Date: 23 March 09
Author: Caroline Ednie, Web Editor
Email this Article
| Click to Print
Alex de Rijke is one of the co-founders of dRMM Architects, a London based studio of international architects and designers. Established in 1995 the practice has become synonymous with innovative, high quality and socially relevant architecture. dRMM’s radical projects are, according to the practice, "led by site, client needs, concept and construction, rather than formulaic or style-based decisions."
The practice has received numerous awards for their work, including a Highly Commended accolade for Kingsdale School in the 'Learning' category of the World Architecture Festival 2008; and Winner of the BD Public Housing Architect of the Year 2006 for their Wansey Street Housing project. dRMM’s most recent project, the remarkable Sliding House, where a 20 ton autonomous roof/wall structure traverses the site on recessed railway tracks, creating combinations of shelter, insulation and open air living according to its position, is one of the most talked about projects of the year.
Ahead of his forthcoming lecture at The Lighthouse, Alex de Rijk discusses with Web Editor Caroline Ednie why he believes that timber is the new concrete and why sliding houses make perfect sense in the current economic climate.
Click on all imaegs to enlarge.
Alex de RIjke
CE: Your forthcoming lecture is entitled ‘Timber is the new concrete’. How did your study and enquiry into timber as a construction material begin?
AdR: I suppose it started whilst doing research work into materials at the Architectural Association, and later branched into practice. I’m also very interested in architectural history and made the observation that every century has its particular era in terms of material. People tend to view different periods in terms of style but if you ignore the styles one can see that each century is characterised by the particular triumph of a material. Brick defines the 18th century; the 19th century is steel frame; concrete defines the 20th century; and I believe the 21st century material is timber.
So why is timber the new concrete?
Timber is the new concrete because there is no downside to timber construction whereas every other construction process has quite serious downsides, particularly centred around carbon production. Timber works the other way - in timber there is hope for the future. In other materials if you’re making more carbon than you are steel for example, then it’s a no brainer. We’re working with pure timber because there are no downsides in terms of embodied energy and toxins.
There is also such progress in adhesives and jointing technology that historical limitations of timber are being superseded. So the 21st century will be a time when timber’s structural characteristics will be exploited. Historically, although it’s widely known that timber is incredibly strong, it’s difficult to joint and this is why steel had the upper hand structurally, because the joints are ten times stronger. But increasingly people like us are exploring new ways of fitting timber together and engineers and adhesive designers and scientists are finding ways of making timber possible to laminate and connect in ways that weren’t possible even a decade ago.
The MK Forty Tower in Milton Keynes was constructed without adhesives but of course the laminated timber does in order to laminate it. But the particular company that we’ve been working with, KLH, use an adhesive that is unique in that it doesn’t have any kind of toxins in it. It’s a completely safe water based adhesive.
MK Forty Tower. 20m tall temporary viewing tower, on site from August 2007 to July 2008 with 5,500 visitors during Autumn 2007.
Photo: Alex de Rijke
MK Forty Tower. Inside the tower, the lower section is a continuous open well staircase, stacked like a Georgian staircase.
Photo: Anthony Carr
There are still many sustainability issues currently affecting the production and sourcing of timber?
You have to specify and choose your sources very carefully. There are many instances of clear cutting forestry, in Russia for instance, that is very damaging. On the other hand, and not so far away, there are forests that are managed much more successfully. We tend to make sure that we know exactly where the wood we use is coming from and exactly what the forestry practices are.
We use timber from Austria, where forestry is not clear cut because it tends to belong to many thousands of individual families who would not cut off their family heirloom. They supply to fairly large timber factories that are closely associated with co-ops and small groups who operate together. They plant three to five trees for every one they cut.
In your work you seem to be stretching many of the perceived limitations of timber. For example you’re working on an all timber stadium design at the moment?
