk Community Cen- scale. Joinery is visible in the main roof, timber structure and column

assemblies, but not within the wood paneled exterior walls or painted

drywall interior partitions which appear to be traditional construction.

Mechanical systems run in the space between the exposed beams and

top of the interior partitions, but it is not apparent if they are assembled

in a manner to come apart to respond to new floor layouts.

Within building assemblies, cladding and interior finishes tend to be

Fig 3.4.3 Steenwijk Community Cen-
tre interior short-lived layers. Exterior and interior finishes are exposed to the wear

and tear of everyday use. Building skins often last half or a third as long

as the life of the building that they are shielding (Weston, 2003). The

exterior façade is the public image of a building, and its statement of

social condition and beliefs (Meyers, p.36).

“…cladding can now be seen as a form of ‘dressing’, a fabric to

be chosen at will and, potentially changed with relative ease…
and buildings may soon be tailored with stylish but cheaper, short-
life ‘suits’, intended to be replaced with something more fashion-
able in a few years... Ephemeral ‘decorative’ exteriors could be
complemented by permanent ‘structural’ interiors, offering the
pleasures of working ‘in the nature of materials’ that high levels
of insulation render problematic due to the cold bridges resulted
from exposed structure (Weston, p.198).”

Finishes and facades cannot be expected to satisfy future generations,

and short technical lifecycles means it is usually not required. Trend

associated designs are at risk for early obsolescence. It is better to

design for longevity to balance functional lifecycle with technical life-

cycle, so the materials are best used. If finishes are likely to obsolesce

due to technical reasons, they should be composed of replaceable and

recyclable materials with disassembly methods. Cladding was a new

layer atop an existing building in the Racine Art Museum in Wisconsin.

97
 In the 2003 renovation, by Brininstool + Lynch, acrylic panels were add-

ed over the existing envelope. They are held by metallic clips and offer

a significant gap between adjacent panels. The joint at the corner of the

volume is denied by panels that fail to meet. There is a sense of light-

ness and fragility to the new facade covering, that mirrors the sense

of lightness the designers wanted to bring to the gallery spaces on the

interior. The minimal system, with little material character, is continued

on the interior with simple, clean finishes that allow the art to be the cen-

ter of focus. The new system layered upon the old facade permitted the

Fig 3.4.4 The Racine Art Museum architects to create an intervention that made the mid nineteenth cen-
new cladding corner detail
tury building look “completely new,” and shaded existing fenestrations

to reduce energy costs, while creating ideal diffuse lighting conditions in

the galleries (Bahamon and Sanjines, 2008, p.64). Exterior and interior

finishes should be designed to employ disassembly principles due to

their exposure.

Mechanical and electrical systems are often conceived as layers be-

hind the finish and atop the structure. Architects and engineers have
Fig 3.4.5 The Racine Art Museum
evolved various solutions for access and manipulation of mechanical
new facade
and electrical systems in buildings. Several solutions incorporate the

layered systems concept of disassembly. Drop ceilings and raised floor-

ing systems create a plenum within which to run wiring and piping, and

blow treated air above or below the structure. It acts as a secondary

finish layer separated from the structure. Wall access panels are less

common, but involve the creation of a reveal to access mechanical and

electrical components between the finish and floor. Ducts and outlets
Fig 3.4.6 Open wall access panel
with outlet cover and finish strip are apparent along the length of the gap, and the reveal is finished with

a panel flush with the wall finish (Durmisevic & Linthorst, 2000). Holes

do not have to be cut into wall finishes in order to create outlet and duct

openings, and the panel creates a clean line, and easy accessibility to

the systems for changes.

Layering makes sense for shorter functional and technical assemblies

99
such as mechanical, electrical, cladding and finishes. Structural assem-

blies do not need to be left accessible as layers, but in the case of the

Steerwijk Community Centre their exposure allowed for the flexibility of

other assemblies.

101
 3.5 Portable and temporary
structures
Fig 3.5.1 Renzo Piano, IBM Travel- Traditional portable structures, their contemporary iterations and tem-
ling Exhibition exterior detail, 1982-
porary pavilions offer lessons in architecture of joinery, impermanence
1984. Customized structural and
cladding components are designed and disassembly. Ideally they are portable when divided into their com-
for disassembly and reassembly at
new sites ponent parts, are essential and minimal for lightness, their joints are

reversible, and they often avoid foundations or other permanent con-

nections to sites.

The Nomad is a contemporary interpretation of the traditional portable

yurt and is designed by Ecoshack (NOTCOT, 2008). The system is com-

posed of a membrane acting in tension to hold the system together,

bamboo posts that keep it from collapsing, and a platform to designate

the space and form a solid base to anchor the other components. The

connections are dry and easy to comprehend for assembly by hand.

Bamboo posts slide into pre-cut holes in the base and a top ring, and

are held in by the pressure of the membrane. Simple joints make the

form easy to assemble and disassemble without mechanical equip-

ment, but are thus open to manipulation by users. The wood elements

Fig 3.5.2 Ecoshack, The Nomad in- lend a warmth and beauty that is reminiscent of the traditional nomadic
terior

103
 structure. Component pieces are standardized, but highly specific, so if

one is lost or damaged during transit it must be replaced by the manu-

facturer. Traditional nomadic structures were typically composed of lo-

cal materials so that they could be easily replaced from within the en-

vironment. The assembly would be limited to flat, dry ground to avoid

damaging the wood panel base and the membrane appears too delicate

to last for a long period of time outdoors, so the yurt is likely meant to be

Fig 3.5.3 The Nomad kit of parts a temporary and seasonal structure.

The Artek Pavilion, by architect Shigeru Ban, was built for 5 days of the

2007 Milan Furniture Fair and was deconstructed in the same amount

of time. The pavilion structure was created from a prototype material of

extruded plastic waste and wood fibres, in a repeated truss module, and

is joined with exposed bolts (Miyake, 2010). The exterior skin is trans-

parent in places to allow light to enter the long shed-like space (Miyake,

2010). The building rests upon a timber platform and appears to be free

of permanent foundations. The repetitive structure acts as the architec-

Fig 3.5.4 Shigeru Ban, The Artek
tural expression at the building scale, while the exposed bolted joinery
Pavilion, 2007
acts as ornament on the small scale. The lack of insulated wall assem-

bly and services allow for the simple layering of cladding and structure.

The material choice is questionable since a composite of plastic and

wood combines biodegradable and recyclable substances, so that they

can only be disposed at the end of use.

The IBM Travelling Exhibition Pavilion designed by Renzo Piano Build-

Fig 3.5.5 IBM Travelling Exhibition ing Workshop, and functional from 1982 to 1984, is composed of pre-
exterior
fabricated modular components. A steel floor truss hides a void for ser-

vices with plywood floor panels, laminated timber arches affix into the

floor assembly, and cast aluminum joints connect a polycarbonate skin

to the structure (Kronenberg, 2000). The travelling building generally

avoids foundations, except on grassy landscapes, because it rests on

Fig 3.5.6 IBM Travelling Exhibition adjustable jacks that adapt to different sites (Kronenberg, 2000). The
Pavilion structural detail
design exploited disassembly by having optional added layers for great-

105
er insulation or sun-shading in different seasons (Kronenberg, 2000).

The heavily customized polycarbonate, aluminum and timber compo-

nents all have the potential to be recycled at the end of the temporary

exhibition.

Portable and temporary structures are usually built with joinery expres-

sive of their impermanence and avoid permanent connections. The im-

permanent bases, that avoid the use of foundations, would effective for

buildings of minimal height and size.

107
 3.6 Building with
standardized elements
Fig 3.6.1 2012 Architects, Villa Wel- Off-the-shelf standard sizes and components are more likely to be re-
peloo facade utilizing cable reel
used in new projects. If in a design a custom form is desired it should
wood slats and reused aluminum
flashing be composed of recyclable material instead of simply reusable, since

non-recyclable materials can only be down-cycled or turned into waste

when they are impractical for new projects. The use of repetitive stan-

dard components can also create a powerful material character.

2012 Architects used easily available and standardized reused material

in Villa Welpeloo. They sourced wood from cable reels that would oth-

erwise have been discarded by the owners at a cost (Superuse, 2007).

Significant energy would have had to be put into the stripping of material

from the cable reels since they are assembled with permanent connec-

tions. This project illustrates an issue limiting material reuse that could

be resolved through joinery to allow for disassembly. Reclaimed lumber

that requires de-nailing costs an additional $0.15 per linear foot regard-

less of the cross section, which adds a significant cost to small dimen-

sion lumber (Kernan, 2002). The center planks of the reel were still in

good condition and utilized for the facade of the Villa, while rotten ones
Fig 3.6.2 Villa Welpeloo exterior
were used for temporary projects due to their compromised integrity.

109
 The unified lengths of material allowed the designers to come up with

a rigorous cladding system, and created a rich texture on the building

exterior. Aluminum drip edges act as bright and clean reveals between

each course of wood. Through their clean lines they highlight the weath-

ered and rough quality of the cable reel wood.

The Azkoitia Municipal Library in Spain, by the architects at Estudio

Berldarrain, also employs reused lumber lengths to create a robust

Fig 3.6.3 The Azkoitia Municipal Li- material character (Bahamon & Sanjines, 2010). Rough and weather-
brary clad in reclaimed railroad ties
beaten railroad ties are well balanced by the clean lines of fabricated

glass and metal parapets, and the sharp edge of the entrance canopy.

