advanced search

Will Urban Office Designs Differ from the Past?

Nov 1, 2001 12:00 PM, By Joseph R. Knisley, Senior Editorial Consultant

As construction industry specialists continue to study the conditions surrounding Ground Zero in New York City, many experts are learning lessons from the disaster that may necessitate changes to future codes and standards relating to the design and construction of tall buildings.

According to Jerry Harke, vice president of communications for the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA), Washington, D.C., the association is not aware of any developers’ plans to reduce building heights in the wake of the attacks. However, it has been sending out information on security and safety to its members since the September 11 attacks.

Ronald Klemencic, chairman of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat and president of Skilling Ward Magnusson Barkshire Inc., a Seattle structural engineering firm, recently called leaders together from the planning, design, and construction disciplines in Chicago. Stressing that overall buildings have excellent safety records, the group nevertheless identified areas for improvement, including emergency egress requirements, integrated automated building controls, redundancy, security, and the development of a performance-based national building security code.

Cautioning against a panic reaction when planning new construction initiatives, Thomas K. Fridstein, a task force member and senior director in the Chicago office of Tishman Speyer Properties, maintains that tall buildings are safe. At this time, the task force is not looking to recommend radical changes.

“We will determine what society wants and expects and what people are willing to pay for,” says Robert E. Solomon, chief building fire protection engineer for the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in Quincy, Mass.

According to Engineering News-Record magazine, in an effort to learn from the WTC and Pentagon attacks, several major industry groups are taking the lead. For example, the Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society of Civil Engineers is forming two investigative teams—one for each disaster location. By studying the failed structural steel, investigators hope to determine how to prepare better designs. Using $20,000 in initial funding, the SEI is partnering with the American Institute of Steel Construction, the American Concrete Institute, the National Fire Protection Association, and the Society of Fire Protection Engineers.

A number of national code officials will also examine details of the WTC tragedy, hoping to initiate code changes for improving emergency access and egress. What prompted this effort? According to eyewitness accounts, workers descending the WTC staircases were met by firefighters coming up the same stairs, hindering effective evacuation procedures. Therefore, the need for separate passageways may be mandated in future codes.

President of the Structural Engineers Association of California Melvyn Green plans to help the International Conference of Building Officials put together a task force of code officials, fire officials, and structural engineers to do a thorough study in cooperation with the American Concrete Institute, American Institute of Steel Construction, the National Institute for Standard and Technology, and the Building Seismic Safety Council.

Amidst the work of these industry task forces and expert recommendations, what will the future hold for buildings of tomorrow? Of course, architects expect security and evacuation systems to become a high priority in the overall design of nearly every type of building or facility. Lobbies may be enlarged to house enhanced security functions, and adjacent or underground parking may no longer be part of the building design. Additionally, builders may be looking at the greater use of shatter-resistant glass coverings, foam- rather than water-based sprinkler systems, and synthetic textiles to reinforce concrete columns. An engineer at North Carolina State University has even developed a new type of concrete that does not fracture and crumble when a building suffers an earthquake or bomb blast. Increasingly, construction specialists are recognizing that any “hardening” of a building to resist a human “intervention” also protects it from the destructive force of tornadoes, hurricanes, and earthquakes.

In light of the recent terrorist attacks, it stands to reason that many people are asking the same question: If buildings are designed differently, what new security/deterrent ideas are plausible? Since 1996, only about 100 patents publicly registered with the U.S. Patent Office have involved inventions related to terrorism. In addition to blast-resistant construction materials, these patents are for communications technologies, identification systems, firearms, and other weapons. After the events of September 11, this may change.

Photo courtesy of Luke Mata.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!

© 2012 Penton Business Media, Inc.

---

Acceptable Use Policy blog comments powered by Disqus

Browse Back Issues Select an Issue EC&M Magazine | April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 1, 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 1, 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 1, 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 1, 2006 May 1, 2006 April 2006 March 1, 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 1, 2004 January 1, 2004 December 1, 2003 November 1, 2003 October 1, 2003 September 1, 2003 August 1, 2003 July 1, 2003 June 1, 2003 May 1, 2003 April 1, 2003 March 1, 2003 February 1, 2003 January 1, 2003 December 1, 2002 November 1, 2002 October 1, 2002 September 1, 2002 August 1, 2002 July 1, 2002 June 1, 2002 May 1, 2002 April 1, 2002 March 1, 2002 February 1, 2002 January 1, 2002 December 1, 2001 November 1, 2001 October 1, 2001 September 1, 2001 August 1, 2001 July 1, 2001 June 1, 2001 May 1, 2001 April 1, 2001 March 1, 2001 February 1, 2001 February 1, 1995 January 1, 2001 December 1, 2000 November 1, 2000 October 1, 2000 September 1, 2000 August 1, 2000 July 1, 2000 June 1, 2000 May 1, 2000 April 1, 2000 March 1, 2000 February 1, 2000 January 1, 2000 December 1, 1999 November 1, 1999 October 1, 1999 September 1, 1999 August 1, 1999 July 1, 1999 June 1, 1999 May 1, 1999 April 1, 1999 March 1, 1999 February 1, 1999 January 1, 1999 December 1, 1998 November 1, 1998 October 1, 1998 September 1, 1998 August 1, 1998 July 1, 1998 June 1, 1998 May 1, 1998 April 1, 1998 March 1, 1998 February 1, 1998 January 1, 1998 December 1, 1997 November 1, 1997 December 1, 1996 November 1, 1996 October 1, 1996 September 1, 1996 August 1, 1996 July 1, 1996 June 1, 1996 May 1, 1996 April 1, 1996 March 1, 1996 February 1, 1996 January 1, 1996 December 1, 1995 November 30, 1995 November 1, 1995 October 1, 1995 September 1, 1995 August 1, 1995 July 1, 1995 June 1, 1995 May 1, 1995 April 1, 1995 March 1, 1995

browse e-newsletters