Category: Uncategorized

Introduction

In the realm of healthcare architecture, the integration of light therapy has emerged as a critical consideration in the design of treatment centers. This post delves into the innovative approach of designing a single structural bay, which facilitates a comprehensive examination of various design issues and ultimately optimizes patient health outcomes.

1. The Importance of a Single Bay Design

Focusing on a single bay allows architects to analyze intricate design variables in isolation. This approach leads to a deeper understanding of how different architectural elements interact with each other, especially in relation to light therapy. By employing a systematic iterative design process, we can ensure that solutions are not only practical but also enhance the therapeutic experience for patients.

2. Development Process: Key Design Variables

2.1 Daylight Optimization

Natural light plays a pivotal role in effective light therapy. Research indicates that optimal illuminance levels range between 5,000 and 10,000 Lux. To achieve these levels, architects must consider various factors, including view, geometry, and materials. For instance, a well-designed bay that maximizes overhead glazing can significantly enhance the amount of light reaching the patient’s eyes.

2.2 Structure and Geometry

The structural arrangement is crucial for optimizing daylight exposure. By positioning trusses to maintain an eastern view, we can ensure that patients receive maximum sunlight, particularly in therapeutic contexts. This thoughtful consideration of geometry not only supports light therapy but also contributes to the overall aesthetic appeal of the treatment center.

2.3 Shade Control and Diffusion

Effective shade control is essential to managing light levels within therapeutic spaces. The design must accommodate varying climatic conditions, ensuring that patients receive adequate light while minimizing discomfort. Testing various shading options through simulations allows designers to create flexible environments adaptable to seasonal changes.

2.4 Electric Light Supplementation

In cases where natural light is insufficient, electric lighting must supplement daylight. This requires careful planning and positioning of luminaires to maintain an effective light therapy environment. A well-implemented lighting strategy can enhance user comfort while providing necessary therapeutic illumination.

3. Evaluating User Comfort

Evaluating user comfort is paramount in designing treatment spaces. By assessing both illuminance and luminance contrast, designers can create environments that not only meet therapeutic standards but also promote overall well-being. Analyzing different climatic scenarios ensures that designs remain effective year-round.

4. Summary of Findings and Conclusions

The development of a single bay design has proven invaluable for the treatment center’s overall architecture. By leveraging advanced tools like Radiance software, we can compare different design schemes and prioritize patient health. Key trends indicate that while achieving the highest illuminance levels through electric lighting poses challenges, integrating natural light is both feasible and beneficial.

Conclusion

The architectural design of treatment centers must prioritize patient health through the innovative integration of light therapy. By focusing on single structural bays, architects can create environments that enhance therapeutic efficacy and overall patient experience. As we move forward, it is essential that designers continue to explore these innovative strategies to foster health and healing within our built environments.

