Analyzing Visual Quality in Residential Block Layouts Using Parametric Modeling in Grasshopper

Goodarzi Ardakani, Alireza; Peyvastehgar, Yaghowb; Heidari, Aliakbar; Mehboodi, Ali

doi:10.22034/ijumes.2025.2065488.1317

Analyzing Visual Quality in Residential Block Layouts Using Parametric Modeling in Grasshopper

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Alireza Goodarzi Ardakani ¹

Yaghowb Peyvastehgar ¹

Aliakbar Heidari ²

Ali Mehboodi ¹

¹ Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Yas.,C., Islamic Azad University, Yasuj, Iran

² Department of Architecture, Faculty of Technical and Engineering, Yasouj University, Yasouj ,Iran

10.22034/ijumes.2025.2065488.1317

Abstract

Visual quality is a fundamental component of contemporary residential design, influencing privacy, spatial perception, daylighting, and the psychological well-being of residents. Key visual factors such as views toward surrounding landscapes, inter-visibility between housing units, and visual access to semi-private open spaces play a decisive role in shaping the residential experience. Nevertheless, the effects of different residential block configurations on these visual parameters have not been sufficiently examined. This study investigates three visual criteria-view toward surrounding landscapes, inter-visibility between residential units, and visual access to semi-private open spaces—across five common residential block layouts: linear, detached, mixed, perimeter, and central configurations. A standardized 2×1-meter window on the southern façade of a representative unit was used for evaluation across five floors. Parametric simulations were performed in Grasshopper using the Ladybug and Honeybee plugins to assess sightlines, visibility angles, and visual overlap patterns. The findings show that building orientation, spatial distance, and window alignment have significant impacts on visual performance. More open forms such as detached and perimeter layouts provide broader landscape views, enhanced daylight access, and greater spatial openness. In contrast, denser configurations like central and mixed layouts exhibit increased window-to-window visibility and weaker visual connection to open spaces. Overall, the results highlight the importance of spatial configuration in improving visual comfort and residential quality. These insights can support the development of design guidelines and urban planning policies aimed at enhancing visual performance and the overall livability of residential environments.

Graphical Abstract

Analyzing Visual Quality in Residential Block Layouts Using Parametric Modeling in Grasshopper

Highlights

Visual quality is a key factor in contemporary residential design, affecting privacy, spatial perception, daylighting, and residents’ psychological well-being.
This study evaluates three visual criteriaو views toward surrounding landscapes, inter-visibility between residential units, and visual access to semi-private open spaces—across five common residential block configurations.
Parametric simulations using Grasshopper with Ladybug and Honeybee plugins were employed to analyze sightlines, visibility angles, and visual overlap from a standardized window across multiple floors.
The results indicate that building orientation, spatial distance, and window alignment strongly influence visual performance in residential layouts.
More open configurations such as detached and perimeter layouts enhance landscape views and visual comfort, while denser layouts show higher inter-visibility and weaker connections to open spaces.

Keywords

Courtyard view

parametric modeling

residential block layouts

view to landscape

visual quality

window-to-window visibility

· Abboushi, B. et al. (2021). Assessing the visual comfort, visual interest of sunlight patterns, and view quality under different window conditions in an open-plan office. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2020.1785309

· Assessing the visual comfort, visual interest of sunlight patterns, and view quality under different window conditions in an open‑plan office. Leukos, 17(4), 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2020.1785309

· Abd-Alhamid, F., Kent, M., & Wu, Y. (2023) Quantifying window view quality: A review on view perception assessment and representation methods.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109742

· Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: privacy, personal space, territory, and crowding.

· Barrett, P., & Barrett, L. (2010). The potential of positive places: Senses, brain and spaces. Intelligent Buildings International, 2(3), 218-228.

· Benedikt, M. L. (1979). To take hold of space: isovists and isovist fields. Environment and Planning B: Planning and design, 6(1), 47-65.

· Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008) The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008. 02225.x

· Bluyssen, P. M. (2017). Health, comfort and performance of children in classrooms–new directions for research. Indoor and Built Environment, 26(8), 1040-1050.

· Elsadek, M., Liu, B., & Xie, J. (2020). Window view and relaxation: Viewing green space from a high-rise estate improves urban dwellers’ wellbeing. Urban forestry & urban greening, 55, 126846.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126846

· Gehl, J. (2011). “Three Types of Outdoor Activities,”“Life Between Buildings,” and “Outdoor Activities and the Quality of Outdoor Space”: from Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space (1987). In The city reader (pp. 586-608). Routledge.

· Heschong, L. (2021). Visual delight in architecture: daylight, vision, and view. Routledge.

· Hessari,P. , Seyf Shojaee,M. and Noor Mohamadi,P. (2025). Study of spatial and visual comfort in the reception space of traditional houses in Mashhad city, IRAN. International Journal of Urban Management and Energy Sustainability, 6(1), 210-224. DOI:10.22034/ijumes.2025.2045753.1269

· Bill, H., & Julienne, H. (1984). The social logic of space.

· Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environmental psychology, 15(3), 169-182.

· Khozaei Ravari F, Hassan AS, Abdul Nasir MH, Mohammad Taheri M (2024), “The development of residential spatial configuration for visual privacy in Iranian dwellings, a space syntax approach”. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, Vol. 42 No. 4 pp.672–703, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-05-2021-0080

· Ko, W. H., Kent, M. G., Schiavon, S., Levitt, B., & Betti, G. (2022) A window view quality assessment framework. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2021.1965889

· Konstantzos, I., & Tzempelikos, A. (2017). Daylight glare evaluation with the sun in the field of view through window shades. Building and Environment, 113, 65-77.

· Lynch, K. (2023, November). The image of the city (1960). In Anthologie zum Städtebau. Band III: Vom Wiederaufbau nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg bis zur zeitgenössischen Stadt (pp. 481-488). Gebr. Mann Verlag.

· Nasar, J. L. (1990). The evaluative image of the city. Journal of the American Planning Association, 56(1), 41-53.

· Pilechiha, P., Mahdavinejad, M., Rahimian, F. P., Carnemolla, P., & Seyedzadeh, S. (2020) Multi-objective optimisation framework for designing office windows: quality of view, daylight and energy efficiency.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114356

· Sadeghipour Roudsari, M., Pak, M., & Viola, A. (2013, August). Ladybug: a parametric environmental plugin for grasshopper to help designers create an environmentally-conscious design. In Building Simulation 2013 (Vol. 13, pp. 3128-3135). IBPSA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26868/25222708.2013.2499

· Tennessen, C. M., & Cimprich, B. (1995). Views to nature: Effects on attention. Journal of environmental psychology, 15(1), 77-85.

· Thayanithy, D., & Perera, N. (2023). Daylight and window view quality for visual comfort: the case of an office building in Jaffna. Built-Environment Sri Lanka, 13(2).

· Turner, A., & Penn, A. (1999, March). Making isovists syntactic: isovist integration analysis. In 2nd International Symposium on Space Syntax, Brasilia (pp. 103-121).

· Turner, A., & Penn, A. (2002). Encoding natural movement as an agent-based system: an investigation into human pedestrian behaviour in the built environment. Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, 29(4), 473-490.

· Ulrich, R. S. (1981). Natural versus urban scenes: Some psychophysiological effects. Environment and behavior, 13(5), 523-556.

· Ulrich, R. S. (1986). Human responses to vegetation and landscapes. Landscape and urban planning, 13, 29-44.

· Vasquez, N. G., Rupp, R. F., Andersen, R. K., & Toftum, J. (2022). Occupants’ responses to window views, daylighting and lighting in buildings: A critical review. Building and Environment, 219, 109172.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109172.