Skyscraper Driven From Inside Out Towards Nature Chang-Soon Choi, Associate Principal, Samoo Architects & Engineers Soo-in Oh, Associate Principal, Samoo Architects & Engineers
Site Location KWANGAN Bridge Marin City- Condominium JANG Mountain Dongbak Island Mipo Harbor Haeundae Beach Hotel Arrea SITE Condominium
PROGRAM DIRECTION 1 2 3 Economic Value
Project Participants PHASE 1 PHASE 2 Arup Structure, Civil Engineering, MEP RJA Fire Protection / Life Safety Con Fortune Elevator Consultant ALT- Curtain Wall Consultant RWDI- Wind Tunnel Tests Van Deusen and Associates Elevator Con CDC- Curtain Wall Consultant + BMT- Cladding Pressure Studies, Wind Tunnel Tests Tomas Balsley Landscape Design SAMOO New York Branch ChungLim DongYang Structure SAMOO MECH ILSONG Con KOREA FIRE PROTECTION LTD SAMOO TEC SAMOO ELEC Con KEC Chunbuk Univ J&S SOLTO landscape
Initial Design Ideas By KPF Residential Tower + Tourist Hotel + Residential Hotel + Observation Deck + Retail
Marketing Target & Program Setting Declined Population Rate Policy for Pre-Construction Housing Sale New Customer Local Residents + Immigrants Less Room Number Required Limitation of Housing Type ( Supplier > Demander) Adaptation for New Life Style Community Facilities & Retail
Housing Sale Strategy for Location Ultimate Priority Maximised Ocean Views
View Standard For Skyscraper From Location View Hierarchy by Numbering Jang Mountain s g n i ild Mountain View ④ u B ⑤ l l Ocean + Urban Viewa ② T t a n t i ① o b l i a c H n u an ③ o C rb + Bridge Ocean View Ocean View U d n a N Urban View dongbak island Kwanan Bridge ①>②>③>④>⑤
Tower Profile Floor Plan Study
Step 1. Unit Orientation Maximum Angle Setting Angle/ Unit Type
Step 2. Inside to Outside - Secured View per 10 Units Step 1 Step 2 Angle/ Unit Type/ Length/Net Area Ratio/ Structure
Landmark Tower Program Vertical Program Tourist Hotel Residential Hotel Observation Deck 78F~94F 50F~75F 29F~47F 97F~99F 22F~28F 8F~19F Relationship with FOH / BOH, Service
Landmark Tower - Vertical Variation Tourist Hotel 100F Mechanical FL 95F Mechanical FL 76F Mechanical FL 48F Mechanical FL 20F Mechanical FL 78~94FL (17 Stories) (119 Units ) 50~75FL (26 Stories) (208 Units ) 22~47FL- (26 Stories) (234 Units) 8~19FL (12 stories) (265 Units) Design & Structural Balance
Similarity Landmark Tower Geometry Step1 Inherent Geometric Organization
Landmark Tower Geometry - Step2 Proposed Core Utilized Existing Layout
Landmark Tower - Proposed Massing Previously Proposed Scheme Proposed Massing Overlay PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED PLAN Proposed Massing 기존삼우평면도 By SOM
Siteplan with Proposed Massing
Siteplan with Proposed Massing - Rotated View Setting from Inside Interference
Final Proposed Massing Tower & Podium
Integration of Towers and Podium
Iconic Faces - Proposed Massing Symbolic Image
Final Model
Siteplan Residential Tower Main Commercial drop-off Warterpark + Retail Residential Tower drop-off Residential Tower Tourist Hotel / Retail drop-off Residential Hotel drop-off Hotel + Observation Deck Service Impartiality
Challenges
Technical Challenges Maximized Ocean View Façade Design Balance with Nature
Technical Challenges Optimized Core & Shell Maximized Ocean View Open Balcony Façade Design Façade Treatment Operable Window Balance with Nature Generate Podium Mass
Technical Challenge - Core & Shell in Residential Tower 2010. 05 City Approval 2011. 08 6 Unit Comb /FL
Technical Challenge - Core & Shell in Residential Tower Residential (Tower A : 438Units, Tower B : 438Units) 62FL (Mechanical FL) 38FL (Mechanical FL) 63~83FL (21 Stories) 40~61FL (23 Stories) 9~37FL (29 Stories) 8FL (Mechanical FL)
Unit Floor Plan 191sqm
Unit Floor Plan 214sqm
Unit Floor Plan 247sqm 2,300
Technical Challenge - Façade Design Inside to Outside A B C 600 200 D 300 200 150
View Simulation WEST 75A-60F 75A-9F 75A-10F 75A-40F 75A-50F 75A-20F 75A-15F 75A-25F 75A-30F 75A-70F WEST 75A-80F u B l l a t T a n t i o b l i a c H n u an o C rb du n a n i ild WEST 75A s g
Technical Challenge - Façade Design Solid Ratio Solid vs Transparent
Technical Challenge - Façade Design Solid Ratio Solid vs Transparent
Technical Challenge Open Balcony Open Balcony Location
Technical Challenge - Open Balcony Balcony Handrail Cladding Pressure Test of Residential Tower > Tempered Glass Handrail Simulation of Outside Balcony 83FL 63FL 39FL Conclusion of CFD Analysis Pressure at Tempered Glass Handrail[Pa] 83FL 63FL 39FL Front side Glass A Back side Glass B Front side Glass A Back side Glass B Front side Glass A Back side Glass B Conclusion of Test Area of Tempered Glass
Technical Challenge - Open Balcony Cladding Pressure Test by BMT. 2012-12-18
Technical Challenge Open Balcony Sliding Window 5.5 KPa 6.0 KPa 6.5 KPa 7.0 KPa 7.5 KPa SUM Residential Tower Type A 292 292 Type B 292 292 Type C 292 292 Type D 4 4 Type E 2 2 Landmark Tower Type F 52 52 Type G 17 24 11 52 SUM 52 882 17 24 11 986
Technical Challenge - Open Balcony
Technical Challenge Operable Window > Original (Project-OUT) > Option A (Casement-In) > Option B (Casement-In) > Option C (Casement-In)
Technical Challenge Operable Window Cladding Pressure Test by BMT
Technical Challenge - Balance with Nature Podium Geometry
Technical Challenge - Balance with Nature Pedestrian Route for Podium ROUTE #5 Entrance ROUTE #1 ROUTE #2 ROUTE #3 ROUTE #4 10m Pedestrian Route 44
Technical Challenge - Balance with Nature Openness of Podium
Technical Challenge - Balance with Nature Podium Design Development
Conclusion
Thank You