Civic archive complex · Nanning, Guangxi
A light-grey modular facade frames the municipal archive complex
Two complete archive photographs record the main Nanning Municipal Archives elevation and the co-located Local Chronicles Hall. This case study separates the documented building timeline and visible facade composition from product, quantity and supplier-scope details that the historic page does not establish.
- Institution
- Nanning Municipal Archives, with Nanning Local Chronicles Hall
- New address
- 19 Yudong Avenue, Wuxiang New District, Nanning
- Construction record
- Started October 2014; formally completed March 2017
- Total building area
- 33,296.5 m² in the official project inspection; not facade area
- Phase-one site
- 50 mu including land reserved for a later phase
- Project agent
- Nanning Weining Construction Investment Co., Ltd.
- Main contractor
- Second Construction Co., Ltd. of China Construction Eighth Engineering Division
- Facade product record
- Legacy light-grey terracotta/ceramic attribution; model, size and quantity not documented
Project identity and a bounded timeline
The Guangxi Archives Administration’s 2017 inspection record traces the project from a July 2009 initiation and June 2012 drawing filing through a site change, September 2014 tender completion and October 2014 construction start. It records acceptance of the main works in November 2016 and formal project completion in March 2017. The same record identifies the project agent and main contractor shown above; it does not identify an architect, facade consultant, facade installer or material supplier.
1987 · old archive record
The legacy LOPO article says the former premises at 65 Xinmin Road were built in 1987. This has not been substituted for an independent construction record.
October 2014 to March 2017 · new complex
The official inspection supplies the construction-start, main-works-acceptance and formal-completion milestones. It does not state a public-opening date.
28 November and 26 December · year not stated
The 2019 archive says records moved to Yudong Avenue on 28 November and public archive-use services resumed on 26 December, but the source text omits the year. These dates are not silently assigned to 2019 or 2017.
What the photographs and legacy material record support
The images show pale grey-beige modular fields on major opaque elevations, a darker base, narrow vertical openings, deep projecting elements and substantial glazed zones. The second building presents a large faceted glass opening beside a regular pale wall grid. These observations describe appearance and arrangement only; photographs cannot identify the clay body, finish code, thickness, support method or performance of a complete wall assembly.
The historic LOPO page alternates among “terracotta rainscreen panels,” “terracotta tiles” and “terracotta board,” while attributing the light-grey exterior units to LOPO. No purchase order, specification, bill of quantities, model number, module dimensions, thickness, colour or surface code, facade area, unit count, test record, system drawing or signed supplier scope was recovered. The careful description is therefore archive-attributed terracotta/ceramic facade units, not a current product identification or proof that every visible wall surface uses one system.
Opaque wall fields
A regular grid is visible across the main pale elevations. Module size cannot be measured reliably from perspective photographs and should come from approved drawings or schedules.
Glass and deep reveals
Glazing, vertical fins, openings, dark base walls and roof-level elements are distinct parts of the composition. The legacy phrase “entire facade” is therefore too broad.
Colour and surface
The photographs support a light grey-beige visual range under bright daylight, not a product colour code, approved sample, batch range or present manufacturing availability.
Keep building scale, collection data and facade quantities separate
The official inspection reports 50 mu of phase-one planned land, including an area reserved for a later phase, and a total building area of 33,296.5 m². These are site and building measures for the project complex. Neither is a terracotta facade area, order quantity or number of panels. They also should not be divided or converted into product quantities without project drawings and a measured schedule.
The legacy page reports a planned capacity of 700,000 paper-file volumes and says nearly 100,000 paper files plus physical archives were moved from the Xinmin Road premises. Capacity and moved holdings are different measures, and both are historic operational records—not current collection counts. The page’s discussion of digital archives and an electronic-record backup centre concerns information systems; it does not demonstrate weather, fire, thermal, structural, durability or archive-preservation performance for the facade.
No reviewed source identifies the architect, design institute, structural or facade engineer, facade contractor or installer. The official record names the main works contractor, but that does not by itself establish responsibility for the terracotta package. Likewise, a supplier-authored archive attribution does not establish that LOPO designed, supplied, installed or warranted the whole facade.
Evidence needed to use this as a procurement precedent
Recover the product schedule
Confirm current manufacturer, item number, nominal and permitted dimensions, thickness, clay body, surface, colour range, batch controls, quantities and replacement-stock strategy from project records and current data.
Define the complete wall assembly
Document panels or tiles together with rails, anchors, joints, cavity, membranes, insulation, flashings, openings, parapets and interfaces. The responsible team must verify project-specific loads, movement, water, fire, thermal and maintenance requirements.
Approve appearance at useful scales
Compare individual samples, a multi-unit range board and a representative elevation mock-up under agreed lighting. Record acceptable colour variation, joint rhythm, corners, reveals, glass transitions and repair criteria.
Confirm roles and retain evidence
Identify designer, engineer, supplier, fabricator, installer and inspection responsibilities. Keep approved drawings, calculations, samples, test reports, delivery records, inspections, non-conformance actions and as-built information.
Case-study limits
- March 2017 is the formal completion recorded by the official project inspection; the September 2019 LOPO publication date is not a completion or opening year.
- The legacy move and service-resumption dates omit their year and are not presented as current visitor guidance.
- 50 mu and 33,296.5 m² describe site/building scale, while 700,000 and nearly 100,000 describe archive capacity and moved records. None is a facade area or product quantity.
- No model, unit size, thickness, surface code, quantity, approved wall build-up or project test record was recovered for the archive-attributed terracotta/ceramic units.
- No reviewed record establishes LOPO’s design, installation, testing, whole-facade supply or warranty responsibility.
- Appearance, civic use and archive functions do not establish structural, fire, water, thermal, durability, environmental or archive-preservation performance.
Build the next facade brief around current evidence
Share elevations, module and colour intent, wall interfaces, applicable project requirements, quantity schedule, sample and mock-up plan, programme and delivery location. Current products and complete assemblies should be checked against project-specific documents before selection.