Why does it matter to model the real terrain and real neighboring buildings?
◦ Which aspects of a building design are most affected by surrounding context? The surrounding context can affect the building’s daylight, wind, noise, views, and overall site layout. For my project, the nearby buildings and roads were especially important when looking at how much sunlight and noise each proposal would receive.
◦ What kinds of mistakes only become visible once the context is present? Without the surrounding buildings, I might assume that a certain massing would get enough sunlight or provide good noise protection. Once the context is included, unexpected shadows, wind conditions, or noise from nearby roads can become more noticeable.
Should the building adapt to the site, or the site to the building?
◦ From a developer's perspective?
◦ From a designer's perspective?
◦ From the perspective of the neighbors who already live there?
Sun hours and wind frequently want opposite things from the same massing.
◦ How should a team break the tie when two analyses disagree? I think the team should first look at which issue is more important for the specific site and how the space will be used. If possible, I would also look for another design solution that can improve the weaker result without sacrificing the better one.
◦ Who should have the final say, and at what point in the process? The design team should make the final decision after reviewing the analysis results and the goals of the project. The decision should be made during the design process, before the massing is finalized, so there is still time to make changes.
Forma's rapid analyses are fast because they are approximate.
◦ What is a rapid operational energy analysis leaving out?
◦ At what stage does that approximation stop being good enough?
◦ What would you need before putting a performance number in front of a client?
You generated three proposals and recommended one.
◦ Did the analysis choose it, or did you choose it and then find numbers that agreed? The analysis helped me choose Proposal 2, but the numbers were not the only reason. I also considered the purpose of each massing and wanted a design that had a good balance between daylight, noise, wind, and carbon.
◦ What would you have had to see to abandon your favorite option? I would change my choice if the analysis showed a major problem that would be difficult to solve through other design changes. For example, if the proposal had consistently poor daylight or created uncomfortable outdoor conditions, I would consider another option.
◦ If the lot next door is built out in three years, does your recommendation hold? Not necessarily. A new building next door could change the sunlight, wind, noise, and views around the site. I would need to run the analysis again with the new neighboring building before deciding whether Proposal 2 was still the best option.