Corner joints are used to express the dimension and depth of the mate-

rial. The railroad ties were screwed to strapping in a visibly permanent

detail that does not express its ability to be removed. This project also

Fig 3.6.4 Achieving a curved form employs reused material that was likely energy intensive to harvest from
with standard lumber pieces and a existing railroad infrastructure due to permanent connections – limiting
custom curved metal angle
the potential for reuse of this kind in other projects.

Pallet Structure by I-Beam Design, utilizing modular components held

together with rope and nails, demonstrates the issues and opportunities

of working with full planar material (Bahamon & Sanjines, 2010). In the

project, planes often do not meet at corners but extend beyond to form
Fig 3.6.5 Building volume with stan-
dard wood flooring curving into wall walkways and overhangs. The shadows formed by the slats are inter-
surface, and freestanding walls
esting, but lost on the pattern of striped floors and walls – their unique

character could be enhanced through selective use. The system offers

easy assembly and no permanent foundation. The forms are ultimately

meant to be turned into relief shelters coated in durable materials like

stucco. However, the use of stucco or other permanent finishing meth-

ods reduce the changeability and disassembly of the palettes – panel-

Fig 3.6.6 An unfinished Pallet Struc- ized roof coverings or impermanent membranes would be a superior
ture
choice for these impermanent buildings. An uncut panel in building is

valuable for avoiding wasting material but is only ideal for right-angled

perpendicular assemblies. Without cutting to fit, the planes extend be-

111
 yond the edges or inscribe within a non-standard geometry.

Standard building materials and components are ideal for avoiding ma-

terial waste because they are more likely to allow for reuse. However,

they are best used in their original forms by avoiding cutting, and thus

have a significant effect on component layout and dimensions in the

Fig 3.6.7 With the assembly of a project. Standardized material assemblies can create rich material build-
planar material and a curve, there
will be leftover material that would ings, but the use of uncut standardized materials offers serious limita-
be wasted if cut
tions to formal experiments in architecture and flexibility of dimensions.

Fig 3.6.8 With the assembly of a

planar material meeting other pla-
near material at an angle, there will
be leftover material that would be

113
 3.7 Case studies for
disassembly
Werner Sobek, R128 House, Stuttgart,
Germany, 2000

Fig 3.7.1 R128 House Architect and engineer Werner Sobek writes that design and construc-

tion methods need to adapt so that buildings become entirely recyclable

to reduce resource use in construction (Sobek, 2010, p.35). His home,

built in 2000, reflects his beliefs. It is considered a fully recyclable build-

ing. He claims there are no organic materials in the primary structure

and enclosure systems to ensure recyclability (Bell & Rand, 2006). How-

ever, the floor panels are made of adhered wood and plastic, so would

not be recyclable or likely reusable. The floor panels are prefabricated

and rest on the I-beams below without fasteners. To simplify assembly

and disassembly the building employs only mortice-and-tenon or bolted

joints, and its components are prefabricated off-site (Sobek, 2010). To

demonstrate the easy assemblage, the house took only 4 days to be

erected (Stang & Hawthorned, 2005). The four storey steel structure is

bolted together and rests on the foundation of the previous “dilapidated

1923 house (Stang & Hawthorne, 2005).” The glass facade and alumi-

num drop ceiling panels are modular, standardized and repeated based
Fig 3.7.2 R128 House bolted steel
structure on the structural bay size. Troughs in the floor around the perimeter of

115
 the home hold the mechanical pipes, electrical and communication

wiring, and are hidden by removable laminated metal covers (Stang &

Hawthorne, 2005, p.107). When pipes rise vertically between floors they

are fully exposed in the space, and are expressed as seamless stainless

steel forms. The design avoids internal walls, except for a small wash-

room core spanning two levels, which is clad in aluminum and frosted

glass (Bell & Rand, 2006). The lack of walls reduces material, allows

Fig 3.7.3 Pipes rise behind the kitch- furniture and openings in the floors to define rooms and creates a flex-
en cabinets
ible and continuous open space (Stang & Hawthorne, 2005). Connec-

tion details are often customized and prefabricated: “fixed triplex glass

cladding panels are cradled in custom stainless steel “yokes” near each

corner. This provides nodal connections to the glass without requiring

penetrating bolts. An EPDM (ethylene propylene diene monomer) rub-

ber membrane bounds each piece of glass (Bell & Rand, 2006).”

The R128 house is customized, which offers little opportunity for re-

use, but because the majority of components are recyclable there is

little waste material. The project offers some evidence of its assembly:

seams between prefabricated ceiling panels, exposed beams between

floor panels, exposed mechanical pipes and steel fasteners. The project

is primarily minimal and high-tech in expression, rather than expressive

of joinery and assembly. It uses a lot of welded joinery instead of visible

reversible joinery in its prefabricated components such as railings and

staircases. The project could offer more evident expression of its intent

to disassemble and recycle the building.

117
 Kieran & Timberlake, Loblolly House,
Maryland, USA, 2007

“Stephen Kieran...likens his family’s new weekend house...to a

duck blind.... And like a duck blind, the building...can be disas-
sembled. Most of its pieces are then recyclable (Pearson, 2007,
p.141).”

Fig 3.7.4 Loblolly House The building avoided creating a permanent connection to the site by

creating a platform atop wooden piles sunk into sandy soil. Sandwich

panels of wood studs, plywood or cement board were fabricated off-

site and formed the walls, roof, and floor framing (Pearson, 2007). A

frame, reminiscent of temporary scaffolding, formed the base structure

that accepted the craned in panels. The scaffold was composed of two

element types: extruded aluminum sections with standardized profiles

and basic connectors. A standard t-shaped groove in the aluminum sec-

tions was made to allow for standard joinery, but also allowed for the

creation of specialized joinery by the architects, and the introduction

of sliding doors along the section (Kieran and Timberlake, 2008). The

off-site fabrication allowed for very quick construction – it was built in 6

weeks on site once the piles and collar beams were installed. The archi-

tects tried to make minor assemblies from entirely off-the shelf elements

and components, such as kitchen cabinets, and a metal spiral stair,

Fig 3.7.5 Aluminum frame with bolt-
ed connections which meant they were more capable of reuse (Pearson, 2007). The

119
 standardized kitchen cabinets were not designed for disassembly once

constructed. The designers avoided the layered systems approach by

integrating radiant heating coils, structure, electrical conduits and duct-

work into their pre-assembled floor panels. Plywood sandwiched struc-

tural joists and beams, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and insulation

into one component (Kieran and Timberlake, 2008, p.84). This integra-

tion of systems meant that no layers could be amended and updated

without having some impact on the others. Prefabricated wall, floor and

roof sandwich assemblies appeared to be of traditional stud wall con-

struction with permanent nail connections and inaccessible materials.

The cedar rain-screen, that attempted to unify the panelized assembly

Fig 3.7.6 Washroom and mechani-
cal prefabricated block by wrapping around the living and bedroom volumes, was connected

to its strapping with nails. It was built off-site and could have employed

impermanent joinery techniques. The mechanical and electrical mani-

folds were built into the stud-wall bathroom blocks (Kieran and Timber-

lake, 2008). The fabricators avoided hot (and permanent) connections

like soldering or fusing pipes, wires and ductworks – instead employing

impermanent friction and clamp connections (Kieran and Timberlake,

2008, p.104).

Kieran and Timberlake’s use of standard forms makes for easier reuse

of components and dry connections make for easier disassembly. The

building is only somewhat expressive of its assembly with some exposed

structural scaffolding, cross bracing and fasteners. Interior finishes and

exterior cladding are not visibly jointed and expressive of assembly and

disassembly. The Loblolly House fails to achieve disassembly for mate-

rial life cycle parameters when it favours speed assembly techniques,

but it offers innovative ideas when it avoids permanent connections.

121
 SMV Architects, Mountain Equipment Co-op
Store, Burlington, Ontario, 2008

Fig 3.7.7 Mountain Equipment Co- The architects claim to have designed the store for material recover-
op Store
ability after the life of the building is over. They chose to explore disas-

sembly because of the short duration of stand-alone retail buildings,

citing a lifespan of 25 years on average (Cowling, 2010). Dan Cowling,

the partner in charge stated:

“Our efforts to apply sustainable design principles to an inherently

unsustainable building typology can be seen as emblematic of the
larger struggle to reinvent suburbia. Not all the problems can be
solved at this moment in time, and our role as designers must in
part be to help others implement more comprehensive solutions
when the time is right (Cowling, 2010).”

The glulam structural frame, exterior metal panels, interior cement

board panels and the base structurally-insulated panels are affixed with

mechanical fasteners to speed removal and recovery (Cowling, 2010).

To reduce material waste the building grid is laid out to accommodate

standard widths of structurally insulated panels and cement fibre boards

(Cowling, 2010). Wiring and piping is hung beneath the exposed struc-

ture in metal tracks, and lighting hangs from bolted connections in the

metal decking above. Vents are built in to poured concrete floors, mean-

ing that mechanical systems are inaccessible to updates. The efforts

to design for disassembly are commendable, but limits of realization

Fig 3.7.8 MEC Burlington interior are apparent in permanent material and detail choices. Exterior rock

123
cladding with mortar joints are difficult to disassemble and reuse. Poured

concrete floors on metal deck are impossible to reuse and the compos-

ite assembly then limits recycling of the deck pan.