Image/Figure Credits

Figure/Image	Credit	Description
Figure 7.1-1: Refined Design Solution	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Illustration of the design solution for a single structural bay that integrates light therapy.
Figure 7.1-2: Illuminance Grid at Eye Level	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	A grid showing illuminance (lux) levels at eye level during various activities, such as treadmill use.
Figure 7.1-3: Testing Optimal Overhead Geometry	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Various overhead geometries and materials tested for optimal light exposure to the eye.
Figure 7.1-4: Testing Optimal East Facade Geometry	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Comparison of different east facade geometries to determine the best design for light therapy.
Figure 7.1-5: Single Story Space	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Design layout for a single-story space with an east view and double sawtooth geometry.
Figure 7.1-6: Double Height Space	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Design layout for a double-height space with an east view and south-facing sawtooth geometry.
Figure 7.1-7: Overall Building Massing	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Visualization of the overall massing of the Treatment Center based on the two bay designs.
Figure 7.1-8: Structure	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Diagram of the truss system supporting the sawtooth geometry.
Figure 7.1-9: Structural Layout Ensures View of Sky	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Layout ensuring structural members do not block the patient’s view of the sky for maximum daylight.
Figure 7.1-10: Shade Control & Diffusion	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Illustration of shade fabric use to diffuse direct sunlight and control light exposure.
Figure 7.1-11: Shade Control Up Close	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Close-up of roller shades designed for optimal light control in varying climatic conditions.
Figure 7.1-12: Electric Light Supplement	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Diagram showing the use of electric lighting as a supplement on overcast days to meet light therapy needs.
Figure 7.1-13: Electric Supplement Up Close	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Detailed view of electric lights suspended from trusses, directing light towards patients.
Figure 7.1-14: Mitigating Heat Gain	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Design proposal showing sliding doors for natural ventilation to manage heat gain.
Figure 7.1-15: Overcast Day, View of Sky	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Structural layout ensuring light from the sky reaches the patient even on overcast days.
Figure 7.1-16: Partly Cloudy Day	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Depiction of shading deployment during a partly cloudy day to manage light exposure.
Figure 7.1-17: Sunny Summer Day	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Illustration of shading fully deployed on a sunny day, with open doors for natural ventilation.
Figure 7.1-18: Night, Early Morning	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Diagram showing electric lighting working in tandem with shade fabric during early morning hours.
Figure 7.3-1: Process for Determining User Comfort	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Flowchart illustrating the process used to determine visual contrast in the design.
Figure 7.3-2: December Overcast	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Analysis of illuminance and contrast values during an overcast day in December.
Figure 7.3-3: December Clear	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Analysis of light levels and comfort during a clear December day, noting electric light reliance.
Figure 7.3-4: March Overcast	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Overview of lighting conditions and patient comfort during an overcast day in March.
Figure 7.3-5: March Clear	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Evaluation of light exposure and comfort levels on a clear March day.
Figure 7.3-6: June Overcast	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Analysis indicating light levels and comfort during a typically overcast June day.
Figure 7.3-7: June Clear	Source: Author’s Design Analysis	Summary of light conditions and shading requirements on a clear June day, noting electric light usage.

Introduction

Selecting an appropriate site for a treatment center dedicated to addressing winter depression is a critical aspect of architectural and environmental design. This chapter examines the criteria utilized to select the site for the proposed center, located in a parking lot immediately west of Cal Anderson Park in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Seattle. Through a comprehensive analysis, we illustrate how this specific location optimally supports the therapeutic needs of patients dealing with winter depression.

6.1 Site Criteria: Winter Depression Treatment Center

The site criteria presented here serve as a benchmark for evaluating the suitability of potential locations for the treatment center. These criteria were developed based on the design parameters established in earlier chapters and align closely with the program requirements discussed previously. The evaluation process involved analyzing various sites in the Seattle area to ensure they met the outlined criteria.

Key site criteria include:

• Access to Daylight: The site must ensure adequate exposure to natural light, a vital component in treating winter depression.
• Proximity to “At-Risk” Populations: Locations should be easily accessible to populations most affected by winter depression.
• Transportation Options: Sites should promote active transportation methods such as walking and biking, discouraging reliance on cars.
• Exercise Opportunities: Proximity to parks and recreational facilities encourages physical activity, another effective treatment for winter depression.
• Natural Landscapes: The presence of natural elements—such as parks, bodies of water, and diverse plant life—contributes positively to patient health.

In analyzing various locations, the selected site effectively addresses each of these criteria and can anticipate future access to daylight, even with potential developments in the area.

6.2 Site Selection

The chosen site, a portion of a parking lot west of Cal Anderson Park, meets the established site criteria comprehensively. This section provides a detailed examination of how this site supports the therapeutic goals of the treatment center.

Transportation and Patient Health

Transportation to the center should be viewed as an integral component of patient health. Encouraging modes of transport that promote physical activity—such as walking, biking, and using mass transit—aligns with therapeutic practices that combat winter depression. By discouraging car use, patients can spend more time outdoors, engaging with their environment and benefiting from exposure to daylight.

