Sie sind auf Seite 1von 66

s u s t a i n a b l e

+

a

p p

l

i

e

d

d e s i g n

r e s e a r c h

Max C. Doelling, Dipl.-Ing.

e d d e s i g n r e s e a r c h

Entry Stairs; The Hive, Kotagiri, India. A Kundoo + M C Doelling, 2008 - 2012

Annual Cooling Energy Annual Heating Energy Average Air Temp. + Daylight 7 kWh/m 2 103
Annual
Cooling Energy
Annual
Heating Energy
Average
Air Temp. + Daylight
7
kWh/m
2
103
40
kWh/m
2
136
18
°C
22
218
log(lux)
3870

Interactive Spatial Thermal + + Daylight Visualization

Custom Software. M C Doelling 2013 - 14

s u s t a i n a b l e

+

a

p p

l

i

e

d

d e s i g n

r e s e a r c h

Selected Projects, Papers + Presentations

p. 3 - 15 Accepted proposal

16 - 27

Built design

28 - 37

38 - 50 Peer-reviewed paper

51 - 60

Peer-reviewed paper

61 - 66

Invited presentation +

+ Peer-reviewed paper

Project

South Florida Wildlife Center Redevelopment Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA

The Hive, Honey and Coffee Manufactory Kotagiri, Tamil Nadu, India

Post Suburbia Cape Cod, MA, USA

Publication

Space-based Thermal Metrics Mapping for Conceptual Low - Energy Architectural Design

Parametric Design: a Case Study in Design - Simulation Integration

Hybrid Daylight Models in Architectural Design Education +

+ Prototyping Daylight

1 2 6 3 4 5 22.0 SP A 8.9 C A C 6.3 B
1
2
6
3
4
5
22.0
SP
A
8.9
C A
C
6.3
B
1
2.8
48
B
2
3
2
4
5
6
3.3
7.04.53.83.1
4.5
3.7
4.7
Client
4.5
3.7
4.5
4.4
The Humane Society
of the United States
The Keystone Foundation
Setting Out Plan on Contours; The Hive
Independent study
Venue
University College London (UCL), UK.
Building Simulation and Optimization 2014
10.5 6.2
Institut Nationale de l’Énergie Solaire
(INES), France. Building Simulation 2013
2.7
2.7
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(MIT), MA, USA. DIVA Day 2012.
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7

National University of Singapore (NUS). CAADRIA 2013.

s

o u t h

f l o r i d a

w i l

d l

i

f e

c

e n t e r

r e d e v e l o p m e n t

p. 3 | for the Humane Society of the United States Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA. 2009 - 2010, 2014

M y real-world thesis project helped the Humane Society to develop a phased rehabilitation plan for the South Florida

Wildlife Center (SFWC), where injured native species and the occasional domestic animal are treated, rehabilitated and then released back into the wild or adopted. The center primarily relies on core veterinary, rehabilitation staff and countless volunteers.

As a volunteer designer, I was tasked with developing a no holds barred redevelopment plan to accommodate future operational growth and inspire upcoming development drives.

The resultant pays gives special attention to the unique programme demands, site sustainability considerations, the subtropical climate’s influence on building morphology and related energy use. Tropical building rule guides, solar geometry inputs and selective performance simulation were also used to shape the architecture, building on previous typology experiences in India.

For this portfolio, I created several new drawings and reworked existing ones to tell the design story in a compact format.

protected

wetlands

new wildlife care center building

Additionally, extensive multi-zone thermal and daylight simulations of the final design state were run and visualized with custom software developed by me and not available when the project was first completed. The new holistic simulations show that the

intended design indeed lives up to its original performance intent previously not calculated on a whole-building level.

 

Background/Opposite:

Aerial Perspective; South Florida Wildlife Center, Final Restructuring Phase

animal

habitats

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 4 | Location + Original Site Impressions

T he SFWC site is wedged between a public park, an industrial area and Ft. Lauderdale International Airport. The initial

task was to develop an overview of the site and its operational structure, both previously undocumented.

and its operational structure, both previously undocumented. 1 Current Wildlife Hospital Snyder Park 1 2 2

1 Current Wildlife Hospital

Snyder Park

1

2

undocumented. 1 Current Wildlife Hospital Snyder Park 1 2 2 Native Animal Rehabilitation Habitats Raptors in

2 Native Animal Rehabilitation Habitats

undocumented. 1 Current Wildlife Hospital Snyder Park 1 2 2 Native Animal Rehabilitation Habitats Raptors in

Raptors in Flight Cage

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 5 | Challenges + Functional Programming

Opposite, top:

Site and Architectural Programming, based on staff interviews

D ocumenting the site revealed a scattered distribution of animal treatment and rehabilitation activities that grew over the years

in an ad-hoc fashion. In combination with detailed staff interviews, the main design challenges became clear:

Opposite, bottom:

Adaptable Structure Sketches

Bottom, left:

Existing Site Layout

Animal Hospital

Animal Hospital

Offices

Offices

Nursery

Nursery

Break Room / Kitchen

Break Room / Kitchen

•  Develop detailed functional programme requirements

•  Understand key needs of separate animal groups

•  Re-organize the site to improve caretaking operations

•  Account for future growth and improve outreach facilities

•  Redevelopment must not cause operational interruptions

Intern Apartment Maintenance Animal Feed Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens Small Domestics Trailer Wild Animal Habitats
Intern Apartment
Maintenance
Animal Feed Kitchen
Domestic Animal Pens
Small Domestics Trailer
Wild Animal Habitats
Restrooms + Showers
Material + Feed Storage
Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens Small Domestics Trailer Wild Animal Habitats Restrooms + Showers Material + Feed
Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens Small Domestics Trailer Wild Animal Habitats Restrooms + Showers Material + Feed
Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens Small Domestics Trailer Wild Animal Habitats Restrooms + Showers Material + Feed

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 6 | Phased Development

S haped by the programme requirements, a convoluted access situation, interlocking development goals and the presence of

protected wetlands at the site’s center, a plan to in three phases erect an eventually joined, multi-use building was proposed.

The structure would in its final state form an enclosure around the domestic animal and adoption functions open to the public, seclude the private wild animal facilities to minimize human imprinting and offer new, properly distributed site positions for all key facilities.

Creating the plan was a challenge since caretaking functions should be interrupted as little as possible; only structures whose functions were addressed in each phase could be relocated, also causing intermittent repurposing of existing facilities.

causing intermittent repurposing of existing facilities. Animal Hospital Animal Hospital Lobby Offices Nursery Break

Animal Hospital

Animal Hospital Lobbyrepurposing of existing facilities. Animal Hospital Offices Nursery Break Room / Kitchen Intern Apartment

Officesexisting facilities. Animal Hospital Animal Hospital Lobby Nursery Break Room / Kitchen Intern Apartment Maintenance

Nurseryfacilities. Animal Hospital Animal Hospital Lobby Offices Break Room / Kitchen Intern Apartment Maintenance Animal

Break Room / KitchenAnimal Hospital Animal Hospital Lobby Offices Nursery Intern Apartment Maintenance Animal Feed Kitchen Domestic

Intern ApartmentAnimal Hospital Lobby Offices Nursery Break Room / Kitchen Maintenance Animal Feed Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens

Lobby Offices Nursery Break Room / Kitchen Intern Apartment Maintenance Animal Feed Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens

Maintenance

Animal Feed KitchenNursery Break Room / Kitchen Intern Apartment Maintenance Domestic Animal Pens Small Domestics Wild Animal Habitats

Domestic Animal Pens/ Kitchen Intern Apartment Maintenance Animal Feed Kitchen Small Domestics Wild Animal Habitats Material & Feed

Small DomesticsMaintenance Animal Feed Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens Wild Animal Habitats Material & Feed Storage Main Lobby

Wild Animal HabitatsAnimal Feed Kitchen Domestic Animal Pens Small Domestics Material & Feed Storage Main Lobby Exhibition /

Material & Feed StorageDomestic Animal Pens Small Domestics Wild Animal Habitats Main Lobby Exhibition / Multi-Use Café Seminar Room

Domestics Wild Animal Habitats Material & Feed Storage Main Lobby Exhibition / Multi-Use Café Seminar Room

Main Lobby

Exhibition / Multi-UseWild Animal Habitats Material & Feed Storage Main Lobby Café Seminar Room (2nd floor) Sustainability Office

Café& Feed Storage Main Lobby Exhibition / Multi-Use Seminar Room (2nd floor) Sustainability Office (2nd floor)

Seminar Room (2nd floor)& Feed Storage Main Lobby Exhibition / Multi-Use Café Sustainability Office (2nd floor) Administration (2nd floor)

Sustainability Office (2nd floor)Lobby Exhibition / Multi-Use Café Seminar Room (2nd floor) Administration (2nd floor) Souvenir Shop Thrift Shop

