
19 days to build a 57-storey tower - creamyhorror
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-3cca82c0-af80-4c3a-8a79-84fda5015115
======
snowwrestler
Here is a great short documentary about a similar "pre-fab" approach to
building a new tall building in London:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5RgRboBE2Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5RgRboBE2Y)

I think it took longer than 19 days, but they had more limited space and time
to work each day, and (almost certainly) more stringent standards for safety
and quality.

------
blisterpeanuts
Wow, he's like a Chinese version of Elon Musk (if Elon Musk believed in
uniforms, company anthem, and tight social controls over his employees)!

I don't know that I agree with all of his thinking that the BBC article
outlined, e.g. the very strict and intrusive control over employees' lives,
but he definitely is creative and unusual, and he _thinks big_.

Perhaps a "green" tower that accommodates 800 apartments and thousands of
offices and other businesses is the way to go; occupies a small physical
footprint but delivers a huge amount of useful space in a country where cities
are already congested and space is at a premium.

The BBC website by the way is quite interesting. I am not sure I would like
all websites to look like that, but it's a creative take on interspersing
multimedia with text, and the layering of the second image over the first is
brilliant. Awesome!

------
lifeformed
Pretty cool but I hope they don't overlook the importance of aesthetics. It's
worth spending extra time and money to make a building look unique and fitting
for the location it is in. A city filled with identical mass-produced
skyscrapers will not be pleasant once the novelty wears off.

------
ChuckMcM
I have been following the 'sky city' stuff for a while and it really does read
like a fraud. The original attempt to build it wasn't some "missing paperwork"
it was a pretty clear that the building would fall over if he built it, and
some folks in the structural engineering community made that point to the
government and BSB could not show how their assertions were incorrect. I've
not seen the complaint but it was related to the wind loading and torque
requirements on lower sections.

It will be interesting to watch this 'mini' tower and see how it holds up
prior to trying something more dramatic.

But structural engineering aside, being able to rapidly assemble a building of
significant capacity and a small foot print is a worth while capability to
have. It doesn't lend itself to variety (and like an air craft carrier would
probably require grid co-ordinates in the hallways to make navigation inside
the building possible) but by shortening the time to erect, you eliminate a
huge variability in cost which is the time on site/equipment use. Over half of
the Bay bridge's cost overruns were associated with storage, inactive
equipment and staff, and material cost bids expiring. So being able to do all
of the erection in even a straight shot of two or three months would improve
the economics tremendously.

------
sneak
Now solve the REAL challenge: how to get one built at 16th and Mission.

~~~
abakker
Now that is some wishful thinking. Honestly though, I would love to see more
towers in SF. As someone who rents a house build in the 50s, it would be worth
it for the seismic safety alone. I'm pretty sure the house I live in has NO
insulation, single pane glass, and is framed with 2x4s...

SF needs some bigger, better housing and office buildings.

------
mfoy_
Content aside, the article employs some really cool scrolling effects too.

------
BenoitEssiambre
China seems to be winning at capitalism.

------
hobarrera
This really is amazing, but do we really need to keep building super-dense
areas?

I don't mean to say this isn't awesome: it is.

But we have lots of unused surface, and generally, building horizontally has
lots of advantages: more sunlights for citizens, more room for parks, less
congestion/traffic.

I've noticed that places were people live more relaxed and happy lives tend to
have less tall buildings, while places with more stressful inhabitants tend to
be those with larger tower. More traffic, less green/sun and plenty of other
factors are usually strongly related to both.

------
pharke
The description of these buildings reminds me of the 'lifeboat city' eco-doom-
meme that was floating around for a while seemingly inspired by Lovelock's
idea of 'lifeboat islands' or geographic areas that will weather the coming
catastrophe well enough to continue supporting a sustainable society.

While I don't agree with really any of the above doomsaying or wild
speculation I am somewhat fond of the idea of packing up the modern anthropic
world into self contained bubbles.

This shouldn't, however, be a license to run rampant across the newly freed
land with industry or to simply stack these habitats as tightly as possible to
increase density. The opposite should be true, provide a clean, comfortable,
and efficient location for people to live and do business while freeing up the
rest of the land for enjoyment and recreation or sustainable food production.