Exercise Opportunities

The site’s proximity to outdoor exercise facilities, including the Bobby Morris Playfield and Cal Anderson Park, enhances the treatment options available to patients. Additionally, the nearby Seattle Central Community College offers indoor swimming and exercise options. Access to diverse exercise opportunities is crucial, as individual patients may respond more positively to different types of physical activities. This variety increases the likelihood that each patient will find an engaging exercise routine that complements their treatment.

Varied Landscape Features

The existing landscape features of Cal Anderson Park significantly contribute to patient health. Interaction with natural environments—water, wildlife, and plant life—can enhance mental well-being. While the center’s design will incorporate natural elements, leveraging the park’s existing amenities will further enrich the therapeutic experience for patients.

6.3 Site Analysis Summary

The following key points summarize the findings of the site analysis:

• Site Criteria: A comprehensive list of site criteria was employed to evaluate the suitability of potential locations. These criteria focus on access to at-risk populations, mass transportation options, exercise opportunities, natural landscapes, and daylight exposure during key treatment times.
• Optimal Location: The treatment center’s location west of Cal Anderson Park meets all established site criteria, ensuring a supportive environment for patient care.
• Future Considerations: The selected site anticipates ongoing access to daylight, even with potential future developments. This foresight is crucial for maintaining the therapeutic effectiveness of the center.

In conclusion, appropriate site selection is vital for the success of the treatment center dedicated to winter depression. Subsequent chapters will detail how the design of the center responds to this specific site and capitalizes on the unique amenities of the Capitol Hill neighborhood. Through thoughtful architectural planning, we can create an environment that not only treats but also empowers individuals on their recovery journey.

