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?
I think that shade and wind are most affected by the surrounding context, where neighboring buildings can be high-rises and block lots of sunlight and wind, or it can be a more open area where the lot receives lots of daily light and high winds. Also, I think the design and intended use of buildings should complement and/or match the surrounding area.
◦ What kinds of mistakes only become visible once the context is present?
Mistakes like entrances to roads, where to reduce wind/noise, and designated outdoor viewing areas only become visible with surrounding context.
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 that it depends. I would say that if the building exists in a very windy area and/or the building’s functions require efficient wind reduction, then I would prioritize designs that are modified for wind consideration. I think that wind is also likely to cause more damage to the building or outdoor features, so I would be more cautious about wind.
◦ Who should have the final say, and at what point in the process?
I think that structural engineers can determine the safety requirements based on the wind in that area, so I would argue they have the final say in how to properly prioritize the needs of the site. I would hope that these decisions are made during the design process so there are not complications further down the road.
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 think I had an intuition about which proposal would perform best, and then the numbers from the analyses reflected it. However, there was one proposal that I thought would have better results, and they were not reflected in the numbers produced.
◦ What would you have had to see to abandon your favorite option?
I would have had to see significant, at least 20% better, differences in total carbon, noise, and wind to abandon my favorite option.
◦ If the lot next door is built out in three years, does your recommendation hold?
It depends on whether the new site affects the shade, wind, and noise at my proposed site. If those aspects change, then I would likely reconsider my recommendation to better fit the new environment.