FUTURARC FORUM 2008, Gran Melia Jakarta Indonesia, 19 February 2008

Green Building
“The facts are well-known, largely undisputed, and devastating: we are systematically destroying our home, the planet we live on. Buildings are a major cause of green-house gas emissions, wastage and pollution, yet today we know that holistic sustainable design can minimize a building’s impact on the environment.”
Dr Matthias Krups, Chairman of the BCI Group, Publisher of FuturArc

FuturArc Forum 2008 will enable 4,000 architects, developers, engineers and students of these professions to learn more about green building and sustainable design first-hand from leading architects, engineers and academics. The nine conferences, each designed as an exceptional day of learning and information exchange, will be held in Jakarta, Singapore, Manila, Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok, Ho Chi Minh City, Sydney, Hong Kong and Shanghai between February and April 2008. Besides speeches by pioneers in green building, each conference will feature a presentation of awards for the FuturArc Prize 2008 competition and the release of a nine-country survey on green building.

Featuring in Indonesia:

Welcome address:
Dr Matthias Krups, Chairman of BCI Asia
Rachmat Witoelar, Minister of Environmental, Republic of Indonesia
Fauzi Bowo, Governor of Jakarta

Keynote speech:
Budi A. Sukada, Chairman of the Indonesia Institute of Architects (IAI)

Speaker:

Ray Cole, PhD is Professor and Director of the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture at the University of British Columbia and Academic Director of the School’s Design Centre for Sustainability. Dr Cole was selected as a North American Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture Distinguished Professor for “sustained commitment to building environmental research and teaching” in 2001. In 2003 he received the Architectural Institute of British Columbia Barbara Dalrymple Memorial Award for Community Service and the US Green Building Council’s Green Public Service Leadership Award.

Poul E Kristensen, Managing Director of IEN Consultants. He leads a consultancy firm that specializes in integrated sustainable building design and helps clients to meet their desired energy and environmental targets within a reasonable economic cost. Through the use of advanced digital tools, he has amassed expertise and experience in the use of solar energy, day lighting design and technologies as well as indoor climate strategies. Poul is a sought after adviser to both government and private sectors and is regularly consulted on planning and design stage projects that highlight the need for energy conservation.

Ir. Jimmy Priatman, M.Arch, is Chairman of Center for Building Energy Study Petra Christian University and the Principal Architect of Archi-Metric, PT. He completed a Masters degree at the College of Architecture of the Illinois Institute of Technology in the United States and helped design the 110th floor of the Cityfront Tower in Chicago. He promotes green building and energy-saving concepts. His design of high-rise buildings includes air-conditioning without chlorofluorocarbons.

Ir. M Ridwan Kamil, M. Arch, is Principal of Urbane Indonesia Architect. He completed a Masters degree at the University of California, Barkeley, in the United States. In 2003 Ridwan Kamil returned home from studies and employment at SOM in San Fransisco and Hong Kong to establish his own architecture and design company, Urbane Indonesia. His award-winning enterprise now works on large-scale projects throughout the Middle East, China and Southeast Asia.

Lee Kut Chueng, is Managing Director of RSP Architects Planners & Engineers (Pte) Ltd. With more than 30 years experience in a wide variety of building projects, he is currently leading RSP’s effort in promoting sustainability in architectural design. He is also a Board Member of the Building Control Authority (BCA) in Singapore – the key Government body in charge of building and construction activities. He has a special interest in tropical architecture and energy efficient design.

Event Management Contacts :
- Bobby (021) 5790 2930
- Handoko (021) 7014 7741
- Kurnia (021) 7149 9321

PT BCI Asia
Manggala Wanabakti Building, 8th Floor Wing A Suite 804-805
Jl. Jend. Gatot Subroto, Jakarta 10270, Indonesia
www.bciasia.com

Indonesian Institute of Architects PKB point (Nilai Kum): 6 (six) points
Get 50% discount for student, 20% for early bird registration before 15 January 2008

Read More.....

