Potential for the vertical extension of existing buildings

Gillott, C (2022) Potential for the vertical extension of existing buildings. PhD thesis, University of Sheffield, UK.

Abstract

Vertical extension refers to the addition of new storeys above existing buildings and is increasingly recognised as a means of generating new useable floorspace whilst reducing resource extraction, waste generation and associated carbon emissions. Despite this, understanding of the potential for vertical extensions remains limited, with existing work representing a series of fragmented perspectives from neighbouring contexts. The work contained within this thesis thus takes a more holistic and context-centric perspective to further understanding of the potential for future space provision through the vertical extension of existing buildings. First, through a sequential explanatory mixed methods study, the relative importance of key drivers, barriers and enablers of vertical extension are assessed. Economic drivers are revealed to be most influential, with environmental considerations simply representing a secondary benefit. The most inhibitive barriers identified are typically technical, such as the identification of reserve capacity, but are not thought to indicate infeasibility. Recommendations to enable or promote extension include enhanced education of various stakeholders national and sub-national policy amendments. Next, the influence of common design inefficiencies on utilisation and reserve capacity in steel framed buildings is considered. Column utilisation is found to vary greatly with design and appraisal approach, with an average reserve capacity of 10% being found even in least-weight Eurocode designs. This is found to facilitate extension without strengthening in 9%-36% of cases, depending upon structural form and use, with further reserve capacity and extension potential being found in buildings designed to superseded codes and using defensive or conservative approaches. Finally, a bottom-up assessment framework is developed and applied to assess the potential for housing delivery through permitted development vertical extension across nine cities in England. Over 2 million properties are identified as eligible for extension, with this being capable of generating 176 km2 of new useable floorspace and housing almost 3.8 million people. The spatial distribution of this within and between the considered cities is also assessed, revealing the majority of extension potential to be within suburban areas. Together, this work offers the first holistic and context-centric perspective of the vertical extension of existing buildings. It illustrates a significant potential to meet housing needs through vertical extensions and that, although a number of barriers remain, reserve structural capacity is likely to be present within a large number of buildings. Remaining barriers are also shown not to be indicative of infeasibility, and instead may be mitigated through adjustment of national or regional policy.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Thesis advisor: Densley Tingley, D and Davison, B
Uncontrolled Keywords: carbon emissions; education; policy; England; stakeholder
Index terms: housing need, strengthening, appraisal, housing, relative importance, suburban area, eurocode, housing delivery, column, England, carbon emission, mixed method, spatial distribution, waste generation, national policy
Subjects: housing and residential development, Geography, urban design, structural engineering, factor and component analysis, public policy, environmental impact, climate science, construction type, geographical analysis, engineering standards, risk assessment, data collection methods
Topics: Urban Studies, Research Practice, Governance, Construction Technology, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Risk Management, Sustainability
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here