Administration (2nd floor)Seminar Room (2nd floor) Sustainability Office (2nd floor) Souvenir Shop Thrift Shop Lab Agriculture Restrooms +

Sustainability Office (2nd floor) Administration (2nd floor) Souvenir Shop Thrift Shop Lab Agriculture Restrooms +

Souvenir Shop

Thrift ShopOffice (2nd floor) Administration (2nd floor) Souvenir Shop Lab Agriculture Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Feed/Biomass

Labfloor) Administration (2nd floor) Souvenir Shop Thrift Shop Agriculture Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Feed/Biomass

AgricultureAdministration (2nd floor) Souvenir Shop Thrift Shop Lab Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Feed/Biomass Production Phase

Restrooms + Showers

Shop Thrift Shop Lab Agriculture Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Feed/Biomass Production Phase 1: New Animal

Aquaponics

Feed/Biomass ProductionThrift Shop Lab Agriculture Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Phase 1: New Animal Hospital • Hospital &

Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Feed/Biomass Production Phase 1: New Animal Hospital • Hospital & office
Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Feed/Biomass Production Phase 1: New Animal Hospital • Hospital & office
Restrooms + Showers Aquaponics Feed/Biomass Production Phase 1: New Animal Hospital • Hospital & office
Phase 1: New Animal Hospital
Phase 1:
New Animal Hospital

Hospital & office functions in new building

Domestics adoptions moved to old hospital

Begin limiting public access to wild part

Old admin trailer now education/outreach

North wetlands site remains untouched

Phase 2: New Nursery • Nursery redeveloped at secluded site
Phase 2:
New Nursery
• Nursery redeveloped at secluded site

Minimized wild animal exposure to noise

Created new functions (e.g. lab) in nursery

Maintenance takes over old nursery trailer

New domestic animal pens at site center

Phase 3: Public Functions & Adoptions
Phase 3:
Public Functions & Adoptions

Enclosed structure holds final functions:

Lobby, edu. room, café and exibition area

Adoptions center and thrift shop

New administration staff offices

Enclosed maintenance yard, workshops

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 7 | View from Hospital towards Adoptions, Main Entrance + Nursery

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 8 | Ground Floor Plan + Section / Elevation A

1.1 Animal Hospital Lobby

1.2 Admissions Desk + Offices

1.3 General Triage

1.4 Triage Wild Animals

1.5 Triage Domestic Animals

1.6 Triage Isolation

1.7 Main Treatment Area with Wet Cell

1.8 Auxiliary Treatment Room

1.9 Auxiliary Treatment Room

1.10 Intensive Care Unit

1.11 Surgery

1.12 Surgery Preparation

1.13 Radiology Office

1.14 Radiology

1.15 Pharmacy

1.16 Lab

1.17 Animal Feed Kitchen

1.18 Feed Kitchen Storage

1.19 Cages + Equipment Storage

1.20 Building Services

1.21 Morgue

1.22 Delivery + Disinfection Yard

1.23 Isolation Ward

1.24 Reptiles Ward

1.25 Domestics Ward

1.26 Wild Animals Ward

1.27 Veterinarian’s Office 1

1.28 Veterinarian’s Office 2

1.29 Staff Office

1.30 Staff Tea Kitchen

1.31 Staff Break Room

2.1

Administrative Areas

2.2

2.3

Meeting + Break Room,

Library

Server Room

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

Animal Feed Kitchen

General Storage

Treatment Area

Baby Bird Room

Baby Bird Incubator

Work + Prep area

Bird Terrace

Specialised Incubator

3.9 Work + Prep Area

3.10 Baby Racoons

3.11 Adolescent Racoons

3.12 Baby Opossums

3.13 Adolescent Opossums

3.14 Work + Prep Area

3.15 Baby Squirrels

3.16 Adolescent Squirrels

3.17 Other Animals / Work Area

4.1

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

6.1

6.2

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

8.1

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

Science Office

Lobby

Exhibition + Multi-Purpose Room

Visitor + Staff Cafeteria

Souvenir Shop

Storage Cafe/Shop

Storage External Facilities

Storage Exhibition

Domestic Animal Habitats

Adoptions Desk

Examination Room

Thrift Shop

Animal Feed Kitchen

Storage Feed Kitchen

Storage External Facilities

Workshop

General Storage

Building Services

Workshop Yard

Section A

3.8 3.7 3.9 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.2 3.8 3.14 3.1 3.15
3.8
3.7
3.9
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.2
3.8
3.14
3.1
3.15
3.16
3.3
3.8
3.17
4.1
6.1
5.5
2.2
5.4
8.3
5.3
8.5
8.1
8.4
7.1
8.2
5.1
7.6
7.2
7.5
7.4
6.2
5.2
7.3
Section C
Section B

2.3

2.1

1.23

1.24

1.25

1.26

1.27

1.30

1.31

1.6

1.20

1.17

1.15

1.18 1.19

1.16

1.13

1.14

1.7

1.5

1.2

1.4

1.1

1.21

1.3

1.22

1.12

1.11

1.10

1.9

1.8

1.28

1.29

Section D

5.6 Education + Seminar Room

3. Nursery

5.1 Lobby

2.5 Administration: Public Functions

5.2 Exhibition + Multi-Purpose Room

7.7 Adoptions Staff Break Room, Intern Apartment

7. Domestic Adoptions + Service Areas, Thrift Shop

8.6 Maintenance Office 2.4, 1. Main + Hospital Administration 8.5 Workshop + Yard 2. Admin
8.6 Maintenance Office
2.4, 1. Main + Hospital Administration
8.5 Workshop + Yard
2. Admin Meeting + Library
1. Animal Hospital + Lobby

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 9 |

Floor Plan +

Section / Elevation B

1st

1.32

Changing Rooms (male staff)

1.33

Changing Rooms (female staff)

1.34

Hospital Office

2.4

Main Administration

2.5

Administration: Public Functions

2.6

Meeting Area

2.7

Office Storage

3.19

3.21

3.22

 

3.18

8.6

Office + Maintenance Personnel

 

3.20

3.18

Nursery Office

3.19

Nursery Office

3.20

Nursery Staff Break Room

3.23

4.2

3.21

Changing Rooms (male staff)

3.22

Changing Rooms (female staff)

3.23

Storage

4.2

Lab: Research

5.7

5.6

Education + Seminar Room

5.7

Education Lobby + Observation Deck

6.3

Education Equipment Storage

6.3

7.7

Adoptions Staff Break Room

7.8

Changing Rooms (male staff)

7.9

Changing Rooms (female staff)

7.10

Storage

9 Veterinary Intern Apartments

 

5.6

8.6

2.4

1.32

1.33

1.34

Intern Apartments   5.6 8.6 2.4 1.32 1.33 1.34 Public Areas (education, domestics + adoption) Private

Public Areas (education, domestics + adoption)Intern Apartments   5.6 8.6 2.4 1.32 1.33 1.34 Private Administrative / Service Areas Private Wild

Private Administrative / Service Areas1.33 1.34 Public Areas (education, domestics + adoption) Private Wild Animal Care Areas (hospital + nursery)

Private Wild Animal Care Areas (hospital + nursery)domestics + adoption) Private Administrative / Service Areas 7.8 2.5 2.6 Section B 2.7 7.7 7.9

7.8

2.5 2.6

Section B

2.7 7.7

7.9 9

7.10

9

+ nursery) 7.8 2.5 2.6 Section B 2.7 7.7 7.9 9 7.10 9 2.5 Administration: Public

2.5 Administration: Public Functions

2.6 Administration: Meeting Area

7.7 Adoptions Staff Break Room, Intern Apartment

8.6 Maintenance Office

2.4, 1. Main + Hospital Administration

5.1 Lobby

5.2 Exhibition + Multi-Purpose Room

7. Domestic Adoptions + Service Areas, Thrift Shop

8.5 Workshop + Yard

2. Admin Meeting + Library

1.1 Animal Hospital Lobby

1.1 Animal Hospital

1.22 Delivery + Disinfection Yard

unique monitor height 6m 5m control 4m 3.63m 3.57m horizontal monitor line 3.1m 3.04m 3.09m
unique
monitor height
6m
5m
control
4m
3.63m
3.57m
horizontal
monitor line
3.1m
3.04m
3.09m
3.03m
control
overhang + roof
height / pitch control
Opposite:

diagrid height

control

diagrid pattern

control

main outline

control

s o u t h w i l d l

p. 10 |

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

Elevation C, D +

Section /

Control System / Geometry I

I n order not to overwhelm the site with excess building volume and provide an envelope adapted to the new program, the section continuously changes over the length of the building.

To retain control over this movement, a parametric system reads input curves to define the building outline, the structural grid, roof monitor positions etc. After shape definition, a secondary script divides the facade into bays of identical width sets and positions the individually shaped frames that form the building’s spine.