BCI Asia Top Ten Architects 2008

Recipients of this year’s BCI Asia Top Ten Awards will enjoy an opportunity to learn more about sustainability from experts on green building at FuturArc Forum 2008, to be held in nine cities between 19 February and 11 April 2008. The BCI Asia awards are bestowed each year to the 10 most active architectural firms in China, Hong Kong SAR, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. For Indonesia, this year’s recipients are listed on the following pages.

BCI Asia, the publisher of FuturArc, aims to improve built environments by assembling the principals of Top Ten firms with greenbuilding academics and practitioners from around the world as well as representatives of large property development companies, engineering firms and building technology providers. Besides participating in a discourse on green building, they will attend exclusive Top Ten Awards dinners during or immediately after each respective FuturArc Forum.

Several firms in this year’s Top Ten list are already developing a competency in green building such as Surbana International Consultants Pte Ltd of Singapore with its Green Mark Platinum rated Treelodge @ Punggol project as well as Wong & Ouyang (HK) Ltd with its design for University of Hong Kong Centennial Campus. Green building may still be in its infancy, but there has been a great leap in environmental awareness among local design professionals since early 2006 when BCI Asia Chairman Dr. Matthias Krups first called on architects to play a leadership role in designing sustainable buildings.

“The only way for Asia––and the world––to survive urban development on such a scale is to focus on sustainability,” Dr Krups said in his welcome address at the Top Ten Awards ceremonies in 2006. “Let us celebrate the remarkable accomplishments and the great responsibilities of the leading ten architectural firms.”

In collecting data on this year’s Top Ten, BCI Asia conducted about 300,000 interviews with architects, developers, engineers and contractors. Its research staff also followed tenders, visited sites and reviewed municipal records to ensure accuracy. The Top Ten winners had the highest accumulated value of active projects in their portfolios reported in BCI Asia’s e-bulletin/Leadmanager service in the year to September 2007. Active projects were either reported for the first time at design or documentation stages in the year to 30 September 2007; or updated to tender, post tender or construction stages during this annual period from design or documentation stages in the previous annual reporting period. Projects were excluded if they were abandoned or deferred.



Indonesia

AIRMAS ASRI PT.
address Jalan Cikini IV No. 6, Jakarta 10330 tel 62 21 3190 6688
recent projects Sunter Point • The Curve - Samarinda Mall • Artha Gading Office Park • MT Haryono Office • TMT Tower, Jalan TB Simatupang Jakarta
www.airmasasri.com

ARKONIN PT.
address Gedung Arkonin, Jalan Bintaro Taman Timur, Bintaro Jaya Sektor I, Jakarta 12330 tel 62 21 736 4176
recent projects Galeri Indosat Bandung • Pejatan Mall • BKPM Auditorium • Ciputra Superblock (Ciputra World) • Lintas Artha Office - Bandung • BSL (Bio Safety Level) III Laboratory - Jakarta
www.arkonin-id.com

ANGGARA ARCHITEAM PT.
address Jalan Tebet Barat IV No 6 Jakarta 12810 tel 62 21 830 3322 / 830 8356
recent projects Jakarta Excelcomindo Network Building - Bintaro • Pelita Harapan University : Blok F • Harris Hotel • Summarecon Office, Serpong, Jakarta
www.anggara.co.id

DENTON CORKER MARRSHAL JAKART A – DUTA CERMAT MANDIRI PT.
address Wijaya Puri Blok G No 30, Jalan Wijaya II, Jakarta 12160 t 62 21 721 0210
recent projects Novotel - TB Simatupang • Novotel Hotel Bandar Lampung (4 Stars) • The Kuningan Place • Nikko Bali Resort Expansion • Nu Ciwalk - Bandung
www.dentoncorkermarshall.com

INDOMEGAH CIPTA BANGUN CIPTA PT.
address Sentra Bisnis Artha Gading Blok A7 D No 20-21, Jakarta 14240 tel 62 21 453 3445
recent projects Kelapa Gading Market • Lucky Square • Makassar Town Square • Mutiara Kebayoran • The Sky Line Office Tell at Batam Center, Batam, Kepulauan Riau
www.indomegah.com