Using a bolted timber structure, avoiding interior finishes, and using

standardized material sizes were effective means of addressing disas-

sembly for material life cycle, but several cases of permanent connec-

tions limited the effectiveness of the project.

125
4 Design exploration

127
 4.1 System design proposal
Fig 4.1 (Pages 67-68) worn plastic The project to explore the theories and practices of disassembly, and
surface
Fig 4.1.1 Anderson & Anderson, material life cycle will be a system of standardized building components
system design employed in various
residential project scales
that can be assembled and disassembled for reuse and recycling. Mini-

mal programmatic distraction will allow for a focus on the intent of the

thesis – the expression of disassembly in architecture, and the reduc-

tion of waste materials and components after the life of the building.

The project will delve into detailed design of connections and material

assembly, and will demonstrate the process of assembly, how it func-

tions as a building, and how it can be taken down and the parts reused

or recycled.

The building system will be developed for a generic commercial pro-

gram and offer iterations of cladding, layout and finishes. Additionally,

it would show how outdoor spaces, different cladding, shading, and

energy collection systems could be added, and how the system could

be adapted to form specific buildings in context. It will employ the layer-

129
ing principle so parts can be updated without impacting more lasting

assemblies. It will have accessible services, and show the avoidance

of waste through material selection and standardized forms and dimen-

sions. It will selectively employ customized components, and will look to

prefabricated building processes to speed assembly and disassembly.

The design would follow the principles of layering of assemblies, working

with uncut standard forms, employing homogeneous materials instead

of composites, using non-permanent connections, and using recyclable

components when compelled to cut or customize. Since commercial

buildings are likely to demand change before they have met the end of

their technical lifecycle, it would be composed of reusable or recyclable

materials. The built form would express the assemblage of pieces and

joinery that allows materials to be separated. It would explore prefabri-

cation of components and connectors to improve disassembly, and em-

bellish visible mechanical joinery and the expression of assembly. It will

demonstrate how cyclical material life and a disassembly system could

produce superior material life cycle and a building system that allows for

more efficient material use than traditional construction.

The building system is siteless, but through specific building iterations will

demonstrate the ability to be employed at different sites and with distinct

layouts. Unlike many architectural design approaches, a system design

offers a more thorough study of assembly methods and materials. It is a

technical approach to architectural design that incorporates elements of

industrial design. The project maintains its status in the field of architec-

ture, however, because each individual part of the system depends upon

the whole for its significance. At the same time, the incorporation of an

industrial design approach addresses facets of design that architecture

typically minimizes, such as production and reusability. The added level

of complexity is intended to create a functional building that adds eco-

nomic, cultural, and social spaces to its community while performing in a

greater material context.

131
4.2 Commercial agenda
The commercial building is not the focus of my thesis, but to establish

a viable context, program, and scale of disassembly system the project

will require a predetermined stance on commercial developments.

“Commercial buildings have to adapt quickly, often radically, be-

cause of intense competitive pressure to perform, and they are
subject to the rapid advances that occur in any industry. Most
businesses either grow or fail. If they grow, they move; if they fail,
they’re gone. Turnover is a constant. Commercial buildings are
forever metamorphic… (Brand, 1994, 7) ”

New design standards

“[In the United States] the retail sector, with its involvement of
many tenants and dependence on cars, has lagged behind other
sectors in incorporating sustainable design... (Lee & Moore, 2008,
p.70)”

“In Europe, a region where high energy prices are taken for
granted, designers, developers, and retailers have historically
embraced energy savings as a cost-cutting strategy... the move
away from the enclosed shopping mall and artificial climate con-
trol is a signature of European sustainable commercial design.
Reduction of construction and demolition waste is also becoming
a widely accepted goal on a crowded continent where hauling and
disposal costs can reach the equivalent of thousands of dollars
per truckload (Hoadley, 2008, 64).”

The BREEAM standards are a green design standard created in the

United Kingdom in 1990 (Hoadley, 2008, 65). The first retail protocols

were included in 2003, and they include construction waste parameters

– such as quantifying the materials and energy utilized with new tenant

renovations. The chain department store Marks & Spencer - despite

increasing its square footage by 20% between 2007 and 2012 - claimed

that it would try for carbon neutrality and allow zero waste to be sent to

landfills during the time frame (Hoadley, 2008).

Higher design standards will be demanded from developers creating

commercial projects, and innovative practices have to emerge. A disas-

sembly system of components would be an effective means to tackle

133
 material and energy use in construction, renovation and obsolescence.

Suburban retail developments

Fig 4.2.1 The concept of suburban Advancing the design strategies for individual buildings cannot be inde-
retail
pendent from a greater planning strategy to reduce waste and encour-

age more sustainable planning.

David Platt, a Ryerson University Graduate claims in his thesis “Walk-

able Live/Work Neighourhoods in Big Box Greyfields,” that “big box

stores exhibit the worst tendency in our society to waste resources by

building cheaper and less durable structures (Platt, 66).” Most stores

are built with a technical lifespan of 15 years (Platt, 59). They utilize

poor materials and assemblies. David Platt (2009, 61) interviewed a

Toronto big box architect who claimed that “...it was not cost effective to

reuse an older big box as they were too poorly built and... usually too

big for most other uses.” When the buildings obsolesce very little can

be salvaged for reuse. A GTA demolition company that takes down half

a dozen large grocery stores and a dozen malls and plazas every year

claimed that they would recycle all possible materials, but “the lack of

deconstruction design in [the] buildings prevented the recovery of use-

able components... (Platt, 65)“

The functional life of the big box store is generally shorter than 15 years

for several reasons (Platt, 2009). Developers select sites anticipating an

135
 appreciation in value as population growth reaches the area. The store

is then demolished and replaced with more profitable uses (Platt, 2009).

Tenants also abandon the building when expansion requirements arise,

and when the location is made redundant by “population shifts” or more

convenient competing facilities (Killingsworth & Farrow, 2007, 2). Aban-

doned big boxes are a particular issue in the United States. In 2007,

Wal-Mart advertised for 21,000,000 square feet of space for lease or

sale (Killingsworth & Farrow, 2007, 1). In “Adaptive reuse of large sin-

gle-tenant retail facilities (Case study),” authors Killingsworth and Far-

row (2007) claim that very little successful adaptation of this building

type has been possible. Author of “Big Box Reuse,” Julia Christensen

(2008) claims that adaptation is difficult due to the excessive size, lack

of pedestrian access, lack of natural light penetration, and permanent

construction

The concept of suburban commercial plazas is itself an issue. Valuable

agricultural land is lost when retailers support suburban sprawl. Ontario

contains more than one half of Canada’s most productive farmland, but

the Greater Toronto Area has been consistently ceding that land to de-

velopment. 150,000 acres of farmland were relinquished between 1976

and 1996, followed by 600,000 acres between 1996 and 2006 (Ontario

Farmland Trust, 2012). Diminished local food production can lead to

greater reliance on food with more extensive transport, and thus higher

embodied energy. Suburban retail developments also depend upon

customers with personal transit, instead of the more lauded energy-

reductive alternatives of cycling, walking and public transit:

“They have parking lots four to seven times the size of the store
footprint with direct access to main arteries (Killingsworth & Far-
row, 2007).”

The business practices of some big box retailers are also worth scru-

tinizing. Although “Wal-Mart is leading the way to LEED in retail” for

Fig 4.2.2 Suburban retail parking the design of their individual buildings conscious planners and citizens

137
have become wise to energy-inefficient procedures (Kirck, 2006, 74).

“Wal-Mart’s strategy has effectively closed many smaller Main

Street retailers in surrounding towns, their strip malls and other
big box competitors. They then close their first big box after a
larger regional one is built. This forces consumers to drive even
farther which has transferred distribution costs off Wal-Mart books
to their customers. Another abandoned big box is also created in
the process which is why Wal-Mart has so many of them (Platt,
2009, 24).”

The reduction of waste and efficient use of energy and materials must

extend to planning and development strategies. Inaccessible and ex-

cessively large commercial buildings can no longer be tolerated.

Commercial project intentions

Commercial developments cannot be placed beyond the reach of pe-

destrians and transit. Planners are developing downtown department

stores, retail main streets and walkable neighbourhood centres. “Com-

pact urban development” reduces miles of vehicular use by 20 to 40%

(Paull, 2008, 3). Infill and brownfield developments are energy-saving

approaches. A 2001 study found that an acre of brownfield redeveloped

was equal to approximately 4.5 acres of greenfield developed (Paull,

2008, 9). Urban infill projects utilize the knowledge that there are sav-

ings in the order of 25% on infrastructure maintenance and construction

for urban versus suburban projects (Paull, 2008, 3).

For the purpose of this design exploration, the size of commercial build-

ings would be dictated by the urban site dimensions and zoning, while

secondary internal divisions would adapt to permit various tenant types,

whether small retailers or large grocery stores. The disassembly system

will employ the efficiency of modular components. There will be a mini-

mum floor plate for small retail and sites, and the opportunity for added

modules on larger sites, to increase floor area and height.

The commercial container can be used by a variety of tenants rather

139
Fig 4.2.3 Concept for commercial than be overly specific and risk obsolescence. Independent tenants
infill in vacant urban land or atop ex-
isting outdoor parking lots (includes can personalize with merchandise and furnishings. Generic commercial
opposite page)
buildings may not be high-design, but nor do they have to be poor qual-
ity boxes. 19th and 20th century warehouses are adopted as housing

for commercial, residential and office applications because of their high

quality, flexible, and durable designs.