~~~
brudgers
Pruit-Igoe is the poster child for the theory of apartment towers in the park
meets reality.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruitt%E2%80%93Igoe](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruitt%E2%80%93Igoe)

~~~
jarek
American reality, so with a healthy dose of classism, racism, and general
political failure.

"Residents cite a lack of maintenance almost from the very beginning,
including the regular breakdown of elevators, as being a primary cause of the
deterioration of the project. Local authorities cited a lack of funding to pay
for the workforce necessary for proper upkeep of the buildings. ... The
project's parking and recreation facilities were inadequate; playgrounds were
added only after tenants petitioned for their installation. ... Housing
projects of similar architectural design were successful in New York, but St.
Louis's fragmented political culture and declining urban core contributed to
the project's failure."

------
schnaars
Amazing story, but reminds me of the buildings in Manna by Marshall Brain.

------
jklein11
<zenophobia>*story</zenophobia>

------
mianos
The Soviets built these type of buildings at the same speed in the 60s:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panel%C3%A1k](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panel%C3%A1k)
Amazing, doing it higher than 20 floors though.

~~~
nkoren
I am unfamiliar with the paneláky, but I would be surprised if they were built
at a comparable speed. While I am aware of large building _shells_ which have
been constructed on this sort of timescale, they still required many
months/years of fit-out afterwards (plumbing, electricity, fine interior
finishing). what is unique about what Broad Group is doing is that they are
assembling fully fitted-out modules, which are essentially ready for move-in
the day after construction is complete. The only historical analogues I'm
aware of are things like Moshe Safde's Habitat 67[1] and some Japanese
"metabolist" buildings.[2] But those have been architectural experiments
without any real financial viability. What Broad Group is doing is unique in
that they are making it commercially viable at scale.

1:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_67](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_67)

2:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metabolism_%28architecture%29](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metabolism_%28architecture%29)

~~~
minthd
In the article they mentioned the issue of leaks.I read about it in another
piece about an American pre-fab building, where it has been a huge problem.

What do you think about that issue ? how can it be solved ?

------
skatenerd
it takes 19 days to build, and the next 100 years to fill it with occupants.

------
gonzo41
One quote comes to mind

-I'm from the future, learn Chinese.

------
CrLf
For some reason I don't feel compelled to spend time in such a building...

~~~
puranjay
I live in India and had a maid who was incredibly quick to clean the house.
She would come in, do her thing and be out in 15 minutes.

For other maids, the same cleaning up would take at least an hour.

I was convinced she wasn't doing a good job. All past experience with other
maids had shown me that it takes at least one hour to clean the house.

One day, I decided to follow up after she'd done her cleaning. I went over
every thing she'd cleaned and checked them for any dirt or grime.

Nothing.

So I decided to follow her as she cleaned. I trailed her like a ghost,
carefully noting her every move.

She was cleaning everything _very_ thoroughly. She did not leave a single
stone unturned.

My suspicions were only because everyone else was being inefficient.

Lesson learned: don't mistake inefficiency for quality.

~~~
known
What is her Caste?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India)

------
pjc50
Early on in the article I wondered about how steel was going to be
CO2-efficient, given the amount of coal involved in its production; but then I
see it's as a replacement for concrete, which is much worse.

~~~
oska
Steel fabrication does not _necessarily_ require coking coal.

[1] [http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4190319-u-s-steel-
natural-...](http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4190319-u-s-steel-natural-gas-
process-will-soon-replace-coke/)

[2]
[https://coalactionnetworkaotearoa.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/c...](https://coalactionnetworkaotearoa.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/can-
we-make-steel-without-coal/)

------
mmrasheed
I am fascinated by their construction technique, which is nothing but
perfection of management. I was eagerly waiting to see the proposed 220 story,
850 m tall building construction in seven months since 2012, but that plan was
halted due to continuous rejection by the authorities and the engineering
communities.