Care was also taken to study rationalization; despite its sweeping shape, few facade bays are truly unique; the roof elements are tessellated flat (albeit still geometrically complex) and simple infill panels compensate for gradual roof line changes before the facade units need to step up or down. Many of the frames, however, remain singular, custom elements.

Frame + Facade Bay Rationalization System, Control Curves

3.2 Staff 4.2 Science Lab 5.7. Obs. Deck 5.6 Edu / Seminar Room 2.5 Admin:
3.2
Staff
4.2
Science Lab
5.7. Obs. Deck
5.6
Edu / Seminar Room
2.5 Admin: Public Functions
3.1/2 Baby Racoons
+ Baby Opossums
3.14
Work / Prep Area
3.17 Other
4.1 Science Office
5.1 Lobby
3.15 Baby Squirrels
Animals + Work Area
5.4 / 3 Café,
Souvenir Shop
Animals + Work Area 5.4 / 3 Café, Souvenir Shop 9 Intern Apartments 8.6 Maintenance Offices
Animals + Work Area 5.4 / 3 Café, Souvenir Shop 9 Intern Apartments 8.6 Maintenance Offices
9 Intern Apartments 8.6 Maintenance Offices 2.4 Main Admin 1.34 Hospital Admin
9 Intern Apartments
8.6
Maintenance Offices
2.4 Main Admin 1.34 Hospital Admin

Left:

Section / Elevation C, D + Section Location Indicators

7 Adoptions

8.5 Workshops + Building Services

2.1 Meeting + Break Room, Main Admin

1.1 Hospital Lobby

1.4 Triage

1.7 Main Treatment Area

1.14 Radiology

1.16 / 19 / 20 Lab, Storage, Services

1.21 Morgue

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 11 | View towards Main Entrance

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 12 | Performance Section + Schematic Frame Variations

T he building section’s rationale is to keep the structure as thin as possible to allow for cross-ventilation, use the roof monitors

to achieve deeper daylighting in wider parts of the building and to minimize afternoon glare if the facade louvers were to be closed, especially at the east and west-facing orientations on ground level.

As already apparent from the plans, many permanent occupancy zones, e.g. offices, are floating under the roof at the second building level; since they then do not necessarily border both outside ground floor facades, the roof monitors in these cases effectively become a third side daylighting and ventilation window line through their change in location, size and orientation.

The schematic outlines of all frames are drawn on this page to give a further appreciation of the structure’s movement. At the lower left is the first frame of the nursery, which is the widest and squattest building section.

Opposite: Complete Frame Sections Below: Environmental Section through Main Entrance Hall

and squattest building section. Opposite: Complete Frame Sections Below: Environmental Section through Main Entrance Hall
and squattest building section. Opposite: Complete Frame Sections Below: Environmental Section through Main Entrance Hall
and squattest building section. Opposite: Complete Frame Sections Below: Environmental Section through Main Entrance Hall

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 13 | Conceptual Design Simulation:

Daylight + Energetic Performance

S simulations for daylight (Daysim), energy use (EnergyPlus) and facade irradiation (Radiance) checked performance during

design and at the end of the conceptual ideation phase. Energy and daylight visualizations were created with my software Mr.Comfy.

Annual daylight performance, especially on the upper floor, is very good (~ 75% of occ. time illumination between 300 - 1500 lux) - in part due to the roof projection, which shields the upper facades, as visible in the irradiation image. Appropriate intensity daylight in offices reduces lighting energy use, here a sustainability goal.

Relative cooling energy demand of the 1st floor office spaces is surprisingly uniform, given the multiple orientations. This is in part due to different adjacency conditions to variedly used ground floor zones, some of which are semi-exterior and non-conditioned. However, natural ventilation with coupled mixed-mode changeover mechanical cooling reduces conditioning energy demand by ~35%.

Generally, the zoning concept of moving office spaces to the first floor and using a generous shading overhang works well, as do the roof monitors for deeper daylighting and good cross-ventilation. The original environmental design intent (also see previous page) is confirmed as feasible through the simulations; however, a final design iteration would still have room for improvements: secondary overhangs at the ground floor would again reduce cooling loads, as would e.g. a further (daylight-conscious) glazing area reduction.

Cumulative Annual Air Changes

203

Daylight 300 - 1500 lux (frequency)

0

Annual Cooling Energy Use

0

Ground Floor Daylight Distribution

0

air changes

% of occ. hours

kWh/m 2

log(lux)

87085

100

111

16910

Annual Cumulative Facade Irradiation

0 382 log(lux) kWh/m 2 6733 2100
0 382
log(lux) kWh/m
2 6733 2100

03 Annual Cumulative Air Changes (E+

AirFlow Network natural ventilation)

Natural ventilation was used in conjunc- tion with mixed-mode changeover artifi- cial cooling; spaces with fewest internal obstructions and openings on several sides fare best, e.g. most offices. The apartments, internal storage and service spaces show comparatively reduced ventilation rates due to lower transient occupancy, which was set to directly control window operation. Overall, natural ventilation is triggered frequently enough to significantly reduce cooling energy demand.

02 Annual Total Cooling Energy Use Seminar + Daylight Frequency 300 - 1500 lux Room
02 Annual Total Cooling Energy Use
Seminar
+ Daylight Frequency 300 - 1500 lux
Room
Nursery
Offices
Front
Offices
South(West) facing offices show similar
cooling use patterns; the apartments
require less conditioning due to lower
occupancy. Seminar and nursery offices
receive higher solar gains due to East/
West orientation, and experience higher
loads, even though daylight is well
controlled on most of the floor. Abso-
lute energy use values only valid for
geometric sensitivity testing, mediated
by ground floor adjacency conditions:
Intern
Conditioned zone floor adjacency
Apartments
Semi-exterior/unconditioned adj.
Hospital +
Main Administration
01 Annual Facade Irradiation + log of
Avrg. Ground Floor Illumination (lux)
East- and west-facing facade areas
and south-oriented, tilted roof sections
receive highest solar gains. The roof
projection successfully shields upper
facade sections on all orientations, co-
responsible for good 1st floor daylight
performance. The ground floor is also
well daylit (dot overlay), but shows
partially undesirable peak intensities.

s o u t h w i l d l

f l o r i d a

i

f e

c e n t e r

p. 14 | View from Lobby towards Interior Yard + Multi-Use Space

To Whom It May Concern: Max Christian Dölling , born 01/24/82, served as an architectural

To Whom It May Concern:

Max Christian Dölling , born 01/24/82, served as an architectural design volunteer at the South Florida Wildlife Center for one year, beginning in September 2009.

The South Florida Wildlife Center, founded in 1969, is one of the largest wildlife trauma hospitals and rehabilitation centers in the nation, admitting nearly 13,000 animals spanning over 255 species, annually. As a proud affiliate of the Humane Society of the United States, we serve the South Florida tri- county region of Broward, Palm Beach, and Miami-Dade. It is our mission to protect wildlife through rescue, rehabilitation, and education.

The recovery habitats on our leased 4.1 acre property in Ft. Lauderdale, which house up to 875 animals at any given time, are upgraded, replaced, or added in order to keep up with a growing diversity of species and rehabilitative care demands in South Florida, which is partially a result of urban sprawl encroaching on natural habitats.

Max set himself the task of creating a comprehensive case study on how the center might accomplish its growth and reorganization goals over the next few decades. In the analysis stage, he spent several days familiarizing himself with the way we work, conducting interviews with our crew, observing animal care and sketching as well as photographing the entire site. In the process, Max exhibited a wonderful ability to collaborate with our staff in order to learn of our precise requirements. Additionally, he studied the influence Florida's subtropical climate has on our activities and how to best utilize and control the combined impact of the prevailing winds, sun movement, building air flow and site topography. All those concerns were impressively addressed in the final design.

Based on his initial site analysis, further literature research on animal care and rehabilitation, as well as our continuous guidance, Max envisioned a multi-phase site restructuring concept that would allow key functions to be gradually moved to more appropriate locations on our property while maintaining care operations during the entire process, a concern that is very important to us and extremely difficult to achieve. The envisioned phasing scheme and final intended functional layout show great insight into the way we work and are highly imaginative, especially as additional educational spaces are proposed to further our community outreach mission, as well as achieving the clear spatial separation of domestic and wild animals. Throughout the entire concept, comfort requirements for the well-being of the animals, as well as the staff providing all manner of care of them, were fulfilled and even greatly improved upon, as compared to the status quo.