“They are broad, raw space—clear-spanned or widely columned,

with good natural illumination and ventilation and high ceilings of
12 to 18 feet. The floors, built strong enough for storage or to hold
heavy machinery, can handle any new use. Their heavy timbers
and exposed brick appeal to the modern eye... [they] are honest,
generic, sound, and common (Brand, 1994, 108).”

Franchises and chains propagating template buildings and developers

of multiple commercial sites could implement a system with superior

design and materials allowing for adaption and reuse in new locations,

instead of disposal.

A disassembly building system would allow a new business model

where commercial buildings could occupy temporarily vacant lots or

low-density urban parking lots while leasing to retailers for previously

untapped revenue. Durable design would allow for temporary but po-

tentially long-lasting construction, so the retailer could stay for as long

as necessary, until a new use is slated for the site. The building would

then be taken apart into components, returned to the factory for repair

and reconfiguration and then moved to the next vacant urban site for

reassembly. The commercial program could be used to satisfy resident

needs and desires, while disassembly principles would allow for flex-

141
ible commercial inhabitation while making use of vacant lots and declar-

ing new urban space.

143
 180m

60m
120m

secondary street access

4.3 System design

Fig 4.3.1 Toronto urban block size The scale of the building system is driven by the efficient use of 4’ x 8’
with optimum urban lot in black
building panels, and made to fit within standard block and lot sizes for

urban land in Toronto (Siksna, 1996). In Arnis Siksna’s (1996) paper

“The effects of block size and form in North American and Australian

city centres,” optimum urban lots are said to be 15 to 20 metres wide

and 30 to 40 metres long. They are appropriate for small scale building

forms and can be amalgamated to create square lots to build medium

size buildings. This lot size is appropriate for Toronto’s existing grid sys-
24’~7.5m
tem divisions since it follows the allotment for secondary street access

within major blocks. Toronto has many narrow commercial buildings on

main streets that appear to range between 5 and 10 metres wide. The
20’ ~ 6m
system module bay comes to 20’ x 24’ so that it fits within a 7.5 meter

wide narrow lot and can add up to an ideal 15m width of two bays. It
Fig 4.3.2 Bay dimensions with also functions as a structural bay for parking lot stalls should the system
building panels, overlayed with car
parking be implemented to infill the air space above an existing urban outdoor

parking lot.

The individual layers of the system are described in detail over the fol-

lowing pages.

145
 Site
Connections to the site are difficult to create impermanently, but there

are several options for the base of a potentially impermanent commer-

cial building. Pre-cast concrete blocks are used often as the platform

for small modular projects (Triumph Modular, 2012). They have the ap-

pearance of impermanence and require repositioning over time as the

earth shifts. The precedent section 3.5 Portable and temporary struc-

tures showed the use of platforms sitting directly on the site for several

impermanent projects. Frames on the earth can decay from moisture

penetration in certain materials, so are not ideal for use in a project that

could potentially last and otherwise intends to continue reusing materi-

als. Both blocks and platforms would demand a somewhat level site

since they do not penetrate the earth surface, but they usually have

the benefit of little site preparation. Screw piles offer significant advan-

tages to the aforesaid options. The standardized steel forms function

like screws penetrating the soil. They are rapidly installed compared

to traditional foundations that demand time for concrete to cure – one

installer claims that you can drill them in the morning and begin to build

in the afternoon (techno Metal Post, 2012). Screw piles cause minimal

disturbance to the soil, so they can be used on sites where there is risk

of contamination. The quick installation is also beneficial where they

can again be removed like screws at obsolescence and taken to a new

site for reuse. They are lightweight compared to prefabricated concrete

blocks and offer more flexibility in terms of acceptable site conditions.

The increased stability over platform or blocks means there is potential

Fig 4.3.3 Screw pile as a mechani-
cal and reversible foundation for a long lasting built form.

147
 Structure
The building structure is a typically long lasting layer that should be

formed of either recyclable or durable materials, because it will have a

long functional life to mirror a long technical life. Since it is a layer re-

quiring little manipulation and updates over time, it can employ custom

and expressive joinery. On the lower floor level a combination timber

and steel structure would have a rich material character, and be durable

and reusable in standard forms. The roof level employs lightweight steel

joists and columns since it carries less load. The post and beam sys-

tems utilize less material than load bearing walls, can be left exposed,

and are transportable by individual member and assembly. Angled

posts and columns become both load bearing and lateral-load bearing

members. Canted posts would act as the perimeter supports, while the
Fig 4.3.4 Timber cross-bracing at internal posts would be un-canted to allow for flexible layouts and move-
the building perimeter
ment in the floor plan.

Timber can offer significant spans and can be left exposed. To avoid

adhesives and maintain the organic wood composition, “laminated” tim-

ber can be created from penetrating stacked dimensional lumber with

wooden dowels at alternating angles. This technique of creating timber

allows the wood to ultimately be recycled, energy recycled or decom-

pose naturally. In “The Ecology of Building Materials,” reuse and recy-

cling can extend the functional life of pine from 75 to 350 years (Berge,
2009).
Fig 4.3.5 Timber beam held to-
gether with nonaligned dowels

Steel is an essential structural material for its lightweight strength, stan-

dardized dimensions, and recyclability. It can be composed of entirely

recycled content – in 2010, the Steel Recycling Institute (2011) in the

United States claimed that the recycling rate for structural steel was

98%. It is a natural choice for impermanent and custom structures since

it can be returned to the factory for recycling when its life is complete

instead of the landfill, thus eliminating the need to harvest more iron ore

149
 from the earth. Durable steel connections would stand out visually from

the timber structure, and withstand repeated assembly and disassem-

bly to allow for adaptation and for the reuse of timber and steel. The

steel could be left exposed and given a fire rating of 3 hours with a

coating of intumescent paint (Krytiuk Specialty Contracting Inc., 2012).

The paint is durable and easily repaired, and would allow for continued

reuse and disassembly, since it does not affect access to steel mem-

bers and connectors.

Fig 4.3.6 Exposed metal joinery The visible joinery throughout the project could become that of folded

steel ribbons, bolted to connect standardized uncut materials – and be

implemented in furnishings and finishes to create a common language.

Simple and often oversized joints would minimize the number of fasten-

ers and connectors to increase the speed of disassembly. The durabil-

ity of steel would ensure a continued ability to reuse the custom forms,

but also recycle them when the system obsolesces or is damaged.

151
 Skin
The system will take advantage of the benefits associated with a pan-

elized building enclosure, including roof, walls and under-floor panels.

Structurally insulated panels (SIPs) are typically laminated layers of

OSB or plywood adhered to a rigid insulating layer, but have been built

with material variations. Their quick assembly on site can immediately

Fig 4.3.7 Skin location on the out- provide a finish surface on the interior, the air barrier and high levels of
side of the structure
insulation for the building (Anderson & Anderson, 2007). They are ideal

for low-pitch or flat roof buildings because they do not have trapped air

spaces that need ventilation (Anderson & Anderson, 2007). Standard-

ization and prefabrication make them an inexpensive option. They can

be preassembled into lengths up to 24 feet at 4 or 8 feet wide with stan-

dard panel dimensions (Anderson & Anderson, 2007). When SIPs are

not used for their structural properties as walls and roofs, they require

only light connectors to align them.

Standard SIP construction is not, however, appropriate for disassembly.

In addition to using adhesives to form the panel, they are also typically

used to assemble panels into an entire wall, floor or roof system (Uni-

versity of Virginia, 2012). Assembling with adhesives removes the op-

tion of disassembly and reuse of the materials. It is unlikely undamaged

materials will be salvaged from breaking the strong chemical bonds, so

mechanical connections are preferable for reuse (University of Virginia,

2012). Additionally, the common elements of SIP construction, EPS and

OSB, are not readily recycled due to their chemical compositions (Uni-

versity of Virginia, 2012). Recyclable and non-toxic alternatives would

be substituted. All panels in the system would be based upon standard

4x8 foot dimensions and mechanically fastened together off-site into

larger arrangements based upon the building dimensions. Material layer

compositions and fastenings will differ based on the panel location in the

building, whether roof, wall or subfloor. The panel assemblies are de-

signed to be reused in their entirety or broken down into their individual

153
 elements for reuse or recycling.