I am not a civil engineer, so I can't criticize their construction method. But
I wonder if it is traditional civil engineering community's prejudice, or fear
of being swept away by any revolutionary technology that keeps them opposing
this sort of construction technique?

~~~
brudgers
Development projects stall for many reasons among them are modifications of
the developer's _pro forma_ that reduce the viability of a project - interest
rates go up, the cost of construction goes up, rents go down, local occupancy
rates dip, etc. etc. The technology has the potential for some small
incremental change to the real-estate development process, but it doesn't
alter the underlying market forces where a housing shortage of 3000 dwellings
is identified and twelve developers each throw up a "coming in 2017" signboard
on some piece of land for an 1800 dwelling project. It's not enough to be out
front of the pack with construction, what really matters is business
intelligence.

Which is a round about way of suggesting that despite bureaucracy and
resistance from entrenched traditions, that real-estate development ideas are
much like startups: most run out of money and are worth zero. Unlike startups,
the upper bound on profit is low, but their potential persists owing to the
real nature of real property - land doesn't go anywhere.

~~~
minthd
Can't these kinds of buildings change the dynamic in real-estate ?

For example , in israel, where the land is usually bought from the state,
sometimes groups of private people gather together to build an apartment
complex and save a bit of money.But that's a long(and maybe risky) project, so
people rarely do so.

But let's say it was a short process - a group gathers, gives the funds , and
in month they enter their apartments. I could see this becoming more common,
because you can have decent savings .

And assuming that happens - now it's people buying their own land(and build
higher structures on it), won't that change the pricing dynamic on land, and
the political pressures on the state which sells such land ?

~~~
brudgers
Real-estate markets are markets. They seek equilibrium. When a building is
delivered, supply increases, demand goes down and a new equilibrium is
established. Groups of people who would build apartments have the option of
moving in to existing apartments without the impedance of land entitlement,
large project financing, or construction timelines. Speed to market presents
less risk to developers except when everyone else can get to market just as
fast. Then the risk that someone else delivers and the market becomes over-
supplied comes back.

~~~
minthd
How can it be that there's a risk of over-supply if times gets short and
feedback loops between buyers/contractors/sellers become much faster ?

------
drinchev
Sometimes I think IT industry is moving slow, because it's so much harder to
multiply the efforts with more human power. IT is so much quality over
quantity that effects like this would not happen easily.

Although there is no mention of the planning involved in the construction of
the building, I think the result is astonishing.

~~~
_pmf_
> IT is so much quality over quantity that effects like this would not happen
> easily.

I hope you are joking.

~~~
drinchev
I'm so not joking. 100 developers might equal = 10 experienced developers
these days. You can't just "put more force into the project and make it for 10
days", because actually the people that you want to hire might be not that
easy to find.

~~~
aries1980
Agreed, but I feel the renaissance of the 'Learn xyz in 24hrs' books in the
form of 'Check how Joe Bloggs made xyz in 3 weeks' articles.

~~~
innguest
So you judge a field by the sophists that come to exploit it?

~~~
aries1980
The commenter above stated we have better quality in IT and that is the only
thing that I reflected on.

------
zimpenfish
19 days to -assemble- a 57 storey tower. Four and a half months constructing
the modules for assembly.

> Broad Sustainable Building spent four and a half months fabricating the
> building’s 2,736 modules before construction began. The first 20 floors were
> completed last year, and the remaining 37 were built from 31 January to 17
> February this year, Xiao said.

[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/30/chinese-
constru...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/30/chinese-construction-
firm-erects-57-storey-skyscraper-in-19-days)

~~~
brudgers
Normally the time it takes to turn clay into brick or timber into lumber is
not considered as part of the time of construction. The first order
consideration is typically time on site because that's where the owner begins
to have liability related to construction activity.

By analogy we as outsiders don't count dressing in the dressing room against
the 90 minutes of a futbol match despite the Laws of the Game requiring
uniforms, boots and shinguards.

------
donkeyd
> “The biggest problem we face in the world right now isn't terrorism or world
> war. It's climate change,” he says.