The phasing plan and the proposed flexible building structure to accommodate it have minimum volumetric impact and tread very lightly by not impinging on a residual patch of wetlands at the center of our site, which is undergoing a restoration presently. We were especially impressed by the clever consideration of natural environmental advantages to keep the structure as green as possible and to reduce lighting, cooling and other electrical needs, which is one of our major operational cost factors. Despite offering much more space than currently available to us, the designed building does not overwhelm the site and appears light and airy. Max used the factors of building orientation, layout and structure to their fullest effect, delivering a creative, stellar design that is as beautiful as it is functional. He presented the outstanding final product to our executive staff in September 2010 and received unanimous praise.

Through the case study we were able to enhance our own understanding of the interrelationship between our care activities, the overall site organization and the possible benefits of improving our building stock. The knowledge thus gained continues to influence us to this day, for which we would like to thank Max. Working with him was a breeze, and his commitment to making the built environment a greener place, for humans and animals alike, is truly inspirational and very close to our own mission.

We wish Max all the best for his future and believe that if all of society acted in unison, as demonstrated by this project, the harmony of man and environment might someday be fully achieved.

Sincerely,

Sherry L. Schlueter Executive Director, South Florida Wildlife Center

sschlueter@humanesociety.org t 954-524-7464 f 954-343-0760

South Florida Wildlife Center

3200 S.W. 4th Avenue

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33315

s o u t h

w i l

d l

i

f l o r i d a

f

e

c e n t e r

p. 15 | Client Recommendation Letter

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 16 | for the Keystone Foundation, Kotagiri, Nilgiris, India. 2008 - 2010, 2012 (completion)

J ointly designed by Anupama Kundoo and me working together in Berlin, the new “Hive” building for India’s NGO they Keystone Foundation finished construction in 2012.

Nicknamed such by Keystone’s staff, the structure’s main purpose

is to contain the processing and packaging of local cliff bee honey

(very tasty, very dangerous to collect) harvested by indigenous people in Southern India’s Nilgiri mountains, plus packaging and shipping of locally grown coffee.

The design was challenging due to the extremely steep slope Keystone’s campus is situated on; a form had to be found that would be constructable by a local general contractor at minimum cost, while still maintaining good design, minimizing land use impact and taking into account logistical production demands.

Environmental concerns of passive heating potential and natural lighting also played a major part in shaping the architecture; as the campus slope faces roughly North-East, capture of morning solar gains and provision of well daylit working spaces was enabled by relatively large facade apertures necessitating a concrete frame structure, which is clad with local stone on the lower floors and uses rammed earth construction on the upper building levels.

The Hive has been in use for a few years now, and Keystone are

satisfied with how the design provides a good working environment. It is a very happy feeling to know that our contribution has made

a difference to help preserve the region’s unique ecosystem,

part of the UNESCO World Network of Biosphere Reserves, and aspects of its indigenous way of life.

Background/Opposite:

View towards the Hive, South-East facade of Built Design Variant

t h e h i v e : h o n e y + m
t h e
h
i v e
:
h o n e y
+
m a n u f a c t o r y
b
u
i
l
c o f f e e
d i n g
p. 17 | Site Overview, Design Development 01
D ue
to rapid operational growth, the Keystone campus required
a
larger building to replace the original Hive structure. A
new parcel of land (upper right) was originally intended as its
location, yet unforeseen permissions aspects forced a late move
of the structure to be integrated into the main campus. The partial
reworking meant that select aspects of the building’s intended
layout were changed, however it proved a blessing in disguise to
have the new structure closer to existing campus functions.
Background/Opposite:
Keystone Campus Site Plan, Kotagiri, Nilgiris, India.
Original Hive Building Site Location (upper right) and Redesign
Location (center) indicated (red outlines)
Survey: M.Ghandi, adapted by Author
South-West View towards Meeting Hall (center), prior to New Hive Construction

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 18 | Design Development 02

T he building’s shape was developed from conceptual sketches by Anupama and volumetric 3d models created by me, which tested many roof geometry and on-slope positioning ideas.

Using a digital site surface model helped check cutout volume, which we tried to minimize; to create a building that spans over slope sections would have increased construction difficulty and cost. For this and access reasons, a form closely following the contours was chosen, with vertically nested functions.

Early Digital Massing Study + Roof Form Exploration (Author)

Initial Programme Stacking + Distribution Sketches (A. Kundoo) Sketch Floor Plate + Section Geometries (Author)
Initial Programme Stacking + Distribution Sketches (A. Kundoo)
Sketch Floor Plate +
Section Geometries
(Author)
Slope-spanning/”Hovering”
Design Massing Sketch
(Author)

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 19 | Final Design Variant Plans 01

T est iterations led to a final design variant that precisely conforms to site contours and features main access stairs to the North-West facade, outside

of the building itself. Individual floors are vertically stacked and only partially overlap horizontally; by not extending roofs to touch the facade of the level on top, balconies are carved out which are directly accessible from each floor. In effect, a shed roof typology is formed, which equipped with roof monitor windows allows for deeper daylighting and improved ventilation.

Note that due to the late-stage site change and construction of the building by an independent general contractor, design changes were introduced in the built version, but luckily overall design intent was retained.

South-East

Elevation

Lateral (a)

Main Section

Office

Dispatch

= + 10,1m

= + 6.4m

Coffee Floor

= + 3,2m

Honey Floor

= 0

a

B

A

+ 10,1m = + 6.4m Coffee Floor = + 3,2m Honey Floor = 0 a B
Offices 46 sqm Dispatch + Storage 120 sqm Coffee Floor N
Offices
46
sqm
Dispatch + Storage
120 sqm
Coffee Floor
N

75 sqm

2.7 2.7 4.7 3.3 3.1 3.8 4.5 7.0 22.0 8.9 1 2 6 3 4
2.7
2.7
4.7
3.3
3.1
3.8
4.5
7.0
22.0
8.9
1
2
6
3
4
5
SP
C
C
A
2.848
a
1
B
2
3
2
4
Honey Floor, 118 sqm
N
5
on Setting Out Plan
6
6.3
4.5
3.7
4.5
3.7
4.5
4.4
10.5
6.2
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 20 | Completed Structure on New Site, Dec. 2013 Note “tree courtyard” and modified roof detailing

Photo: Keystone Foundation

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 21 | View of Honey Floor Work Stations, Dec. 2013

Photo: Keystone Foundation

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 22 | Staff Member at Work, Honey Floor

Photo: Keystone Foundation

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 23 | Dispatch Floor, December 2013 Staff packaging local produce

Photo: Keystone Foundation

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 24 | Final Design Variant Plans 02

A central feature of the conceptual and built structure is the outside staircase linking production floors. While the dumb waiter indicated in the original plans was not included after the site move, the stairs remained as an important design element; how they connect to the land in part determined floor heights and entrance positions. The axonometric drawings shown on this page were used by the general contractor to better understand and adapt the (by local standards) unusual building geometry.

1 2 3 4 5 3,2m 6,4m 0m
1
2
3
4
5
3,2m
6,4m
0m

North-West

Elevation

6

10,1m

Rammed Earth + Stone Wall Infill

Reinforced

Concrete Struct.

Wall + Column Foundations

Cutout +

Foundations

6

5

4

3

2

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 25 | Final Design Variant View

C omparing the original design variant with the constructed building shows that main spatial concepts were retained; In the final drawings, the

material definition of the outer walls was left open to be discussed with the contractor, who also served as structural engineer. Hence, adapting the building to use rammed earth on the upper floors proved easy and was anticipated. Fundamental changes during construction are not unheard of in India, hence I am grateful to the Keystone for sticking closely to the original vision.

Perspective View of Final Design Variant, showing four-floor configuration and full-height NE-facade windows

t h e h i v e : h o n e y   +

t h e

h i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 26 | Completed Structure on New Site, Dec. 2013 Opposed views along main access stairs

Photos: Keystone Foundation

t h e

h

i v e

:

h o n e y

 

+

c o f f e e

m a n u f a c t o r y

b

u

i

l

d i n g

p. 27 | Acknowledgements & Recommendation Letter

I would like to thank Anupama Kundoo for giving me the chance to work on

an ambitious design and granting me great influence on its intended and built

form- it was an interesting challenge that influenced my career.

The Keystone foundation deserves huge credit for accepting a challenging geometry and never giving up on the project despite at times seemingly insurmountable difficulties- Matthew and Sneh, thank you!

Kanika Puri’s contribution to keep the project on track after the site change is not forgotten; without her, I am sure even less of the intended design would have been saved or even built at all, for which she has my deep gratitude.

Finally, Keystone’s Aritra Bose took many of the pictures that made it into this portfolio- thank you for going through all that trouble!

portfolio- thank you for going through all that trouble! 12 t h May, 2012 We are

12 th May, 2012

We are an environmental NGO working in the Western Ghats in India, more specifically in the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve. We engage with issues concerning conservation of resources and livelihoods of indigenous people and have over the years several programmes in these hills. See www.keystone-foundation.org

We have since 2000 been developing our campus in the hills and work with Anupama Kundoo as our architect for both office and residential premises. The several small units in the campus represent different aspects of our work. Since 2009-10 we have worked on expanding our facilities to help indigenous people value add and market their produce for better returns. This new building was designed by Anupama and Max Doelling, and with a few adaptations, is now complete.