MEGATIKA INTERNATIONAL PT.
address Komplek Apartemen Permata Eksekutif Gedung Kantor Lt.3, Jalan PosPengumben, Jakarta 11550 tel 62 21 5365 1221
recent projects Grand Apartment • Kuta Apartment • Marbella Dago Pakar - Hotel • The Cosmopolis • Century Hills Hotels and Apartment • SCBD Office Park, at SCBD Lot 18, Jakarta

PTI ARCHITECTS
address Wisma Metropolitan II, 12th Floor, Jalan Jend Sudirman Kav 29. Jakarta 12920 tel 62 21 570 2702/03
recent projects The Fame • Trans Kalla - Integrated Business Complex • Sampoernia International School • Kuningan International School • Deli Grand City at Jalan Putri Hijau, Medan
www.pta.com.au

SEKAWAN DESIGNINC ARSITEK PT.
address Menara SDA Jalan Guntur No. 44, Jakarta 12980 tel 62 21 835 2235/835 1905
recent projects Bulungan Apartment • Bosowa Low rise Apartment • Mercure Pontianak Hotel • The Ambassade: Apartment and Suites at Jalan Denpasar, Kuningan, Jakarta
www.designinc.com.au

TETRA DESIGN INDONEISA PT.
address Jalan Tanah Abang IV / 1, Jakarta 10160 tel 65 21 351 8910
recent projects Trisula Office • Cyber Two • Omni Medical Center - Tangerang • Jakarta Financial Centre • The Cyber Jalan Kuningan 8, Jakarta
www.tetra.co.id

URBANE INDONESIA PT.
address Jalan Sumur Bandung 20, Bandung 40132 tel 62 22 250 0453
recent projects Tsunami Museum • Rasuna Epicentrum • Balikpapan Nirwana Hill Resort • Senayan Expo • Pancoran Office Park at Jalan Pancoran, Jakarta
www.urbane.co.id

© Copyright 2007 FuturArc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

Read More.....

Primary School Building in Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam

PROJECT DATA
Project Name
Primary School Building in NAD, Indonesia
Location
Bireun, Bener Meriah, Aceh Selatan and Aceh Singkil District, Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, Indonesia
Status
Construction
Expected Completion
December 2007
Site Area
Approx 1,000 – 5,000 m2 at 66 locations
Gross Floor Area
Approx 1,000 – 2,000 m2 on average per location
Number of Rooms
9 rooms per location
Building Height
1 storey
Client
UNICEF will be handing the project over to the Ministry of National Education Government of Indonesia
Architecture Firm
PT BITA ENARCON ENGINEERING, Bandung, Indonesia
Project Director
Bambang Panudju
Principal Architect
Sugeng Triyadi, Herry Mulyajaya,
Architect In-charge
Masedizal, Ariani Mutiara Wulan, Boyke M. Akbar
Plumbing & Electrical Engineer
Andrisa Pramadityani, Iyus Darusiam
Civil & Structural Engineer
Bambang Karto, Dedy Chandra
Images/Photos
Pitus Kartiman A, M. Mulya Hareza, Endang Ruchiyat.



On 26 December 2004, a major earthquake and resultant tsunami caused widespread devastation in the northern and western coastal areas of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam (NAD). The disaster left over 230,000 people dead/missing to date, and over 500,000 displaced. A subsequent earthquake on 28 March 2005 also resulted in severe devastation in the island of Nias of North Sumatra Province. According to a report by the Ministry of National Education (MONE) in April 2005, the tragedy left 40,900 children/students dead/missing, 2,500 teachers dead/missing and 2,135 destroyed/heavily damaged schools, across the board from kindergarten to university. Among those, 1,521 (71 percent) were primary schools.

Restoring the learning spaces for children in emergencies is one of UNICEF’s core commitments. With the “build back better” slogan in post-tsunami Aceh, on 2 April 2005, UNICEF signed a Memorandum of Understanding with MONE to reconstruct up to 300 primary schools and rehabilitate up to 200 primary schools with a budget of US$90 million in three years. In February 2006, safety concerns led UNICEF to decide not to rehabilitate damaged schools, but reconstruct them instead.

