Site performance

The site factors should respond to the local conditions in terms of view, visuality and identity. Dunne et al (2011) referred to the importance of the site when designing schools in order to enhance the EU senses through concentrating on considering the immediate visual context and enhancement of the site. In terms of the views and orientation, various authors have referred to them. Padilla (2002) referred to the importance of utilizing both views and orientation. The views should be evaluated based on the surrounding buildings and on the landscape. This is in order to utilize them for building design. Long Crendon council (2009) indicated the importance of assesing a site and its effectiveness on visual focus. They referred to how the curvature of a street can help to visualise the unfolding area.

Code End User Factors References

BA1 Utilizing views and orientation Padilla (2002)

BA2 Affect site on visual focus Long Crendon council (2009)

BA3 Enhancement of site to consider identity Dunne, Boussabaine and Stringer (2011) Table 4-9: Passive design for Performance: Sub-Attribute: Site

4.3.2 Space

Space is one of the most important issues which should be considered regarding the PDS. This can be through considering several measurements plus PDS which can enhance the PLVT. One of the measurements is to provide suitable space for the functions and activities. Khalil and Husin (2009) point out that a building’s indoor environment should satisfy users easily, which will be through providing good functionality and through being fit for the user’s purpose. In terms of PD each space should be adequate with regard to PDS. Also, the importance of facilitating and responding to EU needs when they are using and occupying the building has also been referred to. The designer should create the spaces that respond to climate as well as that will be suitable for the user. Part and parcel of suitability through creating the spaces that enhance EUs’ needs and demands is to design the space that creates balance between benefits from surrounding environmental sources and EU circumstances such as their ages, abilities and so on. The WBDG Productive Committee (2011) point out that the space should help the EU to practice their activities. The performance of the space should achieve the EU well-being. This is has been confirmed by both Fowler et al (2005) and the WBDG Productive Committee (2011). The latter referred to the indoor environment which can enhance human health and EU well-being. Fowler et al (2005) point out one of their questionnaire a classification is to whether the office’s layout is enhancing the EU need or not; this is in one way or another space response to the

EU need. For this reason, using the natural conditions is an essential requirnemnts to enhance EU comfort. The question was "How satisfied are you with ease of interaction with co-workers?"” Komu-

ro (2004) indicated flexibility, security and way finding as part and parcel of post-occupancy evaluation which is part of performance. For this reason, these indicators should be responding to the EU. They should enhance EUs and respond to their activities to help them to use the spaces without any confusion. The WBDG Productive Committee (2011) confirmed the importance of providing flexibility, social interaction and technologies to enhance EUs. Social interaction, which means EU interaction, should be considered by the designer to enable the EU to perform their function with en- joyment during their work. Hassanain (2011) points out that the building performance covers three main points, which are technical, functional and behavioural. The latter covers several points; one of them is social interaction with the building. This should be through creating the suitable space for it. Fowler et al (2005) include allowing social interaction in the classification of office performance. This should be natural in any facility to enhance interaction and activity (Cutler and Kane, 2009). Naoko Komuro (2004) and Heerwagen and Zagreus (2005) indicated the interaction between the user and the spaces and how that can enhance EU satisfaction. This could be through providing methods that en- hance such as transparent glass between spaces whilst maintaining EUs’ privacy. This method also shows how the space can respond to EU interaction, as well as reduce feelings of isolation. Dunne et al (2011) referred to the importance of colour selection. Montague (2007) referred to the necessity of considering special characteristics. For this reason, provide a special character for the space is select- ed as an essential factor that should be considered by the designeer for optimising the space performance.

Code End User Factors References

BB1 Durable, high quality finishes Ministry for the Environment (2008) BB2 Select good colour to use Dunne et al (2011)

BB3 Passive spaces’ layout to allow social interac- tion

Hassanain (2011), Fowler et al (2005), Cutler and Kane (2009), Naoko Komuro (2004), Heerwagen & Zagreus (2005)

BB4 Provide a special character for the space based on building type

Montague (2007) BB5 Space layout allows for security, way finding,

and flexibility of use

Komuro (2004), WBDG Productive Committee (2011)

BB6 Space layout enhances or interferes with well- being of occupants

Fowler et al (2005), WBDG Productive Commit- tee (2011)

BB7 The adequacy of passive design space availa- ble for function/activities

Khalil and Husin (2009), WBDG Productive Committee (2011)

Table 4-10: Passive design for Performance: Sub-Attribute: Space

4.3.3 Thermal comfort

The second S-ATT is thermal comfort. This is in a simple sense how to benefit from sun to create a balance between the space and thermal comfort. Zachary et al (2010) referred to the temperature of the space and its control. Also, it has referred to the user using the temperature control buttons and if the system responds quickly. Thomas and Baird (2006) cited the importance of controlling thermal

comfort as well as the importance of creating sharing between EU and designers who should appreci- ate the necessity for ventilation and cooling. Khalil and Husin (2009) claimed that the indoor thermal comfort can be part of EU satisfaction. The ventilation could enhance this in one way or another. The indoor thermal comfort could enhance the user’s feelings or not. In the classification of performance of space (workplace), Fowler et al (2005) referred to the ability of thermal comfort to interfere with EU ability to work. Gossauer and Wagner (2007) clarified the relationship between EU and thermal comfort and how an indoor thermal environment should be created to interact with the user’s space. Also, other factors such as clothing which could play a clear role on EUs’ lives have been referred to.