Works Cited 

1	Bernheim, Anthony. “Good Air Good Health” in Sustainable Healthcare Architecture by Guenther, Robin and Vittori, Gail. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008. 40.
2	Boubekri, Mohammed. Daylighting, Architecture, and Health. Architectural Press, Burlington, MA, 2008. 60, 63-104.
3	Buxton, Orfeu M., Lee, Calvin W., L’Hermite-Baleriaux, Mireille. “Exercise elicits phase shifts and acute alterations of melatonin that vary with circadian phase.” Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol, 2003.
4	Capitol Hill Station – Transit Oriented Development Seattle Zoning Maps. Web. 18 July 2010.
5	Eastman, Charmane, Young, Michael A., Fogg, Louis F., Liu, Liwen, Meaden, Patricia M. “Bright Light Treatment of Winter Depression: A Placebo Controlled Trial.” Arch Gen Psychiatry, 883.
6	Graw, Peter. “Winter and summer outdoor light exposure in women with and without seasonal affective disorder.” Journal of Affective Disorders, 1999. 165.
7	Guenther, Robin and Vittori, Gail. Sustainable Healthcare Architecture. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008. 40, 49, 306.
8	Hobday, Richard. The Light Revolution: Health, Architecture and the Sun. Findhorn Press, Scotland Inc., 2008. 85.
9	Howland, Robert. “An Overview of Seasonal Affective Disorder and its Treatment Options.” The Physician and Sports Medicine, 2009. 110-111.
10	Kasof, Joseph. “Cultural variation in seasonal depression: Cross-national differences in winter versus summer patterns of seasonal affective disorder.” Journal of Affective Disorders, 2009. 80-84.
11	Kellert, Stephen R. & Heerwagen, Judith. “Nature and Healing: The Science, Theory, and Promise of Biophilic Design” in Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life, New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008. 85.
12	Lam, Raymond, et al. “The Can-SAD Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Effectiveness of Light Therapy and Fluoxetine in Patients With Winter Seasonal Affective Disorder.” Am J Psychiatry, 2006, 809-811.
13	Lavoie, Marie-Pier, et al. “Evidence of a Biological Effect of Light Therapy on the Retina of Patients with Seasonal Affective Disorder.” Biol Psychiatry, 2009. 257.
14	Leppamaki, S., et al. “Bright Light Therapy Combined with Physical Exercise Improves Mood.” Journal of Affective Disorders, 2002. 142-143.
15	Lewy, A., et al. “The circadian basis of winter depression.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006. 7414.
16	Lewy, A., et al. “Winter depression: Integrating Mood, Circadian Rhythms, and the Sleep/Wake and Light/Dark Cycles into a Bio-Psycho-Social-Environmental Model.” Sleep Med Clin, 2009. 285-294.
17	Lewy, A., et al. “Winter depression: Integrating Mood, Circadian Rhythms, and the Sleep/Wake and Light/Dark Cycles into a Bio-Psycho-Social-Environmental Model.” Sleep Med Clin, 2009. 285-294.
18	Mersch, Peter, et al. “Seasonal affective disorder and latitude: a review of the literature.” Journal of Affective Disorders, 1999. 44. 46.
19	Michalek, Erin, et al. “A pilot study of adherence with light treatment for seasonal affective disorder.” Psychiatry Research, 2007. 318.
20	Miller, Alan. “Epidemiology, Etiology, and Natural Treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder.” Alternative Medicine Review, 2005. 5-11.
21	Modell, J., et al. “Seasonal Affective Disorder and Its Prevention by Anticipatory Treatment with Bupropion XL.” Biol Psychiatry, 2005. 658.
22	Online Handle Esoteric Trash. “I have Seasonal Affective Disorder” support group. Web. 15 April.
23	Online Handle Siren 1971. “I have Seasonal Affective Disorder” support group. Web. 15 April. Link
24	Partonen, Timo. “Three circadian clock genes Per2, Arntl, and Npas2 contribute to winter depression.” Annals of Medicine, 2007. 236.
25	Roecklein, K., et al. “A missense variant (P10L) of the melanopsin (OPN4) gene in seasonal affective disorder.” Journal of Affective Disorders, 2009. 280.
26	Rohan, K., et al. “Cognitive and Psychophysiological Correlates of Subsyndromal Seasonal Affective Disorder.” Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2004. 40, 89-90.
27	Rose, Jonathan F. P. “Green Urbanism: Developing Restorative Urban Biophilia” in Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life, by Kellert, Stephen R. & Heerwagen, Judith H. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008. 299.
28	Seattle Zoning Maps. Seattle Department of Planning and Development. Web. 18 July 2010.
29	Schettler, Ted. “From Medicine to Ecological Health” in Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life, by Kellert, Stephen R. & Heerwagen, Judith H. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008. 68.
30	Sher, L. “The role of genetic factors in the etiology of seasonality and seasonal affective disorder: an evolutionary approach.” Medical Hypotheses, 2000. 54, 90, 91, 94.
31	Sullivan, Brianna & Tabitha W. Payne. “Affective Disorders and Cognitive Failures: A Comparison of Seasonal and Nonseasonal Depression.” Am J Psychiatry, 2007. 1663-1664.
32	Ulrich, Roger. “Biophilic Theory and Research for Healthcare Design” in Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life, New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008. 89.
33	Van Bommel. “Non-visual biological effect of lighting and the practical meaning for lighting for work.” Applied Ergonomics, 2006. 462-463.
34	Van Someren, E. J. W. “More Than a Marker: Interaction Between the Circadian Regulation of Temperature and Sleep, Age-Related Changes, and Treatment Possibilities.” Chronobiology International, 2000, 337.
35	Van Den Berg & Wagennar. Healing by Architecture, 2005, 1.
36	Westrin, Asa & Lam, Raymond. “Long Term and Preventative Treatment for Seasonal Affective Disorder.” CNS Drugs, 905.
37	Webb, Ann R. “Considerations for lighting in the built environment: Non-visual effects of light.” Energy & Buildings, 2006. 723.