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?
◦ What kinds of mistakes only become visible once the context is present?
Should the building adapt to the site, or the site to the building?
◦ From a developer's perspective?
From this perspective, I would say it depends. Because the developer is focused on the financial aspect of this, they might choose the cheaper option, whether that’s adapting to the site or adapting to the building. There are also legal factors that go into it, which, I would assume, would determine whether they can legally change the land.
◦ From a designer's perspective?
From this perspective, the site should adapt to the building. Designers tend to create lavish designs, often underestimating or ignoring the realities of the terrain they are working with. Because their main focus is the design of the building and not so much its context, it is much easier for them to have the site work with them, not against them.
◦ From the perspective of the neighbors who already live there?
From this perspective, the building should adapt to the site. It is much easier to develop a building given the current terrain and circumstances on the site than to have to remodel the site itself. Changing the site would only meddle with the lives of the surrounding neighbors for a longer period of time. There would be noise complaints and increased traffic due to blocked-off roads to make space for construction, among other nuisances. While this holds true for constructing a building, the time frame is much smaller.
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 that a team should break the tie depending on which factor is more turbulent/changes most frequently. Depending on the location, there may be crazier, more frequent changes in direct sun hours. Thus, a team should focus on the sun hours. The same would hold true if the wind changes more frequently.
◦ Who should have the final say, and at what point in the process?
I believe that the sun hours should have the final say, and quite early on in the process. This is because the sun hours impact the amount and type of windows you will have, the electric lighting necessary, and the direction your building is facing.
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?
I chose the design I believed was the better fit. I based my choice on the numbers and graphs provided by the analysis.
◦ What would you have had to see to abandon your favorite option?
If my other designs performed better in the daylight analysis, then I would have abandoned my chosen proposal. This is because the daylight potential determines the types of windows and electric lighting needed in my design, both additions of which would increase the electric demand.
◦ If the lot next door is built out in three years, does your recommendation hold?
My recommendation may hold. This is because weather patterns can change drastically in 3 years, especially with increasing climate change. Thus, in 3 years, climate patterns may be different. However, because my current design performs well in almost all aspects, it should be able to withstand these changes.