This letter is to appreciate the effort taken in the design to adapt to our needs and make necessary changes quickly. The design was made keeping in mind our steep mountain terrain and cold weather. The 3 floors now have cascade effect giving us open sunny terraces and large windows facing the morning sun. This has made our working areas bright and warm saving on costs concerning lighting and heating. The spaces are large and well ventilated and have given the team working there flexibility to adapt their work spaces as per their needs. The upper floor uses rammed earth walls – like the rest of the campus buildings, and blends well both with the existing structures and the landscape. The lower floor use of local stone for cladding walls has also made the building beautiful and easy to maintain.

We now use the building to its maximum capacity and would like to appreciate the work done by the architects to design it well to enable a comfortable working environment for us.

it well to enable a comfortable working environment for us. Snehlata Nath Director, Programs

Snehlata Nath

Director, Programs





              



p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 28 | Independent Urban Design Study Cape Cod, MA, USA. 2008 - 2009, 2014

C ape Cod exemplifies many archetypical housing and urban development phenomena present in the US to this day, and

thus holds a special place in the collective understanding of how (sub)urban life is shaped and influences human life in return.

Due to my own history in the US (albeit in Florida, not New England) and a great interest in the intersection of natural ecosystems and man’s desire to shape the environment in ways beneficial to contemporary (and contested) modes of living, I conducted a case study that investigated the impact of suburbanization on Cape Cod, and developed a phased, participatory master plan to test ideas on how to remedy perceived (and very real) problems caused by low-density land use.

The planning narrative approaches the problem in three stages:

•  analysis of suburbanization impact on land + ecosystem

•  Explore conceptual urban design ideas based on analysis

•  Adapt core concepts for possible real-world implementation

The planning site eventually chosen is shown in the highlight below; after mapping the peninsula, efforts were concentrated on applying what was learned at a smaller suburban scale.

Unlike the Wildlife Care Center and Hive projects, this study has

a purely academic target audience, which is a big limitation; I

believe, though, that it still holds up to scrutiny, mainly due to the rigor with which the initial impact data was collected and the way

it influenced the phasing study.

Background/Opposite:

Ecosystem + Land Use Map, Cape Cod, MA, USA Data: MassGIS Mapping: Author

Background/Opposite: Ecosystem + Land Use Map, Cape Cod, MA, USA Data: MassGIS Mapping: Author Area of

Area of further study

Background/Opposite: Ecosystem + Land Use Map, Cape Cod, MA, USA Data: MassGIS Mapping: Author Area of

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 29 | Mapping Ecosystem Impacts with Geographic Information System Data

L ow-density residential use dominates Cape Cod, which has approached complete build-out; note that almost all dark-green

land shown on the map is protected free space. GIS-mapping of publicly available ecosystem and land use data reveals an intricate pattern of spatial hierarchies; 1/4th to larger than 1/2 acre lots are concentrated on the shore, with higher densities and multi- family housing typically located closer to inland commercial strips. This also a landscape of social stratification, visible e.g through the differentiation between private and public beaches.

Core animal habitats are highly fragmented due to development, but it is not only the animals suffering from adverse environmental impacts; many inland lakes and bays are usage-impaired due to water pollution, mainly caused by a lack of sewer systems and non-point source runoff from the significant portion of surface area now sealed on the Cape. Red symbols on the map indicate pollution sources, with drinking water wells often close nearby.

The issues of use-impairing pollution, social stratification and environmental habitat degradation - all of which negatively affect human habitation - were hence identified as major aspects to tackle in the planning case study performed on a small part of the Cape, shown in the main map to the right at the bottom center.

The site was picked because it has almost uniform housing density; as such, it exemplifies the majority of spatial patterns on Cape Cod, unfortunately including environmental impacts. Also, since it is a peninsula within a peninsula, it gives the observer an almost fractal sense of zooming in towards spatial principles that repeat on the macro as well as micro scale.

Background/Opposite:

Ecosystem + Land Use Map, Cape Cod, MA, USA Data: MassGIS Mapping: Author

as well as micro scale. Background/Opposite: Ecosystem + Land Use Map, Cape Cod, MA, USA Data:

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 30 | Site Analysis Maps 01 + 02 Territories + Ecosystem Interlacing

A t Cape Cod’s shoreline, a sensitive coastal ecosystem meets sprawling low-density urban growth. Forests and non-overbuilt natural open spaces are only saved when

explicitly protected from development, as also shown by the regional GIS study- In effect, man-made and natural systems are fused into one totality.

The analysis maps isolate and show this interlacing; a homogenous fabric of housing developments abuts and interrupts ecosystem features such as wetlands and barrier beaches, carving out individual territories extended into the water through private piers. Functional differentiation of the urban fabric is low, as is democratized water access. If one were to consider the site a town, and not just an agglomeration of dwellings, what operations could increase its urbanity, social inclusiveness and overall sustainability?

The question of course assumes a desire to move development along these lines, which I posit in this study but is not unrealistic considering growing sustainability awareness.

unrealistic considering growing sustainability awareness. Analysis Map 01 : Figure Ground Plan, Ecosystem, Priority

Analysis Map 01 : Figure Ground Plan, Ecosystem, Priority Natural Habitats

Analysis Map 02 : Housing + Private Piers : Territorialization

Map Legend (both)

Forest

Forest

Wetlands

Wetlands

Barrier Beaches

Barrier Beaches

Hydrological Features

Hydrological Features

Accessor’s Parcels

Accessor’s Parcels

Priority Natural Habitats

Priority Natural Habitats

Empty Lots

Empty Lots

Ambivalent Coastal Zone

Ambivalent Coastal Zone

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 31 | Phase 0 | Concept Engineering Experiments in Streetscape + Land Use Volumetrics

B efore confronting the intricacy of creating a plan limited by existing conditions, the conceptual phase freely tested

concepts derived from the situational and environmental impact mapping. Not all of the more far-fetched concepts made it into the final plan but are in part shown here, such as radically modifying the linear street scape or even introducing new topography.

However, several initial ideas made it into the phasing as underlying design intent; especially the introduction of de-paved play streets leading to the water and the concept of a central green boulevard “spine” were influenced by ideas developed herein, as was the introduction of mixed-use functions alongside it. Spatially, a density gradient from peninsula center to the coast, with new and larger central lot building volumes inspired by solar envelopes, was tested and featured in the final iteration.

2
2
3
3

1

Variant Concept Sketches 1: Density Gradient Sketch, Lateral Peninsula Section (implemented as density gradient falloff in final plan) 2: FIrst Site Cross Section Modification Sketch (concept not pursued due to ground water levels + scale) 3: Radical “Green Band” Superstructure Sketch (not used, since extremely large blocks break local scale) Bottom: Mixed-use Solar Envelope Blocks (implemented as higher-density structures in final plan) Right: “Sinuous Band” Streetscape + New Locations of Additional Urban Functions (partially implemented)

in final plan) Right: “Sinuous Band” Streetscape + New Locations of Additional Urban Functions (partially implemented)

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 32 | Phase 1 + 2 | Negotiating Space Streetscape Activation + Water Access + Multi-Use

T o function as a town, a balance of multiply usable street spaces, public access to natural amenities such as the waterfront and a mix of local functions needs to be

present, which the analysis map shows is currently not the case. In an existing fabric, it is not easy to achieve fast change; phase 1 and 2 therefore intend to carefully negotiate multi-use rezoning to the North of the peninsula and creation of public spaces for partial water access in the South. Beach access is focused in the East, as there existing lots are farther removed from the shore and impinge less on an “ambivalent zone” that would exist once greater public diffusion occurs into this once solely private realm.

