Working share link to your Forma project
Module3_homework - Fall 26 - CEE 120A_220A - Adelekan - Autodesk Forma Board
One page facade comparison showing both options with their metrics
Typical floor plan image with unit types or zones labelled, plus the unit mix schedule
One AI render of the chosen scheme
Design memo of 300 to 500 words: how the massing changed from Week 2 and why, what the facade studies showed, what you chose, and where you overrode the automation
I kept the three-layered building from Week 2 but made several adjustments while developing the facade. With some help, I changed the original basic building into a line building so that changes made to one floor could be replicated across the other floors. I initially designed the floor plans for floors 2–5 and replicated them on floors 6–8. However, because the third layer was smaller than the second layer, fewer rooms could fit on those floors. Hence, I cut out the excess rooms (outrightly out of floor space initially) and enlarged the third layer so it could contain the leftover rooms (in or somewhat in floor space initially) . This kept the building layout as consistent as possible.
I developed two facade options. Facade 1 had balconies stacked vertically across the building, with additional windows for larger bedrooms. Facade 2 used a zigzag balcony arrangement and omitted balconies from the south-facing section, which experienced significant shading. Both facades offered good daylight and sunlight potential. However, Facade 1's stacked balconies shaded the balconies below, limiting their access to sunlight. Facade 2 improved sunlight access on the south-facing side and offered slightly better access elsewhere. Both facades had equal carbon footprint of 3.01M kg of CO2 emissions for the first year.
I chose Facade 1 because both options had similar metrics and I wanted to balance the sunlight access with some shading. I hypothesise that in a warm place like Napa, California having some access to shade could mean reduced cooling load. This decision was made as both buildings had very similar metrics. Facade 1 also had a more consistent balcony arrangement. I also considered merging the balcony- free section of facade 2 with the rest of facade 1.
I overrode the automation a few times during the design process. When the facade elements failed to align despite using the right measurement, I adjusted them manually. I wanted to avoid placing elemnts around the building core elements so I manually placed facade elements on nearby walls. Lastly, I made little aesthetic window changes when windows felt oddly placed in any section.