IN CONVERSATION WITH CHRISTOPH INGENHOVEN
Bringing German green design to Sydney
by Ulf Meyer
Christoph Ingenhoven is seen not only as Germany’s most successful
architect of his generation, but also as a leader in sustainable design. Sydney
will soon get a prominent addition to its skyline with Ingenhoven’s new office
tower on Bligh Street in the CBD. It is the first building in Australia that will
feature a double glass façade. But this is only one of several features that will
earn the project its 6-Star Green Star status. Ulf Meyer talks to Ingenhoven
in his Düsseldorf office about his design philosophy, the strict standards in
Germany in relation to Australia, and of course the Bligh Street project.
UM: Mr Ingenhoven, there is a feeling in Australia that it lags behind Europe in terms of
environmentally friendly design. Is it true?
CI (laughs): Well, Australia, until recently, even had a Prime Minister who thought green architecture was voodoo!
UM: How did you get involved in the design of the new office tower in downtown Sydney?
CI: Any project in downtown Sydney should be the result of an architectural competition. That is a great rule! In this
case it was the Australian architecture firm Architectus who first worked on the site and felt that they needed a strong
design partner for the design approval phase of the building. The client also suggested that he would favour it if
Architectus teamed up with a prominent international partner. So the architects simply did a search on Google using
some key words such as “environmentally friendly high-rise building”, found us and called!
UM: That is a great story; you get your commissions through Google! But anyhow, you have earned
your reputation as an innovative green architect by designing a large number of big-scale projects
all over the world. But in the case of Australia, why does it make sense to hire a German architect
for a project so far away? If Europe does have a leading edge in green design, how can it be applied
to Australia?
CI: Well, green architecture and engineering clearly are further ahead in central Europe. I know that big Australian
cities like Melbourne and Sydney seriously think about green architecture nowadays but things might not be as
developed elsewhere in the country.
UM: But the approach to building green is quite different in Germany and Australia. And so are the
regulations. While we have a tough Energie-Einspar-Verordung (a federal law to save energy—
mainly through insulation—that applies to any building in Germany) that only measures the heating
needs, Australia chose the Anglo-Saxon way of creating a voluntary rating system. Which makes
more sense? Should Germany adopt a rating system?
CI: Yes, I quite like the incentive system that Australia chose, because building green makes no sense if the client
does not like it. In Germany building green is common sense, but can barely be rated. But with the rating system, who
would not like to claim a silver, gold or platinum status for his building? The Americans were the first to ‘get it’: There
needs to be a catchy name, such as LEED!
I firmly believe that the customer is king, and a powerful one! Today many large office or commercial buildings
are invested in by big real estate firms. This is also the case with the Bligh Street project in Sydney. These firms
increasingly demand environmentally friendly buildings for their portfolios. Green buildings will earn higher rents.
In Sydney, the incentive system does not stop there: You can even earn a 10 percent bonus on the permissible
floor plate if you achieve ‘design excellence’. Our client was very happy when he found out just now that we will be
granted this privilege.
While all rating systems have limits, the Swiss Minergie standard is a good example of a system that was continuously
improved. To reach 5-Star status in the Australian rating system is quite easy for us. So we went for 6 stars!
UM: Would you say a bonus system works better then a penalty system?
CI (laughs): Yes, but that is something Germans need to understand! Bonuses are more fun! While in Germany clients
get in trouble, in Australia they get stars! But still the average standard in green architecture is higher in Germany or
Europe.
UM: I first experienced downtown Sydney on a Friday evening. When in America every CBD would
be dead with nothing but garbage left in the streets, in Sydney I was very pleasantly surprised to find large crowds of office workers having drinks in the first floor bars that seem to be part of many
office towers.
CI: Isn’t that wonderful? We will also include a restaurant/bar in the base of our building and a childcare centre, to
make some social life possible even in the CBD. Actually, in our case we will be able to completely open the whole
first floor with shutter-style glass façades all around. The city encourages that approach. We completely raised our
building over a public plaza—and thus gained even better views for the office floors.