The roof panel is composed of an exterior layer of durable corrugated

metal roofing backed by building paper and several layers of compressed

agricultural fiberboard – which act as both sheathing and insulation for

a total of R20. The agricultural fiberboard is a fully recyclable and bio-

degradable material. The waste fibers from harvesting wheat grains are

compressed at high temperatures until they release their own natural

binding resin, and are then formed into standard-sized panels (NAHB

Research Center, 2001). The panels can be made up to 4 inches thick,

after which the natural resin is not enough to hold the fibers together

and additional adhesives are required. Manufacturers have improvised

by creating thicker panels by layering several boards atop one another

(U.S Department of Energy, 2011). In the roof SIP, adjacent panels over-

lap and slot together like puzzle pieces, thus avoiding thermal bridging

and water penetration. Panels are fastened together mechanically with

bolts, and are assisted structurally by secondary supports of roof and

floor joists. The roof is sloped gently to allow precipitants to drain and

be collected.
bolt and washer
metal roofing
building paper

layered
agricultural
fiberboard
steel angle
bolt

Fig 4.3.8 Roof panel prefabricated Wall panels are similarly constructed to roof panels. Layers of agricul-
assembly
tural fiberboard intersect in a tongue and groove fashion for thermal

continuity. Lengths of several panels are bolted together off-site to cre-

155
 ate 20 or 24 foot long sections, depending on the bay orientation, and

fixed with exterior building paper and exterior finish to reduce on-site

labour. On site, folded metal connections would hold the panels to struc-

tural beams. The sections would be connected together and the seams

tightened with folded metal strips bolted in place. The exterior seams

between adjacent panel modules would be taped atop the building pa-

per to prevent air and moisture penetration, and a final folded metal

reveal would fill the space where finishes were held back to allow the

joint to be taped at installation. Exterior finishes can vary but are limited

to the panel dimensions. Selections can be more impermanent because

of the higher occurrence of damage and decay with repeated exposure

to the elements. Wood rainscreen is shown in the image below for its

durability and ultimate recycling, because it would likely fail technically

before it fails functionally.

exterior finishes
air space
building paper
layered agricultural
fiberboard

folded metal
reveal at seam
folded steel
finish strip
on-site bolts
exterior tape
off-site bolts

Fig 4.3.9 SIP wall section The glazing component of the building system will be a custom, unitized

curtain wall system. It will be assembled in factory and shipped to site

as large units, for more reliable seals and assembly, less labour on-site,

and quicker installation (National Institute of Building Sciences, 2012).

Unitized curtain walls tend to have more robust dimensions than stick-

built, which ensures they are capable of travel between sites for reuse.

157
 The vertical mullions would anchor to beams at the floor edge, and

gaskets seal between adjacent units. The market for curtain wall mul-

lion reuse is currently greater with aluminum than steel. Service life is

expected to be 10-15 years, in which case they can be removed and

replaced, in order to be re-anodized and sealed in the factory (National

Institute of Building Sciences, 2012). Glazing panels would be standard-

ized to match the dimensions of wall panels, so that solid and glazing

could be interchangeable depending upon the desire for natural light and

view. Glazing panels would have customized metal frames to slot into

SIP tongue and groove connections.

Underfloor panels are composed of the same mechanically-fastened

and layered agricultural fiberboard assembly. They would be maneu-

vered into the channel of steel i-beam supports by crane. Once timber

joists are in place above, the panels would be bolted to them with the

use of steel connectors. The panels would be protected from moisture

and damage on the exposed underside with building paper and exterior

finish material in the same manner as the wall panels.

timber joists
steel angle with
on-site bolts
underfloor panel
steel I-beam

Fig 4.3.10 Floor panel connection

perspective

159
 Services
Volumetric prefab components would serve as vertical circulation and

access to site services. A washroom core extends insulated space be-

low to grade to connect to water, hydro and waste, and becomes wash-

room pods within the building. A vertical circulation core reminiscent of

a temporary elevator wrapped by a staircase would be assembled from

a few pieces on site and encompass an entire structural bay. It does not

require a machine room, hoistway, or overhead load but simply uses its

own weight resting on the ground as ballast (GEDA USA, 2012). Steel

frames with bolted panel finishes create simple prefab volumes.

Fig 4.3.11 The service-washroom On each level services run alongside the length of the structure at both
core and circulation core
floor and ceiling level. Services, such as electrical, plumbing and HVAC

would be located in a raised floor system and run in between the joists

to provide floor level electrical outlets and diffusers at interchangeable

locations. Exposed lighting tracks would run alongside beams at ceiling

level for easy accessibility.

161
Fig 4.3.12 Service plenum layout
perspective
Furnishings
Standardized furnishings would incorporate disassembly to be easily

transported to new sites or replaced if one type of commercial were un-

successful. They would be constructed of reusable or recyclable com-

ponents so that at obsolescence they are not discarded. Shown are an

exterior planter and shelving examples with folded metal connections

bolted to standard timber lengths.

Fig 4.3.13 An exterior planter and This category also includes canopies, exterior stairs and ramps that
shelving with folded metal con-
nections bolted to standard timber work at a smaller scale to customize the site iteration. Where site situ-
lengths
ation allows, standardized and self-contained planters and solar panels

could take advantage of open, sunny spaces to create energy and grow

plants for sale or use.

163
164
 Systemized disassembly

When the building iteration obsolesces all parts can be reused in a new

building layout – but when a specific component obsoleses it can be re-

solved into its industrial or natural nutrients for recycling. The materials

are divided into biological and industrial categories. Components are

selected for durability in the hope that they be reused after the build-

ing obsolesces. However, if damaged or worn, biological and industrial

components can both be recycled into their respective nutrient cycles.

bio
ts

co

deg
se in s tem projec

ce

mp
ing obsolescen

radat
o nen

ion into nutr

t obsolescen
ys

b u ild
reu

ce

i en
ts
s

co

rec
ect

ce

mp
sc e n

yclin
system proj

o nen
e

g into nutrien
ol

t obsolescen
ng o b s
se in

u ild i
b
reu

ce

ts

Fig 4.3.14 (Opposite) An example

of a bay assembly using the system
Fig 4.3.15 The process cycles at
building or component obsoles-
cence

165
 Parl
E
r St
Bloo

iame
nt S
Yon

t
ge S
t

She
rbo
urne
St
Chu
rch
St

2
0 m
~110
2
0 m
~160
2
m
400
lot=1

2
m 2
~725 0 m
2 ~120
m
~ 4800

166
 4.4 Site specific design
Since the system can be used for various commercial building itera-

tions and sites, with different combinations of components, specific ex-

amples are necessary to demonstrate the level of specificity that can be

achieved in context.

Wellesley St E and Sherbourne St site

tE
esley S
Well

Sher
bour
ne S
t

A former gas station and donut shop lot at Wellesley Street East and

Sherbourne Street in Toronto offers the opportunity to test the disas-

Fig 4.4.1 Aerial view of the for- sembly system. It has stood vacant since 2010 on a triangular parcel of
mer gas station site, which is now
land on a corner across from a new library, a medical building and brick
cleared of existing buildings
Fig 4.4.2 (Opposite top) General apartment building (Toronto blog, 2011). Abandoned gas stations are
commercial land-use within a 1-km
radius (8 minute walk) of the aban- frequently left vacant due to soil contamination, and often at prominent
doned lot in downtown Toronto
commercial locations. Cleanup is expensive so developers and buyers
Fig 4.4.3 (Opposite bottom) Square
footage of large chain grocery often avoid them (Konieczna, 2005).
stores within a 1-km radius (8 min-
ute walk) of the abandoned lot in
downtown Toronto

167
168
Fig 4.4.4 (Opposite top) Site photo The disassembly site connection permits building on contaminated land.
taken from the North-east corner of
Wellesley St E and Sherbourne St Where contexts permitted, the soil remediation process could be com-
in February 2012
pleted on site while the building performed, with a form raised above the
Fig 4.4.5 (Opposite bottom) Site
photo taken from the West side of earth to allow bioremediation through plantings beneath. Soil remedia-
Sherbourne St on Wellesley St E in
February 2012 tion by plantings (phytoremediation) could be attempted on portions of

the site left open, or if the building were raised to allow access to natural

light and precipitation particular to the type of contamination and thus

types of plantings.

A proposal for a new condominium tower on the site has been circu-

lated, but neighbouring residents are adamant that no more residential

towers be built in the area. The site is in proximity to the highest density

residential zone in Toronto, the high-rise neighbourhood of St. James

town. The condominium proposal encloses the entire site footprint while

residents have demanded that public space be created at grade.

The corner location is prominent and advantageous, and should be re-

inforced by the massing of the new building. Planters and greenery are

characteristic of the adjacent corners, where every building is set back

from the street in some fashion. The integration of open space is impor-

tant to the site design. The public library at the North-East corner has

integrated seating into raised planters that pedestrians use while await-

ing transit. There is a bus stop on Wellesley Street East at the North end

of the site.

Area residents are served by commercial strips nearby at Parliament St,

Church St and Yonge St. The site sits along a broken commercial strip

and is appropriately sized to house several smaller bays of commercial

tenants, or one large retailer. Covering the footprint of the lot would

provide enough square footage for a large department style retailer to

function. The building created is two storeys at 1250 square meters and

leaves a significant portion of the site open for public space.

169
170
Fig 4.4.6 (Pages 170-171) Aerial
view of assembly process

171
 To assemble the building, prefabricated members are maneuvered and

affixed on site with the use of a truck-mounted crane since it avoids a

permanent foundation. The crane can reach from 15 to 25 meters and

lift 0.8 to 80 tons depending on the size of truck (Hubei Fotma Machin-

ery Co., 2010). First the screw pile foundations are drilled. Then the

stick-built structure is bolted together and the cores are located. Next,

underfloor panels are slid into place bearing upon the beams. Joists are

bolted in, and window, wall, and roof panels are affixed with respective

finishes. Services are installed, followed by finishes and partitions on the

interior, while on the exterior decks, ramps, and stairs are located and

bolted in place, then finished. Final touches involve the placement of

planters and other site specific assemblies. In this building iteration, the

site is un-shaded by adjacent buildings, so it is shown with independent

weighted solar panel kits that sit atop the highest roof.