The stadium is a design looking for a site. It’s a research project where we’ve demonstrated how entirely feasible it is to have a 100 metre diameter flat pack stadium. We designed it as a multi-purpose stadium because in order to get the maximum use out of large space buildings you need to have multi-programme use. Our stadium was particularly designed to provide shelter on the outside as well as internally creating a space that can be subdivided and accommodate events such as a basketball match during the day and then an Amy Winehouse gig in the evening.
A timber stadium does unfortunately conjure images such as the Bradford City disaster (where, in 1985, fire engulfed the football stadium resulting in 56 deaths)?
Ever since the Great Fire of London timber has had bad press because it’s flammable when used as a frame. I’d like to make the distinction clear that what we’re doing is not timber frame. It’s massive timber – panellised solid laminated timber and that behaves differently from timber frame. We’re interested in this because in terms of fire it’s much better than steel buildings due to its own in-built protection. Have you ever tried to burn a tree trunk? It doesn’t burn. The outside chars and that charring (charcoal) protects the structural core.
The famous fires in timber buildings almost invariably happen because it’s a building that’s in a certain flammable state, for example under construction like the Colindale fire, or it could be the unprotected framed housing in London in the Great Fire. It’s important to make the distinction between frame and mass timber. There’s a lot of misunderstanding surrounding timber.
Are attitudes in the UK construction industry sympathetic to what you are trying to achieve?
You could say that we’re one hour and twenty years behind mainland Europe in terms of construction. The time difference does seem to be shortening now I’m happy to say, because of the work of dRMM and others. We’ve been trying to educate the construction industry in terms of the work that we do, and via publications, presentations and so on. We are trying to spread the word that we can play catch-up in this country with continental construction industry techniques.
Does the timber construction technique that you describe lend itself to volume developments?
Absolutely. It’s very suitable for volume housing. In fact that’s how panellised mass timber started – by responding to small-span, fast apartment building construction. We’re actually doing a flat pack house, called the 'Naked House', which is going to be exhibited later in the year, we hope, at the Tate Modern. This project addresses the question of volume house production with a simple panellised form of construction. We’ve done a prototype in Norway and we’re going to complete and build it on the banks of the Thames in front of the Tate Modern.
At last year’s Venice Architecture Biennale you presented a project for Timber Towers housing in Norway?
This project was an attempt to build the highest ever timber construction. The MK Forty Tower was a precursor and allowed us to establish the viability of doing tall buildings in mass timber and in particular stairwells and lift-shafts. We worked with a Norwegian firm called Helen and Hard from Stavanger and they invited us to collaborate on a project to design high-rise apartment buildings inspired by Norwegian trees. The design has a central strong structural trunk and apartments that branch out at higher levels, leaving the ground plane relatively free with just a central trunk.
This is a commission that is currently being delayed by the recession. We wait with bated breath to see how far this will continue as we took the project as far as planning. At the stage that we left it, it was a hybrid construction of mostly timber with some concrete and it was all set to go to 16 storeys high.
Timber Towers, Norway. 3D visualisation of two of the three towers that are planned for Sandnes, Norway. Working with researchers, engineers and manufacturers, the project demonstrates the possibility and practicality of timber high rise.
Image: dRMM and Helen & Hard Architects
Timber Towers, Norway. 1:25 model of one of the Timber Towers as exhibited at 'Home/Away: Five architects build housing in Europe', British Pavilion, 11th Venice Architecture Biennale, 2008
Photo: Alex de Rijke
You mentioned the recession – how is this currently affecting dRMM?
We seem to be stable in the sense that our workload isn’t predominantly linked to the commercial sector. The Norwegian project is, but that’s not typical of our workload, which involves more public buildings that are local authority or government funded. We’re also working on the 2012 Olympics.
One of the practice’s best-known public buildings is Kingsdale School in London, which has been described as a “groundbreaking project recognised by the Government as a unique model of national relevance.”
