Student Exploration of CE Visualization, CGA Code and Performance Reporting Tools

Student Exploration of CE Visualization, CGA Code and Performance Reporting Tools

Project background and context Urban design performance: challenges in scale and level of detail for reporting Design requirements for sustainability and livability Student designs and models Performance reporting Behind the models: a brief look at CGA coding for performance calculations

After Turner and Dailey, 2008

Challenges in scale and level of detail District scale falls between areas of current focus; potential to provide link across scales Planning scales: Resilient sustainable communities: mapping, analysis of wide variety of variables (eg, Cutter et al 2014) Site and building scale Ecosystem services assessment frameworks not well agreed upon (eg, Haines-Young and Potschin, 2008)

Fairview subdistrict, Boise s West End City Center 2000 ~ 95 ac Vacant / underutilized parcels Central location High redevelopment priority Geothermal line Main subwatershed

Required: City Code and Downtown Design Guidelines Other guidance: LEED ND NPDES permit, Green Stormwater Infrastructure Guidelines Livable Streets design guidelines LIV District goals Recent built projects (typologies, costs, etc)

3 Stage Process: 1. Create conceptual development plan, summarize sustainability/livability goals and requirements Review existing CGA code for attribution, reporting capabilities 2. Develop massing model with major urban form, structure Modify CGA code as needed 3. Refinement and reporting

Parking & Transit: integrate; 30% parking reduction, keep surface parking close to storefronts, interior of block or structured Bike & Pedestrian: Ped-oriented, good regional connectivity; 5 protected bike lanes both sides on all major roads; sidewalks 5-10 Setbacks: 17 25 ; Storefront commercial building minimum 40 depth; Façade breaks at minimum 122 ; vertical modulation required minimum 10-20 inset; +3 rd story setbacks @ 10 Stormwater: 90% on-site management Building energy consumption reduction 20% Street trees 40 o.c.; preferred native veg mix with clear zones Street lights 30 60 o.c.

Traditional design models

Summaries & Plans:

Reporting (sample CGA)

Reporting Current Limitations (sample CGA for Stormwater) Fine tuning for local conditions, similar to other assessment tools Limitations of CGA code - coarse models, or challenges in accounting for detail in models developed in other programs (e.g. Revit, Vue) Accounting for changes in infrastructure performance, e.g., traffic patterns and volumes Exporting for feedback looping Reporting needs refining for each set of local conditions How do we incorporate standard measures, especially for qualitative attributes?

Students demonstrate better understanding of site context and scale, don t overbuild Developing standard CGA code modules tied to common assessment tools is challenging: Economic models / pro forma District level energy analysis Traffic / transportation models Other demographic and socioeconomic models Design may be handled better in other environments, imported to CE for reporting capabilities. Good visual communication regarding general aspects of redevelopment

Selected References Cutter, S L, K D Ash, C T Emrich. 2014. The geography of community disaster resilience. Global Environmental Change 29:65 77 Ervin, S M. 2001. Digital landscape modeling and visualization: a research agenda. Landscape and Urban Planning 54.1: 49-62. Jessop, M. 2008. Digital visualization as a scholarly activity. Literary and Linguistic Computing 23.3: 281-293. Haines-Young, R. and M. Potschin. 2009. Methodologies for Defining and Assessing Ecosystem Services. Final Report, JNCC, Project Code C08-0170-0062, 69 pp. Ross, H and F Berkes. 2014. Research Approaches for Understanding, Enhancing, and Monitoring Community Resilience, Society & Natural Resources, 27:8, 787-804 Schmitt, G. 2012. A Planning Environment for the Design of Future Cities in Arisona, S M, et al, eds., Digital Urban Modeling and Simulation. Berlin: Springer. 3-15. Turner, R. K. and Daily, G. C. 2008.: The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environmental & Resource Economics 39(1): 25-35. Wergles, N. and A. Muhar. 2009. The role of computer visualization in the communication of urban design A comparison of viewer responses to visualizations versus on-site visits." Landscape and urban planning 91.4: 171-182. Supported in part by NSF EPSCoR Research Infrastructure Improvement award: Managing Idaho s Landscapes for Ecosystem Services (MILES) Award #IIA-1301792, 6/15/13-5/31/18