To reinforce the corner a raised volume slides along Sherbourne St and

conveys the existing length of retail buildings next door to the inter-

section. There is access from both streets for pedestrian approach – a

ramp up from Wellesley St East and stairs at the Sherbourne St corner.

Glazing wraps the ground level corner on Sherbourne St to entice cus-

tomers, and the service and circulation cores are visible through to the
Fig 4.4.7 Simple block massing of
the building on site street as independent features in the open space.

The building entrance is off a covered deck beneath the overhanging

volume. It was critical to create public space to satisfy resident de-

mands, so there is ample room for outdoor gathering spaces, both shel-

tered, and uncovered. Seating and tables could be used by shoppers

and the community as a public porch for gathering and socializing. A bus

stop on Wellesley Street East at the North end of the site benefits from

grade level outdoor seating. On the interior, the bays demonstrate the

use of functional aisles if laid out with merchandise in a standard man-

ner. Freestanding furnishings allow for flexible occupation. If one retail

type fails then furnishings can be removed and replaced with another

173
layout. The optional layout is intended to keep the retail type vague, but

demonstrate inhabitation of the building.

The upper volume would be partly glazed to offer views up Sherbourne

Street at the North end, and would be screened overtop the glass on

the East and West of a potential dining space. Most of the south end of

the volume would have solid walls around kitchen and service spaces,

but transom windows between the joists would allow natural light into

the spaces. The transom windows are ideal for shopping areas as well,

where solid walls can be backed by merchandise. On the roof adjacent

to the dining area there is opportunity for plantings to supply a restau-

rant with fresh ingredients, or roof terrace dining. Significant exposed

structure and the lifted canopy volume are reminiscent of the canopies

on the library and medical buildings nearby.

175
 St E
ley
lles

Sherbourne St
We

covered
deck

covered
uncovered deck entry

cash
back of merchandise
house

loading

176
 dining space

plantings

back of house

Fig 4.4.8 (Opposite) Ground floor

plan
Fig 4.4.9 (This page) Upper floor
plan

177
178
Fig 4.4.10 (Opposite top)Wellesley
Street East and Sherbourne corner
Fig 4.4.11 (Opposite bottom) Sher-
bourne Street looking North towards
Wellesley Street East
Fig 4.4.12 (This page) Upper floor
interior view towards the Sher-
bourne-Wellesley intersection

179
The process of disassembly is

the reverse of assembly, starting

with the removal of items that are

not integral to the building, such

as planters, solar panels, and

furnishings. Then come exterior

built forms, interior finishes, elec-

trical and mechanical. The pan-

elized wall, window and roof as-

semblies are detached, followed

by joists, then under floor panels.

The post and beam structure is

unbolted piece by piece, the

cores removed, and finally the

screw pile foundations are re-

versed and loaded up for repair

or to be taken to a new site.

Fig 4.4.13 The disassembly pro-

cess at Wellesley St E and Sher-
bourne St

181
 Danforth Ave and Playter Blvd

Play
ter B
lvd
Ave
orth
Danf

Fig 4.4.14 Aerial plan of the vacant In order to demonstrate the ability of the system to adapt to different
lot on Danforth Ave
situations another building example is developed. A vacant corner lot on

Danforth Ave has been used occasionally as an unofficial parking lot,

but currently stands empty. The lot acts as a significant void in the active

commercial strip between Broadview and Chester subway stations, and

a prime location for retail outlets, with a healthy pedestrian population.

The site is flanked by two and three storey brick buildings with com-

mercial on the ground floor and residential above. Large single-family

homes with treed lots make up the neighbourhood to the North.

The assembly process is the same as the last iteration with variations

in arrangement, finishes and furnishings specific to the site and context.

The building mass is set back from adjacent commercial buildings along

Danforth Ave in order to bring pedestrians up a few steps to the build-

ing floor level , which creates an exterior walkway. The building is also

significantly set back from its lot line on the west side to form a large out-

door patio – which the Danforth lacks despite its rich restaurant options.

The patio falls in line with front lawn setbacks of the large homes to the

183
184
Fig 4.4.15 (Pages 1184-185) Aerial
view of sassembly process at Dan-
forth Ave and Playter Blvd

185
Fig 4.4.16 (Opposite top) Ground North. The building mass is broken down on the upper level to create
floor plan
Fig 4.4.17 (Opposite bottom) Upper a terrace on the south-west corner, and to minimize the building scale
floor plan
seen in elevation from the street. A massive facade along Danforth ave

would not have been appropriate for the intimate size of the surrounding

building context. Modular steel canopies are employed to protect entry-

ways. The roof structure employs shorter joists, and the roof assembly

is less one 4’ x 8’ panel to avoid the overhangs of the last iteration that

were not aesthetically fitting in the context.

It is expected that the building iteration would house several smaller

tenants, such as a restaurant on the ground floor, and a bar or gallery

space on the upper floor that could make use of the west-facing ter-

races. Loading is achieved off of Playter Blvd, and the circulation core is

accessed directly off of the street entrance to ascend to the upper level.

The washroom-service core bridges the division between front and back

of house on both floors. Stair and washroom cores are designed to be

accessible from either bay direction so that they can function in various

building layouts.

The building offers less exposed structure, and appears more solid

and subdued in its possession of the corner lot – more in tune with

the heavier structures along the Danforth – but still retains its language

of assembly and impermanence through panelization, exposed joinery

and visible structure. It is shown with wood cladding and screen on the

upper volume and terracotta rainscreen panels on the lower form as a

lightweight version of the heavy bricks in adjacent homes and stores.

Up close, visible details, joints, and worn materials give a sense of the

assembly process and the potential for disassembly and reuse.

187
 loading back of house

Playter Blvd

terrace

Danforth Ave

back of house
Playter Blvd

terrace

N Danforth Ave

189
190
Fig 4.4.18 (Opposite top) View
eastward along Danforth Ave
Fig 4.4.19 (Opposite bottom) View
westward along Danforth Ave
Fig 4.4.20 (This page) Exterior
entrance view from Danforth Ave

191
Fig 4.4.21 Aerial view of the disas-
sembly process

193
 88%

50%

Evaluation
Fig 4.4.22 The conventional archi- In Canada, 9.3 million tonnes of solid waste are created annually
tecture material cycle, where little or
no materials are sourced for reuse through construction and demolition in Canada (OWMA, 2011). In stan-
or recycling
dard demolition practices, a small amount of materials are salvaged due
Fig 4.4.23 The material cycle for
demolition of an obsolescent build- to their easy removal and reuse, such as windows, doors and lighting
ing in 2004, where 88% of the ma-
terial volume becomes waste and fixtures (Frisman, 2004). In the demolition of an obsolescent building
only 12% is reused or recycled
Fig 4.4.24 The material cycle for
only 12% of material volume is reused or recycled (Frisman, 2004). The
buildings constructed traditionally
current alternative to maximize reuse and recycling of buildings - decon-
but disassembled, at least 50% of
materials are reused or recycled in struction through careful hands-on disassembly - is labor-intensive and
the year 2000
time-consuming since buildings are not designed for easy disassembly,

however a review of deconstruction case studies by the University of

Florida’s Powell Center for Construction & Environment in 2000 found

that deconstructed buildings diverted at least 50% of materials from

landfills (Frisman, 2004).

A building constructed from the disassembly system will be infinitely

quicker and easier to deconstruct than a permanently detailed building,

reducing the excessive time and labor of deconstruction. The material

and component design also maximizes recyclable and reusable content,

so that the landfill diversion rate approaches 100%. By estimating the

volume of material used in the first building iteration, the disassembly

system can achieve over 99% reuse of its components in new iterations.

195
 99+% reusable

Building iteration

97+ % r
ecyc
la b
le

Building iteration

196
 If the system were to obsolesce and the building model discarded – the

parts would be over 97% recyclable to become nutrients for new indus-

trial and natural materials (Appendix 1). The parts that currently hold the

system back from reaching its full potential are membranes, gaskets

and other materials that are easily damaged and cannot be recycled.

The system proposes a new material lifecycle for an impermanent com-

mercial architecture. Components are selected and combined using

Fig 4.4.25 (Opposite) The new ma- details that allow for their disassembly and reuse in different locations.
terial cycle for reuse and recycling
of materials When components are worn out they become nutrients – either biologi-
cal or industrial for the creation of new materials – never wasted.

197
5 Conclusions

199
Fig 5.1 (Pages 121-122) worn Architecture of disassembly and material life cycle was a worthwhile
metal panel
study to undertake considering the concern for wasted materials and

energy in the construction and architectural fields. Placing strict rules

upon detail design and material use became a means to urge architec-

tural innovation. It forced a critical look at current assembly methods and

a pursuit of improvised solutions. It was evident from the research and

early design studies that there would be significant formal limitations to

designing for disassembly and cyclical material life. By urging the use of

uncut standardized materials, designs could only be composed within

dimensional and, typically, orthogonal material limits. There was also a

lack of elegance to many standardized materials – such as the propor-

tions of 4’ x 8’ panels - that made it more difficult to create aesthetically

pleasing products and would greatly limit the accessibility of this ap-

proach for other designers. The need for reversible connections and

avoidance of composite materials were both opportunities for design

exploration as well as hindrances. Techniques and efficiencies devel-

oped over time in the building trade, often involving material efficiency in

the short term, had to be rethought to favor disassembly and durability

for the long term (such as the avoidance of adhesives). The concept of

layering assemblies so that their maintenance or removal did not com-

promise still functioning layers, offered a clear and functional diagram,

but challenged convention in many circumstances.