Targeted for 66 remote locations in NAD, this post-tsunami school rebuilding project follows UNICEF’s concept of a Child-Friendly School (CFS). A CFS is sustainable and environmentally friendly; accepted by the local community in terms of cost effectiveness, flexibility and ease of maintenance; and provides students with:
• A safe and healthy natural environment that ensures accessibility for disabled children
• A good and comfortable learning environment that has sufficient natural light, sufficient air circulation and maintains a comfortable temperature relative to the environment
• Classrooms and playgrounds that can accommodate child-centered education
• A permanent construction that can withstand natural hazards and has a lifespan of over 30 years.



In terms of architectural concepts, such guidelines mean that classrooms are designed to allow sufficient natural cross ventilation and daylight; classroom arrangements are made flexible to support student-centred teaching and learning methods; school premises are able to accommodate local community activities; and a child-friendly scale is considered in the design of classrooms, corridors, toilets, washbasin and tap height and other applicable aspects. Site development and site plan optimise the use of existing contours with minimal cut and fill activities. Existing trees are also preserved whenever possible.

To build earthquake-resistant and safer schools, the architects took into account some recommended guiding principles that govern seismic resistant design and construction in structural aspects. These include building smaller rooms and shorter structures, and having small openings in the walls such as windows that are as centrally located as are functionally feasible.

To streamline design and construction, repetitive modules were developed which comprise all the needed combinations of classrooms, libraries, teachers’ rooms and toilet blocks. These cookie-cutter modules were applied at each Phase 1 site to respond to the site’s characteristics.The size, orientation and contours of each site were significant determinants in the sitting of the building modules on each site. This efficient modular system will allow subsequent phases to be prepared (and constructed) more rapidly and efficiently.

A rule of thumb for school construction is high capital investment cost and low maintenance cost. By scrupulously selecting building systems and building materials that are characterised by their durability, albeit at a slightly higher cost, the recommended structures can be expected to serve the village populations well for many years, without the need to replace finishes or repair structures in the next 25 to 30 years, although prudent maintenance is always required.



Sturdy building materials such as steel was selected for durable superstructures, robust foundations, footings and floor slabs, roof sheeting and so on. Some of the building materials such as corrugated iron sheets, ceramic tiles, concrete blocks, sand, gravel and rabble stones were locally obtained, which helps to reduce construction costs and more importantly, get the local community actively involved in the construction of the schools.

The overriding feature of the school is its practicality. The simple structure provides maximum light and ventilation (especially by the use of clerestories). The straightforward steel shed roof has a sizeable cavity that is usefully stuffed with glass wool to reduce heat gain at lowland school sites. With the school buildings’ structural systems and finishes pragmatically looked after, the design team proposed the use of bright colour palettes, which were carefully selected for their attractiveness to young children. While school committees were engaged to help choose final colours, the project architects ensured that childfriendly colour schemes were selected.–Erwin Maulana/Candice Lim

© Copyright 2007 FuturArc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

Read More.....

Architects’ Act in Indonesia

Budi A. Sukada has been an active member of the National Committee of the Indonesian Architecture Institution (IAI) since 1986, and became the IAI Chairman in 2002. He is also a lecturer in the University of Indonesia and the Tarumanegara University, and is currently serving as a juror in several architecture competitions

Indonesia is not a safe place to live. Earthquakes happen almost every week in some part of the archipelago along with tsunamis; volcanoes may erupt at any time, and sudden floods from overflowing rivers (or banjir bandang) happen regularly without early warning, as do local tornadoes (or puting beliung). Indonesian people in the past have recognised such disasters and responded to them wisely through building traditions that have differed from place to place. Casualties have therefore been minimal while the ability to recover and reconstruct has been very high.