In the intervention map, permeably repaved side “play” streets now lead up to ocean blocks that are assumed to have been successfully negotiated and will form public shore access anchorages; where exactly these were positioned would in reality not be so clear- cut, hence the plan only describes one possible formal outcome.

hence the plan only describes one possible formal outcome. Analysis Map 03 : Land Use A,

Analysis Map 03 : Land Use A, Roads, Coastal Outline

Intervention Map 01 : Speculative Public Open Spaces & Streetscape Modification

Map Legend (left inset)

Land Use Single - Family Residential

Land Use Single - Family Residential

Multi - Family Residential

Multi - Family Residential

Forest

Forest

Other (see next map for details)

Other (see next map for details)

Agriculture / Open Space

Agriculture / Open Space

Urban Open (none)

Roads

Roads

Map Legend (background)

Urban Open (intended)

Urban Open (intended)

Empty Lot : reused

Empty Lot : reused

Empty Lot: left vacant

Empty Lot: left vacant

Urban Park (intended)

Urban Park (intended)

Public Beach (intended)

Public Beach (intended)

Ambivalent Coastal Zone

Ambivalent Coastal Zone

Main Boulevard

Main Boulevard

Play Streets: Pathways, reduced Traffic (intended)

Play Streets: Pathways, reduced Traffic (intended)

Public Transport Link

Public Transport Link

Unmodified Streets

Unmodified Streets

Central Redevelopment Area Open Spaces (to be defined architecturally)

Central Redevelopment Area Open Spaces (to be defined architecturally)

Phase 1 & 2

Phase 1 negotiate for multi - use scenario

Phase 1 negotiate for multi - use scenario

Phase 2 assemble ocean lots to repurpose as urban squares

Phase 2 assemble ocean lots to repurpose as urban squares

All shown urban open spaces are intentional only, unless already negotiated

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 33 | Phase 3 | Negotiating Functions Multi-Use Scenarios for Beach Squares and the North Quarter

I f water access were successfully negotiated as in the previous steps, the resultant beach squares would become focal points for a variety of urban functions. The analysis

map shows that most commercial and agricultural functions are currently clustered along strip developments to the North; negotiating and inserting a mixed-use fabric would cut down motorized traffic towards these aggregations and build a community-oriented structure that offers local employment and the urban space needed to service it.

Lots adjacent to the new beach squares would be ideal candidates for further renegotiation, spurred on by a possible increase in land value due to added local amenities. Select empty lots are in this scenario reprogrammed as ecological infrastructure or even urban agriculture; the percentage of multi-family housing is increased and often coupled to local commercial zoning to allow for smarter land use along the central spine boulevard, which could terminate in the South of the peninsula with new public and cultural functions.

of the peninsula with new public and cultural functions. Analysis Map 04 : Land Use B,

Analysis Map 04 : Land Use B, Roads, Coastal Outline

Intervention Map 02 : Speculative Modified Land Use Pattern

Map Legend (background + left insert)

Land Use Single - Family Residential

Land Use Single - Family Residential

Multi - Family Residential

Multi - Family Residential

Commercial Strip

Commercial Strip

Transportation

Transportation

Waste Disposal

Waste Disposal

Nurseries

Nurseries

Cranberry Bog

Cranberry Bog

Agriculture / Open Space

Agriculture / Open Space

Cemetary

Cemetary

Additional Land Use (background)

Public Institutional + Cultural

Public Institutional + Cultural

Social / Educational Services

Social / Educational Services

Urban Park

Urban Park

Ecological Infrastructure / Urban Agriculture

Ecological Infrastructure / Urban Agriculture

Multi-Use: low level commercial & multi-family residential

Multi-Use: low level commercial & multi-family residential

Community Center

Community Center

Local Commercial

Local Commercial

Urban Squares

Urban Squares

Empty Lot : reused (white outline)

Empty Lot: vacant

Empty Lot: vacant

Uniform Density

Uniform Density

Phase 3

Negotiate usages adjacent to beach squares & inland (unless lot is already empty)

Proximity to greater quality urban open space will encourage higher density and diverse functions

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 34 | Phase 4 | Future Inclusive Growth Density Gradients + Typological Modifications + Green Infrastructure

T he Cape’s continuing demand for urban space will either lead to a further decimation of natural habitat or to densification; this plan follows the densification narrative. In

the conceptual stage, the idea of gradually limiting lot volumes from spine to coast was introduced and is here taken up as a qualitative mix of density falloff and solar envelop gradients that would soften the impact of higher density developments on neighboring structures. Growth and functional enrichment would also essentially turn the peninsula into a center itself, then possibly gaining surrounding communities as true suburbs.

As the analysis map again shows, urban impact through e.g. water pollution and wetland destruction is a very real concern. Wetland restoration at the interface of suburb and new center, as well as the possible remediation of the East shoreline are given as goals in the plan, as would be the formation of ecological architecture development sites to act as prototypes for the remaining space, e.g. in terms of improved on-site waste management.

space, e.g. in terms of improved on-site waste management. Analysis Map 05 : Uniform Density, Natural

Analysis Map 05 : Uniform Density, Natural Boundaries, Wetlands, Water Pollution

Further Symbology (background + left insert)

Uniform Density

Uniform Density

Agriculture / Open Space

Agriculture / Open Space

Forest

Forest

Wetlands

Wetlands

Category 5 Water Pollution

Category 5 Water Pollution

Barrier Beaches

Barrier Beaches

Eeelgrass Aquatic Ecosystem

Eeelgrass Aquatic Ecosystem

Map Legend (background only)

Qualitative Density Graduation

Ecological Architecture

Ecological Architecture

Development Sites

Empty Lot / Ambivalent Terrain

Empty Lot / Ambivalent Terrain

Ecological Infrstructure / Urban Agriculture

Ecological Infrstructure / Urban Agriculture

Urban Forest / Habitat

Urban Forest / Habitat

Houses affected by Phase 1 Development

Houses affected by Phase 1 Development

Phase 4

Renaturalization

Inclusion as new “Suburb”

Typological Modification

Incorporation into City Fabric / Redensification

Intervention Map 03 : Density graduation, Ecological Infrastructure, Impact Assessment

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 35 | Composite Plan, Phases 1 - 4 Summary + Evaluation + Outlook

T he planning state regarded as “final” in this case study shows simultaneous operations already taken place or in process of

changing the suburban fabric into the beginning of a town. Of the many strategies mentioned, these are they key ones:

•  Introduce main “green” central axis / boulevard + side streets

•  Negotiate + open public shore access around public squares

•  Negotiate multi-use zoning in squares and North Quarter

•  Develop community hub at peninsula center

•  Introduce prototypical ecological architecture development sites

•  Improve local waste management services to limit pollution

•  Retain free lots, some as urban agriculture, some as open space

•  Rebuild select wetlands and barrier beach sections

•  Connect new center to “suburbs” and natural amenities

What makes the plan “realistic” in its urbanization intent is the respect for the fabric it might grow from, intervening within a negotiated framework to activate functions that would build a town. Questions in need of answering if this study were to move ahead further are what exact density is the target, what precise mix of functions is needed to service it and what architectural and technological sustainability measures, including their impact on local ecosystem capacity, could modify this ratio.

Parallels of this plan to contemporary “Smart Growth” or “New Urbanist” ideas are not coincidental; indeed walkability, individual transit reduction, local amenity creation and streetscape activation are important in these planning principles.

The greater question of how suburban America will develop into the 21st century remains open; it will certainly not stay as it is, but a move towards dense urbanization seems equally improbable. The concepts presented herein therefore stay on middle ground, hybridizing aspects of low- and high density planning.

Map Legend

Land Use Single - Family Residential

Land Use Single - Family Residential

Multi - Family Residential

Multi - Family Residential

Commercial Strip

Commercial Strip

Transportation

Transportation

Waste Disposal

Waste Disposal

Nurseries

Nurseries

Cranberry Bog

Cranberry Bog

Agriculture / Open Space

Agriculture / Open Space

Cemetary

Cemetary

Public Institutional + Cultural

Public Institutional + Cultural

Social / Educational Services

Social / Educational Services

Urban Park

Urban Park

Ecological Infrastructure / Urban Agriculture

Ecological Infrastructure / Urban Agriculture

Multi-Use: low level commercial & multi-family residential

Multi-Use: low level commercial & multi-family residential

Community Center

Community Center

Local Commercial

Local Commercial

Urban Squares

Urban Squares

Empty Lot : reused (white outline)

Empty Lot / Ambivalent Terrain

Empty Lot / Ambivalent Terrain

Uniform Density

Uniform Density

Agriculture / Open Space

Agriculture / Open Space

Forest / Habitat

Forest / Habitat

Wetlands

Wetlands

Category 5 Water Pollution

Category 5 Water Pollution

Barrier Beaches

Barrier Beaches

Qualitative Density Graduation

Renaturalization

Renaturalization

Annexation as new “Suburb”

Annexation as new “Suburb”

Typological Modification

Typological Modification

Incorporation into City Fabric / Redensification

Incorporation into City Fabric / Redensification

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 36 | Composite View, Phases 1 - 4 Functional Massing + Natural Space

p o s t

s u b

u r b i a

p. 37 | Appendix | Climate Data

p o s t s u b u r b i a p. 37 | Appendix

Humidity (%)

Wind Direction

(degrees)

Weather Data (incl. PAR): Waquoit Bay Station, National Estuarine Research Reserve System (3-year averages from 2005/06/07) Insolation Data: National Renewable Resource Data Center Redbook (30-year averages from 1961 - 1990)