The incredibly common misconception that architectural creations are

permanent has led architects and the construction industry to ignore the

management of the materials that compose them, which has a lasting

effect. Selecting materials based upon expected functional lifespan was

entirely logical and acceptable, since building a structure to last several

months with material that is neither reusable nor recyclable is problem-

atic and short-sighted. It is clear that materials should be clearly suited

to the architectural permutation. The functional life of a building should

drive the type of materials specified and the method of assembly.

201
The design of a disassembly system had its own added challenges.

System designs inherently need to find a balance between customized

and prefabricated components to achieve efficiency while also creat-

ing differentiation. The building iteration at each site needed to be re-

sponsive to conditions, but still systematic in approach. It was difficult

to conceive an architectural system that would be generic enough to

function in different iterations, while also being interesting as a building.

The pursuit of expressive assembly, detail design, and use of high qual-

ity materials was considered as a means to provide interest where re-

petitive spatial and formal conditions could not. Small-scale assemblies

such as finishes and furnishings were also considered as a method of

achieving differentiation between sites, using components and materi-

als that would be appropriate for shortened functional lives and more

specific commercial spaces.

The design of reversible assemblies placed an emphasis on connec-

tions and detailing, that in traditional works can often be hidden and

overlooked. The value of the system design was a thorough study of

assembly methods and materials for a holistic understanding of material

life. With the system, assemblies could be reused in new configurations

or recycled into nutrients for new components. The design of an archi-

tectural system offers a very comprehensive study of materials and as-

sembly methods. It incorporates elements of industrial design because

it addresses aspects of design that architecture typically underplays,

such as production and reusability. The project upholds a position in

the field of architecture, however, because each individual part of the

system is dependent upon the whole for its significance. The added

level of complexity is intended to create a functional building that adds

to the economic, cultural, and social structure of its community while

performing in a greater material context. The thesis study demanded

a more technical approach to design challenges that ensured a deep

understanding of how the building would function, be constructed, and

perform in a larger context.

203
The impermanent nature of the commercial buildings derived in the de-

sign project implies a built environment that is constantly changing. A

fear associated with that impression is the loss of physical memory of

place, culture and history. However, built permanence is not assured

even if you build with lasting construction methods. Obsolescence is not

foreseeable, as buildings can be slated for removal due to physical fac-

tors including material wear and ineffective design, behavioural factors

such as change in use and damage by occupants, and finally, by ex-

ternal factors in the surrounding environment. A building that allows for

disassembly, in part or in whole, can allow for adaptation and improve-

ments to counter physical factors that threaten its existence. It is nearly

impossible to design a lasting building, but designing a solution that is

capable of change and adaptation could extend its life. The value of

impermanence in architecture is the ability to experiment, adapt, revise,

and improve. The design of the system assemblies allows for durable

components and materials to be easily removed and replaced as they

age, deteriorate or obsolesce. It also permits the layout and arrange-

ment of spaces to be updated to allow the building to adapt to changing

needs. A city built for disassembly and cyclical material life would not

necessarily reinvent itself from the ground up every decade, but would

gradually grow, adapt and change over time in a more sustainable man-

ner than is now offered. Disassembly buildings accept that architecture

is impermanent, but materials and resources are long-lasting. Material

lives would be considered beyond the single building’s existence, and

be allowed to provide for changing needs without wasteful use.

For any building, system or component that is impermanent, an archi-

tecture of disassembly and cyclical material life is an appropriate re-

sponse. Buildings designed to last for hundreds of years could easily

adopt the flexibility of impermanence in shorter-lasting layers, such as

cladding, finishes, services and furnishings in order to be prepared for

change. The presence of history and memory in the built environment

is a wondrous thing, and the buildings that survive the tests and trials of

205
time should be celebrated. However, constructing architecture to make

change difficult, with permanent assemblies that are complicated to dis-

assemble and reuse, ignores an honest truth: nothing is static, the world

is constantly changing. Architects cannot make permanent marks since

buildings need to transform alongside society or they become nothing

more than artifacts. All architects can do is attempt to improve the built

world while they have the chance, and try to ensure the generations that

follow have the same opportunity.

207
Appendix 1

Material volume estimate analysis for Sherbourne St and Wellesley St East building iteration

Approximate Reuse within Reuse

volume of the system beyond the Recyclable
Component building (m3) (m3) system (m3) (m3)

Site
Steel screw piles 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9

Structure
Timber posts 10.79 10.79 10.79 10.79
Steel posts 19 19 19 19
Steel beams 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5
Timber joists (lower) 42 42 42 42
Steel joists (upper) 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04
Metal connectors 3 3

Skin
Underfloor panels:
Agriboard 364 364 364 364
Soffit finish 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7
B
Building
ildi paper, ttape 0.88
0 88 0.88
0 88
Metal connectors
Wall panels:
Agriboard 324.1 324.1 324.1 324.1
Bio/Industrial finishes 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96
Precast concrete firewall 34.27 34.27
Building paper, tape 0.6 0.6
Metal connectors 3 3 3
Roof panels:
Agriboard 310.5 310.5 310.5 310.5
Metal roofing 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4
Building paper, tape 1.2 1.2
Metal connectors
Glazing:
Curtain wall frame and glass 27.7 27.7 27.7 27.7
Gaskets 3

Exterior doors and hardware 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9

Metal flashing 3 3

Services
Washroom/service core:
Mechanically fastened pipes
209
Fixtures (metal)
Steel frame
Box finish enclosure (metal) 1.5 1.5 1.5
Metal connectors
 Gaskets

Exterior doors and hardware 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9

Metal flashing

Services
Washroom/service core:
Mechanically fastened pipes 3 3 3
Fixtures (metal) 3 3 3
Steel frame 3 3 3
Box finish enclosure (metal) 1.5 1.5 1.5
Metal connectors 3 3 3
Elevator core:
Mechanics 3 3 3
Steel frame 3 3 3
Core finish enclosure 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Lighting fixtures 3 3 3

Finishes
Floor panels:
Bio/Industrial finish 28 28 28
Metal access panels 0.87 0.87 0.87
Metal connectors 3 3 3
Exterior wood deck 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3
Metal connectors 3 3 3
Interior partitions
p
Bio/Industrial finish 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Metal frame 3 3 3
Metal connectors 3 3 3
Interior doors and hardware 3 3 3

Furnishings:
Planters and furniture:
Custom metal frames 3 3
Bio/Industrial finish panels 3 3 3
Plant sacks 3 3
Metal canopies N/A N/A N/A
Staircases:
Metal frames 3 3
Bio/Industrial finishes 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
Metal connectors 3 3

Total estimable material volume 1241.96

Total estimable reusable volume 1241.96
Total estimable recyclable volume 1205.01

Total reusable ratio 100%

Total recyclable ratio 97%

211
References
Addis, Bill. (2006) Building With Reclaimed Components and Materals:
A Design Handbook for Reuse and Recycling. Sterling, VA:
Earthscan.

Alfred, Randy. (2009, July 31) Aug. 2, 1803: Crystal Palace Architect
Born, In Wired Magazine. Retrieved from www.wired.com,
Dec 7, 2011.

Ander, Gregg D (2012) Daylighting. National Institute of Building

Sciences, retrieved from http://www.wbdg.org/resources/
daylighting.php?r=joint_re-tail, Feb 2, 2012.

Anderson, Mark & Anderson, Peter. (2007) Prefab Prototypes:

site-specific design for offsite construction, New York:
Princeton Architectural Press.

Architecture 2030. (2011) retrieved from www.architecture2030.org/

home/html, Mar 14 2011.

Architecture, Modern Home & Interior Design, Furniture. (2010, Nov)

Outdoor Bamboo Restaurant. Retrieved from www.arch
planner.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Ashby, Michael F. (2009) Materials and Environment: Eco-In formed

Material Choice. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Inc.

Bahamon, Alejandro & Sanjines, Maria Camila. (2010) Rematerial:

From Waste to Architecture. WW Norton & Co.

Barreneche, Raul D. (2005) New Retail. New York: Phaidon Press

Limited.

Bell, Victoria and Rand, Patrick. (2006) Materials for Design. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press.

Berge, Bjorn. (2009) The Ecology of Building Materials: Second

Edition. Massachusets: Elsevier Ltd.

Brand, Stewart. (1994) How Buildings Learn: What happens after

they’re built. London: Viking.

Carr-Smith, David. (2009) Temporary Architecture. Retrieved from

http://davidcarrsmith.co.uk/_D-WW_TMP-ARC_CAF1.htm ,
Nov 20, 2011.

CBC. (2011) Throw-away buildings: The slow-motion failure of

Toronto’s glass condos. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/
toronto/features/condos/index.html, Nov 22, 2011.

Cho, Minsuk. (2010) Best Used Before: The Asian City and the Quest
for a Time-specific Architecture, In Ruby, Ilka & Andreas (Ed.)
Re-inventing Construction. Berlin: Ruby Press, 201-216.

Christensen, Julia. (2008) Big Box Reuse. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Citizendium. (2010) Crystal Palace. Retrieved from http://

en.citizendium.org, Dec 7, 2011.

213
Cowling, Dan. (2010) Mountain Equipment Co-op: New store tests
design for recoverability, In SAB Magazine, retrieved from
www.sabmagazine.com, Nov 30, 2011.