The present situation is quite the opposite. Indonesians today have forgotten such wisdom and all they do when a disaster occurs is to ask the government to come to their rescue and blame government officials for their misconduct. The Indonesian government does, in fact, recognise the country’s innate geological conditions and has put many regulations in place to keep the number of casualties to a minimum. There is the Building Act (Undang-undang Bangunan Gedung), which took the government almost 30 years to launch, and the Construction Services Act (Undang-undang Jasa Konstruksi), which took several years to enact. However, these regulations have not been bound under a legal umbrella due to bureaucracy and lengthy government procedures. If a legal umbrella existed, it would be compulsory not only to abide by building and construction regulations, but by the regulations governing those who provide the necessary services, including architects.

But who are the architects? In Indonesia, anybody who has built their own building thinks they are an architect––and the majority of buildings were built by owners. The result has been devastating. Ninety percent of buildings that were heavily damaged in earthquakes and urban fires were those constructed by their owners. In one very sad example, the dome of a big mosque ripped apart twice and its minaret collapsed, yet the owners insisted on rebuilding the structure themselves because they thought they were the architects. They did not assign real architects––not even for supervision––simply because there was no law that forces them to do so.

The first Indonesian architects and many generations afterwards were actually trained as building engineers, following the Dutch tradition. They immediately became professionals after graduation and were eligible to practice. But that was the time when most work was provided by the Dutch-Indies government and, subsequently, the Indonesian government. Now it is a different situation, especially with the rise of the private sector. In the past there was plenty of work that required the contribution of Indonesian architects; now it is the Indonesian architect that needs to find work––and it is the private sectors who starts by asking: “Who are you?” as they make informative comparisons with foreign architects. The same question is asked by foreign architects when they must work with Indonesian architects, either personally or through their professional organisations, along with routine questions such as,”Are you protected by law? Do you have professional indemnity?”

Unable to answer these kinds of questions, Indonesian architects lose the opportunity to get international-scale projects and be recognised by the international community of architects. It is this situation that has allowed foreign architects more than enough opportunities to practise in Indonesia––unnoticed but legal because they can practise under their respective codes which are internationally acknowledged. On the other hand, it is also this situation which has driven the IAI to recently submit a bill for an Architects’ Act to the Parliament. The Act describes the architect, the services architects provide, their competency, rights and responsibilities; as well as their organisation and code of conduct for practices and ethics.

Unlike most other countries, the Act considers it compulsory to have good knowledge and respect for local genius; an understanding of local cultures; and a principle which does not see architecture as an end to itself but rather as a vehicle towards achieving a better built environment for Indonesia. The ultimate aim is, of course, for the benefit of society at large and Indonesians in particular, to have a safe and pleasant environment to live in and a civilised and orderly building procedure. With this Act, there is a bright future for Indonesian architects, who can become regulated, protected professionals in their own country and recognised internationally as well––all in line with IAI’s motto calling all Indonesian architects to build our environment together.

© Copyright 2007 FuturArc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

Read More.....

The CAD Way

In Indonesia CAD, rather than BIM, remains the main working tool of architects.

by Erwin Maulana

Computer aided drawing, or CAD, is an engineering system which has been used by the manufacturing, construction and architectural industries since the 1980s. For the architect, the CAD system has become a tool that changes the work pattern of an architect from drafting to designing, expressing ideas and presenting plans in detail.

Today the American Institute of Architecture (AIA) through vendors of the CAD system have gone a step further, applying building information modeling (BIM) as the standard for architectural working systems. As a result BIM has been adopted by architects in various countries across Asia, including China and Singapore. In Indonesia, however, CAD remains the main working tool of architects––and BIM seems a distant future.

According to Rizal Syarifuddin and Liza Wiryawan from the Indonesian Architecture Institution (IAI), although CAD has a larger range of working tool elements compared to BIM, it is far less complex, as it simply changes the pattern of the architect’s work by bringing it from the drafting table to the computer. BIM, on the other hand, is capable of changing the entire design procedure in architecture.