UM: Australia’s climate is radically different from Europe’s, yet you came up with a similar solution for
the Bligh Street building as your early RWE-Building: a double façade. Why is that? Does one size fit all?
CI: While the solution looks similar at first glance, it really is quite different. Australia obviously has a lot of sun and
glare—which is why many older office towers in Sydney have dark glass and textile screens. To me, this does not
make too much sense because you will then need artificial light inside the offices, which is a waste of energy. Plus
electric light comes with heat, so you need to cool the buildings even more.
We are using white glass in order to make maximum use of the sunlight for lighting and view. In order to keep the
heat out, an outdoor sun screen is needed. The screen should be small and adaptable, and takes care of the glare
too. In order to keep that away from the wind, we have added the secondary outer glass façade. Only during 10
percent of office time will it be necessary to have the blinds turned down at more than a 30-degree angle. While in
Germany, in this case, the inner façade would be openable; in Sydney that is just an option, although the outer façade
also makes sense with the inner façade closed. Most tenants that are considering renting the building or part thereof
actually have expressed their wish to have openable windows. This is an interesting observation, because to be able
to open the façade also has a positive psychological effect of being able to control your work environment. The metal
louvres for the sun screen will be almost completely horizontal most of the time so that they do not obstruct the
fabulous view of Harbour Bridge and Sydney Harbour. The space between the two façades will be large enough for a
person to walk between them for maintenance.
UM: The shape and design of the building are all derived from the urban condition, views and
specific needs of the site. Is it a model nevertheless or is it too site-specific?
CI: If you ask clients what floor plan they prefer, they will always tell you a simple rectangular box with the core to the
side. That was our starting point. We just cut the corners off, because right-angle corners are disadvantageous for high-rise
buildings both inside and out, and we bent the floor plan to make maximum use of the view. The building clearly
has a front and a back side. The difference between an orientation to the north or to the south is even more extreme in
Australia than it is in Europe, although the seasons are not as important there. So we had to learn. And we did.
UM: Making the atrium the social heart of the building reminds me of John Portman’s famous Hyatt
Hotel interiors of the 1970s with the glass elevators going up and down…
CI (laughs): Yes, but with hotel rooms and transparent walls! But the atrium also has its role to play for the green
concept.
UM: But a double façade also has some disadvantages: You now need twice the amount of glass and
twice the amount of aluminium to produce the façade—both of which are materials that consume
a lot of energy when produced. It only starts to make ecological and economical sense when
the political framework is favourable. In Germany, the Green party has made energy more costly
recently so that it will start to make sense to invest extra money to save it. Do you think energy is
still too cheap?
CI: Absolutely. I advocate high energy prices. Especially if the extra tax would go into research of renewable energies.
We need better battery technology for our cars, for example, and more support for clean energy production. But apart
from prices, consciousness is key. Take the separation of garbage for example: Germans loved it and overwhelmed
the recycling companies with their green passion!
UM: In your article on all the glitzy new projects in China and the Arab world in Spiegel magazine
you wrote: “Whoever wants to work with us, needs to understand that a completely different kind
of a status symbol is possible: The most environmentally friendly, the most social building should
be the best status symbol.” Are you suggesting that green architecture should become a matter of
image purely?
CI: To be green is a status symbol, not to pretend to be green. We do not need ‘greenwash’, and a rating
system helps to distinguish the two. But there is nothing wrong from my point of view to make green architecture
‘fashionable’, a ‘must-have’ or something to aspire to. Ultimately, we have to aim for zero-emission buildings.
UM: Should there be one global rating system in the future?
CI: Yes, and it will be the American LEED. It is not the toughest one, but well-known and complex. Also Germany
should adapt it and could invent some variations. It should be continually improved like Wikipedia. Because different
places have different needs for their green architecture.
UM: In 10 or 20 years’ time, will there be dozens of new skyscrapers in downtown Sydney with
double façades do you think?
CI: Absolutely. Yes, I see our concept—but not necessarily the shape—of the building as a true model. People will
see the qualities it allows.
1 Bligh Street
Table of Contents
|