Code End User Factors References

BC1 The temperature controls provide for the needs of different occupants

Zachary et al (2010), Thomas& Baird (2006) BC2 Thermal comfort in spaces enhances or in-

terferes with well-being of occupants

Fowler et al (2005), Gossauer and Wagner (2007)

Table 4-11: Passive design for Performance: Sub-Attribute: Thermal comfort

4.3.4 Ventilation

The third S-ATT is ventilation which plays a clear role on the PDs. Fowler et al (2005) referred to the relationship between the indoor air quality and EU satisfaction such as with regard to stuffy/stale air, cleanliness and odours. The space should adequately take advantage of air quality without any negative effects. Todd (2001) also referred to the importance of air quality as one of the performance criteria. Air movement in the space can enhance the air quality where it can refresh the air (Khalil and Husin, 2009). Fowler et al (2005) claimed that the indoor air quality also enhanced EU ability to get their job done, which means in one way or another to enhance the EU performance. This means that it is important to simplify and design the space to respond to EU needs and functions. In this criterion, using air to enhance indoor air quality enables EUs to perform their function. Milne, Morton and Ko- hut (2006) referred to the important task of providing internal air at a temperature that is comfortable. This is of course will be for the EUs’ benefit.

Code End User Factors References

BD1 A comfortable internal air temperature Milne, Morton and Kohut (2006) BD2 The air quality in space enhances or interferes

with well-being of occupants

Fowler et al (2005) BD3 The air quality in spaces (i.e. stuffy/stale air,

cleanliness and odours)

Fowler et al (2005), Todd (2001)

Table 4-12 : Passive design for Performance: Sub-Attribute: Ventilation

4.3.5 Lighting

The fourth S-ATT is lighting and how to enhance its efficiency in a space, whether artificial or nat- ural. This is what Fowler et al (2005) said in their questionnaire classification in the light section when they wrote to what extent the EU is satisfied with the current light in their workspace. This re- fers to both space response to EU need and the natural source. Todd (2001) also referred to the importance of indoor light as one of the main issues that should be considered. Cutler, L.J. and R.A.

Kane (2009) referred to ensuring the adequacy of light within a space which is specifically provided for the EU. This can be through creating a space that responds to EU lighting needs. Hassanain (2011) referred to natural light as sources and space (the lobby) and how to enhance EU comfort through the outside view, which will be more desirable for them. Fowler et al (2005) referred to the fact that natu- ral light could be more than the EU needs and give negative impacts on the use of space and could make EUs dissatisfied. This gives an indicator about the important of optimising quantity to respond to the EU. Fowler et al (2005) said that visual comfort should satisfy the EU through reducing nega- tive impacts such as glare or contrast.

Visual comfort or day lighting should be achieved through locating the space to the outside or allo- cating larger window or other strategies (Khalil and Husin, 2009). All of these strategies are to harness the day lighting performance to function very well regarding the space to respond for the EU need. EU can perform the function when the quality of space lighting is very high (Fowler et al, 2005). This also is confirmed by the WBDG Productive Committee (2011). It is said that day lighting can increase the EU productivity, which is in one way or another to enhance their job. Day lighting performance can be enhanced through providing the control devices that enhance space usage easily. An atrium with curtain glass walls can quickly light the space with optimum lighting (Khalil and Husin, 2009).

Code End User Factors References

BE1 The adequacy of light sufficiency in spaces Fowler et al (2005), Cutler and Kane (2009), Todd (2001)

BE2 The adequacy of natural light in spaces Hassanain (2011), Fowler et al (2005) BE3 The visual comfort of the lighting (e.g., glare,

reflections, contrast)

Fowler et al (2005), Khalil and Husin (2009) BE4 The lighting quality enhances or interferes with

well-being of occupants

(Fowler et al (2005), WBDG Productive Commit- tee (2011)

BE5 Atrium or rotunda control devices for optimum space comfort

Khalil and Husin (2009)

Table 4-13: Passive design for Performance: Sub-Attribute: Lighting

4.3.6 Acoustic

The fifth S-ATT which should be considered is how to optimise the sound between spaces or be- tween inside and outside acoustics. Khalil and Husin (2009) claimed that noise pollution is one of the determinants of EU satisfaction or dissatisfaction. For this reason, designers should consider design- ing the spaces to care about voice privacy as well as outside noisy. Fowler et al (2005) stated that the space acoustic quality enhances the ability of the user to perform their function. The space should keep the acoustics at a limit that do not bother other EUs or lose their privacy. This gives an indicator about EU performance with regard to indoor comfort.

Code End User Factors References

BF1 Select insulation against noises from corridors to give space privacy

Khalil and Husin (2009) BF2 Utilize good acoustic conditions Fowler et al (2005)