Kingsdale School was actually a precursor to the BSF (Building School for the Future) programme. It was one of the projects that gave the programme a leg-up. It was a nice project as it was always going to be experimental. It was a deliberate experiment to establish a direct corollary between design and education standards and whether you could inspire school children with architecture. And I’m happy to say that it did. The school is truly transformed and on the up and up. Obviously a lot of that has to do with teaching but I would then make the point that teachers have to be inspired too. The continuity of staff is crucial to the success of a school and the staff are very into the place. Kingsdale is a very positive story.
Surprisingly, we haven’t had a repeat commission of that nature. It was perhaps too experimental. There are many school projects around in the UK but the way that they are procured is mysterious to me. PFI is - thanks in large part to Richard Rogers - currently being denounced as a dodgy way to deliver good architecture. I’ve never seen an outstanding piece of PFI architecture. I think it’s a contradiction in terms.
Would you accept a PFI commission?
Challenge is always tempting – it really would depend on who the client was, what their aspirations were and who the contractor was. But as a formula it is not proven to be one that prioritises design.
Kingsdale School Main Building. ETFE covered courtyard and plywood geodesic auditorium
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Kingsdale School. New build sports hall and music school and link building as seen across the school campus from the main building.
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Kingsdale School Music and Sports Building. Interior of auditorium with 'useful art' ventilation sculpture by Joep van Lieshout
Photo: Michael Mack
Kingsdale School Music and Sports Building. The sports hall and mezzanine in use; cross-laminated timber is both the structure and the finish
Photo: Michael Mack
Your latest project is the remarkable Sliding House, which has been described as a design ‘tour de force’ and ‘coup de theatre’, and has really captured the public imagination. There seems to be an almost child-like joy in the approach to the design and its mechanisation?
It was very unabashed. And the client, I’m happy to say, shares that enthusiasm. He does really enjoy playing with his house!
This kind of commission doesn’t come along very often, but it wasn’t achieved on a huge budget. There is an on-cost in making it move, but the client has calculated that as 20% on a house that costs £340k. It costs 20% more to make it move but the client will not have to pay for his heat or cooling because it moves. Most people love the fact that it does move but don’t really know why. Yes, it varies space and light but it also works in effectively allowing the sun to penetrate certain areas, particularly the glass-house. The way the client is using the house at the moment is that it is open in the morning and the house warms up quite quickly. Then you simply close it so that the heat is captured and the house doesn’t overheat. Most people who live in glass houses spend a fortune on both heating and cooling them. This is like having your cake and eating it.
Formally you describe it as being as simple a ‘Monopoly House’. Many contemporary architects seem to take the reverse view and rely on form as a statement or signature?
I wouldn’t say that I’m not interested in form – I am interested in form. But we couldn’t afford that in this house. The planning and budget constraints meant that it had to be about other things. We do experiment with form but not in a boy scout, form for form’s sake, way. Most architects fall into that trap far too readily, and there are other more interesting things to explore really.
Finally, what can we expect from dRMM in the future?
We are busy completing a new school building for Clapham Manor School. It’s a new wing for an old primary school. This is an experiment with polychromy - it has a polychromatic façade of glass. It’s an interesting composition. dRMM are also working on housing for 2012 Olympics but I can’t talk about that at the moment.
We also have a very nice project to follow up the MK Forty Tower at Milton Keynes. It’s a pavilion building and will stand alongside the existing building as an educational facility, its use will also extend to performance and music. It’s a temporary structure but I personally think that all structures are temporary - it just depends to what degree. There is a fine line between temporary and permanent.
Images below: Sliding House, Suffolk. Private house completed Jan 2009. A 20 ton autonomous roof/wall structure traverses the site on recessed railway tracks, creating combinations of shelter, insulation and open air living according to its position.
Click on images to enlarge.
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: Alex de Rijke
Photo: R Russell
Alex De Rijke: Timber is the new concrete
26 March 09, 6-8.30pm
Location: The Lighthouse, Level 3 Scotland's Centre for Architecture, Design and the City, 11 Mitchell Lane, Glasgow G1 3NU Telephone: +44 (0)141 221 6362 Fax: +44 (0)141 221 6395 Email: enquiries@thelighthouse.co.uk
