Glenn KatzUpon carefully reflection of my initial building form and layout proposal in Module 6, I concluded that the design would not be conducive to achieving a sustainable or net zero building. From the outset of the the design process, I set maximization of prefabrication and modularity, environmental cohesion, and connectivity with local vernacular to be the primary targets that would inform my designs. However, my previous proposal presents itself as an empty vessel that would likely only feign sustainability, despite my good intentions, even with further development. The building envelope was far too complex, the layout irregular, and many program elements critical to achieving sustainable building systems such as the MEP rooms and roof space were inadequate or not carefully incorporated into the larger design. I felt that the sum of all these challenges yielded a design that would be hard to impactfully make sustainable. The complexity and irregularity of forms would directly impact on the rest of the design process including affecting structural layout and material demands and increasing the difficulty of HVAC and plumbing installation. These cascading challenges would inhibit embodied carbon goals and drive up construction costs and complexity. Additionally, with my initial proposal, I felt that I lost target of a fundamental design goal which was to integrate with and complement the local architectural vernacular of my site within Sao Paulo. I concluded that I had become the very thing I despised, a starchitect with a vision of sustainability that would not be accessible nor replicable. After my reflection, I decided to rework my initial proposal and undergo further iterations that would target the following goals and principles:
- simplicity
- spatial uniformity
- consistent floor plan between levels
- reduced footprint
- adequate sizing of critical elements
- integration with context
Below is an update of my proposal following a few rounds of intensive iteration. I believe this design is responds more directly to my project goals and the direction I wish to continuing moving towards as the design process progress. Here are some key features:
- reduced number of levels from 3 to 2 for the eastern wing to reduce footprint while not compromising project spatial budget
- regular MEP room sizes and more strategic positioning
- proximity to egress and wide circulatory avenues
- stacked from floor to floor to allow for duct shafts
- sloped roofs at relatively consistent heights and slopes
- conducive for easier solar panel installation and maintenance
- better facilitates interior daylighting and natural ventilation ambitions
- more symmetrical and balanced facades
- more pleasant and beautiful appearance compared to the previous proposal
- better positioned for incorporation of prefabricated facade package kits
- greater atria area + fewer and more distance walls from the perimeter
- better enables the capability to harness natural ventilation as a secondary HVAC system
South Elevation
North Elevation
3D Views
Floor Plans (L1 to L3)
L1 - Annotated