I really like seeing this quote from a Chinese business man.

~~~
zhte415
There's more, but a small personal anecdote: I have a boss with similar, if
somewhat more relaxed, thinking. "Why stay in the Shangri-La when a [200 Yuan
per night] Motel 168 or HomeInn is perfectly clean, safe and more convenient."
or "Have a laptop and a standing desk if you like, it saves more than having
you unhappy or leave." or "50 Yuan per day travel bonus, enjoy the local
food." It is not penny pinching (the opposite, he'll spend where it is
needed), it is a true conviction that things should be done differently (from
the status quo).

When it encroaches on personal things such as the size of a family (below,
from the article's Zhang Yue) I do not like it - work is work and life is life
- but there is a deep dislike of the way things are done by the moneyed by a
lot of business people (and women are far more represented in this grouping
than in large companies operating in China, including multinationals or
traditional government backed companies) than a lot of people outside China
are aware of.

Further quotes:

> “Don't buy things you only use once, such as newspapers.”

> “Grow your own vegetables.”

> “Most importantly, have only one child, to allow the population of the world
> to return to a level it can bear.”

> Another company handbook urges staff to brush their teeth twice a day, and
> to share cars.

> His hair is greying. Dyeing your hair is bad for the environment, he says.

> I have to set an example. My staff imitate me, and they then influence those
> around them. That's how we influence society.”

~~~
kayoone
Great quotes, the "only one child" quote is only meant for certain countries i
guess. In Germany we have a problem with the population growing older and
older because young people get less and less kids. That taxes the health care
system and skews politics towards the old among other things.

~~~
ido
Fortunately Germany has high net migration, and the world's population is not
shrinking.

------
melling
The new World Trade Center took 8 years and is the most expensive building in
the world:

[http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/may/11/one-
world...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/may/11/one-world-trade-
centre-build-time-lapse-video)

Everything done is the U.S. takes more time and costs a lot more money.

Consider, for example, that China has constructed 10,000 miles of high-speed
rail in about a decade. We still have 0.0 miles. Yeah, yeah, we don't need 10k
but we need more than 0.

Airports, subways, cities, and I imagine roads are being constructed at an
incredible pace. This Bill Gates blog gets the point across:
[http://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/Concrete-in-
China](http://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/Concrete-in-China)

This is all good for China but the U.S. looks like it will quickly be passed
as the largest economy. That may have some repercussions.

~~~
mikeash
I live in the DC area and frequently visit Beijing.

The DC Metro is currently building the Silver Line, an extension out to Dulles
airport and a bit beyond. The first segment of the extension, with five
stations, was completed last year after five years of construction. The
remainder is planned to be complete in 2019 or 2020... assuming there aren't
any more delays.

In a similar amount of time, the Beijing subway went from a sad little system
with three lines to the second largest system in the world today, with 18
lines and 7 more under construction currently.

Now, Beijing is a substantially larger city, but it's still vastly
disproportionate. The contrast between the two metro systems is just shocking.

I don't know what the hell we're doing in the US, but whatever it is, we're
doing it wrong. Safety and quality differences aren't adequate to explain it
by a long shot.

~~~
rayiner
What slows down development in the U.S. is accommodating competing interests
in a democratic society. My parents, who live in the area, were among the
people who strongly opposed the overland route and wanted a tunnel through
Tysons, which would have cost another billion dollars and jeopardized federal
funding. That tunnel fight took up a lot of time. There are environmentalists
who care a lot more about the impact on the environment than the economic or
convenience benefits of the new line. There are folks who remember when
Fairfax County was a pretty sleepy place and strongly objected to any line at
all. In the U.S. we try to reconcile competing interests as much as possible.
In China, pro-development officials steamroll over everyone else.

Not to mention, the GDP per capita in the Tysons area is about 8x that of
Beijing. We spend a lot more on safety because we have a lot to lose.

I'm a pro-development kind of guy, but the Chinese model of unelected
technocrats dictating what gets built isn't the right answer. We should be
looking to Western Europe, where development like public transit gets done
because there is widespread public support to push things through the
democratic process.

~~~
ticviking
> I'm a pro-development kind of guy, but the Chinese model of unelected
> technocrats dictating what gets built isn't the right answer. We should be
> looking to Western Europe, where development like public transit gets done
> because there is widespread public support to push things through the
> democratic process.

Except in our history the major projects that got built were built in exactly
this way. Robert
Moses[[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses)]
is perhaps the most famous example of this, but we've had many others. The
technocrats get either a public official, or a private multi-billionaire and
make their vision happen, and damn the consequences.

I'm not familiar with the history of urban development in Europe, but I would
not be surprised to see similar figures behind the first few systems before
the benefits were obvious to everyone else.

Democracy is really good at forcing the system to take, or pretend to take,
competing needs into account, but end of the day in basically every system "he
who has the gold makes the rules".

