Integration of Energy with Ecology and Environment:

Architects and developers have little direct say upon social provision but they need to be

aware of divisions that they perpetrate or help break down, where they can however, have

influence is in another triangular set of relationships. The various international agreements

on the environment and climate change mean that building design has three distinct

perspectives to consider – energy, ecology, and environment.

The concentration upon low energy design is no longer sufficient if true sustainability is to be

met, but conversely, sustainable development that does not have at its centre an energy

strategy is also invalid.

Designers now need to incorporate into master

plans the regenerative potential of ecosystems and to

consider in a holistic fashion the environmental

resource implications of their development

decisions.

It's a tall order, especially with inadequate

information on lifecycle impacts and a construction

industry that appears reluctant to innovate in the

housing sector.

But it's possible to extract indicators from complex

picture and use these to highlight good practice at a

local level.

For example, with energy, one could relatively

easily model different designs against CO2

emissions and other pollutants per year, with

environmental resources, one could measure water

use, and with ecosystems, one could use a single

species (such as the blackbird or toad) as an

indicator of local biodiversity. By using indicators to

model or monitor performance. The full complexity

of sustainable development could be reduced to

measurable parts. It will not tell you the whole

picture, but as a design or management tool it

could point in the right direction

Green Building Guidelines

Sustainability

Sustainable development... Is the development that meets the needs of the present without  

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs? There is no future for  

sustainable housing without a culture change in society. Resources conservation can’t be  

achieved without a fundamental review of the type, form and location of housing.  

Housing is not sustainable if it’s cold, damp unhealthy, expensive, and if the community is  

unsafely and unhealthy. The priorities are:  

• Staying warm, living in a safe neighborhood and keeping water bills down.  

• The conservation of natural resources (land, energy, water)  

• The sensible reuse of man made resources  

• Maintenance of ecosystems and their regenerative potential.  

• Equity between generations, people and classes.  

Provision of health, safety and security.  

Sustainable housing will probably display a list of features:  

• Healthy, comfortable, secure homes.  

• Designed in ability to upgrade.  

• Low energy design exploiting renewable energy sources.  

• Super insulated homes.  

• Low water consumption.  

• Public transport oriented urban design.  

• Pedestrian friendly streets  

2.1 key factors considered for sustainable  

buildings  

Sustainable houses offer enhanced comfort, lower energy or water bills, greater self reliance,  

improved health and more relationship with nature.  

Three factors in particular are emerging as essential construction requirements of the sustainable  

house:  

9 Thickness of perimeter fabric.  

9 Air tightness linked to high levels of insulation  

9 Efficient boiler systems.  

Housing form and layout should be generated by the need to achieve simple social pleasures:  

such as having access and views to attractive gardens, each home should have good orientation  

for solar gain so that living spaces have a pleasant and warm ambience for the family, in urban  

areas each home should be connected to a good transportation system, and should be a linkage  

to a clear framework of supporting communy facilities.  

As for the houses the DETR (the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions), In  

England they suggest that these are likely to be super- insulated, of high thermal mass, air tight in  

construction and made from building materials based upon no toxic, low embodied energy  

principles.  

In addition, the sustainable house will feature water collection from the rain, sewage treatment,  

waste recycling and local energy generation.  

Old Architectural Sketch 2

Bramante, Donato (1444–1514)

Untitled, Uffizi, UFF 1714 A, Approx. 15.5 _ 16.6cm, Ink on paper

Bramante was one of the first of the great High Renaissance architects, influencing numerous

prominent architects of Rome such as Peruzzi and Sangallo. He is best known for reviving the architecture

of classical antiquity, which had begun with the works of Alberti (Allsopp, 1959). Vasari

reported that Bramante spent much of his time studying and sketching the buildings in Rome

(Vasari, 1907).

Born Donato di Angelo di Anthonio da Urbino/Pascuccio, it is speculated that he studied with

Piero della Francesca and/or Andrea Mantegna. His first notable building was S. Maria Presso S.

Satiro in Milan. In Rome, some of Bramante’s most celebrated and influential projects were for

Pope Julius at the Vatican, where he designed the Cortile di S. Damaso and the Cortile del

Belvedere. With an interest in centrally planned churches similar to Leonardo, he also designed a

Greek cross plan for St. Peter’s with a vast central dome. His expressive building of the classical tradition

was the Tempietto of S. Pietro in Montorio, 1502.

Bramante’s design for the Tempietto was sited in the courtyard of the Church and Monastery of

San Pietro in Montorio. It constitutes a diminutive temple acting as a Martyria, standing on the place

presumed to be St. Peter’s Martyrdom. Small and circular, it revisits antique forms appealing to contemporary

Christians’ preferences, crowned with a hemispherical dome resembling the Pantheon.

This small monument displays simple proportions where the width of the dome is equal to the height

of the interior cylinder (Allsopp, 1959).

This sketch on the facing page (Figure 1.1) exhibits a small shrine-like structure, representing an

example of a centrally planned building. The sketch reads as an elevation of an octagon-shaped

dome on a raised foundation. In plan, the building presented appears to be shaped in the form of a

cross with small projections containing porches; it is vaguely reminiscent of Palladio’s Villa Rotunda.