Statistics, Analysis and Plots/Graphics: Author

30,00 350 NW 25,00 300 294 290 278 276 W 20,00 269 269 268 276
30,00
350
NW
25,00
300
294
290
278
276
W
20,00
269
269
268
276 264
260
255
251
250
250
240
240
239
15,00
234
SW
221
218
215
206
199
200
10,00
195
186
201 188 193
185
S
168
170
5,00
151
150
0,00
100
-5,00
50
-10,00
-15,00
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

January: allow max. solar gains, night insulation, additional heating, protect from cold W winds mechanically redistribute thermal mass indirect gains to direct gain areas

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

Wind Speed (m/s) Mean Temp. (°C) Precipitation (mm) 350 NW 300 276 W 250 246
Wind Speed (m/s)
Mean Temp. (°C)
Precipitation (mm)
350
NW
300
276
W
250
246
236
234
234
SW
225
225 231
220
216
215
213
207
207
201
199
200
195
196
196
192
203 195 185
S
181
183
181
177
165
160
150
144
141
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

July: minimize solar gains, shield thermal mass, maximum cross-ventilation

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

350 NW 303 300 281 279 W 269 267 266 262 260 253 250 250
350
NW
303
300
281
279
W
269 267 266
262
260
253
250
250
245
241
240
240
236
237
234
SW
223
224
221 217
210
200
S
183
174
168
164
154
149
150
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

February: see above

30,00 350 NW 25,00 300 W 20,00 250 242 15,00 239 228 230 SW 218
30,00
350
NW
25,00
300
W
20,00
250
242
15,00
239 228 230
SW
218
213
208 214
205
201
200
10,00
190
187
187
196 188
190
184
184 190 199
S
176
174
176
175
168
5,00
152
149
150
140 149
135
132
0,00
100
-5,00
50
-10,00
-15,00
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

August: see above & stack ventilation

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

350 NW 300 289 287 288 278 W 271 273 273 272 273 264 258
350
NW
300
289
287
288
278
W
271
273
273
272 273
264
258
256
252
253
249
250
246
243
239
236
228
SW
221 226
213
211
204
205
203
199
190
S
150
139
107
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

March: allow max. solar gains, night insulation, protect from cold W winds, redistr. mass gains

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

350 NW 300 W 250 240 235 230 228 SW 225 219 214 218 212
350
NW
300
W
250
240
235
230
228
SW
225
219
214 218
212
207
208
209
208 206 200
199
200
195
187
188
S
176
169
169
167
165
164
154
155
148
150
137
135
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

September: see above & stack ventilation

30,00 350 30,00 NW 25,00 25,00 300 W 20,00 20,00 267 254 250 246 243
30,00
350
30,00
NW
25,00
25,00
300
W
20,00
20,00
267
254
250
246
243
15,00
232
230
SW
15,00
203
199
200
10,00
196
10,00
189 197
188
185
184
S
183
181
176
177
171
168
166
5,00
158
155
152
151
5,00
150
145
143
143
139
123
0,00
0,00
100
-5,00
-5,00
50
-10,00
-10,00
-15,00
0
-15,00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

April: allow max. solar gains, night insulation, allow some cross ventilation

350 NW 300 276 276 285 W 258 251 250 247 243 244 246 230
350
NW
300
276
276 285
W
258 251
250
247
243
244
246
230
234 228
SW
225
221
217
212
207
201
202
200
197
195
192
S
179
172
166
150
139
140
138
134
100
94
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

October: start allowing partial gains, start limiting night ventilation

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

350 NW 300 W 250 245 241 231 233 235 SW 220 212 213 214
350
NW
300
W
250
245
241
231
233
235
SW
220
212
213
214
208
216 208
206
205
200
196
192
194
S
182
183
176
173 171
172
168
163
157
151
150
139
140
125
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

May: begin limiting solar gains by (partial) shading of glazing & cross-ventilation

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

350 NW 300 W 267 269 264 261 260 255 251 250 241 240 234
350
NW
300
W
267
269
264
261 260
255
251
250
241
240
234
233
SW
225
222
226 219
219
209
208
209
211
206
202
200
191
189 190
S
174
160
151
149
150
140
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

November: allow max. solar gains, night insulation, protect from cold W winds, redistr. mass gains

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

350 NW 300 W 268 250 250 250 241 238 234 228 SW 223 224
350
NW
300
W
268
250
250
250
241
238
234
228
SW
223
224
220
216
213
214
212
206
205
217 206
206
201
200
196
192 192
187
189
S
172
167
164
160
156
150
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

June: see above

30,00

25,00

20,00

15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00

-5,00

-10,00

-15,00

350 NW 299 300 293 279 W 269 267 265 272 262 257 257 252
350
NW
299
300
293
279
W
269
267
265
272 262 257
257
252
253
250
247
245
239
239
236
233
234
SW
225
220
213
220
199
208 200
200
191
186
S
182
166
150
147
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27 28
29
30
31

December: allow max. solar gains, night insulation, protect from cold W winds, redistr. mass gains

30 100 90 25 80 20 70 15 60 10 50 5 peak wind speed
30
100
90
25
80
20
70
15
60
10
50
5
peak wind speed
40
0
30
231
230
237
185
192
208
203
188
192
209
216
233
-5
20
max/min temperature
range
-10
10
heating
cooling
temp. peak
cooling
heating
-15
0
1
2
345
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Precipitation (mm)
Mean Temp. (°C)
Wind Speed (m/s)
Wind Direction (degrees)
Humidity (%)
40000 7,0 35000 6,1 6,1 6,0 5,6 5,5 5,6 5,5 5,4 30000 5,3 5 5,00
40000
7,0
35000
6,1
6,1
6,0
5,6
5,5
5,6
5,5
5,4
30000
5,3
5
5,00
5,1
4,90
5,0
4,80
4,7
4,70
4,70
4,90
4,60
4,40
4,30
25000
4,3
4,2
4,3
4,0
3,9
3,60
3,7 3,7
3,6
20000
3,5
3,4
3,30
3,10
3,1
3,1
3,1
3,0
3,0
3,0
2,8
2,8
2,9
2,7
15000
2,6
2,0
1,9
1,9
10000
1,5
1,0
5000
0
0,0
12345
6
insolation peak
7
8
9
10
11
12
Photosynthetically Active Radiation (MicroEinsteins)
Insolation [latitude tilt] (all in W/m^2/day)
artificial shading required in summer
[lat. +15° = 55°]
[Horizontal Surface]
[Vertical Surface]
all incl. uncertainty factor of 9% (shaded bands)

s p a c e - b a s e d

t h e r m a l

m e t r i c s

v i s u a l

i z a t

i o n

p. 38 | Cognition Support for Low-Energy Conceptual Architectural Design

Custom software developed based on design/sim experiments

Tested and evaluated in specialized design optimization classes

Publication: Building Simulation & Optimization 2014, London

B ased on integrated design/simulation workflow observations from interdisciplinary classes held by colleagues and me,

a new process model empirically developed from them and the insight that hybrid design/performance representations shape cognition in low-energy architectural design, I developed a spatial thermal and climate-based daylight data analysis/visualization plugin for Rhinoceros3d/Grasshopper3d, dubbed Mr.Comfy.

Instead of using charts or tabular formats, energy consumption, comfort, illuminance levels and any other available performance report variable are directly displayed through color-coded surfaces (and numeric values) where they occur – in the individual spaces of a design. Mr.Comfy bridges the gap between sustainable designers’ need to analyze data spatially but still retain numeric precision and multiple data representation modes as typically exposed through traditional graphing.

The tool’s features and user case studies are published in several project publications and invited presentations, most notably at Building Simulation and Optimization 2014 in London, at the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in Switzerland and the NYC IBPSA chapter, USA.

All publications are available in full on my visualization software website: http://mrcomfy.org/?page_id=116

Background/Opposite:

Annual Hourly Map of All-Zone Average Air Temperatures (excerpt), Sample Building, Climate: Berlin

s p a c e - b a s e d

t h e r m a l

m e t r i c s

v i s u a l

i z a t

i o n

p. 39 | Rhinoceros/Grasshopper3d Integration for Improved Design-Analysis Interaction

B y color-mapping and visually reinforcing differences between zone behaviors, designers and engineers can more easily diagnose which parts of a building use more energy and answer fine-grained analysis questions. Mr.Comfy’s features include:

Spatial color-mapping of EnergyPlus *.csv zone report variables

Spatial co-mapping of Daysim daylight and irradiation results

Automatic generation of fitted or custom gradient display bounds

Interactive hourly scheduling & custom report time ranges

Generate average, sum report maps and discover data extremes

Map percentages of hours that meet custom conditions

Custom report variable creation through component instantiation

Shown to the right is a custom mapping scenario for one floor of a circular sample office building in Berlin, Germany:

01: Custom Search, Zone Highest Monthly Cooling Energy Use kWh/m 2 : month timecode; Schedule: 24 hrs.