Daniels, Yolande. (2003) Detail and Articulation, In The State of
Architecture at the Beginning of the 21st Century. New York:
The Monacelli Press. 48.

Design4deconstruction. (2011) Case Studies. Retrieved from http://

www.design-4deconstruction.org/, Nov 22, 2011.

Dezeen magazine. (2011, Nov 17) Taichung Infobox by Stan Allen, In

dezeen magazine. Retrieved from www.dezeen.com, Nov 28,
2011.

Dickinson, Duo. (1996) Expressive Details. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Duerksen, Chris (2008) Saving the World Through Zoning, American

Planning Association, retrieved from http://law.du.edu/
documents/rmlui/saving-the-world-through-zoning.pdf, Feb 2,
2012.

Durmisevic, Elma & Brouwer, Jan. (2002) Dynamic Versus Static

Building Structures, Netherlands: Delft University of
Technology.

Durmisevic, Elma & Yeang, Ken. (2009) Designing for Disassembly

(DfD), In Architectural Design, 79 (6), 134-137.

Durmisevic, Elma & Linthorst, Patrick. (2000) Industrialization of

Housing (Building with systems) The Netherlands: Delft
University of Technology,

Ermanno, Ranzani. (1990, Feb) Ampliamento dell’IRCAM a Parigi:

Renzo Piano Building Workshop, In Domus, [38] 47.

Fleishman, Gregg, (2011) Humanizing the Factory Produced House.

Retrieved from www.greggfleishman.com, Nov 28, 2011.

Ford, Edward R. (2009) Five Houses, Ten Details, New York: Princeton
Architectural Press.

Frampton, Kenneth. (2008) Rappel à L’Ordre: A Case for the Tectonic,

In Mallgrave, Harry Francis and Contandriopoulos, Christina
(Ed.) Architectural Theory: Volume II An Anthology from 1871-
2005. USA: Blackwell Publishing. 565-571.

Frampton, Kenneth. (2001) Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of

Construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century
Architecture. MIT Press.

Frascari, Marco. (2008) The Tell-the-tale Detail, In Mallgrave, Harry

Francis and Contandriopoulos, Christina (Ed.) Architectural
Theory: Volume II An Anthology from 1871-2005. USA:
Blackwell Publishing. 500-508.

Frisman, Paul. (2004) Building Deconstruction, In OLR Research

Report. retrieved from http://www.cga.ct.gov/2004/rpt/
2004-R-0911.htm, April 10 2012.

215
GEDA USA (2012) Rack and Pinion Elevators, retrieved from
http://www.gedausa.com/rack-and-pinion-elevators.html, May
1, 2012.

Hubei Fotma Machinery Co. (2010) Truck Mounted Crane, retrieved from
www.cmec-hb.com, Mar 31, 2012.

Hulchanski, J. David. (2010) The Three Cities Within Toronto: Income

Polarization Among Toronto’s Neighbourhoods, 1970-2005.
Toronto: Cities Centre, University of Toronto.

Iwamoto, Lisa. (2009) Digital Fabrications: Architectural and Material

Techniques. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Kernan, Paul. (2002) Old to New: Design Guide: Salvaged Building

Materials in New Construction, 3rd Edition. Greater Vancouver
Regional District, Policy and Planning Dept.

Kieran, Stephen and Timberlake, James. (2002) Manual. New York:

Princeton Architectural Press.

Kieran, Stephen and Timberlake, James. (2008) Loblolly House:

Elements of a New Architecture. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press.

Killingsworth, R., & Farrow, B. (2007) Adaptive reuse of large single-

tenant retail facilities (Case study). Auburn University, Auburn,
AL: Department of Building Science. Retrieved from http://
www.rics.org/site/download_feed-.aspx?fileID=3329&file
Extension=PDF, Jan 31, 2012.

Knecht, Barbara. (2004, Oct) Designing for Disassembly and

Deconstruction, Architectural Record, Vol 192 Issue 10,
181-188.

Kronenberg, Robert. (2000) Portable Architecture, Second Edition.

Oxford: Architectural Press.

Krytiuk Specialty Contracting. (2012) Intumescent Paint, retrieved from

www.ksccanada.com, Mar 26, 2012.

Laubin, Reginald & Gladys. (1977) The Indian Tipi: Its History,
Construction and Use, Second Edition. University of Oklahoma
Press.

Levesque, Carole. (2008, May) Actions in indeterminability: exploring

the possibilities of temporary architecture, In Reconciling
Poetics and Ethics in Architecture retrieved from www.arch.
mcgill.ca/theory/conference/papers/Levesque_Carole.doc,
Nov 10, 2011.

Marble Fairbanks. (2011) Flatform, Home Delivery: Fabricating the

Modern Dwelling. Retrieved from www.marblefairbanks.com,
Oct 27, 2011.

McDonough, William & Braungart, Michael. (2002) Cradle to Cradle.

North Point Press.

Melet, Ed. (2002) The Architectural Detail: Dutch Architects Visualise

217
 their Concept. Rotterdam: NAI Publishers.

Miller, Stephen G. (Ed.) (1990) Nemea: A Guide to the Site and

Museum. Berkeley: University of California Press.
retrieved from http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/
view?docId=ft1q2nb0x1;chunk.id=d0e5888;doc.view=print,
Dec 7, 2011.

Mori, Toshiko. (2003) Materiality and Culture, In (Ed.?) The State of

Architecture at the Beginning of the 21st Century. New York:
The Monacelli Press. 30-31.

Muslimin, Rizal. (2010) Bead Brick, retrieved from http://www.

brickstainable.com/current-winners/technical-design.html,
Dec 9, 2011.

NAHB Research Center (2001) Strawboard Panels. Retrieved from

http://www.toolbase.org/Technology-Inventory/Whole-House-
Systems/-strawboard-panels, Feb 12, 2012.

National Institute of Building Sciences (2012) Building Envelope

Design Guide – Curtain Walls, in Whole Building Design
Guide, retrieved from http://www.wbdg.org/design/env_
fenestration_cw.php, April 11, 2012.

Ontario Farmland Trust (2012) Saving Farmland, retrieved from

http:// www.ontariofarmlandtrust.ca/issues-and-programs/
saving-farmland, Jan 31, 2012.

Ontario Waste Management Association. (2005) A Landfill Story:

Capacity, Export & EA. Retrieved from www.owma.org/
db/db2file.asp?fileid=457, March 27 2011.

Panchapakesan, Charisma. Sustainable Building Design: Case Study,

Wal-Mart Eco-Store, William McDonough Architects. University
of Waterloo. retrieved from http://www.architecture.uwaterloo.
ca/faculty_projects/terri/125_W03/Panchapakesan_
walmart.pdf, Feb 12, 2012.

Pearson, Clifford A. (2007) On a wooded site on Taylors Island,

Maryland, Kieran Timberlake tested a new way of building
with the LOBLOLLY HOUSE, In Architectural Record.
p140-146.

Prussin, Labelle. (1995) African Nomadic Architecture: Space, Place

and Gender, Smithsonian Institution Press and The National
Museum of African Art: Washington and London.

Remodelista. (2011, March 21) Architect Visit: Suyama Peterson

Deguchi Architects in Seattle, retrieved from www.remodelista.
com, Nov 28, 2011.

Saieh, Nico. (2008, Aug 14) Kunsthaus Art House Extension/ssm

Architekten, In archdaily. Retrieved from www.archdaily.com,
Nov 28, 2011.

Sobek, Werner. (2010) Architecture Isn’t Here to Stay, In Ruby, Ilka &
Andreas (Ed.) Re-inventing Construction. Berlin: Ruby Press,
34-45.

219
Sober, Werner. (2011) Station Z, retrieved from www.wernersobek.de,
Dec 9, 2011.

Stang, Alanna and Hawthorne, Christopher. (2005) The Green House:

New Directions in Sustainable Architecture. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press.

Steel Recycling Institute. (2011) Steel Recycling Rates, retrieved from

www.recycle-steel.org, Mar 26, 2012.

Superuse. (2007) Cable Reel Reality, retrieved from www.superuse.

org, Oct 27, 2011

Thomsen, André and van der Flier, Kees. (2011) Understanding

Obsolescence: A Conceptual Model for Buildings, BRI
Building Research & Information, 39 (4), 352-362.

Triumph Modular (2012) Building Foundations, retrieved from

www.triumphmodular.com/building-foundations.php,
Feb 10, 2012

Universitat Stuttgart, Institut fur Leichte Flachentragwerke. (1975)

Anpassungsfahig Bauen = Adaptable Architecture, Stuttgart:
Universitat Stuttgart.

University of Virginia (2012) ecoMOD 3: Design for Deconstruction,

retrieved from http://ecomod.virginia.edu/wp-content/
uploads/2010/02/dfd-060407-.pdf, Feb 10, 2012

US Department of Energy (2011) Natural Fiber Insulation Materials,

retrieved from http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/
insulation_airsealing/index.cfm/mytopic=11560, Feb 12 2012.

Vitra Design Museum, (2002) Living in Motion: Design and Architecture

for Flexible Dwelling. Vitra Design Stiftung gGmbH and
contributors.

Weston, Richard. (2003) Materials, Form and Architecture. London:

Laurence King Publishing Ltd.

Woodwork Details. (2007-2009) Mortise and Tenon Frame Joints.

Retrieved from www.woodworkdetails.com, Nov 28, 2011.

221