Syarifuddin and Wiryawan, who are both in IAI’s CAD Team, said CAD entered Indonesia at the end of 1980 when then-Minister of Research and Technology, BJ Habibie, launched a large project called the Centre for Science and Technology Research (Puspiptek). At the time, a consortium of architectural consultants was formed––consisting of the country’s ten biggest architectural consultants––and subsequently named Archi-10. They were the first to apply CAD in Indonesia, thus demonstrating that Indonesia was not slow in anticipating CAD technology. By the 1990s students and educational institutes were well versed in CAD.

Afterwards, CAD technology was naturally compulsory for those involved in the construction industry. But here problems arose: because many industry players were strapped for cash and had low levels of awareness regarding software copyright, there was widespread use of illegal CAD software. The reality was that a wide gap existed between large, technology-savvy firms in Jakarta (and most of Java) which handled large scale projects; and their smaller, ‘traditional’counterparts outside the capital, which had poor access to information and technology, struggled to make ends meet, and therefore had to resort to using illegal CAD software.

The situation prompted IAI to negotiate, around 2001 and 2002, for discounted prices from CAD vendors. From IAI’s perspective, it was important to note that its members were mostly small and medium firms that were uanble to charge much for their services and therefore lacked the means to buy legal software. Making legal software cheaper, IAI said, would eliminate the widespread use of illegal software. Vendors of CAD software, on the other hand, argued they had to pay hefty import taxes for their products which, conseqently, meant they could not cut down on prices.

During this time, IAI also conducted an authorised training centre for CAD systems. This started in 1999 but ended in 2004, when IAI was unable to pay its annual fees owing partly to the fact that IAI’s market consisted mainly of students and fresh graduates of architecture.

Meanwhile, from the end of 2005 law enforcers started clamping down on users of illegal software, including CAD systems; several architecture firms in Indonesia were affected.

Still, IAI was aware of the importance of CAD as a working tool for architects. So IAI started to investigate––through surveys and researches––more affordable alternatives. Discussions with architect associations in other countries, such as the Philippines, Singapore and China, resulted in several alternative brands that IAI urged its CAD Team to try.

Syarifuddin said the main consideration for choosing a CAD replacement software was its compatibility with, or at least its similarity to the CAD platform previously employed by the user. He said some countries had developed their own CAD software, such as Singapore, through the Singapore Institute of Architects (SIA). IAI would also like to see this happen in Indonesia, he said.

Syarifuddin said that based on its surveys, IAI had chosen CAD software by IntelliCAD Technology Consortium (ITC), an organisation of software developers of IntelliCAD, a computer aided design engine.

Rizal hoped IAI could one day develop its own CAD system under an IAI CAD Centre: “We hope our CAD Centre will eventually be doing three things: firstly, trade. We will conduct the procurement and distribution of the system, to make it convenient for our members.

“Secondly, we will open a CAD training centre to provide training to architecture students, young architects, members and non-members of IAI, to allow them to know more about CAD systems and technology. We will not limit the CAD to certain vendors; we will, as much as possible, provide training for all CAD systems according to user demands.

“Thirdly, we want our own CAD system to match our needs in Indonesia as well as users’ individual needs––be they architects, community members or others in the architecture industry. We will develop plug-ins, libraries and other matters related to the CAD system.”

He said IAI is optimistic about the future of the architectural profession. Several milestones that are cause for celebration are: firstly, the implementation of the Architects’ Act in the foreseeable future (see sidebar for more information). According to current copyright regulations in Indonesia, the value of an architect’s work lies only in the draft work; in fact, the work of architects involves much more than just drafting, as it includes the creation of design ideas and concepts. The association holds high hopes for the bill on the Architects’ Act which was recently submitted to the People’s Representative Council. The Act protects the architectural profession; it protects users of architectural services; and therefore increases community appreciation for the architectural profession.

The second cause for optimism, Syarifuddin said, was the prediction by various economic observers of high growth in Indonesia’s construction industry in future years.

The two conditions above will hopefully increase the wellbeing of architects and their ability to apply trends in design and technology.

© Copyright 2007 FuturArc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

Read More.....