02: Same as previous, but for heating energy use

03: Average of Total Daytime Zone Internal Latent Gains, kJ/m 2 Illuminance Distribution, log(lux), Schedules: 8 - 20 hrs.

To analyze the interplay of internal and external gains and how they are mediated through the building fabric (e.g. glazing areas, shown dotted to the right) is a first step to understand where specific load scenarios occur- and how to reduce their severity.

Cooling Energy Use

2.22

Heating Energy Use

8.54

Avrg. of Total Internal Lat. Gains

3.93

Log. of Avrg. Illuminance

382

kWh/m

kWh/m

2

2

kJ/m 2

log(lux)

22.17

28.7

9.32

6733

01 02 03
01
02
03

s p a c e - b a s e d

m e t r i c s

t h e r m a l

i z a t

i o n

v i s u a l

p. 40 | Animation, Multi-Timestep Mapping for Seasonal Performance Analysis

T he combination of several data mapping types with temporal animation can reveal a surprising amount of building

behavioural information that is not always easy to understand through traditional means; Mr.Comfy’s zone-based display makes it easier to attain an overview and focused explorations of what is happening in both thermal and daylight domains.

Through instantiating several Mr.Comfy components it is also possible to create custom metrics; the monthly overview map of the sample building’s first floor (right) simultaneously overlays mean radiant temperature display with two daylight metrics.

Black to white dots show the percentage of selected hours when zone illuminance is within 300 to 2000 lux- an acceptable range; white to red inset display sensor nodes show the frequency of overlit hours. In effect, when overlit tends towards null and illuminance is in a usable range, the contrast between metrics is diminished (white on white) and a quick daylight check possible.

A recommendation to improve the sample building’s performance would be to reduce part of the yard’s north-facing glazing area, include window shading on its south-facing part and introduce overhangs to the south office windows. Both winter heat loss and summer solar gains are problematic in this building; the high incidence of summer overlit areas indicates that there is leeway to improve thermal performance and daylight utilization, by e.g. reconsidering the window-to-wall ratio (esp. in the yard).

Zone Average Radiant Temperature

14

°C

31

Illuminance 2000 - 100,000 lux

0

% set hrs.

100

Illuminance 300 - 2000 lux

0

% set hrs.

100

hrs. 100 Illuminance 300 - 2000 lux 0 % set hrs. 100 Jan Feb Mar Apr

Jan

Feb Mar
Feb
Mar
Apr
Apr
May Jun
May
Jun
Jul Aug
Jul
Aug
Sep
Sep
Oct
Oct
Nov Dec
Nov
Dec

s p a c e - b a s e d

t h e r m a l

m e t r i c s

v i s u a l

i z a t

i o n

p. 41 | Academic Performance Mapping + Optimization of Student Designs

T o explore the use of the tool in actual design scenarios, a class was held during my tenure at the TU Berlin in which

student designers mapped and optimized already energy-conscious buildings created in previous simulation-integrated studios.

Testing the tool in unconstrained use allowed for many improvements to be added on the fly, new features to be prototyped and design process observations to be made, which will influence integration model concepts in upcoming studies and classes.

Surprisingly, almost all participants managed to again improve the performance of their designs; a zone-based approach facilitated to

finally gain a spatial understanding of simulation results, which is

a first step to optimize further. Some of the resulting explorations are shown in the following pages.

Finally, a survey was held to exactly discover users’ thoughts

about the tool and its underlying spatial mapping principles, results

of which are published in a paper presented at Building Simulation

and Optimization 2014, London, UCL.

Background/Opposite:

Student Sophie Barker presents Mapping Case Study of Waratah Bay House, Winter 2013/2014, TU Berlin, Germany

04 Research, Administration 04 03 Multi- Purpose 02 Exhibition 03 01 Exhibition 00 Events 02
04
Research,
Administration
04
03
Multi-
Purpose
02
Exhibition
03
01
Exhibition
00
Events
02
100%
occ.
01
hrs.
0%
Intended interior
daylight volumetrics
(greyscale) vs.
simulation results
Window to wall
00
ratio effect on
heating energy
Climate: Berlin,
N
use studies
Germany

s p a c e - b a s e d

m e t r i c s

t h e r m a l

i z a t

i o n

v i s u a l

p. 42 | ROBUST Studio Design Reoptimization Design: C. Sitzler, L. de Pedro; Sim. Prof.: Author

Design: C. Sitzler, L. de Pedro; Sim. Prof.: Author A design from the simulation-integrated ROBUST studio

A design from the simulation-integrated ROBUST studio also

featured in this portfolio, students were in the mapping class

tasked with once again improving design performance aided through visualizations created with Mr.Comfy.

As the ROBUST designs were already highly energy-conscious, this served as a good proving ground to discover whether cognition can be further enhanced by new mapping technologies.

The design shown here, by Christopher Sitzler and Laura de Pedro, already performed comparatively well; its concept of using infra - lightweight concrete to form structural bays of alternating zones of dark and light was through simulations convincingly shown to work as intended; however, as discovered in the following, performance deficits remained and were discovered through mapping.

UDI 100 - 2000 Lux

Daylight studies for alternating contrast situations

D. Availability 500 Lux

for alternating contrast situations D. Availability 500 Lux Cross Sections HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2] NORTH 114 113
for alternating contrast situations D. Availability 500 Lux Cross Sections HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2] NORTH 114 113

Cross

Sections

HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2]

NORTH 114 113 112 111 110 109 108 107 106 10 20 30 40 50
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
10
20
30
40
50
60

OPENINGS [%]

SOUTH

Lateral

Section

s p a c e - b a s e d

m e t r i c s

t h e r m a l

i z a t

i o n

v i s u a l

p. 43 | ROBUST Studio Design Reoptimization Design: C. Sitzler, L. de Pedro; Sim. Prof.: Author

A n all-zone mapping of the ROBUST design especially revealed problems on the top building floor, where staff offices are to

be located. Some concerns about this configuration had already been raised during the initial studio, but were delegated to a low priority and did not skew the overall positive energy balance of the original scheme. Re-mapping of whole-building performance, however, made the top floor problems hard to ignore:

East/West-facing office plate glass is overdimensioned

Discontinuous office layout increases exposed total facade area

Shading was tested, but performance problems remained

Summer PMV slightly uncomfortable, high cooling energy use

High winter heating energy use due to fabric losses

Spaces largely overlit, especially in summer, with glare risk

Based on the analysis maps, students implemented a number of geometric changes to get energy use and comfort under control:

Merge top floor into one continuous space, facing south

Reduce overall glazing area, offer shielded balconies, overhangs

Improve north-facing glass U-values, add low-e coating on south

The measures improved thermal comfort, more than halved cooling energy consumption and reduced heating energy use by a projected 100 kWh/m 2 ; daylight availability was brought from an almost entirely overlit state to more than 80% of the redesigned space being lit by daylight alone during the summer.

Opposite (this and next page):

Multi-Metric Mapping of ROBUST Design Top Floor Base State + Optimization Simulations: C. Sitzler + Author; Simulation Checking, Maps: Author Source: Building Simulation & Optimization 2014 paper (see bibliography)

+ Author; Simulation Checking, Maps: Author Source: Building Simulation & Optimization 2014 paper (see bibliography)

s p a c e - b a s e d

m e t r i c s

t h e r m a l

i z a t

i o n

v i s u a l

p. 44 | ‘ROBUST’ Studio Design Reoptimization Design: C. Sitzler, L. de Pedro; Sim. Prof.: Author

A part from the (literally) glaring problems on the top floor, intermediate floors also had some improvement potential.

The explorations here especially focused on heating energy use reduction; cooling was checked but found to be by far the lowest energy use factor. To lower heating energy demand, students combined geometric and material tweaks:

Change ground floor lobby glazing amount

Add unconditioned lobby buffer space

Reduce north-facing “picture window” area

Improve U-Value of remaining north glazing

While not as dramatic as the top floor performance improvements, overall heating energy consumption was still lowered considerably - especially in the lobby spaces - while touching few of the south windows important for daylighting. The design’s concept to have dark and daylit spaces alternate when traversing the building on the long axis made the optimizations more straight-forward.

In the maps, combined geometric and material improvements show as greater “jumps” in scale than the linear improvements made through material changes only. Compound changes like these often occur in design and are hard to track, since zones are mutually influential; being able to locally, visually pin down performance effects of complex changes is one reason why spatial performance mapping, as found in class, is highly useful in conceptual design. Furthermore, error checking in large models becomes easier, too, since when zones behave radically different from similar ones, something tends to be amiss, and is easily visible in performance maps.

behave radically different from similar ones, something tends to be amiss, and is easily visible in

s p a c e - b a s e d

m e t r i c s

t h e r m a l

i z a t

i o n