Glenn KatzImages of Your 3 Design Proposals
Proposal 1:
Proposal 2:
Proposal 3:
Side-By-Side Comparisons of Your Analysis Results
Sun Hours Analysis:
Daylight Potential Analysis:
Your Recommendation for the “Best” Design Option
After comparing the surrounding environments of Copenhagen, New York, and Sao Paulo as potential project locations, I have chosen New York as the site for my design. I aim to establish an exhibition center that is almost pure white and has a modern style, a design that seems difficult to integrate into the surroundings of Copenhagen and Sao Paulo. The architecture around Copenhagen is relatively traditional European in style, and the building site is too close to surrounding structures to allow for garden design. Sao Paulo's relatively bright architectural style makes it hard for a pure white building to blend well into the community environment. In contrast, the architecture around the New York design site is more modern, and there is a large grassy area nearby, making my building and garden design more suitable for this land.
Project Locations from Google Earth:
- Copenhagen
- New York
- Sao Paulo
Building on New York
I created three basic models for potential designs. My design will focus on emphasizing outdoor spaces, so I want the main building to be relatively low and narrow. Later designs will incorporate more curvilinear elements compared to these simple models.
After conducting Sun Hours and Daylight Potential analyses for the three proposals, I believe that proposal 1 is the best option. We can see that the complex structure of Proposal 3 prevents a large area on the first floor from receiving sufficient light. The structure of Proposal 2 does not make full use of the land area. The direct architectural form of Proposal 1 provides more abundant lighting conditions, allows more effective use of sunlight to replace artificial lighting, and offers a larger floor area.