Jonathan Yeung

Designer (Architecture and Interior), founding partner of YY Projects. Lecturer at the University of Hong Kong and the Technological and Higher Education Institute of Hong Kong. Holds a M.Arch from Harvard University and a B.A. (Arch) from UC Berkeley. Previously in Brooklyn, currently based in Hong Kong.

BROWSE ALL FROM THIS AUTHOR HERE

Revisiting Skyscraper Design: The Benefits of Responsive Facades and Passive Designs

Our contemporary society has been witnessing a surge in skyscraper construction in urban centers worldwide for various reasons—including engineering advancements, increased urban density, space constraints, and, arguably, a competitive drive for building the tallest structures. The allure of all-glass facades and the pursuit of curtain walls with larger panes of continuous glass have often come at the cost of functionality.

In these towers, operable windows are sacrificed for aesthetics and expansive views, with a central core layout that maximizes 360-degree views while creating architectural "solar heat-gain monsters." Without natural or cross ventilation, these glass skyscrapers trap significant heat from solar radiation within habitable spaces, relying almost exclusively on mechanical HVAC systems to cool these spaces. This raises the question: is passive ventilation strategy becoming obsolete in high-rise design, or can operable systems be integrated effectively into our high-tech towers?

Revisiting Skyscraper Design: The Benefits of Responsive Facades and Passive Designs - Image 1 of 4Revisiting Skyscraper Design: The Benefits of Responsive Facades and Passive Designs - Image 2 of 4Revisiting Skyscraper Design: The Benefits of Responsive Facades and Passive Designs - Image 3 of 4Revisiting Skyscraper Design: The Benefits of Responsive Facades and Passive Designs - Image 4 of 4Revisiting Skyscraper Design: The Benefits of Responsive Facades and Passive Designs - More Images+ 24

An Urban Living Machine for the Common Good: Municipal Services Buildings in Hong Kong

In Delirious New York, Rem Koolhaas vividly discusses the Downtown Athletic Club, a striking example of how an unassuming building exterior can conceal a vibrant mix of distinct, self-contained programs. Inside the uniform facade of this skyscraper, a private athletic club hosts an eclectic range of facilities—boxing gyms next to oyster bars and interior golf ranges below swimming pools—all segregated yet highly accessible. The Downtown Athletic Club epitomized the dynamism of New York's skyscrapers at the time, showcasing the thrill of capitalism through a selective, inward-focused world of leisure and privilege for the selected. This "machine of programs" operated independently of the external city as an isolated ecosystem within its walls. Yet, one might ask: could a similar model, designed for public use, create a more inclusive, lively community and neighborhood experience? This will activate the building within, instead of only serving the selected elites, and influence and transform the urban fabric and shapes around the building. In Hong Kong, a distant parallel can be drawn with the Municipal Services Buildings (MSBs)—publicly-funded structures that serve the community by integrating diverse functions within a singular vast building mass, much like the Downtown Athletic Club.

An Urban Living Machine for the Common Good: Municipal Services Buildings in Hong Kong - Imagem 1 de 4An Urban Living Machine for the Common Good: Municipal Services Buildings in Hong Kong - Imagem 2 de 4An Urban Living Machine for the Common Good: Municipal Services Buildings in Hong Kong - Imagem 3 de 4An Urban Living Machine for the Common Good: Municipal Services Buildings in Hong Kong - Imagem 4 de 4An Urban Living Machine for the Common Good: Municipal Services Buildings in Hong Kong - More Images+ 15

Building Methods in Focus: The Solid vs Hollow Partitioning Debate

Two primary building approaches are commonly identified in architecture and design: solid versus hollow construction. These methods vary significantly across different cultures and regions, specifically for interior partitioning systems, when they appear interchangeable. Each has its own established practices influenced by local materials, labor preferences, climatic conditions, and cultural traditions. When architects and designers focus on their local context, it is easy to overlook the broader construction assumptions, limiting design flexibility and methodology. This raises an important question: How do these two building approaches differ?

Focusing mainly on interior systems, the distinctions between solid and hollow construction largely stem from the availability of materials and workforce preferences. For example, in the United States and Japan, stud walls, both wood and metal, are frequently used for partitioning. Conversely, brick remains the predominant material for partition walls in regions such as Hong Kong and southern China. Why do we build differently, and what are the benefits and challenges of each building methodology?

Building Methods in Focus: The Solid vs Hollow Partitioning Debate - Image 1 of 4Building Methods in Focus: The Solid vs Hollow Partitioning Debate - Image 2 of 4Building Methods in Focus: The Solid vs Hollow Partitioning Debate - Image 3 of 4Building Methods in Focus: The Solid vs Hollow Partitioning Debate - Image 4 of 4Building Methods in Focus: The Solid vs Hollow Partitioning Debate - More Images+ 14

A Skyward Shift: Exploring the Social Impact of Elevated Public Spaces in Cities

With escalating land values in urban centers, there has been a growing trend to float public spaces from ground level to elevated locations, such as rooftops or podiums between buildings. From a development perspective, maximizing floor area has become crucial as urban environments expand. Ground-level spaces are highly sought after for retail use due to their strategic location, which attracts foot traffic and potential customers and drives city development and economics.

This financial consideration, which often guides building activities and directions in urban centers, contradicts design principles advocated during the modernist era for the benefits of better outdoor space for the public, such as the concept of 'Freeing the Ground'. Architects like Le Corbusier championed this concept through projects like Villa Savoye and Unite d' Habitation. These modernist designs envisioned a future where buildings were elevated to restore open, accessible outdoor ground-level spaces for its users. However, for the reasons above, many contemporary projects instead seek to replicate the function of public grounds within the building's structure.

A Skyward Shift: Exploring the Social Impact of Elevated Public Spaces in Cities - 5 的图像 4A Skyward Shift: Exploring the Social Impact of Elevated Public Spaces in Cities - 1 的图像 4A Skyward Shift: Exploring the Social Impact of Elevated Public Spaces in Cities - 2 的图像 4A Skyward Shift: Exploring the Social Impact of Elevated Public Spaces in Cities - 3 的图像 4A Skyward Shift: Exploring the Social Impact of Elevated Public Spaces in Cities - More Images+ 10