Bramante’s concern with the reference to a shrine led him to draw this sketch demonstrating its volume

from the exterior, rather than interior space. Here, he used the porch to accent the central

domed space, stressing the qualities of a monument, a temple from antiquity.

The building’s organization describes an octagon within a Greek cross imposed within a square,

but the sketch presents an image somewhere between a perspective and an elevation, as the face of

the porch has been drawn slightly taller than the side porches. To stress the central altar and promote

a three-dimensional effect, Bramante employs shading on the side of the octagon, further confusing

the flat façade of the elevation. The sculptural figures on the roof have been drawn with the same lack

of complexity as the scale figures standing on the stairs. Although the sketch does not appear to be

hurried, Bramante describes the stairs with minimal detail. The set on the left display some definition,

while the other set of stairs have been represented simply by double diagonal lines. This technique

concentrates the focus to the center, and emphasizes the fact that the building was designed to

be viewed equally well from all angles.

The sketch suggests a self-reflexivity, as it refers to the many centrally planned structures designed

by Bramante. It also recalls the three-dimensional/volumetric qualities of Bramante’s concern for a

building’s mass. The architectural historian James Ackerman wrote about the volume of Bramante’s

walls: ‘[W]e sense that where the earlier architect drew buildings, Bramante modelled them’ (1961,

p. 27). Although this design for a small building may not be directly related to the Tempietto, it is representative

of a theme, one that Bramante explored throughout his career.

Old Architectural Sketch

Peruzzi, Baldassare (1481–1536)

Study of a sepulchre, Uffizi, UFF 159 A, 12 _ 13cm, Brown ink and wash

A prominent architect of the high Renaissance in Rome, Baldassare Peruzzi’s approach was influenced

by the work of Bramante and Raphael. His peers respected him for his revival of the art of stage

design, and for his expertise in the art of perspective drawing. Peruzzi arrived in Rome in 1503 from

Siena. He began as a painter under Pinturicchio, and was commissioned in 1509 by the Sienese

banker Agostino Chigi to design the Palace Farnesina. The palazzo reflects his strong sense of proportion

and his interest in the principles of mathematics as set down by Alberti. Different in plan than

other Roman palaces of the time, Villa Farnesina has two wings flanking a central loggia, containing

frescos by Raphael.

Much of Peruzzi’s experience was obtained in the Vatican Workshop assisting Donato Bramante,

and, later, collaborating with Raphael until 1527 when he fled to Siena precipitated by the Sack of Rome. Bramante had envisioned a rebuilding of St. Peter’s based on a Greek cross plan, and Peruzzi’s plan suggested a variation (Allsopp, 1959). Other projects designed by Peruzzi individually or in collaboration,

in addition to St. Peter’s, include: fortifications near Porta Laterina and Porta S. Viene,

Palazzo Pollini, San Nicolٍ in Carpi, and the Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne in Rome. He died in

Rome in 1536, and Serlio, who included Peruzzi’s drawings prominently in his treatise, heralded his

influence on architecture.

This ink and wash sketch (Figure 1.3) demonstrates a three-dimensional study of what seems to be

a sepulcher, or tomb chest, with an apsidiole form. This small projecting chapel structure consists of

a self-contained entity, possibly planned for an interior wall of a cathedral side aisle. Drawn freehand

in perspective, or a version of an elevation oblique, the sketch appears somewhat distorted, obviously

not calculated or measured. Because this view employs washes for shadows and a completed composition,

Peruzzi was able to interpret and evaluate the proposed solution. The sketch, then, suggests

the importance for Peruzzi to quickly comprehend three-dimensional relationships. The sketch acted

as a method of evaluation to represent either an image from his mind’s eye or an emerging design

solution. Although the ink techniques are minimal and scratchy, the sketch contains enough information

to visualize the form as a whole.

Peruzzi must have understood the sketch as part of a process. Although showing the aedicule as a

whole, the technique of the lines are quick and loosely constructed, suggesting not a solution, but a

momentary snapshot of a thought in the process. The columns are straightened by additional lines in

a method of ‘making and matching,’ numbers are sprinkled over the top and other façades, and pentesting

lines appear in the background (Gombrich, 1969, p. 29). These elements, which appear on and

around the sketch, suggest the little value given the image by Peruzzi after the information was conveyed

in a dialogue of the design process. Even though the columns are not straight and the distances

between the columns are irregular, the sketch conveys a compositional whole, displaying proportions,

relationships and symmetry. The ink wash provides depth that enhances the three-dimensional illusion,

helping to judge the final effects of the whole. Being both a definitive view and a design in

process, the sarcophagus/tomb-chest stand has been drawn and redrawn in a search for its relationship

to the columns and figures. This reveals how the design was still fluid and could be reevaluated when

seen in conjunction with other elements.

This sketch gave a quick proportional and compositional view to Peruzzi, allowing him to see the

whole at a decision point in his thinking